UKBouldering.com

the shizzle => shootin' the shit => Topic started by: tomtom on February 26, 2020, 04:26:33 pm

Title: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on February 26, 2020, 04:26:33 pm
Not wishing to start a panic (as if...) but its looking increasingly like containment to a few geographical locations is not going to work completely...

I guess the measures are all to slow the impact - stretch it out so medical services are not overwhelmed all at once and it gives vaccine research more time to come up with something.

Still - concerning times when the leaked UK govt worst case data suggests 500k people could die in the UK alone...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dunnyg on February 26, 2020, 04:42:19 pm
It does seem to be popping up in a few more places. I'm starting to get less psyched to get on a plane to Turkey (work trip) in the near future. 500k is a grim figure, 1/140(!). Fingers crossed eh?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on February 26, 2020, 05:05:36 pm
It does seem to be popping up in a few more places. I'm starting to get less psyched to get on a plane to Turkey (work trip) in the near future. 500k is a grim figure, 1/140(!). Fingers crossed eh?

based on 2% of population where 80% contract it IIRC.

We've a second year field course with 30 students to Tenerife in 2-3 weeks..... suspect that won't happen now.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on February 26, 2020, 05:17:55 pm
I started wondering last night whether booking a week in Font in September was a good idea or not. Not sure whether BMC insurance would cover cancellation if it was necessary.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: CrimpyMcCrimpface on February 26, 2020, 05:28:01 pm
I've been following the Johns Hopkins dashboard to allay / enhance my fears of catching this. At least new confirmed cases are levelling out in China but its those outside without efforts of containment that concern. https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6

I travel for work 12-14 weeks of the year and thus far haven't had the fortunate excuse to cancel travel. Worst part is speaking to 30+ different people a day when the longest incubation period recorded is 27 days. What can one do?! I suspect if it gets much worse I will start cancelling trips.

Didn't they have to quarantine an entire hotel in Tenerife? No please
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dunnyg on February 26, 2020, 05:32:07 pm
I imagine it will be difficult to claim back unless foreign office change their travel advice (for personal holidays).
Hadn't thought about student fieldwork, that sounds like a bit of a nightmare. The uni haven't said anything yet, but I think the risk assessment got submitted today, we will wait and see.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 26, 2020, 06:19:48 pm
I’m in Glasgow, for the next 3 weeks, busy at the academy and not paying attention...
Mrs OMM texted me an hour ago, because my eldest son’s football training has been cancelled. One of the lads on his team had just returned from a ski trip in Italy and three of the kids had become ill on the journey back. They were in  quarantine (might still be).
By the time I saw the text and checked the story on Devon live, theschool announced the kids had tested negative.
Frankly, that all seems a bit quick (I thought incubation was estimated at twi weeks and the test results seem pdq.).
But, Ican see panic coming soon. Half expecting to be stuck in Glasgow with grounded flights and halted trains in three weeks time...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stewart on February 26, 2020, 06:43:34 pm
Half expecting to be stuck in Glasgow with grounded flights and halted trains in three weeks time...

Plenty of time to get to dumby then. Look on the bright side. Also coronavirus is no match for the plague infested broken glass at dumby so it may be the safest place in the country.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mark s on February 26, 2020, 06:46:40 pm
Everyone thinks readzas vast knowledge is logging grit routes above e5.
Although it was one, studying dieses and virus is the one he makes money from.
Ive asked him about it and the outlook doesnt look good.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duncan campbell on February 26, 2020, 07:24:31 pm

Still - concerning times when the leaked UK govt worst case data suggests 500k people could die in the UK alone...

Just had a quick google of this and the first thing I clicked on was this; https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.standard.co.uk/news/health/coronavirus-worst-case-scenario-government-document-a4371726.html%3famp

Hardly a trustworthy news source as I don’t believe a word the sun prints.

Looking down the search page only the shitty papers like the express, the mirror, the sun etc are running stories with that sort of data. So probably just trying to sell papers/click bait.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 26, 2020, 07:56:06 pm
Half expecting to be stuck in Glasgow with grounded flights and halted trains in three weeks time...

Plenty of time to get to dumby then. Look on the bright side. Also coronavirus is no match for the plague infested broken glass at dumby so it may be the safest place in the country.

OT:

On that note, young Mr MacLeod was in TCA this evening. I nearly had one of those embarrassing moments where you see a familiar face, say hello like you’re old mates, and only then realise that it’s not an old acquaintance and the only reason you recognise them is because they’re famous...

Father in law is a very senior Naval Surgeon, retired now but only a year ago, used to be the Commanding officer for the Portsmouth medical dept/hospital. He’s been on our backs about all the traveling I’ve been doing. Gave me a lecture about washing hands, last Thursday.

Edit: actually I should clarify. I’m trotting around the country doing courses. Seven so far. The other delegates are Merchant Navy officers from all over the world, many who have flown in from here, there and everywhere for that course, quite afew from cruise ships...
Seriously, nobody is shaking hands and making a point of not doing so.
 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on February 26, 2020, 08:23:56 pm

Still - concerning times when the leaked UK govt worst case data suggests 500k people could die in the UK alone...

Just had a quick google of this and the first thing I clicked on was this; https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.standard.co.uk/news/health/coronavirus-worst-case-scenario-government-document-a4371726.html%3famp

Hardly a trustworthy news source as I don’t believe a word the sun prints.

Looking down the search page only the shitty papers like the express, the mirror, the sun etc are running stories with that sort of data. So probably just trying to sell papers/click bait.

I originally read about it in the Indy.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/coronavirus-news-latest-deaths-uk-infection-flu-a9360271.html
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fultonius on February 26, 2020, 08:48:51 pm
I’m in Glasgow, for the next 3 weeks, busy at the academy and not paying attention...
Mrs OMM texted me an hour ago, because my eldest son’s football training has been cancelled. One of the lads on his team had just returned from a ski trip in Italy and three of the kids had become ill on the journey back. They were in  quarantine (might still be).
By the time I saw the text and checked the story on Devon live, theschool announced the kids had tested negative.
Frankly, that all seems a bit quick (I thought incubation was estimated at twi weeks and the test results seem pdq.).
But, Ican see panic coming soon. Half expecting to be stuck in Glasgow with grounded flights and halted trains in three weeks time...

You at both TCAs?  Won't be down this week (mildly tweaked my shoulder on a pink yesterday, noticed a little crunch at the time but not much, fingerboarding felt fine). This morning it was a bit twingey, so I'll just stay off it for a bit.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 26, 2020, 09:18:05 pm
I’m in Glasgow, for the next 3 weeks, busy at the academy and not paying attention...
Mrs OMM texted me an hour ago, because my eldest son’s football training has been cancelled. One of the lads on his team had just returned from a ski trip in Italy and three of the kids had become ill on the journey back. They were in  quarantine (might still be).
By the time I saw the text and checked the story on Devon live, theschool announced the kids had tested negative.
Frankly, that all seems a bit quick (I thought incubation was estimated at twi weeks and the test results seem pdq.).
But, Ican see panic coming soon. Half expecting to be stuck in Glasgow with grounded flights and halted trains in three weeks time...

You at both TCAs?  Won't be down this week (mildly tweaked my shoulder on a pink yesterday, noticed a little crunch at the time but not much, fingerboarding felt fine). This morning it was a bit twingey, so I'll just stay off it for a bit.

I’m using The News Room at the moment. I have been crap and done virtually nothing since I ruptured the disc last October. I realised a few weeks ago I’d gained 10kg and was desperately unfit. I figured three weeks in an hotel and then an AirB&B with no family around and nothing to do after 15:30; was a good time to start pushIng my lardy arse off the couch. In three days, I’ve walked 20miles (4 mile round trip to TCA from the hotel and 3 mile round trip to the college). I’m starting to feel almost human again. Always was a square on climber, preferring to thug through and lacking finesse, but by god! I think someone implanted steel rods into my hips and waist! That and I now have a mortal fear of “pinging” off and landing awkwardly.
Didn’t bring a harness, but with hindsight, top roping/auto belay would have been a safer option. 🤦🏻‍♂️

So I’ve confined myself to jug swinging on the Orange circuit. There’s a Pink through the roof on the left of the Moonboard that I spent some minutes considering tonight. Then bottled it and found anther jug ladder.
Getting old sucks.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on February 26, 2020, 10:34:19 pm
Amazing that according to the report I've just read the US had tested fewer than 500 people, a small fraction of the number even the comparatively small UK has tested.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: jwi on February 26, 2020, 10:42:14 pm
Well Trump did cut the funding for CDC and fired almost everyone in the senior administration who was vaguely competent...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on February 26, 2020, 10:52:27 pm
Yup the report mentioned that.

On the projected scale of the virus in the UK from a new statesman article:

An early epidemiological model, from scientists at Imperial College London, estimated that up to 60 per cent of the population of the UK (66.4 million) could become infected within the first year of transmission. We still know little about how many infected people become seriously ill. As many as 90 per cent may suffer only mild symptoms or nothing at all. But even this would leave six per cent of the UK’s population, around four million people, suffering a serious illness.

If estimates of a 2 per cent fatality rate among sick people translate here, then we might expect 80,000 coronavirus-related deaths in the UK over the next 12 months.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on February 27, 2020, 12:37:49 am
Republicans are missing a trick and the Conservatives ought to be throwing everything we've got at it. If it's mainly the elderly that die, just think what 500k fewer Conservative voters would mean for them!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on February 27, 2020, 06:42:21 am
For god's sake, Trump has just appointed Pence to oversee the efforts against coronavirus. The man is virtually inanimate. Complacency and contradiction are the watchwords for the Trump administration. His only concern is to try and talk up the stock market.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mark20 on February 27, 2020, 07:40:34 am
Republicans are missing a trick and the Conservatives ought to be throwing everything we've got at it. If it's mainly the elderly that die, just think what 500k fewer Conservative voters would mean for them!
A mass outbreak could be good news for fit and healthy millenials hoping to get on the property ladder...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tommytwotone on February 27, 2020, 09:51:36 am
Think there's a heck of a lot of availability bias going on here:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Availability_heuristic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Availability_heuristic)


Yes it's spreading fast, but my reading of it is that the mortality rate is higher than average from "normal" flu etc, but that it's only the young / old / vulnerable that are at risk.


Compared to the number of cases / deaths per day from heart disease, cancer, stroke (and probably car crashes and stairs to be honest), I think Covid-19 is small beer. Not that the media will report from that perspective, but hey, that's their business model.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on February 27, 2020, 10:02:19 am
Yes it's spreading fast, but my reading of it is that the mortality rate is higher than average from "normal" flu etc, but that it's only the young / old / vulnerable that are at risk.

Not the young, apparently.  The mortality for less than 9 years old is 0% according to this analysis

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/coronavirus-children-are-safer-than-anyone-0l3b5tsc6?shareToken=7a217a73bc89305670c9349e957fd1cf

Comparatively,  its highest above 80 at nearly 15%.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on February 27, 2020, 10:38:39 am
Republicans are missing a trick and the Conservatives ought to be throwing everything we've got at it. If it's mainly the elderly that die, just think what 500k fewer Conservative voters would mean for them!
A mass outbreak could be good news for fit and healthy millenials hoping to get on the property ladder...

And for the prospects of whatever Democrat is facing Trump in November.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on February 27, 2020, 10:55:17 am
Quite a nice summary/comparison of Covid19 to regular Flu here
https://www.livescience.com/new-coronavirus-compare-with-flu.html

Takehome message is regular flu has a mortality rate of c. 0.05% (US data) Covid19 ~2%

Covid19 - 5% of cases were 'critial' where "Critical cases were those that exhibited respiratory failure, septic shock, and/or multiple organ dysfunction/failure"
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: AMorris on February 27, 2020, 12:04:11 pm
I started wondering last night whether booking a week in Font in September was a good idea or not. Not sure whether BMC insurance would cover cancellation if it was necessary.

I have one booked mid April... Fingers crossed for the efficacy of the international effort.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on February 27, 2020, 12:51:02 pm
It's hard to tell what to do really. If we're all going to get it then we might as well get it in France. It just depends what the FCO's advice is. We might even be past the containment phase by then and have given up on quarantining everyone. I was originally reticent out of concern for our young children but it seems at the moment that they might not be affected.

I'm now wondering whether it's worth hanging on a bit to book it in the hope that the price of ferries and Air BnBs plummets in the face of reduced demand!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fultonius on February 27, 2020, 01:06:16 pm
You're concerned about a Font trip in September? Slight over-reaction I would guess. Go on, live normally, and wash your hands before visiting old people.

Also, re: insurance. I'm guessing if you have the money for the holiday, not going is not going to be financially crippling, merely unfortunate. Just book it. Either we'll all be dead, or it will be long forgotten....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on February 27, 2020, 01:16:28 pm
Well obviously nobody has ever been financially crippled by having a holiday cancelled. My concern is that it would be very very disappointing. Stoicism aside, I prefer to avoid disappointment if at all possible. And I have a duty to protect the baby and 3 year old that I would be travelling with from coming to harm. Given that infectious diseases normally kill the very young and the old in greater numbers, I don't think it's an unreasonable concern to have or have had.


I'm struggling to remember my Exodus now. We've had the plague of locusts in east Africa, the storms in the midlands, now it's pestilence. Are we on boils or frogs next?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on February 27, 2020, 01:23:14 pm
boiling frogs.

No, that's just us as the earth gets hotter.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: csl on February 27, 2020, 01:48:30 pm
Well obviously nobody has ever been financially crippled by having a holiday cancelled. My concern is that it would be very very disappointing. Stoicism aside, I prefer to avoid disappointment if at all possible. And I have a duty to protect the baby and 3 year old that I would be travelling with from coming to harm. Given that infectious diseases normally kill the very young and the old in greater numbers, I don't think it's an unreasonable concern to have or have had.


I'm struggling to remember my Exodus now. We've had the plague of locusts in east Africa, the storms in the midlands, now it's pestilence. Are we on boils or frogs next?

The young are less likely to become infected with it, but they might pass it on to you https://www.statnews.com/2020/02/27/coronavirus-kids-what-role-transmission/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on February 27, 2020, 03:33:45 pm
Hold out Will. There are apparently lots of travel and hotel bargains now because of people cancelling.

I can only see the situation getting worse for now...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: T_B on February 27, 2020, 04:44:47 pm
Maybe in destinations where there have been outbreaks, but that means more demand elsewhere as people/tour operators switch to alternatives.

But, yes if you want to go to Venice next week you can probably get a bargain.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on February 27, 2020, 04:50:37 pm

And for the prospects of whatever Democrat is facing Trump in November.

Are you sure? The Guardian reports that Trump thinks there is next to no risk
Quote
In a press conference in Washington, the US president said the danger to Americans “remains very low” and predicted that the number of cases diagnosed in the country, currently on 15, could fall to zero in a “few days”.
“We have had tremendous success, tremendous success, beyond what people would have thought.

If you can take Trump at his word, then his administration is clearly ahead of the rest of the world..
Quote
Whatever happens, we’re totally prepared,
:-\ :-\
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dr_botnik on February 28, 2020, 12:17:19 am
Quite a nice summary/comparison of Covid19 to regular Flu here
https://www.livescience.com/new-coronavirus-compare-with-flu.html

Takehome message is regular flu has a mortality rate of c. 0.05% (US data) Covid19 ~2%

Covid19 - 5% of cases were 'critial' where "Critical cases were those that exhibited respiratory failure, septic shock, and/or multiple organ dysfunction/failure"

Ok, on the surface, that seems worrying. However, later in the article it says;

Quote
...in Hubei Province, the epicenter of the outbreak, the death rate reached 2.9%; in other provinces of China, that rate was just 0.4%

So, 0.4% is higher than the flu, but significantly lower than 2%.
One explanation for the higher 2.9% in the Hubei Province could be due to higher rates of respiratory illness due to the extremely high levels of atmospheric pollution (https://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/blog/1820/bad-to-worse-ranking-74-chinese-cities-by-air-pollution/) in the area. Death rates won't be so high in areas where children have seen distinct clouds
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mark s on February 28, 2020, 08:47:37 am
Ive seen reports of it in buxton
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Muenchener on February 28, 2020, 08:52:47 am
Massively cheap flights to Barcelona right now due to cancellation of the Mobile World Congress - huge telco industry shindig. Thought about a long weekend in Siurana but decided it would be irresponsible (see also Long Haul Flights thread)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on February 28, 2020, 09:16:02 am
Thought about a long weekend in Siurana but decided it would be irresponsible (see also Long Haul Flights thread)

Emitting some extra CO2 might be responsible - hot weather stops coronavirus..


Pedants:
(a.  I'm aware hot weather possibly doesn't stop coronavirus, and b. a joke)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: AMorris on February 28, 2020, 10:30:50 am
Death on his pale horse has trotted into Wales :wavecry:
It's been a pleasure lads
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on February 28, 2020, 11:19:44 am
Death on his pale horse has trotted into Wales :wavecry:
It's been a pleasure lads

Hopefully just Pestilence on the white horse rather than the last rider!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: 36chambers on February 28, 2020, 11:44:00 am
My brother's been living in China for the past 18 months. He came back to the UK for a holiday about a week before the whole thing kicked off. Having been at my parents' house for a month (or so) he's now gone back to China because he'd rather take his chances there than spend another day in Lancashire :lol:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dunnyg on February 28, 2020, 12:09:47 pm
Understandable
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: AMorris on February 28, 2020, 01:41:37 pm
As depressing as it is to say, I was waiting for this article...
https://nypost.com/2020/02/27/americans-are-avoiding-corona-beer-amid-coronavirus-outbreak-survey-finds/?fbclid=IwAR2KoE8eRmKKGiwDBNm0M1Q3WyfE3377b96w0fNGvgWjFadoTUOig3tiFMA (https://nypost.com/2020/02/27/americans-are-avoiding-corona-beer-amid-coronavirus-outbreak-survey-finds/?fbclid=IwAR2KoE8eRmKKGiwDBNm0M1Q3WyfE3377b96w0fNGvgWjFadoTUOig3tiFMA)

Though it's worth taking with a pinch of salt. Sampling bias, loaded questions etc.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on February 28, 2020, 01:51:18 pm
Though it's worth taking with a pinch of salt. Sampling bias, loaded questions etc.

And a slice of lime.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on February 28, 2020, 10:34:19 pm
Death on his pale horse has trotted into Wales :wavecry:

By the by, there's a fantastic short novel by Katherine Anne Porter called Pale Horse, Pale Rider that focuses on the influenza epidemic of 1918/19. Most apposite reading for these times, and a simply brilliant piece of writing.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on February 28, 2020, 10:44:49 pm
Quote
The old and the sick. The current fatality rate is less than 0.5% for people under the age of 50. But it rises to 8% for people in their 70s and 15% for people over 80. Meanwhile, nearly 11% of people with diseases of the heart died when infected. As did 7% of people with diabetes and 6% of people with long-term lung problems. The average for healthy people is 0.9%.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51683428

Thats really grim reading - especially having spent the day with my 80+ yo parents...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: eastside on February 29, 2020, 03:55:46 pm
Quite a nice summary/comparison of Covid19 to regular Flu here
https://www.livescience.com/new-coronavirus-compare-with-flu.html

Takehome message is regular flu has a mortality rate of c. 0.05% (US data) Covid19 ~2%

Covid19 - 5% of cases were 'critial' where "Critical cases were those that exhibited respiratory failure, septic shock, and/or multiple organ dysfunction/failure"

Ok, on the surface, that seems worrying. However, later in the article it says;

Quote
...in Hubei Province, the epicenter of the outbreak, the death rate reached 2.9%; in other provinces of China, that rate was just 0.4%

So, 0.4% is higher than the flu, but significantly lower than 2%.
One explanation for the higher 2.9% in the Hubei Province could be due to higher rates of respiratory illness due to the extremely high levels of atmospheric pollution (https://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/blog/1820/bad-to-worse-ranking-74-chinese-cities-by-air-pollution/) in the area. Death rates won't be so high in areas where children have seen distinct clouds

The most worrying thing to me is that if this thing truly reaches pandemic proportions, and I think that's likely at this point, it has the potential to completely overwhelm the healthcare systems worldwide. Even in first world countries we only have the capacity to provide critical care to ~0.1% of the population. If 5% of the population becomes critically ill, most of those people are just going to die as there will be no way to properly care for them. We only have so many ventilators for example, so if you need one that isn't available because they're all already in use, you're screwed. With this in mind it may well be that the later cases will have a higher mortality than earlier cases as the earlier cases are more likely to actually get proper care.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on February 29, 2020, 07:12:02 pm
I think one of the main reasons for trying to slow the spread of the virus is so the impact is spread over a few months on a health system - rather than all happen at once.

I was reading the personal account of a Chinese man (20 something) in Wuhan who has recovered - but was amazed to read that despite being self quarantined he still had 2-3 ct scans, was given retrovirals and anti HIV drugs and IV antibiotics that probably cleared up his lung problems.

That’s a high level of treatment from a stretched Chinese healthcare system.  would that happen in the UK - or US - esp of c.20% of the population have no healthcare??
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on February 29, 2020, 07:23:24 pm
US - esp of c.20% of the population have no healthcare??

The un- or underinsured in the US are, almost by definition, more likely to be poor, in more insecure employment, and with very few resources on which to fall back. They are probably much more likely to ignore symptoms, delay seeing a doctor, and to continue going to work when they feel sick. Not a good recipe.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 29, 2020, 08:08:34 pm
It’s already “escaped” hasn’t it. Too many unexplained cases, too many undiagnosed wandering around.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on February 29, 2020, 08:32:04 pm
It’s already “escaped” hasn’t it. Too many unexplained cases, too many undiagnosed wandering around.

I think so. 1000 cases in Italy. Close to a thousand new ones in SKorea today. God knows how many in Iran....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: duncan on February 29, 2020, 08:34:08 pm
US - esp of c.20% of the population have no healthcare??

The un- or underinsured in the US are, almost by definition, more likely to be poor, in more insecure employment, and with very few resources on which to fall back. They are probably much more likely to ignore symptoms, delay seeing a doctor, and to continue going to work when they feel sick. Not a good recipe.

Exacerbated by having no mandatory sick leave at a national level (some cities and states have it). A considerable public health hazard.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 29, 2020, 08:45:40 pm
I’m walking around Glasgow and just noting how many tourists there are, from just about every corner of the globe (not something I’d normally really remark) and it’s not even the busy season.

I don’t actually see how we could possibly control it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on February 29, 2020, 08:48:04 pm
All about slowing it down and stretching out the impact.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: moose on February 29, 2020, 08:59:26 pm
I’m walking around Glasgow and just noting how many tourists there are, from just about every corner of the globe (not something I’d normally really remark) and it’s not even the busy season.

I don’t actually see how we could possibly control it.

My brother, currently living in Hong Kong, wrote similar to me recently (inbetween exchanges about Fury vs Wilder and LUFC's promotion hopes):

"It’s easy to mock Hong Kongers’ paranoia getting such that they’re committing armed robberies to get hold of face-masks and toilet roll (actually happened), but, on the other hand, at least they take it seriously and know what to do - plenty of experience of these epidemics! They’ll go months without going to cafes / pubs /  sports events if they need to. Schools closed down. I just can’t see European governments / people adjusting to it quickly enough.

...Let’s put things in perspective by comparing it to the plague. It’s not as bad as the plague."
 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 29, 2020, 09:07:07 pm
I’m walking around Glasgow and just noting how many tourists there are, from just about every corner of the globe (not something I’d normally really remark) and it’s not even the busy season.

I don’t actually see how we could possibly control it.

My brother, currently living in Hong Kong, wrote similar to me recently (inbetween exchanges about Fury vs Wilder and LUFC's promotion hopes):

"It’s easy to mock Hong Kongers’ paranoia getting such that they’re committing armed robberies to get hold of face-masks and toilet roll (actually happened), but, on the other hand, at least they take it seriously and know what to do - plenty of experience of these epidemics! They’ll go months without going to cafes / pubs /  sports events if they need to. Schools closed down. I just can’t see European governments / people adjusting to it quickly enough.

...Let’s put things in perspective by comparing it to the plague. It’s not as bad as the plague."


We have effective treatments for the Plague...

😱 😜
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 01, 2020, 11:17:32 am
Latest from the US

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/inside-trumps-frantic-attempts-to-minimize-the-coronavirus-crisis/2020/02/29/7ebc882a-5b25-11ea-9b35-def5a027d470_story.html
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 01, 2020, 11:59:49 am
A friend messaged me with a link to a 'Global Research' website article on COVID-19 being a fake pandemic...

As usual, extreme events produce extreme explanations....

To paraphrase, according to Professor of Economics at Ottowa University Michel Chossudovsky, editor of Global Research:
COVID-19 is an orchestrated plot by the US and other powerful institutions, to isolate and destabilise China and use the resultant economic fall-out to concentrate wealth into the hands of said powerful interests.
Facilitated by the WHO and global media interests.
A smoking gun is the John Hopkins National Security global pandemic simulation run in October 2019.
Other benefactors of the plot are the 'big 5' global vaccine producers.

Obvious really when you think about it. :blink:

Quote from: Global Research
About the author:
Michel Chossudovsky is an award-winning author, Professor of Economics (emeritus) at the University of Ottawa, Founder and Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), Montreal, Editor of Global Research.  He has taught as visiting professor in Western Europe, Southeast Asia, the Pacific and Latin America. He has served as economic adviser to governments of developing countries and has acted as a consultant for several international organizations. He is the author of eleven books including The Globalization of Poverty and The New World Order (2003), America’s “War on Terrorism” (2005), The Global Economic Crisis, The Great Depression of the Twenty-first Century (2009) (Editor), Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War (2011), The Globalization of War, America's Long War against Humanity (2015). He is a contributor to the Encyclopaedia Britannica.  His writings have been published in more than twenty languages. In 2014, he was awarded the Gold Medal for Merit of the Republic of Serbia for his writings on NATO's war of aggression against Yugoslavia. He can be reached at crgeditor@yahoo.com

An alternative view about the author:
Quote from: wikipedia
Michel Chossudovsky (born 1946) is a Canadian economist, author and conspiracy theorist.[1][2] He is professor emeritus of economics at the University of Ottawa[3][4] and the president and director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), which publishes conspiracy theories.[5][6][7][8] Chossudovsky has promoted 9/11 conspiracy theories.[9][10][13][14]

In 2017, the Centre for Research on Globalization was accused by NATO information warfare specialists of playing a key role in the spread of pro-Russian propaganda.[6]

Chossudovsky is the son of a Russian Jewish émigré, the career United Nations diplomat and academic Evgeny Chossudovsky, and an Irish Protestant, Rachel Sullivan.[15] Raised in Switzerland, Chossudovsky moved to Canada and joined the University of Ottawa in 1968.[13][16] According to the Ottawa Citizen, Chossudovsky's academic research kept him "on the margins of mainstream academia," but won praise from anti-establishment intellectuals such as Noam Chomsky. In 2005, shortly after Chossudovsky began writing about terrorism, the Citizen reported that Chossudovsky's was "a popular figure among anti-globalization activists," and that some of his students referred to him as "Canada's Chomsky."[13] At that time, some colleagues were becoming uncomfortable with Chossudovsky's ideas, with one professor describing them as having "a conspiratorial element."[13]


Seems there's also a risk of a pandemic of misinformation/conspiracy theories.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sheavi on March 01, 2020, 02:08:35 pm
Global Research is a crank website

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Globalresearch
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 01, 2020, 02:29:29 pm
Why give them (conspiracy sites) the oxygen...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 01, 2020, 07:05:29 pm
Yep, posting here because clearly 'Global Research' have some traction online. My friend isn't an idiot but apparently prone to believing stuff he shouldn't. He asked me what I thought about their article. I replied that he should spend 5 minutes researching the author.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: eastside on March 01, 2020, 07:11:46 pm
I think one of the main reasons for trying to slow the spread of the virus is so the impact is spread over a few months on a health system - rather than all happen at once.

I was reading the personal account of a Chinese man (20 something) in Wuhan who has recovered - but was amazed to read that despite being self quarantined he still had 2-3 ct scans, was given retrovirals and anti HIV drugs and IV antibiotics that probably cleared up his lung problems.

That’s a high level of treatment from a stretched Chinese healthcare system.  would that happen in the UK - or US - esp of c.20% of the population have no healthcare??

It will certainly reduce mortality to have the cases spread out over time.

About the "20% have no healthcare", that's a bit of a misconception. 20% may have no health insurance but that doesn't mean that they don't get care. Under US law, all people must receive appropriate emergency and inpatient care regardless of their insurance or ability to pay. The bigger concern IMO is the actual limit of the healthcare system to provide care, and the inability to expand that capacity in a meaningful and timely manner.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 01, 2020, 07:33:38 pm
Yes abs - my mistake 20% without insurance.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 01, 2020, 10:45:47 pm
Nice twitter thread (merged) about longevity on surfaces and transmissivity.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1233807348306792448.html
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 02, 2020, 07:26:33 am
This is also worth watching:

 https://zdoggmd.com/peter-hotez-coronavirus/ (https://zdoggmd.com/peter-hotez-coronavirus/)

Though, at ~40 minutes I haven’t finished it yet (I have school!😱), so if it turns to crap after ~0:20:00, sorry.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 02, 2020, 08:48:59 am
Scotland has fallen.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on March 02, 2020, 09:07:31 am
I think one of the main reasons for trying to slow the spread of the virus is so the impact is spread over a few months on a health system - rather than all happen at once.

I was reading the personal account of a Chinese man (20 something) in Wuhan who has recovered - but was amazed to read that despite being self quarantined he still had 2-3 ct scans, was given retrovirals and anti HIV drugs and IV antibiotics that probably cleared up his lung problems.

That’s a high level of treatment from a stretched Chinese healthcare system.  would that happen in the UK - or US - esp of c.20% of the population have no healthcare??

It will certainly reduce mortality to have the cases spread out over time.

About the "20% have no healthcare", that's a bit of a misconception. 20% may have no health insurance but that doesn't mean that they don't get care.
Doesn't an inability to pay and a fear of potentially being bankrupted for receiving care lead to people avoiding seeking the care they need?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on March 02, 2020, 09:28:04 am
Scotland has fallen.
SNP planning to send in 500,000,000,000 midges to eat the virus...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Mugabe251 on March 02, 2020, 12:37:23 pm
Madagascar has reportedly closed all ports and blocked all international flights.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 02, 2020, 12:53:22 pm
This is also worth watching:

 https://zdoggmd.com/peter-hotez-coronavirus/ (https://zdoggmd.com/peter-hotez-coronavirus/)

This was very good. Worth listening to. Some interesting comments. 14.8% of health professionals working with cases in China developed severe symptoms (requiring hospitalisation) much higher than the public levels. This has key implications as you could easily run out of people to treat the ill/sick...

Vaccine would take at least a year to develop because vaccines have the most stringent of regulations/trials needed etc.. (thanks anti vaccers..).

Transmissivity is 1:4 - 1 person will pass it on to 4. This puts it between the regular flu at 1:2, Ebola 1:2 and Measles 1:14. But still not completely sure whether its transmitted via very small droplets (like measles).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 02, 2020, 03:40:50 pm
Apparently Boris and Matt were wrong about the NHS at the weekend. Who could have seen that coming?

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/mar/02/coronavirus-just-eight-out-of-1600-doctors-in-poll-say-nhs-is-ready


Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 02, 2020, 04:34:12 pm
5 schools in Torbay closed. Waiting on an email. after a meeting this evening, to find out if my youngest two’s primary is closing tomorrow or not.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on March 02, 2020, 06:22:06 pm
How long are they planning on shutting them for OMM?  Also interested to hear what advice parents are getting, are they children now supposed to avoid contact with others and stay at home.??
No closures in the North of the Shire at present.  Two schools have recently returned from ski trips to Northern Italy, they have all returned as normal because they weren’t in the areas defined as high risk by the Italian government.

On the plus side air quality in China is on the up.  There is the possibility that air pollution related mortality could be reduced as a result.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 02, 2020, 06:25:54 pm
I don’t know.
Unfortunately, my info is filtered through text messages from my partner, but I gather they’re all schools who did the half term ski trips to Italy, or those who had siblings on the same.
My kid’s school is staying open for now.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: jwi on March 03, 2020, 01:57:59 pm
But on the positive side, sales of Camus's The Plague and Saramago's Blindness are skyrocketing https://www.actualitte.com/article/monde-edition/italie-a-l-ere-du-coronavirus-la-peste-de-camus-devient-un-best-seller/99478
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 03, 2020, 02:16:57 pm
Strangely, Kierkegaard’s The Sickness Unto Death seems not to have had the same boost  :-\
https://www.naturalthinker.net/trl/texts/Kierkegaard,Soren/TheSicknessUntoDeath.pdfday
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: jwi on March 03, 2020, 02:58:30 pm
Strangely, Kierkegaard’s The Sickness Unto Death seems not to have had the same boost  :-\
https://www.naturalthinker.net/trl/texts/Kierkegaard,Soren/TheSicknessUntoDeath.pdf

There you go

also
http://existentialcomics.com/comic/204
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 03, 2020, 03:13:06 pm
Okay, that's a find, cheers.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 03, 2020, 07:52:43 pm
This article (albeit sky news) has some really good graphs showing ocurrences and death rates amongst different age groups - as well as for those with existing conditions.

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-reality-check-how-worried-should-we-be-11948003

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tommytwotone on March 03, 2020, 08:45:26 pm
My sister in law (NHS nurse) has (been) volunteered to be a "swabber" - sent is a photo from earlier when she was being fitted for all her protective clobber. Full hazmat, mask, the lot!  :o


FWIW, her take re: being worried etc was "nah, just wash your hands well and don't panic. More people die of seasonal flu. 3.5k globally from Corona and 17.5k from seasonal flu..."



Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on March 03, 2020, 10:09:42 pm
More people die of seasonal flu. 3.5k globally from Corona

To date...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 04, 2020, 08:08:06 am
I've been following the worldwide stats on here, it updates every hour or so: https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html?fbclid=IwAR3IgaBUvTEKarHvo-1vZMAQ0ncJb5NJZtkvASQndO75eRYHlxOT9QNzQyU#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6

Feels very bond villain's lair:
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/BMC6GBm85omS-MS6UrPeOurXDnWBAH4Yml16kivfdvbMp-ZXD7FTK-i9TWCKXEu-hMYaR2TH0qC9bW8843kVpxUHwbgDsZ_Qv2IJn-V28SNdG_Mw9mlX449oxemNf0t7lrvSftMh6LKfBnJ4dAo3nqCY_q0ZNQjXD4xSojf1b-lM2vbR16eTAgVUrG--9iEwGtiKlAFWIl2iTX34iA4FU_ktoavRfdYik527RKrR2UEIaVpFhwJgVLfI0b0Rj5uduDhSiiyl0Are7DFnUXGRke3tD52Tzh-8AeoriUaqd6_fYsDtW2skZYfebCfj3emEH_2ZT3RbSdI-2RGCdZTf9ALlj-37KihxXZBzozhjsc26nSe0GqFtoGVQXw676vT4h-K7cAqZ81ZFLgMhMqiRyY6Pd2tMg8YMdGea-AtcUTe0JflE57W3OC68X_10qBOBwVwIza_6TMgpO5jznv_YP75Kp-nUQXnd9kDKTxAFU-76p8pQM3CQU8H05iMHCjcgfuALJUWiwquI_cpO7sn-t_249I9HNWPchE-wNpV5dYXt-mi_aHKS1j_Moc2JW1RV78zZ84oZkI7nIOSMaPInMKGEQNDrThhgKGc49Lho_47ytYQLkxA2hjfi_wFiVFQ_toMwfk-btODwXSRW8enG3Zxs7nGI61gZUd0yjwUaKTg6JHGh95oH=w1914-h935-no)


Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 04, 2020, 09:57:14 am

FWIW, her take re: being worried etc was "nah, just wash your hands well and don't panic. More people die of seasonal flu. 3.5k globally from Corona and 17.5k from seasonal flu..."

That's a daft attitude as the mortality rates are estimated as at least  ten times greater and for the majority who recover the proportion with long term health effects are much higher.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/03/yes-worse-than-flu-busting-coronavirus-myths-covid-19

It seems retired NHS workers are not so keen to return to help as the government implied.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/04/majority-of-retired-nhs-staff-dont-want-to-return-to-tackle-covid-19-crisis

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nik at work on March 04, 2020, 10:28:52 am

That's a daft attitude
Rude...
And...
No it’s not. It’s exactly the attitude (albeit expressed in a slightly more refined way) of every medical professional I have spoken to.

Employ sensible effective strategies that can be readily and willingly implemented by the population and have an appropriate cost:benefit. And crack on.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on March 04, 2020, 10:50:10 am

That's a daft attitude
Rude...
And...
No it’s not. It’s exactly the attitude (albeit expressed in a slightly more refined way) of every medical professional I have spoken to.

Employ sensible effective strategies that can be readily and willingly implemented by the population and have an appropriate cost:benefit. And crack on.

I'd agree. Unfortunately people will get, some will die from it. Obviously best to try to minimise this as much as possible, but not at the expense of trashing the economy and bothering with jumping up and down getting frightfully worried and panic buying toilet paper
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 04, 2020, 10:54:27 am
We have a stores full of FFP3 face masks here.. willing to negotiate a good price for bulk orders... will even chuck in a free bottle of hand sanitiser for orders over 100..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: highrepute on March 04, 2020, 11:00:10 am
More people die of seasonal flu. 3.5k globally from Corona

To date...

The 18k figure for flu is also to date... this season
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Steve R on March 04, 2020, 11:19:30 am
We have a stores full of FFP3 face masks here.. willing to negotiate a good price for bulk orders... will even chuck in a free bottle of hand sanitiser for orders over 100..

Get 'em on ebay!  The sales figures for last few days are startling :o eg. this (https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/FFP3-Face-Mask-3M-8835-Valved-Safety-Breathing-Respirator-Dust-Particle-Filter/152814464216?_trkparms=ispr%3D1&hash=item239473acd8:m:mMpMdcydUjqnB5gxAb9tavg&enc=AQAEAAACQBPxNw%2BVj6nta7CKEs3N0qU3Yv5f7gO4W4%2BUIkPhW6wWy3CHWrmZ%2FDl30tYfTjTxcoGq2S7gLrSIl27kteMW6Z%2B80XrbZbxK2w7%2By3svXGTDApXI74CtZ8Fp0dsToOep49IdR3c%2FoAnAFg7QPuqZY3adQxTDBDjvY5SMsAo93OfMQiTENJ21yYyIYeInQbvInNcEUtIo7BTQ0UWtTlv%2F%2BDXzElrpJ9G43u%2Feqvj7HcW%2FxRD9e5ILSJYwWAXQU2wKOkE1jALex94TAZzkoDofFQTQAmDz2dIrPiClB3LkxD6xNveUZbZeQ8l%2FEhiuLK9ua5x9adMu2PuON%2FoINvwxqIvZK8tUCkf6GyxvLlgOW24pPtXPUTTdjK3rm4itz55RQpUR56uUxZKLek0aEjzlOiUDxSQeldCB8A2fasw6fCr6j4s1cnyUZm7RCbcMvLPF8zIr6svIq8YnSIREJXQgdqLVpaMOjObtF4oUWBF3Gnwxwd2%2FDo9f2yK9q6xBc%2FoEk8%2B7zEHElbDrPzRMA9uv%2FlrbAOBEcQLZGBAbyilvPZRZwCbSFV%2B%2BuTaoBHlsaYMy%2Ff0FpAZLcUBKEJ%2BTTjqIX3pGYyYt%2B8xYyf9ASbOGAtaFe4mo2ftJJ7lGRJrFZlmO0j0%2F%2Ffte5YiTkw4L27%2FfZyjq9rYgR13%2BiC84xUVV82lr4dJIUooAbgDMt4z%2BDB8q%2Fw7ntUlWe5MRwWOAINT4dabMD0t%2Fb3kwH3IeZsEBkeq%2BTf7vqd44DBp%2BKQwioJibOg%3D%3D&checksum=152814464216ecc339ff5a484d8c9cd79ce62f96124e)
Depending on the size of your storeroom, you could be retired by June?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on March 04, 2020, 11:50:13 am

The 18k figure for flu is also to date... this season

Apologies to TTT I should have checked
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tommytwotone on March 04, 2020, 12:01:12 pm
I think the other thing, in terms of perspective is looking at historical cause of death. Being a sad man I found the Office Of National Statistics lets you download data on causes of death.

Sadly the most recent they have is 2018, but - taking for example Males, aged between 5 and 50, leading causes of death:

- Suicide: 2403
- Accidental Poisoning: 2057
- Land Traffic Accident: 450

A reminder that Covid-19 has (yes yes, so far) resulted in 1 UK death.

Did you worry excessively about your morning commute (assuming you drove in) this morning?


NB: Influenza and pneumonia killed 21,955 80+ year-olds that year alone.


Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 04, 2020, 12:17:26 pm
We have a stores full of FFP3 face masks here.. willing to negotiate a good price for bulk orders... will even chuck in a free bottle of hand sanitiser for orders over 100..

Get 'em on ebay!  The sales figures for last few days are startling :o eg. this (https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/FFP3-Face-Mask-3M-8835-Valved-Safety-Breathing-Respirator-Dust-Particle-Filter/152814464216?_trkparms=ispr%3D1&hash=item239473acd8:m:mMpMdcydUjqnB5gxAb9tavg&enc=AQAEAAACQBPxNw%2BVj6nta7CKEs3N0qU3Yv5f7gO4W4%2BUIkPhW6wWy3CHWrmZ%2FDl30tYfTjTxcoGq2S7gLrSIl27kteMW6Z%2B80XrbZbxK2w7%2By3svXGTDApXI74CtZ8Fp0dsToOep49IdR3c%2FoAnAFg7QPuqZY3adQxTDBDjvY5SMsAo93OfMQiTENJ21yYyIYeInQbvInNcEUtIo7BTQ0UWtTlv%2F%2BDXzElrpJ9G43u%2Feqvj7HcW%2FxRD9e5ILSJYwWAXQU2wKOkE1jALex94TAZzkoDofFQTQAmDz2dIrPiClB3LkxD6xNveUZbZeQ8l%2FEhiuLK9ua5x9adMu2PuON%2FoINvwxqIvZK8tUCkf6GyxvLlgOW24pPtXPUTTdjK3rm4itz55RQpUR56uUxZKLek0aEjzlOiUDxSQeldCB8A2fasw6fCr6j4s1cnyUZm7RCbcMvLPF8zIr6svIq8YnSIREJXQgdqLVpaMOjObtF4oUWBF3Gnwxwd2%2FDo9f2yK9q6xBc%2FoEk8%2B7zEHElbDrPzRMA9uv%2FlrbAOBEcQLZGBAbyilvPZRZwCbSFV%2B%2BuTaoBHlsaYMy%2Ff0FpAZLcUBKEJ%2BTTjqIX3pGYyYt%2B8xYyf9ASbOGAtaFe4mo2ftJJ7lGRJrFZlmO0j0%2F%2Ffte5YiTkw4L27%2FfZyjq9rYgR13%2BiC84xUVV82lr4dJIUooAbgDMt4z%2BDB8q%2Fw7ntUlWe5MRwWOAINT4dabMD0t%2Fb3kwH3IeZsEBkeq%2BTf7vqd44DBp%2BKQwioJibOg%3D%3D&checksum=152814464216ecc339ff5a484d8c9cd79ce62f96124e)
Depending on the size of your storeroom, you could be retired by June?


Holy shit that's crazy! We have literally hundreds :-\..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sheavi on March 04, 2020, 12:33:02 pm
I think the other thing, in terms of perspective is looking at historical cause of death. Being a sad man I found the Office Of National Statistics lets you download data on causes of death.

Sadly the most recent they have is 2018, but - taking for example Males, aged between 5 and 50, leading causes of death:

- Suicide: 2403
- Accidental Poisoning: 2057
- Land Traffic Accident: 450

A reminder that Covid-19 has (yes yes, so far) resulted in 1 UK death.

Did you worry excessively about your morning commute (assuming you drove in) this morning?


NB: Influenza and pneumonia killed 21,955 80+ year-olds that year alone.

Comparisons are intersting but not necessarily relevant - yet.  Unlike the flu there is no immunity to Covid 19 - hence many people are likely to get it en mass.  A proportion will need hospital care, not to mention mass absence within the NHS, schools, businesses, policing etc.  Worst case scenario the government is working on is 80% infection rate in the UK with 1% mortality (approx 500K deaths).  Unlikely I know. Even at a 20% infection rate that's approx. 130K deaths.  The lack of adequate healthcare across the board will also likely trigger other preventable deaths.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 04, 2020, 01:31:17 pm

taking for example Males, aged between 5 and 50, leading causes of death


Statistically it's unlikely that when most of us get it it will kill us / do long lasting harm (even though I will shortly be outside of the demographic provided above). Elderly relatives, on the other hand, are a cause for concern..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tommytwotone on March 04, 2020, 02:23:14 pm
Indeed - back to the Sky News article T2 posted above.

I'm more worried about my nearly-retired Mum working in the NHS, and her older partner than I am about me, my other half, the kids etc.

TBH my missus has had 2 kids with no pain relief, and nearly carked it due to Sepsis a couple of years back when she was adamant it was "just a cold". She is clearly hard as nails, and has some mad level of immune system that I've never seen before.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on March 04, 2020, 02:41:30 pm
3 cases in my wife's hospital and she is currently being fitted for a mask. It now feels a bit real (especially with a 4 yo with persistent lung issues).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 04, 2020, 03:04:47 pm

That's a daft attitude
Rude...
And...
No it’s not. It’s exactly the attitude (albeit expressed in a slightly more refined way) of every medical professional I have spoken to.

Employ sensible effective strategies that can be readily and willingly implemented by the population and have an appropriate cost:benefit. And crack on.

I guess we will know who is being rude here by this time next week.  I think this is serious and people need to take much greater care than with flu. Populations don't tend to do sensible in the face of a novel epidemic and the secondary effects because of that may be as bad as that of the virus. Finally your anecdotal medical pofessionals don't seem to fit the pessimism in the survey data I linked above (copied again).

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/mar/02/coronavirus-just-eight-out-of-1600-doctors-in-poll-say-nhs-is-ready
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 04, 2020, 03:23:51 pm
It can simultaneously be a cause for concern (for elderly relatives, family in health service etc) and also think that its being massively overhyped to the point of ridiculousness. Just wash your hands and crack on; all you can do in any case.

Edit: I suppose actually the more interesting question to pose is what do people who are very worried about it expect everyone else to do? Short of cancelling everything and going into Camus-esque Plague style lockdown (and even that might not work) I don't see what else there is to do but carry on as normal and keep your fingers crossed.

From Private Eye:

1,666 - Deaths recorded as result of new coronavirus by last Sunday, according to World Health Organization

290,000–650,000 - Deaths from respiratory diseases linked to seasonal flu each year, according to World Health Organization.

and from its medical correspondent:

https://twitter.com/rolandmcs/status/1233463414367956996
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tommytwotone on March 04, 2020, 03:33:22 pm
I should add that I'm not being naive here - for the majority of us I'm assuming the prognosis here is you'll get it at some point, it'll be pretty horrible, despite your best efforts you'll probably pass it on to a few people, but ultimately you'll get better.

As Nik (and others) have said, the strategies are about ensure that the above doesn't happen to millions of people all at once, and that when it does people don't overreact.

I'm not sure that the media reporting about "killer viruses", panic buying and hand sanitiser shortage is particularly responsible in this context.




Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 04, 2020, 03:39:05 pm

I'm not sure that the media reporting about "killer viruses", panic buying and hand sanitiser shortage is particularly responsible in this context.

This is the key issue for me. In Australia people are panic buying toilet roll for christs sake!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 04, 2020, 04:19:10 pm
Well the recommendation is to use tissues to sneeze into. Bogans use it for that..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Lopez on March 04, 2020, 04:50:14 pm
The vietnamese got it all worked out

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAbDnNlig1A
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 04, 2020, 04:58:13 pm
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.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 04, 2020, 05:15:45 pm
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.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 04, 2020, 05:45:39 pm
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.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on March 04, 2020, 05:46:22 pm
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  :blink:. 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!).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nik at work on March 04, 2020, 06:37:45 pm
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.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nik at work on March 04, 2020, 06:38:47 pm
Fucking auto correct bollocks.... grrr
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 04, 2020, 07:13:22 pm
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 (https://www.vox.com/2020/3/2/21161067/coronavirus-covid19-china?utm_campaign=vox.social&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&utm_content=ezraklein)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nik at work on March 04, 2020, 09:04:23 pm
Also appear to have confused sister in law for wife... doh. Sorry
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 04, 2020, 10:36:59 pm
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/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 04, 2020, 10:53:17 pm
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.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tommytwotone on March 04, 2020, 11:21:24 pm
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.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 05, 2020, 09:08:23 am
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.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 05, 2020, 09:13:24 am
https://twitter.com/i/status/1235264960172871680 (https://twitter.com/i/status/1235264960172871680)

Someone who actually speaks some sense.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 05, 2020, 09:16:57 am
Off width- is that the bullshit about not giving daily updates? If so. Agree. Nuts decision.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 05, 2020, 09:25:43 am
Yes ... a petition has started on the subject..... click and see

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/300322/moderation-info
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 05, 2020, 09:27:33 am
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...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 05, 2020, 09:43:56 am
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.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 05, 2020, 09:48:38 am
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.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 05, 2020, 09:53:49 am
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
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dunnyg on March 05, 2020, 10:02:53 am
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).

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 05, 2020, 10:12:05 am

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!


Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dunnyg on March 05, 2020, 10:13:45 am
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.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 05, 2020, 10:21:21 am
I think misinformation will fill the gaps between updates, stoking anxiety and speculation more than informing the public in a prompt and sober fashion.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 05, 2020, 10:31:45 am


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


Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 05, 2020, 10:51:47 am
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."
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 05, 2020, 10:55:38 am
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..

Well yes exactly - the takeaways of that being:
Under-reporting of relatively non-deadly viruses isn't unique to covid-19.
Both flu and covid-19 have lower global mortality rates than the figure obtained by deaths/reported cases, rates increasing with age.


....in any case you can only count deaths against reported cases.


As explained just now by the Chief Medical Officer:

Deaths divided by reported cases does not give you the 'mortality rate' of a virus it give you 'deaths per reported cases'.

'Mortality rate' is obtained by deaths divided by total number of cases, which can be estimated by modelling.

Covid-19 mortality rate is currently estimated at 1% of total cases reported/unreported/asymptomatic.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 05, 2020, 11:35:41 am
Flu mortality rate is estimated at 0.1%

WHO know more than you do Pete. The lower figure of 0.7% is in China outside the early area affected with no expense spared on access to respirators and oxygen and state compulsion on treatment.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/24/who-says-coronavirus-outbreak-in-china-has-peaked-new-cases-in-iran-and-italy-are-deeply-concerning.html
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 05, 2020, 11:39:09 am
Offwidth, what do you actually want to happen? At the moment your posts just read like you typing away frantically in an ever increasing panic. I have reservations about how much any government can do in these situations.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 05, 2020, 11:50:25 am
Re China. The podcast that OMM linked to a couple of pages back featuring a discussion with a virologist (N American) - states that the Chinese had been excellent at giving out info. The virus was sequenced incredibly fast and the results posted on line. All the research and findings about how it behaves and is transferred in China had been freely posted... he seemed to think it couldn’t have been done much better.

It’s easy to put the Chinese response in conspiracy theory territory because they are an authoritarian regime etc..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 05, 2020, 12:03:30 pm
Offwidth what on earth are you talking about - I've just posted exactly what the chief medical officer has said publicly in the televised select committee Q&A, where he said the global mortality rate for covid-19 is estimated at 1%. He broke that down into different populations for age, various different underlying conditions, even down to pointing out the risk for smokers versus non-smokers. Is that not valid enough information for you?
He also answered many other questions, many of which hit on similar points made in your long post copy/pasting the WHO doc. I really don't see what you're getting at.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dunnyg on March 05, 2020, 12:13:43 pm
Being a large authoritarian regime does seem like it can be extremely useful in situations like this, having a huge pool of resources you have direct control over is a useful asset, combined with a population who are used to doing what they are told.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 05, 2020, 12:59:12 pm
Being a large authoritarian regime does seem like it can be extremely useful in situations like this, having a huge pool of resources you have direct control over is a useful asset, combined with a population who are used to doing what they are told.

A dictatorship can build an empire in the time is takes a democracy to decide who’s keeping the minutes of their first session.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: duncan on March 05, 2020, 01:25:04 pm

Being a large authoritarian regime does seem like it can be extremely useful in situations like this, having a huge pool of resources you have direct control over is a useful asset, combined with a population who are used to doing what they are told.

This is the 'At least Mussolini made the trains run on time' argument. Which is untrue: any (debatable) short-term improvements in the early part of the Fascist era were largely due to work done by the post WW1 democracy (https://www.thoughtco.com/did-mussolini-get-the-trains-running-on-time-1221609). And in the longer term, the Italian railways were not running so well by 1945.

The counter-argument in this case is that the virus would not have had a chance to propagate so widely in it's early stages had the regime been more open to reporting bad news. Not that silencing whistle-blowers is unique to authoritarian regimes of course.

Compliance by the Chinese population has at least as much to do with Confucian notions of putting collective before individual welfare as they do authoritarian rulers. The latter are pushing at an open door.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: jwi on March 05, 2020, 01:40:14 pm
Free flow of information is worth a hundred quarantines*. China did however do a lot of things right, even if they did the one thing they always do wrong wrong.

*so 140 days then?
Sorry
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: duncan on March 05, 2020, 02:00:00 pm
In other news, my work confirmed it's first case yesterday (https://thetab.com/uk/kings/2020/03/05/a-kings-student-has-been-reportedly-diagnosed-with-coronavirus-28502). We've been directed to Keep Calm and Carry On (I paraphrase).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dunnyg on March 05, 2020, 02:24:32 pm
I suppose one of the advantages of being in the writing up stage is I just sit alone at my desk all day and have limited interaction with students/staff.

I recon if/when cases get reported at my uni, the remote working capabilities are going to get hammered...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 05, 2020, 02:36:19 pm
Being a large authoritarian regime does seem like it can be extremely useful in situations like this, having a huge pool of resources you have direct control over is a useful asset, combined with a population who are used to doing what they are told.

As per our NHS. Will be interesting to see how response in UK/Europe with (generally) state healthcare fares against the more distributed system(1) in the US.

(1) define as you like - you know what I mean, its really quite different...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on March 05, 2020, 02:47:55 pm

As per our NHS. Will be interesting to see how response in UK/Europe with (generally) state healthcare fares against the more distributed system(1) in the US.

As per most things with the NHS I assume it will be a total postcode lottery!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 05, 2020, 02:57:45 pm
Offwidth what on earth are you talking about - I've just posted exactly what the chief medical officer has said publicly in the televised select committee Q&A, where he said the global mortality rate for covid-19 is estimated at 1%. He broke that down into different populations for age, various different underlying conditions, even down to pointing out the risk for smokers versus non-smokers. Is that not valid enough information for you?
He also answered many other questions, many of which hit on similar points made in your long post copy/pasting the WHO doc. I really don't see what you're getting at.

My main point is the mortality rate will almost certainly be 3% or higher when resources are not fully available for the 5% who needed respirators to survive and the 15% who needed weeks on oxygen. WHO urged caution only this week on the 1% figure and said 3% was more likely on average (as it was in China in the initial outbreak).

Your point on people being well enough informed is ridiculous. For starters looking at Twitter it's obvious too many people refuse to learn anything sensible.  I've been watching this closely and learnt a lot from the WHO reports on China . Our government are still peddling the myth that critical cases are only the 5%.... those are the people who will need specialised intensive care to survive, many outside that group will die if the hospital system buckles under the strain and they can't get oxygen. The chief medical officer almost certainly knows the 1% in the UK only applies as long as the outbreak is largely contained and doesn't overwhelm the NHS intensive care capabilities. On the BBC news an unnamed intensive care consultant said Boris's claims on expanding intensive care by 5000 beds were ridiculous.

As I said above it won't take long to see where this is heading and I really hope I'm wrong.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 05, 2020, 03:30:11 pm
Offwidth, what do you actually want to happen? At the moment your posts just read like you typing away frantically in an ever increasing panic. I have reservations about how much any government can do in these situations.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 05, 2020, 03:49:12 pm
Offwidth, what do you actually want to happen? At the moment your posts just read like you typing away frantically in an ever increasing panic. I have reservations about how much any government can do in these situations.

I want honest public health information and advice, to a standard like we have seen in Singapore. I'd like Boris and Matt to be put right by medical experts when they claims by far the majority of people who catch it will have little or moderate symptoms when 15% so far have had serious problems and another 5% require intensive care; and when rabbits they claim to have in hats are largely fictional (we can have fast doubling in intensive care beds, mass recruitment of most retired medical staff is likely etc). I'd like people to be honestly told to be calm as possible but also vigilant as early diagnosis and contact tracking is the best way we keep this from being bigger than it needs to be. It seems to me too few are willing to stand up to this government blustering when we are moving out of (it's almost ubiquirous use in current tory) politics and into life threatening circumstances. I'd like the government and the DHSC to behave as well as experts would want them to
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: eastside on March 05, 2020, 06:03:38 pm
Offwidth, what do you actually want to happen? At the moment your posts just read like you typing away frantically in an ever increasing panic. I have reservations about how much any government can do in these situations.

I want honest public health information and advice, to a standard like we have seen in Singapore. I'd like Boris and Matt to be put right by medical experts when they claims by far the majority of people who catch it will have little or moderate symptoms when 15% so far have had serious problems and another 5% require intensive care; and when rabbits they claim to have in hats are largely fictional (we can have fast doubling in intensive care beds, mass recruitment of most retired medical staff is likely etc). I'd like people to be honestly told to be calm as possible but also vigilant as early diagnosis and contact tracking is the best way we keep this from being bigger than it needs to be. It seems to me too few are willing to stand up to this government blustering when we are moving out of (it's almost ubiquirous use in current tory) politics and into life threatening circumstances. I'd like the government and the DHSC to behave as well as experts would want them to

I'm in full agreement that we are in for major problems. Who exactly is going to be running the ICU after all the doctors and nurses have been quarantined because they have all contracted the virus from patients? In California they quarantined over one hundred healthcare workers just for having been exposed, how's that going to work when there are thousands or millions of infected?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: 36chambers on March 05, 2020, 09:40:59 pm
I suppose one of the advantages of being in the writing up stage is I just sit alone at my desk all day and have limited interaction with students/staff.

I recon if/when cases get reported at my uni, the remote working capabilities are going to get hammered...

I (and two offices worth of employees) had to work from home today, so the company could test work continuity should it all kick off.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 05, 2020, 10:30:55 pm
I suppose one of the advantages of being in the writing up stage is I just sit alone at my desk all day and have limited interaction with students/staff.

I recon if/when cases get reported at my uni, the remote working capabilities are going to get hammered...

I (and two offices worth of employees) had to work from home today, so the company could test work continuity should it all kick off.

Some record solitaire scores went down today then...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: yetix on March 05, 2020, 11:14:39 pm
Today I was notified I will be working from home until the situation changes.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on March 06, 2020, 09:28:40 am
Today I was notified I will be working from home until the situation changes.

Don't break yourself on the fingerboard......
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: yetix on March 06, 2020, 09:36:01 am
Today I was notified I will be working from home until the situation changes.

Don't break yourself on the fingerboard......

When all the walls close because of this and given the current weather woes I may only be able to do that!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 06, 2020, 09:40:03 am
When it happens to me, I might just finish building the woody in the garage. Maybe. Or just walk down to the boulders.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 06, 2020, 10:23:45 am
Bear with me... but if we assume a state of general societal paralysis - where meeting in public places, gatherings, eating out, going to the pub etc.. become something that is discouraged/very much avoided, where does this leave climbing? Random thoughts from me...

1. A climbing wall is (sometimes) busy public space - that involves multiple people touching the same plastic blobs - I'd have thought to be avoided.
2. At the other end of the spectrum - getting in a car and driving to a remote moorland scrittle fest - where no-one has been for months, is probably very safe - and I'd have thought within the realms of self isolation.
3. What about the middle ground... what about popular crags/spots..?
4. CV19 can be transmitted by fomite contact (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fomite) - so how long will it hang about on a lump of rancid limestone (I'm looking at you the Tor...)? Will chalk have a detrimental effect on this? or not?
5. Does this mean I can't hug Shark next time I see him?

Just thinking out loud...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dunnyg on March 06, 2020, 10:31:46 am
1) Climb in full hazmat suit. Possibly useful training for walking up everest? Fighting through crowds with bulky clothing, limited vision and an air supply, to get to your climb....
2) esoterica will become popular (all spots on unknown stones will erode away completely by the end of this year)
3) Stanage will be overgrown
4) The tor will be the last harbor of CV19 in the year 2092. Shark will be a figure of myth and legend who guards the disease ridden grounds. It will be said, upon his passing, the world will be free of the virus. However everyone will be too scared to check incase they see him in his undies.
5) If you are going to climb at the tor anyway, you might aswell
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 06, 2020, 10:34:06 am
'kinell, Shark living to 2092? Is he fucking highlander or something?

Well immortality is one strategy to get up the Oak I guess..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: duncan on March 06, 2020, 10:42:59 am
5. As shark 'works' from home and you work in a large institution his risk is much greater and he won't let you get close enough for you to have to make that decision.



Currently weighing-up the risks going to Ceuse in June via the train to Avignon. From a risk of getting infected perspective, I have no major concerns: being in Ceuse will be a lot less risky than being in London. Train travel is slightly risky but probably less so than going to work on the Tube.

My major concern is travel to France (or from the UK) will be banned or advised against. I think this is irrational but governments can’t be relied on to act rationally according to best evidence. A lesser concern is that one of us gets infected or have to self-isolate at the wrong time (two of us work in high-risk environments).

So my view is still that we book tickets but take out insurance having had a very careful look at the exclusion clauses of the policies available. If anyone has any suggestions regarding insurance please let me know!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on March 06, 2020, 10:50:55 am
I got this as an email from The BMC and it seems to cover their position pretty well

https://www.thebmc.co.uk/how-does-coronavirus-affect-bmc-travel-insurance
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 06, 2020, 10:53:47 am
I (and two offices worth of employees) had to work from home today, so the company could test work continuity should it all kick off.

Where did you get to? Caley?




On TomTom's thoughts, do viruses not generally become inactivated by UV - hence why winter is the flu season? Not sure how that tallies with humidity, where higher humidity kills viruses. Mind you, I think that's absolute humidity rather than relative humidity, so perhaps viruses will last less long in summer because absolute humidity is higher, even if relative humidity is lower.
So basically, in summer the risk of fomite transmission out of doors is lower, so climbing probably less risky provided you're not at a busy crag or working a problem with members of The Infected.

In any case, there are shitloads of crags you can go to where you're not going to bump into anyone. Could be the ideal time to go to Yeadon/Eavestone/Sypeland/Sigsworth etc etc etc.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 06, 2020, 11:05:30 am
5. As shark 'works' from home and you work in a large institution his risk is much greater and he won't let you get close enough for you to have to make that decision.



Currently weighing-up the risks going to Ceuse in June via the train to Avignon. From a risk of getting infected perspective, I have no major concerns: being in Ceuse will be a lot less risky than being in London. Train travel is slightly risky but probably less so than going to work on the Tube.

My major concern is travel to France (or from the UK) will be banned or advised against. I think this is irrational but governments can’t be relied on to act rationally according to best evidence. A lesser concern is that one of us gets infected or have to self-isolate at the wrong time (two of us work in high-risk environments).

So my view is still that we book tickets but take out insurance having had a very careful look at the exclusion clauses of the policies available. If anyone has any suggestions regarding insurance please let me know!

Off topic, but I'd be interested in the logistics of getting to Ceuse via train. Could you possibly drop me a DM with the websites etc you're using? Cheers
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 06, 2020, 11:12:13 am
@will. From what I’ve read UV kills it. But viruses are quite happy in the dry - and some prefer moisture. So there’s no hard and fast rule.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 06, 2020, 11:12:48 am
[monthly nohotwaterforBeaconcustomers moan]
1. Coronavirus will have to queue up behind the rest of the massed ranks of viruses lurking around in the Beacon waiting to infect you, since they're too stingy to provide their customers with warm water to wash their hands after using the loo or after climbing.
[/monthly nohotwaterforBeaconcustomers moan]
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 06, 2020, 11:14:03 am
From what I've read CV 19 won't last long in high 20s, maybe why there are no outbreaks in Southern Hemisphere where it's midsummer?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 06, 2020, 11:19:49 am
From what I've read CV 19 won't last long in high 20s, maybe why there are no outbreaks in Southern Hemisphere where it's midsummer?

Has there been a major tectonic episode over night and Australia move several thousand K’s north? 😃
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 06, 2020, 11:21:35 am
Latest stats from John Hopkins:

(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/afiCzbYIY3F6Nyj01o6yTAwEQDtFssHD6wfyQmX7w85noAmJFmcSDEa40pfwDq0cqalqzka9v8K5zTv3xXXoVAmoWHyMsCnrIM7SoajndqfIAVUVKGH-Ti60Bj99DRFSbifiEfSptuc-rwoxJS-uo9hP6bLtR-kTbg01EdgL2IsTSVp1bUc2nppdxusODG_04yY40QW3J9zIgeFPrC8SmZS95Ij9L4YZ_OrXd320JeDJb6uH2Ew-sGN55417CBpN15MNVqhwc6y1x6vUc-fvqDcj6SnSW7qxLPHK0n1EaOxitiM4nmmWu3znt9rSgG8TdU4EJ_QJTuocLXj6slT8umkSQRJiPA9djIB-ayrw55XHPouPX50O0KFfd9ZTjTBMux6UdNVvf7w705JnqD6EnlW0pk1ffvTcnzOCZIvLvHFb9mbpO6hjAxMsVsu_eOvkFddSb7pqVfvvo4xAjJ8Q_oEC2xPkPUhKZrF-M_XSzCXDFw9_vATPNE0BQM2D_jShDXCjEWmbx0f8FquxnX1RX2XsXKnJvorrpT9SK24YehJ4Q7U4wdVLNDrnR5RcIu5w5qGnBKYNSy5xTzUEaiQXCovtXZ3FofczZMncpToomAZNVaA6pJWEUhsMg2jN6_FAyyA0lZcg29UFI6LZ_EnLF3QAZwYUmRbjhj7azaPDV684vtkaTXzTZRk=w1271-h901-no)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tommytwotone on March 06, 2020, 11:27:38 am
In any case, there are shitloads of crags you can go to where you're not going to bump into anyone. Could be the ideal time to go to Yeadon/Eavestone/Sypeland/Sigsworth etc etc etc.

Who knows, you might find the antidote lurking down a hole in the jungle under Guisecliffe!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on March 06, 2020, 11:37:07 am
Liquid chalk: performance hand sanitiser!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on March 06, 2020, 11:43:10 am
[monthly nohotwaterforBeaconcustomers moan]
1. Coronavirus will have to queue up behind the rest of the massed ranks of viruses lurking around in the Beacon waiting to infect you, since they're too stingy to provide their customers with warm water to wash their hands after using the loo or after climbing.
[/monthly nohotwaterforBeaconcustomers moan]

Warm water offers no benefit for hygiene when washing hands.

Most bacteria and viruses are not affected by warm water. For the water to be hot enough to impact them, is going to irritate (or even scald) your skin, leaving you more susceptible to infection.

Maybe the Beacon are trying to look out for your safety  :-\
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 06, 2020, 11:55:36 am
From what I've read CV 19 won't last long in high 20s, maybe why there are no outbreaks in Southern Hemisphere where it's midsummer?

Has there been a major tectonic episode over night and Australia move several thousand K’s north? 😃

Missed that, apparently Brazil too.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 06, 2020, 12:23:32 pm
[monthly nohotwaterforBeaconcustomers moan]
1. Coronavirus will have to queue up behind the rest of the massed ranks of viruses lurking around in the Beacon waiting to infect you, since they're too stingy to provide their customers with warm water to wash their hands after using the loo or after climbing.
[/monthly nohotwaterforBeaconcustomers moan]

Warm water offers no benefit for hygiene when washing hands.

Most bacteria and viruses are not affected by warm water. For the water to be hot enough to impact them, is going to irritate (or even scald) your skin, leaving you more susceptible to infection.

Maybe the Beacon are trying to look out for your safety  :-\
Yeah I was actually aware of that about bacteria/hygiene, however cold water doesn't get rid of dirt and grease very well does it. The simple practicalities of getting the grease, dirt and chalk off your hands is much easier with warm water than cold. That's why we use it to wash stuff isn't it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on March 06, 2020, 12:33:58 pm
[monthly nohotwaterforBeaconcustomers moan]
1. Coronavirus will have to queue up behind the rest of the massed ranks of viruses lurking around in the Beacon waiting to infect you, since they're too stingy to provide their customers with warm water to wash their hands after using the loo or after climbing.
[/monthly nohotwaterforBeaconcustomers moan]

Warm water offers no benefit for hygiene when washing hands.

Most bacteria and viruses are not affected by warm water. For the water to be hot enough to impact them, is going to irritate (or even scald) your skin, leaving you more susceptible to infection.

Maybe the Beacon are trying to look out for your safety  :-\
Yeah I was actually aware of that about bacteria/hygiene, however cold water doesn't get rid of dirt and grease very well does it. The simple practicalities of getting the grease, dirt and chalk off your hands is much easier with warm water than cold. That's why we use it to wash stuff isn't it.

A decent surfactant makes far more difference when getting rid of non water soluble compounds than temperature. Though I'm guessing the Beacon often doesn't have decent handwash either?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 06, 2020, 12:37:54 pm
[monthly nohotwaterforBeaconcustomers moan]
1. Coronavirus will have to queue up behind the rest of the massed ranks of viruses lurking around in the Beacon waiting to infect you, since they're too stingy to provide their customers with warm water to wash their hands after using the loo or after climbing.
[/monthly nohotwaterforBeaconcustomers moan]

Warm water offers no benefit for hygiene when washing hands.

Most bacteria and viruses are not affected by warm water. For the water to be hot enough to impact them, is going to irritate (or even scald) your skin, leaving you more susceptible to infection.

Maybe the Beacon are trying to look out for your safety  :-\

Cold vs warm water might not be better or worse washing microbes from your hands, but you are more likely to spend more time washing if the water is warm. 30 seconds is a long time to wash your hands under cold water for. Furthermore, if you're using a bar of soap, you're going to get a better lather under warm water.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 06, 2020, 12:47:22 pm

A decent surfactant makes far more difference when getting rid of non water soluble compounds than temperature. Though I'm guessing the Beacon often doesn't have decent handwash either?

They provide hand wash, just not warm water. I can’t comment on whether or not it’s decent.
If warm water is irrelevant to hand-washing - and I’m aware it isn’t necessary to remove some bacteria -  then we’ve all been doing it wrong for a very long time. As Will points out there are good reasons for using warm not cold. If you think cold is fine then just use cold.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 06, 2020, 01:01:18 pm
The expert I heard on the BBC the other day said that warm water was important. Water above 25-30 degrees physically breaks down the virus. Hence washing clothes/gloves  works too.

Beacon could be reported - warm/hot water for washing is a basic work place requirement IIRC.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 06, 2020, 01:04:19 pm

Beacon could should be reported - warm/hot water for washing is a basic work place requirement IIRC.

Fixed! I imagine they'll have a hot water tap behind the counter for the staff though...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: r-man on March 06, 2020, 02:08:44 pm
The expert I heard on the BBC the other day said that warm water was important. Water above 25-30 degrees physically breaks down the virus. Hence washing clothes/gloves  works too.

Seems odd, given that it's well below human body temperature.

Hot water taps should produce water at 50 deg. (I just googled that). Though I think most people find that a bit uncomfortable for hand washing.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dunnyg on March 06, 2020, 02:18:48 pm
Depends how thin your skin is. After smashing yourself on the grit that would be torture.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on March 06, 2020, 03:50:56 pm
Beacon could be reported - warm/hot water for washing is a basic work place requirement IIRC.

As I said in the other thread where this was mentioned, I'm pretty sure building regs. also require it where there are public toilets.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Dolly on March 06, 2020, 11:24:26 pm
Sorry if I’m slow (I read the link TT) so can the virus stay on rock ? And is it worse on non porous rock ?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 07, 2020, 08:08:19 am
Sorry if I’m slow (I read the link TT) so can the virus stay on rock ? And is it worse on non porous rock ?

No idea. Those are good questions. I’d have thought it’s more easily transferable on smooth glassy rocks.. as that’s the surfaces it seems to like from the built environment.

Self isolate in the shed...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 07, 2020, 11:52:18 am
News from Italy

https://www.esicm.org/covid-19-update-from-our-colleagues-in-northern-italy/

10% in Intensive Care compared to the 5% Chinese data may be because China has proportionately fewer elderly.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/04/world/europe/coronavirus-italy-elderly.html

A Guardian article yesterday said there were 50% hospitalisations of those who tested positive in Italy but this was later edited out (the figure for China was 20%). I suspect the Italians may be avoiding complacency, given the large number of elderly patients and extra risks if they fall seriously ill at home.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 07, 2020, 01:07:53 pm
Interesting to consider the differing proportions of over 65 years old between countries suffering covid outbreak. Japan's population should suffer proportionally worse from covid, based on proportion of elderly. But so far the numbers don't suggest that, with death rates in the lower end compared to Italy's (Europe's highest proportion of elderly population) higher death rate.

(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-061yYcYe_ul9AQAg3uToMqgW56c7SjH5eUeohY5Ht8kTMXFcxGpQIg6Eff5FCwDe2FE-JhI1bWS5g4cONKhgIhRkK52XX2b1BkWT7mvG_RfynuiMWvuxnxRxLUldXgcdMmdz1gPk-ygUVep8FrwhB2CW-124nWuXTS6tEvUJs1rysPZInYdfGEhwCprCcDoXH1l3fXV6AOJ5dfifF5GDGGBlc5KMD8DC2C9apVPuhqeZjKApVuIuYKQ3V6Najn7_09ypfPLnxpQyKcTltJFjlX8imgqGtOj4hix6NvcIwFaHT4d5POmS6i-RPMoYRsawgB_LH_EqfXOsKvKby237Q7m3AZX_YBeekG6qRXfwdVc7-rPOEpH09G3SA7gr1wdSNb68hihI7syfVdPyT3cIX0r40j8KhulDOkIv3NC2aTVa3pAE-VYNSx8taxKVgD4hZ8QJ0JNmj4kp2W6Tvg9eEeISGy_pGTbcP7tDSCzSh7uRPmnptA9pPrpPH3BvRijeJk21cwQYLw9et-V8s4ubCN-vzhXhmpiDxEtDNo73u8vbr9G3ubxnsRZndugyPBQ5Xx4rbcuzxPTv7nJA7c2gLoAW4w4DTpwJRu7bRKRKIzsIBGtKE8_nKnf9_LA-LSjlJXAabDiTCHKDD5FaZ94mW7r-dwXu5GNV9kPDu1kU_4sk5QYADjw=w1037-h859-no)

Maybe Japan have very good containment, or a top quality health service with spare capacity. Or there are likely other underlying causes preventing their elderly population not succumbing at the same rate as Italy's elderly population. Or maybe they're just not reporting very well?
Japan's population is famous for its relatively good health long into old age compared to the rest of the world. Not so much the case in Italy - and especially so in the UK and US which have relatively high levels of ill health in old age. Too early to say and maybe the proportion of deaths in Japan will increase (obviously I hope they don't).

As someone posted further back up the thread, when this event is over the data will shine more interesting light on differences between countries standards of underlying health, quality of health services and other underlying issues affecting quality of life. Poverty will probably be an underlying factor as always, but the fact that the younger seem to escape much more lightly than the older - relatively more affluent but probably suffering more underlying ill health - might make poverty less of a factor. Maybe it will also help focus minds on the relative merits of good health versus level of affluence...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on March 07, 2020, 02:16:14 pm
As someone posted further back up the thread, when this event is over the data will shine more interesting light on differences between countries standards of underlying health, quality of health services and other underlying issues affecting quality of life. Poverty will probably be an underlying factor as always, but the fact that the younger seem to escape much more lightly than the older - relatively more affluent but probably suffering more underlying ill health - might make poverty less of a factor. Maybe it will also help focus minds on the relative merits of good health versus level of affluence...

Right! I think underlying levels of heath, healthcare systems, and relative poverty/inequality will all have big effects on outcomes. But each disease also has its own profile. If I remember right the 1918 flu pandemic was far more deadly for young adults than any other demographic.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: jwi on March 07, 2020, 02:37:18 pm
Wasn't that mostly down to the statistics being young men in trenches?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 07, 2020, 02:39:32 pm
Cultural differences in degree of physical contact between strangers or acquaintances , seems likely to play into it.
Given some of the preliminary transmission data described in the various articles above. Lack of significant aerosol transmission, for one.
Getting hugged or kissed, by relatively “remote” friends and acquaintances, is certainly more likely in Italy; than it is here.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 07, 2020, 02:41:01 pm
Couple of articles stating the overall mortality rate in Italy is c. Twice that from China due to a generally older population (amongst those that caught it).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: AJM on March 07, 2020, 04:14:01 pm

Off topic, but I'd be interested in the logistics of getting to Ceuse via train. Could you possibly drop me a DM with the websites etc you're using? Cheers

Can't speak for Duncan but his post mentions Avignon, which is served by direct train from London in the summer (London to Avignon, Aix and Marseille).

But more widely I've found seat61.com to be a mine of useful information for European train planning!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: seankenny on March 07, 2020, 06:00:13 pm

Off topic, but I'd be interested in the logistics of getting to Ceuse via train. Could you possibly drop me a DM with the websites etc you're using? Cheers

Can't speak for Duncan but his post mentions Avignon, which is served by direct train from London in the summer (London to Avignon, Aix and Marseille).

But more widely I've found seat61.com to be a mine of useful information for European train planning!

I've done London to Avignon, it's a very civilised journey down and there is car hire at the station. Not sure about Ceuse but it's super convenient for Buoux.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dr_botnik on March 07, 2020, 09:50:25 pm
Panic buying at the big Millhouses Tesco has hit the eggs, tinned good, handwash, and loo roll. I think all the media attention is going to soon tire people out and, in a month or two, people will be all over the over exposure.
I wonder how much overlap there would be on a venn diagram containing datasets of "people who panic buy" and "people who still popped out to the shop while they had flu like symptoms for a pain au raisin*" :-\

*insert your preferred pastry or fresh good here
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Dolly on March 07, 2020, 10:06:28 pm
Still fine at ALDI 200 yds away
Yes I shop there as well as Waitrose
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 07, 2020, 10:12:07 pm
I find the panic buying odd. My partner had to try a restock the Bunker today, couldn’t even get toilet roll in Bookers.
She went to buy pasta in the Torquay Sainsbury, empty shelves.
I went out to buy stuff, here in Glasgow, as I have several times in the last few weeks and there’s no sign of panic buying.
No1 daughter came down with tonsillitis this week. Mrs OMM couldn’t even find paracetamol, ended up feeding a 14 year old junior Calpol.
Plenty on the shelves here.

Is this a “Southerners” heading to the storm shelters, whilst the “Northerners” get their big coat out of the wardrobe?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: moose on March 07, 2020, 10:32:09 pm
Not sure the North is immune - in Ilkley's shops, the toilet roll and handwash / hand sanitiser shelves have been empty for a week or two.  No shortage of any foods thankfully.   That said, pretty chilled in comparisson with my brother's messages from Hong Kong, which have a World War Z, zombie apocalypse vibe (mind you his main concern is still Leeds United's promotion push, which I guess is some comfort).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 08, 2020, 07:28:59 am
I'm surprised there's been so much concern on here about stopping the spread of the virus, given that Power Club in the winter months barely goes a week without someone saying "full of a miserable, stinking cold so just went to the wall and spread germs on all the holds".
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 08, 2020, 07:39:04 am
Pasta was sold out in Tescos near here - and most but not all paracetamol was gone too.

Back when the last hoarding time was (brexit) I couldn’t get bread flour easily - so got a load a couple of weeks back. That was all gone yesterday.

Sanitiser aside / I suspect it’s more supply chain issues (stock in the wrong places etc..) than anything actually running out.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nai on March 08, 2020, 09:59:56 am

Sanitiser aside / I suspect it’s more supply chain issues (stock in the wrong places etc..) than anything actually running out.

Mrs reports that folk are nicking the sanitizer dispensers off hospital walls.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 08, 2020, 11:06:20 am
Not a sheet of bog roll left in Bingley on Friday. Presumably this thing makes you shit yourself to death.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Footwork on March 08, 2020, 11:13:22 am
Mrs reports that folk are nicking the sanitizer dispensers off hospital walls.

Same here FFS  :(

This whole every person for themselves attitude pisses me off. So what about the health workers who will actually need it when dealing with the outbreak rather than one selfish cnut who thinks having an industrial bottle by their bedside will keep them safe when it's as much use there as the dream catcher above their bed.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bradders on March 08, 2020, 11:26:51 am
Well said.

It's the dichotomy between collective responsibility and rational self-preservation. It's logical for everyone to just carry on as normal (because that has the best overall outcome) and then there wouldn't be the supply issues / run on the bank / stock market fall, yet it's also entirely rational for people to want to look after their own interests and hoard supplies / withdraw their cash / sell their shares because no one wants to be the person left with nothing but their own smug sense of personal responsibility.

The media have a lot to answer for here. It's in no one's interests but their own to be spreading panic and fear inducing messages as in many of the headlines from the last couple of weeks.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 08, 2020, 11:35:19 am
I wonder if thefts from clinics of stuff like hand sanitiser have more to do with opportunistic twats seeing a  money-making opportunity, rather than thinking of self-preservation (we’re hardly in bubonic plague or Ebola lethality).
After someone on here pointed out the absurd prices that face masks are fetching on eBay, I had a word with our warehouse guys to tell them to control the issue of the 300 boxes of face-masks we have in our stores. Everyday items are suddenly in profiteering territory. Tulip bubble..
 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Steve R on March 08, 2020, 12:01:21 pm
opportunistic twats seeing a  money-making opportunity
Guess you didn't get them listed then!?  Good for you.  Virtue signal alert, couldn't quite bring myself to sell my modest stock of masks (would've been the easiest few hundred quid I'd ever exploited) though must admit I was tempted.  Opportunistic twatdom narrowly avoided!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 08, 2020, 12:17:56 pm
Ha! I must admit the thought crossed my mind of putting a few boxes ‘aside’.. like you say opportunity for shortt-term easy money is high at the moment. But I don’t want to be that person setting a poor example to others, and anyway it would amount to theft of company assets! I let our HSE director know my concern and a mass email has been set round the group warning of stock control issues.
It won’t surprise me if people take advantage to make some quick easy money, in our company and others. I expect to see stories in the coming months of theft and hoarding of in-demand items.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 08, 2020, 07:19:07 pm
A couple of personal CV19 snippets from people I've been talking to...

Baby friends - both parents work as Micro-biologists at MRI (Big Manchester hospital) - and were quite relaxed/sanguine about it. Suggested UK's strategy was to slow the spread as much as possible and pray for a warm spring. They both thought warmer weather/summer would bring a natural lull in the disease - though it would tick along at a lower rate over summer then come back in the autumn/winter.

Second - friend we saw this afternoon, who had been on holiday at the hotel next door to the one quarantined in Tenerife a week ago... and been in a sort of self quarantine just in case since then (but had gone out as they were going spare..).

My own musings FWIW... rate of new cases doubles roughly every 6 days... which means we're about (very roughly) a month behind Italys total. So unless we manage to contain things much more (which I think is a little unlikely) then we'll be at the 5k+ cases in the first week of April... which is at which time the Italians have decided to lock things down. Quite a balance if the warm weather factors are correct...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 09, 2020, 09:30:00 am
Long easter holidays then.

Just in time for mint connies on the coast..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: duncan on March 09, 2020, 10:44:54 am

...we'll be at the 5k+ cases in the first week of April... which is at which time the Italians have decided to lock things down.

I am so up for two weeks self-isolation around then. Somewhere remote in Pembroke would be ideal.

Joking aside, it’s all about flattening that peak so my Mum, Sister, and other high-risk folk still have a hospital bed to go to if they need to.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 09, 2020, 12:32:05 pm

...we'll be at the 5k+ cases in the first week of April... which is at which time the Italians have decided to lock things down.

I am so up for two weeks self-isolation around then. Somewhere remote in Pembroke would be ideal.

Joking aside, it’s all about flattening that peak so my Mum, Sister, and other high-risk folk still have a hospital bed to go to if they need to.

Exactly. It’s really good news that kids are not badly affected (in general) but worrying for me with octogenarian parents.. as it will be for many.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 09, 2020, 01:43:29 pm
My mother in law was telling me she'd be happy to look after the kids if the school closes. I told her in no uncertain terms she'd be on house arrest, and the closest she's get to the kids would be a Skype call. Late 70s, unfit smoker seems pretty high risk to me.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 09, 2020, 02:27:16 pm
Given the state of the oil price, it looks like self isolation will be the least of my concerns shortly.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 09, 2020, 03:02:49 pm
The WHO data page on technical guidance

https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/technical-guidance
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: rich d on March 09, 2020, 03:22:10 pm
no pasta or tinned tomatoes in asda in notts today, idiots having to have a chilli for tea now.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 09, 2020, 03:25:18 pm
Aldi in Sheffield was totally normal the other day - no sign of any panic buying. If anything it looked like they'd stocked up on toilet roll expecting a rush on it that hadn't come
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: rich d on March 09, 2020, 03:40:40 pm
it is a bit southern down here, there were very few toilet rolls left either. Also no bread flour, and lots of people buying LOTS and LOTS of tins of spaghetti hoops.
I forgot half the stuff I was supposed to buy as I wandered around just staring at people in amazement.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dunnyg on March 09, 2020, 04:05:01 pm
To be fair, I fucking love spaghetti hoops

HOOPS HOOPS HOOPS

I can't imagine you would feel well after eating them for 2 weeks though.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 09, 2020, 05:44:26 pm
If you have the same essential metabolism as my 2-year-old's then I can confirm that you can actually live almost exclusively on spaghetti hoops. And you can still maintain a very varied diet. There are regular, Thomas the Tank, Peppa Pig, letters, numbers etc etc
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Andy F on March 09, 2020, 06:01:25 pm
Also no bread flour, and lots of people buying LOTS and LOTS of tins of spaghetti hoops.
As long as they leave the tinned beans and sausages you're quids in. Those bad boys are like Michelin starred manna.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 09, 2020, 07:31:18 pm
Some grim reading from Italy.

https://mobile.twitter.com/silviast9/status/1236933833653653505
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 09, 2020, 08:04:34 pm
Some grim reading from Italy.

https://mobile.twitter.com/silviast9/status/1236933833653653505

Powerful.

Quote
So be patient, you can't go to the theatre, museums or the gym. Try to have pity on the myriad of old people you could exterminate.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 09, 2020, 09:00:34 pm

I am assuming here, that the Italian Government have not “taken leave of their senses” and that they have reason to believe their death toll is about to get much worse?


Italy extends coronavirus measures nationwide https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-51810673 (http://Italy extends coronavirus measures nationwide https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-51810673)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: lagerstarfish on March 09, 2020, 10:37:05 pm
We're due to take my 80 yr old parents to Gran Canaria at the end of the month.
Mum has a knackered liver and low kidney function. Dad's imune system is somewhat muted due to meds for his autoimmune disease.
Neither are anywhere near fit.
Not staying in a hotel.
I guess we wait and see what the situation is nearer travel time.
My parents are willing to take their chances as long as travel is allowed.
What interesting times we live in!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 10, 2020, 07:47:40 am
Yeah.

My parents (Mum, cancer survivor, diabetic. Dad, cancer survivor, getting frail), are insisting we visit them for Sunday lunch.
I’ve been in Glasgow, at college, for three weeks and flying home on Friday.
I’m about as “self isolated” as Boris is humble.

For the first time since I was an easily embarrassed teen, I dread my Italian mother’s over enthusiastic hugging and kissing.

And yet, saying no to the invite, seems impossible!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: fatneck on March 10, 2020, 08:40:11 am
Font in 4 weeks - staying positive...

Toilet roll shopping (normal amounts) yesterday had no issues at my local store but apparently larger stores (in more affluent areas) have been wiped out!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on March 10, 2020, 08:45:06 am
The posh obviously have a greater right to shit in comfort and dignity.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 10, 2020, 09:05:09 am
wiped out!

Quality punning.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 10, 2020, 09:06:44 am
Let them use bidets.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 10, 2020, 09:17:38 am
Just been chatting to a friend on there way to a big DofE policy meeting re schools reaction to this.
Seems like they are looking at extending the Easter hols to 4 or 6 weeks starting early, maybe as early as two weeks time.
Nice for the kids and teachers but maybe a bit shit for people with kids to look after.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 10, 2020, 09:19:58 am
Don’t worry though teachers. I suggested you could all just play catch up by reducing your summer hols to two weeks. I knew you wouldn’t want any more time of work.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: M1V0 on March 10, 2020, 09:24:43 am
Font in ten days, trying to stay very positive nothing happens between now and then...

Not too concerned if, once there, they close travel out of France though. Worse places to get stuck, I suppose.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 10, 2020, 09:29:30 am
Just been chatting to a friend on there way to a big DofE policy meeting re schools reaction to this.
Seems like they are looking at extending the Easter hols to 4 or 6 weeks starting early, maybe as early as two weeks time.
Nice for the kids and teachers but maybe a bit shit for people with kids to look after.

I suppose the logic is that by then a good chunk of us will be isolating anyway so the impact is lessened?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 10, 2020, 09:35:25 am
But the effect on middle age suicide rates and infanticide needs to be considered  if you lock parents inside with their children for 4 weeks.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 10, 2020, 09:38:43 am
True that.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 10, 2020, 09:56:27 am
Looks like all Italian ski resorts are shut down for the season.

Where we were last Easter (Gressoney on the Monte Rosa ski area) posted on Facebook that they are now closed for the season. Small town with a lot of economy relying on ski visitors, are they going to get compensation?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on March 10, 2020, 10:20:54 am
I think there are going to be very large amounts of widely distributed economic pain.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nibile on March 10, 2020, 10:29:29 am
Still better than widely distributed amounts of deaths...
Surreal moment.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on March 10, 2020, 10:31:43 am
True, though there may be both, sadly.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 10, 2020, 10:34:39 am
Still better than widely distributed amounts of deaths...
Surreal moment.

If I was you I'd just stay in your house and do brutal workouts on weights and fingerboard.

No change there then!! :)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nibile on March 10, 2020, 10:43:19 am
No change at all, I can tell you.
 ;D
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 10, 2020, 10:57:52 am
But the effect on middle age suicide rates and infanticide needs to be considered  if you lock parents inside with their children for 4 weeks.

I've started stockpiling lego.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 10, 2020, 12:57:36 pm
Don’t worry though teachers. I suggested you could all just play catch up by reducing your summer hols to two weeks. I knew you wouldn’t want any more time of work.

I don’t want time off school. I want my kids to pass their exams, with excellent grades.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 10, 2020, 02:11:52 pm
I knew that was the case which is why i suggested you would all be happy to give up your summer holidays to help out.

It will be tabled at the DofE meeting today. The person i was speaking with was pretty sure they will have to go for the extended Easter break as things stand.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 10, 2020, 04:05:23 pm
A geographical information summary has been  posted

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-number-of-cases-in-england/coronavirus-covid-19-number-of-cases-in-england
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 10, 2020, 04:34:33 pm
I knew that was the case which is why i suggested you would all be happy to give up your summer holidays to help out

It won’t help out with any current exams tho Gav- the last ones finish in June, lots are in May, and all the Spanish orals (which I examine) are in 3 weeks. So I am praying we are open till then, at least...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 10, 2020, 05:50:27 pm
I know, my son is sitting his GCSEs this year so we are hoping for no disruption as well, not sure thats going to happen though.

Guess the exams will go ahead but not helpful if he misses 3-4 weeks of lesson time.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 10, 2020, 05:54:23 pm
Well good luck to him. Depending on what the DfE decides it may be possible for schools to run reduced schedules focusing on exam groups.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 10, 2020, 05:57:14 pm
We're trying to re-arrange field trips here amongst the shifting sands of changing government and University advice. Within 24 hours we've changed from do whatever you like apart from Italy/China etc.. to non essential OSeas travel cancelled to all OSeas and non-essential UK travel stopped. And now, no UK travel on public transport. Which raises questions for those who use public transport to go to work etc..

For once I don't blame them (university admin) - they're trying to figure out what to do when the situation changes almost hourly... we've had at least 3 missives today... and an extra two missives trying to explain the meaning of the other missives.

I doubt we'll be open after easter hols (which apart from exams wouldnt be too crippling to students) - and wonder whether we'll be open next week... Staff have already been given the option of not coming in if they don't feel happy with coming in...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 10, 2020, 06:06:05 pm
Well good luck to him. Depending on what the DfE decides it may be possible for schools to run reduced schedules focusing on exam groups.

This was mentioned as an option. Guess w will just have to deal with what we are given. I am not overly concerned with the whole thing other than the effect it is having on the economy which may last a lot longer than a bit of flu.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 10, 2020, 06:08:19 pm
We're trying to re-arrange field trips here amongst the shifting sands of changing government and University advice. Within 24 hours we've changed from do whatever you like apart from Italy/China etc.. to non essential OSeas travel cancelled to all OSeas and non-essential UK travel stopped. And now, no UK travel on public transport. Which raises questions for those who use public transport to go to work etc..


Where is this advice coming from. We have just told all the staff to get on with everything as normal until we are told otherwise. I was in our Holland offices last week and they are doing the same. Obviously Italy and China are out but to my knowledge you can travel anywhere else under any means.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on March 10, 2020, 06:13:29 pm
For once I don't blame them (university admin) - they're trying to figure out what to do when the situation changes almost hourly... we've had at least 3 missives today... and an extra two missives trying to explain the meaning of the other missives.

The government has been relatively transparent about this, with a bit of reading between the lines. It's not going to roll out the big guns (bans on public meetings/movement restrictions etc) at this stage because it thinks, probably fairly, that if it does it now, the public will either ignore it because the situation isn't that bad yet, or by the time it is that bad, the public will have fatigued and will ignore it.

So the restrictions are going to roll in gradually over the next few weeks and the situation will change quickly. If you are planning ahead, do so on the basis of what is likely to be the situation in 2 weeks, not what they are saying now. As a rough guide, Italy is 2-3 weeks ahead of us in terms of case numbers and they have gone into complete lockdown. It's not unreasonable to assume something similar will happen here despite the denials.

On the plus side, as the situation is going to get predictably worse, the markets probably have a long way left to fall as they seem to be reacting to news rather than any sort of forecasting. You can save your pension by shorting the market on the way down, I have, it's working well (thus far).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 10, 2020, 06:21:28 pm
Well put, that's precisely the discussion we've had at work today. We're working on the basis we'll be open next week but likely to be closed for an extended period over Easter.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 10, 2020, 07:08:34 pm
On the plus side, as the situation is going to get predictably worse, the markets probably have a long way left to fall as they seem to be reacting to news rather than any sort of forecasting. You can save your pension by shorting the market on the way down, I have, it's working well (thus far).

Admire your opportunism but that seems a risky strategy! Especially if doing it with money you can't afford to lose. Obviously everyone's circumstances are different but this year *could* be a good opportunity to be buying into the market for the long-term, though most won't for similar reasons shelves are cleared of toilet roll. Suppose it depends on the length of time before planning to take your pension, if I was staring at an imminent 20% loss I might start gambling!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bradders on March 10, 2020, 08:19:14 pm
Staff have already been given the option of not coming in if they don't feel happy with coming in...

This really is the era of the "snowflake" isn't it...

On the plus side, as the situation is going to get predictably worse, the markets probably have a long way left to fall as they seem to be reacting to news rather than any sort of forecasting. You can save your pension by shorting the market on the way down, I have, it's working well (thus far).

Not sure I agree with many of these points!

Yes markets have panicked in the last couple of weeks but the biggest fall - yesterday - was precipitated by the combination of the unknown factor (CV-19) and a known factor (Saudi Arabia ramping oil production, which can be tracked through to a real and lasting economic impact worldwide) which produced a market shock. People are trying to price in the economic impact and whilst the news flow on CV-19 is consistently pointing towards an escalation it seems fair to keep marking the impact higher.

I do agree there's further to go.

With regard to your pension;
a) if you have more than a handful of years until retirement then this whole episode will be a distant memory by the time that comes around, and should provide a decent entry point for ongoing contributions.
b) if you have less than 5 years to go then you ought not to be in equities to any great extent, in which case impact should have been limited to positive. If you are in equities with that little time before needing the money then...well...I wouldn't want to gamble losing any more!

Edit: then again if you have big balls and cash to spare then have at it!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mark s on March 10, 2020, 08:48:07 pm
at work im in a share save. 150 quid max in a month and you get the same you buy for free. last month you paid for 3 and got 6, not far off 4 and 8 now. they will rebound eventually.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on March 10, 2020, 08:50:54 pm
 
Not sure I agree with many of these points!

Conversely, I don't disagree with any of your points. Except the snowflake bit.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 10, 2020, 09:15:20 pm
Bradders - I think my colleague in the office next door who has had pneumonia twice in the last year (and still had a hacking cough), my PHD student with immune deficiency  staying away is very sensible behaviour. 

Not a snowflake. Whatever that horrible term means.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dunnyg on March 10, 2020, 10:38:06 pm
What tomtom said. Get some empathy.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 10, 2020, 10:48:20 pm
TTTs employer sounds like a decent one. Mine will be hanging on to office based staff until the government forces their hand at gunpoint...

"snowflake" is almost always a way of missing the point in favour of a cheap shot. It's easy to say there's nothing to worry about if you are young with no underlying health conditions (I do!), but I think it's worth remembering that employers should definitely be giving those who are more vulnerable the choice at this stage.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 11, 2020, 07:54:54 am
Hi spidermonkey, if what Silvia Stringhini says here is true, it does not tally with only the oldest/illest being in danger:
https://twitter.com/silviast9/status/1237334622041669633
Quote
10% is ICU, 55% hospitalized!

The situation in Italy seems very extreme with lots of patients suffering from bilateral pneumonia- quite different to what I had understood the illness to be.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 11, 2020, 08:14:34 am
Yes there are some very disturbing threads kicking around on Twitter that paint quite a different picture to how the virus has been reported elsewhere. Obviously fingers crossed the UK doesn't end up in that boat...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on March 11, 2020, 08:36:56 am
Apparently there's two schools from Gloucestershire that went on a skiing trip to piedmont on the 6th march. What were they thinking?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bradders on March 11, 2020, 08:53:48 am
Bradders - I think my colleague in the office next door who has had pneumonia twice in the last year (and still had a hacking cough), my PHD student with immune deficiency  staying away is very sensible behaviour. 

Not a snowflake. Whatever that horrible term means.

Sorry sarcasm isn't as easily transmitted as CV-19 apparently ;)

You made it sound like people are being given complete license to stop coming to work just because they're nervous about the situation, as opposed to genuinely vulnerable people having a sensible discussion with their line management and deciding on appropriate precautions; which is a very different thing.

Seriously, I suspect that in the end this will impact a relatively small proportion of the population in terms of people who actually get it, and an even smaller number who genuinely suffer from it. We're still only talking about a few hundred people so far; and whatever it is, it's not the plague! The wide reaching impact which will be felt by everyone, and has already arrived to a certain extent, will be from fear and the irrational actions it drives. The more scared people are the more businesses will go bust, jobs will be lost, and the greater the likelihood of a recession which itself is a cause of death!

On that basis, I think it's fair to follow the current advice, which is wash your hands, don't do anything stupid and crack on!

Yes there are some very disturbing threads kicking around on Twitter that paint quite a different picture to how the virus has been reported elsewhere. Obviously fingers crossed the UK doesn't end up in that boat...

And are we really getting our news from Twitter now?! Again, this is scare-mongering and is only making it worse.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 11, 2020, 08:54:33 am
Just had a facetime chat with a colleague/friend/coworker in Australia. Judging by what he said they're at the state we were about 2-3 weeks ago... He seemed really surprised that business travel had been cut - and other similar home working measures etc..

He is in Darwin though - which has one case. And takes at least 4 hours to fly to from anywhere else - or 2 days to drive to from anywhere with more than one shop :)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 11, 2020, 08:58:33 am

You made it sound like people are being given complete license to stop coming to work just because they're nervous about the situation, as opposed to genuinely vulnerable people having a sensible discussion with their line management and deciding on appropriate precautions; which is a very different thing.


I think to a degree they are given that licence. TBH, pretty much all of my job at the moment could be done remotely - I gave three lectures yesterday that were recorded - and could have been delivered in that way - though its better in person. As an academic, I feel almost like I'm self employed in many ways (might sound strange but thats how if feels to a large degree). That announcement was given in the context that any concerns about coming in should talk to their line manager about it - but that the balance of judgement would be towards those not wanting to come in.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 11, 2020, 09:11:15 am
A longer post - on a different point. I've had a few conversations and been mulling the following over the last few days....

We don't know how this is all going to pan out at the moment (for the better or for the worse) - but I hope some positives will come from this too. These include:

1. Changing the 9-5 in the office work ethic - and making homeworking and remote working more the norm than the exception. I hope and suspect that many changes in the workplace that are happening right now because of CV19 will lead to a long lasting shift in this. Of course many jobs require a workplace - but many in our largely service driven economy do not - and I hope this can show that people can carry on doing whatever spreadsheet shuffling they may do equally as well at home as at work.

2. Putting a dent in our short haul flight addiction. Maybe less optimism for this - folk may well return to business as usual once this changes. But - with the travel restrictions and downturn in flying I hope people start to realise that they don't need to have five europe mini breaks a year and can have just as relaxing/equivalent break closer to home (with less emissions required...). There are lots of positives in terms of widening peoples perspectives and breaking down cultural barriers of going to lots of places - but I can't help but think we do too much of it.

3. A slower pace of life. Already (from my observations) the roads and public transport are noticably quieter... Not so much self quarantine, but people making concious decisions to go out less, spending more time at home etc.. are these necessarily bad things? (thuogh it may just lead to Netflix dependancy issues :D )

4. If we do less - will we consume less - and leading to a wider point does this mean less of an emphasis on the growth growth growth economic model that the world seems to have subscribed to? I doubt CV19 will stop this - but maybe putting a dent in it and slowing things down globally isnt such a bad thing... (I await someone with stocks and shares pension/isa/savings to come back at me otherwise with this..)

Anyway - just some general musings about how it may change the world we live in - possibly in some positive ways. None of the above is evidence based :)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 11, 2020, 09:35:54 am
Mine will be hanging on to office based staff until the government forces their hand at gunpoint...

Surely companies have a duty of care to their employees? Could people make claim if they became ill at work if they hadn't been given the option of staying away?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 11, 2020, 09:52:24 am
More on Italy.... given numbers are still doubling every 3 days or so in the most affected countries, imagine where Italy might be with just one more week like this. A massive problem will be incresed risk of infecting health staff as they run out of isolated facility and all involved may have problems  with access to protective equipment. China showed young unprotected doctors can die due to high initial virus load.

https://metro.co.uk/2020/03/10/italian-doctors-forced-choose-save-coronavirus-12377883/?ico=pushly-notifcation-small&utm_source=pushly

I'm simply gobsmacked some here are still saying most of us will be OK, in this context of a modern health system crumbling with mortal consequences. Someone asked about ISAs .... mine won't be doing at all well but stuff that. I have friends in the NHS and (as a couple) 4 parents in the very high risk group that I'm much more worried about.

Over 1000 cases in the US now (and they have had testing issues so won't be as accurate as the European test numbers)

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 11, 2020, 10:01:04 am
I'm simply gobsmacked some here are still saying most of us will be OK,

Surely most of us will be ok, physically. But it wouldn't surprise me if most of us end up knowing someone who gets killed by it (parents/in-laws, aunts, uncles, friends' parents etc.)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 11, 2020, 10:14:41 am
Quote from: Bradders
And are we really getting our news from Twitter now?!

Seriously? I've been getting all my news from Twitter for years now, and so it seems do most of the world's top journalists. Are you confusing it with Facebook or something?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 11, 2020, 10:14:54 am
THIS: is a great graphic/stats of UK cases.

https://www.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/f94c3c90da5b4e9f9a0b19484dd4bb14

Updated regularly by Public health egnland I think,,



This is good too... for european comparisons. Normalised (ish) for time.. We're below the italian curve - but only a week or two from the exponential growth (that Italy is now seeing..)

(https://preview.redd.it/28h71zs23wl41.png?width=1139&format=png&auto=webp&s=7a2e494e7ddf9de59ce955e739022c1fb985cdfc)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sheavi on March 11, 2020, 10:19:41 am
Joe Rogans latest podcast - worth a listen

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3URhJx0NSw

Blurp - Michael Osterholm is an internationally recognized expert in infectious disease epidemiology. He is Regents Professor, McKnight Presidential Endowed Chair in Public Health, the director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy (CIDRAP), Distinguished Teaching Professor in the Division of Environmental Health Sciences, School of Public Health, a professor in the Technological Leadership Institute, College of Science and Engineering, and an adjunct professor in the Medical School, all at the University of Minnesota.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 11, 2020, 10:20:59 am
Surely a clear desk would help minimise the spread :D
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 11, 2020, 10:25:26 am
Quote from: Bradders
And are we really getting our news from Twitter now?!

Seriously? I've been getting all my news from Twitter for years now, and so it seems do most of the world's top journalists. Are you confusing it with Facebook or something?

Plus the person posting is a doctor from a hospitial on the verge of collapse under the pressure.

In answer to Ru's qustion I'm gobsmacked people seem to be missing the real problems. I'm little concerned with those who will be OK, I'm very concerned with what looks now like hundreds or thousands in the UK and tens if not hundreds of thousands elsewhere who will not, and how health systems will cope (like the NHS, if we follow the pattern and face the same issues as Italy in 2 weeks) . Imagine the impact of no functionall secondary health system (hospitals) on everything else, let alone on the 'too many' serious coronavirus victims. People need to take this very seriously without panic and try to do all they can to stop infection spreading.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sxrxg on March 11, 2020, 10:36:35 am
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/business-51826295

Anyone booking trips for Easter (or later in the year) might want to consider that sportscover direct are no longer covering coronovirus related claims. Sure other insurance providers will be implementing similar clauses as well...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 11, 2020, 11:09:16 am
Good piece with lots of stats on why lockdowns work:

https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-act-today-or-people-will-die-f4d3d9cd99ca
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Footwork on March 11, 2020, 11:16:57 am
Quote from: Bradders
And are we really getting our news from Twitter now?!

Seriously? I've been getting all my news from Twitter for years now, and so it seems do most of the world's top journalists. Are you confusing it with Facebook or something?

Plus the person posting is a doctor from a hospitial on the verge of collapse under the pressure.

In answer to Ru's qustion I'm gobsmacked people seem to be missing the real problems. I'm little concerned with those who will be OK, I'm very concerned with what looks now like hundreds or thousands in the UK and tens if not hundreds of thousands elsewhere who will not, and how health systems will cope (like the NHS, if we follow the pattern and face the same issues as Italy in 2 weeks) . Imagine the impact of no functionall secondary health system (hospitals) on everything else, let alone on the 'too many' serious coronavirus victims. People need to take this very seriously without panic and try to do all they can to stop infection spreading.

Agreed. It's pretty certain that all elective and non-emergency hospital appointments are going to be cancelled for an untold period when this shit gets really bad. The situation in Italy sounds grim, no care if you're over 65 or if you have pre-existing health conditions.

I'd believe doctors on twitter over our government/ BBC any day.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: AMorris on March 11, 2020, 11:25:34 am
Myself and a group of mates have a trip to font booked next month... I am preparing for a late cancellation. Ideally we would get there and a 2 month lockdown is called.

There has been a case in Shrewsbury now, which means it has a direct train to Aber. Hopefully the wankness of travel Cymru means it will get stuck in Machynlleth like everyone else.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on March 11, 2020, 11:33:29 am

Agreed. It's pretty certain that all elective and non-emergency hospital appointments are going to be cancelled for an untold period when this shit gets really bad.

They already are. My wife in cancelling clinics/consultations (and assuming her own op will be cancelled on the 25th) but she does work with immunocompromised patients with respiratory issue, i.e. lung cancer patients. She is fully expecting to lose patients because of this.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 11, 2020, 12:05:41 pm
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-51823338

Getting close to home.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tk421a on March 11, 2020, 12:26:34 pm
Here's my take - my wife's an infectious disease registrar at a regional centre. We've been discussing:

- Us staying at separate houses to reduce the chance of me getting it if she starts treating patients. Not visiting parents for Mothers' Day
- Seriously considering asking our parents to self-isolate starting in the next few days. My parents are retired, hers are not, so would be relatively easy for my parents to do.
- Expecting that travel on a trip booked to Australia (family wedding + climbing trip beforehand), flying end of March and mid April will be cancelled
- Snowcard are still taking on policies and will cover COVID-19 cancellations due to FCO changing travel advice. I've purchased a policy today after calling to confirm (was on my to do list for last 2 weeks). Hotels are cancellable and Qantas would likely cancel flights so I could just cancel the policy in 14 days if required.
- We did a big shop a couple weeks back, on the assumption that we'd eat the food anyways over time. Probably ok for a couple weeks if required.
- My workplace are finding it hard to get stock of basic cleaning supplies. We have enough for a while.

We very possibly are in the calm before the storm. Who knows what will happen!
P.s. it's really easy to hand wash regularly, it's really hard to not touch your own face so regularly!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 11, 2020, 12:56:11 pm
Does anyone know if this is going to increase the deaths from flu in the UK or will coronavirus just take a load of people out who had a good chance of going from normal flu and the rates of that drop.

I think 10000 - 15000 people are killed by flu in Uk every year, surely coronavirus will mainly take a big chunk of this group and not a group on top of this.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 11, 2020, 12:58:42 pm
Have a read of what's going on in Italy Gav. It's on top. Why would people stop getting normal flu? Plus once the hospitals are full, people start dying who wouldn't have.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 11, 2020, 01:09:49 pm
Why would people stop getting normal flu?

Bluntly, the answer would be "because those who would have died from normal flu are already dead".
Note: not trying to answer the original question, because I don't know the answer, but it would be logical to suspect that flu-related deaths might well drop slightly, although that drop might be as likely to come post-COVID-19 as during the actual crisis. That said, as you point out, impact on care probably offsets any reduction on flu deaths by meaning that people who would normally recover from it may be more likely to die.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 11, 2020, 01:13:12 pm
I suppose, however in Italy it's pretty clear that number will be far exceeded by those dying of any cause due to lack of critical care due to service overload.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 11, 2020, 01:13:55 pm
Yes. (in reply to barro's edited post)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on March 11, 2020, 01:14:18 pm

I think 10000 - 15000 people are killed by flu in Uk every year, surely coronavirus will mainly take a big chunk of this group and not a group on top of this.
The UK population is 66.44 milliion
We're told to expect between 40% and 80% to be infected
Case fatality rates quoted range from 1% to 5%
Based on those figures the UK deathtoll would be between 265,760 and 2,657,600
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 11, 2020, 01:24:41 pm
Have a read of what's going on in Italy Gav. It's on top. Why would people stop getting normal flu? Plus once the hospitals are full, people start dying who wouldn't have.

So the deaths are going to increase due to lack of care not due to the virus. Whilst i can believe this is the case for a small amount i would have thought that there would be a reduction in the number of people dying of "normal flu". I am interested in what this amount will be.

For this to have the same death toll as the flu does each year, based on a 3% death rate from Coronavirus we will need to have 43 million cases in the uk. This is 2/3rds of our population. Spanish flu only effected 25% ish.

If this was hitting healthy people outside of the usual group i would be more concerned but as it is i think we will just end up with a "bad year" on the flu stats. 

Both of my parents would be f**ked if they get it i suspect but the same could be said of any flu.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 11, 2020, 01:26:55 pm

I think 10000 - 15000 people are killed by flu in Uk every year, surely coronavirus will mainly take a big chunk of this group and not a group on top of this.
The UK population is 66.44 milliion
We're told to expect between 40% and 80% to be infected
Case fatality rates quoted range from 1% to 5%
Based on those figures the UK deathtoll would be between 265,760 and 2,657,600

No idea where the 40-80% figures come from as this is far worse than any pandemic ever. Worse cases are 30% ish.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 11, 2020, 01:27:41 pm
Worse cases historically i mean. This could obviously be a lot worse.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 11, 2020, 01:31:16 pm

Both of my parents would be f**ked if they get it i suspect but the same could be said of any flu.

Difference is I know my elderly relatives faithfully get an annual flu shot. I know it's not 100 effective, but seems to work for them most years.

There is no prophylactic effective against CV-19 at present.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on March 11, 2020, 01:33:43 pm
No idea where the 40-80% figures come from as this is far worse than any pandemic ever. Worse cases are 30% ish.

I haven't had chance to scrutinise these (or the source thereof) but the X-axis may be of interest:

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ESsudjCXkAIFH3k.png:large)

More pretty pictures here:
https://infobeautiful4.s3.amazonaws.com/2020/03/corona-mobile-1.png
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 11, 2020, 01:34:06 pm
I think 10000 - 15000 people are killed by flu in Uk every year, surely coronavirus will mainly take a big chunk of this group and not a group on top of this.
Quote
For this to have the same death toll as the flu does each year, based on a 3% death rate from Coronavirus we will need to have 43 million cases in the uk.

Eh? 3% of 43 million is 1,290,000.

For 15,000 to die at 3% we'd need 0.5 million cases, or 0.75% infected.

Italy's stats today: 10,100 cases, 649 deaths, 724 recovered.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 11, 2020, 01:35:16 pm
When you go to the wall, make sure you stick to blob jumping, not fomite fondling.
https://www.straitstimes.com/sport/coronavirus-covid-19-case-linked-to-gyms-boulderclimbing-and-climb-central
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 11, 2020, 01:40:27 pm
I think 10000 - 15000 people are killed by flu in Uk every year, surely coronavirus will mainly take a big chunk of this group and not a group on top of this.
Quote
For this to have the same death toll as the flu does each year, based on a 3% death rate from Coronavirus we will need to have 43 million cases in the uk.

Eh? 3% of 43 million is 1,290,000.

For 15,000 to die at 3% we'd need 0.5 million cases, or 0.75% infected.

Italy's stats today: 10,100 cases, 649 deaths, 724 recovered.
Sorry did the numbers in my head. should have been 430000.

I am not questioning the seriousness of it just trying to get some context.

I do however think it wont be anywhere near as bad as we think. Looking forward to getting a holiday bargain to Garda in a few months.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 11, 2020, 01:47:44 pm
How bad it will be will depend entirely on how quickly we move into lockdown. Hopefully we will do so early and the worst of it will be people moaning that it didn't seem bad enough to justify it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on March 11, 2020, 01:52:02 pm
A longer post - on a different point. I've had a few conversations and been mulling the following over the last few days....

We don't know how this is all going to pan out at the moment (for the better or for the worse) - but I hope some positives will come from this too. These include:

1. Changing the 9-5 in the office work ethic - and making homeworking and remote working more the norm than the exception. I hope and suspect that many changes in the workplace that are happening right now because of CV19 will lead to a long lasting shift in this. Of course many jobs require a workplace - but many in our largely service driven economy do not - and I hope this can show that people can carry on doing whatever spreadsheet shuffling they may do equally as well at home as at work.

2. Putting a dent in our short haul flight addiction. Maybe less optimism for this - folk may well return to business as usual once this changes. But - with the travel restrictions and downturn in flying I hope people start to realise that they don't need to have five europe mini breaks a year and can have just as relaxing/equivalent break closer to home (with less emissions required...). There are lots of positives in terms of widening peoples perspectives and breaking down cultural barriers of going to lots of places - but I can't help but think we do too much of it.

3. A slower pace of life. Already (from my observations) the roads and public transport are noticably quieter... Not so much self quarantine, but people making concious decisions to go out less, spending more time at home etc.. are these necessarily bad things? (thuogh it may just lead to Netflix dependancy issues :D )

4. If we do less - will we consume less - and leading to a wider point does this mean less of an emphasis on the growth growth growth economic model that the world seems to have subscribed to? I doubt CV19 will stop this - but maybe putting a dent in it and slowing things down globally isnt such a bad thing... (I await someone with stocks and shares pension/isa/savings to come back at me otherwise with this..)

Anyway - just some general musings about how it may change the world we live in - possibly in some positive ways. None of the above is evidence based :)

I've been thinking about exactly this the last few days and talked about it with my class on Monday. Will there be a completely full return to business as usual? n
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on March 11, 2020, 02:01:38 pm
How bad it will be will depend entirely on how quickly we move into lockdown. Hopefully we will do so early and the worst of it will be people moaning that it didn't seem bad enough to justify it.
If any lockdown is successful, it will almost certainly lead to people moaning about exactly this.

With no vaccine on the horizon, the interesting part of a lockdown will be what happens when it is eased / when people start ignoring it.

This hasn't happened anywhere yet but exponential growth will almost certainly return to areas where it does happen unless the easing is very carefully managed and complied with.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 11, 2020, 02:03:04 pm
Maybe it's Gaia redressing the balance?

Removing a % of the population, and reducing our CO2 output from numerous sources in one fell swoop.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: fatneck on March 11, 2020, 02:10:47 pm
Our main work concern is how we manage the distribution of emergency crisis food through the Foodbank Network. Most of our volunteers are older people and thus in the higher risk groups.

We can manage most of our debt operation remotely and staff are equipped to work from home.

Contingency planning is a bit of a nightmare and I've got a number of staff on sickness warnings who are concerned about the impact on their disciplinary record!

Also, not going to Font would be fairly gutting....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 11, 2020, 02:15:47 pm
How bad it will be will depend entirely on how quickly we move into lockdown. Hopefully we will do so early and the worst of it will be people moaning that it didn't seem bad enough to justify it.

Are you suggesting a "lockdown" or just a bit of common sense re large gatherings. Surely you dont think we need to do the former.

I bet you just fancy a few weeks off and some quiet trips out on the grit.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on March 11, 2020, 02:28:37 pm


No idea where the 40-80% figures come from as this is far worse than any pandemic ever. Worse cases are 30% ish.
The 80% figure comes from Chris Whitty, the UK's chief medical officer, stated as the reasonable worst case scenario. The 40% to 80% range was a quote from someone from the World Health Organisation on Radio 4.

That article Adam posted earlier is very clear and in depth. I'd highly recommend reading it as it cuts through the media noise surrounding the issue and lays out the facts as far as they are known so far. It makes a very compelling case for action rather than delay. https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-act-today-or-people-will-die-f4d3d9cd99ca
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 11, 2020, 02:30:15 pm
Dominic Raab not following government advice!?

https://twitter.com/dinah_ditch/status/1237728180980592640
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 11, 2020, 02:31:11 pm
Slow-down of emissions are a benefit, but at what cost. Evidence suggests that the increased production post-crisis will outstrip the savings made during the lull, but regardless of that the financial fallout of this is probably going to be huge (perhaps even more damaging than the virus itself...?)

People not booking holidays, people not going to the cinema/shops, people not staying in hotels etc etc etc. So many businesses will fold. And then their employees don't have work and don't spend, compounding the problem. In the face of a recession like that, there's only so many ways that government can offer a liferaft. Wanton consumerism is one thing - fast cars and greed are the ugly face of that - but we live in a service economy and people buying goods and services from each other is what keeps us all fed and watered. 

Whenever I discuss climate change with my brother, I make the case that without very radical change we are all quite fucked in the future. It's true, but when you actually look at what that the required radical change looks like, it quickly becomes apparent that it will kill millions and cause a societal collapse of its own.



Btw, Gav, the point about all these measures is that for them to actually be effective, you have to implement them before you think you need to. By the time you shut the stable door the horse has bolted. What's the point of having a lockdown when it's already become widespread among the population?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 11, 2020, 02:35:17 pm
Btw, Gav, the point about all these measures is that for them to actually be effective, you have to implement them before you think you need to. By the time you shut the stable door the horse has bolted.

I think thats probably Gavs point.....

What's the point of having a lockdown when it's already become widespread among the population?

To stop it getting worse! By this it wouldnt matter if people were going around sneezing in peoples faces! Fuck it, lets have CV19 parties - bring yer Granny....

I'd also argue that the lockdown has worked in China - and there is (apparently) a drop in new cases in Lombardy where the lockdown has been in operation for nearly two weeks.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 11, 2020, 02:42:46 pm

[/quote]

To stop it getting worse! By this it wouldnt matter if people were going around sneezing in peoples faces! Fuck it, lets have CV19 parties - bring yer Granny....

I'd also argue that the lockdown has worked in China - and there is (apparently) a drop in new cases in Lombardy where the lockdown has been in operation for nearly two weeks.
[/quote]

Wasnt the lockdown in China a proper one with no movement at all. As far as i am aware you can still do most things in Italy just not large gatherings, School closures and your asked to keep a bit of personal space.

 Businesses, bars etc are open which i could live with.

I will get a box set of the walking dead on tonight so i can see what the future holds.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 11, 2020, 02:45:55 pm
Yes - China lockdown was more authoritarian! (I had an interesting discussion with my Chinese PhD student about this yesterday...). A couple of articles appearing today about Italy - all along the lines of "the population finally gets it and is staying indoors/away from people/lying low"...

eg: https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-scared-italians-finally-heed-call-to-stay-at-home-as-deaths-rise-11955061
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 11, 2020, 02:48:54 pm
I was trying to make that point, TT, but didn't choose my words very precisely.

Maybe should have said: a lockdown will have maximum effect if you implement it before the virus becomes widespread, but you can still have one anyway once it has, but it won't be as effective.


Btw, Gav, the point about all these measures is that for them to actually be effective, you have to implement them before you think you need to. By the time you shut the stable door the horse has bolted.

I think thats probably Gavs point.....

I think Gav is saying that he wouldn't bother having any sort of lockdown unless things were quite dire, and my point is that Gav is wrong. My point is that the lockdown would be most effective if it was implemented early (maybe not now, but certainly earlier rather than later), at a time when folk like Gav would be saying "what's the point?".
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on March 11, 2020, 02:53:32 pm

Quote

Wasnt the lockdown in China a proper one with no movement at all. As far as i am aware you can still do most things in Italy just not large gatherings, School closures and your asked to keep a bit of personal space.

Good interview here with a guy from WHO who's been to see the Chinese measures. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/04/health/coronavirus-china-aylward.html
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 11, 2020, 02:55:29 pm
@will @gme Fair enough. :)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 11, 2020, 02:56:47 pm

Quote

Wasnt the lockdown in China a proper one with no movement at all. As far as i am aware you can still do most things in Italy just not large gatherings, School closures and your asked to keep a bit of personal space.

Good interview here with a guy from WHO who's been to see the Chinese measures. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/04/health/coronavirus-china-aylward.html

FFS paywalls... any chance you can copy and paste a couple of choice bits (or the lot if its not too long?)?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 11, 2020, 02:58:04 pm
In my case I mean ceasing running training courses and limiting personal interactions. We have 16 guys coming here from all over the UK and beyond every week to spend 35 hours heavy breathing while straddling each other. In the great scheme of things postponing courses won't harm anyone and I'd rather do what I can to avoid a healthcare crisis.

We've kept our overheads are fairly low so shutting for a month or so doesn't worry me but I do need to make a call a few days ahead. Working on Italy's example we can either do it ourselves next week or have it forced on us the week after. Monitoring the stats carefully for now.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on March 11, 2020, 03:01:56 pm
TomTom - That's odd, I can read for free (just ignore and scroll past banner at start).
Quote
As the leader of the World Health Organization team that visited China, Dr. Bruce Aylward feels he has been to the mountaintop — and has seen what’s possible.

During a two-week visit in early February, Dr. Aylward saw how China rapidly suppressed the coronavirus outbreak that had engulfed Wuhan, and was threatening the rest of the country.

New cases in China have dropped to about 200 a day, from more than 3,000 in early February. The numbers may rise again as China’s economy begins to revive. But for now, far more new cases are appearing elsewhere in the world.

China’s counterattack can be replicated, Dr. Aylward said, but it will require speed, money, imagination and political courage.



For countries that act quickly, containment is still possible “because we don’t have a global pandemic — we have outbreaks occurring globally,” he added.

Dr. Aylward, who has 30 years experience in fighting polio, Ebola and other global health emergencies, detailed in an interview with The New York Times how he thinks the campaign against the virus should be run.

Unlock more free articles.
Create an account or log in
This conversation has been edited and condensed.

Do we know what this virus’s lethality is? We hear some estimates that it’s close to the 1918 Spanish flu, which killed 2.5 percent of its victims, and others that it’s a little worse than the seasonal flu, which kills only 0.1 percent. How many cases are missed affects that.

There’s this big panic in the West over asymptomatic cases. Many people are asymptomatic when tested, but develop symptoms within a day or two.

In Guangdong, they went back and retested 320,000 samples originally taken for influenza surveillance and other screening. Less than 0.5 percent came up positive, which is about the same number as the 1,500 known Covid cases in the province. (Covid-19 is the medical name of the illness caused by the coronavirus.)


There is no evidence that we’re seeing only the tip of a grand iceberg, with nine-tenths of it made up of hidden zombies shedding virus. What we’re seeing is a pyramid: most of it is aboveground.

Once we can test antibodies in a bunch of people, maybe I’ll be saying, “Guess what? Those data didn’t tell us the story.” But the data we have now don’t support it.

That’s good, if there’s little asymptomatic transmission. But it’s bad in that it implies that the death rates we’ve seen — from 0.7 percent in parts of China to 5.8 percent in Wuhan — are correct, right?

I’ve heard it said that “the mortality rate is not so bad because there are actually way more mild cases.” Sorry — the same number of people that were dying, still die. The real case fatality rate is probably what it is outside Hubei Province, somewhere between 1 and 2 percent.


ImagePatients waiting to be transferred from one hospital in Wuhan to Leishenshan Hospital, a newly built medical center to address the epidemic that is also in Wuhan, China.
Patients waiting to be transferred from one hospital in Wuhan to Leishenshan Hospital, a newly built medical center to address the epidemic that is also in Wuhan, China.Credit...Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
What about children? We know they are rarely hospitalized. But do they get infected? Do they infect their families?

We don’t know. That Guangdong survey also turned up almost no one under 20. Kids got flu, but not this. We have to do more studies to see if they get it and aren’t affected, and if they pass it to family members. But I asked dozens of doctors: Have you seen a chain of transmission where a child was the index case? The answer was no.

U.S. Will Drop Limits on Virus Testing, Pence SaysMarch 3, 2020
Why? There’s a theory that youngsters get the four known mild coronaviruses so often that they’re protected.

Get an informed guide to the global outbreak with our daily coronavirus newsletter.

That’s still a theory. I couldn’t get enough people to agree to put it in the W.H.O. report.

Does that imply that closing schools is pointless?

No. That’s still a question mark. If a disease is dangerous, and you see clusters, you have to close schools. We know that causes problems, because as soon as you send kids home, half your work force has to stay home to take care of them. But you don’t take chances with children.

Are the cases in China really going down?

I know there’s suspicion, but at every testing clinic we went to, people would say, “It’s not like it was three weeks ago.” It peaked at 46,000 people asking for tests a day; when we left, it was 13,000. Hospitals had empty beds.

I didn’t see anything that suggested manipulation of numbers. A rapidly escalating outbreak has plateaued, and come down faster than would have been expected. Back of the envelope, it’s hundreds of thousands of people in China that did not get Covid-19 because of this aggressive response.

Is the virus infecting almost everyone, as you would expect a novel flu to?

No — 75 to 80 percent of all clusters are in families. You get the odd ones in hospitals or restaurants or prisons, but the vast majority are in families. And only 5 to 15 percent of your close contacts develop disease. So they try to isolate you from your relatives as quickly as possible, and find everyone you had contact with in 48 hours before that.

You said different cities responded differently. How?

It depended on whether they had zero cases, sporadic ones, clusters or widespread transmission.

First, you have to make sure everyone knows the basics: hand-washing, masks, not shaking hands, what the symptoms are. Then, to find sporadic cases, they do fever checks everywhere, even stopping cars on highways to check everyone.

As soon as you find clusters, you shut schools, theaters, restaurants. Only Wuhan and the cities near it went into total lockdown.

How did the Chinese reorganize their medical response?

First, they moved 50 percent of all medical care online so people didn’t come in. Have you ever tried to reach your doctor on Friday night? Instead, you contacted one online. If you needed prescriptions like insulin or heart medications, they could prescribe and deliver it.



But if you thought you had coronavirus?

You would be sent to a fever clinic. They would take your temperature, your symptoms, medical history, ask where you’d traveled, your contact with anyone infected. They’d whip you through a CT scan …

Wait — “whip you through a CT scan”?

Each machine did maybe 200 a day. Five, 10 minutes a scan. Maybe even partial scans. A typical hospital in the West does one or two an hour. And not X-rays; they could come up normal, but a CT would show the “ground-glass opacities” they were looking for.

(Dr. Aylward was referring to lung abnormalities seen in coronavirus patients.)

And then?

If you were still a suspect case, you’d get swabbed. But a lot would be told, “You’re not Covid.” People would come in with colds, flu, runny noses. That’s not Covid. If you look at the symptoms, 90 percent have fever, 70 percent have dry coughs, 30 percent have malaise, trouble breathing. Runny noses were only 4 percent.

The swab was for a PCR test, right? How fast could they do that? Until recently, we were sending all of ours to Atlanta.

They got it down to four hours.

So people weren’t sent home?

No, they had to wait. You don’t want someone wandering around spreading virus.

If they were positive, what happened?

They’d be isolated. In Wuhan, in the beginning, it was 15 days from getting sick to hospitalization. They got it down to two days from symptoms to isolation. That meant a lot fewer infected — you choke off this thing’s ability to find susceptibles.

What’s the difference between isolation and hospitalization?

With mild symptoms, you go to an isolation center. They were set up in gymnasiums, stadiums — up to 1,000 beds. But if you were severe or critical, you’d go straight to hospitals. Anyone with other illnesses or over age 65 would also go straight to hospitals.

What were mild, severe and critical? We think of “mild” as like a minor cold.

No. “Mild” was a positive test, fever, cough — maybe even pneumonia, but not needing oxygen. “Severe” was breathing rate up and oxygen saturation down, so needing oxygen or a ventilator. “Critical” was respiratory failure or multi-organ failure.

So saying 80 percent of all cases are mild doesn’t mean what we thought.

I’m Canadian. This is the Wayne Gretzky of viruses — people didn’t think it was big enough or fast enough to have the impact it does.



Hospitals were also separated?

Yes. The best hospitals were designated just for Covid, severe and critical. All elective surgeries were postponed. Patients were moved. Other hospitals were designated just for routine care: women still have to give birth, people still suffer trauma and heart attacks.

They built two new hospitals, and they rebuilt hospitals. If you had a long ward, they’d build a wall at the end with a window, so it was an isolation ward with “dirty” and “clean” zones. You’d go in, gown up, treat patients, and then go out the other way and de-gown. It was like an Ebola treatment unit, but without as much disinfection because it’s not body fluids.

How good were the severe and critical care?

China is really good at keeping people alive. Its hospitals looked better than some I see here in Switzerland. We’d ask, “How many ventilators do you have?” They’d say “50.” Wow! We’d say, “How many ECMOs?” They’d say “five.” The team member from the Robert Koch Institute said, “Five? In Germany, you get three, maybe. And just in Berlin.”

(ECMOs are extracorporeal membrane oxygenation machines, which oxygenate the blood when the lungs fail.)

Who paid for all of this?

The government made it clear: testing is free. And if it was Covid-19, when your insurance ended, the state picked up everything.

In the U.S., that’s a barrier to speed. People think: “If I see my doctor, it’s going to cost me $100. If I end up in the I.C.U., what’s it going to cost me?” That’ll kill you. That’s what could wreak havoc. This is where universal health care coverage and security intersect. The U.S. has to think this through.

What about the nonmedical response?

It was nationwide. There was this tremendous sense of, “We’ve got to help Wuhan,” not “Wuhan got us into this.” Other provinces sent 40,000 medical workers, many of whom volunteered.

In Wuhan, our special train pulled in at night, and it was the saddest thing — the big intercity trains roar right through, with the blinds down.

We got off, and another group did. I said, “Hang on a minute, I thought we were the only ones allowed to get off.” They had these little jackets and a flag — it was a medical team from Guangdong coming in to help.

How did people in Wuhan eat if they had to stay indoors?

Fifteen million people had to order food online. It was delivered. Yes, there were some screw-ups. But one woman said to me: “Every now and again there’s something missing from a package, but I haven’t lost any weight.”


Lots of government employees were reassigned?

From all over society. A highway worker might take temperatures, deliver food or become a contact tracer. In one hospital, I met the woman teaching people how to gown up. I asked, “You’re the infection control expert?” No, she was a receptionist. She’d learned.

How did technology play a role?

They’re managing massive amounts of data, because they’re trying to trace every contact of 70,000 cases. When they closed the schools, really, just the buildings closed. The schooling moved online.

Contact tracers had on-screen forms. If you made a mistake, it flashed yellow. It was idiot-proof.

We went to Sichuan, which is vast but rural. They’d rolled out 5G. We were in the capital, at an emergency center with huge screens. They had a problem understanding one cluster. On one screen, they got the county headquarters. Still didn’t solve it.

So they got the field team. Here’s this poor team leader 500 kilometers away, and he gets a video call on his phone, and it’s the governor.

What about social media?

They had Weibo and Tencent and WeChat giving out accurate information to all users. You could have Facebook and Twitter and Instagram do that.

Isn’t all of this impossible in America?

Look, journalists are always saying: “Well, we can’t do this in our country.” There has to be a shift in mind-set to rapid response thinking. Are you just going to throw up your hands? There’s a real moral hazard in that, a judgment call on what you think of your vulnerable populations.

Ask yourself: Can you do the easy stuff? Can you isolate 100 patients? Can you trace 1,000 contacts? If you don’t, this will roar through a community.

Isn’t it possible only because China is an autocracy?

Journalists also say, “Well, they’re only acting out of fear of the government,” as if it’s some evil fire-breathing regime that eats babies. I talked to lots of people outside the system — in hotels, on trains, in the streets at night.

They’re mobilized, like in a war, and it’s fear of the virus that was driving them. They really saw themselves as on the front lines of protecting the rest of China. And the world.


Image
A medical worker in a hospital in Wuhan working with traditional medicines to treat patients.
A medical worker in a hospital in Wuhan working with traditional medicines to treat patients.Credit...Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
China is restarting its economy now. How can it do that without creating a new wave of infections?

It’s a “phased restart.” It means different things in different provinces.

Some are keeping schools closed longer. Some are only letting factories that make things crucial to the supply chain open. For migrant workers who went home — well, Chengdu has 5 million migrant workers.

First, you have to see a doctor and get a certificate that you’re “no risk.” It’s good for three days.

Then you take the train to where you work. If it’s Beijing, you then have to self-quarantine for two weeks. Your temperature is monitored, sometimes by phone, sometimes by physical check.

What’s going on with the treatment clinical trials?

They’re double-blind trials, so I don’t know the results. We should know more in a couple of weeks.

The biggest challenge was enrolling people. The number of severe patients is dropping, and there’s competition for them. And every ward is run by a team from another province, so you have to negotiate with each one, make sure they’re doing the protocols right.

And there are 200 trials registered — too many. I told them: “You’ve got to prioritize things that have promising antiviral properties.”

And they’re testing traditional medicines?

Yes, but it’s a few standard formulations. It’s not some guy sitting at the end of the bed cooking up herbs. They think they have some fever-reducing or anti-inflammatory properties. Not antivirals, but it makes people feel better because they’re used to it.

What did you do to protect yourself?

A heap of hand-sanitizer. We wore masks, because it was government policy. We didn’t meet patients or contacts of patients or go into hospital dirty zones.

And we were socially distant. We sat one per row on the bus. We ate meals in our hotel rooms or else one person per table. In conference rooms, we sat one per table and used microphones or shouted at each other.

That’s why I’m so hoarse. But I was tested, and I know I don’t have Covid.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 11, 2020, 03:03:24 pm
So, that September Font trip that I mentioned earlier. I think I'm going to book some accomodation and a ferry tonight while I can still get insurance with trip cancellation in the event that the FCO pulls the plug on travel to the area. Good idea? Bad idea? When I asked a couple of weeks ago people were saying to hold out for a deal; now things seem more frantic.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 11, 2020, 03:06:08 pm
TomTom - That's odd, I can read for free (just ignore and scroll past banner at start).
Quote

Thanks for posting. I think its because I've used my 5 free artucles a month or something...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on March 11, 2020, 03:06:26 pm
In my case I mean ceasing running training courses and limiting personal interactions. We have 16 guys coming here from all over the UK and beyond every week to spend 35 hours heavy breathing while straddling each other. In the great scheme of things postponing courses won't harm anyone and I'd rather do what I can to avoid a healthcare crisis.

We've kept our overheads are fairly low so shutting for a month or so doesn't worry me but I do need to make a call a few days ahead. Working on Italy's example we can either do it ourselves next week or have it forced on us the week after. Monitoring the stats carefully for now.

Likewise, I'm thinking how best to raise this with TPTB at my work. Acting when the predictable alarming acceleration of cases occurs is acting late and will cost many many lives and crash the NHS
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 11, 2020, 03:07:38 pm


I think Gav is saying that he wouldn't bother having any sort of lockdown unless things were quite dire, and my point is that Gav is wrong. My point is that the lockdown would be most effective if it was implemented early (maybe not now, but certainly earlier rather than later), at a time when folk like Gav would be saying "what's the point?".
[/quote]

I am just being facetious and am far from being in the "whats the point" category. In fact i have been in a meeting about the whole thing this morning and now have one staff member working from home as a precaution. I do however think we could easily go to far and create long term economic pain far greater than a 10-15% spike in the UKs annual death rate.

And as always i remain very much an optimist and dont think it will be anywhere near as bad as people say even if we dont isolate ourselves although i suspect we will.

I suspect we will try to hold out until the Easter hols when all the schools are shut anyway and lots of people have holidays. Least amount of impact then but dont expect Font to be open.


Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 11, 2020, 03:15:04 pm
Quote
I do however think we could easily go to far and create long term economic pain far greater than a 10-15% spike in the UKs annual death rate

Hmm, I'll take long term economic pain over death personally, but I can't speak for everyone. Struggling to see how you can compare economic 'pain' with actual death tbh?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 11, 2020, 03:16:47 pm
In my case I mean ceasing running training courses and limiting personal interactions. We have 16 guys coming here from all over the UK and beyond every week to spend 35 hours heavy breathing while straddling each other. In the great scheme of things postponing courses won't harm anyone and I'd rather do what I can to avoid a healthcare crisis.

We've kept our overheads are fairly low so shutting for a month or so doesn't worry me but I do need to make a call a few days ahead. Working on Italy's example we can either do it ourselves next week or have it forced on us the week after. Monitoring the stats carefully for now.

Nice for some but thats really not the case for a vast majority though is it. Most people cant afford to miss a month at work.

A majority of my staff could work to an extent from home but would become pretty ineffective within a few weeks without work on site going ahead. We have nearly 40 lads working all over the country every day so if this stopped they would have to go on statutory sick as we couldn't afford to pay for more than a week or two unless Boris is prepared to do so.

Most people are not as sensible as you appear to be and if they miss a months money it can take them years to get on top of it.

4 weeks shut down would probably cost the business 250k.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 11, 2020, 03:18:13 pm
Quote
I do however think we could easily go to far and create long term economic pain far greater than a 10-15% spike in the UKs annual death rate

Hmm, I'll take long term economic pain over death personally, but I can't speak for everyone. Struggling to see how you can compare economic 'pain' with actual death tbh?

Long term economic pain will equal more deaths though just wont show as a bump on a chart.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 11, 2020, 03:44:40 pm
Long term problems can be mitigated against as time goes on. An overwhelmed health service cannot.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Liamhutch89 on March 11, 2020, 03:50:27 pm
Quote
I do however think we could easily go to far and create long term economic pain far greater than a 10-15% spike in the UKs annual death rate

Hmm, I'll take long term economic pain over death personally, but I can't speak for everyone. Struggling to see how you can compare economic 'pain' with actual death tbh?

Long term economic pain will equal more deaths though just wont show as a bump on a chart.

This is not supported by data: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-00210-0

"Death rates have dropped during past economic downturns, even as many health trends have worsened."
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: 36chambers on March 11, 2020, 04:04:27 pm
We've just been told that if/when the government adopts the "delay stage" our work office will close.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dunnyg on March 11, 2020, 04:13:02 pm
Uni has cancelled all fieldwork indefinitely, and vivas can be done via video-conferencing. I'm lucky that this hasn't messed things up for me in any big ways, but this must be causing nightmares for some.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 11, 2020, 04:14:28 pm
Uni has cancelled all fieldwork indefinitely, and vivas can be done via video-conferencing. I'm lucky that this hasn't messed things up for me in any big ways, but this must be causing nightmares for some.

Owning a small climbing wall, is not a great place to be right now...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 11, 2020, 04:17:48 pm
We've just been told that if/when the government adopts the "delay stage" our work office will close.

that seems weird, why not working from home?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: 36chambers on March 11, 2020, 04:22:44 pm
We've just been told that if/when the government adopts the "delay stage" our work office will close.

that seems weird, why not working from home?

sorry I meant the physical office. We'll have to work remotely, but business as usual otherwise.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bradders on March 11, 2020, 04:30:33 pm
Quote
I do however think we could easily go to far and create long term economic pain far greater than a 10-15% spike in the UKs annual death rate

Hmm, I'll take long term economic pain over death personally, but I can't speak for everyone. Struggling to see how you can compare economic 'pain' with actual death tbh?

Long term economic pain will equal more deaths though just wont show as a bump on a chart.

This is not supported by data: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-00210-0

"Death rates have dropped during past economic downturns, even as many health trends have worsened."

Haven't seen a full study on this and that article is actually a bit inconclusive if you read through. Interested to see a proper study on it as logically a recession and increased poverty should result in an increase in death rates. Certainly the link between poverty and reduced average lifespan/poorer health outcomes is very well established.

However, this meta analysis from a quick skim seems to show a strong correlation between recessions and increases in suicide rates:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4473496/

This takes me back to my central point on all this; we need a balanced, sensible, considered response. Panicking and closing things down too early brings with it potentially more problems than it solves, whilst doing things too late likewise brings significant risk. Fear-based decisions help no one.

How tragic would it be if we shut everything down and save 10,000 people dying from coronavirus, but 10,000 people end up killing themselves in the resulting recession and average life spans are shortened by the increase in poverty! Numbers plucked from thin air but a responsible approach has to consider these things in my view.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 11, 2020, 04:59:41 pm
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-outbreak-declared-pandemic-by-who-11955521

Now declared official Pandemic by WHO.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 11, 2020, 05:10:16 pm
 :agree: with bradders

The word balance seems to be getting missed a lot of the time.

A month off work for most on here would probably be fine but do the same to a lot of people who live hand to mouth and the situation would be a lot different. This needs to be taken into consideration and balanced between a bunch of old folks who might be having there, already long lives shortened by 5 years or so and a family with kids to feed who only gets paid for the time he works. Statutory sick wont even cover your rent in the SE.

Sounds harsh but i think it has to be considered.

I always thought more stuff like this would come along as population gets too high. Most of us live too long already and provide very little for the last 20 years of it other than free child care.  :whistle:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nik at work on March 11, 2020, 05:21:26 pm
Exactly.
Is Coronavirus a bad thing? Yes of course it is, potentially terrible. But there is a bigger picture which is far more complex and nuanced.

I’m worried about my elderly parents, my severely asthmatic ex wife and my GP partner (girlfriend seems a daft word in your mid 40’s), and I will do what I can to ensure their well-being. But that is a very different thing to national/worldwide strategies which need the above mentioned balance.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on March 11, 2020, 08:31:48 pm
Denmark just announced a complete lockdown for the next two weeks (for now, presumably).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 11, 2020, 08:44:41 pm
Denmark just announced a complete lockdown for the next two weeks (for now, presumably).

wow. what does that entail/mean in terms of what you can and can't do? Or is everyone still trying to figure it out?

(edit- just read what that entails. Shcools, universities and government things..)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 11, 2020, 08:53:33 pm
 https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-act-today-or-people-will-die-f4d3d9cd99ca (https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-act-today-or-people-will-die-f4d3d9cd99ca)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on March 11, 2020, 08:57:27 pm
Still trying to figure it out, in particular for travel to and from the country (not that we're planning any travel, but I hope it means travel to and from will be very tightly restricted and seriously monitored). All schools/universities, non essential government work, and cultural institutions closed. All private enterprises strongly encouraged to move to distance working where possible. Total lockdown is probably too strong a term. But I am very concerned given my wife's very comprised health currently. I think I will be the only one leaving the apartment for the time being and then only to ensure we have food.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 11, 2020, 09:00:46 pm
Still trying to figure it out, in particular for travel to and from the country (not that we're planning any travel, but I hope it means travel to and from will be very tightly restricted and seriously monitored). All schools/universities, non essential government work, and cultural institutions closed. All private enterprises strongly encouraged to move to distance working where possible. Total lockdown is probably too strong a term. But I am very concerned given my wife's very comprised health currently. I think I will be the only one leaving the apartment for the time being and then only to ensure we have food.

TBH I think thats pretty sensible (the Danish govt response - and yourself!)... and now I wish our Govt would bite the bullet and do the same. They'll have to in the next week or two...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on March 11, 2020, 09:10:42 pm
I think the attitude here has generally been a little complacent, but the government has suddenly moved very decisively, which I'm glad of.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 11, 2020, 11:04:01 pm
This is an excellent article - for me the best bit was how the Chinese data can be used to show how many undiagnosed cases there are at the moment (he estimates 25000-140000 in France 😱).

https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-act-today-or-people-will-die-f4d3d9cd99ca
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 12, 2020, 06:19:39 am
This is an excellent article - for me the best bit was how the Chinese data can be used to show how many undiagnosed cases there are at the moment (he estimates 25000-140000 in France 😱).

https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-act-today-or-people-will-die-f4d3d9cd99ca

I linked that article a few posts earlier.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 12, 2020, 06:35:27 am
Soz OMM. Didn’t know.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 12, 2020, 07:21:25 am
Soz OMM. Didn’t know.

At least, unlike Trump, you’re not pinning the blame for the US situation (in the article, indicated to be currently, vastly, underestimated); on Europe.

Apparently, the US outbreak is entirely down to European travellers entering the US.

I really do hope that most of Trumps wealth is in hotels and resorts...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nik at work on March 12, 2020, 07:24:49 am
This is an excellent article - for me the best bit was how the Chinese data can be used to show how many undiagnosed cases there are at the moment (he estimates 25000-140000 in France 😱).

https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-act-today-or-people-will-die-f4d3d9cd99ca

I linked that article a few posts earlier.

And JB linked it 3 pages ago  ;)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on March 12, 2020, 07:31:38 am
The US's travel restrictions seem crazy, UK exempt citizens exempt but screened? On holiday with a group of Americans, all trying to get home before it starts now...  Seems like it'll just start a travel panic, and do little to realistically prevent transmission
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 12, 2020, 07:44:34 am
Surely the first thing to ban to prevent spread across the USA would be internal flights??

No chance.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on March 12, 2020, 08:21:46 am
The US's travel restrictions seem crazy, UK exempt citizens exempt but screened? On holiday with a group of Americans, all trying to get home before it starts now...  Seems like it'll just start a travel panic, and do little to realistically prevent transmission
This happened in Italy where news of the impending lockdown was leaked the day before, leading to lots of people traveling across the country while they still could to be at home/with family.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on March 12, 2020, 08:27:11 am

Quote

Wasnt the lockdown in China a proper one with no movement at all. As far as i am aware you can still do most things in Italy just not large gatherings, School closures and your asked to keep a bit of personal space.

Good interview here with a guy from WHO who's been to see the Chinese measures. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/04/health/coronavirus-china-aylward.html

FFS paywalls... any chance you can copy and paste a couple of choice bits (or the lot if its not too long?)?

Tip for getting past news site paywalls: search for the headline on Google news. You should find that accessing the link via Google news bypasses the paywall.

Hopefully you should be able to see the full article at this link:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2020/03/04/health/coronavirus-china-aylward.amp.html (https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2020/03/04/health/coronavirus-china-aylward.amp.html)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: M1V0 on March 12, 2020, 11:25:52 am
Macron is giving a national address tonight at 1900 GMT (2000 in France) concerning CV-19. Hopefully not restricting travel.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 12, 2020, 12:12:30 pm
Irish Schools and Colleges now closed.

I predict Boris will make the same announcement after lunch. Schools closed from now until Easter holidays.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sxrxg on March 12, 2020, 12:21:54 pm
Macron is giving a national address tonight at 1900 GMT (2000 in France) concerning CV-19. Hopefully not restricting travel.

Not meaning to be a dick but surely a font Easter trip (I assume that is why you don't want travel restricted) is not that important in the grand scheme of things during the current outbreak... The rocks will still be there for a long time after this pandemic. I just hope that peoples older/high risk relatives and friends are also around for a long time as well.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bradders on March 12, 2020, 12:29:34 pm
Irish Schools and Colleges now closed.

I predict Boris will make the same announcement after lunch. Schools closed from now until Easter holidays.

Yeah, if it's not today then tomorrow or over the weekend surely.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 12, 2020, 12:31:59 pm
I reckon as of Monday. Hope so, got a day off to ski tomorrow! ;)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on March 12, 2020, 12:50:17 pm
Easter Hols are two weeks away down here... I think they’re early compared to other parts of the country.  Teachers have been asked to prepare home learning packs by this weekend.

I run a small unit for pupils with Autism/ Communication and interaction difficulties attached to a mainstream school, I have 4 members of staff.  At the start of this week I had one member of staff off with concussion, one member of staff had a fever over the weekend but felt OK to return to work on Monday.  During the week me, one more member of staff and a pupil have become ill - sore throat, headache, fever, runny nose.  We were advised to contact 111 whom in turn referred back to our local GPs.  GP advice was that, as there are no confirmed cases in our area that it is just a cold/flu virus and unlikely to be COVID.  No requests for isolation, no testing nothing..  They did ask the question, have you had contact with a confirmed case?  (How would we know if they’re not testing?)

The three of us (me, member of staff and pupil) are at home at present but could return on Monday or even tomorrow if feeling better. 

It all seems a bit lax to me..    Not sure what I have, how would I? I wonder how soon this kind of thing will be taken far more seriously?!

Given that the primary way the virus is spread is through airborne transmission you can see why schools are ideal places for transmission.  I sat in an assembly with 250+ pupils together in close proximity last week, thinking you could all have perfectly clean hands but if the person next to you coughs or sneezes you’re very likely to breath in whatever they have expelled.... 

I am currently organising a video link with my one year 11 pupil so I can take him through his remaining GCSE course work from home!

Personally, I have gone from thinking this is bollocks designed to distract to oh shit this is serious and we need action now, it’s not too f**king early in the space of a week!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 12, 2020, 12:54:31 pm
Big sporting event happening at the works this weekend i think. I bet there hoping the announcement that is looking more and more likely is held off until Monday.

Its got virus spread written all over it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 12, 2020, 01:11:34 pm
Big sporting event happening at the works this weekend i think. I bet there hoping the announcement that is looking more and more likely is held off until Monday.

Its got virus spread written all over it.

https://www.ukclimbing.com/news/2020/03/cwif_restricted_to_competitors-only_event_-_watch_via_livestreams-72226
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 12, 2020, 01:18:00 pm
Quote
We were advised to contact 111 whom in turn referred back to our local GPs.  GP advice was that, as there are no confirmed cases in our area that it is just a cold/flu virus and unlikely to be COVID.  No requests for isolation, no testing nothing..

Yeah, a colleague went to A&E on Monday for an eye injury - they had a COVID Isolation pod set up which turned out to be a portakabin in the car park with a phone in it direct to 111.

Having said that we do seem to have tested a lot with a low rate of positives, not seen any good stats on how that compares to elsewhere though.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: M1V0 on March 12, 2020, 01:25:54 pm
Macron is giving a national address tonight at 1900 GMT (2000 in France) concerning CV-19. Hopefully not restricting travel.

Not meaning to be a dick but surely a font Easter trip (I assume that is why you don't want travel restricted) is not that important in the grand scheme of things during the current outbreak... The rocks will still be there for a long time after this pandemic. I just hope that peoples older/high risk relatives and friends are also around for a long time as well.

Of course contextually my concern for a pleasant trip pales in comparison, foolish for me to think a climbing-related comment on a climbing-related forum was appropriate though. Will refrain in the future.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 12, 2020, 01:37:31 pm
Yeah. I will be considerable more upset if my parents, step-parents or inlaws die from COVID-19 than if my trip to Tarn gets cancelled. But that doesn't mean that I wont be pissed off and comfort eat 10 cookies if my trip gets cancelled.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on March 12, 2020, 01:47:27 pm
Having said that we do seem to have tested a lot with a low rate of positives, not seen any good stats on how that compares to elsewhere though.

I read an article with these stats this morning and now I can't find it again. From what I remember, we have tested a higher percentage of potential cases than most other countries, with the notable exception of South Korea, hence the low positive/test ratio.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: highrepute on March 12, 2020, 01:48:18 pm
This is an excellent article - for me the best bit was how the Chinese data can be used to show how many undiagnosed cases there are at the moment (he estimates 25000-140000 in France 😱).

https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-act-today-or-people-will-die-f4d3d9cd99ca

I read that article with increasing terror. Certainly paints a dark picture.

One difference that seems obvious to me between here and Hubai is that they shut down when they had 44 cases because I guess they knew they likely had many more. Here, however, it seems like we have been strongly testing since before we even had 1 case. The article shows a table that shows our testing rate to be quite high internationally. So we can we be more confident that we have contained the early cases which in Hubai they had no forewarning of. And we have better data because we have been testing from the very start. Thoughts?

I see Ireland have closed school based on 60ish cases.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: JamieG on March 12, 2020, 02:01:34 pm
Hi James,

It certainly is a worrying read. Unfortunately whilst we do seem to have done quite a bit of testing. There are quite a few reports of people waiting days and days to hear about a test and getting no response. Despite having been to high risk areas and having the symptoms too.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/mar/11/uk-coronavirus-cases-jump-to-456-and-eighth-briton-dies

The article describes the following situation:

"Phillip Meyer, a businessman from Kent, said he and his son had been waiting nine days for a coronavirus test after getting a cough following a trip to northern Italy.

He said: “We are testing between 1,000 and 2,000 people a day in the UK, so clearly there is a bottleneck. If in South Korea they test 15,000 a day, why can’t we do that here?”

A retired intensive care doctor told the Guardian that the increase has come “way too late” after he and his friends were repeatedly refused tests despite falling ill following a skiing trip, to Ischgl in Austria. The 55-year-old doctor from Chichester, who has his name only as Andrew said: “They may be upping the testing but they haven’t put Ischgl on a high risk list, despite knowing about this for days. Six of us have been back in Chichester going about their daily life. I suspect we’ll find a big cluster in Chichester two weeks.”


Quite worrying.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Yossarian on March 12, 2020, 02:04:01 pm
 :oops:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Yossarian on March 12, 2020, 02:04:37 pm
But that doesn't mean that I wont be pissed off and comfort eat 10 cookies if my trip gets cancelled.


 https://youtu.be/hwmlNFBqfiY (https://youtu.be/hwmlNFBqfiY)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: highrepute on March 12, 2020, 02:10:26 pm
Hi James,

It certainly is a worrying read. Unfortunately whilst we do seem to have done quite a bit of testing. There are quite a few reports of people waiting days and days to hear about a test and getting no response. Despite having been to high risk areas and having the symptoms too.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/mar/11/uk-coronavirus-cases-jump-to-456-and-eighth-briton-dies

The article describes the following situation:

"Phillip Meyer, a businessman from Kent, said he and his son had been waiting nine days for a coronavirus test after getting a cough following a trip to northern Italy.

He said: “We are testing between 1,000 and 2,000 people a day in the UK, so clearly there is a bottleneck. If in South Korea they test 15,000 a day, why can’t we do that here?”

A retired intensive care doctor told the Guardian that the increase has come “way too late” after he and his friends were repeatedly refused tests despite falling ill following a skiing trip, to Ischgl in Austria. The 55-year-old doctor from Chichester, who has his name only as Andrew said: “They may be upping the testing but they haven’t put Ischgl on a high risk list, despite knowing about this for days. Six of us have been back in Chichester going about their daily life. I suspect we’ll find a big cluster in Chichester two weeks.”


Quite worrying.

I've read those reports but there's bound to be 1000s of people who feel aggrieved they can't have a test. I'm not convinced it's representative of a lack of testing.

I guess we have to wait 5 days and see what happens in Chichester.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sxrxg on March 12, 2020, 02:13:55 pm
Macron is giving a national address tonight at 1900 GMT (2000 in France) concerning CV-19. Hopefully not restricting travel.

Not meaning to be a dick but surely a font Easter trip (I assume that is why you don't want travel restricted) is not that important in the grand scheme of things during the current outbreak... The rocks will still be there for a long time after this pandemic. I just hope that peoples older/high risk relatives and friends are also around for a long time as well.

Of course contextually my concern for a pleasant trip pales in comparison, foolish for me to think a climbing-related comment on a climbing-related forum was appropriate though. Will refrain in the future.

As a climber I understand your comment and would hate for you to refrain on commenting in the future (as I can see you are a new poster).

In fact I should probably have refrained from posting myself. I added nothing to the thread other than noting my worry about the lack of action by governments and not changing our expectations of what we will/won't be able to do in the next few weeks or months.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on March 12, 2020, 03:20:39 pm
Big sporting event happening at the works this weekend i think. I bet there hoping the announcement that is looking more and more likely is held off until Monday.

Its got virus spread written all over it.
Indeed, was planning to head to a comp. at the Hangar in Plymouth this weekend, I know it’s not quite the CWIF but at present it’s still on.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Yossarian on March 12, 2020, 03:27:32 pm
I’m basically only going to the wall when my kids have classes / squad training at the moment. If the schools close then I’m assuming most of those sessions will be shutting down too.

I have a feeling we’re going to see a lot of fingerboard PBs set this year...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 12, 2020, 03:40:28 pm
When the zombie holocaust arrived I was expecting that there would be a run on guns and tinned food not, as the spam emails I am getting suggest, laptops, dust masks, soap and VPN services.

A bit disappointing really.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 12, 2020, 03:45:07 pm
Had a meeting with my bank manager today ( they could only attend if less than 6 people involved). They met with a funeral directors yesterday who you would have thought was delighted at this. However he’s expecting less work as he thinks rates will drop due to all the cleaning going on having a positive ( negative in his case)  effect on the volume of normal flu, novovirus etc cases that supply him with customers.
Will be interesting to see.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on March 12, 2020, 04:10:18 pm
They met with a funeral directors yesterday who you would have thought was delighted at this. However he’s expecting less work as he thinks rates will drop due to all the cleaning going on having a positive ( negative in his case)  effect on the volume of normal flu, novovirus etc cases that supply him with customers.

Unless he's got any actual data to back that up, I wouldn't hold my breath.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 12, 2020, 04:12:40 pm
Melbourne Grand Prix cancelled.

Awaiting the Cobra outcome....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on March 12, 2020, 04:27:06 pm
Had a meeting with my bank manager today ( they could only attend if less than 6 people involved). They met with a funeral directors yesterday who you would have thought was delighted at this. However he’s expecting less work as he thinks rates will drop due to all the cleaning going on having a positive ( negative in his case)  effect on the volume of normal flu, novovirus etc cases that supply him with customers.
Will be interesting to see.

In Lombardy, (and, I presume, now the rest of Italy) funerals have been cancelled. Only parents, children, partners and siblings are allowed, and services are very much scaled back with everyone having to comply with the minimum distance requirements from each other.

If we end up in a similar situation, funeral directors may have lots of cases to deal with but I their earnings per case could be very low.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 12, 2020, 07:18:44 pm
I was trying to make that point, TT, but didn't choose my words very precisely.

Maybe should have said: a lockdown will have maximum effect if you implement it before the virus becomes widespread, but you can still have one anyway once it has, but it won't be as effective.


Btw, Gav, the point about all these measures is that for them to actually be effective, you have to implement them before you think you need to. By the time you shut the stable door the horse has bolted.

I think thats probably Gavs point.....

I think Gav is saying that he wouldn't bother having any sort of lockdown unless things were quite dire, and my point is that Gav is wrong. My point is that the lockdown would be most effective if it was implemented early (maybe not now, but certainly earlier rather than later), at a time when folk like Gav would be saying "what's the point?".

So the question apparently on everyone's mask-covered lips now is.. when should the UK trigger a lockdown and how draconian should it be?
My personal take from listening to the various voices today is that we will end up at some point in the next 1-4 weeks having a surprisingly draconian lockdown - more draconian than Italy (but less than China) - but also one specifically targeted at the most vulnerable groups: the over 60s and those with underlying ill-health. In the belief that when a lockdown comes it can be as total as possible for the longest time practically achievable. Presumably there'll be high compliance from those vulnerable groups. Majority of the rest of us will probably get the virus if we haven't already had it/got it. Number of deaths will mostly depend on how many of those over 60 or with underlying ill-health catch it.
I kind of agree with some of the assumptions behind delaying a lockdown i.e. the fear it would prove increasingly ineffectual the longer a lockdown lasted..  Analogous to forming three ranks and letting the swarm of zulus get right up close before taking action for maximum effect with your limited resources.
Think the messaging currently makes sense so as to not be scaring the public into further panic behaviour by implying a lockdown is imminent.. probably needs to be systems in place that aren't there yet or which could be better, and which mass herd behaviour now wouldn't help prepare. We'll only know on the other side!
But can also understand Jeremy Hunt's point doing the rounds today, that we could be taking greater measures to increase social isolation like in Taiwan etc.. Just don't see how that approach is sustainable for very long.. will be interesting to see how Italy fares in a couple of weeks.. also their 'lockdown' doesn't appear 'that' draconian - would the most effective approach not be to enforce emergency laws against groups of the most vulnerable to remain socially isolated for their own sake and that of the health service?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 12, 2020, 07:34:28 pm
Just watched Jeremy Hunt on the news. First time I have agreed with him since Leveson. He looked terrified.

Whatever the issues around timing, I do think the govt is squandering opportunities to get the public to plan ahead now, as well as slow the spread more effectively in its earlier stages.

60k at Cheltenham?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Andy W on March 12, 2020, 07:37:30 pm
France is shutting schools and colleges from Monday, just watched Macron, quite impressed with him after the guff from Boris and Trump.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 12, 2020, 07:59:02 pm
I'm not just agreeing with Jeremy Hunt on concerns on slow government action. For the first time I am seriously worried about the honesty of their data. The big headline is we are 4 weeks behind Italy but if you look at the Italian data we are at Feb 26th in terms of deaths and cases. Where is the extra two weeks coming from?

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/italy/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 12, 2020, 08:08:58 pm
Offwidth. The extra weeks are because our cases have not accelerated as fast as Italy in the early stages. Our curve isn’t as steep.

I listened to the statement/press conference for quite a while. BJ is just a front man. But the CMO and CSO were open with their reasons - and there was no attempt to shy away from any interviewers questions etc...

Whilst it may seem sensible to lock stuff down now - I also get it that people can only handle that for so long and the danger is people emerging from the lockdown prematurely.

That said - there’s a slightly scary article in the guardian citing recent research showing that 40-80% of transmission was before people were symptomatic... and people were at their most dangerous/virus shedding before they developed any symptoms. Which implies that self isolation post diagnosis (even if only suspected) will only be part effective - and that a full on China style lockdown may be the only way.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on March 12, 2020, 08:21:45 pm
I'm not just agreeing with Jeremy Hunt on concerns on slow government action. For the first time I am seriously worried about the honesty of their data. The big headline is we are 4 weeks behind Italy but if you look at the Italian data we are at Feb 26th in terms of deaths and cases. Where is the extra two weeks coming from?

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/italy/
  Could they be waiting for things to be proportionally similar?

I think our current government is the least trustworthy collection of self servers you could possibly imagine.  I think the main priority will be to ensure the least amount of financial damage to their own accumulated wealth and that of their donors.  I wouldn’t be in the least bit surprised to discover that profit is being made from the situations. I don’t believe they give a shit about loosing a few proles, so long as there is enough worker bees remaining.
Looks like I will be staying home for 7 days...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 12, 2020, 08:38:50 pm
It seems to my punter mind that in this circumstance you can break the population into two important distinct groups:
1. at high risk of becoming seriously ill. (age group 60+)
2. at low risk of becoming seriously ill. (age group under 60)

Assuming you want to save the maximum number of lives whilst aiming for the minimum economic impact, then wouldn't the most rational thing to do be to impose an extremely draconian isolation measure - enforced by martial law if necessary - on the group at high risk of becoming seriously ill. That would lower the spike of severely ill. And it's fortunate that the most vulnerable group are also economically the least productive (I'm guessing?), so enforcing isolation on this group is less economically damaging than it would be for isolation of age group 18-60.

Allow the group at low risk of becoming seriously ill to continue to go about their daily business.

Holes in that reasoning?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 12, 2020, 08:42:02 pm
over 60’s are mostly Tory voters? 😂 (which is actually true..)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 12, 2020, 08:44:32 pm

Holes in that reasoning?

That you can selectively control transmission rates in the two populations.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 12, 2020, 08:48:07 pm

Holes in that reasoning?

That you can selectively control transmission rates in the two populations.


That the data suggests the risks of serious illness in much younger (than 60) victims is quite a bit greater than you seem to imagine?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 12, 2020, 08:50:16 pm

Holes in that reasoning?

That you can selectively control transmission rates in the two populations.

It would change transmission rates within the populations - and also change the exposure or vulnerability.

I suspect this was what BJ was hinting at in his presser. ‘Taking more care of the elderly’ as in putting them in special measures.

Is Shark 60 yet? 😃
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 12, 2020, 08:59:53 pm
Holes in that reasoning?


That the data suggests the risks of serious illness in much younger (than 60) victims is quite a bit greater than you seem to imagine?

What does it 'seem' to you that I imagine? And what data?


I'm going off these figures for the most 'at risk' groups:

(https://ourworldindata.org/uploads/2020/03/Coronavirus-CFR-by-age-in-China-1-800x526.png)


and


(https://ourworldindata.org/uploads/2020/03/Coronavirus-CFR-by-health-condition-in-China.png)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 12, 2020, 09:02:28 pm
Maybe I'm putting too much store in that Medium article, but I was very surprised by the Government's response, given that the only useful measure that can now be employed is social distancing and that any small delay makes a big impact on effectiveness. Having said that, I totally get the concept of not being able to go too early for pragmatic reasons. But I do think people are ready to take the necessary steps to slow the spread.


In other news, I found a house in Moigny-sur-Ecole that offered free cancellation until the 29th August. No BMC insurance (new policies won't have any coverage for virus related claims) on offer so fingers crossed that this has all blown over by then!  :please:
I guess I have to hold off on booking the ferry till closer to the time, and hope that insurance is then being offered?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 12, 2020, 09:09:56 pm
Holes in that reasoning?


That the data suggests the risks of serious illness in much younger (than 60) victims is quite a bit greater than you seem to imagine?

What does it 'seem' to you that I imagine? And what data?


I'm going off these figures for the most 'at risk' groups:

(https://ourworldindata.org/uploads/2020/03/Coronavirus-CFR-by-age-in-China-1-800x526.png)


and


(https://ourworldindata.org/uploads/2020/03/Coronavirus-CFR-by-health-condition-in-China.png)

Exactly what I said, you are conflating fatality with “serious illness”.

Many people are requiring extended care, in hospital. Often weeks in duration, not days and not limited to over 60’s. In the linked data earlier in the thread, it seems that is age related, in terms of likelihood, but the significant tipping point seems closer to 40 than 60.

Many of the people posting here fall into that category.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 12, 2020, 09:21:43 pm
I'm not conflating. I'm aware of your point. But there is clear and obvious correlation with # fatalities and # serious illness. So drop the at high risk group to 'over 50'. The logic remains the same that you can divide the population into two quite distinct groups: 1. at high risk of serious illness 2. at low risk of serious illness.
 
And given the two goals are to  1.minimise fatalities (and burden on health service) and 2.minimise economic damage
..
to achieve maximum effect in both goals, you could (and should?) treat the two groups very differently.

I'm open to why that's wrong.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 12, 2020, 09:35:08 pm
The problem as I see it Pete isn't that there aren't big differences between the two groups, of course there are, but that you can selectively separate them. If you place the older group under house arrest and leave the younger group unrestricted I don't doubt it will improve the older group's health. But I suspect not to the extent that limiting transmission in the broader population will.

Given that the impact of this illness when it is severe is calamitous, for those in at risk groups,  for families and for front-line staff, I think there is an argument for restricting all the population.

One of the reasons put forward for the prevalence of the illness amongst doctors was the high exposure levels. It isn't as if we know from prior episodes that a split approach will be effective. It seems very risky to me.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Falling Down on March 12, 2020, 09:36:50 pm
For what it’s worth, I’ve been sick since Monday evening and have stayed at home to work and will be isolating for the next week at least. 

Felt a bit weird over the weekend then came down with fatigue, aches and pains, elevated temperature and periodic coughing on Monday and they’ve stayed like that since.  Not like a bad cold or real flu - quite mild really.

London will be a real shitshow I suspect. I must have taken dozens of tubes, trains, taxis and buses and been in loads of offices and meeting rooms in different companies over the last four weeks.  I started hand sanitising and washing like mad about three weeks ago and haven’t shaken hands with anyone for at least a couple of weeks or more but have still got sick. 

Still don’t know whether it’s the virus but felt like staying at home earlier this week was the right thing to do.  I’ve got a slightly dodgy immune system with ulcerative colitis (anti immune disorder) so tend to get sick easier when I’m run down and I’m 50 in a few months.  Not worried but glad I’ve isolated this week to save spreading anything.

Keep washing your hands peeps 👍
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on March 12, 2020, 09:47:35 pm
So everyone taking better care of their hygiene and washing hands is great, it will reduce the prevalence of other illnesses.  Keep doing it for sure...

However, someone with better knowledge can correct me if I am wrong but the main way of getting the virus is inhaling it...  Not shaking hands etc... is great but if you’re breathing the same air as someone who has the virus that’s how you will catch it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on March 12, 2020, 09:48:12 pm
Hope you have a fast recovery FD ✊
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 12, 2020, 09:49:24 pm
+1
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 12, 2020, 09:49:30 pm
I agree with that and am aware. But there is clear and obvious correlation with # fatalities and # serious illness. So drop the at high risk group to 'over 50'. The logic remains the same that you can divide the population into two quite distinct groups: 1. at high risk of serious illness 2. at low risk of serious illness.
 
And given the two goals are to  1.minimise fatalities and 2.minimise economic damage
..
to achieve maximum effect in both goals, you could (and should?) treat the two groups very differently.

I'm open to why that's wrong.

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.

Imagine if we got close to the 80% of the population infection rate of the worst case scenario?

Shit, you’re looking at 60% of the population being too ill to work!

Obviously, that’s a worst case and as such, not the most likely. But, hell, it doesn’t need to get that bad to really put a dent. Basically, the difference between a two-four week imposed lockdown and a four to six week period of mass absenteeism doesn’t add up in my guestamation
(In fact, it wouldn’t be just the 4-6 weeks of peak illness. It would be drawn out, with a taper as summer draws in). I would have guessed the latter to be more harmful.

Then there’s the strain on medical services. Bed demand etc etc.

No. I don’t see the logic of the split you suggest.

I mean, I do, of course, it’s far from stupid, I really don’t mean to suggest it is. I just don’t see it as better than a total slow down of infection rates, which is what the lockdown strategy is intended to achieve.

I would also suggest, the Chinese strategy, which appears to have been largely successful, was not motivated by sentimental regard for their elderly, but by a cold appraisal of what would be best for the state and their economic continuity.

Even if our society doesn’t allow such dictatorial action and our population more likely to rebel/ignore; we could achieve a partial, if less effective, facsimile.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 12, 2020, 09:53:53 pm
Heal fast FD.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ged on March 12, 2020, 09:57:36 pm
So everyone taking better care of their hygiene and washing hands is great, it will reduce the prevalence of other illnesses.  Keep doing it for sure...

However, someone with better knowledge can correct me if I am wrong but the main way of getting the virus is inhaling it...  Not shaking hands etc... is great but if you’re breathing the same air as someone who has the virus that’s how you will catch it.

I think hand to mouth and hand to eye is actually the most common route of transmission for these sorts of things. Although obviously someone coughing in your face isn't ideal either.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nik at work on March 12, 2020, 10:03:36 pm
It wouldn’t be 2-4 weeks lockdown. It would be much longer at this stage, more like 13-16 weeks I think...
I’m no Boris fan boi and I disagree with Pete completely with regards to Brexit. But on this I think Pete is closer to the ‘best’ option than the idea of immediate lockdown.

Get well soon FD

And Brutus current opinion/thinking is hand washing 5 times a day for the full 2 minutes reduces your risk of getting Covid by a third, that’s why it’s worth doing.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on March 12, 2020, 10:24:05 pm
Ditto FD get well.

Thank you Nik that’s useful.  I watched this and at around a minute in the ‘expert’ (I think he’s legit) talks about how the virus acts and is transferred.  If he’s correct a bit less than a cough in the face is needed.. 

https://youtu.be/cZFhjMQrVts
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 12, 2020, 10:27:57 pm

Is Shark 60 yet? 😃

Last spotted heading to his disaster bunker in the US... https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/11/disease-dodging-worried-wealthy-jet-off-to-disaster-bunkers (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/11/disease-dodging-worried-wealthy-jet-off-to-disaster-bunkers)


I’m no Boris fan boi and I disagree with Pete completely with regards to Brexit. But on this I think Pete is closer to the ‘best’ option than the idea of immediate lockdown.

Please. The two are completely irrelevant to each other. You may as well link my support of LFC with my view on abortion.
edit - actually Liverpool FC historically have a catholic support base! But you get my point.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 12, 2020, 10:34:10 pm
Labour leadership shindig postponed. I am starting to thing this is all a Corbyn plan to keep him as leader for a bit longer.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on March 12, 2020, 10:40:10 pm
 :lol: Whole bleddy thing is his fault innit.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 13, 2020, 01:23:30 am
Offwidth. The extra weeks are because our cases have not accelerated as fast as Italy in the early stages. Our curve isn’t as steep.

I listened to the statement/press conference for quite a while. BJ is just a front man. But the CMO and CSO were open with their reasons - and there was no attempt to shy away from any interviewers questions etc...


I'm sorry but I'm not convinced. If anything the data and information indicates an apparent steeper take off in cases in Italy was probably due to a slow start in testing. UK deaths roughly match the Italy situation 2 weeks ago (possibly a slightly slower increase but not so different for the week before that).. Hence, I'm shocked if no one questioned this at the press conference. Two weeks is more than an order of magnitude difference in infection and deaths on an exponential rise. Luckily in any case we will know within a few days if this statement from the government is wrong. I feel for the CMO as I suspect he is under massive pressure from the government to delay the hard decisions on delay.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/uk/

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/italy/


Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 13, 2020, 07:03:41 am
Didn’t mean to endorse either approach - was just reflecting what was said in the press conference. They were also asked why thru didn’t ramp up measures like other countries etc..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on March 13, 2020, 08:54:27 am
I am now at home and not at work (a school)  ‘self isolating’ for 7 days as instructed.  Have what feels like a very heavy cold and a temperature/ fever. The school I work at has lots of staff off for similar reasons, remaining staff are stretched very thin.  I am 1 member of staff away from closing my unit..  Not far off having to shut anyway.
Former public health chief Prof. John Ashton was highly critical of government last night.  In my view, there is no way in the world that this government has our best interests at the heart of their decision making.  If they can’t make the right decisions perhaps it is down to us to take necessary action to protect ourselves and those around us.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on March 13, 2020, 09:00:52 am
The reason we're not shutting down like other countries is that they are trying to stop the virus spreading (as seems to have been successful in China and a couple of other countries) whereas we are only trying to slow it down. China seems to have almost completely stopped transmission (18 new cases yesterday) with something like 0.02% of the population having been infected.

The UK's plan, somewhat bafflingly, assumes that we cannot stop the virus, and that at least 60% of the population need to catch it to get herd immunity (not that there's any real evidence that immunity necessarily follows infection so far as I can find). The plan is only to flatten out and delay the peak to reduce NHS stress. Sir Vallance, the CMO, has said as much.

Clearly if the gov is wrong on that front, every other developed country in the world may get on top of this, whilst we are still shrugging our shoulders in the middle of summer saying mass infection is unavoidable (and presumably either being banned from travelling internationally or reigniting chains of transmission).

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 13, 2020, 09:04:54 am
Didn’t mean to endorse either approach - was just reflecting what was said in the press conference. They were also asked why thru didn’t ramp up measures like other countries etc..

Yeah.... history and the data science don't count as the British are masters of the special science about their population getting bored with too early a lockdown (despite all the epidemiology supporting that).

Another good info link from the other channel:

https://twitter.com/MaxCRoser/status/1238236295480119298
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 13, 2020, 09:09:02 am
Get well soon Brutus.

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. Hard to escape the feeling that the government is prioritising the economy over peoples lives, which seems a dud bet to me given the behaviour of the markets. Politically speaking there was no risk doing what other countries have done in terms of shutting schools and banning public events as it would be perceived as necessary. The whole strategy seems to be based on behavioural science (as yet undisclosed by the government) suggesting that two weeks is the maximum people will tolerate lockdown measures for.

On the plus side, whatever is driving this policy it isn't populism, which is something I suppose.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 13, 2020, 09:19:14 am
Comforting...

 https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/world/coronavirus-iran-digs-mass-graves-for-victims-87t7dph03?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1584035037 (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/world/coronavirus-iran-digs-mass-graves-for-victims-87t7dph03?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1584035037)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: rich d on March 13, 2020, 09:25:23 am
So my youngest 11 has developed a cough and will now be off school for 7 days and stay at home this weekend etc. Bit tricky with work for me and the wife. I suppose more concerning is that we've all been in close proximity with her and we've all including daughter been out and about as normal, in fact her eldest sister is at school as normal today.
The odds are that it's just a normal cold, but it does show how easily it can spread, especially if as some reports are saying it's at it's most contagious before symptoms show. 
I was thinking about the stats etc and I wondered how prevalent it actually is. I know that one premier league player and a manager are confirmed positive after testing and would have thought that their hygiene levels as professional sports people were better than the population at large and I'm assuming unlike the rest of us disposable plebs that they will be tested when showing signs of symptoms. Reckon it might be out there in the population already and possibly quite widespread.
PS hope you feel better soon FD.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 13, 2020, 09:33:00 am
I know that one premier league player and a manager are confirmed positive after testing and would have thought that their hygiene levels as professional sports people were better than the population at large

Premier League hygiene: don't share bank notes when you're doing lines of coke. And always disinfect the stripper's back before you indulge.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 13, 2020, 09:38:10 am
The reason we're not shutting down like other countries is that they are trying to stop the virus spreading (as seems to have been successful in China and a couple of other countries) whereas we are only trying to slow it down. China seems to have almost completely stopped transmission (18 new cases yesterday) with something like 0.02% of the population having been infected.

The UK's plan, somewhat bafflingly, assumes that we cannot stop the virus, and that at least 60% of the population need to catch it to get herd immunity (not that there's any real evidence that immunity necessarily follows infection so far as I can find). The plan is only to flatten out and delay the peak to reduce NHS stress. Sir Vallance, the CMO, has said as much.

Clearly if the gov is wrong on that front, every other developed country in the world may get on top of this, whilst we are still shrugging our shoulders in the middle of summer saying mass infection is unavoidable (and presumably either being banned from travelling internationally or reigniting chains of transmission).

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  ;D
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 13, 2020, 09:43:14 am
So, let's assume that we're looking at a multi-month outbreak stretching through Apr/May/Jun/Jul... maybe more... who wants to guess at what point it's logistically feasible and socially responsible to go on a climbing trip? Or who knows somewhere good for that period with cheap accommodation to "work from home"?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on March 13, 2020, 09:48:28 am
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.

Quote
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.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 13, 2020, 09:54:48 am
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.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 13, 2020, 09:57:02 am
Should have said changing by the minute as Germany just announced gradual closure of schools from next week.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on March 13, 2020, 10:06:16 am
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  ;D

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.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on March 13, 2020, 10:17:32 am
Report from Day 2 of Self-Quarantine: the teenager is already bored out of her mind. Not a good start.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 13, 2020, 10:34:07 am
I'll be surprised if it's over in China. The end of the beginning perhaps.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on March 13, 2020, 10:37:17 am
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.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 13, 2020, 10:44:21 am
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.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ally Smith on March 13, 2020, 10:46:28 am

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"...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 13, 2020, 10:53:07 am
I'll be surprised if it's over in China. The end of the beginning perhaps.

I love your positivity.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 13, 2020, 10:54:22 am
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...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on March 13, 2020, 10:57:18 am
... 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.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: highrepute on March 13, 2020, 10:58:29 am
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 (https://www.popsci.com/story/health/coronavirus-covid-19-faq-transmission/) 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
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 13, 2020, 11:00:43 am
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.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ally Smith on March 13, 2020, 11:03:13 am
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
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on March 13, 2020, 11:04:13 am
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.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: bigironhorse on March 13, 2020, 11:12:10 am
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.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 13, 2020, 11:14:14 am

Immunity after getting a virus well documented. Corona-virus is no different (https://www.popsci.com/story/health/coronavirus-covid-19-faq-transmission/) 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.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on March 13, 2020, 11:19:34 am

Immunity after getting a virus well documented. Corona-virus is no different (https://www.popsci.com/story/health/coronavirus-covid-19-faq-transmission/) 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."
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Andy W on March 13, 2020, 11:22:38 am
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.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on March 13, 2020, 11:25:13 am
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.....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: highrepute on March 13, 2020, 11:30:07 am

Immunity after getting a virus well documented. Corona-virus is no different (https://www.popsci.com/story/health/coronavirus-covid-19-faq-transmission/) 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 (https://www.popsci.com/story/health/coronavirus-covid-19-faq-transmission/) 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.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: highrepute on March 13, 2020, 11:31:54 am
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.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 13, 2020, 11:32:37 am
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.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on March 13, 2020, 11:36:03 am
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.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 13, 2020, 11:39:03 am

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

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 suppose my takeaway is that we don't have a vaccine or developed immunity and wont for a significant period of time. Seems a significant gamble to me (Times editorial today quite good on this). Usual caveats that I know fuck all of what I'm talking about apply.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 13, 2020, 11:44:13 am
I disagree: experts seem to think mortality rates are reliably estimated now. 0.5 to 1% where in control and 3% to 5% where not. That's certainly the line from WHO.

Where are lockdown boredom and herd immunity regarded as critical factors in the correct national response to this pandemic according to WHO. Why is Britain so special? ?

I'm worried about what government experts say publicly as we don't know the balance they are bending against. Yesterday's announcement was political, and will be weighing infection against perceived economic damage. I think they have it wrong on both counts as I believe the epidemiology is clear now: that with the reported levels we have, stopping cross infection in public is crucial. On economics I expect if parts of the NHS crash then the length of the crisis the level of panic and economic damage will be much worse.  China messed up initially in Wuhan but it only took a month to get things under control, yet they used methods the UK can't consider, unless things become truly horrible. The big Eastern economies appear to have the infection under control with faster harsher action.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 13, 2020, 11:52:41 am
Previous pandemics didn't show major repeat waves of infections. It's not happened in China... nearly all their new infections are from people travelling to China from outside and seem to be being contained. These major Eastern economies don't expect most people to be infected eventually (from extensive testing in places like Korea maybe a fraction of a percent at most) to build herd immunity, so why do we? This UK government information is not consistent with that coming from WHO, nor other countries based on their best advice.

Look at the new cases curve in Korea. From a similar level to where we, in the UK, are now they are close to back to the same level in less than a month. Thats what proper state action results in. Remember Korea were unlucky as they had an early superspreader in a cult community.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/south-korea/

https://www.businessinsider.com/south-korean-official-tests-positive-coronavirus-doomsday-church-cult-2020-2?r=US&IR=T
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 13, 2020, 12:09:00 pm
RE: Ru's questioning of UK policy, and questions around immunity, Germany appears to be thinking along the same lines (broadly):

"This morning at a regular press conference which the head of the Robert Koch Institute, the leading public health and safety body in Germany has been holding for the past two and a half weeks, its director, Lothar Wieler said [...]

Wieler said that between 60-70% of the population would get the virus, due to the fact that it is new, there is no immunity against it, no vaccination against it and no treatment for it” and that “many many people” will have had it already without knowing it, and will have already recovered. Those numbers are unquantifiable, but the more people who get it, long term, the better, as that will increase the immunity levels.

Four-fifths of people will get it very mildly with many not even realising they have it, he added."
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on March 13, 2020, 12:24:09 pm
no climbing trips for ondra:

https://news.expats.cz/coronavirus-in-the-czech-republic/breaking-czech-republic-to-close-borders-from-march-16-barring-residents-from-leaving-and-tourists-from-entering/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dunnyg on March 13, 2020, 12:28:49 pm
I hope the world is ready for some grotty local limestone boulder eliminates, 9A and harder...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nails on March 13, 2020, 12:31:31 pm
I have a cunning plan.

In theory you could isolate all the people in high-risk groups and their carers, whilst deliberately infecting all the people in low-risk groups. Those infected wouldn't have to be isolated and could even go to work if they felt up to it.

There's bound to be a few selfish types who would refuse deliberate infection. They would just have to sit it out with the high-risk group. 2 to 3 weeks down the line and we're all done and dusted.

I admit you may struggle to get this past the ethics committee.  :goodidea:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: highrepute on March 13, 2020, 12:35:56 pm
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.

Flu and Corona (and common cold) are both viruses. They behave in the same way. I think it sounds quite scary to say you can get corona-virus multiple times and if you have immunity it only last a year. But saying the same about flu doesn't seem so bad because we know it to be the case and we live with it every year.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on March 13, 2020, 12:48:42 pm
Flu and Corona (and common cold) are both viruses. They behave in the same way. I think it sounds quite scary to say you can get corona-virus multiple times and if you have immunity it only last a year. But saying the same about flu doesn't seem so bad because we know it to be the case and we live with it every year.

The quote doesn't say that immunity only lasts a year, it says that people with other corona viruses have been purposely, successfully and symptomatically reinfected after a year. A straight reading of the quote does not imply that that re-infection could not have occurred earlier or that there was any immunity developed prior to reinfection.

The situation is different to flu, because Covid-19 is many times worse in terms of mortality and morbidity (I note very little is being said about survivors that are left with significant lung and other organ damage) and because the whole point of the government strategy is an assumption that immunity is developed so that widespread infection is desirable. The point of the quote was to question the basis of that assumption.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on March 13, 2020, 01:02:36 pm
I have a cunning plan.

In theory you could isolate all the people in high-risk groups and their carers, whilst deliberately infecting all the people in low-risk groups. Those infected wouldn't have to be isolated and could even go to work if they felt up to it.

There's bound to be a few selfish types who would refuse deliberate infection. They would just have to sit it out with the high-risk group. 2 to 3 weeks down the line and we're all done and dusted.

I admit you may struggle to get this past the ethics committee.  :goodidea:

On the contrary, I think that is almost exactly the government's plan. Albeit we have not had advice to isolate at risk groups as yet.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 13, 2020, 01:04:53 pm

Flu and Corona (and common cold) are both viruses. They behave in the same way. I think it sounds quite scary to say you can get corona-virus multiple times and if you have immunity it only last a year. But saying the same about flu doesn't seem so bad because we know it to be the case and we live with it every year.

Except there are obviously lots of different flu's because the viruses mutate all the time. The flu vaccine varies in efficacy each year because medical professionals have to take a punt on which will be the most prevalent strain that year.

As Ru says, the mortality rate is much worse for covid-19 which by extension raises the stakes in the event that it mutates even slightly and the predicted (hoped for) herd immunity and eventual vaccine proves less effective than we would like. Hence my (admittedly as a lay person) preference for fewer people getting it in the first place.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: highrepute on March 13, 2020, 01:10:07 pm
Flu and Corona (and common cold) are both viruses. They behave in the same way. I think it sounds quite scary to say you can get corona-virus multiple times and if you have immunity it only last a year. But saying the same about flu doesn't seem so bad because we know it to be the case and we live with it every year.

The quote doesn't say that immunity only lasts a year, it says that people with other corona viruses have been purposely, successfully and symptomatically reinfected after a year. A straight reading of the quote does not imply that that re-infection could not have occurred earlier or that there was any immunity developed prior to reinfection.

The situation is different to flu, because Covid-19 is many times worse in terms of mortality and morbidity (I note very little is being said about survivors that are left with significant lung and other organ damage) and because the whole point of the government strategy is an assumption that immunity is developed so that widespread infection is desirable. The point of the quote was to question the basis of that assumption.

This is the full quote.

Quote
The best studied of the non-SARS coronaviruses, human coronaviruses 229E and OC43, cause respiratory symptoms, such as rhinorrhea, nasal congestion, sore throat, and cough, as well as systemic symptoms, including fever, headache, and malaise, when they are inoculated intranasally in adult volunteers. Symptoms develop 2 to 4 days after inoculation, but about 30% of the volunteers who excrete virus had no associated illness. Symptoms usually persist for about 1 week but sometimes for as long as 3 weeks. 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.

Sounds quite scary right, as you are pointing out?

human coronaviruses 229E and OC43 are type of the common cold. Now doesn't sound quite as scary. Which is my point - that it's easy to make this sound scary.

But I get your point, which I missed before. There are types of coronavirus that once you've had don't induce "high levels of protective immunity". I guess my next question is what does "high levels" mean?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on March 13, 2020, 01:32:28 pm
Sounds quite scary right, as you are pointing out?

human coronaviruses 229E and OC43 are type of the common cold. Now doesn't sound quite as scary. Which is my point - that it's easy to make this sound scary.

But I get your point, which I missed before. There are types of coronavirus that once you've had don't induce "high levels of protective immunity". I guess my next question is what does "high levels" mean?

Exactly. I'm not concerned about how "scary" it sounds, I wondering what evidence the government has to support an aim of getting 60% of the population to contract Covid-19 so we get herd immunity.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 13, 2020, 01:41:35 pm
My sister-in-law lives in Southend with her husband and two young kids. They're down to their last bog roll and the shop's shelves are bare. Things are about to get ugly in that house.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: wasbeen on March 13, 2020, 02:33:27 pm
I am wondering if the government's thinking is that the virus could be (much) less lethal than assumed?

Cases are much more likely to be under reported than over reported and deaths are likely to be (pretty) accurately reported.

Based on the government's estimate of 5000-10000 cases in the country, that puts the current mortality rate at between 0.1 and 0.2%. Countries with apparently have the most thorough contact tracing and testing (e.g. North Korea, Singapore, Malaysia) all have fatality rates lower than 1% and in some cases much lower. Even the Diamond Princess cruise ship 'only' had a rate of 1% and it would be hard to think of many more skewed demographics.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on March 13, 2020, 03:04:00 pm
Most UK cases are ongoing, the individual has neither died or recovered. The average time between onset of symptoms and death is about 17 day, so death figures will always be lagging behind eventual totals.
On a side note younger healthier folk take longer to succumb, so we wont know the true age spread of fatality in the UK for a good while yet.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: wasbeen on March 13, 2020, 03:12:42 pm
Most UK cases are ongoing, the individual has neither died or recovered. The average time between onset of symptoms and death is about 17 day, so death figures will always be lagging behind eventual totals.
On a side note younger healthier folk take longer to succumb, so we wont know the true age spread of fatality in the UK for a good while yet.

The point I was trying to make is our government don't have a clue how many cases there are and this is the case for every other European country. None more so than Italy where the number of confirmed cases is probably limited by the number of people they can test in a day.

The most accurate figures are likely to be where the testing captures the highest proportion of the people infected. Leading on from this, the most accurate mortality rates are for the countries with the lowest mortality rates.

Or perhaps I am just an optimist!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 13, 2020, 03:42:55 pm
I'm not sure if 'optimist' is the best descriptor of saying death rate is 1% of a massive number. Better that than 2% though!

Interesting the difference in opinion from different colleagues in the office today. Lets just say I wouldn't want to be the parents of some of them!

Ru, might be relevant to consider if there are significant differences in how an infection behaves in a giant country such as China with huge areas of empty land between population centres, versus how it behaves in densely-populated central Europe/the UK. And therefore differences in what's realistic to achieve and what the best approach is. But then again aren't Singapore, Taiwan and Hong Kong comparable to us in density (more so)..? Seems there are two diverging mindsets - those who wish we were Taiwan/Singapore/HK etc. and containing any spread, and those who think we have to let it spread but in as controlled a manner as possible. Like you say it'll be interesting to see what the justifications are based on.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on March 13, 2020, 04:00:13 pm
This fall firmly under 1st world problems but the Institution with which I have a review next week announced on Tues that they'd be starting daily update bulletins that day, and if not, the next day at the latest (Wed).

It's Fri now and nobody has heard anything. I've contacted them this morning saying essentially I assume the radio silence means you're not intending to cancel yet the radio silence continues (in contrast the previous reply was received in under 5 mins). I don't know what to make of this other than people seem wary of accepting the Gov's stance on social distancing.

 :tumble:  :worms:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on March 13, 2020, 04:00:47 pm
It strikes me that based on the case/fatality rates and comparisons with other countries, we already have more than our health system can cope with baked into the cake. It would now take very aggressive control measures to 'flatten the peak' and there is little sign of this from the govt. It seems like all the talk of spreading the load over time is either BS to calm the public or based on flawed over-optimistic analysis.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 13, 2020, 04:11:07 pm
Singapore is a large, world city where people generally live in densely populated high-rise buildings. Apartments often have very little in the way of a kitchen and people eat instead in the relatively cheap hawker centres that are in every high-rise.

The reason that we aren't seeing the spread there and in other similar countries, where conditions are otherwise good for spreading infection (humidity notwithstanding), is that they had SARS in 2003 and they learned. My brother, who lives there, reports that every office building and shop seems to have a heat sensitive camera at the entrance and people are tested for high-temperature wherever they go (in a non-intrusive way). Clearly this tech has been bought since 2003 and maintained and updated, ready for another such eventuality. The authorities are highly-geared towards contact tracing. The population is more inclined to wear effective masks (I think westerners tend to look at these in a bemused way as just another way that east is peculiar to west. That attitude might well change).

Social distancing is an effective way to slow the spread of the virus to much more manageable levels. The thinking is that the UK population won't put up with it. We might well be prepared to do things differently in the pandemic of 2037.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: wasbeen on March 13, 2020, 04:30:45 pm
I'm not sure if 'optimist' is the best descriptor of saying death rate is 1% of a massive number. Better that than 2% though!


I think it is more like 0.5%

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/coronavirus-outbreak-diamond-princess-cruise-ship-death-rate
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tommytwotone on March 13, 2020, 05:48:12 pm
Overheard my sister-in-law talking to a medic friend in school playground today. He was saying that while testing is going on at hospitals, due to time it takes to get kitted out in protection for the swabbers, they can do 12 a day max.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on March 13, 2020, 06:20:31 pm
He was saying that while testing is going on at hospitals, due to time it takes to get kitted out in protection for the swabbers, they can do 12 a day max.

The US tested eight people on Tuesday.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on March 13, 2020, 06:31:48 pm
From what I've just seen (not completely verified but I think it's true) Denmark is closing its borders tomorrow.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 13, 2020, 07:51:41 pm
From what I've just seen (not completely verified but I think it's true) Denmark is closing its borders tomorrow.

Whilst I can see the logic - isn’t this going to lead to mass panic buying (and last min travelling)?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 13, 2020, 07:59:53 pm
In my opinion this reaction really isn’t what we need. Trump style reaction that I though Europe would not do.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on March 13, 2020, 08:15:16 pm
I'm neither justifying nor condemning, merely reporting facts that might not otherwise be noticed. Stores utterly normal as of midday. Freight is not effected from what I understand. And you can still leave at any time after tomorrow. Restrictions are still much more stringent in Italy I think.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 13, 2020, 08:24:03 pm
Me neither... I don’t know enough to make a complete judgement.  Which in itself is a bit unnerving....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Doylo on March 13, 2020, 08:28:49 pm
I’m a clueless cunt but this ‘herd immunity’ strategy seems like one hell of a gamble that’s gonna cause a lot of deaths. The Italians are saying they wish they’d locked down earlier. China are getting on top of it with draconian measures yet we’re the only country conducting what pretty much amounts to an experiment with very high stakes. I hope they’ve got it right for the sake of the vulnerable (including my mum). Disclaimer : I’m a clueless cunt
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Andy W on March 13, 2020, 08:41:51 pm
I’m a clueless cunt but this ‘herd immunity’ strategy seems like one hell of a gamble that’s gonna cause a lot of deaths. The Italians are saying they wish they’d locked down earlier. China are getting on top of it with draconian measures yet we’re the only country conducting what pretty much amounts to an experiment with very high stakes. I hope they’ve got it right for the sake of the vulnerable (including my mum). Disclaimer : I’m a clueless cunt

I keep mis-reading 'herd immunity' as 'herd mentality' then I think of 'mad cow disease'. I'm worried  ;)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on March 13, 2020, 08:50:56 pm
I’m a clueless cunt but this ‘herd immunity’ strategy seems like one hell of a gamble that’s gonna cause a lot of deaths. The Italians are saying they wish they’d locked down earlier. China are getting on top of it with draconian measures yet we’re the only country conducting what pretty much amounts to an experiment with very high stakes. I hope they’ve got it right for the sake of the vulnerable (including my mum). Disclaimer : I’m a clueless cunt
. The prime minister Dominic Cummings is into eugenics isn’t he? I expect he’s quite pleased at the opportunity to remove inferior DNA without having to change a single social policy.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 13, 2020, 09:25:05 pm
Anyone got a link for some decent (regularly updated) graphics/graphs sites? The ones I’ve got bookmarked never upstate.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: HarryBD on March 13, 2020, 10:18:10 pm
Think this is done at a minimum of daily https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on March 13, 2020, 10:42:11 pm
ITV news are suggesting on Twitter that the government are poised to do an imminent u-turn with large public gatherings being banned shortly.

Perhaps a result of opposition pressure to publish the science behind their lack of action?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 13, 2020, 11:02:10 pm
Anyone got a link for some decent (regularly updated) graphics/graphs sites? The ones I’ve got bookmarked never upstate.

Have you been using the John Hopkins map? https://www.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6 (https://www.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6)


China still flatlining.. Looks like the largest daily increase today in rest of world.
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/YA2_v8xsm_9fqEVbW4N4gSprH1BTixRgaU5FaSmOI7t5jc01WYwZDtdbaum1VUmkK_KaOIh6Vicmj5HX0BwmzGZcPXXzswFC_BR5CG01Ew4ipOmgacXd9CHIakazbHnL9X3ZrLyn2UZalQv7NUA_dmNS5SQehnAfFro3vHsPbqoML2a9kQ-zGDBcjd_mDWe5NV_t5NP8pv2NaRVupu8RPgcdi5u9xqiaTjkOBAL_vfsjgEbltvZs1ZV0f5zdRdXMG83tLMbGF2dcTolEYQ8RjBbbKKd2qWP4eZvCwJ2qW8eJhnfsW98xM_4MZcAlWuUDCorNpjV-IKrshc31RA6R37RnnmFGDheMMK2CUfikSYldl2TA9QjJZKoCfIAEI205jxAGDbdDUavwbsyjBUVYJWQjvfhhabDmKxHpkttTSLckVDs6W9yyHo83R7_3d9xP6eVjbnLyrH0lGQPbWZ1AewMTciY6kQDB50gViRE2sQHHsZIbpjTCgS6v9E9L5hQ6ynOetGHkkz-J6Gr36iUbg2pa4wFbOApz30bH4Hv1yY27iTpTMJgP3pRyyvQ5yfBgJjFMOocjOnOoT4C6HNQHjxSVdqIXdpZnEOH97qXJURJ3tpbncDpX0-zHUPmnYMo0gDPa_2SYOPBLwnE_FqKQ0lLg4TgorSiCy0Qn12aaiMEajcCmdFKQ=w1909-h871-no)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 13, 2020, 11:12:03 pm
Some of the media making out the ban on public gathering is a 'U-turn' in policy. For anyone with eyes and a working brain it's obviously been coming, as are other much more drastic measures coming, how can that be a u-turn? We're on a path towards all sorts of drastic policies, just because a policy hasn't been announced yet does not mean it isn't intended to be enacted at a relevant point in time. Political point-scoring probably the worst thing anyone can do right now, it erodes confidence and encourages panic.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nik at work on March 14, 2020, 07:24:04 am
Completely agree Pete.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bradders on March 14, 2020, 07:47:02 am
Political point-scoring probably the worst thing anyone can do right now, it erodes confidence and encourages panic.

I take it as more an attempt to save political face given it's essentially been taken out of their hands; so many businesses and organisations have already decided to act that they had to "ban" things to make it seem like they're keeping up.

Not saying they weren't always planning to do it, but they weren't being transparent about those plans.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 14, 2020, 08:36:33 am
What’s becoming clearer as the days progress is a lack of leadership across Europe. With a virus that respects no boundaries or social groups some leadership pan Europe was what was needed here (let’s forget the EU/Brexit shit for a min). Could the country leaders get together and come up with a plan together?

Second - people renting are in a potential real pickle. Can’t see any of the govt measures helping them.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on March 14, 2020, 08:46:54 am
What’s becoming clearer as the days progress is a lack of leadership across Europe. With a virus that respects no boundaries or social groups some leadership pan Europe was what was needed here (let’s forget the EU/Brexit shit for a min). Could the country leaders get together and come up with a plan together?

Very true. But even in a region with a high degree of institutional and ideological alignment, e.g. the EU, organising such things can be incredibly difficult. It took many months for anything like a coherent, cohesive response to the financial crisis of 2008 to emerge.

But this moment does give lie to the idea that there is some kind of Pan-European supra-national government.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on March 14, 2020, 09:38:19 am
A cracking opening line from Matt Chorley in the Times today:

Just as we're asking frail, confused elderly people to stay indoors America is being asked to put them in the white house. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 14, 2020, 09:39:22 am
Bit of perspective.. Singapore cases accelerating now, suggesting it isn't realistic to contain this, as per what the UK are saying. Singapore actually have a 4-times greater reported cases of infection per head of population than the UK - 200/5million versus 800/65million.

You can sign up for daily email updates from John Hopkins center.. Info on death rates in S.Korea from today's update:

Quote
The South Korean CDC reported a total of 7,979 confirmed COVID-19 cases, including 67 deaths. Epidemiological links have been identified for 79.8% of cases. The most recent report provides an updated breakdown of cases by region, sex, and age group, providing additional insight into the ongoing epidemic. Females represent 61.9% of cases but only 41.8% of deaths. The unadjusted case fatality ratio for individuals aged 80 years and older is 8.30% (21 deaths out of 253 cases), and it is 4.74% for those 70-79 years old and 1.42% for those 60-69 years old. For cases under the age of 60, the case fatality ratio is only 0.12%. Notably, there have been only 2 deaths below the age of 50, despite 4,712 confirmed cases.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sheavi on March 14, 2020, 09:51:46 am
Some of the media making out the ban on public gathering is a 'U-turn' in policy. For anyone with eyes and a working brain it's obviously been coming, as are other much more drastic measures coming, how can that be a u-turn? We're on a path towards all sorts of drastic policies, just because a policy hasn't been announced yet does not mean it isn't intended to be enacted at a relevant point in time. Political point-scoring probably the worst thing anyone can do right now, it erodes confidence and encourages panic.

Totally agree. Prof. Ian Donald on Twitter has a thread on the governments policy that is worth a read.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on March 14, 2020, 09:56:21 am
Bit of perspective.. Singapore...

Quote
The South Korean CDC reported a total of 7,979 confirmed COVID-19 cases, including 67 deaths. Epidemiological links have been identified for 79.8% of cases. The most recent report provides an updated breakdown of cases by region, sex, and age group, providing additional insight into the ongoing epidemic. Females represent 61.9% of cases but only 41.8% of deaths. The unadjusted case fatality ratio for individuals aged 80 years and older is 8.30% (21 deaths out of 253 cases), and it is 4.74% for those 70-79 years old and 1.42% for those 60-69 years old. For cases under the age of 60, the case fatality ratio is only 0.12%. Notably, there have been only 2 deaths below the age of 50, despite 4,712 confirmed cases.
That is a low figure for under 60s, but I wonder how much it takes into account the fact that as cases ramp up the early fatalities will be inevitably be the frailest sufferers. In China the average time from first symptoms to deaths was around 17 days, which will include the weakest dying sooner and the strongest surviving for longer.
The age spread of CFR in most countries wont be evident for some time yet IMO.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on March 14, 2020, 10:17:35 am
Political point-scoring probably the worst thing anyone can do right now, it erodes confidence and encourages panic.

Agreed,  in the UK,  the government seems to be doing as good a job as could be expected.
Trump's reaction, on the other hand was objectively batshit crazy, and he still seems more interested in trying to tell everyone hes a genius than in doing anything useful.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 14, 2020, 10:19:11 am
Agree that any figures currently are only provisional and won't be accurate when we look back in 1-2 year's time. I'm certainly not underplaying anything.
Sobering to read up on the mortality stats for 1918-1920 Spanish flu pandemic. Of note is that killed more young adults then elderly. But reading between the lines, life expectancy was only 41 in Spain at the time! So possibly if there had been millions more elderly in 1918 then the mortality stats for Spanish flu would be skewed more to the elderly... as per today with covid-19.. Also of note is that it was a two-year pandemic, with repeated re-emergence...

I predict this event will kill Trump's presidency because it will show him up in stark relief, even to those who so far have been wilfully blind, for what he is: a self-absorbed personality(disorder) without the leadership qualities required for public emergencies.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on March 14, 2020, 10:24:27 am
Totally agree. Prof. Ian Donald on Twitter has a thread on the governments policy that is worth a read.

Tweet 5 in that thread seems to rely on immunity following infection which I thought was still currently unproven?

https://twitter.com/iandonald_psych/status/1238518378039574528?s=19
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 14, 2020, 10:26:53 am
Pete is talking complete nonsense about S Korea and Singapore. The S Korean data speaks for itself

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/south-korea/

As for Singapore... I also have friends there and confirm what Will said yesterday at 5.11pm. Singapore will be on top of their testing (where most countries will be well behind and the US barely off the starting blocks) so comparative numbers there are inflated and they had the diesese early and still have have no deaths. They still give daily details almost down to indivdual case levels (straits times is arguably thier main serious newspaper).

https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/13-new-covid-19-cases-including-nine-who-caught-it-overseas-200-confirmed-cases-so-far

Time did an article yesterday on how to learn from Singapore Hong Kong and Taiwan

https://time.com/5802293/coronavirus-covid19-singapore-hong-kong-taiwan/

As for Ian Donald he is a psychologist and an expert in how people respond in epidemiology. His first point in his multiple tweet yesterday is this

"The govt strategy on #Coronavirus is more refined than those used in other countries and potentially very effective. But it is also riskier and based on a number of assumptions. They need to be correct, and the measures they introduce need to work when they are supposed to."

WHO say the UK approach of herd immunity is wrong. I know what I'm going to believe.

Our government said they were holding off on mass closures one day and change their mind the next (as many organisations did it for them). Pete might be right that this strictly speaking isn't a U turn but its a bloody hard bend (or the first part of a 3 point turn).  It's not anti government to celebrate they are now following the best epidemiology.  Ian Donald in the long tweet says Johnson needs to be kept away from the complexity of this planning
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sheavi on March 14, 2020, 11:02:49 am
Totally agree. Prof. Ian Donald on Twitter has a thread on the governments policy that is worth a read.

Tweet 5 in that thread seems to rely on immunity following infection which I thought was still currently unproven?

https://twitter.com/iandonald_psych/status/1238518378039574528?s=19

Yes it comes with obvious/usual caveats. Anecdotally there are reports of a small number people being 're-infected'.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: eastside on March 14, 2020, 11:17:50 am
Font in the time of Coronavirus: In Milly-la-Foret this morning the supermarket was quite busy. Plenty of toilet tissue available but no hand sanitizer and the pasta aisle was running quite low. Still people on the streets and in the cafes but less busy than normal on the streets. Nobody wearing masks. The boulders were very quiet yesterday, it's quite amazing though somewhat spooky. My wife and I are here until April 1 and not planning to return early, I actually feel safer here than in the states. We stocked up on enough food to last us until our return so we don't have to go back to the market. We are avoiding cafes but still go to the boulangerie each morning when they open, this strategy may change depending on developments. Our gite is quite isolated and comfortable so if need be we can hide out here, but we plan to still climb unless things get really bad. It seems most of the other Americans left Europe in a mad panic on Friday but I see no compelling reason to do so. It may be a bit of a gamble but also perhaps a once in a lifetime experience to have the forest more or less to ourselves. Our friends and family think we're crazy but if on the off chance we've made a fatal mistake at least we will have enjoyed ourselves. Wishing you all good health 🙏
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bradders on March 14, 2020, 11:24:38 am
Man, imagine being in Font and unable to get pastries...end of the world!

I'd enjoy it while you can eastside, my working assumption is that climbing outside is actually the sort of activity one could quite safely carry on almost regardless of how bad it gets (and presuming you aren't yourself infected). If you're out in the open air and away from other people then surely you're quite a lot safer (both in terms of potentially catching it yourself and in infecting others if you're a carrier) than being at work/in the pub/in a climbing gym/etc. Anyone any thoughts on this?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 14, 2020, 11:27:32 am
Offwidth. That's fair enough ref S.Korea and Singapore. I'm not trying to prove a point here. And it seems likely that European countries inc. the UK are going to surpass Singapore's infections per head of population quickly, if they haven't already. 
I think our gov are doing what any UK gov realistically could in this circumstance, yes they're making *some* choices different from some other countries, but they're choices seemingly based in reason and scientific advice. 

The important thing to realise is we are not S.Korea, Singapore or HK. It might be desirable, but it seems to me that their sort of response begins a long time before an outbreak like this, in the preparations of systems made over years and borne from experience. You're being unrealistic to expect the UK population or government to react just like those countries in this circumstance (yes, hopefully we'll quickly learn and adapt). Being unrealistic isn't very desirable right now, and your constant undertones of seeking to blame government don't seem useful.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 14, 2020, 11:33:30 am
On a point of order, it's pretty dumb to compare cases per head of population between the UK and Singapore. Singapore is one city where everyone lives cheek by jowl and uses the mass transit system or taxis. Near impossible to isolate yourself. In contrast, much of the UK live in houses without common space shared with their neighbours and travels in private vehicles.
You'd be better off comparing Singapore with London.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on March 14, 2020, 11:35:33 am
Man, imagine being in Font and unable to get pastries...end of the world!

I'd enjoy it while you can eastside, my working assumption is that climbing outside is actually the sort of activity one could quite safely carry on almost regardless of how bad it gets (and presuming you aren't yourself infected). If you're out in the open air and away from other people then surely you're quite a lot safer (both in terms of potentially catching it yourself and in infecting others if you're a carrier) than being at work/in the pub/in a climbing gym/etc. Anyone any thoughts on this?
Was about to say the same..  Going out bouldering on your own has to be a pretty safe activity, stay away from other people, if you’re really worried about picking it up off the rock, wash your hands after. The places I boulder locally are unlikely to have seen any traffic and get rinsed by the ocean twice a day.  I was thinking if we go on full shutdown that this is one activity I can do with little risk of spreading virus.  I don’t think being locked indoors full time with the family will be good for mental or physical health.  I will certainly take the chidlers outdoors to remote places nearby where I know we can avoid contact with others.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 14, 2020, 11:48:40 am
That’s my plan. Esoterica.

I like climbing on my own anyway.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tk421a on March 14, 2020, 11:54:54 am
UK testing is focusing on those in hospital not in the wider community.
"Will I be tested if I think I have COVID-19?
We will not be testing those self-isolating with mild symptoms."
- https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-stay-at-home-guidance/stay-at-home-guidance-for-people-with-confirmed-or-possible-coronavirus-covid-19-infection

I've heard this isn't the case with other countries (Germany?) so comparing confirmed cases per population isn't a helpful measure.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: eastside on March 14, 2020, 11:56:17 am
Man, imagine being in Font and unable to get pastries...end of the world!

I'd enjoy it while you can eastside, my working assumption is that climbing outside is actually the sort of activity one could quite safely carry on almost regardless of how bad it gets (and presuming you aren't yourself infected). If you're out in the open air and away from other people then surely you're quite a lot safer (both in terms of potentially catching it yourself and in infecting others if you're a carrier) than being at work/in the pub/in a climbing gym/etc. Anyone any thoughts on this?
Was about to say the same..  Going out bouldering on your own has to be a pretty safe activity, stay away from other people, if you’re really worried about picking it up off the rock, wash your hands after. The places I boulder locally are unlikely to have seen any traffic and get rinsed by the ocean twice a day.  I was thinking if we go on full shutdown that this is one activity I can do with little risk of spreading virus.  I don’t think being locked indoors full time with the family will be good for mental or physical health.  I will certainly take the chidlers outdoors to remote places nearby where I know we can avoid contact with others.

Thanks for the reassurance guys, it's hard not to feel a little nervous when everyone else is panicking. But we have plenty of hand sanitizer and actually liquid chalk works as well as it's 70% isopropyl alcohol. All the hand sani is sold out but you can still buy liquid chalk! :) Might be a good opportunity to check out some of the out of the way zones too so we're really alone in the woods. Yesterday at Canche there were perhaps twelve people out including us. We don't touch our faces and make sure to sanitize before eating or drinking. It's made me realize how unsanitary many of our daily habits are - for example usually when bouldering we don't bring sanitizer and climb then eat then climb and so on, touching holds that have been touched by thousands of people. And brushing the chalk off holds and breathing the dust - probably not such a good idea these days. But obscure zones are probably the one of the safest places you could be right now. Much safer than work, and immeasurably more joyous :)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: eastside on March 14, 2020, 12:04:16 pm
UK testing is focusing on those in hospital not in the wider community.
"Will I be tested if I think I have COVID-19?
We will not be testing those self-isolating with mild symptoms."
- https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-stay-at-home-guidance/stay-at-home-guidance-for-people-with-confirmed-or-possible-coronavirus-covid-19-infection

I've heard this isn't the case with other countries (Germany?) so comparing confirmed cases per population isn't a helpful measure.

https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-act-today-or-people-will-die-f4d3d9cd99ca

This article does what seems to be a sound statistical analysis showing that the true rate of infection is far higher than the confirmed rate basically everywhere except China and South Korea. The confirmed case numbers are basically useless. The article shows that a better estimation of the true infection rate is # deaths x 800. So in fact the UK likely has 6,400 cases, US around 40,000, France ~64,000, Italy > 500,000
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 14, 2020, 12:13:42 pm
That multiplication idea is very approximate (it will strongly depend on test rates for instance) and will only work on the initial exponential rise... I suspect italy are moving beyond that now...keep an eye on the logarithmic graph on deaths on  worldometer over the next week and see if their measures are kicking in. You can already see how their  initial lack of response gave a faster exponential rise. Other places are also on top of testing, like Singapore. The US is where I worry most about a western economy with coronavirus out of control, due to lack of testing.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/italy/

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/14/coronavirus-washington-state-us-outbreak
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 14, 2020, 12:53:29 pm
Eastside: hope you enjoy Fontainebleau. Seems like a good time to go tbh!

Some explanation of scientific sources and modelling on which govt will base strategy here:
 https://twitter.com/AdamJKucharski/status/1238418007824764930 (https://twitter.com/AdamJKucharski/status/1238418007824764930)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 14, 2020, 01:46:37 pm
Great link jonathanr. The 'SPI-M  Modelling Summary' document is well worth reading. Gives a pretty clear overview of what we're currently experiencing, and the responses we're seeing (and how limited the options are).

e.g.

p7. 'Initial Outbreak, Implications for planning':
Quote
Encourage construction of realistic and detailed local plans for containment in the source country. (This is different to attempting to contain the virus once it is widespread which has little chance of success, see section 3.3).

p.8. 'International spread, what we know':
Quote
b. Low-level restrictions in international travel (e.g. less than 70% of journeys) would have a minimal impact (Mateus et al. 2014). Even relatively high levels of travel restrictions would only delay an epidemic for a few weeks. For instance, imposing a 90% restriction on all air travel to the UK would delay the peak of a pandemic wave by only 1 to 4 weeks (Cooper et al. 2006, Mateus et al. 2014). A 99.9% travel restriction might delay a pandemic wave by 2 months (Cooper et al. 2006, Ferguson et al. 2006).
...
f. If restrictions on travel from all countries which had epidemics of pandemic flu were put in place internationally, the effect could be somewhat greater: a 90% reduction might delay the spread by 3 to 4 weeks and a 99.9% effective ban by 3 to 4
months (Cooper et al. 2006). If the UK has cases early in the pandemic, then this would involve travel restrictions out of the UK.

h. While clearly possible in principle, for all practical levels of restriction, there is little chance of a country missing the pandemic altogether due to travel restrictions (Cooper et al. 2006).


p.10 Geographical Development of the Pandemic Within the UK:
Quote
c. Because of the probable multiple importations of pandemic flu, and the concentration of the population in cities, attempts at containment (similar to those explained in section 3.1b above) by antiviral prophylaxis and practical social distance measures are almost certain to fail (Ferguson et al. 2006, Nguyen-VanTam et al. 2004).

d. Even very substantial reductions in internal travel between localities (of say ~90%) would have little effect on the length and peak size of the epidemic in each local area. However, coupled with the elimination of international travel, they could spread out a national epidemic by desynchronising the epidemics in the local areas (Mateus et al. 2014, and refs therein). Such restrictions are probably impractical. More realistic reductions in such travel would have a negligible effect on the national epidemic (HPA 2005)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 14, 2020, 02:31:05 pm
Quote
[Arlene Foster: Schools will not be closed immediately but schools and parent should prepare because when they do they will close "for at least 16 weeks"/quote]
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: eastside on March 14, 2020, 02:49:00 pm
That multiplication idea is very approximate (it will strongly depend on test rates for instance) and will only work on the initial exponential rise... I suspect italy are moving beyond that now...keep an eye on the logarithmic graph on deaths on  worldometer over the next week and see if their measures are kicking in. You can already see how their  initial lack of response gave a faster exponential rise. Other places are also on top of testing, like Singapore. The US is where I worry most about a western economy with coronavirus out of control, due to lack of testing.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/italy/

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/14/coronavirus-washington-state-us-outbreak

Yes it's very approximate but still probably closer to the truth than the official numbers. Apparently the Chinese numbers converged on the true number about two weeks after the lockdown, ie they continued to rise and then eventually leveled off, not because it took two weeks for the spread to stop but because it took two weeks to account for all the cases. Apparently in China transmission basically went to practically zero as soon as they locked down.

Looks like Spain is next in line for a lockdown, crossing my fingers that Germany and France will be close behind. With any luck the other major economies will follow suit.

There is no doubt that this will save thousands, possibly millions, of lives. Though we may have to accept that the world economy will be wrecked for the foreseeable future.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 14, 2020, 02:51:13 pm
From reading the 'SPI-M  Modelling Summary (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/756738/SPI-M_modelling_summary_final.pdf)' it appears the gov is following the SPI-M groups' advice almost to the letter.
The summary advice was written by the Scientific Pandemic Influenza Group on Modelling - which according to the author quoted in the link comprises the leading groups of pandemic modellers in the UK, from various universities across the UK. 

It's difficult to see how anyone can argue that our government isn't following the best available advice.

e.g.

p7. 'Initial Outbreak, Implications for planning':
Quote
Encourage construction of realistic and detailed local plans for containment in the source country. (This is different to attempting to contain the virus once it is widespread which has little chance of success, see section 3.3).

p.8. 'International spread, what we know':
Quote
b. Low-level restrictions in international travel (e.g. less than 70% of journeys) would have a minimal impact (Mateus et al. 2014). Even relatively high levels of travel restrictions would only delay an epidemic for a few weeks. For instance, imposing a 90% restriction on all air travel to the UK would delay the peak of a pandemic wave by only 1 to 4 weeks (Cooper et al. 2006, Mateus et al. 2014). A 99.9% travel restriction might delay a pandemic wave by 2 months (Cooper et al. 2006, Ferguson et al. 2006).
...
f. If restrictions on travel from all countries which had epidemics of pandemic flu were put in place internationally, the effect could be somewhat greater: a 90% reduction might delay the spread by 3 to 4 weeks and a 99.9% effective ban by 3 to 4
months (Cooper et al. 2006). If the UK has cases early in the pandemic, then this would involve travel restrictions out of the UK.

h. While clearly possible in principle, for all practical levels of restriction, there is little chance of a country missing the pandemic altogether due to travel restrictions (Cooper et al. 2006).


p.10 Geographical Development of the Pandemic Within the UK:
Quote
c. Because of the probable multiple importations of pandemic flu, and the concentration of the population in cities, attempts at containment (similar to those explained in section 3.1b above) by antiviral prophylaxis and practical social distance measures are almost certain to fail (Ferguson et al. 2006, Nguyen-VanTam et al. 2004).

d. Even very substantial reductions in internal travel between localities (of say ~90%) would have little effect on the length and peak size of the epidemic in each local area. However, coupled with the elimination of international travel, they could spread out a national epidemic by desynchronising the epidemics in the local areas (Mateus et al. 2014, and refs therein). Such restrictions are probably impractical.More realistic reductions in such travel would have a negligible effect on the national epidemic (HPA 2005)


p.19 What we Know About the Impact of Social Distance Measures

School closures:
Quote
d) On the other hand, if there were significant background immunity amongst adults there may be a more considerable impact on the pandemic. For example, in the UK in the 2009 pandemic, school holidays (possibly in combination with general summer holidays) suppressed the epidemic over August (Eames et al. 2012). However, to be used successfully as a suppression strategy, closures would need to be maintained until pandemic specific vaccines were available.

Quote
e) School closure is therefore most usefully employed if children are particularly badly affected, or if there is known to be significant background immunity in adults.

Neither is the case in this outbreak. There isn't background immunity, nor are children badly affected.

Quote
j) Little direct evidence is available on the effects of cancelling large public events. However, the results might be expected to be similar to those for closing schools, albeit on a considerably more limited scale. Some benefit might be expected for those who would have otherwise attended the events but very little for the overall community. Some benefit might also be expected from the reduction in travel to such events. However, the benefits of even major reductions in all travel are small.

k) Voluntary home isolation, i.e. people staying at home if they show ‘flu like’ symptoms, will decrease the number of contacts between infected and uninfected individuals, and hence is likely to decrease the spread of infection.

The combined effects of various social distancing measures (including closing schools, cancelling large public events, closing places of entertainment, and home isolation) if started very early on in a locality affected by influenza may have
a significant impact on reducing transmission. In some US cities in the 1918 to 19 pandemic it is thought that the combined measures reduced R to less than 1
(from an R0 value of 1.4 to 2) however such measures would need to be maintained until sufficient quantities of pandemic specific vaccine became available. In the US cities, when the measures were relaxed there was a second wave of infection.

So with no vaccine available, a second wave is probable.

p.21 Implications for Planning:
Quote
While there is a role for the less disruptive social distance measures such as voluntary home isolation in any pandemic, school closures and the cancelling of public events are generally only justified in very severe pandemics because of their severe social impact over an extended period of time until a pandemic specific vaccine becomes available.

This seems the key point and explains why the UK government think lock-downs won't work at this point in time. We need immunity, or the virus will just continue its travel through our population as soon as lock-down relaxes.
We can get some immunity from being infected (maybe), but long-term we need a vaccine. So unless we're prepared to go into lock-down now and stay there for the next 12 months, then lock-down will be ineffective. If this is correct then we should see cases continue to flare-up and need containment in China and other states over the next 12 months.

So it appears that most countries, including ours, are either currently in, or about to attempt, the 'probably impractical' measure of lock-downs and social isolation. Implications to me of that is:
this may be the big one that happens once every few generations,
there will be more than one wave,
we probably need a vaccine,
and trying a 'probably impractical' measure might be worth a go to reduce the short-term death toll and resultant health service fall-out, but is unlikely to reduce the death toll over the longer-term.


Onto reading p22. 'Subsequent Waves'....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 14, 2020, 03:01:39 pm
WHO must be thick as pigshit in that context Pete and all those Eastern economies hard won successful actions an illusion.

Sadly they just announced that UK deaths pretty much doubled today. In that context the 'U turn' wont be hard to support.

One interesting titbit from catching two GPs (from Southampton and W Yorkshire) complaining about test availability for health sftaff  on Any Answers, and what from they tried to do to get tested aftrshowing symptoms, might indicate the government may have concerns because we could be running short in test kits... certainly so in some local areas. Any other health workers here noticed similar problems where they live?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 14, 2020, 03:09:29 pm
I'm pointing out why the government are doing what they're doing. They're obviously following the scientific advice clearly laid out in that document. Surely you can see this even with your bias-clouded eyes?
I'm not commenting on whether they should be or shouldn't be - none of us are qualified to say. If you think they're wrong, then you must also think our 'leading pandemic modellers' are wrong.

Another point that leads from this -  your consistent suggestions since this pandemic started that the government is pressuring its chief scientific advisers to toe some party line against the best available advice is being shown to be total bullshit.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 14, 2020, 03:24:05 pm
I recognise the work but most epidemiologists seem to disagree and most importantly WHO says  its wrong and no other country has gone that way.  Its pretty childish to call that bias (and especially ironic with some of the one-sided rubbish you have spouted on the subject). At some point the UK suggested plan may be the only route to follow but there is no rush for now, as actions on both paths are now similar (after the 'U turn'). If the European nations that are ahead of us cannot keep death rates down then we may agree then that UK advice is all that is left. Its great that its out there at last for others to peer critique....on that subject if you think Im heavily biassed you should read the Nottm Uni virologist's post on the UKC climbing wall and corona virus thread. I won 'coronavirus beer' last night as only Derek Bolger and I tuned up from the 'legends' group for the last round of the Unit bouldering comp. I'm happy walls stay open for now  but users should be washing hands before and after and not touching their face.

https://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/ukc/the_climbing_bug_-_indoor_walls_and_coronavirus-716820
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 14, 2020, 03:27:38 pm
It's beyond debate that you've been suggesting this government is pressuring its scientific advisers to go against best available advice since this outbreak began. They clearly have not.

In other news, the Beacon yesterday had a trickle of hot running water for, I think, the first time in their history. We are in unprecedented times.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on March 14, 2020, 03:36:51 pm
The bit I don't understand is the "flattening the curve" part. The explanation I have heard from government is that it is about firstly trying to spread the number of cases over a larger period of time so that load on the NHS doesn't peak as sharply, and secondly trying to move any peak away from next winter when there will also be NHS demands from seasonal flu cases. I can't see how that  will make a difference if there are so few intensive care beds that the NHS becomes super saturated for almost the entire period of the pandemic no matter where the peak is. I think my real concern is that there is logic to this, but not because of NHS loading, but because of loading on other services and panic if people start dying in their homes in great numbers.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 14, 2020, 03:43:50 pm
I openly admit I was wrong there, however, I can't assess what is not public and its a real shame this advice wasn't released ages ago to recieve proper peer review. It does contradict nearly everything else from experts that is public. Even those independant (like Donald ) supporting it say it is based on assumptions and is very high risk.

Go read what Levi, the NU guy is saying on the other channel. If you are still banned I'll link your posts and the UKB discussion over there.  Maybe the discussion on if we should keep climbing walls open should be a new thread.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: eastside on March 14, 2020, 03:53:02 pm
Implications to me of that is:
this may be the big one that happens once every few generations,
there will be more than one wave,
we probably need a vaccine,
and trying a 'probably impractical' measure might be worth a go to reduce the short-term death toll and resultant health service fall-out, but is unlikely to reduce the death toll over the longer-term.

While I agree that the lockdowns are unlikely to reduce the total number of infections in the long run, they do have the potential to drastically reduce the death toll specifically because they slow down the spread of the virus. In places where the virus has spread rapidly we see case fatality rate increase dramatically as the medical system simply lacks the capacity to care for all the sick so many cases which would have been survivable given proper critical care turn into fatalities as there is simply no critical care capacity to treat these cases. As I said before, if you get to the point of needing intubation but every ventilator is in use, you just die. This is somewhere between 1.5 and 5% of cases. Even with the same number of cases, if you can spread them out over time more of the infected people will have access to the proper level of care and thus more people will survive. So in this regard a lockdown scenario is almost certain to reduce the total mortality by a very significant amount. South Korea has a case fatality rate of less than 1%, and in some regions of Italy right now the fatality rate is over 5%. When you're talking about 30-40% of the population of the UK, the difference between the two scenarios may mean a million lives. I would like to think that even the possibility that a lockdown would save a million lives would mean it would be worth a try, rather than simply "taking on the chin" and accepting that these people already have a death sentence. They don't.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 14, 2020, 03:59:01 pm
I think my real concern is that there is logic to this, but not because of NHS loading, but because of loading on other services and panic if people start dying in their homes in great numbers.

My take reading between the lines Ru is governments (not just ours) think it's increasingly probable that there'll be a very large number of deaths among the over 60s/underlying ill-health group (note most people over 70 classed as underlying ill health), and the best we can do is prolong the timing of those deaths over a longer period instead of a short spike. End result in numbers could be similar after the event, whether we isolate early or late as the world population cannot burrow underground and stay there for the next 12 months, so without a vaccine or widespread immunity it will be the healthiest survive and some of the least healthy don't. Will be very happy if I'm wrong - and yes hopefully well-timed lockdowns can reduce the impact.

I say that because of a combination of, among other things,:
a) seeing governments attempting measures deemed by world-leading modellers to be 'likely impractical' and 'ineffective' in the long-term, and risking crashing the global economy in the process nevertheless.
b) the markets aren't dumb, when SARS, MERS, H1N1/H5N1 and Ebola struck we didn't experience the type of market correction we're currently experiencing. Although worth noting Russia are doing what they can to impose extra carnage on their competitors at their weakest time, by crashing the oil price. Looking for gains in power off the back of a pandemic.

Then again, maybe China will prove us wrong and spring/summer dampens the virus.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 14, 2020, 04:01:48 pm
TBF, Pete, you can't expect evidence to get in the way of Steve wanting to see the fault in everything the Conservative government does.

Similarly, I mentioned to a doctor friend how surprising it was that Jeremy Hunt, ex cabinet and current chair of the health select committee, was so insubordinate in criticising the government response. All he could do was go into a diatribe of how Jeremy Hunt knows nothing. Almost as if Jeremy Hunt saying the sky was blue would somehow make that not true.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 14, 2020, 04:16:50 pm
TBF, Pete, you can't expect evidence to get in the way of Steve wanting to see the fault in everything the Conservative government does.

Similarly, I mentioned to a doctor friend how surprising it was that Jeremy Hunt, ex cabinet and current chair of the health select committee, was so insubordinate in criticising the government response. All he could do was go into a diatribe of how Jeremy Hunt knows nothing. Almost as if Jeremy Hunt saying the sky was blue would somehow make that not true.

Fighting talk ....I've always been a social liberal and still fondly remember when the left of the tory party shared many of my views. I've nearly caused mass injury in my trade union collegues when I told them I wasn't a socialist. So for the record I think J Hunt did a good job in difficult circumstances,... the Lilley reforms were a disaster and went against the manifesto and Hunt had to pick up the pieces and face the economic idiocy of austerity that has now mysteriously disappeared in a puff of posh tory popularist smoke.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/mar/14/this-tory-budget-is-keynes-reborn-will-hutton
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 14, 2020, 04:23:13 pm
Coel has been digging into Adams links and found this: on the view of the government modelers on what the government announced.

"I am deeply uncomfortable with the message that UK is actively pursuing ‘herd immunity’ as the main COVID-19 strategy. Our group’s scenario modelling has focused on reducing two main things: peak healthcare demand and deaths... 1/

For me, herd immunity has never been the outright aim, it’s been a tragic consequence of having a virus that - based on current evidence - is unlikely to be fully controllable in long term in the UK. 2/

Sadly, even large-scale changes (like those other European countries are making, and we may very soon) may not control COVID for long. We must flatten the curve as much as possible, but there could still be many infections (and hence immunity). 3/

The communication about COVID science has generally been clear in the UK, but talk of ‘herd immunity as the aim’ is totally wide of the mark. Having large numbers infected isn’t the aim here, even if it may be the outcome. 4/

A lot of modellers around the world are working flat out to find best way to minimise impact on population and healthcare. A side effect may end up being herd immunity, but this is merely a consequence of a very tough option - albeit one that may help prevent another outbreak. 5/

Clearly we cannot finely tune the path of this outbreak. The best we can do is identify actions that have highest chance of effectively and sustainably reducing impact on the population and burden on NHS. 6/

To be clear: we have to reduce impact on UK as much as we can. But we are in this for the long term. A couple of weeks of closed schools and cancelled events won’t solve this - we will have to fundamentally change our lifestyles. 7/

Given the seriousness of the situation, we are obviously working to get our latest modelling analysis out in the public domain as soon as we can. 8/8

https://twitter.com/AdamJKucharski/status/1238821515526897664 "

Maybe explains the fast 'U turn' as it seems from this the government misread the advice.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 14, 2020, 04:43:40 pm
Had to happen...

https://metro.co.uk/2020/03/14/donald-trump-confirms-coronavirus-test-12398469/?ico=pushly-notifcation-small&utm_source=pushly
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: eastside on March 14, 2020, 04:48:03 pm
The bit I don't understand is the "flattening the curve" part.

There are three ways in which flattening the curve will decrease the total number of fatalities.

1. Given a constant capacity to deliver critical care, a flatter curve will result in fewer fatalities as the critical cases will be spread out in time and more of them will actually receive critical care rather than dying at home as some of the earlier cases will have either recovered or died, freeing up the resource for later cases.

2. Critical care capacity can be expanded, albeit slowly, so a flatter curve means a greater proportion further along in time when there is a higher capacity.

3. Possibly most importantly: Given that vaccine development is likely to happen at some point in the future, the flatter the curve the greater proportion of the population will make it to the advent of the vaccine before falling ill.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: eastside on March 14, 2020, 04:52:26 pm
Had to happen...

https://metro.co.uk/2020/03/14/donald-trump-confirms-coronavirus-test-12398469/?ico=pushly-notifcation-small&utm_source=pushly

 :popcorn:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on March 14, 2020, 04:54:49 pm
The bit I don't understand is the "flattening the curve" part.

There are three ways in which flattening the curve will decrease the total number of fatalities.

1. Given a constant capacity to deliver critical care, a flatter curve will result in fewer fatalities as the critical cases will be spread out in time and more of them will actually receive critical care rather than dying at home as some of the earlier cases will have either recovered or died, freeing up the resource for later cases.

2. Critical care capacity can be expanded, albeit slowly, so a flatter curve means a greater proportion further along in time when there is a higher capacity.

3. Possibly most importantly: Given that vaccine development is likely to happen at some point in the future, the flatter the curve the greater proportion of the population will make it to the advent of the vaccine before falling ill.

I get that, but I'm skeptical that it can work in a healthcare system like the NHS which is pretty much at capacity before the outbreak starts.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 14, 2020, 04:56:59 pm
We don't have any alternative options open to us, do we? It's impossible to contain this virus, huge numbers of people will catch it. Therefore a proportion of that number will die. It's a matter of when they die, not if. Longer we can make the duration between outbreak and widespread infection the lesser will ultimately perish.

Goodbye Trump (at least his career..), I hope.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: JamieG on March 14, 2020, 05:06:00 pm
Just got an email saying all face to face teaching cancelled at Liverpool University. I suspect the rest will follow suit very soon.

Not at all surprised. I've been working from home this week (as I suspect many other staff have) and the rumours have been floating around every time I talk to a colleague on Skype.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: eastside on March 14, 2020, 05:15:02 pm
I get that, but I'm skeptical that it can work in a healthcare system like the NHS which is pretty much at capacity before the outbreak starts.

Yeah just read that bed occupancy was already at 95% in December. Still 5% is worth more spread over time than it is at any one instant. Also things can be done to free up beds, e.g. canceling all elective procedures. Also point 2 and 3 still hold true. Critical care can be expanded, for example now that elective procedures are cancelled you can convert some of your ORs and PACU beds into temporary ICU. So you can still save lives, it isn't a lost cause.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 14, 2020, 05:31:23 pm
Offwidth I see no evidence for a 'U-turn' and no amount of you repeating it makes it any more true. It's been clear for days that social-isolation measures have been coming, the only unknown is exact timing. It's been clear for a number of days that we're on a path to all the isolation and lock-downs we can handle.

Also, from the same pandemic modeller as previous..

'A couple of key takeaways from our analysis of early COVID-19 dynamics in Wuhan':

We estimated that the control measures introduced - unprecedented interventions that will have had a huge social and psychological toll – reduced transmission by around 55% in space of 2 weeks 1/

There's evidence that the vast majority of the population is still susceptible in Wuhan - we estimated around 95% at end of January. As soon as control measures are lifted, there is the risk of new introduced cases - and another outbreak. Source: https://thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(20)30144-4/fulltext 2/

It's easy to say 'let's just do what Wuhan did', but the measures there have involved a change to daily life that really has been unimaginable in scale and impact. And as we've seen, China cannot sustain them indefinitely. 3/

Countries like Hong Kong and Singapore, which for so long have managed to contain COVID-19, now seem to be seeing a rise in transmission, as infections continue to be introduced. (Source: https://cmmid.github.io/topics/covid19/current-patterns-transmission/global-time-varying-transmission.html) 4/

There isn't going to be an easy solution to COVID-19. Among some extremely difficult options, we have to pick the most effective, sustainable way to minimise risk of overwhelming health system - and impact on the people most at risk. 5/5
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on March 14, 2020, 05:39:46 pm
Yeah just read that bed occupancy was already at 95% in December. Still 5% is worth more spread over time than it is at any one instant.

We have, apparently, 4k ICU beds at 95% capacity, that's 200 free. Estimated 40m cases, so 4m people need ICU if 10% cases are critical. Flattening the curve isn't going to dint that number of people needing critical care. I appreciate that more beds can be added but it's still going to make little difference as the disparity is so great.

I'm not saying there's no other reason to do it, just that the government is not being transparent in it's reasoning or modelling.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 14, 2020, 05:43:20 pm
Offwidth I see no evidence for a 'U-turn' and no amount of you repeating it makes it any more true.

Front page headline of the FT today, init. Tell them.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 14, 2020, 06:19:59 pm
Just got an email saying all face to face teaching cancelled at Liverpool University. I suspect the rest will follow suit very soon.

Not at all surprised. I've been working from home this week (as I suspect many other staff have) and the rumours have been floating around every time I talk to a colleague on Skype.

I’m waiting for that email from my university.

We were due to be on one of the Tenerife flights that were turned back mid air earlier today. With 30 students.

We have a week of replacement classes this week (when the course is running) and having just organised those I suspect we’ll have to re jig things again.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: M1V0 on March 14, 2020, 07:13:08 pm
Lancaster University cancelled all face-to-face as of Monday.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: eastside on March 14, 2020, 07:20:03 pm
Spain is locking down as of Monday.

France is having a soft lockdown starting now it sounds like.

Cafes, restaurants, cinemas, and discotheques are all closed in France. Spain is looking a little more serious.

Edouard Phillipe's speech just now was awesome, basically saying that we have to protect healthcare workers because if they all get sick we're screwed.

As a critical care and emergency nurse I very much appreciate the sentiment and wish there was more of this in the US.

He did say that in France people can still go outside to exercise but to just avoid other people. It's a step in the right direction and I'm glad as that means we can still go bouldering.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: 36chambers on March 14, 2020, 07:23:01 pm
Font in the time of Coronavirus:

I was supposed to be heading to Bishop for the first 3 weeks of April :(. Now that's not happening I was thinking today about how reckless it would be to just drop everything and head to Font ASAP. The temptation is real.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dunnyg on March 14, 2020, 07:24:55 pm
I'd be pretty tempted. Yeaaaaaah.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 14, 2020, 07:36:55 pm
Yeah just read that bed occupancy was already at 95% in December. Still 5% is worth more spread over time than it is at any one instant.

We have, apparently, 4k ICU beds at 95% capacity, that's 200 free. Estimated 40m cases, so 4m people need ICU if 10% cases are critical. Flattening the curve isn't going to dint that number of people needing critical care. I appreciate that more beds can be added but it's still going to make little difference as the disparity is so great.

I'm not saying there's no other reason to do it, just that the government is not being transparent in it's reasoning or modelling.

What part of the government's reasoning or modelling do you not think is being relayed transparently Ru? Genuinely interested.

My take is the transparency is there, if you (not aimed personally at you) want to make the effort to have a dig around and research the figures and implications contained in publicly-available government information. And then compare with previous pandemics i.e. spanish flu and let that information sink in.
I think they're currently wisely unwilling to state the complete most probable truth in plain language for fear of panicking people, and tipping into other social disorder problems right at a point that would make the situation worse.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: eastside on March 14, 2020, 08:27:18 pm
Font in the time of Coronavirus:

I was supposed to be heading to Bishop for the first 3 weeks of April :(. Now that's not happening I was thinking today about how reckless it would be to just drop everything and head to Font ASAP. The temptation is real.

Yeah man sorry for the travel ban, I don't think it's going to help anything. Also not sure it would hurt to come out to font but it may lock down for real soon, sort of halfway there already though you can still go to the boulders.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on March 14, 2020, 08:42:47 pm
https://www.itv.com/news/2020-03-14/elderly-to-be-quarantined-for-four-months-in-wartime-style-mobilisation-to-combat-coronavirus/

 :o
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: highrepute on March 14, 2020, 08:52:15 pm
I openly admit I was wrong there, however, I can't assess what is not public and its a real shame this advice wasn't released ages ago to recieve proper peer review.

The paper Pete is quoting from was released in 2013.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 14, 2020, 08:57:12 pm
https://www.itv.com/news/2020-03-14/elderly-to-be-quarantined-for-four-months-in-wartime-style-mobilisation-to-combat-coronavirus/

 :o

Which is what I suggested two days ago is the most logical response, given the circumstances we find ourselves in.
 
It seems to my punter mind that in this circumstance you can break the population into two important distinct groups:
1. at high risk of becoming seriously ill. (age group 60+)
2. at low risk of becoming seriously ill. (age group under 60)

Assuming you want to save the maximum number of lives whilst aiming for the minimum economic impact, then wouldn't the most rational thing to do be to impose an extremely draconian isolation measure - enforced by martial law if necessary - on the group at high risk of becoming seriously ill. That would lower the spike of severely ill. And it's fortunate that the most vulnerable group are also economically the least productive (I'm guessing?), so enforcing isolation on this group is less economically damaging than it would be for isolation of age group 18-60.

Allow the group at low risk of becoming seriously ill to continue to go about their daily business.

Holes in that reasoning?

and

.... The logic remains the same that you can divide the population into two quite distinct groups: 1. at high risk of serious illness 2. at low risk of serious illness.
 
And given the two goals are to  1.minimise fatalities (and burden on health service) and 2.minimise economic damage
..
to achieve maximum effect in both goals, you could (and should?) treat the two groups very differently.

I'm open to why that's wrong.


I hope it works. Provided there's the resolve to overcome obvious issues, chiefly having old people with underlying poor health alone and unable to be allowed contact with potential carriers, it could be the best of a bunch of potentially bad options.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 14, 2020, 09:53:01 pm
Have you considered applying for that job Cummings advertised Pete?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Yossarian on March 14, 2020, 10:24:06 pm
Does anyone know any decent epidemiology forums, because I’ve got some really urgent questions about AnCap protocols...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 14, 2020, 10:26:28 pm
Does anyone know any decent epidemiology forums, because I’ve got some really urgent questions about AnCap protocols...

👏👏 someone start a thread called power club...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 14, 2020, 10:46:15 pm
Have you considered applying for that job Cummings advertised Pete?

I wasn't aware of that..
  :lol: This one?:
   
Quote
Dominic Cummings, Boris Johnson’s chief adviser, has set the tone for a radical shake-up of Whitehall by inviting “data scientists, project managers, policy experts and assorted weirdos” to apply for Downing Street jobs.

In perhaps the most unusual government job advert ever seen, Mr Cummings invites applications from “true wild cards, artists, people who never went to university and fought their way out of an appalling hell hole”.

He added: “If you want to figure out what characters around Putin might do, or how international criminal gangs might exploit holes in our border security, you don’t want more Oxbridge English graduates who chat about Lacan at dinner parties with TV producers and spread fake news about fake news.”

In exchange, he offers the prospect of long hours and zero job security: “I’ll bin you within weeks if you don’t fit — don’t complain later because I made it clear now,” he wrote on his own personal blog.

Mr Cummings wants to transform Whitehall, synonymous with cautious officialdom, into a dynamic organisation informed by science, data analysis and maverick freethinkers.

He tells “public school bluffers” not to apply for a year-long assignment as his own personal assistant, promising that the job will involve interesting work alongside “uninteresting trivia that makes my life easier which you won’t enjoy”.

The former director of the Vote Leave campaign stressed the long hours, saying: “You will not have weekday date nights, you will sacrifice many weekends. Frankly it will be hard having a boy/girlfriend at all.”

Mr Cummings admitted that some of the Whitehall old guard would have fears about his proposals — “some reasonable, most unreasonable” — but insisted that many officials, particularly younger ones, were ready to embrace change.

His blog enthused about the frontiers of the science of prediction, AI and cognitive technologies, and “the selection, education and training of people for high performance”.

He said: “In many aspects of government, as in the tech world and investing, brains and temperament smash experience and seniority out of the park.”

Mr Cummings’s principal interest is in applying mathematics and science to political problems, and his blog has invited high-achievers from the world’s great universities to apply for jobs at the heart of Mr Johnson’s Downing Street operation.

He suggested, by way of example, that they should consider a paper in the journal Nature — “Early warning signals for critical transitions in a thermoacoustic system” — which looks at systems in physics that could be used to warn of epidemics or financial meltdowns.

The chief adviser, who is positioned at the heart of a powerful new Downing Street machine, is also on the lookout for project managers and innovative communications experts.

His blog suggested Mr Johnson’s government would be willing to expand the number of paid political appointments (special advisers or “spads”) to oversee this new approach.

“We want to hire an unusual set of people with different skills and backgrounds to work in Downing Street with the best officials, some as spads and perhaps some as officials,” he said.

Although the blog is aimed at recruiting outsiders into Number 10, Mr Cummings said there were “many brilliant people in the civil service and politics” and invited them to apply too.

Got to admit it made me chuckle. Be more fun working for Cummings than my current mediocre and cynical cunt of a director. (love you really xx)

I hear spunkgoat got the job and Fiend is his SPAD.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: 36chambers on March 14, 2020, 11:21:10 pm
Font in the time of Coronavirus:

I was supposed to be heading to Bishop for the first 3 weeks of April :(. Now that's not happening I was thinking today about how reckless it would be to just drop everything and head to Font ASAP. The temptation is real.

Yeah man sorry for the travel ban, I don't think it's going to help anything. Also not sure it would hurt to come out to font but it may lock down for real soon, sort of halfway there already though you can still go to the boulders.

It's all good, we'll just have to reschedule Bishop for the end of the year or something. Hope you're getting good connies in Font!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 15, 2020, 08:05:39 am
Got to admit it made me chuckle. Be more fun working for Cummings than my current mediocre and cynical cunt of a director. (love you really xx)

I hear spunkgoat got the job and Fiend is his SPAD.

That's the one. Failing that perhaps one of the mods could change your subtitle to 'maverick freethinker'.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: haydn jones on March 15, 2020, 08:36:17 am
Spain seems to be in full lock down. I'm about to set of for France but just having breakfast in the car park at albarracin.

Police came and told everyone to not climb and isolate themselves in the van for 15 days. They told me it's fine to drive to France though.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on March 15, 2020, 09:05:19 am
Spain seems to be in full lock down. I'm about to set of for France but just having breakfast in the car park at albarracin.

Police came and told everyone to not climb and isolate themselves in the van for 15 days. They told me it's fine to drive to France though.

Apparently Margalef has been fully closed off as well.  Give it a couple of weeks maximum for similar restrictions in the UK. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: eastside on March 15, 2020, 09:11:39 am
Spain seems to be in full lock down. I'm about to set of for France but just having breakfast in the car park at albarracin.

Police came and told everyone to not climb and isolate themselves in the van for 15 days. They told me it's fine to drive to France though.

Wow. Yeah the Spanish police don't fuck around. Bailing is probably wise. Font is still climbable but maybe not for long.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dr_botnik on March 15, 2020, 09:26:07 am
All ski resorts in France are being closed. My family woke up to a message from their hotel saying they must leave today (they only just arrived yesterday and don't have flights booked until friday)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on March 15, 2020, 09:33:46 am

What part of the government's reasoning or modelling do you not think is being relayed transparently Ru? Genuinely interested.

My take is the transparency is there...
 
I think they're currently wisely unwilling to state the complete most probable truth in plain language for fear of panicking people, and tipping into other social disorder problems right at a point that would make the situation worse.

They can't be transparent AND unwilling the state the truth in plain language, even if it is being done for a sensible reason.

Another example: two days ago herd immunity was an aim, today the department of health says it's a nice side effect if it happens, but has never been an aim.

Chief Scientific advisor: “Our aim is to try to reduce the peak, broaden the peak, not suppress it completely; also, because the vast majority of people get a mild illness, to build up some kind of herd immunity so more people are immune to this disease and we reduce the transmission, at the same time we protect those who are most vulnerable to it....About 60 per cent is the sort of figure you need to get herd immunity.”

Matt Hancock: ""Herd immunity is not a part of it. That is a scientific concept, not a goal or a strategy. Our goal is to protect life from this virus, our strategy is to protect the most vulnerable and protect the NHS through contain, delay, research and mitigate."


A further example: I have been involved, with my wife, in trying to plan how her GP practice will respond and deal with patients. There is virtually zero information on what the government plan is, whether they will be expected to deal with hospital overflow, the extent that they should deal with coronavirus patients etc. Hospital staff seem to be equally in the dark, including those doing the planning based upon what I have been told by a consultant anaesthetist.

None of that is transparent.

Whilst reducing panic in the general public is a wise aim, vagueness, contrary statements and statements that appear to be incorrect after a bit of mild scrutiny won't achieve that. The psychological health of those that will be dealing with the crisis is also important and just letting them guess what their role will be isn't a good idea.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 15, 2020, 09:34:49 am
Good luck Haydn.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 15, 2020, 10:32:50 am
I actually thought Hancock made sense this morning on Mar. At several points I wanted to throttle Mar or, at least, scream “shut up and let him speak!”

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: eastside on March 15, 2020, 10:56:35 am
Well scratch what I said about Font being quiet, just rolled past cuvier parking and it was full, fuck that. Back at the gite with the top secret book trying to find a nice obscure locale for the day.

Also folks out everywhere bicycling, walking, convening. Not much social distancing in evidence which is a bit ominous
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 15, 2020, 11:03:01 am
I openly admit I was wrong there, however, I can't assess what is not public and its a real shame this advice wasn't released ages ago to recieve proper peer review.

The paper Pete is quoting from was released in 2013.

You are seriously conflating my stated concerns about the sources of government advice now (leading to what I saw as a dangerous aim to build herd immunity) being open to peer critique alongside WHO advice, with one 2013 paper from one group involved in informing government?

My views are very similar to what Ru just expressed. On top of all that he said I was being all concerned at the start of this thread  while people were wise cracking; carefully explaining it was not like seasonal flu as it quickly grows to overwhelm ITU facility (before it happened in Italy). How the death rate will not be what the government expert predicted, at 1%, if hospitals can't cope, as WHO said 3 to 5%. How the government were foolish to move to weekly reports (U turn in one day) how the government were foolish to say retired staff would rush back to help (a survey showed only about 20% would be) how they overstated the readiness of the NHS to face whats coming, despite huge medical staff concerns about that.

In the end the communication issues Ru alludes to across the health systems might be one of the most dangerous factors. They clearly don't have the coordinated advice that they need. Do all the hospitals in hotspots have expansion plans with enough equipment; is there enough protective equipment for staff; is there a shortage of tests in some areas? What are GPs supposed to do?

On the new advice that they may just have to leave older infirm patients to die, so the system can cope.... I'd say its probably going to end up being a necessity... however imagine if one of them is your gran. Imagine if having sadly accepted that, the news then says some rich grans are being saved. We simply can't predict what horrible shit will come out of leaving vast numbers of the old and infirm to die.

I'm OK with treating government announcements on a simplistic basis to get the right message out without causing panic but what has happened has been often the opposite. I still think beyond wash your hands, the people of the UK don't get whats coming (if we don't modify our behaviour). I'm glad the 'U turn' means we are not aiming for herd immunity for now. I'm glad that given my low estimation of the qualities of Boris and Matt that they haven't messed things up even more. I am worried about Pritti when the army and police get involved in lockdowns. This isn't an anti tory view its anti incompetance.

Rant over.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 15, 2020, 11:19:01 am
I actually thought Hancock made sense this morning on Mar. At several points I wanted to throttle Mar or, at least, scream “shut up and let him speak!”

On the other channel I expressed the view that if a Hunt was a unit of Health Secretary competance, Matt looked to be struggling to make a deciHunt. I do think he is showing better than that now. It was maybe a massive lesson after saying on Question Time that he had been talking to the big supermarkets about food security, for them to broadcast the next day that he hadn't. The cabinet had maybe got used to telling lies with impunity. Despite having made bad SI jokes about his competance after that QT mess, I do think it must be horrible to be in his shoes at the moment.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 15, 2020, 11:21:33 am
Well scratch what I said about Font being quiet, just rolled past cuvier parking and it was full, fuck that. Back at the gite with the top secret book trying to find a nice obscure locale for the day.

Also folks out everywhere bicycling, walking, convening. Not much social distancing in evidence which is a bit ominous
Apremont's nice.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on March 15, 2020, 11:39:40 am
Well scratch what I said about Font being quiet, just rolled past cuvier parking and it was full, fuck that. Back at the gite with the top secret book trying to find a nice obscure locale for the day.

Also folks out everywhere bicycling, walking, convening. Not much social distancing in evidence which is a bit ominous

Get a rope and go to Saussois (about 1 1/2 hrs away) and do the classics like Chimpanzodrome. I didn't see another climber when I was there. It was post-apocalyptically quiet, peak holiday season.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: lagerstarfish on March 15, 2020, 11:50:12 am
Well scratch what I said about Font being quiet, just rolled past cuvier parking and it was full, fuck that. Back at the gite with the top secret book trying to find a nice obscure locale for the day.

Also folks out everywhere bicycling, walking, convening. Not much social distancing in evidence which is a bit ominous

Buthiers Canard for some soloing
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 15, 2020, 12:00:35 pm
 Some news from the UK front line staff

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/15/coronavirus-senior-nhs-consultant-speaks-out
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 15, 2020, 12:23:25 pm
Well scratch what I said about Font being quiet, just rolled past cuvier parking and it was full, fuck that. Back at the gite with the top secret book trying to find a nice obscure locale for the day.

Also folks out everywhere bicycling, walking, convening. Not much social distancing in evidence which is a bit ominous

I wonder if the Font dogging boards are full of conversations about what to do!... :D
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 15, 2020, 12:56:31 pm

What part of the government's reasoning or modelling do you not think is being relayed transparently Ru? Genuinely interested.

My take is the transparency is there...
 
I think they're currently wisely unwilling to state the complete most probable truth in plain language for fear of panicking people, and tipping into other social disorder problems right at a point that would make the situation worse.

They can't be transparent AND unwilling the state the truth in plain language, even if it is being done for a sensible reason.

Another example: two days ago herd immunity was an aim, today the department of health says it's a nice side effect if it happens, but has never been an aim.

Chief Scientific advisor: “Our aim is to try to reduce the peak, broaden the peak, not suppress it completely; also, because the vast majority of people get a mild illness, to build up some kind of herd immunity so more people are immune to this disease and we reduce the transmission, at the same time we protect those who are most vulnerable to it....About 60 per cent is the sort of figure you need to get herd immunity.”

Matt Hancock: ""Herd immunity is not a part of it. That is a scientific concept, not a goal or a strategy. Our goal is to protect life from this virus, our strategy is to protect the most vulnerable and protect the NHS through contain, delay, research and mitigate."


A further example: I have been involved, with my wife, in trying to plan how her GP practice will respond and deal with patients. There is virtually zero information on what the government plan is, whether they will be expected to deal with hospital overflow, the extent that they should deal with coronavirus patients etc. Hospital staff seem to be equally in the dark, including those doing the planning based upon what I have been told by a consultant anaesthetist.

None of that is transparent.

Whilst reducing panic in the general public is a wise aim, vagueness, contrary statements and statements that appear to be incorrect after a bit of mild scrutiny won't achieve that. The psychological health of those that will be dealing with the crisis is also important and just letting them guess what their role will be isn't a good idea.

That's an understandable point of view but I think you're letting *relatively* unimportant short-term details (I'm not suggesting they're not important) get in the way of what (to me) seems obvious. What's obvious is: this is a much more highly contagious and resilient virus than other recent pandemics; there is no immunity and no vaccine yet; and therefore you cannot prevent most of the population catching it whatever you try to do. The virus will stop when either: there's a vaccine, there's immunity, or a large enough number of hosts have died.
The public are going to know the score pretty soon because it will be obvious, and tory/labour or the minutiae of messages won't have made any difference in the long term outcome.
 
The public are being drip fed the reality from what I can see. The transparency is there if you want to see it I think, most people just don't want to fully understand it yet. That seems sensible, because it's quite a scary prospect to inform people that they are very shortly - within 2 weeks - about to go from living in a fully-functioning western democracy to potentially a martial-law state with high levels of death around them including people we all know and love, caused by an invisible killer, a health service buckling under the pressure, most of the rest of the world in the same situation, the global economy in recession, and political turmoil caused by the fall-out. But that's where I think we're probably going to end up this year. Hopefully it will be relatively short-lived, somewhere between 6 months and 2 years.

To my mind it's a system and we know some rules.

Rules
The pandemic moving through the UK will take 6+ months. There probably will be subsequent waves.
It can't be stopped. It can only be delayed.
You will probably catch it, most people probably will.
The under 60 group probably won't be killed or hospitalised. A small minority of under 60s will get very ill or die. 
The over 60 group still 'probably' won't be killed or hospitalised. A large minority of over 60s will get very ill or die.
You can treat the group with 'underlying health conditions' (heart disease, cancer, COPD etc.) roughly the same as the over-60 group in terms of risk.
You cannot prevent infection. Full isolation is impossible due to length of time required: 6+ months. And there being no immunity and currently no vaccine upon coming out of isolation.
You can delay getting infected.
A % of population will be infected and die either early on or later.
Critical care will reduce deaths.
Immunity will reduce deaths.
Health service can be re-formulated to quite a large degree, within constraints of equipment and people.
# of lives saved by critical care is reduced by overwhelming with cases in a short period of time.
Immunity available from two sources: following infection or vaccine.
Immunity gained from infection takes less than 12 months. Currently unproven but probable.
Vaccine will take a minimum of 12 months.


Within the bounds of those rules (and others I've no doubt missed), we're left with few options and none of them pleasant especially if you're in the highest risk group. Best option to minimise number of dead is to delay the infection of the group who will have most deaths (and place most pressure on the health care system). Results will depend on the isolation being as total as possible for as long as possible, while being as humane as possible. Meanwhile carry on with a skeleton-society of people in the lower risk group.

The alternative option is to isolate the whole population for 6-12 months. Why would you try this alternative when:
a. it isn't possible.
b. it isn't required (to minimise numbers of deaths).


Offwidth, complaining about the ins and outs of political messages in this instance strikes me as about as productive as complaining about the tide coming in. Linking to media reports that quote consultants saying they don't think the NHS is prepared to cope with this pandemic - really?, you don't say! I'd be stunned if they could. Can any health service ever be prepared for the scale of this pandemic? I highly doubt it.   
I think you can always critique. The politicians are being led by the scientists, and I don't see any attempt to do anything but their best effort in the face of forces far more powerful than nations. Like you say, the public are going to know the score pretty soon.
 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on March 15, 2020, 01:27:15 pm
That's an understandable point of view but I think you're letting *relatively* unimportant short-term details (I'm not suggesting they're not important) get in the way of what (to me) seems obvious.

Well I'm not really letting it get in the way of anything, I'm just chatting about stuff I have thought. I wasn't trying to rank the most important things about the Covid-19 outbreak.

I disagree about the transparency.

I do think the lack of any real direction being given to the health services is an issue. Drip feeding the public is one thing, drip feeding those that will be expected to deal with it and are being denied any proper opportunity to prepare, practically and mentally, is another. There are practical healthcare changes that will need to be made and the NHS is sitting on its hands, possibly only 2 weeks away from a complete meltdown such as in Italy, because it has no idea what the plans are. The reality is that entire hospitals may need to be repurposed into covid-19 only units, which won't happen over night.

Where you say you would be stunned if the NHS could be ready for the outbreak, it currently has 4k ICU beds at 95% occupancy. Germany has 25k (for approx 25% bigger population) at 60% occupancy and is also concerned it's not ready. Clearly those are completely different levels of "not ready."
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: JamieG on March 15, 2020, 01:30:45 pm
The transparency is there if you want to see it I think, most people just don't want to fully understand it yet.

Not that I particularly disagree Pete that this is very serious and the outlook is bleak. But that is a very weird definition of transparency. Being transparent would be saying exactly what is on the table, no squinting required. What you’re describing is reading between the lines of arguably slightly opaque messaging. If you can read between the lines it’s obvious this is serious. A lot of people won’t be reading between the lines and taking the message at face value.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 15, 2020, 01:34:06 pm
You've gone all Trump from intially accusing others of exaggerating how bad this will be, to doing it yourself. I'm sorry but if you listen to most epidemiologists,  medical staff, or numerous other experts there is loads that can be practically done, from nationally to the front line, that isn't being done currently.  Matt says this am they will buy extra ITU ventilator kit... where from?...  they are the international medical equivalent of supermarket bog roll. This is not an attack on the government as broadly speaking in their public face they have done OK, especially good in the first few weeks,  but their 'U turns', as best case scenarios have been lost, were needed, and they must have clear accepted public justifications for their actions. In particular (my biggest concerns) are the DHSC really need to listen more to the front-line staff  and  'get its act together' to ensure clear messages and action plans to primary and secondary care. They should be running 'full-on, war-time-style', emergency planning The stated aim for herd immunity was a terrifying lapse from the CMO and CSA in the current situation. It was rightly critised by  WHO, the previous tory Health Secretary and even some of the experts they based their case on. They now thankfully say this is not the aim.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 15, 2020, 02:25:41 pm
Coel has posted a link on the infection rates of the young in  Korean data on the other channel.

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrEricDing/status/1239041092978343937

Robert Durran also posted some nice educational visualisation

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/world/corona-simulator/?fbclid=IwAR1r02wIsrH8eY-KK2DPWJ3PCfX298Eo6EOBV795HeRJn4ODN54yUeOahvc
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 15, 2020, 04:57:30 pm
Coel has posted a link on the infection rates of the young in  Korean data on the other channel.

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrEricDing/status/1239041092978343937

Robert Durran also posted some nice educational visualisation

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/world/corona-simulator/?fbclid=IwAR1r02wIsrH8eY-KK2DPWJ3PCfX298Eo6EOBV795HeRJn4ODN54yUeOahvc

Not saying these are wrong - but are they normalised for population group? Italy has a really old (3rd oldest on world) pop distribution....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 15, 2020, 05:14:47 pm
S Korea is maybe strange in how the virus spread as the early rapid growth was in a cult... I've no idea of the cult demographic.

Another opinion on herd immunity has been posted today.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/mar/15/epidemiologist-britain-herd-immunity-coronavirus-covid-19

Plus some Trump being Trump

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/mar/15/trump-offers-large-sums-for-exclusive-access-to-coronavirus-vaccine

I noticed today someone smote me for posting too many Guardian links.... it and the BBC are by far the best quality free online UK news resources and the BBC seems to be being really careful at the moment with government stuff (I dont blame them) so I apologise, but what choice is there?



Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 15, 2020, 05:50:53 pm
Offwidth: you are free to post links to whatever you want mate- Pete hasn’t imposed martial law yet.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 15, 2020, 08:49:02 pm
I saw Anthony Costello (former director of maternal and infant health in WHO) questioning the UK approach on Newsnight a few days ago. He was unconvinced by British strategy.

Here's some questions for the government in the Guardian:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/mar/15/uk-covid-19-strategy-questions-unanswered-coronavirus-outbreak

and in a twitter thread:
https://twitter.com/globalhlthtwit/status/1238425621375651840
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: highrepute on March 15, 2020, 08:58:39 pm
I openly admit I was wrong there, however, I can't assess what is not public and its a real shame this advice wasn't released ages ago to recieve proper peer review.

The paper Pete is quoting from was released in 2013.

You are seriously conflating my stated concerns about the sources of government advice now (leading to what I saw as a dangerous aim to build herd immunity) being open to peer critique alongside WHO advice, with one 2013 paper from one group involved in informing government?

When you wrote "this advice" it seemed to me like you were referring to the paper Pete was quoting from. Were you not?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 15, 2020, 09:04:45 pm
Leaked govt report on predictions

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/15/uk-coronavirus-crisis-to-last-until-spring-2021-and-could-see-79m-hospitalised

300k dead..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: highrepute on March 15, 2020, 09:07:39 pm
Leaked govt report on predictions

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/15/uk-coronavirus-crisis-to-last-until-spring-2021-and-could-see-79m-hospitalised

300k dead..

Almost seems like they've read this thread...

UK government spent £500 billion bailing out the banks. Let's see how much they commit to helping us plebs get through this.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: 36chambers on March 15, 2020, 09:09:18 pm
here are some interesting simulations showing infection rates and ways of influencing them. No idea if the article is reliable or whatever, but the graphics are good. Apologises if it's been posted already.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/world/corona-simulator/?itid=sf_
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: highrepute on March 15, 2020, 09:11:56 pm
Spain has closed some climbing areas. Can't quite understand why as I thought being outside was quite a good place to be.  :shrug:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Doylo on March 15, 2020, 09:19:02 pm
Spain has closed some climbing areas. Can't quite understand why as I thought being outside was quite a good place to be.  :shrug:

To limit the potential of people requiring the emergency services/ hospitals.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 15, 2020, 09:20:12 pm
Leaked govt report on predictions

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/15/uk-coronavirus-crisis-to-last-until-spring-2021-and-could-see-79m-hospitalised

300k dead..

The document says that: “As many as 80% of the population are expected to be infected with Covid-19 in the next 12 months, and up to 15% (7.9 million people) may require hospitalisation.”
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 15, 2020, 09:38:32 pm
You've gone all Trump from intially accusing others of exaggerating how bad this will be, to doing it yourself.

Offwidth. I thought this was total bullshit when I read it. But just to confirm, I've scanned back through the last 23 pages of this thread and checked every one of my posts. There isn't a single post made by me accusing anyone of exaggerating how bad this will be. Take 15 minutes and look for yourself, and when you're done please come back to me and apologise for characterising me that way. Yet more unsubstantiated bullshitting from you.

BTW it wasn't me who smote you for endless Guardian links, that was TB..

My posts give my view, as matter-of-factly as I can, on what I see happening and what looks most likely to my non-expert, non-medical-profession mind based on a reading of the facts as they emerge, and attempting to put them in historical context.

That leaked report is pretty much what the facts were suggesting middle of this week. Unfortunately, each time I've been correct in my predictions of how this will play out. Today in the climbing wall and elsewhere, most I spoke to were still in some state of denial about the long-term outlook, but the truth was dawning. Things will change next week.





Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Adam Lincoln on March 15, 2020, 09:42:11 pm
Spain has closed some climbing areas. Can't quite understand why as I thought being outside was quite a good place to be.  :shrug:

A lot of these climbing areas are next to villages full of old people. Thats the reason margalef was first to stop climbing.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 15, 2020, 09:51:05 pm
Ru, I was about to reply that you can't 'drip feed the medical professionals the whole truth' but keep it from the public as you suggest the government might do. They are one and the same thing, as this just proves.
Truth's out now, we can all prepare accordingly.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 15, 2020, 09:55:54 pm
Ru, I was about to reply that you can't 'drip feed the medical professionals the whole truth' but keep it from the public as you suggest the government might do. They are one and the same thing, as this just proves.
Truth's out now, we can all prepare accordingly.

What would Dom do Pete?

😃
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 15, 2020, 10:35:35 pm
Ha.Ha.

Probably looking into best way to jerry-mander ventilator technology in the short term and showing non-experts how to run them for when the experts are off ill or not available. Advance proper ventilator tech in the medium-term - if we can make iphones do the things they do then we can make ventilators do things better with billions to spend. Problems will obviously be resources, predict some mining jurisdictions will withold.  That will be one thing among hundreds of actions to look at. Global co-operation required, but global selfishness will be more likely at certain points in time during next 2 years for those with the resources.

My back of the envelope estimation the middle of this week was 650,000 deaths in the UK.  That's what I meant when I was saying the government was, quite wisely, drip-feeding this to the public.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on March 15, 2020, 11:41:59 pm
Ru, I was about to reply that you can't 'drip feed the medical professionals the whole truth' but keep it from the public as you suggest the government might do. They are one and the same thing, as this just proves.


I quite purposely didn't suggest the government might do that. I said that whilst reducing panic in the general public is a wise aim, vagueness, contrary statements and statements that appear to be incorrect after scrutiny won't achieve that. I then said that drip feeding any plan to medical professionals was a bad idea. At no point did I suggest that the government could successfully tell the public one thing and the professionals another.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 16, 2020, 05:29:32 am
Frankly - drip feeding information to the people is an excuse not a reason.

If you have no firm plan - don't know what is going on - are making it up as you go along - then you get a drip feed of information.

People can make rational decisions about how to plan for events that will reshape our world over the next 12 months - if you provide them with a plan, or a sequence of what is expected to happen. This should be backed up by the data, the reasoning why so people can (a) belieive the decisions and (b) make more nuanced decisions based on the wider analysis. If we are not getting this - its because IMHO the government don't have it.

To address this - I see today that #10 and BJ are going to have daily press briefings. This is a good idea in general. But please, put up the CSO and CMO instead of the blonde cluster fuck who will just give a simplified headline driven version of what the scientists are saying. AND CSO and CMO - please give some references/data.

I find it DEEPLY ironic that we knew so much about this virus SO early because the Chinese scientists posted all their findings online/open access. From data about its spread to its sequencing. YET, our own government hide their data and their analysis (presuming they actually have any aside from back of fag packet scribbles) from the rest of the world. If we have a great way of dealing with things - why are we not sharing this with everyone else? This alone leads me to believe our decision is basically interpretation (e.g. oppinion) rather than numbers. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: eastside on March 16, 2020, 07:50:01 am
Spain has closed some climbing areas. Can't quite understand why as I thought being outside was quite a good place to be.  :shrug:

From what I understand Spain has basically closed everything other than medical services, pharmacies, grocers, and other essential services. My friends in Albarracin aren't allowed to leave their apartment for any other reason
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 16, 2020, 09:23:43 am
You've gone all Trump from intially accusing others of exaggerating how bad this will be, to doing it yourself.

Offwidth. I thought this was total bullshit when I read it. But just to confirm, I've scanned back through the last 23 pages of this thread and checked every one of my posts. There isn't a single post made by me accusing anyone of exaggerating how bad this will be. Take 15 minutes and look for yourself, and when you're done please come back to me and apologise for characterising me that way. Yet more unsubstantiated bullshitting from you.

BTW it wasn't me who smote you for endless Guardian links, that was TB..

My posts give my view, as matter-of-factly as I can, on what I see happening and what looks most likely to my non-expert, non-medical-profession mind based on a reading of the facts as they emerge, and attempting to put them in historical context.

That leaked report is pretty much what the facts were suggesting middle of this week. Unfortunately, each time I've been correct in my predictions of how this will play out. Today in the climbing wall and elsewhere, most I spoke to were still in some state of denial about the long-term outlook, but the truth was dawning. Things will change next week.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 16, 2020, 09:58:02 am

Offwidth. I thought this was total bullshit when I read it. But just to confirm, I've scanned back through the last 23 pages of this thread and checked every one of my posts. There isn't a single post made by me accusing anyone of exaggerating how bad this will be. Take 15 minutes and look for yourself, and when you're done please come back to me and apologise for characterising me that way. Yet more unsubstantiated bullshitting from you.

The Trump thing was a pretty obvious joke for exaggerated effect (for the record I think you are nothing like the orange one).   On March 5th on one of your first serious posts on the data you clearly implied the death rate that I and others were worried about was exaggerated, being likely 1% (as the CMO said so)  and argued this through several posts.  (WHO maintained throughout it is 3% or more when the health system can't cope). You clearly implied my concerns over the government stopping daily release of data were exaggerated.  You also said some of the twitter posts on that link were bordeline hysterical when the worst then seem to me similar to you current position now. You said China we aren't... China released huge amounts of data to help the world, despite being an information dictatorship ....we as a democracy seem to be struggling still.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 16, 2020, 11:15:31 am
Roy Lilley's latest post (I disagree with a fair bit but it wouldn't be fair to only post what he says when I agree :)

https://ihm.org.uk/roy-lilley-nhsmanagers/


"Spread it... News and Comment from Roy Lilley

The 15 Puzzle, the Five-Room Puzzle, the Three-Cups problem... as nothing, compared to the Corona-Triangle. How to reconcile balancing the numbers and the NHS coping, with; creating herd immunity with protecting the vulnerable and saving the economy.

Herd immunity? Normally, if about 60% of people catch the virus and survive they can get-on with keeping things ticking over and we'll have immunity when the virus pops-up, again, in November or next year.  We don't know if COVID-19 will behave 'normally'. 

The plan?  Let people infect each other to the point when the NHS is reaching capacity... balancing the numbers going into hospital, with the ones going home, recovered or not survived. Timing a ban on large gatherings and school closures enables them to throttle up, or down, infection rates.  However, it's been kicked-into-touch.  The public and the sports authorities have done it.  Bang goes a chunk of herd immunity assumptions? I can envisage families, that can, taking their kids out of school.  Head teachers and governors will be in a tricky spot to enforce attendance. Italiano-lock-down is ok but when you open up again, the infection comes back.  Like snuffing out a forest fire.... a wind will reignite it.  We are alone in our strategy.  If it works... we'll come out immune and streets ahead. BoJo is following sophisticated science.  Public opinion mustn't force him to abandon it and follow politics.

Protecting the vulnerable?   There are 120,000 vacancies for social-care workers.  Frankly, it's broken.  Care Homes have already imposed a lock-down.  Who will look after yer granny or the disabled at home?  Enter Deliveroo, Just Eat, Uber Eats, Meals-on Wheels bolstered with student volunteers and Army kitchens.Cocooning Granny, means volunteers, training, police-checks and more time than we have.  Er, when we close the Uni's we'll have lots of volunteer students. 

The economy?  Supermarkets can't deliver their 'no-shortages', promise.  They're blaming us and are naive. Naivety is dangerous.  Of course customers stock pile and empty shelves reinforce mistrust.  Of course families, faced with self isolation, will buy bog rolls and everything else. Behavioural science, the study of why we do, what-we-do, isn't complicated.  We rat run the traffic, walk across the grass and do what's easy and in our best interests. If we cut our number of contacts in half, we halve the risk, so we don't go to restaurants, bars, shopping and the cinema.If we see empty shelves, we'll stock-pile. Airlines aren't taking off and the high street is in nose-dive.  The economy losing traction.

The numbers?  Here's a guess; In simple terms; if someone dies today, assume they were in the NHS for ten days and before, for 7 days, asymptotic/symptomatic.  If we assume a death rate of 1%, that means 17 days ago 100 people were alive and had Covid-19.Assume the numbers double every 4 days... that means, from 100, we go to 200, 400, 800 in 17 days... but it's my guess.  We haven't counted them. We know, 21 people have died and when, so we can forecast, by tracking-back, make assumptions and some guesswork.  That is all it is...  I'll leave you to explode your calculator, to create a spread sheet.  It's not rocket-science.  The variables; the death rate, one, two percent or more and the compounding effect, four days, three or two?   Tiny adjustment give huge variations. Einstein said; compounding is the eigth wonder of the world... it redefines avaricious.   Virologists plan the 'stages' of disease and a virus rips them up.
  
The NHS? Add a dose of Corona to  'normal' sickness rates, about 4%, people self isolating and painting the kitchen... there might be two million days lost a month?  More? Corona' gives us pneumonia, hospitalised patients need ventilators.  The very sick, kit to support kidneys, liver and heart.  We are ranked 24 out of 31 for the number of IUC beds.  We might be facing a seven-fold-plus, increase in demand.  We know the NHS is in competition with every other healthcare system in the world, to buy more ventilators... they're all struggling. By all accounts Germany has bought 10,000. Hence, BoJo is asking for engineering companies to make more.  Good luck with getting around international patents.  Here's how to make them, via open source, to avoid patent problems.  My guess, we'll need at least 30,000.

All this and it's only Monday!  My advice; wash yer hands, pretend you have the virus and behave like you don't want to spread it."

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 16, 2020, 11:41:21 am
Quote
I find it DEEPLY ironic that we knew so much about this virus SO early because the Chinese scientists posted all their findings online/open access. From data about its spread to its sequencing. YET, our own government hide their data and their analysis (presuming they actually have any aside from back of fag packet scribbles) from the rest of the world. If we have a great way of dealing with things - why are we not sharing this with everyone else? This alone leads me to believe our decision is basically interpretation (e.g. oppinion) rather than numbers.

Assuming you're joking because I think it should be clear by now that there isn't a great way to deal with this..
 
The rest are all fair points, not disagreeing, but have you read the SPI-M document? If not I think you should, as should anyone wanting to understand more about the possible responses and their likely effectiveness. Looks to me that they're following the advice in SPI-M almost to the letter. Given that this advice is the summary from the group of people dedicated to modelling this kind of event then I think that's the best they can do. The maths modelling behind SPI-M hasn't been made widespread knowledge, AFAIK?, but at least one of the modellers involved in the group has been tweeting.

The obvious points are that covid19 will spread throughout the global population over the next year or so. No response anyone has in their arsenal can stop it - the only way to do that would be to put the entire UK/Europe/US into total lock-down for the next 12 months - not possible. We're only in the start of the rise, 16 weeks still to go until the peak and the infections double every 3-4 days. You don't need to be a maths professor to understand the numbers that will ultimately be involved here.
But we can delay the infection in the group most likely to need hospital i.e. over age-60 and/or underlying ill-health. And try to deal with the carnage best as possible, which at times won't be possible. 


edit: BTW, good info from French health minister. If you get covid19, don't use Ibuprofen. It reduces the effectiveness of the body's immune response by blocking inflammation, and increases risk of a more severe reaction to covid.(turns out it came from an article in Lancet dated March 11th, investigating drugs used in heart conditions and diabetes and their potential negative health impact in covid19.  Possible effects of ibuprofen came from that, but not proven.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 16, 2020, 11:51:26 am
Not sharing our science findings is really shit.
Its nearly as shit as trying to buy out a vaccine company to ensure US exclusivity.
Not quite as wanky - but on the same page of shit things to do during a global pandemic.

Because they're not being shared - it makes me think its because they are
(a) crap and too embarassed to share or
(b) don't exist and are based on 'best professional judgement' which in my field is also called guessing.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 16, 2020, 11:55:11 am
Struggling to square the info not being released with my impressions of Vallance who seems a thoroughly reasonable and very competent guy. That said he clearly got the 'herd immunity' bullshit badly wrong/ communicated it badly at least.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 16, 2020, 12:12:47 pm
Not sharing our science findings is really shit.
Its nearly as shit as trying to buy out a vaccine company to ensure US exclusivity.
Not quite as wanky - but on the same page of shit things to do during a global pandemic.

Because they're not being shared - it makes me think its because they are
(a) crap and too embarassed to share or
(b) don't exist and are based on 'best professional judgement' which in my field is also called guessing.

Gov has just announced that the modelling data is to be shared today or tomorrow.

edit: I don't see it altering anything about the outcome, it will just result in a lot of smart people feeling empowered to add their opinions along with all the dumb people like me. Open to hearing new info that changes everything.. But still fail to see how there are any other possible options open except:
a. 100% worldwide lock-down for 6-12 months. Surely impossible.
b. 100% worldwide lock-down of 4-6 weeks. Surely ineffective and more costly to health in the long-term.
c. various variations on 'carry on with no long-term lock-downs'. Possible but very costly to life.
d. targeted lock-down of most at risk. Possible, still costly to life, but less costly than 'c'.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fultonius on March 16, 2020, 12:59:32 pm
Pete, What about b & d, then d?

I.e. massive lock down now, to curb the initial exponential increase globally. Then, total lock-down for those "most at risk", to prevent infection and to slow the rate of infection. This will go on for months.

Once the initial surge is over, life should go on while still trying to maintain distance and being extremely cautious mixing with "at risk" people. That way the healthy get it, not all at once, but spread over months, and transmission to the "at risk" is minimised.

Part if me wants to get it now, then I'm free (as far as most scientist seem to think...) to get back to work (somewhat essential job in energy, but not really) and get on with helping people in need.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fultonius on March 16, 2020, 01:00:43 pm
Leaked govt report on predictions

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/15/uk-coronavirus-crisis-to-last-until-spring-2021-and-could-see-79m-hospitalised

300k dead..

And, let's see if they "socialise" the losses of the rich again...

Almost seems like they've read this thread...

UK government spent £500 billion bailing out the banks. Let's see how much they commit to helping us plebs get through this.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 16, 2020, 01:06:41 pm
Pete, What about b & d, then d?

I.e. massive lock down now, to curb the initial exponential increase globally. Then, total lock-down for those "most at risk", to prevent infection and to slow the rate of infection. This will go on for months.

Seems like learning from China, Korea etc would be the most sensible - lockdown hard and early to get it under control, then slowly unlock (70% back at work in Wuhan, travel still limited) while targeting outbreaks with heightened measures and intensive testing as they occur.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 16, 2020, 01:07:33 pm
Pete, What about b & d, then d?

I.e. massive lock down now, to curb the initial exponential increase globally. Then, total lock-down for those "most at risk", to prevent infection and to slow the rate of infection. This will go on for months.

Once the initial surge is over, life should go on while still trying to maintain distance and being extremely cautious mixing with "at risk" people. That way the healthy get it, not all at once, but spread over months, and transmission to the "at risk" is minimised.

Part if me wants to get it now, then I'm free (as far as most scientist seem to think...) to get back to work (somewhat essential job in energy, but not really) and get on with helping people in need.

Yes, quite possibly, I suppose I'm just posting what I can see are our options in this circumstance, and how I see it will likely play out. I can see our government's logic.. But yes maybe there are better option, I don't know.

This is very informative and a simple way of understanding what we're trying to achieve. I'd urge everyone to share it widely.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1238906195651559424 (https://twitter.com/i/status/1238906195651559424)

It's a simple concept, but actually quite sophisticated compared to 'total lock-down'.

Clearly, it's going to rely on public compliance at the right moment.


edit: JB I think it isn't realistic (assuming the data behind the UK modeller's plan is sound, and we're supposedly very good?).


The twitter video raises a further point - the problem ISN'T 'the exponential rise' per se. The death rate and rate of infection will be what they are for each virus, in a population without immunity and vaccine. The problem IS not being able to treat the most severely ill.

While we can treat, the death rate will be what it naturally will be.

Therefore it makes sense to allow the exponential rise for as long as you can treat (*obviously* after taking the actions you can to delay until the health service capacity is at what can be achieved within the constraints of each countries circumstances - huge debate!). Stop at last safe moment - as per illustrated in that vid. Keep treating and try to keep the death toll within the natural range of the infection for as long as possible.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fultonius on March 16, 2020, 01:29:45 pm
Form what I've heard/read form friends in the medical profession and online, is that ICU currently ticks along at 95% capacity. So, while there is logic in the water flow bucket argument, we're potentially already at the point!

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 16, 2020, 01:30:17 pm
What isn't realistic?

For me that demo is worryingly over-simplistic (patronising even). It suggests a) that we have loads of spare ICU capacity, and b) it suggests you're turning the tap off based on today's data, and getting a quick result from your reaction.

You aren't - you're turning it off based on what the models suggest numbers will be in ~10 days/ the incubation period/ two doubling cycles time - i.e. the numbers locked into the system because today's critical cases were last week's walking infectors. I'm struggling with how that 95% capacity allows for that with any margin for error.

The strategy is also dependent on high levels of testing - which we seem to be doing okay on but very hard to separate signal from noise here - while being very vulnerable to errors in modelling, which given we're dealing with exponential growth are likewise potentially huge.

Obviously the scientists involved know this better than I do, and I understand it's a hard call to make. But better to go too early than late. The timing of the peak is surely better delayed - giving more time to understand and prepare.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 16, 2020, 01:51:45 pm
My take is that the time-lag you mention will be baked into the response time, it has to be.

Again I'm definitively not trying to paint a rosy picture because it's going to be shit.  I think from memory that 95% is from last December. I'm not trying to say we have loads of capacity, clearly we don't. Obviously capacity will be artificially increased.
One positive (or less negative) point I've heard (which may/may not have much truth) is that for many hospitalisations in the severe (not critical) category the treatment is fairly agricultural - you don't need too much more than a bed in a building, some oxygen, and time. The rest comes from the body - you either beat it or move into critical category. In no way attempting to underplay anything - clearly you do need more than just that but we aren't talking highly specialised ICU for all hospitalisations. Corners will have to be cut.
Critical care obviously requires far more, e.g. vital organ support etc. It looks highly likely we won't have critical care capacity at some point.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 16, 2020, 02:07:44 pm
Which brings me to a related point - if and when the hospitals are overwhelmed, is it socially responsible to continue climbing?

Are you comfortable with the increased level of personal risk if there isn't a functioning A&E?

Are you comfortable with the thought that any treatment you might require will encroach on that required by Covid-19 sufferers?

Much as I believe my risk assessment skills to be good, and I've never had a climbing injury beyond a sprained ankle (touch wood), I might not be comfortable adding to a statistical group that contributes regular trips to A&E. That might also go for cycling, surfing, rugby, driving etc - anything other than walk or jog. This might need explaining to a lot of people, while balancing it against the health and mental health issues of self-isolation at home. 

Potentially a more worthwhile point to discuss on a bouldering forum than our uninformed and irrelevant critiques of national policy?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 16, 2020, 02:12:59 pm
In reply to why I don't think it's realistic right now to 100% lock-down the whole UK, which is what would be required to halt the spread (but wouldn't stop the virus existing and re-emerging)

I just don't think we're capable of making that work for the sort of length of time required to be effective. Locking-down one city plus rural province in a huge country with a compliant population under the control of an undemocratic system is not the same as locking-down an entire densely-populated country in a western democracy. You can dig into reasons why it would or wouldn't work, but that's my instinctive answer. Italy and other nations will be a test case to prove what works best I guess.
Maybe my views are biased by having been involved in various riot-control situations in northern Irelend over the 90s, in Londonderry, Belfast and Drumcree. People are difficult to control, especially in emotionally-charged times. And it doesn't take too much for things to go a bit pear shaped. Not saying that's valid in this situation but maybe informs my view.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 16, 2020, 02:14:52 pm
Yeah I've been wondering the same ref climbing, bouldering and mountain biking. Think it's very valid to ease off any activity that carries an elevated risk of minor injury.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: JamieG on March 16, 2020, 02:18:26 pm
I mostly agree with you here JB. Except that this is irrelevant or uniformed.

Many people posting here either work the medical and scientific communities (or have family/friends that do). So maybe not every nuance is picked up but generally I think UKB discussions aren't too far off the mark.

As for irrelevant if the postings here make a few people change their behaviour, which in turn results in the people they know changing their behaviour etc. then this is helpful. For me any discussing these things is an important exercise in working out what my own opinion is.

I agree it isn't going to get the government to change their policy but it has me shape my own personal one.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on March 16, 2020, 02:23:23 pm
The water flowing out of a bucket into a bottle analogy is fundamentally flawed. It assumes a flow rate that's too small and a spare capacity that doesn't exist. I saw a well reasoned calculation, that I will try and post a link to if I can find it again, that took into account the amount of excess healthcare capacity currently available, made some fairly generous guesstimates as to how much extra we can reasonably get in the next year (taking into account things like stopping elective operations getting more equipment and staff) and worked out that for the "flattening the curve" plan to make any difference to the number of people that could be treated (assuming 60% infection) the infections would have to be spread out over 17 years.

With respect to continuing to climb, I've made a mental list of low balls.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: JohnM on March 16, 2020, 02:34:20 pm
Quote
Yeah I've been wondering the same ref climbing, bouldering and mountain biking. Think it's very valid to ease off any activity that carries an elevated risk of minor injury.

I got some fairly abrupt responses on a FB group for asking whether it was ok to go climbing in a pair by bike or on foot during the current lockdown we are having in Innsbruck. I understand people are scared and stressed at the moment so asking about selfish activities is high risk if you don't want to get flamed on the internet. I understand the argument from not taking any risks that could add additional strain on the hospitals, but rationally I don't think climbing would add a significant strain on ICUs on average on a week by week basis. However, these are not rational times.   
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 16, 2020, 02:36:50 pm
Quote
You can dig into reasons why it would or wouldn't work, but that's my instinctive answer. Italy and other nations will be a test case to prove what works best I guess.

Sure. I think we're very lucky not to be in their position, but will benefit from being able to watch the preview. My hunch is people will adapt very quickly and behaviour will be driven not by the state but by the death rate. Given prudent finances some forced gardening/ netflix leave shouldn't be a hardship and could have lasting societal benefits, as mentioned higher in the thread. The question is how many businesses and individuals will quickly be into dire financial straits and how they can be helped through.

Quote
I've made a mental list of low balls.

I'm not sure I'll go that far, considering how many will be throwing themselves at DIY projects. Or the second wave might coincide with the baby boom from the first.

Quote
Except that this is irrelevant or uniformed.

Good point. I was thinking about how our critique isn't going to get fed back to government but you're right, it doesn't need to.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 16, 2020, 02:40:12 pm
I got some fairly abrupt responses on a FB group for asking whether it was ok to go climbing in a pair by bike or on foot during the current lockdown we are having in Innsbruck.

Yeah, my post was prompted by a FB post this morning - 'my ski touring holiday is cancelled so we're heading to Scotland - where's good?'. It got a similar response, with the point that highland communities are small, isolated and not overrun with ICUs. That said I'm going ahead with my own scottish winter trip tomorrow, though not sure how fast things will change.

PS anyone know why the Germans aren't dying?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on March 16, 2020, 02:47:39 pm
#TopropeClub
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on March 16, 2020, 02:49:54 pm
It'll be interesting to see how the civil engineering industry copes. Some very large Contractors aren't in great shape currently and from what I'm seeing the industry is getting ready to make sites safe and essentially stop work.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on March 16, 2020, 03:03:59 pm

PS anyone know why the Germans aren't dying?

They were ready for the Wurst case scenario.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Doylo on March 16, 2020, 03:05:38 pm
A minor topic but I can see climbers starting to get roasted for glory posts on Insta when the death rates start going up. Might aswell close it down til it’s over and suspend all sponsorship deals.  :o
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 16, 2020, 03:07:15 pm
Increasingly feeling like whatever the government say indoor climbing is not very socially responsible at the moment. Outdoors clearly better but still not brilliant.

The potential benefits of people doing things they enjoy/going outside if they are practising social distancing through the week have to be weighed up against the potential strain on healthcare services in the event of accidents and the potential to transmit the virus even while outside. To that end; my thoughts at the moment are to personally avoid indoor climbing in favour of fingerboarding, tentatively plan to continue outside climbing and avoid going to pubs this week. No doubt by tomorrow I'll have changed my mind of some of this but thats my current thoughts. Interested in other peoples.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 16, 2020, 03:10:59 pm

PS anyone know why the Germans aren't dying?

They were ready for the Wurst case scenario.


May as well close down 'Best Pun in 2020', we have a winner!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: yetix on March 16, 2020, 03:11:56 pm
Increasingly feeling like whatever the government say indoor climbing is not very socially responsible at the moment. Outdoors clearly better but still not brilliant.

The potential benefits of people doing things they enjoy/going outside if they are practising social distancing through the week have to be weighed up against the potential strain on healthcare services in the event of accidents and the potential to transmit the virus even while outside. To that end; my thoughts at the moment are to personally avoid indoor climbing in favour of fingerboarding, tentatively plan to continue outside climbing and avoid going to pubs this week. No doubt by tomorrow I'll have changed my mind of some of this but thats my current thoughts. Interested in other peoples.

pretty much what I'm doing now. Avoid the wall at all costs.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 16, 2020, 03:14:20 pm
Might as well close it down til it’s over and suspend all sponsorship deals.  :o

May as well. Olympics are looking increasingly unlikely.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on March 16, 2020, 03:43:52 pm
Sounds like the EU is closing it’s boarders to all but non-essential travel for 30 days...

Edit - a press conference afterwards said that UK citizens would continue to be allowed...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 16, 2020, 03:44:36 pm
It'll be interesting to see how the civil engineering industry copes. Some very large Contractors aren't in great shape currently and from what I'm seeing the industry is getting ready to make sites safe and essentially stop work.
Can you direct me to where you see this. Having spoken to a lot of contacts in the construction industry this isnt the general consensus.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on March 16, 2020, 03:47:21 pm
My inbox? You've got me on FB so feel free to pester.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 16, 2020, 03:57:23 pm
Increasingly feeling like whatever the government say indoor climbing is not very socially responsible at the moment. Outdoors clearly better but still not brilliant.

The potential benefits of people doing things they enjoy/going outside if they are practising social distancing through the week have to be weighed up against the potential strain on healthcare services in the event of accidents and the potential to transmit the virus even while outside. To that end; my thoughts at the moment are to personally avoid indoor climbing in favour of fingerboarding, tentatively plan to continue outside climbing and avoid going to pubs this week. No doubt by tomorrow I'll have changed my mind of some of this but thats my current thoughts. Interested in other peoples.

I’m probably going to stop going indoors this week.

But outdoors I don’t see a problem. Plenty of esoteric regularly rain washed and uv bathed (sometimes!) crags around.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 16, 2020, 03:59:04 pm
Sounds like the EU is closing it’s boarders to all but non-essential travel for 30 days...

Remove the "but".

(from my face).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on March 16, 2020, 04:12:18 pm
Sounds like the EU is closing it’s boarders to all but non-essential travel for 30 days...

Remove the "but".

(from my face).

Ah yes, my bad! Though now sounds like UK citizens are exempt.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on March 16, 2020, 04:59:06 pm
Which brings me to a related point - if and when the hospitals are overwhelmed, is it socially responsible to continue climbing?

Are you comfortable with the increased level of personal risk if there isn't a functioning A&E?

Are you comfortable with the thought that any treatment you might require will encroach on that required by Covid-19 sufferers?
Had exactly these thoughts recently. My grit wish list includes a few things with a small risk of minor but hospitalisable injury and I am questioning whether this is the right season, even for as selfish a reason as "lower limb injuries would suck even more dick if the nation is on lockdown". Not that I need any excuse to pussy out.... I don't see a problem with climbing per se as a lot of risk can be mitigated even without resorting to doing laps on Zippy's, but now might be the time to start one's Lleyn Peninsula DWS career  :blink:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dunnyg on March 16, 2020, 05:51:35 pm
Zippys is always covered in fresh chalk. I recon the highballs would be less risky...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 16, 2020, 05:55:13 pm
Given the latest announcement  - avoid all unnecessary social contact - then that’s it for climbing walls.

I feel really sorry for wall owners and those working for them. Can’t see them being open tomorrow.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on March 16, 2020, 05:58:40 pm
Both my children (6 and 9) are off school with coughs as am I.   My wife has Charcot Marie Tooth disease (CMT) type 4c.  Some of you medical types will know exactly what this is, no doubt.  She is high risk and has been admitted to hospital with breathing difficulties as a result of chest infections in the past.  We have unilaterally taken the decision to keep them off school for the time being to protect my wife.  I am currently negotiating with my head as to whether I go back between now and Easter hols.  My main consideration is avoiding bringing back anything that could cause my wife serious illness.  Definitely not climbing indoors anytime soon!

Took the chidlers out for a walk on Exmoor in the sunshine today, good dose of vitamin d, fresh air, exercise and not another soul in sight. Pretty safe and definitely needed.

The father in law is stuck in Portugal with his caravan, due to get a ferry from Bilbao on 27th.  The site he’s on is shut but they are being told to stay put.  When told about isolating over 70s here, his response was ‘that’s not happening’, he would ignore and go down the local for a pint if he was here. 

Seems to be a general attitude of complacency amongst our populace, can’t see how the shit is not going to hit the fan big style and we seem to blissfully unaware of the impending crisis. 


Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 16, 2020, 06:04:24 pm
I suspect the behavioural models will turn out to have been wrong, or at least not accurate enough to guide policy. People are very adaptable and will change fast as soon as the hospital near them is full and the obituaries are pouring out.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 16, 2020, 06:07:43 pm
Brutus: Word on the street is Bilbao ferries are shut, but that's 2nd hand. Also given new announcement you and whole family should be in the house for 14 days
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Coops_13 on March 16, 2020, 06:13:21 pm
Given the latest announcement  - avoid all unnecessary social contact - then that’s it for climbing walls.

I feel really sorry for wall owners and those working for them. Can’t see them being open tomorrow.
All the walls in Denver have closed over the past week. Apparently the popular sport crags have been rammed...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on March 16, 2020, 06:14:00 pm
That’ll take us up to Easter hols...

We’ve told the father in law to stay put and enjoy the good weather... whether or not he listens is a different matter.

I have yet to see new announcement but cheers for the heads up.

Exactly JB when the shit hits people will change behaviour but that’s probably too late, surely, when the aim is to slow things down.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Doylo on March 16, 2020, 06:24:11 pm
Be nice if the government do something to help those of us who can no longer earn money. Especially given the billions they spent bailing out the banks after the financial crash. Not holding my breath though.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on March 16, 2020, 06:28:25 pm
Exactly my thoughts Doylo.  It’s time to empty the Caman Islands it’s your turn to bail us out you selfish cvnts..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 16, 2020, 06:47:43 pm
I'd expect there will be support of some sort. Allowing businesses to skip business rates or mortgage payments etc.

I'm not saying there'll be particular measures which will help the individuals on here, but there will definitely be support of some sort for businesses, and quite possibly the self employed as well.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 16, 2020, 06:55:11 pm
Good news for all Rhesus Macaques reading the forum.

Early info on re-infection, from the John Hopkins daily email update (http://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/newsroom/newsletters/e-newsletter-sign-up.html):

Quote
'NEW PREPRINT FINDINGS  The second study describes the potential for re-infection in rhesus macaques who had been infected and recovered. The study reintroduced the SARS-CoV-2 virus to the macaques and found that none showed notable viral loads five days after the reintroduction. The researchers suggest that these findings provide evidence that initial SARS-CoV-2 infection could offer protective immunity for those re-exposed. The duration of that protection is not known.'
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: 205Chris on March 16, 2020, 07:03:37 pm
Given the latest announcement  - avoid all unnecessary social contact - then that’s it for climbing walls.

I feel really sorry for wall owners and those working for them. Can’t see them being open tomorrow.

I disagree. I think in the absence of a clear government directive to shut many of them will stay open and just preach 'wash hands, cardless payments, stay away if feeling unwell' etc. Business is business at the end of the day.

I really hope I'm proved wrong.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: HarryBD on March 16, 2020, 07:03:45 pm
Be nice if the government do something to help those of us who can no longer earn money. Especially given the billions they spent bailing out the banks after the financial crash. Not holding my breath though.

Yep, think this is time to seriously think about universal basic income. I’d personally welcome increased income tax in order to help the self employed and the soon to be unemployed not end up homeless.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fultonius on March 16, 2020, 07:14:39 pm
Be nice if the government do something to help those of us who can no longer earn money. Especially given the billions they spent bailing out the banks after the financial crash. Not holding my breath though.

Yep, think this is time to seriously think about universal basic income. I’d personally welcome increased income tax in order to help the self employed and the soon to be unemployed not end up homeless.

I was just saying this the other day, if we had proper UBI, then a shutdown like this would be a hell of a lot less stressful for many. I'm employed, but by a huge and potentially teetering engineering firm...this could tip them over the edge.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 16, 2020, 07:19:27 pm
Good point Harry.

Chris205, I am a subscription member of a hot yoga studio. Also on member/mailing list of a couple of walls and other yoga studios, all of which have found time to email about what they are doing re Covid19, update it and in the case of Yoga Manchester, suspend classes.

My studio? No news apart from advertising extra classes for a subsidiary studio they opened last year  :wall: Looks like they are afraid to say anything in case it puts people off coming. Namaste, y’all.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 16, 2020, 07:58:53 pm
Be nice if the government do something to help those of us who can no longer earn money. Especially given the billions they spent bailing out the banks after the financial crash. Not holding my breath though.

What's already been announced is here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/guidance-to-employers-and-businesses-about-covid-19/covid-19-guidance-for-employees

Guidance for businesses at the root link.

For the self employed you can apply for universal credit. Haven't looked into I think but it doesn't sound promising.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 16, 2020, 08:03:29 pm
That announcement was a disgrace. Stopping short of banning pubs etc has the sole effect of giving insurance a reason not to pay out. People's lives and livelihoods are on the line and this government just cares about it's own bottom line. Compare and contrast with Macron just now unveiling massive economic support. Fucking nonsense.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Adam Lincoln on March 16, 2020, 08:23:43 pm
Brutus: Word on the street is Bilbao ferries are shut, but that's 2nd hand. Also given new announcement you and whole family should be in the house for 14 days

Really? Seems open to me sat here in my van......
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on March 16, 2020, 08:45:11 pm
That announcement was a disgrace. Stopping short of banning pubs etc has the sole effect of giving insurance a reason not to pay out. People's lives and livelihoods are on the line and this government just cares about it's own bottom line. Compare and contrast with Macron just now unveiling massive economic support. Fucking nonsense.

I agree, pretty poor performance - this is a time when the government needs to be clear and decisive..  Can't see it lasting though, pretty sure they will be forced to provide more clarity pretty quickly.  Lots already in the news picking upon the obvious issues with whats been done so far
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Andy W on March 16, 2020, 09:01:01 pm
Here in France, Macron although making sweeping initiatives has still left many questions. I guess understandable in such unprecedented times. However I can still go bouldering as long as I’m alone, which is what I usually do anyhow 🙂
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Andy W on March 16, 2020, 09:04:18 pm
Here in France, Macron although making sweeping initiatives has still left many questions. I guess understandable in such unprecedented times. However I can still go bouldering as long as I’m alone, which is what I usually do anyhow 🙂

Edit, my wife says I’m wrong, because driving to the bouldering is ‘making an unnecessary journey’. Thank god for my woodie.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on March 16, 2020, 09:13:33 pm
Brutus: Word on the street is Bilbao ferries are shut, but that's 2nd hand. Also given new announcement you and whole family should be in the house for 14 days

Really? Seems open to me sat here in my van......
Don’t be bringing none of dem nasty Euro viruses back into the Wez Cunry with eee!

The father in law is staying put for the time being, he may decamp to his cousin’s place in Portugal which is an hour or so away from where he is.

Andy W Can anyone explain how getting in my car on my drive, going somewhere no one else is, climbing on rock no one else has touched and going home again is a problem?  Is it the risk of crashing?  I guess it is an unnecessary journey but....  do we really have to stay inside our own homes the whole time?

So ask everyone to voluntarily keep social distance to slow the spread whilst still sending our little virus conductors to be in close proximity with their peers, to then take it all home to their families anyway.   :no:  Bonkers.. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Andy W on March 16, 2020, 09:21:00 pm
Hi Brutus
Yea I don’t get that either, but Macron has threatened action against folk that ignore his directives. He has said individual sport is ok, so could cycle to the boulders, if I was fit enough 😉
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on March 16, 2020, 09:33:08 pm
Hi Brutus
Yea I don’t get that either, but Macron has threatened action against folk that ignore his directives. He has said individual sport is ok, so could cycle to the boulders, if I was fit enough 😉
At least it sounds like he’s making solid decisions, our government seems to not want to make any firm decisions.... Is driving your car in a racey fashion considered an individual sport??
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on March 16, 2020, 09:41:13 pm
Given the latest announcement  - avoid all unnecessary social contact - then that’s it for climbing walls.

I feel really sorry for wall owners and those working for them. Can’t see them being open tomorrow.

I disagree. I think in the absence of a clear government directive to shut many of them will stay open and just preach 'wash hands, cardless payments, stay away if feeling unwell' etc. Business is business at the end of the day.

I really hope I'm proved wrong.

All TCA centres are shut as of now. Difficult for them but probably the right call. Until this afternoon flashpoint in Bristol were still going ahead with a comp tomorrow! Thankfully that's cancelled now, but they're still open.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Andy W on March 16, 2020, 09:44:52 pm
I was going to get my leather gloves out, then realised that sporty and Touran will never sit together comfortably.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: 205Chris on March 16, 2020, 09:50:27 pm
Given the latest announcement  - avoid all unnecessary social contact - then that’s it for climbing walls.

I feel really sorry for wall owners and those working for them. Can’t see them being open tomorrow.

I disagree. I think in the absence of a clear government directive to shut many of them will stay open and just preach 'wash hands, cardless payments, stay away if feeling unwell' etc. Business is business at the end of the day.

I really hope I'm proved wrong.

All TCA centres are shut as of now. Difficult for them but probably the right call. Until this afternoon flashpoint in Bristol were still going ahead with a comp tomorrow! Thankfully that's cancelled now, but they're still open.

Yeah, I saw that. Props to them. I hope others follow suit.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 16, 2020, 09:51:15 pm
Strong comment article on the other channel:

https://www.ukclimbing.com/news/2020/03/climbing_wall_use_during_the_covid-19_pandemic_-_its_time_to_reconsider-72236

That also has an excellent link to a WaPost article with some great simple virus transmission model animations...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/world/corona-simulator/?utm_campaign=articles_id_0&utm_content=link7&utm_medium=articles_post&utm_source=ukclimbing
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: jwi on March 16, 2020, 09:52:59 pm
Here in France, Macron although making sweeping initiatives has still left many questions. I guess understandable in such unprecedented times. However I can still go bouldering as long as I’m alone, which is what I usually do anyhow 🙂

Edit, my wife says I’m wrong, because driving to the bouldering is ‘making an unnecessary journey’. Thank god for my woodie.

Yes, you are quite wrong. What more, the President has given the police almost unlimited power to enforce this: at least that was how we interpreted the speech.

Here is a summary of the situation in France to the best of my understanding that I just wrote:

Starting tomorrow at noon, all travel except travelling alone for work or for shopping essentials is forbidden. Meeting friends and family is not allowed. The government will be responsible for the details, but the president warns that ”any violation of these rules will be sanctioned.” Taking a breather/jog is allowed. Alone.

The borders to non-Schengen countries are closed.

No business, no matter how small, is allowed to go bust: for this the president has pledged 300 billion in credits. Rent, electricity, water and gas-bills will be suspended for small and medium enterprises in difficulties. All workers are guaranteed pay.

The resources of the country will be geared to the medical staff. A system of child care for medical workers will be put in place, and they can requisition hotels or taxis at the government's expense.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 16, 2020, 10:00:19 pm
Re Going to the Wall. Having mulled over the UKC article for ten min or so...

This is clearly a far worse virus spreading context than going to a pub or other social space. By climbing on holds that lots of other people have touched (via climbing on) its more like going to the pub and then shaking hands with everyone in there. Including the people who've been in there for the past few days.

I think you're nuts if you think thats OK right now. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on March 16, 2020, 10:03:29 pm
Here in France, Macron although making sweeping initiatives has still left many questions. I guess understandable in such unprecedented times. However I can still go bouldering as long as I’m alone, which is what I usually do anyhow 🙂

Edit, my wife says I’m wrong, because driving to the bouldering is ‘making an unnecessary journey’. Thank god for my woodie.

Yes, you are quite wrong. What more, the President has given the police almost unlimited power to enforce this: at least that was how we interpreted the speech.

Here is a summary of the situation in France to the best of my understanding that I just wrote:

Starting tomorrow at noon, all travel except travelling alone for work or for shopping essentials is forbidden. Meeting friends and family is not allowed. The government will be responsible for the details, but the president warns that ”any violation of these rules will be sanctioned.” Taking a breather/jog is allowed. Alone.

The borders to non-Schengen countries are closed.

No business, no matter how small, is allowed to go bust: for this the president has pledged 300 billion in credits. Rent, electricity, water and gas-bills will be suspended for small and medium enterprises in difficulties. All workers are guaranteed pay.

The resources of the country will be geared to the medical staff. A system of child care for medical workers will be put in place, and they can requisition hotels or taxis at the government's expense.
‘kin ell.  This puts our government to shame, very impressive.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 16, 2020, 10:07:13 pm
Brutus. I'm not being a twat, but you're complaining in one post that going out bouldering should be OK. And then complaining in your other post that you wish the government would make firm decisions. You can't have both! You've just been told to not engage in any unnecessary travel or social contact. In an unprecedented restriction of liberties unknown since WWII. 
What do you want - to be forced to obey? They can enact martial law and criminal sanctions to force you to comply, if they want to. I predict they will do this at a later stage, if it's deemed enough people aren't obeying the guidance or when the death toll is accelerating rapidly, but for now it's left up to our collective good sense to do the right thing.
Kids in school are a much lower risk than adults mingling, surely that's clear to everyone by now. I'm sure school closures will come in too, at the acceleration of deaths period.
Perhaps you should either enjoy your current freedoms while complying with the spirit of the guidance; or comply 100% and don't do anything unnecessary like going out bouldering. But not complaining about both options.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on March 16, 2020, 10:09:50 pm
https://twitter.com/alexwickham/status/1239655710872518663?s=19

 :tumble:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Andy W on March 16, 2020, 10:15:32 pm
Here in France, Macron although making sweeping initiatives has still left many questions. I guess understandable in such unprecedented times. However I can still go bouldering as long as I’m alone, which is what I usually do anyhow 🙂

Edit, my wife says I’m wrong, because driving to the bouldering is ‘making an unnecessary journey’. Thank god for my woodie.

Yes, you are quite wrong. What more, the President has given the police almost unlimited power to enforce this: at least that was how we interpreted the speech.

Here is a summary of the situation in France to the best of my understanding that I just wrote:

Starting tomorrow at noon, all travel except travelling alone for work or for shopping essentials is forbidden. Meeting friends and family is not allowed. The government will be responsible for the details, but the president warns that ”any violation of these rules will be sanctioned.” Taking a breather/jog is allowed. Alone.

The borders to non-Schengen countries are closed.

No business, no matter how small, is allowed to go bust: for this the president has pledged 300 billion in credits. Rent, electricity, water and gas-bills will be suspended for small and medium enterprises in difficulties. All workers are guaranteed pay.

The resources of the country will be geared to the medical staff. A system of child care for medical workers will be put in place, and they can requisition hotels or taxis at the government's expense.

It’s always nice to be quite wrong.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on March 16, 2020, 10:24:26 pm
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf (https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf)

So flattening the curve ("mitigation" in this paper) as explained by the government was a load of bollocks after all, for exactly the reasons we suspected. Someone should buy Dominic an envelope to scribble on the back of. 18 months of isolation, however, will be economic armageddon.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on March 16, 2020, 10:28:36 pm
Fuck me that’s grim reading, if not massively surprising 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on March 16, 2020, 10:28:58 pm
This is possibly the most depressing reaction to the virus I could imagine:

US sales of guns and ammunition soar amid coronavirus panic buying
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/16/us-sales-guns-ammunition-soar-amid-coronavirus-panic-buying?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

Makes UK panic buying of tinned tomatoes and pasta look positively community spirited.

The real irony is that guns might end up causing more harm ...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on March 16, 2020, 10:48:35 pm
Trying to look on the bright side of this:

1. If you had to dispassionately pick a killer pandemic, this one is probably the one you would choose in terms of the mortality demographics.
2. Hopefully the global nature of the pandemic will result in increased international co-operation.
3. If 2. is correct, a reversal of isolationist, nationalist politics.
4. A realisation of the need to invest heavily in social healthcare and social support mechanisms.
5. A restructuring of the economy away from carbon intensive use.

It would be nice to think that we could look back on it as a positive turning point.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on March 16, 2020, 10:52:36 pm
Pete.  Hypocrisy is the greatest luxury, allow me to indulge...  I was having a little banter with Andy.   The consequences of bringing the virus to my wife is potentially very serious.  I don’t need marshall law to help me with my decisions.

As it stands the decision made by our government leaves businesses in the shit.  Something decisive that says we will support you if you’re in trouble as a result is needed or the door is left open for the unscrupulous to profit and the socially conscious to lose out.  They won’t ask businesses to close because they don’t want to pay out.  That’s why I am impressed with Macron (never thought I’d say  that).

Kids mingling at school are low risk??  Really.. based on what?

Is starting a sentence with ‘I’m not being a twat but..’ the same or similar to ‘I’m not being a racist but’ ??

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 16, 2020, 10:54:03 pm
Yeah grim reading, but as Stu says not unsurprising.

Worth reading the whole paper and not just the headlines. Dilemma doesn't describe it. Two choices, each of them terrible.

edit: Among many sentences, this stands out: most of the countries across the world face the same challenge today with COVID-19, a virus with comparable lethality to H1N1 influenza in 1918.
Same lethality, but we've a far larger population than 1918.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on March 16, 2020, 11:09:49 pm
Trying to look on the bright side of this:

1. If you had to dispassionately pick a killer pandemic, this one is probably the one you would choose in terms of the mortality demographics.
2. Hopefully the global nature of the pandemic will result in increased international co-operation.
3. If 2. is correct, a reversal of isolationist, nationalist politics.
4. A realisation of the need to invest heavily in social healthcare and social support mechanisms.
5. A restructuring of the economy away from carbon intensive use.

It would be nice to think that we could look back on it as a positive turning point.

A positive take on it. Several columnists have observed that you couldn't design a better carbon dioxide emission reduction strategy: precipitatous drop in flights, factories closing, car journeys reduced...
International cooperation isn't looking terribly good at the moment, particularly from the US but perhaps this might prove the value of the EU if they pull their fingers out.
Interesting comment on a R4 program earlier about previous virus which affected pig farms in Malaysia which had a 70-80% mortality when humans caught it. Given Cv19s relatively low mortality rate (although it's still pretty significant) now is the time for the world to develop realistic approaches to inevitable future pandemics
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 16, 2020, 11:37:36 pm
Kids in school are a much lower risk than adults mingling, surely that's clear to everyone by now.

What do you mean by ‘lower risk’?
Less likely to develop serious complications? Less likely to increase transmission of the virus than adults?

The former is well known. Do you have any evidence for the latter? Share it please if you do.

 Re the latter, child-child, child-adult and subsequent adult-adult transmission will increase mortality rates as it accelerates the epidemic.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 16, 2020, 11:41:31 pm
Another piece of info from Singapore from a few days ago.
The (night)club that my brother went to on Saturday night only allowed 250 people in. Everybody completed a form on arrival with their contact details and travel history. Temperatures taken on the door. This is now standard for any building.

Contact tracing innit.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: eastside on March 17, 2020, 04:51:01 am
Hi Brutus
Yea I don’t get that either, but Macron has threatened action against folk that ignore his directives. He has said individual sport is ok, so could cycle to the boulders, if I was fit enough

So you are allowed to walk to the boulders but not to drive? I don't see how that makes much sense but what have you. At least there is a zone, albeit tiny, walking distance from where we're at.

bleau.info/moigny (http://bleau.info/moigny)

Guess I'll work on the 7C+ for the next two weeks :)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Andy W on March 17, 2020, 06:42:14 am
Hi Brutus
Yea I don’t get that either, but Macron has threatened action against folk that ignore his directives. He has said individual sport is ok, so could cycle to the boulders, if I was fit enough

So you are allowed to walk to the boulders but not to drive? I don't see how that makes much sense but what have you. At least there is a zone, albeit tiny, walking distance from where we're at.

bleau.info/moigny (http://bleau.info/moigny)

Tbh I don’t really know what’s alllowed.

Guess I'll work on the 7C+ for the next two weeks :)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 17, 2020, 07:04:59 am
Trying to look on the bright side of this:

1. If you had to dispassionately pick a killer pandemic, this one is probably the one you would choose in terms of the mortality demographics.
2. Hopefully the global nature of the pandemic will result in increased international co-operation.
3. If 2. is correct, a reversal of isolationist, nationalist politics.
4. A realisation of the need to invest heavily in social healthcare and social support mechanisms.
5. A restructuring of the economy away from carbon intensive use.

It would be nice to think that we could look back on it as a positive turning point.

How will it change your perspective Ru?

My musings from 10 days ago...
A longer post - on a different point. I've had a few conversations and been mulling the following over the last few days....

We don't know how this is all going to pan out at the moment (for the better or for the worse) - but I hope some positives will come from this too. These include:

1. Changing the 9-5 in the office work ethic - and making homeworking and remote working more the norm than the exception. I hope and suspect that many changes in the workplace that are happening right now because of CV19 will lead to a long lasting shift in this. Of course many jobs require a workplace - but many in our largely service driven economy do not - and I hope this can show that people can carry on doing whatever spreadsheet shuffling they may do equally as well at home as at work.

2. Putting a dent in our short haul flight addiction. Maybe less optimism for this - folk may well return to business as usual once this changes. But - with the travel restrictions and downturn in flying I hope people start to realise that they don't need to have five europe mini breaks a year and can have just as relaxing/equivalent break closer to home (with less emissions required...). There are lots of positives in terms of widening peoples perspectives and breaking down cultural barriers of going to lots of places - but I can't help but think we do too much of it.

3. A slower pace of life. Already (from my observations) the roads and public transport are noticably quieter... Not so much self quarantine, but people making concious decisions to go out less, spending more time at home etc.. are these necessarily bad things? (thuogh it may just lead to Netflix dependancy issues :D )

4. If we do less - will we consume less - and leading to a wider point does this mean less of an emphasis on the growth growth growth economic model that the world seems to have subscribed to? I doubt CV19 will stop this - but maybe putting a dent in it and slowing things down globally isnt such a bad thing... (I await someone with stocks and shares pension/isa/savings to come back at me otherwise with this..)

Anyway - just some general musings about how it may change the world we live in - possibly in some positive ways. None of the above is evidence based :)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 17, 2020, 07:10:38 am
When is the anger going to come out?

There are alot of anxious people out there - anger is one outlet for anxiety...

We've not seen mass disorder yet in Europe (only over toilet rolls in Sydney...:) ) - but this is surely something to come?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 17, 2020, 07:50:25 am
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf (https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf)

Fucking hell. We didn't even need them to fuck up the behavioural 'science', they managed to fuck up the basic stuff. No wonder people have had enough of experts.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 17, 2020, 07:56:42 am
Kids in school are a much lower risk than adults mingling, surely that's clear to everyone by now.

What do you mean by ‘lower risk’?
Less likely to develop serious complications? Less likely to increase transmission of the virus than adults?

The former is well known. Do you have any evidence for the latter? Share it please if you do.

 Re the latter, child-child, child-adult and subsequent adult-adult transmission will increase mortality rates as it accelerates the epidemic.

Well-known that they are at less risk of developing serious illness (by orders of magnitude). Also well-known that they will increase transmission rate. Therefore obviously increase overall mortality rate.

Unfortunate reality of a virus like this is that being alive right now increases the transmission rate  :)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: eastside on March 17, 2020, 08:10:30 am
Tbh I don’t really know what’s alllowed.

From what we are reading you must carry a signed attestation of your reason for travel when you leave the house. You are allowed to exercise in the vicinity of your domecile. Very vague but I assume this means walking a few hundred meters through the woods is ok but driving is verboten. Not that there will be gendarmerie in the forest but they may stop people on the road and I doubt saying you're going out to the boulders is going to cut the mustard.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 17, 2020, 08:15:38 am
JB, my reading of the situation is that the response the UK started with - the mitigate response -  was the most sensible response given the modelling and the data they had back then - bearing in mind the total shutdown for 6-18 months alternative was complete economic destruction. The data from # of Italian hospitalisations requiring ICU has changed the outlook, and the government has changed the response. I don't see cause for anger, they were doing what they should - acting on the advice of the best science at the time, and they've changed their approach according to new data. That's good.
(not suggesting you personally BTW, but more the social media mob).
Worth restating that we're still ahead of other countries on the curve, obviously London is closer to beginning the rapid exponential rise than the rest of the UK.

Glad I live in a relatively underpopulated part of the country.

Where I do see potential cause for anger is if they don't support businesses and the unemployed.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tk421a on March 17, 2020, 08:24:18 am
I'm posting here because I think this is a much more likely to have a reasonable discussion vs ukc.

Preface: I'm a wall owner married to an infectious diseases registrar.

We are currently open for today.
My reasoning being that all the advice I have gotten - government, PHE and clinicians I have spoken to in person or through my partner; we should stay open until told to. I fully expect this to be coming in the next few days.
Absolutely do not go to the wall if you think it is "non-essential". However, this is likely to go on for months and for some their mental wellbeing and health may need it. Many people have mentioned this, including doctors who will be more highly stressed than anyone. I can see some studies in a few years showing significant changes in mental health illnesses during this time.
From what I've been advised, the risk is not like going to a pub - in that at walls (given the current uncrowded-ness) you can maintain a significant distance, and with everyone handwashing we can minimise (but not eliminate) the risk of transmission. The main vector is through aerosols in close proximity to people, with some governmental agencies saying infection via surfaces has not been demonstrated (https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/covid-19/controlprevention.html).

For the first time, I wish I was still working my secure corporate job, working from home so I can support my partner.
Expect that some walls will never re-open.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 17, 2020, 08:26:21 am
No Pete, they made a very basic error of judgement in using rates of critical care for a different virus. The data was already out there and increasing by the day for this one, as everyone doing back of the envelope calcs could see. Presumably they thought the difference between us and China would be greater than this virus and another. Not angry, just dismayed at what looks a lot like yet more misguided English exceptionalism.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 17, 2020, 08:38:48 am
I'll reserve judgement JB as that isn't what I've seen, but fair enough.

TK421a: I understand your thinking but three obvious points that spring immediately to mind are:
a. when lead climbing, you're touching multiple surfaces (which others have touched) and then putting your hand in your mouth when clipping (most people's clipping looks like: grab rope, rope goes in mouth, grab more rope and make clip).

Just based on that makes me think this can't be the right thing to encourage.
Two other points:
b. climbing is a sweaty activity. Imagine you filmed a crowd of climbers for 1 hour. And then imagine watching back the film and seeing how many times those climbers will wipe their brows, touch their faces, etc. All while repeatedly touching potentially infected surfaces.
c. increased risk  of injury - especially a+e type injury.

The whole activity of indoor climbing seems, to my non-expert eyes, to go against what we should be doing to reduce transmission. Also factor in that many indoor climbers will be in the high risk group of older people.

I don't envy your position. That's my take.. But I'd love to keep on climbing indoors or out as well!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on March 17, 2020, 08:43:13 am
JB, my reading of the situation is that the response the UK started with - the mitigate response -  was the most sensible response given the data we had back then. The data from # of Italian hospitalisations requiring ICU has changed the outlook, and the government has changed the response.

That's a pretty generous take on things, given people were demonstrating that it couldn't work from the outset. The ICU admission rate in china, known in early Feb, was 5%. Italy is 8%. Happy to be proved wrong, but that 3% difference isn't enough to tip between mitigation working and not working based on some simple sums.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 17, 2020, 08:43:38 am
Preface: I'm a wall owner married to an infectious diseases registrar.

We are currently open for today.
My reasoning being that all the advice I have gotten - government, PHE and clinicians I have spoken to in person or through my partner; we should stay open until told to. I fully expect this to be coming in the next few days.
Absolutely do not go to the wall if you think it is "non-essential". However, this is likely to go on for months and for some their mental wellbeing and health may need it. Many people have mentioned this, including doctors who will be more highly stressed than anyone. I can see some studies in a few years showing significant changes in mental health illnesses during this time.
From what I've been advised, the risk is not like going to a pub - in that at walls (given the current uncrowded-ness) you can maintain a significant distance, and with everyone handwashing we can minimise (but not eliminate) the risk of transmission. The main vector is through aerosols in close proximity to people, with some governmental agencies saying infection via surfaces has not been demonstrated (https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/covid-19/controlprevention.html).

For the first time, I wish I was still working my secure corporate job, working from home so I can support my partner.
Expect that some walls will never re-open.

Thats hard doors. I hope the Government takes steps like Macron seems to have done to help businesses like yours.

I have to say - that I think you being open right now is wrong. You say you can mininise spread by handwashing, the main vector via aersols and regarding fomites on surfaces cite some government agencies. Thats a few ifs buts and maybe's in there...

According to the modelling cited in the thread above the difference between social distancing being implemented (AND people abiding by it) or not implemented  in the UK is 180 000 deaths. Can we afford to take the chance that you are right?

I'm not. I am steering well clear of climbing walls until this has gone.

Sorry TK421a - I hate to think what is going to happen to thousands of small businesses like yours and the people who are employed by them over the next year.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 17, 2020, 08:44:33 am
I'm posting here because I think this is a much more likely to have a reasonable discussion vs ukc.

Preface: I'm a wall owner married to an infectious diseases registrar.

We are currently open for today.
My reasoning being that all the advice I have gotten - government, PHE and clinicians I have spoken to in person or through my partner; we should stay open until told to. I fully expect this to be coming in the next few days.
Absolutely do not go to the wall if you think it is "non-essential". However, this is likely to go on for months and for some their mental wellbeing and health may need it. Many people have mentioned this, including doctors who will be more highly stressed than anyone. I can see some studies in a few years showing significant changes in mental health illnesses during this time.
From what I've been advised, the risk is not like going to a pub - in that at walls (given the current uncrowded-ness) you can maintain a significant distance, and with everyone handwashing we can minimise (but not eliminate) the risk of transmission. The main vector is through aerosols in close proximity to people, with some governmental agencies saying infection via surfaces has not been demonstrated (https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/covid-19/controlprevention.html).

For the first time, I wish I was still working my secure corporate job, working from home so I can support my partner.
Expect that some walls will never re-open.

It’s going to be hard to not shut down.

The attacks and “slagging off” have already started. Even if, like us, you are just waiting to discuss with your staff and other affected parties, before you hang a sign on the door.

People stand to lose their livelihoods and the government have not given any clear indication of any intent to mitigate this. The extent, so far, is a promise to provide a grant of £3k, but no indication of how to claim.
Our staff stand to lose, our landlord stands to lose and we will lose everything we had left.

And, no, the insurance doesn’t cover this.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 17, 2020, 08:52:41 am
Economic reality bites. Just fielded a phone call from my boss and hung up having taken a 1/3 pay cut. Simultaneously feels prudent and fair enough and like I've been kicked in the nads.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on March 17, 2020, 08:53:54 am
I have no problem with walls, or any other business, staying open in an attempt to stay afloat and avoid redundancies whilst the government has not instructed them to close. Advising their customers to abandon them whilst offering no support or guaruntees is outrageous.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tk421a on March 17, 2020, 08:55:40 am
I'll reserve judgement JB as that isn't what I've seen, but fair enough.

TK421a: I understand your thinking but three obvious points that spring immediately to mind are:
a. when lead climbing, you're touching multiple surfaces (which others have touched) and then putting your hand in your mouth when clipping (most people's clipping looks like: grab rope, rope goes in mouth, grab more rope and make clip).

Just based on that makes me think this can't be the right thing to encourage.
Two other points:
b. climbing is a sweaty activity. Imagine you filmed a crowd of climbers for 1 hour. And then imagine watching back the film and seeing how many times those climbers will wipe their brows, touch their faces, etc. All while repeatedly touching potentially infected surfaces.
c. increased risk  of injury - especially a+e type injury.

The whole activity of indoor climbing seems, to my non-expert eyes, to go against what we should be doing to reduce transmission. Also factor in that many indoor climbers will be in the high risk group of older people.

I don't envy your position. That's my take.. But I'd love to keep on climbing indoors or out as well!

Sorry, I should add, I fully support everyone staying at home. I certainly would for a few days while the picture develops.
(a) Don't lead? :)
(b) I agree - current CDC guidance - https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prepare/transmission.html
"It may be possible that a person can get COVID-19 by touching a surface or object that has the virus on it and then touching their own mouth, nose, or possibly their eyes, but this is not thought to be the main way the virus spreads."
(c) This I agree I don't know how to deal with. I can only assume that if the government wanted everything to stop they would have said so.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on March 17, 2020, 08:58:14 am
That's shit spidermonkey, commiserations. And OMM, hope you can get through this.

Feeling very lucky to have secure work atm (so secure my boss has to provide the gov with daily updates on staff health...)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 17, 2020, 08:58:19 am
I have no problem with walls, or any other business, staying open in an attempt to stay afloat and avoid redundancies whilst the government has not instructed them to close. Advising their customers to abandon them whilst offering no support or guaruntees is outrageous.

I agree with this.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tk421a on March 17, 2020, 08:59:00 am
Preface: I'm a wall owner married to an infectious diseases registrar.

We are currently open for today.
My reasoning being that all the advice I have gotten - government, PHE and clinicians I have spoken to in person or through my partner; we should stay open until told to. I fully expect this to be coming in the next few days.
Absolutely do not go to the wall if you think it is "non-essential". However, this is likely to go on for months and for some their mental wellbeing and health may need it. Many people have mentioned this, including doctors who will be more highly stressed than anyone. I can see some studies in a few years showing significant changes in mental health illnesses during this time.
From what I've been advised, the risk is not like going to a pub - in that at walls (given the current uncrowded-ness) you can maintain a significant distance, and with everyone handwashing we can minimise (but not eliminate) the risk of transmission. The main vector is through aerosols in close proximity to people, with some governmental agencies saying infection via surfaces has not been demonstrated (https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/covid-19/controlprevention.html).

For the first time, I wish I was still working my secure corporate job, working from home so I can support my partner.
Expect that some walls will never re-open.

Thats hard doors. I hope the Government takes steps like Macron seems to have done to help businesses like yours.

I have to say - that I think you being open right now is wrong. You say you can mininise spread by handwashing, the main vector via aersols and regarding fomites on surfaces cite some government agencies. Thats a few ifs buts and maybe's in there...

According to the modelling cited in the thread above the difference between social distancing being implemented (AND people abiding by it) or not implemented  in the UK is 180 000 deaths. Can we afford to take the chance that you are right?

I'm not. I am steering well clear of climbing walls until this has gone.

Sorry TK421a - I hate to think what is going to happen to thousands of small businesses like yours and the people who are employed by them over the next year.

I agree and support your choice. See my above post for the CDC guidance on surface transmission. I agree there's many variables but we're doing our best to control what we can control (and you should too, if going to the wall is too much of a risk for you). Not much else but to try and follow the current advice.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: seankenny on March 17, 2020, 09:00:58 am
I think the problem we have is that if climbing walls, cafes, pubs, restaurants, hairdressers, etc etc all close, it is quite impossible for the insurance industry to cover those losses. The state has to step in and become the insurer of last resort. It can rely on tax receipts years and years into the future to pay for this now. Otherwise millions of people face ruin.

If the government don’t get this then they are screwed, especially given we can look to France and see what they’re doing.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tk421a on March 17, 2020, 09:05:55 am
I'm posting here because I think this is a much more likely to have a reasonable discussion vs ukc.

Preface: I'm a wall owner married to an infectious diseases registrar.

We are currently open for today.
My reasoning being that all the advice I have gotten - government, PHE and clinicians I have spoken to in person or through my partner; we should stay open until told to. I fully expect this to be coming in the next few days.
Absolutely do not go to the wall if you think it is "non-essential". However, this is likely to go on for months and for some their mental wellbeing and health may need it. Many people have mentioned this, including doctors who will be more highly stressed than anyone. I can see some studies in a few years showing significant changes in mental health illnesses during this time.
From what I've been advised, the risk is not like going to a pub - in that at walls (given the current uncrowded-ness) you can maintain a significant distance, and with everyone handwashing we can minimise (but not eliminate) the risk of transmission. The main vector is through aerosols in close proximity to people, with some governmental agencies saying infection via surfaces has not been demonstrated (https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/covid-19/controlprevention.html).

For the first time, I wish I was still working my secure corporate job, working from home so I can support my partner.
Expect that some walls will never re-open.

It’s going to be hard to not shut down.

The attacks and “slagging off” have already started. Even if, like us, you are just waiting to discuss with your staff and other affected parties, before you hang a sign on the door.

People stand to lose their livelihoods and the government have not given any clear indication of any intent to mitigate this. The extent, so far, is a promise to provide a grant of £3k, but no indication of how to claim.
Our staff stand to lose, our landlord stands to lose and we will lose everything we had left.

And, no, the insurance doesn’t cover this.

Which insurance do you have? Town and Country have given us a "maybe some limited cover, we won't know until we start submitting claims" line.

I can see some small possibility where everything in the world continues to run to a much lower degree rather than a full shutdown for months.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Andy W on March 17, 2020, 09:12:44 am
Tbh I don’t really know what’s alllowed.

From what we are reading you must carry a signed attestation of your reason for travel when you leave the house. You are allowed to exercise in the vicinity of your domecile. Very vague but I assume this means walking a few hundred meters through the woods is ok but driving is verboten. Not that there will be gendarmerie in the forest but they may stop people on the road and I doubt saying you're going out to the boulders is going to cut the mustard.

Eastside that's my take on the situation as well. We have to see how strict the police enforcement will be. Personally the fines they are talking about seem a bit low, if we are locked down for weeks, a 38 euro fine for a days bouldering (obvs avoiding all people) might seem like a good deal. Until then I am being a responsible citizen, I just hope the rest of France   does as well. Good luck with the project!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on March 17, 2020, 09:22:51 am
I have no problem with walls, or any other business, staying open in an attempt to stay afloat and avoid redundancies whilst the government has not instructed them to close. Advising their customers to abandon them whilst offering no support or guaruntees is outrageous.

100% that ‘we expect you to close’ or whatever it was is pure bullshit.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 17, 2020, 09:23:33 am
That's shit spidermonkey, commiserations.

I'm lucky as my overheads are pretty low at the moment (living with girlfriend in her house) so should manage fine, but doubtless there will be millions across the country who will very shortly be in dire straits.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 17, 2020, 09:27:12 am
Anyway - just some general musings about how it may change the world we live in - possibly in some positive ways. None of the above is evidence based :)

Not sure if mentioned as well but;

1) Realisation that we don't all have to commute to work every single day of the week
2) Companies taking a view that it's not strictly necessary to fly halfway round the world to shake someone's hand, talk about the weather, reach an agreement on something and sign a bit of paper.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 17, 2020, 09:27:20 am
I think the problem we have is that if climbing walls, cafes, pubs, restaurants, hairdressers, etc etc all close, it is quite impossible for the insurance industry to cover those losses. The state has to step in and become the insurer of last resort. It can rely on tax receipts years and years into the future to pay for this now. Otherwise millions of people face ruin.

If the government don’t get this then they are screwed, especially given we can look to France and see what they’re doing.

Yeah this.
TK - another take on this situation.  If the gov don't introduce radical financial aid rapidly this week, then the public sentiment that may start to emerge after a number of weeks of sitting at home watching the economy be destroyed, will be at odds with the goal of staying at home. I say that because the government have used the term 'non-essential travel and contact'. A country full of businesses and individuals going to the wall (financially) through no fault of their own, without support from its government, will most likely begin to reason what is essential and what isn't. Possibility of saying fuck the government, and start going to the wall (climbing type). Obviously this sort of situation isn't a desirable or sustainable siatuaion. So the only rational way is financial aid.

Tough decisions ahead. What isn't sustainable is the status quo.


Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 17, 2020, 09:31:36 am
I agree and support your choice. See my above post for the CDC guidance on surface transmission. I agree there's many variables but we're doing our best to control what we can control (and you should too, if going to the wall is too much of a risk for you). Not much else but to try and follow the current advice.

Sorry - what I have highligted above is a fundamental misunderstanding of the whole point of social distancing - it is really important to make the point below.

This is not about my personal risk - its about the risk to EVERYONE. I have a low mortality risk from CV19 - but all the people I may contact and the people they may contact and the people may contact etc.. etc.. may not.

This is so so important. It is not about you - its about reducing the spread for everyone - this in turn reduces the risk for the old and vulnerable. This is the fundamental shift from the 'let it spread a bit amongst the healthy but shield the vulnerable' approach we had up until yesterday.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 17, 2020, 09:47:04 am
Latest Guardian articles on front line concerns:

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/mar/16/not-fit-for-purpose-uk-medics-condemn-covid-19-protection

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/16/im-losing-faith-in-the-leadership-a-doctors-story-coronavirus

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/16/everyone-is-scared-to-speak-up-nhs-staff-need-covid-19-tests

Plus some positive stuff on how people can add to those helping the vulnerable locally.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/16/covid-19-mutual-aid-how-to-help-the-vulnerable-near-you


....and to cheer people up (who are maybe desparing about the panic buying of guns in the US) some countries in the EU panic buy very differently :)

https://metro.co.uk/2020/03/16/dutch-panic-buyers-queue-round-block-cannabis-12405192/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: JohnM on March 17, 2020, 10:03:47 am
Living with the restrictions here in Austria, but following what is going on in he UK, I can't believe the stark contrast with what is now happening in most of the rest of Europe. It seems the UK is in collective denial about what is coming, which is not helped by the mixed messages that have come out of government. However, maybe the UK is just a week or two behind here and things will shutdown soon. I had a friend from the UK a couple of weeks ago saying nobody will be talking about this in a few weeks and banging on about the cruise she still plans to take her 80 year old mum on, people still saying they will go to the pub as usual, discussing whether or not it is ok to go to the climbing wall (not even an option here) and schools still open. Companies seem to be making their own decisions w.r.t closing or home working. My sister's company is doing half the staff home working one week and then they swap over with the other half of the company the next week which seems pointless to me.

Quote
When is the anger going to come out?

There are alot of anxious people out there - anger is one outlet for anxiety...

We've not seen mass disorder yet in Europe (only over toilet rolls in Sydney...:) ) - but this is surely something to come?

Here there seems to be a lot of anger (online anyway) to people pursuing any sort of selfish activity such as climbing. Now the debate is raging on that climbing in a pair in the woods or ski touring is low risk for transmission but that any accidents would put necessary strain on health services. Other people are arguing that if that is the case driving should be banned as it is statistically more dangerous than many other activities. There is obviously no end to this debate and people are obviously, perhaps selfishly, somehow trying to defend the pursuit of their normal activities. Rock climbing is being lumped with skiing as a no go activity due to the risk but in my mind they are incomparable in terms of risk.

I am not sure I will risk outdoor climbing this week as I think one could face an angry confrontation if somebody saw you going climbing. In the worst case you can receive a 3000 Euro fine for breaching the restrictions and this includes entering a playground. There seems to be more of a sense of following the rules rigidly for the collective good here (which also happens in most of Germany) which you don't really get in the UK. Normally rigid rule following is annoying but it may be useful during these exceptional circumstances. What I hear coming out the UK is that some people are willing to socially isolate whereas others will actively refuse and continue with their usual visits to the pubs. This inconsistent mixture of attitudes as well as no forced closures and kids that are still attending school will cause cases to continue to rise rapidly affecting a larger percentage of the population over a shorter space of time. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tk421a on March 17, 2020, 10:06:01 am
Current gov.uk advice on social distancing - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-guidance-on-social-distancing-and-for-vulnerable-people/guidance-on-social-distancing-for-everyone-in-the-uk-and-protecting-older-people-and-vulnerable-adults

"What is social distancing?
Social distancing measures are steps you can take to reduce the social interaction between people. This will help reduce the transmission of coronavirus (COVID-19).

They are:

Avoid contact with someone who is displaying symptoms of coronavirus (COVID-19). These symptoms include high temperature and/or new and continuous cough;
Avoid non-essential use of public transport, varying your travel times to avoid rush hour, when possible; 3.Work from home, where possible. Your employer should support you to do this. Please refer to employer guidance for more information;
Avoid large gatherings, and gatherings in smaller public spaces such as pubs, cinemas, restaurants, theatres, bars, clubs
Avoid gatherings with friends and family. Keep in touch using remote technology such as phone, internet, and social media.
Use telephone or online services to contact your GP or other essential services.
Everyone should be trying to follow these measures as much as is pragmatic.

For those who are over 70, have an underlying health condition or are pregnant, we strongly advise you to follow the above measures as much as you can, and to significantly limit your face-to-face interaction with friends and family if possible.

This advice is likely to be in place for some weeks.
 
How do you look after your mental wellbeing?
Understandably, you may find that social distancing can be boring or frustrating. You may find your mood and feelings are affected and you may feel low, worried or have problems sleeping and you might miss being outside with other people.

At times like these, it can be easy to fall into unhealthy patterns of behaviour which in turn can make you feel worse. There are simple things you can do that may help, to stay mentally and physically active during this time such as:

Look for ideas of exercises you can do at home on the NHS website
Spend time doing things you enjoy – this might include reading, cooking, other indoor hobbies or listening to/watching favourite radio or TV programmes
Try to eat healthy, well-balanced meals, drink enough water, exercise regularly, and try to avoid smoking, alcohol and drugs
Keep your windows open to let in fresh air, get some natural sunlight if you can, or get outside into the garden. You can also go for a walk outdoors if you stay more than 2 metres from others
Further information on looking after your mental health during this time is available."

Travelling by private transport, climbing on your own at a wall where there are a limited number of people keeping apart from one another, and returning home, fulfils all the criteria for social distancing while helping your mental wellbeing and health.
Please everyone look after yourselves for the next few months.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 17, 2020, 10:16:09 am

What I hear coming out the UK is that some people are willing to socially isolate whereas others will actively refuse and continue with their usual visits to the pubs. This inconsistent mixture of attitudes as well as no forced closures and kids that are still attending school will cause cases to continue to rise rapidly affecting a larger percentage of the population over a shorter space of time.

Worth watching BBC News from last night for examples of this. People openly admitting to a news crew they were planning on continuing to go out. Without enforcement from the police and/or army the strategy will result in massive numbers of deaths. Perhaps they are unavoidable though as clearly an 18 month lockdown is unworkable; which is how long a feasible vaccine might take according to that report.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 17, 2020, 10:30:22 am
TK - another take on this situation.  If the gov don't introduce radical financial aid rapidly this week, then the public sentiment that may start to emerge after a number of weeks of sitting at home watching the economy be destroyed, will be at odds with the goal of staying at home.

I think I agree with this - conformity to advice relies on the "we're all in it together, let's have each others backs" mentality. If you, family, friend etc are losing jobs, going bankrupt, failing to pay rent etc without the gov stepping in then I think there's a risk that this mentality becomes v short lived (especially given the timescales we seem to be talking about)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: cheque on March 17, 2020, 10:33:59 am
Anyway - just some general musings about how it may change the world we live in - possibly in some positive ways. None of the above is evidence based :)

If it makes us a bit more hygienic as a society then that can’t be a bad thing. I can’t see how it will fail to really- I’ve always thought “that’s crazy” when I’ve seen Asian people with masks on in the past, I still don’t like the idea of it being normal but now I understand that they went through SARS and that kind of experience will change you forever- hopefully a little of that will help lower illness  transmission in general in the future.

When I was at Awesome Walls on Friday (an odd experience- we seem to be the last country in the world that hasn’t just shut walls- one guy was saying “I think this is just ‘cos now Brexit is over the media need something else to write about”  :slap:) I noticed that as well as signs telling you to wash your hands before and after climbing they had also hung one telling you to not wear your climbing shoes into the bogs. I used the facilities musing that this may be what it finally takes to get walls to take hygiene seriously then as I walked out a lad was walking in in just his socks.  :sick:  :lol:

In what I suppose is a small Covid-related YYFY my Dad (who must be a serious risk as he’s 82, asthmatic, was rushed to hospital fighting for breath last Tuesday and has been diagnosed with heart failure as a result) is being discharged from hospital today. It’s been a stressful week to say the least and it still doesn’t look great but at least he’s out of there before things get ugly.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 17, 2020, 10:45:49 am
Another musing..
Anybody else think that this has the potential (if not already there) to turn into THE moral dilemma that will be studied and dissected for the next hundred years?

i.e.

Situation:
An infection to which humanity has no immunity and no vaccine is rapidly spreading throughout the world. It kills a tiny fraction of people in good health under 50, and an order of magnitude greater fraction of people in poor health over 60.
The only way to prevent mass infection is total isolation.
No health service can cope with the ill-health with mass infection which will result from unimpeded spread of the virus.
No economy can cope with the only way to prevent mass infection.

Do you:
a. voluntarily kill the global economy temporarily, to try to protect the at-risk group from infection?
b. protect the livelihoods of current and future generations, but accept that the at-risk group will die in huge numbers from infection?

Is that about right? Big envelope required.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on March 17, 2020, 10:52:53 am
Kids mingling at school are low risk??  Really.. based on what?

It isn't that children going to school are low risk but that the consequences of closing the schools may be deemed to be higher risk.

If you close the schools, who cares for the children?

In a lot of cases, it could be the grandparents. Now the children, who may be low risk in terms of deaths but may also be high risk in terms of spreading, are in greater contact with the highest risk population.

Or maybe the parents have to stay at home. Straight away, that is another huge chunk of people who are off work with all of the financial implications. I heard yesterday that 20% of health workers could be forced off work if schools are closed.

There is also the issue of the most vulnerable children who only get one proper meal a day: their school lunch. Many of the children at my mother's school will be put in to very dangerous situations if they have weeks at home with no teachers looking out for the signs of abuse and neglect.

There are ways to reduce the impact such as closing schools but keeping on a skeleton staff for the children of health workers, the police and other essential workers.

It isn't quite as simple as just closing schools to reduce spread. That said, I do expect they will close at some stage.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 17, 2020, 11:06:54 am
Another musing..
Anybody else think that this has the potential (if not already there) to turn into THE moral dilemma that will be studied and dissected for the next hundred years?

i.e.

Situation:
An infection to which humanity has no immunity and no vaccine is rapidly spreading throughout the world. It kills a tiny fraction of people in good health under 50, and an order of magnitude greater fraction of people in poor health over 60.
The only way to prevent mass infection is total isolation.
No health service can cope with the ill-health with mass infection which will result from unimpeded spread of the virus.
No economy can cope with the only way to prevent mass infection.

Do you:
a. voluntarily kill the global economy temporarily, to try to protect the at-risk group from infection?
b. protect the livelihoods of current and future generations, but accept that the at-risk group will die in huge numbers from infection?

Is that about right? Big envelope required.

I’m not willing to agree or disagree.

But this is an unavoidable question.

Ultimately, it will have to be answered and the divisions that creates, might make the Brexit issue pale.

I feel like I can already tell the difference between those who don’t have to make these decisions and those who do.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nibile on March 17, 2020, 11:09:52 am
PS anyone know why the Germans aren't dying?
A friend of mine explained this, he's a senior professor specialist in viruses and vaccines here at Siena University.
Germans are dying just like in every country, only they do NOT report deaths as caused by the virus if the patients had other physical issues.
Just this.
My friend is very piss** because this behavior fuc** up epidemiology stats.
This is what I've been told.
HTH.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bradders on March 17, 2020, 11:19:20 am
Travelling by private transport, climbing on your own at a wall where there are a limited number of people keeping apart from one another, and returning home, fulfils all the criteria for social distancing while helping your mental wellbeing and health.

Completely agree with you TK.

TT - can absolutely see where you're coming from and I think you've made some really important points but until the Goverment step in to support businesses I simply can't see how they could close voluntarily. Obviously people will then make up their own minds. Ultimately it'll probably end up forcing the Governments' hand as the spread worsens.

For reference based on social media posts looks like all the Depot centres are staying open, plus the Lab in Leeds. Imagine they'll be very quiet. I won't be cancelling my membership, but doubt I'll be using it!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 17, 2020, 11:30:28 am
I've been instructed to be working from home as of tomorrow. Lunchtimes I will be nipping down to the cliffs to try and finally get some projects done. Likely stash a pad and shes so I can run there (5 min at a run I hope). They are all lowball / low risk.

I expect this will last until schools close, which I expect will be imminent.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on March 17, 2020, 12:01:49 pm
Tca in Bristol was eerily quiet yesterday when I left around 6.

Just panic bought a beastmaker and a pulley...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 17, 2020, 12:02:54 pm
Quote
Do you:
a. voluntarily kill the global economy temporarily, to try to protect the at-risk group from infection?
b. protect the livelihoods of current and future generations, but accept that the at-risk group will die in huge numbers from infection?

I consider this a category error - the decision has already been made as a) and always will be.

Human lives are real and cannot be valued in economic terms. Conversely the economy is entirely a product of our imaginations and has no unbreakable link to reality. It won't go away because modern society is dependent on trade. But the current position is no more concrete than a game of monopoly, there are just more players.

Imagine a venn diagram with three concentric circles like a target. At the centre is the economy, the middle ring society, the outer environment. The economy can only subsist as a subset of a functioning society, just as society can only exist within a functioning environment.

Yes I know, economists think they can put a dollar value on life, and the economy is quite capable of bestowing harm and benefit. But money is not a real thing, if you press reset tomorrow the only actual effect is rich people lose their wealth, which bestows no real harm only damage to self-image. If you don't agree, consider this - at least 12 trillion has already been lost from the US economy due to covid-19. Where has it gone? It only existed as a measure of people's aggregate confidence in the future. If they are deserving of it they will soon build it back up - the economy will come roaring back as soon as we let it.  The problem of course is those in power are those with the capital. They won't press reset and the rich will try to push their losses onto others. But the longer this goes on the more radical the solution will need to be.

Human life and health is real and will be treated as such, as it has been since before money was conceived and will be after it has been forgotten.

Like GME I'm actually optimistic - as this becomes the only issue for huge sections of society I expect a vaccine will be developed and distributed in record time. The team that create it will be set for life with both status and wealth.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: crzylgs on March 17, 2020, 12:08:17 pm
I expect this will last until schools close, which I expect will be imminent.

Teacher friend who is head of department and thus involved in decision making and planning of a secondary school. They are down 16 out of 72 teachers already. So under the current guidelines of people having to self-isolate it won't be long until they are forced to close. Am sure it is a similar case up and down the country.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on March 17, 2020, 12:36:51 pm
Quote
Do you:
a. voluntarily kill the global economy temporarily, to try to protect the at-risk group from infection?
b. protect the livelihoods of current and future generations, but accept that the at-risk group will die in huge numbers from infection?

Those aren’t the only two choices. Looked at retrospectively, or theoretically, they might look like the only options but the likely reality is that we will fudge a path between the two, locking down when cases rise, easing restrictions when they fall, to allow people to earn some money. Whilst the middle way may not achieve a technically optimal outcome it will probably be the only one that will be politically possible.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Doylo on March 17, 2020, 12:49:49 pm
And maybe the Chinese will start doing without bats and similarly wonderful ingredients in their soups and butties.  And close those fuckin markets.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fultonius on March 17, 2020, 12:56:56 pm
And maybe the Chinese will start doing without bats and similarly wonderful ingredients in their soups and butties.  And close those fuckin markets.

While I agree the Chinese do some, to our minds, unthinkable things (sharks fin soup, rhino horn etc.), I don't think playing the Blame the Chinese card right now is going to do anyone any favours. Considering the openness of how they've shared data on this, they've saved countless lives.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: kelvin on March 17, 2020, 12:58:05 pm
I've cancelled all my work for the foreseeable future - I'm a self employed decorator.
This week's supposed customer was 73 with lung issues.
In fact, the next job I can realistically do is in early June, they're both fit and under 70. That's ignoring the fact I'm asthmatic myself.

So no income for a while. Luckily, I'm pretty solvent but I can't imagine how tough it'll be for people in a similar work situation as me and that have young kids, a mortgage, car loan etc
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on March 17, 2020, 01:02:45 pm
Fultonius, missed your post while I was typing mine! Indeed that is an option. It will be interesting to see what the government step in with later today...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 17, 2020, 01:04:57 pm
We will need to go a lot deeper into this before anything radical gets suggested. But Macron seems to be pointing the way.

I do expect some sort of Mortgage and Rent relief in the short term.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on March 17, 2020, 01:06:48 pm
Andy W Can anyone explain how getting in my car on my drive, going somewhere no one else is, climbing on rock no one else has touched and going home again is a problem?  Is it the risk of crashing?  I guess it is an unnecessary journey but....
One could speculate that spending money running a private vehicle could be minorly useful for the economy. Presuming it averages out as more costly than gardening and netflix.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on March 17, 2020, 01:19:21 pm
I’m visiting the court in Liverpool as court hearings are still ongoing. No sign of anyone taking any of this seriously. Full of shoppers and people wandering round. Even saw a group of what looked like 65-70 yr old ladies getting off a bus in St. Patrick’s day gear going on a pub crawl.

So my prediction is that the current measures won’t work and we will need a full, enforced continental style lockdown.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Muenchener on March 17, 2020, 01:22:03 pm
There are ways to reduce the impact such as closing schools but keeping on a skeleton staff for the children of health workers, the police and other essential workers.

This is what is being done over here in Bavaria, which declared a state of emergency and closed schools - among many  other things - yesterday.

Quote
In a lot of cases, it could be the grandparents. Now the children, who may be low risk in terms of deaths but may also be high risk in terms of spreading, are in greater contact with the highest risk population.

Saw a grandmother pushing a toddler in a pushchair in the supermarket yesterday and thought "dead woman walking". But yeah, one knows nothing about what the family circumstances might be.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Doylo on March 17, 2020, 01:30:33 pm
Even saw a group of what looked like 65-70 yr old ladies getting off a bus in St. Patrick’s day gear going on a pub crawl.

.

Lambs to the slaughter .
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Davo on March 17, 2020, 01:31:12 pm
Just my twopenneth here: as someone who runs a small business we are likely to be very severely affected over a long period of time. Most of our clients are elderly and are likely to be unable to be seen for a lengthy period. For the person that says money isn’t real (I accept the theory) I would suggest that they are likely facing a different situation to us. This is as many have stated likely to be an economic nightmare thousands of small to medium sized businesses going under. The effect of that on employment and demand for goods and services will be hard to imagine.

I hope (but am not optimistic) that the govt announces significant financial support for small businesses and the self employed such as one man bands etc. If we really all are in this together and want everyone to act in each other’s best interests then that is what it will take. If we are simply asking every small business owner or self employed person in the uk to sign onto universal credit for a year I really don’t see how that is being in it together!

Just to be clear I value human life as much as the next person but what we are asking of society is enormous and there should (in my opinion) be compensation for all businesses affected and not just simply we will give you a loan or a mortgage holiday. Yes this means taxes might go up and possibly we would have to look at wealth taxes etc

Anyway, I am still thinking of climbing as an essential and fairly risk free bit of exercise as long as I don’t go to a climbing wall.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on March 17, 2020, 01:43:35 pm
I’m visiting the court in Liverpool as court hearings are still ongoing. No sign of anyone taking any of this seriously. Full of shoppers and people wandering round. Even saw a group of what looked like 65-70 yr old ladies getting off a bus in St. Patrick’s day gear going on a pub crawl.

So my prediction is that the current measures won’t work and we will need a full, enforced continental style lockdown.

Agreed, seems similar in South Manchester, any change in behaviour seems fairly minor from what I have seen.  Think the whole recommendations and suggestions approach is not really going to work - maybe this is part of a plan to soften up people for a stronger mandated approach coming soon (aware that this is possibly assigning too much foresight and planning to our current leadership)?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 17, 2020, 01:45:41 pm
I’m visiting the court in Liverpool as court hearings are still ongoing. No sign of anyone taking any of this seriously. Full of shoppers and people wandering round. Even saw a group of what looked like 65-70 yr old ladies getting off a bus in St. Patrick’s day gear going on a pub crawl.

So my prediction is that the current measures won’t work and we will need a full, enforced continental style lockdown.

Aberdeen City Centre is near deserted.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 17, 2020, 01:46:02 pm
There are ways to reduce the impact such as closing schools but keeping on a skeleton staff for the children of health workers, the police and other essential workers.

This is what is being done over here in Bavaria, which declared a state of emergency and closed schools - among many  other things - yesterday.


Totally. Someone above referred to open schools as ‘low risk’ which is nonsense. 
Schools could be open to Y11, Y13 and the children of key workers only.
It would help protect:

the futures of kids doing exams as more will be in and well enough to learn
key sectors  ( who wants their ICU consultant at home looking after their sick/isolating child?)
the numbers of teachers in work doing their job
people who would otherwise become ill due to increased transmission.

More flexible thinking is needed here.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bradders on March 17, 2020, 01:53:28 pm
our current leadership

Just seen Stanley Johnson saying he'll ignore his own son's advice and keep going to the pub  ::)

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Yossarian on March 17, 2020, 01:57:57 pm
I am in London till the end of the week then working from home till the end of the month. London is getting more and more quiet - train up fairly empty this morning, and bus from Cannon St to Holborn that’s usually packed has 3 people on it.

The client for the project I’m working on might pause things, which will mean me not working past the end of the month. I tried to call the mortgage company (self employed line) as was in the middle of trying to persuade them not to repossess our house. That line has been manic all day, so assume there are plenty of other people up shit creek.

Understandably, none of the usual design / creative job sites have anything new up.

On the plus side, I will have plenty of time to sit at home and draw pictures.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 17, 2020, 02:35:06 pm
Word to that. Lots of folk already suggesting that Boris's advising avoidance not mandating closure is to protect the capital underwriting the insurance industry. Are the Lloyd's names etc going to lose their pants again? I suspect protecting them may force the government to do something more interesting. But there'll be a lot of wait and see first.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 17, 2020, 02:41:02 pm
Work-wise, just been speaking to clients about upcoming projects and as far as some of them are concerned we're going ahead with work as planned, starting next week. (I'll believe it when we're actually doing it). We have maintenance projects on large petro-chemical sites and they can't just stop maintenance on those types of sites. Other clients with less pressing jobs have postponed some work.

Attitude among colleagues is very complacent, most seem to think work will go ahead regardless and there won't be that much to worry about from the virus. I think they're in for a surprise when there are hotels full of dying (no not a typical weekend in Llandudno), but hope I'm wrong.

Driving into the office mid-morning I was surprised by how many people are making 'essential' journeys  :lol:  Based on this first day, voluntary lock-down will not be effective.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 17, 2020, 02:44:02 pm
Work-wise, just been speaking to clients about upcoming projects and as far as some of them are concerned we're going ahead with work as planned, starting next week. (I'll believe it when we're actually doing it). We have maintenance projects on large petro-chemical sites and they can't just stop maintenance on those types of sites. Other clients with less pressing jobs have postponed some work.



Al of the clients i have spoken to are proceeding as normal until told otherwise. Crossrail etc.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on March 17, 2020, 02:45:37 pm
Kids mingling at school are low risk??  Really.. based on what?

It isn't that children going to school are low risk but that the consequences of closing the schools may be deemed to be higher risk.

If you close the schools, who cares for the children?

In a lot of cases, it could be the grandparents. Now the children, who may be low risk in terms of deaths but may also be high risk in terms of spreading, are in greater contact with the highest risk population.

Or maybe the parents have to stay at home. Straight away, that is another huge chunk of people who are off work with all of the financial implications. I heard yesterday that 20% of health workers could be forced off work if schools are closed.

There is also the issue of the most vulnerable children who only get one proper meal a day: their school lunch. Many of the children at my mother's school will be put in to very dangerous situations if they have weeks at home with no teachers looking out for the signs of abuse and neglect.

There are ways to reduce the impact such as closing schools but keeping on a skeleton staff for the children of health workers, the police and other essential workers.

It isn't quite as simple as just closing schools to reduce spread. That said, I do expect they will close at some stage.
I get all that but what I think is absurd is that a large part of the workforce have been asked to stay home and work (me included), and have children old enough to not need constant supervision. Why are we not being encouraged to take our children out when it is very easy to do so?? Any reduction in numbers in school is a good thing even if full closure is deemed unfeasible. As things stand I could look after my kid at home tomorrow but I would be breaking the law in doing so!! Hardly agile thinking on the part of the government. Seems like a no-brainer from where I'm sat (at home on a laptop).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on March 17, 2020, 02:51:19 pm
I have no idea what your on about then and totally disagree.
Not sure what to say to that.  :lol:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on March 17, 2020, 03:09:35 pm
Just seen Stanley Johnson saying he'll ignore his own son's advice and keep going to the pub  ::)

As much as I enjoy seeing him undermine his son, WTF is he doing on TV. Why do they keep booking him?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on March 17, 2020, 03:32:24 pm
Work-wise, just been speaking to clients about upcoming projects and as far as some of them are concerned we're going ahead with work as planned, starting next week. (I'll believe it when we're actually doing it). We have maintenance projects on large petro-chemical sites and they can't just stop maintenance on those types of sites. Other clients with less pressing jobs have postponed some work.

Attitude among colleagues is very complacent, most seem to think work will go ahead regardless and there won't be that much to worry about from the virus.
Most of our work is on large scale petrochem turnarounds and infrastructure projects and on construction and safety/maintenance turnarounds in the power industry.

So far, all sites are business as usual. None have shut, although many have prepared plans for making everything safe for imminent shutdowns. In the very short term, I expect all to keep going as long as they are allowed to.

In the medium term, work for the power industry is likely to be barely impacted as the timing of most projects is safety critical. Some nuclear construction projects may get delayed and some onshore wind  projects are likely to be put on hold.

Petrochem owners, however, are brutal when it comes to cancelling or postponing non-essential infrastructure projects as soon as they cease to be cost effective in the short term.

When oil prices tanked last time, many refineries went from planning imminent expansions and infrastructure work to mothballing the whole site. Some sites reopened, some projects were reopened, but many remain closed today.

Driving into the office mid-morning I was surprised by how many people are making 'essential' journeys  :lol:  Based on this first day, voluntary lock-down will not be effective.

My commute (likely to be my last for a while) was deserted. Knowing the sequence of the traffic lights through the town centre, I was able to time every light so that it turned green just before I got there. Very satisfying.

I left the house 5 minutes later than usual and arrived at the office 5 minutes earlier than usual on a 20-25 minute journey, despite never going above 60 on the dual carriageway.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: JamieG on March 17, 2020, 03:42:38 pm
On a lighter note, the main thing my parent's seemed to have stockpiled is a large block of manchego cheese . . . . .

 ;D
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on March 17, 2020, 04:15:12 pm
For those in need of isolation this route/highball seems to fit the bill.
https://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/c.php?i=242332
 :thumbsup:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: fatneck on March 17, 2020, 04:25:22 pm
I am heartened today. I have done nothing but sit in meetings discussing how we manage to support already vulnerable people being pitched into crisis. I am heartened by the response we are seeing from the general public, the city council, the football clubs and other agencies in a position of support to work together in this.

Our foodbank and debt advice volunteers mostly fall into at risk groups but we are overrun with  a new wave of volunteers - people who's workplaces have shut down, organisations who want to pay their staff to come and volunteer for us. We ran out of card to print vouchers on today and a swift phone call to our friendly local printer saw him come down in person with a ream or red card for us - this is a guy who doesn't know how long his business will be to operate for and may have to lay significant numbers of his staff off.

Here's a little taster of the kind of support we're getting - £70k in 72 hours!!!! (https://twitter.com/LFC/status/1239657823811833856?s=20)

We don't know what tomorrow looks like let alone next week or the week after but we will keep on doing our best to do what we do!

Proper crazy times man - going climbing on Friday afternoon with a good friend and small business owner who could be in a difficult place soon...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 17, 2020, 04:43:02 pm
I have no idea what your on about then and totally disagree.
Not sure what to say to that.  :lol:

I am having a fucking long day.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 17, 2020, 04:58:06 pm
I have no idea what your on about then and totally disagree.
Not sure what to say to that.  :lol:

I am having a fucking long day.

Tell me about it.

Mine has involved some heated arguments and even tears.

Still, a neighbour has put it in perspective, a little. They have been holed up for two weeks already, since her husband got home from the R.D&E cancer ward. Their daughter is a classmate of our eldest, she’s been off school and house bound, for her father’s sake. Needed someone to go shopping for them etc. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 17, 2020, 05:00:52 pm
Best wishes both.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 17, 2020, 05:16:18 pm
Best wishes both.

Yup. :(
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 17, 2020, 05:24:59 pm
Unless I’m mistaken the US treasury is mailing people $1000 cheques...

Read something about Italians being given €800 each.

Here £330bn loan package for businesses. Sounds good idea  but I bet it won’t be straightforward to apply... devil in detail etc..

Looks like Direct quantative easing to people is starting to happen. Universal basic income......
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on March 17, 2020, 05:40:49 pm

Just seen some of the select committee meeting with Sir Patrick Vallance on the TV in the brew room and Jeremy Hunt has just said that in The Netherlands, half the Covid-19 cases in intensive care are under 50.

This seem pretty different what we have been lead to believe?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: jwi on March 17, 2020, 05:42:06 pm
That's an anecdote, not data...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 17, 2020, 05:48:00 pm
There’s a scary interview on sky news website with an Italian doctor suggesting pretty much the same.

And that they triage people based on whether they can make it or not. So the older ones don’t get the ICU treatment.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on March 17, 2020, 06:02:21 pm
That's an anecdote, not data...

If it's anecdote, I'm disappointed it's being used in a select committee meeting.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on March 17, 2020, 06:08:08 pm
That's an anecdote, not data...

If it's anecdote, I'm disappointed it's being used in a select committee meeting.

A quick look finds it does seem to be reported in the Dutch press - but without knowing more it's not clear what the reason/significance is.  For example it looks like its based on a relatively small number of patients in ICU (50 according to report I read).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: eastside on March 17, 2020, 06:13:27 pm
That's an anecdote, not data...

The big confounding factor is

What percent of active cases are people under 50? If 90% of active cases are under 50 and they make 50% of ICU then it's still much better to be under 50.

In the Netherlands it's probably because younger people have been infected more often. In Italy, it's probably because the younger people have been given preferential treatment when triaging.

But yes it's still scary, being young and healthy does NOT mean you avoid the risk of death or serious illness from this disease.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on March 17, 2020, 06:13:57 pm
Work-wise, just been speaking to clients about upcoming projects and as far as some of them are concerned we're going ahead with work as planned, starting next week. (I'll believe it when we're actually doing it). We have maintenance projects on large petro-chemical sites and they can't just stop maintenance on those types of sites. Other clients with less pressing jobs have postponed some work.

Attitude among colleagues is very complacent, most seem to think work will go ahead regardless and there won't be that much to worry about from the virus. I think they're in for a surprise when there are hotels full of dying (no not a typical weekend in Llandudno), but hope I'm wrong.

Driving into the office mid-morning I was surprised by how many people are making 'essential' journeys  :lol:  Based on this first day, voluntary lock-down will not be effective.

I've seen pretty much the same thing Pete. At work in the peak yesterday people in villages etc just carrying on as normal. Roads in Sheffield seem almost normally busy. Several people at work being extremely complacent, which is pretty worrying as it's the NHS! I wonder how many people have to die before some believe it. It's pretty sobering that 20000 is being mentioned as a good outcome.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on March 17, 2020, 06:16:45 pm
There’s a scary interview on sky news website with an Italian doctor suggesting pretty much the same.

And that they triage people based on whether they can make it or not. So the older ones don’t get the ICU treatment.

Scientist interviewed on R4 said that, it Italy they've reserved ventilators for <65 year olds.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 17, 2020, 06:38:21 pm
In Hull morning rush hour was much much quieter. Dead in some busy places - but not completely.

Last night the University finally stopped face to face teaching (as if they had a choice) and the place was very quiet this morning.

Drive over to Manc was quiet too... I also noticed quite a few caravans on the road. Unusual this time of year and not around hols. Older folk escaping with their caravans packed with Costco pasta bog rolls and tomato tins I expect.

Usual amount of trucks on the road though.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: HaeMeS on March 17, 2020, 06:50:19 pm
A quick look finds it does seem to be reported in the Dutch press - but without knowing more it's not clear what the reason/significance is.  For example it looks like its based on a relatively small number of patients in ICU (50 according to report I read).

It was yesterdays quote by the chairman of the Dutch IC association. At that moment there were 96 Corona patients in IC in the entire Netherlands.
https://nos.nl/video/2327330-arts-over-coronapatienten-op-ic-verdeling-tussen-oud-en-jong-is-fiftyfifty.html (https://nos.nl/video/2327330-arts-over-coronapatienten-op-ic-verdeling-tussen-oud-en-jong-is-fiftyfifty.html)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 17, 2020, 07:21:16 pm
People should sign up for the daily John Hopkins Centre email update(there's a link in a post from yesterday).

Today's update contains updated data on fatality rates by age group in Italy :

''Italy’s National Institute of Health is publishing daily COVID-19 data updates. The March 16 update reports 25,058 cases—including 2,339 healthcare workers—and 1,697 deaths nationwide. The case fatality ratio for individuals 90 years and older is 21.6%, 18.8% 80-89 years, 11.8% for 70-79 years, and 3.2% for 60-69 years. The CFR is 1% for individuals 50-59 years and 0.3% or less for all younger age ranges. Notably, nearly 75% of reported cases are individuals over the age of 50, including 37.4% over the age of 70. Only 1.1% of cases have been reported in individuals 18 years and younger. Based on data from 8,802 of Italy's cases, 6.5% were reported as asymptomatic and a total of 58.8% had mild or very mild disease or no symptoms.''


If 75% of reported COVID19 cases in Italy are people over age 50 then I find it hard to understand how 50% of ICU cases in Netherlands can be under age 50. Are older people hard as fuck in the Netherland's or something?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: reeve on March 17, 2020, 07:27:44 pm
If 75% of reported COVID19 cases in Italy are people over age 50 then I find it hard to believe 50% of ICU cases in Netherlands are under age 50.

Unless ICU beds are being selectively provided to the young rather than the aged, meaning there could be many untreated >50 year olds but no <50 left untreated.

Or the numbers are otherwise skewed

*Pure conjecture caveat applies*
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 17, 2020, 07:30:02 pm
Not hard to understand, N=96 vs N=25,000.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 17, 2020, 07:32:25 pm
A shopping list was messaged out by my dad (age 80) this evening from within the inner sanctum of their cocoon. They put in their first ever order on online shopping with Asda today, but due to demand the earliest available delivery date is Friday NEXT WEEK..

Mostly sausages, soup and cheddar cheese, and a 'Total TV Guide' magazine... :lol:


edit: yep small number fallacy.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 17, 2020, 07:41:04 pm
A shopping list was messaged out by my dad (age 80) this evening from within the inner sanctum of their cocoon. They put in their first ever order on online shopping with Asda today, but due to demand the earliest available delivery date is Friday NEXT WEEK..

Mostly sausages, soup and cheddar cheese, and a 'Total TV Guide' magazine... :lol:


edit: yep small number fallacy.

This is why our neighbours had to call for assistance. Here, no matter which delivery supermarket we tried ourselves; the earliest delivery was 06/04!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 17, 2020, 07:45:47 pm
Yeah it's nuts. There must be a lot of elderly in the same boat - either can't get a delivery date or don't know how to use online shopping. So they'll end up going out shopping. I think we should each all check up on at least one old neighbour to get them their 'Hello' mag and gamon.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Muenchener on March 17, 2020, 07:46:21 pm
Unless I’m mistaken the US treasury is mailing people $1000 cheques...

Read something about Italians being given €800 each.

Here £330bn loan package for businesses. Sounds good idea  but I bet it won’t be straightforward to apply... devil in detail etc..

Looks like Direct quantative easing to people is starting to happen. Universal basic income......

My landlady in Ötztal at the weekend (just before the hammer fell!) was saying the Austrian government had already instructed banks to suspend payments on business loans, and guaranteed the wages of seasonal workers up to the normal end of the ski season. Further compensation package for loss of business earnings still being worked out in detail but she was - surprisingly for a small businessperson - confident that the budget being talked about was ample to cover the realistic losses.

Presumably much easier to pull off something like that in a small, relatively homogenous country, where they're heavily dependent on a single industry and everybody knows it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on March 17, 2020, 08:06:50 pm
I see the Depot walls have joined the TCAs in closing their doors now. Really hope these businesses can survive.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 17, 2020, 08:19:30 pm
I see the Depot walls have joined the TCAs in closing their doors now. Really hope these businesses can survive.

A UTurn by the Depots. Earlier today FB and Insta posts saying they were open but being careful etc etc..

These received largely sympathetic comments but a few choice ones calling them out for not closing.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 17, 2020, 08:36:21 pm
(https://i.ibb.co/RCKjT5c/3-BAB1755-0-E6-C-49-C7-8-FCA-9-CAF537-E3362.jpg)

Doesn’t even help to go upmarket...

We’re closing.

It’s not as simple as TT seems to imagine, you cannot just yank someone’s job from them; they have their own living expenses and needs. You can’t just tell the schools and groups who have bookings, that they’re off. It takes coordination and understanding from quite a few involved parties.

Actually, for shits and giggles...
That screen cap was from ~7pm ish. Mrs OMM just tried again, just to see if it was a fluke.
Ummmm....

(https://i.ibb.co/DM5qWcz/EF26-C7-DD-BEC4-4-F78-8004-936826-F261-E3.jpg)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 17, 2020, 08:48:00 pm
I know that Matt. I’ve not had a business - but I’ve had to fire a few people in my time and know what that’s like. I know it will affect you greatly - and I’ll be really sorry if it means the end of the new wall in Hull. I walked past people doing up an old pet shop into a cafe near my house yesterday - and wondered if their dreams were going to be broken.

On Friday there were reports of 140k job losses in Ireland (pop 6 million) a week after they brought in similar measures. It’s going to screw over so many people.

I can’t see what the govt had done working - it strikes me as just being too complex... I hope I’m wrong and that you can Lever something from it...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 17, 2020, 10:00:12 pm
Substation in Macc has just closed its doors too.

Brilliant little wall, just a year old, you hope it can survive and reopen. I worry for the staff though.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 17, 2020, 11:43:45 pm
Roads round us were busy today.

Our neighbour is an elderly lady who is taking the warnings seriously. Her garden is going to be fucking immaculate by the time this is over.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: jshaw on March 18, 2020, 07:56:03 am
The University I work at closed completely for teaching and research as of 5pm last night. We all expected it would eventually happen and most were ready but in the end we were given just 4 hours' notice to completely shut down every single lab. Very surreal experience.

edit: wording clarity
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 18, 2020, 08:27:02 am
The University I work at closed completely for teaching and research as of 5pm last night. We all expected it would eventually happen and most were ready but in the end we were given just 4 hours' notice to completely shut down every single lab. Very surreal experience.

edit: wording clarity

Ours was half a day ahead. Despite being closed for most things - my inbox reveals that university administrators are still working to full effect. Truly the cockroaches of the academic system.

(For their ability to survive etc... honest.. 😃)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: moose on March 18, 2020, 08:34:21 am
Roads round us were busy today.

Our neighbour is an elderly lady who is taking the warnings seriously. Her garden is going to be fucking immaculate by the time this is over.

It's bizarre how a section of the population is taking isolation very seriously, whilst some people seem to be ignorant or ignoring it.

My office has been shut since Friday.  We were told at 3pm Thursday that we all had to start homeworking, except for 2 people on separate floors of the building, who will never meet.  Cue lots of frantically grabbing supplies and packing away case files, whilst the IT technicians tried to revive spare laptops to give to the secretaries so they could continue to work from home.  Since then we've been working from home, only going outside for site visits - where we tend to have no direct contact with people - with lots of stringent arrangements to prevent fellow employees from ever meeting or passing through the same space within 24 hrs (as much a business continuity policy as public health I suspect).

Yet, when I have been out (to a site visit, and I had to buy a printer), the streets are still busy, public transport is crowded.  I phoned my parents - they had just come back from Wetherspoons, where they met a few friends.  My Dad was telling me how it's only 90 year olds and people who are already nearly dead who are at risk.  I tried to tell him different - making reference to the course of the epidemic in Italy, limitations on ICUs in a perma-stretched NHS etc and just got an almost audible shrug.... and from a man in his late 60s, who sounded like a knackered bellows from the effort of putting the recycling in the bin..... I despair...     
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Doylo on March 18, 2020, 08:47:24 am
My old man still thinks he’s going to London next week on a cultural trip. Grumbling that all his other holidays probably won’t happen. Hopefully it’ll dawn on him before he goes it’s not the best idea with London having more cases than the rest of the UK put together  :slap: I’ve sent his lady a message hoping she’ll have more brains.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 18, 2020, 08:50:08 am
Not least the fact that all the cultural institutions are likely to be shut by then I'd have thought?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Doylo on March 18, 2020, 08:55:19 am
Not least the fact that all the cultural institutions are likely to be shut by then I'd have thought?

Yes he’ll hopefully realise this at some point. Time to stick to the outdoor walks OldKing.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Falling Down on March 18, 2020, 09:20:06 am
I live here/there - unless he fancies an immersive ‘21 days later’ experience or queuing a lot, he’s going to be disappointed.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on March 18, 2020, 09:21:26 am
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-bill-what-it-will-do


Quote
"There has never in my lifetime been a law that so encroached on our civil liberties and basic rights as the Coronavirus Bill, scheduled to become law by end of month. It is all aimed at keeping us safe. But the transfer of unchallengeable power to the state for two years is..."

https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1240042142678089730?s=19
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 18, 2020, 09:24:57 am
The differences in behaviour is bizarre and interesting to observe. Behavioural science in action! Yesterday evening popped into the supermarket - loads of people seemingly without much care, and plenty of old folk shopping. Conversely, saw a young man walking across the car park wearing an industrial painter's ori-nasal filter mask with organic & acid gas filter attached!!! Looked like he was going to a fetish club.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 18, 2020, 09:32:58 am

Ours was half a day ahead. Despite being closed for most things - my inbox reveals that university administrators are still working to full effect. Truly the cockroaches of the academic system.

(For their ability to survive etc... honest.. 😃)

Ours has shut face to face teaching and moving all meetings to microsoft teams. The talk to move to online only teaching is hitting a few bumps (in particular as we have practical and legal problems with lecture capture from last year).  Its going to be hard work for those with large classes as resolving individual student issues by email is always slower than face to face. Our research labs are open until we are forced to work from home.

Problems at Cambridge:

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/mar/18/cambridge-colleges-criticised-for-asking-students-to-leave-over-coronavirus

More concerns about NHS coronvirus testing for staff on the Guardian today... contrasts starkly with the health leadership reassurance given to the select committee yesterday.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/17/there-is-a-policy-of-surrender-doctor-on-uks-covid-19-failures







Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: duncan on March 18, 2020, 09:34:20 am
Not least the fact that all the cultural institutions are likely to be shut by then I'd have thought?

All the major institutions - National Gallery, Tate, V+A, NPG, British Museum, Museum of London, all major concert halls -  are closed.

The response of some on the Climber's Club FB page is similar: a lot of denial and invitations to visit rural N Devon. How many ITU beds does Barnstaple hospital have...?

I live here/there - unless he fancies an immersive ‘21 days later’ experience or queuing a lot, he’s going to be disappointed.
   ;D :'(

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 18, 2020, 09:37:40 am
Hear in hopefully soon to be leafy S.Manchester, Nursery (its part of a school) was only half full today.

Roads were quiet - MrsTT got to work quickly.

Also - lots of people out running. The area is full of 'young professionals' and I'd guess many of them were working from home and taking the opportunity to get out (even though it was drizzling).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 18, 2020, 10:00:01 am
Honestly, “that” generation are a pain in the fucking arse.

It’s as if the program “World view” was installed in their brains, circa 1966, as Read Only and anything that happened since is “fake”, “snowflake” or a “Socialist plot”.

I had to go into town yesterday. Very few people under 60 visible, every cafe full of obviously retirees.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on March 18, 2020, 10:01:44 am
Not least the fact that all the cultural institutions are likely to be shut by then I'd have thought?

All the major institutions - National Gallery, Tate, V+A, NPG, British Museum, Museum of London, all major concert halls -  are closed.

The response of some on the Climber's Club FB page is similar: a lot of denial and invitations to visit rural N Devon. How many ITU beds does Barnstaple hospital have...?

I live here/there - unless he fancies an immersive ‘21 days later’ experience or queuing a lot, he’s going to be disappointed.
   ;D :'(


  I live in Barnstaple, North Devon!  Firstly, can I say on behalf of everyone here ‘don’t be coming eer grockles!’.  I can also report that North Devon hospital was in code red or whatever they call the we’re f**ked and full to the brim before this started. Our neighbour works there and unsurprisingly reports it’s full on up there.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: JamieG on March 18, 2020, 10:03:49 am
As if the Italians weren't suffering enough already! Along comes Bono!  :wank:

https://www.theguardian.com/music/2020/mar/18/bono-coronavirus-song-italy-let-your-love-be-known
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on March 18, 2020, 10:05:46 am
The differences in behaviour is bizarre and interesting to observe.

My Dad's cycling club (all over 60, most with additional complications) are set to go out on a club ride as per usual today. He's not attending.

His mate (60+) just made it back from France yesterday and decided he'd be going out for dinner to celebrate. My in-laws flew to Sydney on Fri and when we were talking to them regarding risk they cited us climbing and said something along the lines of "we have no underlying health issues". They're 77.

I had to have a strong conversation at home as we now have excessive amounts of toilet roll  :chair:.

hopefully soon to be leafy S.Manchester, Nursery (its part of a school) was only half full today.

Did you see the footage of the venice canals (very clear water) / Italian ports (dolphins)? I have zero idea if the change is real but I'm believe it for now.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 18, 2020, 10:17:31 am
My Dad's cycling club (all over 60, most with additional complications) are set to go out on a club ride as per usual today. He's not attending.

His mate (60+) just made it back from France yesterday and decided he'd be going out for dinner to celebrate. My in-laws flew to Sydney on Fri and when we were talking to them regarding risk they cited us climbing and said something along the lines of "we have no underlying health issues". They're 77.

 :wall:
My boss had to have an argument with his (70 yr+, pre-exisiting conditions) parents the other day because they wanted to come round to his house to see his son, whose birthday it was. Sounds like they only relented after he told them that he would point blank refuse to open the door to them.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 18, 2020, 10:21:24 am
They're all fucking mental. If they aren't going to help themselves there is a very real risk that others just stop taking precautions too.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on March 18, 2020, 10:28:19 am
My parents are holed up at home in Minehead as of today... However, they’ve been in S Wales visiting my dad’s brother, followed up with a couple of days in Cardiff.
The father in law is stuck in Portugal but his response to social distancing...’that’s not happening’!
The boomers don’t appear to give a :shit:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 18, 2020, 10:29:35 am
Honestly, “that” generation are a pain in the fucking arse.

I had to go into town yesterday. Very few people under 60 visible, every cafe full of obviously retirees.

That 'Blitz Spirit' of carry on carry on - is very much NOT what should happen.....

My parents (80's - and healthy) are taking sensible precautions. Stopped socialising (my mum played bridge 3 times a week with a load of other rinsers) and only sending one of them out to the shop at a time.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 18, 2020, 10:32:15 am
JB, my reading of the situation is that the response the UK started with - the mitigate response -  was the most sensible response given the modelling and the data they had back then - bearing in mind the total shutdown for 6-18 months alternative was complete economic destruction. The data from # of Italian hospitalisations requiring ICU has changed the outlook, and the government has changed the response. I don't see cause for anger, they were doing what they should - acting on the advice of the best science at the time, and they've changed their approach according to new data. That's good.

I did a bit more reading on this today, as like Pete I have trouble with dismissing our experts as idiots.

Some good analysis online, (Nassim Taleb's feed is a good starting point), summary:

It is an important model because it includes social/ government response not just contagion, but has significant issues, e.g. doesn't include superspreaders, uses aggregates not agents, limited second-order effects etc.

The takeaway of the model should have been that small changes in the inputs have massive, non linear effects on the outputs, and therefore significant uncertainty exists and are unreliable for decision making.

'In the real world, one must REDUCE RISK in the absence of reliable data, via the MOST ROBUST (model resistant) method.' (Taleb)

Instead, it seems they fixated on how certain inputs generated a magic output that appeared to save lives AND the economy, while leaving the population immune. Game the system, win, win, everyone else looks stupid. #ClassicDom 'maverick freethinking' in other words. Unfortunately those inputs didn't look tenable for very long.

The takeaway is the experts had too much confidence in the models and the ministers too much confidence in the experts. Having been in the safety industry 20 years this is not news to me sadly, when I rewrote the IRATA syllabus I included what was to me one of the most important phrases: 'technicians should recognise the limits of their competence'. Experts in modelling pandemics are not necessarily experts in risk management.

My hunch is that the numbers of deaths produced by the model were too shocking for them to really take seriously, and were further abstracted by the huge variations produced by the model. So instead they fixated on the effects on the economy which dealt in figures they were far more used to dealing with.

Meanwhile, look at this:

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ETFRQF1XsAAp3Yp?format=jpg&name=large)

Quote
I can also report that North Devon hospital was in code red or whatever they call the we’re f**ked and full to the brim before this started. Our neighbour works there and unsurprisingly reports it’s full on up there.

We simply don't have the slack in the system to make these sort of errors and delays. We don't need an outbreak as bad as Italy or a population as old as Italy to become the next Italy.

WHO advice: Test, test, test.

Uk, meh, in a bit maybe. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/17/there-is-a-policy-of-surrender-doctor-on-uks-covid-19-failures

I think the outlook is fucking grim right now.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 18, 2020, 10:34:51 am
They're all fucking mental. If they aren't going to help themselves there is a very real risk that others just stop taking precautions too.

Fortunately it's not everyone. My dad (super-high-risk) and step-mum have been self-isolating for a few weeks already (helps that they live in the country with a huge garden).
My mum's response (this was about a week or more back) was that they'd reduced going out to events/seeing people, and that self-isolation didn't sound so bad, but... "I'm not sure I'd want to cancel quartet practice".  :lol: Fortunately after both me and my brother expressed bewilderment at her interpretation of self-isolation and concern for her and our step dad, they now seem to get it. On that note, I suspect that we can have an effect on at least some of these people by a heavy (and much needed, by the sounds of it) dose of emotional bullying/appealing to parents, grandparents, aunts, uncles, etc
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: seankenny on March 18, 2020, 10:39:42 am
They're all fucking mental. If they aren't going to help themselves there is a very real risk that others just stop taking precautions too.

I think they are just too intellectually and emotionally inflexible to understand how hugely and rapidly things have changed. My mum has dementia so just does her routine trip for a paper anyhow, because that's what she does. I'm not losing any sleep over that as most other stuff is cancelled. A couple of aunties have now cancelled everything and are busy sorting themselves out for a protracted stay at home. I think being told that my partner and I think we have the disease made it a bit more real for them.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 18, 2020, 10:40:19 am
Good post JB. I'd add that the Govt seemingly only consulting/trusing the Imperial experts (f*cking Imperial...) rather than a group who might include more/less pessimistic outcomes has got us into this mess. When you have a committee - its good to have a range of views from which you can draw up a strategy.

Your graph is interesting. The shape of the curves - including the flat line then exponential up-tick - is interesting. Wonder what that hiatus/flat area represents. Further - as we've drastically reduced the spread of our testing (across the wider population) the number of positive tests is not an especially good metric for comparison. Deaths probably is more reliable - though as others have posted not flagging up CV19 deaths in Germany may be an issue here.

Yes. The outlook is grim.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on March 18, 2020, 10:50:28 am
My parents are holed up at home in Minehead as of today... However, they’ve been in S Wales visiting my dad’s brother, followed up with a couple of days in Cardiff.

On the plus side, I hear that Cardiff is completely dead. The restaurants and bars that haven't closed yet mostly had zero customers yesterday.

Sadly the Welsh government still aren't taking things seriously and are business as usual, expecting staff to go in to the office. For work that should all be done remotely were it not for antiquated and ineffective IT "security" measures.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Doylo on March 18, 2020, 10:54:48 am
BigMickyD also took his 95 year old mother out for a meal. Just no words..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 18, 2020, 11:12:04 am
BigMickyD also took his 95 year old mother out for a meal. Just no words..

Inheritance? Is one word in vogue right now. Or should be.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: cheque on March 18, 2020, 11:18:54 am
Interesting to see the differences between the climbers that I follow on Instagram’s “stories”- the mainland Europeans are posting a mix of light-hearted “training at home” and more serious “remember why we’re doing this” stuff while the US, UK, Canadian and Australian ones are an absolute mixed bag from people who are self-isolating whether they’ve been told to or not all the way through to people carrying on with trips, posting videos of themselves partying with large groups of people after etc. The latter seems like madness to me, particularly when you consider that climbing trips in the US involve people travelling from major cites to very small towns in the middle of nowhere... Moab hospital apparently has only 17 beds and 3 ventilators.

Lots of people caught blissfully unaware while climbing in Europe, including quite a few who read this I imagine- I hope you’re all doing OK. I’m sure we can all relate to going on a trip and a lot of the pleasure being the disconnection from following current affairs etc. Must be horrible to have the current affairs (literally) come and find you- a friend of mine posted a message along the lines of “I’m all alone in Spain, who wants to come out from Britain and climb with me where it’s nice and quiet?”- type message then soon after, following online opprobrium and possibly even the authorities arriving followed it with an “I’m so sorry I had no idea what was actually going on”- type one.

As I said earlier, my Dad’s really high risk and my Mum (72, has MND) can’t be loads lower but fortunately they’re extremely sensible, their illnesses mean they don’t go out much anyway and they have a neighbour who looks after them with shopping etc. It only occurred to me yesterday that having had a pneumothorax less than two years ago probably means that I’m not in the very lowest risk category myself but I’m now working completely from home. The problem we have in my organisation is that loads of people who in theory can work from home have never done it so whether the certificates etc. on their laptops are actually set up or not is now going to be tested at a crucial time. :slap:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 18, 2020, 11:32:35 am
Honestly, “that” generation are a pain in the fucking arse.

I had to go into town yesterday. Very few people under 60 visible, every cafe full of obviously retirees.

That 'Blitz Spirit' of carry on carry on - is very much NOT what should happen.....


It's fucking mental. My aunt and uncle (who spend winter in Les Gets) are both in their 70s. When they heard the Portes du Soleil was closing down, they went skiing at a nearby resort for the day, then used a car they were sharing with some friends of a similar age to access the slopes (who had just arrived by plane), then all went on a snowshoe hike together and had a picnic. Now deciding when the are going to close up there and drive back to the UK, sometime in the "next couple of weeks". I said to them that if things get worse they might not be able to, I was told i was talking "nonsense".
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 18, 2020, 11:35:46 am
I look forward to millennial behaviour being blamed for the enormous death toll in a few months time... :wall:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 18, 2020, 11:43:20 am
I look forward to millennial behaviour being blamed for the enormous death toll in a few months time... :wall:

Yup.

A normally bigoted, misogynistic and vocal, uncle of mine; referred to it as “Millennial Flu” the other day.

Gotta luv them straight talkers, who “say it as they see it”.

Perchance, one supposes, they should have gone to Specsavers.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 18, 2020, 11:44:46 am
Can someone critique my maths?

There' an infographic doing the rounds on FB, advocating social distancing and  saying
- If 1 person infects 2.5 others every 5 days, then after 30 days you have 406 infections
- If 1 person infects 1.25 others every 5 days, then after 30 days you have 15 infections
- If 1 person infects .625 others every 5 days, then after 30 days you have 2.5 infections

But my rough numbers, when assuming it takes 15 days to become "uninfected and uninfectious" come out as more like 1600, 65 and 0 (it's fudged because doing things in blocks of 5 days doesn't work nicely). Am I wrong or are they?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 18, 2020, 11:49:41 am
Cancelled my winter climbing trip yesterday - Scotland has even less ICU beds than England. Will be closing the company doors on Friday. If they don't close the schools I'll be pulling my son out anyway. Time to do what you can.

Quote
- If 1 person infects .625 others every 5 days, then after 30 days you have 2.5 infections

The fact that you're getting 0 from this would seem to be your first problem.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 18, 2020, 11:51:20 am
EDIT: removed while I work this out
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 18, 2020, 11:58:26 am
The fact that you're getting 0 from this would seem to be your first problem.

I originally got ~1600, 85 and 2, but then I modified my model. Maybe it was better the first time. In any case, I can't get anywhere near as low as 400 for the first instance
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 18, 2020, 12:13:23 pm
Cancelled my winter climbing trip yesterday - Scotland has even less ICU beds than England. Will be closing the company doors on Friday. If they don't close the schools I'll be pulling my son out anyway. Time to do what you can.

Quote
- If 1 person infects .625 others every 5 days, then after 30 days you have 2.5 infections

The fact that you're getting 0 from this would seem to be your first problem.

Scotland is far worse hit in cases per population than England....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 18, 2020, 12:38:35 pm
Lynn went shopping for a 90 year old diabetic this morning (close friend of a close friend) and had to be firm about refusing being invited in for a cup of tea. She is now off to sort out a serious medical issue with her dad in yorkshire (mid 80s, following a series of strokes being medically cared for at home...  immobile, peg fed, pneumonic problems)... working with district nurses to try to keep him out of hospital if possible. My parents, both in their 80s, both struggling with health issues,  failed yesterday when trying to online shop for the first time ever and have been rescued by my brother going to the supermarket. They are in a sense lucky as people are looking out for them. This is going to be horrible for old folk trying to follow the rules if they don't have any help or personal human contact. In between fingerboard training sessions why not 'adopt' a lonely old person if you can.

https://covidmutualaid.org/resources/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 18, 2020, 12:48:49 pm
Plenty of old folk out in Bingley today. I've been to the shops to satisfy an urge to buy a few tins of rank looking soup. Our chest freezer is topped out - fuck knows what's under the first layer but I hope it's edible.
Found bog roll in the 4th shop we visited and won a fight to the death for it with an octogenarian by bludgeoning her repeatedly with a 4 pack of 3 ply.
Sprog is still in nursery and I suppose will be until they close (their next day in would be next Tuesday and I don't think this will happen).
While out at the shops we passed a newly opened cafe and it wasn't particularly busy so popped in for coffee and cake. Just to put some money in their till before everything shuts down. A self employed bloke in there talking to the lady at the counter clearly very worried. They had a hug before he left.
Also went and got my hair cut. They've had lots of cancellations. The lady who cut my hair told me that baby formula has disappeared from the shelves because, in the absence of milk, some daft cunts have bought it instead. Not sure if I believe that.
Think I'm going to nip out and get some beading later to finish some repairs to the back door.

Which all seems very careless compared to the posts above. But life does need to go on to some extent and since I'm on leave it makes sense to try and tackle some jobs to prepare for an extended period of staying in. The old folk in the shops might seem daft but they do need to eat and they probably won't feel able to call on their neighbours for help until the problem is much more apparent.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Liamhutch89 on March 18, 2020, 12:58:26 pm
I've scheduled this weekend for building a home woodie. I'm beginning to worry that might be too late to buy materials!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: 36chambers on March 18, 2020, 01:06:13 pm
since I'm on leave it makes sense to try and tackle some jobs to prepare for an extended period of staying in.

It's quite ironic this, everyone rushing out and about to get as many things ready for staying in.

I'm not saying I've been much better though.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 18, 2020, 01:10:58 pm
At least some are taking it seriously. Sorry for the sun link.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11192542/boozy-brits-benidorm-ignore-coronavirus-warnings-tell-quarantine-cops-its-just-flu/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 18, 2020, 01:14:17 pm
I've scheduled this weekend for building a home woodie. I'm beginning to worry that might be too late to buy materials!

Do ypu think there might have been a run on 19mm ply.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Liamhutch89 on March 18, 2020, 01:17:17 pm
I've scheduled this weekend for building a home woodie. I'm beginning to worry that might be too late to buy materials!

Do ypu think there might have been a run on 19mm ply.

I fear there might be a quarantine and shops might close
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on March 18, 2020, 01:26:52 pm
I've split off the finance parts of the thread as best I can.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: JamieG on March 18, 2020, 01:33:19 pm
The fact that you're getting 0 from this would seem to be your first problem.

I originally got ~1600, 85 and 2, but then I modified my model. Maybe it was better the first time. In any case, I can't get anywhere near as low as 400 for the first instance


Yeah I'm getting similar numbers to you.

2.5 = 1838
1.25 = 129
0.625 = 18

using this code



infection_rate = 0.625;

infected_at_each_stage = 1;
cumulative_at_each_stage = 1;

for i = 1:6
   
    infected_at_each_stage(i+1) = cumulative_at_each_stage(i).*infection_rate;
    cumulative_at_each_stage(i+1) = sum(infected_at_each_stage);
   
end

final_infected = floor(cumulative_at_each_stage(end))


Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: JamieG on March 18, 2020, 01:36:15 pm
Actually i've worked out their numbers

If you change the line  infected_at_each_stage(i+1) = cumulative_at_each_stage(i).*infection_rate;

to infected_at_each_stage(i+1) = infected_at_each_stage(i).*infection_rate;

i.e. the newly infected go and infected new people but the remove themselves from the system you get

2.5 = 406
1.25 = 15
0.625 = 2
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 18, 2020, 01:40:57 pm
Ah gottacha. Their number seems a weird way to present it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tommytwotone on March 18, 2020, 01:53:56 pm
Well literally one day after the govt revised its guidance, and yesterday Tone Jnr mk.2 had a slight temperature spike at nursery so that's us in self-isolation for 2 weeks then.

Obviously apart from a runny nose there's sod all wrong with him but I guess we have to follow the guidance.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 18, 2020, 01:59:34 pm
Schools in Scotland to close Friday.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on March 18, 2020, 02:01:53 pm
Ditto for Welsh schools...  what’s going on Engerrrrland?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 18, 2020, 02:03:01 pm
I've scheduled this weekend for building a home woodie. I'm beginning to worry that might be too late to buy materials!

Do ypu think there might have been a run on 19mm ply.

I fear there might be a quarantine and shops might close

It will be a few weeks off before that happens, if it does.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 18, 2020, 02:09:33 pm
Do you think there might have been a run on 19mm ply.

I think double and single ply might be more of a concern.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 18, 2020, 02:19:25 pm
The fact that you're getting 0 from this would seem to be your first problem.

I originally got ~1600, 85 and 2, but then I modified my model. Maybe it was better the first time. In any case, I can't get anywhere near as low as 400 for the first instance

In a productive afternoon of work at home, I realised my error - I was deducting total cases 15 days later, not new cases only. Now get 1705, 100 and 10...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 18, 2020, 02:53:07 pm
since I'm on leave it makes sense to try and tackle some jobs to prepare for an extended period of staying in.

It's quite ironic this, everyone rushing out and about to get as many things ready for staying in.

I'm not saying I've been much better though.

Yes. But. Inevitably some prep and maintenance of food stocks is necessary. The numbers of The Infected is only going to rise, exponentially. So until the peak, at any moment in time, if you have to go out and do something where you might meet other people, the time of lowest risk is now (obviously it might be better to delay a few hours in order to visit the shops at a quieter hour).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 18, 2020, 03:08:05 pm
Can someone critique my maths?

There' an infographic doing the rounds on FB, advocating social distancing and  saying
- If 1 person infects 2.5 others every 5 days, then after 30 days you have 406 infections
- If 1 person infects 1.25 others every 5 days, then after 30 days you have 15 infections
- If 1 person infects .625 others every 5 days, then after 30 days you have 2.5 infections

But my rough numbers, when assuming it takes 15 days to become "uninfected and uninfectious" come out as more like 1600, 65 and 0 (it's fudged because doing things in blocks of 5 days doesn't work nicely). Am I wrong or are they?

Saw that and just posted on CD's page.

Isn't it to the power of 6?
If the period is every 5 days, and total is after 30 days, then:
there are 6 of those 5-day periods in 30 days.
So after 30 days,
@ infection rate of 2.5 to power of 6 = 244 people infected
@ infection rate 1.5 to power of 6 = 11 people
@ infection .625 to power of 6 = .006 of a person (doylo, the only one remaining with residual infection)


That's disregarding 'becoming uninfected' which is important in maths terms but unimportant in terms of the message being given.
Caveat I'm a dumbass not a phd
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 18, 2020, 03:19:16 pm
You have to include the original infections i.e. total infections after 5 days = 1 (starting person) + 2.5 (new infections) = 3.5, not the 2.5 that you've assumed. Then 3.5*2.5+3.5 etc... This makes a huge difference after a few cycles.

Interestingly - but obvious really if you think about exponential curves - deducting cases that have expired after 2 weeks makes less difference:
With deductions:1705, 100, 10
Without: 1838, 129,18
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 18, 2020, 03:26:33 pm
Gotchya, yeah that makes sense.Your figures look right then! Isn't working out exponential infections fun!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: HarryBD on March 18, 2020, 04:18:45 pm
Ok I'm going to pull out my maths modelling coursework (zombies) from final year of uni and convert to a js SPA you can all play with
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 18, 2020, 04:25:48 pm
I know we've all got our own worries, but hope everyone has dropped a note to any elderly neighbours to see if they need anything. Some of my elderly relatives are too far away (Dawlish, and hopefully soon Ashtead Surrey) to be able to do much for them other than provide moral support and help with online stuff, but I'd like to think neighbours will be there to help them if needed, like I am doing for elderly near me.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fultonius on March 18, 2020, 04:36:31 pm
Girlfriend and I are both working from home, already had our first spat haha...anyway, we've both got very mildly tickly coughs - kind of reminds me of when I had asthma as a kid. Generally slight fatigued/slow/thick head, but no fever, coughing fits.

How "mild" can a  case of Corona be? My mum's friend's son-in-law had it after coming back from Italy, tested positive (in a group who had symptoms), but no symptoms, discharged form hospital after a week for isolation.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 18, 2020, 04:43:28 pm
I had the impression that it can be so mild as to give no symptoms... but I can't remember where I've read that so treat cautiously
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on March 18, 2020, 05:22:11 pm
And schools in England close on Friday, they had to follow suit.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 18, 2020, 05:44:13 pm
But not for kids of NHS staff. Imagine being the kid who has to go in when everyone else is off  :lol:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 18, 2020, 05:52:16 pm
Rumours that London will be in lockdown from the weekend... Send your projects now or forever hold your peace. For a few weeks anyway. Bad timing for the dry weather to arrive!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: crzylgs on March 18, 2020, 05:55:12 pm
Rumours that London will be in lockdown from the weekend... Send your projects now or forever hold your peace. For a few weeks anyway. Bad timing for the dry weather to arrive!

Have also heard this from a friend who's Dad works in Parliament.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 18, 2020, 06:13:52 pm
I had the impression that it can be so mild as to give no symptoms... but I can't remember where I've read that so treat cautiously

I think one of the studies on Korean data - where they have much more testing of the general population suggested that 25% of under 18’s showed no significant symptoms.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nai on March 18, 2020, 06:25:42 pm
But not for kids of NHS staff. Imagine being the kid who has to go in when everyone else is off  :lol:

Yeah just imagine being the one of the kids who has to be in school while their parent/s are in the front line of this, perhaps without the proper equipment to keep them safe and with a muddled, confused plan to work to.  And maybe their grandparents who could offer comfort are unable to help out because they're in isolation.  Right laugh. 

Bit close ot home for a few on here. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on March 18, 2020, 06:44:01 pm
But not for kids of NHS staff. Imagine being the kid who has to go in when everyone else is off  :lol:
A friend who is a paramedic just posted a picture of her daughter’s face when she heard the accept for children of key workers, THE definition of not impressed!
Waiting to see who is asked to continue working at school and how my school organises this..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 18, 2020, 06:48:35 pm
I understand it might not be all schools. That a school in an area might be nominated to host all the students (if that option exist, North Devon is not overburdened with an excess of schools).
But that’s just rumour from teaching friends, they’re expecting to know more by Friday.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nik at work on March 18, 2020, 06:55:10 pm
Currently just travelling back from visiting my kids on the Isle of Man, no fucking idea when I’ll next be able to see them.

My partner and her ex are both GP’s. Rather than sending their kids to school I’m going to be on childcare duty I think. Seems slightly fairer than packing them off to a deserted school while mum and dad work the coal face.

My mum, mid 70’s, is a care worker for the housebound elderly. She’s not stopping working because there is nobody else to do the work, and if nobody helps her clients they will die Covid or not. She is however isolating herself in all other aspects of her life to as great an extent as possible. She’s my hero (and she can still do a pull-up)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Doylo on March 18, 2020, 07:04:03 pm
Bad timing for the dry weather to arrive!

I dunno I reckon the start of winter would be even more depressing. My mums pretty sure she’s had it. Cough, headache and fever and had the flu jab so prob not normal flu. Hopefully it was Covid as she’s on the mend now.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 18, 2020, 07:07:52 pm
Rumours that London will be in lockdown from the weekend... Send your projects now or forever hold your peace. For a few weeks anyway. Bad timing for the dry weather to arrive!

Have also heard this from a friend who's Dad works in Parliament.

And that’s why the internet changes everything to do with public behaviour compared to 1918 Spanish flu..!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on March 18, 2020, 07:25:24 pm
But not for kids of NHS staff. Imagine being the kid who has to go in when everyone else is off  :lol:

That's my daughters, though I might take unpaid leave to look after them.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on March 18, 2020, 07:26:04 pm
Currently just travelling back from visiting my kids on the Isle of Man, no fucking idea when I’ll next be able to see them.


You managed to avoid the quarantine just I guess?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 18, 2020, 07:45:58 pm
About the age thing.. Just dropped a load of food shopping round at my dad's, chatting to each other in the doorway was interesting for a sense of how he see's the situation.
My dad's relatively smart, a career civil engineer, still switched on and curious about the world. But the way he talked about the situation this evening makes me think there's just an unbridgeable gulf between many people of that generation and ours in terms of how we access information, and how we can now all quickly use multiple alternative sources of data to question and try to form an accurate view of events. May be wrong about the 'accurate' part (actually hope so! because I think it's dire).
He seems to just go with what he hears or sees on the tv or radio, or reads in the newspaper, but not really go any deeper. Very trusting of authority - whatever the CMO or CSO says on that day is all there is to know. Suppose it's better than him believing whatever's in the mail or express.
He sounded a bit surprised this eve that 'the CSO seemed a bit more concerned this evening - ''seemed like they're starting to struggle a bit''... I think he'll be genuinely shocked when the high-risk group start dying in big numbers, which seems almost certain to all of us on here looking into it a bit deeper, although it seems obvious even from daily news.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Liamhutch89 on March 18, 2020, 08:56:42 pm
There's a post doing the rounds on Facebook about a rumoured full lock down coming on Friday from a friend of a friend of a friend who's in the army... Whether it turns out to be true or not wouldn't surprise me either way but there will no doubt be additional chaos in the shops tomorrow.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 18, 2020, 09:06:12 pm
Quote
there's just an unbridgeable gulf between many people of that generation and ours in terms of how we access information, and how we can now all quickly use multiple alternative sources of data to question and try to form an accurate view of events.

Agree, though as much as there's a lot of older folk with this issue I've been amazed how many younger people are no better.

Suspect any lockdown might start in London and then broaden. They are significantly ahead.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on March 18, 2020, 09:09:54 pm
About the age thing..

I've just cracked the mother in law I think (77; don't go there Doylo). I asked if they were still out and about in Sydney which she replied saying "yes but with care". I made the point care and being out were mutually exclusive and now that Parkinson's disease (Nat's Dad has it) advice is that the effects are far worse, they really needed to accept that they are in that risk group and act accordingly.

I've sent her the Imperial study. She'll read it and panic accordingly.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 18, 2020, 09:34:47 pm
The people not heeding govt advice about social distancing/ socialising are quite simply being selfish. Putting their desires above the bigger picture of people dying.

Selfish actions are not mutually exclusive to the over 50/60’s but look how that age group have recently voted... (twice).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 18, 2020, 09:51:36 pm
Indeed. I posted on the fb page of Yogalifeuk (Wilmslow) that whilst they had said nothing, not one thing, 3 walls and  Yoga Manchester had all emailed to advise, updated, and then shut down.

I quoted the Substation,
Quote
Whilst we haven’t been forced to close, we couldn’t live with ourselves knowing that we are potentially increasing the speed at which the virus is spreading.

Post taken down pretty quickly

They have cancelled classes now.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nik at work on March 18, 2020, 10:10:44 pm
Currently just travelling back from visiting my kids on the Isle of Man, no fucking idea when I’ll next be able to see them.


You managed to avoid the quarantine just I guess?

Yes, by a few days. To be honest I anticipate it will be widely ignored over there. They appear to have gone all in on the panic buying whilst not really bothering with the social distancing/isolating so much.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Andy F on March 18, 2020, 10:25:44 pm
On the school front, I appreciate it's tough for parents who rely on them to work, but as a teacher who works with immunocompromised colleagues, this week has been tough.
My school is in one of the most deprived areas of Liverpool, as such many pupils come from families with very little. The school has organised food parcels to go along with work for pupils.
Regarding staying open for our most vulnerable pupils and those whose parents work in the emergency services, the school is organising a rota for staff to support those who need to come in (both my wife, the exams officer in the school, and I have put ourselves forward to help).
Everyone is worried, but we are all pulling together to help out where and when we can.
Realistically it's going to get much worse before it gets better
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 18, 2020, 10:35:39 pm
The people not heeding govt advice about social distancing/ socialising are quite simply being selfish. Putting their desires above the bigger picture of people dying.

Selfish actions are not mutually exclusive to the over 50/60’s but look how that age group have recently voted... (twice).

Ooh controversial TT! Not agreeing or disagreeing, but noting that there's a powerful undertone in this crisis of them and us.


Just watched the Dominic cummings story on bbc2. Didn't know much about him before watching this, seems like a bit of a cock, deliberately provocative by walking round like a tramp while everyone else is in suits (because he's that important and special he can wear what he wants), and dedicated to scheming. My first instinct - the prog seems nicely timed - perhaps a combo of political and security service vested interest in getting it on air now - to seed the implication that someone like cummings, who appears to be a maverick with juvenile ideas and who's never known real life outside political scheming, is a poor choice of character to have around advising in this situation which is very much real life and death. Relatively harmless (unless you're a politician) provided nothing life and death is in his hands. But faith in medical experts is now front and centre in the public mind - real science not social science or the visions of a maverick Machiavellian. Won't be surprised if Cummings is gone before the end of covid outbreak.
edit: or perhaps that's totally wrong and he'll turn come up with a masterplan and there'll be a statue of him in London one day!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on March 18, 2020, 11:28:25 pm

Ooh controversial TT! Not agreeing or disagreeing, but noting that there's a powerful undertone in this crisis of them and us.

Do you mean older / younger? This crisis certainly seems to bring out the best and the worst in people.

I thought this worth sharing; BBC News - Coronavirus: NHS staff 'at risk' over lack of protective gear
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51950276
Team I work in have been given one paper surgical mask each. Pretty seriously concerned about this.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 18, 2020, 11:38:10 pm
Yes older / younger. Or higher risk / lower risk.

The PPE thing, gov could easily requisition at a guess 10s of thousands of FFP3 masks from industrial services companies and other industrial companies who have stores full of them because they use them daily.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Muenchener on March 19, 2020, 08:45:39 am
Bavarian state gov yesterday announced compulsory reporting - and potential requisitioning - of all medical-relevant supplies.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on March 19, 2020, 08:50:36 am
Yes older / younger. Or higher risk / lower risk.

The PPE thing, gov could easily requisition at a guess 10s of thousands of FFP3 masks from industrial services companies and other industrial companies who have stores full of them because they use them daily.

Blimey,  if your people have stocks why not get in touch with someone and see if they can be used. I really don't feel terribly reassured about potentially very close and prolonged exposure to high virus load with a paper napkin over my face. Even worse for people in ICUs.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on March 19, 2020, 08:56:49 am
A police officer we know has been instructed to be a ‘first responder’, they have been issued with no PPE and will be coming into contact with anyone.  She was at Screwfix yesterday buying the kind of face mask you would use for a bit of DIY.. not sure how effective these masks are but very concerning that the police are unable to supply frontline officers with basic PPE.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SamT on March 19, 2020, 09:12:12 am
Chatting to a mate (on the phone) last night.   His sister runs the geriatric ward in a large hospital, which has also been designated the Covid-19 ward.  (I guess they have the expertise in dealing with ill old folk).
They've had one death already. 

He says she's bricking it. They've no clue as to what's going on, no plan, no proper hazmat stuff, nowt.  Nobody's telling them what to do.  Pure chaos.  And its not even started.

Maybe I'm doing them a dis-service, though the medium of chinese whispers, but my mates not particularly prone to exaggeration. 







Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 19, 2020, 10:12:12 am
Are people still planning to go climbing outside at the weekend? Desperate to escape the house while I still can. My gut feeling is that its still ok but interested in what others think.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SamT on March 19, 2020, 10:23:09 am
Are people still planning to go climbing outside at the weekend? Desperate to escape the house while I still can. My gut feeling is that its still ok but interested in what others think.

If you and a mate drive out to Moscar, walk over to Stanage end, potter about and drive back. Cant see an issue. 

Pad party at Gorilla Warfare, with various groups from Manchester, Nottingham and  Sheffield, using the train/bus, sharing crisps and Redbush tea from the thermos.  Not really cricket.

Common sense init.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on March 19, 2020, 10:24:00 am
Are people still planning to go climbing outside at the weekend? Desperate to escape the house while I still can. My gut feeling is that its still ok but interested in what others think.

I'm going out on my bike today. I'm going to be a hell of a lot more cautious on the descents than usual (the pheasant has no agenda). I doubt I'll see anyone.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on March 19, 2020, 10:27:30 am
I reckon we could do with a separate thread on climbing, be interesting to see how it progresses over the next few weeks. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: JamieG on March 19, 2020, 10:28:37 am
I was having this exact discussion yesterday evening with my wife. And we came to the conclusion it isn't just about whether or not your are putting yourself at risk from either coronavirus or injury, but about perception. If people see you out and about carrying on as normal going climbing then they are probably less likely to be cautious themselves in their own activities. I.e. "I saw some lads climbing earlier, why can't I go down the pub?"  So as gutting as it is I'm trying to be strict with myself and stick to the fingerboarding.

I might crack though . . . I'm in the house with a 15 month old in full push the boundaries mode.  :2thumbsup:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 19, 2020, 10:40:05 am
I intend to go climbing, meeting up with a mate and going for a boulder but suspect we wont see anyone else.  A couple of friends were supposed to be stopping with us but my wife has said no so they will have to camp if they do come up. Will happily meet them to climb though.

The crags will be empty but they always are.

To counter all the news about how bad it is in hospitals at the minute i have family working in hospitals in north east, a doctor and a buyer. The buyer is manic busy spending millions on stuff in prep for what ever happens, they have re opened old wards and got more beds etc. However they both say the hospitals are really quite, way quieter than normal and all is calm. There is a sense that something is about to happen but at the minute its quiter than a normal March.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SamT on March 19, 2020, 10:44:02 am
The crags will be empty but they always are.

amen to that

Quote

To counter all the news about how bad it is in hospitals at the minute i have family working in hospitals in north east, a doctor and a buyer. The buyer is manic busy spending millions on stuff in prep for what ever happens, they have re opened old wards and got more beds etc.

good to hear

Quote
However they both say the hospitals are really quite, way quieter than normal and all is calm. There is a sense that something is about to happen but at the minute its quiter than a normal March.

Because all non essential ops have been cancelled??  (and a lot of the neds are out panic buying instead of rocking up at A&E cause they have a splinter ?? )


Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 19, 2020, 10:51:25 am
Yes older / younger. Or higher risk / lower risk.

The PPE thing, gov could easily requisition at a guess 10s of thousands of FFP3 masks from industrial services companies and other industrial companies who have stores full of them because they use them daily.

Blimey,  if your people have stocks why not get in touch with someone and see if they can be used. I really don't feel terribly reassured about potentially very close and prolonged exposure to high virus load with a paper napkin over my face. Even worse for people in ICUs.
We have 300 in a warehouse about 100 feet away from where I'm sitting. We're a small division of a gigantic group. Each part of the group will have stock. If the group decides it wants to donate its stock then that's the exco's decision (unless gov enforce requisition, which they might well do). Those directors have eyes and ears like the rest of us so must know there's a need. If in a month or two's time it's clear there's a shortage (likely) and if the group exco haven't donated then I'll do what little I can.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: JamieG on March 19, 2020, 10:56:36 am
Fair enough. To be honest I might have to head out before I get cabin fever anyway. I am not the best at being stuck indoors under normal circumstances. I'm lucky that I'm near all the Chew Valley grit. I doubt anyone has been up Alderman, Running Hill Pits, Pots and Pans etc for ages. Even Wimberry is almost always deserted.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 19, 2020, 11:10:45 am
A police officer we know has been instructed to be a ‘first responder’, they have been issued with no PPE and will be coming into contact with anyone.  She was at Screwfix yesterday buying the kind of face mask you would use for a bit of DIY.. not sure how effective these masks are but very concerning that the police are unable to supply frontline officers with basic PPE.

It'll be either an ffp3, p2 or p1. P3 offers the highest protection and the standard of mask to be worn by NHS staff; but any of those (p2 or p1) are  better than a surgical mask.
Regards effectiveness, they're as effective as you can get in that type of 'temporary dust mask' type of PPE, without going the next step and wearing something more restrictive and cumbersome such as a half mask or going further again and using a face shield or full face mask - which aren't practical or relevant for 99.9% of people.

From what I've read they're only a useful preventative measure in very specific circumstances of doing a job where you have get up close into the personal space of someone who's coughing. Masks aren't going to add any benefit in preventing infection of people going about normal daily activities. Partly because they change behaviour - such as the wearer repeatedly touching their face to adjust the mask, less hand-washing behaviour by those wearing masks; and partly because transmission is by droplets on surfaces.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 19, 2020, 11:12:15 am
The crags will be empty but they always are.

amen to that

Quote

To counter all the news about how bad it is in hospitals at the minute i have family working in hospitals in north east, a doctor and a buyer. The buyer is manic busy spending millions on stuff in prep for what ever happens, they have re opened old wards and got more beds etc.

good to hear

Quote
However they both say the hospitals are really quite, way quieter than normal and all is calm. There is a sense that something is about to happen but at the minute its quiter than a normal March.

Because all non essential ops have been cancelled??  (and a lot of the neds are out panic buying instead of rocking up at A&E cause they have a splinter ?? )

I think the latter is definately having an effect.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 19, 2020, 11:25:40 am

The crags will be empty but they always are.


bear in mind with walls closing, weather improving and people at home during the day this may change. If anyone is at the crag, be prudent and keep your distance.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 19, 2020, 11:34:01 am
It wont.

Maybe if i dont go to bowden or kyloe to be sure though.

Anyone at home all day should either be in isolation, at work or looking for a new job.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 19, 2020, 11:52:00 am
To counter all the news about how bad it is in hospitals at the minute i have family working in hospitals in north east, a doctor and a buyer. The buyer is manic busy spending millions on stuff in prep for what ever happens, they have re opened old wards and got more beds etc. However they both say the hospitals are really quite, way quieter than normal and all is calm. There is a sense that something is about to happen but at the minute its quiter than a normal March.

Silvia Stringhini, an italian doctor on twitter (https://twitter.com/silviast9/status/1236933818654896129) ten days ago:

Quote
4/ I myself watched with some amazement the reorganization of the entire hospital in the past week, when our current enemy was still in the shadows: the wards slowly "emptied", elective activities were interrupted, intensive care were freed up to create as many beds as possible.

5/ All this rapid transformation brought an atmosphere of silence and surreal emptiness to the corridors of the hospital that we did not yet understand, waiting for a war that was yet to begin and that many (including me) were not so sure would ever come with such ferocity.

6/ I still remember my night call a week ago when I was waiting for the results of a swab. When I think about it, my anxiety over one possible case seems almost ridiculous and unjustified, now that I've seen what's happening. Well, the situation now is dramatic to say the least.

7/ The war has literally exploded and battles are uninterrupted day and night. But now that need for beds has arrived in all its drama. One after the other the departments that had been emptied fill up at an impressive pace.

8/ The boards with the names of the patients, of different colours depending on the operating unit, are now all red and instead of surgery you see the diagnosis, which is always the damned same: bilateral interstitial pneumonia.

11/ Cases are multiplying, we arrive at a rate of 15-20 admissions per day all for the same reason. The results of the swabs now come one after the other: positive, positive, positive. Suddenly the E.R. is collapsing.

13/ Someone already to be intubated and go to intensive care. For others it's too late... Every ventilator becomes like gold: those in operating theatres that have now suspended their non-urgent activity become intensive care places that did not exist before.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: JamieG on March 19, 2020, 12:00:38 pm
Phew that is pretty bleak. I think for some places this is the calm before the storm.

Again my Dad being ridiculous. He is being sensible about staying in isolation, since they live in rural France. But when it comes to the food he buys thats a different story!

Apparently this morning he was woken up by a car honking. It was the local shop doing a driving food service. My Dad bought a few essentials, including Roquefort cheese. I think my definition of essentials differs from my Dad's!  ;D
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 19, 2020, 12:25:34 pm
FFS, just saw an elderly lady walking back from nursery holding grandchild's hand in close quarters with two other mothers, one with a pram, and about 3 other toddlers. No cases locally yet, but you never know.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 19, 2020, 12:27:49 pm
To counter all the news about how bad it is in hospitals at the minute i have family working in hospitals in north east, a doctor and a buyer. The buyer is manic busy spending millions on stuff in prep for what ever happens, they have re opened old wards and got more beds etc. However they both say the hospitals are really quite, way quieter than normal and all is calm. There is a sense that something is about to happen but at the minute its quiter than a normal March.

Silvia Stringhini, an italian doctor on twitter (https://twitter.com/silviast9/status/1236933818654896129) ten days ago:

Quote
4/ I myself watched with some amazement the reorganization of the entire hospital in the past week, when our current enemy was still in the shadows: the wards slowly "emptied", elective activities were interrupted, intensive care were freed up to create as many beds as possible.

5/ All this rapid transformation brought an atmosphere of silence and surreal emptiness to the corridors of the hospital that we did not yet understand, waiting for a war that was yet to begin and that many (including me) were not so sure would ever come with such ferocity.

6/ I still remember my night call a week ago when I was waiting for the results of a swab. When I think about it, my anxiety over one possible case seems almost ridiculous and unjustified, now that I've seen what's happening. Well, the situation now is dramatic to say the least.

7/ The war has literally exploded and battles are uninterrupted day and night. But now that need for beds has arrived in all its drama. One after the other the departments that had been emptied fill up at an impressive pace.

8/ The boards with the names of the patients, of different colours depending on the operating unit, are now all red and instead of surgery you see the diagnosis, which is always the damned same: bilateral interstitial pneumonia.

11/ Cases are multiplying, we arrive at a rate of 15-20 admissions per day all for the same reason. The results of the swabs now come one after the other: positive, positive, positive. Suddenly the E.R. is collapsing.

13/ Someone already to be intubated and go to intensive care. For others it's too late... Every ventilator becomes like gold: those in operating theatres that have now suspended their non-urgent activity become intensive care places that did not exist before.


Yet again i love how you can really bring any positivity down to earth with a bang. I really hope i never get stuck in a lift with you.

225000 cases, 9277 deaths and 81000 recovered world wide still is so far away from what people are saying will happen, so i am still trying to sort out real stuff and look on the bright side.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 19, 2020, 12:30:50 pm
There's positivity and there's wilfully ignoring the facts for the sake of positivity. Looking on the bright side is great but it sounds like (I may be wrong) you're saying its all a fuss over nothing.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 19, 2020, 12:57:10 pm
Unfortunately Gav, the proven response to pandemic threat is to over-react, and over-react early. Wishful positive thinking only leads people not to take the simple basic steps that could control it.

I'm pretty sure a month ago you have scoffed at the number of cases and deaths we have now. The speed things are now accelerating should surely be concerning. Everyone still carrying on as normal is only contributing to the body count.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 19, 2020, 01:18:38 pm
To counter all the news about how bad it is in hospitals at the minute i have family working in hospitals in north east, a doctor and a buyer. The buyer is manic busy spending millions on stuff in prep for what ever happens, they have re opened old wards and got more beds etc. However they both say the hospitals are really quite, way quieter than normal and all is calm. There is a sense that something is about to happen but at the minute its quiter than a normal March.

Silvia Stringhini, an italian doctor on twitter (https://twitter.com/silviast9/status/1236933818654896129) ten days ago:

Quote
4/ I myself watched with some amazement the reorganization of the entire hospital in the past week, when our current enemy was still in the shadows: the wards slowly "emptied", elective activities were interrupted, intensive care were freed up to create as many beds as possible.

5/ All this rapid transformation brought an atmosphere of silence and surreal emptiness to the corridors of the hospital that we did not yet understand, waiting for a war that was yet to begin and that many (including me) were not so sure would ever come with such ferocity.

6/ I still remember my night call a week ago when I was waiting for the results of a swab. When I think about it, my anxiety over one possible case seems almost ridiculous and unjustified, now that I've seen what's happening. Well, the situation now is dramatic to say the least.

7/ The war has literally exploded and battles are uninterrupted day and night. But now that need for beds has arrived in all its drama. One after the other the departments that had been emptied fill up at an impressive pace.

8/ The boards with the names of the patients, of different colours depending on the operating unit, are now all red and instead of surgery you see the diagnosis, which is always the damned same: bilateral interstitial pneumonia.

11/ Cases are multiplying, we arrive at a rate of 15-20 admissions per day all for the same reason. The results of the swabs now come one after the other: positive, positive, positive. Suddenly the E.R. is collapsing.

13/ Someone already to be intubated and go to intensive care. For others it's too late... Every ventilator becomes like gold: those in operating theatres that have now suspended their non-urgent activity become intensive care places that did not exist before.


Yet again i love how you can really bring any positivity down to earth with a bang. I really hope i never get stuck in a lift with you.

225000 cases, 9277 deaths and 81000 recovered world wide still is so far away from what people are saying will happen, so i am still trying to sort out real stuff and look on the bright side.


I think one way to get a realistic idea of what's likely to unfold this year in the UK is to take a look back to fatalities in UK from last Sunday, and the week before that, and the week before that, and the week before that. Then look at today's fatalities. Two weeks ago 2 fatalities wasn't looking too bad compared to Italy, last week 11 fatalities wasn't looking too bad relative to Italy. Today 104 fatalities isn't looking too bad relative to Italy. We're doubling every 3-4 days. It's at the point of rapid acceleration, firstly in London then in other large population centres.

That isn't being pessimistic or doom-mongering it's just the reality of what's happening and what will happen given the behaviour of the virus.

Then research what the models say about how long the virus will be around for and when it will peak. Research the difference for total lock-down versus no action taken. Then add in some guesstimates for overwhelmed or not overwhelmed health care.

Then look at the same retrospective fatality figures for the 'best' countries: S.Korea, Taiwan, Singapore; versus the 'worst': Italy.

According to our CSO the UK is looking most likely to have an outcome worse than S.Korea and better than Italy. Which covers a lot of different outcomes! He's suggested 20,000 excess dead will be a good outcome, but I'm sure I either heard him say or saw it written somewhere (will check) that this is by August. This won't be finished by August. I think many people haven't picked up on that or are in denial, and the media haven't pressed that point.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 19, 2020, 01:22:54 pm
There's positivity and there's wilfully ignoring the facts for the sake of positivity. Looking on the bright side is great but it sounds like (I may be wrong) you're saying its all a fuss over nothing.

You are wrong.I have not ignored any facts and only state the ones i am given. I am dealing with this on an hourly basis both here, in Holland and in belgium trying to keep 250 people employed, A lot of them are really scared, not of the virus but of loosing there jobs so if i took the negtive approach many have it doesnt really help them all.

However i still think the deaths and infection numbers people are quoting are vastly overstated but only time will tell. If i am wrong i will happily admit it but i am confident im not. 300-600 thousand people die from flu each year and so far we have 8000 from this. Not convinced it will reach anywhere near our normal figures plus a lot of the deaths will be from people who possibly would have died from something else.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 19, 2020, 01:24:40 pm
Unfortunately Gav, the proven response to pandemic threat is to over-react, and over-react early. Wishful positive thinking only leads people not to take the simple basic steps that could control it.

I'm pretty sure a month ago you have scoffed at the number of cases and deaths we have now. The speed things are now accelerating should surely be concerning. Everyone still carrying on as normal is only contributing to the body count.

A month ago i would have thought the situation was going to be much worse and the deaths way higher, hence my sceptisim of the higher end figures coming out.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 19, 2020, 01:35:35 pm
Some other giveaways of the magnitude of this one are:

a. The markets aren't dumb, they don't' react this way to a bad flu year or even a doubling of a bad flu year, or Ebola/SARS/etc.
b. Government epidemic plans which state that, for very serious pandemics, total lock-down is 'probably impractical' and not likely to be effective in the long-term. Then square that fact with the fact that governments worldwide are anyway choosing the 'probably impractical in the long term' option to try to reduce the numbers of fatalities.
c. Then square that 'probably impractical in the long-term' bit with the economic destruction governments are wilfully inflicting on their nations, to try to reduce the numbers of fatalities.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Falling Down on March 19, 2020, 01:38:27 pm
Quick report from London town:

I ventured out for the first time this morning after ten days in self isolation following symptoms last week.  Walked down to Harrow Road to do some food shopping as I was worried about the rumoured/confirmed (and by midday denied) lockdown.  Lots of people out in masks and gloves, buses looked half full. There was a massive scrum of people outside Iceland at 08:30 waiting for it to open. It was orderly and quiet in the Co-Op with restrictions on key items.  The good thing about round here is all the middle eastern, Indian and Caribbean shops so I was able to get fresh fruit and veg and fish.  The guy on the stall said the wholesale market was a bit chaotic this morning. The pharmacy had a one-in-one-out policy and a two metre no-go zone in front of the till.

Labourers and builders are doing their thing down the road and the construction sites are operating. Tradesmen going around doing jobs.

At our place, we're all working remotely now including loads of our clients too.  At work we have 19 in self-isolation and one quite ill (with pneumonia) in their early 40's.  I have clients at the two biggest supermarkets and they're all working hard to keep the shelves stocked (everyone from head office doing shifts in stores like at Christmas time) and are ramping up the click 'n collect capabilities across the board to address the shortage of home delivery slots and the volume of people in stores.  Supply chains seem OK and one said that it was tougher early on for non-food items when China was closed down.

W is still working at the beer and wine shop although they have stopped on-sales (they have a small bar) and they're doing loads over Deliveroo.  She's expecting restrictions to come in over the next few days.

Outside of work, I'm seeing my therapy clients over Zoom sessions and our training college is shut.  I have a little backyard that's a real blessing to be able to go and sit in the quiet and do some weeding and stuff.

Anyway, thought that might be of interest to some.



Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: robertostallioni on March 19, 2020, 01:41:01 pm
cheers for the update FD
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 19, 2020, 02:16:36 pm
Some other giveaways of the magnitude of this one are:

a. The markets aren't dumb, they don't' react this way to a bad flu year or even a doubling of a bad flu year, or Ebola/SARS/etc.
b. Government epidemic plans which state that, for very serious pandemics, total lock-down is 'probably impractical' and not likely to be effective in the long-term. Then square that fact with the fact that governments worldwide are anyway choosing the 'probably impractical in the long term' option to try to reduce the numbers of fatalities.
c. Then square that 'probably impractical in the long-term' bit with the economic destruction governments are wilfully inflicting on their nations, to try to reduce the numbers of fatalities.

Reports of Italy’s badly hit areas being overwhelmed. Hospitals with critically ill people, not just the dead. Morgues over run.
But not outside of those areas, yet.
So, surely it’s reasonable to conclude that the measures taken have mitigated the worst effects (hopefully).

Even without doing an iota of statistical analysis or even very much reading, that “overwhelming” of the system is not a typical feature of seasonal flu, even in a bad year. Add to that, the very short time frame (what is it now, 3 weeks? What’s a flu season? Almost 6 months?) and this is bloody obviously much worse.
Then add in everything Pete just pointed out.
Then consider that this is not “media driven hype”, it’s “Top Expert driven” Government intervention, which leads the media’s reporting by several hours (in the main) despite it’s apparently dynamic, change by the minute, nature.

It’s probably reasonable to say “it’s not the Black Death”, but it’s a damn few tens of notches up from even a bad flu season.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 19, 2020, 02:18:22 pm
This won't be finished by August. I think many people haven't picked up on that or are in denial, and the media haven't pressed that point.

This seems the most hard to fathom part of this from the selfish point of view of direct impact to my life (until/unless parents get ill)... A month back I was thinking I'd still be going to France at Easter. 2 weeks back I was thinking it was unlikely but you never know. My current working assumption is that we wont be leaving the country for recreational purposes during 2020.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: JamieG on March 19, 2020, 03:27:48 pm
Just as a counter example to the old versus young taking it seriously debate.

I have a PhD student that is asking for special permission to carry on going into uni (its basically closing on Friday except for very specific cases). Since working from home is not ideal! Apparently so are a couple of the postdocs. One of whose main work is modelling on his laptop. FFS!

I have basically told him "don't be ridiculous" in a not so subtle round about way. :wall: I would have really thought our graduate students were more sensible.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 19, 2020, 03:39:22 pm
 https://www.dispatchlive.co.za/news/2020-03-19-italy-orders-army-to-take-bodies-from-coronavirus/ (https://www.dispatchlive.co.za/news/2020-03-19-italy-orders-army-to-take-bodies-from-coronavirus/)

An example of “overwhelmed”.

Anyway, to add another point for consideration to why the Governmental response might seem excessive, compared to the current casualty figures. Both here and other affected nations.

I expect they are better informed about the prognosis of a good few people, under care, not yet added to the final list.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 19, 2020, 06:31:17 pm
The primary school of my two youngest, just sent us a letter.

The school has been instructed (their words) to remain open to provide child care for key workers, throughout what would have been the Easter holidays.
All staff have had leave canceled.

They have said they will provide a list of key employments, tomorrow, when they receive it.

Anyone else hearing this or similar?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on March 19, 2020, 06:31:30 pm
Gav,

Both your pessimism a few weeks ago and optimism now aren’t supported by the numbers. Case rates and deaths in Europe have followed a very predictable growth rate with little sign (yet) of suppression methods helping. You could have predicted today’s numbers with some confidence 2 weeks ago.

If you extrapolate that trend forwards it ain’t good I’m telling you.

We will only avoid an all out cluster fuck (hundreds of thousands in the UK dead) IF the social distancing works and people take it seriously. If people can be made to stick to that then you’ll be right and this will look like a bad flu year from a health standpoint.

However, I’m more optimistic than Barrows and Pete. The grimmest scenarios painted by, for example, the UCL doc suggest we’ll have to keep this going all year, but there are some possible end games.

1) Antiviral drugs might be found that would reduce the hospital stay of a critical sufferer. If this can come down from 15 days to 5 we could let infections rates triple and the amount of time we’d be stuck in special measures would come down by the same amount.

2) There’s an alternative model that combines massive testing programs with mobile phone tracking that would allow governments to successfully isolate the currently infected and those they come into contact with.

This would require a massive effort to speed up testing and people accepting a major infringement of privacy though.

3) if a test can be developed to detect those who have recovered and probably immune they can go back to work and keep things going.

Some combination of these three might offer a way to avoid lockdown till 2021
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on March 19, 2020, 06:32:02 pm
This won't be finished by August. I think many people haven't picked up on that or are in denial, and the media haven't pressed that point.

This seems the most hard to fathom part of this from the selfish point of view of direct impact to my life (until/unless parents get ill)... A month back I was thinking I'd still be going to France at Easter. 2 weeks back I was thinking it was unlikely but you never know. My current working assumption is that we wont be leaving the country for recreational purposes during 2020.

I would probably agree with that. For a start quite a few airlines will likely be out of business. And sterling will be so devalued that we won't be able to afford to buy fuel or food if you were abroad
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 19, 2020, 06:35:00 pm
The primary school of my two youngest, just sent us a letter.

The school has been instructed (their words) to remain open to provide child care for key workers, throughout what would have been the Easter holidays.
All staff have had leave canceled.

They have said they will provide a list of key employments, tomorrow, when they receive it.

Anyone else hearing this or similar?

We will be open for key offspring over Easter- staffed on a volunteer basis. I will go in a bit.

Lessons here will continue, as normal, but remotely. Registers, homework, same timetable etc.

Stu- the test to identify antibodies alone would change things immeasurably. I’d guess this is the most achievable?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 19, 2020, 06:39:35 pm
The primary school of my two youngest, just sent us a letter.

The school has been instructed (their words) to remain open to provide child care for key workers, throughout what would have been the Easter holidays.
All staff have had leave canceled.

They have said they will provide a list of key employments, tomorrow, when they receive it.

Anyone else hearing this or similar?

Yup. The school is waiting for the DFE letter with the info. MrsTT is an NHS worker and considers herself not completely essential - but her employer is insisting she comes in and doesn’t work from home. So she may well be essential.

Amongst her colleagues much confusion as to whether the NHS key worker school cover thing is of one partner is NHS and the other working? Or only if both are NHS keyworker etx...

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 19, 2020, 06:42:51 pm
Accirding to NASUWT update, only  if both ie if one parent at home to cover, then child stays with them.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 19, 2020, 06:59:38 pm
Accirding to NASUWT update, only  if both ie if one parent at home to cover, then child stays with them.

So not if they’re working from home... 🤦‍♂️
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on March 19, 2020, 07:07:28 pm
As if someone up there is reading my UKB posts...

https://www.itv.com/news/2020-03-19/boris-johnson-says-mass-testing-for-coronavirus-is-now-official-policy/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on March 19, 2020, 07:12:20 pm
IF the social distancing works and people take it seriously. If people can be made to stick to that then you’ll be right and this will look like a bad flu year from a health standpoint.

Stopped at the top of a hill today to cram some sugar down my neck (Stu you'd really like cycling) and a car full of grey haired people having a picnic on the other side of the road jokingly shouted at me not to come any closer as they were self isolating. They said they were on their last trip out before perhaps they weren't allowed and then joked they'd be going out anyway.

I suggested I was doing the same in case recreational cycling wasn't allowed. They were fully outraged at the prospect of this especially when I pointed out that France/Spain had measures in place covering sport such as climbing. When I suggested it was to ease unnecessary pressure on our healthcare system the penny seemed to drop.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on March 19, 2020, 07:39:11 pm
I can report the info and action from the  secondary school I work at.

School will be open for children of key workers,  they will be split into year groups and primarily based in various IT suites around the school site.  Subject teachers have been asked to set work for their classes daily using an online system.  Pupils attending school will be supported with their work by the staff there but no formal lessons will be offered.  The same work will be set for pupils at home.

The school will be open for children of key workers over the Easter break.

I am not working and self isolated, I will not return to work to protect my wife whom is high risk. 
I have one member of staff whom is pregnant, one who’s partner is a key worker that will be looking after his children, one who has a daughter with SEN (that has been sent home from her residential school) and a husband whose recovering from a stroke.  This leaves 1 member of staff from my unit for pupils with autism.  Suffice to say we’re closing it.  Have arranged online support for my cohort and for my staff to ‘key work’ a couple of pupils/families each. 



Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on March 19, 2020, 07:41:35 pm
Meant to add, it would be ideal if I could get tested to confirm I’ve had it/my wife’s had it and then I can get on and help people at work and in the wider community.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 19, 2020, 07:41:59 pm
Sounds difficult Brutus, good luck with that. I take it this means you are more or less isolating yourself indefinitely then?

Report on Bloomberg about dangers to young people:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-19/coronavirus-in-young-people-is-it-dangerous-data-show-it-can-be
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on March 19, 2020, 08:33:46 pm
Sounds difficult Brutus, good luck with that. I take it this means you are more or less isolating yourself indefinitely then?

Report on Bloomberg about dangers to young people:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-19/coronavirus-in-young-people-is-it-dangerous-data-show-it-can-be
It is what it is and I am sure our situation is better than others.  I am self-isolating indefinitely.

We have all being ill to some degree or another, my son developed a temperature yesterday that peaked at 39C. Calpol every 4 hours and a good nights sleep has left him a normal temp and a cough today.  Scary moment though.
The idea that some youngsters won’t get very poorly is clearly a myth.


Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 19, 2020, 08:52:37 pm
Accirding to NASUWT update, only  if both ie if one parent at home to cover, then child stays with them.

So not if they’re working from home... 🤦‍♂️

Apparently yes, now...
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/19/children-to-attend-school-if-one-parent-classed-as-key-worker
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 19, 2020, 09:05:43 pm
Thanks. That’s some good news. We probably only need it for two days a week. I got the impression at drop off today that the school wanted to put something on - and was tryin g to get NHS worker children signed up almost.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 19, 2020, 09:09:14 pm
Those children who can mix with their peers will be the lucky ones .
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 19, 2020, 09:25:59 pm
Those children who can mix with their peers will be the lucky ones .

Yes - that’s well worth bearing in mind.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 19, 2020, 09:58:56 pm
Those children who can mix with their peers will be the lucky ones .

This has just sunk in here, tonight.
The twinigans are supposed to be doing all their year six leaving stuff. SATs (not so much to be morned), they always put on a production, had a big ceremony and prize giving, and a massive “Prom” (which the girls had already bought dresses for etc).
Basically it’s been a big deal at this school and they saw both elder brother and sister do all this cool stuff. Now, it’s not going to happen for them.
They both just clicked that tomorrow will be their last day with their friends if the last six years.
Hit them both like a ton of bricks.

Eldest is just pissed that she was supposed to do her GCSEs a year early and now has to do them with the rest of her year (smart arse, that one. Actually quietly happy she’s not going to get everything her way. I’ve always been worried about her reaction to not being the smartest cookie when she hits uni. She needed a reality check).

Funny how such a small thing has ruptured the illusion of mild adventure and suddenly it’s serious.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 20, 2020, 07:40:09 am
Another musing..
Anybody else think that this has the potential (if not already there) to turn into THE moral dilemma that will be studied and dissected for the next hundred years?

i.e.

Situation:
An infection to which humanity has no immunity and no vaccine is rapidly spreading throughout the world. It kills a tiny fraction of people in good health under 50, and an order of magnitude greater fraction of people in poor health over 60.
The only way to prevent mass infection is total isolation.
No health service can cope with the ill-health with mass infection which will result from unimpeded spread of the virus.
No economy can cope with the only way to prevent mass infection.

Do you:
a. voluntarily kill the global economy temporarily, to try to protect the at-risk group from infection?
b. protect the livelihoods of current and future generations, but accept that the at-risk group will die in huge numbers from infection?

Is that about right? Big envelope required.



I consider this a category error - the decision has already been made as a) and always will be.

Human lives are real and cannot be valued in economic terms. Conversely the economy is entirely a product of our imaginations and has no unbreakable link to reality. It won't go away because modern society is dependent on trade. But the current position is no more concrete than a game of monopoly, there are just more players.

I was thinking about this yesterday. I'm not sure it's as simple as this. Imagine if the risk to age demographics was reversed. Children especially vulnerable and the older you get the less risk you're at. We'd have had martial law at the outset.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 20, 2020, 11:27:42 am
My elderly neighbour (78) is doing her best with distancing. She's switched on and gets it. Her boyfriend (early 60s) had a conversation with my wife this morning which left her shaking with rage.
These are the various things he had to say.

"Why's your Will telling B to stay at home?"
"They should be able to go out. It's discriminatory against the elderly".
"They've paid their taxes. They're entitled to use the NHS".

Complete failure to comprehend the scale of the problem.

Plenty of old people on our street carrying on like nothing is happening. Yesterday, on our social distancing walk there were young people out climbing as a crew. Old ramblers groups out together. We definitely won't see any behavioural change until the bodies are piling up and it's far too late.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 20, 2020, 11:30:17 am
Quote
We'd have had martial law at the outset.

I'm not convinced - once the death toll rises sufficiently you've got martial law. As you observe, until then it seems there's a collective failure of imagination due to the invisible threat.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 20, 2020, 11:53:23 am

"Why's your Will telling B to stay at home?"
"They should be able to go out. It's discriminatory against the elderly".
"They've paid their taxes. They're entitled to use the NHS".


Jesus fucking christ. Did your wife give him both barrels?

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 20, 2020, 12:01:09 pm

"Why's your Will telling B to stay at home?"
"They should be able to go out. It's discriminatory against the elderly".
"They've paid their taxes. They're entitled to use the NHS".


Jesus fucking christ. Did your wife give him both barrels?

Let's just say he got a flea in his ear.

While we're on the subject of dull cunts, there was a vox pop on the news last night of a woman in London saying "we won't change what we're doing because then we're giving in to it". Like it's a terrorist group whose goal is to alter our daily life, instead of a virus whose goal it is to use you as a vector and maybe kill you in the process.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 20, 2020, 12:05:12 pm
I was thinking about this yesterday. I'm not sure it's as simple as this. Imagine if the risk to age demographics was reversed. Children especially vulnerable and the older you get the less risk you're at. We'd have had martial law at the outset.

I'm not quite sure of your point here. Presumably for most people with any sort of utilitarian leaning* would consider the question/answer to be quite different in your scenario, so it's not surprising that people would come to a different conclusion?

*I'm naively assuming that this covers most non-highly-religious people, but may be entirely wrong on this front
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 20, 2020, 12:09:39 pm
Client in America who clearly buys into the whole 'British stiff upper lip' wank said to me on the phone yesterday 'even during the Blitz the shops and theatres stayed open and now they're shutting them for a virus.' The different being, of course, that one couldn't catch the Blitz...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 20, 2020, 12:21:27 pm
I was thinking about this yesterday. I'm not sure it's as simple as this. Imagine if the risk to age demographics was reversed. Children especially vulnerable and the older you get the less risk you're at. We'd have had martial law at the outset.

I'm not quite sure of your point here. Presumably for most people with any sort of utilitarian leaning* would consider the question/answer to be quite different in your scenario, so it's not surprising that people would come to a different conclusion?

*I'm naively assuming that this covers most non-highly-religious people, but may be entirely wrong on this front

I think the point was that JB seemed to be saying that all life was sacred and there was no question about wrecking the economy if it saved lives. Yet, clearly people aren't really following the advice. A couple of friends of mine went to the pub last night: "it wasn't busy and we'd rather keep the business going". But if there were images on the TV of dying children instead of the elderly and infirm then people would be more inclined to listen I think.
In itself I think that's self evident, but it seems contrary to what JB said.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 20, 2020, 12:39:03 pm
My elderly neighbour (78) is doing her best with distancing. She's switched on and gets it. Her boyfriend (early 60s) had a conversation with my wife this morning which left her shaking with rage.
These are the various things he had to say.

"Why's your Will telling B to stay at home?"
"They should be able to go out. It's discriminatory against the elderly".
"They've paid their taxes. They're entitled to use the NHS".

Complete failure to comprehend the scale of the problem.

Plenty of old people on our street carrying on like nothing is happening. Yesterday, on our social distancing walk there were young people out climbing as a crew. Old ramblers groups out together. We definitely won't see any behavioural change until the bodies are piling up and it's far too late.

Yes.

Today is the first time I felt angry.

Yesterday I spent juggling money to arrange loans, so I can pay my staff as normal and call it “holiday” for as long as possible (or at least until I can make head or tail of the Government’s aid package).
I spent time cancelling customers direct debits and shutting down payments before they’re drawn (I know some of our regulars have been laid off already).
I dealt with a SEN school, who use us for their 6th form students, every week and are not shutting down, but now are struggling to provide much for their students. They were genuinely upset that we couldn’t accommodate them. Fair play, they’re as lost as we are.

I had to deal with upset kids, last night (as I mentioned before) and I know that that probably seems very minor, but it’s huge for them. They already lost all their clubs, sports and activities and it’s not as if we can just let them roam the streets and hang out with their mates, aka defeating the whole purpose of the shutdown.

Then I had to pop out (alone and because we refuse to buy threemonths worth of food now) and the place was absolutely crawling with over 65’s. Cafés, shops, sat on the benches in the pedestrian precinct. Bloody meeting up at the church hall for a coffee morning!

Why are we bothering?

I want to let rip with some long rant about “fucking Boomers”, because I actually have had some niggling, teeth grinding, views of my parents generation for several years; but I imagine many here don’t need the obvious laying out.

And if I hear/read on more of them banging on about the “Blitz” and/or “Dunkirk” spirit, I will lose it.

I am 49 years old. My Grandmother (last surviving grandparent) was ONLY 15 YEARS OLD AT THE END OF THE WAR.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 20, 2020, 12:41:51 pm
I agree that we value young life above old. I'm not convinced that means the lower value placed on old life is anywhere close to the much lower value place on money. In desperate times people say things like 'it's only money, we'll get through it'. They don't say 'ah well it's only death'.

It's clear that lots of people, perhaps even a majority, are just blithely ignoring the facts and will do until the bodies are being trucked out. At which point they'll complain that nobody warned them.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 20, 2020, 12:46:55 pm

225000 cases, 9277 deaths and 81000 recovered world wide still is so far away from what people are saying will happen, so i am still trying to sort out real stuff and look on the bright side.

For the nth time it's nothing to do with the number of deaths right now, its to do with the fast growth in infections and the significant numbers of those needing critical care... if it gets out of control it will firstly overwhelm our hospitals as it did in Wuhan and Italy, and then without a lockdown it would likely eventually kill getting on for 1% of the populaltion. It's way more serious than seasonal flu.

A sobering article on what might happen in the third world:

https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2020/mar/20/worlds-most-vulnerable-in-third-wave-for-covid-19-support-warn-experts

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on March 20, 2020, 01:08:09 pm
Seems to business as usual in the Dales: roads busy, lots of motorcycle routers and campers/motor homes, lots of old folk driving about and the start of the spring ‘car rally’ season (saw a Sierra Cosworth rally yesterday which I’m sure 3T would have loved). Not stopped in town but drove through and still tonnes of people knocking around the shops.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: duncan on March 20, 2020, 01:12:40 pm
Happy to report one 80-something gets it but but my Mum takes most of her medical advice from me rather than social media.  We've collectively decided she's safer where she is than joining any of her offspring. Hope her local shops stay stocked with some kind of food.

By the way, once this is all over and the over-70s (apart from my Mum) have been culled, when do we have the Brexit recount?!


In other news, we (medical school) have just had a circular begging for anyone with good molecular biology lab. skills to volunteer to help with testing as the hospital lab. is very stretched. It read rather like Shackleton's mythical job advert (http://discerninghistory.com/2013/05/shackletons-ad-men-wanted-for-hazerdous-journey/)...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Smith42 on March 20, 2020, 01:17:56 pm
STAY IN THIS WEEKEND!  BE PART OF THE SOLUTION< NOT PART OF THE PROBLEM.

Read this from Italy where they have one of the best health services and more ICU beds than the NHS!

4/ I myself watched with some amazement the reorganization of the entire hospital in the past week, when our current enemy was still in the shadows: the wards slowly "emptied", elective activities were interrupted, intensive care were freed up to create as many beds as possible.

5/ All this rapid transformation brought an atmosphere of silence and surreal emptiness to the corridors of the hospital that we did not yet understand, waiting for a war that was yet to begin and that many (including me) were not so sure would ever come with such ferocity.

6/ I still remember my night call a week ago when I was waiting for the results of a swab. When I think about it, my anxiety over one possible case seems almost ridiculous and unjustified, now that I've seen what's happening. Well, the situation now is dramatic to say the least.

7/ The war has literally exploded and battles are uninterrupted day and night. But now that need for beds has arrived in all its drama. One after the other the departments that had been emptied fill up at an impressive pace.

8/ The boards with the names of the patients, of different colours depending on the operating unit, are now all red and instead of surgery you see the diagnosis, which is always the damned same: bilateral interstitial pneumonia.

11/ Cases are multiplying, we arrive at a rate of 15-20 admissions per day all for the same reason. The results of the swabs now come one after the other: positive, positive, positive. Suddenly the E.R. is collapsing.

13/ Someone already to be intubated and go to intensive care. For others it's too late... Every ventilator becomes like gold: those in operating theatres that have now suspended their non-urgent activity become intensive care places that did not exist before.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: northern yob on March 20, 2020, 01:24:34 pm
There’s so much information on what we (the first world) are doing to try to contain the impact of all this. I’ve seen absolutely nothing about what is happening in the 3rd world. If things are going to be as bad as seems apparent, I dread to think what the impact will be in the barrio’s of South America and the slums of India.... it’s truly terrifying.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Muenchener on March 20, 2020, 01:27:20 pm
Just saw on twitter - so completely true & authoritative, obvs - that Lima is on lockdown and Peruvian Patient Zero has recovered. Hmm.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Snoops on March 20, 2020, 01:29:22 pm
In Italy, they didn't differentiate between patients who had COVID.
They put everyone on ventilators on a first come first served basis.
This mean't all the ICU were taken by mainly older patients with commorbidities, who would of been very unlikely to make it anyway.

The result of that decision was patients who would of benefited from ventilation couldn't gain access, in affect had/have to wait for someone to die who was already ventilated. This has significantly increased the mortality rate in Italy.

There have never been enough ventilators/ICU capacity for a normal flu season in UK, every winter, every day, every hospital decisions are made as to who should be given access (Level 2/3 care) and who is (old and 'crumbly') and should not have invasive support (because there isn't enough for everyone)...these patients get supportive measures and are made comfortable, they might pull though..usually they don't.

You just don't hear about it in the news.
Yours an NHS surgeon
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 20, 2020, 01:39:31 pm
Sub Saharan Africa it will be devastating. Hopefully as little travel goes on it will be contained, but information won't be well disseminated and there will always be things like food delivery that will risk spread of the disease.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 20, 2020, 01:42:42 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=TPpoJGYlW54&feature=emb_logo

not sure if this has been shared before, but interesting background as to how this all came about
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 20, 2020, 01:44:11 pm
"It was agreed that a policy of alternating between periods of more and less strict social
distancing measures could plausibly be effective at keeping the number of critical care
cases within capacity. These would need to be in place for at least most of a year. Under
such as policy, at least half of the year would be spent under the stricter social distancing
measures. "*

Unsurprising given recent statements and the Imperial paper, but confirms that current plan is for this to be the long haul. Lord knows how any business affected (walls, cafes, bars etc) is supposed to plan around this?


*From here: https://www.gov.uk/government/groups/scientific-advisory-group-for-emergencies-sage-coronavirus-covid-19-response

see
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/873729/06-spi-m-o-consensus-view-on-behavioural-and-social-interventions.pdf
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tim palmer on March 20, 2020, 01:46:48 pm
I guess the hope is an easily upscale-able testing scheme, or vaccine will be arrived at which will truncate the timetable
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 20, 2020, 01:49:16 pm
Another musing..
Anybody else think that this has the potential (if not already there) to turn into THE moral dilemma that will be studied and dissected for the next hundred years?

i.e.

Situation:
An infection to which humanity has no immunity and no vaccine is rapidly spreading throughout the world. It kills a tiny fraction of people in good health under 50, and an order of magnitude greater fraction of people in poor health over 60.
The only way to prevent mass infection is total isolation.
No health service can cope with the ill-health with mass infection which will result from unimpeded spread of the virus.
No economy can cope with the only way to prevent mass infection.

Do you:
a. voluntarily kill the global economy temporarily, to try to protect the at-risk group from infection?
b. protect the livelihoods of current and future generations, but accept that the at-risk group will die in huge numbers from infection?

Is that about right? Big envelope required.



I consider this a category error - the decision has already been made as a) and always will be.

Human lives are real and cannot be valued in economic terms. Conversely the economy is entirely a product of our imaginations and has no unbreakable link to reality. It won't go away because modern society is dependent on trade. But the current position is no more concrete than a game of monopoly, there are just more players.

I was thinking about this yesterday. I'm not sure it's as simple as this. Imagine if the risk to age demographics was reversed. Children especially vulnerable and the older you get the less risk you're at. We'd have had martial law at the outset.

Yep I think that's probably right about age - if it was the very young and up to, say age 40, who were looking at a 15% case fatality rate then the public sentiment would look very different to how things look currently. Lots of dead may change sentiment but it will be a bit late.

There seems an inevitable logic about this situation because in the absence of effective anti-virals or a vaccine a virus will infect and kill the % its designed to kill. It doesn't care what you believe, what you earn, what your plans are or who you know. The only variables that alter the probability of the different outcomes of infection are your underlying health status and your age - chronological age being a proxy for immune system status.

I think people consciously or not have baked-in the likelihood of their own demise of this virus into the more ancient instinctive parts of their brains.
 
Seems fairly simple to understand. But difficult/near impossible to educate those in low-risk groups who can't wrap their imaginations around that they're supposed to act in awkward ways to try to slow the exponential rise of an invisible microbe that gives most people a mild cold but kills a smallish fraction of a gigantic number of people who they don't know, many of who seem just as unconcerned by it as them anyway.

 


Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 20, 2020, 01:59:20 pm
I agree that we value young life above old. I'm not convinced that means the lower value placed on old life is anywhere close to the much lower value place on money. In desperate times people say things like 'it's only money, we'll get through it'. They don't say 'ah well it's only death'.

It's clear that lots of people, perhaps even a majority, are just blithely ignoring the facts and will do until the bodies are being trucked out. At which point they'll complain that nobody warned them.

They do, just not in those terms. It's wired into us in the way we're more accepting of old people dying than children or young adults dying. One is mostly natural, one is mostly tragic and unnatural.

Something like this makes far starker and difficult to square the calculation of relative value between money/younger people living their lives, and protecting older/sicker people.

I agree with the second bit.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Murph on March 20, 2020, 02:24:28 pm
This is probably a bit off message but I cant see that it's worth the cost. The hope is that by closing the economy down and making millions unemployed can save 300k 500k (?) lives at a cost of £hundreds of billions. So a million quid a life easily.

When was the last time lives were worth a million quid on average? Especially old/sick ones. The NHS cost effectiveness threshold is something like £20k per QALY. Cant see how the covid cost isn't quite handsomely north of that.

I fear that the current policy - of sort of half putting out the fire - is going to cost a fortune and deliver little benefit. I dont think it will extinguish it and so long as it rages around the world this wont change unless Britain or whatever country is semi permanently cut off. We are not talking about wuhan locking down within China where it is a few % of the population.

As things are at the moment school closes today - mine are already out - but we have a rearranged birthday party invite for monday to respectfully decline. What is the point?

So a million people lost their jobs and (small sacrifice but ukb related!) I'm not supposed to go bouldering any more but old people - the people that absofuckinglutely should be on lockdown are out and about having a nice time. For some people not dependent on working to earn this really cant have been any sort of inconvenience yet.

So I just dont think it will work and we will get 80% of the cost of a proper lockdown with 20% of the benefit (figures calculated with SCIENCE). Surely its debatable whether the sort of epidemic stopping lockdown is even possible now/here.

Sorry long rambly rant there but this feels like it could be the biggest big deal for 100 years and I'm struggling to process it. Hope I'm wrong of course.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on March 20, 2020, 02:34:30 pm
When was the last time lives were worth a million quid on average? Especially old/sick ones. The NHS cost effectiveness threshold is something like £20k per QALY. Cant see how the covid cost isn't quite handsomely north of that.

Guidance in my industry allows for you to essentially put a price on loss of life when comparing it to the cost of remedial works. That figure is considerably in excess of £20k and it's far nearer the million quid.

Imagine for instance you've done a load of works to make something safe in 2018 to current best practice as the loss of life as a result of failure is likely. You spend £Xm. In 2020 if that guidance is updated and the difference between the 2018 condition and the current isn't 'that much' (in terms of loss of life) but will cost £££ to improve to the modern standard it's considered disproportionate. However, as above, those figures aren't ~£20k/head.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: jshaw on March 20, 2020, 02:34:54 pm
skills to volunteer to help with testing as the hospital lab. is very stretched

I work in the School of Biological Sciences at Uni of Manchester. I know of a number of PhD's with good molecular biology lab skills but with little to do since all the research building have closed until further notice.

It'd probably be the same at the nearest University to wherever you're based...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: duncan on March 20, 2020, 02:48:59 pm
When was the last time lives were worth a million quid on average? Especially old/sick ones. The NHS cost effectiveness threshold is something like £20k per QALY. Cant see how the covid cost isn't quite handsomely north of that.

Guidance in my industry allows for you to essentially put a price on loss of life when comparing it to the cost of remedial works. That figure is considerably in excess of £20k and it's far nearer the million quid.


Back of an envelope Department of Heath Economics here:

A QALY is one year in ideal health (or two years in 50% compared-to-ideal health, etc.). A 25 year-old living to 85 might be thought to have roughly 50 QALYs ahead of them, perhaps made up of 35 years ideal health, 20 years not-bad health and 5 years mediocre health. If a QALY is valued at £20k (likely now £30k) then a young adult life is roughly worth £1 million.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Murph on March 20, 2020, 02:51:43 pm
Beat me to it Duncan. Thanks.

If saving a healthy 25 year old from sudden death is worth a million, then saving an unhealthy 85 year old is not. Not under the QALY framework anyway.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 20, 2020, 03:44:47 pm
That's what's being wrestled with isn't it. Either by those who can see the figures and make the calcs, or in more of an instinctive inaccurate estimation by people who can't, but who still realise there's a calculation at play.

You can mess around with the figures such as infection rate 80% or 60% or 40% of 65,000,000

Then a fatality rate of 1% or 2% or 3% of the total.

Plus the probable % breakdown of that total by age.


The expected death total ends being massive in scale.
Given the scale of economic damage inflicted by choosing full lock-down, for it to be a rational choice the lessening effect on the death toll must also be massive. Unless you take a different view on the worth of money versus life as per JB's point.

Seems to maybe make sense to give full lock-down a shot in the short term and hope for a miracle anti-viral or vaccine. In the long term, it doesn't unless you alter the value of things.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on March 20, 2020, 03:47:58 pm
Duncan, where does the £20k (or £30k) come from? And is a similar sort of estimation used to calculate what sort of other medical treatments are offered that just improve quality of life?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 20, 2020, 04:08:36 pm
No been through the thread since this morning - but Amazon’s Audible audio book service is now free for all children’s books 👏👏👏
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: duncan on March 20, 2020, 04:42:32 pm
Duncan, where does the £20k (or £30k) come from? And is a similar sort of estimation used to calculate what sort of other medical treatments are offered that just improve quality of life?

This is the NICE cost-effectiveness threshold: the value per QALY gain that NICE use to judge the cost-effectiveness of a new health interventions. A new intervention (hip replacement, cancer drug, form of psychotherapy) results in gains of a certain number of QALYs compared to the usual care. The new intervention generally has more associated costs than usual care so there is a cost per QALY gain. Above this threshold the intervention is judged not cost-effective: the money would be better spent elsewhere

QALYs are a crude measure but they encompass both quality (of life) and quantity (years) so allow for comparison between very different treatments in people with wildly different conditions. The £20k threshold is much debated but it is interesting, in a macabre kind of way, that it can be tortured to give a roughly similar number to the £1 million often quoted by Engineers.  Note that this threshold does not apply to expensive new end-of-life treatments (https://pharmaphorum.com/views-and-analysis/three-nice-thresholds-for-cost-effectiveness-does-that-make-sense/) for no reason other - that I can see - than avoiding Daily Mail headlines.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: cheque on March 20, 2020, 05:50:40 pm
No been through the thread since this morning - but Amazon’s Audible audio book service is now free for all children’s books 👏👏👏

Got to plug public library services here- we (I work for one) have loads of free online resources- ebooks, e-audiobooks, emagazines and, certainly in the case of my authority, all of us who don’t work on the frontline are still working full time so these online services are very much fully operational and supported even though we’ve closed our branches temporarily.  :thumbsup:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 20, 2020, 07:53:03 pm
First two deaths in Torbay hospital today.

Judging from the social media response to the announcement, it had more effect than Bojo’s news conference.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on March 20, 2020, 10:08:42 pm
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BtN-goy9VOY

These Kurzgesagt vids are always great at getting the science across in a palatable manner.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 20, 2020, 10:14:51 pm
Drip.
.
.
Drip
.
.
Drip drip
.
.
Drip drip drip drip
.
.
Drip drip drip drip drip drip drip drip

 https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-hospital-idUKKBN2172QM?utm_campaign=trueAnthem%3A+Trending+Content&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=facebook (https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-hospital-idUKKBN2172QM?utm_campaign=trueAnthem%3A+Trending+Content&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=facebook)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on March 20, 2020, 10:32:57 pm
Don’t think this has been shared but a very good paper, explains why we need all need to isolate, now..

https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-the-hammer-and-the-dance-be9337092b56
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mark20 on March 20, 2020, 11:00:35 pm
I handed my notice in at work a few weeks ago and it's supposed to be my last day next Thursday. The plan was to spend Spring working on my loft conversion, bathroom and re-wire before renting it out and move to Cornwall this summer with my missus who has a new job lined up down there. I can't see any reason the UK won't be shutdown like France,Spain,Italy etc this time next week, which will make it almost impossible to go out and get the stuff I need to do the work, and for others to put up scaffold, etc. I don't want to be sat at home all summer with no income and making no progress on the house, so I'm going to have to ask to rescind my resignation and hopefully I can carry on working (frontline water industry 'key worker'). Either way it throws the whole Cornwall move in the air now- I don't think we'll be able to go and view houses down there anytime soon. All a bit uncertain for us at the moment. Sorry to whinge, we have our health and that's the main thing. Good to get that off my chest! Stay safe out there
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on March 21, 2020, 09:41:47 am
Good article in Guardian showing the impact on other health provision and explaining my wife's current life:

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/mar/19/cancer-patients-coronavirus-outbreak-difficult-decisions

whilst stressing about getting infected and passing it on to our daughter.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Wood FT on March 21, 2020, 09:46:07 am
I handed my notice in at work a few weeks ago and it's supposed to be my last day next Thursday. The plan was to spend Spring working on my loft conversion, bathroom and re-wire before renting it out and move to Cornwall this summer with my missus who has a new job lined up down there. I can't see any reason the UK won't be shutdown like France,Spain,Italy etc this time next week, which will make it almost impossible to go out and get the stuff I need to do the work, and for others to put up scaffold, etc. I don't want to be sat at home all summer with no income and making no progress on the house, so I'm going to have to ask to rescind my resignation and hopefully I can carry on working (frontline water industry 'key worker'). Either way it throws the whole Cornwall move in the air now- I don't think we'll be able to go and view houses down there anytime soon. All a bit uncertain for us at the moment. Sorry to whinge, we have our health and that's the main thing. Good to get that off my chest! Stay safe out there

I feel for you and V, they’ll be time for all this later. Just remember to keep perspective.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 21, 2020, 10:07:55 am
More farce

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/51980731
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mikester on March 21, 2020, 11:25:45 am
So how long does Cov-19 stick around on different surfaces...

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2004973

Unfortunately, they didn't test rock types.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Muenchener on March 21, 2020, 03:52:22 pm
frontline water industry 'key worker'

Bavarian state government where I live have mentioned the possibility of quarantining essential services workers *at work*. They aren't doing it yet, but apparently under state of emergency powers they can & might.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mark20 on March 21, 2020, 04:12:31 pm
frontline water industry 'key worker'

Bavarian state government where I live have mentioned the possibility of quarantining essential services workers *at work*. They aren't doing it yet, but apparently under state of emergency powers they can & might.
Interesting. A friend at a power station said the operators there are doing this already.
But I can’t see it affecting me as I’m a mobile worker covering lots of sites across the county with no defined ‘place of work’ to be quarantined at.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 21, 2020, 04:47:35 pm
So how long does Cov-19 stick around on different surfaces...

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2004973

Unfortunately, they didn't test rock types.

My take home from this is that it’s not quite the same as the SARS virus it’s compared to. This is important as many people assume it is similar/same. If anything it seems hardier on some surfaces :(
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on March 21, 2020, 06:22:55 pm
frontline water industry 'key worker'

Bavarian state government where I live have mentioned the possibility of quarantining essential services workers *at work*. They aren't doing it yet, but apparently under state of emergency powers they can & might.
Interesting. A friend at a power station said the operators there are doing this already.
But I can’t see it affecting me as I’m a mobile worker covering lots of sites across the county with no defined ‘place of work’ to be quarantined at.
I'm a key worker in electricity generation - there's already a plan in place for teams of us to live in the office if really hits the fan.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on March 21, 2020, 06:25:48 pm
https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-the-hammer-and-the-dance-be9337092b56

This is interesting, and seems well reasoned and based on sound assumptions
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on March 21, 2020, 08:09:05 pm
https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-the-hammer-and-the-dance-be9337092b56

This is interesting, and seems well reasoned and based on sound assumptions
Yup, shared that on previous page.

Further to North Devon Hospital being fucked, it now appear that second home owners and convoys of caravans are heading this way. Campsites have not been instructed to close and it would appear that people think they can come here to isolate themselves from the issue in more built up areas and take in the holidays vibes whilst doing so.  So they’re potentially bringing the virus with them and so furthering the pressure on the hospital.  Locals are sharpening pitch forks as I speak.  There is talk of blockading the link road..  Seriously grockles, just fuck off it ain’t holiday season..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: seankenny on March 21, 2020, 08:38:21 pm
I think the virus is beginning to really rip through London and I guess other major cities can’t be too far behind.

If crowds are leaving this weekend it’s almost certain some of them will be bringing you a nasty little present.

As an aside, it’s pretty grim to have even some of the symptoms. Not sure why you’d want to go through that in a camper van on a campsite. Fuck that.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on March 21, 2020, 09:22:08 pm
For sure...  they’ve missed a trick closing hotels but not holiday parks :no:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 21, 2020, 09:27:26 pm
National trust has announced its closing all its parks, gardens, houses, everything from tonight.

It all feels like too little too late... our number of dead is rising at near the same as Italy two weeks ago.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on March 21, 2020, 09:43:00 pm
UK: 5000 cases total, 1000 of those today...

https://www.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/f94c3c90da5b4e9f9a0b19484dd4bb14
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: 205Chris on March 21, 2020, 10:06:06 pm
Still some way to go with UK measures......

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YfsdJGj3-jM&feature=youtu.be
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on March 21, 2020, 11:29:06 pm
It's strange to reflect that whatever you felt about Brexit, how massively insignificant it now seems. Along with pretty much everything else. Now I'm just hoping that at some point in the next year or two, we get this under control, and friends and family stay healthy and alive.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 22, 2020, 12:12:30 am
The guidance documents on .gov.uk bug me hugely. You can tell they've been written by scientists. There's some background, a preamble, and then you eventually get to some bullet points (not highlighted in any way) which tell you what you should and shouldn't do.

Part of my job is reading and interpreting and sometimes arguing with government department guidance and I feel fine reading this stuff, but fuck me, the average Joe Punter is going to switch off after sentence one, or more likely just be overfaced and not even start. And the daily lectern ramblings aren't exactly concise. Why is there nobody in government able to give a clear message beyond "wash your hands and stay away from old people"?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 22, 2020, 06:52:22 am
Sorry - You’d lost me at the second sentence 😂
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 22, 2020, 09:11:51 am
That study on how long the virus survives did not address the two I’d like to know: plastic and glass.
Or handles and grubby touch  screens, to be more precise
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 23, 2020, 12:39:08 pm


It all feels like too little too late... our number of dead is rising at near the same as Italy two weeks ago.

I think we've just overtaken it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 23, 2020, 05:18:56 pm
No daily briefing from Team Boris today.

But an address to the nation later. My money is on a lockdown (Shirley? Been on the cards for a while)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on March 23, 2020, 05:27:14 pm
No daily briefing from Team Boris today.

But an address to the nation later. My money is on a lockdown (Shirley? Been on the cards for a while)

Any idea what a lockdown could mean?

We live on a boat and need to move semi-regularly to empty the toilet.

We have an offer of a house from my sister who has an empty one after moving. But it would mean a few trips to move (it's got no furniture) from Leeds to Cumbria.

We're weighing up whether to go now as whilst small, the boat is home. But also don't think we could be locked in here indefinitely.

Not quite sure what lockdown would really mean

Edit - moving would become essential if we get stuck here with no access to toilet etc.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 23, 2020, 06:14:36 pm
Dunno James.

Germany have a decent idea with no gatherings of more than 2 people...

In Spain/France you need to fill in an online form print it and take it out with you.

Lots of unknowns about all This.

Meanwhile in our road - where 3/10 houses have/are being affected tales are coming out. Those who started with ‘like a cold’ are now saying ‘never felt so tired’, the 35 yo man training to run a marathon (upnto 20k so far) described it as having 3 days where someone heavy was sitting on his chest (he’s now knackered still taking the dog for a potter)... also one with mild symptoms but no taste/smell (which is also a common one it appears).

What’s VERY noticeable from the houses in quarantine (we’re all terraces) are how little noise or activity there is. None of the normal waving out the window - or seeing people being about. They’re all sleeping lots and really tired.

7 colleagues/friends of my wife have it. NCT dads dad is in ICU with it (not looking good) . Dunno what it’s like your way but S.Manchester seems riddled - and it wouldn’t surprise me if several hundred thousand have it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on March 23, 2020, 06:33:08 pm
Cheers TT - hopefully any rules mean we would still be able to travel if needed. Either that or we pack up and head off tomorrow... Wouldn’t be seeing anyone & would continue isolation upon moving into the house. It’s just the actual move I’m unsure of.

I’m in central Leeds & haven’t heard anything about it other than the newspaper positive count (29 as of yesterday). We’re basically locking ourselves away and going for a few little walks each day now (other than fieldwork yesterday (super remote)). Not sure if it’s useful that we live on some pontoons so no one really passes us other than the small community of us who live here. Quite a few at risk neighbours so everyone is (quite rightly) fairly paranoid.

It’s scary to hear local stories of it like yours. Especially fit and healthy people who are being impacted in a big way. Hope you and your family can keep safe.

Going to be a hell of a year... Doubt we’ll have a wedding going ahead now, doesn’t seem worth the risk. Anything to help keep the ICU’s free.

Can’t help thinking about those in the NHS who are going to be scarred & exhausted for the foreseeable. Such a shit time.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 23, 2020, 06:54:31 pm
Hi tt, I also know a few with ‘bad flu’ who seem to be hibernating but not sure you can really say that people ‘have it’ unless hospitalised and tested.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: seankenny on March 23, 2020, 07:04:54 pm

Meanwhile in our road - where 3/10 houses have/are being affected tales are coming out. Those who started with ‘like a cold’ are now saying ‘never felt so tired’, the 35 yo man training to run a marathon (upnto 20k so far) described it as having 3 days where someone heavy was sitting on his chest (he’s now knackered still taking the dog for a potter)... also one with mild symptoms but no taste/smell (which is also a common one it appears).

What’s VERY noticeable from the houses in quarantine (we’re all terraces) are how little noise or activity there is. None of the normal waving out the window - or seeing people being about. They’re all sleeping lots and really tired.


One of my friends at university returned home to Germany, got ill and tested positive. I've been in several classes with her so given that my symptoms fit well, I'm assuming I've had it.

Clearly some people get away with very few symptoms but it can be really quite debilitating. I have been extremely tired, today for the first time in nearly a week I've not needed an afternoon sleep, but I haven't left the sofa. Social distancing is absolutely no problem as I don't have any interest in leaving the house.

I'm not saying this to garner sympathy, just to give anyone reading it an idea of what you might get. You've something in you that, until December, had only ever lived in bats and pigs...  :sick:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Falling Down on March 23, 2020, 07:09:40 pm
Glad you're on the mend Sean.  I'm still getting afternoon tiredness and had to have a nap today even though I'm now free of other symptoms - although I do seem to have the odd couple of hours where I get tired and cough every other day. 

It's alarming that you, me and Duncan have all been poorly so that's a pretty high % of UKB'ers in London.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 23, 2020, 07:16:41 pm

It's alarming that you, me and Duncan have all been poorly so that's a pretty high % of UKB'ers in London.

I suspect our testing regime is massively under reporting cases. I’ve had an email exchange with a German colleague - and he things the German figures are closer to the actual number than the uk ones. We have a mortality rate of 5% (or more) based on the figures - but in developed countries it’s estimated to be 0.5-1% - hence the common reasoning. That 10 times trust number in the Uk have or have had it.

The antibody test to see if you have had it will become super important as a test whether you can return to normal life etc...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 23, 2020, 07:53:12 pm
The gov scientists have mentioned a few times in the briefings that the infections *are* - not might be - 10 times the reported cases.

I'll be interested to see the stats when this is over for the correlation between areas of high air pollution and severe covid cases. Hopefully will help accelerate the rollout of electric and the outlawing of diesel in cities.
Great before/during maps of China, Italy, S.Korea and UK showing levels of particulate matter: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/mar/23/coronavirus-pandemic-leading-to-huge-drop-in-air-pollution (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/mar/23/coronavirus-pandemic-leading-to-huge-drop-in-air-pollution)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 23, 2020, 08:03:46 pm
Good point, but won’t poor air quality typically correlate with high population density too?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fultonius on March 23, 2020, 08:04:19 pm
That article on Medium seemed to think it was around "reported cases x 20" for the true number, or "deaths x 600".

For the UK, that would mean somewhere in the of 6650 x 20, or 335 x 600 = 130k to 200k cases. We're doing a lot less testing than a lot of countries.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: bigironhorse on March 23, 2020, 08:04:41 pm
I haven't be keep a super close eye on this thread so this might have been posted already. Pretty interesting graphs and charts tracking the virus:

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 23, 2020, 08:12:39 pm
There is a problem with not testing insofar as someone who has been ill may believe they have had *it* and act as if they cannot then catch it again and infect someone, when in fact they have had another illness, thus accelerating the epidemic.

Quote

Guardian: Should someone behave differently if they think, but don’t know for certain, that they have already had it?

Buchholz: We all have to be role models. If we’re all in it together, we all should be doing social distancing.

Hillman: Since there’s no real way to know at this point who might have had it, unless you’re symptomatic, you get a swab and are definitively diagnosed with it, I would just act as if you hadn’t had it. Keep doing all of those things that we all should be doing at this point: social distancing and hand hygiene.

From the Guardian interview with Dr David Buchholz, senior founding medical director, primary care, assistant professor of pediatrics, Columbia University Irving Medical Center and Dr William Hillmann, associate inpatient physician director at Massachusetts general hospital.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Falling Down on March 23, 2020, 08:19:38 pm
That's certainly what I'm doing - I have no idea whether I've had it or not so am opting to be on the safe side and continue as if I haven't.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: AnaisB on March 23, 2020, 08:23:22 pm
I’m pretty sure I’ve got it (mildly.). Colleague tested positive and 3/4 of people in my house unwell. The 7 year old is happily unaffected. Symptoms have been dry cough, chest pains and breathless. No fever, although I normally run at 35.6 and got up to 37.   The illness overlapped with having shingles so it was difficult to be specific about tiredness, headaches etc.

I might not change my behaviour in regards to social distancing, but I’ll certainly feel more confident at work - patient facing NHS. In a lot of ways it’s a massive relief to be pretty certain I’ve had it. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on March 23, 2020, 08:30:46 pm
We're doing a lot less testing than a lot of countries.

Quite true, and testing is a crucial step. Hopefully a journalist will enquire at tonight's briefing where we are with it. 5 days ago it was 5000 a day, with a promise we were moving towards 25,000 a day. It would be reassuring to know whether or not we are getting there, plus an update on the antibody (i.e. "whether you've already had it") test.

More importantly it would be good to have a direct question about whether NHS frontline staff are being provided the correct PPE and on what timescale? My nextdoor neighbour is an A&E doc and hasn't yet even been face-fitted for, never mind provided with, an FFP3 mask. Plastic aprons, paper masks. I have already given my new FFP3 to a GP I know who was in the same boat. Health professionals will die unneccesarily if this is not sorted very very soon. These are items which are piled high in the stockrooms of main contractors nationwide and which should have been requisitioned weeks ago by the government IMHO if there was a shortage in the marketplace. I suspect the army must have a bunch stashed away somewhere too. None of which is ideal but its a damn sight better than a paper mask! If logistics are a problem then it makes you wonder how good this government's contingency planning is...

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on March 23, 2020, 08:53:13 pm
So, can I see my daughter (who lives with her mum ~ 75% of the time) for the next few weeks? Anyone know where to look for updated guidelines on this after today's announcement?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Muenchener on March 23, 2020, 08:57:12 pm
So, can I see my daughter (who lives with her mum ~ 75% of the time) for the next few weeks? Anyone know where to look for updated guidelines on this after today's announcement?

This may not be much help but over here under Bavarian lockdown rules you could.

(Although as I already mentioned further up the thread, my ex is on immunosuppressants and there is no f*cking way our son is going anywhere near her for the duration)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 23, 2020, 09:05:50 pm
We're doing a lot less testing than a lot of countries.

State of play at March 19th.

(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/mX5wXAmofBrgabYS0h7KdeWEjQ4kiZ5bZGgGFjfIPo8RYiv3XIIpIVcKOg3feYyqqpALLK0drDKeaYEdFMbHBd2P2KaNoeRBcsrkWEmQmVGefbwYTyoPygYNyNqfqxWUjYeZmG0KLN_tMCzeGAVs5dolVILCKCEwjr6hq_7CB2Yse4MJglHkjz6VoaIFY1mrwIqYLVmUIQPS995QLLQMBsUb5lotyu45x1cLKwueE6Lx8k-MdAdcEaJcctaAg8w6p9g0Zg6ZrpWvdIjr6opI7_sarSeA2St3GuQd8ygPcFJwbPxWIS9mbbeVcWp0BODNVbTuwnzg3shXeDwe6kOmzkCH5AvrMjIEoR4wkWkcHtQGZMLihr-4XCrUYkexOtD3MJ01VwO8YckuNx4aHTfTksRKDB2w2ojMnrHi13Q2pWudFLe3IPxLBDmTtlvhM-Vj6_exjXyuy17GCeWweXRz7GPxNp2DXfBIuuCLZVSjIUONyymxF45s7Ns1RpYuoorqh70bVYXLY5wk2wHPlnAEmUuutO8yL-x029KbFGKhZiLXbzI7aKPCtH8aNQhGFtbhgS4cW1UQ0QtFYevp0UUAgiTh_sYx61Fxs0YiCxrQwr94VuMvpZsRBfp-69aIsXQWRQZ8FEi-cjsgupUkb_SL9s08UxkNhSm9m1Xkz2ph8pW7sbXqc8hCqT5z7rQ=w1252-h883-no)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Muenchener on March 23, 2020, 09:17:04 pm
Deep inroads into traditional Alpine culture being made now: Bavaria has asked schnapps distilleries to switch to producing medical grade ethanol.

My brother's comment when I told him this: so they'll just change the labels then?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on March 23, 2020, 09:19:35 pm
Anyone know where to look for updated guidelines on this after today's announcement?

The transcript is here:
https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1242188591654150145?s=19
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on March 23, 2020, 09:25:37 pm
Still no word on support for the self employed? Or have I missed something.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on March 23, 2020, 09:32:52 pm
No you haven't. They're promising later this week from what I can see on Twitter.

From Martin Lewis:
https://twitter.com/MartinSLewis/status/1242143752820600833?s=19
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nik at work on March 23, 2020, 09:43:29 pm
Isle of Man has fully closed it’s birders to non residents. I have no idea when I’ll next see my kids. I hope can continue to see your daughter Duma.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on March 23, 2020, 09:45:44 pm
That's tough Nik, hope you're OK
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nik at work on March 23, 2020, 09:54:12 pm
They’re safe and healthy right now, which is the main thing. If they, or more pressingly their very asthmatic mum, get ill I’ll be less calm....

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 23, 2020, 10:10:57 pm
Isle of Man has fully closed it’s birders to non residents. I have no idea when I’ll next see my kids. I hope can continue to see your daughter Duma.

That is utterly shit for you and I cannot imagine not being able to see my kids.

I really hope you can work something out.

However.

Your typo about Birders is hilarious.
I had no idea IOM Bird Watcher were so promiscuous...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 23, 2020, 10:13:45 pm
"Home" must include garden surely?

Also parks to be open, but surely playgrounds should be shut? Hate to think how many little hands grab pieces of playground equipment every day.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 23, 2020, 10:29:01 pm
There was specific mention, in the after blurb on the BBC report, that playgrounds, sports courts etc, would be closed down.

I can’t see the Police inspecting the entire nation’s back gardens (I’m pretty sure that counts as home) unless you’ve rescheduled Glastonbury in your shrubbery?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on March 23, 2020, 10:30:36 pm
So, can I see my daughter (who lives with her mum ~ 75% of the time) for the next few weeks? Anyone know where to look for updated guidelines on this after today's announcement?

There was an advisor on 5 live earlier who answered this question from a caller. She said that the children should stay with one parent and that it's terrible but communicate with the other via phone Skype etc until the lockdown is over. She said that transfer between households or visiting was expressly prohibited.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: jwi on March 23, 2020, 10:49:56 pm
A bit exercise outdoors might still be allowed in France, but I have decided to stop running for the foreseeable future. I will do a skipping rope workout in the apartment instead. We have a balcony, it will have to do for outdoor activities for the coming month or two.

I plan to limit myself to shopping once a week. I went shopping today and the store limited the number of clients quite strictly. Despite showing up before they opened in the morning I had to wait 50 min in line, and was given 10 min to shop.

We had a party at home tonight, inviting friends to join via zoom (works very well, and the 40 min limit on free accounts is waivered for now). That was surprisingly nice. First "face-to-face" social contact we've had this week.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 23, 2020, 11:10:57 pm
There was specific mention, in the after blurb on the BBC report, that playgrounds, sports courts etc, would be closed down.

I can’t see the Police inspecting the entire nation’s back gardens (I’m pretty sure that counts as home) unless you’ve rescheduled Glastonbury in your shrubbery?

Good about playgrounds etc. We have a front garden but not much back? You could take it literally if you wanted to be a dick about it though.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 23, 2020, 11:12:01 pm
A bit exercise outdoors might still be allowed in France, but I have decided to stop running for the foreseeable future.

Interested to hear why you have decided this, given that it is allowed.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 23, 2020, 11:41:42 pm
Surely people aren't thinking about stopping their children from playing in the garden? Nobody else will be coming onto your property.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 23, 2020, 11:51:10 pm
Unlikely, but only takes one dickhead. I expect people will be getting a bit vigilante about this.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on March 24, 2020, 12:08:31 am
Unlikely, but only takes one dickhead. I expect people will be getting a bit vigilante about this.

At the weekend in the peak someone had put up big spray paint signs saying go home or countryside closed. Quite enterprising, perhaps it was Boris.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on March 24, 2020, 02:32:30 am
A garden, or any private outside space, even a balcony, will be a massive advantage over the next few weeks. Sadly my daughter has neither at her mum's.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on March 24, 2020, 03:10:52 am
So, can I see my daughter (who lives with her mum ~ 75% of the time) for the next few weeks? Anyone know where to look for updated guidelines on this after today's announcement?

There was an advisor on 5 live earlier who answered this question from a caller. She said that the children should stay with one parent and that it's terrible but communicate with the other via phone Skype etc until the lockdown is over. She said that transfer between households or visiting was expressly prohibited.
Thanks for the info Toby. Gutted, haven't slept at all yet. If anyone sees anything official written down somewhere on this they can link to I'd appreciate it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on March 24, 2020, 03:59:43 am
Further to this, and in case it's relevant to others, the document linked below contradicts Tobys post re the 5live advisor:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/full-guidance-on-staying-at-home-and-away-from-others/full-guidance-on-staying-at-home-and-away-from-others

Specifically, the exception for

"Any medical need, or to provide care or to help a vulnerable person."

Has a footnote that says:

"Where applicable, this includes moving children under 18 between their parents’ homes."
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nik at work on March 24, 2020, 07:08:06 am
Duma I hope you can find a way to see your daughter. I am in a position where I cannot see my sons at all (beyond Skype etc) but if there was a ‘grey area’ I would be exploring it. I think this is somewhat different to the desire/need to climb or exercise.

OMM I’m glad I’ve provided some small amusement, I think we could all do with a bit of a laugh right now. Bloody iPhone thinks it’s smarter than me... to be fair it probably is 😂
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 24, 2020, 07:27:26 am
The stated allowance in that written guidance is "Travelling to and from work, but only where this absolutely cannot be done from home."

So that includes our monitoring work. And we are a critical sector. And we're not on the list of outlawed businesses (obviously); neither is our contractor.
This is making it quite difficult to know what to do. Will have to thrash it out with my colleagues.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gollum on March 24, 2020, 07:52:06 am
So, can I see my daughter (who lives with her mum ~ 75% of the time) for the next few weeks? Anyone know where to look for updated guidelines on this after today's announcement?

There was an advisor on 5 live earlier who answered this question from a caller. She said that the children should stay with one parent and that it's terrible but communicate with the other via phone Skype etc until the lockdown is over. She said that transfer between households or visiting was expressly prohibited.
Thanks for the info Toby. Gutted, haven't slept at all yet. If anyone sees anything official written down somewhere on this they can link to I'd appreciate it.

If it helps Gove has just been on BBC saying that children can be moved from one parent to another under the age of 18.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Muenchener on March 24, 2020, 08:16:07 am
A bit exercise outdoors might still be allowed in France, but I have decided to stop running for the foreseeable future. I will do a skipping rope workout in the apartment instead. We have a balcony, it will have to do for outdoor activities for the coming month or two.

Same in Bayern. My son is still going out for early morning runs alternate days, which I'm fine with for now, but I'm doing TFNA-style box step-ups by the hour. Works ok if you get your youtube queue properly set up in advance.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nai on March 24, 2020, 08:42:11 am
A bit exercise outdoors might still be allowed in France, but I have decided to stop running for the foreseeable future. I will do a skipping rope workout in the apartment instead. We have a balcony, it will have to do for outdoor activities for the coming month or two.

Have you experience of skipping previously? Can be pretty hard on the knees so mind how you go with it
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 24, 2020, 08:43:55 am
The stated allowance in that written guidance is "Travelling to and from work, but only where this absolutely cannot be done from home."

So that includes our monitoring work. And we are a critical sector. And we're not on the list of outlawed businesses (obviously); neither is our contractor.
This is making it quite difficult to know what to do. Will have to thrash it out with my colleagues.

The earlier guidance stated 'go to work (if you're a key worker)'

They then backtracked and issued the vagueness of last night.

Whatever you decide I would do it on the basis of where we are headed not what the small print says you could get away with today. When the hospitals are in the shit I don't think you'll want it on your conscience.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: fatneck on March 24, 2020, 08:48:21 am
We have closed the office bar essential staff this morning. Have the team are working from home. We have one foodbank open today who are seeing people at the door and handing out parcels but not having anyone in (most centres still open have been doing this for the last week).

All volunteers have been ordered to stay at home bar the centre that is open today.

We have had to completely change our operation but are classed as an essential service. We have commandeered a local sports centre and are planning to pre-pack 10,000 food parcels over the next week or so in an effort to ensure some kind of supply chain to the centres we are able to keep open.

The city council, general public (1,700 emails offering volunteer support in the last two days!) and both football clubs have really got behind the effort but we are struggling to understand how we are going to operate safely under the lock down. Hoping to get some clarity from government and council and the Trussell Trust today.

We are currently good for money and food. Will keep people posted!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: jwi on March 24, 2020, 08:55:51 am
A bit exercise outdoors might still be allowed in France, but I have decided to stop running for the foreseeable future. I will do a skipping rope workout in the apartment instead. We have a balcony, it will have to do for outdoor activities for the coming month or two.

Have you experience of skipping previously? Can be pretty hard on the knees so mind how you go with it
Thx for the heads up. Did skipping as cardio a few years ago, but I will start slow. Mostly worried about DOMS...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 24, 2020, 08:58:39 am
The stated allowance in that written guidance is "Travelling to and from work, but only where this absolutely cannot be done from home."

So that includes our monitoring work. And we are a critical sector. And we're not on the list of outlawed businesses (obviously); neither is our contractor.
This is making it quite difficult to know what to do. Will have to thrash it out with my colleagues.

The earlier guidance stated 'go to work (if you're a key worker)'

They then backtracked and issued the vagueness of last night.

Whatever you decide I would do it on the basis of where we are headed not what the small print says you could get away with today. When the hospitals are in the shit I don't think you'll want it on your conscience.

I agree. And frankly, I would expect the guidance to be tightened in the face of people taking the broadest interpretation and it not working. The particular complication here is that we could end up being sanctioned by the very government that we're trying to comply with if we don't do the work.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 24, 2020, 09:30:29 am
Shark can probably elucidate this better, but this morning a local GP, here in Devon, shared the condition of one of his patients.
“Well below the critical age category”.
“No underlying health issues”.
And now in critical care.

Edit

Actually, he said this:

“ Covid 19. The coronavirus. It has made me take to Facebook to get a message across.
I’m a GP in a rural practice in the West Country.
Here in deepest Devon we have a staff member who is critically unwell from coronavirus and on ITU. No risk factors. No underlying health conditions. And way under the ‘at risk’ age.
For all those who think:
‘It’s not a serious illness’
‘It’s all a conspiracy’
‘It’s social engineering’
‘It won’t affect me’
‘Social distancing is for other people’
You are wrong.
This is a genuine crisis. It is an illness that is killing people. It will kill people you know and people you care about.
You need to take it seriously.
Stay away from other people.
Support the vulnerable (safely).
Wash your hands.”

I’m reluctant to share the GP’s name. It was a public FB post, so you can find it if you try.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: duncan on March 24, 2020, 10:51:58 am
It's alarming that you, me and Duncan have all been poorly so that's a pretty high % of UKB'ers in London.

Just the oldies Ben!

I'm slowly recovering, hope you do too. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: jwi on March 24, 2020, 10:59:55 am
A bit exercise outdoors might still be allowed in France, but I have decided to stop running for the foreseeable future.

Interested to hear why you have decided this, given that it is allowed.

Until I am tested I will just assume that I have the virus but is asymptomatic. I will do what I can not to spread it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 24, 2020, 11:53:57 am

It's alarming that you, me and Duncan have all been poorly so that's a pretty high % of UKB'ers in London.

My brother said two of his mates in London are in bed with it, he's seen them both before the shutdown, so reckons it might be a question of time..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 24, 2020, 11:55:00 am
A bit exercise outdoors might still be allowed in France, but I have decided to stop running for the foreseeable future.

Interested to hear why you have decided this, given that it is allowed.

Until I am tested I will just assume that I have the virus but is asymptomatic. I will do what I can not to spread it.

Do you think you will be tested, or will you just paly the waiting game. Your stance is admirable btw.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on March 24, 2020, 01:20:29 pm
So, can I see my daughter (who lives with her mum ~ 75% of the time) for the next few weeks? Anyone know where to look for updated guidelines on this after today's announcement?

FYI - this morning at 7:20 on GMB Gove said that children should stay put. There's an exception for children with unique vulnerabilities.

I can't provide a link but I'm assuming it'll be on an online streaming service.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 24, 2020, 01:40:18 pm
He corrected that on the Today programme.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dunnyg on March 24, 2020, 01:51:03 pm
Random anecdotes:
I live opposite an old folks/sheltered accommodation place. I see oldies regularly leaving via the same gate, rarely wearing gloves. The last person opened it and within 2 seconds wiped his nose with his hand. It is so easy to see how this can spread, scary times! There are way fewer people out and about however, and at least half of them are wearing masks, some gloves as well, though I do worry this may provide false ideas of security, particularly the gloves. Having worked in a clean lab (not biology stuff)  I have an idea about how hard it is to break the face touching habit and how incredibly anal you have to be to stop all contamination, I find it difficult outside the lab.

I also live next door to a GP surgery, they had the lights on until 10pm last night for the first time in the 2 years i've lived here...   
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Drew on March 24, 2020, 02:27:01 pm
So, can I see my daughter (who lives with her mum ~ 75% of the time) for the next few weeks? Anyone know where to look for updated guidelines on this after today's announcement?

I asked my missus, who spends about 50% of her time dealing with this sort of thing. She's had a newsletter this lunchtime from some authority or other saying Gove has tweeted to apologize for contradicting the official line in various media outlets this morning. Essentially it sounds like children can switch between two parent's houses, as long as no-one is self-isolating for medical grounds.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Falling Down on March 24, 2020, 02:35:12 pm
It's alarming that you, me and Duncan have all been poorly so that's a pretty high % of UKB'ers in London.

Just the oldies Ben!

I'm slowly recovering, hope you do too.

Ha! True...

Hope you get better soon. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on March 24, 2020, 02:43:27 pm
FYI - this morning at 7:20 on GMB Gove said that children should stay put. There's an exception for children with unique vulnerabilities.

Gove has tweeted to apologize for contradicting the official line in various media outlets this morning. Essentially it sounds like children can switch between two parent's houses, as long as no-one is self-isolating for medical grounds.

Wow. They're doing really well in providing a clear and consistent message to all  :tumble:.

https://twitter.com/michaelgove/status/1242358443702390789?s=20
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 24, 2020, 04:42:42 pm
87! Today.

I was daring to hope the curve was flattening.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 24, 2020, 04:46:09 pm
Matt Hancock has today stated that where people can't work from home they should go to work. A bit lost for words at that so I will instead use all of the emojis available that are appropriate.
 >:( :o :???: :'( :furious: :guilty: :rtfm: :spank: :wank: :wavecry: :icon_321: :no: :wall: :slap: :thumbsdown: :ohmy: :shit: :chair:


87! Today.

I was daring to hope the curve was flattening.

The curve can't possibly flatten for about 2 weeks, can it? The deaths are already locked in because the infections which cause the deaths that will occur in 2 weeks or so have already happened. Sorry if I've got that wrong. Given that it's been business as usual today (for lots and lots of people) on the government's express instruction then I don't see how the peak can do anything but receive a small set back.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 24, 2020, 05:04:21 pm
I know.
And I knew. But there had been a small drop over the last two days and we are ahead of Italy in all of our measures.
For instance our current lockdown level. Italy only hit the panic button at 800 deaths, still double the current UK tally.
Clearly, the social distancing thing of a couple of weeks ago, did not work.

Well, it probably did, we’ll never know how much worse it might have been today.

I hope that even with the confusion and idiots ignoring, the new measures might take us off the Italian trajectory two weeks from now, because I’ve not plotted todays figures yet, but anything over 60 would have put us on a steeper slope than Italy.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mark20 on March 24, 2020, 05:08:20 pm
Plus a spike at some point corresponding to the stupidity on Last Pub Day / Sunny Weekend / Mother’s Day ?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: jwi on March 24, 2020, 06:40:15 pm
(https://uspo.fr/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/gestes-3.jpg)
To exit: 1 Long sleeves. 2 Put up the hair, no earrings. 3. Mask on if you have. 4. Avoid public transport. 5. Avoid touching any surfaces. 6. Use paper towels when touching surfaces. 7. Throw them in a closed bin. 8. Cough in the elbow. 9. Pay by card. 10. Wash the hands or use hand sanitiser after touching anything. 11. Do not touch the face before washing. 12. Keep distance

(https://uspo.fr/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/gestes-1.jpg)
To enter: 1. Do not touch anything. 2. Take of shoes. 3. Disinfect the paws of pets. 4. Take of the clothes and throw them in the washing machine. 5. Put keys and bags in a paper box by the door. 6. Wash the hands, or better, take a shower. 7. Disinfect glasses and smartphone. 8. Disinfect anything brought in. 9. Take of the gloves (wait a minute, shouldn't this be step 5?). 10. Impossible to disinfect everything, the goal is to minimise risks.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 24, 2020, 06:58:16 pm
Where's this from jwi, is it official French government advice?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 24, 2020, 06:59:15 pm
Mumbai police:
https://twitter.com/HiHyderabad/status/1242371665021095938 (https://twitter.com/HiHyderabad/status/1242371665021095938)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: jwi on March 24, 2020, 07:03:32 pm
Sorry, should have said, but got interrupted. It is from one of the labour unions of Pharmacist workers (https://uspo.fr/). I do think everyone should take the same precautions.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 24, 2020, 07:57:18 pm
Sorry, should have said, but got interrupted. It is from one of the labour unions of Pharmacist workers (https://uspo.fr/). I do think everyone should take the same precautions.

My wife has been going straight to the shower and putting her work clothes in a plastic bag to keep separate when she gets in from work.

Told her off for coughing into her hand last night. Cue domestic... and excessive use of sanitiser (in low supply)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: 205Chris on March 24, 2020, 09:07:49 pm
From what I've seen today on my first day of enforced Daddydaycare it's only a matter of time before stricter measures are enforced. Went for my permitted walk through our local park which is fortunately just over the road from us and saw;

People driving to the park to walk their dogs
People using the skate park which was barrier taped off with signs up saying do not use
Multiple runners / walkers making no attempt to leave 2m social distancing

Clearly a lot of people are working on the principal of 'unless we're expressly forbidden from doing something we're going to keep calm and carry on'

 :wall: :wall: :wall: :wall: :wall: :wall: :wall: :wall: :wall:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 24, 2020, 09:09:57 pm
People driving to the park to walk their dogs

Is that really so bad? Sounds like minimising the amount of contact you might have with others until you get to the wide open space (pavements don't readily allow for passing at a 2m distance).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: 205Chris on March 24, 2020, 09:28:30 pm
People driving to the park to walk their dogs

Is that really so bad? Sounds like minimising the amount of contact you might have with others until you get to the wide open space (pavements don't readily allow for passing at a 2m distance).

Driving somewhere immediately increases the risk of an RTC and the need to fuel your car.

By extrapolating your argument you could well claim that a drive into the Peak was fine.

I'd argue if you can't walk your dogs from your house without ensuring a 2m distance from other people then you need to be staying indoors (or picking quiet times of day).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bradders on March 24, 2020, 09:49:12 pm
From what I've seen today on my first day of enforced Daddydaycare it's only a matter of time before stricter measures are enforced. Went for my permitted walk through our local park which is fortunately just over the road from us and saw;

People driving to the park to walk their dogs
People using the skate park which was barrier taped off with signs up saying do not use
Multiple runners / walkers making no attempt to leave 2m social distancing

Clearly a lot of people are working on the principal of 'unless we're expressly forbidden from doing something we're going to keep calm and carry on'

 :wall: :wall: :wall: :wall: :wall: :wall: :wall: :wall: :wall:

Total opposite for me. Local walk with the dog; few people also out walking and running but everyone very clearly observing 2m distance, including an amusing exchange with a family with young children as to who should cross the road (we did in the end obvs.). Plenty of stepping into the road to maintain distance etc. I was reassured that people were taking it seriously. Interesting to see the differences in our own tiny little spheres.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: T_B on March 24, 2020, 10:06:31 pm
Yeah I had a run around the hood this pm. Very reassuring. A few folk walking dogs etc but so few cars you could just run in the middle of the road and not go near anyone. Thanked by one family with child on bike for steering clear of them. Feel a lot better for it having spent way too much time today avoiding going out.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on March 24, 2020, 11:06:10 pm
 Yes Tom I noticed the same thing in what little I saw of Sheffield today. Few people out, mostly avoiding each other. Beautifully quiet, you can suddenly hear birdsong in places where you never normally would.
Small positives.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 25, 2020, 07:56:11 am
Covid symptoms tracker. For the healthy as well as unwell, to track progress of disease through population.
https://covid.joinzoe.com/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on March 25, 2020, 08:22:14 am
Isle of Man has fully closed it’s birders to non residents. I have no idea when I’ll next see my kids. I hope can continue to see your daughter Duma.

That is utterly shit for you and I cannot imagine not being able to see my kids.


My daughter has been on exchange in NYC for the academic year. When lockdown was first announced there she and a couple of friends (they already lived together) decided to "shelter in place." At the time I wasn't sure that was necessarily worse than any other decision and they seemed to be taking self-isolation very seriously. However, I've become increasingly anxious about her being there in recent days. Yesterday her UK university ordered all students still overseas home immediately, promptly a mad scramble last night. I think we have a her on a flight out of JFK this (US) evening. Now she just has to face international travels, though I've also heard of reports of places with just tiny handfuls of people on them. Surprisingly, didn't get totally scalped for the ticket. I'll be very relieved when I hear she's made it to my brother's, where there's plenty of space for proper quarantining, at some point on Thursday. Worrying.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 25, 2020, 08:50:14 am
Fingers crossed Andy.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 25, 2020, 08:59:08 am
Covid symptoms tracker. For the healthy as well as unwell, to track progress of disease through population.
https://covid.joinzoe.com/

Downloaded this but doesn't seem to open on my phone. Looks like lots of debugging to do judging by the reviews
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Muenchener on March 25, 2020, 09:03:30 am
My heart goes out to all of you far away from your kids. Can't believe how fortunate I am to have my son firmly locked in with me.

A friend's daughter who I've known since she was four days old got shipped home from an exchange year in Dublin a couple of days ago - was very happy & relieved to wave at her out of the window as she went past on her daily bike ride yesterday.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 25, 2020, 09:07:19 am
Take it back - got the ap to work by restarting my phone..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 25, 2020, 09:22:07 am
I went for a run yesterday, first a loop with my son, then without.

As I passed the park I noted from a distance 3 teenagers sitting on a bench chatting. If I wasn't with my son I would have had a word, but luckily on the way back I spotted a police van and waved them down and said (from a distance) what i had seen, they said they'd seen it too and were just on their way there. Otherwise people out walking dogs and families out together, everyone behaving and civilised. Had to stop and give a few "which way" suggestions when approaching junctions, otherwise fine.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on March 25, 2020, 10:31:41 am
Feeling for folk with relatives trapped overseas..
In our case it’s the father-in-law that was in the Algarve mit caravan.  He, along with others were instructed to return home, issue being that Bilbao is closed.  Caravan club arranged crossing for them via channel tunnel.  Cue cross country mission through ‘closed’ borders.  In Rouen as of yesterday, will cross today, all being well. We have ordered fish n chips from his local to be delivered to his home this evening.  Will be great relief to know he is safe at home, hopefully he has avoided picking the virus up.  Under very strict instructions to stay at home once he’s there!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dunnyg on March 25, 2020, 11:38:35 am
My sister's partner is involved with NHS clinical trials, and has been asked to spread this symptom tracker app around. It is helpful to fill it in whether you think you have the virus or are all fine and dandy. It doesn't matter if you have pre-exisiting conditions or not. Data only used for non-profit and can be as anonymous as you want. Organised by King's college London, so is legit.

Took about 2 minutes to install and fill in the survey, and the idea is you update it daily, which I assume will take much less than 2 minutes.


https://covid.joinzoe.com/?fbclid=IwAR2yMpQ7l8wicwamtoEyv7L1t-EJi7VsnC3Aiy-WNe-FAupb4uy0WhNTmq4 (https://covid.joinzoe.com/?fbclid=IwAR2yMpQ7l8wicwamtoEyv7L1t-EJi7VsnC3Aiy-WNe-FAupb4uy0WhNTmq4)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: seankenny on March 25, 2020, 11:54:07 am
On the “relatives stuck abroad” theme, please spare a thought for anyone you know who has family in Asia, Africa and the Caribbean.

My mother-in-law is in Sri Lanka, they are in total lockdown - only allowed out for a few hours to buy food. Of course the times are not announced in advance and there have already been food shortages. Luckily people take disease very seriously because it is pretty common and everyone seems to be calm and collected.

Over the longer term the impact on places like India, Pakistan, Nigeria, Jamaica, could be really severe and loads of Brits have family in those countries. Not to forget China too. Just another way this is going to hit us hard.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Drew on March 25, 2020, 12:25:29 pm
Wow. They're doing really well in providing a clear and consistent message to all  :tumble:.

https://twitter.com/michaelgove/status/1242358443702390789?s=20

To add to this, this morning my missus showed me something from the absolute head honcho in family courts, going slightly against Gove's tweet. From my understanding, he's basically said that the normal rules are out, and anyone with a court order in place for parental visitation can't demand it's upheld. The parent who is currently looking after the child can call the shots. Especially if there's any extenuating circumstances like the child having a medical issue, or the distance being excessive.

As long as the parents are amicable and local to each other, then there should be no issue in the child being transported from one residence to the other.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 25, 2020, 02:06:30 pm
Worth a read.

 https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/25/nyregion/brooklyn-high-school-principal-36-dies-from-coronavirus.html?smtyp=cur&smid=fb-nytimes&fbclid=IwAR2rPusuieybbaGhzoIskJdyhACYk6m-TKRDlYQL0Vt0zbnmopoOFi4TGrc&fbclid=IwAR14aSPt2vMzzRzpXqlurm4hs9WlH2_YO01AMQ4qjM-kSQV4u76Kfu2lEYw (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/25/nyregion/brooklyn-high-school-principal-36-dies-from-coronavirus.html?smtyp=cur&smid=fb-nytimes&fbclid=IwAR2rPusuieybbaGhzoIskJdyhACYk6m-TKRDlYQL0Vt0zbnmopoOFi4TGrc&fbclid=IwAR14aSPt2vMzzRzpXqlurm4hs9WlH2_YO01AMQ4qjM-kSQV4u76Kfu2lEYw)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 25, 2020, 03:06:11 pm
If this is true it could be a game changer. It was mentioned a few days ago by both Johnson and Hancock but i had no idea it could be up and running so quickly.

Prove you have had it, get on with life.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/25/uk-coronavirus-mass-home-testing-to-be-made-available-within-days?fbclid=IwAR3kUsfkZ5KAFvZBILfUXSCa0H-qOAVh3iqgl9izI0D7PVt6iVfBluxMf3k
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on March 25, 2020, 03:20:54 pm
This'll be huge if its as good as that makes it sound.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 25, 2020, 03:33:41 pm
Without wanting to put a downer on good news, I really don't think that's how it will work apart from "key workers". The alternative of applying it to everyone would be fraught with difficulty and danger - people faking the result, people going out attempting to get infected so they can "pass" the test and get back to work/Malham etc.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 25, 2020, 03:48:55 pm
Miserable bastard. I thought you were one of the positive ones on here among all the miserable doom mongers. It might mean you can get out and ruin some more classic problems with your knees and even If i had one sneaking to malham wasnt really what i had in mind.

Agree with the implications if do it ourselves but should be easy to set up test centres or licences for business etc. The test is surely a positive thing and the logistics could be worked out.

 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 25, 2020, 03:55:33 pm
Surely the risk of everyone going out at trying to get COVID at the same time would be too great though? I bet most young people would think "fuck it, I'll get it sometime so it may as well be now adn I can get on with life"... you'll have queues at the shops just to lick the trolley handles  :lol:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 25, 2020, 04:01:52 pm
ttps://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-briton-21-with-no-existing-health-conditions-dies-after-contracting-covid-19-11963451

It's just like getting flu right....

And while I'm on it, a lot people don't know what proper flu is. Pharma companies have made things like lem sips calling them flu remedies, meanwhile they help you feel a bit better and clear your sinuses when you have a nasty head cold.

Proper flu will lay you out flat for a week, your eyes hurt so much you can only be in the dark, every muscle in your body aches and even breathing is painful, and you are drained of energy for about a month afterwards, by all accounts CV-10 is like this only worse.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 25, 2020, 04:08:30 pm
I have had real flu only once in my life, i tried to work through it and ended up on a drip in hospital for a week with pneumonia.

Really isnt something you can just take a lemsip for.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Falling Down on March 25, 2020, 04:16:27 pm
What Gav and Chris said.  I’ve had it twice, the first time I could only lay in bed hallucinating for ten days.  Didn’t go downstairs or move further than the toilet for a week.  Horrible.

I read that the severity of CV-19 symptoms is dependent on the initial viral load at the point of infection and your own health/age and probably numerous other factors.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on March 25, 2020, 04:26:54 pm
Agree how shit flu is.
Re healthy folk and CV19, viral load is apparently hugely important, so eg health workers at much greater risk.
Re the test, can't see how they can just sell it over the counter, there'd be riots for access, faking results etc.
But. Mass testing is still huge. Testing for medical professionals would make a big dent in transmission and health service capability immediately, and then rolling out targeted testing into the community and isolating cases would further help. Once you have a good idea of centres of infection they can be targeted for strict measures and you can start relaxing rules for others (not to normal obvs). Easy quick testing means further outbreaks can be quickly found and isolated, massively reducing the risk of uncontrolled spread and the NHS being overwhelmed. All that should get us to a point of bearable restrictions that are manageable for the months until a vaccine is ready.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 25, 2020, 04:29:59 pm
During the Rugby World Cup in South Africa in 1995 there was a massive flu outbreak due to SA being in isolation from the rest of the world for years, and then a sudden influx of foreign visitors. Half our company was off at one point with it, and  kept going around the population for a few months afterwards.

This viral load part is especially important if you get it and are sharing a house with others. Quarantine yourself as far away from the rest of the family as you can.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 25, 2020, 04:34:31 pm
More good news.

https://www.thestar.co.uk/business/licences-added-list-shops-allowed-stay-open-during-coronavirus-lockdown-2517989
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 25, 2020, 04:35:11 pm
I read that the severity of CV-19 symptoms is dependent on the initial viral load at the point of infection and your own health/age and probably numerous other factors.

I also saw this but was sceptical as it was just in some copied and pasted text on Facebook. It seems to make sense, but I've no idea whether it's actually true. Anyone care to confirm?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 25, 2020, 04:40:46 pm
i saw an interview with an doctor on this, he seemed clued up, I will try track it down.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: cheque on March 25, 2020, 05:07:39 pm
Agree how shit flu is.

 :agree: It’s an absolute bastard. I haven’t had it since Christmas ‘99 and I can still vividly remember how bad it was and how long it was before I was fully recovered. We’ve somehow progressed to using the term to mean a heavy cold but that’s not the flu.

It’s interesting how many people will hear that the best case scenario of getting the virus doesn’t feature bad symptoms and almost completely disregard all the other horrific things about it. A bit like when Jez gets chlamydia in Peep Show but cancels his plans to tell past and future sexual partners as soon as he’s told that it’s symptomless.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 25, 2020, 05:11:03 pm
It’s interesting how many people will hear that the best case scenario of getting the virus doesn’t feature bad symptoms and almost completely disregard all the other horrific things about it.

I suspect many people are assuming - as I am - that we'll probably get it at some point over the next 12 months anyway. That's what we've been told to expect after all (though this may have changed given change in gov's strategy). So the main thing becomes not fucking over other people too much by all getting it at the same time, rather than worrying about whether it will suck ass or not.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Footwork on March 25, 2020, 05:19:02 pm
I'm not resigned to getting it just yet - sounds shit.

"would you like 100 maltesers"
"ooh yes please"
"3 of them will kill you"
"on second thought..."

It's not exactly something I want to risk so will be doing my best to not spread it into the house and taking care whilst out the house.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 25, 2020, 05:21:11 pm
It’s interesting how many people will hear that the best case scenario of getting the virus doesn’t feature bad symptoms and almost completely disregard all the other horrific things about it.

I suspect many people are assuming - as I am - that we'll probably get it at some point over the next 12 months anyway. That's what we've been told to expect after all (though this may have changed given change in gov's strategy). So the main thing becomes not fucking over other people too much by all getting it at the same time, rather than worrying about whether it will suck ass or not.

The second part of that is the crux, isn’t it.

Things will start to change now, there’s more than one case of otherwise  healthy people in their 20s and 30s succumbing to the virus. Other reports of people recovering but losing 60% or more of their lung function. Etc etc.
I was wondering about this and numbers from elsewhere seem to be simply split into dead or not, since the early stuff from China, anyway.
Surely, the elderly and acutely vulnerable die quickly, the healthier linger longer and don’t start showing up for a few days or weeks after?

Ok. A bit doom and gloom, there’s other, better, news around too.

Edit:
Sorry shouldhave said, stories like this:
 https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/25/london-woman-36-dies-of-suspected-covid-19-after-being-told-she-is-not-priority (https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/25/london-woman-36-dies-of-suspected-covid-19-after-being-told-she-is-not-priority)
 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: cheque on March 25, 2020, 05:51:11 pm
It’s interesting how many people will hear that the best case scenario of getting the virus doesn’t feature bad symptoms and almost completely disregard all the other horrific things about it.

I suspect many people are assuming - as I am - that we'll probably get it at some point over the next 12 months anyway. That's what we've been told to expect after all (though this may have changed given change in gov's strategy). So the main thing becomes not fucking over other people too much by all getting it at the same time, rather than worrying about whether it will suck ass or not.

Yeah I agree with you, I was including the infectiousness and the ability to pass the virus on even if you don’t have the symptoms in the “horrific things”. The idea of being responsible for spreading it scares me as much as getting really ill with it does.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 25, 2020, 07:26:25 pm
i saw an interview with an doctor on this, he seemed clued up, I will try track it down.

Have read a few articles, can’t seem to find them now. My takeaway was that the virus itself isn’t the issue, it’s  immune system going into overdrive after a slow response initially. This out of control inflammatory reaction precipitates the pneumonia and most serious symptoms.

Logically therefore, viral load would affect the body’s immune response. Equally, the treatment would vary according to the point at which it was caught- immunosuppressants would be needed in a late stage.

This is my understanding of what I read; I can’t vouch for the quality of the science or argument.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 25, 2020, 07:38:59 pm
The viral load arguments could explain why health workers are so disproportionately affected in terms of infection rates, severity and hospitalisation themselves.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fultonius on March 25, 2020, 07:44:23 pm
https://www.nationalgeographic.co.uk/science-and-technology/2020/02/heres-what-coronavirus-does-body
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 25, 2020, 08:10:29 pm
Anyone know why there’s no figures released for England today? Scotland and Wales released their numbers around 5pm, as normal.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: JamieG on March 25, 2020, 08:19:41 pm
The cynic in me suspects the numbers look bad and the slow response by the government is going to criticised. They had warnings of what was coming and were still slow. I really hope I’m just being too cynical.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on March 25, 2020, 08:22:27 pm
Anyone know why there’s no figures released for England today? Scotland and Wales released their numbers around 5pm, as normal.

Small print at the bottom of here https://www.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/f94c3c90da5b4e9f9a0b19484dd4bb14 says:

"Daily updates are sometimes delayed as data cannot be published until signed off by DHSC."
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 25, 2020, 08:26:30 pm
500 000+ new applicants for Universal Credit this week apparently....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on March 25, 2020, 08:46:43 pm
Anyone knowledgeable who'd care to comment on the Oxford study flagged up that more than half the UK population may already have had the virus without showing symptoms? (feel free to punter me if it's already been posted and i missed it...). Remotely possible or based on poor assumptions?

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/what-if-half-the-population-already-has-coronavirus-
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: JamieG on March 25, 2020, 08:52:37 pm
28 further deaths in England according to Guardian live feed. I was just being cynical. Hopefully the deaths start to trail off, but i should know better than to extrapolate from two data points. Hard not to though.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fultonius on March 25, 2020, 08:53:03 pm
Anyone know why there’s no figures released for England today? Scotland and Wales released their numbers around 5pm, as normal.

Small print at the bottom of here https://www.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/f94c3c90da5b4e9f9a0b19484dd4bb14 says:

"Daily updates are sometimes delayed as data cannot be published until signed off by DHSC."

The bar chart at the bottom shows 1500 new cases on 25/03.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bradders on March 25, 2020, 08:55:09 pm
From what I've seen today on my first day of enforced Daddydaycare it's only a matter of time before stricter measures are enforced. Went for my permitted walk through our local park which is fortunately just over the road from us and saw;

People driving to the park to walk their dogs
People using the skate park which was barrier taped off with signs up saying do not use
Multiple runners / walkers making no attempt to leave 2m social distancing

Clearly a lot of people are working on the principal of 'unless we're expressly forbidden from doing something we're going to keep calm and carry on'

 :wall: :wall: :wall: :wall: :wall: :wall: :wall: :wall: :wall:

Total opposite for me. Local walk with the dog; few people also out walking and running but everyone very clearly observing 2m distance, including an amusing exchange with a family with young children as to who should cross the road (we did in the end obvs.). Plenty of stepping into the road to maintain distance etc. I was reassured that people were taking it seriously. Interesting to see the differences in our own tiny little spheres.

Observations from this evening's stroll around the neighbourhood:

- main people seemingly failing to obey the "stay at home" / no unnecessary journeys were kids riding mopeds and motorbikes at great speed. Reckon there's not much to be done about this, doubt the police could catch them even if they had the resources to look for that sort of behaviour.
- on the point of speed, lots of drivers using the opportunity of fairly empty roads to drive well in excess of the 20 or 30 mph limits. I really hate speeding, particularly in residential areas. Just because the roads are quiet it's not a license to treat them like a race track!!!! Especially with young families out for a walk and people more likely to step into the road to maintain distance.
- most worrying, walking along a quiet road with a beautiful view over the valley we see a young couple sitting on a bench. As we approach a woman comes out of her house and shouts as loud as she can from the other side of the road at them that "old people use that bench" and to "fuck off back where you live"!!

Pretty disturbing to witness the last bit. The couple, or rather the woman at least, were visibly shaken as they walked away. Quite clearly didn't mean any harm and were doing nothing wrong whatsoever in my view.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on March 25, 2020, 08:57:43 pm

The bar chart at the bottom shows 1500 new cases on 25/03.

Updated since I posted it 😄
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 25, 2020, 09:36:43 pm
Anyone knowledgeable who'd care to comment on the Oxford study flagged up that more than half the UK population may already have had the virus without showing symptoms? (feel free to punter me if it's already been posted and i missed it...). Remotely possible or based on poor assumptions?

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/what-if-half-the-population-already-has-coronavirus-

Obviously, no clue.
Been debating it with Stevie Haston of all people on FB.

But this:

“ As of 9am on 24 March 2020, a total of 90,436 people have been tested, of which 82,359 were confirmed negative and 8,077 were confirmed positive. 422 patients in the UK who tested positive for coronavirus (COVID-19) have died.”

From GOV.UK seems to mitigate against the supposition.

Because, were it correct, there should have been far more positive tests.
Unless, by some fluke, they tested everyone who definitely has it seriously and almost nobody who has it very mildly.

But, ultimately, we’re not going to know either way until it’s all but over for this season, surely. Everything else is a artefact of the model’s initial parameters, isn’t it?   
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 25, 2020, 09:48:00 pm
Because testing varies so much from country to country - the best figures on the worldometer site imho are the deaths per million population...

Although some countries may be over keen to attribute CV19 for deaths (someone dies and is CV19 then it’s counted as CV19) such as Italy - and others less keen (Germany).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 25, 2020, 09:57:15 pm
Anyone knowledgeable who'd care to comment on the Oxford study flagged up that more than half the UK population may already have had the virus without showing symptoms? (feel free to punter me if it's already been posted and i missed it...). Remotely possible or based on poor assumptions?

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/what-if-half-the-population-already-has-coronavirus-

Professor Neil Ferguson is knowledgeable.. (we're all following policy based on his group's estimates). I watched the footage of him giving evidence today to the science & technology select committee on global disease outbreaks. Well worth a watch for the current estimations of where we're at and where we're going.

At 26 minutes in he's asked a question about the Oxford paper (Gupta), and specifically its point that 50% of UK may have been infected. He replies he 'doesn't think that's consistent with the observed data'. and 'we're nowhere near the Gupta scenario'.

Footage here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000h37y/select-committees-live-global-disease-outbreak-committee (https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000h37y/select-committees-live-global-disease-outbreak-committee)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 25, 2020, 10:09:56 pm

Have read a few articles, can’t seem to find them now. My takeaway was that the virus itself isn’t the issue, it’s  immune system going into overdrive after a slow response initially. This out of control inflammatory reaction precipitates the pneumonia and most serious symptoms.

Logically therefore, viral load would affect the body’s immune response. Equally, the treatment would vary according to the point at which it was caught- immunosuppressants would be needed in a late stage.

This is my understanding of what I read; I can’t vouch for the quality of the science or argument.

My take too. Based on the attached, the bod'ys immune system is weakened, making it vulnerable to bacterial attack. Of all the videos I've seen this explains it best, an idiots guide to CV-19 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtN-goy9VOY
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 25, 2020, 10:43:59 pm
Anyone knowledgeable who'd care to comment on the Oxford study flagged up that more than half the UK population may already have had the virus without showing symptoms? (feel free to punter me if it's already been posted and i missed it...). Remotely possible or based on poor assumptions?

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/what-if-half-the-population-already-has-coronavirus-

Obviously, no clue.
Been debating it with Stevie Haston of all people on FB.

But this:

“ As of 9am on 24 March 2020, a total of 90,436 people have been tested, of which 82,359 were confirmed negative and 8,077 were confirmed positive. 422 patients in the UK who tested positive for coronavirus (COVID-19) have died.”

From GOV.UK seems to mitigate against the supposition.

Because, were it correct, there should have been far more positive tests.
Unless, by some fluke, they tested everyone who definitely has it seriously and almost nobody who has it very mildly.

But, ultimately, we’re not going to know either way until it’s all but over for this season, surely. Everything else is a artefact of the model’s initial parameters, isn’t it?
I am genuinely fucking clueless about this so science types feel free to laugh but is there a difference between being tested for having the virus and testing if you have previously had it.
This could be an explanation to the opposing ideas/ facts.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 25, 2020, 10:48:13 pm
Anyone knowledgeable who'd care to comment on the Oxford study flagged up that more than half the UK population may already have had the virus without showing symptoms? (feel free to punter me if it's already been posted and i missed it...). Remotely possible or based on poor assumptions?

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/what-if-half-the-population-already-has-coronavirus-

Obviously, no clue.
Been debating it with Stevie Haston of all people on FB.

But this:

“ As of 9am on 24 March 2020, a total of 90,436 people have been tested, of which 82,359 were confirmed negative and 8,077 were confirmed positive. 422 patients in the UK who tested positive for coronavirus (COVID-19) have died.”

From GOV.UK seems to mitigate against the supposition.

Because, were it correct, there should have been far more positive tests.
Unless, by some fluke, they tested everyone who definitely has it seriously and almost nobody who has it very mildly.

But, ultimately, we’re not going to know either way until it’s all but over for this season, surely. Everything else is a artefact of the model’s initial parameters, isn’t it?
I am genuinely fucking clueless about this so science types feel free to laugh but is there a difference between being tested for having the virus and testing if you have previously had it.
This could be an explanation to the opposing ideas/ facts.

I expect there is a difference. But if it was so wide spread, why are so few infected now? Why are the most vulnerable only succumbing now etc etc? It’s supposed to be enormously infectious, so why are the hospitalised numbers climbing so steeply now, not two months ago?

Edit:
Equally clueless, genuine use of question marks. I’m trying to get my head around the idea. I just can’t make it add up.
Had this conversation last week at home, because my daughter had the symptoms for around three weeks over Xmas. None of the rest of us came down with anything, though.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 25, 2020, 10:53:07 pm
No idea as I am clueless about this kind of thing.
It does in part add up to why German, the country who has carried out by far the most testing, has a far lower death to infection ratio than the rest of the EU.
Most people are only testing those that present with symptoms.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 25, 2020, 10:58:25 pm
No idea as I am clueless about this kind of thing.
It does in part add up to why German, the country who has carried out by far the most testing, has a far lower death to infection ratio than the rest of the EU.
Most people are only testing those that present with symptoms.

But that’s it. They tested and found infected people. Only 20% of the people tested here, despite presenting symptom, actually had it.

Testing will eventually answer the conundrum, but I’d put money (a small wager, anyway) on Pete’s mentioned expert being right, or right-er at least.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 25, 2020, 10:59:48 pm
WHO’s advice on this is pretty simple— test relentlessly, find infection, quarantine, trace contacts, test and quarantine and trace- endlessly. Everything else comes second, hand washing excepted.

So Germany, Singapore, S Korea- massive lockdowns may not be needed if enough testing tracing and quarantining is done from the off?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on March 25, 2020, 11:10:51 pm
Anyone knowledgeable who'd care to comment on the Oxford study flagged up that more than half the UK population may already have had the virus without showing symptoms? (feel free to punter me if it's already been posted and i missed it...). Remotely possible or based on poor assumptions?

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/what-if-half-the-population-already-has-coronavirus-

I don't know that much about the technical /statistical aspects of CV19 testing; however I am rather suspicious of the linked article, which is by Ross Clark, noted for being somewhat sceptical about climate change to put it mildly, and a rampant free market libertarian. The Spectator has published some absolutely appalling articles recently, one a few weeks ago trying to argue that we really shouldn't worry about coronavirus at all. It clearly has an overriding agenda towards a Trump style policy of screw the people who've got it, preserve economic advantage.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on March 25, 2020, 11:28:27 pm
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2020/mar/25/coronavirus-exposes-the-problems-and-pitfalls-of-modelling

This piece suggests the spectator article is just picking up on the most extreme scenario modelled from a selection of hypotheses, essentially playing with numbers to fit the death rates.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Muenchener on March 26, 2020, 06:39:52 am
So Germany, Singapore, S Korea- massive lockdowns may not be needed if enough testing tracing and quarantining is done from the off?

(a) Germany is in massive lockdown, some states more than others. Bavaria declared a state of emergency on the 16th & lockdown on the 20th.

(b) anecdatally, before the lockdown an acquaintance of mine, who had a fever but no other relevant/suspect symptoms, spent a week unsuccessfully trying to get himself tested. I can't comment on the actual national testing statistics about which I know nothing.

Bavarian state government said yesterday full lockdown is neither socially nor economically sustainable for more than a few weeks. And by "economically" they were referring to supply chains for essentials breaking down, not the stock market. I still don't think this means I will be happily trundling off to Kalymnos in May.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on March 26, 2020, 07:34:15 am
I’m not an expert but I think I know enough about stats and modelling to explain the Oxford paper.

Essentially they are pointing out that you get the same deaths in a population if 50 people have been infected and 1/10 of them die, or if 5000 people have been infected and 1/1000 of them die.

In the latter case though, the disease would have to have been spreading for longer and many of us would already unknowingly have caught it and recovered. The authors of this paper think covid-19 might be like this.

This is a valid possible scenario because, as gav pointed out, our testing to date only tells us if someone is ill right now. It doesn’t tell us if someone has been ill and recovers. This is changing, Countries like Singapore have started doing the second kind of test and we are about too. We will soon know if the “Oxford scenario” is true.

The big snag though is that the Oxford paper only looks at deaths, and not other data. Data on infections from countries that have tested heavily and situations like the Diamond princess where almost everyone was tested, don’t reveal large numbers of people carrying the disease without symptoms. There’s enough wiggle room that the Oxford study might be right, but it probably isn’t.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 26, 2020, 08:11:55 am
Stu - the Korean data shows 25% of positive tested <25’s were asymptomatic.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 26, 2020, 08:24:22 am
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2020/mar/25/coronavirus-exposes-the-problems-and-pitfalls-of-modelling

This piece suggests the spectator article is just picking up on the most extreme scenario modelled from a selection of hypotheses, essentially playing with numbers to fit the death rates.

This is a good article. Written by someone who knows a bit about modelling and model sensitivity.

However - they give the imperial group an easy ride. It was their fuck up with the model parameterisation that sent us down the wrong route - followed by a mea culpa and a reversal in govt policy.

They nicely quote the late George box with ‘all models are wrong but some are useful’ but they fail to say that a model is only as good as the assumptions and parameters used in its operation... garbage in garbage out etc...

This is why 4-5 weeks ago (or whenever it was) the modelling should have been open to general scrutiny. The more eyes that see it the more likely it is to spot mistakes.

I’m now going to show my anti establishment colors and say typical Imperial...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on March 26, 2020, 08:25:18 am
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2020/mar/25/coronavirus-exposes-the-problems-and-pitfalls-of-modelling

This piece suggests the spectator article is just picking up on the most extreme scenario modelled from a selection of hypotheses, essentially playing with numbers to fit the death rates.

In my view the spectator should probably have been buycotted and taken off the shelf by retailers for some of the poisonous drivel it has published recently.
Until we were pretty deep in the shit it was heavily pushing the agenda that Cvirus was just some sort of snowflake fad, I've not looked in the last couple of weeks but I would think they've changed now. They continue to be unpleasantly 'sceptical' about climate change, which is actually just a euphemism for denial. I like some of their columnists and many right of centre publications but the spectator has sunk to a US shock jock level of political discourse.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nai on March 26, 2020, 08:52:56 am
It's owned by the Barclays, who own the Telegraph, so wouldn't really be expecting them to come too far off their wing.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 26, 2020, 09:09:01 am
I've had a low level headache for about 4 days now, in spite of drinking a lot of water, exercising, eating well and sleeping more than usual. Not bad enough to need paracetamol. I wonder if it's the only symptom I'm showing, or if I'm paranoid.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 26, 2020, 09:29:48 am
It wasn't just The Spectator though, the FT and other serious news outlets were guilty as well, then various members of the public played chinese whispers on social media. The Oxford paper was published as a draft where in normal times it would have been much more carefully peer reviewed and edited before publication. Its 'conclusions' seem to contradict the best data. The news headlines unfairly emphasise one end of a range.  The paper to me illustrates the error bars when dealing with exponential pandemic growth modelling with an uncertain 'infection rate' and as such why testing is so important. I put 'infection rates' in quotes as they too are an average of a range but the models often won't deal with that.

Someone asked above about the influence of viral load, see the link below.... that's almost certainly what killed those young doctors in Wuhan, including the main whistle blower.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(20)30232-2/fulltext

I agree with tomtom that the Imperial group have got an easy ride and the top government experts seemed to have been convinced by that group, when as top experts they should have been displaying more cautious scepticism.   The CSA now seems to agree with what various climbers who work with data have been saying on UKC all along:  the UK gap to Italy is not 4 weeks nor the revised 3 weeks but 2 weeks. We were most probably later applying social mobility restrictions than we should have been.

A lot of the government promises a week back on testing and PPE for medical staff are looking very dodgy as well. Its lovely to see half a million volunteers but they will need PPE and so far even some on the front line are still waiting.

Some journalistic analysis on Spain that supports the faster transmission rate (via a football match) :

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/26/spain-coronavirus-response-analysis

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/25/how-spain-sat-on-its-hands-as-coronavirus-took-hold
 
On being appropriately  'doomful' but pragmatically keen on surpressing social mobility as much as possible, the best evidence we have is the caution it leads to is what will keep more people alive.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: T_B on March 26, 2020, 10:15:41 am
I've had a low level headache for about 4 days now, in spite of drinking a lot of water, exercising, eating well and sleeping more than usual. Not bad enough to need paracetamol. I wonder if it's the only symptom I'm showing, or if I'm paranoid.

This was sent to a GP friend of a friend and her trust’s NHS staff this morning.

Virus Detection:

The simplest way to distinguish Coronavirus from a Common Cold is that the COVID-19 infection does not cause a cold nose or cough with cold, but it does create a dry and rough cough.

The virus is typically first installed in the throat causing inflammation and a feeling of dryness. This symptom can last between 3 and 4 days.
The virus typically then travels through the moisture present in the airways, goes down to the trachea and installs in the lungs, causing pneumonia that lasts about 5 or 6 days.

Pneumonia manifests with a high fever and difficulty breathing. The Common Cold is not accompanied, but there may be a choking sensation. In this case, the doctor should be called immediately.

Experts suggest doing this simple verification every morning: Breathe in deeply and hold your breath for 10 seconds. If this can be done without coughing, without difficulty, this shows that there is no fibrosis in the lungs, indicating the absence of infection. It is recommended to do this control every morning to help detect infection.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on March 26, 2020, 10:21:49 am
I've had a low level headache for about 4 days now, in spite of drinking a lot of water, exercising, eating well and sleeping more than usual. Not bad enough to need paracetamol. I wonder if it's the only symptom I'm showing, or if I'm paranoid.

This was sent to a GP friend of a friend and her trust’s NHS staff this morning.

Virus Detection:

The simplest way to distinguish Coronavirus from a Common Cold is that the COVID-19 infection does not cause a cold nose or cough with cold, but it does create a dry and rough cough.

The virus is typically first installed in the throat causing inflammation and a feeling of dryness. This symptom can last between 3 and 4 days.
The virus typically then travels through the moisture present in the airways, goes down to the trachea and installs in the lungs, causing pneumonia that lasts about 5 or 6 days.

Pneumonia manifests with a high fever and difficulty breathing. The Common Cold is not accompanied, but there may be a choking sensation. In this case, the doctor should be called immediately.

Experts suggest doing this simple verification every morning: Breathe in deeply and hold your breath for 10 seconds. If this can be done without coughing, without difficulty, this shows that there is no fibrosis in the lungs, indicating the absence of infection. It is recommended to do this control every morning to help detect infection.

The 10s one is interesting, I was listening to that being rebutted on the news the other day. However it may have been saying that if you can hold your breath for 10s then you don’t have CV. Which is different from saying it indicates an absence of infection.

Edit - fact-checked on here: https://edition.cnn.com/2020/03/16/us/coronavirus-myths-debunking-holding-breath-10-seconds-trnd/index.html
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 26, 2020, 10:31:50 am
Chris. I was like this last week - as was MrsTT. We both put it down to stress and bad sleep. And the feedback of bad sleep leading to more stress to bad sleep etc etc..

I’m actually far less fraught this week now things are fairly locked down and work is clearly closed until at least sept. I know where I stand a bit more etx...

MrsTT has had persistent low level sore throat for the last week and keeps worrying. The lad has a very infrequent cough (what 3 year old doesn’t!). None of us have had temps. So I think we’ve all been fine/normal.

Those in our road who think they’ve all had it all feel really whacked out. Eg. The marathon runner inmentioned in an earlier lost has just gone in the car to the butchers (1/2 mile away) as he’s still too done in to go far. Our normally quite lively neighbours next door have been completely quiet through the walls since they went into isolation. Eg. I think Even when mild it whacks you out. But that’s just my view. Only the antibody testing will reveal all (probably)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 26, 2020, 10:35:41 am
Just heard some interesting info from a doctor friend working in anaesthetics in the south-west. He is currently self-isolating for 14 days because his partner has symptoms. Neither of them are being tested, which I questioned the sense of.

Apparently the test has a relatively high false negative rate of about 30%. Which makes me consider that the testing of healthcare professionals at this stage could be a dangerous thing leading to practitioners being sent back to work when they are infectious. The quality of the test does improve as the disease progresses.


I've had a low level headache for about 4 days now, in spite of drinking a lot of water, exercising, eating well and sleeping more than usual. Not bad enough to need paracetamol. I wonder if it's the only symptom I'm showing, or if I'm paranoid.

I think this is symptomatic of spending more time with your wife and children?  ;)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 26, 2020, 10:38:11 am
Hence the need to regularly test Will....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 26, 2020, 10:43:30 am
Is there any data on how many tests can be globally manufactured and how this might compare with global demand? As dunnyg delights in pointing out, I am in no position of knowledge to criticise government's decision making, but if demand is outstripping supply (which it almost certainly is - vastly) then perhaps it makes sense to keep your powder dry for when you really need it (in a scenario where the lid is blown off the situation and the virus is widespread in the population, this might be approaching and during the peak)?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 26, 2020, 10:44:51 am
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(20)30232-2/fulltext

On this subect of viral load I thought I should maybe be clearer on what this might likely mean. A very high viral load (say from a seriously ill patient coughing in someone's face) might well kill young healthy people with no underlying conditions. It has clear implications for front line NHS staff as well as some for carers and those dealing with a family member in home quarantine. It's why PPE for front line medical staff is so important and even with it some younger healthy medical staff will probably die in overrun wards.

Another good Guardian article on why balancing economics against deaths,  as Trump suggested, is a bad idea right now

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/mar/25/there-is-no-trade-off-between-the-economy-and-health
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 26, 2020, 10:50:56 am
Is there any data on how many tests can be globally manufactured and how this might compare with global demand? As dunnyg delights in pointing out, I am in no position of knowledge to criticise government's decision making, but if demand is outstripping supply (which it almost certainly is - vastly) then perhaps it makes sense to keep your powder dry for when you really need it (in a scenario where the lid is blown off the situation and the virus is widespread in the population, this might be approaching and during the peak)?

Its hardly what they decided that is a key concern but what they said. We are now ramping up testing..... etc. It turns out to be significantly bs.

It's not just these tests that are running short.  On a more mundane level Lynn just had her normal March prescription for inhalers, to help get her through some fairly serious spring pollen allergy  problems, refused as a huge spike in demand has led to a need for rationing.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 26, 2020, 10:51:45 am
I think this is symptomatic of spending more time with your wife and children?  ;)

Now we are getting used to it, life stress is actually becoming lower than usual. No commute, no getting kids ready for school, no taxi service for the to numerous activities, no getting clothes sorted. If it wan't such a horrific reason for it, I could adapt to life like this.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on March 26, 2020, 11:00:52 am
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(20)30232-2/fulltext

On this subect of viral load I thought I should maybe be clearer on what this might likely mean. A very high viral load (say from a seriously ill patient coughing in someone's face) might well kill young healthy people with no underlying conditions.

I've heard that said before (from doctors), but this papers doesn't seem to say that. It just says that patients with a more severe condition had a higher viral load when tested than those with a less severe condition. I'm not saying you're wrong, just that that isn't a conclusion you can draw from the paper. Disclaimer - I only skim read it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 26, 2020, 11:12:26 am
And there seems to be confusion about what is meant by viral load. The viral load is just the number of individual viruses that you have in your body. We know that people who achieve a higher viral load will generally be more unwell and will take longer to rid themselves of the infection, but nothing is said about whether this correlates with the infectious dose (a term I just got from a Sky News article), which apparently describes the amount of the virus that you're exposed to at first infection.

So a higher infectious dose could lead to a more severe illness, but that isn't what the linked article is saying.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 26, 2020, 11:18:47 am
I think this is symptomatic of spending more time with your wife and children?  ;)

Now we are getting used to it, life stress is actually becoming lower than usual. No commute, no getting kids ready for school, no taxi service for the to numerous activities, no getting clothes sorted. If it wan't such a horrific reason for it, I could adapt to life like this.

I’m almost enjoying the break, as long as I don’t think about why I’m getting it.

Polly and I have been in a continuous state of sore throat and headache for over a week. No fever. Don’t believe it’s C19.
Royal Marines from Lympstone, have been in confinement for 14 days, with no cases. They have been sent home!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on March 26, 2020, 11:29:08 am
Stu - the Korean data shows 25% of positive tested <25’s were asymptomatic.

All of the testing been done to date has gaps and flaws that make drawing firm conclusions about anything to do with the virus hard. Tests are not allocated randomly. They're not given often enough, the tests have unknown reliability and specificity. The Diamond Princess is interesting because it's a closed system where nearly everyone was tested, but even then not everyone and not frequently enough.

From what I can gather it is not yet possible to draw solid conclusions about things like the asymptomatic fraction or death rate, and the range of uncertainty allows for epidemiological models to be out by an order of magnitude in terms of outcomes right now.

For those wondering I checked out how my interpretation of the Oxford study matches with people who really do know about epidemiology*. See this thread https://twitter.com/adamjkucharski/status/1242569554171179008?s=21 (https://twitter.com/adamjkucharski/status/1242569554171179008?s=21).

*i.e not someone who once wrote a toy model of a zombie apocalypse and is therefore now an "expert".
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 26, 2020, 11:34:19 am
Afaik the Koreans have tested far wider than others.

I’d suggest diamond princess js a weak example in many ways  - not a representative set of ages - spurious types of transmission (crew or ventilation) etc.. eg very different contexts of transmission from a city.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 26, 2020, 11:37:25 am
Using absolutely no data or expertise whatsoever, I have arrived at the conclusion that the most outlandish modelling scenarios, which predict that we're either going to be fine or extinct are those that will be picked up by the press and trend best on social media. The truth is likely to be somewhere in the middle and the best analysis will be done retrospectively when we're all talking about Brexit again.
So probably just best to stay at home, wash your hands, and be jolly careful about going to the shops.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on March 26, 2020, 11:43:18 am
Will - suggest you are bang on the money.

Tomtom - the point of the Diamond Princess data is not that it's representative or unbiassed, it's that its (relatively) easy to understand and therefore correct for the biasses. For example, the age distribution is skewed, but it's known. And there are enough people on-board to measure the death rates and asymptomatic proportions as a function of age. For example it seems old people are much more likely to be asymptomatic than the young.

However, the key message is not that one dataset is better than another, it is that no dataset currently allows model predictions with any confidence.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 26, 2020, 11:59:04 am
Using absolutely no data or expertise whatsoever, I have arrived at the conclusion that the most outlandish modelling scenarios, which predict that we're either going to be fine or extinct are those that will be picked up by the press and trend best on social media. The truth is likely to be somewhere in the middle and the best analysis will be done retrospectively when we're all talking about Brexit again.
So probably just best to stay at home, wash your hands, and be jolly careful about going to the shops.

I suspect that was the aim of the Oxford paper (a little bit..) :)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 26, 2020, 12:25:34 pm
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(20)30232-2/fulltext

On this subect of viral load I thought I should maybe be clearer on what this might likely mean. A very high viral load (say from a seriously ill patient coughing in someone's face) might well kill young healthy people with no underlying conditions.

I've heard that said before (from doctors), but this papers doesn't seem to say that. It just says that patients with a more severe condition had a higher viral load when tested than those with a less severe condition. I'm not saying you're wrong, just that that isn't a conclusion you can draw from the paper. Disclaimer - I only skim read it.

It's evidence for looking in  the reverse direction..... risk is almost  certainly higher around  those who are seriously ill.

Info on the whistle blowing doctor

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Li_Wenliang

More research info on  viral load...
http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/03/italian-doctors-note-high-covid-19-death-rate-urge-action
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 26, 2020, 12:47:05 pm
http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/03/italian-doctors-note-high-covid-19-death-rate-urge-action

Could you quote from that article, which bit it is that evidences this statement? I've just read it and can't see anything that indicates such.

A very high viral load [I assume you mean infectious dose] (say from a seriously ill patient coughing in someone's face) might well kill young healthy people with no underlying conditions.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 26, 2020, 01:11:30 pm
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/03/24/europe/austria-ski-resort-ischgl-coronavirus-intl/index.html

Another example of an epicentre that is, in hindsight, easy to understand.

Read the bit at the bottom about whistles and oral beer pong....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 26, 2020, 01:15:59 pm
Your misreading what it evidences: high viral loads in the seriously ill, those who need healthcare. If you have a high viral load you are more likely to infect others seriously when coughing etc, and young healthy doctors have died in such situations. The other research link evidences the early stages of hospitalisation are the periods of highest risk.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 26, 2020, 01:19:58 pm
From how the virologist I worked with on a grant proposal a couple of months back described it to me:

Its not that one virus is going to get you. The body is quite good at fighting them off. But if there is sufficient load (enough viruses) to overwhelm the body’s ability to get rid of them then the get a foothold - multiply rapidly and etc.. etc.. etc..

So if you have a big dollop of viral load - it (a) makes the chance of you getting it higher and (b) makes the impact likely to be higher as your body will have less time to engineer its defences to it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 26, 2020, 01:22:54 pm
Is there any data on how many tests can be globally manufactured and how this might compare with global demand? As dunnyg delights in pointing out, I am in no position of knowledge to criticise government's decision making, but if demand is outstripping supply (which it almost certainly is - vastly) then perhaps it makes sense to keep your powder dry for when you really need it (in a scenario where the lid is blown off the situation and the virus is widespread in the population, this might be approaching and during the peak)?

It will be more widespread the less testing takes place now.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 26, 2020, 01:23:35 pm
Hence the need to regularly test Will....

Why do we have to regularly test Will? :-\ :-\
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 26, 2020, 01:24:43 pm
Hence the need to regularly test Will....

Why do we have to regularly test Will? :-\ :-\

:D

Because.....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 26, 2020, 01:26:45 pm
Let’s eat Grandma.

Or
Let’s eat, Grandma.

Punctuation saves lives.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 26, 2020, 01:27:31 pm
Will/Offwidth/TT

With infections such as this, isn't it well established that the dose (viral load, infectious dose etc. etc.) makes the poison?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 26, 2020, 01:31:40 pm
Will/Offwidth/TT

With infections such as this, isn't it well established that the dose (viral load, infectious dose etc. etc.) makes the poison?

Layman’s comment alert: I don’t really know but what I’ve read suggests that when its in the lungs the body goes into some total immune system overload that swamps it and the kings with fluid. Hence Pneumonia.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 26, 2020, 01:46:06 pm
Yes that's the theory going round. Supposedly related to 'Cytokine release syndrome' (layman caveat applies). 
But isn't it well established that there's a lower probability of reaching that point in the stage of illness, from one microbe of a virus entering your system then one thousand?
(numbers obvs just for illustration, magnitudes higher in reality) 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 26, 2020, 01:46:43 pm
If you have a high viral load you are more likely to infect others seriously when coughing etc

That bit in bold there is the bit that you've assumed. People with higher viral loads are more infectious, and they tend be more unwell. But you haven't shown any evidence to suggest that a greater infectious dose would lead to a more severe illness.


Pete, I think you're right that other viruses (like flu and SARS type viruses) do show this behaviour. But I don't think it's yet been demonstrated in COVID-19 (or rather, I haven't seen it demonstrated). There is evidence (from mice I think) that lots of low-level exposures can infect just as well as a single high infectious dose, but again, I haven't seen evidence that shows that this then leads to more or less severe illness.

I think Offwidth is probably correct in his assumption, but it irks me that it's made with such authority when it is actually just an assumption (albeit one that is quite probably correct).
The way that I conceptualise the disease, it seems obvious that a greater infectious dose would lead to more severe illness - you could say you're giving it a head start. But I'm not a virologist or an immunologist, so I don't know whether (let's say) a higher infectious dose would trigger a greater response from the body's immune system, which cancels out the higher initial dose. It could be that higher infectious doses lead to more severe illness, but that the effect is generally not significant. What would a graph look like if you plotted infectious dose on the x and disease severity on the y? Would it be a straight line climbing up? Would it be a steep line? Or would it a curve? At what rate would the curve steepen? What is the critical infectious dose that we should be wary of - a cough in the face from someone on an intensive care bed, or using a mucky door handle followed by picking your nose?

This is a really critical thing to understand because it has an impact on how careful we need to be when out and about, and about how we might need to isolate in our own homes to protect our families. My suspicion is that Offwidth is jumping to conclusions because it gives a good opportunity to get cross at the government. As I say, he's probably right, but I wouldn't mind being shown the science behind it so that we can actually understand it fully.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on March 26, 2020, 01:52:39 pm
Will's point is correct.

We know that those that are more seriously ill have a higher viral load (more of it in their body) and are therefore more likely to infect others (as more of it expelled into the air/onto surfaces).

What seems to be conjecture is that the seriousness of the resulting illness in the person that catches it is dependant on the strength of the initial dose. Clearly this makes intuitive sense in that the immune system may find it easier to fight off a lower initial dose, and it accords with anecdotal experience of lots of doctors being seriously ill, but I've not seen any evidence for it.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 26, 2020, 01:54:36 pm
And when I say that "we" don't understand it, I'm referring to the amateur medics who are posting on this thread like we're some sort of WHO critical research team  :) :lol:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 26, 2020, 01:59:43 pm
Good points.


My suspicion is that Offwidth is jumping to conclusions because it gives a good opportunity to get cross at the government. As I say, he's probably right, but I wouldn't mind being shown the science behind it so that we can actually understand it fully.

 :)
I read the majority Offwidth's posts as if in brackets:
[I am angry at this government and all I see, do and say is tainted by this bias]
Offwidth's comment.
[/I am angry at this government al everything I see, do and say is tainted by this bias]


I think the forum would benefit from this option and some others..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 26, 2020, 02:05:59 pm
Clearly this makes intuitive sense in that the immune system may find it easier to fight off a lower initial dose, and it accords with anecdotal experience of lots of doctors being seriously ill, but I've not seen any evidence for it.

We are all making lots of assumptions. It seems simplistic to me that a single numerical input determines severity of illness. I'm unconvinced it makes much difference to outcomes whether you ingest a single virus picked up from a dirty touch screen vs being coughed over by a very unwell person- once. Surely doctors are repeatedly exposed to high numbers of virus cells, hour after hour, day after day- and it is that which impacts the body's ability to cope?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 26, 2020, 02:25:34 pm
Ru: health workers in China and esp now in Spain have far higher rates of hospitalisation wjenCb19 positive than the general population. This is well documented.

Whilst that doesn’t mean that viral load or repeat exposure (to more viral load) is the cause - it’s hard to explain in any other way. Cause and effect,  Black swan/white swan etc.. etc.. 

Interestingly - this and the key issue of shortage of health workers due to illness and the need to protect them was one of the key points by the virologist charting in a podcast linked in the first few pages of this thread.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 26, 2020, 03:31:33 pm
Can someone critique my maths?

There' an infographic doing the rounds on FB, advocating social distancing and  saying
- If 1 person infects 2.5 others every 5 days, then after 30 days you have 406 infections
- If 1 person infects 1.25 others every 5 days, then after 30 days you have 15 infections
- If 1 person infects .625 others every 5 days, then after 30 days you have 2.5 infections

But my rough numbers, when assuming it takes 15 days to become "uninfected and uninfectious" come out as more like 1600, 65 and 0 (it's fudged because doing things in blocks of 5 days doesn't work nicely). Am I wrong or are they?

Saw that and just posted on CD's page.

Isn't it to the power of 6?
If the period is every 5 days, and total is after 30 days, then:
there are 6 of those 5-day periods in 30 days.
So after 30 days,
@ infection rate of 2.5 to power of 6 = 244 people infected
@ infection rate 1.5 to power of 6 = 11 people
@ infection .625 to power of 6 = .006 of a person (doylo, the only one remaining with residual infection)


That's disregarding 'becoming uninfected' which is important in maths terms but unimportant in terms of the message being given.
Caveat I'm a dumbass not a phd

You have to include the original infections i.e. total infections after 5 days = 1 (starting person) + 2.5 (new infections) = 3.5, not the 2.5 that you've assumed. Then 3.5*2.5+3.5 etc... This makes a huge difference after a few cycles.

Interestingly - but obvious really if you think about exponential curves - deducting cases that have expired after 2 weeks makes less difference:
With deductions:1705, 100, 10
Without: 1838, 129,18


Just revisiting this - I noticed a tweet by the mathematician and epidemiologist Adam Kurcharski where he does this same calculation and gets 244. Here: https://twitter.com/AdamJKucharski/status/1239146318301483009

So three different answers to the same problem: '1 person infects 2.5 others every 5 days; after 30 days how many infected?'
No wonder there's confusion about the more complicated stuff!

Your answer, which takes account of the number previously-infected people in each 5-day period, seems to be the correct one when you think about it.. But he's the expert, calculating infection growth rates is surely bread and butter in that field!?

Seems pretty important to the rest of the modelling...Is he right with 244 or are you right with 1600? (I think I can see the infographic answer is wrong).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: JamieG on March 26, 2020, 04:00:42 pm
In this case Pete what he means is you now have 244 people that are out in public infecting new people. The cumulative number of infected is still 406, just that at the end of each 5 days the old infected are removed from number out in public (i.e. self isolation).

These are the newly infected at each stage 1, 2.5, 6.25, 15.625, 39.0625, 97.6562, 244.1406. Added those numbers up and you get 406.2344 infected.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 26, 2020, 04:13:57 pm
His version assumes 2.5 infections total per infected person - they infect 2.5 over the course of 5 days and then, presumably, stay home and stop infecting. In my version they're still out there infecting 2.5 more on days 5-10, then again on days 10-15... then they're removed from the model and stop infecting. I guess the difference between 406 and 1705 shows how important it is to stay indoors and not even go to the shops if you or any in your household have any symptoms!

But yeah, just goes to show that even with the simplest little model there are loads of ways to approach it that could have very drastic influence on the outcomes
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 26, 2020, 04:41:31 pm
Yeah I understand the logic for the three different figures.

What I don't understand so much is which figure represents the reality we live in. It can't be all three. (yep, all models are wrong etc..) So which one is most useful?
As in what do the models assume people who carry the covid infection actually do in real life? They can't all stay at home because they aren't all symptomatic and so won't be aware that they're spreading anything. Obvs this is why the lockdown.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: JamieG on March 26, 2020, 06:01:48 pm
This response to his original post suggests its much more infectious than 2.5 new infections every 5 days.

https://twitter.com/epsilon3141/status/1239174442770665478

It says the time to double infections is around 2 and a half days. Apparently this gives you 3000 cases by the end of the month. So much much worse. And this seems to hold for the actual data out of Italy, Wuhan and the States.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on March 26, 2020, 06:12:22 pm
The most common estimate used in epidemiology models at the moment is that it takes circa 5 days from exposure to become infectious and you remain infectious for about 3 days. Some slack in these obviously.

Each person infects on average 2.2-2.5 people.

When you crunch the numbers this gives you the 2.5 people in 5 day figure. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 26, 2020, 06:17:08 pm
Will's point is correct.

We know that those that are more seriously ill have a higher viral load (more of it in their body) and are therefore more likely to infect others (as more of it expelled into the air/onto surfaces).

What seems to be conjecture is that the seriousness of the resulting illness in the person that catches it is dependant on the strength of the initial dose. Clearly this makes intuitive sense in that the immune system may find it easier to fight off a lower initial dose, and it accords with anecdotal experience of lots of doctors being seriously ill, but I've not seen any evidence for it.

I don't mind posters playing devils advocate on theoretical arguments but in the end when dealing with actions relating to current NHS staff risk not reaching crazy levels it's better to do what can be done on whats likely, given what they are about to face. Health staff need to be careful and good PPE gear is vital. The delays in sourcing what the government said would be provided for PPE is a scandal (and not the only one... but it's a tough game they are playing where even the best intentioned would make mistakes). Here is another recently published mistake (I don't support the lurid headline but am worried about what happened)

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/26/no-10-boris-johnson-accused-of-putting-brexit-over-breathing-in-covid-19-ventilator-row

From working for decades around  biomedical research staff I thought it was well establised that for most virus infections the initial infection dose mattered (either single size or cumulatively) in severity of subsequent symptoms. The body's defences have less chance to adapt and defend. I've not seen a paper proving that yet for coronavirus but it's very likely to be the case and it certainly explains the unuusal severity level in young healthy medical staff  treating the most seriously infected. It's  very much best to assume it's true if you want to protect NHS staff as well as you can. If someone wants to see some public explanatory journalistic links google Dr Edward Archer of the London School of Hygene and Tropical Medicine (or maybe email him... academics are human too).  Otherwise for those who prefer arguments to civilised discourse on important topics I can bill  for five minutes at standard rate or at a discount for 10.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 26, 2020, 06:56:49 pm
Another 'U turn' in the last hour (but we still failed to secure those ventilators offered in the link above).

From Guardian live @ 18.25:

"Downing Street announced a U-turn over the EU-wide ventilator procurement scheme. A spokesman for No 10 said the UK did not receive an invitation in time to join in the first effort to procure ventilators and other equipment “owing to an initial communication problem”."

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2020/mar/26/uk-coronavirus-live-news-updates-self-employed-rishi-sunakhospital-car-parking-charges-waived-for-nhs-staff-in-england
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 26, 2020, 07:17:47 pm
Parents monumentally screwed by that self employed package as it doesn't cover small ltd companies who take dividends. This is a significant proportion of the self employed, surely there will have to be a row back over the next few days...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 26, 2020, 07:20:26 pm
Update on the EU/ UK risk assessment situation.

https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/publications-data/rapid-risk-assessment-coronavirus-disease-2019-covid-19-pandemic
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on March 26, 2020, 07:35:05 pm
I don't mind posters playing devils advocate on theoretical arguments but in the end when dealing with actions relating to current NHS staff risk not reaching crazy levels it's better to do what can be done on whats likely, given what they are about to face. Health staff need to be careful and good PPE gear is vital.

I didn't say it was not likely that greater initial exposure = greater severity. I was just wondering if it had been proven. No one suggested that medical staff should not be equipped for the worst case.

Quote
From working for decades around  biomedical research staff I thought it was well establised that for most virus infections the initial infection dose mattered (either single size or cumulatively) in severity of subsequent symptoms.

It might be well established, but the referenced paper wasn't about that. That's all.

Quote
The body's defences have less chance to adapt and defend. I've not seen a paper proving that yet for coronavirus but it's very likely to be the case and it certainly explains the unuusal severity level in young healthy medical staff  treating the most seriously infected.

That's what I said.

Quote
It's  very much best to assume it's true if you want to protect NHS staff as well as you can.

Agreed. No-one suggested otherwise.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 26, 2020, 07:53:18 pm
An article looking at the situation in the US and speculating about the future.

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/03/how-will-coronavirus-end/608719/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 26, 2020, 08:14:38 pm
Parents monumentally screwed by that self employed package as it doesn't cover small ltd companies who take dividends. This is a significant proportion of the self employed, surely there will have to be a row back over the next few days...
This is what he was hinting at when he mentioned future changes. Limited company status has been pushed by accountants for years to people who shouldn’t really be limited as a way to avoid tax. The rope access industry is full of it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 26, 2020, 08:17:29 pm
Someone paying a minimum salary from a limited company then the rest of what really should be salary as dividend saves them selves a fortune in tax and also the company saves on NI. The biggest tax loop hole in the country that is used by tens of thousands.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 26, 2020, 08:33:34 pm
Parents monumentally screwed by that self employed package as it doesn't cover small ltd companies who take dividends. This is a significant proportion of the self employed, surely there will have to be a row back over the next few days...

The self-employed package opens up a huge can of worms.

As someone who for the last ten years has employed self-employed subbies almost weekly and who's got to know many of them and their ...ahem approaches to tax... I can fully appreciate the impossible task of trying to come up with fair financial aid scheme for the self-employed in this circumstance.
Consider for e.g. the offshore worker who boasts of earning £50k and is proud of the fact he doesn't pay a penny in income tax or national insurance - like many of these guys, he runs a 'limited company', pays himself a company 'dividend' and writes off all possible profits that he can against  the purchase of (non-existent) 'essential work equipment and plant' along with various other fraudulent ruses. By the way his father's in the local hospital being treated for a heart attack but he doesn't twig that the treatment's paid for by the taxes he's dodging.
Under this government aid scheme this person will get 80% of 0, because he doesn't make a profit right?
If this person ends up in financial hardship I find it difficult to generate much sympathy for his plight. A proportion of these types of guys (nearly always guys) spend their lives doing their utmost not to contribute their share to the welfare net when it suits them, instead squandering their (inflated) wages on toys.

Then on the other end of the spectrum, the person working from home providing some service or trade, making a reasonable living and who declares all their income. They'll get 80% of their declared profits which seems fair (although a 2 month wait for it).

Somewhere in the middle there'll be various tradespeople who do a range of stuff, on a spectrum of fully working for cash to fully declared for tax. There are so many combinations of circumstances it's hard to come up with something fair to all.

Not trying to be divisive, just that I've dealt with a lot of the former types (and was probably guilty of being one to a small degree a long time ago) and it's interesting to see this play out now they're in need of a state-funded welfare net. Lots of expensive toys going cheap on ebay.. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 26, 2020, 08:41:53 pm
I am really impressed with what’s been offered by the chancellor so far. Yes there will be some genuine people it doesn’t work for but I think as a whole it puts money in people’s pocket at the bottom rather than how the bank bailout was dealt with.
The one man Ltd company thing is a joke and has been for years.
As a business owner not one thing the government has offered benefits the business at all, all the business has been offered is cash flow help.
The give aways are all to the employees which is how it should be.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on March 26, 2020, 08:47:58 pm
Someone paying a minimum salary from a limited company then the rest of what really should be salary as dividend saves them selves a fortune in tax and also the company saves on NI. The biggest tax loop hole in the country that is used by tens of thousands.

I know absolutely nothing about this sort of thing to be honest, but on an instinctive level being say a single person rope access worker who is a Ltd. company has always seemed a bit of an odd one. There are no huge set up costs, or indeed ongoing costs / liabilities which require Ltd. status. And semantically being the sole shareholder just seems weird for a start (not really sharing is it?). They are sole traders.

All that said, I would happily rather see the tax loopholes used by large corporations closed as a priority.

As an aside, a lot of companies seem quite happy to be the sole employer of self-employed people on effectively a full time basis, rather than make them employees with increased rights, to save themselves a few bob on NI and holiday pay...as always these things cut both ways.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Doylo on March 26, 2020, 08:52:34 pm
They were already clamping down on one man Ltd companies with the IR35 reforms. They’ve been postponed to next April now due to the virus. The offshore brigade all going ape about having to go PAYE as you can imagine.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Wil on March 26, 2020, 09:19:11 pm
I'm getting nothing at all from this deal. The irony is that I left a (part-time) teaching post in December. I'd have been getting full pay to do not a lot, probably a day or two a fortnight.

Instead I've been freelancing this year, supplemented by a bit of supply teaching. I've still got some freelance work coming in and can work from home with a few compromises. I have been lucky to have relatively steady, if small, income so far this year from it, but keeping supply teaching in the pocket is important so that I can maintain cashflow if needed. There's limited chance of anything from that now, probably until September. I've been doing some freelance since 2017, but it was a minor part of my income for the first 2 years, so I don't think I'll be seeing a penny.

Luckily I have savings and even if they're depleted I'm basically guaranteed some teaching work once this is all over. My other half is working in risk management for the Department for Education and earns enough to keep us afloat if needed as well. She's earning her pennies at the moment!

 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 26, 2020, 10:04:54 pm
Have all the CV 19 threads merged into 1 now?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SamT on March 26, 2020, 10:24:24 pm
Have all the CV 19 threads merged into 1 now?

I don't think so, though it probably wouldn't alter any of them is they were, as there's been so much interrelated discussion.  I was surprised at the initial splits TBH.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 26, 2020, 10:42:30 pm
Someone paying a minimum salary from a limited company then the rest of what really should be salary as dividend saves them selves a fortune in tax and also the company saves on NI. The biggest tax loop hole in the country that is used by tens of thousands

As an aside, a lot of companies seem quite happy to be the sole employer of self-employed people on effectively a full time basis, rather than make them employees with increased rights, to save themselves a few bob on NI and holiday pay...as always these things cut both ways.

We employ a few subbies due to necessity but not happy with it.
We prefer to operate a zero hours contract with people if they and we want a flexible agreement. This costs us a bit more but also the employee more and a lot won’t don’t want it.
The construction industry is bad for it but the rope access industry, especially off shore is diabolical.

There was almost a wry smile on the chancellors face as he mentioned how things needed to change.
If you here a sole trader/ Ltd rope access worker complaining about the deal they are getting tell them to go fuck themselves. As they should be able to look after themselves with all the tax they haven’t paid. 

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 26, 2020, 10:47:41 pm
And apologies if I am ranting on. Had a mental week and just got my self very angry looking twitter about this subject.
I know exactly what goes on with self employment and the dark arts of accountants and am not squeaky clean myself. The people moaning are the same as the guy on question time claiming not to be one of the 5% whilst earning 90k.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 26, 2020, 10:56:42 pm
You're not ranting (much) gme you're spot on and I feel exactly the same. Some of these people are, in their particular socio-economic bracket, the equivalent of MPs who robbed public funds during the expenses scandal; bankers who gamed the system for their personal benefit or corrupt business owners who screw their employees. If it wasn't such a public health disaster you could almost imagine the staff of chancellor's office chuckling at this once-in-a-century opportunity to give back to the one man Ltd company wankers exactly what they deserve from the state - i.e. fuck-all. This is one of the few good things to come out of this pandemic.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on March 26, 2020, 11:25:33 pm
I’m all for applauding those on the front line putting themselves in danger, they are massively heroic.  However, does anyone else see the irony in the general public clapping the NHS when many having only recently voted to continue running it into the ground? :wall:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 27, 2020, 07:40:42 am
A peach of bad reporting Spectator ness for those interested https://twitter.com/frasernelson/status/1243266492063461376?s=21

The academic source turns out to be a retired (Imperial) Prof of micro-engineering....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on March 27, 2020, 07:57:38 am
I’m all for applauding those on the front line putting themselves in danger, they are massively heroic.  However, does anyone else see the irony in the general public clapping the NHS when many having only recently voted to continue running it into the ground? :wall:

I'm not sure that trying to make a political statement here is in any way helpful.  Now is the time that hopefully everyone just listens to what the PM,  CMO, etc keep saying and just stay the f*** at home.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 27, 2020, 08:22:08 am
Some interesting points regarding the self employed. I know there is a significant amount of piss taking that goes on but on the other hand (I know I would say this!) the caricature you have presented of tax dodging one man bands does not match what my parents do! I would have no objection to closing loopholes but its a bit rich to prioritise this one when big corporations get away with blue murder at the other end of the scale isn't it? More generally, personally this seems a poor time to explicitly exclude people from state support; even if you disagree with their company structure (which incidentally is recommended by accountants everywhere as you know) they are skint just like everyone else and have mortgages to pay. Some of the comments smack of schadenfreude a little.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: fatneck on March 27, 2020, 08:23:50 am
Update from the Foodbank

We have mobilised about 10% of the volunteer offers of help we've had (over 2,000 up to now)

New packing centre for emergency food parcels should be fully operational next week, we have also secured daily fresh fruit and veg deliveries as well as bread to supplement the packs we'll be sending out

Currently a bit stymied by bigger organisations than ours playing catch up with where we're at

Seems to be a lack of boxes (I need 10,000)

Regular H&S briefings coming from the council are being actioned at the central warehouse and distribution centres.

Again a bit stymied by lack of PPE as most stocks are rightly being directed to the NHS although we are classed as an essential service

Half our staff working from home - skeleton staff and vols at main office so we can adhere to distancing requirements

Moving to an e-referral process for food vouchers is a ball ache but we're getting there - main hassle is training people to use the system

My main stress is the phone calls being never ending - we have ended up taking it off the hook and picking up messages twice a day. This is a very emotional task and we have all felt overwhelmed at times.

The council have set up a central phone line without much thought or expertise in managing the calls. Most are being referred to us -100's of people each day and we are struggling to keep on top of them. Most people are actually ok and just worried but we are increasingly having to look to deliver food parcels - something we have never done before. Hopefully by next week we will be mobilising local taxi firms to do this for us.

One lady threw a parcel back at one of my drivers yesterday as she wouldn't deign to eat "that crap". This is going to be a wake up call for many people when they realise how dire the social security system is and what emergency food provision actually looks like!!

We are not tasked with helping shielded groups although not much seems to be happening for them at present

Personally, I cannot sleep. We've shortened our working day to 9-4 but I've been in work since 7 ...

Don't know if this is useful and I'm pushed for time so this may not make much sense - hoping to give a flavour from the front line that's not the NHS...

Take care people - in my opinion, it's going to get much worse before it gets better...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 27, 2020, 08:38:54 am
t; even if you disagree with their company structure (which incidentally is recommended by accountants everywhere as you know) they are skint just like everyone else and have mortgages to pay. Some of the comments smack of schadenfreude a little.

There is no schadenfreude at all. I do exactly as they do, and most directors,  so am far from squeaky clean And am in exactly the same position in relation to what the government is offering me.  There is nothing illegal and it’s common practice but I also don’t expect to be supported by the government now it’s not working for me.
It is pushed on people by accountants ( for who I have the same regard as politicians) but I can’t believe it wasn’t explained and therefore  were not aware of why it’s done like that or that they agreed to It.
As I have said already I don’t have an issue with it but I do have one when people are now complaining the government isn’t supporting them.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 27, 2020, 08:41:34 am

 accountants ( for who I have the same regard as politicians)


On this we totally agree!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 27, 2020, 08:50:57 am
Get them to look at how much tax they have paid in the last three years on income earned then compare it to what would have been paid under PAYE.
The difference will most likely be considerably more than the 7500 the government is offering for three months furloughing.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 27, 2020, 08:58:29 am
Some interesting points regarding the self employed. I know there is a significant amount of piss taking that goes on but on the other hand (I know I would say this!) the caricature you have presented of tax dodging one man bands does not match what my parents do! I would have no objection to closing loopholes but its a bit rich to prioritise this one when big corporations get away with blue murder at the other end of the scale isn't it? More generally, personally this seems a poor time to explicitly exclude people from state support; even if you disagree with their company structure (which incidentally is recommended by accountants everywhere as you know) they are skint just like everyone else and have mortgages to pay. Some of the comments smack of schadenfreude a little.

Not that we’ve ever drawn one, however a Dividend is taxable. At a lower rate than income tax, but that’s meant to reflect the risk. Most company directors draw a salary, on which they pay NI and IT as required.
I understand your “one man band” image, however, the type you describe is not what a LTD company was supposed to be and is, surely, illegal? If you are aware of such, shouldn’t you be reporting it? You seem to believe it’s wrong, after all.

When I ran Avalon G, I was a sole director. My insurance company wouldn’t have covered a sole trader to carry out that kind of work.
(I was not the sole shareholder, though), all the surveyors on the team were subcontractors.
Actually, we all subcontracted to each other, each of us having a different specialty. The arrangement allowed us to cover a lot of ground without keeping a large staff on payroll.
Not every investigation I carried out required a physical security consultant, for instance. On the other hand, sometimes you needed a finishings and coating surveyor on the same tasking as an Anti-piracy/terrorism consultant.

My point being, you tarred a lot of people with a very broad brush.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 27, 2020, 09:09:19 am
Is this directed at me or gme Matt?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 27, 2020, 09:11:20 am

Don't know if this is useful and I'm pushed for time so this may not make much sense - hoping to give a flavour from the front line that's not the NHS...

Take care people - in my opinion, it's going to get much worse before it gets better...

It's very helpful to me. Such social action shows the best side of humanity.  I'd like to see more people here doing stuff to help others and less moaning, particularly about old people (one day they might be old and grumpy and confused). As well as foodbanks it's also important not to forget those involved in social care, assisting the homeless, dealing with domestic abuse (that all indicators point will get worse) and many other support areas to cover the gaps in government and council action (often funded by charities now facing income problems).

We are helping various people: old, those with serious health problems and some who count as both.  One thing that has come out of this is the advice to these people is  really confusing. In particular, 'strongly advised'  is different to 'advised' in exactly what specific ways?  When old folk have knowledgeable people to help them, that they trust, it's easy to persuade them to stay at home and cut risk in other ways but there is a huge number that don't.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bradders on March 27, 2020, 09:14:13 am
More generally, personally this seems a poor time to explicitly exclude people from state support; even if you disagree with their company structure (which incidentally is recommended by accountants everywhere as you know) they are skint just like everyone else and have mortgages to pay. Some of the comments smack of schadenfreude a little.

Very much agree with this. Whatever the faults in the system there are, now seems a particularly poor time to rectify them, or to penalise people for using legal means of drawing an income.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 27, 2020, 09:18:02 am

My point being, you tarred a lot of people with a very broad brush.

Indeed ... if its illegal (evasion), report it; if it's not (avoidance) campaign to have the tax loopholes closed.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 27, 2020, 09:19:23 am

I'd like to see more people here doing stuff to help others and less moaning


You have absolutely no idea what anyone on here is doing to help.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 27, 2020, 09:21:57 am
Some interesting points regarding the self employed. I know there is a significant amount of piss taking that goes on but on the other hand (I know I would say this!) the caricature you have presented of tax dodging one man bands does not match what my parents do! I would have no objection to closing loopholes but its a bit rich to prioritise this one when big corporations get away with blue murder at the other end of the scale isn't it? More generally, personally this seems a poor time to explicitly exclude people from state support; even if you disagree with their company structure (which incidentally is recommended by accountants everywhere as you know) they are skint just like everyone else and have mortgages to pay. Some of the comments smack of schadenfreude a little.

Not that we’ve ever drawn one, however a Dividend is taxable. At a lower rate than income tax, but that’s meant to reflect the risk. Most company directors draw a salary, on which they pay NI and IT as required.
I understand your “one man band” image, however, the type you describe is not what a LTD company was supposed to be and is, surely, illegal? If you are aware of such, shouldn’t you be reporting it? You seem to believe it’s wrong, after all.

When I ran Avalon G, I was a sole director. My insurance company wouldn’t have covered a sole trader to carry out that kind of work.
(I was not the sole shareholder, though), all the surveyors on the team were subcontractors.
Actually, we all subcontracted to each other, each of us having a different specialty. The arrangement allowed us to cover a lot of ground without keeping a large staff on payroll.
Not every investigation I carried out required a physical security consultant, for instance. On the other hand, sometimes you needed a finishings and coating surveyor on the same tasking as an Anti-piracy/terrorism consultant.

My point being, you tarred a lot of people with a very broad brush.

I understand the reason you describe but at the same time did you choose to pay a realistic salary or, as in most cases, the tax free allowance level then dividend. If it’s the later it’s only done to avoid paying tax. Therefore you should not expect money back from the tax pot you avoided paying into when things are hard.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 27, 2020, 09:24:46 am

My point being, you tarred a lot of people with a very broad brush.

Indeed ... if its illegal (evasion), report it; if it's not (avoidance) campaign to have the tax loopholes closed.

I am not complaining about the system. Bit hypocritical if I did to be honest.
I am having a go at the people who are complaining the system isn’t helping them when they have been playing it for years.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 27, 2020, 09:26:07 am

You have absolutely no idea what anyone on here is doing to help.

Tell us then....  link to others doing great stuff.... this is not the time for 'traditional british modesty'.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 27, 2020, 09:33:17 am
Neil Ferguson from Imperial (the key group informing UK policy) is having his optimism broadcast in the US now... what do others think about this? Will the NHS be stressed but not break??

 https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/coronavirus-nhs-london-hospitals-lockdown-boris-johnson-neil-ferguson-a9426756.html
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 27, 2020, 09:41:04 am

I understand the reason you describe but at the same time did you choose to pay a realistic salary or, as in most cases, the tax free allowance level then dividend. If it’s the later it’s only done to avoid paying tax. Therefore you should not expect money back from the tax pot you avoided paying into when things are hard.

Really? In a national emergency if they did nothing illegal?  Its also really bad for the economy if thousands of such businesses go to the wall. It's a matter of politics to close legal tax loopholes. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 27, 2020, 09:52:39 am

You have absolutely no idea what anyone on here is doing to help.

Tell us then....  link to others doing great stuff.... this is not the time for 'traditional british modesty'.

Yes it is. This is not a fun charity event. I'm sure everyone is doing something without expecting a round of applause from the neighbourhood.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 27, 2020, 09:55:59 am
Neil Ferguson from Imperial (the key group informing UK policy) is having his optimism broadcast in the US now... what do others think about this? Will the NHS be stressed but not break??

 https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/coronavirus-nhs-london-hospitals-lockdown-boris-johnson-neil-ferguson-a9426756.html

I think (and this is just my conjecture) that we'll be somewhere between Italy and Switzerland when this washes up. Both with high ocurrences in the population - but I think we may just get enough extra health measures in place to avoid Italy scale shit hitting fan scenes.

Though there will be big regional variations. London of course (and Brum?) being worse afflicted.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 27, 2020, 10:03:54 am
Some interesting points regarding the self employed. I know there is a significant amount of piss taking that goes on but on the other hand (I know I would say this!) the caricature you have presented of tax dodging one man bands does not match what my parents do! I would have no objection to closing loopholes but its a bit rich to prioritise this one when big corporations get away with blue murder at the other end of the scale isn't it? More generally, personally this seems a poor time to explicitly exclude people from state support; even if you disagree with their company structure (which incidentally is recommended by accountants everywhere as you know) they are skint just like everyone else and have mortgages to pay. Some of the comments smack of schadenfreude a little.

Not that we’ve ever drawn one, however a Dividend is taxable. At a lower rate than income tax, but that’s meant to reflect the risk. Most company directors draw a salary, on which they pay NI and IT as required.
I understand your “one man band” image, however, the type you describe is not what a LTD company was supposed to be and is, surely, illegal? If you are aware of such, shouldn’t you be reporting it? You seem to believe it’s wrong, after all.

When I ran Avalon G, I was a sole director. My insurance company wouldn’t have covered a sole trader to carry out that kind of work.
(I was not the sole shareholder, though), all the surveyors on the team were subcontractors.
Actually, we all subcontracted to each other, each of us having a different specialty. The arrangement allowed us to cover a lot of ground without keeping a large staff on payroll.
Not every investigation I carried out required a physical security consultant, for instance. On the other hand, sometimes you needed a finishings and coating surveyor on the same tasking as an Anti-piracy/terrorism consultant.

My point being, you tarred a lot of people with a very broad brush.

I understand the reason you describe but at the same time did you choose to pay a realistic salary or, as in most cases, the tax free allowance level then dividend. If it’s the later it’s only done to avoid paying tax. Therefore you should not expect money back from the tax pot you avoided paying into when things are hard.

Ha!
Typed a long response, then lost it all.
Can’t be arsed starting again.

You responded while I was typing, to your original, I hit send and went off with kids to doPE with Joe.
Your response actually changed my impression of your/Petes original post.

Your points:
No, I took a large salary.
I had been an expat for almost two decades, no NI since early 90s and needed a credit rating and mortgage asap. That was the accountants advice. Never drew a dividend.
Not an angel, just took advice and followed it. Not sure what I would have done in different circumstances.
Current business is totally different. We draw no salary and take no dividend. We take a loan repayment on our original investment of ~£100/week. Not at the moment, of course. We have other income and any profit the business makes gets re-invested.


I do believe, if you have paid tax on your dividend and paid your required NI, and hence done all that is required of you by law, on a fully declared income, you should not be excluded from protection in the current climate.
The level of that support? No clue.
I guess it depends how much tax you, or your company paid.
You, for instance, probably paid Corporation tax? VAT? Etc etc. You and your company contributed to the economy. Hw many peopledid you employ? Big Employers contribution from you?
I see your point, with the one man band. But where LTD company status is inappropriate, I still think you should not be supporting it and/or reporting it.
I know that sounds sanctimonious. I don’t know howI would respond myself, in that situation, but I know what is “supposed” to happen.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 27, 2020, 10:15:06 am
A peach of bad reporting Spectator ness for those interested https://twitter.com/frasernelson/status/1243266492063461376?s=21

The academic source turns out to be a retired (Imperial) Prof of micro-engineering....

It's worth opening the full thread and reading the comments to see the range of views of the Spectator readership who post comments, some very scary, others sensible but caustically funny. On the numbers from the Prof of microengineering  he stated his assumptions (mainly following the trend seen in China) and he isn't advising government... also at Imperial... Ferguson's group yesterday predicted deaths down to 20,000 and he is advising government (the same group who were saying 2 weeks ago that we were 4 weeks behind Italy). Frankly, I think any models for the UK currently need to be taken with a massive pinch of salt given the sensitivity to assumptions, input data and the lack of good test data. We need to look at Italy and Spain and try to do better than them: in particular lock-down harder and take better social precautions.

Both these Imperial models predict numbers in the range of annual deaths for flu seasons but as one wit in the Spectator commented comparing flu to covid 19 is like comparing normal road traffic deaths to terror events using vehicles.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 27, 2020, 10:28:37 am
Otherwise for those who prefer arguments to civilised discourse on important topics I can bill  for five minutes at standard rate or at a discount for 10.

There's no need for sanctimonious bellendery. I asked for a fact check on something I'd seen copied and pasted to Facebook. Your response was to link to an article which did not answer the question, the implication being that you didn't understand either the question or how viral load is different to infectious dose. You also made a political point which was not relevant to the initial question and wasn't being contested (NHS staff should, of course, have access to the appropriate PPE).
When it was pointed out that your link did not provide anything useful for the discussion, you said that we had misread it (we hadn't).
I recognised that the infectious dose was probably significant in disease severity, because this is seen in other similar diseases, but in tripping over yourself in your hurry to make a political point, you ignored that it might be useful to people to understand the phenomena in more detail.

 :shrug:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 27, 2020, 10:29:01 am

Yes it is. This is not a fun charity event. I'm sure everyone is doing something without expecting a round of applause from the neighbourhood.

In a time of crisis how do people judge.... what or who it's best to support, things that worked and things that didn't, important practical considerations, etc... if everyone keeps quiet about it. It's fuck all to do with expecting applause.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: northern yob on March 27, 2020, 10:29:14 am
Some interesting points regarding the self employed. I know there is a significant amount of piss taking that goes on but on the other hand (I know I would say this!) the caricature you have presented of tax dodging one man bands does not match what my parents do! I would have no objection to closing loopholes but its a bit rich to prioritise this one when big corporations get away with blue murder at the other end of the scale isn't it? More generally, personally this seems a poor time to explicitly exclude people from state support; even if you disagree with their company structure (which incidentally is recommended by accountants everywhere as you know) they are skint just like everyone else and have mortgages to pay. Some of the comments smack of schadenfreude a little.

Not that we’ve ever drawn one, however a Dividend is taxable. At a lower rate than income tax, but that’s meant to reflect the risk. Most company directors draw a salary, on which they pay NI and IT as required.
I understand your “one man band” image, however, the type you describe is not what a LTD company was supposed to be and is, surely, illegal? If you are aware of such, shouldn’t you be reporting it? You seem to believe it’s wrong, after all.

When I ran Avalon G, I was a sole director. My insurance company wouldn’t have covered a sole trader to carry out that kind of work.
(I was not the sole shareholder, though), all the surveyors on the team were subcontractors.
Actually, we all subcontracted to each other, each of us having a different specialty. The arrangement allowed us to cover a lot of ground without keeping a large staff on payroll.
Not every investigation I carried out required a physical security consultant, for instance. On the other hand, sometimes you needed a finishings and coating surveyor on the same tasking as an Anti-piracy/terrorism consultant.

My point being, you tarred a lot of people with a very broad brush.

I understand the reason you describe but at the same time did you choose to pay a realistic salary or, as in most cases, the tax free allowance level then dividend. If it’s the later it’s only done to avoid paying tax. Therefore you should not expect money back from the tax pot you avoided paying into when things are hard.

The whole dividend thing isn’t exactly a loophole, it exists to encourage entrepreneurs to start small businesses, and to create jobs for people, yes it’s used by one man bands to milk the system, but it’s definitely not that simple. And a lot of people who more than pay their way in society will be worse off because of this! It’s far from simple and the government are trying. I just hope they can find a way to not penalise hard working small business owners.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 27, 2020, 10:38:46 am
I asked for a fact check on something I'd seen copied and pasted to Facebook. Your response was to link to an article which did not answer the question

You assumed I was using it as proof for one thing when I explained I was using it as evidence for something else. On load versus dose you are strictly speaking correct but they are used interchangeably when looking at things the other way round, it's semantics that most people should be able to see past. I'll quote from (the Wikipedia page) what the doctor said who treated the whistleblower,  Li Wenliang:  "Doctor Yu Chengbo, a Zhejiang medical expert sent to Wuhan, told media that although most young patients do not tend to develop severe conditions, the glaucoma patient whom Li saw on 8 January was a storekeeper at Huanan Seafood Market with a high viral load, which could have exacerbated Li's infection.[24]"

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Li_Wenliang
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 27, 2020, 11:14:07 am

Yes it is. This is not a fun charity event. I'm sure everyone is doing something without expecting a round of applause from the neighbourhood.

In a time of crisis how do people judge.... what or who it's best to support, things that worked and things that didn't, important practical considerations, etc... if everyone keeps quiet about it. It's fuck all to do with expecting applause.


It really isn't hard to work this stuff out; a crisis often makes it simpler, not more difficult, to see the right course of action. For sure in times of crisis a bit of guidance on what might be useful actions to take is a good thing. People will take some of the possible actions - such as volunteering, or helping neighbours, or donating food, or xyz - provided they're made of the right stuff (or yes, if people who are made of the right stuff encourage others, who aren't).
I don't think anyone could argue there's any lack of guidance right now - virtually the whole population is sat around listening to radio, on the internet or watching the tv abut COVID-19 and possible ways to help.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 27, 2020, 11:20:14 am
If you want to constantly reinvent the wheel and be inefficient. My engineering side and experience with people who work in charities and other NGOs, tells me 'coal face'  communication is very important. Fatneck's post is a perfect illustration to me.

Anyow on a different subject (thanks to girlymonkey on the other channel) here is a scientific link on viral load:

https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-questions-about-covid-19-and-viral-load/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 27, 2020, 11:32:45 am

The whole dividend thing isn’t exactly a loophole, it exists to encourage entrepreneurs to start small businesses, and to create jobs for people, yes it’s used by one man bands to milk the system, but it’s definitely not that simple.

We need new words to split the two types of tax avoidance.  Commentators on the right are often saying things like "stop moaning you hypocrites, all tax breaks are avoidance".. it's a ''squirrel distraction defence' to detract from their own dishonesty.  Tax incentive schemes, set up for good reasons, get exploited by dishonest accountants and clients to do something else: that is an avoidance loophole that needs closing in law. I think most people paying tax, most of the time avoid tax legally for fair reasons.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: fatneck on March 27, 2020, 11:49:25 am
Bo Jo's got CV-19!!!  :lol:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 27, 2020, 12:03:36 pm

The whole dividend thing isn’t exactly a loophole, it exists to encourage entrepreneurs to start small businesses, and to create jobs for people, yes it’s used by one man bands to milk the system, but it’s definitely not that simple.

We need new words to split the two types of tax avoidance.  Commentators on the right are often saying things like "stop moaning you hypocrites, all tax breaks are avoidance".. it's a ''squirrel distraction defence' to detract from their own dishonesty.  Tax incentive schemes, set up for good reasons, get exploited by dishonest accountants and clients to do something else: that is an avoidance loophole that needs closing in law. I think most people paying tax, most of the time avoid tax legally for fair reasons.


You're right in the main, that is what happens at a population level.

But you're wrong and naïve about some small subsets of the population, probably because you have no experience of dealing with these people. Gme and I do. Some of these people avoid paying tax by ruses that border on legality. As Bradders says, the system is set up to encourage highly creative entrepreneurs and risk-takers to create wealth for the benefit of many. Unfortunately, the system is then leached upon by these one-man band parasitical twats who aren't, like OMM or GME, setting up business's that benefit anyone - they're simply screwing a system that wasn't supposed to be for them. They do it to simply to expand their bank balance by avoiding all possible contribution back to the society from which they still live in and still benefit from. They can't even claim to be benefitting society in the way that media entertainers or sportspeople do who also use this system. The ones I'm talking about are just parasitical twats. They can sell their jet-skis and Beemer M3s (fuel costs deducted from revenue) to get them through.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 27, 2020, 12:13:57 pm
If you want to constantly reinvent the wheel and be inefficient. My engineering side and experience with people who work in charities and other NGOs, tells me 'coal face'  communication is very important. Fatneck's post is a perfect illustration to me.

 ::) Patronising twat. My 'being a human being' side gives me inside knowledge too.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 27, 2020, 12:16:54 pm
Where are all these M3s?  Even the local drug middle mangement on my main road (the infamous St Anns Wells Road)  seem to have the sense to drive stuff that doesnt attract unknown attention to their illegal business. I know quite a few people running single person Ltd companies from high tech down to trade and most seem honest to me.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 27, 2020, 12:19:52 pm
If you want to constantly reinvent the wheel and be inefficient. My engineering side and experience with people who work in charities and other NGOs, tells me 'coal face'  communication is very important. Fatneck's post is a perfect illustration to me.

 ::) Patronising twat. My 'being a human being' side gives me inside knowledge too.

Exactly, also your common sense.

Most of what good people are doing is not rocket science and doesn't need engineering knowledge, just basic grass roots sensible networking and speaking to people.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 27, 2020, 12:26:26 pm
Not normally me saying this, but times are strange.

This is now all a bit testy and recursive.

Points made, wadded and puntered as the audience sees fit.

Can we move it on?

Given that the PM is into his first 24 hours of symptoms, I’m actually concerned about where that might lead, since he’s hardly been in isolation on the run up to this point.

I actually, genuinely, wish the man I would have happily called a wanker to his face, a couple of weeks ago, all the best.

Poor fucker actually thought he was going to grab a shit load of glory, for very little effort, on the back of a few trite sound bites.

Copped a roundhouse to the temple and snap kick to the nuts instead. Has had to flip his entire ideology and world view and actually hasn’t been the insufferable twat he normally is.


Anyway, Royal Navy joke to ease springs:

If Charles is positive, does this prove Queen Elizabeth and The Prince of Wales, are both Carriers....?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 27, 2020, 12:35:14 pm
Boom tish OMM :)

I agree. Move the conversation on in the thread please? It’s not the time to be getting snarky.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 27, 2020, 12:51:03 pm
Before we all get carried away (i.e. people thinking that the Tories have suddenly move rapidly leftwards and we're about to get permanently nationalised industries and a significant increase in the size of the state; also Jeremy Corbyn crowing that he was proved right etc etc etc), it might be worth bearing in mind that the government's financial measures are a temporary response to an unprecedented threat.
I think that a lot of the government's action has been highly commendable, but I can't see it continuing once we're back to business as usual.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 27, 2020, 01:09:07 pm
The NCP view on charity work during the pandemic:

https://www.thinknpc.org/resource-hub/coronavirus-guide/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 27, 2020, 01:11:29 pm
The health secretary -who else? - will be joining the PM in isolation it appears.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 27, 2020, 01:14:52 pm
Before we all get carried away (i.e. people thinking that the Tories have suddenly move rapidly leftwards and we're about to get permanently nationalised industries and a significant increase in the size of the state; also Jeremy Corbyn crowing that he was proved right etc etc etc), it might be worth bearing in mind that the government's financial measures are a temporary response to an unprecedented threat.
I think that a lot of the government's action has been highly commendable, but I can't see it continuing once we're back to business as usual.

I would not be surprised to find a few voters waking up to certain possibilities, though.

It’s quite likely to have a profound effect, isn’t it.

A German friend shared a natty little tidbit on FB that I liked:

“In Germany, we don’t do charity; we pay tax.
Charity shows the government’s failure to fill it’s responsibility.”
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: rich d on March 27, 2020, 01:21:31 pm
Where are all these M3s?  Even the local drug middle mangement on my main road (the infamous St Anns Wells Road)  seem to have the sense to drive stuff that doesnt attract unknown attention to their illegal business. I know quite a few people running single person Ltd companies from high tech down to trade and most seem honest to me.
Hi from Notts!! there was a bloke on the Trent Bridge bouldering last night when I went for my daily outdoor exercise not seen that for a while.
I think it's a mixed bag with tax and self employed, although 3 out of 4 use it purely to reduce to a minimum their tax. 2 are single person businesses who pay themselves through dividends and write everything else off, the other is a tradesman who declares a fifth of his earnings and makes no profit official - he's now livid that the government aren't giving him more - that does feel like karma in that situation - although still working at least for this week.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Andy F on March 27, 2020, 01:55:10 pm
Just a heads up, if you get an email for the department of health telling you not to eat tinned pork because it contains covid-19 ignore it, it’s spam.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 27, 2020, 02:00:20 pm
I should have probably started the topic re tax and self employed in the coronavirus economics page so sorry about that.

More in line with this page, are people aware of what is going on in Holland. I have a business there as well and speak pretty much daily to them. The dutch attitude is very much full steam ahead, we have no restrictions in place on our working other than stay 1.5m apart. Still allowed to have meetings and events upto 100 people and travel not limited. They shut schools, bars and resturants before us but thats pretty much it.

Ploughing along openly supporting the herd immunity route. 761 ICU beds full out of 1100, dertemined not to let it effect the economy. There infection/deaths curve is pretty much the same as ours but a day or two behind us.

Will be an interesting experiment if they hold fast on this route.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 27, 2020, 02:02:58 pm
The NCP view on charity work during the pandemic:

https://www.thinknpc.org/resource-hub/coronavirus-guide/

https://www.goodsamapp.org/NHS

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 27, 2020, 02:06:45 pm
Even I gave up on Trent Bridge when the traverses were chipped to make them easier about a decade back. I used to live in The Meadows so most days I got a quick evening session at Trent Bridge or Lady Bay  until '92. On tax fiddles we just don't know (it's all anecdote here). I'd rather give most the benefit of the doubt.

On a different subject Roy Lilley's weekly blog:

"Next week...
News and Comment from Roy Lilley
As this historic week draws to a close I sense the NHS is holding its collective breath.

Our biggest exhibition centre is being turned into a four thousand bed hospital.  NHS people are being trained up, stepping-up and are up for whatever's next.  

The public are showing their admiration for the NHS by volunteering to help, in their droves.

At eight o'clock last night, did you stand on your door-step and applaud the NHS?  Amazing, an ovation from the nation.  I have to admit, it brought a tear to these dry-old-eyes.

The question we dare not whisper; is the NHS ready?  It depends how you define ready. 

PPE?  You know, when the army are called-in, there really is an issue.  My guess is, this will sort itself out by mid-week.

These are testing times... made more testing by the fact we aren't testing anything like enough people.  Instead of testing we're guessing.  Guessing about transmission rates, geography and all the rest.

I guess the answer to the question, the NHS is ready as it can be but... is the public?

People will end their days connected to a machine, surrounded by anonymous people, trapped behind masks and gowns.  No chance to say goodbye, last memories, a picture on an iPad. 

Tenderness and technology are unlikely companions.

If you love someone, don't waste a moment.  Tell them today... now.

Ventilators?  Normally, people need them for three to five days.  The longer they are in use, the less likelihood of a good outcome.  Covid patients might need them for 11-21 days.  

A lot of people on ventilators, for a long time?  Thirty thousand machines might not be enough.

Are there any plusses?  Yes... 

... we're learning we can look after patients using our smart phones, we know we don't need to spend a fortune on offices, we've all got a kitchen table.  

We know we can, sensibly, share data and no one gets hurt... they are more likely to get hurt if we don't.  

We know we will look back and say, that was a Covid-Change. 

We have weeks of this ahead of us.  We will learn new things about the NHS, about medical science and about ourselves.

What about next week?

We know you will start work earlier and stay later, you'll certainly work harder.  Many of you will working for less and a huge number will be working for nothing... volunteering.

If you are a boss, you will redefine 'visible'.  You will make sure you are seen.  Seen being constructive and helpful and smiling and positive.  Yes, that's your role now.

Attitude is so important.  This is not something 'to get through' this is the new reality, for the foreseeable.  This is about getting into it. The new normal. 

Standards will change but they will only drop as far as you let them.  Set your own.  Be at ease with yourself.

Younger colleagues are the ones to be with.  Tech-native, keep them close they'll have the ideas, the work-arounds.  They'll teach you how to do future-working, today.

As times get tougher, your best allies will be found in teams, collegiate working and mutual respect.

If you've never been a networker, now is the time.  Keeping in touch with friends and family, of course but keeping in touch with professional colleagues through the IHM, the Academy of Fabulous Stuff and all the other great organisations who exist to offer advice, innovation and support.

As the focus is on deliveries there is one thing that only you can deliver, by the truck-load, yourself... it is a mega-load of 'thank-you's' and 'well-done's'.  

There will be backs that need patting, find them.  Not an email.  Make a phone call, better still, FaceTime; personal, a quiet, shared, private moment of calm, thoughtful thanks and well-done.

Remember, you are who you hang-out with.  Avoid the gloom mongers, the nit pickers and the nay sayers.  

Everywhere there are good people, just like you, doing their best and like you they will drop the ball, make a mistake, get something wrong.  

Before you shout, stop and think.  These are tricky times and next time it might be you.

Get some rest, if you can, keep safe because we need you, I'll see you next week...

... and have the best weekend you can.
---------------------------
Contact Roy - please use this e-address
roy.lilley@nhsmanagers.net 
Know something I don't - email me in confidence"
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 27, 2020, 02:35:56 pm
Fuuuck... just under 3k new UK cases.. and 181 fatalities. Worse than Italy 2 weeks ago...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 27, 2020, 02:51:05 pm
But, look at the US, there’s a ticking bomb.
Quite a few youngsters dying too. Several reports of even teens, with no under  lying conditions.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 27, 2020, 02:53:00 pm
On tax fiddles we I just don't know (it's all anecdote here). I'd rather give most the benefit of the doubt.

Correction - *you* don't know; and for you it's anecdotes. Some of us *do* know, and for us it isn't anecdotes it's our realm and we do business with these people and/or have been these people.


Interesting to see what happens in the Netherlands.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on March 27, 2020, 03:05:38 pm
Before we all get carried away (i.e. people thinking that the Tories have suddenly move rapidly leftwards and we're about to get permanently nationalised industries and a significant increase in the size of the state; also Jeremy Corbyn crowing that he was proved right etc etc etc), it might be worth bearing in mind that the government's financial measures are a temporary response to an unprecedented threat.
I think that a lot of the government's action has been highly commendable, but I can't see it continuing once we're back to business as usual.

I'm sure you're right, it won't continue on the Conservative's watch. I suspect everyone knows that.

I don't see anyone on here getting carried away or claiming the things you put in brackets (are they?), but in the interests of engaging with it, at least their fiscal and monetary response shows that these things are possible *in principle*, despite their previous protests e.g. There is no alternative (to austerity), no magic money tree etc.

If we look where we are now compared to two weeks ago (relatively normal, economically speaking), we have government money going directly to citizens, restrictions on amount and delay time of UC lifted at a stroke, railways nationalised, and homeless people being forced to be housed by this weekend no less! The fiscal response to coronavirus went from 12bn to 300bn to unlimited over the same two weeks.

If this is commendable in the current context, why not at other times? No doubt the government would like this to be temporary, but I would suggest it may have given the lie to certain ideologies - the chancellor even said (admitted?) "this is no time for ideology".
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 27, 2020, 03:22:31 pm
The fiscal response to coronavirus went from 12bn to 300bn to unlimited over the same two weeks.

If this is commendable in the current context, why not at other times?

I don't hold an ideological position and I'm no economist, but I suspect most people's instinctive answer would be 'because it wiped out ours and every other nation's economies to take these measures'.
Habrich and others can debate the details, but if we were to continue with the same measures as the norm, wouldn't JB's point about 'money being illusory' have to apply and every country would have to be on the same page? Otherwise in a global market how would you prevent competitive advantage going to nations who reverted to the economic model of pre covid emergency?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 27, 2020, 03:27:42 pm
The fiscal response to coronavirus went from 12bn to 300bn to unlimited over the same two weeks.

If this is commendable in the current context, why not at other times?

I don't hold an ideological position and I'm no economist, but I suspect most people's instinctive answer would be 'because it wiped out ours and every other nation's economies to take these measures'.
Habrich and others can debate the details, but if we were to continue with the same measures as the norm, wouldn't JB's point about 'money being illusory' have to apply and every country would have to be on the same page? Otherwise in a global market how would you prevent competitive advantage going to nations who reverted to the economic model of pre covid emergency?

Isn’t it all ok as long as you call it “monetary easing” and don’t say “printing money”?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 27, 2020, 03:34:13 pm
Good chart from the FT: Stars show when lockdown started. Lines start at 10th recorded death.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EUEVzQoWkAEsn4j?format=jpg&name=small)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 27, 2020, 03:40:48 pm
Good chart from the FT: Stars show when lockdown started. Lines start at 10th recorded death.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EUEVzQoWkAEsn4j?format=jpg&name=small)

Yes, I’ve been following. I didn’t share because the FT is paywalled etc. I’m too fucking dim to think of screen shot sharing. 🤦🏻‍♂️

Opened the front door today, for a delivery and felt distinctly odd.
Shall now rename the house “Outside the Asylum” and change my name to “Wonko the Sane”...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 27, 2020, 03:42:50 pm
Was going to invoke Hobbes and Locke in the discussion about self-employed, as the Covid crisis peels away the layers of government to reveal what's going on underneath and why. See that it's been mentioned today in the guardian. Lockdown's the perfect opportunity for people to read Leviathan and have the opportunity to actually see it playing out for real on the street in front of their eyes.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/mar/27/coronavirus-politics-lockdown-hobbes (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/mar/27/coronavirus-politics-lockdown-hobbes)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on March 27, 2020, 03:43:06 pm
The fiscal response to coronavirus went from 12bn to 300bn to unlimited over the same two weeks.

If this is commendable in the current context, why not at other times?

I don't hold an ideological position and I'm no economist, but I suspect most people's instinctive answer would be 'because it wiped out ours and every other nation's economies to take these measures'.

Yes that would be most people's instinctive answer, agreed. History will decide on whether this turns out to be true - fact is we aren't yet after the event so no-one actually knows whether it will wipe out our economies or not.

If it doesn't then people might rightfully ask why government can't do more to help the neediest citizens in normal times.

If it does then people might rightfully ask whether the previous economic model was a good one if it is broken so quickly? I recall this was asked in 2007 but nothing meaningful happened. I cant see people swallowing another decade of austerity as the solution to the solution. But maybe too idealistic!

Bit pushed for time so will consider the second part of your post separately.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on March 27, 2020, 03:46:04 pm
The fiscal response to coronavirus went from 12bn to 300bn to unlimited over the same two weeks.

If this is commendable in the current context, why not at other times?

I don't hold an ideological position and I'm no economist, but I suspect most people's instinctive answer would be 'because it wiped out ours and every other nation's economies to take these measures'.
Habrich and others can debate the details, but if we were to continue with the same measures as the norm, wouldn't JB's point about 'money being illusory' have to apply and every country would have to be on the same page? Otherwise in a global market how would you prevent competitive advantage going to nations who reverted to the economic model of pre covid emergency?

Isn’t it all ok as long as you call it “monetary easing” and don’t say “printing money”?

Yes it is. In the same way that we have "negative growth" instead of "recessions".
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: northern yob on March 27, 2020, 03:48:30 pm
On tax fiddles we I just don't know (it's all anecdote here). I'd rather give most the benefit of the doubt.

Correction - *you* don't know; and for you it's anecdotes. Some of us *do* know, and for us it isn't anecdotes it's our realm and we do business with these people and/or have been these people.


Interesting to see what happens in the Netherlands.

So you know some people who fiddle their taxes..... I presume you know some who don’t.... to say that you know for a fact that most people that pay themselves through dividends are on the fiddle seems a little presumptuous. Maybe in your world but not across the board.
 
I realise it’s mission impossible but there will be quite a lot of very hard working small business owners who do the right by their employees, that currently are about the only people who aren’t getting any assistance from the government. Whilst busting their guts to keep their businesses going and their employees in work.

I just hope they can find a way to distinguish between the tax dodging one man company and hard working entrepreneurs
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on March 27, 2020, 03:54:47 pm
I’m all for applauding those on the front line putting themselves in danger, they are massively heroic.  However, does anyone else see the irony in the general public clapping the NHS when many having only recently voted to continue running it into the ground? :wall:

I'm not sure that trying to make a political statement here is in any way helpful.  Now is the time that hopefully everyone just listens to what the PM,  CMO, etc keep saying and just stay the f*** at home.

Toby maybe brutus's point was awkwardly expressed, but there is still a place for political comment and I don't think we should just pipe down! He does have a point, for instance:

Advice on protective gear for NHS staff was rejected owing to cost

Quote
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/27/advice-on-protective-gear-for-nhs-staff-was-rejected-owing-to-cost?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Muenchener on March 27, 2020, 04:01:01 pm
More in line with this page, are people aware of what is going on in Holland. ... The dutch attitude is very much full steam ahead

... and German states on that side of the country have been screaming at Merkel to close the border for over a week now.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 27, 2020, 04:02:19 pm

So you know some people who fiddle their taxes..... I presume you know some who don’t.... to say that you know for a fact that most people that pay themselves through dividends are on the fiddle seems a little presumptuous. Maybe in your world but not across the board.


How about just taking a look back to the beginning of the posts about self-employed and reading what I actually said? Instead of attributing to me words I haven't said and then arguing against them.

I agree with you.

I can repeat it here:
Quote
As someone who for the last ten years has employed self-employed subbies almost weekly and who's got to know many of them and their ...ahem approaches to tax... I can fully appreciate the impossible task of trying to come up with fair financial aid scheme for the self-employed in this circumstance.
Consider for e.g. the offshore worker who boasts of earning £50k and is proud of the fact he doesn't pay a penny in income tax or national insurance - like many of these guys, he runs a 'limited company', pays himself a company 'dividend' and writes off all possible profits that he can against  the purchase of (non-existent) 'essential work equipment and plant' along with various other fraudulent ruses. By the way his father's in the local hospital being treated for a heart attack but he doesn't twig that the treatment's paid for by the taxes he's dodging.
Under this government aid scheme this person will get 80% of 0, because he doesn't make a profit right?
If this person ends up in financial hardship I find it difficult to generate much sympathy for his plight. A proportion of these types of guys (nearly always guys) spend their lives doing their utmost not to contribute their share to the welfare net when it suits them, instead squandering their (inflated) wages on toys.

Then on the other end of the spectrum, the person working from home providing some service or trade, making a reasonable living and who declares all their income. They'll get 80% of their declared profits which seems fair (although a 2 month wait for it).

Somewhere in the middle there'll be various tradespeople who do a range of stuff, on a spectrum of fully working for cash to fully declared for tax. There are so many combinations of circumstances it's hard to come up with something fair to all.


Not trying to be divisive, just that I've dealt with a lot of the former types (and was probably guilty of being one to a small degree a long time ago) and it's interesting to see this play out now they're in need of a state-funded welfare net. Lots of expensive toys going cheap on ebay..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 27, 2020, 04:15:32 pm
Could this part of the thread and ongoing conversation please be moved to the CV economics and finance thread?
Thanks Everyone,
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: northern yob on March 27, 2020, 04:19:17 pm

So you know some people who fiddle their taxes..... I presume you know some who don’t.... to say that you know for a fact that most people that pay themselves through dividends are on the fiddle seems a little presumptuous. Maybe in your world but not across the board.


How about just taking a look back to the beginning of the posts about self-employed and reading what I actually said? Instead of attributing to me words I haven't said and then arguing against them.

I agree with you.

I can repeat it here:
Quote
As someone who for the last ten years has employed self-employed subbies almost weekly and who's got to know many of them and their ...ahem approaches to tax... I can fully appreciate the impossible task of trying to come up with fair financial aid scheme for the self-employed in this circumstance.
Consider for e.g. the offshore worker who boasts of earning £50k and is proud of the fact he doesn't pay a penny in income tax or national insurance - like many of these guys, he runs a 'limited company', pays himself a company 'dividend' and writes off all possible profits that he can against  the purchase of (non-existent) 'essential work equipment and plant' along with various other fraudulent ruses. By the way his father's in the local hospital being treated for a heart attack but he doesn't twig that the treatment's paid for by the taxes he's dodging.
Under this government aid scheme this person will get 80% of 0, because he doesn't make a profit right?
If this person ends up in financial hardship I find it difficult to generate much sympathy for his plight. A proportion of these types of guys (nearly always guys) spend their lives doing their utmost not to contribute their share to the welfare net when it suits them, instead squandering their (inflated) wages on toys.

Then on the other end of the spectrum, the person working from home providing some service or trade, making a reasonable living and who declares all their income. They'll get 80% of their declared profits which seems fair (although a 2 month wait for it).

Somewhere in the middle there'll be various tradespeople who do a range of stuff, on a spectrum of fully working for cash to fully declared for tax. There are so many combinations of circumstances it's hard to come up with something fair to all.


Not trying to be divisive, just that I've dealt with a lot of the former types (and was probably guilty of being one to a small degree a long time ago) and it's interesting to see this play out now they're in need of a state-funded welfare net. Lots of expensive toys going cheap on ebay..

Thanks! Sorry I hadn’t seen that. I’ll get back in my box
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on March 27, 2020, 04:20:30 pm
More in line with this page, are people aware of what is going on in Holland. ... The dutch attitude is very much full steam ahead

... and German states on that side of the country have been screaming at Merkel to close the border for over a week now.
The belgians even more so. I have a business there as well and we are on full lockdown there. Our offices are 60km apart and operating in two diferent worlds at the minute.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 27, 2020, 04:47:12 pm
Could this part of the thread and ongoing conversation please be moved to the CV economics and finance thread?
Thanks Everyone,

And there is now a Politics CV19 thread. Well done Gollum.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 27, 2020, 05:21:08 pm
 :offtopic: Complete aside. Can somebody with their feet up on 80% to some sort of data dump of all the timestamps of posts on this thread. Then plot a graph so we can see whether this thread has followed an exponential growth curve?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on March 27, 2020, 06:25:18 pm
Pete, I think you're right that other viruses (like flu and SARS type viruses) do show this behaviour. But I don't think it's yet been demonstrated in COVID-19 (or rather, I haven't seen it demonstrated).

At the risk of sounding like a total pedant, the current virus we are battling with is "SARS"*, it's called SARS-Cov-2. It is colloquially called "Coronovirus" as it's a novel coronovirus and was given the temporary name 2019-nCoV. The WHO don't want to uses SARS in the name to avoid confusion with 2003 SARS.

COVID-19 is the disease** caused by the virus, and is just "Coronavirus disease 2019" abbreviated.

*SARS = Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome
** I want to say "condition" but my wife, a Consultant Oncologist, says "Disease" is very much the correct term.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 27, 2020, 08:44:39 pm
Well.

I had been feeling almost peaceful, at home, quiet and viewing the world as if from outside.

Polly (Mrs OMM) just got a call from her distraught cousin (she’s close with them). Distraught because her 13 year old daughter had just died. She had a long standing heart condition and had a heart attack earlier this evening.
The thing is, she was staying with her dad, who is separated from Polly’s cousin, but only lives a little under a mile away in the next village.

Here’s the thing, no visiting the funeral home. Almost nobody will be allowed to attend the funeral. No chance for family to rally round or race up to lend support. She’s sat at home, with her teenage son.
Suddenly, isolation sucks.
 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 27, 2020, 08:52:36 pm
Nothing will console for the loss of a child. Very sorry to read that.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 28, 2020, 07:58:41 am
'Attended' my first ever virtual funeral yesterday.  It's sad for all but close family not to be able to be at such things but the concept worked well and maybe should become standard to console those unable to travel.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: remus on March 28, 2020, 12:56:09 pm
I thought this was a great (if simplified) look at how various strategies affect the outcome.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxAaO2rsdIs
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Muenchener on March 28, 2020, 02:52:30 pm
'Attended' my first ever virtual funeral yesterday.  It's sad for all but close family not to be able to be at such things but the concept worked well and maybe should become standard to console those unable to travel.

I nearly didn't make it to a very dear friend's funeral due to Storm Ciara. Up until a couple of weeks ago I thought that was going to have been the stressful part of  the year!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 28, 2020, 03:08:40 pm

I nearly didn't make it to a very dear friend's funeral due to Storm Ciara. Up until a couple of weeks ago I thought that was going to have been the stressful part of  the year!

Mate, this is 2020.

We’ve almost had WW3, Brexit has begun, Stock markets have crashed, storms have ravaged the lands and a plague is upon us.
It’s friggin March ffs!
This Bitch isn’t even warmed up yet.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 28, 2020, 04:06:31 pm
Stupid joke.

Today we passed the 1k mark.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 28, 2020, 07:16:31 pm
Grim reading. 50% of UK CV19 ICU patients don’t make it.

Lots of good info about age, gender and susceptibility there.

Men - much more affected it seems.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 28, 2020, 07:47:26 pm
I thought this was a great (if simplified) look at how various strategies affect the outcome.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxAaO2rsdIs

Just watched this, posted this on the other climbing thread, anyone think it's incorrect?:
 https://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,30540.msg602903/topicseen.html#new (https://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,30540.msg602903/topicseen.html#new)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: JamieG on March 28, 2020, 08:20:08 pm
I thought this was a great (if simplified) look at how various strategies affect the outcome.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxAaO2rsdIs

Just watched this, posted this on the other climbing thread, anyone think it's incorrect?:
 https://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,30540.msg602903/topicseen.html#new (https://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,30540.msg602903/topicseen.html#new)

He does stress that these are simplified scenarios so I’d take the findings with a large pinch of salt. I suspect the way he’s implemented social distancing isn’t very realistic. If 90% of people comply then they effectively nearly completely cut themselves off from the outside world and the 10% carry on interacting mostly with each other. In his scenario the 10% wander freely within the whole population whilst 90% try to maintain some sort of spacing. This isn’t very realistic. I don’t have chavs wandering through my house (yet). I’ve barely interacted with anyone outside my house for couple weeks now so I’ve really almost totally removed myself from the system. And I’m sure many others are similar.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 28, 2020, 08:57:05 pm
Trying to visualise this (not the chavs, that's easy).

100 dots. Over every time period T, each dot interacts with 10 other dots.


Which action results in less interactions:
1. reduce total number of dots by 90% to 10 dots
2. keep 100 dots but reduce number of interactions per time period T by 90%, to 1


edit, the same..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 29, 2020, 10:49:21 am
You might also want to think of dots as local isolated populations, in trying to fight pandemics

https://arxiv.org/abs/2003.08784 (again thanks to Richard J on the other channel)

He also highlighted this article on countries using mobile data for tracking.

https://www.economist.com/briefing/2020/03/26/countries-are-using-apps-and-data-networks-to-keep-tabs-on-the-pandemic
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 29, 2020, 08:26:10 pm
US Deaths doubled since Friday. 2k today.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 30, 2020, 12:32:36 am
US Deaths doubled since Friday. 2k today.

The epicentres are starting to spread. Deaths in states increasing by 20% or more on worldometer today (in declining case order and above 10 deaths) are:

Illinois; Texas; Pennsylvania; Maryland;  Missouri; Virginia.


https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/

Plus a news report implying US market manipulation to add to the previous news reports implying  insider trading of some of its Senators:

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/mar/27/hell-is-coming-how-bill-ackmans-tv-interview-tanked-the-markets-and-made-him-26bn



Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 30, 2020, 12:01:14 pm
A good youtube animation on how to visualise real signs of improvement (posted by Robert Durran on the other channel):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54XLXg4fYsc&fbclid=IwAR0Fw1szvG51BBVMRpDdaMbD9oCc3uWG8YSxxG5qKPqGC6hr1tOvHCGQNUc
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 30, 2020, 03:21:37 pm
This is interesting..

**Disclaimer - I've been an investor in Chromadex* for over 5 years. Chromadex is the manufacturer and patent-holder of a novel form of B3 vitamin called nicotinimide riboside chloride (abbreviated as NR) - brand-name TruNiagen. TruNiagen is a NAD+ precursor, with some advantages over other NAD+ precursors such as niacin.
NR and NAD+ augmentation is currently fashionable among 'biohackers'. (No, I don't consider myself a biohacker!). I've taken NR daily since 2014, originally in the hope it might help during the healing of a damaged sciatic nerve, then as evidence started emerging for its general health benefits.**


A fellow Chromadex investor named Shelly Albuam has blogged about some emerging research on the mechanism of covid-19 virus within human cells, and the role played by depletion of NAD+ in development of severe symptoms. Researchers suggest a hypothesis that covid19 patients augment their NAD+ levles, by taking NAD precursors such as NR or Niacin, and this may reduce severity of symptoms.

I've copy/pasted the text below from Shelly's blog (https://www.right-of-assembly.org/covid-19?fbclid=IwAR2klHnWx4qYfCFpn_1LWLDLJBSLVOkyPg0VG9O6Qt9lO_dTdx1K33MrNOQ), there are a lot of links to old research papers as well as the two new pieces - visit his blog for the links to read the papers:

Don't shoot the messenger here btw, I'm posting this for interest of others and for people to do their own research on the studies, and note my disclaimer. (first port of call for those DYOR should be Charles Brenner's twitter).

...............
..............
New research suggests that the process by which COVID-19 damages lung tissues includes NAD depletion. And so people ask whether Vitamin B3-based NAD precursors, which replenish NAD, might protect against tissue harm caused by COVID-19?



First, an important disclaimer: There is no scientific study that says that NAD replenishment by any method treats, cures, or prevents any disease, including COVID-19. The human evidence only shows that B3 vitamins like Niagen are safe and effective at replenishing NAD. The effect of that replenishment in humans remains unproven. It is only in animal studies that we see NAD replenishment having a positive effect on physical conditions involving NAD depletion.



One more thought before we get to the research. Niacin is the most famous of the B3 vitamins. It was identified early on as a cure for the wasting disease Pellagra, which was very common in the first half of the 20th century. Today Pellagra is rare because flour and cereals are enriched with Niacin. But the US government's RDA for Niacin is only what's necessary to prevent pellagra (15mg).

 

Now we know that Vitamin B3 can do much more than just prevent pellagra, so supplementing at a higher level could be smart, regardless of what the science may show about COVID-19. However, Niacin itself is not the B3 vitamin of choice. This article compares the different NAD precursors. And this article compares to the two NAD precursor finalists, NR and NMN.



BACK TO THE SCIENCE

Here is the emerging science on COVID-19, and why it points toward the potential of NAD precursors. It turns on "Cytokine Storms."



Cytokines are small proteins released by the immune system. When the COVID-19 coronavirus enter the lungs, cytokines are released, causing inflammation. But in some patients too many cytokines are released -- an uncontrolled storm. This severe overreaction can cause deadly levels of inflammation. Cytokine storms are more likely to occur in older patients, who have both well-developed immune systems and diminished levels of NAD.



This Editorial published in Nature on March 23, 2020, says,

"We propose some simple, but largely ignored, approaches to the treatment of COVID-19 patients...Since Vitamin B3 is highly lung protective, it should be used as soon as coughing begins..."



That may  be enough by itself for some people to act. As usual, the best NAD precursor is the most expensive, but Nicotinamide and Niacin probably would do the job, and the article does not suggest otherwise.



But let's go deeper and try to understand WHY Vitamin B3s are recommended.


This preprint manuscript (not yet peer-reviewed) says that in the "pathology pathway of COVID-19, almost all procedures lead to or originate from NAD+ depletion." Specifically, SIRT1 regulates cytokines to modulate inflammation, and the depletion of NAD prevents the operation of SIRT1, and thus cytokine storms can develop.


What I just described is an oversimplification of the "pathology pathway," which is more completely expressed in the paper thus: "NAD is consumed in large scale by PARP and its depletion inhibits the activity of other protective protein like SIRT1 and CD38. Expression of NFkB and cytokines and blood and immune cell defects are the consequences of SIRT1 and CD38 inhibition respectively."


But the bottom line is to suggest therapeutic approaches that prevent or respond to NAD depletion. Or, as the authors say,

"In conclusion, it seems interruption of the explained lethal circles may convert COVID-19 to a simple common cold."


That again may be enough to suggest for some people Niacin, Nicotinamide, or Nicotinamide Riboside as a prophylactic. [I do not think NMN makes any sense at this time, despite Dr. Sinclair's enthusiasm, for reasons explained here. If nothing else, the commercially available versions of NMN are expensive and unstable.]


If you want to go even deeper into the mechanisms involved, the science gets complex. For example, the study says that normally PARP-1 functions as an antiviral agent by removing a ribose from the cell's NAD and then attaching it to the virus, which inhibits the virus's function. But coronaviruses like COVID-19 code for PARG, which removes ribosides. As a result, “Excessive activation of PARP occurs to compensate ADP-ribose hydrolyzation of PARG which is associated with catalytic consumption of NAD+ followed by ATP reduction leading to depletion of energy and cell death."

 
Or, as one online commenter helpfully explained, "PARP1 tries to inhibit viral replication by breaking ribose off NAD and attaching it to the viral RNA. But the virus encodes PARG which whips that ribose right off. So PARP1 and PARG are fighting over ribosylation of the viral genome, all the while burning through the cell’s supply of NAD. Fiendish."


BUT Dr. Charles Brenner has said that the mechanism involving PARP1 is not correctly described in this paper:
 

"Note that a recent publication saying PARP1 is activated by coronavirus is completely wrong. It’s clearly coming from a group that doesn’t know the literature and hasn’t done an experiment." (emphasis added)


In the end, it nonetheless appears that COVID-19 causes NAD depletion, which in turn triggers a cascade of troubles which can, among other things, result in lung damage. We await further details on the mechanisms.

 
Even before COVID-19, researchers were focusing on NAD repletion as a method of preventing lung damage from inflammation. For example, in this ongoing study that began before the COVID-19 outbreak, the researchers noted that "supplementing mice with the unique NAD+ precursor nicotinamide riboside (NR)" reduced both age-related and induced fibrosis, and therefore the researchers hypothesized that attempts to "boost NAD+ bioavailability will restore SIRT activity and limit fibrosis" including in inflammation-dependent models of systemic sclerosis. That study is a mouse study, it isn't complete, and their method of NAD repletion is to inhibit CD38 (because CD38 also depletes NAD). But the general idea that excess inflammation can result in NAD depletion, which in turn can cause lung damage, which in turn can be prevented by replenishing NAD, predates COVID-19. COVID-19 is just be the most recent example of an NAD-depleting illness that could potentially be addressed with NAD-replenishing strategies.


CONCLUSION

In summary, there is zero evidence that a vitamin can prevent COVID-19 infection. But there is emerging science that suggests that preventing NAD depletion might be an important strategy in mitigating the effects of COVID-19 infection.

Numerous ways of preventing NAD depletion exist, including replenishment of NAD using one or more of the Vitamin B3 NAD precursors, such as Niacin (NA), Nicotinamide (NAM), Nicotinamide Mononucleotide (NMN), or Nicotinamide Riboside (NR).

There are no human studies that show whether NAD replenishment will in fact have any effect on COVID-19 symptoms. The animal studies suggest that it might. The human studies only show that Vitamin B3s are safe and effective at replenishing NAD.


I will update this article as new COVID-19 studies emerge that support or contradict the NAD replenishment hypothesis.
........................
........................



* For anyone interested in researching an epic tale of bloody warfare between scientists, research institutions and commercial interests over a novel molecule thought to be beneficial for health in the ageing process, you might find the back-story behind NR very interesting! Various characters, companies and research institutes involved: Chromadex/Elysium, Dartmouth/MIT, Dr's Brenner, Guarente and Sinclair. I've been following the story since 2014 as a side-line to being an investor in Chromadex. It looked like the various legal trials would reach a conclusion in 2020 until coronavirus delayed everything some more..


edit: also interesting is the suggestion of an association between certain HPA (immune response) genes and likelihood of developing severe covid-19 symptoms.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fultonius on March 30, 2020, 09:07:16 pm
I'd like some thoughts on this. I saw a planer-thicknesser on gumtree for a good price, quite local. "Essential", no, but it will greatly aid a whole load of DIY projects I plan to do in the next few months as I have stack of reclaimed oak flooring that needs refinished before use. I reckon I can pick it up when I'm out to do a shopping run (we've not been to the shops for over a week), and can even do it without any person to person contact. (just arrange meeting place, transfer money online, spray down item with disinfectant )not that I'd bother, but...)

Now, I get that one argument is that this is non-essential and therefore shouldn't happen, and that is probably true. What's prompted this is Gumtree's response email:
Quote
Advice for Gumtree users
Stay home
As we all know, it’s imperative that everyone follows Government advice and stays home. So please do not arrange face-to-face contact with anyone. By staying at home you are helping protect people who are vulnerable even if you believe you are not.

Use collection and delivery services
Look to use a delivery service where possible. Home collection and delivery services, although much in demand, are still available and we advise you to use these through a postal service, courier or a local delivery driver.


Use an online payments system
We recommend buyers and sellers use an online payments system, which may also offer payment protection, in addition to avoiding face-to-face contact.

So I replied: 

Quote
Can you explain to me how getting Person A (seller) to pass to Person B (buyer), while maintaining 2m distance, cleaning hands etc.(1 human to human contact, albeit at "social distance"), is worse than Getting Person A to organise a delivery via Company Z, which will then have to have office workers, mechanics, cleaners etc. etc. to pick up (contact 1) from Person A, then drive to Person B (contact 2), then go home, maybe via a petrol station (contact 3) back to family (contact 4,5,6)?

I am fully on board with minimising contact, but what you suggest does not do this at all

Have I missed something, or is their assumption that the "business" will have some super impeccable procedures in place that make all those extra person to person contacts less "dangerous" than the 1 semi contact in scenario 1?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 30, 2020, 09:57:37 pm
I imagińe their logic is that delivery services train staff in best practice whereas the general public include a motley range of numpties. Additionally, delivery services will minimise random public interactions which will increase with people out and about (whilst I’m out, I may as well...etc). And of course, businesses do like to encourage turnover.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on March 31, 2020, 09:15:14 am
It's absolutely ridiculous that all of the media are reporting that CPAP is something new. It's a respiratory adjunct which has been used for decades.
Obviously it's a good thing that they're being made if they help CV19 patients but I would have thought a brief Google wouldn't have been too much effort.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on March 31, 2020, 10:21:53 am
Fultonius, I think it'd be fine to pick up, easily combined with a shopping trip and doable while social distancing. Most of the trips to the supermarket have been non essential if you apply it strictly.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 31, 2020, 10:59:27 am
FWIW I agree with you, but you leave out the "idiot factor", where some people are too dumb to figure something out and think it's OK to travel across the country to collect a rare LP or Thunderbirds Toy, shake hands with the seller, count out a pile of cash, have a cup of tea with them and play with their dog.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 31, 2020, 12:20:45 pm
Horrible images...

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/mar/30/las-vegas-parking-lot-homeless-shelter


ONS look at UK data (probably similar issues in many countries)..

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/31/england-and-wales-coronavirus-death-toll-40-higher-than-previously-stated
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 31, 2020, 01:16:10 pm

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/mar/30/las-vegas-parking-lot-homeless-shelter


Sickening. Surely there are empty hotels? Even abandoned ones would be better than this.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: JamieG on March 31, 2020, 02:00:24 pm
Was just about to post that article. That has to be one of the single most depressing pictures I have ever seen. Catastrophic failure of rich western society to manage to even provide the most basic of human needs, shelter, to some of the most vulnerable. Sickening.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 31, 2020, 02:24:14 pm
Was just about to post that article. That has to be one of the single most depressing pictures I have ever seen. Catastrophic failure of rich western society to manage to even provide the most basic of human needs, shelter, to some of the most vulnerable. Sickening.

There’s an entire, abandoned hospital in Philly (I think) that’s being “ransomed” by the developer that owns it to the City for $39k/day...

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Liamhutch89 on March 31, 2020, 02:24:32 pm
There are no human studies that show whether NAD replenishment will in fact have any effect on COVID-19 symptoms. The animal studies suggest that it might. The human studies only show that Vitamin B3s are safe and effective at replenishing NAD.

Good enough for me to buy some and give it a try if any of my family get symptoms
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 31, 2020, 03:11:16 pm
As Bonjoy pointed out there’s not much opportunity for transmission in the sea...

Well, actually, now you mention it...

Something that really irked me was an article in the ENDS report (sadly paywalled) with the headline: "Could rivers be carrying coronavirus from sewage works?"

Wherein a couple of folk see an opportunity to use an international emergency to advance their campaign messages using some particularly ill-thought out science  :spank:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 31, 2020, 04:16:51 pm
Question for Stu or others who understand probability and modelling.

Just reading this latest report from Imperial estimating the effects of the social distancing measures across Europe.
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/mrc-global-infectious-disease-analysis/COVID-19/ (https://www.imperial.ac.uk/mrc-global-infectious-disease-analysis/COVID-19/)

Noticed it used 'credible interval' instead of 'confidence interval' in its estimate that the European distancing measures:
'saved 59,000 deaths up to 31 March [95% credible interval 21,000-120,000]

..and wondered what the difference was between credible interval and confidence interval, so I looked it up. Credibility interval is used when you use bayesian probability to calculate a value. As explained here:

Quote
Classical approaches generally posit that the world is one way (e.g., a parameter has one particular true value), and try to conduct experiments whose resulting conclusion -- no matter the true value of the parameter -- will be correct with at least some minimum probability.

As a result, to express uncertainty in our knowledge after an experiment, the frequentist approach uses a "confidence interval" -- a range of values designed to include the true value of the parameter with some minimum probability, say 95%. A frequentist will design the experiment and 95% confidence interval procedure so that out of every 100 experiments run start to finish, at least 95 of the resulting confidence intervals will be expected to include the true value of the parameter. The other 5 might be slightly wrong, or they might be complete nonsense -- formally speaking that's ok as far as the approach is concerned, as long as 95 out of 100 inferences are correct. (Of course we would prefer them to be slightly wrong, not total nonsense.)

Bayesian approaches formulate the problem differently. Instead of saying the parameter simply has one (unknown) true value, a Bayesian method says the parameter's value is fixed but has been chosen from some probability distribution -- known as the prior probability distribution. (Another way to say that is that before taking any measurements, the Bayesian assigns a probability distribution, which they call a belief state, on what the true value of the parameter happens to be.) This "prior" might be known (imagine trying to estimate the size of a truck, if we know the overall distribution of truck sizes from the DMV) or it might be an assumption drawn out of thin air. The Bayesian inference is simpler -- we collect some data, and then calculate the probability of different values of the parameter GIVEN the data. This new probability distribution is called the "a posteriori probability" or simply the "posterior." Bayesian approaches can summarize their uncertainty by giving a range of values on the posterior probability distribution that includes 95% of the probability -- this is called a "95% credibility interval."

A Bayesian partisan might criticize the frequentist confidence interval like this: "So what if 95 out of 100 experiments yield a confidence interval that includes the true value? I don't care about 99 experiments I DIDN'T DO; I care about this experiment I DID DO. Your rule allows 5 out of the 100 to be complete nonsense [negative values, impossible values] as long as the other 95 are correct; that's ridiculous."

A frequentist die-hard might criticize the Bayesian credibility interval like this: "So what if 95% of the posterior probability is included in this range? What if the true value is, say, 0.37? If it is, then your method, run start to finish, will be WRONG 75% of the time. Your response is, 'Oh well, that's ok because according to the prior it's very rare that the value is 0.37,' and that may be so, but I want a method that works for ANY possible value of the parameter. I don't care about 99 values of the parameter that IT DOESN'T HAVE; I care about the one true value IT DOES HAVE. Oh also, by the way, your answers are only correct if the prior is correct. If you just pull it out of thin air because it feels right, you can be way off."

In a sense both of these partisans are correct in their criticisms of each others' methods, but I would urge you to think mathematically about the distinction -- as Srikant explains.


I was wondering, is the uncertainty in the estimate (21,000 to 120,000 lives saved) due to us not knowing the 'posterior' probabilities with high confidence?

 

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Murph on March 31, 2020, 04:22:24 pm
Good questions TB. All I can think is that none of these questions came up in wuhan. Trains and buses cancelled. No one gets out or in. Leave the house once every three days for food. What we have going on isnt approaching what they did.

Gav - for what it's worth northumbria is different. You guys have so much space up there and can genuinely get out and not bump into people more power to you. (In case you cant tell I am not being sarcastic). The slightest relaxation of what we are allowed to do in Sheffield and the peak will be rammed again.

I think the police were right to run that shaming footage. I would fucking love to go out for a climb up at curbar right now. Or go to griffs.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Murph on March 31, 2020, 04:35:36 pm
Just realised I might have replied to the wrong thread. Oh well - apologies. CV and CV climbing both cover the same ground more or less!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on March 31, 2020, 04:40:50 pm

Noticed it used 'credible interval' instead of 'confidence interval' in its estimate that the European distancing measures:
'saved 59,000 deaths up to 31 March [95% credible interval 21,000-120,000]

...

I was wondering, is the uncertainty in the estimate (21,000 to 120,000 lives saved) due to us not knowing the 'posterior' probabilities with high confidence?

Basically yes. We know how many deaths there have been (ish) but must rely on the models to know how many they would have.

The model predictions can depend on very large numbers of input parameters, each of which is known only imprecisely. So there’s a really large spread in how many deaths their model predicts depending on what you assume the true parameter values are.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dunnyg on March 31, 2020, 04:56:47 pm
The output of a bayesian model is a distribution, so the size of the "credible interval" is one way of describing that posterior distribution, i.e. number of deaths.

If you imagine you draw two values from 2 (prior)distributions at random, and times them together, and save the output value.

Repeat this process a million times times and you will get a distribution of output values - your posterior distribution.

If you have broader distributions on your first 2 values (your prior), you will get a broader distribution of your posterior, and a larger credibility interval.

If you are modelling more complex things, you will have a more complex equation with more parameters, and the distribution size of some prior distributions have greater effects.

The general rule of models always stands though, if your prior assumptions are crap, the output is crap.

(not a comment on any linked models etc. etc.)

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 31, 2020, 06:04:30 pm
From an environmental systems perspective - despite all the nonlinear / exponential responses of the models, the DATA shows the behaviour of CV19 in response to mitigation measures has been remarkably similar.

It’s clear that only very clear interventions (China) or massive testing and tracing efforts (Korea - and probably soon Germany) do anything. Most of Western Europe (Germany aside) is following the same trajectory with some further ahead than others. In other words looking at the larger picture it’s remarkably consistent in how it behaves.

I suspect if you were a pandemic modeller and you got something that looked like France when you where hoping for Italy (in your curve of cases/deaths) you’d be very pleased you were doing something right!

Part of me - therefore thinks that whilst the models and simulations are really good for showing how the dynamics of virus spread can change - or could be altered by social distancing - when you look over a large area where some areas will be doing it well and others not so - it makes little difference.

Either REALLY get with the program and sort your isolation/testing/tracing shot out or you’re just Shaving a little bit off the top of the curve (which may anyway be worthwhile)

My caveat is that the USA is looking like a train wreck happening in slow motion at the moment and could be an exemplar of not what to do (why are there still internal flights in the USA ffs!)

Edit. Not an expert view - but I do develop environmental models for a living.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on March 31, 2020, 06:34:21 pm
The new ICL paper that Pete refers to backs up your analysis. It’s a really nice bit of work actually.

Conceptually it’s really simple. Model the deaths the way you’d do it naively by modelling the infections the way Barrows tried - each person infects Ro~2-3 and the whole cycle repeats every ~5-6 days.

Then add the complexity needed because some people will infect more/less and might be infectious for more/less time. And allow Ro to be changed by interventions.

Finally, add a layer to a hierarchy that allows each country to be different, but makes sure they are all drawn from the same underlying distribution - eg assume all countries have the same Ro under each type of intervention unless the data says they don’t.

It’s a nice piece of work and their conclusions seem robust against their assumptions. It’s just the conclusions are so vague.

Basically almost all countries modelled might have reached the magic number needed to control the outbreak. Spain might, but probably hasn’t and Sweden urgently needs to sort itself out :-(
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 31, 2020, 06:53:56 pm
Quote
It’s clear that only very clear interventions (China) or massive testing and tracing efforts (Korea - and probably soon Germany) do anything.

So what's going on in Japan? The Americans I follow seem to think it's widespread mask wearing and the WHO are wrong in suggesting they are only useful for the infected and those caring for them.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 31, 2020, 07:03:02 pm
Quote
It’s clear that only very clear interventions (China) or massive testing and tracing efforts (Korea - and probably soon Germany) do anything.

So what's going on in Japan? The Americans I follow seem to think it's widespread mask wearing and the WHO are wrong in suggesting they are only useful for the infected and those caring for them.

Whilst this is true, masks are pretty “ normal” across East Asia. The Japanese have a cultural habit of avoiding contact etc etc.

There could be a panoply of seemingly minor differences that accumulate into massive outcomes for viral spread. Pinning it all on masks seems to oversimplify.

I mean, wear a mask, a lot of people are. We’re wearing gloves to go shopping and wiping down and using hospital grade Milton on stuff and...

No reason not to take excessive precautions if you want to.

Given the shortage of such for NHS staff etc, I can’t see the Gov. stumping up 68 million of them for everyone though.
 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on March 31, 2020, 07:38:11 pm

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/mar/30/las-vegas-parking-lot-homeless-shelter


Sickening. Surely there are empty hotels? Even abandoned ones would be better than this.

Currently over 100k empty hotel beds in Vegas.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 31, 2020, 07:48:33 pm
How’s Mrs Galpinos view on all the CV19 stuff Nick?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on March 31, 2020, 08:03:48 pm
How’s Mrs Galpinos view on all the CV19 stuff Nick?

She's pretty worried* but it's the calm before the storm in Manchester currently. It's playing havoc with what she can offer her patients and the reduction in the service offered will lead to poorer care/shortened life (no surgery or general medical support). They have movied to telephone consultations where they can and are trying to isolate in-patients when positive but that has only been so effective. She's waiting to be reassigned to the GMEX if we follow down the London path as there won't be enough work for the full lung cancer team. The approach to dealing with it has been very piecemeal and every hospital/trust seems to have its own plan.

*Her sister is a Renal Consulant in London who has been drafted into Covid support on a 7 day on 7 day off rota. Pretty full on. Also, our youngest collapsed a lobe in her lung pre Christmas, it took a lot of work to get it back up and just before this all kicked off we got her most recent immunology report back which was pretty poor so her potential vulnerability is an added stress.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 31, 2020, 08:30:08 pm
Christ Nick that’s enough to worry about. Sure you’ve got enough of a network to get you stuff but if you need anything let me know.

3/10 houses in our road have had it.. (now all recovering - all at home) so there’s a fair bit around here. Though what the hospitals are getting now is probably stuff transmitted 4 weeks ago etc... behind the London and Birmingham curve.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on March 31, 2020, 09:23:23 pm
Quote
It’s clear that only very clear interventions (China) or massive testing and tracing efforts (Korea - and probably soon Germany) do anything.

So what's going on in Japan? The Americans I follow seem to think it's widespread mask wearing and the WHO are wrong in suggesting they are only useful for the infected and those caring for them.


I wondered about Japan when this was all starting to go global. They've among the lowest rates of testing, they haven't enforced much of a lock-down, and they have the world's oldest population (but it says in the article below the old in Japan are much more separated from the rest of society than in Europe).
Quite a good overview article here which looks at various theories, including that they just might not be reporting: https://www.vox.com/covid-19-coronavirus-explainers/2020/3/28/21196382/japan-coronavirus-cases-covid-19-deaths-quarantine (https://www.vox.com/covid-19-coronavirus-explainers/2020/3/28/21196382/japan-coronavirus-cases-covid-19-deaths-quarantine)
Don't read the 'elderly tragically separated' article it's just sad.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 31, 2020, 09:33:12 pm
Quote
It’s clear that only very clear interventions (China) or massive testing and tracing efforts (Korea - and probably soon Germany) do anything.

So what's going on in Japan? The Americans I follow seem to think it's widespread mask wearing and the WHO are wrong in suggesting they are only useful for the infected and those caring for them.


I wondered about Japan when this was all starting to go global. They've among the lowest rates of testing, they haven't enforced much of a lock-down, and they have the world's oldest population (but it says in the article below the old in Japan are much more separated from the rest of society than in Europe).
Quite a good overview article here which looks at various theories, including that they just might not be reporting: https://www.vox.com/covid-19-coronavirus-explainers/2020/3/28/21196382/japan-coronavirus-cases-covid-19-deaths-quarantine (https://www.vox.com/covid-19-coronavirus-explainers/2020/3/28/21196382/japan-coronavirus-cases-covid-19-deaths-quarantine)
Don't read the 'elderly tragically separated' article it's just sad.

Korea too.

There’s a huge difference in social/cultural attitudes. The Korean response seems as though fear had a large part to play in the effectiveness of their measures.
Rather than the denial that, at first (and still in some quarters) pervaded attitudes in the West?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Coops_13 on March 31, 2020, 10:06:29 pm
Denver stay-at-home (lockdown) extended to April 30th. I really hope we can get through this in time for the Alpine season in summer but the chance is looking smaller and smaller...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Muenchener on March 31, 2020, 10:27:56 pm
Denver stay-at-home (lockdown) extended to April 30th. I really hope we can get through this in time for the Alpine season in summer but the chance is looking smaller and smaller...

Bavaria reviewing the situation after Easter; Austria already said it's unlikely schools will re-open this school year.

I have a mate who was keen to go the Écrins this summer, and another recruiting for a trip to Lofoten. Will be surprised if either actually happens, and thankful if I'm able to get out again locally.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on April 01, 2020, 06:43:03 am
I would fancy being in the shoes of the senior management morons who thought this was a good idea:

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/mar/31/nhs-staff-gagged-over-coronavirus-protective-equipment-shortages
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: moose on April 01, 2020, 09:23:29 am
Simple explainer on the issues involved in modelling future Covid deaths:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-its-so-freaking-hard-to-make-a-good-covid-19-model/ (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-its-so-freaking-hard-to-make-a-good-covid-19-model/)

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 01, 2020, 10:19:40 am
Simple explainer on the issues involved in modelling future Covid deaths:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-its-so-freaking-hard-to-make-a-good-covid-19-model/ (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-its-so-freaking-hard-to-make-a-good-covid-19-model/)

I’m gonna be (importantly) pedantic here - as we don’t actually know what good is yet.

In other words we don’t have any complete data on what’s happening or happened.

And to go all Rumsfeld on y’all - there’s presumably a few unknown unknowns...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 01, 2020, 02:31:34 pm
563.

Today.

I know, stupid to post the number. Pointless, negative, unsurprising.

I just feel the need to acknowledge it, somehow.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 01, 2020, 04:34:47 pm
563.

Today.

I know, stupid to post the number. Pointless, negative, unsurprising.

I just feel the need to acknowledge it, somehow.

It’s fucking grim. And this without hospital beds being full (as far as I know). It implies that either this is a very bad day - or we’re just as riddled as Spain and Italy but haven’t got the testing penetration to show what would me a massively higher figure.

Makes 20k seem like a dream outcome. Very sorry to say that...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 01, 2020, 05:16:08 pm
Yeah, that’s the current thinking amongst some observers:

 https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-the-data-suggests-the-uk-is-on-course-for-many-thousands-of-deaths-11966517 (https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-the-data-suggests-the-uk-is-on-course-for-many-thousands-of-deaths-11966517)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 01, 2020, 05:17:56 pm
Makes 20k seem like a dream outcome. Very sorry to say that...


I'm fairly sure a couple of weeks ago when Chris Witty first started mentioning 20,000 deaths he used that figure in the context of the peak. I think this has been subtly altered to imply it will be 20,000 in total.

If you agree that cases (thus hospitalisations - thus deaths) double every 3-4 days currently, and that the doubling figure slows towards the peak, and the peak is approx 10-14 days in the future, then we're on a course to reach approx. 20,000 deaths at the peak.
But it should be clear there will be a down slope.
I just think they don't want the message to look too grim at one time. Drip feed the grimness.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on April 01, 2020, 05:24:40 pm

I'm fairly sure a couple of weeks ago when Chris Witty first started mentioning 20,000 deaths he used that figure in the context of the peak. I think this has been subtly altered to imply it will be 20,000 in total.


No, he said social distancing could reduce the deaths to less than 20,000.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 01, 2020, 05:30:48 pm
I hadn't suggested 20,000 per day.I suggested we're on a track to reach approx 20,000 total at the peak.

I'm not talking about when he was briefing that social distancing measures would reduce deaths to less than 20,000.

I'm talking about before then - there was a briefing I watched in which Chris Witty used the figure of 20,000 deaths, it was the first time I'd heard the figure mentioned, and it was used in the context of 'by the peak'. I recall he said something like 'by June' or words to that effect. This has been lost. I'd be interested to see if anyone dredges through the archives and finds it.


edit, saw you deleted the per day part of your post.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on April 01, 2020, 05:51:34 pm
I’m doing my own little data science project at home to stop me doing real work.

I have a very basic model of where I expect things to go, and keep an eye on how it compares to the daily progression.

It’s not good enough to make predictions as to where we would end up, but it is a good model to capture the range of uncertainty.

Today’s news is everything Matt says; awful, grim sad. And expected.

The good news is that it’s still consistent with a path that would end with 20,000 deaths. The bad news is that is now at the very lower end of possible outcomes.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on April 01, 2020, 06:02:58 pm
Holland - Economy tiking along nicely, little disruption to the constrution industry, far fewer rules and regulations, no lockdown.

How is there curve flattening more than ours and daily new cases dropping. I still cant help but think we are doing something wrong here.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/netherlands/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on April 01, 2020, 06:16:25 pm
Have you watched that Sky News thing Matt linked gme? It suggests that the Netherlands and Germany are heading in basically the same direction as all the other European countries.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 01, 2020, 06:34:45 pm
Have you watched that Sky News thing Matt linked gme? It suggests that the Netherlands and Germany are heading in basically the same direction as all the other European countries.

NL and Belgium all heading the same way as us. My jury is still out on Germany.

It is remarkable how similar they all actually are.

And Grim.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on April 01, 2020, 06:37:35 pm
I have seen it however it does not show that in the stats i linked to.

They appear to have it more under control than we do without the level of controls and that is the opionion of people in holland as well not just the evidence on the charts.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 01, 2020, 06:53:27 pm
Have you watched that Sky News thing Matt linked gme? It suggests that the Netherlands and Germany are heading in basically the same direction as all the other European countries.

NL and Belgium all heading the same way as us. My jury is still out on Germany.

It is remarkable how similar they all actually are.

And Grim.

I don't find it remarkable how similar the growth rates are - it's a virus that infects all humans the same. Unless you remove humans from the virus then the percentage of population infected will be similar everywhere.
Although I'm interested to see if small genetic differences in survival associated with HPA and other genes emerge out of the bigger picture.

What I find remarkable is regions who've managed to lower the infection growth rate.
China, S.Korea, Singapore, Norway, Taiwan and Japan. It's interesting to see if they reach the same total figure - over a longer period of time - than they would have reached anyway with less stringent measures. Be those measures of testing and quarantining, or total isolation, or whatever the hell's going on in Japan who aren't doing either testing or isolation.

Gav I think it's correct to say(?) Netherlands are just heading for the same destination on the path as everybody else, just a little further back.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 01, 2020, 06:58:21 pm
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/apr/01/public-inquiry-coronavirus-mass-testing-pandemic

Anthony Costello writing about how important testing would be, if we were to do it effectively.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: JamieG on April 01, 2020, 07:03:24 pm
(https://www.ft.com/__origami/service/image/v2/images/raw/http%3A%2F%2Fcom.ft.imagepublish.upp-prod-eu.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fb75b9a72-7394-11ea-95fe-fcd274e920ca?fit=scale-down&quality=highest&source=next&width=1260)

This doesn't make it look like the Netherlands are doing much better than any other European country. Not worse, but not much better either.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 01, 2020, 07:13:20 pm
(https://www.ft.com/__origami/service/image/v2/images/raw/http%3A%2F%2Fcom.ft.imagepublish.upp-prod-eu.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fb75b9a72-7394-11ea-95fe-fcd274e920ca?fit=scale-down&quality=highest&source=next&width=1260)

This doesn't make it look like the Netherlands are doing much better than any other European country. Not worse, but not much better either.

They are very similar.

Netherlands are just behind.

See Pete’s post.

I think the East Asian experiences in the past few years, of those Pandemics that hardly touched us, have given them better coping strategies and infrastructure.

TT, they might have flattened their curve sufficiently to hit Vaccine/treatment protocols that will keep their total deaths very low in comparison to the West.

We have dropped the ball.

We thought we’d see it coming much earlier. We thought these things were “tropical”, even “3rd world” problems or the  stuff of Hollywood.

Hardly feeling the recent outbreaks, left us feeling remote and overconfident.


Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 01, 2020, 07:28:10 pm
With the 'didn't see it coming / dropping the ball' argument, you have to ask the question:
Would it have been palatable to the population to be locked-down 3 or 4 weeks earlier than we did? I'd say no. We would have been locking down the UK with tens of deaths. I know it would have been 'right' given the exponential nature. But most people wouldn't have been convinced and I think it's sad but true to say that it wouldn't have worked, wouldn't have been politically palatable. You need either a population who grasp the maths, or a population of compliant drones.

Some people I know still don't really grasp the exponential growth now - they look at where we are now (sometimes comparing to others); without looking back at where we came from and in what time period, and plotting that forwards to where we're going in what time period.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 01, 2020, 07:34:10 pm
Good governance is making the right decision even if it is unpopular....

I agree with OMM that we should have done what we did 3-4 weeks before - but even a week or two earlier would have helped surely?? Whe we had the voluntary distancing - there was so much ambiguity that most of life went on as usual.

Maybe that week or two would t matter in the end and the die was set - we’ll find out.

Those dying in hospital now were most likely infected 3-4 weeks ago before any measures were introduced...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 01, 2020, 07:42:23 pm
I think we could have locked down sooner, but it’s more the infrastructure and “mental preparedness”, I’m tilting at.

I bet every supermarket in Korea, the security check your temperature on the way in.

I bet most of SE Asia, have a good stock of masks and gloves in their homes.

I’ll bet people started to distance themselves, informally, the moment the first reports came out of China.
(Except your standard religious nut jobs).

They’re used to this. They take it seriously.

Stuff like this, too:
 https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/coronavirus-nhs-ventilators-treatment-testing-cases-update-a9440471.html (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/coronavirus-nhs-ventilators-treatment-testing-cases-update-a9440471.html)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on April 01, 2020, 07:48:36 pm
(https://www.ft.com/__origami/service/image/v2/images/raw/http%3A%2F%2Fcom.ft.imagepublish.upp-prod-eu.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fb75b9a72-7394-11ea-95fe-fcd274e920ca?fit=scale-down&quality=highest&source=next&width=1260)

This doesn't make it look like the Netherlands are doing much better than any other European country. Not worse, but not much better either.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on April 01, 2020, 07:51:43 pm
(https://www.ft.com/__origami/service/image/v2/images/raw/http%3A%2F%2Fcom.ft.imagepublish.upp-prod-eu.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fb75b9a72-7394-11ea-95fe-fcd274e920ca?fit=scale-down&quality=highest&source=next&width=1260)

This doesn't make it look like the Netherlands are doing much better than any other European country. Not worse, but not much better either.

Only marginally better admittedly but with far less restrictions than here.
Meetings still allowed. You can still have guests to your house up to a max of three.
You maybe right that it will get worse than here but it appears to just be following the same path but without as much intervention that will leave the economy in a much better position.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on April 01, 2020, 08:28:33 pm
Gav - I’m not sure you see the point people are making. The people who are dying now, got infected around 3 weeks ago. 3 weeks ago the UK had a similar regime to the Dutch.

If the UK and the Dutch continued with their current regimes it would be 2 weeks before you’d expect any difference to start showing up.

It “following the same path” is exactly what it should do.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on April 01, 2020, 08:33:30 pm
Or maybe it’s clearer out like this. If the UK hadn’t gone into lockdown just over a week ago, we’d still be seeing exactly the same number of fatalities as we are now.

The two paths will hopefully diverge significantly in a fortnight.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on April 01, 2020, 08:35:05 pm
Netherlands has twice the death rate per million

It's got half the cases, and half the deaths we do, but quarter of our population. How is that doing better??

130 odd new deaths today in the Netherlands is about the same per population as 500 odd here.

Plus the positive effects of our lockdown won't be felt for a few days yet.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 01, 2020, 08:37:22 pm
Agree with both of you OMM/TT in principle. But I think it's fruitless to compare with what we aren't and couldn't have been.

For example, if loads of us who live in rural areas had little tractors with a snowplough blade that we could fit in November like they do in alpine and northern Scandinavian regions, then we wouldn't have all the blocked country roads that we (don't) get every winter... I.e. we don't suffer from heavy snow in winter enough to make the countermeasures seem worthwhile.

If we'd had a pandemic like those countries did, or a political system like China does, or xyz, then we could have done things differently. Offwidth will probably disagree but he's coming from a mindset of fault-finding anything this government does, almost on principle. I'm not saying fault-finding isn't useful, I think fault-finding is essential to improve the scope of future responses to a next crisis. Sure aspire to better standards. But I don't see any use in fault-finding by comparing to standards that were unrealistic at the time. Seems a bit 'historical revisionism'.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on April 01, 2020, 08:43:05 pm
Do you think people in the UK would  buy into a Chinese style isolation system?

Basically contact tracing on steroids. If you have symptoms, you (and your immediate contacts) get taken to a makeshift holding area (hotel, Uni dorms etc) to await testing.

Anyone who tests positive goes straight to an isolation hospital. If you test negative you can go home.

The advantage is it allows you to focus testing where it’s needed. But it needs massive buy in from the public - there’s a huge disincentive to pretend you don’t have symptoms.

I’m actually quite optimistic that the current regime is just enough, but if it isn’t the above is probably the best way to avoid total clampdown...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 01, 2020, 08:44:29 pm
There was massive disquiet when testing was scaled back on March 12; that’s not fault finding, that’s looking with horror and wondering what on earth was going on.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 01, 2020, 08:46:15 pm
Do you think people in the UK would  buy into a Chinese style isolation system?

Basically contact tracing on steroids. If you have symptoms, you (and your immediate contacts) get taken to a makeshift holding area (hotel, Uni dorms etc) to await testing.

Anyone who tests positive goes straight to an isolation hospital. If you test negative you can go home.

The advantage is it allows you to focus testing where it’s needed. But it needs massive buy in from the public - there’s a huge disincentive to pretend you don’t have symptoms.

I’m actually quite optimistic that the current regime is just enough, but if it isn’t the above is probably the best way to avoid total clampdown...

I suspect the Chinese back up that system with the threat of...? Something a bit worse than a UK government would.So compliance will be high. Big stick.

People in the UK get uppity if they can't walk fido along Curbar.


mrjonathanr: I'm definitely not sticking my flag in any position here. Maybe you're right. But there are already a few different things being discussed here: testing, locking down earlier, locking down harder, health surveillance in shops, stocks of PPE, etc. etc.
We're almost bound to have fucked up on most of those given the last time this happened on this scale was 1918. It would be miraculous if we nailed it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on April 01, 2020, 08:52:17 pm
With the 'didn't see it coming / dropping the ball' argument, you have to ask the question:
Would it have been palatable to the population to be locked-down 3 or 4 weeks earlier than we did? I'd say no.

And I'd agree, but I don't think anyone is suggesting that? It would however, have been doable to impose a lockdown a week to 5 days earlier, and I think it would have got traction - that would certainly have saved a lot of lives, but it's hindsight, and I don't think the gov have been that bad with the timings.

The lack of test and trace, on the other hand is a fucking scandal and once this is over there should be some consequential questions asked of those responsible.

Why are people insisting on comparisons to China - it's clearly not a good fit. S Korea is much better in size and liberties - they have the huge advantage of experience of SARS and MERS (Covid is basically SARS2 as I understand?), but we should have been looking to them from the start
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 01, 2020, 08:59:53 pm
Agree with both of you OMM/TT in principle. But I think it's fruitless to compare with what we aren't and couldn't have been.

For example, if loads of us who live in rural areas had little tractors with a snowplough blade that we could fit in November like they do in alpine and northern Scandinavian regions, then we wouldn't have all the blocked country roads that we (don't) get every winter... I.e. we don't suffer from heavy snow in winter enough to make the countermeasures seem worthwhile.

If we'd had a pandemic like those countries did, or a political system like China does, or xyz, then we could have done things differently. Offwidth will probably disagree but he's coming from a mindset of fault-finding anything this government does, almost on principle. I'm not saying fault-finding isn't useful, I think fault-finding is essential to improve the scope of future responses to a next crisis. Sure aspire to better standards. But I don't see any use in fault-finding by comparing to standards that were unrealistic at the time. Seems a bit 'historical revisionism'.

I didn’t say “we should be the same”.

I’m attempting to highlight some of the reasons we are not, now, in the same position.

We dropped the ball, because the WHO amongst others (even the Chinese) were shouting their warnings in January.

In the UK, in particular, we didn’t move until we were pushed. We had warning. We had Italy, virtually on our doorstep.
We have known, for decades, that this was more likely than not.

It’s not really fair to try and say “we had no choice because we’re not an authoritarian regime like China, so none of this can be helped”; because, what we are doing now, will probably help.

Neither Korea, nor Japan are “authoritarian regimes” either.

I’m pretty hopeful we’ve done enough.

Not “everything we could” and I think the a Government certainly missed opportunities to act faster, with regard to equipment purchase etc.
Christ, from about two days after I arrived in Glasgow, in early Feb, I was half convinced I would be stuck there with all flights grounded and no public transport to get home and that was just from reading the papers.
How much better was the Government’s intelligence and advice?

There will be some tough questions for them to answer, later.

The fact that many influential people are already asking them, despite the gravity of what’s happening, seems a fair indication of how bad that aspect will get.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 01, 2020, 09:05:11 pm
It’s not really fair to try and say “we had no choice because we’re not an authoritarian regime like China, so none of this can be helped”;


Pretty sure I'm not saying that.


I agree there'll be no shortage of questions and answers.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 01, 2020, 09:12:48 pm
It’s not really fair to try and say “we had no choice because we’re not an authoritarian regime like China, so none of this can be helped”;


Pretty sure I'm not saying that.


I agree there'll be no shortage of questions and answers.

Not in those words. You did say “or if a political system like China does.... then we could done things differently” so I just sddressing that point.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 01, 2020, 09:41:16 pm
Anyway, it’s late, so here’s a bedtime story.

N’night.

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sSrbxyna4z4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sSrbxyna4z4)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on April 01, 2020, 10:58:09 pm

It would however, have been doable to impose a lockdown a week to 5 days earlier, and I think it would have got traction - that would certainly have saved a lot of lives, but it's hindsight, and I don't think the gov have been that bad with the timings.

The lack of test and trace, on the other hand is a fucking scandal and once this is over there should be some consequential questions asked of those responsible.

Why are people insisting on comparisons to China - it's clearly not a good fit. S Korea is much better in size and liberties - they have the huge advantage of experience of SARS and MERS (Covid is basically SARS2 as I understand?), but we should have been looking to them from the start

I don't think any significant earlier lockdown was likely possible by this government. In the 6 days preceeding the first serious social mobility curtailment on March 18th the deaths had increased from 10 to 104. This clearly caught the government and their models out. Despite this slightly late call, with really scary increases in numbers, the foolish section of our country still saw the Sunday following that announcement as a final chance for some kind of mass holiday. Elsewhere, mobile phone data was showing a million leaving Paris, which makes me think what might have happened in London if Boris had called a lockdown on 35 deaths, just 3 days earlier.... it must have risked causing mass panic (Madrid and Lombardy had a similar exodus).

As I said at the time, almost every scientist I knew and trusted when looking at that data was saying we were close to 2 weeks behind Italy and the government relied on modellers who said 4 (then only recently down to 3 and now pretty much 2). Despite this I don't think the government timing was so bad, as it seems that it was more based on that quick increase in deaths. I'm saying this even though I wanted them to lockdown earlier. The government relied too much on mathematical models (the wrong ones it seems)  and behavioural science (which I think seems to have been about right)  and too little on public health  expertise and on doctors experienced with fighting virus outbreaks ... to scare them away from complacency ((see the Guardian links below).

The testing has been a shambles and is THE major scandal, with PPE not far behind. There is no joy in being proved right that our government were so wrong on this (and on the other factors). Again see the Guardian links below. I think this goes well beyond the politicians, as indicated by hospitals trying to gag staff who were reporting testing and PPE issues. I also think its crass to call this political point scoring when it has unnecessarily cost so many public lives and added a lot of risk to our health and care workers (and sadly some deaths).

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/01/absolutely-wrong-how-uk-coronavirus-test-strategy-unravelled
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/apr/01/public-inquiry-coronavirus-mass-testing-pandemic

I have pointed out several times that although S Korea have done well they were also initially unlucky... they had a superspreader in a cult church; so they started the early part of their outbreak in a worse state than anyone else.

Still many people on social media are clutching at straws, be it the laxer situation in Holland and Sweden (following our data by over a week, maybe slightly worse given per capita infection rates), the Oxford paper, the Spectator articles. However, when something this scary and horrible happens anyone can be forgiven for seeking false solace. The scariest thing to me is what will happen in the US in terms of deaths, what happens to their poor and homeless and the potential depth of world recession it might induce.

On the plus side most people have behaved well after that Sunday blip and some amazing ideas, coordination, and action has happened on the edges of the outbreak response (linked on the positive thread). Maybe we can come out of this with less attachment to the worst excesses of global capitalism and in that help avert a climate disaster that, just a few months back, seemed almost certain to be coming.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 02, 2020, 07:15:47 am
Morning everyone - hope you’re all well.

Aside from the PPE/Testing coronashambles that’s unfolding - one article in the Indy caught my eye - https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/coronavirus-uk-cases-nhs-symptoms-111-update-death-toll-a9440246.html

Where 1.75 million 111 (online and phone) enquiries were flagged as being potential CV19. Whilst many of these could/were have been other viruses/colds it provides an upper limit on how wised spread it could be..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on April 02, 2020, 07:57:47 am
In light of H1N1 and SARS, the our government and public health bodies put quite a bit of effort into modelling/analysising what might happen in the UK if we had an Influenza-type pandemic. This was looked at as medics have no answer to a viral infection like this, there is no cure, there is no vaccine, they can just support/help the patient fight it off themselves. The medical outputs of these sessions, especially the 2016 one was:
It's pretty depressing that we were well aware of this but the government now claims it has taken them by surprise. At the end of Jan, Matt Hancock's statement to the Commons said the risk to the UK was low and that, though there was a small chance of people in the UK getting infected, we are, "well prepared and well equipped to deal with them".

Re an earlier lockdown, though it seems like we should have locked down earlier, I'm not sure whether the public would have bought into it. We were told it was a bit like getting the flu, Boris was joking about shaking hands with everyone in a hospital with patients with Covid-19 and we, the nation, are already looking for loop holes to get out of it.

I also think that if we start antibody testing, so people who've had it can start to go out/work etc as I have seen proposed, that will be the absolute end of the lockdown.
 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 02, 2020, 08:13:08 am
I also think that if we start antibody testing, so people who've had it can start to go out/work etc as I have seen proposed, that will be the absolute end of the lockdown.

That’s a super important point. Controlling the return back to work could be really hard... if you let a few back there will be all sorts of shit going on. People doing tests for their mates, people not wanting to go back. People who’ve not had it being really nervous / resentful of those returning...

Hard to see how you manage it other than an all back or no one back scenario.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on April 02, 2020, 08:27:54 am
That’s a super important point. Controlling the return back to work could be really hard... if you let a few back there will be all sorts of shit going on. People doing tests for their mates, people not wanting to go back. People who’ve not had it being really nervous / resentful of those returning...

Hard to see how you manage it other than an all back or no one back scenario.

I agree, a partial return for the "immune" will lead to people looking at those out and about and just thinking, sod it, I'm going out too, people trying to get infected in order to recover and then go out and find work, it could only be policed bif we bring in some draconian rules, there will be no end of issues.

There doesn't seem to be a plan to end the lockdown. I would like to say that obviously the government will have a plan but my confidence in them isn't exactly soaring at the moment.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 02, 2020, 08:42:11 am
I’ve woken to a world where both the Mail and the Telegraph have turned on Boris. Both their front pages are pretty scathing.

 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs/the_papers (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs/the_papers)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on April 02, 2020, 08:48:09 am
There doesn't seem to be a plan to end the lockdown. I would like to say that obviously the government will have a plan but my confidence in them isn't exactly soaring at the moment.

I'm not sure any non-communist dictatorship country has a feasible plan in place to gradually reverse their lockdown so i wouldn't think too badly of the government for not having figured it out yet...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: duncan on April 02, 2020, 09:20:04 am
Holland - Economy tiking along nicely, little disruption to the constrution industry, far fewer rules and regulations, no lockdown.

How is there curve flattening more than ours and daily new cases dropping. I still cant help but think we are doing something wrong here.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/netherlands/

It's understandable but misleading to look at what other countries are doing now and relate it to their reported spread of Covid-19

It's unwise to pay much attention to infection rates: many countries are not testing with anything like the intensity to give a remotely accurate figure. The more valid figure is reported deaths. Death rate is not a perfect measure, it depends on age and health of populations, quality of health systems, and variation in recording (eg UK folk dying outside hospitals and Russians recorded as having pneumonia). Death rate reflects what was happening 3-4 weeks ago. So current UK deaths doubling every ~3 days reflects a time when few here were taking this very seriously. Spain and Italy look bad now but their rate of increase - the important figure - is now much lower than UK, Netherlands or US. 

This is all a huge and gruesome experiment in different strategies of disease control.  The East Asian countries that shut down hard like Taiwan and South Korea seem to be doing best job so far. I'm suspicious of whats happening in Japan and China and not sure we're getting the whole story there. Taiwan is interesting as it has tiny numbers, not coincidentally they have a strong public health service and their Vice President is a former epidemiologist with previous experience with SARS. Rather unlike the shower of chancers and bullshitters running the show in the UK and US.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 02, 2020, 09:54:42 am
That’s a super important point. Controlling the return back to work could be really hard... if you let a few back there will be all sorts of shit going on. People doing tests for their mates, people not wanting to go back. People who’ve not had it being really nervous / resentful of those returning...

Hard to see how you manage it other than an all back or no one back scenario.

I agree, a partial return for the "immune" will lead to people looking at those out and about and just thinking, sod it, I'm going out too, people trying to get infected in order to recover and then go out and find work, it could only be policed bif we bring in some draconian rules, there will be no end of issues.

There doesn't seem to be a plan to end the lockdown. I would like to say that obviously the government will have a plan but my confidence in them isn't exactly soaring at the moment.

I had a text discussion with sloper about this (I think) and my view was because we don't have any national ID system it would be nigh on impossible to administer - let alone police...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 02, 2020, 09:56:51 am
@duncan - the Taiwan story is being somewhat obscured by China's (powerful) insistence that it is treated as part of China.. Wifes cousin is a teacher there and from FB posts looks like a happy (as in population content) lockdown of sorts...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on April 02, 2020, 10:14:21 am
There doesn't seem to be a plan to end the lockdown. I would like to say that obviously the government will have a plan but my confidence in them isn't exactly soaring at the moment.

I'm not sure any non-communist dictatorship country has a feasible plan in place to gradually reverse their lockdown so i wouldn't think too badly of the government for not having figured it out yet...

I'll hazard a guess;

1) Resume as much industry / manufacturing as possible, possibly on low output, maintaining social distancing as well as possible
2) Reopen retail, with social distancing rules
3) Reopen restaurants and pubs, at limited times only.
4) reopen school / let people go back to offices
5) release travel restrictions, first locally, then internationally
6) reopen schools
7) reopen tertiary ed
8) Allow small gatherings; cinemas etc
9) allow larger gatherings; concerts and sports events

And if infection numbers start to rise, go back to lockdown and start again.

A guess anyway.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 02, 2020, 10:45:34 am
Tedros Ghebreyesus stating the WHO's advice, March 16. till we can implement this, I can't see much changing:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=19&v=3GqhApWmFtA&feature=emb_logo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=19&v=3GqhApWmFtA&feature=emb_logo)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on April 02, 2020, 10:49:50 am
Re my point about Holland. I am well aware of the stats and the fact that they are 5th worse in the world for deaths per population. And am aware they are following exactly the same curve as us.
However there approach is very different and as of yesterday they have no intention of changing officially announcing the restrictions are to stay in place until 28th April but not tightened. My business partner is very good friends with a minister there so the info is not via the media but straight from the horses mouth.
Most on here just seem to dismiss that there are other options other than either a full lockdown or mass testing but ignore the facts that other places are doing less without damaging there economy as much as we are.
And for all those on here that seem to think that this will somehow move us away from capitalism as we know it I fear you couldn’t be more wrong and I think it will properly fuck up the EU project.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on April 02, 2020, 10:52:11 am
There doesn't seem to be a plan to end the lockdown. I would like to say that obviously the government will have a plan but my confidence in them isn't exactly soaring at the moment.

I'm not sure any non-communist dictatorship country has a feasible plan in place to gradually reverse their lockdown so i wouldn't think too badly of the government for not having figured it out yet...

I'll hazard a guess;

1) Resume as much industry / manufacturing as possible, possibly on low output, maintaining social distancing as well as possible
2) Reopen retail, with social distancing rules
3) Reopen restaurants and pubs, at limited times only.
4) reopen school / let people go back to offices
5) release travel restrictions, first locally, then internationally
6) reopen schools
7) reopen tertiary ed
8) Allow small gatherings; cinemas etc
9) allow larger gatherings; concerts and sports events

And if infection numbers start to rise, go back to lockdown and start again.

A guess anyway.

Would have thought this is pretty accurate but think the big business sporting events will come earlier than pubs restaurants and climbing walls/gyms. Money talks.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on April 02, 2020, 11:03:41 am
Re my point about Holland. I am well aware of the stats and the fact that they are 5th worse in the world for deaths per population. And am aware they are following exactly the same curve as us.

They are only following the same curve as us because the death rates are 2-4 weeks behind infections. If lockdowns work, our curve will start flattening off in a couple of weeks, whereas Holland will still have an exponential rise. In other words, we can't say whether Holland's approach works, or will prove to be a catastrophic misreading of the situation, for another few weeks.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 02, 2020, 11:17:11 am
Re my point about Holland. I am well aware of the stats and the fact that they are 5th worse in the world for deaths per population. And am aware they are following exactly the same curve as us.

They are only following the same curve as us because the death rates are 2-4 weeks behind infections. If lockdowns work, our curve will start flattening off in a couple of weeks, whereas Holland will still have an exponential rise. In other words, we can't say whether Holland's approach works, or will prove to be a catastrophic misreading of the situation, for another few weeks.

Plus, how does losing a more significant % of your population (which is what is happening in the Netherlands) actually affect your economy, in the long term?

How will the Dutch public respond, should their death rate continue to climb, steeply, when the rest of Europe starts to plateau?

How will others view a nation, unwilling to sacrifice to preserve it’s vulnerable?

You alway focus on the economic impact GME,do you want to convince us all that it’s unnecessary?

If our lockdown, flattens that curve and people who don’t need to die, don’t, then it’s worth it.

We can’t predict what will happen, not really, only act on the best modelling  and (what are) educated guesses.

Since almost every model, without strict(ish) measures leads to exponential growth, overwhelmed medical facilities and people dying (even of things unrelated to COVID), how, how, does doing anything other than playing safe, make sense.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on April 02, 2020, 11:19:23 am
There doesn't seem to be a plan to end the lockdown. I would like to say that obviously the government will have a plan but my confidence in them isn't exactly soaring at the moment.

I'm not sure any non-communist dictatorship country has a feasible plan in place to gradually reverse their lockdown so i wouldn't think too badly of the government for not having figured it out yet...

I'll hazard a guess;

1) Resume as much industry / manufacturing as possible, possibly on low output, maintaining social distancing as well as possible
2) Reopen retail, with social distancing rules
3) Reopen restaurants and pubs, at limited times only.
4) reopen school / let people go back to offices
5) release travel restrictions, first locally, then internationally
6) reopen schools
7) reopen tertiary ed
8) Allow small gatherings; cinemas etc
9) allow larger gatherings; concerts and sports events

And if infection numbers start to rise, go back to lockdown and start again.

A guess anyway.

Would have thought this is pretty accurate but think the big business sporting events will come earlier than pubs restaurants and climbing walls/gyms. Money talks.

Sadly you may be right. Plus big sports events are a panacea to entertain the masses. Maybe they will be behind closed doors and televised only, that's where the big bucks are, not gate receipts. And all players tested before matches. I just think they will do what they can to prevent a repeat of this https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-champions-league-match-a-biological-bomb-that-infected-bergamo-experts-say-11963905
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: duncan on April 02, 2020, 11:30:25 am
Most on here just seem to dismiss that there are other options other than either a full lockdown or mass testing but ignore the facts that other places are doing less without damaging there economy as much as we are.
And for all those on here that seem to think that this will somehow move us away from capitalism as we know it I fear you couldn’t be more wrong and I think it will properly fuck up the EU project.

Apologies if I was being patronising. What Ru said. I have not much idea what the best approach is. I take my lead from work colleagues (in a medical school public health department) who think UK decision-making has been influenced far too much by theoreticians and not enough by public health people with on-the-ground experience. But I suppose they would say that.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on April 02, 2020, 11:34:47 am
Re my point about Holland. I am well aware of the stats and the fact that they are 5th worse in the world for deaths per population. And am aware they are following exactly the same curve as us.

They are only following the same curve as us because the death rates are 2-4 weeks behind infections. If lockdowns work, our curve will start flattening off in a couple of weeks, whereas Holland will still have an exponential rise. In other words, we can't say whether Holland's approach works, or will prove to be a catastrophic misreading of the situation, for another few weeks.

Plus, how does losing a more significant % of your population (which is what is happening in the Netherlands) actually affect your economy, in the long term?

How will the Dutch public respond, should their death rate continue to climb, steeply, when the rest of Europe starts to plateau?

How will others view a nation, unwilling to sacrifice to preserve it’s vulnerable?

You alway focus on the economic impact GME,do you want to convince us all that it’s unnecessary?

If our lockdown, flattens that curve and people who don’t need to die, don’t, then it’s worth it.

We can’t predict what will happen, not really, only act on the best modelling  and (what are) educated guesses.

Since almost every model, without strict(ish) measures leads to exponential growth, overwhelmed medical facilities and people dying (even of things unrelated to COVID), how, how, does doing anything other than playing safe, make sense.
I am not saying it’s unnecessary at all just pointing out that there maybe other options. I am towing the line completely both as an individual and as a business. We were actually the first to stop site works in our industry as we felt it was the correct thing to do.
I focus on the economy as I honestly think the long term damage we are causing will be far greater than the short term impact of the virus. If we think austerity was bad before it’s just got a whole lot worse.
I don’t have an answer just pointing out others are approaching it differently.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on April 02, 2020, 11:39:24 am
Most on here just seem to dismiss that there are other options other than either a full lockdown or mass testing but ignore the facts that other places are doing less without damaging there economy as much as we are.
And for all those on here that seem to think that this will somehow move us away from capitalism as we know it I fear you couldn’t be more wrong and I think it will properly fuck up the EU project.

Apologies if I was being patronising. What Ru said. I have not much idea what the best approach is. I take my lead from work colleagues (in a medical school public health department) who think UK decision-making has been influenced far too much by theoreticians and not enough by public health people with on-the-ground experience. But I suppose they would say that.

A very pertinent point. We all get our ideas from those around us. I know lots of business people so I have an economic slant, others work in NHS, research, education etc so have different ideas, others use it to push politics and tell us how shit  torys are and what a bad job there doing.
The only thing we have in common is we all know we are right.

I like it on here due to this. Only place I discuss this stuff other than face to face ( well computer screen to computer screen at the minute. )
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 02, 2020, 11:47:49 am
Gav, all you have to do to know the future is scale up Holland's total infections (not reported infections) to the hundreds of thousands (or a million). Why wouldn't this happen? In a population not in isolation why wouldn't the infection spread in people there the same as anywhere else in the world not in isolation, all other things being equal.
Then, apply an infection death rate of 0.1% - 0.26%* of all infections (not reported infections). Tells you all you need to know.


* infection fatality rate estimate from Center for Evidence Based Medicine  (https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/global-covid-19-case-fatality-rates/)
Quote from: https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/global-covid-19-case-fatality-rates/
Taking account of historical experience, trends in the data, increased number of infections in the population at largest, and potential impact of misclassification of deaths gives a presumed estimate for the COVID-19 IFR between 0.1% and 0.26%.
This site

The site above is updated regularly with latest estimates of IFR and CFR based on updated evidence. Good for getting your head around the various fatality estimates and why they're constantly fluctuating.


About the economy I don't disagree that we'll have to change our thinking in the long term. I think the 'exit strategy' to lockdown can only follow one of two possible courses based on whether or not a vaccine is found.
Short-term: we're hoping for a vaccine, and in the meantime absorbing the economic damage. Large parts of the workforce aren't significantly out of pocket* while the government underwrites them, so the economy *can* bounce back. So lock-down for ~3months.
Long-term: if no vaccine is found then sentiment will shift towards acceptance that we have to get back to work. While mitigating as best we can for the most vulnerable. The original 'mitigate' policy.

An effective anti-viral might give us a fudge option.


* (I'm not making light of significant numbers who are out of pocket)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 02, 2020, 12:00:50 pm
There are no human studies that show whether NAD replenishment will in fact have any effect on COVID-19 symptoms. The animal studies suggest that it might. The human studies only show that Vitamin B3s are safe and effective at replenishing NAD.

Good enough for me to buy some and give it a try if any of my family get symptoms

Another study hypothesising the role of B3 (NR, NMN or Niacin) - among other strategies - in protection against severe covid symptoms.
https://www.aging-us.com/article/102988/text (https://www.aging-us.com/article/102988/text)

That's at least three papers now hypothesising a role for B3.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Murph on April 02, 2020, 12:07:37 pm
If the death rate is really in the 0.2% ballpark then I really cant see how this isnt a massive over reaction. We are going to be paying for this for years to come with ever decreasing living standards and hospital closures etc. That comes at a cost.

Theres some analysis to be done somewhere showing what lockdown policy is worth what death reduction and I'm not sure 0.2% justifies the current one.

Theres also the policy itself. I think a lot of countries have sort of followed china but not done a good job of it. If wuhan had a proper lockdown and lots of support from the rest of china to make that stick, then the uk lockdown is at best a minority fraction of it. Buses and trains are still running. By this stage in wuhan they had been cancelled for a fortnight.

An analogy with antibiotics - don't just take them every other day for two days, take the full dose for a week or dont bother.

Have I got this wrong still - is no cost too high to save 0.2%?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 02, 2020, 12:08:35 pm
There are no human studies that show whether NAD replenishment will in fact have any effect on COVID-19 symptoms. The animal studies suggest that it might. The human studies only show that Vitamin B3s are safe and effective at replenishing NAD.

Good enough for me to buy some and give it a try if any of my family get symptoms

Another study hypothesising the role of B3 (NR, NMN or Niacin) - among other strategies - in protection against severe covid symptoms.
https://www.aging-us.com/article/102988/text (https://www.aging-us.com/article/102988/text)

That's at least three papers now hypothesising a role for B3.

I'd just be pretty careful at this point Pete. With CV19 everything is being published in pre-print format with scant or no peer review... this is important to save time getting any new ideas out - but also removes an important quality filter...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 02, 2020, 12:13:25 pm
Where do you get 0.2% from?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on April 02, 2020, 12:13:34 pm
If our lockdown, flattens that curve and people who don’t need to die, don’t, then it’s worth it.

I love it when people make absolute statements that cover every option you can imagine (e.g. 2 deaths prevented) and so can easily be reduced to absurdity  :wall:

As a relevant aside, talking to my mum yesterday she said something along the lines of that she wouldn't want younger generations to be fucked for years/decades in order to save a chunk of her generation. So clearly at least some of the high-risk groups can countenance a debate about where a line should be (and might be, if an exit strategy doesn't emerge over the next few months) drawn
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Murph on April 02, 2020, 12:16:29 pm
Where do you get 0.2% from?
Was that to me? Pete quoted it but it wasnt the first time I'd heard.

infection fatality rate estimate from Center for Evidence Based Medicine
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on April 02, 2020, 12:20:31 pm
Gav, all you have to do to know the future is scale up Holland's total infections (not reported infections) to the hundreds of thousands (or a million). Why wouldn't this happen? In a population not in isolation why wouldn't the infection spread in people there the same as anywhere else in the world not in isolation, all other things being equal.
Then, apply an infection death rate of 0.1% - 0.26%* of all infections (not reported infections). Tells you all you need to know.


* infection fatality rate estimate from Center for Evidence Based Medicine  (https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/global-covid-19-case-fatality-rates/)
Quote from: https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/global-covid-19-case-fatality-rates/
Taking account of historical experience, trends in the data, increased number of infections in the population at largest, and potential impact of misclassification of deaths gives a presumed estimate for the COVID-19 IFR between 0.1% and 0.26%.
This site

The site above is updated regularly with latest estimates of IFR and CFR based on updated evidence. Good for getting your head around the various fatality estimates and why they're constantly fluctuating.


Pete referenced his source.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 02, 2020, 12:25:19 pm
There are no human studies that show whether NAD replenishment will in fact have any effect on COVID-19 symptoms. The animal studies suggest that it might. The human studies only show that Vitamin B3s are safe and effective at replenishing NAD.

Good enough for me to buy some and give it a try if any of my family get symptoms

Another study hypothesising the role of B3 (NR, NMN or Niacin) - among other strategies - in protection against severe covid symptoms.
https://www.aging-us.com/article/102988/text (https://www.aging-us.com/article/102988/text)

That's at least three papers now hypothesising a role for B3.

I'd just be pretty careful at this point Pete. With CV19 everything is being published in pre-print format with scant or no peer review... this is important to save time getting any new ideas out - but also removes an important quality filter...

Yep, aware of this TT but good point. I said in the earlier post about B3 to DYOR. Plus my disclaimer that I'm an investor in a company selling NR.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Davo on April 02, 2020, 12:27:39 pm
If the death rate is really in the 0.2% ballpark then I really cant see how this isnt a massive over reaction. We are going to be paying for this for years to come with ever decreasing living standards and hospital closures etc. That comes at a cost.

Theres some analysis to be done somewhere showing what lockdown policy is worth what death reduction and I'm not sure 0.2% justifies the current one.

Theres also the policy itself. I think a lot of countries have sort of followed china but not done a good job of it. If wuhan had a proper lockdown and lots of support from the rest of china to make that stick, then the uk lockdown is at best a minority fraction of it. Buses and trains are still running. By this stage in wuhan they had been cancelled for a fortnight.

An analogy with antibiotics - don't just take them every other day for two days, take the full dose for a week or dont bother.

Have I got this wrong still - is no cost too high to save 0.2%?

I raised this exact point last week and generally got shot down. I have seen nothing published yet that explains how much we are spending and costing ourselves to save a certain percentage of the population.  Surely this is a valid question and deserves debate? Yet there has basically been nil discussion of this in the media or elsewhere (from what I have seen). I understand this is emotive stuff but it is also exactly the same kind of decision making that the health system and government makes on a day to day basis and I don’t see why this should be different
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 02, 2020, 12:33:13 pm
I think it's an inevitable question that will have to be faced down the line. But while there's a hope of a vaccine in the relatively near future it's political suicide for any government to not at least try to crawl over the vaccine line in a hypothetical future timeline.

edit: looks at the serious questions being asked of government about testing, timing of lock-down, effectiveness of lock-down, and PPE. These are based on perceptions of government not doing enough. Can you imagine the questions these same people would have if the government policy 'allowed' 100's of thousands to die in the next few months, as they would if everyone went back to work, uni and school.

When or if the evidence appears to show we aren't going to reach that line without totally destroying the global economy - not just recession but massive prolonged depression - then watch the policy change. All imo obvs.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 02, 2020, 12:37:54 pm
If our lockdown, flattens that curve and people who don’t need to die, don’t, then it’s worth it.

I love it when people make absolute statements that cover every option you can imagine (e.g. 2 deaths prevented) and so can easily be reduced to absurdity  :wall:

As a relevant aside, talking to my mum yesterday she said something along the lines of that she wouldn't want younger generations to be fucked for years/decades in order to save a chunk of her generation. So clearly at least some of the high-risk groups can countenance a debate about where a line should be (and might be, if an exit strategy doesn't emerge over the next few months) drawn

Tough.

You don’t think anybody is benefiting from the lockdown?

I think that’s pretty unlikely and as asinine as you think I am.

Rationalise away.

Here we are and here we’ll stay. I’m grateful that it’s not some of the posters here making the decisions.

I think Pete is almost certainly right, so see his posts (not the B3 thing, no idea about that).

One more time, it’s not just the people dying from C19, it’s the additional deaths from unrelated ailments etc due to and overwhelmed system. It’s about the many thousands who will end up critically ill, again, not just with C19, with other (normally) preventable/treatable afflictions.

I know I’ve said it, I know Pete’s said it, I know others have said it.
Without effective treatment or vaccine this thing is going to take who it wants. The best we can do is slow it to a manageable rate.

Exit strategy:

Actually, I reckon, the first  Lockdown, is to buy time to increase Care capacity. Let the deaths drop to a “tolerable” level. 
Then it will be eased and only brought back when the new capacity seems likely to be breached.

I suspect this is why testing is not the priority that “we” think it should be. It’s ultimately not worth it.
Others have already pointed out the issues with passport to work schemes. Likely so fullbof holes as to be pointless and only a couple of people slipping through and starting off the infection cycle again is enough.

We’re in this for the long haul and the lockdown is way more cynical than “we” think and almost certainly “they” think it the least worst option.


Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stabbsy on April 02, 2020, 12:53:40 pm
Morning everyone - hope you’re all well.

Aside from the PPE/Testing coronashambles that’s unfolding - one article in the Indy caught my eye - https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/coronavirus-uk-cases-nhs-symptoms-111-update-death-toll-a9440246.html

Where 1.75 million 111 (online and phone) enquiries were flagged as being potential CV19. Whilst many of these could/were have been other viruses/colds it provides an upper limit on how wised spread it could be..

I think the upper limit could easily be higher than that. More Or Less did a piece on CV19 in Iran to try and decide whether we were seeing the whole truth of the outbreak there (we probably weren't). One of the bits of analysis was a back of the envelope calc for CV19 cases based on death numbers. A quick attempt to replicate for the UK - please feel free to critique the assumptions.


Based on yesterday's 2,352 deaths, that gets you to 1.9 million people infected and those aren't particularly prudent assumptions.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Murph on April 02, 2020, 01:01:03 pm
Well I'm not shooting the idea down Davo.

If this thing is costing us £500bn - a figure that admittedly I just made up but which must surely be in the low end ballpark - and it saves 130k lives all in net of the additional deaths caused by the lockdown measures and resulting economic collapse then that's nearly £4m per life saved. For £4m theres a few more cost effective life saving measures I could think of.

People cant go bouldering but they can still go to the shops and buy fags. It doesn't make completely coherent sense. How about banning fags... Boom. You've just saved (extended) lives by more than all the world's lockdowns added up together.

My hope - if you can call it that - is that 0.2% is way short of the mark and the unobservable/hypothesized counterfactual is it is actually masses more dangerous, mutated, comes around every few months etc and kills in the millions so by having a semi lockdown we are buying a month or two for the scientists to get working on a miracle.

But in the absence of that, having a lockdown while smoking is still a thing is some form of mental gymnastics. I know, it's all about the peak but really is this the only way? Theres a luxury lockdown for at risk groups option too. I know it's where we are and theres no going back I'm just interested in how the numbers stack up. History is full of decisions made that turned out to be a really bad idea but which must have made sense at the time - the fourth crusade attacking it's own city, italy entering ww1, credit default swaps etc... I wonder if this is one of them?

We are certainly living through a bit of history anyway. Something that will be studied for years to come. Maybe the Dutch are right. We wont know in a week or two but probably will know in a year or two.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 02, 2020, 01:14:22 pm

  • Fatality rate of 1% - the 0.2% quoted a couple of posts up might be right but gives some ridiculous numbers. 1% seems broadly in line with the Chinese case fatality rate of 4% and three-quarters of cases not requiring hospitalisation.
  • Delay from infection to death of 3 weeks - the range I've seen quoted elsewhere is 2 - 4 weeks, so taken a midpoint.
  • Cases doubling every 7 days - I've heard much lower figures than this, but let's assume the lockdown is working and social distancing was working before that.

Based on yesterday's 2,352 deaths, that gets you to 1.9 million people infected and those aren't particularly prudent assumptions.


This isn't in line with the current estimates from here: https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/global-covid-19-case-fatality-rates/ (https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/global-covid-19-case-fatality-rates/)

....................................................................................
Estimating COVID-19 Infection Fatality  Rates (IFR) (Update 29TH March)
The current COVID outbreak seems to be following previous pandemics: initial CFRs start high and trend downwards. For example, In Wuhan, the CFR  has gone down from 17% in the initial phase to near 1% in the late stage. It is increasingly clear that current testing strategies are not capturing everybody.  In South Korea, considerable numbers who tested positive were also asymptomatics-  likely driving the rapid worldwide spread.

CFR rates are subject to selection bias as more severe cases are tested – generally those in the hospital settings or those with more severe symptoms. The number of currently infected asymptomatics is uncertain: estimates put it at least a half are asymptomatic; the proportion not coming forward for testing is also highly doubtful (i.e. you are symptomatic, but you do not present for testing). Therefore we can assume the IFR is significantly lower than the CFR.

Emerging evidence suggests many more people are infected. than tested. In Vo Italy, at the time the first symptomatic case was diagnosed, about 3%, had already been infected –  most were completely asymptomatic.

We could make a simple estimation of the IFR as 0.26%, based on halving the lowest boundary of the CFR prediction interval. However, the considerable uncertainty over how many people have the disease means an IFR of 0.26 is likely an overestimate. In Swine flu, the IFR ended up as 0.02%, fivefold less than the lowest estimate during the outbreak (the lowest estimate was 0.1% in the 1st ten weeks of the outbreak). In Iceland, where the most testing per capita has occurred, the  IFR lies between. 0.01% and 0.19%.

Taking account of historical experience, trends in the data, increased number of infections in the population at largest, and potential impact of misclassification of deaths gives a presumed estimate for the COVID-19 IFR between 0.1% and 0.26%.*
.....................................................................................


For more on the *, see here: https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/global-covid-19-case-fatality-rates/ (https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/global-covid-19-case-fatality-rates/)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 02, 2020, 01:20:14 pm

My hope - if you can call it that - is that 0.2% is way short of the mark and the unobservable/hypothesized counterfactual is it is actually masses more dangerous, mutated, comes around every few months etc and kills in the millions so by having a semi lockdown we are buying a month or two for the scientists to get working on a miracle.

But in the absence of that, having a lockdown while smoking is still a thing is some form of mental gymnastics. I know, it's all about the peak but really is this the only way? Theres a luxury lockdown for at risk groups option too. I know it's where we are and theres no going back I'm just interested in how the numbers stack up. History is full of decisions made that turned out to be a really bad idea but which must have made sense at the time - the fourth crusade attacking it's own city, italy entering ww1, credit default swaps etc... I wonder if this is one of them?


Hi Murph, yes, hadn't seen TT's post above mine about 0.2%
The current case fatality rate currently is about 8% in UK so for a 0.2%  rate per infection you need reported:actual infections rate to be 1:40. Are we only reporting 0.25 of all infections? I know we are massively under, but that's a lot.

I have read a few times that fatality rate is nearer 2% of infections. That does not take into account an increase in deaths due to an overwhelmed health service (if this occurs) or other preventable deaths no longer effectively treated due to impact of CV19 on health services.

OMM:
Quote
One more time, it’s not just the people dying from C19, it’s the additional deaths from unrelated ailments etc due to and overwhelmed system. It’s about the many thousands who will end up critically ill, again, not just with C19, with other (normally) preventable/treatable afflictions.

This graph from Tomas Pueyo gives pause for thought, do have a look:

http://twitter.com/tomaspueyo/status/1243648422403440640/photo/1 (https://twitter.com/tomaspueyo/status/1243648422403440640/photo/1)

edit overlapping posts, yes, that's where I went:  https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/global-covid-19-case-fatality-rates/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 02, 2020, 01:25:40 pm
Regarding Trump's idea that some oldies will be willing to take one for the team to keep the economy moving, Andrew Cuomo said this:
Quote
My mother isn't expendable
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nik at work on April 02, 2020, 01:29:34 pm
Morning everyone - hope you’re all well.

Aside from the PPE/Testing coronashambles that’s unfolding - one article in the Indy caught my eye - https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/coronavirus-uk-cases-nhs-symptoms-111-update-death-toll-a9440246.html

Where 1.75 million 111 (online and phone) enquiries were flagged as being potential CV19. Whilst many of these could/were have been other viruses/colds it provides an upper limit on how wised spread it could be..

I agree with Stabbsy the upper limit could be higher than that ( in fact fuck it, I’ll speculate, in all likelihood is a deal higher than that). Or is that what you were implying? It wasn’t completely clear to me.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on April 02, 2020, 01:29:58 pm
Regarding Trump's idea that some oldies will be willing to take one for the team to keep the economy moving, Andrew Cuomo said this:
Quote
My mother isn't expendable

Yeah, but my mum thinks differently to at least some extent as I said above...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nik at work on April 02, 2020, 01:30:30 pm
Regarding Trump's idea that some oldies will be willing to take one for the team to keep the economy moving, Andrew Cuomo said this:
Quote
My mother isn't expendable
To him...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stabbsy on April 02, 2020, 01:36:29 pm

  • Fatality rate of 1% - the 0.2% quoted a couple of posts up might be right but gives some ridiculous numbers. 1% seems broadly in line with the Chinese case fatality rate of 4% and three-quarters of cases not requiring hospitalisation.
  • Delay from infection to death of 3 weeks - the range I've seen quoted elsewhere is 2 - 4 weeks, so taken a midpoint.
  • Cases doubling every 7 days - I've heard much lower figures than this, but let's assume the lockdown is working and social distancing was working before that.

Based on yesterday's 2,352 deaths, that gets you to 1.9 million people infected and those aren't particularly prudent assumptions.


This isn't in line with the current estimates from here: https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/global-covid-19-case-fatality-rates/ (https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/global-covid-19-case-fatality-rates/)


Pete - I'm not disagreeing with the CEBM numbers - the 4% CFR for China came from your link posted above (first table). My calc was just a back of the envelope attempt to come up with case numbers via a different route to see where it landed and decide whether the 1.75m NHS111 calls really was an upper limit or not. If you plug in the 0.2% IFR as your fatality rate then your case estimate goes up to c.9m from 1.9m. When I said the numbers looked ridiculous, it wasn't a criticism of the 0.2% figure, just that 9m cases seemed a bit of an overestimate.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on April 02, 2020, 01:45:49 pm
Does anyone else get bored of OMM not writing what he later says he means, and not reading other posts properly?  :shrug:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 02, 2020, 01:51:56 pm
Does anyone else get bored of OMM not writing what he later says he means, and not reading other posts properly?  :shrug:

Evidence.

I think you come across as rather cold.

You only wish to prove yourself correct and everyone else to simply agree with you.

If it makes you happy, yes, you irritate me. If you wish to make this a personal attack debate, you have succeeded.
Well done.
Give my regards to your mum.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on April 02, 2020, 01:57:50 pm
Ironic as f
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on April 02, 2020, 01:59:51 pm
Maybe the Dutch are right. We wont know in a week or two but probably will know in a year or two.

I can't see how the Dutch can be right on deaths. We will see that by two weeks anyhow, as if the numbers follow the same trends, deaths will start to overwhelm their hospitals by then. It's not just their people they are risking by laxer social distancing, given the open borders. In the ten days after their total deaths exceeded a hundred their level was 864 (and 1039 the next day) and our total in comparison was 1019 after ten days...pretty similar in logarithmic terms when estimating the exponential growth rate. They are about 2 to 3 days behind us (growing slightly less fast at the current time) and their population would have seen more about things being bad elsewhere and likely have been more cautious with their own choices of social distancing as a result. Our population is just under 4 times theirs so their per capita deaths are right now almost exactly twice ours. Deaths follow infections roughly by 3 weeks so if our state social distancing worked better we will see in a week and a half to two weeks.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: JamieG on April 02, 2020, 02:02:06 pm
I don't agree with the idea that because we are going to overburden younger generations with footing the bill to save a few oldies the lockdown might not be worth it. Apart from some of the problematic ethics surrounding this idea and me not personally wanting to put my older relatives in the firing line, I think the idea the younger generation will need to pay is unfair. That is just the status quo of our economy and I feel it seriously needs dealing with.

It already is very hard for the young. Rising house prices, tuition fees, cuts to social security services. This country for a long time worked for the older generations and made it hard for the younger. Why can't the older generations help pay for it too? Loads of people are sitting on massively overvalued properties and land. Why don't we have much fairer tax system to help ease the burden? We used to have a fairer tax system that better supported the younger generations.

In summary, I think it is important to cut the number of deaths to as little as possible, but then we really need to make a fair tax system to get the country back on its feet. None of this 'all in this together' nonsense which was essentially an excuse to cut services but not change a thing regarding taxation.

Maybe I'm being naive.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 02, 2020, 02:09:08 pm
^ Broad agreement on that.
Looks like Holland expects not social distancing won't result in massive increase in infections, with inevitable consequences. I can't see how the virus is going to behave differently in NL compared to everywhere else. Am I missing something?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on April 02, 2020, 02:09:49 pm
Does anyone else get bored of OMM not writing what he later says he means, and not reading other posts properly?  :shrug:

I think you come across as rather cold.

You only wish to prove yourself correct and everyone else to simply agree with you.

If it makes you happy, yes, you irritate me.

Fight. Fight. Fight.

God I'm bored.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on April 02, 2020, 02:21:48 pm
I don't agree with the idea that because we are going to overburden younger generations with footing the bill to save a few oldies the lockdown might not be worth it. Apart from some of the problematic ethics surrounding this idea and me not personally wanting to put my older relatives in the firing line, I think the idea the younger generation will need to pay is unfair. That is just the status quo of our economy and I feel it seriously needs dealing with.

It already is very hard for the young. Rising house prices, tuition fees, cuts to social security services. This country for a long time worked for the older generations and made it hard for the younger. Why can't the older generations help pay for it too? Loads of people are sitting on massively overvalued properties and land. Why don't we have much fairer tax system to help ease the burden? We used to have a fairer tax system that better supported the younger generations.

In summary, I think it is important to cut the number of deaths to as little as possible, but then we really need to make a fair tax system to get the country back on its feet. None of this 'all in this together' nonsense which was essentially an excuse to cut services but not change a thing regarding taxation.

Maybe I'm being naive.

It's not about saving more old people it's about keeping those infected from overwhelming the NHS when covid deaths will massively surge (some young people are dying now despite best NHS efforts and a much greater proortion will do so if the system is stuffed), as will subsequent deaths for all other conditions needing intensive care. In that, yes you are being naive.

I agree with your points on the lack of fairness in wealth between the old now and what the young can expect. As a result I despair that more of the young don't vote, so we can have a better chance of that fairer society through democracy.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on April 02, 2020, 02:24:53 pm
A couple more points:

I do think it's worth debating the "cost" of the lockdown. The general population might find these conversations hard but medical/NICE etc have these conversations everyday. It may sound callous, but we can't fix everything at what we can do, comes at a cost. Looking at the cost benefit is the correct thing to do, we will all differ on where we think that line is drawn.

It's worth bearing in mind, during this debate, that the mean time from onset of symptoms to death found by Verity et al* (who also put IFR at 0.66% (0.39%,1.33%)) was nearly 18 days. It's going to be while till we see the benefit of the lockdown.

Case reporting is all over the place. Anecdotal evidence from medics I know shows a lots of false negatives which will lead to under reporting of both cases and deaths, but also a reluctance to test, which will also lead to an under reporting of cases.

Spikes in deaths after the weekend are to be expected and are normally due to paperwork being filed on Monday afternoon which falls into Tuesday's count.

My mum (mid 70s) has already phoned me to say she doesn't want to take up a ventilator. I reassured her that she wouldn't get one anyway so not to worry.......

*https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.09.20033357v1
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: JamieG on April 02, 2020, 02:27:34 pm
I absolutely agree with you Offwidth. Sorry I was being a bit facetious in my 'save a few oldies' comment. It is about stopping this becoming totally overwhelming to the NHS.

I have quite a few relatives and friends that work in the NHS (including on Covid wards) and I am as worried about what this is doing to their mental health, stress levels etc as much as anything else.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on April 02, 2020, 02:34:38 pm
more than just that.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/28/first-working-nhs-surgeon-dies-from-coronavirus

the health risk on them due to viral load is massive.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Murph on April 02, 2020, 02:39:17 pm
When I said maybe the Dutch are right I didn't mean that they could get away with it but rather maybe they have done the maths and at 0.2% it's not worth a full lockdown.

There is - there has to be - a price that isnt worth paying or a cure worse than the disease. I'm not exactly clear who has been thinking through the consequential and emotions may be governing this.

JamieG - agree with a lot of that intergenerational divide stuff. Theres a lot of inequality in the way the spoils of the economy are shared and that's a big one. No guarantee whatsoever that it will be fixed tho. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 02, 2020, 02:45:45 pm
I'd urge caution with the figure of 0.2%. It sounds pretty minor. More meaningful would be the total numbers of people we expect will die as a result of different strategies. 0.2% of millions of people plus secondary deaths as a direct result of overwhelmed services is an awful lot of people. And that is without disputing the accuracy of the overall infection fatality rate, which will not be calculable with certainty at this point.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on April 02, 2020, 02:56:39 pm
When I said maybe the Dutch are right I didn't mean that they could get away with it but rather maybe they have done the maths and at 0.2% it's not worth a full lockdown.

The "maths" is currently guesswork and conjecture. In a month's time, we will see if our deaths have tailed off and their haven't? If they don't tail off because of social intervention we don't know at what point we will hit the peak, nor how high and wide that peak will be.

Italy and Spain are the only Euro/Western countries that no. of deaths are starting to flatten and they are the ones with the most draconian lockdowns.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on April 02, 2020, 03:01:52 pm
Does anyone else get bored of OMM not writing what he later says he means, and not reading other posts properly?  :shrug:

I think you come across as rather cold.

You only wish to prove yourself correct and everyone else to simply agree with you.

If it makes you happy, yes, you irritate me.

Fight. Fight. Fight.

God I'm bored.

Is anybody else just so so ready to watch 15 stone of ex-navy meat and gristle go toe-to-toe with a 6-foot-tall tendon who wouldn't tip the scales to 8 stone? Get it on Youtube Live!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 02, 2020, 03:03:35 pm
Just watch for Barrows knees OMM... 😃
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 02, 2020, 03:07:13 pm
Re: Murphy economics point - eg cost of lockdown greater than cost of not etc.. (grossly simplified - sorry).

It’s interesting that a country who has incarecetated well over a million people in one of its regions - and has a very bad human rights record chose a path of strict lockdown and treat everyone they could. None of this ventilator rationing - they simply got more to save people. My point (if it’s not already clear) is that China chose the path of contain, trace and treat rather than let it run wild... and continues to do so...

Why?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 02, 2020, 03:15:45 pm
I'd urge caution with the figure of 0.2%. It sounds pretty minor. More meaningful would be the total numbers of people we expect will die as a result of different strategies. 0.2% of millions of people plus secondary deaths as a direct result of overwhelmed services is an awful lot of people. And that is without disputing the accuracy of the overall infection fatality rate, which will not be calculable with certainty at this point.

I get the impression from everything I'm reading* that Covid, if left to play out over say the next 24 months without a vaccine, is as lethal as Spanish Flu.
This is because Covid is highly contagious relative to SF, but with a relatively low infection fatality rate.
Whereas Spanish Flu was less contagious than Covid, but had far higher infection fatality rate.

The potential proportion of deaths per head of population (not per head infected) is similar over the long term.


I suppose back in 1918 because there was no vaccination the virus did what it did, eventually. Whereas today there is a hope of vaccine cutting short the natural progress of Covid.


*search for estimates of the infection rates of Covid versus spanish flu
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: rich d on April 02, 2020, 03:17:35 pm
Re: Murphy economics point - eg cost of lockdown greater than cost of not etc.. (grossly simplified - sorry).

It’s interesting that a country who has incarecetated well over a million people in one of its regions - and has a very bad human rights record chose a path of strict lockdown and treat everyone they could. None of this ventilator rationing - they simply got more to save people. My point (if it’s not already clear) is that China chose the path of contain, trace and treat rather than let it run wild... and continues to do so...

Why?
Is there any faith in the numbers coming out of China, I have no idea on this, but I've believed very little media output from the Chinese government over the decades and I can't see a world wide crisis making them suddenly trustworthy. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on April 02, 2020, 03:18:58 pm
Maybe the Dutch are right. We wont know in a week or two but probably will know in a year or two.

I can't see how the Dutch can be right on deaths. We will see that by two weeks anyhow, as if the numbers follow the same trends, deaths will start to overwhelm their hospitals by then. It's not just their people they are risking by laxer social distancing, given the open borders. In the ten days after their total deaths exceeded a hundred their level was 864 (and 1039 the next day) and our total in comparison was 1019 after ten days...pretty similar in logarithmic terms when estimating the exponential growth rate. They are about 2 to 3 days behind us (growing slightly less fast at the current time) and their population would have seen more about things being bad elsewhere and likely have been more cautious with their own choices of social distancing as a result. Our population is just under 4 times theirs so their per capita deaths are right now almost exactly twice ours. Deaths follow infections roughly by 3 weeks so if our state social distancing worked better we will see in a week and a half to two weeks.

I am aware they ar following our track but we put far more constrictive measures in place 10 days ago whilst they stuck to there guns, yet we are still roughly alingned, in fact there figures have flattened a little. Would we not have started to see a difference by now? How long do you think we will need to wait until the accelerate past us, 2 week, 3, 6?

In the last five days the dutch new cases per day has gone down 13% from 1159 to 1019 and the total deaths has gone up 183% from 639 to 1173.

The UK under much tighter controls new cases up by 170% 2546 to 4324 and total deaths by 230% 1019 to 2352.

I am not saying that they have some magic formula that is beating this virus i am saying that maybe all the additional stuff we are doing, that is costing us a fortune, isnt actually doing anything.

The germans and Belgians are not happy with Holland at all, although the germans have offered ICU beds if needed. But  Rutte is sticking to his guns and stating that decisions are made based on their scientists not public opinion, politic or other countries.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 02, 2020, 03:19:19 pm
Does anyone else get bored of OMM not writing what he later says he means, and not reading other posts properly?  :shrug:

I think you come across as rather cold.

You only wish to prove yourself correct and everyone else to simply agree with you.

If it makes you happy, yes, you irritate me.

Fight. Fight. Fight.

God I'm bored.

Is anybody else just so so ready to watch 15 stone of ex-navy meat and gristle go toe-to-toe with a 6-foot-tall tendon who wouldn't tip the scales to 8 stone? Get it on Youtube Live!

I cheat like a fucker.

Of my four or five attempts at tournaments, I was disqualified in every one...

To be fair, my moral compass is, um, dodgy. Despite appearances on here.

Edit:

Ah bollocks.

I shouldn’t have made a crack about how you feel about your mother Alex. That was fucking dumb. Too many things going on, too little self control.
Other than that, what ever epithets you assigned to me, right back at ya.
😝❤️💃
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Murph on April 02, 2020, 03:20:48 pm
Galpinos - in a months time fully expect our exponential graph to look better than the Dutch's. (My knowledge of what is happening over there based on nothing other than Gavin's posts). But like I said above the full analysis of this will need to see how long it takes to recover after. Our entire pack of cards economy is based on people going to places they dont need to go to buy shit they dont need and putting the rent up to pay debts they didn't need to take on. If some of these sacred cows get questioned i think normal could be a lasting memory.

Mrjonathan - Dont worry about the 0.2% I'm not navigating by it or any other number to make policy decisions. But presumably someone has a figure in mind and a figure for the cost and some day they will share it with us and it wont be out by a factor of ten.

TT - think that's an excellent simplification.

Gavin - I think it's way too early to say. Looks like the dutch just arent testing. We will know in a few years for sure.

I'm not pretending to have the answer here, just framing the question with some made up numbers. We could use 1% and £100bn if we wanted.

Still cant believe that fags haven't been banned by the way.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: duncan on April 02, 2020, 03:24:19 pm

We are certainly living through a bit of history ...

We certainly are. I've just come out of a meeting on how to get nearly qualified student health care professionals into hospitals in the next weeks rather than waiting til July when they officially finish. Left me feeling a bit like I'm a World War 1 general leading the recruitment drive in 1914  :(
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 02, 2020, 03:25:28 pm
@richD

Seemed legit early on - though there now seems to be an orchestrated media campaign (started by US right wing media - now followed by ours) that China was holding back from numbers and leaving us in the lurch.

From a science point of view - they’ve been very open and all the important info on the virus, it’s spread and it’s treatment has been freely available.

This makes me think that the west is starting to play to  prior perceptions of China - enabling a future blame game and (most importantly) taking the heat off themselves for bungling it’s spread in the West.

The one thing where China is possibly ‘culpable’ is enabling / allowing the animal markets where it’s thought it crossed over to Humans. I’d be surprised though if China was the only country in the world where these happened..

That’s just my view. Suspect there will be lots of conspiracy theories floating around about China and this...

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on April 02, 2020, 03:27:04 pm
I am aware they ar following our track but we put far more constrictive measures in place 10 days ago whilst they stuck to there guns, yet we are still roughly alingned, in fact there figures have flattened a little. Would we not have started to see a difference by now? How long do you think we will need to wait until the accelerate past us, 2 week, 3, 6?

Takes on average 3 - 4 weeks ish from catching it to dying, so you would need to wait that long after starting a lockdown to see if the numbers change. 10 days not enough.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 02, 2020, 03:27:38 pm
I'd urge caution with the figure of 0.2%. It sounds pretty minor. More meaningful would be the total numbers of people we expect will die as a result of different strategies. 0.2% of millions of people plus secondary deaths as a direct result of overwhelmed services is an awful lot of people. And that is without disputing the accuracy of the overall infection fatality rate, which will not be calculable with certainty at this point.

I get the impression from everything I'm reading* that Covid, if left to play out over say the next 24 months without a vaccine, is as lethal as Spanish Flu.
This is because Covid is highly contagious relative to SF, but with a relatively low infection fatality rate.
Whereas Spanish Flu was less contagious than Covid, but had far higher infection fatality rate.

The potential proportion of deaths per head of population (not per head infected) is similar over the long term.


I suppose back in 1918 because there was no vaccination the virus did what it did, eventually. Whereas today there is a hope of vaccine cutting short the natural progress of Covid.


*search for estimates of the infection rates of Covid versus spanish flu

I looked at that, from a very amateurish viewpoint and thought the same.

I also realised most of what I thought I knew about the Flu and it’s lethality was wrong.
It seems from what I read to have killed most through secondary pneumonia(?) and not entirely dissimilar to C19?
The lack of Antibiotics and other modern care being the “real” difference in its lethality?
Any medical bods out there with an opinion?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on April 02, 2020, 03:28:57 pm
Other than that, what ever epithets you assigned to me, right back at ya.
😝❤️💃

 :lol: 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 02, 2020, 03:33:58 pm
@richD

Seemed legit early on - though there now seems to be an orchestrated media campaign (started by US right wing media - now followed by ours) that China was holding back from numbers and leaving us in the lurch.

From a science point of view - they’ve been very open and all the important info on the virus, it’s spread and it’s treatment has been freely available.

This makes me think that the west is starting to play to  prior perceptions of China - enabling a future blame game and (most importantly) taking the heat off themselves for bungling it’s spread in the West.

The one thing where China is possibly ‘culpable’ is enabling / allowing the animal markets where it’s thought it crossed over to Humans. I’d be surprised though if China was the only country in the world where these happened..

That’s just my view. Suspect there will be lots of conspiracy theories floating around about China and this...

We’re being a little hypocritical on the wild animal thing aren’t we?
I know plenty who indulge in pigeon pie and rabbit stew etc etc.
We eat wild game here too.
 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 02, 2020, 03:34:10 pm
hi Murph, sure, I get that. My point is that these numbers are abstractions. It's too easy to be disconnected from the enormity of what is being discussed.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Murph on April 02, 2020, 03:38:50 pm
The one thing where China is possibly ‘culpable’ is enabling / allowing the animal markets where it’s thought it crossed over to Humans. I’d be surprised though if China was the only country in the world where these happened..

At best they are grossly negligent though. They have been called out on this for years.

Theres a few year old Ted talk saying this is how it happens. There are papers looking post SARS about China's taste for exotic animals is a biological time bomb. Good call I guess. Weird how the Chinese state can enforce all sorts of stuff but cant stop people doing whatever they do at these wet markets.

Just thankful h5n1 isnt easy/possible to transmit human to human - yet - because that one is a 60%er.

OMM - just seen yours assuming it isnt a joke what we are talking about in china is a completely different sport.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on April 02, 2020, 03:45:55 pm
I also realised most of what I thought I knew about the Flu and it’s lethality was wrong.
It seems from what I read to have killed most through secondary pneumonia(?) and not entirely dissimilar to C19?
The lack of Antibiotics and other modern care being the “real” difference in its lethality?
Any medical bods out there with an opinion?

A secondary pneumonia post flu is normally due to bacterial infection and thus should respond to antibiotics. In the case of having Covid-19, it's a viral infection and as such we have nothing to combat it we only have supportive care whilst the patient does or doesn't recover.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Murph on April 02, 2020, 03:46:06 pm
...eg this 2007 paper says "The presence of a large reservoir of SARS-CoV-like viruses in horseshoe bats, together with the culture of eating exotic mammals in southern China, is a time bomb. " (https://cmr.asm.org/content/20/4/660)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 02, 2020, 03:46:34 pm
Genuinely asking.
Why is it different?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Liamhutch89 on April 02, 2020, 03:49:54 pm
Still cant believe that fags haven't been banned by the way.

This would likely lead to an increase in usage and associated crime. Source: every prohibition of substances ever?

 Sorry for :off:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Murph on April 02, 2020, 03:51:41 pm
I'm not an expert matt, but that paper I link above... i dont thi k there are papers like that about game pie.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Davo on April 02, 2020, 03:58:13 pm
Interesting thoughts. I tend to agree with PeteJH here in that we are doing what we are doing currently because realistically no UK (or any worldwide) politician is going to stand up and say that we are going to let a lot of people die because of the cost involved. Instead I do believe that we will have a good go at lockdown and eventually public opinion and political sentiment will change: am thinking here of when the job losses and bankruptcies really start to kick in. At that point I think we will relax things and make all kinds of statements about having done the tough work in containing the virus etc and also that we need to keep the economy going etc

I also think like Murph that economists and health economists will be poring over this stuff for many years to come and will likely find that we have spent an incredibly large sum per person saved that could very well have been spent elsewhere more effectively.

Lastly I really do think we are doing significant harm to a large number of people’s health outcomes here with little thought for them. Many children will be harmed and worse off for what we are doing, many people who were struggling financially anyway will be tipped over the edge and their mental health will crumble.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on April 02, 2020, 03:59:59 pm
Dont mention game pie to my wife, i am making one tomorrow and she believes anything she reads.

I might not put the bats in it though just to be safe.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: JamieG on April 02, 2020, 04:05:08 pm
Isn't one of the problems with wet markets that lots of alive (and weird and wonderful) animals are kept in close proximity to each other potentially all passing viruses to each other and humans. And only killed and prepared once home.

With typical game the animals is killed then and there, like pigeon shooting, and then sold or take home already dead. Presumably the risk for transmission of airborne viruses is then massively reduced.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: seankenny on April 02, 2020, 04:13:53 pm
If anyone is interested in the macroeconomic effects of the pandemic, here are some macroeconomists doing a pandemic-related seminar. One at 5pm today.

https://sites.google.com/view/virtualmacro/

Note I have no idea how technical these will be.

Edit: also on youtube

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCo_KoJ89CTJPLA6LguTbhwA

Edit: I glanced at the first one, it is quite technical. Probably not as interesting as eating bats.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on April 02, 2020, 04:18:57 pm
There was a post a while ago about how the wet markets came about, and were accepted in China to avoid mass starvation. Wildlife was being farmed so people could live.

Secondly, the thing about live animal markets is a twofold; firstly a lot of them are in warmer climates and secondly in countries with limited access to refrigeration. You kill an animal somewhere warm and without refrigeration the flesh rots quickly. The most sensible option is to keep an animal alive for as long as possible; live meat is fresh meat. Seeing people walking home from markets with a trussed up live chicken is pretty common, ready to wring its neck when you get home, and stick it in the pot. It may seem horrible to us, but it's a way of life for others.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on April 02, 2020, 04:20:19 pm
There was a post a while ago about how the wet markets came about, and were accepted in China to avoid mass starvation. Wildlife was being farmed so people could live.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TPpoJGYlW54&t=351s
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on April 02, 2020, 04:22:21 pm
To everyone discussing whether a complete lockdown is worth it:

1) A 0.2% infection-fatality-rate is at the bottom end of the range of viable estimates. Decision making now on that number is farcical.

2) Role play out the costs of being wrong under the two strategies....

LOCKDOWN:
Based on an estimate that the viral could kill up to 2% of the population you lock down for three months. This costs a lot of money and leads to economic hardship. After three months we have the data that shows the danger was vastly over-rated.

The lockdown is released, and everyone complains about the wasted financial cost. Maybe the economy recovers quickly. Maybe it doesn't...

DON'T LOCKDOWN:
The economy continues relatively unaffected (but it's not great cos the economic output of your neighbours has dropped 40%). After two months it becomes clear that the disease actually kills 2% of people, but you now have an out-of-control outbreak and an overwhelmed health service, so you end up with 2% of your population dead. And economic chaos.


Now pick an option?

There seems little point discussing the economic cost of the lockdown now, because it is needed under the precautionary principle. Once you have firm numbers about the disease, the kind of cost-benefit analysis you want makes more sense.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on April 02, 2020, 04:26:12 pm
Thanks stu, I'd been trying to get this straight in my head, this has clarified things a bit
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: JamieG on April 02, 2020, 04:26:38 pm
Sorry that absolutely wasn't meant to be a judgement of wet markets as places to buy produce. And you are absolutely right about the practicalities of home refrigeration etc. Apparently they are also substantially cheaper.

I grew up in the countryside. Our school was next door to the abattoir. We kept and ate our own chickens and I've been rabbit shooting. I've also travelled in various countries (including China) and been to these type of markets they are cool places to visit. So I'm not particularly squeamish about this kind of thing. In fact I think we have gone to far the other way in the west and don't really understand where our meat comes from anymore.

It was more just a comment on why they are potentially bad for novel viruses.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on April 02, 2020, 04:33:53 pm
Would we not have started to see a difference by now? How long do you think we will need to wait until the accelerate past us, 2 week, 3, 6?

No.

It's way too soon to be comparing Holland to the UK. If you get infected today, you probably won't die for around three weeks. Changes made today show up in fatality rates after? Three weeks.

We locked down 1.5 weeks ago. Our curve might start to differ from Holland's in another 1.5 weeks. And even then they'll diverge slowly. Until then comparisons between the two are meaningless. Log back onto this thread on Easter Monday and we'll talk.

(edited to be less arsy)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 02, 2020, 04:38:16 pm
Many months ago, I read a piece that asserted strongly that our greatest pandemic threat was intensive meat farming. That was centred around the Bird Flu, birds shitting in animal pens, type scenario (I hope it’s obvious that I’m simplifying).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 02, 2020, 04:44:33 pm
(What Stu said - far too early to make sensible comparisons)

What is a bit infuriating is the lack of normalising deaths by population in the graphs (e.g. we should be plotting deaths per million).

I’ve seen several comparisons of curves after the first ten deaths or first 100 deaths... that’s just bad data manipulation. Comparing Belgium (or our) curve to the USA after 100 deaths is the same as adding or subtracting a week (or more) from the horizontal axis.

Grr.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Murph on April 02, 2020, 04:49:34 pm
Jamie - I'm no expert but I've seen the youtube video of what a wet market is. And yep.

SA Chris- the video I saw wasnt about live chickens so much as it was about totally exotic animals from different parts of the world all being kept together so their diseases could mutate and spread.

Liam - Is that true though - I dont know. Anyway the smoking thing was a bit of a flippant point. A lot of things have just become a lot less ok and a lot less - not more - popular.

Sean - thanks for the link. Listening now. It's just the sort of thing been muttering about on here.

Stu - im not wedded to 0.2%  if its 2% or 20% then the lives saved part of the equation looks different. But we dont have the first idea what the cost is really. But it sounds like it's a lot. 20% of GDP is going to need a lot of hospitals to close down to pay for it. I admit I haven't really put much thought into what a collapsing health system looks like. The army barricading the carpark? Hospitals just being abandoned? I dont think anyone really knows. Things were different for the Spanish flu but that sounds like it was a lot worse than even the worst case base fatality rate of covid. But back then the dependency ratio in the western world was a lot more manageable - there is now a vast proportion of the population dependent on treatments that hadnt been invented 100 years ago.

Morbid stuff.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 02, 2020, 04:53:31 pm
(What Stu said - far too early to make sensible comparisons)

What is a bit infuriating is the lack of normalising deaths by population in the graphs (e.g. we should be plotting deaths per million).

I’ve seen several comparisons of curves after the first ten deaths or first 100 deaths... that’s just bad data manipulation. Comparing Belgium (or our) curve to the USA after 100 deaths is the same as adding or subtracting a week (or more) from the horizontal axis.

Grr.

It’s worse, given that 100 deaths as a percentage of the population, is a very different matter, from state to state.
Caveat: I haven’t checked all the different populations, globally, or even Europe wide. But one Greater London is probably worth a Luxembourg in the bush. There or there abouts.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Murph on April 02, 2020, 04:57:50 pm
Actually probably rambling too much here. And I will watch Liam's video. But the economic cost of this could spiral in all sorts of ways and 20% of GDP might look modest. I dont know. But I do know that there are all sorts of decks of cards out there that we cannot even imagine. The collapse in 2008 could end up looking incredibly modest. We are experimenting in live running with an extremely complicated system here. It's the uncertainty surrounding the whole thing. All the small things like whether your local cafe or nursery closed down to the geopolitical stuff.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on April 02, 2020, 05:06:22 pm
(What Stu said - far too early to make sensible comparisons)

What is a bit infuriating is the lack of normalising deaths by population in the graphs (e.g. we should be plotting deaths per million).

I’ve seen several comparisons of curves after the first ten deaths or first 100 deaths... that’s just bad data manipulation. Comparing Belgium (or our) curve to the USA after 100 deaths is the same as adding or subtracting a week (or more) from the horizontal axis.

Grr.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/total-covid-deaths-per-million?tab=chart&country=GBR+SWE+ITA+USA+NLD+DEU+CHN+FRA+ESP"

You can add countries etc. Up to date as of today. Netherlands not looking so hot right now.....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: seankenny on April 02, 2020, 05:13:38 pm

Stu - im not wedded to 0.2%  if its 2% or 20% then the lives saved part of the equation looks different. But we dont have the first idea what the cost is really. But it sounds like it's a lot. 20% of GDP is going to need a lot of hospitals to close down to pay for it.

I think the issue is partly the size of the contraction - we know it's going to be eye-watering - but also its length. If it's relatively short I can't see why we can't pay for it over a very long time. Yes we will have higher debt but that seems a price worth paying given the costs of not doing so. If we lost 2% of our population I can imagine that having a massive effect just in terms of overall demand in the economy. In addition you'd get a sort of ad-hoc self isolating process which would be ineffective at halting the disease but economically damaging.

I think in the longer term there'd be a knock-on effect in terms of a massive loss of trust if the governent simply let a lot of people die. Imagine if you were one of those who'd lost their job in the pandemic recession and also lost a close relative: those people are going to be really pissed off. A government - or even worse, a state aparatus - that is seen as unable to look after the basic needs of its citizens would create some kind of political crisis and that would inevitably come with a financial cost.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 02, 2020, 05:18:22 pm
@galpinos. Thanks - Sweden doesn’t look too flash their either. Nor our recent uptick 😱
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Murph on April 02, 2020, 05:35:16 pm
Sorry Sean I meant your video not Liam's. Skipped through it a bit but it was basically looking at the do nothing scenario. And yes it does come with a cost, obviously people wont be going out as much while they are worried about getting sick / sick / dead. It was just a starter though and hopefully will catch it again when they've put some of the costs of the options through the model.

It's all a bit economicsy though - obviously - and only as good as what goes into it which is a lot of assumptions about how quickly people start spending again and substituting different types of consumption etc.

Still. will be interesting to revisit when theres an advance on the do nothing scenario. Thanks for the link.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 02, 2020, 07:24:10 pm
Someone mentioned not being  able to imagine a collapsed healthcare system/nation, earlier?

Might look like this, in the beginning:
 http://huffp.st/j18iLrC (http://huffp.st/j18iLrC)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 02, 2020, 07:58:41 pm
This caught my eye in today's CDC update email:

Quote
PANAMA IMPLEMENTS GENDER-SPECIFIC SOCIAL DISTANCING In an effort to further enforce nationwide social distancing measures, Panama recently announced that it is implementing gender-specific rules for when people can leave their homes. Women will be allowed to be outside on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, and men will be allowed on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays. On Sundays, everyone must remain indoors. The restrictions will reportedly last for at least 15 days. Officials implemented the additional gender-specific restrictions after observing high rates of noncompliance with the previous policies. These rules will be enforced based on the sex specified on individuals’ national identification cards. Additionally, the announcement stated that Panama has also been invited to participate in the SOLIDARITY Trial, led by the WHO, which aims to assess COVID-19 treatment options.

I know men are at greater risk of severe symptoms than women but how is this measure useful, are they suggesting people are still going out on the pull  :-\
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 02, 2020, 08:22:16 pm
This caught my eye in today's CDC update email:

Quote
PANAMA IMPLEMENTS GENDER-SPECIFIC SOCIAL DISTANCING In an effort to further enforce nationwide social distancing measures, Panama recently announced that it is implementing gender-specific rules for when people can leave their homes. Women will be allowed to be outside on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, and men will be allowed on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays. On Sundays, everyone must remain indoors. The restrictions will reportedly last for at least 15 days. Officials implemented the additional gender-specific restrictions after observing high rates of noncompliance with the previous policies. These rules will be enforced based on the sex specified on individuals’ national identification cards. Additionally, the announcement stated that Panama has also been invited to participate in the SOLIDARITY Trial, led by the WHO, which aims to assess COVID-19 treatment options.

I know men are at greater risk of severe symptoms than women but how is this measure useful, are they suggesting people are still going out on the pull  :-\

Does the CDC do April Fools?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: remus on April 03, 2020, 08:12:02 am
This caught my eye in today's CDC update email:

Quote
PANAMA IMPLEMENTS GENDER-SPECIFIC SOCIAL DISTANCING In an effort to further enforce nationwide social distancing measures, Panama recently announced that it is implementing gender-specific rules for when people can leave their homes. Women will be allowed to be outside on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, and men will be allowed on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays. On Sundays, everyone must remain indoors. The restrictions will reportedly last for at least 15 days. Officials implemented the additional gender-specific restrictions after observing high rates of noncompliance with the previous policies. These rules will be enforced based on the sex specified on individuals’ national identification cards. Additionally, the announcement stated that Panama has also been invited to participate in the SOLIDARITY Trial, led by the WHO, which aims to assess COVID-19 treatment options.

I know men are at greater risk of severe symptoms than women but how is this measure useful, are they suggesting people are still going out on the pull  :-\

Perhaps it's easier to police than other options? i.e. if the policy was people were only allowed out 3 days a week how would you keep track?

Not suggesting it's a good idea of course!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 03, 2020, 10:06:46 am
I was uneasy with the discussion tone on here at times, and so want to comment - and then I'll sign off for a while.

I  agree that it is important to see as big a picture as possible, and economic impacts are not abstractions (or shouldn't be), but the wreckage of people's livelihoods. Nevertheless the discussion of trade off between health and the economy has seemed a little light at times.

I wonder if there's a perception that the health impacts of CV19 will be largely inflicted on other people; that the climbers here are unlikely to feel their full force. I wouldn't be too sure about that. This virus is novel, and data incomplete.

Only a small number of people die, but that won't console if it happens to both parents in short order.
Few healthy middle aged people die, but a relative or family member might be one of the few.
Or a friend with diabetes, asthma or other condition.
Women seem to be spared more than men, but that's no consolation if the mother of your child, in an overwhelmed hospital, doesn't make it.
Some people won't get their cancer diagnosed or treated till very late. That may be us, our parents, spouses, children.
Some people will get hurt on the road and contract CV19 in hospital in poor condition to fight it off.
Some kids will get ill, and recover, but with permanent lung damage.
As might you, climbing becoming a thing you used to do, before the breathing difficulties.

In short, when pondering the 'tough choices' that come in balancing economic versus personal pain, please consider that the sacrifices being discussed may be made by us.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Murph on April 03, 2020, 10:45:30 am
Didn't mean to offend.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 03, 2020, 10:51:54 am
You haven't offended Murph, my apologies if I came across that way. I am just saying that this is very real and the impacts may be felt by us directly.

The whole thing is so extraordinary I think it is hard to retain a feel for what is really happening.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on April 03, 2020, 10:54:13 am
(What Stu said - far too early to make sensible comparisons)

What is a bit infuriating is the lack of normalising deaths by population in the graphs (e.g. we should be plotting deaths per million).

I’ve seen several comparisons of curves after the first ten deaths or first 100 deaths... that’s just bad data manipulation. Comparing Belgium (or our) curve to the USA after 100 deaths is the same as adding or subtracting a week (or more) from the horizontal axis.

Grr.

Worldometer have deaths per million now. As I said before Netherland's rate is currently double ours... Sweden is currently at 3/4 the UK rate despite their first death being almost a week later.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

Apologies for the double thread posting but I did think this was a big positive.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 03, 2020, 11:19:16 am
Its been on there for a few days (sneakily added!) - since then we've gone from 8-9 to 42 :(

The site Galpinos linked to is cool - allowing me to plot deaths/mill over time... We'll see but Germany is following the curve - but a couple of weeks behind us....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on April 03, 2020, 11:55:46 am
Warning: mathematical and dusty stats discussion will follow this announcement.

Offwidth, I think your preference for deaths per million is not correct.

Consider two countries with exactly the same disease dynamics (Ro, IFR etc), and an outbreak starting on the same day, with the same number of cases. In this case, the deaths per capita, D/N, will follow exactly the same track, but the raw fatality numbers, D, will not.

I think this is why you are arguing for per-capita plots.

However, if infections started at different times in the two countries, plotting versus population will not give comparable curve.  In this case, you need to apply a shift in the x-axis (time), which is what the "days-since-N-deaths" graphs attempt to do. A "days-since-N-deaths" will also correct for outbreaks with different initial numbers of cases: for example the difference between a few infected people arriving on a plane, and a football stadium full of infected people returning from a match in Bergamo.

Now, here's the epidemiology/maths bit. During the exponential growth phase of the disease, the rate of increase of deaths (the slope) does not depend upon the size of the population. It depends upon the number of cases. Later on, the total population size comes in to play, but not during the initial exponential rise.

Therefore, at the start of the infection, all countries with identical transmission dynamics will lie on the same line in a logarithmic graph of "days since X deaths". Here's the proof. In the graph below I use a simple SEIR model to simulate three cases. The "UK" has 60 million people and I run two simulations, starting from 100 cases and 10 cases. "NL" has 6 million people and starts from 10 cases. All other transmission parameters are the same, and the outbreak started on the same date in all sims. Note how the days_since_100 chart lines all the curves up during the exponential growth phase.

(http://slittlefair.staff.shef.ac.uk/images/which_graph.png)

Take home message: population only matters in the later stages of an infection, when large numbers are immune. Using a "days_since_X_deaths" plot is the correct thing to do.

Caveat: "days_since_X_deaths" plots are much, much, much better when X is a large number. Even without any randomness, days_since_10_deaths will not line up outbreaks that started with different numbers of cases. If you can find someone plotting raw deaths on a "days_since_100_deaths" plot, that's the one to compare for now.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 03, 2020, 12:05:32 pm
Wheres NL on your second chart Stu? Without that I'm not following you...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on April 03, 2020, 12:07:02 pm
On the second chart, NL is right underneath the UK/N=100 case; they follow exactly the same path on a per capita graph since they are designed to have the same level of infection per person...

If you want to see what a "days_since_100_deaths" graph looks like, I've uploaded one to my work website. Please don't share this widely, it's a mild abuse of my IT privileges.

http://slittlefair.staff.shef.ac.uk/covid/

You can click on the legend to add/remove countries. Shift-clicking allows you to select more than one.

What to look for:

In the exponential phase, all the countries should line up on roughly the same straight line. When you reduce the number of people available for an infectious person to infect, the curves should flatten off. This can occur because the disease has run it's course (infected so many people there are few susceptible people left), or because social distancing means that infected people are successfully isolated.

Countries with larger populations WILL level off at larger numbers of deaths for the same degree of social distancing, which I guess is Offwidth's point?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on April 03, 2020, 12:13:26 pm
edit: deleted. Somehow managed to quote myself in my entirety. Not even I'm that narcissistic.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Davo on April 03, 2020, 12:25:34 pm
I was uneasy with the discussion tone on here at times, and so want to comment - and then I'll sign off for a while.

I  agree that it is important to see as big a picture as possible, and economic impacts are not abstractions (or shouldn't be), but the wreckage of people's livelihoods. Nevertheless the discussion of trade off between health and the economy has seemed a little light at times.

I wonder if there's a perception that the health impacts of CV19 will be largely inflicted on other people; that the climbers here are unlikely to feel their full force. I wouldn't be too sure about that. This virus is novel, and data incomplete.

Only a small number of people die, but that won't console if it happens to both parents in short order.
Few healthy middle aged people die, but a relative or family member might be one of the few.
Or a friend with diabetes, asthma or other condition.
Women seem to be spared more than men, but that's no consolation if the mother of your child, in an overwhelmed hospital, doesn't make it.
Some people won't get their cancer diagnosed or treated till very late. That may be us, our parents, spouses, children.
Some people will get hurt on the road and contract CV19 in hospital in poor condition to fight it off.
Some kids will get ill, and recover, but with permanent lung damage.
As might you, climbing becoming a thing you used to do, before the breathing difficulties.

In short, when pondering the 'tough choices' that come in balancing economic versus personal pain, please consider that the sacrifices being discussed may be made by us.

I think I would be one of the people whose comments make you uncomfortable. Reading your post I find it hard to disagree with anything you have written to be honest. I think anyone looking at the issues you have raised would agree that all of them are unpleasant and involve suffering and heartbreak. I certainly don’t wish any of those things on anyone and would be deeply upset if they hit me personally. To give you some information my mother is in care home, prone to chest infections and I would guess highly likely to die from any viral infection which I think she will eventually contract despite the lockdown. My own personal feelings on that don’t stop me considering whether overall what we are doing is for the best

I would also say that the choices we are making now are not just saving lives they are costing lives and causing harm. Whether or not we save more and cause less harm from what we are doing seems like a valid discussion topic. I also appreciate that it is emotive which is why I have included a personal detail so that you can see that I am not heartless or lacking empathy but  am just curious as to whether or not what we are doing is the “least worst “ alternative.

Dave
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on April 03, 2020, 12:33:51 pm
Warning: mathematical and dusty stats discussion will follow this announcement.

Offwidth, I think your preference for deaths per million is not correct.

Consider two countries with exactly the same disease dynamics (Ro, IFR etc), and an outbreak starting on the same day, with the same number of cases. In this case, the deaths per capita, D/N, will follow exactly the same track, but the raw fatality numbers, D, will not.

I think this is why you are arguing for per-capita plots.

I'm not actually arguing for per capita plots (see below) but I do want the current overall per capita number to help counter what I see as silly arguments about the NL and Sweden handling things better (we don't know either way yet, but so far from the data we are pretty similar, with if anything in my view the UK looking slightly the best). Even though we don't know yet, most of the epidemiology would favour them having it wrong.

In-country epidemics are actually lots of little exponential outbreaks aggregated. I think Italy and possibly Spain suffered in addition from the exodus of people from the main infected areas avoiding lock-down,  generating lots of new epidemic areas. For initial outbreaks its not unreasonable to assume there are some per capita effects on the overall numbers, assuming reasonably similar geographical spreads of initial infectors (I'm guessing mostly returning skiers from N Italy for us and NL). Yet, in the end, I agree actual deaths will be a better indicator of comparative control measures. Either way, the data will likely show the success of comparative measures from about 2 weeks time, starting most strongly with daily cases and initial indications in daily deaths. I think before then, NL and SW will have changed their plans.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 03, 2020, 12:57:22 pm

I think I would be one of the people whose comments make you uncomfortable. Reading your post I find it hard to disagree with anything you have written to be honest. I think anyone looking at the issues you have raised would agree that all of them are unpleasant and involve suffering and heartbreak. I certainly don’t wish any of those things on anyone and would be deeply upset if they hit me personally. To give you some information my mother is in care home, prone to chest infections and I would guess highly likely to die from any viral infection which I think she will eventually contract despite the lockdown. My own personal feelings on that don’t stop me considering whether overall what we are doing is for the best

I would also say that the choices we are making now are not just saving lives they are costing lives and causing harm. Whether or not we save more and cause less harm from what we are doing seems like a valid discussion topic. I also appreciate that it is emotive which is why I have included a personal detail so that you can see that I am not heartless or lacking empathy but  am just curious as to whether or not what we are doing is the “least worst “ alternative.

Dave

I don't disagree with you Dave, the economic cost will hit us hard and it is a valid topic to debate. I am just urging a bit of circumspection- it's easy to drift into the abstract, hard to stay anchored in what the reality of these choices means.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on April 03, 2020, 01:12:07 pm
I think the epidemiology posts stray into the same territory, but for some of us it's our way of coping, and trying to get our head round things. Faced with the horror, it's comforting to retreat into the numbers...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on April 03, 2020, 01:17:26 pm
In-country epidemics are actually lots of little exponential outbreaks aggregated ... For initial outbreaks its not unreasonable to assume there are some per capita effects on the overall numbers

This is valid point, but you've drawn the wrong conclusion from it. Initially, each individual outbreak is small compared to it's host population, so the fact that they are fragmented doesn't matter. It's later on that population effects matter.

The general point that the "population" that affects the spread isn't the whole country's population is a good one though. And that you need to be careful about interpreting tail-offs in death rates because of this.

Per-capita plots aren't really useful at all until the very end stages of an outbreak. Look at the bottom plot in my two examples; the two UK models appear in very different positions throughout, despite all the properties of disease transmission being identical. The point at which per-capita comparisons are useful are once all this is over.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 03, 2020, 01:35:16 pm
What interests me though Stu - is that looking at the global data - the trends in the per capita death rates are far more similar than any of the other curves... (temporal shifting aside)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on April 03, 2020, 01:47:44 pm
Warning: mathematical and dusty stats discussion will follow this announcement.

Offwidth, I think your preference for deaths per million is not correct.

Consider two countries with exactly the same disease dynamics (Ro, IFR etc), and an outbreak starting on the same day, with the same number of cases. In this case, the deaths per capita, D/N, will follow exactly the same track, but the raw fatality numbers, D, will not.

I think this is why you are arguing for per-capita plots.

I'm not actually arguing for per capita plots (see below) but I do want the current overall per capita number to help counter what I see as silly arguments about the NL and Sweden handling things better (we don't know either way yet, but so far from the data we are pretty similar, with if anything in my view the UK looking slightly the best). Even though we don't know yet, most of the epidemiology would favour them having it wrong.

In-country epidemics are actually lots of little exponential outbreaks aggregated. I think Italy and possibly Spain suffered in addition from the exodus of people from the main infected areas avoiding lock-down,  generating lots of new epidemic areas. For initial outbreaks its not unreasonable to assume there are some per capita effects on the overall numbers, assuming reasonably similar geographical spreads of initial infectors (I'm guessing mostly returning skiers from N Italy for us and NL). Yet, in the end, I agree actual deaths will be a better indicator of comparative control measures. Either way, the data will likely show the success of comparative measures from about 2 weeks time, starting most strongly with daily cases and initial indications in daily deaths. I think before then, NL and SW will have changed their plans.

"silly arguments" nice way to wind people. I am guessing this is pointed at me as i am the one who keeps mentioning the Netherlands. I only do so as i am talking to Holland every day and on a practical level not just looking at some fucking charts and what they might say in two weeks time.
 
I dont remember saying they are handling the situation better just pointing out they are doing things differently and how that difference is effecting the economy.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on April 03, 2020, 01:48:20 pm
TomTom - I'm not sure that's true is it?

If you look at the chart I put online and plot all the countries with advanced outbreaks, only Iran (dodgy figure), South Korea (known exception) and Japan (mystery) are outliers. The rest basically follow the same trend.

Is a per-capita graph tighter than this? I've not seen one...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on April 03, 2020, 01:50:47 pm
In-country epidemics are actually lots of little exponential outbreaks aggregated ... For initial outbreaks its not unreasonable to assume there are some per capita effects on the overall numbers

This is valid point, but you've drawn the wrong conclusion from it. Initially, each individual outbreak is small compared to it's host population, so the fact that they are fragmented doesn't matter. It's later on that population effects matter.

The general point that the "population" that affects the spread isn't the whole country's population is a good one though. And that you need to be careful about interpreting tail-offs in death rates because of this.

Per-capita plots aren't really useful at all until the very end stages of an outbreak. Look at the bottom plot in my two examples; the two UK models appear in very different positions throughout, despite all the properties of disease transmission being identical. The point at which per-capita comparisons are useful are once all this is over.

I disagree. If the UK and NL got roughly the same (geographically spread) initial per capita infections from N Italy skiing (as one might expect) the initial infection numbers will be per capita based but because the distribution will be focussed on the big cities, where infection is easier, growth less constrained and tracing harder, this might move away from per capita as it grows.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on April 03, 2020, 02:00:16 pm
I don't see what your point is there Offwidth? It seems to be a jumble of mixed points.

Edit: Is your point that *if* the initial infection is the same size per capita, and the outbreaks start at the same time, the disease should follow a similar track? If so, yes, but they'll follow the same track on both graphs at this stage. There's no justification for scaling per capita during an outbreak.
 
If you don't want to take my word and evidence for it, here's some support from the stats team at the FT:

https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1244380095164420101?s=21

Quote John burn-Murdoch:

"Plenty of things indirectly related to population: can make a difference. Population density can increase the rate of spread. Countries with major travel hubs may end up with multiple outbreaks. But population alone is a bad thing to adjust for if wanting to assess how bad an outbreak is"
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on April 03, 2020, 02:06:18 pm

"silly arguments" nice way to wind people. I am guessing this is pointed at me as i am the one who keeps mentioning the Netherlands. I only do so as i am talking to Holland every day and on a practical level not just looking at some fucking charts and what they might say in two weeks time.
 
I dont remember saying they are handling the situation better just pointing out they are doing things differently and how that difference is effecting the economy.

To be 100% clear I did not aim this at you (nor anyone else here). I think you have been pretty balanced in the discussion. I meant it when I said this is the most sane bubble I know on the internet... people can nearly always disagree here without it becoming a highly aggressive flame war.

I was referring to the fact it seems to be all over social media and suits the libertarian viewpoint favoured by people who care more about the economy now than the potential outcomes later (much worse in terms of deaths and likely so even in in terms of the ecomony if we dont lockdown) and the denialism of many others, who are less guilty. Sadly charts in the coming months will be real, not best estimates and the epidemiology is hard to challenge. The 0.2% point is similar.....the very best data we have from extensive tests is 0.3% where the lockdown was early and hard and way off health response capacity. UKB also discussed this sensibly.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on April 03, 2020, 02:14:55 pm
I don't see what your point is there Offwidth? It seems to be a jumble of mixed points.

Edit: Is your point that *if* the initial infection is the same size per capita, and the outbreaks start at the same time, the disease should follow a similar track? If so, yes, but they'll follow the same track on both graphs at this stage. There's no justification for scaling per capita during an outbreak.
 
If you don't want to take my word and evidence for it, here's some support from the stats team at the FT:

https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1244380095164420101?s=21

Quote John burn-Murdoch:

"Plenty of things indirectly related to population: can make a difference. Population density can increase the rate of spread. Countries with major travel hubs may end up with multiple outbreaks. But population alone is a bad thing to adjust for if wanting to assess how bad an outbreak is"

As I said, I don't want per capita death graphs. I do want the per capita data as a balance to total mortality  graphs. I'm saying if  the main initial infections were geographically distributed, and approximately per capita, the initial growth will have had some strongly per capita factors.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 03, 2020, 02:18:40 pm
To me, andI know it’s probably naive, but I’m interested in the per capita numbers, because in nations of varying sizes, the individual has a varying value.
Given the degree of economic parity amongst western nations, relative to the global spectrum; a Dutch citizen is worth “more” than a Brit. That swings both ways, individuals within the “productive” bracket contribute “more” individually and those “no longer productive” cost more, individually.
I know those terms sound provocative, that’s not the point, it’s just the only/best way this Engineer could think of delineating as clearly as possible. It’s not representative of “deserving”.

It the same for any resource isn’t it? The value of a unit increases with it’s ubiquity?

So, the impact of a larger relative loss, on a smaller nation, is relatively greater? Economically at least. So, the Dutch ought to have taken greater care of that resource?

Unless the “resource” sits on the other side of the seesaw...

That’s just cynical musing, not a serious condemnation of the Dutch position.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on April 03, 2020, 02:35:54 pm
A report of secondary deaths due to a stressed  health system not being able to cope:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-52137160
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on April 03, 2020, 02:40:59 pm
As I said, I don't want per capita death graphs. I do want the per capita data as a balance to total mortality  graphs.

You need to define what you mean by "data" then. Are you talking about cases?

I'm saying if  the main initial infections were geographically distributed, and approximately per capita, the initial growth will have had some strongly per capita factors.

No. It really won't. The initial stages are completely and utterly blind to the size of the population. They do depend on things like concentration of the initial cases, and population density in outbreak locations. Total population is a very poor proxy for any of those things.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on April 03, 2020, 03:02:08 pm
I may be misinterpreting everything incorrectly... but I think Offwidth is thinking big country = more clusters therefore looking a small country which has a small no of deaths is misleading, cos it would have more deaths if it were bigger. Stu is saying that once you've shifted to using the "after 100 deaths" metric then this doesn't matter, you just need to chose your X number of deaths to be large enough to iron out any anomalies in the starting points, then the graphs all end up on top of each other if they're the same growth dynamics (presumably relies on "imported" clusters not arriving after the date of X deaths occuring?). Since growth dynamics tell you how you're managing the outbreak, this is what's important...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on April 03, 2020, 03:13:03 pm
The only accurate comparable data is deaths, given testing variability.

I still don't agree with you. Assuming similar per capita infections mainly from N Italy, if we had say 100  infected returnees and NL had 25, all randomly distributed in each country, the chances are intial growth would significantly match that ratio. Some of that per capita 'seeding' (if true) might still be significant now. I agree that population data is better for current comparisons as we just don't know.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Murph on April 03, 2020, 03:19:19 pm
I thought this was a pretty interesting way of looking at the numbers. You also dont need to take a position on what day to use as your starting point.

https://aatishb.com/covidtrends/

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on April 03, 2020, 03:25:57 pm
The only accurate comparable data is deaths, given testing variability.

So you want per-capita data, and the only valid data is deaths, but you aren't asking for per-capita death data. What am I missing?

Assuming similar per capita infections mainly from N Italy, if we had say 100  infected returnees and NL had 25, all randomly distributed in each country, the chances are intial growth would significantly match that ratio.

I'm pretty certain this is wrong. This is exactly the scenario I modelled for you in the earlier post. If per-capita infections are the same, and disease dynamics are the same these two outbreaks will progress exactly the same way.

They will only differ if one country has higher population density, or poorer connectivity between urban centres, as examples, but for none of these factors if population size a proxy.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on April 03, 2020, 04:42:53 pm
Offwidth - do you really disagree with Stu, or do you just mean that it's a pain explaining to people on FB that you need to shift the x-axis of a graph to D deaths where D is not too small a number, vs explaining that small countries probably got "seeded" less because they're small. I think my above post still applies, i.e. Stu's maths/model is the way to do it, but it's harder to explain and visualise so less easy to use it to tell people on FB to shut up.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on April 03, 2020, 04:58:46 pm
Heres an article and some charts from the Dutch media for you mathematicians to look at.

https://www.dutchnews.nl/news/2020/04/coronavirus-statistics-show-lockdowns-are-slowing-rate-of-infection/

Last paragraph is the line people keep telling me.

Scientists have warned repeatedly that strict lockdowns make it harder to build up immunity and create the risk of a new spike in cases when people are let out again.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 03, 2020, 05:08:28 pm
Heres an article and some charts from the Dutch media for you mathematicians to look at.

https://www.dutchnews.nl/news/2020/04/coronavirus-statistics-show-lockdowns-are-slowing-rate-of-infection/

Last paragraph is the line people keep telling me.

Scientists have warned repeatedly that strict lockdowns make it harder to build up immunity and create the risk of a new spike in cases when people are let out again.

Yup.
But, only if you’re sure you can cope with the first spike.
See NY.

Edit:
Sorry, flippant and too brief and Alex will moan that I didn’t explain what I meant etc etc.

Maybe the Dutch and the Swedes are confident they can cope with the first flush of deaths and critically ill. If not cope, then manage(ish).
I don’t think we had the capacity and even with the lockdown, from outside, it looks like a close run thing.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on April 03, 2020, 05:23:01 pm
Sorry, flippant and too brief and Alex will moan that I didn’t explain what I meant etc etc.

 :lol: no, it was quite clear there.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on April 03, 2020, 05:25:05 pm
Netherlands and Sweden have less ICU beds per capita than the UK.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 03, 2020, 05:36:01 pm
Netherlands and Sweden have less ICU beds per capita than the UK.

Then, if they don’t have some ace up their sleeve (really great, very quick, extra hospital construction etc) it’s going to get messy.
I read this morning about one NY hospital, with a 280 bed capacity, currently treating over 500, all Covid19 (with all other patients shipped out elsewhere) and, actually, already “broken”.
Anecdote, true, but probably indicative and we must be getting close here. Holland will hit it in a few days.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on April 03, 2020, 07:48:00 pm
I think it all relates to where you are. NHS fine in NE and Temporary hospital that was being built has been put on hold.
London sounds busy but most other places seem ok.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 03, 2020, 08:00:18 pm
Stu's explanation and model makes sense to me (probably because its correct  ;)).
Hadn't thought about it that way but of course it's true if you think about how a virus spreads. I.e. a virus has no idea if there are 1 million Cypriots or 100 million Egyptians around it. It spreads at the same rate in both countries given a similar population density.

Thought of another way:
Like water flowing at a constant rate into two containers, the water doesn't know the size of container, it just flows.
If you invented a game where 2 people each has a container, but one is 5 litres and the other is 2 litres in volume.
The goal of the game is to scoop out water with a little scoop as it flows at a constant rate into each container.
The rule is that the water will stop flowing before it ever over spills the top of either container.
The winner of the game is the person who has been more successful in reducing the total volume of water in their container.
So the important measures of 'winning' the game is the rate of flow, and the rate you 'scoop out water' - AKA reduce transmission. Not the ultimate size of the container.
 :-\

Once the virus has reached the upper limit of its spread - or in the game the rate of water flow has exceeded the rate of scooping out for long enough to reach the top of the container - per capita death rate is meaningful as a comparison between 'containers'. Unless as per Mat says small countries 'should' preserve more lives per capita than big countries.

Not sure how that analogy holds for the end comparison of per capita after the event..!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on April 03, 2020, 08:06:09 pm
Thanks Pete. Nice to have some backup.

I do think people are a bit quick to dismiss Gav’s hopes about the NL. It’s still plausible they’ve got it right, even if only for them. Remember that although their lockdown is less harsh, it did start about 5 days earlier than ours.

If the Imperial College lot are right we should expect to see the NL curve drop below ours slowly (we may already be seeing this, but it’s too soon to tell), but if our social distancing is better our curve should drop more quickly and we’ll end up better off than them.

Just have to wait and see. I imagine we’re not the only ones keeping a close eye on the situation.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on April 03, 2020, 08:59:14 pm
Offwidth - do you really disagree with Stu, or do you just mean that it's a pain explaining to people on FB

I disagree with the logic of Stu's argument on the intial increases in infections in the UK compared ro NL Does that mean we know who is right? No, but I do think he can't claim initial per capita infections won't be a factor in comparing UK and NL, data.

Instead of thinking countries, think local populations. Assume the Italian ski resorts give the UK 16 separate isolated key infections in urban fast growing environments on day zero and Holland just 4 in similar situations (per capita equal) on the same day. All initial infections act like a mini country following Stu's idea. Assuming all grow at the same rate, and kill the same proportion of those infected, the factor 4 difference moves into the number of deaths and they increase with a ratio that never shifts from 4 until control measures or population limits (or mutation) kicks in. In reality things are way more complicated and the causes difficult to isolate.

If you want to compare the rate of exponential increases in deaths, a shifted plot of total deaths on a log scale is normal with a common start point of a defined number of deaths.  In my assumed scenario the time shift to match at 100 days will be slightly different to Stu's but it will still work for both of our scenarios. The actual exponential rate could depend on all sorts of things: the success of the intial national contact tracing efforts; the acuracy and consistency of defining all  the deaths; the start time of any lockdown;  the natural mixing rates of different cultures in the cities;  the paranoia arising from past experience; the level of state control. Despite all this possible complexity, most EU countries are showing a pretty equal exponential growth rate from a fixed number of deaths.

If you move to per capita normalised deaths you divide the exponential death data by the population. On a log scale that subtracts a different constant but the key gradient of the graph (the rate of exponential rise) remains the same.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on April 03, 2020, 09:04:22 pm
Friends in Braunton (that surf shop filled village on the way to N. Devon beaches Saunton/Croyde) report that new next door neighbours have arrived from London today... Apparently they are here ‘self isolating’, they went for a surf this afternoon (which involves a 5 mile drive)..  Convoys of campers on the way again.. Easter holidays is apparently still on for some people...

Edit: To add that it’s 1ft @ 5secs, flat as fuck in other words. :chair:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Andy W on April 03, 2020, 09:10:51 pm
Friends in Braunton (that surf shop filled village on the way to N. Devon beaches Saunton/Croyde) report that new next door neighbours have arrived from London today... Apparently they are here ‘self isolating’, they went for a surf this afternoon (which involves a 5 mile drive)..  Convoys of campers on the way again.. Easter holidays is apparently still on for some people...

Despair, it's the same in France, the police and army are roadblocking the main routes, but still people think they can take their holidays.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 03, 2020, 09:19:10 pm
Friends in Braunton (that surf shop filled village on the way to N. Devon beaches Saunton/Croyde) report that new next door neighbours have arrived from London today... Apparently they are here ‘self isolating’, they went for a surf this afternoon (which involves a 5 mile drive)..  Convoys of campers on the way again.. Easter holidays is apparently still on for some people...

That’s f*cking shite. One of our sons nursery friends parents upped sticks the moment the schools closed to their in-laws in Cornwall. Part of me thinks fair enough that’s to help with childcare / being cooped up in Manxhester is worse than being cooped up 10 min walk from a beach - but it seemed the wrong thing to do in many ways to me. Another parent (that weekend) took the whole family to their caravan in te lakes for the weekend (the last chance they would have to use it - their words) which again seemed pretty selfish...

Here’s a tale - it’s a bit long winded but - my wife’s aunt has a holiday cottage in the lakes we sometimes rent off her - very remote, rustic - one neighbouring cottage within a Km or so. We know the people there fairly well (lovely folk) and found out they’re just recovering after having CV for three weeks. It seems that CV19 was introduced to their nearest village (Dockray - look it up on a map it’s tiny) at least at the beginning of March and has led to a load of local cases. They’ve figured this all out via village based ‘who got it’ contact tracing :)

My point is - either their village was unlucky - or This would suggest it’s been rife in the UK for well over a month of not two...

Final point - joggers - stop acting like cunts. We’re supposed to be social distancing not near barging people out of the way who are out for a gentle walk!! I don’t want your sweaty mass dripping near me in these times. Bah. I swear people give me a wider berth when I’m out walking either the toddler. Maybe they think he’s got superspreader written all over him 😃. I think I should stop now.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on April 03, 2020, 09:20:55 pm
Thanks Pete. Nice to have some backup.

Just have to wait and see. I imagine we’re not the only ones keeping a close eye on the situation.

More back up here - good theoretical argument and then real life evidence that matches the theory.  And really interesting, its easy to assume that the 'obvious' is the way things work but the real world isn't always like that and we should use statistics and probability to help us understand this  .
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: HaeMeS on April 03, 2020, 09:31:36 pm
Since some of you seem to be preoccupied with the situation in the Netherlands, here’s some  inside details from the country thats acting almost as crazy as Sweden...

The National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM) is basically in charge and tells the government what to do. It’s not politicians or the media dictating rules and regulations, it’s epidemiologists.

Contrarily to what some might think what is in place is a pretty effective yet not restrictive voluntary lockdown. Basically all social contact has come to a standstill. Gatherings of more than 3 people are not allowed. Walking, surfing, cycling, running, walking the dog is allowed. Just keep your distance. No need to get upset over people doing stuff outside where it is not possible to infect others! Big parking lots at very popular outdoor venues have closed or will close during the weekend. Schools have been closed for 3 weeks now, bit kids are still allowed to play together outside. Work and travel is still not restricted, but people are asked to stay home, which has a huge effect.

The funny thing is, in normal live (the live not lived on social media and internet fora) hardly anybody is panicking, even newspapers and television are keeping it sane.  And yes, deaths and IC admissions are still on the rise, but the growth is slowing down, and will probably stabilize
in a few days. RIVM has changed it’s approach since the start of the outbreak, but that's hardly surprising as they will have to act to a known unknown, but do not want to disrupt normal live excessively. It seems they/the government are doing an OK job (disclaimer: I’ve worked @RIVM in the past, but on a different subject).

Today, we saw official data on weekly mortality in 2020 which was compared to weekly mortality in the previous years. It shows the real mortality caused by COVID-19 to be a lot bigger than hospital data (duh...). It also shows COVID-19 mortality to be bigger than mortality caused by the last serious outbreak of the flu. Next weeks data will be even higher:  https://www.rivm.nl/monitoring-sterftecijfers-nederland (https://www.rivm.nl/monitoring-sterftecijfers-nederland)

Concerning IC capacity: today’s 1324 IC beds are occupied by COVID-19 patients. Up by 51. IC Capacity has gone up to 2100 beds (from 1200), and will rise to 2400 in a couple of days. No panic yet.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tc on April 03, 2020, 09:39:34 pm
Friends in Braunton (that surf shop filled village on the way to N. Devon beaches Saunton/Croyde) report that new next door neighbours have arrived from London today... Apparently they are here ‘self isolating’, they went for a surf this afternoon (which involves a 5 mile drive)..  Convoys of campers on the way again.. Easter holidays is apparently still on for some people...

Despair, it's the same in France, the police and army are roadblocking the main routes, but still people think they can take their holidays.

Just watched the news here in France. Seems like the Paris to Normandy weekend exodus has started. Putains de débile  :badidea:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: T_B on April 03, 2020, 10:19:27 pm

Final point - joggers - stop acting like cunts. We’re supposed to be social distancing not near barging people out of the way who are out for a gentle walk!! I don’t want your sweaty mass dripping near me in these times. Bah. I swear people give me a wider berth when I’m out walking either the toddler. Maybe they think he’s got superspreader written all over him 😃. I think I should stop now.

Keep in mind that a lot of people have taken up running (jogging) in the last two weeks. Some of them may be less aware of etiquette on the pavements/trails.

I have to say though my pet hate is bloomin families out for their family “hour of exercise” bonding session walking slowly four abreast down bridleways. Get out of the way you bastards!

Seriously though, people are generally very good around here in terms of making space. There’s the usual odd wanker dog owner that thinks it’s acceptable for their dog to jump up at people/nip them, but that’s just standard with or without SD.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on April 03, 2020, 10:27:46 pm
Friends in Braunton (that surf shop filled village on the way to N. Devon beaches Saunton/Croyde) report that new next door neighbours have arrived from London today... Apparently they are here ‘self isolating’, they went for a surf this afternoon (which involves a 5 mile drive)..  Convoys of campers on the way again.. Easter holidays is apparently still on for some people...

Despair, it's the same in France, the police and army are roadblocking the main routes, but still people think they can take their holidays.

Just watched the news here in France. Seems like the Paris to Normandy weekend exodus has started. Putains de débile  :badidea:
  Not enough policia to do a great deal about, plenty of back roads to avoid road blocks, whilst someone is stopped others drive on through. The town centre was heaving today, a lot of people just not getting it..  What can you do.?.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on April 03, 2020, 10:42:02 pm
Friends in Braunton (that surf shop filled village on the way to N. Devon beaches Saunton/Croyde) report that new next door neighbours have arrived from London today... Apparently they are here ‘self isolating’, they went for a surf this afternoon (which involves a 5 mile drive)..  Convoys of campers on the way again.. Easter holidays is apparently still on for some people...

Despair, it's the same in France, the police and army are roadblocking the main routes, but still people think they can take their holidays.

Just watched the news here in France. Seems like the Paris to Normandy weekend exodus has started. Putains de débile  :badidea:
  Not enough policia to do a great deal about, plenty of back roads to avoid road blocks, whilst someone is stopped others drive on through. The town centre was heaving today, a lot of people just not getting it..  What can you do.?.

This is absolutely fucking unbelievable. I can't believe how pig ignorantly selfish some people are. I was in the peak for work this morning and all the towns and villages I went through were more or less deserted. I hope it stays like that. Brutus, if you encounter any of the grockles perhaps asking how many people it's worth spreading the virus to for them to take a holiday? A few more nurses in their 30s perhaps?

It really does make me extremely angry that some people think they are exempt from this, all that will happen is that the government will be obliged to crack down harder on everyone to try to limit spread.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on April 03, 2020, 10:45:57 pm
Since some of you seem to be preoccupied with the situation in the Netherlands, here’s some  inside details from the country thats acting almost as crazy as Sweden...
...

So only a little more lax than here but with calmer reporting?


My wife has been out walking the kids each day this week and has reported significantly more traffic about. It seems people are getting bored of the lockdown. Or at least have a completely different idea of what the word "essential" means. Some of my work colleagues have been into work to collect a monitor to make it more easy to work at home. Journeys of 10 miles +, sometimes on the M62 there. Hardly essential is it?

We can't say that we're saints on here though, can we? The "how to build a woodie" thread has seen plenty of people out buying wood for instance...  :whistle: :jab: :ang:  (Sorry if that's you. I have no idea whether the local builder's merchants is right next to the supermarket and you were there anyway).
Not me, though. I haven't left home for a week other than to go to Aldi for an hour - which was the scariest time of the whole situation so far. I kept feeling the urge to say "blessed be the fruit" to everyone.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dunnyg on April 03, 2020, 10:52:53 pm
I thought you had been out for walks will?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on April 03, 2020, 10:53:58 pm
I think our friends new neighbours may get some ‘dirty post’  :shit:...
Seriously though.. I am unlikely to come across grockles because we’re not leaving home at all, save to go for walks straight from home..  Viruses can’t move by themselves, it’s not hard to grasp, surely.  So either some people really aren’t so sharp or they’re just being selfish cvnts.  Given that our anecdotal sample of ‘self isolating’ Londoners went ‘surfing’ this afternoon in the shittest conditions imaginable, I’m suggesting it’s the latter.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on April 03, 2020, 10:55:13 pm
I thought you had been out for walks will?

Not this week.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 03, 2020, 11:12:55 pm
Since some of you seem to be preoccupied with the situation in the Netherlands, here’s some  inside details from the country thats acting almost as crazy as Sweden...
...

So only a little more lax than here but with calmer reporting?


My wife has been out walking the kids each day this week and has reported significantly more traffic about. It seems people are getting bored of the lockdown. Or at least have a completely different idea of what the word "essential" means. Some of my work colleagues have been into work to collect a monitor to make it more easy to work at home. Journeys of 10 miles +, sometimes on the M62 there. Hardly essential is it?

We can't say that we're saints on here though, can we? The "how to build a woodie" thread has seen plenty of people out buying wood for instance...  :whistle: :jab: :ang:  (Sorry if that's you. I have no idea whether the local builder's merchants is right next to the supermarket and you were there anyway).
Not me, though. I haven't left home for a week other than to go to Aldi for an hour - which was the scariest time of the whole situation so far. I kept feeling the urge to say "blessed be the fruit" to everyone.

My supermarket trip was fucking surreal.

That wasn’t the phrase that occurred (but spot on), I was truly expecting cans of Soylent Green...

Under His eye.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 03, 2020, 11:14:54 pm
I think our friends new neighbours may get some ‘dirty post’  :shit:...
Seriously though.. I am unlikely to come across grockles because we’re not leaving home at all, save to go for walks straight from home..  Viruses can’t move by themselves, it’s not hard to grasp, surely.  So either some people really aren’t so sharp or they’re just being selfish cvnts.  Given that our anecdotal sample of ‘self isolating’ Londoners went ‘surfing’ this afternoon in the shittest conditions imaginable, I’m suggesting it’s the latter.

Eggs.

Eggs is good for what ails ye.


Thrown properly.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on April 03, 2020, 11:28:49 pm
Since some of you seem to be preoccupied with the situation in the Netherlands, here’s some  inside details from the country thats acting almost as crazy as Sweden...

The National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM) is basically in charge and tells the government what to do. It’s not politicians or the media dictating rules and regulations, it’s epidemiologists.

Contrarily to what some might think what is in place is a pretty effective yet not restrictive voluntary lockdown. Basically all social contact has come to a standstill. Gatherings of more than 3 people are not allowed. Walking, surfing, cycling, running, walking the dog is allowed. Just keep your distance. No need to get upset over people doing stuff outside where it is not possible to infect others! Big parking lots at very popular outdoor venues have closed or will close during the weekend. Schools have been closed for 3 weeks now, bit kids are still allowed to play together outside. Work and travel is still not restricted, but people are asked to stay home, which has a huge effect.

The funny thing is, in normal live (the live not lived on social media and internet fora) hardly anybody is panicking, even newspapers and television are keeping it sane.  And yes, deaths and IC admissions are still on the rise, but the growth is slowing down, and will probably stabilize
in a few days. RIVM has changed it’s approach since the start of the outbreak, but that's hardly surprising as they will have to act to a known unknown, but do not want to disrupt normal live excessively. It seems they/the government are doing an OK job (disclaimer: I’ve worked @RIVM in the past, but on a different subject).

Today, we saw official data on weekly mortality in 2020 which was compared to weekly mortality in the previous years. It shows the real mortality caused by COVID-19 to be a lot bigger than hospital data (duh...). It also shows COVID-19 mortality to be bigger than mortality caused by the last serious outbreak of the flu. Next weeks data will be even higher:  https://www.rivm.nl/monitoring-sterftecijfers-nederland (https://www.rivm.nl/monitoring-sterftecijfers-nederland)

Concerning IC capacity: today’s 1324 IC beds are occupied by COVID-19 patients. Up by 51. IC Capacity has gone up to 2100 beds (from 1200), and will rise to 2400 in a couple of days. No panic yet.

Thanks for reiterating exactly what I am being told from my partners over there. It seems that there is a much more calm and less reactionary policy in place that appears to be keeping you on at least a similar path to here. Time will tell if it works, as it will our policy.

I suspect both countries will end up in pretty similar places but with the Netherlands not having fucked it’s economy over quite as well as we have.

Prepare to be told your wrong and your all going to die. Or failing that get very few responses to your post.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 04, 2020, 12:06:41 am
Quote from: gme link=topic=30489.msg603699#

Scientists have warned repeatedly that strict lockdowns make it harder to build up immunity and create the risk of a new spike in cases when people are let out again.

You are right, that is what it is meant to do. No herd immunity if no new infection with in the herd.

Lift the lockdown and the epidemic resumes. So there has to be another solution, otherwise we will have to live like a whack-a-mole game- ducking back into our holes as the virus roars back every time restrictions are eased. Until a virus is available.

So then herd immunity  looks attractive. Don’t outrun the unrunnable, just manage its pace. Maybe the Dutch are much shrewder than UK and can make it work..

It’s very risky though, potentially with tragic consequences. Is there any other option? Of course there is. WHO have been shouting from the rooftops for those willing to listen.

You should read this Gav
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/apr/03/matt-hancock-government-policy-herd-immunity-community-surveillance-covid-19
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mark20 on April 04, 2020, 12:34:31 am
I've been out each day for work this week and noticed that the traffic has slightly increased Weds & Thurs, and massively increased today, as Will also reports. I suspect the majority are a bit fed up of the shutdown now and tossing it off. Our Dear Leader made a worried plea on radio/TV for people to stay at home this weekend as the weather warms up. The death toll seems to be well on track with Spain/Italy, currently without the harsh lockdowns those countries have. I hope He announces stricter measures at the beginning of next week.
Respect to all those on the front line
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: remus on April 04, 2020, 08:38:31 am
Google have released a mobility report (https://www.google.com/covid19/mobility/) using anonymised data from google maps users to look at how busy certain sectors are compared to baseline. They advise against comparing the figures between countries, but I think within european countries you can probably make a fairly sensible comparison to see how strict the current lockdown situation is in a given country. To pick a couple of relevant countries from this thread:

Sector, UK (https://www.gstatic.com/covid19/mobility/2020-03-29_GB_Mobility_Report_en.pdf), Netherlands (https://www.gstatic.com/covid19/mobility/2020-03-29_NL_Mobility_Report_en.pdf), Italy (https://www.gstatic.com/covid19/mobility/2020-03-29_IT_Mobility_Report_en.pdf)

Retail and Recreation, -85%, -65%, -94%
Grocery and Pharmacy, -46%, -29%, -85%
Parks, -52%, -30%, -90%
Transit Stations, -75%, -68%, -87%
Workplace, -55%, -35%, -63%
Residential, +15%, +11%, +24%

Perhaps unsurprising, but it looks to me like the UK is fairly in the middle in terms of lockdown severity.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on April 04, 2020, 08:48:13 am
Remus beat me to it!

Trips For:

Retail & Recreation: down 85% (UK), 65% (NL), 24% (Sweden)
Grocery: down 45% (UK), 30% (NL), 10% (Sweden)
Parks: down 52% (UK), 30% (UK), UP 43% (Sweden)
Work: down 55% (UK), 35% (NL), 18% (Sweden)

The Dutch numbers are pretty reasonable, and it’s interesting to note that they dropped a week before ours did, which will help tremendously. Striking that movements to places of work are down 35%, despite businesses not being forced to close.

By contrast, our numbers only really dropped when Boris closed the pubs. Perhaps the Dutch are just better at following advice than us, without being forced to?

Sweden on the other hand... Perhaps their epidemiologists think the low population density will keep the virus under control there? It might well do.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 04, 2020, 09:11:47 am

Sweden on the other hand... Perhaps their epidemiologists think the low population density will keep the virus under control there? It might well do.

Hard to imagine that, unless you are referring to geographically distant communities with no travel between them. Otherwise surely lower population density = lower rate of transmission? Wouldn’t the  area under the curve ultimately be the same?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on April 04, 2020, 09:15:26 am
It will, but that’s true everywhere since there’s no vaccine, and we suspect no natural immunity. All the efforts to date are about slowing the rate of infection, to stop health services being overwhelmed and buy more time for a vaccine.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 04, 2020, 09:55:58 am
And to evaluate which retrovirals work - which will be 6-9 months ahead of vaccines.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: shark on April 04, 2020, 10:07:41 am
I’m pretty sure I’ve got it (mildly.). Colleague tested positive and 3/4 of people in my house unwell. The 7 year old is happily unaffected. Symptoms have been dry cough, chest pains and breathless. No fever, although I normally run at 35.6 and got up to 37.   The illness overlapped with having shingles so it was difficult to be specific about tiredness, headaches etc.

I might not change my behaviour in regards to social distancing, but I’ll certainly feel more confident at work - patient facing NHS. In a lot of ways it’s a massive relief to be pretty certain I’ve had it.

Did you get tested to confirm?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 04, 2020, 10:11:32 am
It will, but that’s true everywhere since there’s no vaccine, and we suspect no natural immunity. All the efforts to date are about slowing the rate of infection, to stop health services being overwhelmed and buy more time for a vaccine.

As I mentioned already, I think restrictions will be eased (end of April?) until load threatens capacity again, and so on.
I would think vulnerable groups will want to keep up their own isolation until tested/vacinated/able to be treated.


Exit strategy:

Actually, I reckon, the first  Lockdown, is to buy time to increase Care capacity. Let the deaths drop to a “tolerable” level. 
Then it will be eased and only brought back when the new capacity seems likely to be breached.

I suspect this is why testing is not the priority that “we” think it should be. It’s ultimately not worth it.
Others have already pointed out the issues with passport to work schemes. Likely so fullbof holes as to be pointless and only a couple of people slipping through and starting off the infection cycle again is enough.

We’re in this for the long haul and the lockdown is way more cynical than “we” think and almost certainly “they” think it the least worst option.”
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on April 04, 2020, 10:33:09 am
By contrast, our numbers only really dropped when Boris closed the pubs. Perhaps the Dutch are just better at following advice than us, without being forced to?

Or, perhaps the Dutch don't have social lives that revolve around binge drinking?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 04, 2020, 10:51:49 am
3rd article from Tomas Pueyo, about developments in US:

https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-out-of-many-one-36b886af37e9

The article is quite broad ranging in order to come to a final conclusion.

For those interested in the debate between social distancing and economic impact, I recommend reading it as it considers the issue at some length.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 04, 2020, 10:57:09 am
By contrast, our numbers only really dropped when Boris closed the pubs. Perhaps the Dutch are just better at following advice than us, without being forced to?

Or, perhaps the Dutch don't have social lives that revolve around binge drinking?

I have, rightly or wrongly, always felt that certain Northern European nations are, simply, better behaved than we tend to be. It’s usually felt that way when I’ve been in those places and it seemed that they regarded us as somewhat juvenile.

Maybe we need an order.

Our military, for instance, was, often, absolutely outrageously behaved, until orders were given; when they suddenly snapped into a rather efficient, professional and determined bunch.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 04, 2020, 01:00:32 pm
By contrast, our numbers only really dropped when Boris closed the pubs. Perhaps the Dutch are just better at following advice than us, without being forced to?

Or, perhaps the Dutch don't have social lives that revolve around binge drinking?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ctz_vBmr_FU
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on April 04, 2020, 03:43:11 pm
By contrast, our numbers only really dropped when Boris closed the pubs. Perhaps the Dutch are just better at following advice than us, without being forced to?

Or, perhaps the Dutch don't have social lives that revolve around binge drinking?
Oh they do. They like a drink as much as the brits.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on April 04, 2020, 03:45:27 pm
By contrast, our numbers only really dropped when Boris closed the pubs. Perhaps the Dutch are just better at following advice than us, without being forced to?

Or, perhaps the Dutch don't have social lives that revolve around binge drinking?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ctz_vBmr_FU

The Dutch show me loads of similar videos of there own idiots abroad. They have there own versions of Benidorm.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 04, 2020, 07:09:52 pm
More grim news on the deaths totals today...

Looks like we’re well in the same zone as Spain and Italy...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 04, 2020, 07:42:44 pm
More grim news on the deaths totals today...

Looks like we’re well in the same zone as Spain and Italy...

The FT are calling it “worse” than Italy.
 https://www.ft.com/coronavirus-latest (https://www.ft.com/coronavirus-latest)

The Guardian say it’s under reported. One day at the end of March the reported deaths were 159, revised to over 460 two days later. Takes upto 3 days to gather all the data apparently.

Oops. Here:

 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/04/why-what-we-think-we-know-about-the-uks-coronavirus-death-toll-is-wrong (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/04/why-what-we-think-we-know-about-the-uks-coronavirus-death-toll-is-wrong)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 04, 2020, 08:49:43 pm
Yeah a day deaths are when the tally of the paperwork rather than those who died in the last 24 hours. Which means there’s a 2-3 day potential Lag before the peak is reported... over all it will balance out..

New York’s curve looks fucking scary. Apparently more deaths in West Midlands than London today...

You can do some horrible rough maths. If 50% of ICU CV patients die and someone is in ICU for 10 days.. 8000 ICU beds - means 400 deaths a day from ICU. Of course if the length of stay before death is <10 days then those deaths a day can go up.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Murph on April 05, 2020, 10:38:41 am
3rd article from Tomas Pueyo, about developments in US:

https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-out-of-many-one-36b886af37e9

The article is quite broad ranging in order to come to a final conclusion.

For those interested in the debate between social distancing and economic impact, I recommend reading it as it considers the issue at some length.

I'm a bit nervous about posting anything about this because I dont want to appear heartless. I wont go into personal anecdotes too much but I have taken this very seriously since the start. I dont think that it doesn't matter or that the consequences will be felt only by other people. But we can still retain some objectivity, right?

Interesting article. Powerful stuff. I loved the bit about where the spring breakers went next.

But I'm not such a fan of red dot chart that seems central to demonstrating the win-win of restrictions causing the best economic and mortality outcomes. 

The top left of the chart - green dots that had restrictive policies and did well economically and mortality-wise - the data points that look like they contribute heavily to the downward sloping (non)tradeoff...they are showing that in the period 1914-1919 employment in those cities *doubled*. Looking at the list of cities it is west coast places that were massively growing in that period - before and after Spanish flu. Look at the list - Los Angeles, Oakland, Seattle etc. But over on the bottom right the red dots showing the places that didn't socially isolate(?) and had higher mortality and lower job growth - east coast established cities that were not going through the same boom time at all. In fact the outlier green dots there - a city that isolated but didn't grow - is in Kentucky. It looks to me a little spurious therefore to use growth of employment, manufacturing output, banking assets etc from 1910-1920 as the Y term measure of success of policy X when it cant possibly be the true explanatory factor.

The controls used to correct for the heterogeneous nature of the cities are inadequate - population in 1910 is a control so by that measure presumably boom time LA is the same as any other east coast city that had the same population at that point in time but was growing nowhere near as fast.

If it was true - and I am not being flippant here - then the data would show that what caused Seattle's employment to double was not that it was west coast small city boomtime but that it was *because* of its restrictive social distance policies. There is a massive "something else going on" in the data. Looking at the cities I'm pretty sure I could have a decent line of best fit by just looking at growth in the previous period to explain the growth in the next that is attributed to a policy response here. 

For the avoidance of any doubt, I support doing something about corona, I dont want to see needless deaths, I have been socially isolating to the max and longer and harder than government recommends. But this evidence is really fishy to me - I think it should have been filtered out and so i wonder what else gets through to support a certain position, like a high death rate to make the case.

I am not saying that we should do nothing or that there wouldn't be an economic cost of doing nothing. I am just looking at this bit of analysis that is being used to relate 1918 to 2020 and finding it a bit lacking.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: seankenny on April 05, 2020, 01:41:52 pm
Murph - did you look at the full paper that the medium post is based on? It is interesting but I'm not sure how robust it is. I totally agree that the control for population isn't good enough, nor is using the 1914 proportion of manufacturing workers given the changes in manufacturing due to WW1, which I assume were noticeable. I suppose in their defence they could argue that the west coast boom at that time was much more based on agriculture (which they mention) and resource extraction (which they don't), and how much extra manufacturing capacity was added in the west over the intervening four years... I have no idea either way tbh.

What I think is useful is that the social distancing and other stringent efforts to contain the pandemic didn't seem to change the overall growth path too much, ie those west coast cities were still growing. That also seems to be the take away from chart #16 in the original article.

And also to add that not only have I been sick with what I strongly suspect is coronavirus (a friend returned to Germany and tested positive), some family friends of ours currently have their grandma in hospital, severely ill. I'm taking the human aspect very seriously - but I find these questions really interesting.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Murph on April 05, 2020, 04:51:08 pm
Hi sean, sorry to hear youve been struck with it and your friend's grandma. Wishing you and yours all the best in the circumstances.

I hadnt read the paper. Downloaded it now and skimmed and will have a look if/when parenting duties allow. 

That said, I can see the red green graph is front and centre in the paper too - with employment level on the y axis. I still cant see how that is robust at all or a sensible measure. Some places were more or less doubling in size every ten years while US pop growth was far more modest. I dont think anyone is claiming that the doubling happened *because* of the measures - the mortality rates on the x axis are really too low to have made much difference (which is surprising because I understood spanish flu to have been much worse than that) so any effect of the pandemic or the response appear to be small relative to those bigger trends.
 
I dont think theres much of a way of controlling for the west-coast-is-different issue to be honest. But once you take those outliers out you get a very different line of best fit. I'm putting the graph below again just for anyone else interested, but that downward sloping line of fit looks to me like it would be more or less horizontal if we removed just the 5 cities with employment (population?) growth of more than 50%.

(https://miro.medium.com/max/1400/0*DKU_Tp6npBiSEi-4)

Not sure the relevance of chart 16. Those were all, far as I know, reasonably isolated and nothing like this. The supply shock->demand shock feedback loop is going to unravel in interesting ways that have never been tested before. Who is buying a car or moving home or getting the bathroom extended etc at a time like this and I cant see how that comes to a halt suddenly. It's taken 12 years for wages to get back to pre credit crunch levels and that was just a made up thing. This thing is serious.

Anyway all very academic. Breaks my heart what's going on and the inadequate or inconsistent response. Scottish medical chief going to her second home - albeit reasonably close by and not like gme's new London neighbours - things like that specifically but more general poor compliance appall me to be honest and they do not give hope. All we have to do is stay the fuck inside but there are thousands going to Cornwall and apparently it's not legal for the police to tell people going to curbar to stay at home. And people are dieing as a result. It's disgusting.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on April 05, 2020, 05:20:41 pm
I still can’t see any sign of this rapid deterioration of things in Holland. In fact the opposite appears to be happening and things there seam to be remaining pretty static including deaths.   
Yet we are the ones shouting for tighter measures.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on April 05, 2020, 05:35:44 pm
Have I missed something? When the Netherlands' lockdown was described it sounded very similar to ours.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Murph on April 05, 2020, 05:44:48 pm
Contrarily to what some might think what is in place is a pretty effective yet not restrictive voluntary lockdown. Basically all social contact has come to a standstill. Gatherings of more than 3 people are not allowed. Walking, surfing, cycling, running, walking the dog is allowed. Just keep your distance. No need to get upset over people doing stuff outside where it is not possible to infect others! Big parking lots at very popular outdoor venues have closed or will close during the weekend. Schools have been closed for 3 weeks now, bit kids are still allowed to play together outside. Work and travel is still not restricted, but people are asked to stay home, which has a huge effect.

It sounds like quite a less restrictive version of what we've got Will. Those journey numbers seem to indicate 2/3 or so the reduction we have had.

Gavin - your holiday home neighbours. Do you approve or not? I'm not sure. It does sound quite nice where you are so I could see the appeal...

Edit - that wasnt supposed to be challenging or unkind btw, just interested in your view as you brought it up sort of factually earlier.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: remus on April 05, 2020, 06:03:38 pm
Have I missed something? When the Netherlands' lockdown was described it sounded very similar to ours.

With the differences in reporting Im wary of putting too much stock in these numbers, but the current numbers from https://www.google.com/covid19-map/ are

country, population, cases, deaths

UK, 66 million, 47800, 4932
NL, 17 million, 17851, 1766

So UK is at 724 cases / million and 74.7 deaths / million. NL is 1022 cases / million and 103 deaths / million. I think it's a push to say the Netherlands is doing particularly well, though of course the proof will be in where we are in 12 months time and you can make a better guess of weighing up the # deaths vs. the economic impact.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 05, 2020, 06:24:34 pm
Have I missed something? When the Netherlands' lockdown was described it sounded very similar to ours.

With the differences in reporting Im wary of putting too much stock in these numbers, but the current numbers from https://www.google.com/covid19-map/ are

country, population, cases, deaths

UK, 66 million, 47800, 4932
NL, 17 million, 17851, 1766

So UK is at 724 cases / million and 74.7 deaths / million. NL is 1022 cases / million and 103 deaths / million. I think it's a push to say the Netherlands is doing particularly well, though of course the proof will be in where we are in 12 months time and you can make a better guess of weighing up the # deaths vs. the economic impact.

And, it’s still too early. We won’t see a change here for a week or so and NL is a week behind us.
Every day you say the same thing GME but it’s not a day by day thing.

Even Sweden is moving to tighten up. If they do, this week, that leaves NL alone in this neck of the woods.

Come back to it after Easter Sunday, that’s meant to be our peak. When is the Dutch peak predicted? They must have modelled it just like everyone else.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on April 05, 2020, 06:31:38 pm
Not everyday at all and every time I am told just wait it will get worse but it isn’t.
And i repeat I am not saying they are doing better than anyone just pointing out that they seem to be following a pretty similar path, not better but importantly not worse, but without the level of restrictions we have.
At the moment they are doing better than us and even the deaths per capita measure in the UK is moving towards there’s not the other way as many of you forecast.
Only keep banging my drum as a lot of people think we have not gone far enough.

I think we have gone far enough now and just need to sit tight and deal with it. And a little bit of me thinks we went to far to start with.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 05, 2020, 06:38:28 pm
No mate, the point is, the deaths here, yesterday and today, are still almost exclusively people infected before our lockdown, so of course we’re still on the same curve. We won’t have even done two weeks until this coming Tuesday. Two weeks ago today was Mother’s day, which is the day that sparked the lockdown.
Up to two weeks from infection to symptoms, one to two weeks before death from onset of symptoms.
So, that’s why we’re predicted to peak next weekend and the few days after, only then should we see an effect.
Up until then, we’re experiencing the same curve, because we were under similar conditions when these people were infected.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on April 05, 2020, 07:17:49 pm
I suspect that Gav isn't going to get this until half the people on his street drop dead.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on April 05, 2020, 07:24:06 pm
Fuck you Will I very much get it. Who the fuck do you think you are mr I’m right.

Is not the idea in conversation that alternative points are made.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 05, 2020, 07:39:37 pm
Fuck you Will I very much get it. Who the fuck do you think you are mr I’m right.

Is not the idea in conversation that alternative points are made.

Um, Gav, this whole thing sucks big dog’s bollocks. It fucking hurts in a million ways and nobody, not even the Head Shed of frigging WHO, really knows what to do.

I mean, if I’m honest, I’m scared.
I don’t know which member(s?) of my family, or which friends or neighbours this thing might take. I don’t know if my business or my future job or my Mrs’ job will survive this.

If someone is not, at least, deeply fucking worried; they’re a psycho.

That, probably, applies to Will, too.
I, um, think, he was just making a small joke. In the face of adversity, and all that sort of stuff.

I wish you and yours all, and then some, the best.

That applies to everyone else, too.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on April 05, 2020, 08:18:23 pm
I am not overly stressed about it. Worried a bit about my folks as there in there 80s and a bit knackered but should be fine if they stay in. I’m following the rules and hope others are.

Like you say no one really knows how it will work out and nearly everything on here is hypothetical and based on models. I keep going back to Holland as it’s interesting as based on fact not projections, there model is at the very least doing as well as ours and I feel this should be looked at before we start implementing more rules about what we can and cannot do.

Others obviously don’t agree but I think we have a good chance of fucking yourselves up more than the virus is.  That doesn’t mean I think we should just let a load of people die as was insinuated.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on April 05, 2020, 08:37:49 pm

That doesn’t mean I think we should just let a load of people die as was insinuated.

That's not what was implied at all. It was an exaggerated comment intended to imply that you seem to be a bit in denial about the scale of the damage that is yet to come, perhaps because the problem has not manifested yet on a big scale in the North East.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 05, 2020, 09:50:46 pm
Here is an interesting article about why the antibody test might not be effective. Summary is it seems like people have very different immune system responses to CV19 (which also reflects how badly they are affected). This response (or lack of) is reflected in the amount of antibodies produced (that the test detects). Meaning that those who were asymptotic (or very weak symptoms) may not show in the test that they had it. And those are the exact people the test needs to figure out/determine.

Furthermore - this may also mean that people who had a very low response to it - could catch it again as their immune system wasn’t sufficiently stimulated. Or something like that. Interesting stuff - it’s a long way from being black and white.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/05/coronavirus-testing-kits-could-be-unreliable-uk-scientists-say?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on April 06, 2020, 11:56:10 am
Thought this several days old news report was important (although rather buried on the Guardian scottish pages).  It claims the first UK death was Feb 28th.  Has anyone here seen anything confirming this?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/02/coronavirus-took-hold-in-uk-earlier-than-thought-data-reveals
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 06, 2020, 01:16:57 pm
Thought this several days old news report was important (although rather buried on the Guardian scottish pages).  It claims the first UK death was Feb 28th.  Has anyone here seen anything confirming this?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/02/coronavirus-took-hold-in-uk-earlier-than-thought-data-reveals

That implies it was about 3 weeks or more before that...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on April 06, 2020, 04:36:29 pm
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-health-coronavirus-tbvaccine-explaine/explainer-how-an-old-tuberculosis-vaccine-might-help-fight-the-new-coronavirus-idUKKBN21K36K

Interesting. Worrying that people may be getting false hope, or thinking they are immune because of it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: HaeMeS on April 06, 2020, 05:23:58 pm
I keep going back to Holland as it’s interesting as based on fact not projections, there model is at the very least doing as well as ours and I feel this should be looked at before we start implementing more rules about what we can and cannot do.

Today's graph shows how Black [deaths/day] and Red [hospital admissions/day] have evolved. Not just IC-admissions, but all admissions related to COVID-19. It seems we've had our peak 6 days ago. Graphs like these may help to explain why people in the NL still aren't overly worried.

Keep in mind that the way the disease took off in each country before getting noticed and mitigated will have a big impact on (the size per capita and shape of) graphs like these. It's not just how and how fast a country responded to COVID-19 with measures that will determine the outcome of the decease. In short: data between countries cannot be compared without looking into the finer details.

I hope the measures in the UK will show effect soon.

(https://nos.nl/data/image/2020/04/06/641667/1920x1080a.jpg)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on April 06, 2020, 05:27:42 pm
Is a hospital really called a Ziekenhuis? "Sick house".
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on April 06, 2020, 05:58:03 pm
Danish data also starting to quite strongly suggest the peak has passed here.  Exactly the moment not to get complacent I would have thought.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 06, 2020, 06:01:52 pm
Interesting watching Holland following what appears to be something akin to the UK's previous policy (mitigate) without seeing the large increase in cases.. so far.. Plenty of time for it to change still.

Could their laxer policy be down to being able to more efficiently test and quarantine?

Their testing is not far off double the UK's, per million people:

(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/mOahg8G_GxKtHKJezl8zsKrvEpVKNeW48hy5bT5ODmCc_1UWk3Uf2o2R8FwmWb4uLdh4tgaPwU0ztL5YiR_6CZytoBob1M9wZULWlvGIPfq747jvXGDdxUwBOt3nX88KGLTopEPQXyJlQcaZYg3Jj4e8oZhGAKw5vlXTrtXjf1_oiyM_2jlWoPIxJCIhjMcnjwC1ONog91--MEHPOE7m8H8xjSIGRkV44o9BW3kZ1XmynMxRkpZ_qU35PhGoWy4yCZU9pIriRZ7_UJPGYmnG5Gh9yb8vYMWiMVZ2jycTAXD8LU_AKaZKjrcFXeZpiCQpoCkmTeIX4tzYQ5vvAcJgEjuPxbFeaMz-SwjfeXwwpkQmx5CRiznBwckshXJNIhoZeL97jMzuba-p-XO-K2UiBrGtzR2m-NRox6pZeVFaaxnSBlOgxfiooP7j8n7tF1s1PFsLFxuAwFTEUis4Fw-veBtiGdSR8A7yUQL845v7lcJzuo9-P8eAVitygotQjz6v4bMQRdRyBJog9VBpplncIe38_pAusy1-RPpzDSNUznnttCS3VJsg_Ojn14RpgRKmDkLCMgLd-HfL0X9bruOdn8_rZ229y2nbMCw91hOkosr5jyfqm4S4kALq1Vr7cp_pLNNinwHTY5s5kN4Ox4ZwwKVcKvEFZrszQ9IaSxIw-KeMwkLLzGXRhbZflHY=w1252-h883-no)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on April 06, 2020, 06:03:12 pm
I keep going back to Holland as it’s interesting as based on fact not projections, there model is at the very least doing as well as ours and I feel this should be looked at before we start implementing more rules about what we can and cannot do.

Today's graph shows how Black [deaths/day] and Red [hospital admissions/day] have evolved. Not just IC-admissions, but all admissions related to COVID-19. It seems we've had our peak 6 days ago. Graphs like these may help to explain why people in the NL still aren't overly worried.

Keep in mind that the way the disease took off in each country before getting noticed and mitigated will have a big impact on (the size per capita and shape of) graphs like these. It's not just how and how fast a country responded to COVID-19 with measures that will determine the outcome of the decease. In short: data between countries cannot be compared without looking into the finer details.

I hope the measures in the UK will show effect soon.

(https://nos.nl/data/image/2020/04/06/641667/1920x1080a.jpg)

Thanks for the update. I had just checked this on the worldometers site which shows the same.
It’s now ten days since I first started looking at the stats for the Netherlands with interest and despite being constantly shot down on here for suggesting that somehow things are going differently it still appears that they are.
I am not suggest I know why but still think that something is.
Even the deaths per 1m stat is now getting narrower in relation to others.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on April 06, 2020, 06:06:31 pm
Interesting watching Holland following what appears to be something akin to the UK's previous policy (mitigate) without seeing the large increase in cases.. so far.. Plenty of time for it to change still.

Could their laxer policy be down to being able to more efficiently test and quarantine?

Their testing is not far off double the UK's, per million people:

(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/mOahg8G_GxKtHKJezl8zsKrvEpVKNeW48hy5bT5ODmCc_1UWk3Uf2o2R8FwmWb4uLdh4tgaPwU0ztL5YiR_6CZytoBob1M9wZULWlvGIPfq747jvXGDdxUwBOt3nX88KGLTopEPQXyJlQcaZYg3Jj4e8oZhGAKw5vlXTrtXjf1_oiyM_2jlWoPIxJCIhjMcnjwC1ONog91--MEHPOE7m8H8xjSIGRkV44o9BW3kZ1XmynMxRkpZ_qU35PhGoWy4yCZU9pIriRZ7_UJPGYmnG5Gh9yb8vYMWiMVZ2jycTAXD8LU_AKaZKjrcFXeZpiCQpoCkmTeIX4tzYQ5vvAcJgEjuPxbFeaMz-SwjfeXwwpkQmx5CRiznBwckshXJNIhoZeL97jMzuba-p-XO-K2UiBrGtzR2m-NRox6pZeVFaaxnSBlOgxfiooP7j8n7tF1s1PFsLFxuAwFTEUis4Fw-veBtiGdSR8A7yUQL845v7lcJzuo9-P8eAVitygotQjz6v4bMQRdRyBJog9VBpplncIe38_pAusy1-RPpzDSNUznnttCS3VJsg_Ojn14RpgRKmDkLCMgLd-HfL0X9bruOdn8_rZ229y2nbMCw91hOkosr5jyfqm4S4kALq1Vr7cp_pLNNinwHTY5s5kN4Ox4ZwwKVcKvEFZrszQ9IaSxIw-KeMwkLLzGXRhbZflHY=w1252-h883-no)

Tests per million pop. Not different though although there’s is still better.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on April 06, 2020, 06:54:57 pm
Testing by itself does nothing of course. I don’t know if NL are doing anything dramatic about case isolation?

It’s definitely the case now that things are turning around there, which is great. They did start restricting contacts a week before us, so perhaps it holds out hope that we will start to see things tail off over Easter.

It will be tempting to conclude that tighter restrictions are not necessary. HaeMes is quite right though that this needs much more careful analysis than we can do by eyeballing curves. You can guarantee that work is getting done, but to be frank even careful modelling won’t tell us the answer with confidence until after decisions need to be made.

It is so difficult.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Muenchener on April 06, 2020, 09:16:15 pm
Is a hospital really called a Ziekenhuis? "Sick house".

Natch. It's "Krankenhaus" in German.

Except in Austria where it's "Spital"
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: HaeMeS on April 06, 2020, 10:02:21 pm
Could their laxer policy be down to being able to more efficiently test and quarantine?

TBH I think part of it was we got lucky. It started with localized outbreaks in small villages (close to where I live), but no big cities. Hardly any testing or quarantining when COVID-19 infections at the start.

 But do not underestimate the importance of a very adequate health care system. And the fact that there were no political barriers to overcome once the NL started acting. The National Institute for Public Health and the Environment had carte blanche and their advice was and still is leading. Hardly any politics involved. Mark Rutte is ‘als een paling in een emmer snot’, but he knows when to listen to expert advice.

Hospital is ziekenhuis indeed. Like the German ‘Krankenhaus’. Ill/feeling sick=ziek(Dutch)=krank(German). ‘Hospitaal’ has the same meaning as ziekenhuis, but is hardly used nowadays.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Falling Down on April 07, 2020, 10:21:26 am
An good interview with Neil Ferguson of Imperial in today’s FT (article is free if you sign in)

 http://ftalphaville.ft.com/2020/04/04/1586015208000/Imperial-s-Neil-Ferguson---We-don-t-have-a-clear-exit-strategy-/ (http://ftalphaville.ft.com/2020/04/04/1586015208000/Imperial-s-Neil-Ferguson---We-don-t-have-a-clear-exit-strategy-/)

Wasn’t sure whether to put this in the politics thread or this one.  It’s about the modelling and potential (or lack of) exit strategies.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on April 07, 2020, 10:29:15 am

Hospital is ziekenhuis indeed. Like the German ‘Krankenhaus’. Ill/feeling sick=ziek(Dutch)=krank(German). ‘Hospitaal’ has the same meaning as ziekenhuis, but is hardly used nowadays.

Interesting, another demonstration that Afrikaans is an old undeveloped form of Dutch. Hospitaal is still the only term for one there. Afrikaans they use siek too, not ziek.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on April 07, 2020, 10:43:23 am
An good interview with Neil Ferguson of Imperial in today’s FT (article is free if you sign in)

 http://ftalphaville.ft.com/2020/04/04/1586015208000/Imperial-s-Neil-Ferguson---We-don-t-have-a-clear-exit-strategy-/ (http://ftalphaville.ft.com/2020/04/04/1586015208000/Imperial-s-Neil-Ferguson---We-don-t-have-a-clear-exit-strategy-/)

Wasn’t sure whether to put this in the politics thread or this one.  It’s about the modelling and potential (or lack of) exit strategies.

Copied FT headline into Google news as others advised.

https://news.google.com/articles/CAIiECGsMeUPQouc19YgqglvAUcqFwgEKg8IACoHCAow-4fWBzD4z0gwwtp6?hl=en-GB&gl=GB&ceid=GB%3Aen

Also a Guardian link on a survey of PPE shortages

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/06/nhs-doctors-lacking-ppe-bullied-into-treating-covid-19-patients
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 07, 2020, 10:52:18 am

Hospital is ziekenhuis indeed. Like the German ‘Krankenhaus’. Ill/feeling sick=ziek(Dutch)=krank(German). ‘Hospitaal’ has the same meaning as ziekenhuis, but is hardly used nowadays.

Interesting, another demonstration that Afrikaans is an old undeveloped form of Dutch. Hospitaal is still the only term for one there. Afrikaans they use siek too, not ziek.

Yeah, some of my olds refer to messy omelettes as “Hondasiek” , which baffled me as a kid.
Many years later, as a skipper, I had a First Mate from Pietermaritzburg and this came up in convo.

Apparently it means “Dog Vomit”.

To be fair, the Rhodesian ancestors, were a fucking hard bunch and probably wouldn’t have flinched at an authentic version, if hungry and with a little seasoning...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on April 07, 2020, 11:46:07 am
An good interview with Neil Ferguson of Imperial in today’s FT (article is free if you sign in)

 http://ftalphaville.ft.com/2020/04/04/1586015208000/Imperial-s-Neil-Ferguson---We-don-t-have-a-clear-exit-strategy-/ (http://ftalphaville.ft.com/2020/04/04/1586015208000/Imperial-s-Neil-Ferguson---We-don-t-have-a-clear-exit-strategy-/)

Wasn’t sure whether to put this in the politics thread or this one.  It’s about the modelling and potential (or lack of) exit strategies.

This, an pretty much all articles on possible exit strategys, are pretty horrific reading and outline something that i dont think most people have really go there heads around, myself included. We are not going to be able to resume a life like we are used to for a minimum of 18 months.
I dont see a way forward without adoption of some kind of herd immunity unless we sit and wait for a vaccine to be produced then rolled out  which i guess isnt on the horizon for the next 12 months. Therefore we are going to have to let people get out on get on with stuff, get infected and get ill in a manor that does not overload the NHS.
My guess is that this will happen for crucial elements of the economy, schools and unis etc. 1st and then held for a good long while.

My fear is the likes of climbing walls being open for a long time nor general access to the crags as they will just not be deemed essential nor do they add a lot to the economy in the scheme of things. Peoples social lives are going to be radically different for a long time.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 07, 2020, 12:14:22 pm
I don’t think anybody is actually disputing the herd immunity thing, though, are they?

It’s about controlling the rate of infection to a manageable rate.
Somebody up top realised we wouldn’t cope without drastic action, because “they” could see that “we” weren’t taking the social distancing seriously enough.

Everyday, the N⁰10 FB/Twitter account post their data on things like road use, public transport use etc etc, that they seem to be using as guides to amount of social interaction.
I assume their actions a couple of weeks ago were based on similar.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: HaeMeS on April 07, 2020, 12:22:28 pm
FAZ published an interesting interview with a pulmonologist from the western part of Germany today. He shares an interesting view on how and why people die from COVID-19 and whether treatment by intubation is in their best interest or not.

If his (and his colleagues) opinion/strategy holds true this could have serious implications. It might explain lower mortality in Germany as well.

In short should translation not work:
- hospitals and doctors all around the world were/are panicking.
- intubation is thought to be best treatment for serious cases.
- except it is not for most patients.
- intubation leads to significantly higher mortality.
- stop intubating (unless necessary).

https://www.faz.net/aktuell/gesellschaft/gesundheit/coronavirus/beatmung-beim-coronavirus-lungenfacharzt-im-gespraech-16714565.html?premium (https://www.faz.net/aktuell/gesellschaft/gesundheit/coronavirus/beatmung-beim-coronavirus-lungenfacharzt-im-gespraech-16714565.html?premium)

^Behind the paywall, but probably readable for first time visitors.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on April 07, 2020, 03:25:06 pm
My fear is the likes of climbing walls being open for a long time nor general access to the crags as they will just not be deemed essential nor do they add a lot to the economy in the scheme of things.

I'm getting the same fear. How many sleeping pills to knock me out until Sept 2021?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on April 07, 2020, 03:45:37 pm
I'd like to think that allowing people out into the hills / coutryside for walking / climbing is relatively low risk vs perceived mental and physical benefits, compared to not allowing mass participation events,mass spectator events and "confined" exercise environments like climbing walls, pools, gyms, sports centres etc.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Doylo on April 07, 2020, 03:50:50 pm
My fear is the likes of climbing walls being open for a long time nor general access to the crags as they will just not be deemed essential nor do they add a lot to the economy in the scheme of things.

I'm getting the same fear. How many sleeping pills to knock me out until Sept 2021?

You’ll be weak as shit though.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on April 07, 2020, 04:01:12 pm
You’ll be weak as shit though.

No change there then.

I'd like to think that allowing people out into the hills / coutryside for walking / climbing is relatively low risk vs perceived mental and physical benefits, compared to not allowing mass participation events,mass spectator events and "confined" exercise environments like climbing walls, pools, gyms, sports centres etc.

Hopefully. It's the mass travel that they'll be scared of though surely? Doesn't make so much economic impact but does have people smashing around the country a lot. I reckon low-key local venues might be viable quite early on. Good venues that you have to drive 1hr+ to I guess will have to wait until 1. travel for recreation is legit and 2. locals wont come at you with pitchforks.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on April 07, 2020, 04:04:21 pm
Fine by me. I'll break out the pitchfork and defend my projects against strong local wads who are stuck here and start sniffing about.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Doylo on April 07, 2020, 04:05:49 pm
It’s not gonna be hard for me to outrun the angry grannies round here.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on April 07, 2020, 04:07:27 pm
Thought chasing them was more your style.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Doylo on April 07, 2020, 04:08:09 pm
Thought chasing them was more your style.

The grandads ye.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on April 07, 2020, 04:23:00 pm
My fear is the likes of climbing walls being open for a long time nor general access to the crags as they will just not be deemed essential nor do they add a lot to the economy in the scheme of things.

I'm getting the same fear. How many sleeping pills to knock me out until Sept 2021?

Three zopiclone and a bottle of vodka would probably do the trick Alex. It'd be an interesting hangover though.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 07, 2020, 05:28:04 pm
As others have mused - I can see walls being out of action for until this is near enough over (12-18 months - vaccine+herd immunity stuff).

But crags and the great outdoors will be allowed way before that I think... and part of the reason we’re not going to crags is (a) not to overload the NHS (not sure it would but part of b) (b) setting a good example so all the scrotes don’t go out having BBQ’s at Curbar etc... Once the movement restrictions are loosened (presuming there will still be social distancing) then getting into your car to go to a crag won’t be such a bad thing to do...

That all involves being sensible when climbing, not in groups - not with someone outside of your household, and making sure holds are clean - not been used before you visit (which isnt as hard as you think in the UK - people just need to use their imagination and not go to Plantation and Burbage).

/musing over
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on April 07, 2020, 06:00:23 pm
This may have been posted before, so apologies if so, but I enjoyed it.

https://www.private-eye.co.uk/issue-1519/news?fbclid=IwAR2uZUhbGVdYwnXhEhDy3uZ1UvpCnKsRWbMG_GIBVdTxI4jzisR8cfOlHUQ

On the subject of climbing, once rules are relaxed to the tune of pubs being open I think climbing is in regardless of crag choice. Prior to that, it will depend on how many of the rest of the public are following the rules as to what the community does i would have thought. If walking spots are rammed there will be a significant proportion who think 'fuck it, I'm going'.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 07, 2020, 07:16:04 pm
I don’t think pubs will be open for the foreseeable.

Let’s hope the IMHE predictions are way off -66,000 by August...
https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-kingdom
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on April 07, 2020, 08:05:24 pm
look at italy and spain on the imhe site -

the numbers for the uk are obviously way off
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 07, 2020, 08:16:25 pm
Care to explain? Italy and Spain figures are dropping off, UK climbing. It’s how long and how fast that climb will be that is the question.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on April 07, 2020, 08:22:54 pm
3 countries similar size - week or two further ahead in the cycle

France peak
25k hospital beds
6k ICU
5K ventilation
1k/day deaths
Total by August 15k

Spain peak
29k hospital beds
7k ICU
6K ventilation
1k/day deaths
Total by August 19k

Italy peak
29k hospital beds
7k ICU
6K ventilation
1k/day deaths
Total by August 20k

UK Projected Peak
102k hospital beds
25k ICU
21K ventilation
3k/day deaths
Total by August 66k

Theres no reason I can see to expect our outbreak to be 3-4 times as bad as any of the countries above
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 07, 2020, 08:35:30 pm
Thanks Duma. They seem to expect the initial delayed distancing to have a big impact on exponential growth.
From the Guardian:
Quote
The Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) in Seattle predicts 66,000 UK deaths from Covid-19 by August, with a peak of nearly 3,000 a day, based on a steep climb in daily deaths early in the outbreak.
...
The analysts also claim discussions over “herd immunity” led to a delay in the UK introducing physical distancing measures, which were brought in from 23 March in England when the coronavirus death toll stood at 54. Portugal, by comparison, had just one confirmed death when distancing measures were imposed.
...
Looking at the measures taken by the UK to curb the spread of the disease, the institute says the peak is expected in 10 days’ time, on 17 April. At that point the country will need more than 102,000 hospital beds, the IHME says. There are nearly 18,000 available, meaning a shortfall of 85,000.
...
The IHME said its model was designed to be updated from day to day as the pandemic goes on. For a country such as the UK, which is quite early on in its outbreak, the uncertainty was higher and the headline numbers might change over the next few days as more data is collected.

The high predicted numbers of UK deaths were driven by three factors, the IHME said: what had happened in other countries that are ahead in their epidemics, such as Italy and Spain, what had happened so far in the UK, and when physical distancing measures were put in place.

In the early stages of the UK outbreak, deaths climbed steeply, which the IHME says is a major driver of predicted deaths. The flirtation in government with the idea of “herd immunity” as a way out of the epidemic meant there was a delay in implementing physical distancing until 23 March, when there were already 54 deaths a day.

Important to say Ferguson and Imperial strongly dispute the figures.

Quote

Ferguson said he did not think the predictions could be relied on. “This model does not match the current UK situation,” he said, adding that the numbers used by the IHME were at least twice as high as they should be for current bed usage and deaths in the NHS. “Basically, their healthcare demand model is wrong, at least for the UK,” he said.
 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on April 07, 2020, 08:52:21 pm
They are already way out - the resouces graph shows that by today their base case has a shortfall of ~40k hospital beds and ~11k ICU beds

that's clearly nowhere near the reality.

Deaths the model shows 1250 6th april and 1250 today - actual numbers are 439 and 786 - that's scraping the bottom of their confidence interval

Also look at the shape of the death graph - france, italy and spain all show a very steep peak shape - with corresponding low totals - Ours for some reason is three times as high and a broad hill - maybe they think our lockdown will be much less effective - and I'm no expert, but I can't see it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: largeruk on April 07, 2020, 10:16:01 pm
Anyone care to explain/posit a theory why there seem to be (to me, at least) wide variations in confirmed cases among larger northern conurbations?

The Public Health England figures as of today show:-

Sheffield (population 583k)
Confirmed cases 883
Cases per 1k of pop. 1.515

Liverpool (495k)
552
1.115

Newcastle (300k)
367
1.223

Manchester (548k)
361
0.660

Leeds (789k)
360
0.457

Bradford (537k)
222
0.413

Kingston upon Hull (262k)
38
0.145

Possible factors at play that have occurred to me:-
* Population size/density vary widely between cities which affects infection rates
* Hospital beds per head of population must skew the figures somewhat (Hull?)
* The boundaries of local authorities and NHS Trusts may not coincide that closely

Given that almost all testing is currently being carried out in hospitals, I assume that the no. of confirmed cases fairly closely correlates to CV-related hospital admissions - or is this not the case?

Anyway, as an utter non-stats, non-scientific person, I'd be glad to know others' take on this.

Sources
Confirmed CV cases: https://www.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/f94c3c90da5b4e9f9a0b19484dd4bb14 (https://www.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/f94c3c90da5b4e9f9a0b19484dd4bb14)
Population figures: https://www.ons.gov.uk/file?uri=%2fpeoplepopulationandcommunity%2fpopulationandmigration%2fpopulationestimates%2fdatasets%2fpopulationestimatesforukenglandandwalesscotlandandnorthernireland%2fmid20182019laboundaries/ukmidyearestimates20182018ladcodes.xls (https://www.ons.gov.uk/file?uri=%2fpeoplepopulationandcommunity%2fpopulationandmigration%2fpopulationestimates%2fdatasets%2fpopulationestimatesforukenglandandwalesscotlandandnorthernireland%2fmid20182019laboundaries/ukmidyearestimates20182018ladcodes.xls)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: robertostallioni on April 07, 2020, 10:19:57 pm
Sheffield were doing more testing before most others. Read it elsewhere recently as an explanation. I'll look for it...

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/01/misleading-and-alarming-sheffields-coronavirus-figures#maincontent (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/01/misleading-and-alarming-sheffields-coronavirus-figures#maincontent)

edited to contain link
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: AnaisB on April 07, 2020, 10:33:11 pm
Also, the extent of staff testing varies between hospitals.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: largeruk on April 07, 2020, 10:54:23 pm
Sheffield were doing more testing before most others.

Also, the extent of staff testing varies between hospitals.

Thanks both. Hadn't considered differentials in NHS staff testing. Makes sense.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Steve R on April 08, 2020, 01:48:43 am
Just thinking aloud on nhs worker deaths due to covid-19... obviously dealing with horrible personal tragedies here but 'encouraging' how low this number still is?  ~15 dead from a frontline of ~500,000.  Comparison with stats on general uk population, ~6000 dead from ~60,000,000 gives 0.003% vs 0.01%.  So nhs death rate not drastically different from what you'd expect in any normal 0.5 million group of working age people.   Also this article (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/04/07/nhs-staff-died-coronavirus-frontline-workers-victims/), (small sample size at n=15) looks like older men disproportionately represented as you might expect.  But (again small sample caveat) the article appears to tally with data coming out that black or asian ancestry probably leaves you more susceptible to dying from covid. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mark20 on April 08, 2020, 07:56:33 am
Wouldn’t NHS worker cases/deaths lag a couple of weeks behind, from when they first started coming into hospitals and exposing frontline NHS workers?

Interesting / alarming article on the massive over representation of BAME in the death stats
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/07/bame-groups-hit-harder-covid-19-than-white-people-uk
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 08, 2020, 08:21:40 am
@largeruk

For Hull it’s partly as it’s at the end of the road.... (or motorway). But also - Hull is bordered immediately by large satellite villages/towns that are really part of Hull but count within East Riding of Yorkshire. Eg. Willerby, Anlaby, cottongham, Beverley. Hull infamously has a daytime population of 350k and a nighttime pop of 250k. Beverley was (15 years ago) the UK town containing the largest proportion of commuters.

In other words - it’s probably not lagging too much - just some of the numbers will be in East Riding - which is in the 600’s or so last time I looked.

Also the two large hospitals - HRI is in Hull, but Castle Hill in Cottongham (has infectious diseases unit).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 08, 2020, 08:56:03 am
Wouldn’t NHS worker cases/deaths lag a couple of weeks behind, from when they first started coming into hospitals and exposing frontline NHS workers?

Interesting / alarming article on the massive over representation of BAME in the death stats
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/07/bame-groups-hit-harder-covid-19-than-white-people-uk

Total Noob musing, but either the infections have been going on longer than first thought and the NHS staff succumbing were early infections and pre any PPE, or it’s a viral load thing?

The BAME thing is really getting the white supremacists excited across the pond, there’s rumours of them carrying out (or at least encouraging their infected comrades to) intentional infections in ethnic communities.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on April 08, 2020, 09:16:05 am
In fierce contradiction to the myth going around that they are immune to it. Hope this is not a fall out from that.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 08, 2020, 09:48:30 am
If the BAME susceptibility proves genetic, what’s going to happen when this really takes root in Africa?

It’s autumn in the south now, even if this is seasonal, the timing is bad.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Falling Down on April 08, 2020, 09:52:47 am
I think that’s dangerous speculation (genetics) that can fuel all sorts of sinister agendas.  The article is pretty clear about potential root cause and it’s all socio economic. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 08, 2020, 10:02:52 am
I think that’s dangerous speculation (genetics) that can fuel all sorts of sinister agendas.  The article is pretty clear about potential root cause and it’s all socio economic.

👆✅👏👏
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 08, 2020, 10:07:50 am
Genetics is highly probable to have a hand in susceptibility, regardless of it’s racial origin or otherwise. It would be ridiculous to ignore it’s potential role or make the discussion of it taboo.
Do you think I’m, somehow, delighting in it?
Those socio economic factors, will apply across the genetic/racial divide, in different areas and, later, we’ll see if the same factors, had the same effects, in similarly structured communities, independent of racial predominance.
There are, for instance, poor and overcrowded white communities across the American south.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 08, 2020, 10:12:39 am
I've no idea on the BAME thing other than as FD says the article makes clear socio-economic factors likely to be at play.
But there is a hypothesised genetic susceptibility to covid19 and it's thought to be in the HPA genes. There are a few papers out there on the matter.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Wil on April 08, 2020, 10:17:28 am
Genetics is highly probable to have a hand in susceptibility, regardless of it’s racial origin or otherwise. It would be ridiculous to ignore it’s potential role or make the discussion of it taboo.

The genetic diversity within the world's black population is more than all other groups put together. Add in other British minority groups and you can see why associating "genetics" and "BAME" is at best dodgy. No doubt there is a genetic factor in susceptibility to all illnesses, but it's vastly more nuanced than racial lines (which don't have easy genetic parsing anyway).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on April 08, 2020, 10:23:25 am
Wouldn’t NHS worker cases/deaths lag a couple of weeks behind, from when they first started coming into hospitals and exposing frontline NHS workers?

Interesting / alarming article on the massive over representation of BAME in the death stats
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/07/bame-groups-hit-harder-covid-19-than-white-people-uk

Total Noob musing, but either the infections have been going on longer than first thought and the NHS staff succumbing were early infections and pre any PPE, or it’s a viral load thing?

I would guess there will be a big lag in healthworker deaths because of the timing of when they started to be exposed to large viral loads.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Muenchener on April 10, 2020, 10:52:08 am
Read a couple of things in the local news this morning that made me think about the amount of collateral damage/deaths.

Fire brigades handing over their breathing apparatus to hospitals. So now if you're in a house fire in Bavaria - which you're already more likely to be anyway, because you're (a) spending more time at home and (b) doing a lot more cooking than usual - your survival chances just dropped significantly.

And a consultant worried about a dramatic drop in A&E visits for things like minor heart attacks & strokes. People aren't getting treatment that they actually need because they're scared to go to hospitals. Or because they think they're doing the right thing by not burdening the system.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on April 10, 2020, 11:31:45 am
I'd be surprised if Fires Services were allowed to hand over all their kit, even if they were allowed to. I'd like to think they'd have surplus, but kept enough to maintain their own safety if needed.

I've seen similar things from Children's A&E about parents not wanting to take kids in for ailments when they normally would, assuring them that it's business as usual there.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on April 10, 2020, 08:27:33 pm
Thanks Duma. They seem to expect the initial delayed distancing to have a big impact on exponential growth.
From the Guardian:
Quote
The Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) in Seattle predicts 66,000 UK deaths from Covid-19 by August, with a peak of nearly 3,000 a day, based on a steep climb in daily deaths early in the outbreak.
...
The analysts also claim discussions over “herd immunity” led to a delay in the UK introducing physical distancing measures, which were brought in from 23 March in England when the coronavirus death toll stood at 54. Portugal, by comparison, had just one confirmed death when distancing measures were imposed.
...
Looking at the measures taken by the UK to curb the spread of the disease, the institute says the peak is expected in 10 days’ time, on 17 April. At that point the country will need more than 102,000 hospital beds, the IHME says. There are nearly 18,000 available, meaning a shortfall of 85,000.
...
The IHME said its model was designed to be updated from day to day as the pandemic goes on. For a country such as the UK, which is quite early on in its outbreak, the uncertainty was higher and the headline numbers might change over the next few days as more data is collected.

The high predicted numbers of UK deaths were driven by three factors, the IHME said: what had happened in other countries that are ahead in their epidemics, such as Italy and Spain, what had happened so far in the UK, and when physical distancing measures were put in place.

In the early stages of the UK outbreak, deaths climbed steeply, which the IHME says is a major driver of predicted deaths. The flirtation in government with the idea of “herd immunity” as a way out of the epidemic meant there was a delay in implementing physical distancing until 23 March, when there were already 54 deaths a day.

Important to say Ferguson and Imperial strongly dispute the figures.

Quote

Ferguson said he did not think the predictions could be relied on. “This model does not match the current UK situation,” he said, adding that the numbers used by the IHME were at least twice as high as they should be for current bed usage and deaths in the NHS. “Basically, their healthcare demand model is wrong, at least for the UK,” he said.
 
Further to this, the current update has peak daily deaths down to ~1700 and total down to 37000
I'd expect that to drop further soon as their health system assumptions still look way too pessimistic.

In contrast anyone got any idea what's gone wrong in Belgium? Daily numbers horrible for a country that size.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on April 10, 2020, 08:33:26 pm
Reply to self: looks like Belgiums really bad numbers on the 7th and today are backdated deaths from March in retirement homes.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on April 10, 2020, 08:39:33 pm
Also, anyone got a link to decent daily data for France? Jwi? I look at https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
Which gets its numbers from
https://www.santepubliquefrance.fr/maladies-et-traumatismes/maladies-et-infections-respiratoires/infection-a-coronavirus/articles/infection-au-nouveau-coronavirus-sars-cov-2-covid-19-france-et-monde
Which is very messy as it seems random when they include deaths outside hospital, and there's no historic record of the daily hospital deaths so it's hard to see how the country is doing.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 11, 2020, 09:58:57 am
Re:curve flattening.

Both Italy and Spain have levelled off after c.10k deaths. We’ll pass that total today or tomorrow - and I really hope it signals the crest of the hill :(
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 11, 2020, 10:48:43 am
Re:curve flattening.

Both Italy and Spain have levelled off after c.10k deaths. We’ll pass that total today or tomorrow - and I really hope it signals the crest of the hill :(

I am (trying) to take heart from the totals being below the 1250 or so the less hopeful models anticipated at this point. Which I hope means the social distancing, prior to lockdown, is already influencing matters and that we should see some more pronounced effects soon.

This was supposed to be the point at which it would start to show, so, fingers crossed.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on April 11, 2020, 11:21:48 am
It is worth bearing in mind that the UK deaths are only those that died in hospital, and it’s only the registered deaths in the last 24hrs. Hence we already get lower numbers at the weekends. Also, no care home/community deaths are included in the figures so when Belgium looks bad, they are including those numbers in their figures.

It’s complicated, and not a great picture. Anecdotally from London, some hospitals have ICU capacity but some don’t and transfers between hospitals are tricky. Also, morgues are full so bodies are, in some cases, blocking ICU beds.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 11, 2020, 01:11:07 pm
 :o

 https://www.salomon.com/en-int/blog/doctor-mountain-guide-and-covid-19-survivor?fbclid=IwAR37eS6zWidvk5uXmuW7lRTrhRp_X3k7p6UDyQIzZS6om7EH_RgdUgZJywM (https://www.salomon.com/en-int/blog/doctor-mountain-guide-and-covid-19-survivor?fbclid=IwAR37eS6zWidvk5uXmuW7lRTrhRp_X3k7p6UDyQIzZS6om7EH_RgdUgZJywM)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 11, 2020, 08:52:03 pm
Good article that. I sent it to a couple of 40 and 50-something mountaineer mates of mine who think they’re indestructible and the coronavirus is all a big flu scare. Maybe wake them up but I doubt it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 11, 2020, 08:55:14 pm
Thought was an interesting snippet from Germany. Festival event thought to have been source of spread - similar stories all over Europe (Atletico Madrid v Liverpool..?).

Estimated that only 14%in that province infected so far. Also estimated 0.4% fatality rate.

Edit forgot to add link: https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/04/09/999015/blood-tests-show-15-of-people-are-now-immune-to-covid-19-in-one-town-in-germany/ (https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/04/09/999015/blood-tests-show-15-of-people-are-now-immune-to-covid-19-in-one-town-in-germany/)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on April 12, 2020, 09:15:17 am
For those who pay to read the Sunday Times, there's a really good article by Matthew Syed today, my app wont bring the link up I'm afraid but it's in the main comment section. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on April 12, 2020, 10:30:58 am
Hi Toby.  As others have pointed out copy the article title into google news and copy their link.

On a different topic, on the other channel Toerag posted the following

"All our deaths here in Guernsey (9 in 3 weeks since the first death) have been pensioners. Not one person has been in ICU, and out of our 200 detected cases only 3-5 are in hospital at any one time so far. Small numbers I know, but it demonstrates how people are dying without going into hospital."

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 12, 2020, 11:07:13 am
Every country is doing their numbers in a slightly different way (eg ours our mainly / only hospital deaths  - so far) and some nations have been suggested they may be under (Germany) and over (Italy) reported.

It’s going to be a mess until long after and the numbers have all been corrected / normalised...

I’d suspect it’s different across the different states in the US too..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on April 12, 2020, 11:10:50 am
On a different subject the likely impact on Universities is beginning to surface.

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/apr/11/universities-brace-for-huge-losses-as-foreign-students-drop-out

https://www.hepi.ac.uk/2020/04/12/another-perfect-storm-the-likely-financial-impact-of-covid-19-on-the-higher-education-sector-by-andrew-connors-the-head-of-higher-education-at-lloyds-bank/

https://wonkhe.com/blogs/how-can-universities-climb-out-of-the-coming-financial-abyss/


Overall UK/EU teaching makes a loss (despite current fees), and the vast majority of research is run at a loss. The system only works because of the profit on overseas student fees and other income. Add on to that the growing numbers of institutions refunding term 3 student accommodation charges.

With brexit influences on EU students, staff and research funding, the huge increase in pension deficit (that is likely following this crash), this really is a perfect storm.

As ever when Universities run into trouble, the impact is felt the hardest by the armies of casualised staff involved in teaching and on short term research contracts.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on April 12, 2020, 11:15:51 am
It’s going to be a mess until long after and the numbers have all been corrected / normalised...

Yes, I suspect rough orders of magnitude is all we have at the moment.

Whilst Offwidth is right that this is going to land a heavy blow on UK higher education, there's going to be a lot of very interesting research for some people to do.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on April 12, 2020, 12:08:41 pm
We have fabulous research in UK bioscience but by far the majority of the PhDs, and most post docs and new staff are not from the UK. Like all STEM, a good deal of the funding is EU based and I was unconvinced of a smooth transition onto UK replacement funding for that, even before this pandemic. Like most of the unanswered questions on brexit, given this pandemic isn't likely 'going away' for the rest of 2020, the most I can hope for is that brexit is formally delayed in June, but I think that is unlikely, given our idiot government attitude on the subject.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BenF on April 12, 2020, 01:02:42 pm
Whilst Offwidth is right that this is going to land a heavy blow on UK higher education, there's going to be a lot of very interesting research for some people to do.

My partner works for PHE and is currently pulling together a review of recent research, with very tight parameters. I was stunned by the sheer numbers of papers already out there. Just looking at the meta analyses of research papers about covid19 symptoms gave her masses to work through.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on April 12, 2020, 01:58:14 pm
For those who pay to read the Sunday Times, there's a really good article by Matthew Syed today, my app wont bring the link up I'm afraid but it's in the main comment section.

Yes it was a good read. I don't know if access through a link generated from the app will be number limited but the link is below:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/this-is-the-age-of-me-me-me-until-we-need-a-scapegoat-and-its-them-them-them-x3gls8gwp?shareToken=7811a806c04c2c33993ff9a07a6013fe
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on April 14, 2020, 10:34:56 am
Reuters report on a growing number of positive tests after recovery in Korea

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-southkorea/south-korea-reports-recovered-coronavirus-patients-testing-positive-again-idUSKCN21S15X
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on April 14, 2020, 12:02:27 pm
This shows the data I think is most interesting/useful in looking at the impact as it removes some questions around background data... Only goes to 10 days back I think, not to date

https://t.co/j71W00tCVy
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 14, 2020, 12:14:33 pm
On a different subject the likely impact on Universities is beginning to surface.

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/apr/11/universities-brace-for-huge-losses-as-foreign-students-drop-out

https://www.hepi.ac.uk/2020/04/12/another-perfect-storm-the-likely-financial-impact-of-covid-19-on-the-higher-education-sector-by-andrew-connors-the-head-of-higher-education-at-lloyds-bank/

https://wonkhe.com/blogs/how-can-universities-climb-out-of-the-coming-financial-abyss/


Overall UK/EU teaching makes a loss (despite current fees), and the vast majority of research is run at a loss. The system only works because of the profit on overseas student fees and other income. Add on to that the growing numbers of institutions refunding term 3 student accommodation charges.

With brexit influences on EU students, staff and research funding, the huge increase in pension deficit (that is likely following this crash), this really is a perfect storm.

As ever when Universities run into trouble, the impact is felt the hardest by the armies of casualised staff involved in teaching and on short term research contracts.

Missed this...

Yes - lots of talk about redundancies and job losses from people I know in other institutuions. We were mid way through a compulsory reduncancy round (that has now stopped) so not sure if that is a good or bad thing!

Where I am we have quite low exposure (low overseas student numbers, relatively low EU grant income) but some places will be fucked by the drop in overseas (especially chinese) student numbers. Theres a fair few master courses I know that bring in 100+ overseas students each year - thats £1m plus a course gone.. 4-5 staff..

One of my friends at a HE institute in Wales was sharing with me the news they were to prepare for virtual semster 1 in September - in the anticipation that there will be a second wave and associated lockdown.

The one glimmer of hope for HE from all this is that institutional number caps will come back in - a step back from the open market free for all...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on April 14, 2020, 12:23:18 pm
Looks pretty in line to me Alex?
Graph shows ~ 6000 excess deaths in weeks 12+13, which I guess takes us to the 5th or 7th
Here (https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/uk/) (hospital deaths I think) shows between 5000 & 6000 deaths for that date range. I guess it's to the 5th and the difference is outside hospital?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on April 14, 2020, 12:40:14 pm
The Independent commenting on the ONS data.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/coronavirus-deaths-care-homes-cases-uk-eu-italy-spain-ireland-a9463846.html

The ONS guy on the BBC 13.00 news was reporting 60% extra total deaths compared to what they would regard as average in the week. There is a big obvious gap in explaining the 60% despite the large extra numbers he reported who have died with covid 19 as a factor in care homes, especially so as road accident deaths are massively down.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on April 14, 2020, 12:53:51 pm
Looks pretty in line to me Alex?
Graph shows ~ 6000 excess deaths in weeks 12+13, which I guess takes us to the 5th or 7th
Here (https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/uk/) (hospital deaths I think) shows between 5000 & 6000 deaths for that date range. I guess it's to the 5th and the difference is outside hospital?

Looking at another figure in guardian love updates I think it's to the 3rd, and the uptick for total looks bigger than covid. I wasn't really making a point though, just liked the graph - it's what I've been wanting someone to post for a while
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on April 14, 2020, 01:28:02 pm
https://twitter.com/d_spiegel/status/1249986522692096003?s=21

This is what it looks like when you don’t just eyeball the numbers. Large amounts of excess deaths. Either lots of unreported COVID-19 deaths or a LOT of excess mortality arising from the lockdown. I think it’s too large to be entirely the latter, but obviously important to try and work this out.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Muenchener on April 14, 2020, 02:20:32 pm
I've seen very similar charts for New York and places in Italy - two to four times the normal seasonally adjusted death rate, with half or less of the excess deaths officially attributed to covid-19

I assume (as a total layperson with no actual knowledge) it's a combination of under-reporting of covid-19, and an increase in deaths from other causes due to overloaded medical facilities. I also wonder how much of it is deaths "only" happening a few months earlier than they otherwise would have - in other words, will it all be followed by a period of lower than average mortality?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on April 14, 2020, 02:30:52 pm
It's not the eyeballing stu, it's the dates. Sorry for assuming a week might end on a Sunday (5th), or even that week 1 might last for the first 7 days of the year (7th).

Anyway, from the worldometer site, there was 2846 uk hospital deaths in that week (28th - 3rd)
The ons site has 3475 deaths registered where covid was a factor, and and excess over the 5 year average of 6082.
So somewhere between ~ 20% and ~ 100% above the hospital numbers. Not really sure what this tells us tbh, apart from it being sad. we don't have equivalent data for other countries further down the line to compare.
Traffic deaths in UK are Av 33 a week, so won't impact headline figures much
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 14, 2020, 02:32:44 pm
These type of forecast are really tricky - there is the "they might have died anyway this year" argument (15% of over 80's die each year normally!!) which is probably impossible to do until its all over etc..

EDIT: Surely a large part of the rise is from Care homes (the story just surfacing)...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on April 14, 2020, 02:34:35 pm
I've seen very similar charts for New York and places in Italy - two to four times the normal seasonally adjusted death rate, with half or less of the excess deaths officially attributed to covid-19
The UK isn't 2-4 times over, its 60%. Sorry, I don't mean to nitpick but that's a huge difference.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: HaeMeS on April 14, 2020, 02:57:49 pm
Here's the data per municipality in the Netherlands. Hardest hit area's had up to 7 times the normal weekly deaths in the week from April 3-10.

[/img]https://i.postimg.cc/7Z12K5yW/Knipsel.jpg[/img]

Don't get to exited. Since most who die are over 70/80, after Covid-19 is over weekly death rates will show a reduced number for a longer period.

More intersting data/graphs: https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/nieuws/2020/15/sterfte-neemt-verder-toe
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 15, 2020, 03:36:46 pm
Not read beyond abstract yet, just been given the link.

 https://science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2020/04/14/science.abb5793 (https://science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2020/04/14/science.abb5793)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SamT on April 15, 2020, 10:42:40 pm
Some might find this interesting  :smartass:, its much more biology based rather than stats about the spread.  I found it fascinating.  Especially the stuff about how it jumps species, and why SARS/MERS where not as bad as Covid19.
Hazel puts across some quite techy microbiology in way that's really easy to grasp.

https://youtu.be/tQZuCHIFZkQ
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 16, 2020, 08:25:14 pm
Now this is curious: a science grad who wants to test, but whose team don’t receive enough swabs to stay busy.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/apr/16/swab-tester-uk-germany-south-korea

Is that because HM gov can’t organise enough tests despite having spare testing capacity? Or is it that making use of that capacity is not a priority?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on April 16, 2020, 08:32:13 pm
Wow.

Is it possible that they simply don’t have enough swabs?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 16, 2020, 09:01:59 pm
Wow indeed!! Damning!

Two of our baby friends work in a testing lab at MRI (they were repurposed for testing) and are flat out when we saw them (from a distance) on Sunday.

Stu - I interpreted it to mean not enough sample swabs were delivered to them...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on April 16, 2020, 09:17:44 pm
Me too; but if there’s a physical shortage of swabs then they wouldn’t get swabbed and the swabs wouldn’t make their way to the testing centre.

Or there could be a genuine lack of demand; i’ve seen a few comments along the lines of people saying they got a test immediately recently. If that’s the case they should surely be using the spare capacity to sample the population?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 16, 2020, 09:21:25 pm
I’d heard a week ago there was a lack of the swab cases and the liquid/substance they keep the swab doused in/damp with in the plastic case en route to lab...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on April 16, 2020, 09:22:17 pm
"Lack of demand" was the reason given during Hancock's Half-Hour - those pesky patients / NHS workers just won't take a test for love nor money!

Personally being the incorrigible cynic I am, I am tempted to agree with Ali K higher up - I suspect that over this week they are stockpiling swabs / everything else needed for the big 100K tests on April 30th. They've probably got these stashed now, so expect test numbers to creep up slowly, slowly until end of April then.... BANG out of nowhere a huge jump to 100K tests just in time to save Hancock's bacon and provide a nice distraction for the media (provided for today by Brexit, in case no-one had noticed).

The above is tongue in cheek btw. Kind of....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 16, 2020, 09:33:25 pm
The problem with that theory Nigel is that your plan requires co-ordination, planning and strategy.

Nope. Don’t buy it :)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on April 16, 2020, 09:56:05 pm
Yeah, there's no way is there....shame, I bet Hancock is having some nice baseball caps with "100,000" emblazoned on the front. What a waste.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on April 17, 2020, 10:40:57 am
Yeah, there's no way is there....shame, I bet Hancock is having some nice baseball caps with "100,000" emblazoned on the front. What a waste.

or one with "MAKE THE NHS GREAT AGAIN"
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Falling Down on April 17, 2020, 06:34:00 pm
This is good.  https://critinq.wordpress.com/2020/04/10/ground-zero-empiricism/ (https://critinq.wordpress.com/2020/04/10/ground-zero-empiricism/)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 17, 2020, 06:56:14 pm
This is good.  https://critinq.wordpress.com/2020/04/10/ground-zero-empiricism/ (https://critinq.wordpress.com/2020/04/10/ground-zero-empiricism/)

An interesting read FD. To me it resonates two issues.

First that medicine has a bad past record as a science - lots of trial error and anecdote without rationale testing and understanding.. it feels a bit like some reversion

Second - that science tends to advance through systematic steps - and sudden leaps. Both need to work together but the pressure of people dying around the world from this are forcing more people to make sudden leaps - in the hope or gamble that they pay off.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 18, 2020, 10:26:05 am
Gilead are at it again.

Despite the connotations of their name, they seem quite the hope:

https://www.statnews.com/2020/04/16/early-peek-at-data-on-gilead-coronavirus-drug-suggests-patients-are-responding-to-treatment/ (https://www.statnews.com/2020/04/16/early-peek-at-data-on-gilead-coronavirus-drug-suggests-patients-are-responding-to-treatment/)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on April 20, 2020, 11:14:59 am
UK
Coronavirus deaths: 16,060
Virus fighting superheroes created: 0

Singapore
Coronavirus deaths: 11
Virus fighting superheroes created: 5


Come on, Matt Hancock! Where's our Virus Vanguard?!

https://www.gov.sg/article/battling-the-virus


Particular favourite is MAWA Man

(https://www.gov.sg/-/media/gov/covid-19/dorm-poster/jpeg/en_poster-on-workers-at-dormitories/vv-mawa-man.jpg)

Quote
MAWA Man enforces safe-distancing (Must Always Walk Alone) as he repels people and objects far apart. To his friends, he is Manzoorakkaman (Man Man for short), a sports super agent in his late 30s.
 

Backstory:

Man Man is a fanatical Manchester United fan who grew up in the 80s when Liverpool kept winning titles and he was constantly taunted by his two Liverpool fan brothers. This made him despise everything Liverpool including their motto You’ll Never Walk Alone (YNWA).
 
His hatred for Liverpool so far exceeds his love for Man Utd that it manifested as a telekinesis power in MAWA Man to push objects and people through his eyes.

 
Abilities:

Repelling power to push objects and people back, aided by a digital distance meter through his eyes.
Uses a special helmet he invented to control the magnitude of force and calculate other tech stuff.

 
Weakness:

Cannot stop Man Utd fans from gathering as he will be compelled to join them.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: rich d on April 20, 2020, 01:06:26 pm
I'm still struggling to understand the pay off between the damage lock down will cause short, medium and especially long term to the health of the nation and the relatively small number of deaths. There's what around 66 million people in the UK (ish) and so far there have been 16k deaths, so around 0.02% of the population. Yet there's 11 million newly unemployed or furloughed employees and huge infringement on freedoms and way of life, with no date for an exit and talk of "new normal". I still think the measures against corona are much more frightening than the virus.
I really can't see how many businesses will survive this as we continue with extended lockdown and continued social distancing, and everyone who seems to see this as a new more caring reset will probably be in for a rude awakening if the measures are lifted and public services including the NHS are cut hugely due to lack of tax revenue.
I;m not suggested that economic failure is more important than lives, but economic failure surely leads to loss of lives, and although I've not seen accurate figures there must be additional lives being lost at the moment through NHS focus on corona with procedures such as transplants etc being postponed. I think when this finally finishes instead of the enivetable public enquiry concentrating on PPE levels in hospitals and care homes (which are mainly privately run nowadays) it wold be better to compare the longer term effects of this lockdown on society and it's health compared to Sweden where there has been minimal lockdown but looks like a higher death rate.
Mini rant over. Rich
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 20, 2020, 01:42:41 pm
Fair points, although there are 20,000+ deaths, 16+ is just hospitals. However, the comparator isn't deaths in tens of thousands,  it's hundreds of thousands without lockdown/effective mitigation. That is the figure the gov is, quite rightly, afraid of.

edit - 'effective mitigation' added. The question is the efficacy of UK mitigation without lockdown.
see pp6-7:
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: seankenny on April 20, 2020, 01:55:34 pm
Fair points, although there are 20,000+ deaths, 16+ is just hospitals. However, the comparator isn't deaths in tens of thousands,  it's hundreds of thousands without lockdown. That is the figure the gov is, quite rightly, afraid of.

Under this scenario you’d also get huge numbers of people too sick to work and lots of people doing their own personal social distancing, leading to huge economic problems anyway but without doing much to prevent the spread of the virus. Lots of doctors and nurses would be dead and the NHS would cease to function - good luck to you if you find a nasty little lump. There’d also be a huge loss of trust in the government and across society generally which would inevitably have a long run effect on the economy.

This letter from Australian economists is, as I understand it, fairly representative of lots of the profession:

https://theconversation.com/open-letter-from-222-australian-economists-dont-sacrifice-health-for-the-economy-136686

As for long term effects, we need to pay for the crisis slowly and over many many years, rather than tear more holes in our already battered social fabric.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 20, 2020, 02:00:09 pm
I'm still struggling to understand the pay off between the damage lock down will cause short, medium and especially long term to the health of the nation and the relatively small number of deaths. There's what around 66 million people in the UK (ish) and so far there have been 16k deaths, so around 0.02% of the population. Yet there's 11 million newly unemployed or furloughed employees and huge infringement on freedoms and way of life, with no date for an exit and talk of "new normal". I still think the measures against corona are much more frightening than the virus.
I really can't see how many businesses will survive this as we continue with extended lockdown and continued social distancing, and everyone who seems to see this as a new more caring reset will probably be in for a rude awakening if the measures are lifted and public services including the NHS are cut hugely due to lack of tax revenue.
I;m not suggested that economic failure is more important than lives, but economic failure surely leads to loss of lives, and although I've not seen accurate figures there must be additional lives being lost at the moment through NHS focus on corona with procedures such as transplants etc being postponed. I think when this finally finishes instead of the enivetable public enquiry concentrating on PPE levels in hospitals and care homes (which are mainly privately run nowadays) it wold be better to compare the longer term effects of this lockdown on society and it's health compared to Sweden where there has been minimal lockdown but looks like a higher death rate.
Mini rant over. Rich

We’re not going to be locked down indefinitely. We’re even lucky enough to have comparable neighbours ahead of us from which to learn.

Plus, really, just read what the big dog, central bank type (not the independent) economists are saying. This is better than the alternative.

But, once more, the 16K deaths are what we have today, WITH THE MEASURES IN PLACE. If we hadn’t done that we would have already had tens of thousands more and eventually (upto) 500K deaths, within a year or so.

Then, there’s all the future deaths, because we don’t have any treatment or vaccine. People get older and move further into the at risk group. People develop cancers and other health conditions that push them into at risk groups etc etc. This thing is more deadly than the Flu and it’s not as if the Flu is taking a sabbatical whilst CV19 stands in.

If we develop vaccines and treatments soon (within two years) way-hey and zippity doo dah. Cushty.
If not, we might have to live with this for the best part of a decade.

We don’t even know if it’s seasonal or if it just keeps going.

We don’t even know if catching it and recovering confers immunity, so nobody knows if “herd immunity by exposure” is a thing or not, yet.

So, even if we lifted lockdown today and just pretended it was an extended Spring break and magically nobody was any worse off than they were a month ago; within another month, off we go again with the large numbers of deaths and overwhelming any medical services we could throw at it.

We are already on track to beat the 20k mark, in a period of two months (possibly less).

And it’s not just us, it’s global, so millions of deaths.



Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 20, 2020, 02:07:44 pm

We are already on track to beat the 20k mark, in a period of two months (possibly less).


I agree with you, but just want to highlight this figure. Current numbers are hospital deaths, ignoring community and care home fatalities. We are well over 20k overall already, the estimate from Martin Green, chief exec of Care England suggested possibly >7,000 care home deaths:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/18/uk-care-home-covid-19-deaths-may-be-five-times-government-estimate
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: stone on April 20, 2020, 02:13:20 pm
Now this is curious: a science grad who wants to test, but whose team don’t receive enough swabs to stay busy.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/apr/16/swab-tester-uk-germany-south-korea
Is that because HM gov can’t organise enough tests despite having spare testing capacity? Or is it that making use of that capacity is not a priority?
That's a fascinating insight. That underused Milton Keynes testing lab is supposed to be one of three giant national swab testing labs (the others being in Nether Alderly and Glasgow) supplementing the patient testing currently being done at NHS labs. I applied to join the Nether Alderly lab back in March but it is yet to open AFAIK. I get weekly emails thanking me for my patience.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 20, 2020, 03:23:26 pm
So as per my posts on B3 from here: https://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,30489.msg603070.html#msg603070 (https://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,30489.msg603070.html#msg603070)

and here:
://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,30489.msg603488.html#msg603488 (https://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,30489.msg603488.html#msg603488)


There's now more evidence to back this up.

Preclinical research on NR and its role in covid-19 infected cells has now been released today in pre-print form, available here: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.17.047480v3

Note my disclaimers - I'm a shareholder in Chromadex (which are up 22% on this news)




Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 21, 2020, 04:27:29 pm
Thought I'd share this anecdote because I thought it contrasts with the picture you get from reading the 'covid and climbing' threads.

Did a site visit today to a large industrial site to view some new work. I observed no social distancing in evidence whatsoever among the many maintenance and construction workers I saw (many in their 40s and 50s) going about their work. There's an argument that the site I visited is vital national infrastructure. But I know this to be about 60% bollocks - some of the work is, most of it isn't. This is being replicated all over the country. The NHS will be mopping up the fallout from people like this. Not you sitting at home.

Driving home, I was listening to a teacher and a teacher's union rep saying how carefull we need to be with re-opening schools for fear of spreading covid among pupils and staff. I don't disagree that spreading covid would be bad. But the fact is, no-one gives a flying fuck about 50-year old bob the boiler-maker getting it. Not his employer, not the HSE, not the government, and not anyone who works in an office and who thinks people shouldn't visit the countryside because they might sneeze on a stile.
 
People sit at home and worry about the risk of going shopping, driving for a walk, or nipping out for a discrete boulder, while the real risk of virus transmission is going on in a parallel world out there that I think the majority just don't see.

Then I read the thread about climbing and the BMC's edict that thou shall not climb because it would present a dangerous risk of spreading the virus. Too funny.

There's a split in this country (and prob everywhere) between office/home workers and workers who can't work from an office/home. Driving home listening to teachers scared of schools reopening - and imagining all the office-based people on here agreeing how terrible it was and how poorly thought-out the whole thing is because they may catch covid, just seems ridiculous after visiting a worksite which is like a different planet where you'd be forgiven for believing there's no such thing as a virus.

The stance on outdoor recreation will I hope soon be shown to be mostly nonsensical - but well-intentioned - bollocks. This virus is being spread by people working, commuting to work, and going shopping - not going walking or bouldering or cragging or surfing or mtn biking or fell running.  But I feel the attitude - that people shouldn't go out into the countryside to enjoy time off because it may risk contact with someone outside your household - has much to do with white collar parts of society laying down rules that they themselves can follow but which are blatantly ridiculous for those people who find themselves working daily in close proximity to others without the choice that the people sitting at home enjoy. I'm not saying two wrongs make a right, but I do think there's some self-flagellation going on.
The most socially distant thing I could have done today would have been to nip up to Harmer's Wood or Helsby for a quick boulder.

Just a musing on today.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on April 21, 2020, 04:59:10 pm
...the real risk of virus transmission is going on in a parallel world out there that I think the majority just don't see...There's a split in this country (and prob everywhere) between office/home workers and workers who can't work from an office/home...This virus is being spread by people working, commuting to work...

At the risk of your inevitable accusation of being party political, this has been an obvious failing of the social distancing policy from the outset. And was pointed out as such many times in the initial discussions (both on UKB and by the media and opposition parties).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on April 21, 2020, 05:00:49 pm
Isn't that why it makes sense to focus on fixing and/or enforcing those issues rather than telling little Timmy not to do his forward rolls in the park, the little anarchist?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on April 21, 2020, 06:00:02 pm
Did a site visit today to a large industrial site to view some new work. I observed no social distancing in evidence whatsoever among the many maintenance and construction workers I saw (many in their 40s and 50s) going about their work. There's an argument that the site I visited is vital national infrastructure. But I know this to be about 60% bollocks - some of the work is, most of it isn't. This is being replicated all over the country. The NHS will be mopping up the fallout from people like this. Not you sitting at home.

You're going to point it out to them, right? I think there's now a HSE hotline for concerned workers.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: stone on April 21, 2020, 06:14:16 pm
Did a site visit today to a large industrial site to view some new work. I observed no social distancing in evidence whatsoever among the many maintenance and construction workers I saw (many in their 40s and 50s) going about their work. There's an argument that the site I visited is vital national infrastructure. But I know this to be about 60% bollocks - some of the work is, most of it isn't. This is being replicated all over the country. The NHS will be mopping up the fallout from people like this. Not you sitting at home.

You're going to point it out to them, right? I think there's now a HSE hotline for concerned workers.

Has anyone had a look to see whether construction of the vast new social sciences building at University of Sheffield is ongoing? It was but I think there were complaints about it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 21, 2020, 07:22:40 pm
Did a site visit today to a large industrial site to view some new work. I observed no social distancing in evidence whatsoever among the many maintenance and construction workers I saw (many in their 40s and 50s) going about their work. There's an argument that the site I visited is vital national infrastructure. But I know this to be about 60% bollocks - some of the work is, most of it isn't. This is being replicated all over the country. The NHS will be mopping up the fallout from people like this. Not you sitting at home.

You're going to point it out to them, right? I think there's now a HSE hotline for concerned workers.

Interesting. That's good to know. We'll be on there regularly from next month so I'll bear that in mind.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on April 21, 2020, 07:41:17 pm
I think there's occupational health guidance on RIDDORS as well but you probably found that.

Essentially I think it's saying if one of your workers dies of it/contracts it you're going to need to report the incident (which makes sense, given what is generally for).

I agree regarding the construction industry (the paperwork is likely in place but in reality...) and I think it's what you, Ali k and potentially Nige (this is from memory so apologies if it's not 100% accurate) suggested pre lockdown.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on April 21, 2020, 08:10:09 pm
https://www.hse.gov.uk/news/riddor-reporting-coronavirus.htm

Looks like you’d only end up with a reportable incident if someone was confirmed as having Covid.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on April 21, 2020, 09:04:30 pm
https://www.hse.gov.uk/news/riddor-reporting-coronavirus.htm

Looks like you’d only end up with a reportable incident if someone was confirmed as having Covid.

Given the ten day limit on reporting fatalities, it would be very interesting to know how many reports Her Majesty's Government have submitted *already* regarding deaths of healthcare workers. Do HSE do do FOI requests?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on April 21, 2020, 09:23:50 pm
Quote
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) is required by law to ensure the information captured or created as part of its public function is available for scrutiny by anyone.

HSE acknowledges the important role information plays in demonstrating transparency and accountability of government, as well as the wider societal and economic benefits it provides.

HSE only disclose information where it is in the public interest, and where it is fair and lawful to do so.  All requests for information are considered on a case by case basis under one of the following

 :popcorn:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on April 21, 2020, 09:42:13 pm
Thanks Paul, just had a look myself. Will send an FOI request - anyone on here got any hints or tips on how to phrase this? Never done it before? In particular on the detail - would the RIDDOR report come from the NHS trust involved, or from the Department for Health, or someone else?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on April 21, 2020, 09:57:43 pm
Also, can anyone help on this?

There is a morass of Covid 19 data out there. However one thing I cannot find anywhere is a historical record of *how many covid 19 tests per day* have been done in the UK. I know that this info for the current day is published daily on gov.uk, but these pages are not then stored anywhere as far as I can see? Basically I am using Google to the best of my ability and nowhere can I find a list of figures for UK tests per day, anywhere - any suggestions?

PS I have found this page, but it only records "people tested" rather than tests done https://www.statista.com/chart/21316/people-tested-covid-19-uk/

The reason is I would like to keep tabs on how the "ramping up" to 100K is going.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on April 21, 2020, 10:02:53 pm
Be aware, I think FOI requests don't currently have to comply with the usual timescales.

George Greenwood on Twitter is a journalist who uses them frequently. I think he's also written advice for people making them (I recently did one to show Preston City Council that their parking permit app wasn't infallible after it failed on me and I received a PCN; quite satisfying in the end).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on April 21, 2020, 10:11:33 pm
Thanks Paul. Do you know what the "usual timescales" are? Obvs this is a very simple request i.e. please give two numbers from your database - no. of reportable cases of exposure & no. reportable fatalities of NHS staff / healthcare workers.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on April 22, 2020, 07:17:32 am
20 days according to this https://www.gov.uk/make-a-freedom-of-information-request
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on April 22, 2020, 07:40:07 am
Will send an FOI request - anyone on here got any hints or tips on how to phrase this?

Can’t help with this I’m afraid other than a suspicion that it might have to be worded very specifically to get the right information? Could be worth emailing your favourite investigative journalist to see if they are interested in this angle as the HSE reporting might not be on the media’s radar. They might be able to get a H&S lawyer/specialist to give their take on it too.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on April 22, 2020, 09:11:45 am
Thanks Paul. Do you know what the "usual timescales" are? Obvs this is a very simple request i.e. please give two numbers from your database - no. of reportable cases of exposure & no. reportable fatalities of NHS staff / healthcare workers.

I prodded that journalist and he's bit. I'll let you know how it develops.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 22, 2020, 09:13:34 am
Two minute read.

 https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-health-coronavirus-china-patients-ins-idUKKCN2240HR?utm_campaign=trueAnthem%3A+Trending+Content&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=facebook (https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-health-coronavirus-china-patients-ins-idUKKCN2240HR?utm_campaign=trueAnthem%3A+Trending+Content&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=facebook)

Good morning.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 22, 2020, 09:34:30 am
Nigel I think there's a much more important story to tell here than the number of NHS staff who have died of covid - tragic as that is. If you are genuinely concerned about workers at disproportionate risk of dying of covid, then why don't you do some investigation into how many people who work in the construction and transport industries have died of covid?

It's a story that probably won't get told until long after this is over, for various reasons including lack of interest by the media because the NHS is an emotional hook like no other. Also the political importance of the NHS is felt far more strongly than the political importance of some rough-arsed blokes on industrial and construction sites The media loves the story of defending our NHS and its workers, quite right it's a worthy story and any worker dying through work is one too many. But there is a much larger group of workers who it seems to me are more or less taken for granted because it isn't as an attractive media story, it doesn't twang the public emotions in the same way.

Look up 'more or less' from today for example. The average death rate from covid in UK population for people of working age is currently around 1 in 19,000.
The number of NHS staff recorded as dying from covid roughly correlates with the number of deaths expected in the wider population: 1 in 19,000. There are assumptions involved and you can fiddle around with them, and the proportions are likely to increase. But it isn't drastically different from the general population.
Then look at the fatality rate from covid for transport workers in London. 1 in roughly 1,100 transport workers have died from covid.
Then do some research into construction workers and other trades, if you can find out any figures let us know.

BTW many have made media hay on the fact that the national PPE stockpile (yes there was one, look it up) was reduced in value from £800 million in 2011 to £500 million in 2018. And used this to prove the government were culpable for the deaths of NHS staff. So £300 million pounds of PPE would have prevented 100 deaths - a rate of deaths roughly in line with the death rate in the wider population? The logic isn't very convincing, nor is the £300 million / 100, sad as that may be.

TLDR
The media love an emotional story. The NHS is just that. There are other worse things going on. Are you 'really' concerned about ALL excess deaths? Or are you concerned about juicy political stories?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on April 22, 2020, 09:47:26 am
Pete - yes, you’re right in that NHS deaths are more emotive. A FOI request to the HSE regarding numbers of reported Covid-19 deaths from employers of all types would be useful. No one should be dying as a result of going to work, and is the whole point of the ‘H&S at work act’. I suspect it will be more likely to be reported/investigated with NHS workers as they are being tested for Covid, and it’s easier to associate their work with direct contact with infected patients. And lack of adequate PPE. Other occupations may well be at high risk but it’s potentially harder to prove they were infected at work?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 22, 2020, 09:51:14 am
They've calculated the number for London transport. 1 death in every 1,100 workers. Magnitudes higher than the average of 1 in 19,000.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on April 22, 2020, 09:51:47 am
Thanks Paul. Do you know what the "usual timescales" are? Obvs this is a very simple request i.e. please give two numbers from your database - no. of reportable cases of exposure & no. reportable fatalities of NHS staff / healthcare workers.

I prodded that journalist and he's bit. I'll let you know how it develops.

Thanks Paul. I've sent one too, but suspect a pro would phrase it better and thus have more joy.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 22, 2020, 09:59:05 am
I’ve a contact at the mirror if you need it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 22, 2020, 10:08:04 am
They've calculated the number for London transport. 1 death in every 1,100 workers. Magnitudes higher than the average of 1 in 19,000.
Pete, this last bit of reasoning is both technically correct and disingenuous.
Singling out the CV19 deaths and stating that proportion coincides with expected death rates of the general population is a false indicator.
The true indicator of CV19’s seriousness is it’s influence on  number of deaths from all causes and how it deviates from the norm.
This applies regardless of the section of, or entirety of, the population it applies to.

Otherwise, in the case of the NHS deaths (or the others) you have singled out, you appear to suggest that group have stopped dying from anything else.


It will be interesting, Pete, to see if the constitution industry’s toll is significantly at odds with the national average, and I imagine some law firms are wondering the same thing...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on April 22, 2020, 10:23:13 am
Bet you wont get those stats easily OMM, so Pete's stats are a very good proxy in the face of limited data. (Also, you might well expect non-COVID but COVID-related deaths to map broadly equally by work demographic, so unless you have a good reason to believe otherwise the proxy is likely to work well)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: rich d on April 22, 2020, 10:25:14 am
to go back to the construction workers thing. The work is still going on at 3 separate blocks of flats near us that I pass on one of my walk circuits, with little social distancing evident. My mate who's a decorator is still working, not just in people's houses who can't get paint themselves but also on mixed trade sites and there's no distancing or PPE. My other friend who's a plasterer is again still working on residential properties and on larger construction sites. Both of these are working because the amount of earnings they declared last year have no resemblance to their actual wages, and this is the case for a lot of their colleagues. their opinion is that it's a load of shit and they can't work from home and can't be furloughed. This is in complete opposition to my friends who are teacher's opinions and mindset.
Anecdotal I know.
Rich
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on April 22, 2020, 10:28:30 am
Pete, as usual I can't disagree with most of what you have written. Yes of course I am concerned with all excess deaths. Including people starving, dying of malaria, and other non-Covid things. So yes including all UK construction, shop, transport, garage workers etc. But you have to start somewhere and healthcare workers are the place to start for all the exact reasons Ali K gave.

If you want me to show my mercenary side, if you were hard-hearted you might argue that perhaps you could expect say bus companies to be a little behind the curve on protecting their workforce from infectious diseases. Not to forgive any resulting deaths you understand, but it wouldn't come as a huge surprise to find that their procedures on this were a little weak as they are playing catch up. And as Ali says how do you reasonably know they contracted it at work? But yes it would be very interesting to know about this side of things too I agree. I will update my FOI request.

Sending doctors and nurses into Covid wards is a much more clear cut situation.

However if as you say the death rate for healthcare workers is in the same proportion as in the general population, and it turns out from investigation that none of the around 100 healthcare workers died as a result of their work, then at least the sector will know that actually they were well protected at work. Given what doctors and nurses themselves are saying, it doesn't seem likely, but we should know the facts. Much as I genuinely love "More or Less", I think the HSE will have a more solid take on this.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on April 22, 2020, 10:46:34 am
Look up 'more or less' from today for example. The average death rate from covid in UK population for people of working age is currently around 1 in 19,000.
The number of NHS staff recorded as dying from covid roughly correlates with the number of deaths expected in the wider population: 1 in 19,000. There are assumptions involved and you can fiddle around with them, and the proportions are likely to increase. But it isn't drastically different from the general population.

That's a reasonable comparison only if the NHS deaths share the same profiles as those in the general population in terms of age, underlying medical conditions, etc.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 22, 2020, 11:09:30 am
Bet you wont get those stats easily OMM, so Pete's stats are a very good proxy in the face of limited data. (Also, you might well expect non-COVID but COVID-related deaths to map broadly equally by work demographic, so unless you have a good reason to believe otherwise the proxy is likely to work well)

Not really.

For instance, within construction, there are too many different disciplines, with different working practices/levels of contact with others, etc etc.
Same applies to the other sectors, of course, but those sectors with high “back room” ratios (lower public interaction) versus “front line” (higher public interaction) will throw off the death ratios.

For it to be meaningful, you’re going to have to narrow it to, say, Carpenters, or Nurses; not Construction or NHS.

Even then, that’s not going to actually paint a clear picture for something like “Nurses”. You’re going to have to know how many “Nurses” are working on Covid wards (and admissions?) rather than the total number of “Nurses” to have any real insight into the effect of the PPE issue.

S, I don’t see this being an easy thing for the general public to get a handle on.

Imagine a provincial hospital/trust, with only a few covid patients, where the ration of nurses to patients is higher than a very busy city hospital/trust. What do you do? Take the busy hospital and consider it representative? Average between the two?

Edit:
Anyway, how the hell do really know what numbers to start with, because, at the very least, the official numbers are highly suspect:
 https://www.ft.com/content/67e6a4ee-3d05-43bc-ba03-e239799fa6ab (https://www.ft.com/content/67e6a4ee-3d05-43bc-ba03-e239799fa6ab)

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 22, 2020, 11:21:05 am
They've calculated the number for London transport. 1 death in every 1,100 workers. Magnitudes higher than the average of 1 in 19,000.
Pete, this last bit of reasoning is both technically correct and disingenuous.
Singling out the CV19 deaths and stating that proportion coincides with expected death rates of the general population is a false indicator.
The true indicator of CV19’s seriousness is it’s influence on  number of deaths from all causes and how it deviates from the norm.
This applies regardless of the section of, or entirety of, the population it applies to.

Otherwise, in the case of the NHS deaths (or the others) you have singled out, you appear to suggest that group have stopped dying from anything else.


It will be interesting, Pete, to see if the constitution industry’s toll is significantly at odds with the national average, and I imagine some law firms are wondering the same thing...

I think you've misinterpreted what I'm saying Mat. That's the rate of covid deaths, not the rate for all deaths.

I.e. 1 in 1,100 workers dead *from covid* for London Transport. 1 in 19,000 workers dead *from covid* in the general population.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on April 22, 2020, 11:26:08 am
Yes, ideally you'd subdivide by every imaginable variable, or introduce a fudge based on a bigger dataset to account for them, but you're liable to be waiting a long time for that study, and it's certainly not something you're going to smash out in 5minutes of research. Ru's point on comparisons between general pop and any subgroup of working age is something you'd want to introduce a fudge for fairly quickly, but it's likely to be less important when comparing transport workers to NHS as you've already filtered out retirees (the most affected group) in both groups. Adjusting for London would be an early (and probably doable) step too, if it's London transport workers than Pete's stat is for.

As a first pass, if you see a 15x variation between NHS/general pop and transport workers it's likely to be safe to assume that there's something there worth investigating. It's not like it's 1.5x where you might think it's liable to just be noise from ethnicity, age demographics etc. The 15x discrepancy doesn't prove anything, but it stick a big red flag up in your face that something's probably going very wrong for that group of workers.


Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 22, 2020, 11:30:12 am
I haven't read Ru's or other posts yet but another point just quickly -
We already have an example in London Transport of workers dying of covid in a high proportion compared to the average covid deaths per head of working age in the entire population.

Surely, it isn't beyond the whit of people to look at this example, and think that this same phenomenon must be going on in other humans who are also still in the workplace mostly without social distancing or PPE, away from the NHS which the media and public seem pre-occupied with.

Oh and: if we can record covid deaths then surely we can find out what their jobs were.. it would be prudent to see if there was a pattern emerging.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 22, 2020, 11:39:23 am
Matt, in answer to your last post - I agree. But how many NHS staff, of those reported of having died of covid, worked on covid wards or in ICU etc. (I'm not up with the various areas in a hospital). Do we know? If we don't - and I'm not saying we do or don't btw - then we shouldn't treat 'all NHS' as any different to 'all construction'.

And Alex/Ru -- the stats I re-posted from 'more or less' are for working-age population only, not whole population.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 22, 2020, 01:57:06 pm
Matt, in answer to your last post - I agree. But how many NHS staff, of those reported of having died of covid, worked on covid wards or in ICU etc. (I'm not up with the various areas in a hospital). Do we know? If we don't - and I'm not saying we do or don't btw - then we shouldn't treat 'all NHS' as any different to 'all construction'.

And Alex/Ru -- the stats I re-posted from 'more or less' are for working-age population only, not whole population.

Mate, I’m not making myself clear, sorry.

I don’t think we know enough at all to make even vague calculations.
TFL, were they all drivers? Face to face, close contact with numerous members of the public, or one office with a super spreader?
I know, in that case, it’s reported as the former, so it may be accurate, but otherwise?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 22, 2020, 02:26:45 pm
The last report I saw was 22 had died and they were reported as all being drivers.

As of today that number of deaths from covid-19 among TfL workers increased to 29. Out of a total workforce of 26,000 (2018/19).

https://tfl.gov.uk/campaign/message-from-transport-commissioner-mike-brown-mvo?intcmp=62693 (https://tfl.gov.uk/campaign/message-from-transport-commissioner-mike-brown-mvo?intcmp=62693)

This is a red flag surely.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 22, 2020, 03:08:51 pm
Testing is shit and shit is testing:

 https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/04/coronavirus-found-paris-sewage-points-early-warning-system?utm_campaign=ScienceNow&utm_source=JHubbard&utm_medium=Facebook# (https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/04/coronavirus-found-paris-sewage-points-early-warning-system?utm_campaign=ScienceNow&utm_source=JHubbard&utm_medium=Facebook#)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 22, 2020, 03:48:45 pm
Nice post OMM.

Guardian flagging up research saying nicotine may inhibit Cv progress in patients. Based on general rates of hospitalised CV victims in France being c5% smokers - and that of the overall population (of same age) being 20% (I’ve got the figured wrong but you get the jist). Similar to Chinese findings on this.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/22/french-study-suggests-smokers-at-lower-risk-of-getting-coronavirus?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

There was another interesting article yesterday about how some mutations of the virus may be more deadly than others - leading to different deaths rates globally...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on April 22, 2020, 08:11:20 pm
Guardian flagging up research saying nicotine may inhibit Cv progress in patients.

Finally! Knew the tabs (now vapes) would come good one day.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 22, 2020, 08:16:38 pm
Yes it’s an interesting effect as you’d actually expect the opposite as smokers lungs are more vulnerable.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 22, 2020, 08:39:00 pm
Time to buy shares in Nicotine Replacement Therapies.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on April 22, 2020, 08:39:15 pm
You would think that yes. It was due to come back into fashion at some point though.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 22, 2020, 08:49:04 pm
More numbers and indications that the UK is not alone in under reporting it’s daily toll.
 https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2020/04/16/tracking-covid-19-excess-deaths-across-countries?fsrc=scn/fb/te/bl/ed/covid19datatrackingcovid19excessdeathsacrosscountriesgraphicdetail (https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2020/04/16/tracking-covid-19-excess-deaths-across-countries?fsrc=scn/fb/te/bl/ed/covid19datatrackingcovid19excessdeathsacrosscountriesgraphicdetail)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on April 22, 2020, 08:50:26 pm
The last report I saw was 22 had died and they were reported as all being drivers.

As of today that number of deaths from covid-19 among TfL workers increased to 29. Out of a total workforce of 26,000 (2018/19).

https://tfl.gov.uk/campaign/message-from-transport-commissioner-mike-brown-mvo?intcmp=62693 (https://tfl.gov.uk/campaign/message-from-transport-commissioner-mike-brown-mvo?intcmp=62693)

This is a red flag surely.

Yes that is a red flag. Are TFL getting good advice on Covid 19 mitigation measures I wonder? It doesn't look like it from those figures. As I intimated in a previous post, I imagine transport companies' risk assessment is more biased towards things like driving hazards / antisocial behaviour / diesel etc. With the best will in the world their H&S team probably don't have the best grasp of infectious diseases. Looks like that needs to change asap. I don't know what they currently have, but mandatory contactless payment, fully enclosed driver's compartment, maybe open driver's window (?), driver's masks, and planned regime of proper bus / train cleaning daily would perhaps be the least to be expected. Anyone in London offer info on the situation? Hopefully the powers that be will increase protection levels beyond what they currently are ASAP, as they don't seem to working. Caveat - unless all cases have been contracted outside work. But again, similar to healthcare workers, in absence of hard evidence precautionary principle says do it anyway. Or shut the transport down.

I will update my FOI request to specify TFL workers (apparently it can speed the response to be quite specific).

Incidentally this will be widespread throughout sectors like retail, transport etc., and it is probably incumbent for those of the general public who can chip in with any knowledge to offer a helpful suggestion to management. E.g. if a local shop has a screen over the side of the checkout but not at the end where you actually stand (happened in my Lidl) then mention it. If there is no spray for the trolley / basket handle - same again.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on April 22, 2020, 09:13:47 pm
More numbers and indications that the UK is not alone in under reporting it’s daily toll.
 https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2020/04/16/tracking-covid-19-excess-deaths-across-countries?fsrc=scn/fb/te/bl/ed/covid19datatrackingcovid19excessdeathsacrosscountriesgraphicdetail (https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2020/04/16/tracking-covid-19-excess-deaths-across-countries?fsrc=scn/fb/te/bl/ed/covid19datatrackingcovid19excessdeathsacrosscountriesgraphicdetail)

Interesting OMM thanks (also thanks for link to FT article earlier saying similar). The only immediate comments I have are that 20K deaths being a "good result" (! Hmmm) for the UK seems to have already definitively been passed. So we are now into doing badly even by our government's own macabre standards. Another is that it would be good to see similar data for Germany as they have been accused by some of under-reporting - this data might give an indication of whether that is true or not. The other would be that despite the shit China is getting from some quarters for its numbers, their retrospective revision looks a little more understandable now.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on April 23, 2020, 11:22:59 am
A public health prof's plea to the UK government to watch what happens as countries in Europe ease the lockdown.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/apr/23/europe-is-easing-coronavirus-lockdowns-the-uks-failures-have-never-been-so-stark
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: seankenny on April 23, 2020, 01:58:00 pm

I don't know what they currently have, but mandatory contactless payment

Awww bless!
(Sorry I couldn’t help myself. Yes, we have had that for so long I can’t remember using cash on a London bus.)



, fully enclosed driver's compartment, maybe open driver's window (?), driver's masks, and planned regime of proper bus / train cleaning daily would perhaps be the least to be expected. Anyone in London offer info on the situation?


Not sure about the cleaning but they have everything else. My father in law is a London bus driver.


Or shut the transport down.


Transport here is virtually dead in terms of users but still operating on a limited service. Don’t want it shut down tho.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on April 23, 2020, 02:22:45 pm
Thanks for the update Sean, always good to hear tales from the big city. Up here as long as you have a carrot for the horse and a tab for the driver you're all good.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on April 23, 2020, 02:40:42 pm
My own n=1 is that the lockdown is now largely defunct. Went out for a lunchtime cycle and the traffic on the roads was equivalent to what I would expect to see on any usual Thursday lunchtime. Multiple people who I would strongly suspect don't live together out and about. Past couple of days I've seen large groups of young people aged between 20s and 30s cycling together (not lycra clad road cyclists - chavs on mountain bikes) going down our road. I expect a lot of these people are off work and are quite bored and just think, "I'm not in the at risk category".
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: seankenny on April 23, 2020, 02:51:29 pm
Thanks for the update Sean, always good to hear tales from the big city. Up here as long as you have a carrot for the horse and a tab for the driver you're all good.

Update: just got on a bus... no touching in required and the drivers area is completely taped off, you enter by the rear  door.

Hope those horses are staying safe...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on April 23, 2020, 03:14:25 pm
My own n=1 is that the lockdown is now largely defunct.

That was my experience yesterday. Arterial roads were back to normal traffic levels (god knows where they’re getting the vehicle usage data from as it doesn’t bear any relation to my observations over the last few weeks - including the A1(M) which I can see from my evening walk). Remote pull ins packed, picnickers out in full force, groups blatantly not from the same household etc etc. Basically no different from a regular sunny weekend day.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on April 23, 2020, 03:25:46 pm
Also, can anyone help on this?...
There is a morass of Covid 19 data out there. However one thing I cannot find anywhere is a historical record of *how many covid 19 tests per day* have been done in the UK...
The reason is I would like to keep tabs on how the "ramping up" to 100K is going.

There’s a good graphic showing this on the Guardian live blog now. If I was more competent I’d embed the image, but the answer is that the “ramping up” isn’t going well.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 23, 2020, 03:49:49 pm
https://twitter.com/DHSCgovuk/status/1253321773480697856/photo/1 (https://twitter.com/DHSCgovuk/status/1253321773480697856/photo/1)

https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2020/apr/23/coronavirus-live-news-update-covid-19-face-masks?CMP=share_btn_tw&page=with:block-5ea19afb8f08eb2f433f51d5#block-5ea19afb8f08eb2f433f51d5 (https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2020/apr/23/coronavirus-live-news-update-covid-19-face-masks?CMP=share_btn_tw&page=with:block-5ea19afb8f08eb2f433f51d5#block-5ea19afb8f08eb2f433f51d5)

Can't embed it either
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 23, 2020, 03:50:39 pm
Its linear (and not fast enough) rather than the exponential growth that Raab seemed so convinced about at PMQ's.

Not that I'm cynical :)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on April 23, 2020, 04:38:32 pm
My own n=1 is that the lockdown is now largely defunct.

That was my experience yesterday. Arterial roads were back to normal traffic levels (god knows where they’re getting the vehicle usage data from as it doesn’t bear any relation to my observations over the last few weeks - including the A1(M) which I can see from my evening walk). Remote pull ins packed, picnickers out in full force, groups blatantly not from the same household etc etc. Basically no different from a regular sunny weekend day.

Yes, getting that way in Sheff too bar the fact a lot are still off work. Approx 40 cars at Redmires today (including mine). However I only saw couples and families and everyone was far further apart than at the park. I continue to see it as a good thing that should be encouraged.

However the creep back to normality in towns - and those who continued with non-essential work - is quite the opposite. I can't see how we'll avoid a significant second wave personally.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 23, 2020, 04:59:18 pm
From my n=1 it certainly seems busier on the roads today. But a long way from normal. There is also no rush hour. If anything it’s quieter (no one out and about during the day?)

Also from my bubble contractors have started working on a housing development nearby - and other contractors are re-doing all the roadside fillers and pipes around the corner. Neither of which are non essential I’d wager.

I do wonder if we’ll see some stronger enforcement / interpretation before any relaxation. After all now is the critical time.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: moose on April 23, 2020, 06:00:43 pm
The "creep back towards average" I suspected a week or so ago does seem to be continuing.  I've had fire scene visits in the North East and Lincolnshire this week.  On both occasions there was more traffic on the A1 than previous weeks (which was already an increase from the weeks before that), and more pedestrians in the towns. With the increase in people who had evidently driven to Ilkley Moor last weekend, I fear that a lot of people have pretty much abandoned isolation.  Or maybe I am just gloomily seeing confirmation bias (for 6 weeks the only people I have met and spoken to at any length - at a safe distance of course -  have been fire victims....).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on April 23, 2020, 06:26:10 pm
I do wonder if we’ll see some stronger enforcement / interpretation before any relaxation. After all now is the critical time.

Nah. We'll get some 'please do keep staying at home' platitudes for the next week or two, while ignoring any increasing non-essential economic activity. The official lockdown lift will be fairly late but academic as most will be ignoring it anyway. I'm increasingly convinced they want us at home curtain-twitching on the neighbours so we aren't out and about seeing how many people are still working. They're relying on the good people of the land to take the economic hit by choice while the greedheads keep working.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on April 23, 2020, 06:56:18 pm
Neither of which are non essential I’d wager.

The thing is, there's never been any instruction from government to stop non-essential work. Anyone who can't work from home is to carry on as normal with an updated, but probably not honoured, risk assessment that says that colleagues shall avoid licking each other.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on April 23, 2020, 07:07:34 pm
Quite. I shut down our business early under the assumption that guidance or ruling would follow so our competitors etc wouldn't carry on regardless. No such information followed, and I strongly suspect these will turn out to be the most significant lines of transmission. One of the biggest failings of the goverment imho.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on April 23, 2020, 07:23:11 pm
 :agree:
Of course it will be the #covidiot going for too long a walk/cycle who will conveniently bear the blame in many minds/newspapers.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: T_B on April 23, 2020, 08:58:45 pm
Had a quick ride out into the Peak at 5pm. Lots of cars driving in town (no doubt back from B&Q) but quiet once in the Peak. 6 cars parked at Curbar Gap, 1 at Froggatt bend, none below the Grouse.

Yesterday at a similar time I did my local (running) loop around Eccy woods. Families standing around casually chatting with the adults 2m away from each other but young kids and doggies mingling. 80% of dogs off leads.

Lockdown schmockdown.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on April 23, 2020, 09:09:59 pm
30+ cars at Redmires today. I think the drone shaming and negative Nat Park signage is putting people off travelling over the border to Derbyshire.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on April 24, 2020, 07:14:07 am
There’s a good graphic showing this on the Guardian live blog now. If I was more competent I’d embed the image, but the answer is that the “ramping up” isn’t going well.

Thanks for the heads up Ali, I was out and about so on my phone hence couldn't embed either (not that I'd have the skills anyway!), but I did see it.

To illustrate for those who didn't, you are right we appear to be nowhere close - 23,560 tests on Wednesday. Those tests actually tested 14,629 people. By its own estimates the government says there is approximately 10 million key workers in the UK, and they want to test them all. At the current level of testing I calculate that will take nearly 2 years to do. Hopefully the test numbers will increase "exponentially" as promised - they need to. Whatever ramps the government have procured for their "ramping up" of various critical planks of tackling the virus do seem rather gentle. We needed ski jumps, and they got us the ones they used to drag the blocks up when they built the pyramids.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on April 24, 2020, 07:44:09 am
Our radio wakes us up in the morning, and this was on the Radio 1 headlines.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-52406342
Now I know radio 1 is hardly high-level thinking, but why would you put this on the headlines? Ok, it looks bad, but it only looks bad because we're involved in this pointless "some people are having a shit time so everyone has to have a shit time" bollocks.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Wood FT on April 24, 2020, 07:51:03 am
Our radio wakes us up in the morning, and this was on the Radio 1 headlines.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-52406342
Now I know radio 1 is hardly high-level thinking, but why would you put this on the headlines? Ok, it looks bad, but it only looks bad because we're involved in this pointless "some people are having a shit time so everyone has to have a shit time" bollocks.

Radio 1?  :lol: Makes so much sense now.

Poor buggers on that sub. Should have just had the BBQ inside, that's what we're doing and we're fine£$@

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: stone on April 24, 2020, 08:12:00 am
I'm guessing that the 100k tests/day could be met by the end of the month. They requisitioned loads of PCR machines (and Kingfisher RNA purifying machines) from universities etc back in mid March. Each PCR machine can run a thousand or so tests per day. They have more volunteers to run them than they know what to do with (the people who were using them before they were requisitioned signed up at the time of requisitioning). The increase in "capacity" is exponential because the mode of growth is that the people let in to test are all showing the next bunch where everything is and how things are done.

The main job with swab testing is actually opening the swab tubes and dolling out the snot to purify the RNA from it. That is what 70% of the people involved are doing. I did my first session of that yesterday. Great fun and a great bunch of people. It has a very stringent safety set up with negative pressure hoods and protocols for putting double gloves on etc.

Apparently the one thing Sheffield University has been allowed to do for the national swab testing effort is a mechanical engineering effort to try and automate opening swab tubes and dolling out the snot. I know nothing about that sort of thing but, to be honest, it doesn't come across as an easy to automate job (lots of awkward double bags and broken swabs etc etc). In a counterfactual situation where those swabs were some safe part of an uninteresting arcane research project that I was doing on my own; I guess I would just be dipping the swabs directly from the testee's nose into a 96well plate of virus-dissolving lysis solution ready to plug into the automated workflow -and so never have swab tubes to worry about.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: stone on April 24, 2020, 08:39:37 am
The M60 and M67 yesterday were similarly busy at 7am as at 2pm. Lots of vans. My guess is that almost all of the road traffic is work related rather than these evil BBQ antics apparently plaguing us.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on April 24, 2020, 10:00:30 am
Our radio wakes us up in the morning, and this was on the Radio 1 headlines.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-52406342
Now I know radio 1 is hardly high-level thinking, but why would you put this on the headlines? Ok, it looks bad, but it only looks bad because we're involved in this pointless "some people are having a shit time so everyone has to have a shit time" bollocks.

Quote
The captain of HMS Trenchant, a nuclear-powered attack submarine based at Devonport in Plymouth, has been sent home on leave.

Ah that will help...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on April 24, 2020, 10:06:01 am
Sailors drinking? Whatever next?

 :tumble:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 24, 2020, 10:30:06 am
OT

*Rant*

Sent home on leave, is serious, for him.

It’s also all so fucking wrong it’s beyond belief and the scuttlebutt is of almost mutiny levels of discontent, fleet wide.

I expect it to be “forgotten” as soon as  the media do, because a crew who had been isolated, under the fucking oggin for several months and then kept in isolation, inside an ultra secure compound, within the pretty secure compound that is a Naval Dockyard, are perfectly fucking entitled to socialise together within the fucking compound.

So, the MOD and Whitehall have made a PR decision to treat the Skipper as a disgraced officer awaiting disciplinary action (which I didn’t believe will ever materialise), but, my mates (all now LTCdr, Cdr or Cpt) are not holding back in their ire.

OF 4’s and 5’s are often tempted away by private enterprise and their retention is a huge headache for the RN (hence why I’m rejoining at OF 4, along with about 20 other merchant officers), but these guys actually command the ships of the fleet; if they think the RN is going to fuck them over for PR reasons as petty as this, then they’ll be gone.
(OF 5, Captain, is almost a dead-end rank. You either make Admiral or retire, so most look outside the service after a few years at rank).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on April 24, 2020, 10:33:51 am
Agree. What's an average stint underwater? About the safest bbq on the planet right now.

In lockdown lifting news, just had an email from Petzl:

Quote
Last week, with the mutual agreement of both our employees and management team, we decided to resume operations within our distribution center. This is done with our full commitment to protect the health and safety of our employees. In the following weeks our production will gradually resume to 100% operational.

This from the supposedly more strict lockdown in France. According to JWI's graphs they're about 5 days ahead of us deathwise.  :wave: :wave:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: T_B on April 24, 2020, 10:57:46 am
Yeah saw that.

Contractors back on our road today continuing with an extension on #1.

We’re all in this together.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 24, 2020, 11:22:47 am
Our radio wakes us up in the morning, and this was on the Radio 1 headlines.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-52406342
Now I know radio 1 is hardly high-level thinking, but why would you put this on the headlines? Ok, it looks bad, but it only looks bad because we're involved in this pointless "some people are having a shit time so everyone has to have a shit time" bollocks.

Quote
The captain of HMS Trenchant, a nuclear-powered attack submarine based at Devonport in Plymouth, has been sent home on leave.

Ah that will help...

Media businesses making hay out of a crisis? Whatever next.
The behaviour of most of the media irks me in normal times, but especially irksome in a crisis. See the PPE moral panic. Not making light of anyone dying. I'll believe PPE was worth all the media hysteria when we see the evidence of excess mortality among various sectors.
Sometimes I slip into thinking that this pandemic would be dealt with more quickly and efficiently if we had Chinese state-control of all the media cunts and Nigel (joking, he's not a cunt just a pesky truth-seeker) and let our dear leaders democratic government get on with the task of making difficult decisions. But then I suppose they'd just make fuck-ups in private and perhaps more of them.
Still, I'm not convinced by the argument that our adversarial media cunts are supposed to incentivise our government cunts through fear of shaming and the punishment of ridicule. Large body of evidence shows it doesn't work in any other area of life - parenting, work. Positive reinforcement, backed by authority to sanction, works best in every other area of life, so why not in government? One to ponder maybe.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on April 24, 2020, 11:33:47 am
Nigel (joking, he's not a cunt....)

How dare you! Of course I am!

I'll believe PPE was worth all the media hysteria when we see the evidence of excess mortality among various sectors.

I did some welding without a mask once and my eyes are fine. So I guess by that principle you might be right  ;)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 24, 2020, 11:53:47 am
Fair enough, I'll re-phrase that to: I'll believe that it was worth the public hysteria caused by all the implications by the media that supplies of PPE are responsible for excess mortality among healthcare workers, when we see the evidence of excess mortality among various sectors plus the general population by age group.

I got snow-blindness once from removing my eye-wear for 1 hour at altitude, so I think you were lucky. 8)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on April 24, 2020, 12:02:20 pm
Fair enough, I'll re-phrase that to: I'll believe that it was worth the public hysteria caused by all the implications by the media that supplies of PPE are responsible for excess mortality among healthcare workers, when we see the evidence of excess mortality among various sectors plus the general population by age group.

I imagine most hospital workers aren't too keen to just wait and see how many of them die compared to the general population before they kick up a fuss about PPE.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 24, 2020, 12:11:51 pm
So there’s this:

 https://www.energypeople.com/news/story/new-snood-for-offshore-workers-is-better-than-n95-mask-and-could-be-a-game-changer-in-corona-fight (https://www.energypeople.com/news/story/new-snood-for-offshore-workers-is-better-than-n95-mask-and-could-be-a-game-changer-in-corona-fight)

A Mate, currently at day 93 in isolation on board his dive support vessel, off Saudi, shared this.

Couldn’t make out the entire post, due to (I think) auto correct of some expletives, but the words “heat”, “sweat” and “Ducking Birch” seemed to be common.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on April 24, 2020, 12:57:40 pm
I'll believe that it was worth the public hysteria caused by all the implications by the media that supplies of PPE are responsible for excess mortality among healthcare workers, when we see the evidence of excess mortality among various sectors plus the general population by age group.

So you think the media are whipping up public hysteria by highlighting the PPE supply shortfalls? And by voicing healthcare workers’ fears of PPE shortages? Wow that’s cynical.

Of the ‘essential workers’ I would have put the doctors and nurses who by necessity have to come into direct contact with infected patients right up there at the top of the list. And if they can’t be supplied with sufficient PPE to be safe or at the very least feel safe when they go to work then fuck me something has gone catastrophically wrong.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on April 24, 2020, 01:07:03 pm
Fair enough, I'll re-phrase that to: I'll believe that it was worth the public hysteria caused by all the implications by the media that supplies of PPE are responsible for excess mortality among healthcare workers, when we see the evidence of excess mortality among various sectors plus the general population by age group.

I imagine most hospital workers aren't too keen to just wait and see how many of them die compared to the general population before they kick up a fuss about PPE.

Exactly. Jesus fucking Christ, get some empathy.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: stone on April 24, 2020, 01:18:27 pm
Does everyone now have the impression that they have backtracked on relying on herd immunity to get us out of lockdown? If so then I guess they are hoping that lockdown will cause infections to dwindle down to a point where contact tracing becomes manageable and a test-trace-isolate regime can be used. I've been wondering what sort of ballpark time scale that might take and how much longer our lockdown needs to be thanks to our flirtation with a herd immunity strategy (making all the normal gross simplifications etc).

I suppose about 10k people were fatally infected when lockdown came in on March23. If case fatality rate is about 1% then that would be 1M cases in the UK at that time. Perhaps test-trace-isolate becomes feasible with 1000 cases in UK. So we are wanting a 1000x reduction in infections.

If R is 0.8 now that we have lockdown, it will take about 30 virus transmission generations to get that 1000x reduction. With a five day generation time, that would be five months-ish.

A month long lockdown would have been enough had we implemented the lockdown by the time we had 4000 cases rather than a million. If R was 2.5 before lockdown then that means we would have had to have had lockdown a month earlier for that.

No doubt this is totally muddled by me! Sorry.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on April 24, 2020, 01:31:03 pm
This is why I'm confused about the gov strategy - if that's the strategy, it's a shit one. Much better to lockdown way harder, whatever estimates you make for the numbers. If it's not the strategy, then what is? Unfortunately nothing the gov says on this seems to shed any light. I don't really get why the media aren't pushing harder on the "isn't your strategy kind of muddled bollocks?" question.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on April 24, 2020, 01:43:13 pm
This is why I'm confused about the gov strategy - if that's the strategy, it's a shit one. Much better to lockdown way harder, whatever estimates you make for the numbers. If it's not the strategy, then what is? Unfortunately nothing the gov says on this seems to shed any light. I don't really get why the media aren't pushing harder on the "isn't your strategy kind of muddled bollocks?" question.

The strategy has evolved as time has gone on.

1: Let's do nothing, it will probably all go away.
2: It's not gone away, but it's not that bad, no-one will tolerate a lockdown, so let's just let everyone get it. Probably all a bit late now anyway.
3: It's actually quite bad and we don't think people will put up with thousands of deaths. Let's lock down.
4: We've been locked down for a while now, the economy is a bit fucked, people are getting shirty, but virus death numbers are dropping a bit. Let's carry on locking down a bit longer with a plan to stop in a few weeks and then see what happens.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 24, 2020, 02:14:51 pm
5: In summary:
Minister 1: I have no idea
Minister 2: This is scary, me neither
Both: Let's obfuscate and pretend we do, till Boris takes responsibility, he can't dodge it forever.

Stone, you almost seem to suggest there that the speed of response in a pandemic of exponential growth impacts the outcome...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 24, 2020, 02:49:21 pm
I think we will now see herd immunity via the back door. Bear with me....

Herd immunity via natural immunity (if this actually happens - its not certain) or via vaccination is ultimately the only way this virus will be overcome/worked around.

But, politically the herd immunity fell flat on its face. Herd? Eh? are we a load of cattle (cue Piers Morgans eyes popping out of his head etc..). Further, the public were (understandably) not happy that granny would be left to die in order to help the general population. So - about face and try and do something better - but it was obviously too late.

So keeping R close to 1 is basically about managing case load on the NHS... Keeping the number of cases managable - whilst allowing enough of the economy to function without everything tanking - or our debt becoming totally unweildy.

I'll be a cynical f*cker here and say track and trace is really a political tool to sweeten the pill of the next year or two of shitness. The virus is so widespread we would require a very effective stasi to keep on top of it (and even Singapore couldn't) and as Stone calculates the number of cases would take months to come down to being managable. Tech - apps - nice try - but only a certain percentage of the population have smartphones (with the appropriate bluetooth technology) and mass data gathering of our mobile phone movements, ANPR data, facial recognition etc.. aside from being difficult to iplement would bust all sorts of data protection/privacy rules.

Problem is - 50-100k people will die in total. I doubt the numbers with our shonky lock down will get much below 100 people a day - for 300 days... 30k...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on April 24, 2020, 03:10:54 pm
I wonder if SAGE is really just someone in the background shouting "push on" and "fuck it, just do it", a bit like Loskott from Dosage 2?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 24, 2020, 03:12:55 pm
Fair enough, I'll re-phrase that to: I'll believe that it was worth the public hysteria caused by all the implications by the media that supplies of PPE are responsible for excess mortality among healthcare workers, when we see the evidence of excess mortality among various sectors plus the general population by age group.

I imagine most hospital workers aren't too keen to just wait and see how many of them die compared to the general population before they kick up a fuss about PPE.

Exactly. Jesus fucking Christ, get some empathy.

No I don't think they 'should wait to see how many die'. From spider's and ali's responses clearly it's a subject that can't be talked about with any rationality or you're accused of lacking empathy. There isn't clear evidence that 1. there is excess mortality in healthcare compared to other sectors. 2. Lack of PPE has led to deaths of healthcare workers. 3. There has actually been large-scale instances of PPE actually running out and staff in high risk areas working unprotected - valid concern over supplies running out is different to running out and not having PPE. If evidence emerges I'll change my mind. I'm not saying people shouldn't have concerns. Nor that those concerns shouldn't be made public, course they should. But there's making concerns public, and there's media whipping up moral panic - they're good at that. I know what I meant, I'll leave it at that.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: stone on April 24, 2020, 03:52:55 pm
I was crossing my fingers and hoping that they were going to spring a surprise with serology testing such that it would transpire that 60% of us had already had it without realising and we consequently already had herd immunity or something like that. The announcements of that sort though so far seem so flaky and yet lots of serology testing is being done seriously by others apparently. The fact that there hasn't been any reputable fanfare of that sort is making my hopes fade right away.

I was wondering whether the death rate of some ultra exposed group might give some indication of a lower bound for how bad it would be for the "non-vulnerable" to all get COVID19. Twenty London bus drivers have died of it but there are 25k in total which perhaps makes it seem OK-ish. Is there any other cohort of well/ working age (ie would not be shielded under current current COVID rules) people anywhere in the world with a much higher death rate yet?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on April 24, 2020, 04:15:49 pm
There isn't clear evidence that 1. there is excess mortality in healthcare compared to other sectors. 2. Lack of PPE has led to deaths of healthcare workers. 3. There has actually been large-scale instances of PPE actually running out and staff in high risk areas working unprotected

Of course there isn’t. That will only come out in the inevitable public enquiry, or at the very least once the data is complete and available - potentially years down the line.

Quote
If evidence emerges I'll change my mind.
...there's making concerns public, and there's media whipping up moral panic - they're good at that.

So in the absence of the above data your default position is to assume that the media (and by extension the individuals, organisations and unions sounding the alarm bells) are “whipping up moral panic”. Fuck me.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: stone on April 24, 2020, 04:41:46 pm
I don't see how there can be any ambiguity about whether or not UK medical staff had adequate PPE. They didn't and they caught COVID as a result (well the two COVID ward doctors I know personally both did). https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/06/nhs-doctors-lacking-ppe-bullied-into-treating-covid-19-patients

NHS staff weren't even asking for kit like that in South Korea (where no health care workers have died of COVID). All that was that being asked for was for the previously stated UK standards for PPE to be met.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 24, 2020, 04:51:28 pm
Guardian had a memo from late 2019 presented to cabinet (I think) about the impacts of a mild pandemic on the UK. Prescient.

Quote
• A pandemic would play out in up to “three waves”, with each wave expected to last 15 weeks … “with the peak weeks occurring at weeks 6 and 7 in each wave”.

• 50% of the population would be infected and experience symptoms of pandemic influenza during the one or more waves. The actual number of people infected would be higher than this, as there would be a number of asymptomatic cases.

• A pandemic of moderate virulence could lead to 65,600 deaths.

• The potential cost to the UK could be £2.35tn.

• Even after the end of the pandemic, it is likely that it would take months or even years for health and social care services to recover.

• There would be significant public outrage over any perceived poor handling of the government’s preparations and response to the emergency.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/24/revealed-uk-ministers-were-warned-last-year-of-risks-of-coronavirus-pandemic?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 24, 2020, 05:47:20 pm
There isn't clear evidence that 1. there is excess mortality in healthcare compared to other sectors. 2. Lack of PPE has led to deaths of healthcare workers. 3. There has actually been large-scale instances of PPE actually running out and staff in high risk areas working unprotected

Of course there isn’t. That will only come out in the inevitable public enquiry, or at the very least once the data is complete and available - potentially years down the line.

Quote
If evidence emerges I'll change my mind.
...there's making concerns public, and there's media whipping up moral panic - they're good at that.

So in the absence of the above data your default position is to assume that the media (and by extension the individuals, organisations and unions sounding the alarm bells) are “whipping up moral panic”. Fuck me.

No, and I wish people could consider things without putting words in other people's mouths. My default position is that the truth of what actual impact the PPE situation had on outcomes probably lies somewhere between the picture portrayed in the media and by staff; and the picture portrayed by the government.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on April 24, 2020, 06:28:01 pm
I always find what you write interesting Pete, but I think you're miles off the mark here. Raising questions about whether PPE is as important as the NHS/media say it is isn't commendable "free thinking", it just comes across as bellendry (to use that word again). I find it quite distasteful to be honest as someone with a partner and numerous friends in the healthcare system. DanMs comment about forums distorting people's true views in bad ways may be relevant here, but that's my take.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 24, 2020, 06:45:12 pm
I think it is good that you post questioning received ideas Pete. We should be interrogating our assumptions, no question. So I had a think about the stats.

1,227,375 full time equivalent healthcare workers in NHS  2018, from ONS stats
Covid19 deaths In NHS currently = 119
=0.0097%

Going off the ONS data, updated 10 April, deaths in hospital aged under 65 = 13% of total
65 seems a reasonable proxy for working age.
So approximating numbers, 13% of 20K current hospital deaths = 260 or so under 65.

So the comparator would be therefore 260 as a percentage of 66.5 million, vs 119 as a percentage 1.25 million.
= 0.00039%

The NHS staff rate of death is about 24 times higher than that of similar demographic in the general population, who don’t have PPE and are likely to be statistically in poorer health than NHS staff.

Whilst the data isn’t available, and the ethics of having a study to compare NHS workers with PPE vs a group completely without would be questionable, I’d want PPE if I worked in hospital. Those numbers look grim.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on April 24, 2020, 06:49:07 pm
I wish people could consider things without putting words in other people's mouths. My default position is that the truth of what actual impact the PPE situation had on outcomes probably lies somewhere between the picture portrayed in the media and by staff; and the picture portrayed by the government.

Ah I see. Three clarifications of your original “media hysteria” position later and we discover that’s not what you meant after all  :-\
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on April 24, 2020, 07:08:33 pm
I think it is good that you post questioning received ideas Pete. We should be interrogating our assumptions, no question. So I had a think about the stats.

1,227,375 full time equivalent healthcare workers in NHS  2018, from ONS stats
Covid19 deaths In NHS currently = 119
=0.0097%

Going off the ONS data, updated 10 April, deaths in hospital aged under 65 = 13% of total
65 seems a reasonable proxy for working age.
So approximating numbers, 13% of 20K current hospital deaths = 260 or so under 65


Unfortunately you've made a factor of 10 error on your percentage calculation.  There's a couple of sources that actually back up the evidence that NHS deaths are very similar to deaths in the general community , More or Less ( radio 4) did a decent back of the envelope calculation and was also pretty good on the caveats around any such calculations.

Below also covers this looks in more details at the BAME figures which do look strange.

https://www.hsj.co.uk/exclusive-deaths-of-nhs-staff-from-covid-19-analysed/7027471.article
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 24, 2020, 07:14:11 pm
Well spotted, shouldn’t cook and calculate at same time... still looks like 2.4 to me which, whilst less dramatic, doesn’t seem encouraging, especially considering it’s despite PPE use etc

I’ll have a look at the link.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 24, 2020, 07:19:57 pm
JonR,

Yes, looking at the stats is where I'm coming from. The more or less programme from yesterday that went through the numbers.

First, if you're comparing NHS population with general population then your general population should be of working age: population should be 42 million not 66 million.

Second, you've under-calculated your deaths in the general population by an order of magnitude. The ONS stats (for when more or less programme was recorded) were 2,145 deaths in general population of working age (65 and under).

Now do your same calcs.

2,145 covid deaths in the general population of working age, divided by 42 million general population of working age, gives you a death rate of 0.0051%

Covid19 deaths In NHS currently = 0.0097%


That this was based on deaths at 16,500 - when the more or less programme was recorded. Today it's in the low 20-thousands.

Do the calcs with the updated figures:
2,500 deaths in working age / 42,000 = 0.0059%

So, back of fag packet calcs show the death rate among NHS staff IS higher than the death rate in the general population of working age. Possibly double, it depends how the numbers increase over time. And then factor in that the whole NHS don't work in high risk areas. So the death rate will be higher again.

But. The death rate for London transport workers is also VASTLY higher than average - 29 workers out of 26,000 total workforce (again, not all working in high risk areas).
29/26,000 = 0.112%

Which makes me think other workers in other sectors also must also be facing similar risk as the NHS, going off the back of a fag packet stats. The construction sector for e.g. is full of over-40s and 50s in poor health. Little social distancing going on.

It also makes me think the huge amount of noise focused around PPE might be more emotional than rational and perhaps doesn't correlate with the spectrum of risks encountered by different parts of the population.

I'm just interested in the truth, not what the media or people with their own agendas want to believe. If the evidence shows that the risk of death for NHS staff is massive compared to other sectors, and that risk has been massively increased by a lack of PPE, then I'll accept that.


Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 24, 2020, 07:22:28 pm
From Ian’s link:

Quote
BAME individuals account for 63 per (of all staff), 64 per cent (of nursing staff) and 95 per cent of (medical staff) deaths in the same staff groups
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 24, 2020, 07:31:39 pm
Pete, thanks for that, it looks around double to me. That, if PPE is meant to be any barrier at all, must be a massive concern. Precautionary principle applies.

Transport workers- well there’s another scandal in train there.

I agree again about not blindly following the drumbeat of the news outlets. I don’t generally, although I do sub the Guardian because I think they are trying to do some genuine journalism, starting from a liberal POV. Your last comment does sound a bit ‘fake news’ ish though.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on April 24, 2020, 07:59:54 pm
I think looking at actual figures is a separate issue to the provision of PPE. There seems to be consensus in general about what PPE is required to work in the various parts of the hospitals. If the government are failing to provide this,  then that is an issue, even if that lack of provision does not result in a single extra death.

As everyone in government is fond of a military metaphor: failing to provide adequate equipment to our soldiers in Afghanistan may not have resulted in any additional deaths, but that does not make it less of an issue.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on April 24, 2020, 08:30:31 pm
It also makes me think the huge amount of noise focused around PPE might be more emotional than rational and perhaps doesn't correlate with the spectrum of risks encountered by different parts of the population.

The media focus on PPE supply to healthcare workers is presumably front and centre because as a country we’re being told to maintain 2m distance from every human outside your household and ideally to stay inside 23hrs a day. But at the same time these frontline staff have to come into direct contact and perform procedures on people expelling huge amounts of the virus for 12hr shifts on a regular basis, so it’s easy for the public to see why having the government recommended PPE in the right quantities is important. A story about construction workers catching the virus would rightly focus more on why the hell they’re still at work instead of ‘can they be supplied with enough PPE’. Bus drivers are somewhere in between, as that’s arguably an essential service for medical staff. The death rates across different sectors will be long picked over and make for interesting reading.

I admire your search for the truth Pete. I just don’t think a desire to put pressure on the government to supply PPE to these workers can or should be described as “hysteria”. Supplying sufficient quantities of PPE to NHS workers should be an absolute bare minimum, and that just hasn’t happened.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 24, 2020, 08:52:58 pm
Actually JonR,

NHS figure on more or less is quoted as 1,470,000 staff of working age (this is 98% of the total staff of 1.5 million)

And, this review  (https://www.hsj.co.uk/exclusive-deaths-of-nhs-staff-from-covid-19-analysed/7027471.article)analyses NHS staff deaths from covid.  119 but 13 were excluded:
''Thirteen cases were excluded — in four cases multiple attempts to confirm information over several days were unsuccessful, in six cases the individual had retired and was not working, and in three the individual was not an active healthcare worker.''

So that leaves 106. It gives 94 NHS staff, 10 social care, 2 dental.

So 94 NHS staff / 1,470,000 = 0.006%

Remember my previous post gave the average death rate in general population of working age = 0.0059%


The jury - at least my jury - is out on the impact of PPE to the risk of NHS staff dying from covid. I'm completely open to changing my opinion based on the evidence changing.

But what this suggests to me that there are bad things happening which aren't being looked at, because people love focusing on an emotionally resonate juicy story with political baggage.


Ali, I agree with much of that. But I'd say if you look back over the typical tone of this forum's opinion on the PPE situation it could fairly be described as bordering on implying the government is culpable for huge excess mortality among NHS staff. Again, I agree it may actually come to that, but it doesn't seem to have to me.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on April 24, 2020, 10:19:00 pm
The problem with that calculation is the proportion who died who work in places with a high risk of covid exposure is massively more than your number as.by far the majority of NHS staff don't work in those situations. It's so obbious I suspect you of trolling. I hope any NHS staff reading that have a forgiving nature.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on April 24, 2020, 10:35:15 pm
NHS figure on more or less is quoted as 1,470,000 staff of working age (this is 98% of the total staff of 1.5 million)

So that leaves 106. It gives 94 NHS staff, 10 social care, 2 dental.

So 94 NHS staff / 1,470,000 = 0.006%

Not a fair comparison. You should only be counting front line NHS staff that are exposed to covid patients. They're who the concern re: PPE is about. The vast majority of the staff you are including will never go near a covid patient, so of course the risk to them is low or close to that of the general population. As an example, less than a 1/3 of NHS staff are doctors and nurses. As far as I am aware the hospitals are also split into "dirty" (covid) and "clean" (non covid) wards to prevent spread so not even all the clinical staff have the same exposure.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 24, 2020, 11:29:55 pm
The problem with that calculation is the proportion who died who work in places with a high risk of covid exposure is massively more than your number as.by far the majority of NHS staff don't work in those situations. It's so obbious I suspect you of trolling. I hope any NHS staff reading that have a forgiving nature.
The expected bellendry from you Offwidth. It isn't my opinion - it's an analysis of the facts published by HSJ 2 days ago.
And my point is not to make light of anything - but to try to understand what's really going on behind the media reports, and what it might imply for others who don't work in the NHS and hence don't have the focus shone on their risk of being at work.

Why not just read the analysis? If you think the report authors are trolling then why don't you send them an email to tell them you don't like what their report says? Hopefully they'll forgive you your bellendry.

Ru,
They note absence of intensive care staff:
Quote
''the absence of certain workforce groups among those who have died, while welcome, is also notable. Anaesthetists, intensive care doctors and by association nurses and physiotherapists who work in similar settings are believed to be among the highest risk groups of all healthcare workers. It is therefore notable that all of these groups are completely absent from the data set.''


They estimate number of patient-facing staff:
Quote
''However, the NHS is estimated to employ approximately 1.2-1.5 million staff, including more than 120,000 doctors, approximately 300,000 nurses and a similar number of healthcare support workers. A modest estimate of the patient-facing NHS workforce might be 600,000-800,000,''

So if all deaths are among just the patient-facing staff then the rate would be 94/700,000 = 0.013% or roughly twice the average for the general population. Or the same fatality rate as that for the whole staff of Transport for London.
However the subgroup of TfL drivers would have a massively higher death rate than patient-facing NHS staff. Which as I say above and elsewhere could suggest serious implications for other workers' risk profiles as we all begin to return to work next month.

On one hand it helps put some context to the amount of furious hot air expelled on the subject of PPE.
On the other hand the figures could actually suggest we need *more* stringent PPE guidance for ALL public-facing workers if you pursue that particular line of logic in the figures.
Or it could suggest anything less than a visor AND a mask is ineffective defence against covid - because the people wearing both of those items aren't in the stats but the people wearing just FFP3 are. Or any number of other lines of logic could follow from the figures.


Some quotes from the study (my emphasis added):
....

Conversely, the absence of certain workforce groups among those who have died, while welcome, is also notable. Anaesthetists, intensive care doctors and by association nurses and physiotherapists who work in similar settings are believed to be among the highest risk groups of all healthcare workers.

This is because both caring for the sickest patients with covid-19 and undertaking airway management (so-called aerosol generating procedures) are associated with high risk of viral exposure and transmission. It is therefore notable that all of these groups are completely absent from the data set.

Again, the reason for this is not known and data on infections and serious illnesses are important to consider as well as fatalities, but these data also are currently lacking. What is likely is that these groups of healthcare staff are rigorous about use of personal protective equipment and the associated practices known to reduce risk.

It may be that this rigour is protecting staff better than some fear and the results can be considered cautiously reassuring. However, this finding is not a reason to slacken off on the appropriately rigorous use of PPE, but rather to wonder why others, who are likely involved in what are generally considered to be lower risk activities, are becoming infected and consider whether wider use of rigorous PPE is indicated.

....

However, the NHS is estimated to employ approximately 1.2-1.5 million staff, including more than 120,000 doctors, approximately 300,000 nurses and a similar number of healthcare support workers. A modest estimate of the patient-facing NHS workforce might be 600,000-800,000, which is more than 1 per cent of the UK population and more than 2 per cent of the employed population.

There is also a remarkable correlation between the cumulative UK deaths from covid-19 in the UK population and among health and social care workers. Accepting a lag of one to two days, the ratio is very close to 1:200 so the deaths among health and social care workers are approximately 0.5 per cent of all deaths, suggesting they are not overrepresented.

Although there are caveats to this estimate — explained below — and every death is one to be mourned, the data does not clearly show that healthcare workers are dying at rates proportionately higher than other employed individuals or even the population as a whole. Again, this is cautiously reassuring.

....

The distribution of deaths by occupation among nurses, healthcare support workers and doctors is broadly consistent with employment ratios. Distribution of deaths by geographical region correlates well with known regional distribution of cases.

....

Our report shows that a significant number of health and social care workers are dying during this pandemic. Overall the rate of deaths appears to be largely consistent with the number of healthcare workers in the population and the distributions by occupation and geography are largely as expected. However, individuals of black and minority ethnicity are notably over-represented in the data and conversely those working in the high risk specialties of anaesthesia and intensive care appear to be under-represented, most likely through good practice.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on April 24, 2020, 11:30:51 pm


Not a fair comparison. You should only be counting front line NHS staff that are exposed to covid patients. They're who the concern re: PPE is about. The vast majority of the staff you are including will never go near a covid patient, so of course the risk to them is low or close to that of the general population. As an example, less than a 1/3 of NHS staff are doctors and nurses. As far as I am aware the hospitals are also split into "dirty" (covid) and "clean" (non covid) wards to prevent spread so not even all the clinical staff have the same exposure.

Probably worth reading the analysis I linked to earlier, this actually seems to  show that if anything that 'frontline covid' staff are less impacted than other NHS staff:

'Conversely, the absence of certain workforce groups among those who have died, while welcome, is also notable. Anaesthetists, intensive care doctors and by association nurses and physiotherapists who work in similar settings are believed to be among the highest risk groups of all healthcare workers.

This is because both caring for the sickest patients with covid-19 and undertaking airway management (so-called aerosol generating procedures) are associated with high risk of viral exposure and transmission. It is therefore notable that all of these groups are completely absent from the data set.

Again, the reason for this is not known and data on infections and serious illnesses are important to consider as well as fatalities, but these data also are currently lacking. What is likely is that these groups of healthcare staff are rigorous about use of personal protective equipment and the associated practices known to reduce risk.'

I haven't got any sort of axe to grind here  - I think the performance of the current government  is not great and worry that it's getting worse.  However I think we need to be careful to properly analyse the data available, understand it's limitations and not jump to conclusions which aren't supported by that data.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on April 24, 2020, 11:53:22 pm

Probably worth reading the analysis I linked to earlier, this actually seems to  show that if anything that 'frontline covid' staff are less impacted than other NHS staff:

...

What is likely is that these groups of healthcare staff are rigorous about use of personal protective equipment and the associated practices known to reduce risk.'

I get that, but point being made was that the need for PPE was overhyped. This suggests the opposite.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ctodd on April 25, 2020, 09:03:05 am
Apologies if this has already come up (its a long+++ thread to read!)

I work in the NHS, patient-facing.

PPE is also important in protecting the patient e.g. wearing masks (most common PPE used by all). Anecdotally this is mostly what myself / colleagues are now most concerned about.

Again very much anecdote from my own workplace, but the feeling that nursing/residential homes (again, apologies if this has already come up) are now a bigger issue. In contrast to NHS hospitals etc - little if any provision of any kind of PPE and the systems that come with this (cold vs. hot areas, specific cold vs. hot staff members etc), are resulting in seemingly adverse consequences.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on April 25, 2020, 11:03:27 am

Probably worth reading the analysis I linked to earlier, this actually seems to  show that if anything that 'frontline covid' staff are less impacted than other NHS staff:


It doesn't surprise me at all, its perfectly consistent with the analysis from China and Italy and Korea. With proper PPE, risks to those looking after patients with covid in ITU are low (in most countries there are no deaths from ITU staff and where PPE isn't limited there are some countries with no healthworker deaths at all). Without PPE, dealing with covid patients is carnage (China's first weeks compared to when the state retained control). In this context the true fronline staff are those dealing with patients or in care where infection is likely there, but not tested for, and when proper PPE is inadvertantly not being used if they are positive (as per the sad case of Dr Tun).

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/apr/23/emails-reveal-doctors-plea-for-ppe-before-covid-19-death-dr-peter-tun.


Conversely, the absence of certain workforce groups among those who have died, while welcome, is also notable. Anaesthetists, intensive care doctors and by association nurses and physiotherapists who work in similar settings are believed to be among the highest risk groups of all healthcare workers.

This is because both caring for the sickest patients with covid-19 and undertaking airway management (so-called aerosol generating procedures) are associated with high risk of viral exposure and transmission. It is therefore notable that all of these groups are completely absent from the data set.


Yep, so those staff are being protected, and too many hospitals feel they need to ration elsewhere to protect supply. Do a search and there are numerous cases of healthcare staff complaining and a few threatening legal action for no PPE on standard 'non covid' wards where patients may or may not have covid and despite complaints there have been no tests.


Again, the reason for this is not known and data on infections and serious illnesses are important to consider as well as fatalities, but these data also are currently lacking. What is likely is that these groups of healthcare staff are rigorous about use of personal protective equipment and the associated practices known to reduce risk.'


I'd say it is known very well, but the extent not determined, like lots of things about this virus.

I have got an axe to grind here as I'm very concerned about the government response in some key areas, and I think too many people are focussing on the wrong risks- as important as that data analysis is later, it won't save more people now: better precautionary actions are needed.  The biggest government mistakes were failing to secure proper testing and PPE supply earlier and being oblivious to the 'hidden' risks now. The virologists have said from the start the most infectious patients with the highest viral load are those who are just falling seriously ill.. so by the time you know you need better PPE it's too late. There is also lots of anecdotal evidence (and clear scientific evidence on most other viral infections)  that a high infecting dose of such a load (high load patient coughing in someones face) is much more dangerous than the average covid infection (so more young healthcare workers will die without proper PPE, as per China). With the 'no covid' wards and care homes it's not just the risk to the health worker, it's also the risk of spread to the patient/caree next in line.

Recognising a subtle risk apparently not evident to most is important to me, as not doing so will cause many unnecessary deaths, will seriously weaken the NHS, and as I have relatives and friends of all ages in the at risk group. As per my previous discussion with Ru I can't provide the scientific papers (waiting that later analysis) and I may even be wrong but most evidence seems to stack up in my favour and precaution based on sensible assumption is the correct action. If I'm right serious errors are being made. I'll take being called a bellend (or worse) any number of times if it makes a few more people think.

These discussions remind me of the early government obession with modelling: too little attention being paid to those who fought past viral outbreaks. They are well intentioned but a dangerous distraction if they imply PPE is not needed as much as thought.  The correct PPE is vital for anyone working where the virus may be present.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 25, 2020, 11:43:37 am
Agree with above on PPE - but at the root is testing.

If we knew which areas of hospitals and which care homes were most at risk (geographically - and within institutions) via testing - then you’d know where to priorities our limited supplies (chances are they’d be limited in some way however much had been stockpiled etc.. by now).

Testing also informs parameter values in models, allows validation/verification and continual updating/refining. I really get the impression we’ve been using ‘best professional judgement’ (which is industry speak for guessing) up to and including now.

It should underpin all the decisions we took.

But we pretty much stopped a month ago.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on April 25, 2020, 12:00:04 pm
The expected bellendry from you Offwidth. It isn't my opinion - it's an analysis of the facts published by HSJ 2 days ago.

Pete I don’t know if you’re aware but your tone when you engage with Offwidth is completely different from any other person on this forum, even when they’re making the same argument as him. MrJR even messed up some numbers countering your points and you engaged constructively. If Offwidth had done that you’d have eviscerated him.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on April 25, 2020, 12:33:47 pm
I do wish Pete would engage more constructively for the sake of the forum but I'd rather he doesn't do that at the expense of speaking his mind. I long ago realised it's human nature to build a narrative and stick to it, than to acknowledge errors and change and I've made similar mistakes myself despite having much fewer excuses than most.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 25, 2020, 02:45:07 pm
Will reply properly later but what on earth is my supposed ‘narrative’ regarding the story about PPE? Other than: ‘what does the evidence say?’
I don’t stick to dogmatic views about anything to do with this pandemic - I form my views based on what the (imperfect) evidence suggests and I change my mind according to what updated evidence suggests, not what the papers focus on, or because something’s the flavour of the moment on here (which is often based on what the papers are currently saying)

It’s ironic in the extreme to be lectured on narrative bias by Offwidth  :lol:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on April 25, 2020, 04:00:37 pm
The narrative point I was making was in reply to what AliK commented on.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: stone on April 25, 2020, 05:19:07 pm
I wonder if SAGE is really just someone in the background shouting "push on" and "fuck it, just do it", a bit like Loskott from Dosage 2?

That's Cummings isn't it  :) https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/23/world/europe/uk-coronavirus-sage-secret.html
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: stone on April 25, 2020, 06:07:19 pm
I wonder if SAGE is really just someone in the background shouting "push on" and "fuck it, just do it", a bit like Loskott from Dosage 2?

That's Cummings isn't it  :) https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/23/world/europe/uk-coronavirus-sage-secret.html
Sorry I put the wrong link. The one with Cummings is https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/24/revealed-dominic-cummings-on-secret-scientific-advisory-group-for-covid-19
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on April 25, 2020, 07:20:01 pm
BREAKING: Chief Adviser involved in advising.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 25, 2020, 07:24:38 pm
BREAKING: Chief Adviser involved in advising.

SAGE is supposed to be independent of political influence and consist of scientists and experts.
He wasn’t supposed to be there, that’s why the people who were, have leaked it.
Do you not think some things should be independent of party politics?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on April 25, 2020, 08:58:22 pm
BREAKING: Chief Adviser involved in advising.

Quick reply to this, agreeing with OMM.  Its SAGE, with an "S". Not simply AGE. If Cummings has a "S"cientific qualification which qualifies him to be there and to contribute then lets hear about it? In fact we know he doesn't. Of course he is well within his rights to advise ministers on the political ramifications of any scientific advice, but only after SAGE has spoken impartially. If he was there simply as an observer OK, but he is said to have contributed. On the face of it that seems wrong. There's following the science, and guiding the science...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on April 26, 2020, 09:32:45 am
Pete,

I’ve not time to read the whole paper but but it control for age and co-morbities? It seems to say the mortality rate for the health workers is consistent with the mortality rate of the general population but the deaths in the general population have (I believe) mostly been people near/past retirement age or with co-morbities. So comparing the health worker deaths with the general population does not appear a like for like comparison.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on April 26, 2020, 09:35:43 am
BREAKING: Chief Adviser involved in advising.

I was all ready to be appalled at this but the fact the PMs most senior advisor has always been present at SAGE meetings undermines my outrage.

I’m not sure we can be that upset just because it’s normally some advisor we’ve never heard of and this time it’s Cummings.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on April 26, 2020, 09:56:08 am
Well latest report is that he was just an observer, which seems fine. That contradicts what I read yesterday though! So there is definitely some political briefing and counter-briefing going on here.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 26, 2020, 10:25:58 am
Pete,

I’ve not time to read the whole paper but but it control for age and co-morbities? It seems to say the mortality rate for the health workers is consistent with the mortality rate of the general population but the deaths in the general population have (I believe) mostly been people near/past retirement age or with co-morbities. So comparing the health worker deaths with the general population does not appear a like for like comparison.

The report compares covid deaths among the 98% of NHS staff of age group 18-65, with covid deaths in general population of age group 18-65.

If you examine the figures of who's actually contracting and dying of covid among NHS staff, you can reach some interesting conclusions, such as an FFP3 mask by itself is not effective protection from contracting covid but a visor and a mask with more stringent hyenie controls is. Because according to the stats no ICU staff have died.
If you compare this idea with what the WHO says about general public wearing masks, they say: ''World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines state that while masks can help prevent people from passing on coronavirus, they are inadequate protection on their own from contracting it.''

Then, you can take the data that NHS excess mortality is among staff outside ICU's and perhaps even outside 'hot' areas(?) where just an FFP3 nad apron/gloves is used (again a ?), and apply that concept to everyone else in the general population workforce who are being asked to go to work among people outside their household.
From that my hunch is that the risk of dying from covid is not greater in NHS staff outside of covid ICU or 'hot areas of hospitals than it is among all kinds workers in the general population who are engaging with people outside their household. See the TfL death rates for driver for example, which are higher by far.

I'm looking at this from the point of view of someone responsible for sending small teams of people back to work to carry out tasks where it is impossible for them to socially distance within the team, and also very likely to come into contact with other people from outside their household during the course of their day. I feel I'm pressured from clients and within my group to resume work, and I feel conflicted about having to do this and I want to understand the risk as best I can if I'm asking people to leave home and come and do work for us.
But instead, so much of the focus about risk to workforce seems to be on the risk for group of workers (NHS) which the data so far doesn't correlate with the level of focus. This I think has lead to a blindspot in thinking seriously about what the level of risk is to everyone else.

I'm rambling but basically trying to say the focus should be on ALL people in work not some people, and the thinking should follow the data not the newspapers. Because the newspapers (and posters here who follow the newspapers) have political agendas, some posters much more so than others.. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 26, 2020, 10:48:13 am
Well latest report is that he was just an observer, which seems fine. That contradicts what I read yesterday though! So there is definitely some political briefing and counter-briefing going on here.

So - if you were in a meeting hoping to discuss things candidly about what to advise regarding CV19 and Cummings was at the back of the room - would you be unaffected?

When we have a staff meeting and the dean (or other senior management figure) comes along to just observe and see how we all are there is a very different dynamic.

I can see that if ANOther anonymous civil servant came along to take notes then that’s not such an issue - but Dom? He’s got a rep... and I expect even if he sat at the back of the room looking disinterested playing candy crush on his phone / it’d still influence whAt was said.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on April 26, 2020, 10:48:32 am
Pete,

I’ve not time to read the whole paper but but it control for age and co-morbities? It seems to say the mortality rate for the health workers is consistent with the mortality rate of the general population but the deaths in the general population have (I believe) mostly been people near/past retirement age or with co-morbities. So comparing the health worker deaths with the general population does not appear a like for like comparison.

Just catching up with the past couple of pages but was going to make a similar point. No, the study doesn't control for those things. This has the obvious deficiency that the 8% of NHS deaths of under 30's, and 26% of deaths in 31-50 range, may be vastly different to the same age bands in the general population if those gen. pop. deaths are skewed more towards the upper end of the 18-65 range as we might expect. A "proper" study realistically would have controlled this, but this was not a "proper" study (by the author's own admission) due to lack of data. The author makes the following clarification in the comments beneath the main article:

Quote
For those commenting on the weakness of the basic data - yes we agree. The options were to do our best with this data, openly acknowledging its limitations or to simply ignore the topic... we chose the former.

We've taken a look at age bands comparing our dataset and national data for mortality. Certainly the deaths in the heath and social care workers we identified were in a younger cohort. The population our cases are drawn from (working age population, who are healthy enough to work, in one sector) will inevitably differ from the wider population so this finding is not surprising.

As the overall mortality amongst the people we studied and the whole population is not hugely different - and we'd expect it to be lower in a healthier, younger population - it is reasonable to assume that the data are consistent with an increased mortality in the group we studied. Apologies for not highlighting that earlier.

Taking this anlysis further is challenging and may be stretching the data further than it merits. For real comparison we'd need to kow the mortality figures, by age group, in workers in non-NHS settings and I don't think that is available.

Main conclusion: we need a natonal registry, proper data and analysis by those with access to all the relevant comparative data.

I've highlighted one of the author's conclusions there. Bit naughty of me I admit, as if you read the whole thing dispassionately their ultimate l point is that this is very much a very basic overview sketch of the situation and more data is needed. Not surprising given that the methodology was to remotely collate only media reported deaths of NHS workers, hence it is necessarily incomplete and also represents an absolute lower bound on NHS worker deaths (hence is a "best case" scenario for NHS).

It is possible to point out other gaps in the info - e.g. time factor (i.e. are deaths skewed to earlier / later in pandemic, or consistent throughout, and compare to PPE provision over time). Also it only concentrates on deaths. It would be equally interesting to know about infections - given we accept that NHS workers are a younger cohort then they are more likely to recover (not die), but are they more likely to contract Covid 19? if so by what multiplier, and what is the spread across work roles etc. This sort of study would offer info about PPE and transmission risk in healthcare settings. But as the author said, the data does not exist.

In the interests of balance, Pete you could have made your back of fag packet calcs support your thesis more strongly if you had removed the 8 NHS worker deaths in the 70+ age bracket.

Anyway, I don't want to labour that study. Overall on PPE, if we are in any way "following the science" as a country then by all means downgrade the PPE, but only after the science is available. Until then we should be ideally be going way over the top if possible. I would not be unhappy to find retrospectively this was indeed the case, but waiting a year or two and letting the chips fall where they may does not seem sensible.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 26, 2020, 10:57:53 am
edit, double post.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on April 26, 2020, 11:18:02 am
BREAKING: Chief Adviser involved in advising.

But that’s the whole point isn’t it? Cummings is a political adviser. He has absolutely no relevant qualification or indeed mandate to be involved in these discussions. There’s been a huge emphasis during the press briefings put on the fact they are “following the science every step of the way”, as if there’s a single clear and logical strategy to follow that emerges from ‘the science’. But that’s not the case. There’s a range of competing disciplines and agendas which come into play when deciding on the strategy to follow, one of which is clearly political. Even if he’s just been an observer in the scientific discussions I’m uncomfortable with that fact because it adds a degree of political pressure to what should otherwise be a completely independent and open forum during the meetings. How do we know there hasn’t been a nudge in this or that direction when the judgement is finely balanced already? Or members holding back on raising politically sensitive arguments because he’s at the back of the room? There’s also the question as to what degree Cummings is then filtering the information before he presents his political advice to Johnson or Raab.

They’ve also made great play of being open and honest with the public. You can’t argue that if you don’t release the data, modelling, SAGE reports, or even who’s on the SAGE panel into the public domain all the way through this. Or to what capacity a political adviser has been involved in the supposedly independent discussions. Other than just saying “he was only observing, nothing to see here”.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on April 26, 2020, 11:21:31 am

So - if you were in a meeting hoping to discuss things candidly about what to advise regarding CV19 and Cummings was at the back of the room - would you be unaffected?


Totally, he doesn’t seem like the sort of person that could observe quietly for more than about 10 seconds, unless he’s sat in the corner with a muzzle on 😂

Any arguments about him needing to be there to communicate the SCIENCE in plain English seem to be daft, when you have the CMO and CSO there.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: danm on April 26, 2020, 12:04:42 pm
It does sound awfully like the old days of Stalin, where you'd have a parallel power structure consisting of political commissars ensuring that decisions made by professionals fitted in with state doctrines. One way of making sure that the science which is followed is the "right" kind of science. I do hope I'm entirely wrong about this, but given Cummings penchant for quoting dystopian sci-fi as though it was an operational plan...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on April 26, 2020, 12:10:58 pm
Good grief, move along, move along. It was a throwaway comment aimed at the Guardian which seems to hear Cummings' name and immediately begin to froth itself into an apoplectic ecstasy of outrage.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on April 26, 2020, 12:28:14 pm
...the fact the PMs most senior advisor has always been present at SAGE meetings undermines my outrage.
That’s the government’s line, but it is not the truth. As stated by the previous chief scientific adviser David King.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 26, 2020, 12:33:46 pm
Good grief, move along, move along. It was a throwaway comment aimed at the Guardian which seems to hear Cummings' name and immediately begin to froth itself into an apoplectic ecstasy of outrage.

Yeah, weird isn’t it.

Some people seem to do something similar every time the Guardian gets a mention, too...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: danm on April 26, 2020, 12:40:12 pm
Sorry Will, but I have nothing better to do than work myself into a frothing frenzy right now, plus at this rate I'll have to replace my "Make Orwell Fiction Again" t-shirt with a "Make William Gibson Fiction Again" one if Cummings gets his way.

Back to the point at hand, this government appear to find lying as easy as breathing (until some of them got covid-19 that is)...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Wood FT on April 26, 2020, 01:11:44 pm
Sorry Will, but I have nothing better to do than work myself into a frothing frenzy right now, plus at this rate I'll have to replace my "Make Orwell Fiction Again" t-shirt with a "Make William Gibson Fiction Again" one if Cummings gets his way.

Back to the point at hand, this government appear to find lying as easy as breathing (until some of them got covid-19 that is)...

I’d buy the former t-shirt if you were keen on making it?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 26, 2020, 01:28:17 pm

I think it’s quite telling on the UK media that the newspaper raising the issue of the secrecy and black box of SAGE is the New York Times (then followed by the Guardian).

It seems from the two members of Sage that spoke to the Guardian since this morning - that Cummings was actively involved in discussions in the meeting. Further it seems that govt advisors are rarely if ever at past meetings. Sounding more like a slam dunk as time passes.

The Guardian (independently funded don’t forget), channel4 news and to a lesser degree the FT and Mirror are the only media groups giving the government any scrutiny at the moment. Yes - the Guardian will jump on Cummings back - but at the moment that seems completely appropriate to me!!

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 26, 2020, 01:38:57 pm
Well latest report is that he was just an observer, which seems fine..

SAGE needs to be impartial. It also needs to be seen to be impartial. Cummings’ role is political, not scientific. His attendance is incompatible with both points.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on April 26, 2020, 02:22:08 pm
Well latest report is that he was just an observer, which seems fine..

SAGE needs to be impartial. It also needs to be seen to be impartial. Cummings’ role is political, not scientific. His attendance is incompatible with both points.

Well yes, I actually agree on that.

To clarify my earlier comments, in the hypothetical scenario that the SAGE attendees remained a secret still, and Cummings was not physically present or contributing but simply earwigging from behind lets say some one way glass so he didn't need to waste time getting a separate briefing, then OK (for me. Speed after all is of the essence and that would seem to cut out some middle men). Now that SAGE members are public, and we know he attended, I agree it seems wrong on your appearance of impartiality point, even if he didn't contribute. If he did contribute then we move to the next level of wrong. I was trying my hardest to be even-handed and charitable given the conflicting media reports! I suspect you can probably guess what my instinctive first reaction was...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 26, 2020, 03:29:08 pm
Yes, totally Nigel. Although given you are talking about a person who is currently in contempt of parliament and who effectively waged war on the education system for 4 years, producing a fragmented system with inadequate oversight, massive transfer of public assets to private hands, increased opportunity for conflict of influence and corruption with no clear improvement in  standards, I'd respectfully have to suggest you are a more charitable man than me.

Be that as it may, scientific committees should be free to produce recommendations without inhibition; it's bad science to do otherwise.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on April 26, 2020, 03:56:01 pm
...you are talking about a person who is currently in contempt of parliament and who effectively waged war on the education system for 4 years

Precisely this. Not only is it an extraordinary break from the normal protocol to have him there, but this man has form for manipulation, misinformation, bullying, and an apparent thirst for absolute control.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on April 27, 2020, 09:24:56 am

The Guardian (independently funded don’t forget), channel4 news and to a lesser degree the FT and Mirror are the only media groups giving the government any scrutiny at the moment.

What about the Sunday Times investigation last weekend that was the major story for about 48 hours?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on April 27, 2020, 10:11:45 am
Some interesting city traffic data.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2020/apr/27/the-traffic-data-that-shows-the-road-into-and-out-of-covid-19-lockdown

On SAGE its not just Cummings... his 'pet ex-postdoc' is there too and this links to the ex-postdoc's brother's company government health data contract.

https://mobile.twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/1254315149135151104

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: stone on April 27, 2020, 04:59:13 pm
Might (some rural) parts of the UK have such a low density of COVID19 cases that a South Korean style "test-trace-isolate" approach would work great? That might enable such a district to be a test ground to get such as system up and running whilst the rest of the country waits for infection rates to get down to feasible levels.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: webbo on April 28, 2020, 08:07:32 am
The government are now saying that front line health workers who have died from COVID-19 will get a payment of £60,000.
I might be wrong here but if you die at work or from injury or illness related to your work. You would get compensation anyway.
Am I misinformed.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 28, 2020, 04:35:15 pm
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EWst-e7UcAEn4bT?format=jpg&name=small)

https://twitter.com/EdConwaySky/status/1255147479466565636?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1255147479466565636&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theguardian.com%2Fworld%2Flive%2F2020%2Fapr%2F28%2Fuk-coronavirus-live-news-minutes-silence-to-commemorate-key-workers-who-have-died

:(

And from the UK....

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EWsuj0KUcAIsleP?format=jpg&name=900x900)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 28, 2020, 05:00:11 pm
Christ its fucking grim...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on April 28, 2020, 05:20:45 pm
The government are now saying that front line health workers who have died from COVID-19 will get a payment of £60,000.
I might be wrong here but if you die at work or from injury or illness related to your work. You would get compensation anyway.
Am I misinformed.

https://www.hsj.co.uk/coronavirus/insurance-scheme-to-cover-nhs-staff-who-die-from-coronavirus/7027505.article

This is basically life insurance for all frontline healthcare workers, provided by the government.

NHS workers already get "death in service" payments to their dependents worth up to 2x pensionable income if they pay into an NHS pension. I'm not 100% but I think this £60K is in addition to that? Someone else more knowledgeable may know. The £60K also covers those NHS workers not in NHS pension scheme, and in extended settings e.g. outsourced care.

So as far as I can see it is not "compensation", which I think would require some blame to be accepted? I suspect there will still be legal claims against the government forthcoming from those who have lost loved ones. Unless there are strings attached to this £60K preventing this. I don't know the answer to that part.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on April 28, 2020, 05:43:57 pm
I suspect there will still be legal claims against the government forthcoming from those who have lost loved ones. Unless there are strings attached to this £60K preventing this.
Robert Peston asked this question in the briefing yesterday and Hancock said there wouldn’t be.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 28, 2020, 05:47:56 pm
I suspect there will still be legal claims against the government forthcoming from those who have lost loved ones. Unless there are strings attached to this £60K preventing this.
Robert Peston asked this question in the briefing yesterday and Hancock said there wouldn’t be.

Good.

It will help fund the action then.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 28, 2020, 05:56:19 pm
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EWst-e7UcAEn4bT?format=jpg&name=small)

https://twitter.com/EdConwaySky/status/1255147479466565636?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1255147479466565636&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theguardian.com%2Fworld%2Flive%2F2020%2Fapr%2F28%2Fuk-coronavirus-live-news-minutes-silence-to-commemorate-key-workers-who-have-died

:(

And from the UK....

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EWsuj0KUcAIsleP?format=jpg&name=900x900)

Followed the thread this was posted on, it's deviation from the average not total numbers. Difficult to know the picture from just this graph, bad as it looks.

I asked in the other thread, what data are other countries reporting - is it hospital deaths, all deaths, some deaths? It would be good to know whether we're comparing UK apples to other country's apples to see how badly we compare.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: finbarrr on April 28, 2020, 07:55:59 pm
the NYT has some good graphs on missing deaths/ excess mortality:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/21/world/coronavirus-missing-deaths.html?fbclid=IwAR3YeawMpNHYjZQlySx2oXUnVLPfU7HVaNsol-WU_HVsAcKh6513A1TH4po
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 28, 2020, 08:17:39 pm
the NYT has some good graphs on missing deaths/ excess mortality:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/21/world/coronavirus-missing-deaths.html?fbclid=IwAR3YeawMpNHYjZQlySx2oXUnVLPfU7HVaNsol-WU_HVsAcKh6513A1TH4po

Yes - those data were from when our total was 10k (with an extra 6k not reported)... the proportion will be worse now as the curve of out of hospital deaths seems to be lagging the in hospital ones. I swing between despair and anger when I look at these charts...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: HaeMeS on April 28, 2020, 08:50:38 pm
the NYT has some good graphs on missing deaths/ excess mortality:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/21/world/coronavirus-missing-deaths.html?fbclid=IwAR3YeawMpNHYjZQlySx2oXUnVLPfU7HVaNsol-WU_HVsAcKh6513A1TH4po

As has the Economist:
 https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2020/04/16/tracking-covid-19-excess-deaths-across-countries (https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2020/04/16/tracking-covid-19-excess-deaths-across-countries)

And an explanation of the datamining/interpreting involved:
 https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2020/04/16/tracking-covid-19-excess-deaths-across-countries (https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2020/04/16/tracking-covid-19-excess-deaths-across-countries)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 28, 2020, 09:26:00 pm
Interesting. I'd seen these articles a while back but looks like they've been updated. UK wasn't *too* far down on the reporting compared with other Western countries even when it was only reporting hospital deaths. 71% of all deaths compared to 48% for Italy and Netherlands, 68% Spain, 86% France, 90% Sweden. Even 2 weeks ago there were publicly available figures from ONS on the deaths outside hospital. I really don't see the case for claims of mass under reporting, given the difficulties of collating data from other decentralised settings compared to the centralised NHS with its data collectors (mate's wife works doing this for the NHS). Now we've started (from tomorrow) reporting all settings daily you'd think that should account for most of the excess. Interested to see Germany, expect they'll be efficient as per everything they do!  Italy, Netherlands..yikes.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: stone on April 28, 2020, 09:26:16 pm
South Korea and Singapore seem to have  Apps that work well for them for contact tracing. Why can't we just use those rather than re-inventing the wheel? I'm extremely ignorant about this sort of thing (I don't even have a mobile phone), so this is me asking for info.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 28, 2020, 09:40:37 pm
Hi Stone. Quite a lot of discussion about this on the other thread, including concerns about privacy. Some good explanations from Remus about methods for making it work.

Guardian report Singapore app uptake of 20% amongst smartphone users. I wonder if privacy concerns put people off? See my last post.

https://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php?topic=30554.425
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: jwi on April 28, 2020, 09:43:41 pm
The Singapore app is open source as well
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on April 28, 2020, 09:52:10 pm
Let's not all get too excited about relaxations just yet:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/germany-ready-to-tighten-lockdown-as-coronavirus-cases-climb-again-jgbsl5xp6
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 28, 2020, 10:01:42 pm
Let's not all get too excited about relaxations just yet:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/germany-ready-to-tighten-lockdown-as-coronavirus-cases-climb-again-jgbsl5xp6

Yeah - reports in other outlets that their R has gone from 0.7 back to 1.0 so relaxations may not come soon...

I had a zoom with a Spanish PhD student of mine (nr Madrid) today and it’s worth remembering that the relaxations there mean he’s only just left his flat for the first time in near 8 weeks. People were completely locked down there... so they’re relaxing their lockdown to something still stricter than ours!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: stone on April 29, 2020, 08:09:10 am
Let's not all get too excited about relaxations just yet:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/germany-ready-to-tighten-lockdown-as-coronavirus-cases-climb-again-jgbsl5xp6

Yeah - reports in other outlets that their R has gone from 0.7 back to 1.0 so relaxations may not come soon...

I had a zoom with a Spanish PhD student of mine (nr Madrid) today and it’s worth remembering that the relaxations there mean he’s only just left his flat for the first time in near 8 weeks. People were completely locked down there... so they’re relaxing their lockdown to something still stricter than ours!

Yet even in Spain they have been going out to the supermarkets all the way through. I'm baffled as to why shopping for food isn't something that gets sorted out anywhere. Perhaps I'm wrong but I find it hard to understand why that isn't the weakest link where transmission is actually occurring. In the general scheme of things, food deliveries don't seem too much of a challenge to me. Just assign each street a delivery slot and a supermarket and do it like bin collections. If people don't or can't order online; just give those people a standardised food-box; perhaps even with some alcohol and cigarettes in so that no-one feels they need to go to the shops.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Murph on April 29, 2020, 08:53:35 am
Stone - I think that's pretty much what they did in wuhan.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 29, 2020, 09:01:14 am
Let's not all get too excited about relaxations just yet:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/germany-ready-to-tighten-lockdown-as-coronavirus-cases-climb-again-jgbsl5xp6

Yeah - reports in other outlets that their R has gone from 0.7 back to 1.0 so relaxations may not come soon...

I had a zoom with a Spanish PhD student of mine (nr Madrid) today and it’s worth remembering that the relaxations there mean he’s only just left his flat for the first time in near 8 weeks. People were completely locked down there... so they’re relaxing their lockdown to something still stricter than ours!

Yet even in Spain they have been going out to the supermarkets all the way through. I'm baffled as to why shopping for food isn't something that gets sorted out anywhere. Perhaps I'm wrong but I find it hard to understand why that isn't the weakest link where transmission is actually occurring. In the general scheme of things, food deliveries don't seem too much of a challenge to me. Just assign each street a delivery slot and a supermarket and do it like bin collections. If people don't or can't order online; just give those people a standardised food-box; perhaps even with some alcohol and cigarettes in so that no-one feels they need to go to the shops.

You do realise, that in this country, in some areas, they cannot even manage bin collection more than once in three weeks?

I read a German study, that was unable to detect traces of the virus, on any surface, at any publicly used location (supermarkets etc) in the most severe hot spot in Germany. That’s part of the logic behind the Europe wide “Climbing gym reopening plans” that are being developed.

If I get time later I will try and go back through the discussions and find the links, but overall, I think the Germans are convinced it’s not generally a surface contact spread, that even passing aerosol is unlikely and being too close to people is the problem.

It would be nice, if that were true, wouldn’t it, because that’s manageable; even as a long term behavioural change.

My hopeful guess is, that since supermarket access has been a common concession across the European lockdowns, yet r0 has been drastically impacted, there is a strong argument for the above. If I look at my home town, 170k people are using ~8 supermarkets, delivery or click and collect slots are rocking-horse shit rare; yet the entire county is down to 199 confirmed cases and the admissions have slowed to a trickle.

I have added finger crossing to my hang board routine.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 29, 2020, 09:08:24 am
If it’s not on surfaces and hard to catch via aerosols.... errr...  Pandemic how?

Btw - my local Tesco has double/trebled the size of the click and collect operation. Three bays and a big refrigerated container next to the usual cabin for the extra cold stuff. I’ve managed to get a slot every week. Just check once or twice a day.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 29, 2020, 09:46:06 am
If it’s not on surfaces and hard to catch via aerosols.... errr...  Pandemic how?

Btw - my local Tesco has double/trebled the size of the click and collect operation. Three bays and a big refrigerated container next to the usual cabin for the extra cold stuff. I’ve managed to get a slot every week. Just check once or twice a day.

I didn’t say it’s not aerosol.

I said the German thinking was that it is not spreading by traveling large distances by aerosol, nor living on surfaces (outside the lab) for significant times. Physical contact and close proximity aerosol are the more likely culprits. Don’t put words in my mouth TT. I also stated it was speculation.

I’m glad your local Tesco has increased their click and collect slots, however, here, we’re still looking at more than 10 days to get a slot for C&C and delivery is for vulnerable households only.

So, since we are seeing hundreds entering supermarkets here, daily, and masks are still very much a rarity; yet we know we had a large number of local infections five weeks ago and now few admissions, we must have reduced transmission in the community significantly below1. The queues at Sainsbury’s wrap around the car park.

If the horror scenario of that (very pretty) animation of particles spreading out across multiple aisles at the slightest cough, were even half as potent as suggested; then supermarket use would be impossible to reconcile with a reduction r0.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on April 29, 2020, 10:24:12 am
In the general scheme of things, food deliveries don't seem too much of a challenge to me. Just assign each street a delivery slot and a supermarket and do it like bin collections. If people don't or can't order online; just give those people a standardised food-box; perhaps even with some alcohol and cigarettes in so that no-one feels they need to go to the shops.

Fine for suburbia, but imagine trying to do it in tower blocks?

We stopped by out local Tesco after the family walk, so wife could go in and grab a few essentials. I sat outside with the kids on the grass. Watched one guy come out with a bunch of flowers and a card, saw another come out with a packet of sweets and one pizza, followed by toddler daughter. They both got in the car where his wife was waiting for them......
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 29, 2020, 10:28:40 am
You're thinking Dominos should be included in the Tesco delivery round, right?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 29, 2020, 11:34:56 am
Wasn’t having a go OMM - just that if it’s only passable by really close proximity aerosol - how come it’s spread so rapidly around the world?

Re click and collect slots - They’re never more than a few days in advance often only the next day. And seem to be released at random during the day...

Anyway. Congrats and all that to the PM. Not the best timing though...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: T_B on April 29, 2020, 11:53:41 am
The supermarket thing annoys me. People say it’s too hard but there are loads of local suppliers around, often without a website but who’ve set up on social media and deliver. Even if you live in the countryside that tends to be where farms are located. Wholesalers are supplying the general public as all the restaurants/ pubs are closed and they do click and collect. Not everything is sold in bulk.

It’s just too much hassle for most people and granted it can cost you more. I’m about to go to Tesco for the first time in 5 weeks (click n collect slot secured at 2am #lookatme) as I’ve always assumed rightly or wrongly that supermarkets are the greatest risk of transmission given I don’t go into any other building.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Falling Down on April 29, 2020, 12:07:17 pm
I'm working with the two biggest supermarkets, one national home/DIY store and the two biggest coffee chains (both currently closed) either directly on or close to the various lock down and CV-19 response projects.  It's not as easy as it looks from the outside to suddenly scale up home deliveries, click 'n collect and in-store measures at a national level.  They're getting there (slowly) and are thinking carefully about how to keep shoppers and staff safe if and when lockdown measures are lifted.  A lot of the office staff at the two supermarkets are working shifts in warehouses and shops to keep the wheels turning.  I'm not defending anything mind, just saying that it's pretty complicated and it is interesting seeing it all from the inside.  Dave Lewis (Tesco CEO) was saying yesterday that people are pretty much reverting to one big weekly shop that's helping keep numbers manageable.

I've been buying locally though.  There are a few wholesalers that normally supply pubs and restaurants that are doing home deliveries of veg boxes and other produce and we have lots of small shops nearby largely run by the Asian, Caribbean and North African community with lots of fresh goods.  I'm fortunate to be in the city though. I was asking my mate who lives in Whaley what it's like with only one massive Tesco, a greengrocer and butcher for what must be a circa 10k population and he's having to go to Tesco once or twice a week.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on April 29, 2020, 12:12:06 pm
We're using a weekly / bi weekly click and collect (fortunately a largeish bit not overburdened ASDA nearby) plus using as much local companies as we can (milk, fruit and veg, meat) but having to use local Tesco occasionally to grab a few things either out of stock, or overlooked in meal planning).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 29, 2020, 12:26:50 pm
Local is good, village butcher takes online orders then assigns a slot to come to pick up from the shop, so just a set of clean counters and sealed bags with your order in now. Works well
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 29, 2020, 12:44:18 pm
Mundane suburban lockdown life alert:

I’ve also been getting a fruit, veg and meat box (local meat and dairy - veg is just general) - then topping that up with a Tesco shop as required.

Quality of Meat and veg much better from the box - and I quite like it’s different each week (turkey thighs and a couple of small rump steaks this week! And some beetroot - that I’m going to have to think about!).

We’re also generating c.60% of our usual black bin non recyclable waste over the last few weeks. I didn’t expect that.

I’m off the pop but our neighbours are having to use other people’s glass recycling bins as they’re boozing a lot more - one neighbour called his the conscience bin. Another commented he was moving to cans instead of bottles to make it look better.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 29, 2020, 12:49:28 pm
Single malt's the way to go.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 29, 2020, 01:00:36 pm
Single malt's the way to go.


If you’re still filling the recycle bin after the switch, get help.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on April 29, 2020, 01:37:16 pm
And some beetroot - that I’m going to have to think about!).


Roast it like spuds and have it with your steaks 👌
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: stone on April 29, 2020, 02:56:37 pm
I know it would be neigh on impossible to ramp up normal supermarket deliveries to meet all demand. However a one-street-one-time-slot-one-supermarket approach would make massively better use of the vans than having them bimble around. Not to mention that apparently lots of time slots have been left unused because people have booked weeks in advance and then canceled at the last minute. With supermarkets shut, all the staff would be free to do the deliveries.

I just now heard someone from our lab at University of Sheffield has just come down with COVID19. She lives on her own and apparently has only been out to go to the supermarket.

What we do in Europe gets R down from 2.5 to 0.8 or something. It would be utterly transformative if we had a month or two of R=0.1. I'd be up for quite an effort to do that.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: stone on April 29, 2020, 03:20:01 pm
Also no one has said COVID19 spreads very easily. It's not like measles which has R0=20 I heard. Nevertheless with R>1, COVID19 evidently causes hassle.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on April 29, 2020, 03:36:37 pm

Quality of Meat and veg much better from the box - and I quite like it’s different each week (turkey thighs and a couple of small rump steaks this week!

Plus there is no choice of low fat options from ours, the burgers we got tasted amazing!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: stone on April 29, 2020, 03:39:10 pm
And some beetroot - that I’m going to have to think about!).


Roast it like spuds and have it with your steaks 👌

I'm a fan of borscht.

Also of hot beetroots in a white cheese sauce (ie like cauliflower cheese).

This is a bit off topic I guess.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: stone on April 29, 2020, 03:41:10 pm
And some beetroot - that I’m going to have to think about!).


Roast it like spuds and have it with your steaks 👌

I'm a fan of borscht.

Also of hot beetroots in a white cheese sort (ie like cauliflower cheese).

This is a bit off topic I guess.

white cheese sauce -sorry for typo
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: rich d on April 29, 2020, 03:46:38 pm
Haven't residents in care homes to an extent been some of the most heavily locked down individuals around? Yet care homes have had large infection rates (and obviously and tragically high number of deaths), seems to me that if care homes can have huge number of infections with no visitors apart from staff and no residents leaving the premises that lockdown as a strategy is bollocks.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Muenchener on April 29, 2020, 04:00:57 pm
I read a German study, that was unable to detect traces of the virus, on any surface, at any publicly used location (supermarkets etc) in the most severe hot spot in Germany. That’s part of the logic behind the Europe wide “Climbing gym reopening plans” that are being developed.

If I get time later I will try and go back through the discussions and find the links

Would certainly appreciate the German no-surface-infection link.

The general manager of my main local wall is co-author of one of the reopening papers. Amusingly to me & my mates, since we are all too well aware that he knows absolutely nothing about how to prevent overcrowded climbing walls  :tease:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on April 29, 2020, 04:14:35 pm
Also no one has said COVID19 spreads very easily.

Just leave it out of the fridge and it does. (got distracted by the talk of food..)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on April 29, 2020, 04:21:22 pm
Haven't residents in care homes to an extent been some of the most heavily locked down individuals around?

Don't know how you come to this conclusion? Even if only staff are entering and leaving the premises, that's a lot of in/out per day in comparison to the average household where no non-residents at all will be coming through the front door unless you need an emergency plumber/electrician. I imagine if I had half a dozen of my mates coming round for a fingerboard session every day, I'd be at much higher risk (presumably ~7x, adjusted for the chance of me then catching it from them) of catching things even if that's all they're doing outside of their current routine.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 29, 2020, 04:33:48 pm
Haven't residents in care homes to an extent been some of the most heavily locked down individuals around?

Don't know how you come to this conclusion? Even if only staff are entering and leaving the premises, that's a lot of in/out per day in comparison to the average household where no non-residents at all will be coming through the front door unless you need an emergency plumber/electrician. I imagine if I had half a dozen of my mates coming round for a fingerboard session every day, I'd be at much higher risk (presumably ~7x, adjusted for the chance of me then catching it from them) of catching things even if that's all they're doing outside of their current routine.

Are you saying you only have 7 friends?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on April 29, 2020, 04:44:28 pm
I wish. I was just taking a punt at half a dozen staff.. no doubt could be much more for a big care home
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 29, 2020, 04:56:28 pm
Still tracking the German study, while juggling several other things. But here is a BI article/interview with the author:
 https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com/death-rate-german-laboratory-city-5x-less-than-national-average-2020-4%3famp (https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com/death-rate-german-laboratory-city-5x-less-than-national-average-2020-4%3famp)

And:

 https://today.rtl.lu/news/science-and-environment/a/1498185.html (https://today.rtl.lu/news/science-and-environment/a/1498185.html)

Originally I saw a preprint of the abstract from the paper. Cannot find it now.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on April 29, 2020, 05:01:59 pm
I first read the name of the place as Heisenberg, what a pity.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 29, 2020, 05:47:40 pm
I first read the name of the place as Heisenberg, what a pity.

Yeah, I was a bit uncertain as well.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 29, 2020, 05:56:02 pm
Got it:
 https://www.land.nrw/sites/default/files/asset/document/zwischenergebnis_covid19_case_study_gangelt_en.pdf (https://www.land.nrw/sites/default/files/asset/document/zwischenergebnis_covid19_case_study_gangelt_en.pdf)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Muenchener on April 29, 2020, 06:11:54 pm
Danke!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on April 29, 2020, 06:21:00 pm
Unless I’m missing it Matt, that paper says nothing about how the virus spreads.

It only seems to estimate prevalence and incidence of the virus, along with an estimate of the fatality rate...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 29, 2020, 07:11:22 pm
Unless I’m missing it Matt, that paper says nothing about how the virus spreads.

It only seems to estimate prevalence and incidence of the virus, along with an estimate of the fatality rate...

Yes, found the link and posted without reading it.
I will keep looking for the longer tract. The abstract didn’t read significantly different to his comments in the interview.

Edit:
My German is too basic, I just can’t find the translation that I saw.
These two are cited  in support of the argument, as well, but I can’t read it well enough to tell:

 https://www.rki.de/DE/Content/InfAZ/N/Neuartiges_Coronavirus/Hygiene.html (https://www.rki.de/DE/Content/InfAZ/N/Neuartiges_Coronavirus/Hygiene.html)

 https://www.rki.de/DE/Content/InfAZ/N/Neuartiges_Coronavirus/Steckbrief.html%23doc13776792bodyText1 (https://www.rki.de/DE/Content/InfAZ/N/Neuartiges_Coronavirus/Steckbrief.html%23doc13776792bodyText1)

Perhaps Muenchener could comment on their conclusions?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Muenchener on April 29, 2020, 08:07:48 pm
Those are general official guidelines for healthcare workers & premises, so pretty unlikely to reflect any results from new & controversial studies.

They say transmission risks are:


My quest for the actual Heinsberg paper has so far only brought up press reports - will report back if I actually come up with anything from the man himself.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 29, 2020, 08:43:48 pm
This popped up in my twitter feed.

https://zoonosen.charite.de/fileadmin/user_upload/microsites/m_cc05/virologie-ccm/dateien_upload/Weitere_Dateien/analysis-of-SARS-CoV-2-viral-load-by-patient-age.pdf

German study on viral load in 3k+ patients. Take home message is no significant difference in viral load between age groups (children through to old). In other words just as likely to be transmitted by children as older people. If correct opening schools early will be a bad idea. Usual preprint caveats etc...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on April 29, 2020, 11:00:22 pm
Did anybody see in the news that the Swiss are going to start letting young children see grandparents again - saying something like "they simply don't have the receptors to carry the disease" and that it was the parents who would present the risk to the grandchildren?

This seems out of step with the fact that some young children have died (though it is rare) of the disease. Is it all bollocks?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 29, 2020, 11:07:17 pm
Did anybody see in the news that the Swiss are going to start letting young children see grandparents again - saying something like "they simply don't have the receptors to carry the disease" and that it was the parents who would present the risk to the grandchildren?

This seems out of step with the fact that some young children have died (though it is rare) of the disease. Is it all bollocks?

There’s some sort of alert out across the UK for some associated syndrome in infants and toddlers isn’t there?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 30, 2020, 12:19:19 am
Another article from Tomas Pueyo
https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-how-to-do-testing-and-contact-tracing-bde85b64072e
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: stone on April 30, 2020, 07:42:46 am
The no-sitting-in-parks allowed etc bullshit seems all the more tragic given that Vitamin D deficiency may be a risk factor for COVID19 severity. If you are black and/or wear a hijab etc it would seem a good idea to take cod-liver oil or something I guess https://www.bmj.com/content/368/bmj.m810/rr-46
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: stone on April 30, 2020, 08:07:22 am
Another article from Tomas Pueyo
https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-how-to-do-testing-and-contact-tracing-bde85b64072e

Great article, thanks for the link.

At the end he mentions ideas for scaling up testing. What strikes me though is that there seem to be loads of great ideas for how to ramp up throughput of the testing steps that come after the snot has had its barcode swiped and it has been transferred to a multi-well plate. But everything after that is quick and easy anyway as it is. It is all about getting to that stage from what I can see. That is where innovation is needed. The sewerage testing sounds great for sidestepping that when doing surveillance.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on April 30, 2020, 09:10:34 am
Stone - maybe you can answer a question for me. I’ve seen a couple of papers showing that saliva tests are as effective - and have lower false positive rates - than the nose and throat swabs we currently use.

Less invasive and not an aerosol generating procedure too.

Is it possible to switch to saliva based testing without retailing the test equipment in labs?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 30, 2020, 10:08:57 am
Hi Stone, his other articles might interest you if you haven't read them: https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on April 30, 2020, 10:25:18 am
Some data visualisation on excess deaths.  One way of removing the differences in the way countries declare C19 mortality.

https://www.euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps#z-scores-by-country
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 30, 2020, 10:30:34 am
Some data visualisation on excess deaths.  One way of removing the differences in the way countries declare C19 mortality.

https://www.euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps#z-scores-by-country

These data are the same as those in the SkyNews graphics I posted on Tuesday... it’s good you can tweak them yourselves here though...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on April 30, 2020, 11:12:55 am
Did anybody see in the news that the Swiss are going to start letting young children see grandparents again - saying something like "they simply don't have the receptors to carry the disease" and that it was the parents who would present the risk to the grandchildren?

This seems out of step with the fact that some young children have died (though it is rare) of the disease. Is it all bollocks?

The recent concern about children is, so far as I can tell, an increase in the number of children presenting with symptoms of Kawasaki Disease, which is generally considered to be an autoimmune response to an infection. It still remains rare despite the increase in cases. Having an extreme autoimmune response to a virus can happen independently of how dangerous the virus is in its self to the host, so it may be that the two scenarios aren't mutually exclusive.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on April 30, 2020, 11:48:20 am
Did anybody see in the news that the Swiss are going to start letting young children see grandparents again - saying something like "they simply don't have the receptors to carry the disease" and that it was the parents who would present the risk to the grandchildren?

This seems out of step with the fact that some young children have died (though it is rare) of the disease. Is it all bollocks?

The recent concern about children is, so far as I can tell, an increase in the number of children presenting with symptoms of Kawasaki Disease, which is generally considered to be an autoimmune response to an infection. It still remains rare despite the increase in cases. Having an extreme autoimmune response to a virus can happen independently of how dangerous the virus is in its self to the host, so it may be that the two scenarios aren't mutually exclusive.

Thanks Ru. This might be me being slow, but I'm not quite getting my head around this.

The very brief clip that I heard suggested that young children did not have the receptors to be affected by coronavirus. My layperson's understanding is that this would mean that the virus could enter them but could not then attach to the epithelial cells - meaning no multiplication and no symptoms. So any viruses that entered a child's body would either be shed back out again or die (by just expiring or being targeted by the bodies immune system).

Those cells that did temporarily sit inside the child's body can cause an autoimmune response - which could lead to Kawasaki disease. So does this mean that the virus can't get into the epithelial cells but can still infect the immune cells and cause them to go haywire?

Kawasaki disease is a response to having an infection - but not necessarily of coronavirus. So the children who have been recorded as dying or becoming ill from coronavirus - did they have tests that demonstrated that their Kawasaki disease/over-active immne response was caused by coronavirus? If everything I've written above is right, I'm struggling to think how a child might present. If they have coronavirus but just have the over-agressive immune response as opposed to the damage to the epithelial cells, would they necessarily have a dry cough etc or might they just have a fever?


Apologies. I don't really have the background knowledge about how the virus works to really get my head around this. Most of my knowledge is drawn from this Youtube video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtN-goy9VOY
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on April 30, 2020, 12:02:47 pm
I don’t think anyone really knows Will. Some of the children with Kawasaki symptoms have tested positive for CV, some have not, as far as I know, but how these are related is guesswork. They’re not even 100 % sure Kawasaki is a autoimmune. Plus Kawasaki Disease seems to be a catch all term for a range of similar clusters of symptoms. Kids have been seen with  CV symptoms but not all have been tested and they could have had other respiratory illnesses either instead or possibly at the same time. From what I gather Paediatrics is as much art as science. Kids get lots of weird things, react to known diseases in weird ways due to developing immune systems and you can’t ethically study them in any standardised ways.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: stone on April 30, 2020, 12:14:51 pm
Stone - maybe you can answer a question for me. I’ve seen a couple of papers showing that saliva tests are as effective - and have lower false positive rates - than the nose and throat swabs we currently use.

Less invasive and not an aerosol generating procedure too.

Is it possible to switch to saliva based testing without retailing the test equipment in labs?

I'll check out those papers. That sounds great. Our floor coordinator was saying on Tues (when I was last called in) that she was spooked at having seen swabbing being done on the TV just in people's mouths rather than the normal deep-nose, deep-throat regime. What you are saying explains that. It would be even easier if people could just spit in a tube I guess.

The "equipment" for the first step going from a swab tube to scanning the barcode  and getting the samples in a 96well plate -is just a minion such as myself with a pipette in my hand. That's why it is by far the biggest bottleneck. Dealing with spit in a tube might be much easier to automate than dealing with an often broken and wonky swab in a tube.

I saw something yesterday saying that the virus could be heat inactivated and still be just as good for RT-PCR.  testing. That would be transformative I guess.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 30, 2020, 12:50:56 pm
Will - scan the paper I linked to clearly showing that all children had a similar viral load to adults.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 30, 2020, 01:30:17 pm
Will - scan the paper I linked to clearly showing that all children had a similar viral load to adults.

As now picked up by the Guardian

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/30/coronavirus-scientists-caution-against-reopening-schools?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tim palmer on April 30, 2020, 01:46:02 pm
Ace2 receptors (the 'receptor' for SARS-CoV-2) are expressed in foetal tissues.

Kawasaki disease is an inflammatory condition of unknown cause made on the strength of a combination of clinical and radiological findings.  No consistent link to a specific infectious aetiology has been made (I think). The issue with the diagnosis is it requires specific treatment to avoid severe cardiac sequelae (coronary artery aneurysm).  I think the concern is that the symptoms between this covid- related syndrome and Kawasaki maybe similar and care is required to make the correct diagnosis I.e. treat the Kawasaki disease if that is the clinically appropriate thing to do.  I believe some children have had a delay in their Kawasaki diagnosis.

Whether these covid related things are a variant of Kawasaki and need to be treated as Kawasaki seems like a difficult ball of string to untangle. 

On the subject of swabs I thought false negatives was more the problem?
I hear the serology had a high rate of false pos??

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on April 30, 2020, 03:29:07 pm
You’re right Tim - I meant false negatives when I wrote positives.

Here’s the better of the papers I saw looking at saliva tests: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.16.20067835v1

Looked convincing to me (usual out-of-field disclaimers apply) - esp figure 2.

I’d certainly rather spit in a tube than have someone scrape away at the back of my skull whilst wearing a full hazmat suit. And would seem to massively simplify the logistics of getting tests where they are needed - just post in your tube o’ spit. I’m a bit puzzled that there hasn’t been more made of it.   
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tim palmer on April 30, 2020, 03:40:49 pm
I can say from personal experience the throat and nose swab is a very unpleasant experience.   Being asked "What is your gag reflex like?"  Is never a good sign.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on April 30, 2020, 05:32:19 pm
Are priests doing the tests then?? :)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 30, 2020, 06:32:11 pm
We turned down the opportunity for 100k saliva tests from the USA earlier in the month apparently...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 30, 2020, 06:57:49 pm
(https://assets-global.website-files.com/5e3d471e8cf4751833faf0f9/5ea68cb8d3a80f4ba7d0a1f7_map270420.gif)

Hopefully the above works. Really nice animated gif of the results from the CV19 app that 2.8 million people are reporting symptoms (or not) on in the UK.

Link to page below if image above doesn’t work.

https://covid.joinzoe.com/data#levels-over-time
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on May 04, 2020, 11:29:00 am
I can say from personal experience the throat and nose swab is a very unpleasant experience.   Being asked "What is your gag reflex like?"  Is never a good sign.

My wife and I did it to ourselves at a drive in centre. I nearly threw up in the car and my eyes were streaming. I couldn't drive the car straight away and had to sit their a while to let them recover. The discomfort in my nose/sinus persisted for a good half a day.

My wife then had to do it on our 7yo. It was an experience neither of them enjoyed........
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fultonius on May 04, 2020, 05:32:19 pm
Good to finally see some leadership amongst the UK's leading politicians with a clearly thought-through lockdown exit strategy.

https://www.gov.scot/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-test-trace-isolate-support/pages/1/

You're welcome, Scotland.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on May 04, 2020, 05:37:55 pm
Ok so details of the govts app are release now... seems like all you need to do is switch on Bluetooth for the app and enter the first part of your postcode.

Now - maybe I have a devious mind - but remember this?

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.wired.com/story/99-phones-fake-google-maps-traffic-jam/amp

Where an artist dragged a bag of 99 smartphones around some streets at walking pace - which tricked google maps into saying there was a traffic jam there - and no cars went down there accordingly.

Well - what’s to stop some arsehole signing on to the app - then going to various supermarkets, parks, tube trains whatever - with their phone on - registering contacts all the way. Then next day saying they have the symptoms - and all the people they’ve been near the day before have to go into isolation... or what happens if you work on a building site or amazon warehouse etc.. and want to fuck over the company? Do the same... everyone you’ve worked with has to take the next two weeks off. So much opportunity for abuse...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on May 04, 2020, 05:43:56 pm
Wouldn't it need to rely on a positive test result before you could be flagged on the app as a source of virus?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on May 04, 2020, 05:47:41 pm
Then they'd need to identify you though - which is one of the things everyone wants the app to avoid doing...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on May 04, 2020, 05:55:21 pm
Wouldn't it need to rely on a positive test result before you could be flagged on the app as a source of virus?
Not so apparently. You just register that you have symptoms via the app and then everyone who’s been in contact is alerted. So as tomtom says, unless I’m missing something it’s open to abuse.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on May 04, 2020, 06:01:15 pm
Yeah seems to be. What do they do in other countries?


Couldn't there be a process where you attached an anonymous 'tag' generated by your NHS app, to a test result, which signalled back to the relevant app that it was 'positive' to keep things anonymous..? Dunno just thinking out loud.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on May 04, 2020, 08:25:46 pm
Random anecdote:
Just went to one of the international supermarkets quite close to us. A very different experience from going to Sainsbury's, Tesco or Aldi! No control over numbers, staff and shoppers didn't really give a fuck about distancing. Makes you wonder if this, and/or the underlying attitude, partly accounts for the disproportionate impact on BAME groups? (Probably 80%+ of staff/shoppers seemed to be BAME)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on May 04, 2020, 11:15:53 pm
Amazon are unsurprisingly doing pretty well.

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/business-and-finance/2020/05/amazon-jeff-bezos-finances-coronavirus-pandemic-effect-AWS

The numbers are almost incredible:

The company as a whole is taking in $9,602 per second.

Following the results, Bloomberg’s Billionaires index updated the personal wealth of Amazon’s founder and CEO, Jeff Bezos, to $149 billion. In three months — a period in which US economy has contracted by 4.8 per cent and more than 30 million Americans have filed for unemployment — his personal wealth has grown by of $34.2 billion, an overall growth rate of more than $15 million per hour. Were his wealth to grow at this rate for a year, Bezos would make more money in 2020 than Morocco, a country of almost 36 million people. 

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: remus on May 05, 2020, 08:02:47 am
Then they'd need to identify you though - which is one of the things everyone wants the app to avoid doing...

No idea how the gov app is meant to work, but in theory you wouldn't necessarily need to identify anyone. You could do something like


It's certainly not foolproof (The people running the tests could keep a record of who gets which codes so no anonymity) but it seems like a significant improvement over bob downloading the app, getting cuddly with half of london and then self diagnosing as positive.

This scheme would also rely on an abundance of tests being available, which is not necessarily a reality.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on May 05, 2020, 08:48:33 am
Remus’ suggestion is almost exactly how the Google/Apple plan is supposed to work. The downside is that someone has to test positive before they can alert contacts which adds some delay and will miss people.

But if you allow people to self-report you’ll get all sorts of jokers spamming the system.

This is one of the few advantages of the centralised system; you can do quite a lot to filter out malicious self reports at the database level by looking for unusual patterns.

There’s a long and technical description of how the NHS app will work in principle by the NCSC director Ian Levy.

https://www.ncsc.gov.uk/blog-post/security-behind-nhs-contact-tracing-app

It looks OK in principle. The app doesn’t store much data about you - a random ID, your phone model and the first but of your postcode.

Hard to imagine hackers doing much damage with that if they gain access to the DB.

My concern would be what happens when you submit symptom data. The information that ID 123456 is Alex Barrows will he stored somewhere in the NHS, so that the alerts sent out can be tweaked if Alex tests negative. In theory no single person has the access to link that data together, but we’ve heard those sorts of things before.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 05, 2020, 08:57:58 am
I wonder how many more of these will crop up around the globe.

Europe’s infection date keeps being pushed back and not by days, by months.

 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/04/french-hospital-discovers-covid-19-case-december-retested?CMP=fb_gu&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1588663411 (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/04/french-hospital-discovers-covid-19-case-december-retested?CMP=fb_gu&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1588663411)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on May 05, 2020, 09:29:08 am
I'm not sure this matters very much except for conspiracy theorists.  These unusually early cases obviously didn't cause a outbreak unless the virus mutated as the minimum mortality rate seems to still be more than 0.2% and the unfettered infection growth rate (with no social distancing) was similar across the world.

In the meantime the euromomo stats on real data on excess deaths on England versus everyone else in Europe are shocking. People say the 'hidden deaths' would be the same everywhere, they clearly were not.

https://www.euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 05, 2020, 09:54:45 am
I'm not sure this matters very much except for conspiracy theorists.  These unusually early cases obviously didn't cause a outbreak unless the virus mutated as the minimum mortality rate seems to still be more than 0.2% and the unfettered infection growth rate (with no social distancing) was similar across the world.

In the meantime the euromomo stats on real data on excess deaths on England versus everyone else in Europe are shocking. People say the 'hidden deaths' would be the same everywhere, they clearly were not.

https://www.euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps/

Oh, my bad.

Of course, the early cases simply weren’t infectious...

Don’t be so bloody silly, of course it’s important. Just because it doesn’t fit your chosen narrative (at the risk of sounding like Pete, you are stuck in a certain groove).

If this has been spreading for a month longer than was first assumed (in both Europe and China, since there are reports of unusual cases of pneumonia there from November) then it will be significant. Or are you simply accusing the French of lying?

Spread to vulnerable populations (those prone to severe symptoms) is  random. The possibility of an infection spreading for some time, without hitting a susceptible host, is more than a remote chance. Just as it’s entirely possible that here in the UK, we have as yet unidentified early casualties, who were simply described as pneumonia or otherwise (given we now know of some other, diverse, symptoms and complications).

Early diagnosis was primarily based around travel history and contact tracing. The French example, shows the shortcomings of that. And somewhat proves (or adds significant circumstantial evidence for) the last paragraph.

Oh, and see this:

This is good news, surely?

If I understand the post correctly, approximately 1:10 people have the virus (within the setting context) but are asymptomatic?
(You didn’t say what the total, symptomatic and asymptomatic numbers were).

I don’t see a huge argument that a tertiary cancer clinic, should be significantly different in infection incidence than the general population? Unless there is a Covid ward within the same building and communication of people and services between the two (ventilation, cleaning staff etc).

To be clearer, symptomatic patients had already been tested, symptomatic staff were off work so the 9/10% positives were all asymptomatic at the time of the test.

The setting is a tertiary cancer hospital, i.e. it has in patients. They have a Covid positive ward but this testing has shown that there are staff and patients on the non Covid wards that are Covid positive, so will be shedding virus to currently Covid negative patients.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on May 05, 2020, 10:28:06 am

Of course, the early cases simply weren’t infectious...

Don’t be so bloody silly, of course it’s important. Just because it doesn’t fit your chosen narrative (at the risk of sounding like Pete, you are stuck in a certain groove).

If this has been spreading for a month longer than was first assumed (in both Europe and China, since there are reports of unusual cases of pneumonia there from November) then it will be significant. Or are you simply accusing the French of lying?

Spread to vulnerable populations (those prone to severe symptoms) is  random. The possibility of an infection spreading for some time, without hitting a susceptible host, is more than a remote chance. Just as it’s entirely possible that here in the UK, we have as yet unidentified early casualties, who were simply described as pneumonia or otherwise (given we now know of some other, diverse, symptoms and complications).

Early diagnosis was primarily based around travel history and contact tracing. The French example, shows the shortcomings of that. And somewhat proves (or adds significant circumstantial evidence for) the last paragraph.

To be clearer, symptomatic patients had already been tested, symptomatic staff were off work so the 9/10% positives were all asymptomatic at the time of the test.

The setting is a tertiary cancer hospital, i.e. it has in patients. They have a Covid positive ward but this testing has shown that there are staff and patients on the non Covid wards that are Covid positive, so will be shedding virus to currently Covid negative patients.

The world is a highly connected place so since it was present in China then I'm not surprised there were earlier cases in Europe. The particular French case had no contacts other than his wife (they checked).

In hospitals testing has been good so you would expect people to be tested where local cases have cropped up before  the staff show symptoms. So yes that also means I don't think anything like 9/10  remain asymptomatic with C19 from any mass of evidence. A BMJ report of 75% is the highest I've been aware of but it contradicts earlier data that ranges from 10 to 33%. Also WHO still say peak infectiousness is most common a few days after symptoms show (asymptomatic transmission has been tracked but at much lower numbers).

My argument is not a 'narrative' as the disease infomation simply points with very high probability to particular characteristics that mean a mass world spread in December is highly unlikely, unless the virus subsequently mutated to become more infectious/dangerous.  If we assume it has been around longer with an exponencial growth giving many asymptomatic cases and the mortality a tenth lower than currently thought ( 0.05% or below) then the per capita mortality  rates would be expected to self limit at 500 per million (unless there are a lot of interconnected unknowns, like no immunity from having it and/or a big correlation of mortality vs dose). NY is already at 1270 per million and the US experts don't think everyone there has had it. Also those countries who were successful with track and trace don't fit an older, more slowly spreading less lethal C19.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on May 05, 2020, 10:46:47 am
If this has been spreading for a month longer than was first assumed (in both Europe and China, since there are reports of unusual cases of pneumonia there from November) then it will be significant. Or are you simply accusing the French of lying?

I would have thought that if it had been around that much earlier, the "excess deaths" number would have started creeping up before the "Covid deaths" number, however, they seem to correlate pretty well in the UK.

The stats showing excess deaths by location and the fact the increase in excess deaths seems to have occurred in areas of the UK with high Covid deaths indicates that the FT estimate of currently approx 50,000 deaths attributable to Covid-19 is probably pretty accurate.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on May 05, 2020, 11:00:51 am
assuming 1% mortality rate ~ 5 million have had it...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 05, 2020, 11:13:56 am

Of course, the early cases simply weren’t infectious...

Don’t be so bloody silly, of course it’s important. Just because it doesn’t fit your chosen narrative (at the risk of sounding like Pete, you are stuck in a certain groove).

If this has been spreading for a month longer than was first assumed (in both Europe and China, since there are reports of unusual cases of pneumonia there from November) then it will be significant. Or are you simply accusing the French of lying?

Spread to vulnerable populations (those prone to severe symptoms) is  random. The possibility of an infection spreading for some time, without hitting a susceptible host, is more than a remote chance. Just as it’s entirely possible that here in the UK, we have as yet unidentified early casualties, who were simply described as pneumonia or otherwise (given we now know of some other, diverse, symptoms and complications).

Early diagnosis was primarily based around travel history and contact tracing. The French example, shows the shortcomings of that. And somewhat proves (or adds significant circumstantial evidence for) the last paragraph.

To be clearer, symptomatic patients had already been tested, symptomatic staff were off work so the 9/10% positives were all asymptomatic at the time of the test.

The setting is a tertiary cancer hospital, i.e. it has in patients. They have a Covid positive ward but this testing has shown that there are staff and patients on the non Covid wards that are Covid positive, so will be shedding virus to currently Covid negative patients.

The world is a highly connected place so since it was present in China then I'm not surprised there were earlier cases in Europe. The particular French case had no contacts other than his wife (they checked).

In hospitals testing has been good so you would expect people to be tested where local cases have cropped up before  the staff show symptoms. So yes that also means I don't think anything like 9/10  remain asymptomatic with C19 from any mass of evidence.

My argument is not a 'narrative' as the disease infomation simply points with very high probability to particular characteristics that mean a mass world spread in December is highly unlikely, unless the virus subsequently mutated to become more infectious/dangerous.  If we assume it has been around longer with an exponencial growth giving many asymptomatic cases and the mortality a tenth lower than currently thought ( 0.05% or below) then the per capita mortality  rates would be expected to self limit at 500 per million (unless there are a lot of interconnected unknowns, like no immunity from having it and/or a big correlation of mortailty vs dose). NY is already at 1270 per million and they don't think everyone has had it. Also those countries who were successful with track and trace don't fit an older, more slowly spreading less lethal C19.

Dude.

His wife is likely the asymptomatic person who gave him the infection.

Did she find it in a Christmas cracker? Was it a seasonal Immaculate infection?

He, despite having no obvious travel connections or contact, proved symptomatic. Symptomatic is either the small majority, or a minority, state for those infected.
Either way, his infection can logically be assumed to indicate a larger number of infected people.
We know that it is sufficiently infectious to create exponential growth.

It was here and spreading, before anybody in authority realised. 

You consistently push an antigovernment narrative, that assumes all current negative outcomes, result from initial inaction from that government.
However, it seems pretty clear, that mother nature was merrily spreading her seeds of joy.
 It absolutely affects the government culpability narrative. These infections long preceded even the WHO “Emergency” line, let alone the “Pandemic” categorisation.

No, I dislike Boris and his crew of muppets, intensely and the things they do and decisions they make now, scrutinise away.
But frankly, the first blush, the initial response? It’s hard to really see that they could have done very much better.
If you need an explanation  for the dither and u-turn, blame the WHO. They were reluctant to hit the Pandemic button, after the criticism for hitting it too soon in the past and it was out of the bag before the Chinese lockdown.
The world, busy as always, thought it a local problem. They quietly thanked their respective deities that China was an authoritarian state and tutted at quarantine hotels collapsing, whilst assuming it was largely contained and they could concentrate on their favourite political sound bites and pet peeves.

Dig out, blaming the government for not being prepared for a pandemic. However, I see little to indicate any other political party, or even any other world government, would have responded better (and plenty “cough” USA “cough”) who didn’t.

Before you leap in with “but NZ”!
Defence in depth, buddy.

Pete is absolutely on the money.

They had more time to see it coming and fewer entry points and, ultimately, luck.
 Because they could have copped an early spreader, much as it seems several European countries and the US did, which would have made their tale somewhat different.

Also, not fitting the stats, just means “no or dead end early infection” and does not preclude earlier infection elsewhere.

The French guy had it.

In December.

So did his children.

There was, categorically, infection earlier than previously thought.




Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on May 05, 2020, 11:14:28 am
Random anecdote:
Just went to one of the international supermarkets quite close to us. A very different experience from going to Sainsbury's, Tesco or Aldi! No control over numbers, staff and shoppers didn't really give a fuck about distancing. Makes you wonder if this, and/or the underlying attitude, partly accounts for the disproportionate impact on BAME groups? (Probably 80%+ of staff/shoppers seemed to be BAME)
The area I live in is very ethnically diverse. There are clear differences in how the lockdown has been observed in different ethnic communities. You would be surprised at how little generalisation there is in the below:

The Chinese and Vietnamese stores/eateries introduced strict measures or closed before people had even begun stockpiling loo roll. Masks everywhere, one way systems rigidly observed and people going out of their way to stay as far apart as possible.

The South East Asian businesses operate on similar measures to Tesco. Masks are fairly common and there is some attempt to distance but with a sizable minority not bothering.

The African and middle Eastern businesses generally have a sign on the door and may restrict the total number of people allowed inside, there's quite a lot of mask wearing but there is little evidence of anyone observing distancing inside.

There is no lockdown in the Eastern European population. It is business as usual and has been all along. The shops are just as busy as ever and still double up as a community meeting place. Away from businesses, social gatherings never ceased.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 05, 2020, 11:24:55 am
Random anecdote:
Just went to one of the international supermarkets quite close to us. A very different experience from going to Sainsbury's, Tesco or Aldi! No control over numbers, staff and shoppers didn't really give a fuck about distancing. Makes you wonder if this, and/or the underlying attitude, partly accounts for the disproportionate impact on BAME groups? (Probably 80%+ of staff/shoppers seemed to be BAME)
The area I live in is very ethnically diverse. There are clear differences in how the lockdown has been observed in different ethnic communities. You would be surprised at how little generalisation there is in the below:

The Chinese and Vietnamese stores/eateries introduced strict measures or closed before people had even begun stockpiling loo roll. Masks everywhere, one way systems rigidly observed and people going out of their way to stay as far apart as possible.

The South East Asian businesses operate on similar measures to Tesco. Masks are fairly common and there is some attempt to distance but with a sizable minority not bothering.

The African and middle Eastern businesses generally have a sign on the door and may restrict the total number of people allowed inside, there's quite a lot of mask wearing but there is little evidence of anyone observing distancing inside.

There is no lockdown in the Eastern European population. It is business as usual and has been all along. The shops are just as busy as ever and still double up as a community meeting place. Away from businesses, social gatherings never ceased.

My Romanian in-laws, seem to do very little aside from share FB posts claiming it’s all a hoax, if older than 30 and quite the opposite (with a fair number of “all people in Romania over 30 are twats” posts) if under 30.
Mother-in-law, who lives in Italy (Lecco) thinks her countrymen are deluded wankers.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on May 05, 2020, 11:54:50 am
Mother-in-law, who lives in Italy (Lecco) thinks her countrymen are deluded wankers.

The Italians or the under 30s Romanians or the over 30s Romanians? Or maybe she's a kindred spirit and like me she thinks everyone is a deluded wanker  ;D
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on May 05, 2020, 11:57:35 am

Dude.

His wife is likely the asymptomatic person who gave him the infection.

Did she find it in a Christmas cracker? Was it a seasonal Immaculate infection?

He, despite having no obvious travel connections or contact, proved symptomatic. Symptomatic is either the small majority, or a minority, state for those infected.
Either way, his infection can logically be assumed to indicate a larger number of infected people.
We know that it is sufficiently infectious to create exponential growth.

It was here and spreading, before anybody in authority realised. 

You consistently push an antigovernment narrative, that assumes all current negative outcomes, result from initial inaction from that government.
However, it seems pretty clear, that mother nature was merrily spreading her seeds of joy.
 It absolutely affects the government culpability narrative. These infections long preceded even the WHO “Emergency” line, let alone the “Pandemic” categorisation.

No, I dislike Boris and his crew of muppets, intensely and the things they do and decisions they make now, scrutinise away.
But frankly, the first blush, the initial response? It’s hard to really see that they could have done very much better.
If you need an explanation  for the dither and u-turn, blame the WHO. They were reluctant to hit the Pandemic button, after the criticism for hitting it too soon in the past and it was out of the bag before the Chinese lockdown.
The world, busy as always, thought it a local problem. They quietly thanked their respective deities that China was an authoritarian state and tutted at quarantine hotels collapsing, whilst assuming it was largely contained and they could concentrate on their favourite political sound bites and pet peeves.

Dig out, blaming the government for not being prepared for a pandemic. However, I see little to indicate any other political party, or even any other world government, would have responded better (and plenty “cough” USA “cough”) who didn’t.

Before you leap in with “but NZ”!
Defence in depth, buddy.

Pete is absolutely on the money.

They had more time to see it coming and fewer entry points and, ultimately, luck.
 Because they could have copped an early spreader, much as it seems several European countries and the US did, which would have made their tale somewhat different.

Also, not fitting the stats, just means “no or dead end early infection” and does not preclude earlier infection elsewhere.

The French guy had it.

In December.

So did his children.

There was, categorically, infection earlier than previously thought.

I agree the infection was very likely here earlier but all the evidence indicates either it didn't spread or the version we have has mutated since then. We got lucky somehow in a way that is not yet explained.

If what you say is true show me where the science says so. Show me where WHO have been proved massively wrong and it is a slower growing, less lethal virus. Everything matches 0.5% mortality, the main spread being due to those infected showing early symptoms, and common growth rates where infections were not isolated (yes including NZ who had 1500 recorded positive tests, the large majority of whom who had symptoms). If what you were saying is true it would have been too late for any country to stop it as infection numbers would have been much larger.

As for our government the detail of their failings I've critised are all public and confirmed. More importantly our excess deaths are way higher than anywhere else in Europe by a large margin and our C19 official deaths will be the highest in Europe in a few days. I'm only blaming them for things they have clearly done wrong.... I've even defended them on the timing of lockdown (as I think SAGE failed due to a flawed set up and some unlucky cock-ups).  I can't remember the last time I didn't publicly criticise a government for doing really stupid shit (including Iraq and PFI under Blair). Government is for the people and must be accountable.

I apologise for the differences in details on the French guy.... just trusted the Guardian article.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/04/french-hospital-discovers-covid-19-case-december-retested
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on May 05, 2020, 01:00:16 pm
As for our government the detail of their failings I've critised are all public and confirmed. More importantly our excess deaths are way higher than anywhere else in Europe by a large margin and our C19 official deaths will be the highest in Europe in a few days.


We've certainly by any measures not doing well on coronavirus deaths but I do think the Euromomo figures need more explanation/detail.  The graphs for England seem look far worse than anywhere else in Europe (including Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland?) and on quick look I can't find any detail around data feeding into those graphs including how up to date it is. 

The FT now includes excess mortality info:

https://www.ft.com/coronavirus-latest (https://www.ft.com/coronavirus-latest)

This shows England and Wales as doing badly but not necessarily out of sync with other hard hit countries such as Italy, Spain. Belgium.  It also shows latest updates of available data and this all dates back to early/mid April.

I really do think we need to be careful that data is analysed properly, with things changing so quickly it must be difficult to make accurate comparisons with how different countries are doing.  The UK may be doing pretty badly but if it is so much worse that other places it seems strange that we're not seeing stories around hospital, morgues etc be overwhelmed?

I'm not trying to make a judgement either way here, just think caution is required before making conclusions.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on May 05, 2020, 02:23:36 pm
The data in that FT link does not appear to be up-to date. ONS have released the data in the week ending April 24th now. I also thought the FT excess death stats were all from euromomo so it's best to use the direct link (another benefit is you can manipulate the graph scales and comparisons on that site as well). The main aspects I can see we need to be careful with are:  the extrapolation from April 24th; a large number of deaths will be secondary causes, not due to C19 but due to the NHS not functioning as normal or other factors;  exact direct comparisons on covid 19 need care due to secondary deaths, different age profiles etc.

I thought mortuaries are 'overwhelmed', which is why we keep adding to emergency body storage facility.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/17/coronavirus-crisis-puts-pressure-on-crematoria-and-morgues-in-uk
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: stone on May 05, 2020, 03:09:24 pm
I'm not sure this matters very much except for conspiracy theorists.  These unusually early cases obviously didn't cause a outbreak unless the virus mutated as the minimum mortality rate seems to still be more than 0.2% and the unfettered infection growth rate (with no social distancing) was similar across the world.

In the meantime the euromomo stats on real data on excess deaths on England versus everyone else in Europe are shocking. People say the 'hidden deaths' would be the same everywhere, they clearly were not.

https://www.euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps/
I guess it's possible that the virus was rapidly evolving to being more transmissible and perhaps doing so independently both in Europe and China. I'm meaning to have a look at https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.29.069054v1 (done by Sheffield folk :) ) which looks to be about that sort of thing. So I guess R may have been low early on and then attained R=2.5 after the virus had bedded in to human-human transmission.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on May 05, 2020, 03:47:14 pm
The data in that FT link does not appear to be up-to date. ONS have released the data in the week ending April 24th now. I also thought the FT excess death stats were all from euromomo so it's best to use the direct link (another benefit is you can manipulate the graph scales and comparisons on that site as well). The main aspects I can see we need to be careful with are:  the extrapolation from April 24th; a large number of deaths will be secondary causes, not due to C19 but due to the NHS not functioning as normal or other factors;  exact direct comparisons on covid 19 need care due to secondary deaths, different age profiles etc.

I thought mortuaries are 'overwhelmed', which is why we keep adding to emergency body storage facility.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/17/coronavirus-crisis-puts-pressure-on-crematoria-and-morgues-in-uk

That's the point really, if FT takes the data from Euromomo can you link to the raw data on the Euromomo site you linked to including dates of data inputs used since its not obvious from their charts at all.

On the morgues issue there's a few news stories about pressure and providing extra capacity e.g.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-52346488 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-52346488)

But nothing about mortuaries being overwhelmed. 

It may be that we are facing many more deaths overall that other countries and are 'just' managing to deal with those deaths but if its that much worse I'd like see some proper analysis rather than just you (and me!) trying to interpret some charts on the internet.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: stone on May 05, 2020, 06:15:34 pm
This full Whitty experience was great I thought :- https://www.gresham.ac.uk/lectures-and-events/covid-19
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on May 05, 2020, 07:15:26 pm
Christ. When I saw that URL I thought we were going to be directed to the Neil Graham University, specialising in mail order doctorates on subjects as various as fingerboarding and shitting under routes at Tilberthwaite.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on May 05, 2020, 07:21:30 pm

That's the point really, if FT takes the data from Euromomo can you link to the raw data on the Euromomo site you linked to including dates of data inputs used since its not obvious from their charts at all.

On the morgues issue there's a few news stories about pressure and providing extra capacity e.g.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-52346488 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-52346488)

But nothing about mortuaries being overwhelmed. 

It may be that we are facing many more deaths overall that other countries and are 'just' managing to deal with those deaths but if its that much worse I'd like see some proper analysis rather than just you (and me!) trying to interpret some charts on the internet.

I don't have a link to the raw data but its directly proportional to the per capita excess deaths and we have that data for the UK from the ONS. I was surprised how comparatively small excess deaths were in Italy. They must have hospitalised a much greater proportion of the elderly from care homes. Italy got hit very hard with two weeks less warning in a much smaller population area  with a more elderly population and at flu season. Since their hospitals were overwhelmed the mortality rates will likely have locally soared locally. Italy had all these disadvantages and our excess deaths are already a good bit higher (and we are two weeks of large area under the graph behind them and their infection level is slowing faster due to a harsher lock-down).

ONS data was looked at in detail today on the BBC news so the serious increase in care home deaths in the week ending April 24th and elsewhere not recorded as C19 is clear (only 1/3 of the excess deaths that week are recorded as due to that.). The morgues were not actually especially overwhelmed (why I put it inverted commas) as the state systems have sensibly provided a huge amount of additional cold storage for the bodies: it's a lot easier than new hospitals and some has been 'repurposed' from commercial sources like this one:

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-warehouse-in-glasgow-converted-into-morgue-to-fit-1-700-bodies-11973218

It's something else the UK has got right. In Italy things were probably much worse as the scale of deaths was unexpected.


Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on May 05, 2020, 10:28:26 pm
Wasn’t sure If the posts about the NHS app were on here - but quite a nice explainer about it - and why the background operation may well be flawed in this article

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2020/05/05/uk_coronavirus_app
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on May 05, 2020, 10:50:13 pm
Rubbish isn’t it. I kind of hope take up is woeful so they are forced into plan B.

The privacy issues don’t worry me so much as the effectiveness. I don’t *think* it will work if you’re actively using a different app either.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 06, 2020, 06:17:43 am
It seems that the strain, now dominant globally, is more infectious than the original:

 https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.29.069054v1.full.pdf (https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.29.069054v1.full.pdf)


Reported in the LA Times, yesterday:

 https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-05-05/mutant-coronavirus-has-emerged-more-contagious-than-original?fbclid=IwAR073A2IqUfmKJyJpgCqrTmV_VB-4GzXpIDhlrUBqmrPstO1TZh0S-ZjmD0 (https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-05-05/mutant-coronavirus-has-emerged-more-contagious-than-original?fbclid=IwAR073A2IqUfmKJyJpgCqrTmV_VB-4GzXpIDhlrUBqmrPstO1TZh0S-ZjmD0)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: stone on May 06, 2020, 06:27:13 am
Rubbish isn’t it. I kind of hope take up is woeful so they are forced into plan B.

The privacy issues don’t worry me so much as the effectiveness. I don’t *think* it will work if you’re actively using a different app either.

Is there any way we could have a citizen led app? So just have clued up do-gooders provide a decent app and the public trust them and cut our shitty government out of the loop. Let the government one get going in parallel and fully engage in it but not wait for it.

Channel 4 news featured a "shoe leather" contact tracing initiative in Sheffield orchestrated by GPs. They said if that were done simultaneously in every street as they are doing it, we would now have blanket contact tracing for the whole nation. That is what they did in China and they did it straight away at the start.

I think where we failed on testing is that we deferred to the government when they said they would sort it and we should wait until they had. On contact tracing they have been even worse. What the hell has been happening for the last two months?

They are still making an utter shambles of testing. At Alderly Park we turned up at 7:30 am to be told the samples hadn't been delivered. A tiny amount were delivered at 9:00, then we were told no more were coming. No one had a clue why or what was going on. They cancelled the following shift. I spent longer driving there and back than pipetting. Many people there are living away from home to work there.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on May 06, 2020, 08:34:06 am
It’s been a shambles hasn’t it. At the start of this I imagined there’d be a vast deployment of state resources, but everything has had a “piss up in a brewery” feel about it.

The 750,000 strong army of volunteers hasn’t worked out well either. Most have complained there’s nothing for them to do.

“Neighbourhood watch” contact tracing sounds fraught to me though; the privacy aspects of it are quite subtle. I can’t imagine someone admitting they sneaked out of lockdown to shag their married neighbour to a guy down the road...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on May 06, 2020, 08:36:46 am
On the app thing, Google/Apple have committed to only supporting one app per country or US state.

I don’t know if they’d insist that it was state led, but I imagine so. NHSX has said they will change model if they need to so I’m genuinely conflicted about what to do when the app is released.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on May 06, 2020, 08:42:17 am
It’s been a shambles hasn’t it. At the start of this I imagined there’d be a vast deployment of state resources...

That is what I imagined too. How wrong can you be? Running down state resources, UK manufacturing industries, + lack of leadership in action.

I can’t imagine someone admitting they sneaked out of lockdown to shag their married neighbour to a guy down the road...

It looks like you get a month's grace on that one anyway. Or at least until when some bad news needs a suitable deflection.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on May 06, 2020, 08:52:28 am
It’s been a shambles hasn’t it. At the start of this I imagined there’d be a vast deployment of state resources, but everything has had a “piss up in a brewery” feel about it.
And when we hear all the talk about ”rapidly building a team of 18,000 contact tracers” what they actually mean is outsourcing to a Serco and G4S call centre. While those 750,000 volunteers sit at home waiting for something useful to do.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on May 06, 2020, 09:01:05 am
Having looked into it more about it this morning I’m not sure that register article is right; at least about the technicalities of the app working in the background on iOS.

It looks like it ought to be possible based on what Apple publish about their Bluetooth APIs.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on May 06, 2020, 09:30:22 am
It seems that the strain, now dominant globally, is more infectious than the original:

 https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.29.069054v1.full.pdf (https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.29.069054v1.full.pdf)


Reported in the LA Times, yesterday:

 https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-05-05/mutant-coronavirus-has-emerged-more-contagious-than-original?fbclid=IwAR073A2IqUfmKJyJpgCqrTmV_VB-4GzXpIDhlrUBqmrPstO1TZh0S-ZjmD0 (https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-05-05/mutant-coronavirus-has-emerged-more-contagious-than-original?fbclid=IwAR073A2IqUfmKJyJpgCqrTmV_VB-4GzXpIDhlrUBqmrPstO1TZh0S-ZjmD0)

That sounds very likely in mutation terms but it's important to say that the first strain in Wuhan was the same mortality rate and had a low percentage of the assyptomatic and was most infectious for those showing symptoms. The mutations reported in this paper don't explain the case in France (earlier mutations might). This subject is important (and tempting to ignore)  as the reason the conspiracy theorists believe in a longer spread, of a lower mortality rate virus, that is highly assymptomatic, is it would indicate nearly everyone has had it. Hence herd immunity, hence all this government interference and lockdown shit is unnecessary. It's dangerous and supported by no evidence. In my view it's similar to the climate change denial, and popular with the same people.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 06, 2020, 09:46:42 am
It seems that the strain, now dominant globally, is more infectious than the original:

 https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.29.069054v1.full.pdf (https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.29.069054v1.full.pdf)


Reported in the LA Times, yesterday:

 https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-05-05/mutant-coronavirus-has-emerged-more-contagious-than-original?fbclid=IwAR073A2IqUfmKJyJpgCqrTmV_VB-4GzXpIDhlrUBqmrPstO1TZh0S-ZjmD0 (https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-05-05/mutant-coronavirus-has-emerged-more-contagious-than-original?fbclid=IwAR073A2IqUfmKJyJpgCqrTmV_VB-4GzXpIDhlrUBqmrPstO1TZh0S-ZjmD0)

That sounds very likely in mutation terms but it's important to say that the first strain in Wuhan was the same mortality rate and had a low percentage of the assyptomatic and was most infectious for those showing symptoms. The mutations reported in this paper don't explain the case in France (earlier mutations might). This subject is important (and tempting to ignore)  as the reason the conspiracy theorists believe in a longer spread, of a lower mortality rate virus, that is highly assymptomatic, is it would indicate nearly everyone has had it. Hence herd immunity, hence all this government interference and lockdown shit is unnecessary. It's dangerous and supported by no evidence. In my view it's similar to the climate change denial, and popular with the same people.

Right.

I am not fucking advocating the pissing conspiracy theory (which seeks to imply that most people had the disease in November last year). It is now an established fact that the disease was present here, in Europe, a month earlier than first thought.

This is reported widely.

Here, you like the Guardian:
 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/02/coronavirus-took-hold-in-uk-earlier-than-thought-data-reveals (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/02/coronavirus-took-hold-in-uk-earlier-than-thought-data-reveals)

Actually, I’m more angry with you, than indicated above.

You have placed a tinfoil fucking hat on my head based on your own, rather stupid, “temptation to ignore” the reality presented to you. You have the evidence, live with it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on May 06, 2020, 09:55:13 am
I know you are not Matt but the internet is full of such wish fullfillment shit. Its a threat to everyone as such people won't care about following social distancing.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 06, 2020, 10:00:44 am
I know you are not Matt but the internet is full of such wish fullfillment shit. Its a threat to everyone as such people won't care about following social distancing.

Reality.

All you are advocating here is the “Lies to children” approach to education/informing the public.
Rather hypocritical considering your vociferous blather everywhere else about the lack of transparency by the Government; whilst simultaneously believing that promulgation of actual data that might add credence to a conspiracy theory (it doesn’t) should be down played.

This is why I accuse you of being swayed by your political agenda, in your attitude to the disease and the Government’s response to it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on May 06, 2020, 10:56:21 am
All I said about the French case is it doesn't matter as it went nowhere and means nothing to what we face now. It's interesting and needs investigation but most people on the internet (and quite a few on UKC) seem to be misusing it to defend the conspiracy that we have all had C19 and so social distancing is pointless. IMHO its stupid not to have that argument countered. With the current level of population infections we are maybe two weeks from hospitals being overwhelmed if a UK 'lockdown' ends and any subsequent change will too late to respond once that becomes obvious from a new rapid case growth.

This is the worst PM and worst ministerial line up I've ever seen... their CVs look like a rouges gallery... so yes I'm biased against them but they work in full face of the public and experts and with a capable although austerity damaged civil service, NHS, public health and council sector. I think their timing of the 'lockdown' was exactly right (as discussed today on the other thread), their finance response was excellent, so I'm happy I can think past my dislike of them but you're free to make personal attacks about it if you want.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on May 06, 2020, 11:14:31 am
I can’t imagine someone admitting they sneaked out of lockdown to shag their married neighbour...
It looks like you get a month's grace on that one anyway. Or at least until when some bad news needs a suitable deflection.
He’s being properly thrown under the bus this morning by the look of it. Hancock now suggesting it’s “a matter for the police”, despite Ferguson not being the one to have left his house so not in breach of the regulations. I don’t remember any of the cabinet suggesting the police should get involved when it was Jenrick in the spotlight. Is that a dead cat I see?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 06, 2020, 11:41:12 am
All I said about the French case is it doesn't matter as it went nowhere and means nothing to what we face now. It's interesting and needs investigation but most people on the internet (and quite a few on UKC) seem to be misusing it to defend the conspiracy that we have all had C19 and so social distancing is pointless. IMHO its stupid not to have that argument countered. With the current level of population infections we are maybe two weeks from hospitals being overwhelmed if a UK 'lockdown' ends and any subsequent change will too late to respond once that becomes obvious from a new rapid case growth.

This is the worst PM and worst ministerial line up I've ever seen... their CVs look like a rouges gallery... so yes I'm biased against them but they work in full face of the public and experts and with a capable although austerity damaged civil service, NHS, public health and council sector. I think their timing of the 'lockdown' was exactly right (as discussed today on the other thread), their finance response was excellent, so I'm happy I can think past my dislike of them but you're free to make personal attacks about it if you want.

Yes, yes, the French case is not important because he didn’t infect anyone else...

Obviously, he didn’t catch it from someone else and, of course, the person that he didn’t catch it from, did not infect anyone else, so there was no prior chain of infection already in progress prior to his infection.

Also, equally clearly, I’m not in the least bit irritated by being tarred as a conspiracy nut, after sharing established and corroborated information, and didn’t find it even slightly personally offensive.

Let’s just ignore the apparent fact, that comparison of containment between Western countries (apparently battling a new, more infectious strain) and those Eastern countries who faced an earlier, less infectious strain, are increasingly irrelevant (if they weren’t already).

Back to wondering why Germany, still, seems to be doing so much better (test and trace, imho) and what’s going to happen there next.

Then, given the new strain, how prevalent is it?
It looks as though it’s certainly in the UK, from the Sheffield data. Has it hit Germany yet, or is it about to? What does it mean for all of us looking to reopen or relax current measures?

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on May 06, 2020, 12:35:19 pm
You can't have it both ways Matt. If it was the highly infectious Wuhan variant it should have spread from that guy and the contacts linked to him and so would very likely have led to an outbreak and deaths in France in January. We don't know why it made no difference (if it was the same C19 as in Wuhan) but the fact that it made no difference is clear in the later data. If it was C19 then it could have been dumb luck or a much less serious mutation than that in Wuhan.

If that paper is right it would likely mean most of the EU spread is the newer mutation so thinking we might be seing big differences due to different mutations would be be a big assumption: differences would  more likely depend on how well social distancing is working  (Sweden indicates this is not just what the government do in terms of formal restrictions but how well people responded to the very clear advice there to social distance) and other factors like better testing, better PPE and infection control in hospitals, care homes etc.

In terms of the UK I'm really worried about several factors: those recent ONS care home numbers, that are tested as C19, seemingly still increasing (and community deaths); that R is still estimated at being so high in the UK; and the flat new case data. Look at the last three weeks of new cases of Italy and Spain to see what the decline should look like (presumably due to their stiffer lockdown?) and it indicates we are not anywhere near sensible relaxation as yet and may even need to tighten up a bit.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/spain/
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/italy/
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/uk/


Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on May 06, 2020, 12:49:11 pm
Also important to remember that the virus affects different people in different ways - apparently due to our different genetic composition. There is some sensible research on this looking at impacts on infected twins - both identical and non.

So you have a mutated virus (all viruses mutate) that may behave slightly differently - that anyway affects different people in different ways! 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 06, 2020, 12:50:25 pm
You can't have it both ways Matt. If it was the highly infectious Wuhan variant it should have spread from that guy and the contacts linked to him and so would very likely have led to an outbreak and deaths in France in January. We don't know why it made no difference (if it was the same C19 as in Wuhan) but the fact that it made no difference is clear in the later data. If it was C19 then it could have been dumb luck or a much less serious mutation than that in Wuhan.

If that paper is right it would likely mean most of the EU spread is the newer mutation so thinking we might be seing big differences due to different mutations would be be a big assumption: differences would  more likely depend on how well social distancing is working  (Sweden indicates this is not just what the government do in terms of formal restrictions but how well people responded to the very clear advice there to social distance) and other factors like better testing, better PPE and infection control in hospitals, care homes etc.

In terms of the UK I'm really worried about several factors: those recent ONS care home numbers, that are tested as C19, seemingly still increasing (and community deaths); that R is still estimated at being so high in the UK; and the flat new case data. Look at the last three weeks of new cases of Italy and Spain to see what the decline should look like (presumably due to their stiffer lockdown?) and it indicates we are not anywhere near sensible relaxation as yet and may even need to tighten up a bit.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/spain/
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/italy/
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/uk/

Again.

You ignore the prior chain that infected him.

The later data, of which he is an example, is that undiagnosed transmission and infection was present earlier than originally believed.
The rest of your last post are simply words you insist on placing in my mouth and not anything I have advocated. Again.
There is now a more infectious variant, which is believed to become the dominant strain, in any community it is introduced to, rapidly.
My only speculation is, did anywhere in Europe (maybe Germany) shut down, prior to this strain becoming endemic? Especially, since the implication of the paper linked to earlier, is that the mutation arose in Europe (or, at least, outside the community where the original strain popped up).

Beyond that? Nada.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on May 06, 2020, 01:26:38 pm
We could loop this forever so this is my last post on the subject. The infectiousness and mortality rate of the Wuhan outbreak variant was simply too high for what you argue. Given there was no French outbreak in January, the French case was therefore highly likely irrelevant. Most EU outbreaks track directly through N Italy ski resorts from SE Asia.  Yes there may have been a different (to what we have now and to Wuhan) less serious Covid19 variant around much earlier but I've seen no clear evidence for that and even if it was there it very likely made no impact from the extensive genetic tracing, after the Wuhan variant left China. I think the French case needs investigating but does not currently have any evidence of any relevance to any current UK or EU C19 actions.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: rich d on May 06, 2020, 01:44:04 pm
You can't have it both ways Matt. If it was the highly infectious Wuhan variant it should have spread from that guy and the contacts linked to him and so would very likely have led to an outbreak and deaths in France in January.
We don't know it didn't yet, there's a pretty low death rate from actual infection, with lots not showing any symptoms. Those deaths if there were any would have been registered as flu or pneumonia at the time and I doubt they've been back tested, if that's even possible now.
I don't think this means there was a mass pandemic - but it does pour some cold water on the comments from some commentators that the UK and possibly other European countries acted too slowly if it had already been in the population in December, of course you could also look at it as if it's been in Europe since December than it means governments were actually even slower in reacting.
Tin foil hat now being taken off.....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on May 06, 2020, 02:00:48 pm
As I said, I think that's nonsense, so I'll post something else

https://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-headlines/britain-scores-the-highest-death-toll-in-europe-and-still-the-whinging-carpers-have-nothing-positive-to-say-by-dominic-raab-20200506196174
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: stone on May 07, 2020, 07:41:37 am
With that phone app for contact tracing. Can't people sidestep their privacy concerns by only switching it on when they are going to the supermarket and not when they are doing bank heists or whatever?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on May 07, 2020, 11:54:29 am
Irrelevant to most people, but there were just 3 new deaths yesterday here in Denmark (0.6% increase). I wonder if we will soon see a no-deaths day? New cases have increased by less than 2% for the last 10 days (1.2% yesterday).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Mike Highbury on May 07, 2020, 12:10:15 pm
With that phone app for contact tracing. Can't people sidestep their privacy concerns by only switching it on when they are going to the supermarket and not when they are doing bank heists or whatever?

Privacy stuff is a big this for me so I love this stuff,

James O'Malley on how the app may or may not work in the background,

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1258327399391006720.html
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on May 07, 2020, 12:50:31 pm
That article doesn’t really answer much though does it?

I had a good root through the Apple API docs yesterday and concluded it would work in the background on iOS.

However I had a long chat on Twitter with a VERY qualified dev friend of mine who was adamant it would be flaky and that the real issue was iOS/Android compatibility. I’d like to see THAT tested in the real world.

edited to add link to twitter thread: https://twitter.com/aallan/status/1257936154621612032?s=21
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on May 07, 2020, 12:56:53 pm
Article comparing death/cases  For when Italy and France Relaxed lockdown rules compared to the UK. Spoiler - we’re a long way from the point they were at..

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/coronavirus-uk-lockdown-peak-deaths-cases-covid-19-cases-chart-stats-a9502196.html
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: T_B on May 07, 2020, 01:00:16 pm
Not sure if this has been posted elsewhere?

The section on Nepal is pretty interesting to me. They stopped issuing visas on 13 March effectively pulling the shutters down (only entry points were via land from China and India) then internally locked down hard soon after.

They’ve had fewer than 100 cases. This explains why they were on top of it:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m000hn63
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on May 07, 2020, 01:22:54 pm
Article comparing death/cases  For when Italy and France Relaxed lockdown rules compared to the UK. Spoiler - we’re a long way from the point they were at..
Yes, and given the numbers coming from the BoE today I can’t help feeling we’ll end up both with a massive death rate and a fucked economy. It’s hard to see how lockdown measures can be eased very much given where we are currently relative to the ‘5 tests’ the govt have come up, so the assumption by the BoE that the economy will start coming back on stream from June onwards seems pretty optimistic.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on May 07, 2020, 01:26:34 pm
Article comparing death/cases  For when Italy and France Relaxed lockdown rules compared to the UK. Spoiler - we’re a long way from the point they were at..
Yes, and given the numbers coming from the BoE today I can’t help feeling we’ll end up both with a massive death rate and a fucked economy. It’s hard to see how lockdown measures can be eased very much given where we are currently relative to the ‘5 tests’ the govt have come up, so the assumption by the BoE that the economy will start coming back on stream from June onwards seems pretty optimistic.

Yup. That’s fairly similar to what I think too.

For those more economically astute than me - our whole economic growth is built around buying stuff and doing things. Personally, right now I don’t feel like spending loads on a holiday, or meal, haircut, night out, whatever... I suspect I’m not alone.... I wonder if the demand rather than supply will be the real issue once health concerns fade.

Now climbing shoes is a different matter :D
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on May 07, 2020, 01:26:52 pm
Article comparing death/cases  For when Italy and France Relaxed lockdown rules compared to the UK. Spoiler - we’re a long way from the point they were at..

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/coronavirus-uk-lockdown-peak-deaths-cases-covid-19-cases-chart-stats-a9502196.html

I'd add those eased restrictions in Italy and France are roughly to what we have now. Their harder lockdowns led to the faster decline in cases.

We will have to wait for tomorrow to see what the government has planned (it may just be window dressing) but they have yet again, reading the tory press front pages this am, lost control of the message and any significant UK easing right now would seem to me to be lethal hubris. On the other thread I asked where are SAGE in all this? Is Fergerson's activities being leaked, forcing his resignation from SAGE, conveniently as much to do with this (he really embarrassed the government before when they seemed to ignore him on herd immunity risks) as distracting from the UK having the highest number of deaths in Europe two days ago??
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Mike Highbury on May 07, 2020, 01:44:23 pm
edited to add link to twitter thread: https://twitter.com/aallan/status/1257936154621612032?s=21

Thanks, that's v interesting
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on May 07, 2020, 02:31:43 pm
Sounds like the row back/ uturn on ‘unoockdown’ has started.

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-very-limited-lockdown-changes-in-england-downing-street-11984686
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on May 07, 2020, 02:39:49 pm
Sounds like the row back/ uturn on ‘unoockdown’ has started.

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-very-limited-lockdown-changes-in-england-downing-street-11984686

Expected. Pretty bored of the constant briefing and retraction. Fucking useless.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on May 07, 2020, 02:49:27 pm
Surely the ‘briefings from unknown source’ and associated media frenzy building up expectations is part of the strategy? Rather than them losing control of the message. Though I can’t be arsed to think long enough about it to decide what benefit that strategy is to the govt. But as spidermonkey says it’s pretty tiresome whatever it is.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on May 07, 2020, 02:53:04 pm
Surely the ‘briefings from unknown source’ and associated media frenzy building up expectations is part of the strategy? Rather than them losing control of the message. Though I can’t be arsed to think long enough about it to decide what benefit that strategy is to the govt. But as spidermonkey says it’s pretty tiresome whatever it is.

I'm just not sure the government are that Machiavellian for this to all be part of the strategy. It plays into the idea that Cummings is some sort of genius, whereas in reality hes just a middle aged contrarian incel in my eyes.

As per Hanlon's Razor, never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on May 07, 2020, 03:09:45 pm
he's just a middle aged contrarian incel in my eyes.


Whatever else he is, he does have a wife (from Chillingham Castle near Hepburn) and son, so if he is an incel it’s not the whole time!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on May 07, 2020, 03:13:59 pm
I'm just not sure the government are that Machiavellian for this to all be part of the strategy.
You’re probably right of course. It’s just hard to disentangle what is and isn’t sometimes, especially when this government* has the history it does in terms of its ability to control message and manipulate thinking.
*Vote Leave strategists
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on May 08, 2020, 09:45:32 am
As per Hanlon's Razor, never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity!
I now completely agree. It was just a complete shit show of mixed messaging kicked off by a remark made on the hoof by BJ at PMQs and then amplified by the Downing St briefings. No strategy. Just incompetence as per usual.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on May 10, 2020, 08:47:41 am
A long read: but interesting - how the pandemic played out in Lombardy. Includes lots of details about how Lombardys health system is organised (50/50 private/public) and some shocking/bad numbers about death rates in care homes (30%) and how in the chaos of everything these were somehow not considered in detail.

It’s well written - lots of detail - but long. If you’ve a spare 30 min.

https://www.ilpost.it/2020/05/07/two-months-that-shook-lombardy-to-the-core-coronavirus/

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Sidehaas on May 10, 2020, 11:52:06 am
My biggest takeaway from that is that despite the talk of the system there being overwhelmed, what actually happened reads very similarly to what has been happening in the UK. (Not the governance system, but the impact on the health system and the consequences that have played out)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on May 10, 2020, 01:39:21 pm
Quote
stay at home as much as possible

🤦‍♂️

Still time for a U turn.....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: seankenny on May 10, 2020, 02:46:32 pm
The daily briefings are “number theatre” from a government that isn’t treating us like grown-ups, according to a top statistician.

https://twitter.com/tobyontv/status/1259416363556376576?s=21
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on May 10, 2020, 03:14:56 pm
Dr Ami Jones, tweeting graph of international death rates,
Quote
Showing our supremacy in the world stats as we irresponsibly flount lockdown to celebrate VE Day in the worst fashion. Glad I’ve had a couple of weeks away from ITU to recuperate as the next wave is going to make this horrific statistic even worse. Things are about to get busy .
https://twitter.com/JonesTheBosher/status/1259373302289772545

Sir David Spiegelhalter, from Sean’s tweeted interview
Quote
I think this {gov briefings} is untrustworthy communication of statistics.


Stewart Lee:
Quote
Britain now has the highest coronavirus death rate of any European country, and unpatriotic critics are already trying to connect this data, in some way, to the government’s response to the crisis, as if they were somehow related.

Edit-tweet addded


Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on May 11, 2020, 03:18:47 pm
https://www.erinbromage.com/post/the-risks-know-them-avoid-them

I found this very interesting and enlightening, worth reading through.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on May 11, 2020, 08:48:22 pm
 Worth reading. Thanks.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on May 11, 2020, 08:57:00 pm
https://www.erinbromage.com/post/the-risks-know-them-avoid-them

I found this very interesting and enlightening, worth reading through.

Really good read. I encourage anyone browsing the thread to have a look.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on May 12, 2020, 09:31:50 am
From the link (so important it's worth quoting)

"As states reopen, and we give the virus more fuel, all bets are off. I understand the reasons for reopening the economy, but I've said before, if you don't solve the biology, the economy won't recover.

There are very few states that have demonstrated a sustained decline in numbers of new infections. Indeed, as of May 3rd the majority are still increasing and reopening. As a simple example of the USA trend, when you take out the data from New York and just look at the rest of the USA, daily case numbers are increasing. Bottom line: the only reason the total USA new case numbers look flat right now is because the New York City epidemic was so large and now it is being contained.

So throughout most of the country we are going to add fuel to the viral fire by reopening. It's going to happen if I like it or not, so my goal here is to try to guide you away from situations of high risk."

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on May 13, 2020, 08:51:22 am
Great bit of unplanned sentence juxtaposition on the Today programme just now trailing ‘More or Less’...

Martha Kearney: “Tell us what’s coming up later today”

Tim Harford: “The R value...”
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on May 13, 2020, 06:58:23 pm
So as per my posts on B3 from here: https://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,30489.msg603070.html#msg603070 (https://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,30489.msg603070.html#msg603070)

and here:
://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,30489.msg603488.html#msg603488 (https://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,30489.msg603488.html#msg603488)


There's now more evidence to back this up.

Preclinical research on NR and its role in covid-19 infected cells has now been released today in pre-print form, available here: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.17.047480v3

Note my disclaimers - I'm a shareholder in Chromadex (which are up 22% on this news)

Further research adding evidence to the B3 / NAD+ hypothesis.

https://twitter.com/FehrLab/status/1260342672688119810 (https://twitter.com/FehrLab/status/1260342672688119810)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on May 14, 2020, 09:36:27 am
embed issues
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on May 15, 2020, 05:19:33 pm
No deaths here today.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 15, 2020, 06:30:10 pm
This is worth reading, the Times article is quite good, too, but paywalled:

 https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/bulletins/coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveypilot/england14may2020 (https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/bulletins/coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveypilot/england14may2020)

Same link as the other thread, but thought it worth putting here as well.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on May 15, 2020, 07:45:03 pm
Artículo asombroso, para los que hablan español
https://elpais.com/elpais/2020/05/09/ciencia/1589059080_203445.html

Excellent article, explains exactly how the virus is able to get into human cells so effectively. In Spanish.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: remus on May 16, 2020, 11:50:44 am
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.06.20092999v1.full.pdf

Interesting piece of analysis on risk factors in CV19 patients. Uses a huge dataset of 17million patients in the UK (based on GP records and deaths recorded through a national CV19 tracking system). Summary: don't be an old, fat, non-white male from a deprived background and have uncontrolled diabetes.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on May 19, 2020, 03:09:29 pm
Some epidemiological insight that seems to be getting missed.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/may/19/second-coronavirus-wave-r-number-uk-test-and-trace-mass-gatherings-travel
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on May 20, 2020, 08:49:18 am
I found this twitter thread interesting https://twitter.com/kakape/status/1262863846387134470?s=21

We’ve heard a lot about the R value - but not k - which is how transmission is clustered around certain people. CV19 has a very low k value - that means only a few people with it are responsible for most of the spread. Interesting for the dynamics of its spread... and may explain why it’s taken off in some places and not in others.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on May 20, 2020, 12:36:57 pm
Interesting. Seems to validate the Quillette piece (https://quillette.com/2020/03/27/covid-19-science-update-for-march-27-super-spreaders-and-the-need-for-new-prediction-models/) I shared a couple of months ago which was not received well here?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on May 20, 2020, 12:42:58 pm
My complaint about the quilette piece was not that it raised the possibility of super spreading events, but that it did so as if the epidemiologists working on CV-19 were unaware of it, which is far from the case. You often see it in the papers discussed as "over dispersion". Most modelling papers at the time of the quillette piece discussed it in some sense.



Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on May 20, 2020, 02:45:45 pm
ccu cgg cgg gca
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 20, 2020, 03:25:14 pm
ccu cgg cgg gca

 https://elpais.com/elpais/2020/05/18/ciencia/1589818040_544543.html (https://elpais.com/elpais/2020/05/18/ciencia/1589818040_544543.html)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on May 20, 2020, 04:03:38 pm
Thanks, the parts of that that I understood are fascinating.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on May 20, 2020, 05:21:15 pm
I am not a scientist. maybe one will be along shortly. What I understand is this:

Enzymes are catalysts; they drive reactions. Furin is a common human cell catalyst which changes inactive proteins into a  chemically active form so they can do their jobs.  Uniquely amongst coronaviruses, SARS-Cov2 has 12 bases in its RNA which allow furin to activate the protein which permits the virus to penetrate the host cell membrane. Its presence within the human cell causes the newly replicated virus cells to have that protein already activated, ready to penetrate the membrane of adjacent cells. A bit like a cocked rifle. Lethal.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on May 20, 2020, 06:43:26 pm
And the Commons has voted to end remote proceedings from June 2nd.

https://twitter.com/johnrentoul/status/1263102126755942405?s=21

🤦‍♂️
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on May 20, 2020, 07:04:45 pm
Glad to see scientific rigour is making a comeback. Kids need a control group.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on May 20, 2020, 07:36:56 pm
Glad to see scientific rigour is making a comeback. Kids need a control group.

😂 perfect. They all behave like Children....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on May 20, 2020, 11:34:42 pm
I am not a scientist. maybe one will be along shortly. What I understand is this:

Enzymes are catalysts; they drive reactions. Furin is a common human cell catalyst which changes inactive proteins into a  chemically active form so they can do their jobs.  Uniquely amongst coronaviruses, SARS-Cov2 has 12 bases in its RNA which allow furin to activate the protein which permits the virus to penetrate the host cell membrane. Its presence within the human cell causes the newly replicated virus cells to have that protein already activated, ready to penetrate the membrane of adjacent cells. A bit like a cocked rifle. Lethal.

Thanks, that's the bit I did understand! Not so much a cocked rifle, more like the action on an automatic rifle. The gas from one spent bullet revolves the bolt, and loads the next.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on May 21, 2020, 09:20:21 am
Cheers, I'm not much of a gun specialist! The key thing, it appears, is furin, which was not coded for in Sars Cov1. It appears it is present in most (all?) human cells and Cov2 being able to use it to penetrate the host cell makes it massively more virulent. Which is why we are where we are now, apparently.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on May 21, 2020, 11:07:34 am
It is. I know Trump sounded stupid saying it, but it really is a "clever" virus. As it say, infinite number of monkeys, something was bound to crop up sooner or later.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on May 21, 2020, 12:34:23 pm
As it say, infinite number of monkeys, something was bound to crop up sooner or later.

That’s one way to rationalise Trump being president 😃
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on May 21, 2020, 12:37:09 pm
Interesting. Seems to validate the Quillette piece (https://quillette.com/2020/03/27/covid-19-science-update-for-march-27-super-spreaders-and-the-need-for-new-prediction-models/) I shared a couple of months ago which was not received well here?

Same problems then as now. I thought the main criticisms here were of the politics of the publication rather than the article... I've seen some good stuff there but I've seen occasional good stuff even in the Fail and the Excess. Yet the author is a Quillette editor with a right wing 'US style liberal' to libertarian readership, not an expert. He could have invited an epidemiologist to make the points if it's a common scientific view that things are as he says it is. My main criticism would be cherry picking ideas that have some relevance and extrapolating in unfair ways (the article even says the super spreader approach is more useful where the outbreak is broadly under control, not the case in the or US, UK or Canada). There are also some clear errors... the best modern models do include variations in R (including the UK one behind SAGE advice). The data just doesn't match superspeader dominance when the outbreak has taken off in the population (eg those infected nearly always infect their own family)  The Pen y Fan arguments are still wrong in a way that happens to suit libertarian views.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on May 21, 2020, 12:46:51 pm
It is. I know Trump sounded stupid saying it, but it really is a "clever" virus. As it say, infinite number of monkeys, something was bound to crop up sooner or later.

Evolution favours a virus that has the characteristics that help it spread and mutation is how a virus changes. A low mortality rate and  minor mutation that cuts immune response effectively and a  fast rate of spread is ideal : anything in a range from this to the common cold. Evolution is not intelligence it's a massive radomised experiment, hence why it's sometimes called the Blind Watchmaker.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on May 21, 2020, 01:03:25 pm
Quote
The data just doesn't match superspeader dominance when the outbreak has taken off in the population (eg those infected nearly always infect their own family)

That's the opposite of what the article posted (https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/05/why-do-some-covid-19-patients-infect-many-others-whereas-most-don-t-spread-virus-all) (that prompted me to reconsider the Quillette piece) said:

Quote
“I don’t think this is quite like SARS or MERS, where we observed very large superspreading clusters,” Leung says. “But we are certainly seeing a lot of concentrated clusters where a small proportion of people are responsible for a large proportion of infections.” But in a recent preprint, Adam Kucharski of LSHTM estimated that k for COVID-19 is as low as 0.1. “Probably about 10% of cases lead to 80% of the spread,” Kucharski says.

Quote
The Pen y Fan arguments are still wrong in a way that happens to suit libertarian views.

No, I think they are right in a way that happens to suit libertarian views. That doesn't make them wrong. What is wrong about the libertarian view is the rush to get people back to work.

Quote
A study in Japan found that the risk of infection indoors is almost 19 times higher than outdoors. (Japan, which was hit early but has kept the epidemic under control, has built its COVID-19 strategy explicitly around avoiding clusters, advising citizens to avoid closed spaces and crowded conditions.)

I get that two months ago it was too early to act on this sort of data. However the meantime has only seen those suppositions supported. Walking in the countryside was always low risk, we're just more confident about it now.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on May 21, 2020, 01:21:09 pm
The data just doesn't match superspeader dominance when the outbreak has taken off in the population (eg those infected nearly always infect their own family)

That’s not true. Secondary attack rate in households is around 15-20% (https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.11.20056010v1)

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on May 21, 2020, 01:58:55 pm
Apologies that was me being sloppy. What I meant to say was those infected once the disease had taken off so far seem most likely to have been infected by someone in their household or family (ie not from superspeader events). From that paper:

"Conclusion: SARS-CoV-2 is more transmissible in households than SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, and the elderly ≥60 years old are the most vulnerable to household transmission. Case finding and isolation alone may be inadequate to contain the pandemic and need to be used in conjunction with heightened restriction of human movement as implemented in Guangzhou."

The Pen y Fan argument in that Quillette article is still dishonest. I always agreed being outdoors seems to be much lower risk than indoors; but football matches and other crowded outdoor events did track to multiple outbreaks elsewhere, so it is probabilistic and social distancing outdoors is important. Equally some of the office outbreak studies show being quite a bit more than 2m in particular air circulation was not safe. The main problem in Wales was a simple Public Health message was sensibly made to reduce R, with the inevitable contradictions in specific risk scenarios. Arguing about specific risk in such situations is daft.   Most of any real risk was probably due to crowding at car parks, use of local amenities ( shops cafes  toilets ) with infected people being out and not being careful with hygene ior social distancing. All in the context at the time of a really struggling hospital and MRT system. Libertarians don't like such social control and have form on distorting and exaggerating to try and get their own way,  even when in direct contradiction to the best information on Public Health.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on May 21, 2020, 02:15:17 pm
Does anyone on here have experience of getting tested without being an essential worker or showing symptoms of covid?
I’m asking for my housemate, whose father died yesterday and they want to go home to be with family members. Family members are suggesting getting tested, to protect elderly mother.
I’ve read the guidelines which say only essential workers and those showing symptoms can get a test.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on May 21, 2020, 02:43:50 pm
A care worker I know was infected and her colleagues were all  tested (fortunaely all negative) but none of the clients (some did ask). They only just got proper PPE for home visits two weeks ago.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on May 21, 2020, 03:04:52 pm
Does anyone on here have experience of getting tested without being an essential worker or showing symptoms of covid?
I’m asking for my housemate, whose father died yesterday and they want to go home to be with family members. Family members are suggesting getting tested, to protect elderly mother.
I’ve read the guidelines which say only essential workers and those showing symptoms can get a test.

Sorry for your friends loss, Pete.

I was asked to take a test after reporting some minor symptoms via the COVID symptom tracker app. They had an agreement to refer up to 10k People per day.

They said that you just essentially lie & say you’re a key worker when booking a test - they don’t check at all. I put down that I was a “volunteer”.

I was a bit unsure whether I should go for it or not as I was pretty certain I didn’t have COVID. But given that uptake was massively short of testing capacity at the time & there were loads of slots available at my drive in testing centre (I opted to go an hour after I booked as I figured they probably wouldn’t end up being filled - there were 50+ slots available that day and I knew from local papers not many were being used), I went for it.

I certainly wouldn’t begrudge someone booking a slot under certain circumstances, such as your friends if there was plenty of availability. The drive in centre I went to was empty. I’d not book a home testing kit though as they are in much shorter supply.

I guess you need to consider that it doesn’t guarantee you don’t have it either. There’s false negatives & I think it can take time to come on during which time it doesn’t register on the test (though I could be wrong on that).

I think you can also book private tests but these are c.£400.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nik at work on May 21, 2020, 03:09:08 pm
My dad has paid for a private antibody test. Came in the post, cost about £100 I think. He did it as part of a hoop jumping exercise so is unconcerned with the actual reliability of the test, just that he has a result to tick a box.

I have no idea on the sensitivity etc and no further details about the test or whether it would satisfy tour housemates needs. I can find some more details if helpful...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Sidehaas on May 21, 2020, 03:46:26 pm
Does anyone on here have experience of getting tested without being an essential worker or showing symptoms of covid?
I’m asking for my housemate, whose father died yesterday and they want to go home to be with family members. Family members are suggesting getting tested, to protect elderly mother.
I’ve read the guidelines which say only essential workers and those showing symptoms can get a test.

I'm fairly sure anyone with symptoms can now request a test (over the age of 5) - you no longer need to be a key worker. This changed a couple of days ago.
If you don't have the classic symptoms, I don't think anyone will actually check.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-getting-tested#who-can-be-tested


My wife was given a test through the same route as James - an offer came out the blue after she reported a couple of days worth of dizziness and tiredness on the app.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on May 21, 2020, 06:43:49 pm
Thanks all, I'll investigate getting a test booked via the tracker app.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 24, 2020, 08:41:35 am
Interesting article:

 https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-blood-test-could-show-how-the-immune-system-responds-to-covid-19-researchers-say-11992553 (https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-blood-test-could-show-how-the-immune-system-responds-to-covid-19-researchers-say-11992553)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 27, 2020, 06:49:01 am
Surviving C19 is now a permanently disqualifying factor for joining the US military.
This seems a little odd.
 https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2020/05/06/coronavirus-survivors-banned-from-joining-the-military/ (https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2020/05/06/coronavirus-survivors-banned-from-joining-the-military/)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on May 27, 2020, 04:33:47 pm
Just been out with the Family to Delamere.. (forest tracks - bike trails etc...) and it was rammed (like a weekend on a nice day).

Not much social distancing going on along the main paths - especially with large family groups. I hated it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on May 27, 2020, 05:30:48 pm
Just been out with the Family to Delamere.. (forest tracks - bike trails etc...) and it was rammed (like a weekend on a nice day).
Not much social distancing going on along the main paths - especially with large family groups.
It’s fucked tomtom.

I was at Ilkley the other day and it was the same - big groups of lads all congregating, teenage couples snogging (too young to be moved out and living together), extended families nowhere near social distancing. Local Tesco this morning had no queuing system, way too many people in there, a one way route that everyone was ignoring and people bumping into each other - I just walked out. Plumber was round to fix the toilet this morning - no mask, no concern (“It’s all a bit over the top this corona thing isn’t it”), touching everything in sight, had been working all the way through (“I’ll get a bit from the govt but not much cos you know us plumbers we fiddle it don’t we”), admitted to visiting his family regularly.

It’s all just fucked.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on May 27, 2020, 05:34:58 pm
Not much social distancing going on along the main paths - especially with large family groups. I hated it.

I’ve been staying away from anywhere I think might be busy so I can just pretend everyone is doing a great job!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on May 27, 2020, 05:47:04 pm
Not much social distancing going on along the main paths - especially with large family groups. I hated it.

I’ve been staying away from anywhere I think might be busy so I can just pretend everyone is doing a great job!

Me too. Thought it would be quiet weekday (half term - but there’s no school so..). Scary.

Lockdown has reinforced my desires to live in the middle of no-where surrounded by no-one...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dunnyg on May 27, 2020, 05:52:41 pm
word
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 27, 2020, 06:20:48 pm
Still 2000+ new cases everyday...

We have been going down to Babbacombe/Oddicombe to swim, snorkel, dive, paddle board etc etc (I swam from Petitor point to Long Quarry point (caught two lobsters too), scrambled up to Walls hill and ran back in wetsuit boots. Second part not recommended).
Generally it’s been fine. Distancing ok. The odd daft bunch, but nothing serious.
But, the worrying thing was the groups of teenage boys (jumping/tombstoning) who clearly didn’t get it. Many of them mates of my eldest son. Their parents were not aware. Knew they were out, thought they were savvy enough. One is the son of an A&E Sister (good mate of Mrs OMM).
Words were had. Couldn’t give a flying fuck if that makes us snitches.

Today, however, a party of dick heads turned up. Round from Teignmouth, with a floating fucking bar (Seriously, thatched shack on an oil drum pontoon/raft and an outboard) and a few small cruisers. Obviously not cohabiting, mostly overweight (and over 60) blokes and families on and off the bar and each others boats. Very nearly on a par with that Infamous pool party in the US.

I was restrained.

I didn’t lob any rocks at the twats. Mainly because Mrs OMM hinted at testicle removal if I made a scene, again...

Anyway, as I said to her, they’re doing it to themselves, I don’t need to.

I really fucking hope this thing is seasonal.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on May 27, 2020, 07:24:36 pm
I swam from Petitor point to Long Quarry point (caught two lobsters too)

OT, but I am supremely jealous of this
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on May 27, 2020, 09:38:42 pm
I'm busting out the wetsuit and paddleboard as of tomorrow. 4 days of practically flat calm and sun.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on May 30, 2020, 11:15:36 pm
Just been out with the Family to Delamere.. (forest tracks - bike trails etc...) and it was rammed (like a weekend on a nice day).
Not much social distancing going on along the main paths - especially with large family groups.
It’s fucked tomtom.

I was at Ilkley the other day and it was the same - big groups of lads all congregating, teenage couples snogging (too young to be moved out and living together), extended families nowhere near social distancing. Local Tesco this morning had no queuing system, way too many people in there, a one way route that everyone was ignoring and people bumping into each other - I just walked out. Plumber was round to fix the toilet this morning - no mask, no concern (“It’s all a bit over the top this corona thing isn’t it”), touching everything in sight, had been working all the way through (“I’ll get a bit from the govt but not much cos you know us plumbers we fiddle it don’t we”), admitted to visiting his family regularly.

It’s all just fucked.

I can't help but agree with you here, on the evidence of cycling around the peak today. Large groups of motorbikers stopped in places all sat about with beers like they were in a pub, probably the worst. I overheard some people in a campervan in a car park the other day proudly telling someone parked next to them that they'd been there for three days.
Surely it's only a matter of time until the infection rate starts soaring again.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on May 31, 2020, 06:31:13 pm
Agree. Seems people can't deal with middle ground. It's either lockdown or BAU for a significant enough proportion of the populace to pretty much negate the effort of the rest. That's how it looks anyway.
You've got to hope that a certain type of herd immunity eventually emerges, whereby all the headless chickens who think SD is a waste of time have already caught the thing. Total carnage seems likely in the meantime.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 31, 2020, 06:50:23 pm
Agree. Seems people can't deal with middle ground. It's either lockdown or BAU for a significant enough proportion of the populace to pretty much negate the effort of the rest. That's how it looks anyway.
You've got to hope that a certain type of herd immunity eventually emerges, whereby all the headless chickens who think SD is a waste of time have already caught the thing. Total carnage seems likely in the meantime.

By coincidence, an old friend just put the following on FB:

“ I have been seeing a lot of posts about how effective the Government have been at controlling the pandemic in the UK. Having been working at a Covid 19 testing site, I feel any failings are due to the stupidity of people, rather than a massive failing on the government. I am not protecting them, or saying that one party is better than the other. As I feel with this unprecedented pandemic, all parties would have suffered a similar fate. However, when a car full of people, all about the same age, turn up to be tested and it is only the driver being tested, then you have to ask, why the other 3 people need to be in the car, especially if the driver feels they have shown enough symptoms to go through testing. Then to top it off, they drive across the road to the Range and all go shopping! It is the idiotic general populous that will bring us down, more than the government! Rant over”
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on June 01, 2020, 08:29:49 am
A story about extreme boldness in cliff jumps with a photograph of the worst social distancing outside that I've seen and a classic Grauniad typo.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/may/31/durdle-door-remains-closed-after-three-injured-cliff-jumps-dorset

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on June 01, 2020, 10:48:41 am
By coincidence, an old friend just put the following on FB:

“ I have been seeing a lot of posts about how effective the Government have been at controlling the pandemic in the UK. Having been working at a Covid 19 testing site, I feel any failings are due to the stupidity of people, rather than a massive failing on the government. I am not protecting them, or saying that one party is better than the other. As I feel with this unprecedented pandemic, all parties would have suffered a similar fate. However, when a car full of people, all about the same age, turn up to be tested and it is only the driver being tested, then you have to ask, why the other 3 people need to be in the car, especially if the driver feels they have shown enough symptoms to go through testing. Then to top it off, they drive across the road to the Range and all go shopping! It is the idiotic general populous that will bring us down, more than the government! Rant over”

In the interests of balance, these 4 people all about the same age could have been a household, and the driver could have been a key worker (NHS or care) and eligible for a test even if totally asymptomatic. Their employer may have requested they get a weekly test as a precaution. Then they go to buy essentials. Of course your friend may well be right and its a bunch of people who don't care, but its not a given. There are two sides to every story and that is only one - it looks different if its a household of 4 nurses doing the right thing by getting a test.

The "idiotic general populus" as your friend calls them have managed to get the R rate below 1 by, generally, doing what was asked of them during lockdown. Yes there will always be genuine idiots, but we shouldn't lose our sense of solidarity because of that. We will all have stories - I saw a group of about 10 huddled beneath Kudos wall a couple of days ago. Yes its bad, and stuff like that may well contribute negatively *if* we have a second wave. But they did not cause for e.g. the estimated 40% of total deaths so far being in care homes, or the lack of PPE for medics.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on June 01, 2020, 11:54:00 am
There's a lot to pick at with that reply Nigel, but to start:

Public behaviour could be exemplary during lockdown, and rubbish in this new phase. The amount of total disregard for guidelines I saw this weekend suggest the general public are going to be very bad at this next phase. I saw many instances of groups of 10+ people of all ages sat round a picnic blanket or table sharing food, amongst many other examples this weekend. Prior to this, the vast majority of people out and about behaved sensibly.

The 40% deaths in care homes is a disgrace and lack of PPE/care home policy/hospital discharge may have played the major role in this. But someone brought the virus into the care home. Where did they catch it? Chains of infection start somewhere and if people are behaving like this when we are still seeing 8000 new cases a day.... 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on June 01, 2020, 12:15:18 pm
Prior to this, the vast majority of people out and about behaved sensibly.
This is my feeling based on what I'm seeing now.
The lockdown solidarity seems broken. People very much follow the herd it seems. The general mood was compliant when the stay home message was in place. Now I think the mood is 'we've done lockdown' and people are looking for social cues to back this up, and return to pre-lockdown behaviour. Once a few people act this way lots follow and then many more start to wonder if it's worth persisting with SD if others aren't.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on June 01, 2020, 12:48:05 pm
Herd stupidity is endemic sadly.

I've seen photos of beaches and beauty spots left in a disgusting state up here, like people have been let out of cages and forgotten how to behave.

I wonder if it's a backlash from the Cummings affair, or just idiocy.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on June 01, 2020, 12:49:47 pm
Once a few people act this way lots follow and then many more start to wonder if it's worth persisting with SD if others aren't.

I quite like the idea of not getting infected, personally.
 A lot of young people will be finding isolation and social distance very unnatural and rather see this as someone else's problem.  Big problem losing the feeling of solidarity, Cummings debacle really doesn't help.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nik at work on June 01, 2020, 01:16:02 pm
I wonder if it's a backlash from the Cummings affair, or just idiocy.

Not condoning DC’s movements and subsequent handling but anyone who uses that as an excuse to behave like an idiot is...
Well...
Still an idiot.

The idea that DC can be held responsible for hordes of people turning into brainless bellends is laughable. His actions certainly haven’t helped, but there’s always another reason to justify doing what you want regardless of whether there is a handy DC scandal to fall back on or not.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on June 01, 2020, 01:25:37 pm
The people having barbecues on moorland, packing onto crowded beaches, cramming into a Corsa and passing round a spliff, and going for a picnic with a hookah and leaving their shit behind are chavs. That is their variety of rule-breaking and lack of care. I don't think it's credible that these people saw the Cummings story and acted accordingly.

The gangs of people crowding round at sport crags and moaning about the groups of motorbikers in laybys they passed on the way are breaking the rules too. They might set off with the intention to keep two metres apart but inevitably it doesn't happen religiously (how religiously it needs to happen is up for debate - brushing past your partner a few times is not going to transmit the virus). That's our type of rule-breaking and lack of care.

Most societal demographics are rule-breaking in some way, though as far as we can see they're generally doing it outdoors, so who knows, maybe the transmission risk remains low? We'll soon find out.

It's wrong, but it's human nature that until a family member or close friend is seriously affected, most people will assume that this is just something that happens to other people.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on June 01, 2020, 02:08:18 pm
Re: The Cummings effect. There are plenty of people that act like dickheads at the best of times (see the amount of litter along the sides of roads for a start). And there might not be that many people who are going out specifically because they read about the DC affair. But it’s increased the wiggle room, allowed people to think their circumstances don’t have to be in any way exceptional to justify bending or breaking the rules, and also in a lot of cases has probably been the final straw if they were wavering over whether to do what they’ve been desperate to do for a while. Add that all together, along with the desperation of the govt to cover over their failings by pushing good news stories and suppressing calls for restraint by the scientists and it’s no surprise people think it’s business as usual. That’s potentially tens of millions of people now making decisions based on their own instincts and specific personal circumstances rather than national
solidarity. When the weather breaks we’re even more fucked.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on June 01, 2020, 02:18:31 pm
Exactly. I can't help but think the DC debacle was not the primary cause, but i suspect it's exacerbated it. Not to the point of rioting, but people are still angry to the point of rebellion and it certainly didn't help.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on June 01, 2020, 03:18:40 pm
It’s not Cummings behaviour that’s the problem - the issue is that he wasn’t punished (in ANY shape or form) and has not apologised at all.

Green light that you can get away with whatever you want. From the very top.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on June 01, 2020, 03:48:24 pm
It’s not Cummings behaviour that’s the problem - the issue is that he wasn’t punished (in ANY shape or form) and has not apologised at all.

Green light that you can get away with whatever you want. From the very top.
His behaviour is a bit of a problem. He wrote the guidance, or at least helped to (and undoubtedly signed off on it) but then failed to follow it. The lack of punishment has nakedly exposed who actually runs No 10 and shown the arrogance and lack of humility of Cummings, but the initial behaviour was also wrong. He’s either proved his own guidance wasn’t clear in the first place (if he can interpret it differently to >80% of the population - I don’t believe this btw), or he thought he was special and it didn’t apply to him (then used a loophole meant for victims of domestic violence as an excuse when he was caught - more likely). Either way his behaviour was bad from the start and just got worse and worse IMO.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on June 01, 2020, 04:03:53 pm
The impact of his nonsense is unquantifiable. For some -many- people it will cut through, for others it will be 90% off the radar, although 'that guy in govt who gets away with not following guidance' will have percolated through to everyone who hasn't been living in a rabbit hole this last week or so.

It will have a big enough impact though, if not changing people's decisions outright then certainly making discipline weaken. When things are coming unstuck, the last thing anyone needs is more confusion in the message.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on June 01, 2020, 10:50:06 pm
It's wrong, but it's human nature that until a family member or close friend is seriously affected, most people will assume that this is just something that happens to other people.

I see patients recovering from the worst stages of it at work, and frankly given the state of many of them a couple of months down the line, I think that people need to get a lot more scared. You might get a mild case, or, you might get death or several months of agony and struggling to find the energy to stand up.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on June 01, 2020, 10:56:05 pm
It’s not Cummings behaviour that’s the problem - the issue is that he wasn’t punished (in ANY shape or form) and has not apologised at all.

Green light that you can get away with whatever you want. From the very top.
His behaviour is a bit of a problem. He wrote the guidance, or at least helped to (and undoubtedly signed off on it) but then failed to follow it. The lack of punishment has nakedly exposed who actually runs No 10 and shown the arrogance and lack of humility of Cummings, but the initial behaviour was also wrong. He’s either proved his own guidance wasn’t clear in the first place (if he can interpret it differently to >80% of the population - I don’t believe this btw), or he thought he was special and it didn’t apply to him (then used a loophole meant for victims of domestic violence as an excuse when he was caught - more likely). Either way his behaviour was bad from the start and just got worse and worse IMO.

I'm totally willing to try to see the best in people and give them the benefit of the doubt, but Cummings is just full of shit. His half arsed excuses aren't different interpretation, he clearly went on a day trip for his wife's birthday whilst spending a week or at the family pile in the country. He thought he was above rules and far too clever for anyone. He's less believable than the Russians who perpetrated the Salisbury chemical weapons attack.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on June 01, 2020, 11:58:12 pm
I see patients recovering from the worst stages of it at work, and frankly given the state of many of them a couple of months down the line, I think that people need to get a lot more scared. You might get a mild case, or, you might get death or several months of agony and struggling to find the energy to stand up.

I hear this time and again. Speaking to a friend on the weekend, she said she probably contracted it  at a conference before lockdown, from sitting next to someone a few hours who had it (so moderate load she thought) and she was in bed for a week, and is only now feeling like she can do any running at all, and that is still very slow and very short distances. She reasonably fit and healthy and in early 40s.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 02, 2020, 06:38:21 am
I see patients recovering from the worst stages of it at work, and frankly given the state of many of them a couple of months down the line, I think that people need to get a lot more scared. You might get a mild case, or, you might get death or several months of agony and struggling to find the energy to stand up.

I hear this time and again. Speaking to a friend on the weekend, she said she probably contracted it  at a conference before lockdown, from sitting next to someone a few hours who had it (so moderate load she thought) and she was in bed for a week, and is only now feeling like she can do any running at all, and that is still very slow and very short distances. She reasonably fit and healthy and in early 40s.

I linked to the Military Times article earlier in the thread, but diagnosis and recovery from C19, regardless of the severity of your case, permanently bars you from service in the US military (any branch).
That’s an unusual stance. There is speculation amongst the comments on the original article posting, that more is known about the potential long term effects, than has been generally discussed in the media. The US Navy, has had a large number of cases and given the “captive” nature of those cases, has probably had ample opportunities to follow them in more detail than cases in the general population might be.
Or, they have just over reacted, with an abundance of caution, in good old bureaucratic black or white...
 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 02, 2020, 08:49:56 am
I see patients recovering from the worst stages of it at work, and frankly given the state of many of them a couple of months down the line, I think that people need to get a lot more scared. You might get a mild case, or, you might get death or several months of agony and struggling to find the energy to stand up.

In addition to the brutally long recovery for people who've been hospitalized, especially people who've been on ventilators etc., there also seems to be a phenomenon where some people get fairly mild cases but very prolonged post-viral symptoms:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/15/weird-hell-professor-advent-calendar-covid-19-symptoms-paul-garner

This is a weird fucking virus.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on June 02, 2020, 09:15:40 am
Seen this article crop up a few times.

https://elemental.medium.com/coronavirus-may-be-a-blood-vessel-disease-which-explains-everything-2c4032481ab2

Interesting theory for sure.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on June 03, 2020, 02:37:45 pm
When was the last time lives were worth a million quid on average? Especially old/sick ones. The NHS cost effectiveness threshold is something like £20k per QALY. Cant see how the covid cost isn't quite handsomely north of that.

Guidance in my industry allows for you to essentially put a price on loss of life when comparing it to the cost of remedial works. That figure is considerably in excess of £20k and it's far nearer the million quid.

Imagine for instance you've done a load of works to make something safe in 2018 to current best practice as the loss of life as a result of failure is likely. You spend £Xm. In 2020 if that guidance is updated and the difference between the 2018 condition and the current isn't 'that much' (in terms of loss of life) but will cost £££ to improve to the modern standard it's considered disproportionate. However, as above, those figures aren't ~£20k/head.

I've had cause to review something as to whether it's proportionate today and the figure used is £1.7M per loss of life. Furthermore, for something to be considered disproportionate it needs to cost somewhere between 2-10 times that figure (depending on the certainty of the cost-estimates used).

Some light reading if anyone's inclined:
https://www.hse.gov.uk/risk/theory/index.htm
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: seankenny on June 03, 2020, 06:15:46 pm
I see patients recovering from the worst stages of it at work, and frankly given the state of many of them a couple of months down the line, I think that people need to get a lot more scared. You might get a mild case, or, you might get death or several months of agony and struggling to find the energy to stand up.

I hear this time and again. Speaking to a friend on the weekend, she said she probably contracted it  at a conference before lockdown, from sitting next to someone a few hours who had it (so moderate load she thought) and she was in bed for a week, and is only now feeling like she can do any running at all, and that is still very slow and very short distances. She reasonably fit and healthy and in early 40s.

I'm still feeling the effects of the virus on my lungs a couple of months after having been ill with it. I'm a crap runner at the best of times but it's now noticeably harder than before and I'm a fair bit slower.

I understand why younger people are generally blase about it, even though I think they could be a bit irresponsible, but I don't get why anyone over 40 would be relaxed about covid.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 05, 2020, 10:01:16 pm
I see patients recovering from the worst stages of it at work, and frankly given the state of many of them a couple of months down the line, I think that people need to get a lot more scared. You might get a mild case, or, you might get death or several months of agony and struggling to find the energy to stand up.

In addition to the brutally long recovery for people who've been hospitalized, especially people who've been on ventilators etc., there also seems to be a phenomenon where some people get fairly mild cases but very prolonged post-viral symptoms:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/15/weird-hell-professor-advent-calendar-covid-19-symptoms-paul-garner

This is a weird fucking virus.

Possibly even weirder than that Slabs:

 https://time.com/5848949/covid-19-asymptomatic-spread/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=editorial&utm_term=health_covid-19&linkId=90213795 (https://time.com/5848949/covid-19-asymptomatic-spread/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=editorial&utm_term=health_covid-19&linkId=90213795)

Interesting read and the “asymptotic but showing significant lung damage” thing is quite scary. If it turns out that these numbers are correct, we’re looking at some unpleasant long term issues.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on June 06, 2020, 08:44:43 am
Had a test yesterday. The COVID app sent me an email saying go get a test (despite having no symptoms) as they wanted to test people who may not have it as well.

Anyway / 7pm I booked a test (took 2 min) for 7:30. Left at 7:10 and was home at 7:35. 3 out of 12 ‘bays’ at the test centre were open and there was a que of 1-2 cars per bay. The throat swab was easy (no gag) but he had a good root up my nose which made me sneeze!

See when I get a result.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on June 06, 2020, 01:37:42 pm
Local track and trace in Ceredigion seems to have paid off:

https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/area-wales-missed-coronavirus-simple-18348215?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebarfp2isAT-_qp8oVJ0NP4v8Nt4X0EYTr6iH-o
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on June 07, 2020, 08:23:30 am
Had a test yesterday. The COVID app sent me an email saying go get a test (despite having no symptoms) as they wanted to test people who may not have it as well.

Anyway / 7pm I booked a test (took 2 min) for 7:30. Left at 7:10 and was home at 7:35. 3 out of 12 ‘bays’ at the test centre were open and there was a que of 1-2 cars per bay. The throat swab was easy (no gag) but he had a good root up my nose which made me sneeze!

See when I get a result.

Result took 27 hours. Negative unsurprisingly. I’d encourage anyone to get themselves done if they are concerned. If you can get to a drive thru there is clearly capacity and it wasn’t painful.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: largeruk on June 07, 2020, 11:01:44 am
Embarrassingly I don't know this and can't find a definitive answer. Anyone know the length of validity of a negative test, ie. does a negative test mean you don't have COVID on that day but a test taken the next day might show as positive?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on June 07, 2020, 11:57:58 am
Embarrassingly I don't know this and can't find a definitive answer. Anyone know the length of validity of a negative test, ie. does a negative test mean you don't have COVID on that day but a test taken the next day might show as positive?

^^ yes. Its only negative for the time the swab was taken.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on June 07, 2020, 12:01:06 pm
The lack of knowledge on this is partly down to another failure of PHE.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/25/doctors-condemn-secrecy-over-false-negative-covid-19-tests
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: largeruk on June 07, 2020, 12:11:14 pm
Embarrassingly I don't know this and can't find a definitive answer. Anyone know the length of validity of a negative test, ie. does a negative test mean you don't have COVID on that day but a test taken the next day might show as positive?

^^ yes. Its only negative for the time the swab was taken.
Thank you. That prompts 2 further questions. Given the above:-
1. are those admitted to hospital with covid symptoms tested on a daily basis and not just upon admission to take account of the short validity period of a negative test?
2. what is the current assessment of the incubation period before the onset of symptoms during which you are infectious but don't know you are?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on June 07, 2020, 12:20:34 pm
For 2 - I think on average it’s 5 days from infection to symptoms... to take a stab at a couple of days before that...

Which means for 1.  Really you should be testing everyone every 2-3 days at least in an important setting. Iirc that’s what makes it so much harder to stop than Mers or sars - where symptoms would appear at same time you were infectious (I think)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 07, 2020, 12:24:23 pm
Embarrassingly I don't know this and can't find a definitive answer. Anyone know the length of validity of a negative test, ie. does a negative test mean you don't have COVID on that day but a test taken the next day might show as positive?

^^ yes. Its only negative for the time the swab was taken.
Thank you. That prompts 2 further questions. Given the above:-
1. are those admitted to hospital with covid symptoms tested on a daily basis and not just upon admission to take account of the short validity period of a negative test?
2. what is the current assessment of the incubation period before the onset of symptoms during which you are infectious but don't know you are?

Pretty sure, once symptomatic, you test positive, barring a faulty test.

What it won’t tell you, is if you have had it and are now virus free (which, apparently, doesn’t mean symptom free, as the damage can leave you with symptoms that outlast the infection).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: largeruk on June 07, 2020, 12:31:57 pm
I think on average it’s 5 days from infection to symptoms... to take a stab at a couple of days before that...
I'm a little confused. So roughly 5 days incubation period (infection to onset of symptoms). What did you mean by the words in bold? Sorry for asking, my brain is also clearly on lockdown... :-[
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: colin8ll on June 07, 2020, 12:38:14 pm
Anyone know the length of validity of a negative test, ie. does a negative test mean you don't have COVID on that day but a test taken the next day might show as positive?

More or Less on R4 covered this topic recently (although not your specific question). Their expert guest said false negative test results are around 30% (or was it 40%?) and argued that any symptomatic person should be self isolating regardless of test results
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on June 07, 2020, 12:39:04 pm
Isn’t there quite a lot of research showing that people have the virus and are shedding/capable of passing it on a couple of days before they become symptomatic (timings approximate as there seems to be no hard or fast rule..)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Sidehaas on June 07, 2020, 07:32:45 pm
Isn’t there quite a lot of research showing that people have the virus and are shedding/capable of passing it on a couple of days before they become symptomatic (timings approximate as there seems to be no hard or fast rule..)

I believe that's true. In fact I've seen various articles saying it may be the most infectious period. As I understand it from the medical experts at the daily briefings, it's also the case that in that period (when highly infectious) you are likely to test negative. This is the reason for not providing tests to those who are isolating as contacts of an infected person.
I've seen numbers ranging from very low up to 40% for false negatives. A colleague whose wife is a doctor with a relevant specialism and who had to be tested recently told me that it was known to be even higher than that if you don't have both nose and throat swabs - the point of having two at the same time is to reduce false negatives and apparently the approach to giving one or both is (or was) inconsistent. My wife had a home test (negative) that came with both.
I'm not sure whether the higher % numbers you see for false negatives are just for the period in which people are actually symptomatic or whether they include pre symptomatics and asymptomatics as well. I'd guess it's probably an average over the lot, in which case you'd think the number of false negatives for people who are actually symptomatic would be lower(?)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on June 08, 2020, 07:39:44 am
Pretty sure, once symptomatic, you test positive, barring a faulty test.

Nope, you can still test negative with symptoms

What it won’t tell you, is if you have had it and are now virus free (which, apparently, doesn’t mean symptom free, as the damage can leave you with symptoms that outlast the infection).

One of my wife's hospital's is antibody testing all staff. Total random mix of who seems to have had it and those that haven't, pretty poor correlation with those who had symptoms.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on June 08, 2020, 07:40:58 am
Isn’t there quite a lot of research showing that people have the virus and are shedding/capable of passing it on a couple of days before they become symptomatic (timings approximate as there seems to be no hard or fast rule..)

There is, but you are a lot more effective at spreading with symptoms, i.e. coughing is a better mechanism to spread than just breathing.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nik at work on June 08, 2020, 08:37:54 am
“My experience is the test seems to be about 70% accurate 6-8 days after initial infection/exposure, either side of that the reliability tails of dramatically”
My neighbour (infectious disease consultant)

“Yeah, we’re seeing pretty much the same”
My other neighbour (respiratory consultant)

Testing is useful no doubt, but given it’s fairly limited reliability I’d say a fairly aggressive self isolation policy and a lot of focus on the track and the trace element of Test Track and Trace would be most effective... which isn’t happening afaik??

A negative test is certainly not by any measure the “all clear”.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on June 08, 2020, 09:06:06 am
I may have posted it here or on the politics thread - but Ceredigion councils home baker track and trace recognised the importance of starting the TTI when people were first symptomatic - not when the result came back. Thus saving/buying an extra 24-48 hours for each case. If the test is 70% accurate then the only real way is to keep on repeating the testing... and repeat and repeat.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nik at work on June 08, 2020, 09:54:26 am
Exactly. Isolate and trace contacts ASAP, don’t worry about waiting for test results. And don’t put much stock in a negative result. Use the tests as confirmatory only.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on June 09, 2020, 10:18:47 am
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/08/asymptomatic-coronavirus-patients-arent-spreading-new-infections-who-says.html
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on June 09, 2020, 10:41:34 am
I like the "who says" at the end of the link.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 09, 2020, 10:46:34 am
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/08/asymptomatic-coronavirus-patients-arent-spreading-new-infections-who-says.html

Promising.
There’s a fair amount of hopeful news around. I forgot to share it (busy, this is my tea break) but earlier I read that Bergamo has around a 50% exposure to the virus, according to some comprehensive antibody testing done there. I understood that meant there had been significantly more asymptotic cases than originally thought. That tied in with the US carrier Rosy Roads, where they discovered around 60% of the crew had antibodies. Way more than expected.
Glimmers.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 09, 2020, 10:47:20 am
I like the "who says" at the end of the link.

No, he’s on first, Watt’s on the end.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 09, 2020, 05:25:13 pm
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/08/asymptomatic-coronavirus-patients-arent-spreading-new-infections-who-says.html

Well, that didn’t last long...

 https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/09/world/coronavirus-updates.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur#link-452d2061 (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/09/world/coronavirus-updates.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur#link-452d2061)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 14, 2020, 09:37:49 am
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/08/asymptomatic-coronavirus-patients-arent-spreading-new-infections-who-says.html

The contradictions in the “scientific” advice on how this disease spreads, is astounding.

This Japanese paper, ironically on the CDC site, seems to conclude that it’s spread primarily by young adults, pre or asymptomatic:

 https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/9/20-2272_article (https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/9/20-2272_article)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on June 14, 2020, 09:57:58 am
My conclusion is no one has a clue and are all winging it. Some are doing better than others.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on June 14, 2020, 11:33:15 am
My conclusion is no one has a clue and are all winging it. Some are doing better than others.

In which case you devise your policy to cover both bases - until you know otherwise. I suspect this may be one of the big issues when it comes to making policy.

Btw - anyone here want to eat in a restaurant for an hour or two with only 1m spacing? Just a straw poll...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on June 14, 2020, 11:38:58 am
Btw - anyone here want to eat in a restaurant for an hour or two with only 1m spacing? Just a straw poll...
Latest polling already shows overwhelming lack of public support for relaxing 2m rule. I’m also a no on that one.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on June 14, 2020, 11:43:54 am
Me too
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 14, 2020, 11:46:17 am
Me too

Me 2m
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on June 14, 2020, 12:08:06 pm
One of my more visceral pre lockdown memories is going for an early eve dinner with friends and their toddler at a local Italian chain - 10 days before official lockdown - so early March. Towards the end of the meal - the place started Filling up and right behind me at a big table of ten (family meal - complete with 80-90 yo granny) arrived. Woman sat right behind me - late 20’s early 30’s had a right hacking cough - like a 60 yo smoker. Kept apologising to the table for it and coughing into her armpit - towards me... I got up and moved to sit next to others in our party on a bench seat because of this - then we left etc... I often wonder what happened to this family. Did the young woman have it? (Probably given the prevalence in Manchester then) did the old lady get it and survive etc. Etc..

I’m not in a hurry to go into such an environment again. I really feel for all those in the hospitality sector who are craving for distance rules to be relaxed and for business to reopen (if you believe the Tory press). I don’t think it’ll be that simple and many people simply won’t go. I like having a meal out with friends And family etc..  - but not that much.

I have mused that rather than prop up this sector - and hope things will be back to ‘normal’ one day - maybe we should accept that a load (millions I know) of jobs will be lost in bars and restaraunt and divert the money from propping up to investing in a new area - something where we maybe make something or create something... new green deal etc.. is one option but not the only one. My tuppence on the back of a fag packet etc...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: T_B on June 14, 2020, 02:44:48 pm
I work in travel. Will people want to get on aeroplanes again? Some will, some won’t. Businesses in leisure/hospitality/travel will have to adapt as there will be fewer customers. I would not want to be in a business in any of these sectors that competes on price/volume.

That said I don’t think the experience of travelling with like-minded people will be replaced by a digital experience. It might well be that those areas that aren’t so obviously in an immediate pickle are the ones where we see some of the biggest changes.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on June 14, 2020, 03:30:06 pm
Anecdotally, from an ICU nurse on a covid ward, admission numbers for CV on her ward were starting to noticeably rise again as of about the start of last week.

Most admissions seem to be in their 30s - 50s (presumably this reflects the working population), about 50% of admissions end up intubated. Of those intubated they have so far had 3(!) people recover.

Also of some concern was that she had been off work, ill, for about a week in April. She had a test that confirmed she had CV-19, however an antibody test recently that said she had not got immunity.

Must admit, I was starting to get a bit more relaxed about it all until that (socially distanced, outside) conversation.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on June 14, 2020, 04:11:07 pm

Btw - anyone here want to eat in a restaurant for an hour or two with only 1m spacing? Just a straw poll...

I’m keen, once we have half decent antibody testing and some proof that having had the virus conveys immunity.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on June 14, 2020, 04:27:58 pm


Also of some concern was that she had been off work, ill, for about a week in April. She had a test that confirmed she had CV-19, however an antibody test recently that said she had not got immunity.


A friend of mine, research biochemist, tells me he generally does not produce antibodies in response to vaccines and drs have given up after a few attempts at getting him to produce them on several occasions. What that means about his immune response if infected I have no idea, but it may be an idiosyncratic response which occurs in a small % of population. The issue might be her test, the virus, or her particular immune system. Perhaps hard to know?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on June 14, 2020, 04:37:59 pm
Thats a concerning story Ru - one thing that comes across from a multitude of CV19 studies is just how weird it is... with c8 million known cases worldwide by now you'd have thought we'd have seen all the weird things it can do...

Edit - another 1500 new cases today... its just not dropping here like it did in Spain (and to a lesser extent Italy)...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on June 15, 2020, 01:03:49 pm
Anecdotally, from an ICU nurse on a covid ward, admission numbers for CV on her ward were starting to noticeably rise again as of about the start of last week.

Most admissions seem to be in their 30s - 50s (presumably this reflects the working population), about 50% of admissions end up intubated. Of those intubated they have so far had 3(!) people recover.

Also of some concern was that she had been off work, ill, for about a week in April. She had a test that confirmed she had CV-19, however an antibody test recently that said she had not got immunity.

Must admit, I was starting to get a bit more relaxed about it all until that (socially distanced, outside) conversation.

Speaking to a consultant from t'other side of the Penines to us who said the same thing yesterday. Wife was very disappointed to come up antibody negative, she had convinced herself she'd had it (we were all ill at the same time, daughter the worst spiking high temps).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nik at work on June 15, 2020, 01:16:30 pm
Negative antibody test doesn’t mean you haven’t had it. I can’t remember the exact figures I saw but there is evidence that at 8(?? From memory, don’t quote me) weeks post infection antibody levels drop (or can drop) below the threshold for a positive test.
Whilst this is in no way at all conclusive evidence that immunity is not retained, it is possibly not a great sign.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nai on June 15, 2020, 01:34:13 pm
Edit - another 1500 new cases today... its just not dropping here like it did in Spain (and to a lesser extent Italy)...

Worked out on a fag packet that we started six days behind them as it all escalted but are now around four weeks behind on recovery. France more like six weeks.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on June 15, 2020, 03:35:46 pm
Negative antibody test doesn’t mean you haven’t had it. I can’t remember the exact figures I saw but there is evidence that at 8(?? From memory, don’t quote me) weeks post infection antibody levels drop (or can drop) below the threshold for a positive test.
Whilst this is in no way at all conclusive evidence that immunity is not retained, it is possibly not a great sign.
BBC's More or Less looked at the antibody tests from Roche and one other company, I forget who. They concluded that the data had been cherry picked to appear far better than the truth and that many qualifications and caveats were required before the tests were worthwhile.

Without those caveats reducing the sample size, you might as well ask a magic 8 ball whether or not you've had covid-19.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on June 15, 2020, 04:51:25 pm
Interesting, thorough analysis.

https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-should-we-aim-for-herd-immunity-like-sweden-b1de3348e88b
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on June 15, 2020, 05:15:37 pm
Great article Andy.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on June 15, 2020, 05:55:52 pm
Reflecting on that article it’s really interesting. Nice mix of simple metaphor and some decent more complex thinking. What fascinated me was how those countries that have gone down the herd immunity to protect the economy route have had their economy’s screwed anyway - because of non prescribed behavioural changes. And the gaining Herd Immunity seems to take far longer than people thought - so the pain whilst experiencing immunity building goes on and on.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on June 15, 2020, 06:34:51 pm
And the gaining Herd Immunity seems to take far longer than people thought - so the pain whilst experiencing immunity building goes on and on.

There is an unproven assumption there. Just look at recent posts on this thread.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on June 15, 2020, 07:06:45 pm
What fascinated me was how those countries that have gone down the herd immunity to protect the economy route have had their economy’s screwed anyway - because of non prescribed behavioural changes.

This was always going to be the case, partly because of those behavioural changes. But, in addition, the idea that in a globalised world any individual economy would be able to insulate itself from such a shock to the global economy was patently nonsense.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on June 15, 2020, 08:01:16 pm
Yes quite. And one of those of course moments when reading it.

I think the US is seriously screwed by their response unfortunately... maybe Trump is gambling on Herd immunity kicking in by November. It could partly in some places hit really bad early on I guess - but it’s such a large country with a diverse geography that it will keep on going...

The herd immunity concept is also slightly unfairly treated in that people look at the average across a country or a city. I’d be really interested to see it’s geography and how spatially and demographically heterogeneous it is. E.G. Making this up - but 18-30 year olds in Hackney for example - there may well be 30+ % who’ve positive antibodies - but middle aged people in Hammersmith May be 5% etc...

This effect can lead to apparent stalling of the virus spread - followed by a spurt if it’s then introduced to the more vulnerable demographic.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on June 15, 2020, 09:55:10 pm
Negative antibody test doesn’t mean you haven’t had it. I can’t remember the exact figures I saw but there is evidence that at 8(?? From memory, don’t quote me) weeks post infection antibody levels drop (or can drop) below the threshold for a positive test.
Whilst this is in no way at all conclusive evidence that immunity is not retained, it is possibly not a great sign.

I’d like to see that evidence as the Roche test, for example, claims only to be accurate after 16 weeks once there are sufficient antibodies.

My wife read the Roche test details before it was rolled out and announced, “they’ll never till it out yet, it’s not ready, those results are bobbins, they’re less real world applicable than my PhD tests”. Guess she was right.

Interestingly, those at her work with a positive antigen test, who tested negative on the Roche test, tested positive on the Abbot study she is on. So there does seem to potentially be a more accurate antibody test out there, but it’s getting properly tested.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on June 15, 2020, 10:15:23 pm
Quote
The new normal won’t be the old normal and herein lies our freedom. Mourn the pleasures and recreate them screened off if you like. Or understand that pleasures mutate too and it’s time to find some new ones.

I rather liked this statement at the end of a Suzanne Moore column in the Guardian (I’m not usually her biggest fan).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nik at work on June 16, 2020, 09:07:33 am
I’ll see if I can dig out the information I saw. But don’t hold me to the 8 weeks statement, as I said it was from memory so I could be way out on the timescale. The antibody drop off was definitely a thing though. As I recall this isn’t necessarily a sign that immunity is lost in a short time frame, and I don’t want to be seen as suggesting that it is.

Again dredging up from the depths of memory I’m fairly sure there is at least one other example of an immunisable disease which yields a cyclical level of antibody, meaning if you’re tested for immunity at the wrong time in the cycle you would “fail” the test due to having antibody levels that are sub-detectable, whilst still actually being immune. I’m afraid I can’t recall the specific example and a guess would be just that.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 16, 2020, 10:36:52 am
I’ll see if I can dig out the information I saw. But don’t hold me to the 8 weeks statement, as I said it was from memory so I could be way out on the timescale. The antibody drop off was definitely a thing though. As I recall this isn’t necessarily a sign that immunity is lost in a short time frame, and I don’t want to be seen as suggesting that it is.

Again dredging up from the depths of memory I’m fairly sure there is at least one other example of an immunisable disease which yields a cyclical level of antibody, meaning if you’re tested for immunity at the wrong time in the cycle you would “fail” the test due to having antibody levels that are sub-detectable, whilst still actually being immune. I’m afraid I can’t recall the specific example and a guess would be just that.

It seems you don’t require a specific example, as it might be fairly common:
 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0065277608602199?via%3Dihub (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0065277608602199?via%3Dihub)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on June 18, 2020, 02:28:21 pm
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-53095336

Change of tack on the tracing app.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on June 18, 2020, 02:51:53 pm
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-53095336

Change of tack on the tracing app.

The worst type of student to deal with are those who are not the brightest but arrogant. They belligerently carry on down the path they so strongly believe is right despite being told and having it pointed out to them (repeatedly) that it won’t / would not work. Only when they try - and fail as they always were going to - they realise and change tack. Time after time this government seems to follow this pattern.

As a lecturer when this happens you sigh - and try and take the perspective that at least they got there in the end. But this is our government ffs. Anyone been tallying up the U turns?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fultonius on June 18, 2020, 07:22:32 pm
Saw this earlier today. Sounds kind of promising?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaeldelcastillo/2020/06/16/apple-and-google-admit-ethereum-app-to-let-employees-prove-theyve-been-vaccinated/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on June 19, 2020, 06:06:38 pm
From Guardian live

https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2020/jun/19/coronavirus-covid-19-live-news-update-us-questions-beijing-cluster-figures-who-vaccine-doses-latest-updates

"Researchers discovered genetic traces of Sars-CoV-2 - as the virus is officially known - in samples of waste water collected in Milan and Turin at the end of last year, and Bologna in January, the ISS institute said in a statement seen by AFP on Friday.

Italy’s first known native case was discovered mid-February.

The results “help to understand the start of the circulation of the virus in Italy,” the ISS said.

They also “confirm the by-now consolidated international evidence” as to the strategic function of sewer samples as an early detection tool, it added."
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on June 19, 2020, 06:38:11 pm

The results “help to understand the start of the circulation of the virus in Italy,” the ISS said.


Seems a bit mad sending the samples into orbit, but I guess it reduces the chance of cross contamination!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 19, 2020, 07:24:17 pm
From Guardian live

https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2020/jun/19/coronavirus-covid-19-live-news-update-us-questions-beijing-cluster-figures-who-vaccine-doses-latest-updates

"Researchers discovered genetic traces of Sars-CoV-2 - as the virus is officially known - in samples of waste water collected in Milan and Turin at the end of last year, and Bologna in January, the ISS institute said in a statement seen by AFP on Friday.

Italy’s first known native case was discovered mid-February.

The results “help to understand the start of the circulation of the virus in Italy,” the ISS said.

They also “confirm the by-now consolidated international evidence” as to the strategic function of sewer samples as an early detection tool, it added."

I seem to remember taking some stick from you, on this subject, a couple of weeks ago...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 19, 2020, 07:40:59 pm
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-53095336

Change of tack on the tracing app.

Well, Apple say they’re lying and the UK Government haven’t contacted them at all:
 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-53105642 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-53105642)

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on June 20, 2020, 12:39:14 am
From Guardian live

https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2020/jun/19/coronavirus-covid-19-live-news-update-us-questions-beijing-cluster-figures-who-vaccine-doses-latest-updates

"Researchers discovered genetic traces of Sars-CoV-2 - as the virus is officially known - in samples of waste water collected in Milan and Turin at the end of last year, and Bologna in January, the ISS institute said in a statement seen by AFP on Friday.

Italy’s first known native case was discovered mid-February.

The results “help to understand the start of the circulation of the virus in Italy,” the ISS said.

They also “confirm the by-now consolidated international evidence” as to the strategic function of sewer samples as an early detection tool, it added."

I seem to remember taking some stick from you, on this subject, a couple of weeks ago...

I argued against making assumptions that this is the same mutation of the virus, not that you were wrong saying it was around in the EU earlier than people thought. It's a big puzzle with missing pieces but nearly all the data still indicates the current deadly characteristics of the virus could not have been around then or we would have seen deaths in January in Italy and France.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on June 20, 2020, 12:50:58 am
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-53095336

Change of tack on the tracing app.

Well, Apple say they’re lying and the UK Government haven’t contacted them at all:
 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-53105642 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-53105642)

On Newsnight last night one of the developers helping Apple and Google in Europe said he tried to warn the government in April and offered help at any point as the code is open source. An offer not accepted.

Newsnight was a classic episode last night as the ongoing and very sad issues at the Tavistock were also covered in detail. It's amazing how good the show is currently, in great contrast to the main BBC news.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000k4f6/newsnight-18062020
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 20, 2020, 06:37:21 am
From Guardian live

https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2020/jun/19/coronavirus-covid-19-live-news-update-us-questions-beijing-cluster-figures-who-vaccine-doses-latest-updates

"Researchers discovered genetic traces of Sars-CoV-2 - as the virus is officially known - in samples of waste water collected in Milan and Turin at the end of last year, and Bologna in January, the ISS institute said in a statement seen by AFP on Friday.

Italy’s first known native case was discovered mid-February.

The results “help to understand the start of the circulation of the virus in Italy,” the ISS said.

They also “confirm the by-now consolidated international evidence” as to the strategic function of sewer samples as an early detection tool, it added."

I seem to remember taking some stick from you, on this subject, a couple of weeks ago...

I argued against making assumptions that this is the same mutation of the virus, not that you were wrong saying it was around in the EU earlier than people thought. It's a big puzzle with missing pieces but nearly all the data still indicates the current deadly characteristics of the virus could not have been around then or we would have seen deaths in January in Italy and France.

Bollocks.

You said I was spreading conspiracy stories. Do I have to quote those posts? I just re-read them.
Also, the post I made about the discovery of the more infectious mutation, was an entirely separate post, several posts later, from the link I posted to the French early case article.

You were way off base then, and even further now. In fact, you called any countenance of any “early infection” line of thought, dangerous.
FFS, there is even strong circumstantial evidence of a much earlier outbreak than has yet been considered, based on a 10/12x increase, above seasonal, of hospitalised Flu cases in China in the Autumn of 2019.

I don’t know if you are aware of this, but you often come across as a bit of a slave to the “Party line” or consensus. Both politically and in matters such as this.
(That probably seems harsh and unduly personal, especially coming via the impersonal medium of a forum post. I promise, we’d get on well arguing such things over a pint, it wouldn’t be a bad tempered affair).
I’m rather combative and flit around from idea to idea, with deeply held convictions, that last for all of five seconds before I lurch off on a tangent and forget why I cared. You seem to run on tracks, that require a committee vote, ratification from the central party, authorisation forms (in triplicate) and a duly appointed (union recognised) operator to change the Points; before you can deviate. I suspect, the decoupling and turntable operations required for you to turn around completely, would be epic...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 20, 2020, 06:49:45 am
This is an interesting article, with links to supporting data, about the increase (in the US) of young adult and child infection and transmission:
 https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/06/19/880912184/younger-adults-are-increasingly-testing-positive-for-coronavirus?utm_medium=40digest.7days3.20200619.carousel&utm_source=email&utm_content=&utm_campaign=campaign (https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/06/19/880912184/younger-adults-are-increasingly-testing-positive-for-coronavirus?utm_medium=40digest.7days3.20200619.carousel&utm_source=email&utm_content=&utm_campaign=campaign)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fultonius on June 20, 2020, 09:25:32 am
Matt - I found this thought provoking. There are a fair few criticisms of their research, and it's not peer reviewed yet.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DKh6kJ-RSMI

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 20, 2020, 10:35:39 am
Father-in-law keeps coming back to the Oxford study.
I whole heartedly embraced/embrace the “prepare for the worst, be thankful if you are wrong” philosophy, but I’ve been following this rather closely and the light has shifted, as far as I can see.

FiL (yes, I know I’ve mentioned it before) was a very senior doctor prior to retirement (he ran hospitals for the Navy). From the outset, he kept saying “this is nasty”, “this is going to kill a lot of people”, but he also kept on about the Imperial study being “worst case” and that that was “unlikely the reality”.
He was, for instance, really quite upset that we chose not to send the kids back to school, until we explained that Polly’s boss has cancer (st 4) and her continued employment requires her to shield (in effect) and given the vulnerability of my parents, it just wasn’t worth the added risk.

I’m now not convinced either way, but moderately sure the truth lies somewhere in between and acutely aware Death is not the only negative outcome from this infection, as has been widely noted.

Look at these projections and then compare them (Useful little tab on the graphs). The shapes are very similar. The US a notable exception.
 https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-kingdom (https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-kingdom)

I should add, my impression of the general public’s attitude to “the rules” is that, here, most no longer take it at all seriously and that has been the case for three weeks or more.
We know that on the 4th of July, most of the restrictions will be lifted. If the Times are correct, even the gyms/walls will be able to open. We are about to/are already testing the Oxford hypothesis and the results will be available by the end of July.
I actually think, we don’t really have a choice. There seems no definitive test to prove one or the other, except trying to ease and watching the signs.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on June 21, 2020, 09:25:30 am

Bollocks.

You said I was spreading conspiracy stories. Do I have to quote those posts? I just re-read them.
Also, the post I made about the discovery of the more infectious mutation, was an entirely separate post, several posts later, from the link I posted to the French early case article.

You were way off base then, and even further now. In fact, you called any countenance of any “early infection” line of thought, dangerous.
FFS, there is even strong circumstantial evidence of a much earlier outbreak than has yet been considered, based on a 10/12x increase, above seasonal, of hospitalised Flu cases in China in the Autumn of 2019.

I don’t know if you are aware of this, but you often come across as a bit of a slave to the “Party line” or consensus. Both politically and in matters such as this.
(That probably seems harsh and unduly personal, especially coming via the impersonal medium of a forum post. I promise, we’d get on well arguing such things over a pint, it wouldn’t be a bad tempered affair).
I’m rather combative and flit around from idea to idea, with deeply held convictions, that last for all of five seconds before I lurch off on a tangent and forget why I cared. You seem to run on tracks, that require a committee vote, ratification from the central party, authorisation forms (in triplicate) and a duly appointed (union recognised) operator to change the Points; before you can deviate. I suspect, the decoupling and turntable operations required for you to turn around completely, would be epic...

I don't understand what you mean by a party line or tracks unless that is the mainstream scientific view. Science never denies clear evidence but it doesn't use one piece to ignore everything else. The most likely explanation is the virus was around earler but mutated to become more lethal and/or spread faster. Prof Gupta's views that the virus is unchanged and the level of infection is much larger and been around much longer than the scientific establishment say is still counter to most of the evidence and encourages people not to take the virus seriously; if she is wrong, as is very likely, that is a very dangerous view.  Guess who Ian Duncan Smith was lauding to help push for 1m on the news yesterday?

On the discussion on May 6th I explicitly said others were spreading such conspiracy stories but as for you:

"I know you are not Matt but the internet is full of such wish fullfillment shit. Its a threat to everyone as such people won't care about following social distancing."

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 24, 2020, 02:45:33 pm
An interview with a medic involved in the Dexamethasone trials.

Not wholly encouraging...😱

 https://www.msn.com/en-gb/health/medical/gwynedd-doctor-behind-coronavirus-trials-terrified-of-peoples-reactions-to-lockdown-easing/ar-BB15TAvV?ocid=sf (https://www.msn.com/en-gb/health/medical/gwynedd-doctor-behind-coronavirus-trials-terrified-of-peoples-reactions-to-lockdown-easing/ar-BB15TAvV?ocid=sf)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on July 04, 2020, 11:02:24 pm
 I thought that this article is interesting, I've wondered about the obsession with modelling scenarios endlessly : https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2020/07/government-chose-follow-wrong-science-lethal-social-and-economic-consequences
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Sidehaas on July 05, 2020, 09:40:55 am
I thought that this article is interesting, I've wondered about the obsession with modelling scenarios endlessly : https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2020/07/government-chose-follow-wrong-science-lethal-social-and-economic-consequences

I've thought for a while the Govt and Sage has taken the wrong approach with its modelling. I actually think some of the examples that article gives are poor (eg overestimating the size of the peak - those estimates could easily have been reasonable if no action had been taken, which was what they assumed) but I agree with the general argument.

Modelling should be used to help predict how a situation might evolve and, if you don't have enough confidence in the model's absolute accuracy, it can sometimes still be used to predict the relative sensitivity of the outcome to different parameters as long as you treat the absolute numbers with pinch of salt - this is what they have tried to do with the effects of some social distancing measures.

However it's critical that theoretical models have some validation. Whenever the process isn't fully understood, a model describing it has to include coefficients or other parameters (as well as the various input assumptions) that aim to mimic the effect of the true process. This is fine if you have evidence with which to tune the coefficients until you are confident they give a reasonable outcome with a known uncertainty. However if you don't have that, all you can do is put in the numbers that give you the answer that intuitively makes the most sense. This seems to be the situation a lot of our modellers have been in. It leads to the models being biased towards what people expect from their past experience or personal intuition, regardless of whether there is actually an intent to do this. With all the different assumptions and variables involved in a complex process like Corona virus spread, different models that use slightly different coefficients will end up giving wildly different outcomes when assumptions are changed slightly, and the uncertainty bands are fairly useless.
This has been demonstrated by the fact that many of the models claiming to predict the same thing (an example springing to mind is local r value) have given estimates that are far enough apart that the 95% confidence band intervals do not overlap at all. This simply shows that some or all of the modelling is wrong and those bands cannot be trusted.

Sage's approach as far as I can discern from what Vallance et al have said seems to have been to take lots of different models and assume the best prediction is somewhere down the middle of what they all say. The problem with this is that the true answer for any particular scenario could easily be at one end of the spectrum rather than in the middle ( or even completely outside it) and also that different models will be the best in different scenarios (eg, one might better estimate the sensitivity of R to opening pubs, another might better estimate the sensitivity to travel quarantines.) Really, they were just winging it.
What should have been happening is that they should have been looking for every scrap of evidence they could find to provide some validity to those models and the assumptions and coefficients underlying them, so that they can become a more reliable decision making tool. It's possible they have been doing this. But in the meantime they should not have been being used as the primary way of making decisions. Sage should have been providing advice in a conservative manner, benchmarking it against the decisions taken by other countries and perhaps using that information also to investigate how their own modelling might differ from that in the UK. Govt should only have been using modelling to predict what a very wide range of outcomes might be to inform their planning (and I think the Nightingales was something they did right). One thing this approach would have led to was earlier lockdown when it became obvious our approach was inconsistent with almost everyone else.
Like the Swedes but fortunately in a slightly less extreme manner, our scientists seem to have been too willing to believe that if we paid enough scientists to sit around the table then our own modelling must be about right and all those other countries must be wrong. It's also arguable from the Sage minutes released that early in the pandemic they were simply too unwilling to take really difficult decisions at all without having evidence underlying their models - but what this meant in practice is that the default decision for Govt was simply not to do anything. This perhaps comes to the structural question the article raises.

Disclaimer: I know nothing about epidemiology but I work in the nuclear industry and have to make decisions about the validity and use of a lot of models of uncertain processes that have a high hazard outcome if you get it wrong.

On the subject of structural problems with Sage and the advice it provides, Nick Robinson did quite a good Political Thinking podcast with Neil Ferguson last week.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on July 05, 2020, 10:14:41 am
As someone who has spent the last 25 years building numerical models (of how landscapes change - which I’d argue is possibly more complex) I have a lot of sympathy for what has been carried out. I’m also a bit concerned about an emerging narrative (that The article subconsciously supports) that this is a model/modellers fault - rather than those who make policy decisions based on a breadth (hopefully) of scientific views including models.

A couple of points to bear in mind first - the George Box quote “All models are wrong but some are useful” is completely correct and

Second - modelling CV19 is impossible to do accurately or precisely. Even more so 3 months ago when we knew much less about it and how it behaved in comparison to other viruses. The High levels of asymptomatic transmission - the importance of close physical indoors transmission as opposed to touch contact. The importance of individual or super spreaders. All of these are now better though still far from satisfactorily understood.

You can’t validate something you don’t fully or even partially understand - This can put you in danger of getting “the right results for the wrong reasons” aka the calibration trap.

But what you can do - and wasn’t done with the first imperial model - is carry out a full sensitivity analysis (how internal model parameters affect the outcome) and an uncertainty analysis (how variations/uncertainty in input variables can cascade through the model and affect outcomes). (Basic descriptions above caveat..).  If you have little variation in the model outcomes wrt small changes in input values/parameters you can have greater confidence in the modelled predictions.

Sorry - toddler duty is dragging me away.. edit - the above might come across a bit arsey - not meant to be - bad night etc...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Sidehaas on July 05, 2020, 10:52:32 am
Not arsey at all. I suffer from the same toddler related problems all the time.
I disagree with some of what you said but it's probably in the weeds.

The point about accountability is important. The Govt have to be accountable for all their actions and it is certainly true that they have cocked up on several fronts. They are also ultimately responsible for ensuring that Sage and it's supporting structure and scientists are adequate to give them good advice. However when you look at the Sage minutes and what members have said publicly, is appears to be true that for at least for the first half of the pandemic to datw (I'm not sure about the undoing of lockdown yet) the Govt really did follow the scientific advice closely and the fundamental reasons for our higher than necessary infection rate were scientific rather than political. This does mean we need to learn lessons about our scientific approach thoroughly and carefully, without taking accountability for the overall picture away from Boris and co.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on July 05, 2020, 12:00:37 pm
That's my view as well.  The CMO and CSA saying for a long time that we were 4 weeks behind Italy when the gap was clearly 2 weeks was a clear sign they were clinging to model outputs that just didn't match real data in an incredibly high risk manner. The way to deal with this is to be less secretive (allow peer review) and be conservative on responses (ie lockdown early) given the risk of unknowns on a new virus exponential growth. The modelling is what it is, those to blame are the scientific leaders who set up SAGE with too much model emphasis and too little experience in fighting viral outbreaks (as per the famous Times article) and then didn't open up their work to peer scrutiny. Then there is the clear evidence that we were working on some pessimistic assumptions that the virus could not be stopped, alongside NL and Sweden (who later complained NL and the UK started this with them, then lost their nerve). Other detailed aspects of Cygnus were also ignored or under emphasised, and Cygnus was buried for political reasons. Tens of thousands died because of our scientific and political exceptionalism. Then we need to remember we wrecked a world class Public Health system and Boris joked about handshakes and muddled messages.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/05/anthony-costello-world-health-organization-independent-sage-coronavirus
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on July 07, 2020, 10:11:08 am
Interesting article here in the Grauniad (of course...) musing over what will happen to Gyms when they are allowed to re-open. Some overlaps with what may happen with climbing walls I expect (though not completely)..

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2020/jul/07/parklife-when-gyms-reopen-will-anyone-go-back

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on July 08, 2020, 01:27:39 pm
Updates in WHO

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/08/who-says-evidence-emerging-of-airborne-coronavirus-spread
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on July 08, 2020, 01:37:16 pm
I'd thought it was known for some time that tiny airborne droplets (i.e. those which can travel further than a short distance) were a risk if you were present downwind or in a poorly ventilated space for a prolonged period - because the tiny airborne particles will carry fewer viruses then big droplets, so exposure needs to be longer to achieve an infectious dose.
This is why opening pubs and restaurants, car sharing, etc is a bad idea? Because distancing doesn't work in unventilated spaces?

This was in that contact tracing blog post that was linked to in pages past. Is this only now just becoming properly evidenced?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on July 08, 2020, 01:40:59 pm
I'd thought it was known for some time that tiny airborne droplets (i.e. those which can travel further than a short distance) were a risk if you were present downwind or in a poorly ventilated space for a prolonged period - because the tiny airborne particles will carry fewer viruses then big droplets, so exposure needs to be longer to achieve an infectious dose.
This is why opening pubs and restaurants, car sharing, etc is a bad idea? Because distancing doesn't work in unventilated spaces?

This was in that contact tracing blog post that was linked to in pages past. Is this only now just becoming properly evidenced?

Sentence 2 of the article if you looked at it:

“ WHO bows to pressure from scientists about risk from aerosol transmission”
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on July 08, 2020, 02:01:55 pm
I'd thought it was known for some time that tiny airborne droplets (i.e. those which can travel further than a short distance) were a risk if you were present downwind or in a poorly ventilated space for a prolonged period - because the tiny airborne particles will carry fewer viruses then big droplets, so exposure needs to be longer to achieve an infectious dose.
This is why opening pubs and restaurants, car sharing, etc is a bad idea? Because distancing doesn't work in unventilated spaces?

This was in that contact tracing blog post that was linked to in pages past. Is this only now just becoming properly evidenced?

Sentence 2 of the article if you looked at it:

“ WHO bows to pressure from scientists about risk from aerosol transmission”

I read the article  ::)

My surprise is that this is only just becoming accepted. It was described on here over a month ago. My question (if you looked at it) was why the change in position now. Has the evidence only just now gone through peer review? Does the WHO require a large body of corroborating evidence to change its mind? Perhaps the WHO has been reluctant to acknowledge it until now because it means that economic restart will be hampered (not to mention the difficulty in communicating the new health message to "stay 2m apart unless you're indoors in which case don't be too long") - though of course, economic restart is not within their remit.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on July 09, 2020, 02:33:28 pm
So as per my posts on B3 from here: https://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,30489.msg603070.html#msg603070 (https://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,30489.msg603070.html#msg603070)

and here:
://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,30489.msg603488.html#msg603488 (https://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,30489.msg603488.html#msg603488)


There's now more evidence to back this up.

Preclinical research on NR and its role in covid-19 infected cells has now been released today in pre-print form, available here: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.17.047480v3

Note my disclaimers - I'm a shareholder in Chromadex (which are up 22% on this news)

Further research adding evidence to the B3 / NAD+ hypothesis.

https://twitter.com/FehrLab/status/1260342672688119810 (https://twitter.com/FehrLab/status/1260342672688119810)

Update on this. The next pre-clinical study was released last night US time. It reinforces the hypothesis that's been building around NAD depletion leading to worse outcomes from covid-19 infection; and the role of NAD augmentation using NR to slow virus replication.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/chromadex-announces-study-results-highlighting-103600635.html
These are great times to be a mouse.
Human study coming soon..

(I'm an investor, I'm biased)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on July 13, 2020, 08:21:37 am
Re-infection and non immunity cases appearing... Stone flagged this up on FaceBook

https://www.vox.com/2020/7/12/21321653/getting-covid-19-twice-reinfection-antibody-herd-immunity?utm_campaign=vox&utm_content=entry&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on July 13, 2020, 11:15:04 am
My friends in the Cotswolds have the recurring problem: they recover a bit then get ill again, and again. 5 bouts so far. They were fit and healthy triathletes in their late 50s.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on July 13, 2020, 11:28:16 am
Hearing more and more stories about very fit people in their 50s and 60s suffering life-changing conditions. A climbing friend was telling me this the weekend about his super-fit friend in his 50s who caught covid and suffered a stroke due to it. He said out of all his friends in that age group this was the last person he'd have guessed would fare badly. Seems a lot of the outcome is down to the reaction of the individual's inflammatory response, which is hard to predict. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on July 14, 2020, 06:35:37 pm
Oof 1240 new cases today... I know the numbers fluctuate alot, but thats 9 days after the shops, bars and restaraunts were allowed to re-open....

edit - c400 - looks like the 1240 figure includes a load of previously uncounted pillar2 data from Wales... as you were :)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 14, 2020, 07:36:43 pm
Hearing more and more stories about very fit people in their 50s and 60s suffering life-changing conditions. A climbing friend was telling me this the weekend about his super-fit friend in his 50s who caught covid and suffered a stroke due to it. He said out of all his friends in that age group this was the last person he'd have guessed would fare badly. Seems a lot of the outcome is down to the reaction of the individual's inflammatory response, which is hard to predict.

(https://i.ibb.co/CPJww6J/65-DEE9-F0-B820-4206-AE0-A-8-E920-A8-F2017.jpg)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: remus on July 15, 2020, 08:25:45 am
Good recent episode of More or Less https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p08kdnbp

Probably not that surprising, but more dirt on how shit the government 'testing' figures are. In particular they count tests as they're sent out to people (obviously no actual testing has taken place at that point), and they have now admitted that a full 2/3rds (or 2 million) of these posted home testing kits did not actually end up in a test happening (e.g. courier left testing kit in a puddle so it was unusable, went missing in post etc.)

Some interesting analysis of the swedish strategy too.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sxrxg on July 15, 2020, 10:22:24 pm
Just wondering with masks becoming compulsory in shops has anyone bought one that they can recommend? Been looking this evening and there seems to be a massive variation in materials used and costs.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on July 16, 2020, 07:35:43 am
Just wondering with masks becoming compulsory in shops has anyone bought one that they can recommend? Been looking this evening and there seems to be a massive variation in materials used and costs.

I’ve got a couple of cloth ones and Tbh I prefer the disposable type ones with earloops. I find them a bit lighter and less scratchy than the cotton ones (one made for me by mother in law) and they have a metal/bendy strip along one side to pinch over the nose a bit.

I got them online - and they’re the same brand as the ones my wife is given at work (NHS).

I use them like reusable ones - but ive only used them when dipping in and jut of a shop.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on July 19, 2020, 09:12:45 pm
COVID cluster in Lanarkshire. Based around a call centre carrying out... contact tracing for the NHS... couldn’t make it up..

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-53465160
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on July 20, 2020, 09:03:11 am
Problems reported with Reiff camping

https://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/rock_talk/reiff_climbers_using_port_a_bhaigh_campsite-722330
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on July 20, 2020, 09:57:33 am
Doesn't sound good. I miss the old campsite at Achnahaird.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Falling Down on July 20, 2020, 10:53:48 am
My friends in the Cotswolds have the recurring problem: they recover a bit then get ill again, and again. 5 bouts so far. They were fit and healthy triathletes in their late 50s.

I’ve had three in total. The last, two weeks ago was the worst.  No respiratory problems thankfully but I was out of it for three days and am still recovering.  Much worse than the first bout back in March.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on July 20, 2020, 11:33:34 am
Sorry to hear that Ben. Hope it fades now.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on July 20, 2020, 11:42:45 am
A few days old but data from the ZOE/Kings symptom reporting app suggests that cases can be grouped by their early symptoms. These groups are good indicators of how serious a case is likely to become and whether it is likely to result in hospitalisation and ventilation. They remain good indicators even after considering age and existing conditions.

https://covid.joinzoe.com/post/covid-clusters (https://covid.joinzoe.com/post/covid-clusters)

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.06.12.20129056v1 (https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.06.12.20129056v1)

Tl;dr if you develop shortness of breath, neurological symptoms such as confusion and gastrointestinal symptoms such as diarrhoea, be very concerned.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on July 20, 2020, 07:14:19 pm
Sorry to hear that Ben. Hope it fades now.

Yes - that sounds grim Ben :(
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Falling Down on July 20, 2020, 07:59:57 pm
Thanks guys - I’m mostly OK now. Just have tinnitus, sore eyes and tiredness. Had a long walk round the park yesterday that felt tiring but hasn’t knocked me out thankfully. Having a real pint in a pub was amazing.


I did test the weekend before last after speaking with a GP to see if I had been infected twice or whether it’s a long term thing but somehow managed to balls up the scanning of the barcode on the sample and never got the results so did another today. I’m sure that’ll come back -ve so will do an antibody and a T-cell test if I can.

It weighs on the mind a bit. Like, have I got something that’s going to keep coming back?  I’d normally be doing press-ups and stuff in the morning and the odd run but just don’t have the energy.

Will keep you posted.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on July 20, 2020, 09:56:51 pm
Shit Ben, I am so sorry to read all this; I had no idea. Get well and stay strong.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on July 24, 2020, 11:08:11 am
Not quite concrete evidence, but a promising development for users of crags and walls. Sharing holds maybe not the problem we thought it could be (provided you chalk up).
https://www.abcwalls.co.uk/news/chalk-deactivates-the-virus-on-holds/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on July 24, 2020, 11:15:43 am
"So, if we put the chalk inside the body by, you know intravenously, like an injection or something, then the next day, the virus could just, kind of, vanish. And you experts are looking into that, right?".
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on July 24, 2020, 12:13:51 pm
I see the chalk where it knocks it out in a minute. One minute. And is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside or almost a cleaning.  :devil-smiley:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 24, 2020, 01:50:30 pm
Yeah, but you can’t moan at people that don’t brush after an especially chalky session, now.
‘Coz they’re just doin a public service, ain’t they.

“Left it sterile for ya, mate.”
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Falling Down on July 24, 2020, 02:34:12 pm
Test came back -ve. so it must be longer term symptoms or pvf.  Been alright this week.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on July 25, 2020, 10:37:56 pm
Apparently Grant Shapps is on holiday in Spain atm. 😃
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on July 26, 2020, 09:26:43 pm
Me too. Currently in Asturias, drove out last Thursday grabbing a window of opportunity. Quite relaxed about a two week stay at home on return next week. TBH I can do virtually all the work I need to do from home.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on July 26, 2020, 10:17:05 pm
Glad it’s not a big problem for you Pete. I’m surprised the amount of “I’m outraged” at being quarantined comments from holidaymakers being reported in the press (though they may be courting those type of comments of course). If I was heading overseas at the moment I’d be half expecting CV19 to throw a spanner in the works somewhere...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on July 26, 2020, 10:51:50 pm
Upcoming family holiday at gite in Brittany mid August, booked 12 months ago. Fully expecting virus to throw a complete bag of spanners in the works. If quarantine imposed we’ll stay home but lose the money. Insurers will want  FCO ‘don’t travel ‘ notice to pay out.
tbh, anything positive will be seen as a bonus right now.

Not keen on losing money but it’s only money, not something big like health, so will not get too exercised over it if we have to stay home.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on July 27, 2020, 09:08:59 am
Upcoming family holiday at gite in Brittany mid August, booked 12 months ago. Fully expecting virus to throw a complete bag of spanners in the works. If quarantine imposed we’ll stay home but lose the money. Insurers will want  FCO ‘don’t travel ‘ notice to pay out.
tbh, anything positive will be seen as a bonus right now.

Not keen on losing money but it’s only money, not something big like health, so will not get too exercised over it if we have to stay home.

If only everyone saw it like that. All I ever seem to hear on the news, or at work is whining bores bleating about how their annual couple of weeks cultivating alcoholism and skin cancer is their right.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 27, 2020, 09:38:07 am
Upcoming family holiday at gite in Brittany mid August, booked 12 months ago. Fully expecting virus to throw a complete bag of spanners in the works. If quarantine imposed we’ll stay home but lose the money. Insurers will want  FCO ‘don’t travel ‘ notice to pay out.
tbh, anything positive will be seen as a bonus right now.

Not keen on losing money but it’s only money, not something big like health, so will not get too exercised over it if we have to stay home.

If only everyone saw it like that. All I ever seem to hear on the news, or at work is whining bores bleating about how their annual couple of weeks cultivating alcoholism and skin cancer is their right.

It’s obvious this isn’t over.
What’s happening in Spain, will happen here.
As time passes, more and more people will have personal experience of the more extreme effects of Covid. Even where directly  uninfected, they’ll know know someone who died, someone disabled by it, someone unable to shake it.
As it progresses, the whining will change in character, the conspiracies shift from “it’s exaggerated/a hoax, to more “it’s a weapon” and the countries that have done the most to control it, will suddenly look like the “source” and increasingly see the blame from the conspiracy minded.

What I’m saying is, those moaning as Toby describes, will still moan, they’ll just change the minutiae of their whine.
Not worth listening to. Follow the numbers, listen to the people who spent entire careers studying this sort of stuff and not politicians and  look after yourself and your loved ones.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on July 27, 2020, 10:20:28 am
Can I briefly ask what people's opinion is on travel towards the back-end of the year (early Oct)? I'm beginning to think it's time to cancel anything I can at this point.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on July 27, 2020, 10:35:47 am
I don’t think anyone knows but some things to bear in mind..
Prevalence can change very quickly with restrictions abruptly imposed
The virus is likely to experience a resurgence as weather deteriorates, especially as people mix more indoors
You might be all right..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on July 27, 2020, 10:39:37 am
We cancelled our planned Font trip in September. Full refund was available on accomodation through Air BnB and ferries etc not booked. I felt like it was a fairly low risk venture to start, being that we'd be outdoors or in our own accomodation the whole time, with just trips to the supermarket or patisserie to contend with - which will be subject to the same adaptations as we see here.
Other half not so keen to chance the possibility of getting stuck there or having to isolate on our return, so I think we'll be heading to the Lakes instead.

Slightly puzzled by the outrage at the abruptness of the government's messaging. If you give people warning you'll see a scramble to return (see also "Last Night of the Pubs"), making the problem worse. I expect that a lot of people returning from Spain won't bother going full quarantine anyway.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dunnyg on July 27, 2020, 10:45:33 am
I've got flights booked to the US in October. Not sure if BMC insurance will let us cancel at this stage, I need to get into the fine print (we got insurance before COVID kicked off). There is 0% chance of us getting on a plane for 10 hours. I do have a shit immune system so I am more cautious than the general population. Fortunately I didn't book anything else so other than the flights, it's pretty low key.

I'm pretty gutted because this was a month long trip round classic western US venues with the Mrs at the end of my PhD, but  (most) of the rocks will still be there in a couple of years...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on July 27, 2020, 10:47:23 am
We're still planning (and booked) Sept holiday (driving), and provisionally planning Nov (flight? tbc...) but not booked that yet. But I'd rather take the punt and lose some money than not bother, and I don't care about getting stuck there or quarantining when home (just about getting insured - we'll bail elsewhere if our planned venues are in areas with FCO essential-travel-only advice)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nutty on July 27, 2020, 10:58:18 am
I think that depends a lot on your own circumstances: whether you can shrug-off losing the money, take the hit of being quarantined etc. If it means losing money you can't afford to and losing your job/income if you get quarantined then I'd be thinking of cancelling. With all schools back in September, what's the likelihood of the UK being on everyone's no-travel list in October? Personally I've written-off the idea of any foreign travel in 2020, but I'd accepted that when this hit in back in March. I don't have any current burning euro/US climbing ambitions though so pootling around in the UK doesn't bother me much.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on July 27, 2020, 12:44:34 pm
We've got holiday booked for the first week in October shool holidays here, but leaving it til last minute before booking a holiday anywhere. Will probably wait until after schools are back here in August, to see how things play out, we are usually last minute anyway!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on July 27, 2020, 01:26:15 pm
Interesting to see people's views. Thanks.

I think that depends a lot on your own circumstances: whether you can shrug-off losing the money, take the hit of being quarantined etc. If it means losing money you can't afford to and losing your job/income if you get quarantined then I'd be thinking of cancelling.

Thankfully, this isn't an issue for either of us as we're both able to WFH and both have understanding employers. It makes a few things more tricky (getting the dog back from the parents) but these definitely fall under #firstworldproblems. The trip is to Bavella, Corsica so the accommodation (AirBnB) isn't that cheap for a fortnight. The flights are Easyjet and I'm much more willing to write them off. With a bit of an injury (haven't climbed for 6M) and the Covid uncertainty, I'm thinking it may be best to manage the risk by cancelling the accommodation as there'll be somewhere on the island we can get last minute and whether we go or not will be based around advice on non-essential travel/insurance.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on July 27, 2020, 01:50:34 pm
What's going to be interesting with the Spain travel quarantine is how long it stays in effect for here in Scotland. Schools go back on the w/c 11th August here, will teachers and pupils who have been on holiday in Spain not be able to go to school?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on July 27, 2020, 02:54:14 pm


If only everyone saw it like that. All I ever seem to hear on the news, or at work is whining bores bleating about how their annual couple of weeks cultivating alcoholism and skin cancer is their right.

What a fucking horrible comment, typical of a few you get on here. A lot of people work there arses off all year, are not outdoor types, and whos one big break a year is to fly to Spain and chill in the sun having a few beers but as they are not living in a van doing what you deem as virtuous stuff you write this.

Very daily mail esq stereotyping.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: seankenny on July 27, 2020, 03:04:04 pm
I do have a shit immune system so I am more cautious than the general population...

I'm pretty gutted because this was a month long trip round classic western US venues with the Mrs at the end of my PhD, but  (most) of the rocks will still be there in a couple of years...

This may not be much of a consolation right now, but last year I spent a month in the US and my employer at the time was fine with it - a couple of weeks holiday allowance and a couple unpaid leave. It's not as if I had to do years in the place to get that either, I was on a shortish contract and just said that's what I wanted from the outset. These opportunities do exist if you ask for them, it's just that most people don't because they want other things.

On the other hand, covid is really horrible to have and not worth the risk, at least in my view.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on July 27, 2020, 03:20:55 pm
During this pandemic I seem to have progressed from being able to go local bouldering during the lockdown, to being able to climb routes on the Naranjo Bulnes while nobody wants to risk being in Spain. Plus ca change.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dunnyg on July 27, 2020, 04:18:37 pm
Cheers Sean, yeah hopefully when I get a job and COVID is less of an issue I should be able to wangle something like that.

I'm with GME on that.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on July 27, 2020, 06:42:05 pm
Big increase in cases in the climbing areas of Spain and also lie de France which includes font. Guess they are both more related to the city areas but if lockdowns come in again will be regional.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on July 27, 2020, 08:44:37 pm


If only everyone saw it like that. All I ever seem to hear on the news, or at work is whining bores bleating about how their annual couple of weeks cultivating alcoholism and skin cancer is their right.

What a fucking horrible comment, typical of a few you get on here. A lot of people work there arses off all year, are not outdoor types, and whos one big break a year is to fly to Spain and chill in the sun having a few beers but as they are not living in a van doing what you deem as virtuous stuff you write this.

Very daily mail esq stereotyping.

That wasn't how I meant it, apologies. It wasn't specifically people going on beach holidays; I love going on beach holidays if I've got the time. It was the concept of feeling that flying abroad on holiday is anyone's right. But I accept that I was generally in a bad mood this morning, and should have moderated that one
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on July 28, 2020, 04:22:57 pm
Interesting article here. Researchers have found a gene defect linked to severe Covid in otherwise healthy young men - https://medium.com/@shinjieyong/a-robust-genetic-risk-for-covid-19-in-healthy-young-men-is-finally-found-c1876369e24f
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on July 29, 2020, 09:15:26 am
I wonder how many of such rare genetic issues will lead to problems through hypo or hyper sensitivity to infection. Kawasaki has already been widely highlighted.

One side of my family is prone to auto immune diseases so it's very pertinent to me. My father suffered from Guillain-Barré Syndrome, which is horrible... he was healthy and very fit but after a bout of flu was rushed into intensive care after his immune system attacked his body. He was initially paralysed but then his long recovery started, all the gain in nerve response comes with hard work and intense pain.

https://www.polyneuroexchange.com/gbs?gclid=Cj0KCQjwvIT5BRCqARIsAAwwD-SmzN_yLzbw2U2YAOBd3Fjy3Fi0_kB8zInqFlyS8QdEQSDK63WxE0MaAmcbEALw_wcB


On a different subject some musing on waves...it would be good to see a more in depth look at such things.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/29/one-big-wave-why-the-covid-19-second-wave-may-not-exist-coronavirus
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 31, 2020, 05:34:37 pm
More evidence of children carrying the virus as much as any adult:
 https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/30/health/coronavirus-children.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/30/health/coronavirus-children.html)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 03, 2020, 07:05:18 pm
Pre-print from the Lancet:

 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.07.16.20127357v1?rss=1 (https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.07.16.20127357v1?rss=1)

And the article in Forbes that lead me to it:
 https://www.forbes.com/sites/williamhaseltine/2020/07/31/new-evidence-suggests-young-children-spread-covid-19-more-efficiently-than-adults/ (https://www.forbes.com/sites/williamhaseltine/2020/07/31/new-evidence-suggests-young-children-spread-covid-19-more-efficiently-than-adults/)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: A Jooser on August 04, 2020, 01:25:21 am
https://youtu.be/YveqZkVEOcU

 :???:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on August 04, 2020, 08:09:51 am
Pre-print from the Lancet:

 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.07.16.20127357v1?rss=1 (https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.07.16.20127357v1?rss=1)

And the article in Forbes that lead me to it:
 https://www.forbes.com/sites/williamhaseltine/2020/07/31/new-evidence-suggests-young-children-spread-covid-19-more-efficiently-than-adults/ (https://www.forbes.com/sites/williamhaseltine/2020/07/31/new-evidence-suggests-young-children-spread-covid-19-more-efficiently-than-adults/)

If this is confirmed after peer review it has obvious implications for the reopening of schools.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on August 04, 2020, 11:15:22 am
Pre-print from the Lancet:

 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.07.16.20127357v1?rss=1 (https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.07.16.20127357v1?rss=1)

And the article in Forbes that lead me to it:
 https://www.forbes.com/sites/williamhaseltine/2020/07/31/new-evidence-suggests-young-children-spread-covid-19-more-efficiently-than-adults/ (https://www.forbes.com/sites/williamhaseltine/2020/07/31/new-evidence-suggests-young-children-spread-covid-19-more-efficiently-than-adults/)

If this is confirmed after peer review it has obvious implications for the reopening of schools.

It does. It would be a mad world that I can go to the pub, gym or climbing wall but my kids couldn't go to school though.....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on August 04, 2020, 11:19:29 am
Annoying we can go to pub, restaurant or cinema, but not swimming pool and gym. If school doesn't open fully next week I'll be fucking livid.

Doesn't look good here

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/absolutely-crazy-image-shows-crowd-22460319

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/coronavirus-cases-linked-aberdeen-pub-22463006

Don't see how pubs can possibly stay open.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on August 04, 2020, 01:23:05 pm
All a bit daily mail. I have been in a fair few pubs now both country and in Newcastle and sheff and not seen anything like that.
I still have more chance of picking it up doing the food shop than in my local pub.
I think what goes on behind closed doors a bigger issue. My kids have been invited to a fair few house parties. Victorian dad has said no but I have let them go to ones on the beach.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on August 04, 2020, 02:21:14 pm
I live in one of the locally locked down areas (as I'm sure others do) and had to cancel my folks (who I haven't seen since Feb) from visiting on Fri for the weekend #firstworldproblems.

I went for a bike ride on Fri through Hebden Bridge and I'm a bit bemused by how my folks visiting carries more of a transmission risk than what I saw at 5pm (mixed age, mixed demographic in relatively small spaces) but I guess that's the behind closed doors factor GME is referring to (i.e. that parents visiting isn't an issue, but other goings-on are)?

I'm not sure what happened with all of the local Eid celebrations but I'm guessing, with next to no cancellation time, a lot went ahead as planned (for one colleague it certainly did and then his Wife then disappeared off to her Mum's).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on August 04, 2020, 02:31:17 pm

I still have more chance of picking it up doing the food shop than in my local pub.


No you don't. If you move quickly around the supermarket and don't stop any more than you have to, you have less chance than standing next to an infected person for 20 minutes with the ventilation blowing the wrong way.

I know it's a bit Daily mail, the Daily Record is the local equivalent, the articles were the first that come up on google me being lazy. you can read other articles if you like https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-53650214 https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/aberdeen/2384893/aberdeen-bar-chain-to-close-all-city-venues-until-safe-to-reopen/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on August 04, 2020, 04:13:32 pm
I am not talking about what’s written in the papers I am talking about my own experience. Been in 6-7 different venues and all fine including two city centre type bars.
This kind of article makes out everywhere is like this and it’s just not true, most people are being pretty sensible.
Big modern supermarkets seem ok but smaller or older ones worse than the bars I have been in with older people in particular not doing the social distancing, don’t touch the stuff you are not buying, thing at all.   
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on August 04, 2020, 04:42:27 pm
Each to their own Gav, but i'm a long way from sitting in a bar for a drink or a meal. I've sat outside a couple on holiday (Country beer garden stuff) but being inside with a random mix of people (1m+ apart) for anything more than a minute or two enters my needless risk taking category... but as I said each to their own - which is fair enough.

What does seem bonkers though are the rules that allow this and how they are appleid. My neighbours bar (converted shop in small victorian terrace - narrow and deep 2 floors) seats 25 for drinking (no food) but I went to Homebase on Sunday - usual cavernous industrial unit that was limited to 50 people (one in one out - someone counting). That strikes me as a monstrous differential in terms of people per cubic m...

Looks like 27+ cases linked to one Aberdeen bar so far...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on August 04, 2020, 04:55:13 pm
There's now new area specific legislation:

https://twitter.com/JenWilliamsMEN/status/1290651684876759041?s=20

It supposedly covers more than was announced last week but I'm not clear if there's an intention on briefing out what it does mean.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on August 04, 2020, 04:56:50 pm
My issue is with blanket bans being forced on businesses due to others not towing the line.
Shut the bars/shops/gyms/ climbing walls etc that have a problem and let the others operate.
These articles are generally put up as a reason to shut everything down.
I also think have bars etc open is eventually going to make track and trace work rather than everything going on hidden away in houses which it is now.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on August 04, 2020, 05:00:46 pm
Looks like 27+ cases linked to one Aberdeen bar so far...

Confirmed outbreak links to another restaurant, hotel and another bar. They think it was a french oil worker flying in and going out for a night before mobilising offshore. I expect we will have a city lockdown soon, hope it doesn't extend to 'shire.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on August 04, 2020, 05:10:10 pm
There's now new area specific legislation:

https://twitter.com/JenWilliamsMEN/status/1290651684876759041?s=20

It supposedly covers more than was announced last week but I'm not clear if there's an intention on briefing out what it does mean.

The legislation also states that Hancock can change which area it is applied in as he pleases. So it can be applied to Newcastle, or London or Skegness as needed etc...

Its going to be loads of waves/spikes of different sizes for the next few months/years. Those who were early to the second spike through early re-opening (e.g. Israel) are now seeing a decline as the second round of restrictions kick in..

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/israel/

TTI sucess rates have worryingly plateau'd. I suspect this is a limit of what a call centre approach can do - feet on ground - locals with knowledge of the area chasing people up (and overcoming langauge barriers) seems to be the way forward from other countries. Not something MrsTalkTalk and SERCO have managed to acheive yet from their bunker approach. Intersting op/eyewitness accound on sky about this process in Turkey https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-turkeys-covid-detectives-working-to-keep-the-pandemic-under-control-12041863 where people are also being pushed to treatment faster as well (rather than coughing away at home) that seems to result in far lower deaths. Anecdotally etc.. 

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on August 04, 2020, 05:11:57 pm
My issue is with blanket bans being forced on businesses due to others not towing the line.

...but this is exactly what's happening with issues inside the home, isn't it?

Like I implied earlier, I'm struggling to see a family visit of 2 people to my house poses more infection risk to people standing in/outside (closely) a pub in Hebden Bridge. I guess the former doesn't cause any economic stimulus so the (paltry?) decrease in infection risk doesn't really come at a 'cost' (apart from grumpy letters from constituents to their MP) and is favored?

...where people are also being pushed to treatment faster as well (rather than coughing away at home) that seems to result in far lower deaths. Anecdotally etc.. 

We've received a 'get tested anyway' flyer today.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on August 04, 2020, 05:15:44 pm
Its not just the testing - its treating people earlier - that could avoid someone ending up in ICU etc...

Can't help but wonder why our mortality rate per cap is so bad compared to the rest of the world. (Care home disaster probably a factor - but given our hospitals were not quite over-run what led to this...?)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on August 04, 2020, 06:12:46 pm
Higher percentage of population elderly, health issues, or obese?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on August 04, 2020, 09:16:02 pm
Can't help but wonder why our mortality rate per cap is so bad compared to the rest of the world. (Care home disaster probably a factor - but given our hospitals were not quite over-run what led to this...?)

No evidence, but instinctively I'd answer: because more Britons are chronically diseased with one or more of the big 4, than people from other European nations.


I'm interested to see if there's any enforcement, or nudging, of self-isolation. As someone who's just returned from Spain I'm now supposed to self-isolate for 14 days. I filled in the forms during the ferry travel back and I thought at the time that something as simple as a daily text message / email reminder (the Gov took emails and contact numbers during the procedure on arrival) might nudge a, perhaps significant, proportion of people to act more responsibly than they otherwise might.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on August 04, 2020, 10:56:17 pm
Its not just the testing - its treating people earlier - that could avoid someone ending up in ICU etc...

This is possibly a factor - i read a column in the last couple of days that suggested the 'Protect the NHS' message and virtual closing down of services lead to people soldiering on and presenting at hospital much later than might otherwise have been the case with more serious consequences.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on August 05, 2020, 01:39:36 pm
Looks like 27+ cases linked to one Aberdeen bar so far...

Confirmed outbreak links to another restaurant, hotel and another bar. They think it was a french oil worker flying in and going out for a night before mobilising offshore. I expect we will have a city lockdown soon, hope it doesn't extend to 'shire.

As predicted.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-53666665

Luckily we are in 'shire. Still TBC, but told not to travel into city, shame I had first sports massage since March booked for tomorrow.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on August 05, 2020, 01:42:40 pm
Was just going to post about this. Hope they nip it in the bud.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on August 09, 2020, 10:48:45 am
I was flicking through Worldometer yesterday to catch up with the situation in't US (positive signs at last ... deaths in Florida and Texas levelling off)  and spotted something else. The UK seem to have a very low ratio of the rolling averages of infections three weeks ago to deaths now. As this is unlikely to be related to higher UK mortality rates it seems to indicate our testing is less effective than elsewhere and our actual infection rates are 3 to 10 times  higher than our numbers indicate...pretty important when judging which countries should face border controls.

Some approximate examples of the ratios

UK  12
Italy 30
Belgium 60
US 70
France 100
Spain 240 (this is so high it shows the vast majority of infections must be in the young)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Sidehaas on August 09, 2020, 11:37:28 am
I don't really understand that.
I could certainly believe we are missing most of the infections,given the number of asymptomatics etc.
However I believe we are now conducting more tests than anywhere else in Europe (apart from possibly Germany?) Certainly more than France, despite their recent uptick in infections. They only just got to a capacity of 700,000 per week according to an article I saw last week, which we have been above consistently for a while now. So their % positive must now be notably higher than ours. I therefore can't see a logical explanation for our higher death rate now than other countries that results from missing cases (this was certainly the case in April/May.) I can't find recent data for Spain as another example, but this provides a cumulative comparison of tests undertaken:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1104645/covid19-testing-rate-select-countries-worldwide/

I can only come to the conclusion that our current and recent infections are more inclined towards the older or more vulnerable population than those in countries suffering an uptick in Europe. There may also be some effect of the issue with death reporting that PHE have been investigating (ie some of the current deaths may have tested positive months ago but not recently). It's worth noting that our excess deaths in the UK have been negative for quite a while now, unless it's changed very recently.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on August 09, 2020, 11:44:04 am
Isn't there something weird about the way we record deaths related to covid? Ie that if you've ever had it and you die, no matter how much later, it's recorded as covid related and included in the stats. Ould that account for the difference? Can't remember where I read about it though, sorry.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on August 09, 2020, 11:46:49 am
The numbers are real. Maybe those who should be getting tested in the UK are avoided it to prevent being forced to self isolate.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on August 09, 2020, 11:49:41 am
The numbers are real.

What do you mean by this ?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on August 09, 2020, 11:51:38 am
Isn't there something weird about the way we record deaths related to covid? Ie that if you've ever had it and you die, no matter how much later, it's recorded as covid related and included in the stats. Ould that account for the difference? Can't remember where I read about it though, sorry.

The numbers that involves are tiny proportion of the total covid deaths. If anything in the UK covid deaths are underreported as many who die at home still don't get tested. Estimates are as high as 10% (from a proportion of the 10,000 unaccounted for excess deaths to date).

What I meant by the numbers being real are they are the average current daily official government reported covid deaths (which were always lower than the ONS covid excess deaths) and the average daily official government reported cases from 3 weeks back.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Sidehaas on August 09, 2020, 12:10:26 pm
Isn't there something weird about the way we record deaths related to covid? Ie that if you've ever had it and you die, no matter how much later, it's recorded as covid related and included in the stats. Ould that account for the difference? Can't remember where I read about it though, sorry.

The numbers that involves are tiny proportion of the total covid deaths. If anything in the UK covid deaths are underreported as many who die at home still don't get tested. Estimates are as high as 10% (from a proportion of the 10,000 unaccounted for excess deaths to date).

What I meant by the numbers being real are they are the average current daily official government reported covid deaths (which were always lower than the ONS covid excess deaths) and the average daily official government reported cases from 3 weeks back.

Have you got data sources to back up your assertions in those two paragraphs? I'm not not necessarily questioning them, but I don't think they are obvious any more so would interested to see the data.
Cheers
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on August 09, 2020, 12:34:13 pm
They case and death stats are from Worldometer as I said. Excess deaths have been looked at many times based on the ONS data with various estimates made on Covid causes on those untested who die at home. The ten percent was the largest I saw but I can't find the reference (it's about half of that 10,000). On the weird English data issue nearly all covid hospital deaths and most care home deaths had always been after illness with symptoms and a positive test. Peopl dying from random accidents and nothing to do with covid would e part of the normal average. Excess deaths looks at the difference from average...60,000+ of whom 50,000+ had covid links
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Wil on August 09, 2020, 10:21:44 pm
Are other countries making people self administer the tests?

I've had two tests, the first was administered by a medical professional, the second I had to do myself in the car. The test isn't very pleasant and if I'd not already had one (and hence known what to expect) I'm not sure I'd have done it properly. My suspicion is that this must cause false negatives.

Extrapolating from the deaths we have seemed to have remarkably few positive results at all points during the crisis. Give that most people were only tested with symptoms until late May it's even more surprising that such a low proportion came back negative. I think our test isn't that good.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on August 10, 2020, 08:16:02 am
The numbers are way larger than any likely false negative effect. It could be instead of the European youth spread we have a pensioner spread but someone would be commenting on the average age of the positives and warning the militant grey's to behave. It has to be we are missing at least 2/3of the infected (and probably more) compared to other western countries.

Some more approximate ratios:

Germany 110
Netherlands 170
Sweden 200
Canada 100
S.Korea 100
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Wil on August 10, 2020, 10:57:11 am
The numbers are way larger than any likely false negative effect.

They are, it's true. But reports I've looked at suggest a 30% FN result for tests conducted by a medical professional. This is obviously going to be higher for self administered tests.

I think an interesting angle to the testing now is that we are testing people with no symptoms. On the face of it this looks good to Joe Public, but if the test isn't actually all that accurate, or incidence of infection in the population is low, then testing isn't necessarily as useful as it might appear.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on August 10, 2020, 12:32:41 pm
I was reading an article yesterday (based upon independent SAGE) saying that schools reopening is thought to increase the R by ~0.3.

The current R is somewhere between 0.8-1.0 (I believe). So that's 1.10-1.30 unless some action is taken to get the current R further under control.

Is it just me that feels like we're steaming towards another more stringent lockdown? The Goverment seems to be pretty late (I'm being generous) on acting on scientific advice and this seems like one more thing where SCIENCE will come second.

Sources:
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/may/28/reopening-english-schools-on-monday-could-lead-to-new-surge
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-education/uk-pm-says-schools-must-open-in-september-idUSKCN2550CY
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on August 10, 2020, 12:53:02 pm
Even before the local lockdown, Sturgeon was saying concessions would need to be made wrt closing pubs etc to allow schools to reopen.

We'll know by the end of next week, ours go back this week. Be a test case for the rest of the UK.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on August 10, 2020, 01:06:54 pm
It’s really hard with the kids impacts. Things we know (seem to be consensus) are that kids can have the virus - and a significant percentage can get it. Mortality/serious illness in kids is very low.

But the big questions are how good are kids at transmitting it (a) between each other and (b) to adults.

Afaik there’s only one study looking at this (Australian case tracking one) where a single child with CV19 had numerous school contacts but led to no further cases. But I worry that N=1 in this case...

Test test test. I know they’ve ruled out testing all schools - but why not do a percentage (even 1% of schools) and use this to study what may happen?

Gosh - that’s a strategy right there. Listening #10?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on August 10, 2020, 01:16:45 pm
Well we are going to exclude grandparents and vulnerable relatives from contact with the kids for a couple of weeks after schools go back, we will be guinea pigs, and have to prepare.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Sidehaas on August 10, 2020, 01:24:34 pm
To Offwidth: I still don't get your logic when compared to other countries. I can accept we are missing lots of infections but I'd expect the number missed by others to be greater, not fewer. Something doesn't add up.

To TomTom: having done two tests myself, I think a big spanner in the works of school testing would be just how nasty the current test is. I found the throat swabs made me gag violently and the nose swabs to be quite painful. I would not consent to my 3 year old being tested (and there would be zero chance of success anyway); I doubt that will change much by the time he is in reception class. I doubt a test could be undertaken fully to procedure on most under 10s. So I think a pre requisite to school testing is either (1) a focus only on older kids who understand the importance and can withstand the discomfort (which excludes most primary school kids) or (2) a completely new, less invasive test.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on August 10, 2020, 02:21:06 pm
@sidehaas - had two myself.. tbh I giggled the whole way through the last one (it tickled!) “ey - we’ve a giggler here” the Scouser doing the swabbing shouted to his mates/co-workers :D

I though it was alright But not a pleasant experience. Certainly won’t put me off getting another one if needed.

We’ve a 4yo and I think it would be hard but not impossible. I’d like to think it gets easier as they get older (ha! I bet...) :)

Anyway - guess we’ll see won’t we!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on August 10, 2020, 02:30:15 pm
It’s really hard with the kids impacts. Things we know (seem to be consensus) are that kids can have the virus - and a significant percentage can get it. Mortality/serious illness in kids is very low.

But the big questions are how good are kids at transmitting it (a) between each other and (b) to adults.

Anecdotally Sweden kept their schools completely open through the first wave without schools becoming epicentres of infection in the surrounding community and with a lower proportion of mortality in the pupils than would be expected from the annual flu.

I recall the Iceland population-wide testing concluded there wasn't a single confirmable case where a child had brought the virus from school into the household.

Where schools have reopened across Europe it seems the resurgence in cases is from 20 year olds socialising, not in schools so my feeling would say open the schools and close the bars. If we need further financial support for the pub industry then whatever it costs it it will be a small price compared to the long term damage inflicted by school closure.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: duncan on August 10, 2020, 02:43:46 pm
I self-administered the test as a research guinea pig. Same experience as tomtom: not pleasant but I'd do it again. I could probably persuade my 10 year old to go through with the testing but wouldn't fancy my chances if he was 6. I had to post my results to a testing centre and the sample or results were lost which didn't increase my confidence in the system.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on August 10, 2020, 02:47:24 pm
Sure I'm thumping a familiar tub, but pubs should never have opened. When in contact with others everyone needs to be cautious and sensible about exposure, and in a pub with loads of alcohol it's never going to happen, when after 6 pints you have your "youremybestmatemate" in a headlock hug. Yet gyms and swimming pools remained closed.

This should probably be in the "balls to" thread, but pretty damning of the behavior of Aberdeen footballers, whose formal apology reads like it was written by Domininc C.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53701572
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on August 10, 2020, 03:20:46 pm
Seems the world has now moved into a more delicate balancing act than a couple of months ago, between mitigating economic damage versus increasing virus prevalence. I came home on a ferry from Santander last week with over 800 people on board all mingling in the restaurants and bars, all wearing face masks but still.. It's become a question of what's justifiable. Where's the correct balance between damaging, by x amount, economies and the education of the young, to prevent x-number of virus deaths and per head increase in virus-related ill health. Constant adjustment and managing required. Was it justifiable to go on holiday and risk greater spread than had I stayed at home. Hard to answer, I had a great time and will have great memories. And I'd hate to think of those transport links disappearing through no-one travelling. Another side of the coin of large companies like Virgin , even BA, being at risk of going under is the creative destruction that would result from other companies filling the opportunity in the market that would result in a couple of years time. Little comfort if you're one of the redundant though.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on August 10, 2020, 04:00:24 pm
Sure I'm thumping a familiar tub, but pubs should never have opened. When in contact with others everyone needs to be cautious and sensible about exposure, and in a pub with loads of alcohol it's never going to happen, when after 6 pints you have your "youremybestmatemate" in a headlock hug. Yet gyms and swimming pools remained closed.

This should probably be in the "balls to" thread, but pretty damning of the behavior of Aberdeen footballers, whose formal apology reads like it was written by Domininc C.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53701572

My opinion is very different. Keep all the pubs etc open, open the gyms, send all the kids back to school and stop people meeting in houses.

Eliminates something there appears to be an issue with that has no positive effect on the economy and allows everything that helps the economy to get on with it. Reduces the r number by the .3 someone suggests we need to open the schools.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on August 10, 2020, 04:21:22 pm
But is almost impossible to implement.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nutty on August 10, 2020, 04:23:02 pm
My opinion is very different. Keep all the pubs etc open, open the gyms, send all the kids back to school and stop people meeting in houses.

Eliminates something there appears to be an issue with that has no positive effect on the economy and allows everything that helps the economy to get on with it. Reduces the r number by the .3 someone suggests we need to open the schools.
Do you think there would be compliance with that? I think a lot of people would think that it's bollocks that you can meet another household indoors in a pub with a load of other people but not meet another household in their house, and if people think it's bollocks then they're unlikely to go along with it post-Cummings and it's much harder to enforce than shutting the pubs.

There's still economic activity related to people visiting other people whether that's spending on fuel, visiting service stations, buying bottles of wine, a bunch of flowers, doing a Sunday roast or buying an extra pack of biscuits. Granted it may not be of the same scale and isn't in the same sector.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on August 10, 2020, 04:24:03 pm

My opinion is very different. Keep all the pubs etc open, open the gyms, send all the kids back to school and stop people meeting in houses.

Eliminates something there appears to be an issue with  that has no positive effect on the economy and allows everything that helps the economy to get on with it. Reduces the r number by the .3 someone suggests we need to open the schools.

I try and avoid this topic currently, but I am amazed you think this is feasible. Not saying it won't happen, but I don't really buy the idea that transmission is happening wholesale in peoples living rooms and not in a crowded pub! It defies all logic.

I would close whatever is needed to get schools open in September, but god only knows how its going to work.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on August 10, 2020, 04:25:05 pm
Granted it may not be of the same scale and isn't in the same sector.

Cynically, that economic activity doesn't benefit Tory donors either...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on August 10, 2020, 04:25:14 pm
To TomTom: having done two tests myself, I think a big spanner in the works of school testing would be just how nasty the current test is. I found the throat swabs made me gag violently and the nose swabs to be quite painful.

I, my wife and my 7yo were tested via "self test". We didn't test the 4yo. Wife is a doctor, 7yo spiked a temp hence testing for all of us. Both myself and my wife had persistent nasal pain/discomfort for the rest of the day. We both nearly vomited during the throat swab. 7yo found it very distressing (administered by my wife) and was in tears for a long time after.

From anecdotal (recorded but not proper research), some self administered tests gave negative results when in house, administered by a professional, testing returned positive. Lots of discussion about nasal swabs not getting high enough, it needs to make your eye water, feel like it's pushing on your eye. It's pretty horrible as your have to keep it up there and rotate it. Throat swabs should cause a gag reflex which means it's hard to keep the swab in place for long enough. My wife did not enjoy doing it to the 7yo.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on August 10, 2020, 04:33:37 pm

My opinion is very different. Keep all the pubs etc open, open the gyms, send all the kids back to school and stop people meeting in houses.

Eliminates something there appears to be an issue with  that has no positive effect on the economy and allows everything that helps the economy to get on with it. Reduces the r number by the .3 someone suggests we need to open the schools.

I try and avoid this topic currently, but I am amazed you think this is feasible. Not saying it won't happen, but I don't really buy the idea that transmission is happening wholesale in peoples living rooms and not in a crowded pub! It defies all logic.

I would close whatever is needed to get schools open in September, but god only knows how its going to work.

Presently sat in my garden with holiday let next door that has 16 people from four family’s in it each from different parts of the country. Zero social distancing happening.

Stopped my youngest going to a house party last week in Newcastle where there were 50+ people.

All my local pubs very organised and all socially distancing. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on August 10, 2020, 04:37:09 pm
I was also a guilty party on Saturday when we had a friend of my oldest staying from London, my youngest son girlfriend and two separate sets of climbing friends how dropped in last minute to camp in the garden on there way to Scotland. 5 different family’s 11 people.

All happened by accident but luckily the weather was good so we stayed outside.
I was in a beer garden on fri with less people.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on August 10, 2020, 04:43:12 pm
Just because all the pubs with beer gardens in your part of rural Northumberland are very organised, it doesn't mean every club, bar, pub and restaurant in every city centre in the country are?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on August 10, 2020, 04:49:22 pm
I am not saying they are Chris I spend three days a week in Sheffield and have been out in a few city centre ones as well with no issue but that’s not my point.

I am offering an alternative option to what most on this forum are that I feel could work.

As I suggested earlier bars etc that don’t comply should be closed, those that do should be allowed to trade and save there businesses. I am personally happier going to a pub than round to peoples houses but get invited to more of the later. 

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on August 10, 2020, 04:54:24 pm
My opinion is very different. Keep all the pubs etc open ... and stop people meeting in houses.


That would certainly have cut transmission over Eid!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on August 10, 2020, 05:04:44 pm
Sure I'm thumping a familiar tub, but pubs should never have opened. When in contact with others everyone needs to be cautious and sensible about exposure, and in a pub with loads of alcohol it's never going to happen, when after 6 pints you have your "youremybestmatemate" in a headlock hug. Yet gyms and swimming pools remained closed.

This should probably be in the "balls to" thread, but pretty damning of the behavior of Aberdeen footballers, whose formal apology reads like it was written by Domininc C.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53701572

My opinion is very different. Keep all the pubs etc open, open the gyms, send all the kids back to school and stop people meeting in houses.

Eliminates something there appears to be an issue with that has no positive effect on the economy and allows everything that helps the economy to get on with it. Reduces the r number by the .3 someone suggests we need to open the schools.

Sorry Gav but that sounds like madness to me.

In Manchester, the increase in numbers has been in under 40s, hence infections are on the up but not deaths or hospital admissions. The worry causing the restrictions that were recently imposed is that it'll become so prevalent that it will spill over from the "healthy" sub 40s in to the more vulnerable categories and we'll get another spike, overwhelm the NHS etc. The subs 40s infection rate is thought to be due to a return to normal socialising (Manchester pubs seems to take a somewhat varied attitude to the regulations and Manchester residents have headed back to pubs with gusto) and that sector of society having the highest percentage of jobs that involve a lot of people interactions and a lack of PPE. GMP have basically said they can't police people meeting in houses, what are they going to do, knock on doors and ask who's in there? It's hard enough policing the raves etc......

Add to the above, to quote the MEN, "how the f**k can I play a football match but not see my sister in her garden?,f**k 'em, the rules don't make sense" people aren't abiding buy the rules currently because they are inconsistent. Not meeting in houses isn't thought to be the main transmission vector.

Manchester actually did pretty well bearing in mind the levels of poverty/health issues we have, probably due the centralised PPE system and the local policy of NOT releasing covid positive patients back into care homes etc. but is terrified of a second, worse spike.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on August 10, 2020, 05:09:08 pm
My opinion is very different. Keep all the pubs etc open ... and stop people meeting in houses.


That would certainly have cut transmission over Eid!

I've heard that from quite a few people round here, despite the fact they are all blatantly flouting the guidelines themselves. It's always someone else's fault.

People don't seem to understand the difference between Eid al-Fitr and Eid al-Adha.

 

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on August 10, 2020, 05:19:28 pm
I have no stats or articles to link to but going off my own personal opinion and experience.
The gatherings in houses is an issue and anyone with a 16-20 year old will agree. Our friends in Manchester openly blame there 19 year old son as being part of the issue as he was at parties every week. They are now locked down and he’s gone back to Liverpool to avoid it and also go to a big party in north wales.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on August 10, 2020, 05:24:05 pm
I ventured into Northernden on Sat night to pick up a takeaway and had to wait/wander around for ten min. The “local” (they are VERY local) bars were packed - no distancing between anyone. The restaurant I picked the grub up from was small - had halved its eating space - spreading tables with perplex inbetween. But it was hot, airless lots of people coming and going behind the counter - drivers - customers coming and going.

No way on earth I’d go and eat in there At the moment and I’ll get delivery next time - bonkers. No wonder it’s been on the up around Manchester.

The Aberdeen Bar outbreak is now up past 200 cases O read earlier - and there seem To be several Similar cases in the news - eg a pub in Stone.

As Chris said - when people are pissed inhibitions and rule obeying tend to disappear..

I suspect if the social distancing measures were enforced by the licensing authorities (that pubs are shit scared of in general) rather than the police(?) then it might have been a different outcome.

Sitting in a country beer garden Getting drinks by nipping through a pub one way system to get a drink from a spaced que and Perspex screened bar is alright. But going into a far more compact city venue or somewhere packed - forget about it for me. Nuts.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on August 10, 2020, 06:01:08 pm
People don't seem to understand the difference between Eid al-Fitr and Eid al-Adha.

Yeah how stupid are they hey... :doubt:

I'd bet that most people barely understand the origins and meaning of Lent and Easter!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on August 10, 2020, 06:16:50 pm
I ventured into Northernden on Sat night to pick up a takeaway and had to wait/wander around for ten min. The “local” (they are VERY local) bars were packed - no distancing between anyone. The restaurant I picked the grub up from was small - had halved its eating space - spreading tables with perplex inbetween. But it was hot, airless lots of people coming and going behind the counter - drivers - customers coming and going.

No way on earth I’d go and eat in there At the moment and I’ll get delivery next time - bonkers. No wonder it’s been on the up around Manchester.

The Aberdeen Bar outbreak is now up past 200 cases O read earlier - and there seem To be several Similar cases in the news - eg a pub in Stone.

As Chris said - when people are pissed inhibitions and rule obeying tend to disappear..

I suspect if the social distancing measures were enforced by the licensing authorities (that pubs are shit scared of in general) rather than the police(?) then it might have been a different outcome.

Sitting in a country beer garden Getting drinks by nipping through a pub one way system to get a drink from a spaced que and Perspex screened bar is alright. But going into a far more compact city venue or somewhere packed - forget about it for me. Nuts.

Hence why there needs to be a better approach than just a total closure of pubs.

 What happens if a fitness first style gym becomes the focus, will we all shout for all the others to close including the climbing walls.

Off now anyway to drop my 16 year old off to a beach party with 150 other kids. They have promised to socially distance and as it’s not a pub it must be fine.

They don’t give a flying fuck if the pubs are shut, will just go elsewhere.


Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on August 10, 2020, 06:25:59 pm
TBH I don't care what they have to close to be sure they can get kids back in school full time...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on August 10, 2020, 06:27:51 pm
My opinion is very different. Keep all the pubs etc open ... and stop people meeting in houses.
That would certainly have cut transmission over Eid!
I've heard that from quite a few people round here, despite the fact they are all blatantly flouting the guidelines themselves. It's always someone else's fault.

People don't seem to understand the difference between Eid al-Fitr and Eid al-Adha.

Eh? Socialising in pubs is somewhat alien to Muslims, whichever end of Ramadan you are looking at.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on August 10, 2020, 06:32:47 pm
TBH I don't care what they have to close to be sure they can get kids back in school full time...

You might if it meant you could no longer provide for your kids because your business or employer had just gone to the wall.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 10, 2020, 06:57:32 pm
“ NOTES from the UK Government:

"England data were revised on 10 August 2020 to remove 69 deaths from the time series which were found not to have been confirmed positive cases. This also resulted in the cases being removed from the UK data. 21 new cases were reported for England and the UK, but the cumulative total reduced from to 46,574 (which was reported on 9 August) to 46,526.

The definitions used for deaths are currently under review. It is likely that revised data, which more accurately reflect the current and overall burden of COVID-19 will be published shortly.

The actual cause of death may not be COVID-19 in all cases. People who died from COVID-19 but had not tested positive are not included."

 https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/ (https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on August 10, 2020, 07:18:42 pm
Gav - I think your point that people may be more poorly behaved behind closed doors than in pubs has merit. Unfortunately it focusses on the wrong question - "how likely am I to get covid here" and not "can this environment cause a large spreading event"...

The vast majority of spread occurs within a household. Two households mixing indoors can only introduce covid to one household. Many households mixing in a pub can introduce covid to many new households, inside which a large amount of transmission can take place. This is why pubs/bars/nightclubs can be sources of an outbreak in a way that households cannot. Similar danger from big family get togethers (Eid, Bar mitzvah, Wedding etc).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on August 10, 2020, 08:18:17 pm
TBH I don't care what they have to close to be sure they can get kids back in school full time...

You might if it meant you could no longer provide for your kids because your business or employer had just gone to the wall.

I should have added 'though the govt should provide appropriate financial support for closed sectors as needed' but I thought that could be assumed... Silly me  :slap:

I know in terms of numbers it's tiny but I was surprised/slightly shocked today to read (in amidst the fuss over exam boards downgrading the teachers predicted grades as they are so far above the usual scores!)that home-schooled children won't get any grades for A levels etc this year and have no choice except to sit exams in the winter (at earliest), presumably therefore having to defer university entry.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on August 10, 2020, 10:34:50 pm
One of the UKC regulars, Wintertree, did some analysis on my numbers:

"In reply to Offwidth:
>  I think the UK has a problem and the sooner testing is devolved to local areas the better.

I got the impression from several news stories - and confirmed in one instance by a poster here (Mick Ward re: Wigan I think), that there is test/trace running locally out of what ever remains of local public health teams in parallel to the national system, which is also in parallel to the paper based phone number lists maintained by restaurants etc. 

One other way of looking at it is to look at the estimate of the number of people currently infected from the ongoing ONS pilot infectivity survey.

This is based on random population testing, and is independent of the PHE/NHS work. 
Their most recent estimate of infection rate based on this is During the most recent week (27 July to 2 August 2020), we estimate there were around 0.68 (95% credible interval: 0.38 to 1.17) new COVID-19 infections for every 10,000 people in the community population in England, equating to around 3,700 new cases per day.. [1]. 
The 95% CI is - by my maths - (2100 to 6400) [cases /day]
Taking the 7-day moving average in detected cases through Pillar 1 / Pillar 2 from Worldometer for the middle of that period gives ~750 cases detected per day.   So the hospital admissions and test/trace are catching an estimated 20% of cases with a 95% credible interval of between 11% and 28% of cases.
The lower bound of the CI tallies with your observation on fatality rates inferred from the NHS/PHE data
Even the higher bound of the CI is way to low to make a difference, for example SAGE estimate test and trace needs to be running at 80%.
So, test and trace is currently failing to make a significant difference.
In the last week or so there's been a gradual rise in the number of detected cases; let's hope that that's test and trace improving - the ONS survey has weak support for the actual number of cases remaining level.  Still, it's not improving anywhere near fast enough.
Why isn't this the focus of investigative journalism?  What coverage there is, is about the dodgy nature of various contracts and not the likely possibility that its not working well enough.
[1] https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/bulletins/coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveypilot/england7august2020  "
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on August 10, 2020, 11:03:37 pm
It would be very interesting to be a fly on the wall at a meeting of SPI-M right now because I’m not sure what’s going on with UK numbers.

It looks like cases have been steadily rising since the start of July. And yet there’s been no sign of an uptick in hospitalisation or deaths. Even in the US, where initial spread was amongst the youth, deaths started to rise ~3 weeks after cases did.

It’s odd. I think it’s entirely possible cases are roughly static in the Uk right now. Two pieces of evidence support this:

1) the ONS survey which thinks cases are steady or rising slowly.

2) the false positive rate of PCR tests, which is generally held to be about .4%. With 160,000 tests being done, this would explain about 650 of our ~850 cases a day. The number of new cases a day is also rising in proportion with the number of tests - this could suggest that much of the “rise” is explained by false positives.

That could all be wrong - depending on how large the false positive rate really is, but it would be interesting to know if this is being considered at govt level...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on August 11, 2020, 07:38:09 am
It’s odd. I think it’s entirely possible cases are roughly static in the Uk right now. Two pieces of evidence support this:

1) the ONS survey which thinks cases are steady or rising slowly.

2) the false positive rate of PCR tests, which is generally held to be about .4%. With 160,000 tests being done, this would explain about 650 of our ~850 cases a day. The number of new cases a day is also rising in proportion with the number of tests - this could suggest that much of the “rise” is explained by false positives.

That could all be wrong - depending on how large the false positive rate really is, but it would be interesting to know if this is being considered at govt level...

Stu, you mention the false positive but not false negative rate? My wife pointed me to an article in the bmj ages ago as it had backed up her testing experiences in her hospital that they had a 30% false negative. Has this changed? Surely this would wipe out the effect of the false positive discrepancy?

https://www.bmj.com/content/bmj/369/bmj.m1808.full.pdf
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on August 11, 2020, 07:45:16 am
The false negative rate is important when there are lots of cases around and you’re missing them.

Number of cases missed = actual cases x false negative rate.

The false positive rate becomes important when there are very few cases. In that situation,

Number of false positives ~ number of people tested x false positive rate.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 11, 2020, 07:51:51 am
It would be very interesting to be a fly on the wall at a meeting of SPI-M right now because I’m not sure what’s going on with UK numbers.

It looks like cases have been steadily rising since the start of July. And yet there’s been no sign of an uptick in hospitalisation or deaths. Even in the US, where initial spread was amongst the youth, deaths started to rise ~3 weeks after cases did.

It’s odd. I think it’s entirely possible cases are roughly static in the Uk right now. Two pieces of evidence support this:

1) the ONS survey which thinks cases are steady or rising slowly.

2) the false positive rate of PCR tests, which is generally held to be about .4%. With 160,000 tests being done, this would explain about 650 of our ~850 cases a day. The number of new cases a day is also rising in proportion with the number of tests - this could suggest that much of the “rise” is explained by false positives.

That could all be wrong - depending on how large the false positive rate really is, but it would be interesting to know if this is being considered at govt level...

Looking at the 7 day averages for daily infections and daily deaths on Worldometer, surely the (very slight) rise in daily infections only really began around the 26th of July and daily deaths are essentially level throughout the last two months? So, a bit early to make that call? Also, there’s a reported drop in age/vulnerability amongst the most recent new cases, isn’t there? So we’d not expect as many hospitalisations or deaths? I mean, don’t you think that saying that 2/3’s of all new cases are “false positives” seems a bit unlikely? If that were the case, then death rates should be below 10/day now after two months of sub-250/day new cases?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on August 11, 2020, 08:14:40 am
Not according to the governments own data

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/cases

According to this data cases have been rising steadily since around the 6th July. You can also see numbers in hospital, which are flat.

Usually you’d expect a 2–3 week lag between cases and hospitalisations at most. One explanation is that the case rise starts amongst the young and later spreads to the more vulnerable. That’s plausible, but like I said, in America that argument was also used and the rise in cases showed up as deaths 3 weeks later, like clockwork.

The false positive rate is unknown, and incredibly hard to measure. the fraction testing positive can never drop below this value, so it must be less than a percent or so.

However it’s suspicious when no matter how many tests you run, the same fraction comes back positive. That’s more or less what’s happening now.

We’ll see in another couple of weeks for sure, but I’d give the two explanations about 50/50 chances right now.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on August 11, 2020, 08:45:47 am
I should have added 'though the govt should provide appropriate financial support for closed sectors as needed' but I thought that could be assumed... Silly me  :slap:

My partner works in that sector, as rep for a major brewery. A lot of people are going to lose their livelihoods. That in some cases will include their homes.  Those businesses just aren’t going to survive. The gov won’t save them; only turnover.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on August 11, 2020, 08:57:26 am
So a couple of points to question your false positives suggestion Stu.

I believe (still) each test reported as a test being done is an single sample test (e.g. a nose swab or a throat swab) whereas a person being tested will have both done. So 160 000 tests = <80 000 people. If (this is a big if given the outsourcing of many components of our testing) there is any half decent QC on the data - I would have thought (hoped? dared to hope?) that if one person has a positive test and a negative test then this would be flagged and they would be tested again. If this is the case the chances of a person having two false positives is c. 0.002%??

The same gently rising totals are happening in Italy, Germany, and with greater acceleration in Spain and France.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on August 11, 2020, 09:09:01 am
It’s the same swab that you stick up your nose and to the back of your throat (not in that order!).

So if 160,000 tests is indeed 80,000 people tested the number of false positives would be FPR x 80,000.

There’s no opportunity to check the nose result against the throat one.

I haven’t checked the case vs test numbers in France or Germany in any detail. I’m worried it will disrupt my optimism.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on August 11, 2020, 09:16:33 am
It’s the same swab that you stick up your nose and to the back of your throat (not in that order!).

So if 160,000 tests is indeed 80,000 people tested the number of false positives would be FPR x 80,000.

There’s no opportunity to check the nose result against the throat one.

I haven’t checked the case vs test numbers in France or Germany in any detail. I’m worried it will disrupt my optimism.

Link below shows test positivity rate around the world:

https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-testing (https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-testing)

Shows UK at 0.6% among the lowest in Europe (with Germany 0.7%, Denmark 0.4% etc).  France and Italy higher at 1.7% and 1.3%, Spain much higher at 7.4%, US is 7.6%.   

All the normal caveats on my lack of expertise but if there was a significant real increase in Coronovirus prevelance in the UK wouldn't we expect the postivity rate to be increasing significantly at the same time?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on August 11, 2020, 09:17:26 am
It’s the same swab that you stick up your nose and to the back of your throat (not in that order!).

Not at the two drive through tests I've had....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on August 11, 2020, 09:59:51 am
It’s the same swab that you stick up your nose and to the back of your throat (not in that order!).

Not at the two drive through tests I've had....

It's the opposite for the tests I've had up in Cumbria. One swab which is used on tonsils and nose.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on August 11, 2020, 10:24:27 am
https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/aberdeen/2399326/aberdeen-cheese-restaurant-shuts-after-fighting-to-say-afloat-during-pandemic/

Makes of the most amazing cheese and bacon toasties are no more. I'll need to get my cholesterol elsewhere.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on August 11, 2020, 10:40:44 am
The analysis wintertree and I produced indicates anything from 3 in 4, to 9 in 10, of those with C19 are not being detected in the UK. This is way above any possible level of false negative effects (many sensible enough to be getting tested would presumably retest if symptoms worsen and get a later positive). This clearly shows the central government testing system is completely failing. I strongly suspect mildly affected people are avoiding tests to prevent quarantine issues. The UK is the only western nation in this position I found from the worldometer data. Italy is the closest to us in posible under-detection and they seem to be picking up three times the number of actual population positives compared to us (a ratio of 30 cf 12). As wintertree implied, journalists should be all over this.

I spotted this by accident looking at worldometer data (it surprised me) and wintertree backed it up with ONS sample based estimates of UK population infection levels. 

If the UK was more a problem with spread of positives in the young than elsewhere our daily deaths would be lower.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on August 11, 2020, 12:47:27 pm
Couldn't we rule out false positives really quickly by testing a second sample as soon as someone tests positive?

With the relatively low number of cases at the moment, it wouldn't take much to retest all positives.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on August 11, 2020, 12:48:46 pm
The doorstep tests they do here are one swab for both throat and nose. The drive through ones here are two separate swabs.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on August 11, 2020, 12:56:18 pm
Not according to the governments own data

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/cases

According to this data cases have been rising steadily since around the 6th July. You can also see numbers in hospital, which are flat....


....The false positive rate is unknown, and incredibly hard to measure. the fraction testing positive can never drop below this value, so it must be less than a percent or so.

However it’s suspicious when no matter how many tests you run, the same fraction comes back positive. That’s more or less what’s happening now.

I recall reading a piece a week or two back showing the positive results were rising in proportion with Tier2 testing in the wider community, while the Tier1 numbers were more or less flat/decreasing. Which would indicate more of the less severe cases being picked up that then don't lead to hospitalisation. Is this not/no longer the case?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: iain on August 11, 2020, 01:37:09 pm
It would be very interesting to be a fly on the wall at a meeting of SPI-M right now because I’m not sure what’s going on with UK numbers.

It looks like cases have been steadily rising since the start of July. And yet there’s been no sign of an uptick in hospitalisation or deaths. Even in the US, where initial spread was amongst the youth, deaths started to rise ~3 weeks after cases did.
I was interested in this so I asked my local public health expert.

Cases are definitely rising but as already commented almost all the positives are under 50's with the bulk being under 30's and so far they've managed to avoid passing it to their granny/grandpa. It seems that although folk aren't being careful around their peers they are being more sensible when it comes to older family.

Also public health in Sheff and elsewhere are pro-actively testing (now they have the capacity) in care homes and other groups. So far this appears to be helping contain the virus spread around the most vulnerable.

Usually you’d expect a 2–3 week lag between cases and hospitalisations at most. One explanation is that the case rise starts amongst the young and later spreads to the more vulnerable. That’s plausible, but like I said, in America that argument was also used and the rise in cases showed up as deaths 3 weeks later, like clockwork.

Notwithstanding the ineffectiveness of the national track and trace system and the decimation of resource as a result of austerity public health is still doing a massive amount of work behind the scenes at a local level attempting to keep things in check, something America doesn't have.
It won't last forever though, they've had to deal with 150 folk at a wedding last week and a funeral soon with hundreds expected. Nothing illegal anyone can take action on, just not sensible.

That could all be wrong - depending on how large the false positive rate really is, but it would be interesting to know if this is being considered at govt level...
It's certainly been considered by local public health/PHE and false postiives are not an issue. I've already asked too many questions and don't want to follow up on exactly how they've ruled it out as it's the first proper 'weekend' off in a month.

Edit: hope that's helpful
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on August 11, 2020, 03:11:23 pm
It's definitely helpful! I'd certainly trust your public health guru above my idle speculation. It would be interesting to know why they're so confident that false positives are not an issue - but these people have better things to do than satisfy the curiosity of random people on internet forums!

One way of doing it would be to use infection-fatality-ratios and infection-hospitalisation ratios. These are reasonably well known from the peak of the outbreak, along with the lags between infection and hospitalisation/death. Crucially these are also broken down by age.

With these figures and the age breakdown of cases from a month or so ago, you can calculate how many people you'd expect in hospital right now. If they're in-line then false positives are probably not a big issue.

At a guess, they are doing something like this...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on August 11, 2020, 04:50:52 pm
Off now anyway to drop my 16 year old off to a beach party with 150 other kids. They have promised to socially distance and as it’s not a pub it must be fine.

Quote
You should only be socialising in groups of up to 2 households (including your support bubble) indoors and outdoors or up to 6 people from different households when outdoors.
Source: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/meeting-people-from-outside-your-household-from-4-july

Am I misunderstanding (no judgement intended) or as you've stopped them doing other things is the above basically your own assessment of risk involved or A N other reason (as in there's no stopping them and this is the least bad option)? I'm curious as from what I'm seeing people have given up listening to the Gov and are now making their own assessment of risk (vs. reward).

Here these are the local restrictions in Pendle:
Quote
You must not have visitors to your home, or your garden
You must not visit anyone else in their home or their garden

You cannot mix with other households in indoor venues like pubs and restaurants
You can still meet in public outdoor spaces, including outdoor seating or beer gardens, in groups of no more than 6 people, unless the group includes only people from 2 households
You can still meet in public spaces, like parks, where you can still meet up to 5 other people as long as you maintain social distancing
You can still travel to work
You can still go on holiday with your household members, but you must not travel to other parts of the county or country to meet up with other people
You also must not visit a care home, unless it is an exceptional circumstance

...and they're simply not being adhered to. There's been no effort locally (or as confirmed by M.E.N.) no intention to brief the restrictions out to the public.

For examples, a local cycling club stuck to the 6ppl limit but then went to the pub with each other. A colleague is expecting  and has travelled somewhere outside of the local restrictions to see their other friends who found they had idle hands during lockdown too (i.e. also expecting). The new neighbour (+1) had a garden party on Fri.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dunnyg on August 11, 2020, 05:12:03 pm
I'm sure others have pointed it out ad nauseum, but the rules don't make sense. You can go to the pub beer garden with your family, you can meet them in a park, but you can't meet them in their garden?

If one of the rules doesn't make sense, then it undermines the rest of them. I've (generally) given up on listening to government guidance, sure i'm no expert on COVID, but from my relatively un-informed background, it seems like the guidelines weren't drawn up by them anyway.

That isn't to say i'm meeting up with randoms 24/7, but popping into my parents garden the other day (calderdale), chance of catching anything form them would be very slim, and on the way back, the bars down the road are absolutely heaving with no social distancing whatsoever, but apparently it is more appropriate to meet my parents in their?

I understand the guidelines (laws?) must be flexible, but I honestly can't get over how shit this has been handled regarding communicating regulations with the general public. I'm one of the "vulnerable" types, so it has been steady for me to understand what I can and can't do up until recently, and now I don't trust govt. advice/rules/laws(?) and i'm not overly interested in staying up to date with exactly what I can/can't do as a result.

If I feel like that I can only imagine many others giving even less of a fuck.

Been a while since i've had a good rant.

I read somewhere that the UK has been preparing for this kind of event for over a decade (no reference), with policy reviews in the last 5 years. Imagine if we hadn't!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on August 11, 2020, 05:19:33 pm
I'm sure others have pointed it out ad nauseum, but the rules don't make sense. You can go to the pub beer garden with your family, you can meet them in a park, but you can't meet them in their garden?

You can't. The guidelines say no to meeting people outside your household in a beer garden, as per Paul B's post. This is then undermined slightly by the fact the law they brought it didn't cover beer gardens etc.....

If one of the rules doesn't make sense, then it undermines the rest of them. I've (generally) given up on listening to government guidance, sure i'm no expert on COVID, but from my relatively un-informed background, it seems like the guidelines weren't drawn up by them anyway.

I agree with that.

That isn't to say i'm meeting up with randoms 24/7, but popping into my parents garden the other day (calderdale), chance of catching anything form them would be very slim, and on the way back, the bars down the road are absolutely heaving with no social distancing whatsoever, but apparently it is more appropriate to meet my parents in their?

I understand the guidelines (laws?) must be flexible, but I honestly can't get over how shit this has been handled regarding communicating regulations with the general public. I'm one of the "vulnerable" types, so it has been steady for me to understand what I can and can't do up until recently, and now I don't trust govt. advice/rules/laws(?) and i'm not overly interested in staying up to date with exactly what I can/can't do as a result.

If I feel like that I can only imagine many others giving even less of a fuck.

Been a while since i've had a good rant.

I read somewhere that the UK has been preparing for this kind of event for over a decade (no reference), with policy reviews in the last 5 years. Imagine if we hadn't!

In Manchester, it definitely feels like people have NOT embraced the new guidelines and are continuing as before. Everyone has their own excuse/scenario that makes them exempt from the rules......
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dunnyg on August 11, 2020, 05:39:51 pm
Missed the not with the pub, sorry!

I doubt all the people in that bar were from the same house!

Not sure if the uptake is much better in calderdale.

True about everyone having a reason. I suppose I am part of the problem.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on August 11, 2020, 08:37:09 pm
Another day with more than 1k new cases.... it’s only heading one way at the moment...

Edit: 9/10 pubs visited in Manchester not obeying distancing/name taking in this story. When you watch the vid you can understand the landlords reasoning in many ways... bonkers rules.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on August 11, 2020, 09:52:40 pm
https://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/fp/news/local/investigation-launched-as-new-covid-19-cases-thought-to-be-linked-to-north-east-social-gathering/

Looks like 'shire is about to follow Aberdeen, i think we have until the weekend if we are lucky. Wife's birthday on Friday, we were hoping to go somewhere.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on August 12, 2020, 10:12:55 am
Watching the A level mock grade fudge reaction unfold.

Looks like this government can’t even do a U turn properly! Suspect MrJA has something useful to contribute to this - mock grades look like a very inconsistent measure....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Wil on August 12, 2020, 10:28:30 am
It's another example of an entirely foreseeable problem that is being dealt with on the fly rather than properly planned. Controlling the overall grades of a cohort is entirely possible (at least within subjects with a high enough uptake) and happens every year to some extent. Controlling individual grades doesn't and was always going to be fraught, especially if they're accounting for past school performance.

As a (sometime) maths teacher predicting A-Level grades can be reasonably accurate and in almost every case higher than their mock grade. In other subjects I suspect it's a lot harder to predict.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on August 12, 2020, 10:58:46 am
My youngest is due his GCSE results which I think will be looked at  in the same way although neither him or I are actually bothered as he is going on to 6th form to do A levels and has a place regardless.
I took the announcement yesterday as This.

Your going to be given a grade that is based on teachers assessment and algorithms based on the schools and national statistics.

If your not happy with this result you can defer to what you got in your mocks.

If your still not happy with that you can resit in the autumn.

All seems fair to me. Can’t really see what other options they have? 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on August 12, 2020, 11:11:46 am
This should be another nail in the coffin of Britain's bizarre system of university entry.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on August 12, 2020, 11:16:38 am
Gav - fine except that means doing another set of exams in Autumn and all the revision and rigmarole for that and many people need the grades tomorrow not later go get their desired University place.

Though admissions this year is likely to be a right mess with most of the Russel group losing 20-50% of their student income due to the dive in international student recruitment.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on August 12, 2020, 11:34:22 am
My youngest is due his GCSE results which I think will be looked at  in the same way although neither him or I are actually bothered as he is going on to 6th form to do A levels and has a place regardless.
I took the announcement yesterday as This.

Your going to be given a grade that is based on teachers assessment and algorithms based on the schools and national statistics.

If your not happy with this result you can defer to what you got in your mocks.

If your still not happy with that you can resit in the autumn.

All seems fair to me. Can’t really see what other options they have?


To copy a quote from the National Union of Students:

Quote
We called this week for the UK government to ensure any exam resits were free to the student, and we welcome confirmation that this will be the case.

However, the rest of the triple lock approach is wrong. The use of mock exams results risks making a mockery of the whole system, given the lack of a standard approach to mock exams and the fact they are not taken by all candidates.

This is a botched attempt at a solution which does not fix the problem created by the classist, racist moderation system, that students’ results will be based on where they live not a true reflection of their own abilities.

We still believe that England should follow Scotland in scrapping moderated grades. With its triple lock policy, all the government has done is lock in inequality.

I don't know what they could have done better. But you would think that the people leading the country could some up with something more sensible than a last minute change which can't be applied equally across the country.

Like everything at the moment, it seems very reactionary and ill thought through.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Wil on August 12, 2020, 11:39:05 am
There's no perfect solution to it, and what's proposed is broadly "fair" (with caveats, e.g. predicted grades for black students are less accurate and more likely to be below actual achievement).

It's the last minute chop and change response that's concerning. It's happened all the way through this crisis.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on August 12, 2020, 12:36:18 pm
I am only commenting on the exam situation re this year not The education system as a whole.

Everything is messed up at the minute and very much being done on the hoof as it’s pretty unprecedented but I don’t see how anything could be done right as there is no right.

With everything going on it’s probably not the best time to have a root and branch reform of the exam system however much it needs it.

I would be more worried if one of my kids had just done Alevels as the results matter although my sceptical head thinks all the unis will be fighting to fill there quotas, including the leading ones, so will pay little attention to the results.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Wil on August 12, 2020, 12:41:32 pm
very much being done on the hoof as it’s pretty unprecedented

There was a detailed government planning exercise for exactly this scenario which had not been implemented and mostly ignored throughout this. It may be unprecedented, but the on the hoof aspect is ineptitude. I'm not expecting there to be a right answer, there surely isn't to much of this, but constantly responding with patchwork solutions to things which were known months ago is ridiculous.

There have been a few successes at least - while the furlough arrangements are far from perfect the efficiency with which they've been implemented has been impressive and has benefitted a significant part of the population.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on August 12, 2020, 12:53:56 pm
TBF it was pretty disastrous in Scotland too;

https://news.sky.com/story/downgraded-scottish-exam-results-to-be-withdrawn-after-moderation-controversy-12047226

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on August 12, 2020, 01:07:23 pm
Everything is messed up at the minute and very much being done on the hoof as it’s pretty unprecedented

The dates of the Á levels and GCSEs are the on the same Thursdays in August, every year. Lockdown was in March, 5 months ago. There is no excuse for this being done on the hoof now.

I agree with your point that there is no good solution, but the least worst should not include mocks which are not the same test in different schools. They are not secure, not marked the same way, don’t have the same content, aren’t taken at the same time of year and aren’t standardised. And many kids will improve a full grade from mock to real exam.

What might have worked better is to have consulted more effectively, established mechanisms for examining and validating the sources of evidence of centre assessed grades, and then just gone with them. This ad hoc backtracking just undermines confidence in the grade awarded. The students deserve far better than this.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on August 12, 2020, 01:17:10 pm
They are not going with mock grades though are they. It’s only if your not happy with the estimated grade your given that you can choose to use your mock result.

I suspect a vast majority will be roughly right but there will be a few outliers. All the media and chat is about politics not the kids results.

Not one kid I have talked to is in the slightest bit bothered. Mainly boys and mainly GCSEs. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on August 12, 2020, 01:28:42 pm
They are not going with mock grades though are they. It’s only if your not happy with the estimated grade your given that you can choose to use your mock result.

I suspect a vast majority will be roughly right but there will be a few outliers. All the media and chat is about politics not the kids results.

Not one kid I have talked to is in the slightest bit bothered. Mainly boys and mainly GCSEs.

Not sure your sample size is enough to validate a national system. I’m not really interested in media chatter Gav; just results.

How is accepting a mock result not going with a mock result?  They are using the mocks as a valid grade if the student chooses it, yet there is no statistical validity for mocks UK wide, which are formative assessment,  useful as a staging post en route to summative assessments which are a judgment on performance. These are major exams which affect careers and life choices, not a pick and mix in the cinema queue.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on August 12, 2020, 01:59:39 pm

Not one kid I have talked to is in the slightest bit bothered. Mainly boys and mainly GCSEs.

Oh great, theres no problem then is there? Come on. Jesus wept.

As others have said, you are absolutely correct that there is no ideal solution, but what people object to is it being freestyled a few days before the results come out (which as mjr has pointed out is the same day every year, so they know its coming). My mocks at school were shambolic. No one took them seriously and I got a D in one mock which I managed to improve to a B. Even proposing it as an alternative is unspeakably dim and I'm yet to see an education professional say its a good idea.

Edit: apologies, this comes across as a bit confrontational which wasn't the intention, but I just find it amazing mocks are being seriously talked about as an appropriate solution by anyone. For the record I think the eventual solution arrived at by the Scots (just go with the teacher grades and have an appeals process) is the best way forward. Just a shame they didn't do it first time.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on August 12, 2020, 02:10:55 pm
I still don’t see how it can be better.

The teachers give the grade they think they would get,

an algorithm based on schools previous performance then crunches this to ensure schools have not inflated this ( I would imagine that most teachers would err on the upside if a pupil was borderline).

Your given a grade but if your not happy with it you can take your mock result if it’s better ( not normally the case) or you can resit in the autumn.

More than aware this year is going to be an anomaly but how can this be done better.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on August 12, 2020, 02:13:32 pm

Not one kid I have talked to is in the slightest bit bothered. Mainly boys and mainly GCSEs.

Oh great, theres no problem then is there? Come on. Jesus wept.

As others have said, you are absolutely correct that there is no ideal solution, but what people object to is it being freestyled a few days before the results come out (which as mjr has pointed out is the same day every year, so they know its coming). My mocks at school were shambolic. No one took them seriously and I got a D in one mock which I managed to improve to a B. Even proposing it as an alternative is unspeakably dim and I'm yet to see an education professional say its a good idea.

Edit: apologies, this comes across as a bit confrontational which wasn't the intention, but I just find it amazing mocks are being seriously talked about as an appropriate solution by anyone. For the record I think the eventual solution arrived at by the Scots (just go with the teacher grades and have an appeals process) is the best way forward. Just a shame they didn't do it first time.

Jesus wept!!!! ( to use your vernacular) they are not using the mocks. It’s an option for people not happy with the grade they are offered.

And if your still not happy you can take the exam in October.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on August 12, 2020, 02:37:10 pm
What I would add Gav is that I am really pleased you and your son feel that the system is going to work okay for him and moving to the next stage is assured. What is a worry is those who are going to be disadvantaged because the system isn’t producing a fair result. Tinkering at the last minute isn’t the way to deal with this.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on August 12, 2020, 02:44:33 pm
I think we have different definitions of what 'using the mock' means. For me the fact its anywhere near the process and can be used at all is pretty damning and shows they haven't been listening to teachers. When you add the rushed chaotic nature of things into it, despite the warning they've had, its pretty poor. 

I fear all the issues with the Scottish algorithm will be evident in the English results; those in good schools/postcodes will overwhelmingly emerge ok, but schools in historically underperforming areas will have their results marked down and kids from lower socio economic backgrounds will be more likely to have their grades dropped. Using mocks as a back up for this will not solve it, since mocks (I would bet) will be taken way more seriously at higher achieving schools than lower ones. Thats before you get into the differences between how mocks are assessed at different schools that mjr pointed out. If anything it bakes the inequality into the results even deeper. Its a sop of a policy designed to win over the gullible parents of kids at pretty good schools, but they were never the ones whose kids were going to lose out.

As I said above, my solutions would be to trust the teachers. Yes this year would see inflated grades but better that than adversely affecting kids futures.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on August 12, 2020, 02:47:29 pm
Judging by the total silence about this issue from my employer (and it’s clearing tomorrow) - our University has no fucking idea how to deal with this.

Through UCAS we’ll have results etx.. but nothing about people’s Mock grades. How will these be validated? Can schools make them up retrospectively (I’m sure they wouldn’t etc..) as mocks are just an informal assessment non? Some taken seriously some less so. With a complete mix of old/past papers.

As earlier - it’s amazing that even this government can screw up a U turn!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on August 12, 2020, 02:50:09 pm
With a complete mix of old/past papers.


Our mocks were quite often just a past paper. On at least one occasion I had coincidentally done the same past paper as revision for the mock about two days earlier so knew all the answers and correspondingly aced it!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on August 12, 2020, 03:01:35 pm
I do think mocks are a valid piece of evidence. One drawn from a number of sources. Just not a replacement for the entire exam.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on August 12, 2020, 03:14:03 pm
Everything is messed up at the minute and very much being done on the hoof as it’s pretty unprecedented but I don’t see how anything could be done right as there is no right.
I still don’t see how it can be better.
Without going into the validity of using mock exams as the basis for an appeal I suspect it's the timing that's caused the issue here. As far as I can remember there's never been a mention of using mock exams within the grading process so it looks an awful lot like they've seen what happened in Scotland and tried to avoid that criticism but not wanted to do a full U-turn and rushed this out instead. If it had been a sound way to approach it then surely they would have raised the prospect earlier to give schools and universities time to prepare. As it is it just looks like a cynical last minute political fudge.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on August 12, 2020, 03:15:21 pm
What I would add Gav is that I am really pleased you and your son feel that the system is going to work okay for him and moving to the next stage is assured. What is a worry is those who are going to be disadvantaged because the system isn’t producing a fair result. Tinkering at the last minute isn’t the way to deal with this.

This is a system issue though not just one caused by corona virus. The system does not produce fair results and the school you go to is key.

I have no idea how the algorithm they are using works but i would have thought it ties in to the average performance of the school over a period of time i.e if a school historically had 50% of pupils getting A-C at A level and of them 5% got 3 A*s they will be looking to align this years grades to that, so if the teachers assessments show 60% A-C and 10% 3 A* then they will mark this down. Likewise in reverse. There is a lot of historical data to make this reasonably accurate.

This will be unfortunate for a situation where you have an outstanding pupil in an average school but likewise advantageous for a poor pupil in an better performing one.

In this situation the outstanding pupil can re sit in October, i suspect they will have already been given offers from the unis they applied to as these are just based on an assessment from the school anyway. Its therefore now down to the Unis to decide how strict they will be on the grades the kids get. My gut feeling is that due to a massive hole in overseas students this year they will be flexible.

GCSEs are pretty irrelevant in my opinion but may effect the subjects the kids can take. The one thing i know out of the bunch of 30 kids i speak to is all but one have places confirmed at 6th form or college regardless of grades.

A bigger issue that has nothing to do with grades is the amount of apprenticeships that have been cancelled. 3 of the above group are now going to college for this reason and thats not what they wanted to do.



Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on August 12, 2020, 03:20:39 pm
Everything is messed up at the minute and very much being done on the hoof as it’s pretty unprecedented but I don’t see how anything could be done right as there is no right.
I still don’t see how it can be better.
Without going into the validity of using mock exams as the basis for an appeal I suspect it's the timing that's caused the issue here. As far as I can remember there's never been a mention of using mock exams within the grading process so it looks an awful lot like they've seen what happened in Scotland and tried to avoid that criticism but not wanted to do a full U-turn and rushed this out instead. If it had been a sound way to approach it then surely they would have raised the prospect earlier to give schools and universities time to prepare. As it is it just looks like a cynical last minute political fudge.

And this is the politics that i spoke of before that i am not interested in discussing, and that in no way means i think the government is doing a good job.

If this option is better after months of looking at it, seeing whats happened in Scotland etc. i dont give a fuck about the timing and it has no bearing on the outcome. Sticking to a plan just because you dont want slagging off in the press would be a far greater sin.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on August 12, 2020, 03:26:12 pm
I have no idea how the algorithm they are using works but i would have thought it ties in to the average performance of the school over a period of time i.e if a school historically had 50% of pupils getting A-C at A level and of them 5% got 3 A*s they will be looking to align this years grades to that, so if the teachers assessments show 60% A-C and 10% 3 A* then they will mark this down. Likewise in reverse. There is a lot of historical data to make this reasonably accurate.


Just on this point; yes, that’s how it works.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on August 12, 2020, 03:42:24 pm
I have no idea how the algorithm they are using works but i would have thought it ties in to the average performance of the school over a period of time i.e if a school historically had 50% of pupils getting A-C at A level and of them 5% got 3 A*s they will be looking to align this years grades to that, so if the teachers assessments show 60% A-C and 10% 3 A* then they will mark this down. Likewise in reverse. There is a lot of historical data to make this reasonably accurate.


Just on this point; yes, that’s how it works.

So in this circumstance, those who the teachers predicted to just scrape 3 A*'s would be moderated down and only get 2 A*'s and an A or similar. And, if we can assume that the school has not boosted performance by 5% (the figures I briefly heard on he news a few nights ago were actually bigger than this), then this is actually probably what would have happened.

The whole downgrading thing doesn't seem like a problem to me in principle at a population level, but it will clearly have implications for a lot of individuals who would have been the outliers from the statistics. Those people can choose to use a mock grade, or re-sit. If they've got the grades to get into uni, even if through clearing then they might not decide to bother.

The inequality issues seem to be completely independent of Covid.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on August 12, 2020, 03:59:15 pm

So in this circumstance, those who the teachers predicted to just scrape 3 A*'s would be moderated down and only get 2 A*'s and an A or similar.


No this is not correct. You are looking at this from an individual perspective when each exam is moderated at cohort level. The individual’s spread of exams and grades is not considered. For a given qualification, eg A level Geography, or GCSE Art, the cohort as a group is moderated so that the spread of grades in a given exam aligns with the performance of previous cohorts.

Edit- Looking at Will’s example..
None of the 3 grades would be awarded with any knowledge of the others, just like in a normal year. If if all 3 grades were just a bit optimistic, and this were replicated across the whole set of centre assessed grades in all 3 subjects, all 3 would be marked down.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Sidehaas on August 12, 2020, 06:45:42 pm
Back on Offwidth's topic about the death rate - it looks like counting methodology is fairly significant after all:

BBC News - Coronavirus: England death count review reduces UK toll by 5,000
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-53722711

75% reduction in covid deaths reported last week.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on August 12, 2020, 07:07:53 pm
Isn't there something weird about the way we record deaths related to covid? Ie that if you've ever had it and you die, no matter how much later, it's recorded as covid related and included in the stats. Ould that account for the difference? Can't remember where I read about it though, sorry.

The numbers that involves are tiny proportion of the total covid deaths. If anything in the UK covid deaths are underreported as many who die at home still don't get tested. Estimates are as high as 10% (from a proportion of the 10,000 unaccounted for excess deaths to date).

What I meant by the numbers being real are they are the average current daily official government reported covid deaths (which were always lower than the ONS covid excess deaths) and the average daily official government reported cases from 3 weeks back.

Looks like its a pretty big proportion of recent deaths!

Edit, was going to add link but sidehaas has beaten me to it
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on August 12, 2020, 07:09:36 pm
Really!?  A quote from that news article.

"Someone who stays in intensive care with Covid-19 for five weeks and dies would not be counted as a coronavirus death, for example."

Anyone here think that is honest?

Not that it matters for anyone serious about counting covid deaths as the ONS numbers have been way more trustworthy for a long time.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 12, 2020, 07:41:26 pm
Really!?  A quote from that news article.

"Someone who stays in intensive care with Covid-19 for five weeks and dies would not be counted as a coronavirus death, for example."

Anyone here think that is honest?

Not that it matters for anyone serious about counting covid deaths as the ONS numbers have been way more trustworthy for a long time.

Yep, that’s a glaring fucking error there. Just means other nations are under estimating death toll and now we are too.

I’m sure there was an overestimate/over zealous recording based simply on a positive test. This is a dumb way to moderate for that. “Oh, sorry, you took too long to die, you don’t count”.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on August 12, 2020, 08:12:02 pm
A point of clarification about A level and GCSEs. Where a school enters 15 or more pupils for that exam, teacher assessed grades are not being used at all. As schools have had to rank order the pupils’ performance top to bottom, only the rank order and the schools historical performance will be used.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: largeruk on August 12, 2020, 09:21:51 pm
Really!?  A quote from that news article.

"Someone who stays in intensive care with Covid-19 for five weeks and dies would not be counted as a coronavirus death, for example."

Anyone here think that is honest?

Not that it matters for anyone serious about counting covid deaths as the ONS numbers have been way more trustworthy for a long time.

Yep, that’s a glaring fucking error there. Just means other nations are under estimating death toll and now we are too.

I’m sure there was an overestimate/over zealous recording based simply on a positive test. This is a dumb way to moderate for that. “Oh, sorry, you took too long to die, you don’t count”.
The mismatch between how the UK nations count COVID-related deaths was covered in the latest edition of More or Less - https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000llw2 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000llw2) - worth a listen.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on August 12, 2020, 09:48:38 pm
Really!?  A quote from that news article.

"Someone who stays in intensive care with Covid-19 for five weeks and dies would not be counted as a coronavirus death, for example."

Anyone here think that is honest?

Of course not, but no more so than someone who had a positive test in April and was hit by a bus last week.

If you want the gold standard for covid impact on death rates then excess deaths is the way to go - and that's been negative for weeks. But you are comparing with other nations, and in England until this revision, no one ever recovered from covid, so you couldn't compare.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 12, 2020, 10:39:50 pm
Really!?  A quote from that news article.

"Someone who stays in intensive care with Covid-19 for five weeks and dies would not be counted as a coronavirus death, for example."

Anyone here think that is honest?

Of course not, but no more so than someone who had a positive test in April and was hit by a bus last week.

If you want the gold standard for covid impact on death rates then excess deaths is the way to go - and that's been negative for weeks. But you are comparing with other nations, and in England until this revision, no one ever recovered from covid, so you couldn't compare.

You mean, no one who subsequently died after a positive covid test “recovered” before death.
This was a pretty stupid system.

There are medical professionals who post here, aren’t there? A death certificate will have a cause of death listed, right?
 A medical opinion on the reason for death. Surely this should be the primary criteria for determining who has died of Covid or complications arising from that infection, not an arbitrary four week cut off.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Sidehaas on August 13, 2020, 07:42:16 am
Really!?  A quote from that news article.

"Someone who stays in intensive care with Covid-19 for five weeks and dies would not be counted as a coronavirus death, for example."

Anyone here think that is honest?

Of course not, but no more so than someone who had a positive test in April and was hit by a bus last week.

If you want the gold standard for covid impact on death rates then excess deaths is the way to go - and that's been negative for weeks. But you are comparing with other nations, and in England until this revision, no one ever recovered from covid, so you couldn't compare.

You mean, no one who subsequently died after a positive covid test “recovered” before death.
This was a pretty stupid system.

There are medical professionals who post here, aren’t there? A death certificate will have a cause of death listed, right?
 A medical opinion on the reason for death. Surely this should be the primary criteria for determining who has died of Covid or complications arising from that infection, not an arbitrary four week cut off.

The ONS death data uses death certificates. They also do excess death stats. The point of the PHE data is not to catch everyone (they openly admit it doesn't, as can be seen from the ONS data), but rather to get as accurate as possible picture of the trend in deaths (and cases) as quickly as possible. This can then inform actions to control the disease. In this context, the change they have made was the right thing to do imho.

Ps not a medical professional.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on August 13, 2020, 09:29:48 am
Really!?  A quote from that news article.

"Someone who stays in intensive care with Covid-19 for five weeks and dies would not be counted as a coronavirus death, for example."

Anyone here think that is honest?

Of course not, but no more so than someone who had a positive test in April and was hit by a bus last week.

If you want the gold standard for covid impact on death rates then excess deaths is the way to go - and that's been negative for weeks. But you are comparing with other nations, and in England until this revision, no one ever recovered from covid, so you couldn't compare.

Except we know pretty quickly those who die from covid related death in hospitals and care homes; it's not rocket science.
This is gerrymandering. The ONS add the slower public death certificate information to hospital and care home deaths and say at least 55,000 covid related deaths so far. Those who die non-covid related deaths after testing positive are a small number (probably in the hundreds) compared to slow covid related deaths (in the thousands that we know of); covid increases mortality in those with cancer and heart disease (our two biggest baseline killers).

Excess deaths are not even bronze standard now we are away from the peak as you don't know what the baseline average would have been. At the peak such variability in the average was noise.

The point of PHE is to firefight as they have lost too many vital resources during austerity and have to do the best they can with the little they have. Their leadership should be working for the health of the nation with honest data, not proping up the government. That's the factor you miss: as well as utility the headline numbers need to be basically honest enough to retain public trust. I didn't realise the other countries of the Union used such flawed headline data until now. Why 4 weeks and not 6 or 10, given intensive care covid deaths are often seen to be drawn out?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 13, 2020, 09:54:23 am
Really!?  A quote from that news article.

"Someone who stays in intensive care with Covid-19 for five weeks and dies would not be counted as a coronavirus death, for example."

Anyone here think that is honest?

Of course not, but no more so than someone who had a positive test in April and was hit by a bus last week.

If you want the gold standard for covid impact on death rates then excess deaths is the way to go - and that's been negative for weeks. But you are comparing with other nations, and in England until this revision, no one ever recovered from covid, so you couldn't compare.

Except we know pretty quickly those who die from covid related death in hospitals and care homes; it's not rocket science.
This is gerrymandering. The ONS add the slower public death certificate information to hospital and care home deaths and say at least 55,000 covid related deaths so far. Those who die non-covid related deaths after testing positive are a small number (probably in the hundreds) compared to slow covid related deaths (in the thousands that we know of); covid increases mortality in those with cancer and heart disease (our two biggest baseline killers).

Excess deaths are not even bronze standard now we are away from the peak as you don't know what the baseline average would have been. At the peak such variability in the average was noise.

The point of PHE is to firefight as they have lost too many vital resources during austerity and have to do the best they can with the little they have. Their leadership should be working for the health of the nation with honest data, not proping up the government. That's the factor you miss: as well as utility the headline numbers need to be basically honest enough to retain public trust. I didn't realise the other countries of the Union used such flawed headline data until now. Why 4 weeks and not 6 or 10, given intensive care covid deaths are often seen to be drawn out?

For once, I agree with Offwidth.
This is a blatant attempt to massage the figures.
If what you said was true, Duma, about the down and dirty nature of PHE historical numbers, then there is no need to revise those figures now, because they are already moderated by the more accurate, certificate based, ONS data.
Many of the deaths removed from the “died of Covid” category this week, are going to be put back into it by ONS.

This is a a cynical headline grab to try and minimise damage to the Government. Greater than 90% of the public will simply view it as “almost nobody is dying of Covid anymore and all the reported figures were wrong and probably will continue to be”, which is a gross miss-representation.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on August 13, 2020, 10:21:53 am
Another way to look at this is only about 300,000 people have tested positive so far, that's below 0.5% of the population and supposedly distributed evenly across the population. So of non-covid deaths there would be a max of 60 of the 12,000 baseline non covid deaths a week over a few months (a massive overestimate as death rates are not uniform with age). Nearly all those 5000 removed deaths are covid related.

The latest estimate of population infection is out today. It estimates 6%, so more than 9 in 10 have not been detected; a well known historic indictment on past test, track and trace. The scary factor is this shit performance on TTT is continuing from the analysis of current worldometer and ONS data. Death rates and hospitalisations are way too high for the low numbers of positive tests a few weeks back. We are missing between 3 in 4 and 9 in 10 of the infected with the testing systems currently in use unlike almost every other western country.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/aug/13/up-to-6-of-englands-population-may-have-had-covid-study-suggests
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 13, 2020, 11:38:49 am
Aaaanyhoooo...

I take it everybody is in the mood for another ‘bad news preprint” ?

Yeah, me too:

Aerosol transmission looks highly likely.

 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.08.03.20167395v1.full.pdf (https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.08.03.20167395v1.full.pdf)

Does leave me wondering why it’s not massively more wide spread than the 6% population penetration in the UK (July).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on August 13, 2020, 01:04:09 pm
Yeah, not much too add there to the discussion we had months back. They've detected the virus from air samples and proved it's viability. Big wow. Clearly, either this is not the significant mode of transmission (otherwise we'd be in much deeper shit), or if it is infection must be far more widespread than thought and therefore not as deadly. Same as those scare-mongering cyclist 120m slipstreams we were warned about.

I can see why this sort of lab-based bottom-up research is easy-pickings for scientists but imho the emphasis in this pandemic needs to be top down: track, trace, identify the mechanisms of spread by how they are actually happening, not theoretical potential.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on August 13, 2020, 02:22:15 pm
Same as those scare-mongering cyclist 120m slipstreams we were warned about.

This was just bad science IMO (and I spent 4 years of my life staring into that software modelling solute transport).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 13, 2020, 02:59:06 pm
Yeah, not much too add there to the discussion we had months back. They've detected the virus from air samples and proved it's viability. Big wow. Clearly, either this is not the significant mode of transmission (otherwise we'd be in much deeper shit), or if it is infection must be far more widespread than thought and therefore not as deadly. Same as those scare-mongering cyclist 120m slipstreams we were warned about.

I can see why this sort of lab-based bottom-up research is easy-pickings for scientists but imho the emphasis in this pandemic needs to be top down: track, trace, identify the mechanisms of spread by how they are actually happening, not theoretical potential.

The problem being, it leads to this kind of thing:

 https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/coronavirus-latest-airborne-aerosol-outbreaks-social-distancing-a9667706.html?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1597301815 (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/coronavirus-latest-airborne-aerosol-outbreaks-social-distancing-a9667706.html?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1597301815)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Sidehaas on August 13, 2020, 04:01:17 pm

I can see why this sort of lab-based bottom-up research is easy-pickings for scientists but imho the emphasis in this pandemic needs to be top down: track, trace, identify the mechanisms of spread by how they are actually happening, not theoretical potential.
You need both.
If you only have the bottom up theoretical model, then you have no integral evidence your model is valid from which to draw conclusions.
If you only have the top down empirical version, then you have no grounds to assume it is correct following a small change in input assumptions or conditions.
In an ideal world, you should develop a model with as much theoretical knowledge as available, then fill in the gaps with empirical models based of empirical evidence, then use a separate set of overall empirical data to validate the complete model, with a given uncertainty band.

Edit: obviously you could expect an individual scientific paper to be doing any one of these things, as long as they aren't drawing over ambitious conclusions about how their work should be applied.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on August 13, 2020, 04:24:57 pm
Inductive and deductive.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on August 13, 2020, 06:45:20 pm
Really!?  A quote from that news article.

"Someone who stays in intensive care with Covid-19 for five weeks and dies would not be counted as a coronavirus death, for example."

Anyone here think that is honest?

Of course not, but no more so than someone who had a positive test in April and was hit by a bus last week.

If you want the gold standard for covid impact on death rates then excess deaths is the way to go - and that's been negative for weeks. But you are comparing with other nations, and in England until this revision, no one ever recovered from covid, so you couldn't compare.

Except we know pretty quickly those who die from covid related death in hospitals and care homes; it's not rocket science.
This is gerrymandering.

This seems like a very simplistic knee jerk response, and we have a enough simplistic responses from the government with out resorting to same sort of approach on here.

This was I believe a fairly well known issue with the differences in the way England was counting covid deaths compared to other UK countries - it was certainly covered by More or Less a few weeks ago.  Are you suggesting that the Scottish figures have been gerrymandered by the Scottish goverment for the whole of the epidemic?
   
Obviously there some difficult questions to be answered around how covid deaths are counted and I don't think the way PHE was doing it was obviously correct and it did appear to potentially give some peculiar figures as the epidemic went on.  To give one ancedotal example a friend of my wife's father who has long term illness went into hospital a couple of months ago, caught Covid while he was in there, recovered from Covid while in hospital, came back home with continuing long term illness, a month later is back in hospital and things aren't looking great - previous rules would say that if the worst happens he would be a Covid statistic when there is absolutely no evidence of that.

Also, interestingly the change to recording methods seems to provide an explanation for the unusual death rates to cases ratio you observed for the UK earlier in the thread - possibly a less exciting but potentially plausible explanation rather than some sort of exceptional coronavirus transmission pattern in the UK compared to the rest of Europe? 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on August 13, 2020, 08:29:54 pm
No it doesn't account for the UK anomaly as it only takes about 10% off the covid deaths and yes Scotland et al are gerrymandering the data in my view as intensive care deaths beyond 4 weeks after testing positive are quite common.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on August 13, 2020, 09:39:24 pm
No it doesn't account for the UK anomaly as it only takes about 10% off the covid deaths

Have you looked at the updated figures? Cases to deaths ratio for the UK look to fit within range of other similar countries:

e,g for 20th Jun / 10th July (based on 7 day average)

       Jun-20       Jul-10   Mortality   Cases / Deaths
France   468       15   3.2%   31
UK           1173     35   3.0%   34
Italy           289       15   5.2%   19
Sweden   1080    10   0.9%   108
Belgium   91        3          3.3%           30
Spain   334        3          0.9%           111

More recent figures for UK have mortality rate down to approx 2%, cases/deaths rations up to 50
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on August 13, 2020, 11:53:07 pm
Gerrymandering means messing around with constituency boundaries. Massaging or fiddling is what you do with figures.

Sorry to be a pedant. I can’t help it  ;)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 13, 2020, 11:54:33 pm
Massaging or fiddling is what you do with figures.

Only with mutual consent.

No means no.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on August 13, 2020, 11:57:58 pm
 :lol:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on August 14, 2020, 09:38:20 am
Gerrymandering means messing around with constituency boundaries. Massaging or fiddling is what you do with figures.

Sorry to be a pedant. I can’t help it  ;)

Not really pedantic, it's a clear catachresis :)                                                                                                      
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on August 14, 2020, 11:13:11 am
No it doesn't account for the UK anomaly as it only takes about 10% off the covid deaths

Have you looked at the updated figures? Cases to deaths ratio for the UK look to fit within range of other similar countries:

e,g for 20th Jun / 10th July (based on 7 day average)

       Jun-20       Jul-10   Mortality   Cases / Deaths
France   468       15   3.2%   31
UK           1173     35   3.0%   34
Italy           289       15   5.2%   19
Sweden   1080    10   0.9%   108
Belgium   91        3          3.3%           30
Spain   334        3          0.9%           111

More recent figures for UK have mortality rate down to approx 2%, cases/deaths rations up to 50

I was out yesterday so I didn't get a chance to look at how the changes affected the worldometer data until this morning. My ratios were based on 7 day rolling averages of deaths now and cases three weeks before.

For the UK the ratio using my methodology is now 50 and France 72, so yes the numbers are way more comparable on the new more dishonest UK data.

Wintertrees analysis upthread is unchanged and shows the UK is still missing 80% of cases with its current testing at the point of the most recent ONS estimates a few weeks back.  This means actual infections in the UK are about 5 times higher than indicated, something like 5000 new cases a day, and the missing data being so large has to be mostly those avoiding tests for whatever reason. These missing positives are the most likely people to be spreading the infection. 5000 a day means we are a lot worse than France, where from tomorrow we insist on quarenteen. My most serious concern is this, after all these months UK TTT is still failing. If we don't know anything about 80% of those infected we can only respond weeks too late when those missing positives lead to local outbreaks as visible from the more responsible people who do get tested.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on August 14, 2020, 11:22:04 am
The little I've heard so far (e.g. from one dept) suggests clearing was a shit show yesterday. A very long and difficult day with many stressed and anxious students and parents, some so emotional and upset they were unable to make coherent decisions. Many students with predictions of AAB showing up on the phones with BCC and lower. And for the moment zero clarity as to where final numbers will end (though it seems certain they will be down).

Anyone else heard anything? TT, teachers here, or any parents?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on August 14, 2020, 11:33:06 am
Nope. Will send some whatsapps as I was wondering.

Unusually no "we've had a great / challenging first day of clearing" missive from the VC either...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on August 14, 2020, 11:42:47 am
If anyone else is looking at their currently booked holidays thinking they're not likely to go ahead it's worth noting that many airlines are allowing people to move their flights at little to no cost (this includes EasyJet which is free and you pay any additional increase in fare).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on August 14, 2020, 11:48:15 am
Gerrymandering means messing around with constituency boundaries. Massaging or fiddling is what you do with figures.

Sorry to be a pedant. I can’t help it  ;)

Not really pedantic, it's a clear catachresis :)

The boundary moved in this case is the number of days to count as a covid death, after a positive test, to 28, a point where a significant proportion of those seriously ill on a ventilator (who subsequently die) are still alive in intensive care... I think it deserves largesse given it is a defined boundary the moved and English is a living language based on common usage.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on August 14, 2020, 11:53:13 am
Anyone else heard anything? TT, teachers here, or any parents?

Word is "its gonna be a long slow clearing until people are sure of appeals etc.." & "This is going to drag out"
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on August 14, 2020, 11:57:01 am
Anyone else heard anything? TT, teachers here, or any parents?

Word is "its gonna be a long slow clearing until people are sure of appeals etc.." & "This is going to drag out"

Exactly as I heard just a few moments ago.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on August 14, 2020, 12:07:05 pm
As I've retired it will be a week or so before I get news from my old place but we were overfull before clearing.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on August 14, 2020, 12:11:50 pm
As I've retired it will be a week or so before I get news from my old place but we were overfull before clearing.

The dept I heard from was 25% down ahead of clearing. Here at CBS it was decided a couple of months ago to add 100 new undergraduate places because of demand. A further 200 new places will be added next summer.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on August 14, 2020, 01:41:19 pm
UCAS shows applicants are up and much to my surprise overseas applicants are up 10% (I guess we will wait and see how many come).

https://www.ucas.com/corporate/news-and-key-documents/news/university-applications-rise-during-lockdown

My niece has had the sense to go to Denmark from September where she has no fees, gets a grant and accomodation is cheaper.

https://studylink.com/countries/denmark/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on August 14, 2020, 01:59:15 pm
My niece has had the sense to go to Denmark from September where she has no fees, gets a grant and accomodation is cheaper.

https://studylink.com/countries/denmark/

Whereabouts? I'm in Copenhagen now.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stabbsy on August 14, 2020, 02:17:24 pm
UCAS shows applicants are up and much to my surprise overseas applicants are up 10% (I guess we will wait and see how many come).
Anecdotally, I’d heard from someone at Sheffield uni that the increase in overseas students was due to the US being viewed as a no-go, with people looking for alternatives.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on August 14, 2020, 02:17:54 pm
No it doesn't account for the UK anomaly as it only takes about 10% off the covid deaths

Have you looked at the updated figures? Cases to deaths ratio for the UK look to fit within range of other similar countries:

e,g for 20th Jun / 10th July (based on 7 day average)

       Jun-20       Jul-10   Mortality   Cases / Deaths
France   468       15   3.2%   31
UK           1173     35   3.0%   34
Italy           289       15   5.2%   19
Sweden   1080    10   0.9%   108
Belgium   91        3          3.3%           30
Spain   334        3          0.9%           111

More recent figures for UK have mortality rate down to approx 2%, cases/deaths rations up to 50

I was out yesterday so I didn't get a chance to look at how the changes affected the worldometer data until this morning. My ratios were based on 7 day rolling averages of deaths now and cases three weeks before.

For the UK the ratio using my methodology is now 50 and France 72, so yes the numbers are way more comparable on the new more dishonest UK data.


I don't think language like 'more dishonest UK data' really helps.  Listen to More or Less from 12/8 (recorded just  before the change) which covers in some detail the issues with PHE data on deaths - this confirms that the previous methodology was almost certainly over-counting deaths and that over-counting was becoming much more significant as time goes on and the population of older people with a positive coronovirus test increases. 

They compare deaths reported by gov.uk via previous rules with data produced by ONS from death certificates (which is general viewed as significantly more reliable but has a lag of 1 to 2 weeks in being available) - ONS deaths were significantly high than gov.uk figures during early part of the pandemic but this has now been reversed with ONS figures at end of July less than 50% of gov.uk figures.  The conclusion was that ONS figures are definitely the most accurate numbers but doesn't allow real time view of trends.  Also concluded that Scotland method (28 days) was definitely undercounting deaths, while England method was significantly overcounting deaths over the more recent period.  The move to 28 days for the whole of the UK does look like it will cause issues with undercounting, though if you look into the details a number of other figures are available from gov.uk and ONS. 

In summary counting deaths is not easy particularly if everyone looks for real time update - we had it wrong before , we will have it wrong in a different way now, probably if you want accurate numbers you should look elsewhere than daily headlines.

I'm also interested in why you place such certainty on other countries numbers - I know Spain had controversy over reporting of deaths and I had difficulty finding any detail on methodologies used via quick google (probably doesn't help that anything would likely be in a foreign language!).

I know that we have a shit show for a government but I really don't think it helps if from the other side if we allow a prism of distrust and suspicion to define our view of everything that happens.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on August 14, 2020, 02:27:48 pm
@IanP, given how this government has handled data and information in this pandemic - I think its absolutely ESSENTIAL to view them through a prism of mistrust!

Gosh, where do I begin...
Double counting of test numbers (and including tests sent out)
Counting individual items of PPE (e.g. a glove) when talking about numbers delivered
Many broken promises (we'll test every person in every care home before the end of June - then July)
Track and Trace - quoting misleading success rates (80%+) when if you look at the contacts traced its <60%
The whole Dominic Cummings Barnard Castle affair

I'm sure I've missed a few and others can fill them in...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on August 14, 2020, 02:39:53 pm
@IanP, given how this government has handled data and information in this pandemic - I think its absolutely ESSENTIAL to view them through a prism of mistrust!

Gosh, where do I begin...
Double counting of test numbers (and including tests sent out)
Counting individual items of PPE (e.g. a glove) when talking about numbers delivered
Many broken promises (we'll test every person in every care home before the end of June - then July)
Track and Trace - quoting misleading success rates (80%+) when if you look at the contacts traced its <60%
The whole Dominic Cummings Barnard Castle affair

I'm sure I've missed a few and others can fill them in...

I think a prism of questioning and scepticism is required but outright suspicion and mistrust of everything is not necessarily useful and risks turning into views similar to the anti expert position that seems far too popular.

Have you compared the ONS figures to the old gov.uk figures for England?  If so do you agree that there was significant issues with the gov.uk figures?  The position on here from some posters seems to be that the only possible reason that this could have been changed is to make the figures look better - as said, suggest listening to More or Less which is much better informed than me (its about 10 mins at the start).  I'm not saying the new way of counting is correct either but I do admit there are significant complexities around trying to provide these numbers particularly in real time.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on August 14, 2020, 03:09:33 pm
I think the new way of representing deaths is possibly 'better' in that its more consistent with other parts of the UK (and possibly other countries).

I am also glad they are making quick and firm decisions about quarantine (lets overlook Grant Shapps getting the date wrong yesterday eh...).

But the f*cking tripe that comes out of the government and its ministers is terrible. Jeez - I was listening the other day to them comparing TTI to New Zealands TTI (and How we did so many hundreds of thousands more contact tracing etc..) which was frankly embarrassing given the handful of cases NZ has had in the last four months compared to the 1000 a day we have here...

Ian - we have a government that behaves as if it were in campaign mode. Of a caliber of the vote leave campaign... If they treated the population with the respect we deserve - I would be much happier - and more forgiving.

I'm afraid they are reaping what they have sown - and they carry on behaving the same!!!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on August 14, 2020, 03:55:28 pm

I am also glad they are making quick and firm decisions about quarantine (lets overlook Grant Shapps getting the date wrong yesterday eh...).


Um, yes, but setting the deadline at 4am tomorrow captures all the holidaymakers returning later that day (ie most) who have no option now but to quarantine. Some would have chosen this but many will be frantically working out what it means for their jobs at home.

They sat on their hands long enough. If it was so urgent this decision could have been taken sooner. Could the deadline not have been midnight on Sunday?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on August 14, 2020, 03:56:36 pm
Ian - we have a government that behaves as if it were in campaign mode. Of a caliber of the vote leave campaign... If they treated the population with the respect we deserve - I would be much happier - and more forgiving.


This I couldn't agree with more, the way this government behaves and communicates fills me with horror - I just feel that there needs to be a side that tries to fight this with rationality and a belief in democratic norms and sensible governance. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on August 14, 2020, 04:50:59 pm

I know that we have a shit show for a government but I really don't think it helps if from the other side if we allow a prism of distrust and suspicion to define our view of everything that happens.

I dont need lecturing about variability, difficulties or diferences in national death rates. I'm prepared to give leeway and account for time to react. Yet are in mid August, half a year after the government knew enough about C19 and, after a litany of testing failures, the latest ONS studies of positive tests to population infection level estimates indicate we are still missing about 80% of those infected in just the first T.  Big contracts went to the likes of Serco. These missing positives was my key point from the beginning of raising this ratio issue.. it has massive implications about our ability to fight new outbreaks, so what government sympathy does anybody fair expect? Show me some other western nations doing this badly on TTT.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 14, 2020, 05:28:53 pm
So, SAGE are unsure that R is below one, because they’re using a model that is lagging daily testing numbers by several weeks. Not really seen an explanation of why that is the case. Does that mean the PHE data is nothing more than media fodder?

Anyway, the curve looks a bit steep to me. If my bearing or exhaust gas temps were showing that kind of rise, I’b be into breakdown SOP’s by now...

 https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/ (https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/)

The Independent take of SAGE’s position, gives the impression that they are dithering:

 https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/coronavirus-uk-infection-rate-latest-two-month-high-june-covid19-pandemic-a9671156.html?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1597419009 (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/coronavirus-uk-infection-rate-latest-two-month-high-june-covid19-pandemic-a9671156.html?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1597419009)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on August 14, 2020, 05:32:43 pm

I dont need lecturing about variability, difficulties or diferences in national death rates. I'm prepared to give leeway and account for time to react. Yet are in mid August, half a year after the government knew enough about C19 and, after a litany of testing failures, the latest ONS studies of positive tests to population infection level estimates indicate we are still missing about 80% of those infected in just the first T.  Big contracts went to the likes of Serco. These missing positives was my key point from the beginning of raising this ratio issue.. it has massive implications about our ability to fight new outbreaks, so what government sympathy does anybody fair expect? Show me some other western nations doing this badly on TTT.

I'm not looking for sympathy for the government (god forbid) - I was just asking questions about the death figures and how we should measure them accurately.  Since we're no longer talking about that (unless you want to discuss the points raised?) I'm actually interested in the ONS analysis re population prevalence / recorded cases and how they compare to other countries in Europe -do you have any links to similar statistical analysis for other countries?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 14, 2020, 05:57:50 pm
Anyone else heard anything? TT, teachers here, or any parents?

Word is "its gonna be a long slow clearing until people are sure of appeals etc.." & "This is going to drag out"

Exactly as I heard just a few moments ago.

I understand/believe this to be a genuine example:

(https://i.ibb.co/zfcdcKn/036-E3652-D2-EE-4723-82-B6-FD190-C844338.jpg)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 14, 2020, 06:14:51 pm
I think the new way of representing deaths is possibly 'better' in that its more consistent with other parts of the UK (and possibly other countries).

I am also glad they are making quick and firm decisions about quarantine (lets overlook Grant Shapps getting the date wrong yesterday eh...).

But the f*cking tripe that comes out of the government and its ministers is terrible. Jeez - I was listening the other day to them comparing TTI to New Zealands TTI (and How we did so many hundreds of thousands more contact tracing etc..) which was frankly embarrassing given the handful of cases NZ has had in the last four months compared to the 1000 a day we have here...

Ian - we have a government that behaves as if it were in campaign mode. Of a caliber of the vote leave campaign... If they treated the population with the respect we deserve - I would be much happier - and more forgiving.

I'm afraid they are reaping what they have sown - and they carry on behaving the same!!!


This is long read, but, if it is only a quarter accurate or only a tenth of the anonymous sources genuinely so well informed; it is a stunning indictment of the Government and specifically Bojo’s incompetence.
Possibly a bit rich for an American to be passing judgment on the UK right now, however, the breadth of criticism, on reading, seems entirely justified:

 https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/08/why-britain-failed-coronavirus-pandemic/615166/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=share (https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/08/why-britain-failed-coronavirus-pandemic/615166/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=share)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on August 15, 2020, 11:30:48 am

I dont need lecturing about variability, difficulties or diferences in national death rates. I'm prepared to give leeway and account for time to react. Yet are in mid August, half a year after the government knew enough about C19 and, after a litany of testing failures, the latest ONS studies of positive tests to population infection level estimates indicate we are still missing about 80% of those infected in just the first T.  Big contracts went to the likes of Serco. These missing positives was my key point from the beginning of raising this ratio issue.. it has massive implications about our ability to fight new outbreaks, so what government sympathy does anybody fair expect? Show me some other western nations doing this badly on TTT.

I'm not looking for sympathy for the government (god forbid) - I was just asking questions about the death figures and how we should measure them accurately.  Since we're no longer talking about that (unless you want to discuss the points raised?) I'm actually interested in the ONS analysis re population prevalence / recorded cases and how they compare to other countries in Europe -do you have any links to similar statistical analysis for other countries?

You seem to be defending the change. As the mean time to death is reported as anything from 18 to 20 days with a long tail for those on ventilators I'd suggest 35 days would be way more prudent.  The removal of 5000 deaths which is more than a tenth of official covid deaths should be ringing alarm bells when the data says less than 60 a week from baseline stats would be genuinely non covid related. The number of days simply does not affect the practically of their use, or the previous practice of having no limit would have been changed earlier. The official stats are already about 10,000 less than ONS reported covid deaths so you must be misrepresenting what More or Less actually said if you think they said the government were overcounting (I suspect they are just slightly overcounting current weekly numbers).
 
No I don't have data from elsewhere but bioscience colleagues before I left work said the official count systems in the EU were nearly all better than the UK; Belgium being the most honest of all. That they have ratios of mainly over 100 (and some up to 200) while we have 50 after the fiddled data is another indication. Wintertree has revised his calculations on the other channel on the latest data and now thinks 60% to 70% of positives are likely being missed so maybe local organised TTT is starting to had an impact (unlike the expensive Serco efforts).

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/aug/11/uk-government-serco-contact-tracing-contract-leaked-memo
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on August 15, 2020, 12:47:45 pm
My niece has had the sense to go to Denmark from September where she has no fees, gets a grant and accomodation is cheaper.

https://studylink.com/countries/denmark/

Whereabouts? I'm in Copenhagen now.

Sorry about the delay as I thought I'd stupidly forgotten the name... turns out I wasn't told; it's.an IT institution in Copenhagen... studying data and maths.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on August 15, 2020, 01:33:20 pm

You seem to be defending the change. As the mean time to death is reported as anything from 18 to 20 days with a long tail for those on ventilators I'd suggest 35 days would be way more prudent.   


The joys of arguing on the internet  :) .  I defended the need to change the current methodology since it had clear and significant issues, I was clear that the move to 28 days was also potentially a problem the other way:

'The move to 28 days for the whole of the UK does look like it will cause issues with undercounting'
' I'm not saying the new way of counting is correct either but I do admit there are significant complexities around trying to provide these numbers particularly in real time.'

Maybe 35 days would be a better cutoff than 28 days, that argument is not the same as saying the new figures are nothing more than government gerrymandering.


The official stats are already about 10,000 less than ONS reported covid deaths so you must be misrepresenting what More or Less actually said if you think they said the government were overcounting (I suspect they are just slightly overcounting current weekly numbers).


What to say to that  :o.   

From the More or Less

'now its swapped, daily figures from Public Health England are coming in much higher, sometimes twice as high as those calculated by looking at registered deaths .  The latest ONS figures are hovering around 20 deaths a day rather than 50.' 

I didn't expect to need to transcribe from a very well respected show/podcast but given what you said it seemed worth it.  If you can't find the time to listen to the full 10 minutes, this sections is around 4:00-4:30 (trying not to be sarcastic  ;) ).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on August 15, 2020, 01:41:46 pm
The latest ONS figures are always going to be undercounts for a month due to the slow speed of processing death stats from death certificates on home deaths.

"this confirms that the previous methodology was almost certainly over-counting deaths and that over-counting was becoming much more significant as time goes on and the population of older people with a positive coronovirus test increases."

The fact is the government stats consistently undercounted covid deaths during the significant excess death period and for a while after it's only recently the position switched. The total undercount was over 10,000, now it's about 15,000 and nothing in the broadcast indicates any different. So More or Less are just saying its current weekly deaths that were undercounted which was my point about your sloppy  comment in quotes above.

On the A level subject I found an analysis of the algorithm.

https://ffteducationdatalab.org.uk/2020/08/a-level-results-2020-how-have-grades-been-calculated/

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on August 15, 2020, 01:50:26 pm
The latest ONS figures are always going to be undercounts for a month due to the slow speed of processing death stats from death certificates on home deaths.

Another completely different point, there's a bit of pattern here.  I'm not going to argue since its obviously not worth continuing this discussion, particularly since you can't bring yourself to acknowledge the fact that you were incorrect in accusing me of misrepresenting something you couldn't be bothered to listen to.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on August 15, 2020, 01:54:02 pm
I just explained why in the edit above, as I guessed that response.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on August 15, 2020, 02:07:25 pm
The latest ONS figures are always going to be undercounts for a month due to the slow speed of processing death stats from death certificates on home deaths.

"this confirms that the previous methodology was almost certainly over-counting deaths and that over-counting was becoming much more significant as time goes on and the population of older people with a positive coronovirus test increases."

The fact is the government stats consistently undercounted covid deaths during the significant excess death period and for a while after it's only recently the position switched. The total undercount was over 10,000, now it's about 15,000 and nothing in the broadcast indicates any different. So More or Less are just saying its current weekly deaths that were undercounted which was my point about your sloppy  comment in quotes above.

On the A level subject I found an analysis of the algorithm.

https://ffteducationdatalab.org.uk/2020/08/a-level-results-2020-how-have-grades-been-calculated/

Including the 2nd paragraph from your 'selective' quoting.  Sloppy comments or sloppy reading?  I'm not sure but don't think such language supports constructive discussion. 

'Listen to More or Less from 12/8 (recorded just  before the change) which covers in some detail the issues with PHE data on deaths - this confirms that the previous methodology was almost certainly over-counting deaths and that over-counting was becoming much more significant as time goes on and the population of older people with a positive coronovirus test increases.

They compare deaths reported by gov.uk via previous rules with data produced by ONS from death certificates (which is general viewed as significantly more reliable but has a lag of 1 to 2 weeks in being available) - ONS deaths were significantly high than gov.uk figures during early part of the pandemic but this has now been reversed with ONS figures at end of July less than 50% of gov.uk figures.  The conclusion was that ONS figures are definitely the most accurate numbers but doesn't allow real time view of trends.  Also concluded that Scotland method (28 days) was definitely undercounting deaths, while England method was significantly overcounting deaths over the more recent period.  The move to 28 days for the whole of the UK does look like it will cause issues with undercounting, though if you look into the details a number of other figures are available from gov.uk and ONS. '
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on August 15, 2020, 02:11:00 pm
I just explained why in the edit above, as I guessed that response.

And in all seriousness I really suggest listening to More or Less in general at the moment, its coverage of coronovirus has been excellent and often enlightening.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on August 15, 2020, 04:29:16 pm
It's my favourite radio show and although I think it gets the emphasis slightly wrong occasionally it really annoys me when people misuse it in arguments. In any case there is no more point arguing about the size of the foot of the elephant in the room. Official UK covid deaths long term should be the much larger ONS number (which they say is still an underestimation due to large numbers who died at home with no proper assessment of covid involvement) and if we are ever to return to normality TTT needs to improve massively and preferably quickly.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on August 15, 2020, 06:03:42 pm
It's my favourite radio show and although I think it gets the emphasis slightly wrong occasionally it really annoys me when people misuse it in arguments. In any case there is no more point arguing about the size of the foot of the elephant in the room. Official UK covid deaths long term should be the much larger ONS number (which they say is still an underestimation due to large numbers who died at home with no proper assessment of covid involvement) and if we are ever to return to normality TTT needs to improve massively and preferably quickly.

This really is going nowhere now so lets call it a day .
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on August 15, 2020, 07:04:57 pm
Moderately changing the subject - OFQUAL have released the criteria for exam appeals.

And they seem different from what Gavin Williamson promised...

🤦‍♂️
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 16, 2020, 07:07:29 am
Moderately changing the subject - OFQUAL have released the criteria for exam appeals.

And they seem different from what Gavin Williamson promised...

🤦‍♂️

And, apparently, they have already withdrawn them.

 https://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/level-results-appeal-ofqual-policy-suspended-why-a9672606.html (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/level-results-appeal-ofqual-policy-suspended-why-a9672606.html)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on August 16, 2020, 07:36:04 am
OFQUAL have released the criteria for exam appeals. And they seem different from what Gavin Williamson promised...
And, apparently, they have already withdrawn them.
At the same time as the DfE launches a trust-building campaign to convince parents it’s safe for their kids to return to school. Oh dear...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on August 16, 2020, 09:14:47 am
I suspect OFQUAL has Suddenly thought “how are we going to process 250-400 000 appeals”?...

From Triple Lock to Triple Cock-up.

No A level determining process was going to be perfect or fair (eg if it advantaged students this year against next) - but they’ve had 4-5 months to figure this out and model what the outcomes would be. As well as a weeks warning from Scotland!!

Anyway... cases continue to rise across Europe. Sweepstake on when Bars will have to close? I’ll go for 2nd week of Oct.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on August 17, 2020, 02:25:58 pm
i think there won't be a blanket ban, will opt for local shutdowns.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on August 17, 2020, 05:47:18 pm
I haven't found any good statistics, but while cases are going up across Europe, are hospital cases rising at all?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Sidehaas on August 17, 2020, 08:05:58 pm
I haven't found any good statistics, but while cases are going up across Europe, are hospital cases rising at all?

https://www.connexionfrance.com/French-news/Covid-in-France-Why-cases-rising-but-hospitalisations-not-epidemiologist-explains-and-warns-risk-still-exists
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on August 26, 2020, 05:30:32 am
It seems that some early UK cases were being missed because of restrictions on testing arrangements.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/aug/25/nottinghamshire-woman-75-may-be-first-known-uk-covid-victim
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on September 02, 2020, 01:49:43 pm
Bolton and Trafford which were due to be released from the additional lockdown measures today, are now not being so as the number of cases has risen drastically.

https://twitter.com/slowbikeiain/status/1301130250416517120?s=09

I'm losing track but I struggle to understand how Hancock can insist that these measures are having/can have an effect given he's having to re-introduce the additional measures effectively before any 'relaxing' has had time to have an effect. Doesn't this show that the additional measures don't work (or, from my N = 1 perspective, are being completely ignored by a large proportion of people)?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on September 02, 2020, 01:57:59 pm
Doesn't this show that the additional measures don't work (or, from my N = 1 perspective, are being completely ignored by a large proportion of people)?

To make it n=2 I went to my village shop for the first time in a while yesterday, and I was the only one of six shoppers who came and went wearing a mask.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: jwi on September 02, 2020, 02:27:20 pm
I am too lazy to google, how much would you be fined for not wearing a mask? It is €135 if you do not have one on here in Toulouse.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on September 02, 2020, 02:33:53 pm
I am too lazy to google, how much would you be fined for not wearing a mask? It is €135 if you do not have one on here in Toulouse.

Quote
Presently, those who refuse to wear a face covering where it is required face a £100 fine, which can be reduced to £50 if it is paid within 14 days.

But under the new measures, the penalty will double for each subsequent offence, up to a maximum of £3,200.

After your first offence, I think the reduction doesn't apply.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on September 02, 2020, 02:34:19 pm
Doesn't this show that the additional measures don't work (or, from my N = 1 perspective, are being completely ignored by a large proportion of people)?

To make it n=2 I went to my village shop for the first time in a while yesterday, and I was the only one of six shoppers who came and went wearing a mask.

You must live and operate in a very different world to mine as despite going into multiple shops from our local village deli, Coop and tesco express, huge Asda, Aldi and Waitrose supermarkets and even House of Fraser in Medowhall i have only ever seen one person NOT wearing a mask and he was about 90. Likewise the pubs and restaurants i have been to. There is the odd case of a few people getting closer than they should but its minimal.

Have not visited a town center weatherspoons type venue but have passed them and they looked OK too.

Are you deliberately going looking?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on September 02, 2020, 02:42:16 pm
Have not visited a town center weatherspoons type venue but have passed them and they looked OK too.

Are you deliberately going looking?

No, I just happen to live <1 mile from the highest concentration of infections currently recorded within the UK. Perhaps there's some kind of correlation there.

To turn that around, are you deliberately looking past the numbers (and 'enhanced measures') to support your experience?

EDIT: and yes, I think central Preston (office location) and Nelson (v. close to home) are very different to where you live. The map here should make it pretty clear:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51768274

Pendle = Live
Preston = Work (avoiding mostly but not entirely)
Calderdale = Cycle through (Hebden Bridge etc.)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on September 02, 2020, 03:06:12 pm

Are you deliberately going looking?

Barely been inside anywhere other than our local farm shop, where mask wearing was around 75%, Co-op petrol station in Ingleton where it was around 50% and our local shop as above. Went into Leeds for the first time since lockdown one Friday and uptake seemed to be better overall.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on September 02, 2020, 03:11:13 pm
The worst place I have seen for mask compliance is Skipton. It was abysmal. By contrast Leicester is a haven of compliance. Its almost as if the population of the Dales is dominated by the recalcitrant, contrarian, right wing elderly...

Whats your local farm shop Stubbs? Sounds like an idyllic lifestyle.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on September 02, 2020, 03:14:15 pm
The worst place I have seen for mask compliance is Skipton. It was abysmal. By contrast Leicester is a haven of compliance. Its almost as if the population of the Dales is dominated by the recalcitrant, contrarian, right wing elderly...

Whats your local farm shop Stubbs? Sounds like an idyllic lifestyle.

If it's Keelham Farm Shop then, to be fair, it is quite literally to die for.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dunnyg on September 02, 2020, 03:34:00 pm
I went in there the other day, looks quality, only had a dump though.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on September 02, 2020, 03:36:43 pm
The worst place I have seen for mask compliance is Skipton. It was abysmal. By contrast Leicester is a haven of compliance. Its almost as if the population of the Dales is dominated by the recalcitrant, contrarian, right wing elderly...

Whats your local farm shop Stubbs? Sounds like an idyllic lifestyle.

If it's Keelham Farm Shop then, to be fair, it is quite literally to die for.

We’re number one! 😷

Yeah Keelham, we’ve always done bulk order of dry goods from a hippie coop (Lembas) and we got a fruit delivery sorted during lockdown so only need to do the fun shopping at the farm shop.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on September 02, 2020, 06:04:04 pm
Have not visited a town center weatherspoons type venue but have passed them and they looked OK too.

Are you deliberately going looking?

No, I just happen to live <1 mile from the highest concentration of infections currently recorded within the UK. Perhaps there's some kind of correlation there.

To turn that around, are you deliberately looking past the numbers (and 'enhanced measures') to support your experience?

EDIT: and yes, I think central Preston (office location) and Nelson (v. close to home) are very different to where you live. The map here should make it pretty clear:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51768274

Pendle = Live
Preston = Work (avoiding mostly but not entirely)
Calderdale = Cycle through (Hebden Bridge etc.)

Are people genuinely not wearing masks.

I am not looking for anything to be honest just trying to go round as normally as i can both with work and personal life but i am not seeing anything like what you are saying. In sheffield now and about to go for dinner with clients to Nonnas on Eccy road and expect it will all be fine but if it isnt i will let you know.

Went to the big Asda on the Parkway at lunchtime and everyone was wearing masks.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on September 02, 2020, 06:27:56 pm
As I alluded to in my first post today; adherence here (to both the enhanced measures, and wearing of masks) seems pretty poor and cases seem to be continuing to rise.

This leaves me to think that either the enhanced measures aren't working or that people aren't complying with them sufficiently for them to work. My experience points to the latter. Remember the enhanced lockdown means people such as myself shouldn't be socialising with anyone other than my household, anywhere. We shouldn't use public transport unless necessary etc.

In my immediate peer group (friends [inc. members of this parish], colleagues and neighbours) I can give significantly more examples of people not complying than I would've been able to earlier in the year. I've moved area from the RV (which is doing comparatively well, and is significantly more affluent) to Pendle.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 02, 2020, 06:44:42 pm
Everywhere I’ve been since the rule came in (Manchester and suburbs - and a Penrith Sainsbury's a couple of times) has been 100% compliance. Apart from a young Russian sounding couple in Decathlon.

At the vets on Tuesday - everyone wearing them - even though the chat with the vet and animal handover was all done in the car park.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fultonius on September 02, 2020, 07:33:12 pm
Glasgow is now under some form of extra restrictions short of lockdown. I'd say the advice is relativelyclear , if a little odd.

We cannot meet other households inside, but we can meet them in "catering" as long as we follow the guidelines (i.e. maintain 2m distance)....no idea how that really constitutes a "meeting" at all, I suppose you can sit at opposite ends of a big table. Why this is any different from meeting at home I have no idea.

Just booked flights to Kalymnos (luckily mega cheap, was always a risk) the day before they introduced 14d quarantine from...Greece.....Joy!  Why is it they're not just testing on entry to uk, and again, say, 5 days later?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 02, 2020, 08:28:03 pm
This tale of non functioning track and trace is worrying

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/02/race-to-track-200-people-on-flight-after-officials-fail-to-tell-airline-of-covid-cases?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

I’ve a friend and his wife and daughter who are all In quarantine post Croatia trip. And brother in law and fam same after returning from France. None of them have been contacted as to Check whether they are Still Obeying quarantine...

I really want track and trace etc... to work - but honestly...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on September 02, 2020, 09:21:40 pm

We cannot meet other households inside, but we can meet them in "catering" as long as we follow the guidelines (i.e. maintain 2m distance)....no idea how that really constitutes a "meeting" at all, I suppose you can sit at opposite ends of a big table. Why this is any different from meeting at home I have no idea.


I think (and don't necessarily agree with the reasoning) that a lot of the transfers have been from large unregulated house parties, whereas if you met in a catered establishment then guidelines can be implemented and details recorded.

Or the cynic in me says that the want to keep hospitality business getting some income, rather than more cash going to supermarkets on cheap booze for parties.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on September 03, 2020, 12:07:30 pm
Nicola Sturgeon said their track and trace (which seems to work a hell of a lot better than the centralised English version) evidenced spread in households. It's much easier to behave badly on social distancing in private than in public, and indoor spread is much higher risk than outdoor. It's especially depressing in the face of the huge amount of evidence to see public parks being closed again in Europe.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on September 03, 2020, 01:53:59 pm

We cannot meet other households inside, but we can meet them in "catering" as long as we follow the guidelines (i.e. maintain 2m distance)....no idea how that really constitutes a "meeting" at all, I suppose you can sit at opposite ends of a big table. Why this is any different from meeting at home I have no idea.


Or the cynic in me says that the want to keep hospitality business getting some income, rather than more cash going to supermarkets on cheap booze for parties.

Why does this always get portrayed as a bad thing on here. I think its vitally important we try everything we can to get the countries economy going and support businesses, especially the smaller independents who are really on there arses at the minute.

Why not meet someone at a pub/cafe/restaurant instead of your house, everyone is a winner.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on September 03, 2020, 02:26:19 pm
Why not meet someone at a pub/cafe/restaurant instead of your house, everyone is a winner.

Because in Manchester, it is against the guidelines (though not against the law).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on September 03, 2020, 02:39:01 pm
I'd find it far easier making such a decision if the evidence to support it was made available (what do you lot all get up to in your homes? I think I'm missing out!) and there was public trust/confidence in the way Gov. restrictions are being imposed.

The Bolton/Trafford debacle does not suggest they've got a grip (figures showing where things were headed were published by M.E.N. in the preceding days).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on September 03, 2020, 02:41:49 pm
Why does this always get portrayed as a bad thing on here. I think its vitally important we try everything we can to get the countries economy going and support businesses, especially the smaller independents who are really on there arses at the minute.

My son works in hospitality (kitchen manager in a national mid-range chain, so not an independent) and I am certainly very glad he still has a job at this point in time. If it can be done, then I agree it should be. Caveat; I struggle to get a really clear sense of exactly what things are like in the UK.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 03, 2020, 02:50:25 pm
Why not meet someone at a pub/cafe/restaurant instead of your house, everyone is a winner.

Because in Manchester, it is against the guidelines (though not against the law).

Except it is allowed. If you sit at separate tables. That could be c.1m apart...

It is a mess....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on September 03, 2020, 03:45:52 pm
Wife met friends for coffee last Sunday, there were 5 of them at a table, if they added the 6th (who didn't pitch) they would have had to split to 2 tables.

Mess indeed.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on September 04, 2020, 07:08:34 am
Why not meet someone at a pub/cafe/restaurant instead of your house, everyone is a winner.

Because in Manchester, it is against the guidelines (though not against the law).

Except it is allowed. If you sit at separate tables. That could be c.1m apart...

It is a mess....

Obviously you can get round it but the guidance says:

You should not:

socialise with people you do not live with in other indoor public venues – such as pubs, restaurants, cafes, shops, ............ You may attend these venues with people you live with (or are in a support bubble with), but should avoid interaction with individuals or groups from other households.


which means don't book a table next to friends as that's obviously taking the piss.

The problem is, as you rightly point out, the rules seem unfair/inconsistent/poorly thought out, the government don't seem to be on the ball (as per PaulB's comment, Trafford numbers were going up daily despite numbers of tests going down) and when Boris asked a group of his own MPs how many people could socialise together indoors, less than half knew the correct answer.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on September 04, 2020, 07:42:06 am
Can anyone suggest what the guidance should say?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on September 04, 2020, 09:39:04 am
Crazy talk Will.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on September 04, 2020, 11:28:12 am
Can anyone suggest what the guidance should say?

Crazy talk Will.

For me it's a matter of communication rather than what's written in the guidance (and I guess, evidence to support what's being said). I can't imagine it's easy to foresee every scenario and legislate for it quickly and without confusion. However, it's not unreasonable to expect that people implementing measures should be required to at least attempt to brief them out to the public. If they want them to succeed I can't really see why you wouldn't do this?

The original measures came in at 10pm the Thur before Eid and were splurged onto Twitter by Matt Hancock. The extended measures had even less of an announcement. The level of understanding in these areas of what is and isn't allowed will be related to how much you've given a sh*t to go looking. You've also got a scenario where the Mayor of Greater Manchester didn't want areas releasing, and the M.E.N. were showing the trend throughout the BH which was undoubtedly going to end up with Bolton/Trafford remaining in the extended measures, yet, this only happened after they'd been released for 12hrs. That does no portray a picture of competence (especially when claiming swift and decisive action after the fact).

Also, as I've said above, the enhanced measures don't seem to be being effective. I'd personally like to understand that more. Do they not work? Do people not know what they are? Do people not care what they are? etc.

To me I find it confusing that I can't socialise with anyone in my house/garden/local park but I can go to work and sit in an office (Victorian terrace conversion) with 6 other people, a very small kitchen etc. Next week I'll be visiting a construction site near to my parents for which I'll have to overnight but I'm only allowed to stay in a hotel, rather than staying with them as usual etc. ; this is starting to make more sense with people saying Sturgeon mentioned that T&T is showing transmission to be greatest within households (I've struggled to find much on this that isn't pay-walled) the inference being that people (as other UKBers have suggested) behave better WRT social distancing in public compared to private.

If the answer is the economy is on its knees and thus any transmission risk at all has to come with an economic benefit then so be it but I'd honestly like someone to be bold enough to stand up and say so.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on September 04, 2020, 11:47:29 am
the inference being that people behave better WRT social distancing in public compared to private.

If the answer is the economy is on its knees and thus any transmission risk at all has to come with an economic benefit

My guess is that these two points explain the current guidance. The second point could be acknowledged by a scientist but not a politician (imagine how the press/opposition would present it even if it is, on balance, the right call).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on September 04, 2020, 12:15:46 pm
Fundamentally I don't agree with your last point; scientists can provide evidence, interpretations and predictions but the difficult decision on economic impact and where to 'allow' that risk is inherently a political decision.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on September 05, 2020, 12:54:09 pm
https://twitter.com/TFitzgeraldMEN/status/1301949454883401730?s=19

 :popcorn:

So the most stringent measures on socialising aren't in the borough with the highest figures  :tumble:.

From what I understand, from Tues, Pendle still has restrictions on socialising but the remaining closed businesses can open as per the rest of the UK.

I'd take a guess that the socialising restrictions will be dropped around the 11/9 rather than acknowledging they're not really working (/2P).

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 06, 2020, 08:46:59 am
I thought this quote summed up well how the Scottish and English governments have handled things

“Thankfully, the Scottish government seems to understand that people want to be at work and don’t need to be encouraged to do such a thing.

“In England it seems like schools are a thinly veiled reason to get people back to work, back to business as usual, even though lockdown has presented all these new opportunities and ways to reset.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on September 06, 2020, 10:55:49 am
Where's the quote from?

Personally I find it baffling that Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP administration are lauded like Jacinda Ardern when the outcomes in Scotland have been indistinguishable or at best fractionally better than in England. Truly a triumph of presentation over substance...

As for schools being a 'thinly veiled reason to get people back to work' for those who would like to work but aren't fortunate enough to be able to Zoom to work from home they and other childcare providers are a something of a necessity...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 06, 2020, 04:34:26 pm
To me it isn’t baffling it’s obvious.

Dealt the same set of cards - the Scottish govt has played them far more fairly and transparently than the English/Westminster govt. Therefore generating more buy in and trust from the population. Plenty of examples - but early on the Scottish chief health advisor was sacked/resigned for breaching Lockdown rules vs how the English govt dealt with Cummings. The exams U turn was performed first by Scotland then by England - but with a mea culpa from Scotland rather than ‘of course our algorithm is right’ followed by the climb down.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on September 07, 2020, 09:55:32 am
Yes, I agree the ratings for Sturgeon and the Scottish assembly should be a bit better than for Westminster, it's hard to imagine how communication could have been any worse there. I just don't get why they are at record levels and rising, fundamentally they've made the same decisions and mistakes at the same times with the same end results, with other things such as the Alec Salmond case debacle thrown in but nothing seems to leave a mark...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on September 08, 2020, 09:24:58 am
Interesting article, though I’ve not dug out the paper yet.
 https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-gps-recorded-three-times-more-suspected-cases-of-covid-19-than-official-figures-12066280 (https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-gps-recorded-three-times-more-suspected-cases-of-covid-19-than-official-figures-12066280)

I’m plowing through a mountain of MOD/Civil service contractor procurement guidelines and forms that landed in my inbox at 17:30 last night as the Civil Service COVID dam broke yesterday and the backlog is flooding everybody.
I’m pondering whether this backlog is is going to change the data on the pandemic, given how many depts have been all but shut down since March...?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on September 08, 2020, 03:14:18 pm
Bolton going back into economic lockdown:

https://twitter.com/JenWilliamsMEN/status/1303313921483378688?s=19

"hospitality, bars, takeaways"

I'd take a guess that the socialising restrictions will be dropped around the 11/9 rather than acknowledging they're not really working (/2P).

I was clearly wrong; they seem to need another dose of seeing that local restrictions don't appear to work (or the evidence of home-transmission is VERY convincing).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Muscle.Coach on September 08, 2020, 06:49:26 pm
What are people’s opinions on wearing masks in climbing walls? They seem to be wearing them in America yet when I go to the wall here is seems very lax. I’ve tried to wear one but it becomes quite unpleasant after a couple of hours of trying hard.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Wil on September 08, 2020, 06:52:14 pm
I have the luxury of being able to go in the middle of the day, as such I'm not too bothered about masks as the wall is quiet. I'm still inclined to avoid the wall in the evenings, I suppose I'd consider a mask if I was there in the evening a lot. It does feel like pissing in the wind if you're the only one though.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Muscle.Coach on September 08, 2020, 07:02:12 pm
Pissing in the wind seems a good way of describing it. I’m inclined to not wear masks at all.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on September 09, 2020, 08:49:11 am
Guidance here is wear one when entering, and any time when you are not actually climbing, but not sure how you can avoid touching your face after pulling on holds and putting it on and off, so sounds a bit counterproductive
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on September 09, 2020, 08:59:47 am
More mixed messaging from the govt this morning. Matt Hancock simultaneously claiming that there is spare testing capacity in the system, yes the pinch point is in the labs, but the public are actually the cause of any problems by getting tested when they’re asymptomatic and aren’t eligible for getting a test.

Just as cold and winter flu season kicks off seems an odd time to be discouraging people from getting a test if they’re worried. But I guess someone has to be blamed.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 09, 2020, 08:59:55 am
The mixed messaging from the Govt this morning is terrible..... (Ali k's post arrived at the same time..)

"Groups of more than 6 to be banned (inside and outside)"
Actually - they are ALREADY banned - its just that fines can only be dished out to groups of more than 30... everyone (including parts of my family much to my surprise) seems to think up to 30 is fine at the moment... ffs..

Now Hapless Hanccok is saying "Too many people getting CV19 tests are not elligible" (because the system can't cope).
Ahem - arent these EXACTLY the people you need to test with TTI to pick up possible outbreaks/spreads? His message tells people not to bother getting tested if they are not sure - when it should be "if in doubt get a test". Good grief...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: AJM on September 09, 2020, 09:08:30 am
"Groups of more than 6 to be banned (inside and outside)"
Actually - they are ALREADY banned - its just that fines can only be dished out to groups of more than 30... everyone (including parts of my family much to my surprise) seems to think up to 30 is fine at the moment... ffs..

30 is the law, 6 is the guidance, up until Monday, right? The reason they can't fine you is that it's discouraged but legal.

I think this may be indicative of the weight people put on guidance and perhaps a shift from people doing things because they think they should to people doing things that the law requires - going the extra mile versus minimum compliance...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on September 09, 2020, 09:11:10 am
The testing issue is appalling. It feels like the system is a week at most away from falling over completely. I don't know why I'm remotely surprised.

The rhetoric on 'young people need to stop gathering' alongside 'go to work, take public transport and make sure you go to Pret at lunchtime' is a disgrace. This government is only interested in the public's social activity lining the pockets of shareholders. Anything else is considered surplus to economic requirements. Clearly if things are bad (and Whitty/Vallance/Van Tam) seem to think so, a proper lockdown and extension of the furlough scheme will be necessary, just like everything else in the world. Trying to keep people working while telling them their personal freedoms are restricted cannot last. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nai on September 09, 2020, 09:12:29 am
The mixed messaging from the Govt this morning is terrible..... (Ali k's post arrived at the same time..)

"Groups of more than 6 to be banned (inside and outside)"
Actually - they are ALREADY banned - its just that fines can only be dished out to groups of more than 30... everyone (including parts of my family much to my surprise) seems to think up to 30 is fine at the moment... ffs..

It's a slight tweak isn't it, previously you all members of one household could meet with all members of another household, so no limit on numbers, just use good old British common sense

From https://www.gov.uk/guidance/meeting-people-from-outside-your-household-from-4-july

Quote from: lyingtorybastards
You should:
only socialise indoors with members of up to 2 households ‒ this includes when dining out or going to the pub
   
socialise outdoors in a group of up to 6 people from different households or up to 2 households (anyone in your support bubble counts as one household)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nutty on September 09, 2020, 09:24:05 am
"Groups of more than 6 to be banned (inside and outside)"
Actually - they are ALREADY banned - its just that fines can only be dished out to groups of more than 30... everyone (including parts of my family much to my surprise) seems to think up to 30 is fine at the moment... ffs..

30 is the law, 6 is the guidance, up until Monday, right? The reason they can't fine you is that it's discouraged but legal.

I think this may be indicative of the weight people put on guidance and perhaps a shift from people doing things because they think they should to people doing things that the law requires - going the extra mile versus minimum compliance...
I think people were following the guidance generally, then a certain government advisor (and the entire cabinet in backing him up) basically argued that following guidance is for schmucks and you're fine as long as nobody can prove you broke the law. Guess what? Everyone now ignores guidance.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Yossarian on September 09, 2020, 09:34:18 am
I’ve been back from France for nearly 2 weeks. Of the 7 people I know who came back around the same time, only one has been contacted by the quarantine gestapo. She got a succession of text messages and then a couple of phone calls.

I think it’s bizarre in that if they’re using an automated system to text people then to contact everyone would be simpler than picking people at random. 

Also, Border Force at Calais asked whether we’d done the form (I hadn’t but was going to do it on the ferry) - they insisted that it HAD to be ready to be scanned and scrutinised before we left Dover. When we got there we followed various signs indicating “quarantine tracking checks ahead” (or something like that). Cue a bloke in hi-viz waving everyone through. I thought this was a one-off as it was late at night, but apparently everyone else had the same. If you’d chosen to play dumb and not fill the form in then there would be no record of your trip.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on September 09, 2020, 09:37:56 am
Cue a bloke in hi-viz waving everyone through. I thought this was a one-off as it was late at night, but apparently everyone else had the same.

It's almost as if extra checks at border points lead to lengthy queues which the port authorities don't want to deal with. I'm sure that's relevant to something else in the news.  :wall:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on September 09, 2020, 09:46:02 am

The rhetoric on 'young people need to stop gathering' alongside 'go to work, take public transport and make sure you go to Pret at lunchtime' is a disgrace. This government is only interested in the public's social activity lining the pockets of shareholders. Anything else is considered surplus to economic requirements.

What utter bollocks. Work, public transport, pret etc and also climbing walls, gyms, pubs etc. Are all things that can be managed and controlled. Peoples houses are not ( which is a good thing) and it appears that many people can’t be trusted to follow the rules.

Are climbing walls open just to line shareholders pockets. No.

The economy is important whether you like it or not as it pays for everything. It therefore comes higher up the list than family gatherings.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on September 09, 2020, 10:24:32 am

What utter bollocks. Work, public transport, pret etc and also climbing walls, gyms, pubs etc. Are all things that can be managed and controlled. Peoples houses are not ( which is a good thing) and it appears that many people can’t be trusted to follow the rules.

Are climbing walls open just to line shareholders pockets. No.

The economy is important whether you like it or not as it pays for everything. It therefore comes higher up the list than family gatherings.

We're yet to see any actual evidence that family gatherings are causing the spike; just the governments word. They know it to be true but are avoiding releasing the evidence proving it; quelle surprise. Forgive me for not being convinced.

You have repeatedly said on these forums that all the pubs and cafes you have visited have been managed and controlled, which is convenient as it neatly fits with your pro-business view. Thats obviously good if thats the case, and I have been to a good number which have good systems, but I've also been to a good number which haven't had systems full stop, never mind good ones. Your contention that 60 people inside a pub is managed but 7 people in a house isn't doesn't stand up to me I'm afraid. I'm perfectly willing to admit that my worldview does not prioritise business and their interests, so perhaps thats where the difference lies.

Of course walls opening is not solely for shareholders but its not controversial or even unexpected that the government is prioritising certain sectors which are friendly towards them; eg pubs. Does anyone seriously think opening these in the way they did was a good idea? I'm caught betwixt and between because I am simultaneously glad they're open (and intend to visit!) while also not being convinced they should be.

I don't have the answers, no one does, but I do object to the crashing difference in rhetoric between ' go to the pub, heres a voucher, spend spend spend' and 'don't have a few friends round.' Its obvious that the risk exists for both and for the government to pretend otherwise is so dishonest. Its that which I object to more than the policy itself. If they presented it as 'this is a sacrifice we need to make to keep schools open' I would probably be more onside.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on September 09, 2020, 10:28:37 am

I think it’s bizarre in that if they’re using an automated system to text people then to contact everyone would be simpler than picking people at random. 


Presumably this is just a pricing issue; cheaper to only send a few texts rather than 1000s. presumably this job has been outsourced to someone so they will have a contract to contact a certain number of people?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on September 09, 2020, 10:29:25 am
We're yet to see any actual evidence that family gatherings are causing the spike; just the governments word. They know it to be true but are avoiding releasing the evidence proving it; quelle surprise. Forgive me for not being convinced.

You have repeatedly said on these forums that all the pubs and cafes you have visited have been managed and controlled, which is convenient as it neatly fits with your pro-business view. Thats obviously good if thats the case, and I have been to a good number which have good systems, but I've also been to a good number which haven't had systems full stop, never mind good ones. Your contention that 60 people inside a pub is managed but 7 people in a house isn't doesn't stand up to me I'm afraid. I'm perfectly willing to admit that my worldview does not prioritise business and their interests, so perhaps thats where the difference lies.

Quote
The health secretary blamed the rise 'partly due to socialising by people in their 20s and 30s' and the virus spreading 'significantly' at a number of pubs, discovered by contact tracing.

source: https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/bolton-pubs-restaurants-ordered-shut-18898660
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on September 09, 2020, 10:40:31 am
My view may come over as being totally business focused but it’s not the case. I look at everything as a whole not just coronavirus related and I feel that the economy and education  should be prioritised as they have longer term issues if they fail than people not being able to get together in groups greater than 6.

Any business that does not manage the situation properly looses the right to operate and should be closed.

It’s your assumption that the government makes its decision based on shareholder pressure that got my goat. A vast majority of businesses are not tax dodging behemoths and are just wanting to survive this.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on September 09, 2020, 11:00:36 am

It’s your assumption that the government makes its decision based on shareholder pressure that got my goat. A vast majority of businesses are not tax dodging behemoths and are just wanting to survive this.


Yep, I absolutely agree. I do think though, that even in a pub where there are solid systems in place, having 60 people in a building is an obvious risk. The pubs in Bolton which Paul linked to might have been like this; we don't know. A bit of honesty from the government would go a long way I think. Instead they have turned the cannon onto a demographic that doesn't vote for them because they know they have fucked it, and any semblance of investigation makes it plain. Its arse covering plain and simple.

I don't actually disagree with your view of prioritising education; thats top of my list too. Where the economy can be safely opened I agree with that too, but all the evidence of which sectors were allowed to open first screams of backhands and favours being granted. The fact there is no extended furlough scheme in place yet for sectors which still aren't open is mental; other countries do it so there is no reason why we can't. Its this which leads me to conclude that the government is making decisions on an ideological 'economy first and fuck everything else' basis rather than what is actually best for the country and the people. I don't mean completely safe either because clearly that would involve doing nothing for years.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on September 09, 2020, 11:23:41 am


The fact there is no extended furlough scheme in place yet for sectors which still aren't open is mental; other countries do it so there is no reason why we can't. Its this which leads me to conclude that the government is making decisions on an ideological 'economy first and fuck everything else' basis rather than what is actually best for the country and the people.


I think, added to this, is just the shite that gets spouted day-to-day. One minister talks about widespread rapid testing soon. Another says this will allow 24hr Covid passes meaning people can visit places like theaters. SAGE says 24hr passes are unlikely as the organisation needed for it would be so complex.

Ideas just seem to be spouted on the hoof in interviews with no thought to whether it's actually likely to happen or the additional contradictory information being given to the poor sods who are trying to work out how they can stop their arts venues from closing.

I've seen very little evidence of ministerial competence in such scenarios.

Where I do think it's gone, largely, well is the travel corridor list. Yes it changes frequently but the risks of it changing are well known, decisions are made quickly and have some evidence backing the decisions/changes.

Most other things just seem a mess...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on September 09, 2020, 11:46:14 am
Does anyone have a view on how risky air travel is? Some studies I've seen have said that given air is changed frequently and goes through some heat filter, the risk is actually quite low, perhaps unless you're in the immediate vicinity of someone.

I'm not able to work from abroad now which makes visiting family harder as we have tied in holiday/work to make a 3-4 days of travel (driving) justifiable.

The change in rules about remote working has scuppered our plans for next week...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on September 09, 2020, 11:58:17 am
Most of the arguments around the issue of policy/guidance/law seem to me to involve so much political posturing by people with agendas. I don't have strong opinions on any of the above, except that I have a vague fuzzy half-formed view that the current hazard from damage to the economy currently seems to be a greater short, medium and long term risk to the public than the current risk to the public of suffering a bad outcome from covid.

My thinking is along the lines of what is the current likelihood of:
a. me catching covid
b. me dying/becoming seriously ill from covid
c. me spreading covid to someone I love
d. them dying/becoming seriously ill from covid
e. me spreading covid to someone else
f. them dying/becoming seriously ill from covid

...
a. apparently currently very low.. somewhere around 1:25,000 population-wide according to David Spiegelhalter today. compare that to other serious health issues - cancer, heart attack, stroke, diabetes - and I think I'm correct in saying that in many cases the risk of a bad outcome from covid is comparable or less.
b. less than 3% (assuming becoming one of the currently 1-in-25,000 who catches covid)
c. less than 'a'
therefore d, e and f should be less than 'a' but difficult to say for higher-risk people in old age, especially over 80?


But I'd be interested in hearing others' opinions on the risk figures as I'm likely to be incorrect.


edit: for clarity
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on September 09, 2020, 12:18:31 pm
Most of the arguments around the issue of policy/guidance/law seem to me to involve so much political posturing by people with agendas. I don't have strong opinions on any of the above, except that I have a vague fuzzy half-formed view that the current hazard from damage to the economy currently seems to be a greater short, medium and long term risk to the public than the current risk to the public of suffering a bad outcome from covid.

My thinking is along the lines of what is the current likelihood of:
a. me catching covid
b. me dying/becoming seriously ill from covid
c. me spreading covid to someone I love
d. them dying/becoming seriously ill from covid
e. me spreading covid to someone else
f. them dying/becoming seriously ill from covid

...
a. apparently currently very low.. somewhere around 1:25,000 population-wide according to David Spiegelhalter today. compare that to other serious health issues - cancer, heart attack, stroke, diabetes - and I think I'm correct in saying that in many cases the risk is comparable or less.
b. less than 3% (assuming becoming one of the currently 1-in-25,000 who catches covid)
c. less than 'a'
therefore d, e and f should be less than 'a' but difficult to say for higher-risk people in old age, especially over 80?


But I'd be interested in hearing others' opinions on the risk figures as I'm likely to be incorrect.

Yes.

This.

However, “this” a. changes when prevalence in the community changes. Increase the prevalence and all the other risks rise. Including your personal risk, if (yes, I know, “if”) the viral load is a factor in outcome.

So, trying to control that prevalence of infection seems sensible. It seems logical to assume that an all out, rampant, infection rate would be more harmful economically, in short, medium and long term, than sporadic shut downs of limited duration.
Frankly, what ever causes infection rates to rise in an unmanageable manner, logically should be suspended, regardless of peoples attachment to it. Covid might not have an Ebola level of lethality, but let it run free and I think you’d find the results pretty devastating. From what I understand, it’s rather similar to Polio, in many ways. Talking to those who remember those outbreaks, it was pretty awful.
Covid just seems to affect a population that society has less sympathy for...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 09, 2020, 12:21:10 pm
Front testing UK last week was running at 20 new cases per 100000 people. Or 1 per 5000 people. That’s new cases.

So assuming this is an underestimate of the actual number - and that’s new infections not people with it. Let’s say that’s actually 1 in 500-1000 people.

This will also be skewed by demographics - with more in younger people at the moment. So let’s say it’s twice as likely in those 15-40 years old.

So 1 in 250 to 500 people you meet age 15-40 are likely to have it. 

I’ve no intention of going to the wall (maybe at very quiet times), Pub or eating out - because I think those odds are more than I’d chance.

What odds would you take (of death) for catching a flight Pete? (Or anyone else) Genuinely interested - serious Q. It’s not something we think about often!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on September 09, 2020, 12:28:01 pm
I suppose first I'd need to compare with what are the current odds, in a world without Covid, of death from flying? A quick google reveals the approximate odds of being in a plane crash are 1 in 54 million. I'm assuming 'death from flying' = plane crash.. I'm assuming you don't die of eating the chicken sandwich or peanut allergy..

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on September 09, 2020, 12:33:18 pm
And then try to think about the increased odds from flying in a world with Covid, at its current prevalence..

Air travel likely to involve a majority of people under 60, I'd guess. People willing to fly are probably more likely to be risk-takers than risk-averse (in a 'willing to risk catching Covid' sense). So people who fly on average probably have a higher likelihood to have Covid at that point in time, than the average for their age-group.


Pfff.. dunno.. so many variables!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on September 09, 2020, 12:36:27 pm
I suppose first I'd need to compare with what are the current odds, in a world without Covid, of death from flying? A quick google reveals the approximate odds of being in a plane crash are 1 in 54 million. I'm assuming 'death from flying' = plane crash.. I'm assuming you don't die of eating the chicken sandwich or peanut allergy..

People always choose flying as a “risky” activity, but it’s pretty safe as modes of transport go.
Pick riding a Motorbike instead. On the road.


Ultimately, though, it’s a misleading comparison, because you have the choice to ride or not. Because you have some control over when and how. Because you cannot (easily) “spread” your motorcycle accident to a potentially very large number of other people.
These things, should, make attitudes to such a risk far more personal, than should be the case for a risk that affects a much larger proportion of society.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 09, 2020, 12:39:40 pm
My question is what risk (of dying) by getting on a flight do you think is reasonable to you. Not what the stats are - not riding a bike. What chance of you kaarking it on a flight to Kalymnos to do some bolt clipping would you deem acceptable?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on September 09, 2020, 01:18:02 pm


My thinking is along the lines of what is the current likelihood of:
a. me catching covid
b. me dying/becoming seriously ill from covid
c. me spreading covid to someone I love
d. them dying/becoming seriously ill from covid
e. me spreading covid to someone else
f. them dying/becoming seriously ill from covid



My thoughts are basically the same as this - though I've not put any numbers to it. When we have visited high-risk family we've either doing it in an outdoor space whilst maintaining social distancing, or where we've stayed over (i.e. visiting family abroad for a period of time) we have self-isolated (other than walking in the countryside) for 2 weeks in advance. I.e. try to make it so our journey is the highest-risk aspect.

First time we drove (via an overnight ferry) and basically stayed in our room and only interacted with anyone when buying diesel. Now the only real way to visit is flying and we're trying to work out whether it's sensible bearing in mind: 1) we don't want to catch COVID ourselves, and 2) if we passed it on we would give it to high-risk family.

We've assumed that driving is safer than the eurostar/train option, and that in turn is safer than flying. However this article suggests that maybe flying is lower risk than we thought. https://www.newscientist.com/article/2252152-how-likely-are-you-to-be-infected-by-the-coronavirus-on-a-flight/

I guess this just made me start thinking that we have been comfortable with the level of risk if we were to travel via train, so therefore should we be happy with the risk of travelling via plane as well. The fact we'd be visiting and staying with an ill relative means we're very conscious about contracting it ourselves.

The reason for asking was more to see if there was thoughts or evidence about flying that we're not aware of which would inform decisions further.

Edit:

We've also been happy to visit some local restaurants (which put social distancing in place), but the article saying that flying could be less risky than this also made me start to think what's right.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on September 09, 2020, 02:08:54 pm
Quote from: tomtom link=topic=30489.msg616180#msg616180 date=1599650470

So 1 in 250 to 500 people you meet age 15-40 are likely to have it. 

[/quote

What do you class as meet?  Pass in the street, go to the same bar but sit outside, share a bus with, shake hands or give a great big snog.

Unless it’s the 1st I have not been in contact with 250 people in the last six months
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 09, 2020, 02:36:17 pm
Quote from: tomtom link=topic=30489.msg616180#msg616180 date=1599650470

So 1 in 250 to 500 people you meet age 15-40 are likely to have it. 

[/quote

What do you class as meet?  Pass in the street, go to the same bar but sit outside, share a bus with, shake hands or give a great big snog.

Unless it’s the 1st I have not been in contact with 250 people in the last six months

Thats the unknown isnt it...

Does being in the same pub/restaraunt/wall for 1-2 hours as someone with it count... or not...? Does being stood behind someone coughing at the supermarket que count more than the above..

Anyway - its clearly spreading - so 'in general' as a population we are meeting up/socialising (facilitating its spread) more than we can if we want to stop its spread...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on September 09, 2020, 02:45:39 pm
Could this be facilitated by frequency then. Do most of the things we want to but less.
Climbing wall and gym rationing, number of visits to the shops, pubs once a week not three times.
Hard to manage ( maybe not with booking) but the same can be said of the present situation.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on September 09, 2020, 02:46:25 pm
This was first discussed very early during the pandemic, but for me the main difference in the national mood now versus during the first peak is that the sense of solidarity which bound everyone together and dictated their actions has significantly lessened, if not gone altogether. Local lockdowns inevitably hasten this by targeting specific populations, but increasingly I'm not sure how feasible a kind of 'half normal' is. It kind of feels like restrictions need to be a bit more all or nothing; if you're going to do a local lockdown, then do it properly and go full 'The Plague' by Camus with apprpriate financial support for the population rather than in a half assed way.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 09, 2020, 03:26:36 pm
The idea of the national lockdown was to bring shit under control - so numbers were so small they could be tracked - and dealt with locally. In late March it was too widespread - and testing not upnto it so they had to bring it down to tiny numbers of cases.

This we did. But the real danger now is that the number of outbreaks and the spread grows beyond what we can (a) find out a kit via testing and (b) then track with TTI. If that happens we’re back to national lockdown again. I don’t know wtf had happened with the testing but instead of increasing in numbers it seems to have recently been overwhelmed. Sending a message that testing is rationed or in short supply is incredibly defeating to (as you’ve all said) identifying those symptomless people who might not bother getting tested if it were seen as a burden (to their time or to society). Ergo - I’m fucking flabbergasted that Hancock said what he did. He’s such a dimwit that he was looking for an excuse for testing not being up to it - without thinking of the consequences of his messaging. It’s (once again) a politician trying to save his bacon rather than thinkin of the bigger picture.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on September 09, 2020, 03:43:17 pm
I can see how testing is being over run as i know a few people who have got it just to see what the result was, none had any symptoms. One of them has got the test 3 times without any need, shes a proper hypochondriac.

I had always read it that you dont get tested unless you have symptoms. If a member of the family gets it or someone you have been in contact with you isolate then test if you get symptoms. Seems pretty clear to me.

With 66 million of us if we all just get tested on a whim we will get overloaded. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on September 09, 2020, 03:48:05 pm
I can see how testing is being over run as i know a few people who have got it just to see what the result was, none had any symptoms. One of them has got the test 3 times without any need, shes a proper hypochondriac.

If you look back through this thread a while ago I said that our area was (and is still) telling people even without symptoms to get tested. They interviewed someone on the local news who had received 3 tests so far (this was a few weeks ago).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on September 09, 2020, 04:03:37 pm
People seem pretty down on our testing but according to 'more or less' today the UK is doing more tests (per head) than any other European country.
Statista site seems to back that up, 4th highest in the world? https://www.statista.com/statistics/1104645/covid19-testing-rate-select-countries-worldwide/

Don't know whether the UK figures are bullshit, and really each nostril and throat swab is being counted as 'a test'. But if not, isn't the amount of testing currently being done something to be celebrated, or at least acknowledged, especially having come from a rather shit position to now overtaking nearly everyone?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on September 09, 2020, 04:06:09 pm
Surely without people who have no symptoms getting tested we stand no chance of working out the extent of asymptomatic transmission?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 09, 2020, 04:13:00 pm
Surely without people who have no symptoms getting tested we stand no chance of working out the extent of asymptomatic transmission?

Yup. Though your logic seems to be something Hancock has problems dealing with...

Face. Palm. Etc...

Ive been tested twice - both times at the request of the COVID study app - and both times when testing was quiet.

There does seem to be a glaring inconsistency between encouraging everyone to get a test if they wanted 2 months ago to now. And that’s one of the mixed messaging issues.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on September 09, 2020, 04:20:32 pm
It’s impossible to test everyone so your idea is equally as flawed unless we trace every single person who has had contact with a positive testee, which in itself is impossible unless we all stay at home, which is impossible as we will all go mad and the economy will totally disintegrate.

So what do we suggest we do.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 09, 2020, 04:30:58 pm
It’s impossible to test everyone so your idea is equally as flawed unless we trace every single person who has had contact with a positive testee, which in itself is impossible unless we all stay at home, which is impossible as we will all go mad and the economy will totally disintegrate.

So what do we suggest we do.

It’s not impossible - just difficult and expensive...

If you want everyone doing things as ‘normal’ you’ll need to test many many more people than if things are locked down to various degrees.

Also the spatial demands for tests make it hard. Eg 100 odd cases in Norfolk around a meat factory suddenly mean you need X thousand tests In an area were previously you needed a hundred or so.

Anyway - something has cocked up with the TEsting system as there are several reports of the big testing centres being quiet/dead despite people being told no tests there. Whether that’s providing the test kits to the centres or processing the tests...

Gotta go. Would love to post more.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on September 09, 2020, 04:31:36 pm
It’s impossible to test everyone so your idea is equally as flawed unless we trace every single person who has had contact with a positive testee, which in itself is impossible unless we all stay at home, which is impossible as we will all go mad and the economy will totally disintegrate.

So what do we suggest we do.

Straw man.


Edit:

Anyway...
Number of hospitalised patients increased by almost 100 over the last 24hrs. Going from ~750 yesterday to 843 today.
The number on ventilators went from 70 to 80 in the same period.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on September 09, 2020, 05:29:45 pm
People seem pretty down on our testing but according to 'more or less' today the UK is doing more tests (per head) than any other European country.
Statista site seems to back that up, 4th highest in the world? https://www.statista.com/statistics/1104645/covid19-testing-rate-select-countries-worldwide/

Don't know whether the UK figures are bullshit, and really each nostril and throat swab is being counted as 'a test'. But if not, isn't the amount of testing currently being done something to be celebrated, or at least acknowledged, especially having come from a rather shit position to now overtaking nearly everyone?

Unfortunately there’s some difficulty in having faith that figures are not misleading. (https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/statistics-watchdog-blasts-matt-hancock-over-inadequate-figures-on-coronavirus-testing)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on September 09, 2020, 05:41:18 pm
Not a straw man at all, written slightly facetiously admittedly . All you seem to get on here is why everything is failing but little if any ideas of how we could do things better. All I was asking is for suggestions not political blame.

We appear to be doing as much testing as anywhere else according to the figures you see and are performing about the same as most similar sized European countries yet all you here is how shit we are. Who should we be more like?

I have no fucking idea but, like most people, am trying to get on with life the best I can. I don’t see a way out of it until a vaccine is produced that I have doubts will, so where to now.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on September 09, 2020, 05:48:45 pm


We appear to be doing as much testing as anywhere else according to the figures you see and are performing about the same as most similar sized European countries yet all you here is how shit we are. Who should we be more like?


Any country that doesn’t blatantly lie about its testing figures.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 09, 2020, 05:53:38 pm
Or promise 'moon shot' solutions like we've had this afternoon.

I really wish BJ could suck up his desire to try and sweeten bad news with some sort of promise or other* - that (like normality by xmas) is just bullshit. Sometimes things just need to be told as they are...

*driven by some desire to be liked by everyone I expect.

PS. Sorry this should be in politics...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on September 09, 2020, 06:46:18 pm


We appear to be doing as much testing as anywhere else according to the figures you see and are performing about the same as most similar sized European countries yet all you here is how shit we are. Who should we be more like?


Any country that doesn’t blatantly lie about its testing figures.

I find it difficult to take you seriously if you use evidence from June 2nd to support your insistence that testing figures for September 9th are lies. In the context of Covid-19 early June is almost a different lifetime.
I'm not saying you're wrong, you may well be correct. But if you're correct then show me the evidence that proves it, rather than just saying it must be so.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 09, 2020, 07:26:52 pm
Judging by this fact check article published today - we’re still counting an individual test rather than people tested. Which is pretty the same as  what MrJA’s article said.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/09/coronavirus-testing-the-pm-fact-checked?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: seankenny on September 09, 2020, 07:41:16 pm
This is old, and about something different, but gives a hint of why the virus is indeed a political problem:

https://stumblingandmumbling.typepad.com/stumbling_and_mumbling/2015/02/wages-the-collective-action-problem.html
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on September 09, 2020, 08:00:36 pm

I find it difficult to take you seriously if you use evidence from June 2nd to support your insistence that testing figures for September 9th are lies. In the context of Covid-19 early June is almost a different lifetime.
I'm not saying you're wrong, you may well be correct. But if you're correct then show me the evidence that proves it, rather than just saying it must be so.

My point was that trust has gone after a farrago of devious and misleading use of statistics. Obvious enough, I should have thought.

If you have strong evidence that our government now communicates with accuracy and integrity, rather than its previously misleading bad faith, I'd be relieved to see it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on September 09, 2020, 08:06:29 pm

I find it difficult to take you seriously if you use evidence from June 2nd to support your insistence that testing figures for September 9th are lies. In the context of Covid-19 early June is almost a different lifetime.
I'm not saying you're wrong, you may well be correct. But if you're correct then show me the evidence that proves it, rather than just saying it must be so.

My point was that trust has gone after a farrago of devious and misleading use of statistics. Obvious enough, I should have thought.

If you have strong evidence that our government now communicates with accuracy and integrity, rather than its previously misleading bad faith, I'd be relieved to see it.

Of course, all government communications are trustworthy.

In a limited and specific way.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on September 09, 2020, 08:28:08 pm
Any country that doesn’t blatantly lie about its testing figures.


I find it difficult to take you seriously if you use evidence from June 2nd to support your insistence that testing figures for September 9th are lies. In the context of Covid-19 early June is almost a different lifetime.
I'm not saying you're wrong, you may well be correct. But if you're correct then show me the evidence that proves it, rather than just saying it must be so.

My point was that trust has gone after a farrago of devious and misleading use of statistics. Obvious enough, I should have thought.


That's odd I thought that your point was the UK's testing figures were 'blatant lies', because that's what you said. :shrug:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on September 09, 2020, 08:29:14 pm
tilting at windmills   :tumble:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on September 09, 2020, 09:50:12 pm
Err.. right.....
 
So you don't think the UK's testing figures are blatant lies then. Despite saying that they were.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on September 09, 2020, 11:07:37 pm
I can’t work out whether you are deliberately distorting what I said or genuinely can’t read its tone. My view, expressed to Gav, is that we should be more like any country whose government is trusted to act and communicate in good faith, rather than deceiving the very public it needs to carry with it.

If you really believe that’s how this government acts, having seen its handling of this crisis so far, a post or two on here won’t dent that belief.

Incidentally, at no  point did I say that anything specific about dates, or refer to today’s figures. The issue isn’t whether this or that utterance is misleading, but whether credibility has gone through using figures to mislead.

Anyway, since you ask, I believe the PM claimed today that testing capacity is at 320k per day? Sounds impressive. We must be testing LOTS of people then.

The gov data dashboard says completed tests were at 175,687 on Weds last. How may individuals is that, really? Once we discount the multiple swabs and tests in the post? There is no way of knowing. A fraction of the 320,000, that’s for sure. And that’s about all we can be sure of when figures are bandied about by an untrustworthy source without sufficient detail to properly validate them.

Credibility lost won’t be regained with hyperbole and opacity. Surely, if we can take him at his word, 1/3 million daily tests should allow us to cover demand at a time when the pressure hasn’t really ramped up? Yet we are struggling to test people. The gap between rhetoric and bluster and reality is filled with obfuscation.

To be where we are now, with rising infection rates and unable to meet testing demand, at the very start of the school year with the rocketing transmission that will follow, is not something I can celebrate I’m afraid.

This mismanagement will bring a lot more death and suffering. Now there is an area where we seem to be genuinely world beating.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on September 09, 2020, 11:21:25 pm
Err.. right.....
 
So you don't think the UK's testing figures are blatant lies then. Despite saying that they were.

PS err.. no, I didn’t. If you are going to be picky, be accurate.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on September 09, 2020, 11:55:40 pm
I know, right.

Clearly if capacity is 320k and there were 175k tests carried out, then obviously the system was overwhelmed...


Um.

?

(Actually, the official claim, all pillars is 369k and 249k pillars 1,2 & 4.)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: seankenny on September 10, 2020, 08:07:16 am
I thought this Atlantic article, although focussed on America, was interesting and we see many echoes of their mistakes here.

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/09/pandemic-intuition-nightmare-spiral-winter/616204/

On the whole economy vs the pandemic:

“Meanwhile, as businesses closed and stay-at-home orders rolled out, “we presumed a trade-off between saving lives and saving the economy,” says Danielle Allen, a political scientist at Harvard. “That was foolishness of the most profound degree.” The two goals were actually aligned: Epidemiologists and economists largely agree that the economy cannot rebound while the pandemic is still raging. By treating the two as opposites, state leaders rushed to reopen, leading a barely contained virus to surge anew.”

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on September 10, 2020, 09:08:15 am
Interesting read, thanks.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on September 10, 2020, 09:45:38 am
In the meantime in Sweden a public health director says "we were right"... Pride before a fall or is he right? Given the theories that a large portion of the population has resistance from exposure to other coronaviruses and the cluster spreading nature of infection there's models that show herd immunity working at around 20% penetration. This might be backed up IRL by examples such as Manaus in Brasil where after overwhelming health care the virus apparently retreated without lockdowns or other containment.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/were-vindicated-say-swedes-after-coronavirus-cases-hit-new-low-lt3cmlhtg?shareToken=902d0ec617bc109ac1c4c3b358fb4e63
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on September 10, 2020, 11:07:56 am
One of, if not the only, country not seeing an increase in cases.

Will be interesting to see where there figures are in 2-3 weeks.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on September 10, 2020, 11:09:59 am
There approach is also where I think we will all end up in 12 months time when we realise we can’t do anything but learn to live with it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on September 10, 2020, 01:52:31 pm
In the meantime in Sweden a public health director says "we were right"... Pride before a fall or is he right? Given the theories that a large portion of the population has resistance from exposure to other coronaviruses and the cluster spreading nature of infection there's models that show herd immunity working at around 20% penetration. This might be backed up IRL by examples such as Manaus in Brasil where after overwhelming health care the virus apparently retreated without lockdowns or other containment.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/were-vindicated-say-swedes-after-coronavirus-cases-hit-new-low-lt3cmlhtg?shareToken=902d0ec617bc109ac1c4c3b358fb4e63

20% is too low for herd immunity. That's if most of the 20% are immune (people are only clearly known to have caught the virus twice as they were in the category of having caught different genetic strains). I think the main situation in Sweden is the people are on the whole way more sensible than in most of Europe: they understand the importance of social distancing and act on that.

A reminder of the horror in Manaus, a city with a very young average population (that given covid deaths were often not registered as such may have met herd immunity levels)

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/30/brazil-manaus-coronavirus-mass-graves
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on September 10, 2020, 02:08:01 pm
Scotland Track and Trace App goes live today.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-54098960

Up and running..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on September 10, 2020, 02:49:43 pm
Quote from: The Times
Sweden has registered its lowest rate of positive coronavirus tests yet even after its testing regime was expanded to record levels in what one health official said was a vindication of its relatively non-intrusive Covid-19 strategy.

[/quote]quote="The Atlantic"]This policy was folly for Sweden, which is nowhere near herd immunity, had one of the world’s highest COVID-19 death rates, and has a regretful state epidemiologist. [/quote]

The Uk right-wing press has been desperately pushing the Swedish example from the start. Would be interesting to hear from someone who knows Sweden as to which of these is closer to the truth?


Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 10, 2020, 03:18:35 pm
Two CV19 anecdotes today.

1. Sister in law having to isolate / quarantine after a child in her sons nursery class tested positive 2-3yo.

2. Zoom with researchers at other unis today - one who’s colleague is on SAGE. can’t give details but the mood at Sage is ‘just make it through to March’. IOW going to be a bad winter - and by March summer temps, being outdoors, vaccine development etc.. should kick in. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: HarryBD on September 10, 2020, 03:19:38 pm
In the meantime in Sweden a public health director says "we were right"... Pride before a fall or is he right? Given the theories that a large portion of the population has resistance from exposure to other coronaviruses and the cluster spreading nature of infection there's models that show herd immunity working at around 20% penetration. This might be backed up IRL by examples such as Manaus in Brasil where after overwhelming health care the virus apparently retreated without lockdowns or other containment.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/were-vindicated-say-swedes-after-coronavirus-cases-hit-new-low-lt3cmlhtg?shareToken=902d0ec617bc109ac1c4c3b358fb4e63

20% is too low for herd immunity. That's if most of the 20% are immune (people are only clearly known to have caught the virus twice as they were in the category of having caught different genetic strains). I think the main situation in Sweden is the people are on the whole way more sensible than in most of Europe: they understand the importance of social distancing and act on that.

A reminder of the horror in Manaus, a city with a very young average population (that given covid deaths were often not registered as such may have met herd immunity levels)

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/30/brazil-manaus-coronavirus-mass-graves

Why do you say that 20% is too low? There are suggestions that exposure to other coronaviruses provides 'some' immunity to this one which means that 20% penetration of this virus => immune population is greater than 20%. Infection rate depends on the behaviour of the population as well as the fraction of the population who are susceptible. Required immune population for a population who keep their distance/don't use public transport etc is very different to a population who go round coughing in each others mouths. We had 'herd immunity' in May for a world where nobody leaves their homes.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on September 10, 2020, 03:48:12 pm

The Uk right-wing press has been desperately pushing the Swedish example from the start. Would be interesting to hear from someone who knows Sweden as to which of these is closer to the truth?

Yep; a look at front page of the Telegraph today made me laugh. Sombre headline on Christmas and the byline of an opinion piece above "Enough! The Government has gone too far." Times editorials frequently dismiss a second lockdown on the basis that it is unaffordable, which is a futile argument because as Sean's Atlantic piece points out, you can't separate the economy from public health now anymore than we could at the start. If deaths spike then the economy will dip regardless of the government telling everyone to keep drinking/eating out/going to the office.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on September 10, 2020, 06:22:26 pm
20% is too low for herd immunity.

Given around half of the population may have resistance via T cells it doesn't actually seem implausible to me?

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200716-the-people-with-hidden-protection-from-covid-19
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on September 10, 2020, 07:09:50 pm
20% is too low for herd immunity.

Given around half of the population may have resistance via T cells it doesn't actually seem implausible to me?

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200716-the-people-with-hidden-protection-from-covid-19

You do realise we are going to find out, right?

Hospitalisations rose in the last 24hrs to over 140 per day.
Ventilator beds steady at 80.

Just watch. Nothing that happens today (or on Monday) will make any difference for two weeks and what happens over the next two weeks will give an inkling of which hypothesis is the more representative of reality.
My bet is something in between. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on September 10, 2020, 08:42:46 pm
Yes we are, but it was always going to go that way, unless you can do a New Zealand and lock your country up away from the rest of the world forever....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 10, 2020, 09:20:15 pm
Yes we are, but it was always going to go that way, unless you can do a New Zealand and lock your country up away from the rest of the world forever....

Australia’s not doing too bad...

And we are an island...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on September 10, 2020, 09:39:02 pm
We are indeed an island, but with a much more interconnected society than Australia. I think I read that the Aberdeen outbreak came from a French worker passing through on his way offshore?

I'm not sure the citizens of Victoria would agree with your assessment that they 'aren't doing too bad' either.

Talking of Australia, it's interesting that their premier says they found socializing at home was a massive driver of the second wave, rather than pubs/restaurants.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 10, 2020, 10:03:37 pm
Indeed - an interconnected society that did nothing about monitoring people coming in for CV19 until - err - about a month ago??

Unlike both New Zealand and Australia.

It’s very difficult to compare of course - but do you think the economic hit from shutting borders completely on the first of March would be worse than the hit we’ve now taken. My friends in Nz and Australia are all living pretty much as they were (apart from a couple in Melbourne) and afaik both economies have had far less of a dent than ours has....

It was probably too late to do that anyway on the 1st of March - it was already well embedded amongst the population then...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on September 10, 2020, 10:05:39 pm
I think I read that the Aberdeen outbreak came from a French worker passing through on his way offshore?

Story is the guy flew in to Manchester, got the bus up, stayed in a hotel, went to mobilise, was temp tested and showed positive, was told to isolate, but went to a few pubs for beers instead.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on September 10, 2020, 10:18:16 pm
Quote from: The Times
Sweden has registered its lowest rate of positive coronavirus tests yet even after its testing regime was expanded to record levels in what one health official said was a vindication of its relatively non-intrusive Covid-19 strategy.

quote="The Atlantic"]This policy was folly for Sweden, which is nowhere near herd immunity, had one of the world’s highest COVID-19 death rates, and has a regretful state epidemiologist. [/quote]

The Uk right-wing press has been desperately pushing the Swedish example from the start. Would be interesting to hear from someone who knows Sweden as to which of these is closer to the truth?
[/quote]

I don’t think anyone is saying they did great but they did just as bad as everyone without anywhere near the disruption to normal life that most other countries have had or are having.
Worth looking at why isn’t it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Muscle.Coach on September 10, 2020, 10:20:42 pm
To create an economic reset a second wave is essential, also creating opportunity for further tracking, population control and a cashless society
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: seankenny on September 10, 2020, 11:41:20 pm
This New Scientist piece on Sweden from last month struck me as fair. Terrible health outcomes, particularly compared to its neighbours. Economy hit, not as badly as elsewhere, but hard to be sure yet.

And yes, they had a lockdown. Just that it was voluntary not imposed. I don’t know much about Sweden, but I have read several accounts of how it’s a deeply conformist society. I think it’s fair to say the U.K. is probably somewhat less conformist.



https://www.newscientist.com/article/2251615-is-swedens-coronavirus-strategy-a-cautionary-tale-or-a-success-story/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on September 11, 2020, 05:16:30 am
Economy hit, not as badly as elsewhere, but hard to be sure yet.

Since the article came out Denmark's Q2 GDP figures have been published at -6.9%, so better than Sweden. There's actually a bit of a surge here right now and for the last few days rates of new infections have been running slightly ahead of Sweden (though deaths remain very low, 5 in the last 15 days) but the government has a pretty much full arsenal of tools available and I would expect them to get it under control again. It's hard to imagine a situation in which outcomes begin to come even close to Sweden's.

Personally, I think the conformity of Nordic societies tends to be somewhat overestimated.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on September 11, 2020, 09:44:40 am
Or promise 'moon shot' solutions like we've had this afternoon.

I’m not sure I understand the practicalities of this ‘moon shot’ testing regime.

Is the £100billion price tag because the govt will pick up the bill for everyone’s tests? Or do individuals buy them? If the latter that’s a barrier straight away.

When there’s already an issue with getting people to self-isolate if they test positive under the TTI system and there’s so many disincentives to do so then why would anyone suddenly start with the ‘moon shot’ system? Or do you have to carry the (time stamped?) negative test result around with you to get access to work and shops etc?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on September 11, 2020, 10:26:44 am
I don’t think anyone is saying they did great but they did just as bad as everyone without anywhere near the disruption to normal life that most other countries have had or are having.
Worth looking at why isn’t it.

Thus far, Sweden has done much worse than the most appropriate comparison countries; it's Nordic neighbours. So far there is also no evidence that it has suffered less economic damage and the idea that there has been no social disruption in Sweden is incorrect (as an aside, daily life in Denmark has essentially been normal for two or three months now).

I say thus far because it is obvious that this has not run its course in any country and in fact the rate of new daily infections in Denmark is currently running ahead of Sweden's, but it's very hard to imagine a scenario in which outcomes in Denmark (let alone Norway and Finland) begin to get even close to those in Sweden.

I have seen the argument that Sweden has been "proved" right cropping up since the spring. It hadn't been proven then and it hasn't now.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on September 11, 2020, 11:09:49 am
Quote
I haven't seen the argument that Sweden has been "proved" right cropping up since the spring.
(typo corrected, I think?)

Clearly Denmark is enviably well isolated from the Times and Telegraph and their army of gammon parrots.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on September 11, 2020, 11:53:02 am
No, I did mean that I first saw it in the spring and see it occasionally now, typically from friends in the UK (and friends of friends in the US). It's often accompanied by borderline conspiracy theory anti-lockdown thinking ("the government is seeking to control us, etc. etc.")
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on September 11, 2020, 01:05:32 pm
Ah right. My Dad, who gets his news entirely from the Telegraph and the BBC, tells anyone in earshot Sweden is the exemplar we're all ignoring.

He's very much a common sense type, and thinks Cummings winning elections by targeted social media activity is a conspiracy theory. However like many on the right he doesn't understand that the economy is not separable from society, and that common sense doesn't accommodate exponential risk.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on September 11, 2020, 01:12:39 pm
Tangential to current discussions, but this thread seemed the appropriate place to drop these; I've found them really helpful in terms of assessing the relative risks of different situations (including why 2 metres is not a magic figure).

From the BMJ, an immunologist, and an epidemiologist and colleagues respectively:

https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3223

https://www.erinbromage.com/post/the-risks-know-them-avoid-them

http://www.ezekielemanuel.com/writing/all-articles/2020/06/30/covid-19-activity-risk-levels
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on September 11, 2020, 08:52:02 pm
Or promise 'moon shot' solutions like we've had this afternoon.

I’m not sure I understand the practicalities of this ‘moon shot’ testing regime.


When there’s already an issue with getting people to self-isolate if they test positive under the TTI system and there’s so many disincentives to do so then why would anyone suddenly start with the ‘moon shot’ system?

I suspect you are in good company then, since it has been swerved round the National Screening Committee and no one in gov has a clue what is truly required of such an unprecedented programme.

Quote
The statisticians are all banging their heads against the wall
David Speigelhalter (Source = anywhere you look on the internet).

How many false positives will it create when millions are being tested daily?

It’s just more magical thinking. Where is that extraordinary new technology to resolve the Irish border issue, anyway?  :-\ Surely it’s been rolled out by now?

If the government cannot run a basic world beating test and trace system like the one we have currently, how will it create an unprecedented-science-fictionally-hitherto-never-been-imagined-before world beating system?

No wonder they kept the experts in the screening committee totally in the dark about it, the idea would have been thrown out before lunchtime.

Still, £100bn worth spending on some schoolboy fantasy no doubt. Here’s a reflection on the state of our current system- blue on blue, you could say:

Quote
“They keep saying it’s world-leading,” he said. “It’s world-leadingly bad, is what it is. They talk about this huge capacity … well, the capacity is obviously in Inverness. There’s a serious bottleneck in the laboratory, and that determines the capacity, so it’s a lot less than it’s claimed. So how are they going to fix that?”
David Davies
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 11, 2020, 09:30:02 pm
The false positive is an easy fix though - just take another test... (apparently doing a PCR and antibody test at the same time dramatically ramps up the accuracy and I think this is what Spain do now???).

The more convincing argument for Moonshot failing on the launchpad (as picked up by MrJA above) is that apparently only 20% of people told to isolate/quarantine are obeying this completely. OK - so not obeying it might be going out for a walk around the block when the streets are deserted (ie v low risk) but it does imply that compliance with isolate is woefully low...

We might need Track Trace Isolate and ENFORCE for lift off.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on September 11, 2020, 09:46:37 pm
The more convincing argument for Moonshot failing on the launchpad (as picked up by MrJA above) is that apparently only 20% of people told to isolate/quarantine are obeying this completely.

We might need Track Trace Isolate and ENFORCE for lift off.
The only way I can see this being successful is to get rates down to really low levels and then somehow incentivise people to get tested (lottery system?) and/or make it almost attractive to test positive and have to isolate (stay in a luxury hotel/retreat for a week or two on full pay?). Otherwise people will just ignore it if it interferes with life or they lose pay.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on September 11, 2020, 10:08:01 pm
As I've said (I'm probably a bore), compliance to enhanced measures in my immediate peer group is poor so I can easily believe that self isolation isn't rigourously followed. I'd be unclear what it means for instance in terms of exercise?

I have an unfounded suspicion that enforcement doesn't feature highly as it's challenging to do so and, the measures factor in some kind of rate of compliance.

Enhanced measures are remaining across the NW tonight (no change) due to a worsening national picture. This makes me twitch a bit as if you're going to treat things on a borough by borough basis to trigger enhanced measures, then the reverse should be true (local council and MP supposedly were lobbying for us to come in line with the nation as of Monday).

Although I'm aware this is just karma for enjoying the closed roads for cycling during proper lockdown.

Communication on the subject seems dreadful but I'll give the Government credit for the rule of six. Ok, it's not without contradictions but it is at least clear.

 :tumble:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on September 11, 2020, 10:59:00 pm
The false positive is an easy fix though - just take another test...

As we won’t know which positives are false you are saying every positive result will require a retest?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 12, 2020, 07:05:00 am
The false positive is an easy fix though - just take another test...

As we won’t know which positives are false you are saying every positive result will require a retest?

If you’re making everyone take a test every morning why not? Or as I said earlier and antibody as well as antigen test at same time.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 12, 2020, 07:07:24 am
@PailB - you’d think the rule of six was simple - but one of my uni friends sent this last night on WhatsApp

“ While we can still meet anyone fancy meeting up maybe a game of golf then stay in a hotel for a few beers? Maybe a night during half term?”...

So this is still allowed?? (I hate golf anyway)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: seankenny on September 13, 2020, 11:19:15 am
I’ve been thinking that the dilemma posed by some posters - Covid vs the economy - is asking the wrong question. In fact it’s a classic trilemma for the government: control Covid, open the economy, be popular, pick two.

If we want to make foreign travel safe again, then clearly we need a robust quarantine scheme which would include follow up checks and large fines (well publicised) for non-compliance. Councils, for example, should have the power to inspect and immediately close pubs and restaurants which break social distancing rules. In fact there’s a good argument that out of the whole economy, the hospitality sector is the least important and it should be open last, or heavily curtailed, with a solid furlough scheme to help employees make it through.

Of course all these draconian measures would be miserable and the freedom brigade (such pale imitations of their full throated American cousins) would howl like babies.

Instead the government has picked popularity and opening the economy as quickly as possible, and as a result Covid cases are rising.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 13, 2020, 12:07:11 pm
Indeed - but it’s a tough one. If rules hadn’t been relaxed so people could go away on hols - you might have had more problems with MH issues and civil unrest etc.. people have to let off steam somehow. But the holiday travel (in UK and around) has surely been part of the reason for the increase. Bit too soon for schools effect to kick in I’d have thought.

*govt did something right claxon* - I think the 6 rule is a good idea right now - and glad they’ve done it. Could have been before this weekend (now we have party weekend etc..) but at least it’s a fairly clear rule.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nai on September 13, 2020, 02:08:14 pm

*govt did something right claxon* - I think the 6 rule is a good idea right now - and glad they’ve done it. Could have been before this weekend (now we have party weekend etc..) but at least it’s a fairly clear rule.
/quote]

Is it clear though?  It's always been six OR two households but different rules inside and out.  Now it's six from only two households, which presents a bit of a problem for a couple of families wanting to meet up at the park, etc.
Surely more emphasis on the two household part of the rule would be better with a maximum number of adults stated thereafter.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 13, 2020, 02:30:15 pm
It was advised to be 6 - now it’s THE LAW.. I believe.

Not that THE LAW is something our government plans to abide by..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nai on September 13, 2020, 03:49:33 pm
Ah right, relying on common sense.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on September 13, 2020, 04:52:29 pm
Ah right, relying on common sense.

Those words...

I do not think they mean what the government think they mean...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on September 13, 2020, 07:11:43 pm
Bit too soon for schools effect to kick in I’d have thought.
I dunno. There's been at least five outbreaks in Sheffield schools already. Including two +ve kids in my son's class. So he's back home for two week's isolation after one week in class (and has come down with heavy cold symptoms).
Pretty galling considering how ultra careful we've been for the last six months... Seems like a whole lot of effort for nothing.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on September 13, 2020, 07:45:45 pm
Now it's six from only two households
I thought it was six from unlimited households?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on September 13, 2020, 07:57:40 pm
That's in England; 2 households in Scotland; 4 in Wales but only the same four which have formed an 'extended household/bubble'. Think NI like England.

https://metro.co.uk/2020/09/11/how-the-rule-of-six-differs-in-england-scotland-wales-and-northern-ireland-13255700/#:~:text=Rules%20in%20Scotland%20A%20maximum%20of%20six%20people,and%20beer%20gardens%2C%20as%20well%20as%20in%20homes.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nai on September 13, 2020, 08:36:19 pm
Ah right, so not much has changed at all then, more of a reminder.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on September 14, 2020, 08:29:28 pm
So, the app threw up a request for Polly and I to book a test.

For four days, the nearest available test centre with open slots, is Birmingham...
Only four hours away.

Apparently, from a local test centre volunteer, the test centres are overwhelmed for the following reasons:

If a child has any cold symptoms or a cough, they are sent home from school, along with any siblings and as well as being instructed to isolate, many schools are insisting on seeing a negative test result before allowing return.
 Between my four and their various classes, we worked out that 12 of their peers had been sent home over the last week. Add to that the four absences from my youngest’s class today and three from youngest sons tutor group.
If all of those families are booking tests...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: webbo on September 14, 2020, 08:40:16 pm
Wife’s  colleague at work was late in to work as she had been trying to find somewhere to get her 17 year old daughter tested. In the end she couldn’t find anywhere. The daughter had been called by her boss from work, she works part time in a shop in the local designer outlet. One of the other girls at work and rung in sick stating she had tested positive  for Covid and was now isolating for 2 weeks. However given there are no local testing facilities that have had tests available. There is a strong suspicion somebody just wanted 2 weeks off work. However the consequences could be interesting depending on what people choose to believe.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on September 14, 2020, 09:47:20 pm
@oldmanmatt - the test booking in Devon is bizarre, I needed to get our youngest tested after he threw a temperature on Monday as I've picked up my first offshore work since June and need a clean bill of health. Monday afternoon/evening there were no tests bookable anywhere. Mid-morning on Tuesday I had a choice of Exeter, Tiverton or Taunton with each having 30+ slots available in the next few days. I don't know if we were just lucky with checking bang on the time the slots were released (this was about 11:30) or what...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on September 14, 2020, 10:05:47 pm
Over dinner, tonight, so around 19:00; tried again.

Cardiff was the closest available.

I guess you have to just keep trying every half hour or something.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on September 14, 2020, 10:08:52 pm
I'm getting bored of quoting Jen Williams from M.E.N. but testing in the NW has completely collapsed today in all of the hot spots.

To echo Bonjoy, one neighbour has had a kid at school for a week. He's been sent home as someone tested positive and he and his Mum now both have symptoms. See previous paragraph regarding availability of testing.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 15, 2020, 08:01:14 am
It’s so incompetent it’s almost deliberate. Everyone said there would be increased need when the schools went back - so... how come no capacity was created for now. Is Dido Harding really THAT shit at her job?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on September 15, 2020, 08:26:38 am
How many senior lab managers are also academics returning to work at unis now?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 15, 2020, 08:30:29 am
How many senior lab managers are also academics returning to work at unis now?

Not necessarily true - both lab managers I know at Universities have non teaching positions. Though there’s all the associated shit (sorry work) of students returning that will impact their work load.

Note n=2 etc...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on September 15, 2020, 08:58:28 am
It’s so incompetent it’s almost deliberate. Everyone said there would be increased need when the schools went back - so... how come no capacity was created for now. Is Dido Harding really THAT shit at her job?

Yes. She totally screwed up at talk talk, and clearly has the job because she was at university with Boris Johnson
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stabbsy on September 15, 2020, 09:24:24 am
@oldmanmatt - the test booking in Devon is bizarre, I needed to get our youngest tested after he threw a temperature on Monday as I've picked up my first offshore work since June and need a clean bill of health. Monday afternoon/evening there were no tests bookable anywhere. Mid-morning on Tuesday I had a choice of Exeter, Tiverton or Taunton with each having 30+ slots available in the next few days. I don't know if we were just lucky with checking bang on the time the slots were released (this was about 11:30) or what...
Apparently to do with the way tests are released to all local test centres. My sister (nurse in Stockport) had to get a test last week. Offered Inverness and Aberdeen as nearest options. No priority testing for NHS staff as I understand it, but it was suggested she try again at a particular time and, lo and behold, tests in Ashton. I’ll be trying the same knowledge as we’re quarantined until we can get a test - wife’s a GP and can’t go to work until we get tested.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: webbo on September 15, 2020, 11:53:51 am
It was advised to be 6 - now it’s THE LAW.. I believe.

Not that THE LAW is something our government plans to abide by..
Unless you are going shooting then more than 6 is ok.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on September 15, 2020, 12:28:42 pm
Unless you are going shooting then more than 6 is ok.

Or climbing, to be fair -- as long as it's "organised":

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-outbreak-faqs-what-you-can-and-cant-do/coronavirus-outbreak-faqs-what-you-can-and-cant-do#visiting-public-places-and-taking-part-in-activities

The list of "organised sport or licensed outdoor physical activity that you can do in groups of more than six" is at 3.16.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 15, 2020, 12:32:34 pm
Unless you are going shooting then more than 6 is ok.

Or climbing, to be fair -- as long as it's "organised":

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-outbreak-faqs-what-you-can-and-cant-do/coronavirus-outbreak-faqs-what-you-can-and-cant-do#visiting-public-places-and-taking-part-in-activities

The list of "organised sport or licensed outdoor physical activity that you can do in groups of more than six" is at 3.16.

And includes climbing...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on September 15, 2020, 12:47:12 pm
with guidelines only covering indoors climbing.

Most of my outdoor bouldering time is spent shooting the shit anyway, so think it's OK.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on September 15, 2020, 12:54:38 pm
And includes climbing...

Yup. Not claiming that any of it it makes any particular sense , but we are on the list -- it's not like a singular exception has been made so that people can go grouse-shooting (the government's cronyism is being displayed in other ways at the moment).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: fatneck on September 15, 2020, 01:32:19 pm
Back to testing, I've had three over the last few months (all negative) with zero hassle.

Now I have two staff self isolating, one had a test on Saturday - still awaiting result and the other couldn't get a test despite me registering them through the key worker scheme and labelling the request as "critical". There was no difference in their (in)ability to get a test whichever way they approached it and now awaiting delivery of a home testing kit - who knows how long that will take to get a result...

In the mean time, we are continuing with the guidance that anyone who has been in contact with either of these people can continue as normal until there is a positive test but I am worried there will already have been a spread and we'll end up with no one to run our "essential" service - especially with cases ramping up and more and more people in difficult financial situations.

Absolute shambles.....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stabbsy on September 15, 2020, 01:50:20 pm
Having just spent the morning trying to book tests, I think half the problem is the website and its ability to deal with the demand. 12-15 times through the process, all bar one it has said the website is busy and gone no further. On one occasion, I got offered a slot in Liverpool (from Sheffield) or a walk through test locally and then the website crashed.

Absolute shambles is an understatement.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on September 15, 2020, 02:08:03 pm
Or climbing, to be fair -- as long as it's "organised":

I think this is pretty mad:
Quote from: British Cycling
We initially suspended our events, recreation programmes, club rides and coach-led activities in these areas (parts of Blackburn, Oldham and Pendle), however after discussions with colleagues in Government and the three respective councils this week, we are pleased to say that British Cycling-sanctioned activities are now permitted to resume. However, you should continue to follow all other applicable Government guidance on social distancing and group size.

Please note that in the areas with additional restrictions, informal cycling activity with people from outside your household or support bubble is not permitted. More information on this can be found here.

So, in Pendle, the rule of zero continues unless you go on a club ride!?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 15, 2020, 02:27:18 pm
So, in Pendle, the rule of zero continues unless you go on a club ride!?

Who knows.

I suspect there will be plenty of University Clubs/Societies using things like this to arrange 'meetings'... 'training events' etc.. Actually - thats being unfair - most people are pretty sensible and reasonable, but it leaves the door open.

Having just spent the morning trying to book tests, I think half the problem is the website and its ability to deal with the demand. 12-15 times through the process, all bar one it has said the website is busy and gone no further. On one occasion, I got offered a slot in Liverpool (from Sheffield) or a walk through test locally and then the website crashed.

So I predict that in 3-7 days time there will be a big spike in positive test results when all of this eventually filters through.

In the meantime the test centres are blaming the labs, The labs are saying eh? we're alright its someone else...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Sidehaas on September 15, 2020, 05:00:13 pm
I thought I saw some BMC guidance that allowed for climbing clubs to continue arranging meets for larger groups up to 30 too.
Here it is:
https://www.thebmc.co.uk/covid19-restarting-club-meets

I'd be interested to know what the police would say if they turned up to a busy bouldering crag. Is it mingling even if you've arrived on your own and don't know the other people there? Bit of a minefield but I'd like to think we'd be a long way down their list of people/places to go after.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on September 15, 2020, 05:16:00 pm
I thought I saw some BMC guidance that allowed for climbing clubs to continue arranging meets for larger groups up to 30 too.
Here it is:
https://www.thebmc.co.uk/covid19-restarting-club-meets

I'd be interested to know what the police would say if they turned up to a busy bouldering crag. Is it mingling even if you've arrived on your own and don't know the other people there? Bit of a minefield but I'd like to think we'd be a long way down their list of people/places to go after.

Yeah, club meets fall into the "organized" category. I think the logic is that organized events will (as required by the rules) conduct a risk assessment and follow guidance from their sport's governing bodies, whereas informal gatherings might be sloppier re: risk. Whether that turns out to be the case remains to be seen.

I've been at a busy bouldering crag (Burbage South Valley) and people have generally seemed to be pretty good at keeping to separate boulders, or keeping very distanced when different groups are on different bits of the same boulder -- I had some nice chats across a very proper number of metres.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 15, 2020, 05:22:48 pm
Meanwhile - it appears you can 'cheat' the system and that as long as you get the QR code for a test it can be used at any centre...

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-key-workers-and-families-share-their-struggles-to-get-covid-19-tests-12072426

Where this woman (a Dr) used an Aberdeen postcode to get a slot in Scotland - and used the QR code at a test centre in SW London - then got the result 24 hours later.

Worth a try anyone here needing a test? Expect it'll take a day or two before they close this loophole.

And might make getting a test in Aberdeen trickier too of course...

edit: as also reported here: https://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/18719343.revealed-hack-getting-coronavirus-test-oxford/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on September 15, 2020, 05:32:44 pm
There has been a dramatic uptick in hospital admissions and ventilator bed occupancy over the last 24 hrs.

(https://i.ibb.co/kykPF8m/682-FE05-A-B3-CF-4-C58-89-FF-B0-EDD67-FD299.png)

Marked increase in deaths, too, though that partly is the catchup from weekend under reporting.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on September 15, 2020, 07:42:01 pm
Meanwhile - it appears you can 'cheat' the system and that as long as you get the QR code for a test it can be used at any centre...
/

This was what they told me at the Exeter test centre, the QR code was the important thing to show you have a lab processing slot. Once you have one of those it apparently doesn't matter where you get the test done as the test is matched up with the lab slot and sent off accordingly. Certainly down here the test centres aren't near capacity as the choke point is somewhere else in the system.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on September 16, 2020, 08:04:13 am
Does this surprise anyone?

 https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/kids-day-care-spread-covid-19-parents-teachers-cdc-says-n1239887?fbclid=IwAR2vUp2e5xEHmISb8HeQOkAwtaI6l8BB1cs03v5Goy5Q2BccHI2f66ghyis (https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/kids-day-care-spread-covid-19-parents-teachers-cdc-says-n1239887?fbclid=IwAR2vUp2e5xEHmISb8HeQOkAwtaI6l8BB1cs03v5Goy5Q2BccHI2f66ghyis)

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nutty on September 16, 2020, 08:19:30 am
Meanwhile - it appears you can 'cheat' the system and that as long as you get the QR code for a test it can be used at any centre...
/

This was what they told me at the Exeter test centre, the QR code was the important thing to show you have a lab processing slot. Once you have one of those it apparently doesn't matter where you get the test done as the test is matched up with the lab slot and sent off accordingly. Certainly down here the test centres aren't near capacity as the choke point is somewhere else in the system.
Does make you wonder why the website directs people to test centres hundreds of miles away then, if booking a test is mainly about having a lab processing slot? Presumably another 'mutant algorithm' trying to get the tests distributed geographically according to some quotas it's been given.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Sidehaas on September 16, 2020, 08:24:31 am
Does this surprise anyone?

 https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/kids-day-care-spread-covid-19-parents-teachers-cdc-says-n1239887?fbclid=IwAR2vUp2e5xEHmISb8HeQOkAwtaI6l8BB1cs03v5Goy5Q2BccHI2f66ghyis (https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/kids-day-care-spread-covid-19-parents-teachers-cdc-says-n1239887?fbclid=IwAR2vUp2e5xEHmISb8HeQOkAwtaI6l8BB1cs03v5Goy5Q2BccHI2f66ghyis)

No, but I think the idea of asking a two year old to wear a mask (as the article says is recommended by the CDC) is ridiculous.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 16, 2020, 08:32:48 am
Does make you wonder why the website directs people to test centres hundreds of miles away then, if booking a test is mainly about having a lab processing slot? Presumably another 'mutant algorithm' trying to get the tests distributed geographically according to some quotas it's been given.

I think its just shit system design... whilst this might help people cheat the system in the short term - it makes it look more mickey mouse than heath robinson... Give yourselves a round of applause Deloitte / Serco / Dido.

Also clearly shows the weakpoint in the system is in the processing/analysis of the samples (that we now know).

Having had two tests in the past - without your NHS number (and who really knows that?) then I'd have thought the only way to determine where the person lives (to identify local hotspots - thats done on a postcode basis) is via the home address and postcode given. So - if there are quite a few 'Terry's from (eg) Crawley using a barcode from a postcode and test centre in Aberdeen to get a test near his home - this is going to royally fuck up Aberdeen and Crawleys figures.

Next step (I bet) will be for staff at centres to turn people away who's postcode of home and the test centre doesn't match where they are getting tested etc... But if you did such a clampdown and have say 50000 people a day gaming the system this way (quite possible) then thats 50000 slots that would go to waste...  Damned if you do damned if you don't...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 16, 2020, 08:55:15 pm
So - listened to a very interesting Prof. McNally (Birmingham) on C4 news this evening...

He said it wasnt the number of tests being done that was the issue - just that we were not being very clever with how we used them. He cited a good example. For a school - instead of screening every person individually - swab all the staff and pupils in class/bubble/year groups - but then lump their samples all together for one test*. Then - if that class or year or bubble is positive - go back and re-test them all. Same principle for care homes - doctors surgeries - a family - anywhere.

He basically said the testing labs were good - but the focus on ONLY testing individuals was a real mistake and the government could easily rectify this - but they didnt listen...

*I suspect that doesnt mean one swab does 30 kids :D
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: jshaw on September 17, 2020, 09:34:21 am

*I suspect that doesnt mean one swab does 30 kids :D

Nah, 30 swabs for 30 kids all pooled then processed together. This would mean the testers intially only have 1 reaction to process to detect covid, rather than 30. In theory, the reaction they use to detect covid is so sensitive that a single intact RNA molecule from the virus could be detected. Only concern would be false negatives which could easy be mitigated.

(I'm a molecular biologist, partner worked at one of the testing centres for a bit during lockdown)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 17, 2020, 10:30:45 am

*I suspect that doesnt mean one swab does 30 kids :D

Nah, 30 swabs for 30 kids all pooled then processed together. This would mean the testers intially only have 1 reaction to process to detect covid, rather than 30. In theory, the reaction they use to detect covid is so sensitive that a single intact RNA molecule from the virus could be detected. Only concern would be false negatives which could easy be mitigated.

(I'm a molecular biologist, partner worked at one of the testing centres for a bit during lockdown)

So completely and utterly possible then!

Good grief! (aimed at UKGovt)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tommytwotone on September 17, 2020, 10:32:07 am
This article in today's Guardian sums up the state of play very accurately IMO:


TL;DR - Govt had plenty of time to prepare for this entirely foreseeable problem, was offered help by universities and other public bodies, ignored this in favour of outsourcing to the usual suspects and now we are where we are:


https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/sep/17/england-test-and-trace-public-sector-boris-johnson-covid (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/sep/17/england-test-and-trace-public-sector-boris-johnson-covid)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: jshaw on September 17, 2020, 10:48:36 am

So completely and utterly possible then!

Good grief! (aimed at UKGovt)

Possible, yes absolutely. But say one comes back positive, you have to isolate everyone tested and associated with the group until you can go back through and retest everyone individually. For a class or year group at a school, this could mean absolutely loads of people are isolating. Probably unnecessarily.

It was probably looked at, and seen as a waste of time when speed of decision making was viewed as the priority rather than utilising each test / reaction as effectively as possible.

It's a good idea though and probably should be used on households, or families returning from hols. Loads of e.gs where it'd be useful.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 18, 2020, 03:55:42 pm
I really don’t understand what people are allowed to do or not do now... I even followed a couple of news website QA pages and it still didn’t completely make sense. Doesn’t help that Manchester seems to have different rules from all the other places locked down.

I think most people here are making it up... / using (gulp) common sense.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on September 18, 2020, 04:11:01 pm
I really don’t understand what people are allowed to do or not do now... I even followed a couple of news website QA pages and it still didn’t completely make sense. Doesn’t help that Manchester seems to have different rules from all the other places locked down.

I think most people here are making it up... / using (gulp) common sense.

Nicola Sturgeon put things simply for Scotland.....

You should:

wear a face covering
avoid crowded places
clean hands and surfaces regularly
stay 2m away from other people
self-isolate and book a test if you have COVID-19 symptoms

Other than that most spread is said to be indoors with mixed households not following the above.

https://www.gov.scot/coronavirus-covid-19/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on September 18, 2020, 04:20:48 pm
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-two-week-national-lockdown-in-october-proposed-by-top-scientists-report-12074645

Be most unhappy if it his happens over school holidays; kids in close contact all day every day, as soon as there is a break in this they want to impose a lockdown?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on September 18, 2020, 04:34:33 pm
Possible, yes absolutely. But say one comes back positive, you have to isolate everyone tested and associated with the group until you can go back through and retest everyone individually. For a class or year group at a school, this could mean absolutely loads of people are isolating. Probably unnecessarily.

That's what happens now though. My daughter is now off for a fortnight (managed a whole four full days) as there was a positive case in her class.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on September 18, 2020, 04:41:57 pm
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-two-week-national-lockdown-in-october-proposed-by-top-scientists-report-12074645

Be most unhappy if it his happens over school holidays; kids in close contact all day every day, as soon as there is a break in this they want to impose a lockdown?

I would have thought that would be a perfect time to do it. Extended to two weeks when kids are off and many parents take holidays anyway.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on September 18, 2020, 07:08:27 pm
Even if you have to stay and home and don't spend any money that would keep the economy going?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 18, 2020, 07:18:23 pm
The scientists on Sage who said (last weekend) that cases were doubling every 7-8 days were bang on the money.

Despite my testing carping - we are far more informed now about its spread across the population and country now than we were in March. I really hope this means we can manage Wave2.0 better than the last time.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on September 18, 2020, 08:29:48 pm
Even if you have to stay and home and don't spend any money that would keep the economy going?

There was an assumption that a two week lockdown of some sort is necessary. If one is the damage would be less if it overlapped the half term.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 18, 2020, 08:39:46 pm
Half term is in a months time here. Think it would be too late by then....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on September 18, 2020, 08:57:21 pm
We’re all doomed then.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on September 18, 2020, 09:12:55 pm
Despite my testing carping - we are far more informed now about its spread across the population and country now than we were in March. I really hope this means we can manage Wave2.0 better than the last time.

A worrying anecdote on this subject:

A friend had a routine operation with an overnight stay in hospital this week.

They had to get tested in the 72 hour window before the operation and provide a negative result for the hospital to let them in.

They were one of the people affected by the testing administration errors this week. They received a confirmation that their test was booked but never received the QR code. When they went to the test centre, they were turned away (as were other people while they were there). They then couldn't get another test booked before their operation.

They contacted the hospital who said that other people were in the same position and that they had no choice but to let people in without a negative test result.

It seems that lessons haven't been learned, and we are not going to be able to keep the wards covid free the second time around either.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on September 19, 2020, 10:34:17 am

I think its just shit system design... whilst this might help people cheat the system in the short term - it makes it look more mickey mouse than heath robinson... Give yourselves a round of applause Deloitte / Serco / Dido.



A small point of interest; the Cheltenham festival was mentioned a lot as a failure in March that increased transmission.  I've seen it said in several places that the government was lobbied by a prominent member of the Jockey club to keep it running, as they were considering calling it off. The prominent figure in question with strong connections in government was Dido Harding. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nai on September 19, 2020, 10:41:04 am
The home of the jockey Club is Newmarket, a lot of trainers are based there.
The MP for Newmarket is Matt Hancock.
Can guess where most of his donations come from?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on September 19, 2020, 10:43:53 am
No need to guess:
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmregmem/110516/hancock_matthew.htm
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on September 19, 2020, 11:02:37 am
A small point of interest; the Cheltenham festival was mentioned a lot as a failure in March that increased transmission.  I've seen it said in several places that the government was lobbied by a prominent member of the Jockey club to keep it running, as they were considering calling it off. The prominent figure in question with strong connections in government was Dido Harding.

It’s not a small point Toby, it strikes to the heart of the corruption flourishing under this administration.

There’s a coterie of influencers and beneficiaries related by ideology, interest and personal connection. Large sums of public money are allocated and personnel appointed without due process and scrutiny. Dido Harding and Deloitte are not experts in mass public screening. That expertise lies within the public sector but there’s no opportunity to siphon off funds by supporting the NHS and local occupational health. Why has the expertise of the public screening committee been bypassed?

Faculty, Ben Warner and Peter Thiel- more and more public money is being directed to right wing data crunchers linked to Cummings.

£100bn on  a ‘moonshot’ project. £100bn more of public money to be directed into more private hands! This is serious stuff. We are going to be paying for feathering many nice nests for a long time, while the public sector is starved of proper funding.

Look: austerity has hollowed out services since 2010- NHS underfunded, schools seriously underfunded, shortage of nurses, doctors, police - but if you are a management consultant/ data cruncher, there is a cornucopia of profitable contracts..

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/roberto-saviano-britain-corrupt-mafia-hay-festival-a7054851.html

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/britain-drops-out-of-top-ten-least-corrupt-countries-7tr9dffjw

Given its track record, what  will this administration do once unrestrained by EU state aid laws in directing public money to private business?


Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 20, 2020, 08:48:54 am
This article (from a N.American perspective) gives a good overview on where the SCIENCE seems to be WRT CV19 transmission at the moment:

https://elemental.medium.com/the-most-likely-way-youll-get-infected-with-covid-19-30430384e5a5
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on September 20, 2020, 09:55:12 am
I think that the majority of SE Asia was onto this science a long time ago. Hence, the heavy usage of face masks and a seemingly better grip on the spread of the virus.  Culturally the use of masks when poorly, to protect others, was already there too.  I remember asking about people wearing masks when I visited Japan in 1998, the response being they have a cold and they don't want to share it with others..  Hence I Posted this on 12th March:
Given that the primary way the virus is spread is through airborne transmission you can see why schools are ideal places for transmission.  I sat in an assembly with 250+ pupils together in close proximity last week, thinking you could all have perfectly clean hands but if the person next to you coughs or sneezes you’re very likely to breath in whatever they have expelled....  I guess we can extend that to-  if the person next to you breathes out now.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on September 20, 2020, 09:57:58 am
A small point of interest; the Cheltenham festival was mentioned a lot as a failure in March that increased transmission.  I've seen it said in several places that the government was lobbied by a prominent member of the Jockey club to keep it running, as they were considering calling it off. The prominent figure in question with strong connections in government was Dido Harding.
It’s not a small point Toby, it strikes to the heart of the corruption flourishing under this administration.
....
Given its track record, what  will this administration do once unrestrained by EU state aid laws in directing public money to private business?

No, indeed not,  I was being ironic in using 'small' (an excuse worthy of Trump?  ;) )

Secondly,  they'll probably award an enormous sum of money to a technical company (probably Dyson)for developing some sort of space defence drone dreamed up by Dom in his tedious blog which doesn't ever get built.  Meanwhile Boris Johnson will retire, go back to being a shit columnist,  and the new PM Priti will pour a huge amount of money into giving Chris Grayling a contract to provide a drone defence navy fleet and building a wall around the country for stopping all migration ever.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on September 20, 2020, 12:41:21 pm
I had missed that she was also going to be heading up the national institutefor health protection
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-creates-new-national-institute-for-health-protection

As she sits in the back benches and works and votes for the gov, that’s a massive conflict of interest for heading a public, apolitical body.

Plus she is obviously chosen for her compliance with policy (ie privatisation).

Anyone over the age of 8 who could not foresee that tourists returning from abroad, massively increased attendance at workplaces and the resumption of school for 12milliion children would cause a big increase in testing demand is unfit for the role.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on September 20, 2020, 10:32:30 pm
I had missed that she was also going to be heading up the national institutefor health protection
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-creates-new-national-institute-for-health-protection

As she sits in the back benches and works and votes for the gov, that’s a massive conflict of interest for heading a public, apolitical body.

Plus she is obviously chosen for her compliance with policy (ie privatisation).

Anyone over the age of 8 who could not foresee that tourists returning from abroad, massively increased attendance at workplaces and the resumption of school for 12milliion children would cause a big increase in testing demand is unfit for the role.

She's also married to a conservative MP. She doesn't appear well qualified for anything apart perhaps from owning horses.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on September 22, 2020, 10:16:18 am
Had a test yesterday and the person greeting you to check barcodes, ID, tell you where to go etc was there with no mask, head basically in the car in front with windows fully down having a long chat and passing things in/out.  :o

We covered our faces and spoke through the glass to him.

If there was one place I'd want to work under the strictest conditions covered in PPE it would be a testing centre FFS.

Our MP got back to me very quickly and has raised it with the director of public health to give them a bollocking. Barrow testing center staff - the new superspreaders?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on September 22, 2020, 10:40:52 am
The one in Nelson is a coned off local car park. I rode past it the other day and people were cutting across it as a shortcut.
 :tumble:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on September 22, 2020, 11:08:51 am
Re welsh local lockdowns - anyone know if you can travel through the affected counties without stopping? (specifically the M4)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on September 22, 2020, 11:17:07 am
All the way to Fishguard?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on September 22, 2020, 11:28:14 am
Newport and Bridgend are the main sections affected, however a colleague has just told me he read somewhere it was OK to drive through on the m4. Can't find it now though.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 22, 2020, 01:27:01 pm
Had a test yesterday and the person greeting you to check barcodes, ID, tell you where to go etc was there with no mask, head basically in the car in front with windows fully down having a long chat and passing things in/out.  :o

We covered our faces and spoke through the glass to him.

If there was one place I'd want to work under the strictest conditions covered in PPE it would be a testing centre FFS.

Our MP got back to me very quickly and has raised it with the director of public health to give them a bollocking. Barrow testing center staff - the new superspreaders?

The one in Manc Airport that I've been to twice has always been super careful... make sure you keep your window up at all times - scan the barcode through the window etc..

Filled up this morning and I seemed to be the only person donning a face mask to go in and out of the Petrol station... that will presumably be illegal from later on today/this week.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: joeisidle on September 22, 2020, 05:09:11 pm
Newport and Bridgend are the main sections affected, however a colleague has just told me he read somewhere it was OK to drive through on the m4. Can't find it now though.

Haven't read it officially anywhere but appears to be the case on the ground, have already driven through Rhondda section of m4 twice whilst it was in local lockdown and didn't appear to be any enforcement (which I guess there won't be for current ones as it would effectively cut off the main travel corridor to capital)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on September 22, 2020, 05:35:55 pm
Just don't breathe in the closed section and don't use Newport services. In fact not using Newport services is good advice in for illness avoidance in general.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: remus on September 23, 2020, 11:10:34 am
Newport and Bridgend are the main sections affected, however a colleague has just told me he read somewhere it was OK to drive through on the m4. Can't find it now though.

Handy post from Elfyn on UKC https://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/destinations/can_we_climb_in_wales_now-725317?v=1#x9293235 which suggests travel through areas is fine. Presumably based on some official guidance...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on September 23, 2020, 12:17:18 pm
Newport and Bridgend are the main sections affected, however a colleague has just told me he read somewhere it was OK to drive through on the m4. Can't find it now though.

Handy post from Elfyn on UKC https://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/destinations/can_we_climb_in_wales_now-725317?v=1#x9293235 which suggests travel through areas is fine. Presumably based on some official guidance...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-54234993

about halfway down says its ok
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tc on September 24, 2020, 11:47:37 am
This made me chuckle:

"MICHAEL Gove has ordered Britain to work from pubs, drink in the office and only meet members of their household outside.

The chancellor of the Duchy of Murdoch has also advised Britons that if they do not observe the 10pm curfew they must self-isolate at a sporting event for 14 days, accompanied only by Scottish children.

He continued: “It’s perfectly simple. The rule of six means that any group of six must be from a minimum of six different households and more if possible.

“Offices are perfectly safe for drinking and pubs are ideal places for administrative work. Eat out at home if you can.

“You’re only allowed to be outside if you’re inside, and whatever your position at 10pm you must reverse it. Grandparents are an exception to every rule because they vote Tory.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on September 24, 2020, 12:18:07 pm
Latest Test & trace numbers.

21,268 positive tests referred.
78% reached.
75% of their contacts reached.
Worked out at 4.7 contacts per positive person reached.
If you extrapolate that number to the 22% of positive cases which weren't reached you're left with 42% of close contacts being missed.

World beating?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 24, 2020, 04:10:15 pm
Had my hair cut today and had a good long chat to the Barber (small shop - his). He was scathing of the recent clampdown. He suggested most of the local shipowners wanted a short total lockdown right now (the “circuit-breaker”) to try and nip this in the bud - rather than a 15 week lockdown like before that he thought was inevitable in a few weeks time otherwise.

Interesting POV. And hard to disagree with him....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on September 24, 2020, 04:20:12 pm
I think that shop has sailed.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on September 24, 2020, 04:20:49 pm
Had my hair cut today and had a good long chat to the Barber (small shop - his). He was scathing of the recent clampdown. He suggested most of the local shipowners wanted a short total lockdown right now (the “circuit-breaker”) to try and nip this in the bud - rather than a 15 week lockdown like before that he thought was inevitable in a few weeks time otherwise.

Interesting POV. And hard to disagree with him....

Many Shipowners on your barber’s road?
I had a haircut this morning too, had a long chat with my barber too.
Mainly swearing and calling him a Twunt, for nicking my ear with the razor. I really have  to stop talking to myself...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 24, 2020, 04:48:46 pm
😂😂😂

Missed that one! SHOP owners...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on September 24, 2020, 04:52:40 pm
Shame to see no targeted relief for certain sectors today. I've a lot of friends in the Arts industry and they basically can't work and work for theatres, music venues etc which are all struggling.

The idea of them working 33% of their hours whilst their employer has to pay 55% of their wages isn't going to cut it for many businesses. There's just not the work (or money) there to even put them on a third of their normal hours (if they were on contracted hours in the first place).

It's a shame as whenever things return to some form of normality, many arts venues will be hugely missed and, in my opinion, will really be needed to help people get over the shitshow that would have been the last X years.

I've no idea what the answer is and, in general, I think it's right to begin to reduce state at some point. However I think this will result in many job losses across a lot of industries.

Similarly, I find it awful that universities have forced students back to campus to sit at their computer in their room and have the odd in-person class to make paying for the university-owned accommodation necessary. What we're seeing in Glasgow and Manchester was absolutely inevitable and the responsibility lies with the University in my opinion. And there's no way students are going to stay at Uni at Christmas so its just going to concentrate infections and then spread around the country.

But again, without letting a lot of Universities go bankrupt, I've no idea what the best solution would be.

I'd hate to be running a business or in government right now. Everything is a moral dilemma...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Monolith on September 24, 2020, 05:08:54 pm
Whilst I appreciate the capacity conundrum that Covid presents (education attendance taking precedence over pub attendance for example), things are only get worse so long as pupils are in schools and students are in universities. Hundreds of pupils pile out of the secondary school opposite our house each day, wrestling with one another, no masks, no social distance etc. They may not be badly affected by the virus but they are excellent vectors.

The notion of a 'Covid secure' physical environment is also clearly a fallacy; if a condom isn't 100% secure, then how on earth is having a few glass screens scattered about a non-hermetically sealed series of anti spaces in a restaurant going to work?

I keep telling myself I'll block all of this out but it is effecting everything we do in society. Three of my friends have now had it to varying degrees over the past month and I'd consider them to be diligent, careful individuals who practice good personal hygiene.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 24, 2020, 05:18:31 pm
To answer on HE - I think nearly all Universities could have taught most (90-95%) of things remotely. No need for students to come in at all. BUT - this would be seen as terrible value at 9K fees PA - completely understandably...

So, the Govt put us in this position by offering no bail out... IF for example we were bailed out at 4k per student (so fees were £5k) then we could proceed easily with nearly all remote teaching.

BUT - this didn't happen. We can't cut the fees on our own or we go bust - quite literally - and thats the same across much of the sector (we already have a £20m defecit - before any plumetting international student numbers are factored in). So once one insutution (was it Manchester?) said we want to do some face to face teaching - and for students to have a campus experience then everyone had to follow. Its a market after all now...

So - typical of this government - universitites were left to figure it out for themselves with no help.

Oh - we had guidelines. These were issued - at 1:18am the day after BJ promised they would be released that night in his speech. Apparently the civil service team making the guidelines had no release data given - so pulled an all nighter to get them out. unsurprisingly they are shit - and incomplete. They were relased I think less than two weeks ago.

Everyone in the sector has been flat out this summer in one huge collective WTF preparing online teaching, blended learning, synchronous and asynchronous delivery etc.. etc.. Its a huge task - but is being done. 

Sorry - thats a bit of a rant but NO-ONE in HE is happy with what is happening. And we have lovely indiciduals like the VC of Sussex trying to independently classify his lecturing staff as Key workers so they have to go in etc..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on September 24, 2020, 05:36:43 pm
Sorry - thats a bit of a rant but NO-ONE in HE is happy with what is happening. And we have lovely indiciduals like the VC of Sussex trying to independently classify his lecturing staff as Key workers so they have to go in etc..

I'd completely agree that Universities are in an awful position through no fault of their own - I take back my comment of them being responsible for the spreads we're seeing in the aforementioned clusters, that wasn't fair.

I guess it came from how shocked I am that students are back in halls at all. It was never going to end well and something should have been done to prevent what we're seeing.

I hadn't thought of a subsidy of fees as you mentioned, though thought something such as payment holidays on loans taken to build accommodation could go some way to bridging the income gap (similar to those given to mortgage holders). Though I've no idea how bad things are financially and don't know the best way out of it.

It's sounds awful for those I know working in education. Sorry if it felt I put the blame on your feet!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 24, 2020, 07:09:11 pm
Sorry - it was an in general rant James - not aimed at you. Lots of unrest in the sector.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on September 24, 2020, 07:49:14 pm
Hundreds of pupils pile out of the secondary school opposite our house each day, wrestling with one another, no masks, no social distance etc. 

Oh god, I can picture that exact scene. I don't mean in general, but literally the view across that street to that school. Is there a shudders emoji?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on September 24, 2020, 07:53:14 pm
Thanks Tom and James; very good, informative and eye opening posts on HE.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 24, 2020, 08:00:14 pm
From the BBC website - a first year Glasgow student in quarantine/isolation

Quote
And she asked why the university told them to move into the halls when they could have followed their online courses from home. .
"We were told to come to university halls - 48 people from across the country in one building- it was inevitable that it was going to spread," she said.
"We are getting punished for just living here but we were told to come.
"There's no reason for us to be here because everything is online."

Quite.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-54285720
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on September 24, 2020, 09:36:19 pm
Got to feel for them, first year is supposed to be about drinking, socialising and doing other silly shit.

So they've been told to move into halls, but can't socialise with others in halls, can't go out drinking, are doing courses online and told they might not be able to go home for Christmas.

What a shit show.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on September 24, 2020, 09:51:21 pm
This pandemic may not be making them physically ill, but it is extremely hard on the young, no question. They get overlooked because of the focus on the danger to the older population.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dunnyg on September 24, 2020, 09:54:43 pm
I feel pretty lucky to have just finished my uni studies. One small positive may be that in 3 years time there will be fewer graduates applying for the same jobs, due to reduced student numbers this year.
I have no idea what I would do if i was chosing to start uni or not now, the job market is crap, casual work is slim pickings, cant bum around abroad and university sounds pretty rough living in halls etc..
Having seen organisation of phd programs at close hand, the workload imposed on university staff at all levels seems completely unsustainable, and entirely reliant on good will from staff. I feel pretty bad for phd students too, many have suffered huge delays and will see no extension to funding, with projects falling apart due to lack of fieldwork and labwork. Mental health is a knoen issue with phd types, and none of this will help. Grim stuff all round.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: T_B on September 24, 2020, 09:57:20 pm
There are more students this year aren’t there? Due to the A level fuck up.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: T_B on September 24, 2020, 10:00:42 pm
It’ll be interesting to see where we are in a few weeks but judging by what’s happening in Sheffield I can’t see schools being open beyond half term. My youngest was sent home yesterday. Everyone seems to know someone whose kid/class has been sent home. Universities? Entire halls of residence will be in lockdown in a few weeks.

Without an effective test/trace system there’s no way to get on top of it. It’s blind faith to think we’ll muddle through.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: moose on September 24, 2020, 10:03:46 pm
To answer on HE - I think nearly all Universities could have taught most (90-95%) of things remotely. No need for students to come in at all. BUT - this would be seen as terrible value at 9K fees PA - completely understandably...

My degree involved 10-15 hours per week of practical lab work.... a year or two of remote learning could result in a generation of pretty hopeless experimentalists (or a lot of horrible accidents in kitchens). 

I do feel sorry for the students... £9k pa for house arrest.  I'd have found that hard to take, and I'm from generation with no tuition fees (hell, I was indigent enough to get a grant towards living costs).  A plus of university is that even if the people you're initially forced near don't appeal, there's lots of opportunity to meet others; now everyone's forced to stay in their (re-)education internment camp.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Wil on September 24, 2020, 10:08:17 pm
If I'd had the option of a job I wouldn't have been going this year I think, but I was fairly uncertain about the whole thing anyway and didn't have specific career goals that required a degree.

If I were in the situation many of them are in now I'd be heading back to my parents and studying from there. It doesn't appear there's much to gain in staying.

Starting uni can be a lonely and homesick time for many. Obviously  in normal times most people get past that fairly quickly, but if you end up self isolating too, with half a dozen people you don't know and might not like, plus not necessarily having access to a communal space to share with them except your cramped kitchen... It doesn't bode well for your mental health.

That said, I was quarantined for 8 days in my first term at University, with mumps, and it wasn't so bad. They gave me internet access at the medical centre and some of my new friends from halls visited my window occasionally and threw me chocolate bars, which I couldn't eat because every time I salivated my jaw was swollen shut. At least I was able to socialise though.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on September 25, 2020, 05:35:23 am
My daughter just started her fourth and final year at Edinburgh. This semester is almost completely dissertation so she would have little teaching anyway (the dissertation had to be completely retooled in the summer as she couldn't do any field work, she's reading anthropology). She's in a nice apartment with two very close friends, so no miserable halls experience. Things could be worse. But her mental health is definitely suffering somewhat. I think it is the uncertainty more than anything, as well as separation from me and her grandparents. In her situation it makes sense to just finish, even if it won't be the experience it should be, but if she'd been a fresher I'd have had very serious doubts about the worth of going. But what else to do? No jobs, probably no internships (not that I'm plugged into those kinds of networks), very little opportunity to travel. I can take this but can easily imagine the doubts and stresses young people must be suffering from. What does the future hold?

Interestingly, my son, who never finished his degree and has been working the last few years, has decided this is a good time to start an OU degree, which I'm very happy about.

All of her teaching so far has been pre-recorded, with no opportunity for interaction, which I find disappointing, but I've also seen British academics saying they are required to pre-record all classes? I finished teaching the day before lockdown in the spring and so didn't have to transition to online then. I'm just getting to end of an intense period of teaching now - two brand new classes, both of which meet more than once a week, with some sessions being up to two and a half hours. I teach a third in person and the rest online, which I do "live" via Zoom. I've found this both easier and more satisfying than I expected
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on September 25, 2020, 08:39:10 am
My oldest is ion his second year at a central London uni and says all is fine. Gets 2 sessions a week of tutor contact, the rest on line. He is socialising in groups of 6 which suits him fine as he was never that bothered with the big party’s.
He was supposed to be in a shared house but half of the students he was sharing with were overseas and have not returned so we made a last minute decision to put him in a self contained student apartment which he loves.
He had no intention of coming home before Christmas and I don’t believe that they will be stopped coming home then anyway.
Whilst it’s not exactly what he signed up for in his own words it’s a fuck load better than being stuck at home with me and his mum.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 25, 2020, 08:59:14 am
More on HE: Its different in every institution (though minor shades of grey really).

I think its a much less potentially fraught situation for returning 2nd and 3rd year students (and 4th sorry!) as they already have their social networks sorted out - know staff  - their department, course and to an extent what to expect. Also - most 2nd/3rd year students return to smaller units of housing (shared houses/private landlords) rather than blocks of halls of residence - which makes distancing/bubbles easier. Furthermore, 2nd and 3rd year teaching tends to be in smaller groups (though not always).

@Moose - labs can be managed for socially distanced teaching - but means you have to teach 10 or 20 people at once instead of 40 or 80... so you end up doing 2-4x the teaching. But most units in our university have postponed their lab classes until Semester 2 after Xmas - hoping things will be easier then.

Delivering classes via recordings or zoom/teams throws up a whole raft of new challenges. Firstly, we are told that hour/50 min long monologues are not in - so all asynchronous delivery (pre recorded!) has to be in 15 min chunks. Then try and have an online quiz or such like in between each chunk. For perfectionists this means re-recording lectures multiple times to get them perfect - I have colleagues using green screens etc.. etc.. so for some this massively ramps up the workload.

Synchronous delivery (via teams/zoom) is for me a largely soulless experience. When you lecture a room - it is a performance - you read your crowd - see how they are on the utterly bored <—> inspired scale and adjust accordingly. When you talk to a screen full of black boxes (near no-one puts their camera on) it drains any buzz or excitement about the delivery from what you do. Even a class you had delivered ten times - I still get a tingle before delivering it as you never know what will happen. That has disappeared. Positives are that students use the chat to ask questions they may not have done - and sometimes answer them themselves. But - if you have a class of 50+ it’s impossible to keep up with chat and lecture at the same time. You need a wingman/woman to deal with that (something we’re doing in a volunteer way with colleagues)..

And we’re all getting used to the tech. My laptop (6 months old) starts to creak when there’s a large TEAMS class going on - all 8 cores are at 80+ percent... if you have a poor / weak broadband connection then its not a great experience. This can disproportionately affect those with less resources than others... We also have a strange situation here where we have 4 or 5 different systems that don’t really talk to each other. We have a system for timetabling, one for student information/welfare, then a VLE (Canvas - a virtual learning environment) where all our recorded lectures and stuff are supposed to live, and then we deliver via TEAMS that also has places where you can record lectures and leave docs etc.. Everyone is feeling their way around how all this works - and so are the students.

Anyway - I shall stop moaning/explaining the issues. I still have a job for the next year at least so in present climes that’s something to be glad of. /out

Oh - one last thing. PPE etc.. We have this bizarre rule that everyone has to wear a face mask around campus buildings - EXCEPT in a lecture theatre...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on September 25, 2020, 09:46:36 am

But her mental health is definitely suffering somewhat. I think it is the uncertainty more than anything, as well as separation from me and her grandparents.


I can relate to this. I'm the kind of person that doesn't really have bad days, but this year the uncertainty with everything is shit! I'm also lucky that we're in a good financial position too, but covid means everything requires so much change, and every choice needs so much more decision making - it's completely exhausting.

Want to see your family? How long should I isolate for before hand, is that tickle in my throat that's been there for two months covid?
Want to see very ill family who are in mainland Europe, god that's so much harder logictically.
Move wedding to next year. There's a good chance people won't be able to travel over safely the way things are looking.
Can't work from home due to space - time to double expenses and get another place to allow you to do this (with no idea when you could move back - we've therefore decided to buy).

This is all whilst living in a beautiful place, loads of freedom, easy access to the fells & climbing, no financial worries, close to family (can chat in the street at least).

I really feel for all of those in tougher situations - students who now seem to be housebound, racking up debt and having a crap time. Those worried about jobs. Though having to work 7 days a week. Those who can't see family.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on September 25, 2020, 10:22:21 am
Thanks James.

Synchronous delivery (via teams/zoom) is for me a largely soulless experience.

I'm definitely a performer when it comes to teaching. I extemporise all my lectures and so I'm not tied to a lectern or notes. I move around and gesture a lot. I think I would hate prerecording (both as a teacher and a student) but I'm finding that live via Zoom I am getting enough feedback and interaction to make it feel "real" and worthwhile. That's true at least for the class I also teach in person, with whom it's been easier to develop some rapport. This is a class of about 70 but there are typically between 40 and 50 log-ins (but more students as some of them are gathering to take the class together). I am sure I would tire of it, and probably quite quickly, but luckily the intensity of this block means I'll soon be done with teaching for a while.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on September 25, 2020, 03:22:03 pm
From my friends FB page. I don’t know if the numbers are UK specific, but it highlights how shit it is for the Arts sector at the moment. What good is the new jobs scheme if you can’t operate?

Quote

Today is hard.
I don’t know if the audience side really understands how dire the situation is for millions of hard-working professionals.
Broadway is closed until 2021, 6 West End venues THINK they can open at the moment. Cirque du Soleil is filing for bankruptcy and cut 3500+ jobs. Feld Entertainment laid off 90% of its workforce permanently. Live Nation had to lay off a significant amount of employees. Cruise ship entertainers are out of work.
Theme park productions have no idea when they will be recalled. There are no concerts, festivals or touring productions scheduled until 2021 and if they don’t happen next year, they may never happen again. No Jazz Fest, no Coachella, no Bonnaroo, no EDC, no Glastonbury, no Download, no ROLLING STONES FINAL TOUR(S), no ballet, no opera....all gone.
It’s being predicted that 90% of independent music venues may close, the longer this continues. No more 1st Ave, Whiskey-a-GoGo, no more Tipitina’s, no more Red Rocks, no more CroBar, all gone. Entertainment Management, Publicity, Live events coordinator, Performing arts organizations of all kinds- choirs, theatres, orchestras, dance companies- all are trying to figure out on a daily basis how to keep going and employ anyone they can in the field.
More than 12,000,000 people work in entertainment production, we are not insignificant and this industry cannot reopen until mass gatherings can happen again. This doesn’t include the additional layoff of venue management and bar staff, security and thousands of vendors. Also, we can’t forget about the hundreds of thousands of performers and entertainers that make  these careers possible, without them, there is no show.
So understand that your performer friends are helplessly watching our industry crumble before our eyes because the government are growing us under the bus. For some there is no financial support, or if there is, it simply isn't enough to even cover the basics & people are falling through the cracks.
This IS personal for us, our entire livelihood is dependent on social gathering and we will not accept being labeled “nonessential”.
Music and art are critical to a cheerful, balanced society.
Everyone’s career and the whole industry is indefinitely on hold.
Gratefully copied. Feel free to do the same.
#SaveOurStages #SaveTheArts #artseducationmatters #WeMakeEvents

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 25, 2020, 03:30:52 pm
This week has been hard for me CV19 Mental health wise - as its now pretty clear that things are (a) going to get alot worse and (b) there's no reprieve until spring.

Of course I didnt think it would be fine by Xmas etc.. and expected a second wave - but did not expect it to be so soon  - and quite dramatic (as it seems to be at the moment). And its dark before 7pm now!

Not alot of happy stuff around at the moment.... Except our lad is loving his first two weeks at reception... :)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on September 25, 2020, 03:33:41 pm
I don’t know if the numbers are UK specific
More than 12,000,000 people work in entertainment production,

Defo not a UK number unless >1/3 of the workforce is in entertainment production...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on September 25, 2020, 03:36:44 pm
Except our lad is loving his first two weeks at reception... :)

Well, that's a big plus.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on September 25, 2020, 03:42:21 pm
I don’t know if the numbers are UK specific
More than 12,000,000 people work in entertainment production,

Defo not a UK number unless >1/3 of the workforce is in entertainment production...

True that. Still, shitty numbers.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on September 25, 2020, 03:48:49 pm
This week has been hard for me CV19 Mental health wise - as its now pretty clear that things are (a) going to get alot worse and (b) there's no reprieve until spring.

Of course I didnt think it would be fine by Xmas etc.. and expected a second wave - but did not expect it to be so soon  - and quite dramatic (as it seems to be at the moment). And its dark before 7pm now!

Not alot of happy stuff around at the moment.... Except our lad is loving his first two weeks at reception... :)

Hope you can find some bits of reprieve in among it all.

Feeling the same this week - and the darkness is a big hit to that. I think back in March, it was all a bit novel despite being so strict. 30 mins out a day meant I had loads of energy, everyone was in it together, social life changed loads to make the situation better (e.g. loads of online socialising).

Now, nights are getting longer, everything feels exhausting, life is kind of BAU with way less of the fun things and you know it'll get worse.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 25, 2020, 04:30:28 pm
Except our lad is loving his first two weeks at reception... :)

Well, that's a big plus.

Yes it is. And he’s not had to be sent home yet which is a huge plus (year 5 is all in quarantine).

Though - it’s very odd at home. Whilst I now have time to work (and climb!!) with no childcare during school hours - it’s strangely quiet being in the house when he’s normally there all the time (even if I’m working..).

Being amongst his peers (at 4) has made a huge difference though. Apart from meeting the odd friend of his in the park it’s just been us at home for the last 6 months.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on September 25, 2020, 05:33:28 pm
This week has been hard for me CV19 Mental health wise - as its now pretty clear that things are (a) going to get alot worse and (b) there's no reprieve until spring.

Of course I didnt think it would be fine by Xmas etc.. and expected a second wave - but did not expect it to be so soon  - and quite dramatic (as it seems to be at the moment). And its dark before 7pm now!

Not alot of happy stuff around at the moment.... Except our lad is loving his first two weeks at reception... :)
  Totally get this and was in a very similar place mid summer, getting dragged down by all the negativity and bleakness of it all.  It's very difficult times for us all, hope things pick up for you and you're getting time to go do whatever keeps you sane.
Happy to report my kids are back in school as am I.  3 weeks in and we are all noticeably less stressed (apart from trying to leave the house in morning!) and enjoying doing something close to 'normal' life. My pupils are all settling in well too and their parents report big improvements on the whole.  Went for our weekly surf with 5 of my pupils today which is always great for wellbeing.  None of the schools in my town (Barnstaple) have had to isolate a bubble or year group yet.  Very hopeful, for everyone's sake, this continues.
We are still living a very cautious life in general (to protect my wife as much as we can).  Not going to shops, restaurants etc.. and having everything delivered. I'm not indoor climbing at all, fortunately the weather has been helpful and have been really enjoying bouldering outdoors regularly.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on September 25, 2020, 06:05:32 pm

it’s strangely quiet being in the house when he’s normally there all the time (even if I’m working..).


It's been very strange of everyone in one way or another. My work sent us home a few days before schools closed, so there were 4 of us in the house all day every day until schools returned, not I feel the need to have a radio on most of the day when the kids are at school.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 25, 2020, 06:10:15 pm
Thanks Brutus - nice post. Here in Greater Manchester as of yesterday there were 256 schools with one or more cases... in Manchester itself the +ve case rate is about 180/100000 so it’s all feeling very real...

Like you we’re being very careful with mixing - shopping etc...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on September 25, 2020, 06:48:18 pm

it’s strangely quiet being in the house when he’s normally there all the time (even if I’m working..).


It's been very strange of everyone in one way or another. My work sent us home a few days before schools closed, so there were 4 of us in the house all day every day until schools returned, not I feel the need to have a radio on most of the day when the kids are at school.

Six of us and three dogs.

Suddenly, I’m alone with the dogs. Hopefully I’ll be off soon, but it’s actually uncomfortable, right now.

The Uni story is looking rather dark, based on posts here and the media are starting to catch on.
Very, very bad PR.

 https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/sep/25/uk-universities-bullying-junior-staff-into-face-to-face-teaching?CMP=fb_gu&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1601052888 (https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/sep/25/uk-universities-bullying-junior-staff-into-face-to-face-teaching?CMP=fb_gu&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1601052888)

Edit:

Actually, that didn’t covey the degree of my disgust at the attitude of many universities; even if only half of what I’ve heard is true.

#2.
I’m due to start another MSc in Jan (Eng management) with Leeds. Will go back and shop around again if there’s this sort of thing going on there.

My daughter is already hunting, she wants to read law . However, she’s a dual national UK/Rom so she’s free to chose across Europe. When she settled on law, that seemed irrelevant, but we’ve been discussing her going to her Grandmother in Italy/Milano. Attitudes overseas seem better.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 25, 2020, 07:04:56 pm
Yup. My work Twitter account is full of stories like this. Through the guardian article does quote a PhD student doing additional teaching (for which they are getting paid above their bursary - usually) so it’s a bit naughty possibly.

One of my colleagues has to teach in a lab that he has been assured has been deep cleaned etc... the hair he taped over the door in March when we all had to leave is still in place. That story is indicative of the mistrust around senior management too...

Most of our students have been great. And tbh they’ll see more of me on a computer screen than they will in person this year... not sure who is happier about that 😂😂
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on September 25, 2020, 08:06:19 pm
Yup. My work Twitter account is full of stories like this. Through the guardian article does quote a PhD student doing additional teaching (for which they are getting paid above their bursary - usually) so it’s a bit naughty possibly.

One of my colleagues has to teach in a lab that he has been assured has been deep cleaned etc... the hair he taped over the door in March when we all had to leave is still in place. That story is indicative of the mistrust around senior management too...

Most of our students have been great. And tbh they’ll see more of me on a computer screen than they will in person this year... not sure who is happier about that 😂😂

I have just sat down and begun to scroll FB, which in my case is pretty much all media outlets.
The first post was:
 https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/manchester-metropolitan-university-lockdown-halls-coronavirus-students-b603148.html?utm_content=Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR15OBExq6hLUCRIRWOqxEbbB9LYL6lN2lTW2aKzbBrJIRWyuyTfzxJVmZ4#Echobox=1601059200 (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/manchester-metropolitan-university-lockdown-halls-coronavirus-students-b603148.html?utm_content=Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR15OBExq6hLUCRIRWOqxEbbB9LYL6lN2lTW2aKzbBrJIRWyuyTfzxJVmZ4#Echobox=1601059200)

And there are numerous other, similar, reports from all over the UK (all three mainland nations, anyway).
At least 32 Uni’s affected.
Is it me, or is it collapsing already?

All shut down within three weeks. Anybody offering a different prediction? Is there a way we can set up a sweepstake on here?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: lagerstarfish on September 25, 2020, 08:13:37 pm
Yup. My work Twitter account is full of stories like this. Through the guardian article does quote a PhD student doing additional teaching (for which they are getting paid above their bursary - usually) so it’s a bit naughty possibly.

One of my colleagues has to teach in a lab that he has been assured has been deep cleaned etc... the hair he taped over the door in March when we all had to leave is still in place. That story is indicative of the mistrust around senior management too...

Most of our students have been great. And tbh they’ll see more of me on a computer screen than they will in person this year... not sure who is happier about that 😂😂

I think you should start all your lectures with you reading a relevant comic strip from the Lego magazine to your lad, then ask him the obvious questions arising from what you have just read. Let him give his answers and then you deliver the extended answer.

the kids will love it

The Lego Lectures
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: colin8ll on September 25, 2020, 08:17:23 pm
My son's not long since started school reception too. It's been positive in the main for the same reasons others have said, but we all now have sinking colds. I guess this was inevitable but it's a bit disheartening because we realise how vulnerable we are to viruses now we're intersecting with school. It's likely just a matter of time before he brings CV home considering the number of little coughs I've been hearing when dropping him off.

It's been weird going from exercising so much control, caution and restraint to surrendering it all. Still, I'm glad he's back.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 25, 2020, 10:11:50 pm
Thanks Lagers. I’ll start with the hot shot Lego City (tm) cop - Duke Detain.

OMM. Suspect the genie is out of the bottle etc.. and if they close Universities and send everyone back - it’d be sending the masses back to the four corners of the UK riddled with the virus (etc...). An avoidable situation.

Pardon my odd way of thinking (it’s late for me) but is this any different from letting a meat processing factory carry on running after an outbreak there? (Sausage machine metaphor unintended...)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on September 25, 2020, 10:33:07 pm
Thanks Lagers. I’ll start with the hot shot Lego City (tm) cop - Duke Detain.

OMM. Suspect the genie is out of the bottle etc.. and if they close Universities and send everyone back - it’d be sending the masses back to the four corners of the UK riddled with the virus (etc...). An avoidable situation.

Pardon my odd way of thinking (it’s late for me) but is this any different from letting a meat processing factory carry on running after an outbreak there? (Sausage machine metaphor unintended...)

I’m sorry, are we actually contemplating logic or reasoning being applied?

Nah, be serious.

I mean, we have a circus clown as PM.

Which tells you everything you need to know about how sensible the UK public and institutions’ response will be.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on September 25, 2020, 11:55:16 pm

Pardon my odd way of thinking (it’s late for me) but is this any different from letting a meat processing factory carry on running after an outbreak there? (Sausage machine metaphor unintended...)

I wonder if there’s much benefit in letting it rip through a low risk population whilst they’re all contained together And away from their higher risk parents... It’s one way to start developing some kind of herd immunity...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 26, 2020, 07:53:51 am
More on HE woes around the world. How other countries are or are not handling it:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/25/universities-respond-to-covid-surge?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ged on September 26, 2020, 07:54:51 am
Thanks Lagers. I’ll start with the hot shot Lego City (tm) cop - Duke Detain.

OMM. Suspect the genie is out of the bottle etc.. and if they close Universities and send everyone back - it’d be sending the masses back to the four corners of the UK riddled with the virus (etc...). An avoidable situation.

Pardon my odd way of thinking (it’s late for me) but is this any different from letting a meat processing factory carry on running after an outbreak there? (Sausage machine metaphor unintended...)

I’m sorry, are we actually contemplating logic or reasoning being applied?

Nah, be serious.

I mean, we have a circus clown as PM.


I don't know if anyone else watches the great British bake off, but matt lucas doing a Boris piss take at the start of episode 1 was priceless.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on September 26, 2020, 10:21:07 am
Quote
Stay alert. Protect cake. Save loaves.

Priceless. More coherent than the HM Gov one.😀
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 26, 2020, 10:50:05 am
Quote
Stay alert. Protect cake. Save loaves.

Priceless. More coherent than the HM Gov one.😀

Hands, Face, Cake?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on September 26, 2020, 11:08:13 am
This week has been hard for me CV19 Mental health wise - as its now pretty clear that things are (a) going to get alot worse and (b) there's no reprieve until spring.

Professor Aisha Ahmad (who wrote that excellent article on "Why You Should Ignore All That Coronavirus-Inspired Productivity Pressure") did a recent thread on the "6-month wall", based on her experience in disaster zones:

https://twitter.com/ProfAishaAhmad/status/1307697965260328961

Personally I got ahead of the game by having my really bad patch at about the four-month mark, but I know a lot of people who are having a hard time at the moment, and it's helpful to know that this is something of a known phenomenon.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ged on September 26, 2020, 12:32:18 pm
Didn't Witty imply there was a good chance of first vaccine doses being done before the new year? Or did I misread that?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SamT on September 26, 2020, 06:09:19 pm
I don't know if anyone else watches the great British bake off, but matt lucas doing a Boris piss take at the start of episode 1 was priceless.

Did you know Marc Elliot of said Bake off was a reasonable climber back in the day.  I worked with him at Outside in the early 90s.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/inspirational-bake-star-marc-carried-22684984

sorry - off topic and sorry for the cheesy mirror article - but it has good pics.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: joeisidle on September 26, 2020, 10:00:50 pm
I don't know if anyone else watches the great British bake off, but matt lucas doing a Boris piss take at the start of episode 1 was priceless.

Did you know Marc Elliot of said Bake off was a reasonable climber back in the day.  I worked with him at Outside in the early 90s.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/inspirational-bake-star-marc-carried-22684984

sorry - off topic and sorry for the cheesy mirror article - but it has good pics.

That's awesome, always loved that pic of him on Nosferatu from the BMC guide, never thought I'd be seeing it in the Mirror!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on September 26, 2020, 10:39:02 pm
This popped up in my Google feed today, which was an interesting (US) hypothesis of how things might go over the next few years even if there is a vaccine early next year.

https://www.politico.com/amp/news/magazine/2020/09/25/how-covid-19-pandemic-ends-421122

Caveat I don't know who politico are or which side of the fence they stand on generally...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on September 27, 2020, 04:54:45 am
News  from NL on long term lung damage

"Of the 1,200 Covid-19 patients who so far recovered after admission to intensive care, "almost 100 percent went home with residual damage", he said to AD. And about half of the 6 thousand people who were hospitalized, but did not need intensive care, will have symptoms for years to come. "

https://nltimes.nl/2020/05/28/thousands-dutch-covid-19-patients-likely-permanent-lung-damage-doctor-says
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SamT on September 27, 2020, 09:36:20 am
News  from NL on long term lung damage

"Of the 1,200 Covid-19 patients who so far recovered after admission to intensive care, "almost 100 percent went home with residual damage", he said to AD. And about half of the 6 thousand people who were hospitalized, but did not need intensive care, will have symptoms for years to come. "

https://nltimes.nl/2020/05/28/thousands-dutch-covid-19-patients-likely-permanent-lung-damage-doctor-says

This is the aspect of the whole thing that shits me up.  OK, I accept that almost a dead cert that I'll contract it sometime soon but hopefully I wont end up in intensive care.  But long term lung damage is not particularly high on my bucket list.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on September 27, 2020, 09:51:35 pm
Likewise, the idea scares me shitless.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on September 28, 2020, 04:08:50 pm
There's also the fun fun fun prospect of "long Covid", where you get hit with something that looks a lot like chronic fatigue syndrome/ME:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/13/i-was-infected-with-coronavirus-in-march-six-months-on-im-still-unwell

Had a bout with chronic fatigue in my teens (and still get fatigued a lot faster than most people I know), not keen to repeat it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on September 29, 2020, 08:22:20 am
I don't know if anyone else watches the great British bake off, but matt lucas doing a Boris piss take at the start of episode 1 was priceless.

Did you know Marc Elliot of said Bake off was a reasonable climber back in the day.  I worked with him at Outside in the early 90s.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/inspirational-bake-star-marc-carried-22684984

sorry - off topic and sorry for the cheesy mirror article - but it has good pics.

That's awesome, always loved that pic of him on Nosferatu from the BMC guide, never thought I'd be seeing it in the Mirror!

I remember it from an OTE photo comp, I think it won. I always glance up at Nosferatu whenever I wander along Burbage South thinking, "One day......."
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on September 30, 2020, 04:25:55 pm
Flights to nowhere. Just what the earth needs...

I know that airlines are struggling but I can't believe some are now offering sight-seeing trips.

https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/flights-to-nowhere-qantas/index.html
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on September 30, 2020, 05:07:12 pm
I know nuts isn’t it!

Reminds me of the closing phrase on this Harry Enfield sketch :D

https://youtu.be/t-jw5GYqMhM
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on September 30, 2020, 05:15:21 pm
I know nuts isn’t it!

Reminds me of the closing phrase on this Harry Enfield sketch :D

https://youtu.be/t-jw5GYqMhM

It's a great sketch!

One article talked about a 12hr round trip to see Antarctica whilst each passenger was responsible for melting 6sqm of the ice they were going to see (or something like that...)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on September 30, 2020, 05:20:53 pm
The aisle seats are a bummer.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on September 30, 2020, 05:24:44 pm
I'd love to be able to be one of the public questioning Boris on his live press conference. It would be so much fun to ask
now that travel isn't restricted, whether we should meet in groups of 7+ or visit someone else's house in order to test our eyesight.

The questions/answers are so dry that it would hopefully inject a laugh at least...


Will - seats ranged from about £70 to £2500. I guess that the aisle seats were at least cheaper  :lol:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on October 01, 2020, 11:49:40 am
First personal experience of the testing scheme for me.
My youngest has been off with tonsillitis but temp was through the roof yesterday and won’t be allowed back to school for two weeks without all clear so had to book a test.
Logged on at 9.30pm last night and was given test options from 8am this morning. Booked him and me for 10 am
30 miles down the A1, but that’s my fault for living in the sticks.
10 mins in the drive through all done and back home. The test centre was  pretty much deserted, maybe 4-5 cars max but space for 30-40. 10 drive through bays in operation.
This is a test centre in Newcastle, probably the biggest hotspot in the uk.
And anyone who describes the actual test as more than slightly uncomfortable needs a long hard look at themselves.
Pretty sure we will be negative but he wouldn’t be allowed back at school without the test being done and we have other family reasons for me getting it done.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on October 01, 2020, 11:53:09 am
One article talked about a 12hr round trip to see Antarctica whilst each passenger was responsible for melting 6sqm of the ice they were going to see (or something like that...)

Sorry OT. This film is great (if not a little grizzly) about body collection from an Antarctic sightseeing trip that crashed into Mt Erebus - and on Amazon Prime if you're on it...
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Erebus-Into-Tama-Jarman/dp/B07M5HQTWM
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on October 01, 2020, 06:39:43 pm
First personal experience of the testing scheme for me.
My youngest has been off with tonsillitis but temp was through the roof yesterday and won’t be allowed back to school for two weeks without all clear so had to book a test.
Logged on at 9.30pm last night and was given test options from 8am this morning. Booked him and me for 10 am
30 miles down the A1, but that’s my fault for living in the sticks.
10 mins in the drive through all done and back home. The test centre was  pretty much deserted, maybe 4-5 cars max but space for 30-40. 10 drive through bays in operation.
This is a test centre in Newcastle, probably the biggest hotspot in the uk.
And anyone who describes the actual test as more than slightly uncomfortable needs a long hard look at themselves.
Pretty sure we will be negative but he wouldn’t be allowed back at school without the test being done and we have other family reasons for me getting it done.

Get with the programme  ::) That sort of anecdote isn’t welcome on this forum.   :chair:

Rules are:
a. There must be a failure,
b.  there must be someone to be held accountable for it,
c. ideally, whatever is wrong will be found to be the direct fault of the Tory government,
d. or of Tory cronies,
e. in cases where neither c or d can be proved, then it’s acceptable to blame Corbyn or his cronies,
f. where neither c, d, or e can be shown, then it’s acceptable to blame the public, as long as it’s made clear we’re talking about ‘idiots’. Not nice people like us.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on October 01, 2020, 08:07:06 pm
Sounds like the experience I had over the summer Gav.

Glad it’s working better - not heard of any long delays getting a test for a week or so, possibly the back to school peak has passed.

Don’t know what it’s like where you all are - but here in Manchester it’s seemed noticeably quieter in the last week or so. Roads, shops etc...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on October 01, 2020, 08:09:09 pm
Got an oil worker on the course this week, he gets tested every fortnight so has had ten or twelve so far. He said some are absolutely fine, others are horrendous, depends on the tester and how keen and clumsy they are. So probably best not to write others' experiences off based on a single one of your own.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on October 01, 2020, 08:12:50 pm
We did them ourselves. Seems sensible as then no contact between you and tester.
Rolled window down an inch and was given test kit in sealed bag with instructions. No idea how you could get it wrong.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on October 01, 2020, 08:51:53 pm
I've had 8 swab tests so far. The swab kits themselves are not the same, I've had them from 4 different suppliers so far.

On a rating out of 10, I would say the immediate discomfort has ranged from 1 up to about 4.

Half the time, the discomfort is over more or less instantly. Sometimes, there is a dry irritation at the back of my throat for 10-30 minutes. And one time, I felt like I was going to be sick for about 5 hours.

I don't know if the difference is the different kits, how far down your throat it goes, or put luck.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on October 01, 2020, 09:18:31 pm
The throat bit on the one me and my kid used was nothing more than a tickle. He’s got tonsillitis as well but was fine. The nose bit just makes you sneeze. No after affects at all.

How come you have had 8? I guess work related.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on October 01, 2020, 09:24:27 pm
One of my nasal ones made me giggle uncontrollably! The fella doing it said to his pals in the portacabin (imagine in a Scouse accent) “eh lads, we’ve got a laugher here” 😃
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on October 01, 2020, 09:55:19 pm
 :chair: :chair: :chair: :chair: :chair: :chair: :chair: :chair: :chair: :chair: :chair: :chair:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/01/snp-mp-margaret-ferrier-took-train-after-positive-covid-test

When will MPs learn to not be dicks?
MP has symptoms, gets tested, decided to go ahead with a trip to Parliament, gives a speech. Somewhere in all that she tests positive for Coronavirus and the gets back on a train from London to Scotland.

And Corbyn going to a dinner party breaking the rule of 6.

Added to the list of other past offences of other MPs.

No wonder people don’t listen to Parliament!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on October 01, 2020, 09:56:30 pm
How come you have had 8? I guess work related.
Taking part in a study.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on October 02, 2020, 06:55:48 am
Test results back in 14 hours.
Both negative. Joel still has a temp but guess it’s to do with tonsillitis
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 02, 2020, 09:23:57 am
Interesting take in the Atlantic:

 https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/09/k-overlooked-variable-driving-pandemic/616548/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=atlantic-daily-newsletter&utm_content=20201001&silverid-ref=NjIxNjQ3MzAxMjc4S0&fbclid=IwAR3hfXUtd5OQXmqMPKLu988bBhpExf9Fo5BfKFzSeJrpkR86RT9NWfDacgU (https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/09/k-overlooked-variable-driving-pandemic/616548/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=atlantic-daily-newsletter&utm_content=20201001&silverid-ref=NjIxNjQ3MzAxMjc4S0&fbclid=IwAR3hfXUtd5OQXmqMPKLu988bBhpExf9Fo5BfKFzSeJrpkR86RT9NWfDacgU)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on October 02, 2020, 03:35:53 pm

f. where neither c, d, or e can be shown, then it’s acceptable to blame the public, as long as it’s made clear we’re talking about ‘idiots’. Not nice people like us.

You forgot g. Where f. comes into effect, it's still the fault of Boris and the Tories because Thatcher made everyone selfish and not considerate of other people.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 02, 2020, 03:38:44 pm

f. where neither c, d, or e can be shown, then it’s acceptable to blame the public, as long as it’s made clear we’re talking about ‘idiots’. Not nice people like us.

You forgot g. Where f. comes into effect, it's still the fault of Boris and the Tories because Thatcher made everyone selfish and not considerate of other people.

Actually, I thought it was always “h” : Centrist Dads not being left/right wing enough.

Edit:

Forgot the most important one:

“i” The opposite of whatever Pete said it was.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on October 02, 2020, 07:19:11 pm
Well I’m glad Pete and Chris have got that off their chests

🤗 🤗 🤗

Now moving on...

Given the POTUS present diagnosis - and that it may or may not worsen. Do people think BJ would have responded differently over e last few months if he hadn’t had a close brush with Covid?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on October 05, 2020, 11:44:03 am
Apparently (linked tweet quotes the daily mail - so pinch of salt etc..) the reason why there was an issue with updating UK CV19 cases with the correct number - and some were missing (and didnt go to track and trace..) was because the data is kept on Excel spreadsheets - and the number of columns had exceeded the maximum.

Excel columns end at 16,384 aka “XFD”.

https://twitter.com/MaxCRoser/status/1313046638915706880?s=20

Where is SlackLine when you need him :)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: remus on October 06, 2020, 08:01:33 am
Apparently (linked tweet quotes the daily mail - so pinch of salt etc..) the reason why there was an issue with updating UK CV19 cases with the correct number - and some were missing (and didnt go to track and trace..) was because the data is kept on Excel spreadsheets - and the number of columns had exceeded the maximum.

Excel columns end at 16,384 aka “XFD”.

https://twitter.com/MaxCRoser/status/1313046638915706880?s=20

Where is SlackLine when you need him :)

To clarify, they weren't actually using excel as the database for testing results (which would be a crime against humanity) but as part of a data processing pipeline (which is understandable...everyone knows how to use excel). The issue was that test results were sent from labs in a text format, then these were automatically collated in to a single XLS file which has a limit of about 65k rows. Each test actually had multiple rows in the data, so in practice about 1.4k patients would fit in each excel file and then when it went over that the rows were silently dropped. source: https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-54423988

To be honest Im actually pretty sympathetic. It smells a lot like something some overworked PHE programmer setup 6 months ago in the heat of the first wave, and then they've been moved on to some other high priority thing and the pipeline has been chugging along fine in the background until now (because the number of tests has increased enormously compared to the start of the pandemic).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on October 06, 2020, 09:06:48 am
Apparently they were using the cases in the columns instead of the rows though, if so, my sympathy is limited.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on October 06, 2020, 09:27:43 am
Yes - feel sorry for the programmer who maybe didn’t know this would end up being scaled up to what it is now...

Maybe they were just contracted in for a couple of months...

But the project manager - and their management - on a £12 billion job...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on October 06, 2020, 09:39:38 am
Exactly..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Evil on October 06, 2020, 09:43:13 am
Apparently they were using the cases in the columns instead of the rows though, if so, my sympathy is limited.

It's interesting how different news sources are quoting different reasons - the BBC quotes exceeding the row limit for .xls files and yet many other places are reporting the columns issue. The Guardian seems to suggest someone loading a .csv file which exceeded the limit into Excel, but anyone who has ever tried to do that would know you get a very obvious notification of the issue which someone would have had to acknowledge and then ignore ... I wonder which it is.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on October 06, 2020, 10:15:30 am
If I've understood the story correctly, the interesting/damning thing to me is that it was Serco rather than a clueless civil servant who have opted to use Excel for the job rather than database software. Seems pretty unprofessional.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on October 06, 2020, 11:07:21 am
I'm surprised Sheffield hasn't had a local lockdown imposed yet. For a while now it's had steeply rising cases and the 2nd highest case rate of any area not under local lockdown (Nottingham has the highest), higher on both metrics than many of the locked down areas. Seems inevitable and imminent to me, but then I thought that this time last week  :shrug:.

PS - My son having completed two weeks isolation after two classmates tested positive, is now back at home for a second two weeks after returning to school for one week and another kid in the class testing positive  :slap: :wall:  :wall:.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/06/covid-cases-and-deaths-today-coronavirus-uk-map
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: T_B on October 06, 2020, 11:10:57 am
Yes, I’m expecting it to be imminent. Youngest went back to school last Friday... oldest self isolating from... last Friday. He’s supposed to be returning on Monday, but for how long?

I have heard some schools in Sheffield are closed?

Will that mean we can’t venture into Derbyshire? Hope not obvs  :(
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Evil on October 06, 2020, 11:14:47 am
Quite a good write up on the Register. They at least asked PHE to confirm the exact cause, but were told to rely on Matt Hancock to make things clearer...  ::)
https://www.theregister.com/2020/10/05/excel_england_coronavirus_contact_error/ (https://www.theregister.com/2020/10/05/excel_england_coronavirus_contact_error/)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on October 06, 2020, 11:16:07 am
There's also a reported outbreak at one of the Sheffield universities, 474 cases as of yesterday.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on October 06, 2020, 11:23:03 am
I'm surprised Sheffield hasn't had a local lockdown imposed yet. For a while now it's had steeply rising cases and the 2nd highest case rate of any area not under local lockdown (Nottingham has the highest), higher on both metrics than many of the locked down areas. Seems inevitable and imminent to me, but then I thought that this time last week  :shrug:.

PS - My son having completed two weeks isolation after two classmates tested positive, is now back at home for a second two weeks after returning to school for one week and another kid in the class testing positive  :slap: :wall:  :wall:.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/06/covid-cases-and-deaths-today-coronavirus-uk-map

That map is quite telling! It makes me wonder why:

1) Our criteria for quarantine upon returning from a trip is that countries have > 20 cases per 100k
2) We haven’t, as far as I know, had restrictions placed on us by countries such as Germany, Especially given they are doing it based on regions rather than full countries.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on October 06, 2020, 11:42:00 am
There's also a reported outbreak at one of the Sheffield universities, 474 cases as of yesterday.

I'd be surprised if there's any further restrictions until the new traffic light system is rolled out (Thursday?) as there's a slight acknowledgment that the situation in the NE and NW isn't overly clear. There's been an attempt to harmonise some of the GM area.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on October 06, 2020, 11:47:17 am
A week or two ago - 12k cases per day started happening in France. It can't get that bad here can it?

Just as in March/April we seem to be following suit...

As of yesterday 500 per 100k here in Manchester. Twice that of Bolton the previous worst in the UK.

Was on an early morning TEAMs meet with colleagues in Australia - none of them can understand why our pubs and restaurants are open...

Neither can I.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on October 06, 2020, 11:52:47 am
Because they don't have a financial plan for jobs that are made temporarily non viable by the restrictions?

/cynic
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on October 06, 2020, 11:53:58 am
Scary results in Scotland where IIRC their positive test rate is above 11%...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on October 06, 2020, 11:57:35 am
Largely restricted to the Central Belt.

I'm worried about the extent of the "Circuit Breaker" announcement at lunchtime, any half term plans we have may be scuppered.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on October 06, 2020, 11:59:53 am
I think you're right Paul regards awaiting the traffic light system. The Sheffield Star is speculating that we may go straight onto tier three lockdown, meaning:
Quote
Red alert (level three) – There would be a ban on social contact with anyone not in your household, pubs, restaurants and leisure businesses would be asked to close once again, and amateur sports (such as bowling, or 5-a-side football) would also be banned. Places of worship would remain open, however.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on October 06, 2020, 12:00:39 pm
Largely restricted to the Central Belt.

I'm worried about the extent of the "Circuit Breaker" announcement at lunchtime, any half term plans we have may be scuppered.
Mine too, we're supposed to be staying on Skye for the week.  :'(
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 06, 2020, 12:08:00 pm
I just realised, that I assumed everybody was aware of the official map, by post code, of weekly cases. Runs about 4-5 days behind.
If you’ve not seen it:

 https://www.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=47574f7a6e454dc6a42c5f6912ed7076 (https://www.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=47574f7a6e454dc6a42c5f6912ed7076)

A week ago, the map was almost completely white.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on October 06, 2020, 12:16:49 pm
Cheers, good map. Looks like it's grouped by something called MSOAs, each of which has approximately the same number of people in it, rather than postcode, so very useful for comparing areas against each other.


Quote
This is a map showing number of positive cases in a week by Middle Layer Super Output Areas (MSOA).  MSOAs are a standard statistical geography of approximately 7,200 people.  Some MSOAs have the same name as local electoral wards and figures within this map should not be compared with ward data you may see published elsewhere
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on October 06, 2020, 12:45:44 pm
I think you're right Paul regards awaiting the traffic light system. The Sheffield Star is speculating that we may go straight onto tier three lockdown, meaning:
Quote
Red alert (level three) – There would be a ban on social contact with anyone not in your household, pubs, restaurants and leisure businesses would be asked to close once again, and amateur sports (such as bowling, or 5-a-side football) would also be banned. Places of worship would remain open, however.

I'm not sure what the demographics of Sheffield are like but if Leeds is anything to go by then all the dark blue areas are the areas where students live either in the community in large numbers or there is a hall of residence. If the authorities are aware that the cases are generally confined to the student accommodation which is already, in effect, in the strictest state of lockdown then they might have decided that life for the general public can go on as (new) normal?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on October 06, 2020, 12:56:18 pm
The dark blue areas of Sheffield are exactly where the accomodation estates of the two universities are Will, yes. Quelle surprise!

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: T_B on October 06, 2020, 12:57:16 pm
Not quite, though whereas back in March/April the cases were in the poor northern areas, now it’s central and around the Uni.

Interesting to keep an eye on somewhere like Norwich, which has a very low infection rate overall. The highest rate is around the Uni.

Good that we’re propping up the universities though whilst so many businesses face ruin.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on October 06, 2020, 01:00:41 pm
Largely restricted to the Central Belt.

I'm worried about the extent of the "Circuit Breaker" announcement at lunchtime, any half term plans we have may be scuppered.
Mine too, we're supposed to be staying on Skye for the week.  :'(

Bugger. Our two week half term starts Friday, we are hoping to get to Northumberland for the first week.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on October 06, 2020, 01:22:31 pm
If the authorities are aware that the cases are generally confined to the student accommodation which is already, in effect, in the strictest state of lockdown then they might have decided that life for the general public can go on as (new) normal?

As to this part, if the major part of rising cases is a student-led problem I can't see a fair solution. At present any locked-down students have paid up front for their own incarceration in order to do a largely online course, which I doubt they will be overjoyed about. However if they are "unlocked" (don't forget students are the "general public" as well!), which they may be without a decent testing regime as a lot of them will be asymptomatic, then the case for locking down the city arises, which affects everybody, including the students. Its Catch 22. There may have been a fair solution at some point over the summer but that ship has long since sailed.

I'm surprised that one of the superforecasters in government didn't twig that the largest annual internal migration of young adults from all parts of the UK into high density accomodation in major cities might spur a rise in cases.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on October 06, 2020, 01:31:06 pm
Superforecasters, or even the no shit Sherlock department.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on October 06, 2020, 01:33:19 pm
If the authorities are aware that the cases are generally confined to the student accommodation which is already, in effect, in the strictest state of lockdown then they might have decided that life for the general public can go on as (new) normal?
I'm surprised that one of the superforecasters in government didn't twig that the largest annual internal migration of young adults from all parts of the UK into high density accomodation in major cities might spur a rise in cases.

The students aren't there because they need to be there to learn (mostly). They're there because it justifies 9 grand's worth of fees and to keep the accommodation services viable. Or at least, that's what I glean from TT's post from a couple of weeks ago.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on October 06, 2020, 01:44:06 pm
Students contribute to the numbers but not everywhere and not to the same degree.

Manchester (today rate is near 550/100000) 90-100000 students. 5-700 hundred cases.

Hull (today’s rate 32/100000) 15000 students, 3 cases.

Two extreme examples - but there are plenty of places in the UK where numbers are rising fast not linked to student populations...

From Wills point - for 95% of degree courses the students do not have to be there this year (if you shunt practical work to next year or come up with alternatives). It’s so they get value for money and the student experience y’all.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on October 06, 2020, 01:47:29 pm
So, what you're saying is that Mancs know how to have a good time and Hull students don't...?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on October 06, 2020, 01:50:38 pm
So, what you're saying is that Mancs know how to have a good time and Hull students don't...?

Nope. But I don’t really care if they do or don’t!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on October 06, 2020, 02:11:53 pm

Good that we’re propping up the universities though whilst so many businesses face ruin.

Are you referring to the return of the students or something else TB?

My understanding is that we are in this crisis precisely because the government has not supported the universities and to protect themselves financially, they have encouraged students to return in person.

It is - or should be- a scandal: tens of thousands of young people around the country put in harms  way, just to secure the uni estates’ balance sheets. They are offered nothing but online courses and platitudes in return. Don’t forget they are paying from loans, not grants. It is a form of exploitation, and a particularly nasty one because although young adults mostly come through COVID ok not all will, especially in view of the numbers contracting it.

It’s just wrong. Now who is the Secretary of State for Education  :-\

We have heard nothing from Michelle Donelan either, it’s her brief.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on October 06, 2020, 02:17:16 pm
So, what you're saying is that Mancs know how to have a good time and Hull students don't...?

War of the Roses finished a long time ago, Will.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on October 06, 2020, 02:38:57 pm
RE bonjoy's post about why other countries aren't putting restrictions on us - most of Northern England is now on the German risk list, meaning you'd need to test/quarantine on arrival in line with state rules for the relevant area of Germany.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on October 06, 2020, 02:43:26 pm
The students aren't there because they need to be there to learn (mostly). They're there because it justifies 9 grand's worth of fees and to keep the accommodation services viable. Or at least, that's what I glean from TT's post from a couple of weeks ago.

Sorry if the sarcasm in my last sentence was not clear - of course they knew this would happen, I just doubt they cared! Students are an easy target - either don't vote / vote labour, easily scapegoated as young and stupid (especially with the connivance of the UK media usual suspects), and pre-ghettoised for an easy lockdown.

Your view above is my view too - my partner is a lecturer at Hallam so I am aware that they are now a property management company with a learning subsidiary. My reference to a fair solution being available over summer is what MrJR mentions - gov support for uni's to allow them to lower / abolish fees and do online only i.e. honest, transparent, fair. Now that uni's are marketised all it took was for one to "go over the top" and offer some token face-to-face teaching and then they all did. Which means everyone back. Obviously they knew all along they would be offering 90-100% online anyway, which I can guarantee you from conversations with students I know was not obvious to them in all cases. So not transparent, not fair, plus costly and dangerous for the students. Into the bargain they'll potentially get the blame for student cities going into lockdown in the future. If I was a student I would be miffed to put it mildly. Another fine mess...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on October 06, 2020, 02:50:41 pm
Imagine being a parent having just sent your excited son/daughter off to start adult life in lockdown with Covid. Distraught I would think.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on October 06, 2020, 03:19:52 pm
RE bonjoy's post about why other countries aren't putting restrictions on us - most of Northern England is now on the German risk list, meaning you'd need to test/quarantine on arrival in line with state rules for the relevant area of Germany.

I think that was my post, but that's good to know. We got the ferry across on Saturday and checked on Friday before the guidance was updated that evening.

We're staying with family in Germany so looks like we're now in quarantine & getting tested...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on October 06, 2020, 03:25:14 pm
The students aren't there because they need to be there to learn (mostly). They're there because it justifies 9 grand's worth of fees and to keep the accommodation services viable. Or at least, that's what I glean from TT's post from a couple of weeks ago.

Sorry if the sarcasm in my last sentence was not clear - of course they knew this would happen, I just doubt they cared! Students are an easy target - either don't vote / vote labour, easily scapegoated as young and stupid (especially with the connivance of the UK media usual suspects), and pre-ghettoised for an easy lockdown.

Your view above is my view too - my partner is a lecturer at Hallam so I am aware that they are now a property management company with a learning subsidiary. My reference to a fair solution being available over summer is what MrJR mentions - gov support for uni's to allow them to lower / abolish fees and do online only i.e. honest, transparent, fair. Now that uni's are marketised all it took was for one to "go over the top" and offer some token face-to-face teaching and then they all did. Which means everyone back. Obviously they knew all along they would be offering 90-100% online anyway, which I can guarantee you from conversations with students I know was not obvious to them in all cases. So not transparent, not fair, plus costly and dangerous for the students. Into the bargain they'll potentially get the blame for student cities going into lockdown in the future. If I was a student I would be miffed to put it mildly. Another fine mess...
Pretty scandalous. I hope a bunch of them sue their Unis and win. From the outside it looks very much like they've been cynically mis-sold, misled, and put at risk.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on October 06, 2020, 03:31:10 pm
Take a look at the Good Law Project Bonjoy. I think this is happening.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on October 06, 2020, 04:03:14 pm
For many of the Universities it was a case of full fees or go bust.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on October 06, 2020, 04:06:11 pm
https://www.gov.uk/tax-relief-for-employees/working-at-home

not sure if everyone knows about this.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on October 06, 2020, 04:17:02 pm
Cheers
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on October 06, 2020, 04:39:28 pm
We have heard nothing from Michelle Donelan either, it’s her brief.

We have now Jr - she just announced a helpline for students.  Sure that'll sort it. :tumble:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on October 06, 2020, 05:08:18 pm
For many of the Universities it was a case of full fees or go bust.
I can believe it. I'd still sue. I wouldn't appreciate being thrown under the bus regardless of how many jobs or what business it rescued.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 06, 2020, 05:14:49 pm
For many of the Universities it was a case of full fees or go bust.
I can believe it. I'd still sue. I wouldn't appreciate being thrown under the bus regardless of how many jobs or what business it rescued.

Ritual sacrifice of the young, is a long standing human tradition and carping about it is the action of a “Lefty Lawyer” or “Do Gooder” type.
I do hope you’re not taking THAT  sort of line.

Just think of the poor people in charge of selecting the offerings, it’s so hard to find a virgin these days.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on October 06, 2020, 05:19:54 pm
For many of the Universities it was a case of full fees or go bust.

I think you missed a fairly obvious option. Presumably when you attended uni they were neither bust, nor did you pay fees?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on October 06, 2020, 06:26:55 pm
Edit - thought I’d posted this an hour ago but it didn’t...

Meant for Bonjoy

I think if you’re stuck kettled up in a badly designed / managed / cramped hall of residence with no care from the university then you’re right.


But that’s not the case everywhere. Two other arguments in play - first would students actually be any better off at home studying (many wouldn’t) or at home looking for a job instead? Second whilst I disagree with the fees system - they are more akin to a graduate tax than a loan - with a large percentage of students never paying them back.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on October 06, 2020, 06:34:12 pm
For many of the Universities it was a case of full fees or go bust.

I think you missed a fairly obvious option. Presumably when you attended uni they were neither bust, nor did you pay fees?

Rather than the fee structure (that as above I’d don’t agree with) I think the biggest problem for HE is competition.

All HE institutes used to have caps on numbers for subjects - so Bristol, Exeter Leeds, Manchester etc.. were limited. With new fees and ‘competition’ universities as above could fill their boots (and more!) leaving other institutions in trouble.

This means you then also have to provide for a university going bust - which hasn’t happened yet but will.

If you go back to some form of quota then things are much more manageable from a running a university point of view.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on October 06, 2020, 07:25:43 pm


This means you then also have to provide for a university going bust - which hasn’t happened yet but will.



I worked in a Business Support Unit in a bank (dealing with customers who were struggling) about 5 years ago. It was full of farms, football clubs and universities. I’m surprised we’ve not seen failures yet!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on October 06, 2020, 07:28:08 pm
I believe the guidelines and procedures for transferring students from a bankrupt university wrrr only drawn up 3-4 years ago.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on October 07, 2020, 11:29:09 am
Would agree with that assessment TT. The summer was a missed opportunity to do something creative in my opinion, but there you go, its no surprise!

Compehensive summary of all of the above in the NYT of all places - https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/06/world/europe/virus-UK-universities.html
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on October 08, 2020, 11:41:26 am

Latest Test & trace numbers.

21,268 positive tests referred.
78% reached.
75% of their contacts reached.
Worked out at 4.7 contacts per positive person reached.
If you extrapolate that number to the 22% of positive cases which weren't reached you're left with 42% of close contacts being missed.

World beating?

Latest Test & trace numbers.

34,494 positive tests referred.
74% reached.
82% of their contacts reached.
Worked out at 3.94 contacts per positive person reached.
If you extrapolate that number to the 26% of positive cases which weren't reached you're left with 39% of close contacts being missed.

So compared to 2 weeks ago, based on today's report we are:

1) referring more positive cases (62% more)
2) getting in touch with less of them (4% less as a percentage)
3) reaching more of their contacts as a percentage
4) "missing" less as a percentage when you extrapolate for positive cases who weren't reached.

But given the 62% increase in cases referred we're probably missing a lot more close contacts compared to 2 week ago, in terms of actual numbers.

And we didn't contact 22% of positive cases 2 weeks ago (4,700 people) and this report says we now didn't contact 26% (9,000 people)

It feels like a very strict lockdown to get numbers at a manageable level would be the best approach at the moment. Then maybe Test & Trace and the new app might could do their job properly...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on October 08, 2020, 12:09:26 pm
Indeed - but I suspect we’ll end up with a shade between Sweden and lockdown.

What will trigger the full lockdown is if hospitals / icu can’t cope.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 08, 2020, 12:14:58 pm
Indeed - but I suspect we’ll end up with a shade between Sweden and lockdown.

What will trigger the full lockdown is if hospitals / icu can’t cope.

You mean “about three weeks from now”, right?

(https://i.ibb.co/DL4X4mL/7-FF7-F65-E-BE5-C-48-E5-B56-D-97-D35-D5-B6-A64.jpg)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on October 08, 2020, 12:41:24 pm
Latest Test & trace numbers.

34,494 positive tests referred.
74% reached.
82% of their contacts reached.
Worked out at 3.94 contacts per positive person reached.
If you extrapolate that number to the 26% of positive cases which weren't reached you're left with 39% of close contacts being missed.


Thanks James, very interesting. It should be noted that this is for England only isn't it? I.e. the privatised Serco system. Over the completed weeks between start of August and end of Sept in Scotland the NHS run Test and Protect system has closed out contact tracing on 97% of all positive cases. Yes, 97% on average! Note that Serco are nowhere near this system, its run by the NHS and local authorities as far as I am aware. If you want the raw figures they are on page 10 of this Scotgov document: https://beta.isdscotland.org/media/5967/20-10-07-covid19-publication_report.pdf . £12 billion well spent?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fultonius on October 08, 2020, 12:55:43 pm
Long Covid?

I think a dose of Covid back in March. Quite mild, but was in close contact with people form work who had it. Persistent cough, some days of flu-like symptoms etc. All cleared up bar some "covid toe" a few weeks later.

Around 3 weeks ago I started getting persistent fatigue, struggling to get out of bed and just not quite feeling 100% cognitively. I had a week off, climbing in fairhead and struggled to get motivated. I was putting it down to be a bit overworked, maybe a bit depressed or generally under the weather but had a nice week anyway. Thought maybe the 2-3 beers in the evening were not helping, so pretty much stopped. Sometimes having a single beer was giving me a headache (I fluctuate between not drinking much and having a beer or two a night, but never have had consistent hangovers from 2 beers!) Stopping has had very little impact other than not throwing another log on the fire, so to speak.

I then had a week back at work, feeling slow and persistent "brain fog". Maybe a few little coughs here and there, but really nothing in the way of flu symptoms. Discussed going to the doctor to see about counselling or something (had some mil-moderate depression and anxiety issues of the last few years since my dad passed away, and GF thought that the whole shit life situation we're all going through was taking it's toll - which it is/could be the issue...)

Last week we were off in the van for a week (just the way the holidays worked out this year) and just took it easy, but still was having focus/mood issues, struggling to recall names, facts, formulate thoughts etc. Noticed I had a bit of "COVID-toe again when taking of climbing shoes, same foot, same 3 toes) My brain is usually a bundle of energy, with a million thoughts all at once. Now it's like wading through treacle...

This week, back at work, more fog. Any long period of sustained concentration fills my brain up with "fog" and I just need to step away and shut my eyes a while.

Got a COVID drive though booked in 45 mins, so I'll see what that says. Pretty sure it'll be -ve but best ruling it out.

Somewhat regretting my slight blase attitude early on - seems like severity of initial symptoms (even if my issues are unrelated...) is not well ocrrelated with ongoing issues. In fact, younger, fitter healthier people seem to be getting hit quite bad by the lower-grade chronic issues.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on October 08, 2020, 01:04:21 pm
Long Covid?

I think a dose of Covid back in March. Quite mild, but was in close contact with people form work who had it. Persistent cough, some days of flu-like symptoms etc. All cleared up bar some "covid toe" a few weeks later.

Around 3 weeks ago I started getting persistent fatigue, struggling to get out of bed and just not quite feeling 100% cognitively. I had a week off, climbing in fairhead and struggled to get motivated. I was putting it down to be a bit overworked, maybe a bit depressed or generally under the weather but had a nice week anyway. Thought maybe the 2-3 beers in the evening were not helping, so pretty much stopped. Sometimes having a single beer was giving me a headache (I fluctuate between not drinking much and having a beer or two a night, but never have had consistent hangovers from 2 beers!) Stopping has had very little impact other than not throwing another log on the fire, so to speak.

I then had a week back at work, feeling slow and persistent "brain fog". Maybe a few little coughs here and there, but really nothing in the way of flu symptoms. Discussed going to the doctor to see about counselling or something (had some mil-moderate depression and anxiety issues of the last few years since my dad passed away, and GF thought that the whole shit life situation we're all going through was taking it's toll - which it is/could be the issue...)

Last week we were off in the van for a week (just the way the holidays worked out this year) and just took it easy, but still was having focus/mood issues, struggling to recall names, facts, formulate thoughts etc. Noticed I had a bit of "COVID-toe again when taking of climbing shoes, same foot, same 3 toes) My brain is usually a bundle of energy, with a million thoughts all at once. Now it's like wading through treacle...

This week, back at work, more fog. Any long period of sustained concentration fills my brain up with "fog" and I just need to step away and shut my eyes a while.

Got a COVID drive though booked in 45 mins, so I'll see what that says. Pretty sure it'll be -ve but best ruling it out.

Somewhat regretting my slight blase attitude early on - seems like severity of initial symptoms (even if my issues are unrelated...) is not well ocrrelated with ongoing issues. In fact, younger, fitter healthier people seem to be getting hit quite bad by the lower-grade chronic issues.

That sounds real crap, hope you start to do better soon.

Would it be worth booking a private antibody test? I’ve see some advertised for around £100.

Whilst they’re not 100% accurate, if it came back positive you might at least have a reason for why you’re feeling like this.

If it’s negative you would still be in the dark though I guess.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on October 08, 2020, 01:11:11 pm
Latest Test & trace numbers.

34,494 positive tests referred.
74% reached.
82% of their contacts reached.
Worked out at 3.94 contacts per positive person reached.
If you extrapolate that number to the 26% of positive cases which weren't reached you're left with 39% of close contacts being missed.


Thanks James, very interesting. It should be noted that this is for England only isn't it? I.e. the privatised Serco system. Over the completed weeks between start of August and end of Sept in Scotland the NHS run Test and Protect system has closed out contact tracing on 97% of all positive cases. Yes, 97% on average! Note that Serco are nowhere near this system, its run by the NHS and local authorities as far as I am aware. If you want the raw figures they are on page 10 of this Scotgov document: https://beta.isdscotland.org/media/5967/20-10-07-covid19-publication_report.pdf . £12 billion well spent?

I just checked and you're right - England only.

It does feel like it isn't working, though in reality I don't know what to compare it to.

The Scotland one is performing far better, but it does have significantly fewer cases to get through. But I guess if you look back at past reports for England (I'm not sure how to get them) they must have had a time with cases were much lower and many people were still being missed then.

It does feel like there should be penalties for consistently missing targets though!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on October 08, 2020, 01:36:22 pm
Thats shite fultonious. I recon there will be a load more cases like yours coming through in the next few years.

RE antibody test - one way to get one is to volunteer for the blood plasma trial (where the NHS wants blood from people who’ve had it to make concentrated antibody treatment for those in ICU). A friend who was fairly sure had it went for this - and they tested him (he had had it) but his antibody levels were not high enough for him to give blood. Obvs - this is wasting resources if you don’t want to give your blood - but if you don;t mind its a good way....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nai on October 08, 2020, 01:36:53 pm
It does feel like there should be penalties for consistently missing targets though!

They'll have to make an even bigger donation to get the next contract gifted to them without tender
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on October 08, 2020, 01:39:04 pm
I heard on the radio just now (can’t find it online) that there is a Greater manchester NHS memo thats been leaked to the MEN that says at present rates we’ll be at the peak rate of hospital admissions here in Manchester by the end of the month.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on October 08, 2020, 01:59:05 pm
I heard on the radio just now (can’t find it online) that there is a Greater manchester NHS memo thats been leaked to the MEN that says at present rates we’ll be at the peak rate of hospital admissions here in Manchester by the end of the month.

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/greater-manchesters-covid-hospital-admissions-19064935

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 08, 2020, 02:13:23 pm
I heard on the radio just now (can’t find it online) that there is a Greater manchester NHS memo thats been leaked to the MEN that says at present rates we’ll be at the peak rate of hospital admissions here in Manchester by the end of the month.

The whole country will be there at the end of this month.
If things don’t change.
IHME have been fairly reliable, so far, I don’t see any reason to doubt their current forcast.

 https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-kingdom?view=total-deaths&tab=trend (https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-kingdom?view=total-deaths&tab=trend)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on October 08, 2020, 02:18:04 pm

Would it be worth booking a private antibody test? I’ve see some advertised for around £100.

Bupa do them for £65. No need to have cover with them, just book online. I had one this morning (booked last friday), took 5 minutes, should get the answer in 3 to 5 days. Mostly out of curiousity as l had a fever etc back in April time, couldn't get any diagnosis as it wasn't really bad enough for hospital, and haven't been quite right since (resting heart rate has never gone back to normal range and any strength training has just dropped off the charts...)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on October 08, 2020, 03:07:53 pm
I just checked and you're right - England only.

It does feel like it isn't working, though in reality I don't know what to compare it to.

It isn't working, either by SAGE's stated requirements (80% of contacts reached to be effective), or strategically. TTTI is meant to be a substitute for generalised lockdowns. Currently we appear to be heading for either a generalised national lockdown, or such widespread local restrictions that it amounts to much the same thing.

The Scotland one is performing far better, but it does have significantly fewer cases to get through. But I guess if you look back at past reports for England (I'm not sure how to get them) they must have had a time with cases were much lower and many people were still being missed then.

Yes Scotland does have fewer cases to deal with as it is a smaller population. This is the argument for devolving contact tracing to smaller local areas within England e.g. local authorities. And as you say even when there were fewer cases  the national Serco system was still missing far too many. Scotland were contact tracing 100% of cases in early August. That said cases are rising in the central belt (although at nothing like the rate of English hotspots), and they are also under local lockdown, so there is obviously a limit to its effectiveness even at 100% reach.

It does feel like there should be penalties for consistently missing targets though!

Hopefully but I doubt it. Although Serco have in the past been fined millions by UK gov for charging them for tagging prisoners who turned out to be dead so you never know.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on October 08, 2020, 03:23:27 pm
It does feel like there should be penalties for consistently missing targets though!
Hopefully but I doubt it. Although Serco have in the past been fined millions by UK gov for charging them for tagging prisoners who turned out to be dead so you never know.

IIRC Private Eye looked into this and found there were no penalties for missing targets within the contract. Either that or there weren’t even any official targets they had to hit. It was one or the other.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gme on October 08, 2020, 03:34:53 pm
If track and trace is working in Scotland we might as well drop the whole fucking idea as it obviously does nothing to stop the spread of the virus.
I have always thought the idea was a waste of time in western country’s  where people just don’t follow rules.

My business is paying wages in full for all staff if they have to isolate yet have caught two people off work who just continued to go out in town, to peoples houses and basically treat it like a normal holiday. One of them had tested positive and has now been sacked.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: lagerstarfish on October 08, 2020, 03:47:44 pm
If track and trace is working in Scotland we might as well drop the whole fucking idea as it obviously does nothing to stop the spread of the virus.
I have always thought the idea was a waste of time in western country’s  where people just don’t follow rules.

My business is paying wages in full for all staff if they have to isolate yet have caught two people off work who just continued to go out in town, to peoples houses and basically treat it like a normal holiday. One of them had tested positive and has now been sacked.

report them
lack of enforcement is only making things worse
https://www.reportingcrime.uk/SYPBreachOfCovid19Guidance/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on October 08, 2020, 04:09:07 pm
If it’s negative you would still be in the dark though I guess.

It could still be post viral fatigue, just not from coronavirus. Viruses are dismissed as something we get over easily, and most of the time we do, but many people get prolonged post viral symptoms.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on October 08, 2020, 04:11:13 pm
IIRC Private Eye looked into this and found there were no penalties for missing targets within the contract. Either that or there weren’t even any official targets they had to hit. It was one or the other.
Just checked again and for both Serco and Sitel the targets they have to hit have never been released. And in both cases the contracts don’t have ‘service penalties’ anyway so it’s irrelevant whether they hit whatever those undisclosed targets are.

Imagine signing a contract for some work and however shit a job your contractor does you still have to pay them.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on October 08, 2020, 04:15:58 pm
If track and trace is working in Scotland we might as well drop the whole fucking idea as it obviously does nothing to stop the spread of the virus.
I have always thought the idea was a waste of time in western country’s  where people just don’t follow rules.

You've probably nailed it there gme. As I've described Scottish test and trace does work. But if people don't isolate then its just useless information. For all the money that is being sprayed at the T&T element of this, the I bit is being largely overlooked.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on October 08, 2020, 04:43:50 pm
Tweets now appearing with data/slides from CWiddy’s briefing to the Northern MP’s...

Edit: here’s a link https://twitter.com/singharj/status/1314179590412271617?s=21

Showing in 18-30’s 30% of cases linked to visits to Pubs and restaraunts, and another 10% from people working there. Total drops to 30% for older groups.

What frustrates me is that if this data isnt super new - why couldn’t we see it before? It smells like its being released now as part of an orchestrated plan to justify more lockdown (which BTW I completely agree with...). I listened to Sturgeons briefing the other day live (having my lunch when WFH) and I wish Englands leaders could treat the audience with the same level of respect and intelligence.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sxrxg on October 08, 2020, 09:50:45 pm
I think I might get one of those Bupa antibody tests to check for long Covid as I have spent the last couple of days with some unexplained symptoms (still being investigated by GP so I might get answers from bloods taken today).

I don't know when I may have had Covid, had a bit of a cough in April however nothing out of the ordinary. Last few weeks though I have felt weak on my board and like my joints are going pop and I might injure myself even on easier problems I just put this down to not having climbed much for a few weeks and not getting much volume in as not visiting climbing walls due to Covid risk and me having asthma. Been using my inhaler for a tight chest however it didn't really feel like my asthma. Anyway in work on Tuesday I got a very very painful chest and it felt like I was being crushed, rang 111 who sent me straight to urgent care for an ECG by the time I got there though the symptoms had started to ease and the ECG was clean so I got sent home and told to refer to the GP. The day after the GP referred me direct to A&E where I had 3 ECG a chest x-ray and bloods to check for a heart attack and cardiac damage. All looked ok so got sent home then that evening I had another bout where I felt like vomiting felt like I was being crushed with pain in my chest, pins and needles in hands and feet, heart pounding and looking very grey. This time an ambulance was dispatched (for the first time in my life) again by the time it arrived the symptoms had eased and the ECG was clear and observations ok. Been back for further tests today however nothing is showing up, GP suggested it is possibly panic attacks however I have never suffered from anything like this in the past and have had no additional stress that would possibly trigger.

Whatever it is going on it is the first time in my life where I was actually worried that it was very very serious, usually I won't see a doctor for anything however I had no doubt ringing 999 was the right thing to do with the way I felt. So the take away is that this might not be long Covid, if it is though I would advise everyone to be very very careful even if you are young (well mid 30's), fit and healthy as I currently do not feel in a good way.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 08, 2020, 10:24:59 pm
That sounds absolutely shite.

I hope you find a clear path to recovery. I’d even say, I hope it is panic attack related, because there’s a way through that.

Just incase anyone had any doubts about the severity of the disease (in the US):

 https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/covid-19-is-now-the-third-leading-cause-of-death-in-the-u-s1/?fbclid=IwAR3k8g6owDRZTV2I4bY1SWlOzOqscbEXRTPZ7q_0nsuxNrFKS0mnt8Ol2Ic (https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/covid-19-is-now-the-third-leading-cause-of-death-in-the-u-s1/?fbclid=IwAR3k8g6owDRZTV2I4bY1SWlOzOqscbEXRTPZ7q_0nsuxNrFKS0mnt8Ol2Ic)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on October 09, 2020, 08:06:02 am
and have had no additional stress that would possibly trigger.

... apart from the pandemic we're all living through? It's really easy to underestimate because it's happening to us all, but it is a huge stressor and apparently a shit-tonne of people are having psych symptoms for the first time in their lives.

Anyway, I hope you get a clear diagnosis (preferably of something fixable!) soon; that sounds terrifying, and not knowing what it is is the worst.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on October 09, 2020, 08:23:04 am

... apart from the pandemic we're all living through? It's really easy to underestimate because it's happening to us all, but it is a huge stressor and apparently a shit-tonne of people are having psych symptoms for the first time in their lives.


I'd agree with this completely. I'm not one for stress, ever, but what a shite year it's been.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sxrxg on October 09, 2020, 08:35:49 am
I agree 100% that it has been a shite year. I would be surprised at the timing though for a panic attack as I am, if anything, feeling better about the whole thing compared to earlier in the pandemic when I got really low and lost motivation for life (including climbing) which is usually more important to me than working!

I am now looking at less news than earlier on and not trying to second guess what anyone else is doing as well as trying to be less judgemental of others as the guidance from government is shite. This has helped and I have managed to get into my own routine whereby daily family life feels pretty normal again. Also I am able to be back in office working that has improved my productivity no end and reduced my work stress.

Tbh though having never had panic attacks or any other diagnosed psyche problems it may well be something along those lines and I won't rule it out especially if it can stop it occuring in the future.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on October 09, 2020, 09:23:10 am

... apart from the pandemic we're all living through? It's really easy to underestimate because it's happening to us all, but it is a huge stressor and apparently a shit-tonne of people are having psych symptoms for the first time in their lives.


I'd agree with this completely. I'm not one for stress, ever, but what a shite year it's been.

It has been pretty crappy, to say the least.  Bad enough that I've recently left a secure job because I realised that I mentally just couldn't cope with it any more.  I'm sure it's been far worse for many others.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on October 09, 2020, 09:38:22 am

... apart from the pandemic we're all living through? It's really easy to underestimate because it's happening to us all, but it is a huge stressor and apparently a shit-tonne of people are having psych symptoms for the first time in their lives.


I'd agree with this completely. I'm not one for stress, ever, but what a shite year it's been.

It has been pretty crappy, to say the least.  Bad enough that I've recently left a secure job because I realised that I mentally just couldn't cope with it any more.  I'm sure it's been far worse for many others.

That’s tough, but it must have been the right move. Respect for taking that decision!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 09, 2020, 10:33:45 am

... apart from the pandemic we're all living through? It's really easy to underestimate because it's happening to us all, but it is a huge stressor and apparently a shit-tonne of people are having psych symptoms for the first time in their lives.


I'd agree with this completely. I'm not one for stress, ever, but what a shite year it's been.

It has been pretty crappy, to say the least.  Bad enough that I've recently left a secure job because I realised that I mentally just couldn't cope with it any more.  I'm sure it's been far worse for many others.

That’s tough, but it must have been the right move. Respect for taking that decision!

As I said, I think so too.
Plenty of potential for you, out there, Toby.
There’s really no rush to get back into the rat race, either. I managed to drag my sorry arse out of an 8 year career hiatus (n=1)...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on October 09, 2020, 10:57:56 am
Looks like I will be "in hiatus" shortly too, Oil industry is not doing well right now.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on October 09, 2020, 11:17:40 am
Looks like I will be "in hiatus" shortly too, Oil industry is not doing well right now.

I think it was in The Guardian I was reading that a lot of people are using this period as an opportunity to jump ship from oil to renewables. Is there much opportunity for you there?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on October 09, 2020, 11:25:56 am
A bit, but renewables are relatively speaking a bit simpler and safer than subsea extraction, not as much expertise required. The company I presently work for is trying to expand in that direction, but not happening quickly enough.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on October 09, 2020, 12:21:34 pm
So ONS mass testing survey says 250000 new cases last week... 1 in 240 nationally (worse in NE/NW etc..).. doubling in a week after a lull in increase last week.

Government apparently holding fire in implementing tier system until parliament votes on it - waiting to see what Rishi has in his bag..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on October 09, 2020, 01:06:35 pm
(May have not heard the 250k figure right - soz of wrong)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on October 09, 2020, 01:28:15 pm
(May have not heard the 250k figure right - soz of wrong)

Guardian says:

Quote

There were an average of 17,200 new cases per day of Covid-19 in private households in England between 25 September and 1 October, according to the latest estimates from the Office for National Statistics (ONS).

This is up from an estimated 8,400 new cases per day for the period from 18 to 24 September.


Which equates to approx 120,000 cases last week and about 59,000 the week before that. Not seen a 250k figure but I guess it's extrapolating that weekly increase (105% rise) which gets you to just under 250,000 in the 7 days up to yesterday.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nutty on October 09, 2020, 01:43:16 pm
224,000 last week: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/bulletins/coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveypilot/latest (https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/bulletins/coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveypilot/latest)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 09, 2020, 01:44:33 pm
Loving the rhetoric coming from the “Government”.

“We will not hesitate to act” they say, delaying the decision to next week...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on October 09, 2020, 02:33:46 pm
Tweets now appearing with data/slides from CWiddy’s briefing to the Northern MP’s...

Edit: here’s a link https://twitter.com/singharj/status/1314179590412271617?s=21

Showing in 18-30’s 30% of cases linked to visits to Pubs and restaraunts, and another 10% from people working there. Total drops to 30% for older groups.

What frustrates me is that if this data isnt super new - why couldn’t we see it before? It smells like its being released now as part of an orchestrated plan to justify more lockdown (which BTW I completely agree with...). I listened to Sturgeons briefing the other day live (having my lunch when WFH) and I wish Englands leaders could treat the audience with the same level of respect and intelligence.

Since that's just a part view of a single slide with no explanation and no background so its completely not clear what it means but since it talks about 'exposure settings' I would suggest that its most likely about what sort environments people have potential exposure rather than than a causal link to where they caught covid.  This seems likely since there's no mention of obvious other places people could have caught covid such as schools/educational establishments. work places etc etc.  In fact from the info it the title it looks that these other setting may have been specifically excluded.

The most recent government weekly surveillance reports shows that the vast majority of covid incidents in the week to 2/10 occurred in educational establishments, work places and care homes (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/923668/Weekly_COVID19_Surveillance_Report_week_40.pdf , fig 20).  Again covid incidents isn't synonymous with the source of all covid infections but this indicates that (not suprisingly) a significant amount of covid may be transmitted within these environments,

Assuming that this is about exposure settings then the fact that 30% of under 30's who have contracted Covid have been to pubs / cafes only gives us significant information if that is higher than a control sample of all under 30s.  No idea whether this is the case, but out of interest a quick google points to between 6% and 9% of the employed population being in hospitality which seems to be in the ballpark with the numbers reporting exposure working in hospitality,



Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on October 09, 2020, 02:58:37 pm
I think I was trying to get across that part of the problem is that we don’t get all the data - just leaks or snippets.

So we’re left filling in the blanks for ourselves.. I wish they’d trust us more... or even a bit!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on October 09, 2020, 02:59:19 pm
There was a CDC study (from US obvs) showing that Covid+ cases reported visiting a hospitality venue at a rate of twice that of the general population...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on October 09, 2020, 05:17:18 pm
Good news on the job furloughing payment plan for locked down areas today.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on October 09, 2020, 11:11:52 pm
There was a CDC study (from US obvs) showing that Covid+ cases reported visiting a hospitality venue at a rate of twice that of the general population...

I think that there was something similar in the UK as well, but most experts considered that it was very likely that someone engaging in any risky behaviour would also be more likely to visit a hospitality venue so that it wasn't terribly conclusive as to where one might be more likely to get / transmit it. I'd guess that a well managed restaurant would be pretty safe really, but most city centre bars / pubs... not so much.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on October 09, 2020, 11:24:50 pm
I think I was trying to get across that part of the problem is that we don’t get all the data - just leaks or snippets.

So we’re left filling in the blanks for ourselves.. I wish they’d trust us more... or even a bit!

Agree completely, I would like to see all the data and analysis and then the rationale on any decisions and the objectives that expect/hope to achieve.  It would be nice also to see some honesty about the limitations of what we can do.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on October 09, 2020, 11:42:43 pm
There was a CDC study (from US obvs) showing that Covid+ cases reported visiting a hospitality venue at a rate of twice that of the general population...

Saw that quoted in the coverage.  Looking up the study I couldn't really make sense on a quick skim.  As I understood it the figures had  41% of covid cases visiting restaurant vs 27 % of non covid, which is 50% more rather than twice as many?.  Still seems like a potentially significant difference which didn't appear to be present for other exposure settings, despite possible questions around the methodology of the study.

I think the bigger question is how big an impact  hospitality visits have in terms of transmission - obviously really difficult to answer but these sort of studies don't seem to attempt to answer this.  It may well be that closing pubs / restaurants does lead to some reduction in covid transmission but I'm not clear how significant that would be compared to that in workplaces/households etc.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on October 10, 2020, 08:26:30 am
Yes - if it were an experiment you’d have ten identical towns and for each town ‘unlockdown’ one feature (bar, cafe, restaraunt, church, gym etc.. ) and compare rates to lockdown rates.

Destined not to be that simple of course and impossible to implement except in a ruthless authoritarian dictatorship 😮 (getting there though 😀).

I’m putting together a grant proposal at the moment with a load of health scientists - and have some insights into how tricky it is to gain meaningful data from how people behave!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 10, 2020, 09:53:16 am
Yes - if it were an experiment you’d have ten identical towns and for each town ‘unlockdown’ one feature (bar, cafe, restaraunt, church, gym etc.. ) and compare rates to lockdown rates.

Destined not to be that simple of course and impossible to implement except in a ruthless authoritarian dictatorship 😮 (getting there though 😀).

I’m putting together a grant proposal at the moment with a load of health scientists - and have some insights into how tricky it is to gain meaningful data from how people behave!

Health scientists like some of the signatories of the Guff Borington  tantrum?

Dr I P Freely?
Dr Not A F Uckinclue?
Dr Harold Shipman?
Or, perhaps, the great, Dr Person Fakename?

If you are a top notch academic and you want to organise a letter signed by other top notch academics and experts, to convince world governments of your superior understanding; yet somehow remain ignorant of basic human nature (despite the “Boaty McBoatface incident et al) you immediately lose the “top notch” appellation.

I wonder if the instigators conducted their respective research work with the same degree of rigour...😂.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on October 10, 2020, 05:25:34 pm
So as per my posts on B3 from here: https://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,30489.msg603070.html#msg603070 (https://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,30489.msg603070.html#msg603070)

and here:
://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,30489.msg603488.html#msg603488 (https://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,30489.msg603488.html#msg603488)


There's now more evidence to back this up.

Preclinical research on NR and its role in covid-19 infected cells has now been released today in pre-print form, available here: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.17.047480v3

Note my disclaimers - I'm a shareholder in Chromadex (which are up 22% on this news)

Further research adding evidence to the B3 / NAD+ hypothesis.

https://twitter.com/FehrLab/status/1260342672688119810 (https://twitter.com/FehrLab/status/1260342672688119810)

Update on this. The next pre-clinical study was released last night US time. It reinforces the hypothesis that's been building around NAD depletion leading to worse outcomes from covid-19 infection; and the role of NAD augmentation using NR to slow virus replication.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/chromadex-announces-study-results-highlighting-103600635.html
These are great times to be a mouse.
Human study coming soon..

(I'm an investor, I'm biased)


Something a bit more practical than whinging about how shit the world is...

Following my posts in March, April and July about vitamin B3 being possibly effective both as a prophylactic and a treatment for covid - results from a phase 2 human study in covid patients were released this week which add more evidence to the mouse studies, cell studies and original hypothesis. Trial was open label.. but with a placebo control. Shows 30% reduction in recovery time in patients with covid. Other compounds in the mix as well as B3.



(disclaimer: investor in Chromodex, manufacturer of Nigen).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on October 10, 2020, 05:33:05 pm
Other compounds in the mix as well as B3.



This sounds like a fairly crucial point! If the other compounds are Dexa, anabolics and chilled monkey brains or whatever Trump has been on then that may make a difference.

Sounds like a good catastrotunity anyway.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on October 10, 2020, 06:01:48 pm
In non drug company related good news - It was great to see this fella getting a gong in the honours.

He set up Ceredigion’s track and trace - and their county based strategy right at the onset of the pandemic and is instrumental to the very low transmission rates there. A genuine unsung hero etc..

https://www.cambrian-news.co.uk/article.cfm?id=134121&fbclid=IwAR34iurv7J530MTcYkSuXNT0xLwnjXQyeYNpstkxLZtm3Tdu_VfKyi8Xy5A

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on October 10, 2020, 06:03:00 pm
Sorry forgot to add the link to the news release for the study:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/chromadex-announces-study-results-showing-103500784.html


Nobody lives in Ceredigion TT.. It's hardly surprising they have a low transmission rate! I hear Ranoch Moor is faring well..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on October 10, 2020, 06:37:17 pm
Stop whinging Pete 😛

Embrace the good news. 🤗
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on October 19, 2020, 11:20:10 am
Interesting thoughts (https://www.mygenefood.com/blog/can-vitamin-d-protect-the-lungs-from-severe-respiratory-infections-like-covid-19/) on seasonality and vitamin D. Summary: the UK's fucked.

The vitamin D theory for flu seasonality is especially interesting in light of this *prescient analysis of likely COVID-19 hot spots published by researchers at the University of Maryland Medical School, which evaluated the weather patterns of cities that were particularly hard hit by coronavirus through community spread. The paper highlights a band of between 30-50 degrees north latitude with temperatures of between 5-11 degrees celsius as most vulnerable to community spread.

*https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3550308 (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3550308)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on October 19, 2020, 02:12:54 pm
Welsh lockdown for two weeks.

Sounds like some fairly sensible detail in there - including primary/nursery schools reopening after half term....

From the other side of the border looks like some decisive action - that’d be welcome here.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on October 19, 2020, 03:17:52 pm
I'm not sure Pete's going to agree with you when he reads the exercise guidelines...  :tumble:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on October 19, 2020, 03:36:32 pm
On first glance it appears the guidance on outdoor leisure activities is as per last time. The bits of the guidance about not driving to exercise in the outdoors away from home are ridiculous for people who live close to mountainous areas (or any rural area really), and punish healthy behaviour that the evidence shows has virtually zero impact on transmission but significantly positive impact on wellbeing. I won't be complying with those parts of the lockdown.

e.g.

''Can you leave home to exercise?
Yes, you can, and you can do so as often as you like for exercise as long as you do so from home and are alone or with members of your household (and/or a carer).

What kind of exercise is permitted?
There are no legal limits on this, but in practice this is constrained by other restrictions that have been imposed such as the closure of leisure centres, gyms and swimming pools.

Are there any limits on how far you can run or cycle for exercise?
There are no limits on the distance you can travel during exercise, though the nearer you stay to your home, the better. Your exercise should start and finish from your home and you should exercise alone or with a member of your household.

Can you exercise by going fishing or horse riding?
This is not specifically prohibited. However, you should not be driving to get to somewhere to exercise, and the need to carry sports equipment isn’t regarded as a justification on its own for driving in these circumstances. This will mean in practice most people cannot do these things for the short period of the lockdown.

All exercise must be undertaken alone or with members of your household.

Can you drive somewhere to exercise?
Exercise should be undertaken locally, the guidelines say. That means from home or as close as possible to the home. In general this should not involve people driving to a location away from home for this purpose. No journeys of any significant distance should be taken, for example, just in order to exercise in the countryside or at beauty spots.

There are exceptions for people with specific health or mobility issues.''

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Anti on October 19, 2020, 04:14:55 pm
On first glance it appears the guidance on outdoor leisure activities is as per last time. The bits of the guidance about not driving to exercise in the outdoors away from home are ridiculous for people who live close to mountainous areas (or any rural area really), and punish healthy behaviour that the evidence shows has virtually zero impact on transmission but significantly positive impact on wellbeing. I won't be complying with those parts of the lockdown.

e.g.

''Can you leave home to exercise?
Yes, you can, and you can do so as often as you like for exercise as long as you do so from home and are alone or with members of your household (and/or a carer).

What kind of exercise is permitted?
There are no legal limits on this, but in practice this is constrained by other restrictions that have been imposed such as the closure of leisure centres, gyms and swimming pools.

Are there any limits on how far you can run or cycle for exercise?
There are no limits on the distance you can travel during exercise, though the nearer you stay to your home, the better. Your exercise should start and finish from your home and you should exercise alone or with a member of your household.

Can you exercise by going fishing or horse riding?
This is not specifically prohibited. However, you should not be driving to get to somewhere to exercise, and the need to carry sports equipment isn’t regarded as a justification on its own for driving in these circumstances. This will mean in practice most people cannot do these things for the short period of the lockdown.

All exercise must be undertaken alone or with members of your household.

Can you drive somewhere to exercise?
Exercise should be undertaken locally, the guidelines say. That means from home or as close as possible to the home. In general this should not involve people driving to a location away from home for this purpose. No journeys of any significant distance should be taken, for example, just in order to exercise in the countryside or at beauty spots.

There are exceptions for people with specific health or mobility issues.''

Yeah, this is from the same Welsh Government who opened golf courses and garden centres while massive parts of the national park were still off limits. I'll be driving 15 minutes to go bouldering outside thanks.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on October 19, 2020, 06:30:53 pm
They’ve also rolled out the same bullshit logic from March about ‘risky activities’:

As one of the purposes of the restrictions is to reduce pressure on the Welsh NHS, we also ask people to avoid activities that involve a significant degree of risk (for example swimming or other exercise at sea, or in lakes, rivers or other waterways).


While the logic of not unnecessarily impacting A&E makes sense, the calculation of what constitutes a risky activity is as illogical now as it was in March. If you look at the excess deaths figures for cycling in 2020 the numbers have gone crazy.

So it’ll be for reasons of lazy superficial impressions if the Welsh government rules lead to climbing being perceived as being too ‘risky’ - notwithstanding climbers already breaking ridiculous rules preventing travel to exercise - while increasing numbers of cyclists once again hit the roads again over the next 17 days of lockdown, this time in autumn weather and low light levels.. So incentivising an activity with already high figures for risk of death or seriously injury, while penalising genuinely zero-harm lower risk activities such as route-climbing, bouldering, hillwalking. Total bullshit.

I await the BMC’s policy of bending itself over the nearest style to be lubed up by Snowdonia National Park and fucked up the ass by Natural Resources Wales.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on October 19, 2020, 06:34:29 pm
They’ve also rolled out the same bullshit logic from March about ‘risky activities’:


...that was the bit I thought might hit the spot  ;D

while increased numbers of cyclists once again  hit the roads again over the next 17 days, this time in autumn weather and low light levels..

Unless they like cleaning their bike as much as riding it I guess there won't be as much as during the stonking weather afforded to us during the last lockdown.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on October 19, 2020, 06:35:37 pm
"I'm just off to pick up my takeaway" is probably as good an excuse as you need. Giving the name Will Hunt of course.... ;)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on October 19, 2020, 06:40:01 pm
They’ve also rolled out the same bullshit logic from March about ‘risky activities’:

As one of the purposes of the restrictions is to reduce pressure on the Welsh NHS, we also ask people to avoid activities that involve a significant degree of risk (for example swimming or other exercise at sea, or in lakes, rivers or other waterways).
This policy didn't have the effect they intended. As swimming pools were so much later to reopen than in England, all of the serious swimmers took to open water training every day because they couldn't train in their usual pools.

The swimming clubs are planning to do the same during this lockdown.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on October 19, 2020, 06:41:51 pm
Yeah I’ve already ordered my fake driving license through alibaba, with Will’s details on it. 😁
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Anti on October 20, 2020, 06:29:48 am
Reduce pressure on the NHS bullshit logic again. We're prohibited from driving into the mountains meanwhile I can walk into Tesco and buy a bottle of cheap alcohol and a packet of cigarettes.

If we're trading civil freedoms for the NHS I expect to these things removed from sale...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: JamieG on October 21, 2020, 04:39:54 pm
I know the Guardian is on the UKB politics bingo card. But nevertheless the failure of the Government to remain accountable during the awarding on contracts to deal with the pandemic is nicely summarised by George Monbiot.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/oct/21/government-covid-contracts-britain-nhs-corporate-executives-test-and-trace

This is particularly outrageous.

"Like so much surrounding this pandemic, the identity of Harding’s team at NHS track and trace was withheld from the public, until it was leaked to the Health Service Journal last month. Clinicians were astonished to discover that there is only one public health expert on its executive committee. There is space, however, for a former executive from Jaguar Land Rover, a senior manager from Travelex and an executive from Waitrose. Harding’s adviser at the agency is Alex Birtles, who, like her, previously worked for TalkTalk. She has subsequently made a further appointment to the board: Mike Coupe, an executive at another of her old firms, Sainsbury’s."

How can they only have one public health expert on the executive committee during a pandemic!?!?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on October 21, 2020, 08:30:16 pm
Because the priority is increasing the private sector involvement?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on October 22, 2020, 12:58:32 pm
I would love to know what roles warrant a £6000 day rate. And whether they are deemed inside IR35....


Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on October 22, 2020, 02:43:25 pm
I would love to know what roles warrant a £6000 day rate. And whether they are deemed inside IR35....

I think 6k was the mean rate over 25 people who were employed on this rate... varied from 7.5 to 4.5....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on October 22, 2020, 02:59:15 pm

Latest Test & trace numbers (10-16 September)

21,268 positive tests referred.
78% reached.
75% of their contacts reached.
Worked out at 4.7 contacts per positive person reached.
If you extrapolate that number to the 22% of positive cases which weren't reached you're left with 42% of close contacts being missed.

World beating?

Latest Test & trace numbers (24-30 September)

34,494 positive tests referred.
74% reached.
82% 68.6% of their contacts reached.
Worked out at 3.94 contacts per positive person reached.
If you extrapolate that number to the 26% of positive cases which weren't reached you're left with 39% 49% of close contacts being missed.


I had some incorrect figures in the last numbers I put up. I put the % of contacts reached who had contact details provided. I should have put the % of contacts reached including those who didn't have contact details provided. As such I have amended the last set of numbers above.

Latest Test & trace numbers (8-14 October):

96,521 positive tests referred.
80.7% reached.
59.6% of their contacts reached.
Worked out at 3.23 contacts per positive person reached.
If you extrapolate that number to the 19.3% of positive cases which weren't reached you're left with 51.9% of close contacts being missed.

So we're now on more than half of contacts not being contacted & asked to self-isolate.

Looking at the actual numbers rather than percentages.

4 weeks ago England's T&T couldn't get in touch with 4,743   positively tested people and didn't contact 41,880   close contacts.
2 weeks ago England's T&T couldn't get in touch with 8,968   positively tested people and didn't contact 67,720   close contacts.
Last week     England's T&T couldn't get in touch with 18,629 positively tested people and didn't contact 161,826 close contacts.

Note that the close contacts has been extrapolated based on average contacts for positive tests who were reached. I guess this is flawed as maybe these people would have had fewer contacts on average, but it's a reasonable assumption I think.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on October 22, 2020, 04:24:27 pm
I've not really followed the story on track and trace. But I can tell you of one friend who gave a false name in a restaurant so that they wouldn't be contacted. Is there any data on why the contacts are failing?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on October 22, 2020, 04:33:37 pm
I believe the local TT that often has difficult cases from the national one sent to it has a 90%+ success rate in reaching contacts.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on October 22, 2020, 04:37:10 pm
I've not really followed the story on track and trace. But I can tell you of one friend who gave a false name in a restaurant so that they wouldn't be contacted. Is there any data on why the contacts are failing?

I'm not sure but I guess I think that there's 4 things:

1) People who test positive who can't be contacted. I assume this is due to people not answering calls / emails as I've always had to supply these when booking a test.

2) People who are successfully contacted and says XYZ was a close contact, give their contact details but the contact doesn't answer/respond.

3) People who are successfully contacted and says XYZ was a close contact, but don't have (or choose not to give) contact details for them. Therefore it becomes problematic trying to find out which John Smith this person might have been in contact with.

4) Something I've not thought of.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on October 22, 2020, 04:41:09 pm
Interesting. If the figures TT gives are representative of the pattern across the country it would suggest that the national organisation just isn't putting in the hard yards to tracking people down (I have occasionally at work had to try and figure out who owns a piece of land and get in touch with them - believe me, you have to be utterly dogged in your approach).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on October 22, 2020, 04:50:56 pm
Interesting. If the figures TT gives are representative of the pattern across the country it would suggest that the national organisation just isn't putting in the hard yards to tracking people down (I have occasionally at work had to try and figure out who owns a piece of land and get in touch with them - believe me, you have to be utterly dogged in your approach).

Again I'm not that familiar with it, but from someone I know who is a T&T caller (who hasn't been given a single person to call despite being paid for 30hrs a week since it was started, well as of about a month ago anyway) they basically just had to call people and if they didn't answer that was it.

So no real ways attempted to get in touch if you don't succeed via the easy route.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nai on October 22, 2020, 05:59:14 pm
Missed a few pages so this might have been said already but isn't thhis down to user compliance (or rather non-compliance). It really could be a world beating piece of technology but without the users on board it's useless.
If it had been introduced during lockdown when everyone was scared and using the App meant you could get out and about it may have stood a chance. Now everyone knows a majority of cases are minor but that they could be isolated for standing too close to someone for too long at some random point.  If that's going to cost you your job, which for the worse off (and most likely to be affected) it might, then it knocks on to screwing up your family life, etc.  So you do what's right for you, stay off grid and just wing it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Muscle.Coach on October 22, 2020, 06:54:57 pm
Is this forum entirely made up of virtue signalling guardianista muzzled covidians? Why not set up your own UKB Gulag ffs.
Is there no one here who questions this fucking lunacy?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on October 22, 2020, 07:02:44 pm
Is this forum entirely made up of virtue signalling guardianista muzzled covidians? Why not set up your own UKB Gulag ffs.
Is there no one here who questions this fucking lunacy?

That’s what Facebook and UKC are for 😀.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Muscle.Coach on October 22, 2020, 07:44:21 pm
Blah blah bollocks
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on October 22, 2020, 07:48:42 pm
What's your take on it?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Muscle.Coach on October 22, 2020, 08:13:17 pm
The impact on health and welfare outweighs the benefits.

Masks and social distancing should not be mandatory

People should be free to travel, exercise and work without fear

Home working where possible is advisable, possibly benefiting the environment

Vulnerable can self isolate with full support if they choose

Boris should be placed in stocks and pelted with rotten fruit and vegetables in line with the medieval psychotic reaction created by spreading fear and misery.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 22, 2020, 08:14:26 pm
So...

Nothing really.

Ok.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Muscle.Coach on October 22, 2020, 08:17:47 pm
Let’s not pretend the politicians, those in control of the mainstream press and nhs and well as various other sources of power actually give a toss. The nhs for a start has been dealing in bad stats and lies since the days of Blair and beyond. Arse
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Muscle.Coach on October 22, 2020, 08:19:47 pm
So...

Nothing really.

Ok.

Bollocks
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 22, 2020, 08:38:56 pm
So...

Nothing really.

Ok.

Bollocks

See.

I was right.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Muscle.Coach on October 22, 2020, 08:49:31 pm
After reading a couple of your posts I’m glad you’re keeping it minimal rather than the standard mountains of excrement you spout
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 22, 2020, 08:56:12 pm
After reading a couple of your posts I’m glad you’re keeping it minimal rather than the standard mountains of excrement you spout

I honestly couldn’t keep up with you on that front.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Muscle.Coach on October 22, 2020, 09:00:51 pm
You’d give a herd of elephants a run for their money  :shit:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on October 23, 2020, 09:02:01 am
The impact on health and welfare outweighs the benefits.

There may be interesting debate to be had on this, if done in an intelligent way (your posts don't give me hope on that front)

Masks and social distancing should not be mandatory
Please justify, since I can see no sensible rationale behind this.

People should be free to travel, exercise and work without fear
This entirely misses the point that older people, people with pre-exisitng conditions, and those who think that long-COVID could fuck their lives up would be significantly less able to travel, exercise in gyms or go to work under the regime you appear to advocate. You may have some nuance behind your thoughts (doesn't seem likely given most of your posts), if so please address my point

Home working where possible is advisable, possibly benefiting the environment

Vulnerable can self isolate with full support if they choose

Boris should be placed in stocks and pelted with rotten fruit and vegetables
I'm sure we're all with you on these ones.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Muscle.Coach on October 23, 2020, 09:08:58 am
Get yer muzzle back on before you contract the dreaded ‘long-covid’.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 23, 2020, 09:14:36 am
Get yer muzzle back on before you contract the dreaded ‘long-covid’.

No, you!
😝
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fultonius on October 23, 2020, 10:15:15 am
Finally starting to feel a little better, some more focus. I think I must have had a mild re-infection but will never know!

Very interesting article in Scientific American:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-we-know-so-far-about-how-covid-affects-the-nervous-system/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: lagerstarfish on October 23, 2020, 12:05:58 pm
The impact on health and welfare outweighs the benefits.
Over what time period are you thinking?
In terms of deaths and lost QALYs, by how much do you estimate this?
(I would appreciate a brief explanation of the method used to arrive at the estimate)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on October 25, 2020, 08:52:43 am
Thought I'd dump these links here, as the government rules become increasingly arcane (and detached from the actual science) -- I've found all these very helpful for understanding the current scientific consensus re: the relative risks of different situations and activities.

https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3223

https://www.erinbromage.com/post/the-risks-know-them-avoid-them

http://www.ezekielemanuel.com/writing/all-articles/2020/06/30/covid-19-activity-risk-levels

https://elemental.medium.com/the-most-likely-way-youll-get-infected-with-covid-19-30430384e5a5
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on October 29, 2020, 10:13:50 am
Nice guide to aerosol transmission here from El Pais (in English).

https://english.elpais.com/society/2020-10-28/a-room-a-bar-and-a-class-how-the-coronavirus-is-spread-through-the-air.html
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on October 29, 2020, 12:06:19 pm
Worth pointing out that article should come with a huge flashing caveat. The model is calibrated based upon super spreading events... This model shows you what would happen if you are unlucky enough to be in a super-spreading event in various places.

Most people (perhaps 8/10) do not cause super spreading events, so we might roughly say that 8 times out of ten putting yourself in the scenarios shown will NOT lead to the outcome suggested...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on October 29, 2020, 12:14:39 pm
Sure, but in these situations we don't know who is infected, and we don't know who is super-spreader. So it's best to proceed on the basis that everyone is a potential super spreader. It has given me food for thought on how we run our classes.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on October 29, 2020, 12:28:37 pm
This is a pre-print, but models transmission to suggest that there's no need to postulate particular individuals who are "super-spreaders" in order to have super-spreading events:

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.10.21.20216895v1.full.pdf
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 29, 2020, 12:33:26 pm
Worth pointing out that article should come with a huge flashing caveat. The model is calibrated based upon super spreading events... This model shows you what would happen if you are unlucky enough to be in a super-spreading event in various places.

Most people (perhaps 8/10) do not cause super spreading events, so we might roughly say that 8 times out of ten putting yourself in the scenarios shown will NOT lead to the outcome suggested...

True, but...

I installed a massive extraction system at the wall. Far bigger than was recommended or than my own calculations called for (I have a fair amount of experience designing HVAC systems for ships), but, looking at those numbers, I want to run their calculator ( it’s very glitchy on a pad, I will try on a Chrome book later). Nevertheless, I think I might buy another fan even so, because I can bring the place to a virtually “outdoor” standard.
I went in last night, and though we don’t require people to wear masks whilst climbing/exercising (all other times except sat in cafe eating/drinking), many were actually wearing masks to climb.
Almost everybody in last night came in on an NHS entry or membership, which might be telling...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on October 29, 2020, 02:01:22 pm
There's no "but" here - the article is great for informing best practice etc, but it gives a totally misleading idea of the risks of being in a room with 6 other people...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on October 29, 2020, 02:28:20 pm
This is a pre-print, but models transmission to suggest that there's no need to postulate particular individuals who are "super-spreaders" in order to have super-spreading events:

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.10.21.20216895v1.full.pdf

That's sort of missing the point. The paper shows that you don't need to have an index case with viral loads at the upper end of the distribution to have a super-spreading event. Fine.

But it's perfectly obvious that the majority of scenarios like the ones in the el-pais article don't lead to the outcomes shown. In every one of those scenarios the index case causes 5+ secondary cases, even given moderate controls (e.g reduced bar capacity).

How then was R0 only ~3 before any controls were introduced? It's simply not possible if the modelled scenarios are typical.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: RobK on October 29, 2020, 03:27:45 pm
Nice guide to aerosol transmission here from El Pais (in English).

https://english.elpais.com/society/2020-10-28/a-room-a-bar-and-a-class-how-the-coronavirus-is-spread-through-the-air.html

"a conclusion backed by the European Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s (ECDC) observation that not a single case of fomite-caused Covid-19 has been observed"

Hang on, I feel like this is fairly major or I am missing something blindingly obvious (the latter is more likely). There are no known cases of surface Covid tranmission...at all?!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: danm on October 29, 2020, 04:15:37 pm
This is a pre-print, but models transmission to suggest that there's no need to postulate particular individuals who are "super-spreaders" in order to have super-spreading events:

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.10.21.20216895v1.full.pdf

That's sort of missing the point. The paper shows that you don't need to have an index case with viral loads at the upper end of the distribution to have a super-spreading event. Fine.

But it's perfectly obvious that the majority of scenarios like the ones in the el-pais article don't lead to the outcomes shown. In every one of those scenarios the index case causes 5+ secondary cases, even given moderate controls (e.g reduced bar capacity).

How then was R0 only ~3 before any controls were introduced? It's simply not possible if the modelled scenarios are typical.
I'm probably being incredibly dumb here: how can you relate the number of people infected in these scenarios to a R number in the population? I don't spend all my time in the pub, in an office with other people etc, so for most of the time these models wouldn't apply to me?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on October 29, 2020, 04:28:26 pm
Here’s an example of (I think - not checked it out fully) a classic CV19 FAIL by peer review! SOTEN (the journal it’s in) is a really well renowned publication - and not especially easy to get a paper in!

https://retractionwatch.com/2020/10/29/amulets-may-prevent-covid-19-says-a-paper-in-elsevier-journal-they-dont/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on October 29, 2020, 04:58:11 pm
This is a pre-print, but models transmission to suggest that there's no need to postulate particular individuals who are "super-spreaders" in order to have super-spreading events:

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.10.21.20216895v1.full.pdf

That's sort of missing the point. The paper shows that you don't need to have an index case with viral loads at the upper end of the distribution to have a super-spreading event. Fine.

But it's perfectly obvious that the majority of scenarios like the ones in the el-pais article don't lead to the outcomes shown. In every one of those scenarios the index case causes 5+ secondary cases, even given moderate controls (e.g reduced bar capacity).

How then was R0 only ~3 before any controls were introduced? It's simply not possible if the modelled scenarios are typical.
I'm probably being incredibly dumb here: how can you relate the number of people infected in these scenarios to a R number in the population? I don't spend all my time in the pub, in an office with other people etc, so for most of the time these models wouldn't apply to me?

Because we do have a fairly decent idea of how long people are infectious for, and what they were doing with their time before the pandemic. Suppose you are infectious for a day or two. The average infected person before controls were in place would find themselves in one of these environments - enclosed transport, offices, pub, climbing wall.

The only way you could have the scenarios shown be typical and still have R0~3 is if people were only infectious for a few hours, so there’s a high chance they weren’t in such situations when they were infectious.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 29, 2020, 05:04:28 pm
This is a pre-print, but models transmission to suggest that there's no need to postulate particular individuals who are "super-spreaders" in order to have super-spreading events:

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.10.21.20216895v1.full.pdf

That's sort of missing the point. The paper shows that you don't need to have an index case with viral loads at the upper end of the distribution to have a super-spreading event. Fine.

But it's perfectly obvious that the majority of scenarios like the ones in the el-pais article don't lead to the outcomes shown. In every one of those scenarios the index case causes 5+ secondary cases, even given moderate controls (e.g reduced bar capacity).

How then was R0 only ~3 before any controls were introduced? It's simply not possible if the modelled scenarios are typical.
I'm probably being incredibly dumb here: how can you relate the number of people infected in these scenarios to a R number in the population? I don't spend all my time in the pub, in an office with other people etc, so for most of the time these models wouldn't apply to me?

Because we do have a fairly decent idea of how long people are infectious for, and what they were doing with their time before the pandemic. Suppose you are infectious for a day or two. The average infected person before controls were in place would find themselves in one of these environments - enclosed transport, offices, pub, climbing wall.

The only way you could have the scenarios shown be typical and still have R0~3 is if people were only infectious for a few hours, so there’s a high chance they weren’t in such situations when they were infectious.

Ok...

Isn’t that backwards? I mean, not that (in that scenario) were only infectious for a few hours, but that they were only in those situations for a few hours?
Edit: or at least, in those situations long enough, ie a lesson usually being an hour or less.
The rest of the time their virus went to “waste”?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on October 29, 2020, 06:27:52 pm
It’s not backwards, it’s just playing with the only variable not fixed in these simulations.

Whoever ran the simulations took a good online tool for simulating aerosol infections.

https://cires.colorado.edu/news/covid-19-airborne-transmission-tool-available

There are many inputs to this model, but the El Pais looks at fixed scenarios - eg the class has a fixed room size and no ventilation etc. The main unknown variable is the amount of virus expelled by the infected person. You can download the tool and play with it - to get these levels of infection the modellers have tweaked this number to it’s upper limits.

For more reasonable values and a class of 50mins you’d get a 0.5% chance of infection per class member, which is much more realistic.

But suppose you take the El Pais numbers as representative. And suppose someone is infectious for several days. They would find themselves in at least one of these scenarios in that time and infect around 15 people, which is miles away from the 2-3 we actually saw.

So there are only two possibilities

1) people aren’t infectious for 2-3 days, but only a short period and so probably didnt attend class, or an office meeting whilst infectious.

2) the el Pais simulations use settings applicable to super spreading events where the index case expels a lot of virus.

And, if you go and play with the tool you see the second one is exactly what has happened.

So the article is great in that it shows you what you need to do to make classes/restaurants/family christmas as safe as possible. It’s terrible for giving you an indication of how risky that event actually is.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on October 29, 2020, 07:17:41 pm
I’d agree but modify your last sentence Stu - The article is not good for telling you how risky an event is likely to be. Its better for informing you about how risky an event could be.. (in a bad case)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on October 29, 2020, 07:23:50 pm
Yes. Well put
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on October 30, 2020, 07:59:16 am
Rishi loses some of his gloss: Eat out to Help out led to fresh clusters of cases

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-eat-out-to-help-out-accelerated-second-wave-of-covid-19-study-says-12118285
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: seankenny on October 30, 2020, 10:21:22 am
More details on that report here:

https://twitter.com/fetzert/status/1322078576133525504?s=21

Wasn’t this a rather obvious consequence of the policy?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Sidehaas on October 30, 2020, 02:34:27 pm
Rishi loses some of his gloss: Eat out to Help out led to fresh clusters of cases

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-eat-out-to-help-out-accelerated-second-wave-of-covid-19-study-says-12118285

This has been blatantly obvious to me for almost exactly 2 months (when all the cases in our area started rising exponentially, after seeing the state of the local restaurants for the previous 4 weeks).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on October 30, 2020, 03:26:53 pm
I don't think anybody was under any illusions that the scheme wouldn't lead to more cases, but literally any policy less severe than chaining everybody to their radiators for the whole summer would have had to same effect to a greater or lesser degree. The question is, was it worth it?
Given the better climatic conditions over summer I think it was right to let people live a little because, EOTHO or no, a tightening of restrictions over winter was inevitable. Having said that, the government should have been quicker with restrictions this time round and should also have been stricter about behaviour in restaurants/pubs over the summer.

We took advantage of it by going out for lunch to places where we could sit outside, and we bought more coffees/ice creams-to-go than we otherwise would have done, but seeing photos of multiple generations crowded round a table in a curry house seemed daft.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dunnyg on October 30, 2020, 03:50:40 pm
Having the extra ice cream is very good  of you x
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on October 30, 2020, 04:31:58 pm
Having the extra ice cream is very good  of you x

I had it for you, my enbubbled friend.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dunnyg on October 30, 2020, 04:35:12 pm
 :wub:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Sidehaas on October 30, 2020, 05:16:49 pm
I don't think anybody was under any illusions that the scheme wouldn't lead to more cases, but literally any policy less severe than chaining everybody to their radiators for the whole summer would have had to same effect to a greater or lesser degree. The question is, was it worth it?

I'm not suggesting places should have stayed shut. The problem with Eat-out-to-help-out was that the demand soared so much that everywhere was crammed full. Unsurprisingly the restaurants (certainly around here, anyway) were pushing the rules to their limits because they were desperate for cash. Worse, it was all concentrated in three days each week. Why not spread it out more? A better policy could have produced an economic gain with far less concentrated crowding. Eat-out-to-help-out was designed to get people together in high numbers again (albeit 'covid-safe') in order to increase people's confidence in going out quickly rather than allowing that to come back naturally over a longer period. It was a gamble.

We took advantage of it by going out for lunch to places where we could sit outside, and we bought more coffees/ice creams-to-go than we otherwise would have done, but seeing photos of multiple generations crowded round a table in a curry house seemed daft.
Well what you describe as daft is exactly what every restaurant round here was like, all days for three days a week through August.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on October 30, 2020, 05:22:11 pm
Eat-out-to-help-out was designed to get people together in high numbers again (albeit 'covid-safe') in order to increase people's confidence in going out quickly rather than allowing that to come back naturally over a longer period.

I'm agreeing with you that the scheme could have been designed better so as to mitigate its increased risk. However what you've said there is, to my knowledge, not based on any evidence at all.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Sidehaas on October 30, 2020, 05:25:54 pm
I'm extrapolating a bit. But Boris said a number of times through summer that he wanted to get people confident going out and about again to get the economy moving. That was his primary focus. I think they just misjudged it.

(Ps my anecdotal observation are all from around South road in Waterloo, it's a pretty popular area for restaurants and bars that some people will travel a bit to, so might not be completely representative of elsewhere, but I'm sure it all had a fairly big impact around here.)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on October 30, 2020, 05:41:06 pm
I'm extrapolating a bit. But Boris said a number of times through summer that he wanted to get people confident going out and about again to get the economy moving. That was his primary focus. I think they just misjudged it.

The government definitely did encourage people to enjoy themselves (and for God's sake, spend some money!) over summer but covid mitigation measures were central to the message which was Enjoy Summer Safely. If you watch the TV ad then it's packed full of the covid safe behaviours (though noticeably now, not mask wearing in shops): queueing outside shops, PPE, hand sanitiser at checkouts, doing outdoorsy stuff.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jiYx2L3yTuo

I'm not surprised that restaurants got as many bums on seats as they could. The rules around that should probably have been tighter and/or better enforced.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Sidehaas on October 30, 2020, 05:52:44 pm
I think we agree on that. Better enforcement of the rules could have helped a lot, as could a better designed policy that didn't unnecessarily concentrate people quite so much. But neither of those things were provided, and for whatever underlying reason, in some areas that was enough to tip the balance back to an exponential increase from mid-late August.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on October 30, 2020, 06:18:30 pm
in some areas that was enough to tip the balance back to an exponential increase from mid-late August.

Sorry, I feel like a nitpicking dick now, but isn't this also speculation? Anything above R=1 in a population will leave to exponential growth. Is that R was sitting below 1 and it was EOTHO that made the increase to >1? I'd be surprised if you could disaggregate EOTHO from the other factors causing increased transmission. Gyms, inter-household visiting, people going dogging again etc etc etc.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on October 30, 2020, 06:22:39 pm
I think we agree on that. Better enforcement of the rules...

I thought that initially but having reflected on it I think by the time you're requiring enforcement you're f*cked.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Sidehaas on October 30, 2020, 06:30:59 pm
Well, data about where most infections occur seems to be hard to come by. The only thing I remember seeing from a source that should be reliable was that slide that was leaked a few weeks ago from a brief Chris Whitty have to some MPs. Hospitality (pubs and restaurants) were way out ahead of everything else on that slide, including people's homes (work and education locations were not shown.)
Other than that, I'm drawing the conclusion that eat-out-to-help-out was responsible for most of the difference in August from the previous month because it led to lots of strangers sitting fairly close together indoors for long periods. I don't think there were any other sudden changes at the time - bits and pieces of stuff opening up but not on the same scale. So it seems very obvious. Pubs did open in late July of course, but I don't think they were drawing in the same number of people.

I did say on a ukc thread that of course this might all have happened anyway - eventually I'm sure the critical mass of people being back in restaurants and pubs would have been enough to tip the balance anyway, at least without restrictions. The rest of Europe is evidence of that. But I do think eat-out-to-help-out must have brought it forward quite a bit.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Sidehaas on October 30, 2020, 06:34:46 pm
I think we agree on that. Better enforcement of the rules...

I thought that initially but having reflected on it I think by the time you're requiring enforcement you're f*cked.
Soft touch enforcement with restaurant owners (eg inspectors making informal contact on the phone to make sure they were aware of their responsibilities) cor similar, could be effective. Many places just had too many tables packed in. Unlike pubs enforcement doesn't mean you don't need to forcibly separate anyone. Anyway, all water under the bridge now...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on October 30, 2020, 06:42:17 pm
I'm not surprised that restaurants got as many bums on seats as they could. The rules around that should probably have been tighter and/or better enforced.

For what it's worth, restaurants had virtually zero control power/control. My son is a kitchen manager/front of house in a mid-range national chain (a Harvester) and if people claim to have an exemption from wearing a mask staff cannot challenge them or ask for proof. Likewise, if a larger group claims to be from one household they cannot be challenged, no matter how obvious it is that they're lying.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on October 30, 2020, 07:50:48 pm
in some areas that was enough to tip the balance back to an exponential increase from mid-late August.

Sorry, I feel like a nitpicking dick now, but isn't this also speculation? Anything above R=1 in a population will leave to exponential growth. Is that R was sitting below 1 and it was EOTHO that made the increase to >1? I'd be surprised if you could disaggregate EOTHO from the other factors causing increased transmission. Gyms, inter-household visiting, people going dogging again etc etc etc.

Read the paper Will. Or the reports about the paper. That’s pretty much what they say - exp growth can be tracked back to when the scheme started.

Lots of really glum Covid news today...

And a lack of firm action from our government (god please don’t sent out George Useless Eustace again) - what’s the saying about making a mistake once is excusable, but twice is....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on October 31, 2020, 12:30:38 am
https://twitter.com/GraemeDemianyk/status/1322299446785314816?s=19

 :tumble:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on November 01, 2020, 10:24:07 am
in some areas that was enough to tip the balance back to an exponential increase from mid-late August.

Sorry, I feel like a nitpicking dick now, but isn't this also speculation? Anything above R=1 in a population will leave to exponential growth. Is that R was sitting below 1 and it was EOTHO that made the increase to >1? I'd be surprised if you could disaggregate EOTHO from the other factors causing increased transmission. Gyms, inter-household visiting, people going dogging again etc etc etc.

I'm with you Will. At the end of the summer the virus spread grew fastest amongst young people and where it was spread (before schools and Universities restarted) was often said in public briefing reports to be in domestic settings (particularly in Nicola's reports to Scotland). This must mean young people were not social distancing as well as other age groups.  I think the eat out policy had a much smaller effect and those thinking otherwise, without much better evidence, risk mistaking correlation for causation; seemingly supported from October information on spread in pubs, restaurants etc (at a time when spread in Unis was clearly much higher than anywhere else).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on November 10, 2020, 08:03:55 pm
Good news. Vaccine that works!

Good news. Increase in rate of new cases seems to have stopped.

Bad news. Deaths 500 a day today (bear in mind due to treatment changes mortality rates have halved..)

For those wanting to see the links between Covid contracts and the Tory party/donors/old Etonians etc... this web page has a neat way of visualising things.

https://sophieehill.shinyapps.io/my-little-crony/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on November 12, 2020, 08:04:03 am
In something of a reversal of the 'Scotland good, England bad' trend when it comes to all things test and trace related, PHS have admitted to being as incompetent at entering/processing data as PHE and the much lauded Scottish test and trace system appears to be just about as lacklustre as the English system...

https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/6267746/coronavirus-scotland-nicola-sturgeon-test-protect-willie-rennie/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: moose on November 12, 2020, 08:28:10 am
My own experience of NHStrace - contacted by text on 8th and informed that due to close contact with a Covid positive, I should be isolating from the 2nd to 16th!

I suspect it must be a Client or business/ property owner whose fire scene I inspected - and whose notion of "close contact" differs from my own (all such people are met either outdoors, or possibly indoors for 15 mins at a decent separation).

Hey ho... effectively only 8 days isolation, and thankfully I had plenty of food and UHT milk in the house.  Not a good reflection of the system but I am grateful that it's inefficiency means I got a weekend out I shouldn't have! [including a nice trip to Stronstrey Bank, which was a new crag for me].
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on November 20, 2020, 10:45:04 am
A report into NHS track and trace has just popped up as the main #1 headline story on the BBC website.

By BBC standards this is about as damning as it gets I suspect... Interesting graphics about the private company involvement.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55008133

Be interesting to see how long this stays top of the BBC news cycle...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: JohnM on November 20, 2020, 01:23:41 pm
Yeah I read that BBC article. It tried to be very diplomatic saying the government was under a lot of pressure (no doubt) rather than they gave their mates a load contracts worth billions of pounds, put people in charge with massive failures in other organisations and bypassed local skills and systems that were already in place.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on November 21, 2020, 11:53:41 am
A link to wintertree's recent sterling work on covid stats on the other channel.

https://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/off_belay/friday_night_covid_plotting-728011
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on November 21, 2020, 08:40:35 pm
News coming out of the US is really grim. The increase in cases means a new record in daily deaths is near certain in about a week (exceeding the April peak) and still increasing after that  for at least a week. Trump is doing f-all.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: moose on November 21, 2020, 09:14:29 pm
There's an article on 538 on the possible effects of Thanksgiving. Some back of the envelope calculations on how in states with a high prevalence, gatherings of 10 or more are likely to have a Covid19 positive attendee, and be a potential super spreader event (North Dakota - 10 people - 80% one is Covid19 positive). Looks grim for the USA... and also for us in the presumably comparable post-Christmas period.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: moose on November 22, 2020, 08:56:15 am
Along the same lines as the above, here's a link to the risk assessment tool described by this week's More or Less on Radio 4.  It gives a probability for a guest at a gathering of a selected size in a particular area being Covid positive (based on background prevalence rates - with a background assumption on how many cases there are for every one detected).

https://covid19risk.biosci.gatech.edu/ (https://covid19risk.biosci.gatech.edu/)

I guess how accurate the figures are is arguable but what seems significant is how much higher the probabilities are for the USA compared to almost everywhere else.  I knew it was bad there but I didn't realise how much worse than the UK it was.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on November 22, 2020, 09:15:56 am
what seems significant is how much higher the probabilities are for the USA compared to almost everywhere else.  I knew it was bad there but I didn't realise how much worse than the UK it was.

It's out of control across huge swathes of the country and it's Thanksgiving this coming Thursday, when Americans travel around the country in huge numbers. There are already signs that many will not do the sensible thing of staying home and celebrating only with their immediate household (we know someone whose 80 something mother just flew from Florida to Texas for that purpose).

Edit: apologies, hadn't looked on the previous page, Thanksgiving already covered.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on November 22, 2020, 10:44:14 am
Along the same lines as the above, here's a link to the risk assessment tool described by this week's More or Less on Radio 4.  It gives a probability for a guest at a gathering of a selected size in a particular area being Covid positive (based on background prevalence rates - with a background assumption on how many cases there are for every one detected).

https://covid19risk.biosci.gatech.edu/ (https://covid19risk.biosci.gatech.edu/)

I guess how accurate the figures are is arguable but what seems significant is how much higher the probabilities are for the USA compared to almost everywhere else.  I knew it was bad there but I didn't realise how much worse than the UK it was.

Useful tool to visualise the risks (providing the assumptions are correct..). If you apply it to the UK, and view going to the climbing wall as going to an 'indoor event with either 50 or 100 people' (for e.g. the Beacon in N.Wales has imposed a max capacity of 91), then at 50 people I get 25% chance of there being at least one covid-positive person present. At 100 people there's a 40% risk. That's at 10:1 actual cases to reported cases. At 5:1 the risks are 12% for 50 people and 25% for 100 people.

Then the person with covid may or may not be a super-spreader...
https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/09/k-overlooked-variable-driving-pandemic/616548/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on November 22, 2020, 11:12:54 am
New legal action against government lead covid appointments.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/nov/21/boris-johnson-acted-illegally-over-jobs-for-top-anti-covid-staff
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: fatneck on November 26, 2020, 02:24:32 pm
Tier 2 for the 'Pool! :bounce:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on November 26, 2020, 04:01:06 pm
Tier 2 for the 'Pool! :bounce:

Good to see.

It’s interesting as here in Manc the cases have come down nearly as much as in Liverpool (from 800-1000 per 100k to about 250 yesterday) but the narrative and treatment is quite different from Liverpool. Can’t help but wonder if this is a bit of punish Burnham going on etc...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on November 26, 2020, 05:33:01 pm
Obvs. Divide and rule tactic with lots of trolling praise for Anderson. As he said, like vipers’ teeth.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on December 02, 2020, 09:19:35 am
Vaccine approval today - rollout imminent. All great news.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on December 02, 2020, 10:33:01 am
Yep great news.

Hopefully they don't drop the ball on the rollout, just like they've dropped nearly every other ball this year.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on December 02, 2020, 10:35:51 am
Yep great news.

Hopefully they don't drop the ball on the rollout, just like they've dropped nearly every other ball this year.

Yes - when I heard Hancock saying 800 000 doses on their way for next week I thought great! but....

At least they are heading to Hospitals and Doctors surgeries rather than Serco offices (though I bet they have a hand in some of the other 'centres')
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Wil on December 02, 2020, 11:47:01 am
I think it's interesting that we're rolling out the vaccine in a similar way to how we roll out flu vaccines. When we do that we're trying to protect the vulnerable, not necessarily create herd immunity (and maybe with many different strains that's not possible anyway).

It's an interesting problem to theorise. On the one hand you vaccinate people who face high consequences from Covid, on the other you vaccinate people with a high risk of contraction or spread (or some mix of both). I've no idea which is preferable, but someone somewhere must have run some numbers on it, alongside speed of the programme, number of available vaccines etc.

Then you've got the large scale Prisoners' Dilemma going on - how many people will refuse the vaccine and hope that the immunity of others protects them?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 02, 2020, 12:57:45 pm
One of the early considerations is vaccinating those most at risk of death or serious long term health damage: be that due to age, underlying health conditions, working on the covid front line or whatever. The added benefit is this will rapidly reduce pressure on the NHS from those most likely to get seriously ill with the virus. Herd immunity will take just as long whatever the order of sub-groups we prioritise.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Anti on December 02, 2020, 01:04:13 pm
Presumably there's an awful lot more people who aren't at any significant risk too, so doing the lower number, higher risk group at first makes most sense?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on December 02, 2020, 01:12:46 pm
My layman's guess on how to get the most benefit from a vaccine is that some sort of pincer movement might be most effective:

Start off with the most vulnerable and health/care workers etc. Then roll out to a mixture of the vulnerable and those who are at the highest risk of contracting and spreading the virus.

There should be more benefit to vaccinating healthy 20 year olds in public facing jobs and students than there is from vaccinating a 40 or 50 year old who can work from home.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: T_B on December 02, 2020, 02:12:26 pm
If a vaccine’s commercially available then I won’t be waiting. No doubt the Gov is counting on a few million travellers buying it (I know I am. Well, a few hundred would do initially...), so they don’t have to fork out.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Wil on December 02, 2020, 04:15:42 pm
Herd immunity will take just as long whatever the order of sub-groups we prioritise.

Yes, but we don't need herd immunity to benefit from slowing the spread by immunising key spreaders. The question is whether that could be more effective than immunising those most at risk first.

In terms of strain on the NHS immunising Care Home residents may have no real impact. Some may be otherwise healthy, but a large number won't be suitable for hospital treatment and will remain in their homes. They will probably receive treatment, but not to the extent of people kept in hospital or in ICU.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tc on December 02, 2020, 10:13:06 pm
Excellent quote today from a Polish writer whose name I can't spell:
"Any vaccine should be tested on the politicians first. If they survive, the vaccine is safe. If they don't, the country is safe"
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 03, 2020, 09:31:05 am
All time record covid daily deaths and all time record hospitalisations in the US reported today.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/02/health/us-coronavirus-wednesday/index.html
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: duncan on December 05, 2020, 12:08:31 pm
Excellent quote today from a Polish writer whose name I can't spell:
"Any vaccine should be tested on the politicians first. If they survive, the vaccine is safe. If they don't, the country is safe"

Except politicians are usually a rather narrow cross-section of society so wouldn’t be an effective way to evaluate safety of a new health technology  ;)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 14, 2020, 06:57:53 pm
A guardian story from a friend and ex colleague on why the government dithered  with SAGE advice in September, due to conversations with fringe herd immunity backers.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/dec/14/herd-immunity-boris-johnson-coronavirus

Also there is some worrying news today about a faster spreading mutation of C19 in the SE (at least it will be taken seriously now the rise is in the capital). Wintetree on the other channel did some plotting to show the spectacular spread from the new data over the last week (scroll down to his 16.24 post)

https://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/off_belay/friday_night_covid_plotting__3-728848

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on December 15, 2020, 05:27:20 pm

Also there is some worrying news today about a faster spreading mutation of C19 in the SE

looks like it has plenty of company:
https://nextstrain.org/ncov/global
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on December 17, 2020, 08:07:28 pm
New York Times article on the cronyism in the UK’s pandemic spending.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/12/17/world/europe/britain-covid-contracts.html
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on December 17, 2020, 08:43:31 pm
New York Times article on the cronyism in the UK’s pandemic spending.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/12/17/world/europe/britain-covid-contracts.html

Interesting - thanks TT. All the stuff that has been previously referenced on this (or one of the others, I forget!) thread - e.g. links to Tory donors / peers / MPs, overpayment, firms with no prior experience / assets, ignoring of domestic manufacturers, appaling mismanagement of our PPE stockpile, even mention of the Ayanda scandal. Its often useful to dip into the US papers as they don't have the same "allegiances" as our domestic press - have we seen this stuff in many UK papers / broadcast media? As a result will they get away with it? Yes, obvs. As I linked elsewhere, it was widely reported in the US papers that Russia have teamed up with Oxford / Astrazeneca to try to improve each other's vaccine. Here - nothing. Even though its actually good news! In general we are poorly served by the UK media, hence the polls - Tories still ahead.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on December 17, 2020, 08:59:39 pm
Being generous - you could say the UK media sometimes can’t see the wood for the trees.

But really the UK press should be holding the governments toes to the fire over this.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on December 17, 2020, 11:47:45 pm
Okay, so with £22bn spent and the full expertise of Dido Harding and Public Health England at its disposal, the government has failed to produce a mass testing programme capable of seriously reducing transmission.

Gavin Williamson clearly believes that secondary schools lacking physical space, training and sufficient staff to run a normal timetable will somehow be able to achieve this feat for free.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/education-55318628

They have not been offered training, extra staff whether skilled or otherwise, or extra funds to buy in expertise though may get some costs reimbursed ‘if reasonable’, apparently. And releasing  the statement 2 hours after term has ended and staff are no longer together- cute.


Can anyone tell me how all this is to be achieved?   :shrug:

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on December 18, 2020, 07:03:36 am
You forgot the slashing the laptops for disadvantaged children scheme...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 18, 2020, 08:45:02 am
Being generous - you could say the UK media sometimes can’t see the wood for the trees.

But really the UK press should be holding the governments toes to the fire over this.

The Good Law Project has been working hard on this topic for months; taking legal action against the government in several areas of poor governance in procurement.

https://goodlawproject.org/update/jobs-for-mates-jr/

As for the press, mostly disappointing but the increasingly impressive independent Byline Times has been making the best efforts. However the BBC News channel did have an interview with Jolyon Maugham of The Good Law Project, who excoriated the government in probably the most extraordinary interview I've ever heard on the channel.

https://bylinetimes.com/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on December 18, 2020, 09:57:02 am
You forgot the slashing the laptops for disadvantaged children scheme...

Well, disadvantaged children are simply not a priority for this administration.

Edit. - not right thread for the comment
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 18, 2020, 06:46:40 pm
You forgot the slashing the laptops for disadvantaged children scheme...

Well, disadvantaged children are simply not a priority for this administration.

Edit. - not right thread for the comment

Unless UNICEF are feeding them.

Anyhow back on topic a Belgium minister has accidently leaked the vaccine costs to the EU.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/dec/18/belgian-minister-accidentally-tweets-eus-covid-vaccine-price-list
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on December 19, 2020, 02:29:01 pm
Nice report on one of the rna vaccines. Fairly easy to understand- esp the infographic and main chart at the beginning

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2034577

Anyone doubting how effective a vaccine is should look at the placebo vs vaccine incidence graph.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on December 19, 2020, 05:13:10 pm
Better late than never Boris.

But this is the third time (at least) he’s late to making the obvious call.

Data presented on the new strain looked scary and fairly clear.

Stay safe everyone.

Edit: the one Q that wasn’t at all answered in the presser was - if cases of the new strain were increasing rapidly in Kent during the November lockdown what makes you think these new measures will work?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on December 19, 2020, 05:33:30 pm
Better late than never Boris.

16th December: Johnson accuses Starmer of wanting to ‘cancel xmas’ when he suggests the relaxations should be tightened.

19th December: Johnson tightens the relaxations.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on December 19, 2020, 05:42:20 pm
Yup. Can’t stand the twat - but I think he’s made the right decision - but at the wrong time.

Having reflected on the presser - I’m left reading between the lines that they’re shitting themselves about the new strain... maybe I’m going into tin foil hat territory there but that’s my reading of their language ...

Edit - seen a couple of tweets just going around that he’s planning to resign in Jan..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fultonius on December 19, 2020, 06:11:24 pm
Nic's closed the border. I think they're all shitting bricks!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on December 19, 2020, 06:13:11 pm
Was there any clarity about whether these new restrictions are going to have a legal basis or just remain guidance?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on December 19, 2020, 06:16:26 pm
Anyone seen the tier 4 rules written down properly anywhere? Trying to work out if you can enter a Tier 4 area in order to use it to leave the country (airport or tunnel)?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on December 19, 2020, 06:21:30 pm
Was there any clarity about whether these new restrictions are going to have a legal basis or just remain guidance?

On the BBC news channel they had one talking head who said that there was a mechanism where it could be made law without going to parliament etc. I expect backbencher tory shire uproar...
Anyone seen the tier 4 rules written down properly anywhere? Trying to work out if you can enter a Tier 4 area in order to use it to leave the country (airport or tunnel)?

Heard you are not allowed to travel abroad from T4... but I expect you can travel through to leave. It’s all allowed if it’s business anyway! So get a letter of invitation to give a talk (or something) where you’re heading and I’m sure that’ll get you out... 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on December 19, 2020, 06:33:09 pm
Looks like they just put the full rules out for tier 4:
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/tier-4-stay-at-home

Looks like it's legit to fly from London or get tunnel from Folkstone if you live in tier 3 (or at least it's not explicitly breaking the law!)..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 19, 2020, 07:01:10 pm
Any idea how strict the Border closure is?

This is the first time it’s gone this far isn’t it?
Things are shutting down all over Europe, even Sweden, apparently.
Seems unlikely that it’s a minor mutation.
Even if it makes no difference to the lethality of an infection, per se, increasing the rate of increase and incidence will increase the mortality rate overall. It was already capable of overwhelming our health services, unchecked, and this seems to be rendering the current checks null.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on December 19, 2020, 07:03:41 pm

Looks like it's legit to fly from London or get tunnel from Folkstone if you live in tier 3 (or at least it's not explicitly breaking the law!)..

Have they sorted out the whole Euros not wanting Brits ton travel to their countries after Brexit now?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on December 19, 2020, 07:04:19 pm
Looks like they just put the full rules out for tier 4:
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/tier-4-stay-at-home

Looks like it's legit to fly from London or get tunnel from Folkstone if you live in tier 3 (or at least it's not explicitly breaking the law!)..

Wondered the same. Was planning to go ski-touring in the French Alps next week. Looks like the Welsh gov just made it illegal to leave Wales though from midnight tonight.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on December 19, 2020, 07:19:42 pm
@OMM aside from increased cases, illness and ultimately fatalities - a more transmissible virus means we (all) have to recalibrate our distancing measures and behaviour. From how careful we personally are in shops, street - even the crag, to how schools and business is organised. By trial and error we have worked out what level of tier or lockdown reduces or controls spread - now that has to be rethought/toughened up.

Maybe.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on December 19, 2020, 07:40:46 pm
Have they sorted out the whole Euros not wanting Brits ton travel to their countries after Brexit now?

No, you need to be out there before 1st Jan... we're currently working out whether the wrath of my mum if we cancel Christmas is more scary than the risk of a more comprehensive lockdown before we're due to escape (just before new year)!

Looks like the Welsh gov just made it illegal to leave Wales though from midnight tonight.

Run while you can!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 20, 2020, 11:09:25 am
@OMM aside from increased cases, illness and ultimately fatalities - a more transmissible virus means we (all) have to recalibrate our distancing measures and behaviour. From how careful we personally are in shops, street - even the crag, to how schools and business is organised. By trial and error we have worked out what level of tier or lockdown reduces or controls spread - now that has to be rethought/toughened up.

Maybe.

As hardline as I am on pandemic control I don't agree with that. The same social distancing, hand washing and mask wearing are very likely just as effective. The virus seems more efficient in attacking inside the body (which might also mean higher viral load). If so the virus of whatever mutation only likely spreads indoors in close proximity and outdoor risks should still be low.

I'm still worried this is a game changer. In London, hospitals are full and we have two weeks of hospitalisation growth built in (todays changes will affect numbers from two weeks time). If R is 0.4 higher the virus will not be dropping fast under Tier 4 (we know this as it will be slower than  the normal mutation decline rates during lockdowns). We might be facing a couple of months of beyond hospital capacity. Vaccination versus growth looks much more like a race now.

I was chatting to our triathlete pals with long covid last night who are very active on support groups.  They say evidence is building that athletes are more susceptible than the general public for those with long covid that doesn't arise from severe hospitalisations. Some are said to have been tested with virus hanging around for months, so not post viral as such as it never went away. I've not seen much research evidence on this yet so for the moment it needs to be regarded as anecdotal. Still, it might be wise not to overtrain as a result of frustration.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on December 20, 2020, 11:21:28 am
Was there any clarity about whether these new restrictions are going to have a legal basis or just remain guidance?

Trying to disentangle this for my daughter, who has a train ticket south from Edinburgh booked for Monday morning - the level to which it will be enforced is as clear as mud. At this point I'm going to tell I don't think she should travel anyway.

By-the-by, Sweden's new "tough" measures are laughable - masks now "recommended" on public transport etc.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on December 20, 2020, 11:36:00 am
@offwidth - you misunderstood my post. We simply don’t know at the moment - but a major shift in the transmissibility of the virus may mean we have to rethink (towards harsher measures) how we deal with it at the moment. That was my point. It may not of course - but given how the govt has clamped down on travel they clearly thing this is an issue. From my reading of the science - at the moment we have the data showing the new strain is growing much faster - implying it’s better at being transmitted - but how is at the moment unknown.

@andyP saw an article on sky news today saying the govt can legally impose the restrictions (they are law) and have 28 days to pass them retrospectively in parliament. The law was updated at 6am apparently.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: 205Chris on December 20, 2020, 01:59:03 pm
Have they sorted out the whole Euros not wanting Brits ton travel to their countries after Brexit now?

No, you need to be out there before 1st Jan... we're currently working out whether the wrath of my mum if we cancel Christmas is more scary than the risk of a more comprehensive lockdown before we're due to escape (just before new year)!

Looks like the Welsh gov just made it illegal to leave Wales though from midnight tonight.

Run while you can!

Looks like Brits abroad might not be welcome:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-55385768
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: danm on December 20, 2020, 02:55:04 pm
Listening to Radio 4 at lunchtime, the backbench Tory MP from the 1922 Committee was about as enraged and scathing about the Government as I've ever heard anyone be. Stormy waters ahead.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on December 20, 2020, 03:27:19 pm
I despair at the collective idiocy and thoughtlessness of people...

Govt: Londoners, stay at home because there's this extra virulent strain of the virus around that spreads really easily.

Londoners: Stuff that, let's all catch a train tonight and go stay with Grandma...

https://www.cornwalllive.com/news/cornwall-news/trains-packed-people-flee-tier-4816981

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on December 20, 2020, 03:33:36 pm
To some extent I find it hard to blame these people after the govt and particularly Johnson have been saying all week that Christmas is on and there’s no reason to cancel, when he’d seen the evidence and just wanted to delay the decision until it wouldn’t come under scrutiny from his own MPs. I feel like they’ve eroded people’s trust so much now that there’s very little good will left to listen to what they are saying and people are just doing their own thing.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 20, 2020, 03:51:29 pm
A US perspective from an actual epidemiologist, on the implications of the new strain:

 https://yourlocalepidemiologist.com/ (https://yourlocalepidemiologist.com/)

“ New COVID19 strain in UK...

Yes, there is another strain in the UK that MAY be increasing transmissibility. Cases are increasing at exponential rate in Wales. But there are a few things to keep in mind...

To mutate and change is what viruses do. Most of the time it’s meaningless tweak. Sometimes the virus gets worse at infecting us and the new variant just dies out.

Sometimes the virus just gets lucky, in that a new strain hits the right people at the right time. This happened in Spain during the summer. Headlines called it the the “Spanish strain", but the exponential cases was explained by simply people catching it on vacation and bringing it home. It wasn’t due to the new strain. It’s important to keep in mind that the virus spreads with political and social contexts in the background. The UK may be placing the blame of new Christmas shutdowns on science, rather than taking the blame of soaring cases due to lax policies. In other words, this could be political.

Sometimes, though, viruses do find a new winning formula. But, we honestly don’t have the data yet to know the full picture. The World Health Organization is working on it. It will take laboratory experiments to figure out if this variant really is a better spreader than all the others.

Will this impact the effectiveness of the vaccine? Probably not. It takes a collection of mutations to impact vaccines. Vaccines are made with mutations in mind. This UK strain has a mutation on the spike protein of the virus. It’s not the first time we’ve seen a mutation on the spike protein. This gains the attention of scientists, though, because the spike is the virus’s key to unlock the door into our cells. Any changes made to that key can make it easier for the virus to get inside. This mutation is certainly something to keep an eye on.

As one professor (McNally) said: "We know there's a variant, we know nothing about what that means biologically...It is far too early to make any inference on how important this may or may not be."

So, in the meantime, everyone take a big, deep breath. Including those in charge of news headlines. Keep doing what you’re doing. This has no implications (yet) on how we should change behavior. Keep washing those hands, keeping your distance, and wearing masks.

Love, YLE”

Edit:
Just realised this isn’t on her site yet, only in the news letter and FB page.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on December 20, 2020, 04:33:02 pm
Holland, Belgium, Italy and just announced Ireland not accepting travellers from the UK.

@OMM also heard that a strain ‘dying out’ can also lead to proportionately higher amounts of the new strain showing up in the stats. But given the prevalence of the other strains in the rest of the country I doubt that’s the case here.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on December 20, 2020, 05:02:16 pm
Holland, Belgium, Italy and just announced Ireland not accepting travellers from the UK.

Come on Mette, shut the bloody door.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on December 20, 2020, 06:04:34 pm

As one professor (McNally) said: "We know there's a variant, we know nothing about what that means biologically...It is far too early to make any inference on how important this may or may not be."


They seem to know a bit about it:

 https://www.cogconsortium.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Report-1_COG-UK_19-December-2020_SARS-CoV-2-Mutations.pdf (https://www.cogconsortium.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Report-1_COG-UK_19-December-2020_SARS-CoV-2-Mutations.pdf)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on December 20, 2020, 06:36:45 pm
Germany, France, Czech Republic, Austria. All banned flights from the UK. For the next 48 hours at least.

Pretty severe as this is the flights - not just stopping UK citizens but everyone..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on December 20, 2020, 06:42:07 pm

As one professor (McNally) said: "We know there's a variant, we know nothing about what that means biologically...It is far too early to make any inference on how important this may or may not be."


They seem to know a bit about it:

 https://www.cogconsortium.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Report-1_COG-UK_19-December-2020_SARS-CoV-2-Mutations.pdf (https://www.cogconsortium.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Report-1_COG-UK_19-December-2020_SARS-CoV-2-Mutations.pdf)

Having read that - it doesn’t really say much apart from what distinguishes the different types and their occurrence.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on December 20, 2020, 07:48:39 pm

They seem to know a bit about it:


Having read that - it doesn’t really say much apart from what distinguishes the different types and their occurrence.

I wasn't trying to be sarcastic. Perhaps I would have been better saying "this is what they do know about it," or something like that.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on December 20, 2020, 10:33:25 pm
Summary from the govts NERVTAG group meeting here

https://khub.net/documents/135939561/338928724/SARS-CoV-2+variant+under+investigation%2C+meeting+minutes.pdf/962e866b-161f-2fd5-1030-32b6ab467896?t=1608470511452

Some things in there that have not really surfaced in any media reports - that the new variant is less detectable in PCR tests (I think) and that 4 of the c 1000 examples were re-infections... Increase in cases was exponential during lockdown - and that the change to the R rate of the new strain/variant was between 0.43 and 0.9 (0.43 quoted by the media is the bottom end of the range)...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on December 20, 2020, 11:11:23 pm
+0.9? Not a lot of ´headroom’ there.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on December 21, 2020, 12:06:50 am
What's the lowest R we've ever achieved with the previous version? I can't find a graph from a quick Google, but IIRC it's never been low enough that anything near the middle of that range from this version would get us below 1.. maybe full lockdown like march including schools closed plus unis closed plus now being better at reducing transmission in hospital and care homes might just get you there?? Looks like a pretty crap few months coming up  :wall: :'( full lockdown by new year?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on December 21, 2020, 12:16:55 am
+0.9? Not a lot of ´headroom’ there.
None..?
If the March lockdown reduced R by 0.6(?) and this variant increases R by 0.4-0.9. Say average 0.65

Has to be a UK-wide strict lockdown within a day or two at most? At those levels of transmission a lockdown as strict or more strict than March could still see constant high levels of infection, with all that implies.
If any more indication was needed of how shit things may be about to get, countries wouldn’t ban all inbound travel ‘that’ rapidly, with the associated logistical shitstorm, unless the consequences of not doing so were v.serious.
Roll on mass vaccination. And hopefully the hints are completely wrong.

Edit - more positively, this report suggests ‘R’ may have reduced from 3.something to 0.7 during first lockdown: https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-53414363
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 21, 2020, 01:04:44 am
You're right Pete but how long before the public realise this? How will they behave then, especially since it seems these threats of policing in England and Scotland are looking toothless??
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 21, 2020, 01:20:43 am
@offwidth - you misunderstood my post. We simply don’t know at the moment - but a major shift in the transmissibility of the virus may mean we have to rethink (towards harsher measures) how we deal with it at the moment.

I agree we don't know everything but hands, face, space is always the best way to start and is the key messaging from the epidemiologists on the news. Any harsher restrictive measures (which I would welcome) are a much more complex balance of many other factors dealing mainly with population effects of indoor social distancing. If we debated in detail we would  probably agree but I think it is important people need to understand the basic advice will still work best and 2m almost certainly won't change and mask wearing outdoors at 2m almost certainly won't have much effect on transmission. The spread of C19 is pretty much all indoors and this new mutation likely won't change that.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on December 21, 2020, 07:32:56 am
Pete - exactly. If it’s the higher end of this value then that means a lockdown with all the measures would slow/halt it but not lead to much reduction. That’s schools out, unis out, proper stay at home measures, all work stopped.

Guess we’ll find out - but there was also comment on the NERVTAG report (it’s only 2 pages) that exponential growth continued in Kent despite the lockdown. Either Kent was shit at lockdown 2 (possible) or the virus is very effective.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 21, 2020, 07:37:05 am
I forgot to copy the Tony Cox tweet last night showing the scary prevalence data for the new mutation.

https://twitter.com/The_Soup_Dragon/status/1340349639946629120?s=20

This is important because the exponential growth despite current restrictions is clear and it shows if any minister claims they didn't have clear evidence of a need for urgent action before Friday they are telling lies.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 21, 2020, 08:20:45 am
The Guardian On the rise UK map has gone from bad to grim in just a few days.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/dec/18/covid-cases-and-deaths-today-coronavirus-uk-map

Tier 1 Cornwall is now up 242% on the week
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nic mullin on December 21, 2020, 08:42:27 am

the new variant is less detectable in PCR tests (I think)

Don’t think this is the case, the new variant seems to be detectable after fewer PCR cycles (lower ct). This implies more copies the viral RNA are present in the test sample and so suggests a higher viral load.

The degree of restrictions rolled out on Saturday (in the context of how much the government has been banging on about Christmas, their libertarian attitude to all things and that London was in tier 2 until a week ago) say pretty clearly that shit just got very real, and the graph offwidth posted says it has been for some time.

Agree with the other posters above that we’ll be in last-March level lockdown very soon and running to stand still at best. Grim.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on December 21, 2020, 08:51:12 am
Thanks Nic. Glad I was wrong!

Reading the sage/nervtag report I was (pleasantly) surprised to see that we sequence 10% of all positive tests to see which strain it is and how it develops. Think how bad it could be if we didn’t know...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nails on December 21, 2020, 09:31:23 am
Leading German virologist Christian Drosten has said he expects the new strain of Covid-19 discovered in the UK to be already in circulation in Germany, but that he was “everything but worried” about the viral mutation at the moment. “The question is: is this virus being washed up by a coming new wave in that region [in South East England], or is this virus responsible for creating this wave in the first place”, Drosten said. “That’s an important difference”.
Drosten noted that the viral strain had also been detected in other countries, like the Netherlands, where it didn’t appear to have multiplied in a significantly more rapid way. “I am open to new scientific insights, and in science there are always surprises, but I am everything but worried in this respect”.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: stone on December 21, 2020, 09:37:23 am

the new variant is less detectable in PCR tests (I think)

Don’t think this is the case, the new variant seems to be detectable after fewer PCR cycles (lower ct). This implies more copies the viral RNA are present in the test sample and so suggests a higher viral load.

My understanding:- the test used for the UK Pillar2 testing multiplexes three PCR primer pairs to SARS CoV2 (along with another pair to an internal MS2 control). One of the three pairs doesn't work on this 69-70del new variant but the other two primer pairs do still work fine and, as you say, have been detecting this variant with lower ct.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on December 21, 2020, 10:35:30 am
Drosten noted that the viral strain had also been detected in other countries, like the Netherlands, where it didn’t appear to have multiplied in a significantly more rapid way.

Shapps doing the rounds this morning used the example of his mate's wedding recently where he said 13 out of 15 guests tested positive afterwards despite all being asymptomatic - claiming that "this is something we didn't know about before" presumably to stress that the new strain is causing the huge rise in cases and the science has changed dramatically in the last few days. Sounded like a man clutching at straws to defend the late decision about xmas. We've known about asymptomatic transmission from the very start. I'm increasingly cynical the govt are using this new strain as cover.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nails on December 21, 2020, 10:43:32 am
My main point is really that with or without the new variant, the rise in cases in London and the South East has not been particularly sudden, and is explained quite reasonably with bog standard Covid. Plenty of examples of cases continuing to rise in the North West back in September whilst effectively being in the equivalent of tier 3. Bolton was a good example. Trouble is, that leaves the government with very difficult explanations as to lack of action. Hence the sudden supposed massive importance of the new variant. Gets them off the hook.

Standard Covid is highly transmissible. If we're social distancing then the risk of transmission is very low (variant or otherwise). The notion of significant amounts of transmission via surfaces seems to have been largely debunked. The main factor that varies is human behaviour. My guess is that regardless of tiers it takes time for people's behaviour to alter. The South East had been in Tiers 1 and 2 prior to lock down. The North West has had significant restrictions since August/September and took a long time for cases to really come down. It's good news, in that the new variant is probably not changing anything significantly, but the hysteria that the government have created whilst covering their arses is going to cause some major real-world problems.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on December 21, 2020, 11:30:12 am
The best case is that you and Ali are absolutely correct in your cynicism (better posted on the covid & politics thread?) that this is all just a government ploy to ‘cover their arses over not cancelling xmas earlier’.

The much worse case is that there actually IS a much more virulent strain of covid spreading uncontrollably across the UK.

I wish that you were correct, but the facts suggest that you’re completely wrong.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: stone on December 21, 2020, 11:34:29 am
It's good news, in that the new variant is probably not changing anything significantly, but the hysteria that the government have created whilst covering their arses is going to cause some major real-world problems.

I'll be relieved when/if it's shown that the vaccine is effective against the new variant.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 21, 2020, 11:38:38 am
My main point is really that with or without the new variant, the rise in cases in London and the South East has not been particularly sudden, and is explained quite reasonably with bog standard Covid. Plenty of examples of cases continuing to rise in the North West back in September whilst effectively being in the equivalent of tier 3. Bolton was a good example.

The recent rise in Kent accelerated and was much faster than Bolton. In any case the tweet I linked shows the new variant went from  minor to dominant in a few weeks from sequence sampling test results. Look at the Guardian map 'On the Rise' , the huge number of areas doubling in a week are much more likely to be due to the new variant (as per the tweet sequencing evidence) than some massive behavioural change. The scientists have published R is 0.4 to 0.9 highe for the mutationr.This is unfortunately a game changer.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 21, 2020, 11:46:44 am
The best case is that you and Ali are absolutely correct in your cynicism (better posted on the covid & politics thread?) that this is all just a government ploy to ‘cover their arses over not cancelling xmas earlier’.

The much worse case is that there actually IS a much more virulent strain of covid spreading uncontrollably across the UK.

I wish that you were correct, but the facts suggest that you’re completely wrong.

My cynically mind sees this the other way round entirely. As much as I think our government is incompetent at times on covid some of the tory backbenches are plain insane on the subject. I think Boris needed the additional evidence on Friday before he could be confident they would win the internal political battle. I think the data and hospital spare capacity indicates we need a March style lockdown now. Tory backbenchers in the Covid Recovery Group and the ERG are talking about forcing a commons vote to try and reverse Tier 4.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on December 21, 2020, 11:57:06 am
To add a glimmer of hope to the outlook, it’s possible that nervtag are wrong about the R increase. 

How quickly a disease grows depends both on R - how many people each case infects - and the serial interval - how long between subsequent infections. It’s not clear from the brief notes if they have reliable data on the serial interval of the new strain, but I’d doubt it at this stage.

If - and it’s a big if - the sudden increase is due in part to a drop in the serial interval then the R increase may be very much towards or below the lower end of the range in those minutes.

The devil is very much in the details here.

If this estimate is correct we are pretty much screwed. The lowest we got R nationally in the lockdown was just over 0.6 - see modelling by imperial college:

https://mrc-ide.github.io/covid19estimates/#/details/United_Kingdom

So it will need tough restrictions and much more widespread compliance with them to control this variant.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on December 21, 2020, 12:00:52 pm
The best case is that you and Ali are absolutely correct in your cynicism (better posted on the covid & politics thread?) that this is all just a government ploy to ‘cover their arses over not cancelling xmas earlier’.

The much worse case is that there actually IS a much more virulent strain of covid spreading uncontrollably across the UK.

I wish that you were correct, but the facts suggest that you’re completely wrong.

My cynically mind sees this the other way round entirely. As much as I think our government is incompetent at times on covid some of the tory backbenches are plain insane on the subject. I think Boris needed the additional evidence on Friday before he could be confident they would win the internal political battle. I think the data and hospital spare capacity indicates we need a March style lockdown now. Tory backbenchers in the Covid Recovery Group and the ERG are talking about forcing a commons vote to try and reverse Tier 4.

I totally agree the more extreme elements of the Tory party are insane. I’m just not fucking concerned with the politics of this virus, just how prevalent it is and what the risk is.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on December 21, 2020, 12:01:58 pm
The best case is...that this is all just a government ploy to ‘cover their arses over not cancelling xmas earlier’.
...the facts suggest that you’re completely wrong.

I'm not suggesting it's simply one or the other. More that they've clearly known about this for longer than they're letting on and are now claiming that the science has changed just in the last few days to explain the late decision over xmas. And when you have a govt minister on the radio talking about the new strain spreading asymptomatically as being "new information" it's just utterly ridiculous.

As Offwidth says, the fact that Johnson has to factor in the covid-denying Tory backbenchers to any decision he makes is insane, if that is the reason he's delayed the changes.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on December 21, 2020, 12:05:15 pm
Much as I love a bit of Tory bashing that’s just not true. The nervtag meeting minutes are from Friday.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: stone on December 21, 2020, 12:05:25 pm

we need a March style lockdown now. .
[/quote]

I'd say we also need proper support for those isolating -not just financial but including provision of isolation accommodation. Also proper contact tracing like they do in East Asian countries -establishing who every case caught it off and then finding out who else was infected.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on December 21, 2020, 12:07:38 pm
The nervtag meeting minutes are from Friday.

Should have been more specific - I meant the case numbers rising has been known for longer than Friday (i.e. something needed to be done).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on December 21, 2020, 12:10:22 pm
The much worse case is that there actually IS a much more virulent strain of covid spreading uncontrollably across the UK.

This seems to be the key question. It's a strain that has been found in the Netherlands and Germany at least. The Germans aren't worried about it and there seems to be some political play involved in the border closures* so I'm still hopeful that it's not as bad as BJ has made out. We shall see.

*to quote twitter, this is the Free Brexit App with in app purchases for the pro version available from the 1st of Jan.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on December 21, 2020, 12:13:29 pm
Much as I love a bit of Tory bashing that’s just not true. The nervtag meeting minutes are from Friday.

The Torys are "self-bashing". Charles Walker on R4 pretty much accused Matt Hancock of knowing about the new strain and the cancelling Christmas and not doing anything until the MPs went home so they could announce without parliamentary scrutiny.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: stone on December 21, 2020, 12:22:18 pm
My impression is that the boffins were puzzled at how cases were rising in Kent etc and simultaneously puzzling over a new variant and only very recently joined the dots. The new variant apparently is special in that it has appeared out of no-where, already with a large set of mutations. That led to the speculation that it may have evolved within one chronically infected immunocompromised patient perhaps with the virus under selective pressure from convalescent serum treatment. https://virological.org/t/preliminary-genomic-characterisation-of-an-emergent-sars-cov-2-lineage-in-the-uk-defined-by-a-novel-set-of-spike-mutations/563

It takes a while for it to become apparent that a new variant may have a selective advantage. It doesn't look to me as though this is old data that they have been sitting on.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 21, 2020, 12:22:24 pm
I’m not saying that there’s panic buying going on, but...
We just drove past Sainsbury’s and my 14 year old son said “It’s busy in there”.
By my calculations, it’s been around five years since he last noticed something outside the car whilst we’ve been driving and that was on a “hard to miss” level of “ major fire in a firework warehouse/minor thermonuclear explosion”.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: HarryBD on December 21, 2020, 01:29:04 pm
Re. the increase in R:

My understanding of R is that it’s a function of the transmissibility of the virus and the behaviour of the population (and susceptibility of the population). R was around 3 in March where behaviour was mostly normal, it dropped to 0.6 in full lockdown as a result of the behaviour change. As a theoretical example if there were 0 interactions between people, R of this new strain couldn’t be between 0.4 and 0.9 because the virus doesn’t spontaneously infect people and if people behaved in a pre COVID way (R~=3) it wouldn’t only increase by 0.9. Why isn’t it being quoted as a relative increase to R? Is this just to make it a more consumable fact by most people or have I misunderstood?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 21, 2020, 01:29:57 pm

I totally agree the more extreme elements of the Tory party are insane. I’m just not fucking concerned with the politics of this virus, just how prevalent it is and what the risk is.

Trouble is the politics and prevalence are now connected. Boris left areas at Tier 2 and Tier 1 that needed to be Tier 3 as a minimum (100% plus growth in a week in all those areas is terrifying). The differences between Tiers 4 and 2/1, and the  timing of the announcement, and the stark change in attitude from PMQs (lampooned xmas cancellation plans of Labour!?) will have added massively to the London exodus of the infected.

As for Stu's point nevrtag did indeed only report on Friday but the scary prevalence growth in Kent has been known for a week now.  I think Boris delayed as he needed more convincing information for his backbenchers (and maybe did cheat a bit by waiting until after the start of the recess).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on December 21, 2020, 01:35:51 pm
Re. the increase in R:

My understanding of R is that it’s a function of the transmissibility of the virus and the behaviour of the population (and susceptibility of the population). R was around 3 in March where behaviour was mostly normal, it dropped to 0.6 in full lockdown as a result of the behaviour change. As a theoretical example if there were 0 interactions between people, R of this new strain couldn’t be between 0.4 and 0.9 because the virus doesn’t spontaneously infect people and if people behaved in a pre COVID way (R~=3) it wouldn’t only increase by 0.9. Why isn’t it being quoted as a relative increase to R? Is this just to make it a more consumable fact by most people or have I misunderstood?

It is being quoted as an increase in R (from what I have seen)... Maybe some press reporting it poorly... but I've not seen that...

@Stone - interesting to hear that - I think that was in the NERVTAG document, but you've made it much clearer...

@Pete - what you said. Think they;ve been caught by surprise by this - and the slam shut the borders response of Europe suggests its pretty darned serious (thats alot of bother for all those countries - never mind the impact on us). They would not be playing part of some Boris political game...

@OMM - every supermarket is busy the week up to Xmas though... its just varying degrees of shopping Armageddon :D
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on December 21, 2020, 01:53:55 pm
As for Stu's point nevrtag did indeed only report on Friday but the scary prevalence growth in Kent has been known for a week now.  I think Boris delayed as he needed more convincing information for his backbenchers (and maybe did cheat a bit by waiting until after the start of the recess).
The rise in cases may have accelerated in the past week but it has been known about since late November.

Wintertree's excellent work on the other channel pointed out towards the end of the last lockdown that the drop in cases in the SE had been reversed and that cases were trending upwards at a worrying pace.

He also pointed out at the time that this was highly unlikely to be caused by people not obeying lockdown rules because of the rapid switch from cases dropping at the start of lockdown to rising in the second half of lockdown.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 21, 2020, 03:13:19 pm
As wintertree said himself he 'made the call 5 days earlier than Boris' without the benefit of the detail of prevalence that the government scientists had. His work is impressive.

https://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/off_belay/friday_night_covid_plotting_4-729093

https://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/off_belay/friday_night_covid_plotting__3-728848
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: stone on December 21, 2020, 04:07:39 pm
BBC being stunningly clear and well informed for once https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55388846
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on December 21, 2020, 04:44:49 pm
There's another announcement shortly I believe (16:50 BBC).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nails on December 21, 2020, 04:57:57 pm
"The amount of evidence in the public domain is woefully inadequate to draw strong or firm opinions on whether the virus has truly increased transmission," said Prof Jonathan Ball, a virologist at the University of Nottingham.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on December 21, 2020, 05:19:04 pm
"The amount of evidence in the public domain is woefully inadequate to draw strong or firm opinions on whether the virus has truly increased transmission," said Prof Jonathan Ball, a virologist at the University of Nottingham.

Tell that to the scientists of nervetag...


From BBC at 4pm. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-55392619
The government's New and Emerging Respiratory Virus Threats Advisory Group (Nervtag) has upgraded its confidence that the new variant spreads more easily, the group's chair has said.

Prof Peter Horby told a Science Media Centre briefing: "We now have high confidence that this variant does have a transmission advantage over other virus variants that are currently in the UK."

Minutes from a meeting on Friday said the group, which advises the UK government, had "moderate confidence" in this.

Another Nervtag member, Prof Neil Ferguson, from Imperial College London, told the briefing there was strong evidence the new variant is 50% more transmissible than the previous virus.

He also said there was a "hint" the new variant infects children more.

"There are other epidemiologically interesting trends with the virus, there is a hint that it has a higher propensity to infect children... but we haven't established any sort of causality on that, but we can see that in the data," he said.


Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nic mullin on December 21, 2020, 08:31:04 pm

My understanding:- the test used for the UK Pillar2 testing multiplexes three PCR primer pairs to SARS CoV2 (along with another pair to an internal MS2 control). One of the three pairs doesn't work on this 69-70del new variant but the other two primer pairs do still work fine and, as you say, have been detecting this variant with lower ct.

Thanks for the information, reassuring how much redundancy there is in the testing, and good to hear its paying off. 

I wasn’t aware of the amount of sequencing that was happening either. Like Tomtom says, that high a fraction is impressive, especially given the case load in the UK. Massive shoutout to whoever convinced the government that they couldn’t skimp on it, and surprised they haven’t made more noise about it until now.

Shame the press conference this evening had no real substance, I thought it might be an announcement on the Oxford/AZ vaccine or a Brexit postponement. No such luck.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on December 21, 2020, 08:48:51 pm
The moment I heard Grant Shapps was one of the three - I knew it would be nothing of substance :D
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on December 21, 2020, 08:57:15 pm
Fuck.. I was quite impressed with the central barrier on the M20 being opened to allow a contra-flow.

It should also allow for U-turns.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on December 22, 2020, 10:48:21 am
The moment I heard Grant Shapps was one of the three - I knew it would be nothing of substance :D

...and it's looking like what was presented wasn't entirely truthful either (I for one am shocked).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: A.Greenhorne on December 23, 2020, 07:37:41 am
One thing confusing me about the pandemic is the current total weekly death rate. It’s slightly above average at the moment consistently around 12,000 and less than the Jan  feb 2018 which was consistently between 12,000 - 15,000. Does this mean the measures are working?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on December 23, 2020, 08:17:23 am
There's a lag between infection and death. The deaths being reported now are mostly people who got infected during the last lockdown. So it means that measures were just about working up to that point.

Lockdown was effective everywhere at reducing cases during its first 2 weeks. Then it began to fail in the SE as areas returned to a rapid increase in cases (despite the lockdown). This failure then spread to a larger geographical area as lockdown progressed.

Since then, we opened things up considerably for a brief time so the rate of increase sped up until tier 4 was introduced for the worst affected areas.

It is almost certain that we will see a large increase in deaths because of this throughout January.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 23, 2020, 10:10:50 am
It's slightly worse so far than a straightforward  approximate 3 week lag as the cases dropped for a while but deaths 3 weeks later plateaued. It's likely that back end failure of lockdown in the SE and rapid growth after it ended in the SE and London is due to the new mutation with its higher R rate (turbo charged a bit with behaviour changes as lockdown ended). The prevalence information is that the mutation is across the UK now.

If you look at the Guardian map and flick between growth areas and Tiers its clear that Tier 1 is fully on fire (all red for high growth) Tier 2 not far behind (and typically worse closest to London) and Tier 3 more stable but starting to grow (with some worrying signs like the growth in cases in the middle class areas around Nottingham). Tier 4 in the area around London  is not slowing growth yet where the new mutation is now probably dominant.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/dec/22/coronavirus-uk-covid-cases-and-deaths-today
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on December 23, 2020, 10:21:01 am
Well - the govt have a chance to (for once) get ahead of things (relatively - for them) today. If they are going for it, T4 everywhere - from / on Boxing Day. I expect what they’ll do is halfway - with some areas will go into 4 and some to 3.

The deaths curve is pretty closely mirroring the cases with a two week lag... as per. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on December 23, 2020, 10:46:43 am
One thing confusing me about the pandemic is the current total weekly death rate. It’s slightly above average at the moment consistently around 12,000 and less than the Jan  feb 2018 which was consistently between 12,000 - 15,000. Does this mean the measures are working?

The stats for excess deaths are pretty clear: https://fingertips.phe.org.uk/static-reports/mortality-surveillance/excess-mortality-in-england-latest.html
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: danm on December 23, 2020, 11:39:25 am
Comparing the total death rates between now and last year is pointless because for a start, deaths from flu will likely be well down on last year, because lockdowns and social distancing will help control both virii and thus suppress flu deaths as well as hopefully stop Covid spiralling out of control. Pollution is well down too, and given it's link to cardiovascular death, asthma etc... plus not commuting to work probably reduces quite a few as well.

My understanding, and someone please correct me if I'm wrong, is that the "excess deaths" figure basically removes the noise from deaths not from Covid to give an idea of how many people it has killed (arguments about how this is actually decided notwithstanding).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 23, 2020, 12:11:43 pm
Comparing the total death rates between now and last year is pointless because for a start, deaths from flu will likely be well down on last year, because lockdowns and social distancing will help control both virii and thus suppress flu deaths as well as hopefully stop Covid spiralling out of control. Pollution is well down too, and given it's link to cardiovascular death, asthma etc... plus not commuting to work probably reduces quite a few as well.

My understanding, and someone please correct me if I'm wrong, is that the "excess deaths" figure basically removes the noise from deaths not from Covid to give an idea of how many people it has killed (arguments about how this is actually decided notwithstanding).

Yes. There is also some merit in the oft touted “some of the Covid deaths would have happened anyway” arguments. For sure, some of those who would likely have been in the winter figures, left early.
But, it is entirely disingenuous to compare figures for this year to any other in living memory. Very little about social interaction, behaviour, movement or even typical exercise or leisure activity; will be comparable to a “normal” year and that will have all sorts of odd sequelae not least in how, when and at what rate, people die.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on December 23, 2020, 12:26:01 pm
Yeah, presumably the interesting metric is "what would be happening if we just smashed on as normal"... but it would be a high risk strategy to try to find out! Failing that, it would be interesting to see analysis by cause of death to see where the declines are to cancel out the covid deaths
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: A.Greenhorne on December 23, 2020, 12:41:20 pm
What are the predictions for January and February for weekly deaths? I’d imagine somewhere between 20-30,000 per week?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 23, 2020, 02:27:27 pm
Yeah, presumably the interesting metric is "what would be happening if we just smashed on as normal"... but it would be a high risk strategy to try to find out! Failing that, it would be interesting to see analysis by cause of death to see where the declines are to cancel out the covid deaths

That second point really intrigues me.

Just with regard to Flu, without anything else considered, the types of precautions and societal changes that have shown marked effect in Covid transmission, would/should (surely) also have similar effects on Flu transmission and cases (and therefore deaths)m added to which there is a fairly effective vaccine. Flu deaths must be well down.

Perhaps that’s the obvious one though, there must be marked fluctuations in accidental deaths? Way more “domestic” far fewer (random selection) Rugby/Equestrian/Boxing et al.
Fewer bar fights? More domestic, less stranger/street/bar/club/road rage murders?

A few PHD’s will grow from this Pandemic and we stand to learn a great deal about society.

And, what a bunch of dicks we are.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on December 23, 2020, 02:35:47 pm
Just with regard to Flu, without anything else considered, the types of precautions and societal changes that have shown marked effect in Covid transmission, would/should (surely) also have similar effects on Flu transmission and cases (and therefore deaths)m added to which there is a fairly effective vaccine. Flu deaths must be well down.

We won't see the effect on flu till next year. Flu deaths normally rack up in the Jan-Mar period so the pandemic hit post the 2020 flu season. We'll see what happens in 2021
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on December 23, 2020, 03:09:34 pm
I haven't been following all of this thread so apologies if mentioned before.
A remarkable statistic I saw the other day was than more than 1 in 4 people who've died of COVID have had a dementia diagnosis.
It's not an argument against shutting things down, (I know it affects all kinds of subgroups, and everyone has long term risk of issues) but it's a high cost to save a particular part of the population.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on December 23, 2020, 03:13:32 pm
Isn’t that just a correlation with Covid mainly killing old people? Assume you’d see a similar proportion for ‘flu.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dunnyg on December 23, 2020, 03:18:17 pm
If you have loads of oldies filling up all the hospital beds, then the knock on effect to the rest of the populations healthcare will be large.
Think about it like that and it isnt that you are saving oldies, but that making sure there is capacity to sort you out if you have an accident or get diagnosed with something horrible.
 Interesting stat, but hard to work out how meaningful it is without knowing dementia occurences in the oldies in
general and the proportion of people dying by age etc. etc.. (what tstub is sezzin)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: A.Greenhorne on December 23, 2020, 03:30:57 pm
I haven't been following all of this thread so apologies if mentioned before.
A remarkable statistic I saw the other day was than more than 1 in 4 people who've died of COVID have had a dementia diagnosis.
It's not an argument against shutting things down, (I know it affects all kinds of subgroups, and everyone has long term risk of issues) but it's a high cost to save a particular part of the population.

Dementia vs Covid starring Sylvester Stallone and Joe Biden, director Michael Bay produced by Klaus Schwab and supported by WHO
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 23, 2020, 03:59:05 pm
Did anybody hear a noise?

I think the damn sewers are blocked again.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: A.Greenhorne on December 23, 2020, 04:37:32 pm
Danm sewers?

Anyway I see lots of England is going into tier 4. Matt Hancock looked quite stressed while talking about it, quite tired. Those guys are really under pressure from all sides at the moment.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on December 23, 2020, 04:51:16 pm
That's the look of "We've fucked up. Again. And we're still fucking up, so we know we'll have to do another one of these in a few days. But we're too incompetent to stop fucking up and actually get ahead of something. Oh fuck, what idiot gave me this job instead of giving it to someone better."
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: A.Greenhorne on December 23, 2020, 05:03:03 pm
What would be a better plan, maybe shield the vulnerable and everyone else get on with it? Or full lockdown until we’re 70% immunised
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on December 23, 2020, 05:13:56 pm
What would be a better plan, maybe shield the vulnerable and everyone else get on with it?

We've talked about this enough before - use the search function if you want to see views on this one.

More generally:
- Not fucking up test and trace might have been useful
- Not threatening legal action against schools that want to move online in the runup to Christmas and where the parents are on-board with that
- Not sending the students back to uni apart from where necessary for significant lab work (or similar) would likely have been sensible. Fund the unis to charge 1/2 price for the course if this is an issue - much cheaper than the furlough costs from increased restrictions due to increased case numbers. This was proper dumbfuckery - higher cases, the students weren't happy, everybody loses. Apart from large property companies  :-\
- Don't tell people to make plans to see people at Christmas when this is clearly a dumb idea. With that horse having bolted, don't move to T4 on the 26th, do it on the 24th.
- Introduce your fluctuating restrictions earlier, when cases are lower, so that the restricted periods can be shorter and TTI can work more effectively

There's a 5 minute starter... Obviously we can't be sure what the impact of any of those measures would have been, but this gov seems spectacularly capable of fucking things up.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on December 23, 2020, 05:21:45 pm
I haven't been following all of this thread so apologies if mentioned before.
A remarkable statistic I saw the other day was than more than 1 in 4 people who've died of COVID have had a dementia diagnosis.
It's not an argument against shutting things down, (I know it affects all kinds of subgroups, and everyone has long term risk of issues) but it's a high cost to save a particular part of the population.

I don’t think it follows that the preponderance of deaths being pensioners in these highly unusual circumstances would remain the same if people were behaving very differently.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on December 23, 2020, 05:27:47 pm
Danm sewers?

Anyway I see lots of England is going into tier 4. Matt Hancock looked quite stressed while talking about it, quite tired. Those guys are really under pressure from all sides at the moment.

Eh? The only sympathy I’ve had for anyone in govt was for Boris when he was in intensive care. Most of the mess has been created by their flawed decisions and scandalously managed ‘solutions’. From TTI to PPE procurement. Trip to Barnard castle anyone?

They’ve refused any scrutiny or enquiry (enquiries are there to help us learn from mistakes not to punish) and keep on offering us meaningless moonshot promises week on week.

There really are too many examples to list!

So no - I have no sympathy for Hancock If he’s looking haggard.

If you voted for them. Reap what you sow.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: A.Greenhorne on December 23, 2020, 05:38:44 pm
Ah cheers, yeah can’t face reading the thread and didn’t know if anyone had come up with a good plan
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: A.Greenhorne on December 23, 2020, 05:39:47 pm
Danm sewers?

Anyway I see lots of England is going into tier 4. Matt Hancock looked quite stressed while talking about it, quite tired. Those guys are really under pressure from all sides at the moment.

Eh? The only sympathy I’ve had for anyone in govt was for Boris when he was in intensive care. Most of the mess has been created by their flawed decisions and scandalously managed ‘solutions’. From TTI to PPE procurement. Trip to Barnard castle anyone?

They’ve refused any scrutiny or enquiry (enquiries are there to help us learn from mistakes not to punish) and keep on offering us meaningless moonshot promises week on week.

There really are too many examples to list!

So no - I have no sympathy for Hancock If he’s looking haggard.

If you voted for them. Reap what you sow.

Easy tiger I didn’t vote
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on December 23, 2020, 05:43:02 pm
Pretty unimpressed with his barefaced lie that they had only just found a way of properly controlling the virus with the Tiers only to be sabotaged by a new variant.

It’s the tiers’ failure to control it which has teed up the current crisis.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: T_B on December 23, 2020, 05:59:04 pm
Bristol down into Tier 2 on Saturday and back into Tier 3 Boxing Day sums it up really.

What planning is going into the vaccine roll out? Or are they just winging it and hoping for the best?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 23, 2020, 06:26:27 pm
My sister had her first dose today.
She’s vulnerable, shielding, NHS staff.
She says they’re starting/doing the NHS staff, frontline and admin.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on December 23, 2020, 06:30:50 pm
- Not fucking up test and trace might have been useful
...this gov seems spectacularly capable of fucking things up.

Decent quick round up of all the failings from Led By Donkeys here:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3qouWMwGVHY
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on December 23, 2020, 07:07:50 pm
My sister had her first dose today.
She’s vulnerable, shielding, NHS staff.
She says they’re starting/doing the NHS staff, frontline and admin.

That’s great OMM.

My parents had their first jab in Kendal today (local GP’s got their shit together and turned over one surgery just for jabs). Then my dad tripped over on the way home and may have broken his wrist 🤦‍♂️

MrsTT has been offered one (she’s a public facing NHS worker - though low risk). She’s not made up her mind whether to take it or not (as in thinks others are more deserved).

Meanwhile R is on the rise and 40k new cases :(
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 23, 2020, 07:16:02 pm
Tell her to take it.
She is also a parent and what ever she does for the NHS, she’s more important than many who will take it.
An avalanche is made of insignificant flakes, take away enough flakes, it’s spindrift. We need the avalche.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on December 23, 2020, 07:25:09 pm
Tell her to take it.
She is also a parent and what ever she does for the NHS, she’s more important than many who will take it.
An avalanche is made of insignificant flakes, take away enough flakes, it’s spindrift. We need the avalche.

Agreed.  Also my wife has had message that they will be offering vaccine to some people at Manchester NHS who are working over Christmas - we suspect they may be making sure they use all vaccine stock,
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on December 23, 2020, 09:57:20 pm
What would be a better plan, maybe shield the vulnerable and everyone else get on with it?

We've talked about this enough before - use the search function if you want to see views on this one.

More generally:
- Not fucking up test and trace might have been useful
- Not threatening legal action against schools that want to move online in the runup to Christmas and where the parents are on-board with that
- Not sending the students back to uni apart from where necessary for significant lab work (or similar) would likely have been sensible. Fund the unis to charge 1/2 price for the course if this is an issue - much cheaper than the furlough costs from increased restrictions due to increased case numbers. This was proper dumbfuckery - higher cases, the students weren't happy, everybody loses. Apart from large property companies  :-\
- Don't tell people to make plans to see people at Christmas when this is clearly a dumb idea. With that horse having bolted, don't move to T4 on the 26th, do it on the 24th.
- Introduce your fluctuating restrictions earlier, when cases are lower, so that the restricted periods can be shorter and TTI can work more effectively

There's a 5 minute starter... Obviously we can't be sure what the impact of any of those measures would have been, but this gov seems spectacularly capable of fucking things up.

Could this be further summarised as "the government has an appalling optimism bias, and inability to plan effectively more than a week ahead "?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: A.Greenhorne on December 23, 2020, 11:14:28 pm

MrsTT has been offered one (she’s a public facing NHS worker - though low risk). She’s not made up her mind whether to take it or not (as in thinks others are more deserved).

🤔 reminds me a bit of Mr. Gummer and the infamous beef burger. ‘It’s too hot, the burger is too hot!’

https://youtu.be/QobuvWX_Grc

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on December 24, 2020, 12:20:38 am
MrsTT has been offered one (she’s a public facing NHS worker - though low risk). She’s not made up her mind whether to take it or not (as in thinks others are more deserved).
If there was someone more deserving, I presume that her refusing to take it would be unlikely to mean they got it instead. It would just go to the next available person on the list.

So I doubt there's any benefit to refusing to take it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on December 24, 2020, 08:08:52 am
Stone posted this preprint on FB - that came out last night.

Worth a read.

https://cmmid.github.io/topics/covid19/uk-novel-variant.html?

“ We were unable to find clear evidence that VOC 202012/01 results in greater or lesser severity of disease than preexisting variants. Nevertheless, the increase in transmissibility is likely to lead to a large increase in incidence, with COVID-19 hospitalisations and deaths projected to reach higher levels in 2021 than were observed in 2020, even if regional tiered restrictions implemented before 19 December are maintained. Our estimates suggest that control measures of a similar stringency to the national lockdown implemented in England in November 2020 are unlikely to reduce the effective reproduction number Rt to less than 1, unless primary schools, secondary schools, and universities are also closed. We project that large resurgences of the virus are likely to occur following easing of control measures. It may be necessary to greatly accelerate vaccine roll-out to have an appreciable impact in suppressing the resulting disease burden.”
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: stone on December 25, 2020, 09:12:18 am
to me a silver lining was them saying that the epidemiological evidence doesn't give any indication of immune escape by the new variant -only of increased transmissibility. Silver lining from a "glass only half full of shit" point of view! -merry Christmas anyway.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 26, 2020, 02:03:03 pm
Wintertree's latest covid plotting:

https://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/off_belay/friday_night_covid_plotting_5-729286
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: A.Greenhorne on December 28, 2020, 09:07:20 pm
More covidian cult curiosities

Sweden - minimal lockdown policy
Currently 2% covid death rate

U.K. cluster fuck - 3% covid death rate

Wait for it.... but the guardian says....
whatever those paying the most and exerting the most force say
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on December 28, 2020, 09:32:03 pm
Some homework for you Andy. Do some research and compare Sweden’s death rate to its Scandinavian neighbours (Denmark, Finland, Norway) that all have far more similar societies and environments to Sweden than we do. Post up the numbers and try to explain the differences considering the different nations covid management strategies.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: A.Greenhorne on December 28, 2020, 10:23:27 pm
Haha your patronisation is such a turn on. Comparing Sweden to Sweden. It’s total yearly deaths being lower this year than 7 of the past 10 years and compares well with the other 3. I’ll continue my homework on Denmark etc
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on December 28, 2020, 10:24:33 pm
Haha your patronisation is such a turn on. Comparing Sweden to Sweden. It’s total yearly deaths being lower this year than 7 of the past 10 years and compares well with the other 3. I’ll continue my homework on Denmark etc

Well you keep coming back so clearly it is 💋 - all the numbers you need are on here  https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

Now no messing about - it’s a five min job and you’ve already taken an hour!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: A.Greenhorne on December 28, 2020, 10:34:18 pm
I can’t even be arsed to look
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: A.Greenhorne on December 29, 2020, 02:04:06 am
I promise I’ll do my homework if you help me understand the Sweden vs Sweden stats.... honest
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: A.Greenhorne on December 29, 2020, 06:04:08 am
Denmark vs Denmark in contrast to Sweden has seen its highest total death rate in the last 10 years if you could help me understand why they are doing a better job at looking after their population?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 29, 2020, 07:10:06 am
Oh.

Wow.

Well, that’s that.

All those prior posts, data, and figures discussing exactly this can be ignored.

Because, obviously, the population of Sweden didn’t do anything at all to mitigate, so that won’t have had any knock on efffect for other causes of mortality. Clearly, despite Sweden having double the population of Denmark, the fact that that population is spread over ten times the land area (even allowing for concentration within urban areas, this means much less transfer between urban concentrations) and that it’s a “true” Scandinavian country, without land borders with and much lower daily movement between it and “mainland” Europe than it’s little neighbour to the south (1/10 the land area, 1/2 the population,  part of mainland Europe, bordering badly affected countries with even denser populations, daily, constant and heavy cross border traffic and trade (probably, for the sake of this exercise, better considered a region/county of Europe, rather than a seperate country) and earlier to be infected).

Of course, this is even more relevant to the UK, with only six times the population of Sweden (almost seven times, really) BUT ONLY HALF THE LAND AREA of Sweden and...

I dunno.

I just opened my pad because I woke up before the rest of the house and read this little exchange, already had the rough numbers in my head, because this argument has been done to death on numerous forums and Dan’s points fall under examination repeatedly, even the Swedish authorities regret many aspects of their approach. Because they’re “natural” advantages over many other developed nations should have/were expected to have, given them greater protection than they did and they’re “actual”, comparable, Scandinavian neighbours, did much better, with a little more in the way of regulation.

However, do toddle along with your apple in one hand and your orange in the other and randomly shout in the faces of strangers that they are clearly the same thing and that is, obviously, that they are both Aardvarks.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: A.Greenhorne on December 29, 2020, 07:58:11 am
Jeez Matt wipe the spittle from your maw for a minute.

Denmark reports a lower Covid death rate than Sweden but a higher percentage overall mortality rate and a mortality rate that has risen over 10 yrs (opposed to Sweden’s which hasn’t). Total mortality seems to me a good measure of what’s going well in the bigger picture. If Sweden managed well without the more extreme measures, then it seems they’re doing something right?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on December 29, 2020, 09:55:38 am
Afraid Andy it’s a back around for your homework.

No presentation of data - sourcing or analysis. The arm waving is fine - as long as it’s backed up by some evidence and discussion of the counter arguments.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: A.Greenhorne on December 29, 2020, 10:19:30 am
I’m not waving an arm it’s a question I don’t know the answer to. So asking you lads. I’m not great at maths so only really understand simple answers.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: A.Greenhorne on December 29, 2020, 10:20:48 am
If that translates as ‘fuckwit’ then I guess I’m a fuckwit.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on December 29, 2020, 10:27:33 am
Denmark reports ... a mortality rate that has risen over 10 yrs

Except, focusing only on your argument about Denmark, this isn't really true. Working with data from the official Danish statistics bureau, there were 54,368 deaths in 2010 and 53,958 in 2019 (so far as I could see they've not yet published official data for 2020). There have been some slight fluctuations around that, with a number of years a little lower and one (2018) a little higher. So, in absolute numbers I would call that as good as flat. In terms of rate it's worth noting that between 2010-2020 Denmark's population grew by about 4.3%.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: A.Greenhorne on December 29, 2020, 10:34:19 am
Ah yeah that makes sense, I chose Denmark as it was suggested I pick a country surrounding Sweden and they seemed a good bet due to better covid statistics than Norway or Finland
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on December 29, 2020, 10:50:59 am
Ah yeah that makes sense

It's not that it makes sense so much as it's factually correct. For what it's worth, a study by the University of Southern Denmark found that total death in the first half of the year were probably lower than would have been expected in a "normal" year (fewer road traffic deaths, fewer workplace accidents etc.). Another report suggested that still held true in mid-October. I don't know what the end of year figures will show. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: A.Greenhorne on December 29, 2020, 10:57:20 am
Maybe comparing total mortality between Norway and Sweden would be a better comparison?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on December 29, 2020, 11:06:31 am
Why, or - rather - in what sense better?

The comparison with Denmark is a perfectly valid one, it's just that the data doesn't support the argument you were trying to make with it. But feel free to make the comparison with Norway; I just doubt it will be any more flattering to Sweden.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: A.Greenhorne on December 29, 2020, 11:30:25 am
Errr I’ve become a bit confused so I’ll ask the original question with Norway instead of Sweden.

Why do they have similarly unchanging all cause mortality rates yet relatively different approaches to coronavirus management?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on December 29, 2020, 11:48:34 am
You said "better," suggesting Norway was a more valid comparison. In fact, Norway and Denmark make equally good comparisons to Sweden in this discussion. You can't just abandon your first comparison because it doesn't deliver the result you want.

Why do they have similarly unchanging all cause mortality rates

But do they? You made a pretty strong but unevidenced claim about total mortality in Denmark over the last decade, but it was easy to demonstrate that it was completely erroneous. Why should anyone trust any other assertion you make?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: A.Greenhorne on December 29, 2020, 01:44:11 pm
I’m not asking you to trust me or making an argument. I’m asking a question you sniffy twat
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: A.Greenhorne on December 29, 2020, 01:57:08 pm
Can I have another negative Karma point for calling Reeve a pious sanctimonious omnipotent bellend, thanks 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: reeve on December 29, 2020, 02:42:11 pm
Can I have another negative Karma point for calling Reeve a pious sanctimonious omnipotent bellend, thanks

As I am only one of those things, your negative karma was well deserved
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on December 29, 2020, 02:49:56 pm
Not this again.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on December 29, 2020, 02:51:15 pm
I’m not asking you to trust me or making an argument. I’m asking a question you sniffy twat

I did answer some of your questions. You made several linked assertions; that is making an argument (e.g. "If Sweden managed well without the more extreme measures, then it seems they’re doing something right?" There is a question mark, but really this is a rhetorical question). And if you're making assertions without evidence then you are asking people to trust you. If not then you've just knocked away the foundations of the basic premise behind your question.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on December 29, 2020, 02:52:24 pm
Not this again.

Sweden? Yeah, I'm sick of bloody Sweden (and I love the place).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 29, 2020, 02:57:41 pm
Not this again.

Sweden? Yeah, I'm sick of bloody Sweden (and I love the place).

I rather liked Denmark.
Well, Aarhus, anyway. Spent six months there in the early ‘90s. Oh boy, the girls!
Very nearly stayed there for one of them.
OT. Sorry.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: A.Greenhorne on December 29, 2020, 04:10:24 pm
It was based on this article and looking at some statistics. Like I said my maths isn’t great and it wasn’t intentional rhetoric although I see now it looked that way. No need to be such a bunch of cunts about it.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.news-medical.net/amp/news/20201116/Study-compares-deaths-in-Sweden-and-Norway-before-and-after-COVID-pandemic.aspx
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: A.Greenhorne on December 29, 2020, 04:32:25 pm
Can I have another negative Karma point for calling Reeve a pious sanctimonious omnipotent bellend, thanks

As I am only one of those things, your negative karma was well deserved

Piety comes with lots of baggage
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on December 29, 2020, 05:20:27 pm
No need to be such a bunch of cunts about it.

I wasn't the one who called someone a sniffy twat. I've actually tried to take your posts in good faith and on their own terms. That was probably a mistake.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: A.Greenhorne on December 29, 2020, 05:35:17 pm
Sniffy twats always have to maintain the moral high ground once it’s created. Now it becomes a question of character which is rather helpful. I handed you that one by delivering the insult, but facts are facts as you rightly pointed out. The question was a genuine one, highlighted by the article. I was asking what you guys thought. I shifted to try and make up for the flaws in my posts each time you pointed out one, until eventually the character flaw was highlighted. ‘Can’t be trusted’. No doubt you’ll find some more pedantry to go at in this paragraph. I’m guessing there’s no answer available here to the Norway -Sweden total mortality comparison. Please feel free to end it by asserting* your authority as the voice of absolute moderate sense in a world otherwise inhabited by mindless buffoons, oh great and mighty woke wizard
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on December 29, 2020, 05:46:15 pm
It was based on this article and looking at some statistics. Like I said my maths isn’t great and it wasn’t intentional rhetoric although I see now it looked that way. No need to be such a bunch of cunts about it.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.news-medical.net/amp/news/20201116/Study-compares-deaths-in-Sweden-and-Norway-before-and-after-COVID-pandemic.aspx

My best guess is that geography and culture matter quite a lot, and this detail may come out more clearly in the post pandemic analysis.
Scandinavian countries have their respective population density (lack of), perhaps have different travel and work patterns (distributed, many at home?), maybe different patterns of socialising (relative lack of indoor socialising compared to France, Italy, UK?), recreation might be based around the outdoors more than the urban shopping precinct.

Based on the above hypothesis, a country such as Sweden could get away with a far less restrictive response to a respiratory infection than a country such as Italy because Scandinavians have a less closely ‘transmissive’ culture and geography. Australia/NZ too. Plenty of space per head of population. Like the difference between doing your shopping in a busy Tesco metro and a quiet rural co-op.
Perhaps Norway is being far more cautious than it could be for the same overall effect on deaths.

That’s my guess anyway. Happy to be shown it’s a load of shit.
But clearly the UK and many of the western and eastern European countries are pretty fucked due to their population density and  interconnectedness.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on December 29, 2020, 05:52:13 pm
Anyway.

Sweden has a death rate due to covid of 817 per million.

For Norway it’s 79 per million.

From the Worldometers website. I think Sweden screwed up - especially as the negative effect of their soft restrictions on their economy were similar to those neighbours (Denmark, Norway, Finland) who had much harder restrictions. From the two Swedes I know this screw up is now widely acknowledged and they are now I believe rolling in restrictions in line with their neighbours.

A lot will come out in the wash - but clearly - from all the ‘experiments’ that have been carried out in how to manage the virus by the 100 or so nations afflicted, the only way to control it is to restrict social contact. Via whatever means works for that nation.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on December 29, 2020, 05:53:12 pm
You know that (despite your protestations to just be asking a question and not making an argument) you didn't actually ask a question in the post that kicked this off right?

More covidian cult curiosities

Sweden - minimal lockdown policy
Currently 2% covid death rate

U.K. cluster fuck - 3% covid death rate

Wait for it.... but the guardian says....
whatever those paying the most and exerting the most force say

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: A.Greenhorne on December 29, 2020, 05:58:43 pm
I’m not claiming papal infallibility barrows. I know I’m a twat. But it remains that I made an effort to admit the flaws of my posts.

Pete’s theory I get in a U.K. vs Sweden argument but the comparison is between Norway and Sweden. Tom’s analysis seems fair based on ‘covid’ statistics but not total mortality which is what I was wondering about.

And I do think the guardian is a rag
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on December 29, 2020, 06:01:13 pm
Yes - but what question are you asking?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on December 29, 2020, 06:04:10 pm


Pete’s theory I get in a U.K. vs Sweden argument but the comparison is between Norway and Sweden.
What's your hypothesis? That's a genuine (not loaded) question.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: A.Greenhorne on December 29, 2020, 06:13:18 pm
I don’t have one, that’s why I asked on here
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: jwi on December 29, 2020, 06:15:47 pm
Anyone who claim Sweden's response to the covid19 pandemic is a success is a Swede, seriously deluded or mislead. Many-a claimant seems to be a combination of at least two of the characteristics.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 29, 2020, 06:18:35 pm
I don’t have one, that’s why I asked on here

I’m about to head out etc etc.

Isn’t this all a little Uriah Heep?

Collar (assertion of lowly status) and Cuffs (vocabulary and grammar) don’t match.

Edit: Obviously I’m wandering into Ad Hominem, too busy to flesh it out properly.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on December 29, 2020, 06:19:50 pm
oh great and mighty woke wizard

Does that come with a cape and nice hat?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 29, 2020, 06:25:38 pm
oh great and mighty woke wizard

Does that come with a cape and nice hat?

You certainly have the beard!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on December 29, 2020, 06:32:30 pm
For Norway vs Sweden total death rate changes you'd probably need to dig into the other causes of death and see where increases/decreases had occurred, and whether they were likely due to pandemic-related issues or something else entirely. I have zero inclination to do this so will leave it to someone very bored or who's being paid to do it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on December 29, 2020, 06:42:03 pm
I’m not claiming papal infallibility barrows. I know I’m a twat. But it remains that I made an effort to admit the flaws of my posts.

Pete’s theory I get in a U.K. vs Sweden argument but the comparison is between Norway and Sweden. Tom’s analysis seems fair based on ‘covid’ statistics but not total mortality which is what I was wondering about.

And I do think the guardian is a rag

You've missed my point.

As you rightly pointed out, Sweden has no overall increase in its excess deaths in 2020. I thought you were correct to point this out and ask why. Other posters on here may try to claim Sweden 'fucked up'. But their protestations fly in the face of the actual evidence - which says that relative to any other 'Swedish' year in the past 10, Sweden clearly did not fuck up because they haven't suffered any excess deaths. (if the evidence changes, I'll change my opinion).

They only fared badly relative to other Scandavian countries, who locked down harder. But the question that then needs to be asked (and which you are asking) is was locking down hard worth it in Scandanavia, if the evidence shows that Sweden's excess death rate is unaltered despite not locking down hard?

So my point / hypothesis was that maybe there are some underlying geographical and cultural factors at play for the low death rates in Scandanavian (when compared to the rest of Europe). And these factors negate the need for harder restrictions such as those applied by Norway. I.e. whose lives are the harder restrictions in Norway actually saving if Sweden isn't suffering any excess death from covid? Could there be less unrelated non-covid deaths in Norway? If so then that wouldn't be the purpose of a lockdown but just a happy side-effect of a socially and economically damaging policy.

None of the above is meant to imply I think the UK's response should be like Sweden (except for maybe being less of a nation of fat unhealthy walking fat-bergs and more a nation of healthy active people).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: A.Greenhorne on December 29, 2020, 06:51:30 pm
.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: A.Greenhorne on December 29, 2020, 06:53:35 pm
I don’t have one, that’s why I asked on here

I’m about to head out etc etc.

Isn’t this all a little Uriah Heep?

Collar (assertion of lowly status) and Cuffs (vocabulary and grammar) don’t match.

Edit: Obviously I’m wandering into Ad Hominem, too busy to flesh it out properly.

God knows I’m a knob. You take being a condescending wanker to new heights. Eat shit
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: A.Greenhorne on December 29, 2020, 07:14:04 pm
Thanks Pete, that makes sense. I did misinterpret your original point but understand it now and cheers for not being a twat about it. Hope that’s not too ‘Uriah fucking Heap’
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on December 29, 2020, 07:16:33 pm
So Alan, during the first wave and lockdown South Africa had a massive drop in total deaths.  A significantly negative excess mortality.

So what do you think excess mortality is going to tell you?

What is the question you are hoping to answer?

As said earlier - each government response is in effect a mini experiment in how to handle covid. The only thing that has been shown to work is to restrict social contact - via lockdowns, persuasion, contact tracing and/or travel restrictions. Nothing else has worked (if it has - show me..).

There is a point at which a countries health service becomes over-run by covid cased. At that point mortality rises very rapidly, as you cannot treat the covid patients as well as all the other people needing help of ongoing treatment. At that point the excess mortality will rocket. Sweden may well have not reached that point. Italy did in the first wave, we did during the first wave abs are probably close to that now. Other countries (like NZ) knew that their health service could not cope with even a moderate amount of cases - so were forced into a very comprehensive lockdown (also helped by geography).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: A.Greenhorne on December 29, 2020, 07:25:01 pm
Pete answered the question I was asking, cheers. The rest seems too much of a mess for me to comment on.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: AJM on December 29, 2020, 07:54:41 pm

As you rightly pointed out, Sweden has no overall increase in its excess deaths in 2020. I thought you were correct to point this out and ask why. Other posters on here may try to claim Sweden 'fucked up'. But their protestations fly in the face of the actual evidence - which says that relative to any other 'Swedish' year in the past 10, Sweden clearly did not fuck up because they haven't suffered any excess deaths. (if the evidence changes, I'll change my opinion).

I had a very brief look at the paper and one thing which struck me was that the winter mortality for 19/20 versus the 5 year average looked notably lighter for Sweden than Norway.

I've no idea why, but it potentially points to a cross-subsidy within the overall excess deaths figure (depending exactly what you are defining your deaths as "excess" compared to) - the excess deaths versus the average in March and April are being offset against lighter winter mortality (and winter mortality is usually the highest but also, in the UK at least, is the most volatile year on year, and the full paper does note a light flu season pre pandemic) to get to the overall "no excess deaths" position.

Whilst they also argue mortality displacement, from deaths dipping below the line in the final few weeks, I don't personally find that enormously convincing in that it returns the 19/20 to below the 5 year average, exactly as it was at the start of their graphs, and furthermore it's seen across all age groups where the excess mortality was not.

I think my view from a brief read of the paper is that Sweden looked like it would have recorded deaths significantly less than its 5 year average due in part to a light winter if it weren't for a spike of covid deaths in the spring.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on December 29, 2020, 08:36:30 pm
That's an interesting detail. And it raises an interesting moral question.
What level of sacrifice to prevent deaths does a society deem acceptable? And at what point does the sacrifice become unacceptable?

Perhaps Sweden's government could be shown to be using its 'societal sacrifice credit' wisely, given it probably knew the bigger picture of their lower than average deaths - would you want to severely restrict people's liberties if you knew covid would likely have zero upward impact on the 10-year average number of deaths statistic? That's a cynical view obvs, because the people would still die whether or not they moved the needle on a chart.
Or perhaps they could have prevented *even more* deaths than in an average year, by restricting people more.
(I don't have an answer).

If what you interpet is true AJM then it also raises the obvious argument that covid (in the specific context of Sweden's experience) has been no more deadly *for them* than 'a bad flu year', so why take extraordinary measures for one but not the other.
 
Sweden's total deaths, last 10 years including 2020:

(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/gKvX-KlIdIeHPJs3HBkgdy3KHCEEhfQ-c6auBpzVbdauWYM6kBbAEibCd6_T1RAWceKPVsgdcSsn9WVBiFvVm5F7rebom4Nd48dCjy60KeSJ2W8yupmqPHYZEPzSY_VZx3r-jw2sRN_rjE6GMlkQ60gbqucwBcrj8okHhqzz_JTW0Urv0eFlKfQ4-B694fLL26EtASIdXim0x30-PKKNGzcHVeCY-P_ch3MDSkUO7xbp5kknD-hvEoXpcEEcHjacfSrGTNV7P3dVl5-asMULJbQfnxbVIC9ILcaP8SCxRp0nHZtoObAAwTXFoZD6pDgkAQhHt8rxUC_IsAeNMrQuQuHd7DS82-LWxx8mF2nf5Q_7FHNKJUM89u33t5uERJeyetcpD69WErOzTLxmYOkVzzxU1u8IZw8jgf8zpjRR-RMW1K-upe7KdkWHmD0xaeIqEiPqkbQd-eugPKK6XgNquOXuDwxJDm17idsri8uHiyqUn1ZfQc9MHIqMYPvkgutdYjpGaQOe2uewrXbfb3ar5Ysjbh1hPKK3mwOik-3W7QzH2SJ2JHB1dEj2UTc3Vk5sLWNettQ8PyePgwoqupFJt8fSWU4WM7Cgyybv5FarkJUiZc1mBiDKc7zu5RNlw4nPNzDmht6PxHZnw3ntZPpPl9z2NbeSwyoIkQjivNPlcKCueHDVFvps_d4VYPtWaQ=w1038-h800-no?authuser=0)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on December 29, 2020, 09:02:14 pm
That's an interesting detail.
If what you interpet is true AJM then it also raises the obvious argument that covid (in the specific context of Sweden's experience) has been no more deadly *for them* than 'a bad flu year', so why take extraordinary measures for one but not the other.

And that’s clearly what Sweden and to an extent our government has tried to do - until it reaches....


There is a point at which a countries health service becomes over-run by covid cased. At that point mortality rises very rapidly, as you cannot treat the covid patients as well as all the other people needing help of ongoing treatment. At that point the excess mortality will rocket. Sweden may well have not reached that point. Italy did in the first wave, we did during the first wave abs are probably close to that now. Other countries (like NZ) knew that their health service could not cope with even a moderate amount of cases - so were forced into a very comprehensive lockdown (also helped by geography).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: AJM on December 29, 2020, 09:09:25 pm
Perhaps Sweden's government could be shown to be using its 'societal sacrifice credit' wisely, given it probably knew the bigger picture of their lower than average deaths - would you want to severely restrict people's liberties if you knew it would have zero impact on the 10-year average number of deaths statistic? That's a cynical view obvs, because the people would still die whether or not they moved the needle on a chart.
Or perhaps they could have prevented *even more* deaths than in an average year, by restricting people more.
(I don't have an answer).

If what you interpet is true AJM then it also raises the obvious argument that covid (in the specific context of Sweden's experience) has been no more deadly *for them* than a bad flu year, so why take extraordinary measures for one but not the other.
 
Sweden's total deaths, last 10 years including 2020:

(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/gKvX-KlIdIeHPJs3HBkgdy3KHCEEhfQ-c6auBpzVbdauWYM6kBbAEibCd6_T1RAWceKPVsgdcSsn9WVBiFvVm5F7rebom4Nd48dCjy60KeSJ2W8yupmqPHYZEPzSY_VZx3r-jw2sRN_rjE6GMlkQ60gbqucwBcrj8okHhqzz_JTW0Urv0eFlKfQ4-B694fLL26EtASIdXim0x30-PKKNGzcHVeCY-P_ch3MDSkUO7xbp5kknD-hvEoXpcEEcHjacfSrGTNV7P3dVl5-asMULJbQfnxbVIC9ILcaP8SCxRp0nHZtoObAAwTXFoZD6pDgkAQhHt8rxUC_IsAeNMrQuQuHd7DS82-LWxx8mF2nf5Q_7FHNKJUM89u33t5uERJeyetcpD69WErOzTLxmYOkVzzxU1u8IZw8jgf8zpjRR-RMW1K-upe7KdkWHmD0xaeIqEiPqkbQd-eugPKK6XgNquOXuDwxJDm17idsri8uHiyqUn1ZfQc9MHIqMYPvkgutdYjpGaQOe2uewrXbfb3ar5Ysjbh1hPKK3mwOik-3W7QzH2SJ2JHB1dEj2UTc3Vk5sLWNettQ8PyePgwoqupFJt8fSWU4WM7Cgyybv5FarkJUiZc1mBiDKc7zu5RNlw4nPNzDmht6PxHZnw3ntZPpPl9z2NbeSwyoIkQjivNPlcKCueHDVFvps_d4VYPtWaQ=w1038-h800-no?authuser=0)

I'm an actuary and not a moral philosopher, so I'll duck that part. But a view that they "knew" that their light actions would not lead to something significantly worse than within the 10-year range, in late March, feels like we're crediting them with a lot of foresight - having watched Wuhan go into full lockdown, South Korea blow up, and having watched Lombardy and the rest of North Italy buckle, to be confident that light restrictions would do the job to that degree feels like something they can't possibly have known.

I've seen various arguments as to how much of their approach was framed by the freedoms enshrined in their constitution and the difficulty of removing those, but since I'm not a lawyer either I don't have much of an informed opinion beyond the fact I've seen it quoted.

In terms of your charts, without knowing how the underlying demographics are changing and what that represents as a rate of improvement and so on I wouldn't want to draw too much out of them - I'd prefer something like a standardised mortality rate comparison to help remove some of those potential confounding factors.

On the point about the flu season, it's worth noting that the areas under and over the trend line in their paper didn't obviously look equal - by eye Id have expected higher than average mortality overall, with more above the trend line than under - I'm only assuming they might offset quantitatively because of what others have said (what's your source for the cumulative 2020 excess deaths being zero - is it just the graph you linked? I tried to look to see if I could tie things back together but didn't find anything enormously helpful - everything I could see pointed to obvious excess deaths in the pandemic window with no obvious move beyond the statistical lower bound to compensate for it) . Which loops a bit back to the point about the underlying demographics and how they link from the rates per 100k to the overall death figures. But it doesn't necessarily invalidate your point in concept, in that *if* it looked like it sat within the bounds of winter variation for Sweden, then someone could probably have an interesting discussion about the right balance of how to react to it!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on December 29, 2020, 09:25:13 pm
That's an interesting detail.
If what you interpet is true AJM then it also raises the obvious argument that covid (in the specific context of Sweden's experience) has been no more deadly *for them* than 'a bad flu year', so why take extraordinary measures for one but not the other.

And that’s clearly what Sweden and to an extent our government has tried to do - until it reaches....


There is a point at which a countries health service becomes over-run by covid cased. At that point mortality rises very rapidly, as you cannot treat the covid patients as well as all the other people needing help of ongoing treatment. At that point the excess mortality will rocket. Sweden may well have not reached that point. Italy did in the first wave, we did during the first wave abs are probably close to that now. Other countries (like NZ) knew that their health service could not cope with even a moderate amount of cases - so were forced into a very comprehensive lockdown (also helped by geography).

Of course. But you're still not really acknowledging the wider context and the moral question it raises. You're just going on about covid deaths and overwhelmed health services as if that's the be all and end all, and any country that fails to lower deaths is 'failing'. It clearly isn't that simple.
You can go on about covid deaths, or deaths from an overwhelmed health service all you like. If, as in Sweden's case those deaths don't actually raise the annual total deaths above the countries long-term average then you can at least ask a valid question: why *should* they take extraordinary preventative measures to prevent those deaths when we know those measures have negative side effects of their own? (I don't have an answer either way)
Also, if Sweden's health service hasn't been/isn't overwhelmed, then why even raise it?

And who are you or anyone else to claim they've 'failed'.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on December 29, 2020, 09:36:50 pm
Perhaps Sweden's government could be shown to be using its 'societal sacrifice credit' wisely, given it probably knew the bigger picture of their lower than average deaths - would you want to severely restrict people's liberties if you knew it would have zero impact on the 10-year average number of deaths statistic? That's a cynical view obvs, because the people would still die whether or not they moved the needle on a chart.
Or perhaps they could have prevented *even more* deaths than in an average year, by restricting people more.
(I don't have an answer).

If what you interpet is true AJM then it also raises the obvious argument that covid (in the specific context of Sweden's experience) has been no more deadly *for them* than a bad flu year, so why take extraordinary measures for one but not the other.
 
Sweden's total deaths, last 10 years including 2020:

(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/gKvX-KlIdIeHPJs3HBkgdy3KHCEEhfQ-c6auBpzVbdauWYM6kBbAEibCd6_T1RAWceKPVsgdcSsn9WVBiFvVm5F7rebom4Nd48dCjy60KeSJ2W8yupmqPHYZEPzSY_VZx3r-jw2sRN_rjE6GMlkQ60gbqucwBcrj8okHhqzz_JTW0Urv0eFlKfQ4-B694fLL26EtASIdXim0x30-PKKNGzcHVeCY-P_ch3MDSkUO7xbp5kknD-hvEoXpcEEcHjacfSrGTNV7P3dVl5-asMULJbQfnxbVIC9ILcaP8SCxRp0nHZtoObAAwTXFoZD6pDgkAQhHt8rxUC_IsAeNMrQuQuHd7DS82-LWxx8mF2nf5Q_7FHNKJUM89u33t5uERJeyetcpD69WErOzTLxmYOkVzzxU1u8IZw8jgf8zpjRR-RMW1K-upe7KdkWHmD0xaeIqEiPqkbQd-eugPKK6XgNquOXuDwxJDm17idsri8uHiyqUn1ZfQc9MHIqMYPvkgutdYjpGaQOe2uewrXbfb3ar5Ysjbh1hPKK3mwOik-3W7QzH2SJ2JHB1dEj2UTc3Vk5sLWNettQ8PyePgwoqupFJt8fSWU4WM7Cgyybv5FarkJUiZc1mBiDKc7zu5RNlw4nPNzDmht6PxHZnw3ntZPpPl9z2NbeSwyoIkQjivNPlcKCueHDVFvps_d4VYPtWaQ=w1038-h800-no?authuser=0)

I'm an actuary and not a moral philosopher, so I'll duck that part. But a view that they "knew" that their light actions would not lead to something significantly worse than within the 10-year range, in late March, feels like we're crediting them with a lot of foresight - having watched Wuhan go into full lockdown, South Korea blow up, and having watched Lombardy and the rest of North Italy buckle, to be confident that light restrictions would do the job to that degree feels like something they can't possibly have known.

I've seen various arguments as to how much of their approach was framed by the freedoms enshrined in their constitution and the difficulty of removing those, but since I'm not a lawyer either I don't have much of an informed opinion beyond the fact I've seen it quoted.

In terms of your charts, without knowing how the underlying demographics are changing and what that represents as a rate of improvement and so on I wouldn't want to draw too much out of them - I'd prefer something like a standardised mortality rate comparison to help remove some of those potential confounding factors.

On the point about the flu season, it's worth noting that the areas under and over the trend line in their paper didn't obviously look equal - by eye Id have expected higher than average mortality overall, with more above the trend line than under - I'm only assuming they might offset quantitatively because of what others have said (what's your source for the cumulative 2020 excess deaths being zero - is it just the graph you linked? I tried to look to see if I could tie things back together but didn't find anything enormously helpful - everything I could see pointed to obvious excess deaths in the pandemic window with no obvious move beyond the statistical lower bound to compensate for it) . Which loops a bit back to the point about the underlying demographics and how they link from the rates per 100k to the overall death figures. But it doesn't necessarily invalidate your point in concept, in that *if* it looked like it sat within the bounds of winter variation for Sweden, then someone could probably have an interesting discussion about the right balance of how to react to it!

I don't think Dan's question was about what intent or assumptions the people in Sweden's government held.

It's about the numbers. They are what they are, whether or not they got lucky.

The data is from Statisca here: https://www.statista.com/statistics/525353/sweden-number-of-deaths/

If you want to look at death rates per 100,000 population as you say, the study that Dan (Greenhorne) linked to gives you that. The answer is the same - Sweden had a big spike compared to Norway, but no actual increase in annual deaths compared to their 10 year average. https://www.news-medical.net/news/20201116/Study-compares-deaths-in-Sweden-and-Norway-before-and-after-COVID-pandemic.aspx

Interesting that Sweden's 5-year mean death rate is higher than Norway's. Life is cheaper in Sweden than Norway..

Text from the study:
Quote
In this study, the researchers calculated weekly mortality rates with 95% confidence intervals per 100,000 individuals and mortality rate ratios to compare the epidemic year (July 29, 2019, to July 26, 2020) with the four preceding years (July 2015 to July 2019).

These scientists have also compared COVID-19 associated deaths and mortality rates for the weeks of the epidemic in Norway and Sweden (between March 16 and July 26, 2020). The data were obtained from the main data registries in these two countries that are close to 100% complete due to mandatory reporting.

All COVID-19 associated mortality (defined as deaths among individuals with a positive COVID-19 test up to thirty days before death) stratified by age has been retrieved from the Institute of Public Health in Norway and the Public Health Agency of Sweden.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on December 29, 2020, 09:43:27 pm
Easy Pete - I was deliberately not raising the moral questions.

I think the moral Q you’re asking is one that’s easier with hindsight - is the pain of lockdown worse than a softer approach. Yes?

There are also the moral questions of which people you choose not to treat (and ultimately to die) because your health service is over-run - if you misjudge how well your population will behave and follow the guidance.

Now fresh challenges as the balance between hard and soft options - will now all need to be recalibrated in light of a version that’s 70% more readily transmitted...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: A.Greenhorne on December 29, 2020, 09:45:27 pm
I wonder if they’re vaccinating those with moderate to severe Alzheimer’s / Dementia? Certainly an interesting moral debate to be had there.
33 meditations on death is worth a read from the perspective of a retired consultant in elderly medicine. TT’s rabid paternalism is a bit nauseating
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on December 29, 2020, 09:47:49 pm
Easy Pete - I was deliberately not raising the moral questions.

I think the moral Q you’re asking is one that’s easier with hindsight - is the pain of lockdown worse than a softer approach. Yes?

There are also the moral questions of which people you choose not to treat (and ultimately to die) because your health service is over-run - if you misjudge how well your population will behave and follow the guidance.

Now fresh challenges as the balance between hard and soft options - will now all need to be recalibrated in light of a version that’s 70% more readily transmitted...

I don't think you can avoid the moral question TT if people are going to make assertions that Sweden 'failed'. And I was specifically referring to your and other's assertions to Dan about Sweden - whose health service has not been overwhelmed.
He wasn't talking about anywhere else.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: AJM on December 29, 2020, 09:49:51 pm
Hmm, the statistica page says it's under maintenance - I did find that link but couldn't get into it. I'll try again in the morning.

I wasn't really responding to Dan, but to your "given it probably knew the bigger picture of their lower than average deaths" comment which implies to me at least the idea of taking decisions with that "headroom" in mind (although maybe I misinterpret you?) - even if you know how much "room you have to play with" in a very utilitarian sense I just don't believe anyone could have had the confidence to know they could stick within it at that point in time.

I wasn't looking for deaths per 100k - SMR is the mortality rate for a reference population (i.e. you take your own rates per 100k by age or age bucket and apply them to a standardised population mix. Removes the potential for distortion by age as well as by population size so more helpful for comparing populations and time periods). I did have a look at the paper but didn't find much of what I had hoped to see in it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on December 29, 2020, 09:53:40 pm
Can you provide a link to where the SMR is used for other studies, in this context?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on December 29, 2020, 09:58:21 pm
Easy Pete - I was deliberately not raising the moral questions.

I think the moral Q you’re asking is one that’s easier with hindsight - is the pain of lockdown worse than a softer approach. Yes?

There are also the moral questions of which people you choose not to treat (and ultimately to die) because your health service is over-run - if you misjudge how well your population will behave and follow the guidance.

Now fresh challenges as the balance between hard and soft options - will now all need to be recalibrated in light of a version that’s 70% more readily transmitted...

I don't think you can avoid the moral question TT if people are going to make assertions that Sweden 'failed'. And I was specifically referring to your and other's assertions to Dan about Sweden - whose health service has not been overwhelmed.
He wasn't talking about anywhere else.

Fair enough Pete - I wasn’t really sure what Dan was arguing about to be honest - more general points about strategies for managing the pandemic.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 29, 2020, 10:14:04 pm
Hmm, the statistica page says it's under maintenance - I did find that link but couldn't get into it. I'll try again in the morning.

I wasn't really responding to Dan, but to your "given it probably knew the bigger picture of their lower than average deaths" comment which implies to me at least the idea of taking decisions with that "headroom" in mind (although maybe I misinterpret you?) - even if you know how much "room you have to play with" in a very utilitarian sense I just don't believe anyone could have had the confidence to know they could stick within it at that point in time.

I wasn't looking for deaths per 100k - SMR is the mortality rate for a reference population (i.e. you take your own rates per 100k by age or age bucket and apply them to a standardised population mix. Removes the potential for distortion by age as well as by population size so more helpful for comparing populations and time periods). I did have a look at the paper but didn't find much of what I had hoped to see in it.


Aren’t we a little early into this discussion?

We know the 19/20 Flu season was relatively light, but that occurred pre Covid arrival in Europe (at least significant infection rates).
These numbers, excess deaths in particular, will need to be compared at the end of the 20/21 Flu season  (say March to March?) before we’ll have a meaningful comparison?
And then, there’s the correction to be expected in the Covid mitigation strategy, also mitigating Flu infections etc.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 29, 2020, 10:21:31 pm
I don’t have one, that’s why I asked on here

I’m about to head out etc etc.

Isn’t this all a little Uriah Heep?

Collar (assertion of lowly status) and Cuffs (vocabulary and grammar) don’t match.

Edit: Obviously I’m wandering into Ad Hominem, too busy to flesh it out properly.

God knows I’m a knob. You take being a condescending wanker to new heights. Eat shit

Ah shucks!

That’s sweet of you. I was worried you weren’t bothered. I really couldn’t give it my full attention, just five minutes here and there. I guess I just have a talent for it (being a wanker, I mean. Too many bloody years at sea, you have to develop certain “skills”).

Thing is (I guess you didn’t notice), I really only hand you back your own shit with a little garnish.
Even when I do have time, I don’t “do it” when you make a good point, or ask a valid question.

I just read you insults and see a juicy target. Glad to know I scored a point.
Duck next time.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: AJM on December 29, 2020, 10:24:33 pm
Do you mean specifically in terms of Covid? (The "in this context" bit)

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/articles/comparisonsofallcausemortalitybetweeneuropeancountriesandregions/januarytojune2020

I don't know if they'll do an update at some point to bring in the full year. But in terms of what I was looking for it's pretty good, from initial inspection, in that it shows standardised mortality rates, then compared to the five year average weekly and cumulatively, amongst other things, for cities and countries in western Europe (including, for the purpose of this discussion, Stockholm and Sweden).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: A.Greenhorne on December 29, 2020, 10:34:45 pm
I don’t have one, that’s why I asked on here

I’m about to head out etc etc.

Isn’t this all a little Uriah Heep?

Collar (assertion of lowly status) and Cuffs (vocabulary and grammar) don’t match.

Edit: Obviously I’m wandering into Ad Hominem, too busy to flesh it out properly.

God knows I’m a knob. You take being a condescending wanker to new heights. Eat shit

Ah shucks!

That’s sweet of you. I was worried you weren’t bothered. I really couldn’t give it my full attention, just five minutes here and there. I guess I just have a talent for it (being a wanker, I mean. Too many bloody years at sea, you have to develop certain “skills”).

Thing is (I guess you didn’t notice), I really only hand you back your own shit with a little garnish.
Even when I do have time, I don’t “do it” when you make a good point, or ask a valid question.

I just read you insults and see a juicy target. Glad to know I scored a point.
Duck next time.

What do you want? I’d like you to get off my case. Please
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on December 29, 2020, 10:57:07 pm
Do you mean specifically in terms of Covid? (The "in this context" bit)

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/articles/comparisonsofallcausemortalitybetweeneuropeancountriesandregions/januarytojune2020

I don't know if they'll do an update at some point to bring in the full year. But in terms of what I was looking for it's pretty good, from initial inspection, in that it shows standardised mortality rates, then compared to the five year average weekly and cumulatively, amongst other things, for cities and countries in western Europe (including, for the purpose of this discussion, Stockholm and Sweden).

Cheers.


From the text below Figure 3. -
''Throughout 2020, no significant deviations from the five-year average mortality rate were observed in Iceland, Norway, Finland, Denmark, Lithuania, Czechia, Slovakia, Bulgaria, Austria, Estonia, and Hungary.''

No mention of Sweden...

(Dubious - perhaps unfairly - of the data from a couple of those countries!)

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: AJM on December 30, 2020, 06:43:22 am

Cheers.


From the text below Figure 3. -
''Throughout 2020, no significant deviations from the five-year average mortality rate were observed in Iceland, Norway, Finland, Denmark, Lithuania, Czechia, Slovakia, Bulgaria, Austria, Estonia, and Hungary.''

No mention of Sweden...

(Dubious - perhaps unfairly - of the data from a couple of those countries!)

I thought figure 5, the cumulative change in mortality, was quite useful too, in that it helps to prove/disprove some of my speculations above about whether the light winter offsets the covid deaths (answer seems to be - not over age 65), and also shows that "light winter" pattern of lower than baseline cumulative mortality from Jan to March across the Nordics and indeed much of europe and then a sharp divergence in outcomes after that for over 65s in particular. Also maybe helps explain why Sweden's aggregate excess deaths aren't that high, in that the under 65 year looks to have been fairly light for mortality overall, driven mostly by the light winter with a small offset for covid spike in April.

You can see some of the same breakdowns or presentations for the UK in the link below if it's of any interest.

https://www.actuaries.org.uk/learn-and-develop/continuous-mortality-investigation/other-cmi-outputs/mortality-monitor
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: A.Greenhorne on December 30, 2020, 07:22:00 am
This seems quite a good tool to compare total mortality across countries and years. Some interesting comparisons to be made.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/excess-mortality-raw-death-count?tab=chart&stackMode=absolute&country=~SWE&region=World
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 30, 2020, 11:07:27 am
FT have finally got round to updating the excess death plots for the recent covid waves.

https://www.ft.com/content/a2901ce8-5eb7-4633-b89c-cbdf5b386938

In excess deaths above the expected average Sweden (+12%) are now fifth following Belgium (26%), Spain (24%) the UK (18%) and Italy (15%) in the EU countries shown; above France, Netherlands and Austria  (all 11%).

Denmark and Norway have no discernible excess deaths.

Back on Sweden the population behaved pretty well on voluntary prevention measures, outside of their care homes, in the first wave. The more recent wave has been more problematic for the general population. The lesson from Sweden to me is a social contract between government and its population benefits greatly in fighting a pandemic.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: stone on December 30, 2020, 12:44:39 pm
spooky stuff:- https://virological.org/t/lineage-specific-growth-of-sars-cov-2-b-1-1-7-during-the-english-national-lockdown/575

"Background: The emerging B.1.1.7 SARS-CoV-2 lineage has proliferated rapidly in the U.K. Here we use a combination of daily local SARS-CoV-2 incidence data and weekly genomic surveillance data from COG-UK to infer its infection dynamics and parameters during English national lockdown from November 5 to December 2 2020.

Methods: A hierarchical Bayesian model is used to jointly model lineage-agnostic spatiotemporal SARS-CoV-2 PCR test data and genomic sequencing data of the B.1.1.7 lineage. This analysis infers the total and lineage-specific temporal incidence in each local authority and estimates the historic basic reproductive ratio R for new and other SARS-CoV-2 lineages per local authority.

Findings: We find strong and consistent evidence that B.1.1.7 proliferated (R>1) during the English lockdown in 86% (215/246) of lower tier local authorities with an average R value of 1.26. At the same time other lineages contracted (R<1) at an average R value of 0.86 in most regions, leading to 81% (200/246) of regions showing B.1.1.7 proliferation while other lineages diminished.

Implications: The emerging B.1.1.7 SARS-CoV-2 lineage spreads faster than its predecessors. It continued to grow during a lockdown in which other lineages shrank. These analyses suggest that stricter measures are required to contain the B.1.1.7 lineage."
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on December 30, 2020, 01:31:46 pm
Thanks Stone. Reports today Saying the PHE data on contact tracing of the new variant positive cases is showing a 50%+ increase in the number of contacts testing positive over other variants....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: stone on December 30, 2020, 02:08:04 pm
Thanks Stone. Reports today Saying the PHE data on contact tracing of the new variant positive cases is showing a 50%+ increase in the number of contacts testing positive over other variants....

Yes, secondary attack rate was 15.1% versus 9.8% for the other variants https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/948152/Technical_Briefing_VOC202012-2_Briefing_2_FINAL.pdf
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on December 30, 2020, 03:36:06 pm
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55489932

 :shit:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: duncan on December 30, 2020, 04:09:20 pm
(https://scontent.flhr6-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/fr/cp0/e15/q65/134750620_10221268222767174_9013836622030230537_o.jpg?_nc_cat=108&ccb=2&_nc_sid=110474&efg=eyJpIjoidCJ9&_nc_ohc=qHQWsQ9OfdcAX9BZX9U&_nc_ht=scontent.flhr6-1.fna&tp=14&oh=b7819adc4a1d1adb0edb958935dcd9c3&oe=60136671)

Thought this was an interesting snapshot of what’s happening locally. It’s from the Zoe/KCL app. so an estimate based on reported symptoms however these numbers historically compare well with actual test results.

My symptoms started on the 16th and I tested positive on the 21st. It looks like I’m one of many.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on December 30, 2020, 04:14:37 pm
That’s grim Duncan (stats and your own illness). Hope you’re feeling better soon.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on December 30, 2020, 06:29:36 pm
Very sorry to read that Duncan. Hope you're already beginning to feel better?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Falling Down on December 30, 2020, 08:13:26 pm
Sorry to hear Duncan. I hope you are feeling better. Don’t be shy to call if you need anything.

This thing is absolutely ripping through London at the moment. W was very poorly and tested positive just before Christmas on the 20th so we were isolating - she’s recovered now but still tired.

All three of my close friends and several acquaintances have positive cases in their households and one had the paramedics out yesterday with breathing problems. 

Stay safe y’all. Wear your masks, wash your hands and try not to socialise.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: danm on December 30, 2020, 09:24:56 pm
Get well soon Duncan. It's definitely on a different level now in London and the SE. My brother is in a bubble with my sister, out of the 6 of them including children, half now have it, and my sister says many of her friends have it. Scary times.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on December 31, 2020, 09:12:07 am
Do we understand yet why the new strain is more infectious and what that might mean practically for the social distancing measures we take? Droplets containing the virus aren't going to travel 70% further. I think I read on the BBC that the virus was more successful at infecting cells, so this might mean that the infectious dose is lower, ergo you don't have to be in close contact with someone for as long on order to pick it up? Could it be roughly the same but a lesser proportion of infected persons present as asymptomatic - so we identify more cases?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: duncan on December 31, 2020, 09:38:22 am
Thanks everyone, I had a very quiet Christmas! I’m recovering, but still get exhausted after trivial amounts of activity, and feeling quite ‘foggy brained’. This all seems pretty standard, verging on good for man of my vintage. Longer term outlook is still a little uncertain but I’m pretty positive and fortunately I don’t have to rush back to anything. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on December 31, 2020, 10:37:12 am
Sorry to hear Duncan. I hope you are feeling better. Don’t be shy to call if you need anything.

This thing is absolutely ripping through London at the moment. W was very poorly and tested positive just before Christmas on the 20th so we were isolating - she’s recovered now but still tired.

All three of my close friends and several acquaintances have positive cases in their households and one had the paramedics out yesterday with breathing problems. 

Stay safe y’all. Wear your masks, wash your hands and try not to socialise.

This popped up on my Twitter - covid positive test rates for London at 18%...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on December 31, 2020, 10:58:12 am
Bloody hell Ben - good to hear W is recovering but it's still very scary.

Meanwhile, the idiotic deniers are out in force on FB ...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 01, 2021, 09:56:08 am
Do we understand yet why the new strain is more infectious and what that might mean practically for the social distancing measures we take? Droplets containing the virus aren't going to travel 70% further. I think I read on the BBC that the virus was more successful at infecting cells, so this might mean that the infectious dose is lower, ergo you don't have to be in close contact with someone for as long on order to pick it up? Could it be roughly the same but a lesser proportion of infected persons present as asymptomatic - so we identify more cases?

This article summarises our state of knowledge on this quite well:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/31/health/coronavirus-variant-transmission.html



Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Falling Down on January 01, 2021, 10:08:28 am
Bloody hell Ben - good to hear W is recovering but it's still very scary.

Meanwhile, the idiotic deniers are out in force on FB ...

Thanks Andy - all on the mend which is good.  I now understand your second sentence having been on FB last night.  :blink:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on January 01, 2021, 10:10:00 am

This popped up on my Twitter - covid positive test rates for London at 18%...

18% of the population or 18% of people tested?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 01, 2021, 10:42:35 am
TT will be referring to tests returned. This table shows current rates per 100,000
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-54324244
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on January 01, 2021, 11:10:11 am
Do we understand yet why the new strain is more infectious and what that might mean practically for the social distancing measures we take? Droplets containing the virus aren't going to travel 70% further. I think I read on the BBC that the virus was more successful at infecting cells, so this might mean that the infectious dose is lower, ergo you don't have to be in close contact with someone for as long on order to pick it up? Could it be roughly the same but a lesser proportion of infected persons present as asymptomatic - so we identify more cases?

This article summarises our state of knowledge on this quite well:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/31/health/coronavirus-variant-transmission.html

Thanks, TT.
The tl;dr for anyone interested is that results are currently preliminary but there are a couple of possible differences. The first is some evidence that the virus sits more in the throat than the lungs so each breath, cough, sneeze will contain more of it; the second is some evidence that the variant might bind more tightly to cells it is trying to infect.

I hope everyone here who's currently suffering with it has a speedy recovery.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 01, 2021, 11:10:36 am

This popped up on my Twitter - covid positive test rates for London at 18%...

18% of the population or 18% of people tested?

Yeah - sorry Tim - fortgot to post the link..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 01, 2021, 11:17:44 am
Anecdote alert: Chatting to one of my University friends on a NYE zoom last night - and she works a midwife in the SW. Just been isolating as their 14 YO daughter got it at school - no one else in the family (5) caught it. As a midwife, she was given a load of the lateral flow tests so she can test herself before shifts etc... During isolation - she's been using these (sparingly she said) to test her daughter and family. Every test has come back negative (including her symptomatic daughter who had a positive PCR test). Her (and her colleagues) view of the Lateral Flow tests was that they were so crap they were next to pointless....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on January 01, 2021, 11:36:53 am
Her (and her colleagues) view of the Lateral Flow tests was that they were so crap they were next to pointless....

I read that they had a 40% sensitivity in Liverpool, which is probably slightly less accurate than an educated guess. They have a high specificity, but that's not much use with Covid where you want to isolate those that have it and don't need to worry about false alarms.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nik at work on January 01, 2021, 05:02:03 pm
...Covid where you want to isolate those that have it and don't need to worry about false alarms.
I would disagree with this, unless I have misunderstood your meaning? You definitely don’t want large numbers of health professionals (or any other ‘key’ workers) isolating off the back of false positives.

Lateral flow tests are by all accounts pretty much useless.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Sidehaas on January 01, 2021, 08:28:37 pm
LFTs are useful for finding asymptomatic positive people from a mass testing programme, as another way to reduce general virus spread. In this scenario, every positive case you find (and then confirm via PCR) is a win, because the person didn't realise they were ill. That's what was done in Liverpool and I think it probably had a positive effect, but not as large an effect as the Govt tried to claim. It's worth noting that quite a few of Liverpool's positive cases are continuing to come via LFT so there are obviously a lot of asymptomatic people around. (This data is now available on the Liverpool council covid dashboard (I'm not sure if it's available for other places), one day last week when I looked, of 800-odd cases in Liverpool, 200-odd were from LFT.)
I agree that using them to screen people and confirm negative is a bad idea, unless there is really no other option or it is part of a belt-and-braces approach to remove further risk in a short time and everyone involved realises it only has a 50% chance of picking the virus up.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 02, 2021, 09:30:56 am
As far as I understand, UK National Screening Committee has been left out of the process of screening LFTs and reviewing their efficacy. We can only imagine why, but the possibility that their advice would contradict the programme’s manner of implementation or the government statements about its success must be high.

As you say Sidehaas, every asymptomatic (true) positive is a win, so long as the person identified has sufficient trust in its accuracy to comply, of course.

Other questions remain though. How much public trust in the results and compliance is there? To what extent are people emboldened by false negatives and more likely to infect others as a result? Without a proper assessment we have no idea if this programme is counterintuitively causing more harm than good, if it is a benefit, and what value for money it offers (ie are there other ways of spending these sums that would better impact the pandemic?).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on January 04, 2021, 09:19:01 pm
So, top 4 priority groups supposed to have 1st jab by mid Feb. Anyone seen a list showing how many people are in each group?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on January 04, 2021, 09:20:20 pm
 :sorry:Answered by own Q in a quick Google... Just under 14m apparently
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Wil on January 04, 2021, 10:22:32 pm
Strange that they seem to be deliberately avoiding putting a number on it. (Maybe my impression is wrong?)

14m is a big ask, I don't have much faith that we'll make it by mid Feb, but I hope to be proved wrong.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 04, 2021, 10:32:14 pm
I’m surprised it’s not being outsourced via pharmacies like the flu jab is. Mine (I’m over 50 now) was - simple 4 field online form - chemist checked via a ref number and did the jab. 2 min total. Expect the whole ‘wait 15 min thing’ doesn’t help that though.

That said - given anaphylaxic reaction might effect 1 in 10000 or higher - surely that’s actually less risky (in terms of fatalities) than not giving the booster dose within 3-4 weeks as recommended....

I dunno. The way we’re counting on it to get out of this mess I’m amazed there’s not more effort going into it...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on January 05, 2021, 01:48:10 am
My understanding is that the current limit on vaccinations isn't the supply of the vaccines, or the number of the number of people available to perform the vaccinations, it's all the logistics in between. So utilising pharmacies wouldn't be very beneficial at the moment.

If we can maintain sufficient supply, and can rollout in large enough numbers, I expect pharmacies will be called on later on. By that time, we are likely to have much more data on who is most at risk of reactions so could send low risk people to pharmacies while higher risk people get theirs in hospitals.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 05, 2021, 10:08:57 am
:sorry:Answered by own Q in a quick Google... Just under 14m apparently

A handy table...

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EpMHtY4WEAEFh_3?format=jpg&name=large)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on January 05, 2021, 10:15:39 am
Johnson's timetable requires an acceleration from 0.3m jabs per week to 1.9m. This seems...unlikely, to put it diplomatically, especially given the government's form, but god knows I'd love to be wrong.

Gove this morning already rowing back on the mid Feb timetable, suggesting 'some but not all' restrictions could be lifted in March.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 05, 2021, 10:27:58 am
Johnson's timetable requires an acceleration from 0.3m jabs per week to 1.9m. This seems...unlikely, to put it diplomatically, especially given the government's form, but god knows I'd love to be wrong.

Gove this morning already rowing back on the mid Feb timetable, suggesting 'some but not all' restrictions could be lifted in March.

There are (I think) two issues at the heart of this new lockdown...

1. The cases going to hospital from now and for the next 2-3 weeks are already 'baked in' (as the stand in Mayor of Liverpool said today). They are going to happen no matter what changes are made to lockdowns or restrictions. So we won't know how bad things actually are for a couple of weeks. London hospitals have had big increases but came from having relatively few existing covid hospitalisations. The hospitals in the NW (and other places) still have patients in them from the November surge/peak - so whilst not (quite) full at the moment could be in a worse position than the London ones in a couple of weeks.

2. We don't know what will control the new strain effectively. The Nov lockdown didn't seem to dent it in Kent/Essex - and we won't know if our now stricter measures are sufficient for a couple of weeks either. I feel sympathy for the government here - whilst they have been slow/reactionary - how to deal effectively with the new strain means we're back to pissing in the wind figuring out what to do and what works best - which was our state in late March.
The vaccine will help of course - but when the impact is felt is unknown - and depends on the roll out speed etc..

So no-one really knows how bad things are going to be (or not,..) for the next two weeks at least...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on January 05, 2021, 10:38:58 am
good table TT, cheers.

from that it appears two thirds of deaths are from ~ 3.5M people, that number should be vaccinated in a few weeks.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 05, 2021, 10:50:23 am
good table TT, cheers.

from that it appears two thirds of deaths are from ~ 3.5M people, that number should be vaccinated in a few weeks.

Yes - probably about half way there by now. Good news.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 05, 2021, 11:01:57 am
It’s not too hard to form a rough outline of “ how bad”, though is it? The Nov surge resulted in >900 deaths per day by the end of Dec:
(https://i.ibb.co/JFQkrYt/B92-C3-DEC-F354-4153-9209-D786-F6-E95-BDD.jpg)

It’s pretty clear, that even allowing for increased testing, we’ve exceeded the Nov surge by a factor of 3(ish), so it doesn’t seem unreasonable to be expecting upto 3k deaths per day, by end Jan, already “baked in”. Of course, some antibody treatments are coming on line as we speak etc, but, hard to imagine that will be available in sufficient quantities to even halve the death rate, so best case >1.5k/day by end Jan.

(https://i.ibb.co/ypL4kwM/B91-FAF6-B-A13-C-4-DED-AB5-A-3662-E9-FB7924.jpg)

I fucking hope I’m way off base, but I won’t be surprised if we have a ~3k death day for each of the 50k new case days we have had/are having right now.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on January 05, 2021, 11:36:54 am
2. We don't know what will control the new strain effectively. The Nov lockdown didn't seem to dent it in Kent/Essex - and we won't know if our now stricter measures are sufficient for a couple of weeks either.
It's early days, and I'll feel a lot happier if the trend continues for a bit longer, but we are starting to see the first drops in younger age groups in London which are hopefully the first signs that Tier 4 was effective at getting the new strain under control (noting that schools have been closed and many people have been off work for a couple of weeks).

Quote
I feel sympathy for the government here - whilst they have been slow/reactionary - how to deal effectively with the new strain means we're back to pissing in the wind figuring out what to do and what works best - which was our state in late March.
I don't have any sympathy for them. While we are back at the figuring out stage, it was clear to see the direction that things were moving and the timing of the vaccine made the choice a no brainer. We should have gone hard and early, instead of delaying. It is the exact same mistakes that they have been making since the beginning. They wait until things reach breaking point before they act.

Why did it take until December 19th to react to a trend which was visible by the end of November? Should have announced the current lockdown before Christmas to allow teachers and parents to prepare for remote learning and childcare, rather than giving them 12 hours notice.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on January 05, 2021, 11:39:52 am
I feel sympathy for the government here - whilst they have been slow/reactionary - how to deal effectively with the new strain means we're back to pissing in the wind figuring out what to do and what works best - which was our state in late March.
I don't share your sympathy. They had hard decisions to make, but sending the kids back for a day to add a link onto the Christmas transmission chain was beyond moronic.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 05, 2021, 11:42:20 am
I hate the idea of defending the government.

But, the sheer stupidity and ability to deny reality, of a large (if not a majority) of both politicians and the general public, tie they’re hands to reacting only when it can be shown by undeniable numbers, that they must.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on January 05, 2021, 11:44:35 am

I don't have any sympathy for them.


Me neither. It's beggars belief that he started the conference saying how much worse the NHS position is compared to the peak of the first lockdown, yet he waited until that point to introduce something strict.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on January 05, 2021, 11:50:05 am
My feeling is that following the SAGE report before Christmas a UKB government would have scrapped Christmas relaxation, possibly locked down, and planned to not reopen schools... and we're a bunch of punters sat on the net between meetings and mince pies So I struggle to have sympathy. It was totally obvious this would happen; waiting until after Christmas was moronic; waiting until some schools had already opened was truly moronic and presumably gives teachers, children and parents limited prep time (thank god I'm not in any of those categories).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gollum on January 05, 2021, 11:59:51 am
I have no sympathy either.

It’s really hard to learn from your mistakes when you deny that you have made any.

As we were watching BoZo last night and he was extolling how the vaccine was the solution, Mrs B and myself turned to each and said, “As long as you don’t cock it up.”
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 05, 2021, 12:12:31 pm
My feeling is that following the SAGE report before Christmas a UKB government would have scrapped Christmas relaxation, possibly locked down, and planned to not reopen schools... and we're a bunch of punters sat on the net between meetings and mince pies So I struggle to have sympathy. It was totally obvious this would happen; waiting until after Christmas was moronic; waiting until some schools had already opened was truly moronic and presumably gives teachers, children and parents limited prep time (thank god I'm not in any of those categories).

Look, I absolutely agree with your proposal above.
More to the point, I wish to fuck the powers that be represented a breadth of education, expertise and experience that the body of posters on this forum do.
But, as an n=1, anecdotal, example (that clearly defeats all counter claims), we picked up my Son’s new MTB for his 14th, yesterday.
Have known the shop owner for decades, he’s no dunce, MTB fanatic, mid forties and Uni educated.
No mask, long and embarrassing lecture about how it’s all overblown and exaggerated. Crowing about how good it’s been for his business.
Fucking idiot is vulnerable, due to his pre-existing and (due to life’s little gifts) back living with his elderly mum.
I couldn’t get out fast enough.
UKB is a broad church, but it’s in no way representative of the larger population.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on January 05, 2021, 12:17:18 pm
My feeling is that following the SAGE report before Christmas a UKB government would have scrapped Christmas relaxation, possibly locked down, and planned to not reopen schools... and we're a bunch of punters sat on the net between meetings and mince pies So I struggle to have sympathy. It was totally obvious this would happen; waiting until after Christmas was moronic; waiting until some schools had already opened was truly moronic and presumably gives teachers, children and parents limited prep time (thank god I'm not in any of those categories).

Having schools go back for one day and then shutting is crap.

But, I do have some sympathy for the idea that it's better to close at the last minute than it is to pre-empt closure and possibly end up being overly cautious. If, prior to Christmas, an announcement had been made that schools would not be reopening then schools would definitely not be reopening. Even if, by some miracle (cancel Christmas mixing and have a firebreak?), the spread had slowed, the teachers and schools would have stopped making plans to test children (regardless of how flawed this idea might be), the school buses wouldn't be planning to run, the canteens wouldn't have ordered any food etc. Basically, the infrastructure around schools is not in a position to suddenly open with a day's notice. It might introduce a great deal of inconvenience, but it is much easier to close schools at short notice than it is to open them.

So, if you subscribe to the view that children should be attending school as normal for as much of the time as possible, the only way to make the call is to favour last-minute cancellation over pre-emptive cancellation. That's the altar on which every parent-of-school-age-children's plans for today have been sacrificed on.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on January 05, 2021, 12:31:40 pm
Wouldn't the time have been better spent preparing for online learning?

Canteens will now be disposing of food, something of which the hospitality industry has been complaining about a reasonable amount (being given only a few days notice of closure/potential opening etc. making it a complete gamble as to whether they do or don't order stock).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 05, 2021, 12:45:12 pm
To clarify: My sympathy for the government is about having to figure out how to deal with a new strain. 

On pretty much all counts (save possibly the first economic response) they should have acted sooner - at every (often signposted) twist in the CV19 journey so far.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on January 05, 2021, 01:38:25 pm
Wouldn't the time have been better spent preparing for online learning?

Not something that's mutually exclusive with planning to open.

Canteens will now be disposing of food

The SARS- CoV-2 pandemic is certainly no rose garden.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on January 05, 2021, 01:48:16 pm
:sorry:Answered by own Q in a quick Google... Just under 14m apparently

A handy table...

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EpMHtY4WEAEFh_3?format=jpg&name=large)

 :geek:
I find it remarkable that the effect of the virus in the UK follows the Pareto principle - 80% of significant effects are caused by 20% of inputs. The same principle holds in many areas from finance to manufacturing.

Or to put it another way approx 80% of covid effects that are most significant to humans (death), happen in approx 20% of the human population.

13 million / 68 million * 100 = 19.1% of population (disregarding .5 million 'carers' as less than 100 deaths in that group)
86% of deaths in this group.


https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/050115/what-are-some-reallife-examples-8020-rule-pareto-principle-practice.asp
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 05, 2021, 01:48:41 pm
The SARS- CoV-2 pandemic is certainly no rose garden.

A lot of self important, Yank Republicans, got infected in one, though.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nai on January 05, 2021, 05:44:14 pm
(as they are open for some unknown reason)

Private businesses that would otherwise go bust according to Matt Hancock.

Edit: found the source now:

https://twitter.com/NadiaWhittomeMP/status/1346406298615767042
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on January 06, 2021, 10:59:17 am
worrying that a couple of folk in america seem to have caught it after getting their first dose of the Pfizer vacc, esp given our govs strategy of delaying second doses
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on January 06, 2021, 11:00:03 am
As suggested by OMM I've split the recent school/home-schooling related stuff into a new topic. Apologies if anyone's post has been put in the wrong place!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 06, 2021, 11:04:58 am
worrying that a couple of folk in america seem to have caught it after getting their first dose of the Pfizer vacc, esp given our govs strategy of delaying second doses

It’s 95% effective with both doses - given the US has vaccinated 4 million - that’s 200 000 people who could get it (from those vaccinated). If we assume 1 in 100 people (really depends on the infection rate I know) then that’s 2000+ people who will have caught it having been vaccinated.

Iirc the really good news is that only one person in the trials (poss none) died after vaccination, so even if it doesn’t prevent it - it seems to prevent serious illness to an even greater degree. Afaik this is one of the big points of the Oxford vaccine - it’s a lower protection rate - but similarly gives a much larger reduction in the number of serious cases.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on January 06, 2021, 11:36:31 am
worrying that a couple of folk in america seem to have caught it after getting their first dose of the Pfizer vacc, esp given our govs strategy of delaying second doses

I don't think thats worrying at all. As TT has said, its to be expected. Media reporting two people getting it after thousands have had the jab is irresponsible as far as I'm concerned; it just causes unnecessary panic.

From what I have read of the 12 week strategy it seems sensible, borne out by other countries pivoting to it. Whilst there is limited data for it that doesn't necessarily mean its a bad idea; there is the obvious plus side of protecting more people right here and now and a massive bank of data that while not directly relevant to this specific jab, suggests that a 12 week gap is fine for other vaccines and so is more than likely to be fine for this one as well. My issues with reportage stand on this issue as well. We could do without an anti vacc movement gaining serious traction like it has in France and these sort of stories only make it more likely.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 06, 2021, 11:51:31 am
Yes - If you listen to Pfizer and AstraZ they don’t recommend delaying the booster simply because they have no data on what happens - as they’ve not tested it. It wasn’t in their trials.

They are totally covering their arses - which is totally right.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on January 06, 2021, 12:23:44 pm
Yes - If you listen to Pfizer and AstraZ they don’t recommend delaying the booster simply because they have no data on what happens - as they’ve not tested it. It wasn’t in their trials.

They are totally covering their arses - which is totally right.

100%. It just annoys me when I read piece (on both right and left) breathlessly saying 'this is so irresponsible, there is no data to support this,' as its only half the story. We have a massive amount of data on flu vaccines, just not this specific one. It was also interesting the BMA didn't have a problem with the change of strategy, only with the cancellation of existing appointments to give second dose to people.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on January 08, 2021, 08:44:19 pm
Merely an observation. Is it any wonder the government thought that kids didn't need feeding during the school holidays in a time when a cup of peppermint tea is a picnic and a scotch egg is a substantial meal?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on January 09, 2021, 11:14:26 am
It was also interesting the BMA didn't have a problem with the change of strategy, only with the cancellation of existing appointments to give second dose to people.

My dad got his second dose yesterday so there was clearly some leeway.

In the meantime, to cheer people up, spare a thought that death rates are already locked in to at least double from their current position (assuming hospitals don't break when it will be a good bit worse). The next few weeks will be really bad.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 09, 2021, 02:43:34 pm
Adam Kucharski tweet with data showing increase risk for both direct and near contact.
https://twitter.com/AdamJKucharski/status/1347871050311344129
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 09, 2021, 05:59:13 pm
What’s the population of Greater London?

Doesn’t really matter, after all, 30, really isn’t a significant number of them.

I take this as a good sign, to be fair. The reality must be sinking in to some very thick skulls:

(https://i.ibb.co/cCMhyfH/410881-F1-E81-C-4-AF4-9657-DA4903-AE5997.jpg)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on January 10, 2021, 07:47:08 pm
So if you thought the rules / guidelines / recommendations for outdoor exercise were vague, spare a thought for those poor religious chaps and chapesses:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/explainers-53219921

Take a drink for every time they use "should" or don't have any specifics to the restrictions involved and you'll soon be too pissed to care about lockdown:

Quote
In the areas of the UK where communal worship is allowed, a number of common measures are in place:

Services should be carried out in the shortest possible time - to ensure safety and minimise infection spread

Worshippers should keep a 2m (6ft) distance from anyone not from their own household or support bubble

People must not mingle with anyone not in their own household or support bubble, and should be "encouraged to move on promptly" afterwards

If shoes are removed before a service, people should avoid touching other people's

There should be no shared items such as prayer mats, service sheets, religious texts or hymn books - worshippers should bring their own and then take them home

If people can't bring their own books, places of worship can offer a selection for individuals to use - these should be quarantined for 48 hours before and after use

Those giving and receiving food and drink in a service will have to observe strict precautions

Spoken responses from worshippers should be uttered softly and communal singing avoided to reduce the risk of transmission

If singing is an essential part of the service, and a recording can't be played, only one person should sing - preferably behind a plexi-glass screen, or facing away from worshippers
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 10, 2021, 08:02:26 pm
I don’t have a problem avoiding other people’s recently removed shoes.

If you do, you’re a naughty, naughty boy. Go and have a nice cold shower and say ten hail Marys.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 10, 2021, 08:23:04 pm
We live c.50 m from a large Mosque. They’ve been pretty careful - Friday prayers now has 2-3 shifts and they clearly limit those coming in. There’s a booking system etc....

That said - there’s still people sharing lifts to get there - a bit of hanging around outside chatting after etc... but mostly fine.

Though I’m surprised it’s not been stopped in the recent lockdown - as it’s probably worse for contact than going shopping etc... a bit.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 10, 2021, 08:24:20 pm
So worshipping Mammon has moved up in your estimation eh, TT?  :P
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 10, 2021, 08:27:03 pm
I’ve been wondering all day (as some of you know) about sharing my heightened anxiety about the way the pandemic is heading.
This morning a family phone call, has pushed the nagging worry from the back of my mind, much further forward.
This worry was seeded by a knowledgeable family member, early last week and that same person called today, because we now have several family members positive and some very ill. People my age and even ten years younger. They have no underlying conditions. None. We expect one to be hospitalised before the night is out.
The seed, that was in the back of my head, germinating away, was a comment about viral load. The new variant is infectious at a smaller viral load.
The comment and the worry of the person who called, was “if the infectious load threshold is lower and we are correct about initial viral load influencing the severity of infection, then we have to consider that the potential for serious infection has also increased”.
I didn’t really know what to think, or whether saying something is daft, without anything more than somebody else’s intuition.
Then I sat down after the dog walk to read through the papers.
I’m sorry, it’s probably paywalled, I know a few can get around that, but the first paragraph carries the gist. I really really hope I’m just getting old and silly. Please, if you have any data or have reliably heard otherwise....

 https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/we-have-patients-in-their-twenties-and-generations-from-the-same-family-ctkp5mb9k?utm_source=Twitter_Fb&utm_campaign=Dr_John_Covid&utm_medium=branded_social&utm_term=Dr_John_Covid&utm_content=Dr_John_Covid&fbclid=IwAR0llFMVDd0-YiV6z_vOgdqnk0_OoN8xaw7gUCXeNbcqNKlNJKifBgEkm5E (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/we-have-patients-in-their-twenties-and-generations-from-the-same-family-ctkp5mb9k?utm_source=Twitter_Fb&utm_campaign=Dr_John_Covid&utm_medium=branded_social&utm_term=Dr_John_Covid&utm_content=Dr_John_Covid&fbclid=IwAR0llFMVDd0-YiV6z_vOgdqnk0_OoN8xaw7gUCXeNbcqNKlNJKifBgEkm5E)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on January 10, 2021, 08:48:40 pm
Matt, I’m really sorry to hear about your family.  It’s early days for solid research but everything I’ve read suggests it does not cause more serious illness.
 
E.g https://www.ft.com/content/04f4120f-fa5f-4e79-93d6-55170057980f

Even if the odds of fit middle aged people getting seriously ill hasn’t changed, we’d still expect more of these cases to come to light, just because there are so many more people infected.

It’s no comfort for you or your family, but maybe that helps the general levels of anxiety you are feeling?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Snoops on January 10, 2021, 08:56:54 pm
Hopefully I can in a perverse way reassure you.
Although the new variant clearly exists and has a higher transmission rate there is no evidence it has a higher morbidity.

The elephant in the room/confounding factor is the south has been hit really hard, the south also had tier 2 leading into Xmas with dinners out/small parties/restaurants and bars open, even the pantomime was on.
Interestingly up north  where we were locked down things are very different, in fact in Sheffield we have a lowering incidence and elective surgery is not threatened at all. (I’m a surgeon)

I find it curious how the media chooses to focus on the new ‘variant’ and not the relationship between  incidence now in areas and what lock down they were in prior.
We are also clearly now going to see the effect of Boris’s Xmas day slackening. Hope it was worth the cost
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on January 10, 2021, 09:23:45 pm
I posted similar thoughts on the other thread, regional rates are now the opposite of where they were in Nov. Glad to hear Sheffield hospitals are still managing well.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 10, 2021, 09:28:12 pm
Hi Matt, I am very sorry to hear about your family, anxious times. Hopefully things will turn around, but it must be worrying. From a non-medical background, initial load I understood as a factor whether you fell ill or shrugged off the virus after contact but not that initial load was to some extent a determiner of severity. Perhaps that is not proven?

It is a horribly capricious illness affecting people in unpredictable ways. Hopefully you won't have to wait too long before your relatives start feeling better.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on January 10, 2021, 09:43:11 pm
I’ve been wondering all day (as some of you know) about sharing my heightened anxiety about the way the pandemic is heading.
This morning a family phone call, has pushed the nagging worry from the back of my mind, much further forward.
This worry was seeded by a knowledgeable family member, early last week and that same person called today, because we now have several family members positive and some very ill. People my age and even ten years younger. They have no underlying conditions. None. We expect one to be hospitalised before the night is out.
The seed, that was in the back of my head, germinating away, was a comment about viral load. The new variant is infectious at a smaller viral load.
The comment and the worry of the person who called, was “if the infectious load threshold is lower and we are correct about initial viral load influencing the severity of infection, then we have to consider that the potential for serious infection has also increased”.
I didn’t really know what to think, or whether saying something is daft, without anything more than somebody else’s intuition.
Then I sat down after the dog walk to read through the papers.
I’m sorry, it’s probably paywalled, I know a few can get around that, but the first paragraph carries the gist. I really really hope I’m just getting old and silly. Please, if you have any data or have reliably heard otherwise....

 https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/we-have-patients-in-their-twenties-and-generations-from-the-same-family-ctkp5mb9k?utm_source=Twitter_Fb&utm_campaign=Dr_John_Covid&utm_medium=branded_social&utm_term=Dr_John_Covid&utm_content=Dr_John_Covid&fbclid=IwAR0llFMVDd0-YiV6z_vOgdqnk0_OoN8xaw7gUCXeNbcqNKlNJKifBgEkm5E (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/we-have-patients-in-their-twenties-and-generations-from-the-same-family-ctkp5mb9k?utm_source=Twitter_Fb&utm_campaign=Dr_John_Covid&utm_medium=branded_social&utm_term=Dr_John_Covid&utm_content=Dr_John_Covid&fbclid=IwAR0llFMVDd0-YiV6z_vOgdqnk0_OoN8xaw7gUCXeNbcqNKlNJKifBgEkm5E)
Really sorry to hear about your family Matt.
I did wonder a similar thing earlier in the pandemic. It would stand to reason that infectious dose from household spread would be on average higher than from community spread. This would be true regardless of minimum infectious dose, so you'd expect it would hold true for previous and current strains. If there were a simple relationship between viral load and morbidity from household transmission you'd expect it would have become very apparent by now. Which makes me think it maybe doesn't work like that.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Snoops on January 10, 2021, 09:45:55 pm
I posted similar thoughts on the other thread, regional rates are now the opposite of where they were in Nov. Glad to hear Sheffield hospitals are still managing well.

Have now seen that and agree.
We are for sure nationwide getting  a spike on the back of Christmas mixing but relatively S.York’s in a good place.
Imagine having a government that had foresight.......
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 10, 2021, 10:00:34 pm
I posted similar thoughts on the other thread, regional rates are now the opposite of where they were in Nov. Glad to hear Sheffield hospitals are still managing well.

Have now seen that and agree.
We are for sure nationwide getting  a spike on the back of Christmas mixing but relatively S.York’s in a good place.
Imagine having a government that had foresight.......

Sheffield seems to have fared much better than Manchester, Liverpool, Birmingham and Newcastle (where infection rates are all rising fast)- any thoughts why? Would have thought the demographics were pretty similar....

On another point - I’m sure we’ve all started hearing about friends/people we know getting CV19 in this recent surge, but I’ve also started hearing a few people saying “we didnt bother getting tested - because we know we’ve probably got it”. Not heard this since the April/May initial peak - and wonder if there is some under-reporting because of this... though suspect this behaviour can be picked up in the positivity rate of tests.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Snoops on January 10, 2021, 10:24:35 pm
I posted similar thoughts on the other thread, regional rates are now the opposite of where they were in Nov. Glad to hear Sheffield hospitals are still managing well.

Have now seen that and agree.
We are for sure nationwide getting  a spike on the back of Christmas mixing but relatively S.York’s in a good place.
Imagine having a government that had foresight.......

Sheffield seems to have fared much better than Manchester, Liverpool, Birmingham and Newcastle (where infection rates are all rising fast)- any thoughts why? Would have thought the demographics were pretty similar....

On another point - I’m sure we’ve all started hearing about friends/people we know getting CV19 in this recent surge, but I’ve also started hearing a few people saying “we didnt bother getting tested - because we know we’ve probably got it”. Not heard this since the April/May initial peak - and wonder if there is some under-reporting because of this... though suspect this behaviour can be picked up in the positivity rate of tests.

That’s a fair point, and testing isn’t a level playing field. Sheffield has so far refused mass testing, as an inappropriate use of resources so pickup would be lower.
However at odds with this is hospital admissions are now significantly lower  than other areas.
This should be perhaps the measure rather than infection rates.
Consensus amongst colleagues feel perhaps due to a very strong community education policy in terms of outbreak management, as a city secondary care and community has linked well.
We don’t know for sure though.
Everywhere is going to spike for a couple of weeks on the back of Xmas.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on January 11, 2021, 07:25:30 am
On another point - I’m sure we’ve all started hearing about friends/people we know getting CV19 in this recent surge, but I’ve also started hearing a few people saying “we didnt bother getting tested - because we know we’ve probably got it”. Not heard this since the April/May initial peak - and wonder if there is some under-reporting because of this... though suspect this behaviour can be picked up in the positivity rate of tests.

Went for another test at the airport last week and, anecdotally, it was deserted and getting a slot was easy for same day (400 odd slots available). With the current infection rates, you'd think it would be busy.

In Manchester from first hand reports, South Manchester seems to be doing ok (feels less bad that Oct/Nov) but North Manchester seems pretty grim, and has been since the Oct/Nov surge. Two friends had colleagues die last week. London sounds pretty grim too from reports from my sister in law, real all hands on deck scenario, surgical consultants doing HCA shifts in ICU etc.....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Snoops on January 11, 2021, 08:35:58 am
To put the effect of the previous  low tier down south  vs high tier up here in a binary context_
Sheffield as of this morning is reducing elective operating and increasing ICU capacity, but only as we are taking even more cases from London now. There will imminently be more southerners than locals in.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 11, 2021, 09:09:05 am
Row back on Boris mid Feb vaccination target. Vacc minister today saying vaccination invitations will be sent to all those in the groups specified by mid feb.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Wil on January 11, 2021, 09:28:40 am
Maybe I'm being really naive, but I really don't understand why BJ set himself up to fail on vaccines. The UK was actually doing a reasonably good job of it (obviously faster would be better) and he set a target that was clearly not going to be reached, with no roadmap. If we've vaccinated half of those people by mid February that's not bad, but instead he's going to fail at an arbitrary goal that wasn't necessary. What was the point?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 11, 2021, 09:32:26 am
Maybe I'm being really naive, but I really don't understand why BJ set himself up to fail on vaccines. The UK was actually doing a reasonably good job of it (obviously faster would be better) and he set a target that was clearly not going to be reached, with no roadmap. If we've vaccinated half of those people by mid February that's not bad, but instead he's going to fail at an arbitrary goal that wasn't necessary. What was the point?

Quite. I'd guess its because its a positive soundbite for people to focus on. And he wants to be loved....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on January 11, 2021, 09:49:53 am
House moving still seems to be legal.

My folks are due to move in with us on Saturday (as their new build isn't ready yet). I'm struggling to find anything that gives clear advice on self isolation or anything ahead of them doing so. Has anyone seen anything?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 11, 2021, 09:53:06 am
Maybe I'm being really naive, but I really don't understand why BJ set himself up to fail on vaccines. The UK was actually doing a reasonably good job of it (obviously faster would be better) and he set a target that was clearly not going to be reached, with no roadmap. If we've vaccinated half of those people by mid February that's not bad, but instead he's going to fail at an arbitrary goal that wasn't necessary. What was the point?

Quite. I'd guess its because its a positive soundbite for people to focus on. And he wants to be loved....

Haven’t you ever had one of those bosses, that you sit with for an hour before the big presentation to the board? The one where you carefully explain the project timetable, lead times on equipment, six months of planning and detailed job planning down to the half man hour, with the clear statement that if everything goes more smoothly than you can possibly hope, you need 32 weeks to handover?
Then the instant the wanker stands up to talk, he promises to be done in six months at a quarter of the budget you just laid out and you sit there turning blue as you choke yourself, deliberately, with your id lanyard?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 11, 2021, 10:02:36 am
Normally that type of boss behavior generates enough rope for the boss to eventually tangle themselves up in.... Its taking a while for that to happen to Boris but its all mounting up.... The Elder Statesmen of the Tory Party will be logging these down to wheel out when they want rid of him sharpish.

That is of little comfort at the moment.

So - some lockdown bingo. I recon - in the next round of measures (by the end of this week?) we'll have:

(a) Facemasks to be worn at all times outside (or a strong increase in facemask restrictions)
(b) Places of worship to be closed
(c) Tightening of what is considered an essential shop to stay open

Recon we're a way off closing manufacturing and construction but you never know...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tommytwotone on January 11, 2021, 10:29:20 am
I think they'll close nurseries next.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on January 11, 2021, 10:44:58 am
I predict further travel restrictions. You know because the general public are just following the actual words used in the restrictions, not the "spirit" of them.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on January 11, 2021, 10:55:52 am
I predict nursery closures, a tightening of keyworker criteria for school attendance, and some rule tightening on travel/exercise.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 11, 2021, 11:00:58 am
I predict a riot.

(Sorry, but Ricky Wilson could make better decisions than this).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 11, 2021, 11:05:31 am
There seems to be a subtle shift in the messaging about outdoor risk (I'm not trying to open the climbing outdoors can of worms any more etc..)... esp WRT ques outside shops and 'market stall environments'....

https://twitter.com/rowlsmanthorpe/status/1348569202404298752?s=20

Given that leaks and shifts in messaging tend to herald changes in policy etc...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on January 11, 2021, 11:12:24 am
Tighter restrictions are all well and good, but compliance with the current restrictions is actually pretty high, despite all the stories you hear about house parties and bad spotting at burbage. Where compliance is still really low is the numbers of people self isolating.

https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2021/01/07/pandemic-fatigue-how-adherence-to-covid-19-regulations-has-been-misrepresented-and-why-it-matters/

Dealing with this would give much bigger results than increases on the current restrictions. I’m exasperated that more isn’t been done to tackle this, but I guess it’s because it needs the government to put it’s hands in Rishi’s pockets...

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tommytwotone on January 11, 2021, 11:20:25 am
...a tightening of keyworker criteria for school attendance...

This is definitely needed - anecdotally (my daughter's primary and the partner's secondary she teaches at) - load more kids in school.

This needs a lift from non-keyworker employers too IMO (thinking Will's post from a week or so ago), so that non-keyworker parents have the capacity / flexibility to take care of home life alongside a job.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 11, 2021, 11:21:15 am
Tighter restrictions are all well and good, but compliance with the current restrictions is actually pretty high, despite all the stories you hear about house parties and bad spotting at burbage. Where compliance is still really low is the numbers of people self isolating.

https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2021/01/07/pandemic-fatigue-how-adherence-to-covid-19-regulations-has-been-misrepresented-and-why-it-matters/

Dealing with this would give much bigger results than increases on the current restrictions. I’m exasperated that more isn’t been done to tackle this, but I guess it’s because it needs the government to put it’s hands in Rishi’s pockets...

Yes - and this is firmly in TTI remit. It has also slipped under the radar that the way TTI is now assessed has been changed...

Is it me - or is anyone else massively underwhelmed by the vaccination effort? I appreciate they may well not have fridges/freezers overflowing with the vaccine to give out at the moment, but the pictures of the 7 vaccination centers are somewhat - er meh? As in a que of people outside and inside a few chairs and 5-10 makeshift cubicles... These 7 can apparently do 1000 a day when up to speed - so thats 7 x 1000 x 30 = 210 000 a month... (if they operate 7 days a week).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on January 11, 2021, 11:23:23 am
...a tightening of keyworker criteria for school attendance...

This is definitely needed - anecdotally (my daughter's primary and the partner's secondary she teaches at) - load more kids in school.

This needs a lift from non-keyworker employers too IMO (thinking Will's post from a week or so ago), so that non-keyworker parents have the capacity / flexibility to take care of home life alongside a job.

Apparently a massive increase in people claiming to be key workers up here.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on January 11, 2021, 11:44:06 am
...a tightening of keyworker criteria for school attendance...

This is definitely needed - anecdotally (my daughter's primary and the partner's secondary she teaches at) - load more kids in school.

This needs a lift from non-keyworker employers too IMO (thinking Will's post from a week or so ago), so that non-keyworker parents have the capacity / flexibility to take care of home life alongside a job.

Apparently a massive increase in people claiming to be key workers up here.
Some numbers from teachers I know:

Derbyshire school had 4% attendance during lockdown 1. It is now up to more than 50%.

Milton Keynes (where cases are now very high) school went from 2% to 60%.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on January 11, 2021, 11:50:01 am

Is it me - or is anyone else massively underwhelmed by the vaccination effort?

I'm still waiting for Operation Moonshot to take off.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 11, 2021, 11:56:02 am

Is it me - or is anyone else massively underwhelmed by the vaccination effort?

I'm still waiting for Operation Moonshot to take off.

I think a large part of it is in cardboard boxes at schools waiting to be used...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tommytwotone on January 11, 2021, 11:58:34 am
As far as I can calculate - c.2% of UK population covered in c. 2 weeks. So at that rate, only 50 more weeks to go!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on January 11, 2021, 12:00:39 pm
Tighter restrictions are all well and good, but compliance with the current restrictions is actually pretty high, despite all the stories you hear about house parties and bad spotting at burbage. Where compliance is still really low is the numbers of people self isolating.

https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2021/01/07/pandemic-fatigue-how-adherence-to-covid-19-regulations-has-been-misrepresented-and-why-it-matters/

Dealing with this would give much bigger results than increases on the current restrictions. I’m exasperated that more isn’t been done to tackle this, but I guess it’s because it needs the government to put it’s hands in Rishi’s pockets...

Yes - and this is firmly in TTI remit. It has also slipped under the radar that the way TTI is now assessed has been changed...

Is it me - or is anyone else massively underwhelmed by the vaccination effort? I appreciate they may well not have fridges/freezers overflowing with the vaccine to give out at the moment, but the pictures of the 7 vaccination centers are somewhat - er meh? As in a que of people outside and inside a few chairs and 5-10 makeshift cubicles... These 7 can apparently do 1000 a day when up to speed - so thats 7 x 1000 x 30 = 210 000 a month... (if they operate 7 days a week).

How many vaccinations do you estimate they'll have done by the end of the second week in February?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on January 11, 2021, 12:04:15 pm
My mum down in Dawlish got her first jab, she's 81 next month. A slight lightening of worries, now hopefully the rest of the "at risk" members of the family will get theirs soon.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 11, 2021, 12:04:32 pm
Good question. The aim is 15 million right?

(I know I'm moaning - but I really f*cking hope they totally smash their target..)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on January 11, 2021, 12:51:49 pm
If you want people to comply with self isolation periods you need to cover their full income whilst they are at home. 
It's a very simple equation but the right wing mentality of this country would suggest that people would abuse this and we don't want people taking an extra 2 week holiday on full pay do we?
The opposition should be shouting this from the roof tops on infinite repeat, a large majority of our population are behind it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on January 11, 2021, 01:18:03 pm
As far as I can calculate - c.2% of UK population covered in c. 2 weeks. So at that rate, only 50 more weeks to go!
Surely more like 100 weeks, given that everyone eventually will receive two doses?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on January 11, 2021, 01:24:58 pm
If you want people to comply with self isolation periods you need to cover their full income whilst they are at home. 
It's a very simple equation but the right wing mentality of this country would suggest that people would abuse this and we don't want people taking an extra 2 week holiday on full pay do we?
The opposition should be shouting this from the roof tops on infinite repeat, a large majority of our population are behind it.

It isn't very useful to discount the viewpoints of a massive portion of society just because they aren't left-wing. It isn't a 'very simple equation' when you actually take viewpoints different to your own into account.
 
What are the incentives?

1. Don't self-isolate, because you'll not be paid.
2. Self-isolate, because you'll be paid.
No brainer it would seem - pay people to self-isolate.


But there are lots of other incentives at play, including:

1. Behave carefully avoiding contacts wherever possible for fear of catching covid, because you won't be paid if you need to self-isolate.
2. Behave less carefully not avoiding contacts wherever possible, because if you catch covid you'll likely be OK and have two weeks paid holiday from work

Society doesn't comprise responsible socialists and public health experts unfortunately. It's full of people who to a greater or lesser degree operate according to (often perverse) incentives.
Look at people currently sending their children to school or travelling, or continuing to ask people to go into the office, or continuing to go indoor climbing up until the point the regs shut gyms, 'because the rules don't say we can't'. What incentives are these people operating by - greater good, or self-benefit?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 11, 2021, 02:10:46 pm

What are the incentives?

1. Don't self-isolate, because you'll not be paid.
2. Self-isolate, because you'll be paid.
No brainer it would seem - pay people to self-isolate.


But there are lots of other incentives at play, including:

1. Behave carefully avoiding contacts wherever possible for fear of catching covid, because you won't be paid if you need to self-isolate.
2. Behave less carefully not avoiding contacts wherever possible, because if you catch covid you'll likely be OK and have two weeks paid holiday from work


I am good with the idea of perverse incentives, but sceptical that the numbers of people seeking to deliberately infect themselves is going to be a big problem.

The numbers of people who just can’t afford to be without their wage for a couple of weeks and so don’t get tested or isolate is a massive problem. There are just too many people in that predicament. It needs fixing.

Automatic furlough if you have to isolate with employers adding 20% might be one solution.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 11, 2021, 02:39:25 pm
Meanwhile apparently Johnson has been caught cycling (with his security entourage) 7 miles away from Downing street....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on January 11, 2021, 03:44:50 pm

What are the incentives?

1. Don't self-isolate, because you'll not be paid.
2. Self-isolate, because you'll be paid.
No brainer it would seem - pay people to self-isolate.


But there are lots of other incentives at play, including:

1. Behave carefully avoiding contacts wherever possible for fear of catching covid, because you won't be paid if you need to self-isolate.
2. Behave less carefully not avoiding contacts wherever possible, because if you catch covid you'll likely be OK and have two weeks paid holiday from work


I am good with the idea of perverse incentives, but sceptical that the numbers of people seeking to deliberately infect themselves is going to be a big problem.

The numbers of people who just can’t afford to be without their wage for a couple of weeks and so don’t get tested or isolate is a massive problem. There are just too many people in that predicament. It needs fixing.

Automatic furlough if you have to isolate with employers adding 20% might be one solution.

Not deliberately infect - I don't know how you'd do that. Just them not being particularly concerned about the consequences to themselves of infection. But I also agree with the principle of supporting people off work through being asked by the government to either isolate or not to open their business. A balance of incentives at play. If work is a significant vector (and it must be) then why not shut more businesses and pay furlough? We all know there's loads of work going on that isn't crucial. But I think it's getting harder to win the hearts and minds the longer this goes on.

..and you have more faith in the 7,000 employees of the company I work for then I do! :)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on January 11, 2021, 04:09:42 pm
If work is a significant vector (and it must be) then why not shut more businesses and pay furlough? We all know there's loads of work going on that isn't crucial. But I think it's getting harder to win the hearts and minds the longer this goes on.


I agree with these two points. But until they compel Sunak to unpadlock his wallet workplaces will continue taking the piss. My office is still open which is definitely not necessary, for example. I do think compliance has reached something of a ceiling but its very localised depending on what people are used to. Here in Leicester its been Tier 3 or equivalent for so long I think people are basically carrying on as they were before as they are s used to it. In London, which has gone from Tier 2 (which sounds like Eden to me!) to 4 in the space of days, you seem to have a mixture of people scared shitless (correctly) and those chafing against the new restrictions having got used to the old norms (workplaces).

In better news, the vaccine rollout seems to going ok, touch wood. 2m have been jabbed so far and we will get daily updates from today. If we are to get anywhere close to the target the 'ramping up' (remember that buzzword being used for tests back in April?!) will have to get going this week, but the early signs are promising. This guy is a very good follow for those on twitter, has been on the money with a lot of his predictions in the last year and seems optimistic, so I'm clinging that liferaft!

https://twitter.com/Samfr/status/1348657928350400517
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 11, 2021, 04:12:43 pm
I don’t know your business Pete but I worked on the ropes for 7 years, so may have an inkling..

Anonymising to protect reputations, this is a conversation I had years ago. Let’s call the company ‘Tubitech’.
Me : hi
Mate: You’ll never guess what ‘Bill’ just said to me.
Me: Oh?
Mate: He said the insurance pays out £5,000 for ´loss of limb’ and asked me if his little finger was a ‘limb’.
Me: Why?
Mate (quoting ‘Bill’): ´.... because if it is, it’s coming off.´
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on January 11, 2021, 04:31:07 pm
On the anecdotal front re vaccination progress the wife (NHS, admin rather than frontline) got vaccinated Sunday, dad (81) is booked in for Friday.  Know a number of other NHS people who have had vaccine and a few other over 80s - feels like things are moving.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on January 11, 2021, 04:46:25 pm
If work is a significant vector (and it must be) then why not shut more businesses and pay furlough? We all know there's loads of work going on that isn't crucial.
Another big issue is workplaces requiring/pressuring employees to go in to work for jobs that can easily be done from home.

And pressure to not take sick leave, not get tested, not isolate, hide covid test results from colleagues, not pass on colleague details to track and trace etc etc.

Approximately 50% of my close circle are having to go in to work some or all of the time for jobs that can be done effectively from home.

All of them have workplaces that claim to be "covid secure" which generally means a risk assessment was completed and a couple of token measures were implemented.

This talk about stricter travel and outdoor exercise restrictions is all a bit pointless if the workplace abuse is allowed to continue.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on January 11, 2021, 04:56:17 pm
It's worse than pointless. It crushes everyone's spirits for very little benefit, whilst giving the impression something useful is being done, hence reducing the pressure to do something actually meaningful. Something meaningful like have an Ofsted style Covid inspectorate appraising workplace control measures.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 11, 2021, 05:09:51 pm
I’ll guess that no employers have yet been fined by the HSE for covid non compliance? (Aside from local councils shutting shops where it’s obvious... that’s happened in a couple of places)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: danm on January 11, 2021, 05:12:44 pm
It's really annoying to hear when you know your own employer has gone to great lengths to support home working and make things as safe as possible for those who do need to go into the office. I really can't fault "the firm" on anything.

I nearly blew up a few days ago when I went into a wine merchant to pick up my order which was pre-paid so I could just mask up, sanitise my hands and go in and grab the box. In the few minutes it took the assistant to get my order, I had a maskless couple come in and stand right next to me talking away. This pair of arseholes were well dressed and obviously fairly loaded, no surprise to see them get into a 4x4 cuntmobile and drive off afterwards.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on January 11, 2021, 05:41:06 pm
I don’t know your business Pete but I worked on the ropes for 7 years, so may have an inkling..

Anonymising to protect reputations, this is a conversation I had years ago. Let’s call the company ‘Tubitech’.
Me : hi
Mate: You’ll never guess what ‘Bill’ just said to me.
Me: Oh?
Mate: He said the insurance pays out £5,000 for ´loss of limb’ and asked me if his little finger was a ‘limb’.
Me: Why?
Mate (quoting ‘Bill’): ´.... because if it is, it’s coming off.´

Ha!

Large industrial group doing everything from cleaning to specialist engineering and design. I manage dopes.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on January 11, 2021, 06:30:45 pm
Meanwhile apparently Johnson has been caught cycling (with his security entourage) 7 miles away from Downing street....

That would be local by the definition of most cyclists out in the spring lockdown, have a little charity!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 11, 2021, 06:52:35 pm
Personally, I see little wrong with going for a cycle that distance away. I am sure Johnson agrees.

I do see quite a lot wrong with pontificating about the rightfulness of people breaking the rules, like Patel, when the top of government does things which the police would prosecute if they were being consistent in their reading of the rules.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 11, 2021, 07:00:13 pm
If the rules were more strictly defined - even if unfair/a bit daft it would be much easier to enforce and for people to obey (not to interpret). You could then give the police the steer to go easy on those bending the rules or not. Eg no more than 5km from your house etc...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 11, 2021, 07:14:06 pm

Is it me - or is anyone else massively underwhelmed by the vaccination effort? I appreciate they may well not have fridges/freezers overflowing with the vaccine to give out at the moment, but the pictures of the 7 vaccination centers are somewhat - er meh? As in a que of people outside and inside a few chairs and 5-10 makeshift cubicles... These 7 can apparently do 1000 a day when up to speed - so thats 7 x 1000 x 30 = 210 000 a month... (if they operate 7 days a week).

I’m more impressed now having read more about it. The Etihad vacc centre can do 2000 a day now going up to 8000. C.50k a week. That’s more like it 👍

Our GP is also one of the 7 GP Centres in Manchester doing the vaccinating. Good.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 11, 2021, 09:30:50 pm
I feel the need to highlight the more amusing “stuff” today.

Avery English Covid problem:

 https://www.thepoke.co.uk/2021/01/11/very-british-tale-of-a-doctor-his-outdoor-shower-and-unfortunate-cat-wildly-viral/?fbclid=IwAR20f79IKzHxIyMSzNYPINnvaTvC0gWCxYtLF1q3WXlMDCx4eEkI9f3O710 (https://www.thepoke.co.uk/2021/01/11/very-british-tale-of-a-doctor-his-outdoor-shower-and-unfortunate-cat-wildly-viral/?fbclid=IwAR20f79IKzHxIyMSzNYPINnvaTvC0gWCxYtLF1q3WXlMDCx4eEkI9f3O710)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on January 12, 2021, 07:59:49 am
On the anecdotal front re vaccination progress the wife (NHS, admin rather than frontline) got vaccinated Sunday, dad (81) is booked in for Friday.  Know a number of other NHS people who have had vaccine and a few other over 80s - feels like things are moving.

Yep, wife's had her first jab (Doctor) and my Mum and her friends (mid 70s) are getting contacted and their jabs being booked. It does feel like "it's happening".....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on January 12, 2021, 08:01:18 am

Is it me - or is anyone else massively underwhelmed by the vaccination effort? I appreciate they may well not have fridges/freezers overflowing with the vaccine to give out at the moment, but the pictures of the 7 vaccination centers are somewhat - er meh? As in a que of people outside and inside a few chairs and 5-10 makeshift cubicles... These 7 can apparently do 1000 a day when up to speed - so thats 7 x 1000 x 30 = 210 000 a month... (if they operate 7 days a week).

I’m more impressed now having read more about it. The Etihad vacc centre can do 2000 a day now going up to 8000. C.50k a week. That’s more like it 👍

Our GP is also one of the 7 GP Centres in Manchester doing the vaccinating. Good.

Yep, sounds good. My local tennis club has teamed up with a local pharmacy and turned into a local vaccination centre.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on January 12, 2021, 08:02:16 am
As far as I can calculate - c.2% of UK population covered in c. 2 weeks. So at that rate, only 50 more weeks to go!
Surely more like 100 weeks, given that everyone eventually will receive two doses?

A more positive take on that is, given 80% of deaths and critical illness occurs in the most vulnerable 20% of population, that means it could be 8 weeks or less for vaccines to give protection for the majority of that 80%.

Over 3% of population vaccinated being reported today and the pace is likely to accelerate.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on January 12, 2021, 08:27:42 am
On the anecdotal front re vaccination progress the wife (NHS, admin rather than frontline) got vaccinated Sunday, dad (81) is booked in for Friday.  Know a number of other NHS people who have had vaccine and a few other over 80s - feels like things are moving.

Yep, wife's had her first jab (Doctor) and my Mum and her friends (mid 70s) are getting contacted and their jabs being booked. It does feel like "it's happening".....


[anecdote]

my 80 yo neighbour has had both his jabs

[/anecdote]

Also agree with pete - if the gov get anywhere near the target by mid feb, plus that study that estimated 12.4M already had it, then we'll be looking in pretty good shape by then.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on January 12, 2021, 08:32:51 am

Also agree with pete - if the gov get anywhere near the target by mid feb, plus that study that estimated 12.4M already had it, then we'll be looking in pretty good shape by then.

The interesting question is what this will mean for restrictions. I understand a lot of people on ventilators in hospital currently are in the 50-70 age bracket, so wont be covered by the initial wave of vaccinations. Although the first set of jabs *should* have an effect on deaths, they may not have as big an effect on hospital admissions and bed capacity as we hope. This might mean waiting for the vaccination of the 50-70 group to be complete as well, which seems to be slated for the end of April, before loosening things. I hope I am wrong on that score!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 12, 2021, 08:56:20 am
The Times has taken it’s analysis a step further from the link I posted earlier.
Again, paywalled, sorry, but also the headline and first paragraph contain the key points:

 https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/latest-wave-of-covid-better-for-under-60s-but-worse-for-women-bsrs96qwx?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR0paVFFD2RCjnAd3rCeBNiRn5J2ReO2BV1G5gtikM5sGnakltmhqVzCcBU#Echobox=1610436202 (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/latest-wave-of-covid-better-for-under-60s-but-worse-for-women-bsrs96qwx?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR0paVFFD2RCjnAd3rCeBNiRn5J2ReO2BV1G5gtikM5sGnakltmhqVzCcBU#Echobox=1610436202)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on January 12, 2021, 09:14:05 am
As far as I can calculate - c.2% of UK population covered in c. 2 weeks. So at that rate, only 50 more weeks to go!
Surely more like 100 weeks, given that everyone eventually will receive two doses?

A more positive take on that is, given 80% of deaths and critical illness occurs in the most vulnerable 20% of population, that means it could be 8 weeks or less for vaccines to give protection for the majority of that 80%.

Over 3% of population vaccinated being reported today and the pace is likely to accelerate.
To be clear, I don't think for a minute the vaccination will take anything like 100 weeks! I was just pointing out that I thought TTT had missed the second dose out of his fag packet calc.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Snoops on January 12, 2021, 09:21:38 am
This is a really interesting comment from Peter Doshi, Associate Editor of the British Medical Journal. From a scientific evidence approach... the data isn't clear. If those results were in my thesis I'd be castigated.
Just to say, this isn't an anti-vac issue (I've already had this vaccine), just that the 'efficacy' figure of 95% seems unsupported at best.



https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2021/01/04/peter-doshi-pfizer-and-modernas-95-effective-vaccines-we-need-more-details-and-the-raw-data/ (https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2021/01/04/peter-doshi-pfizer-and-modernas-95-effective-vaccines-we-need-more-details-and-the-raw-data/)

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 12, 2021, 09:24:06 am
Paper on mask use. Seems fairly comprehensive. Tldr; wearing them good idea - mainly to prevent carriers transmitting rather than uninflected receiving.

https://www.pnas.org/content/118/4/e2014564118

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Snoops on January 12, 2021, 09:28:51 am
This the key bit, and we know first hand in Hospitals how PCR antigen tests fail to pick up  25%-40% of all later confirmed COVID-19  cases....

Quote
All attention has focused on the dramatic efficacy results: Pfizer reported 170 PCR confirmed covid-19 cases, split 8 to 162 between vaccine and placebo groups. But these numbers were dwarfed by a category of disease called “suspected covid-19”—those with symptomatic covid-19 that were not PCR confirmed. According to FDA’s report on Pfizer’s vaccine, there were “3410 total cases of suspected, but unconfirmed covid-19 in the overall study population, 1594 occurred in the vaccine group vs. 1816 in the placebo group.”

With 20 times more suspected than confirmed cases, this category of disease cannot be ignored simply because there was no positive PCR test result. Indeed this makes it all the more urgent to understand. A rough estimate of vaccine efficacy against developing covid-19 symptoms, with or without a positive PCR test result, would be a relative risk reduction of 19% (see footnote)—far below the 50% effectiveness threshold for authorization set by regulators. Even after removing cases occurring within 7 days of vaccination (409 on Pfizer’s vaccine vs. 287 on placebo), which should include the majority of symptoms due to short-term vaccine reactogenicity, vaccine efficacy remains low: 29% (see footnote).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 12, 2021, 09:40:23 am
This the key bit, and we know first hand in Hospitals how PCR antigen tests fail to pick up  25%-40% of all later confirmed COVID-19  cases....

Quote
All attention has focused on the dramatic efficacy results: Pfizer reported 170 PCR confirmed covid-19 cases, split 8 to 162 between vaccine and placebo groups. But these numbers were dwarfed by a category of disease called “suspected covid-19”—those with symptomatic covid-19 that were not PCR confirmed. According to FDA’s report on Pfizer’s vaccine, there were “3410 total cases of suspected, but unconfirmed covid-19 in the overall study population, 1594 occurred in the vaccine group vs. 1816 in the placebo group.”

With 20 times more suspected than confirmed cases, this category of disease cannot be ignored simply because there was no positive PCR test result. Indeed this makes it all the more urgent to understand. A rough estimate of vaccine efficacy against developing covid-19 symptoms, with or without a positive PCR test result, would be a relative risk reduction of 19% (see footnote)—far below the 50% effectiveness threshold for authorization set by regulators. Even after removing cases occurring within 7 days of vaccination (409 on Pfizer’s vaccine vs. 287 on placebo), which should include the majority of symptoms due to short-term vaccine reactogenicity, vaccine efficacy remains low: 29% (see footnote).

So strictly speaking - the vaccine stopped 95% of PCR positive covid cases.

It’s an interesting one - reading the Blog, being generous to Pfizer/Modena they’ve not included some of the data or decisions about data in their publications because it makes it harder to communicate the message (which is something many/most scientists might do)

Not being generous they’re over plying the efficacy and hiding their calculations.

Not releasing the full data (warts and all) helps (initial clarity) but also hinders here - as it leads people (like the Blog writer) to try and join the dots - or make calculations without all the data or by back calculating things from other results presented.

We will find out in the next few weeks when the impact of vaccinations becomes apparent or not!

I thought the behavioural changes in participants who effectively unblinded themselves (if you have a sore arm - it’s pretty clear you’ve not had the placebo) is interesting and wonder if this had any impact “I’ve had the vaccine so am invincible etc..”... 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 12, 2021, 09:50:04 am
This the key bit, and we know first hand in Hospitals how PCR antigen tests fail to pick up  25%-40% of all later confirmed COVID-19  cases....

Quote
All attention has focused on the dramatic efficacy results: Pfizer reported 170 PCR confirmed covid-19 cases, split 8 to 162 between vaccine and placebo groups. But these numbers were dwarfed by a category of disease called “suspected covid-19”—those with symptomatic covid-19 that were not PCR confirmed. According to FDA’s report on Pfizer’s vaccine, there were “3410 total cases of suspected, but unconfirmed covid-19 in the overall study population, 1594 occurred in the vaccine group vs. 1816 in the placebo group.”

With 20 times more suspected than confirmed cases, this category of disease cannot be ignored simply because there was no positive PCR test result. Indeed this makes it all the more urgent to understand. A rough estimate of vaccine efficacy against developing covid-19 symptoms, with or without a positive PCR test result, would be a relative risk reduction of 19% (see footnote)—far below the 50% effectiveness threshold for authorization set by regulators. Even after removing cases occurring within 7 days of vaccination (409 on Pfizer’s vaccine vs. 287 on placebo), which should include the majority of symptoms due to short-term vaccine reactogenicity, vaccine efficacy remains low: 29% (see footnote).

What symptoms?

He said, challenging the the experts with his n=1 anecdotal trump card...

I have, biologically, two children. One, the first, born in the UAE, where they have a substantial mandatory vaccination program, including Chickenpox.
The second, born in the UK, was not vaccinated against Chicken pox. I would have done it, but we were swept up in a cancer battle at that age and before we got to think about it; Chickenpox swept through the school and preschool both children attended.

Number one, developed two (2) clear Chickenpox spots, no fever, slight lethargy, but clearly “symptomatic”. Number two took the full hit. At two years old, that meant firmly securing thick mittens to his hands and enduring days of tears and tantrums etc.

I can’t see how the effectiveness of the vaccine can be truely questioned without much more detail. More than just the “two weeks” cut off etc.
You’d have to go into the severity and nature of symptoms too.
The mild symptoms in this disease are so generic and non specific, they could indicate anything from early stage Ebola to a slight allergy. That severity or lack of, taken with negative tests, improves the potential confidence in the test, surely (either way, sever symptoms + negative test = increased suspicion of test and vice versa) .
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on January 12, 2021, 09:54:46 am
This the key bit, and we know first hand in Hospitals how PCR antigen tests fail to pick up  25%-40% of all later confirmed COVID-19  cases....

Quote
All attention has focused on the dramatic efficacy results: Pfizer reported 170 PCR confirmed covid-19 cases, split 8 to 162 between vaccine and placebo groups. But these numbers were dwarfed by a category of disease called “suspected covid-19”—those with symptomatic covid-19 that were not PCR confirmed. According to FDA’s report on Pfizer’s vaccine, there were “3410 total cases of suspected, but unconfirmed covid-19 in the overall study population, 1594 occurred in the vaccine group vs. 1816 in the placebo group.”

With 20 times more suspected than confirmed cases, this category of disease cannot be ignored simply because there was no positive PCR test result. Indeed this makes it all the more urgent to understand. A rough estimate of vaccine efficacy against developing covid-19 symptoms, with or without a positive PCR test result, would be a relative risk reduction of 19% (see footnote)—far below the 50% effectiveness threshold for authorization set by regulators. Even after removing cases occurring within 7 days of vaccination (409 on Pfizer’s vaccine vs. 287 on placebo), which should include the majority of symptoms due to short-term vaccine reactogenicity, vaccine efficacy remains low: 29% (see footnote).

So strictly speaking - the vaccine stopped 95% of PCR positive covid cases.


Don't really have the skills to understand all the details but the numbers in the those paragraphs are significantly undermined by the next paragraph,

'If many or most of these suspected cases were in people who had a false negative PCR test result, this would dramatically decrease vaccine efficacy. But considering that influenza-like illnesses have always had myriad causes—rhinoviruses, influenza viruses, other coronaviruses, adenoviruses, respiratory syncytial virus, etc.—some or many of the suspected covid-19 cases may be due to a different causative agent.'

I was able to identify that argument in about 2 mins before reading the article - it does seem to me somewhat unlikely that the vaccine would be 95% effective against PCR positive covid but only 19 to 29% effective against non-PCR positive covid?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 12, 2021, 10:20:37 am
Easy Ian... I thought the main question mark raised by the blog were the 3000 cases of non tested / negative but with covid ish symptoms. That appeared equally (ish) across both groups.

Hence my first statement - strictly speaking the vaccine group had 5% of the number of positive pcr tests than the placebo group.

That’s not the same as saying the vaccine is 95% effective (as Pfizer may have said) - as we don’t know about the false negatives.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on January 12, 2021, 10:23:41 am
I understand a lot of people on ventilators in hospital currently are in the 50-70 age bracket

interested where you get this info from, i've not read anything similar and OMM's link would also seem to contradict it?

Given the low death numbers in those in the healthy and < 65 bracket, I think onerous restrictions after the vulnerable are jabbed will become increasingly hard to defend
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on January 12, 2021, 10:23:48 am
What Ian said.

We're doing a lot of testing for *one thing* during the pandemic. What would likely be discovered if all the PCR tests that have been been done to date also magically revealed whatever other viruses the population were carrying?

TT, isn't the term 'suspected covid-19' somewhat irrelevant - what matters are preventing death or critical illness. We aren't parking our lives and economies because people have symptoms of a cold.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 12, 2021, 10:25:56 am
What Ian said.

We're doing a lot of testing for *one thing* during the pandemic. What would likely be discovered if all the PCR tests that have been been done to date also magically revealed whatever other viruses the population were carrying?

TT, isn't the term 'suspected covid-19' somewhat irrelevant - what matters are preventing death or critical illness. We aren't parking our lives and economies because people have symptoms of a cold.

I think you’ve both got the wrong end of what I was trying to say - hope my last post clears that up. I don’t think we’re disagreeing...!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on January 12, 2021, 10:26:21 am
we know first hand in Hospitals how PCR antigen tests fail to pick up  25%-40% of all later confirmed COVID-19  cases....

25-40% being missed doesn't square with the 95% being missed that would be required for those "suspected COVID" cases to all be COVID with false-negative PCR tests though, does it? (I'm assuming these cases were PCR tested - you'd assume trial participants would be told to get a test if in doubt?) So we can presumably mark that up as "highly improbable". Various other valid sounding points in the article though.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on January 12, 2021, 10:28:22 am
I think you’ve both got the wrong end of what I was trying to say - hope my last post clears that up. I don’t think we’re disagreeing...!

Yep, gotcha.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on January 12, 2021, 10:51:45 am

interested where you get this info from, i've not read anything similar and OMM's link would also seem to contradict it?

Given the low death numbers in those in the healthy and < 65 bracket, I think onerous restrictions after the vulnerable are jabbed will become increasingly hard to defend

I agree; politically the govt will struggle make that fly even if they wanted to, but I do think that is what a section of scientists would like to see happen.

Anecdotal evidence from girlfriend who is working on intensive care ward. She reckons circa 70% are 50-70 currently with the remainder being younger. On the non-intensive care wards, the % of 70+ is higher. God knows how this slots into the other data, my brain hurts thinking about it!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Snoops on January 12, 2021, 10:55:47 am
Easy Ian... I thought the main question mark raised by the blog were the 3000 cases of non tested / negative but with covid ish symptoms. That appeared equally (ish) across both groups.

Hence my first statement - strictly speaking the vaccine group had 5% of the number of positive pcr tests than the placebo group.

That’s not the same as saying the vaccine is 95% effective (as Pfizer may have said) - as we don’t know about the false negatives.

Agree.

I think the point is when you only have 0.09% (168 people) getting COVID in the placebo arm, excluding >3000 symptomatic people who we would assume on Uk stats that a minimum of 25% actually had COVID (approx 750 people) asks a serious question of the data.
A further point was that significantly more (5x) amount of participants were excluded from the study in the vaccination arm vs placebo ...thats unusual.

The reasons for the above have not been given, hence why the BMJ and also many Doctors/Scientists/Journals internationally have raised it.

The facts will be in hospitalisation's/morbidity vs vaccine which we won't know for a couple of years.

I don't think anyone is suggesting the vaccine is not going to help, but its efficacy is likely to be lower than 95%. Clearly it also seems clear that in patients who have got COVID post vaccination the symptoms are milder...another reason to have it.

The vaccine is GOOD thing!!! But surely we are allowed to challenge unsupported statements, or else we may as well join MAGA   :(


Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on January 12, 2021, 11:09:42 am
has anyone got any decent links for info on immunity from infection?

Given the 12.4M figure that's been mentioned for current and past infections (England only) then by mid feb we're looking at ~ a third of the population having at least some degree of immunity?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on January 12, 2021, 01:32:01 pm
Easy Ian... I thought the main question mark raised by the blog were the 3000 cases of non tested / negative but with covid ish symptoms. That appeared equally (ish) across both groups.

Hence my first statement - strictly speaking the vaccine group had 5% of the number of positive pcr tests than the placebo group.

That’s not the same as saying the vaccine is 95% effective (as Pfizer may have said) - as we don’t know about the false negatives.

Agree.

I think the point is when you only have 0.09% (168 people) getting COVID in the placebo arm, excluding >3000 symptomatic people who we would assume on Uk stats that a minimum of 25% actually had COVID (approx 750 people) asks a serious question of the data.
A further point was that significantly more (5x) amount of participants were excluded from the study in the vaccination arm vs placebo ...thats unusual.

The reasons for the above have not been given, hence why the BMJ and also many Doctors/Scientists/Journals internationally have raised it.

The facts will be in hospitalisation's/morbidity vs vaccine which we won't know for a couple of years.

I don't think anyone is suggesting the vaccine is not going to help, but its efficacy is likely to be lower than 95%. Clearly it also seems clear that in patients who have got COVID post vaccination the symptoms are milder...another reason to have it.

The vaccine is GOOD thing!!! But surely we are allowed to challenge unsupported statements, or else we may as well join MAGA   :(

How does the quality of the Pfizer data compare with the data provided by AZ for their vaccine? Could this be a reason for AZ reporting a lower efficacy? Or are AZ doing the same dance?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: JJP on January 12, 2021, 01:37:55 pm
One thing I heard being discussed but have never checked up on is that Pfizer didnt test asymptomatic trial patients whereas oxford did, thus likely inflating the Pfizer vaccine effectiveness.  I have had the Pfizer one but tbh never looked into the data. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on January 12, 2021, 01:43:41 pm
What Ian said.

We're doing a lot of testing for *one thing* during the pandemic. What would likely be discovered if all the PCR tests that have been been done to date also magically revealed whatever other viruses the population were carrying?

TT, isn't the term 'suspected covid-19' somewhat irrelevant - what matters are preventing death or critical illness. We aren't parking our lives and economies because people have symptoms of a cold.

I think you’ve both got the wrong end of what I was trying to say - hope my last post clears that up. I don’t think we’re disagreeing...!

Late to catch up - my comments were pointing out issues with quoted paragraphs (not your post  :-[), and definitely not meant to indicate disagreement with your comments  :)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on January 12, 2021, 02:21:44 pm
On the anecdotal front re vaccination progress the wife (NHS, admin rather than frontline) got vaccinated Sunday, dad (81) is booked in for Friday.  Know a number of other NHS people who have had vaccine and a few other over 80s - feels like things are moving.

Yep, wife's had her first jab (Doctor) and my Mum and her friends (mid 70s) are getting contacted and their jabs being booked. It does feel like "it's happening".....


[anecdote]

my 80 yo neighbour has had both his jabs

[/anecdote]
I think all of the healthcare workers and other NHS staff I know have now had at least one dose. Some have had a second dose and many have a second dose scheduled. I don't know if they'll actually get it on their current schedule but it seems that not everywhere is sticking to the longer gap between doses.

Most of them did not have a specific appointment for the first dose, they were on a waiting list. At the end of the day, if all of the vaccine doses hadn't been used up, the staff got them.

Seems to be a good way to get more frontline staff vaccinated quickly. I hope they have a plan to continue using up the spares after all healthcare workers have been done.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on January 13, 2021, 06:02:26 pm
A friend sent me this: https://www.personneltoday.com/hr/scientists-surprised-at-construction-industry-covid-clusters/

Unbelievable to me that a Professor on SAGE is surprised at clusters of transmission in the construction industry, and that he claimed people outside that industry were surprised to discover how much work goes on indoors... :wall:  These people advise the government!
''But he conceded that many people beyond the sector did not realise that many construction workers actually carried out many tasks inside, in confined spaces.''

What do these people actually think happens outside their offices? It wouldn't surprise me at all if the construction industry was the biggest vector of all non essential work.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on January 13, 2021, 07:41:01 pm
Unbelievable to me that a Professor on SAGE is surprised at clusters of transmission in the construction industry

''But he conceded that many people beyond the sector did not realise that many construction workers actually carried out many tasks inside, in confined spaces.''

It wouldn't surprise me at all if the construction industry was the biggest vector of all non essential work.

Agreed. Not just from trades on site either. The meetings I’ve had to attend in the last 6 months have been fucking atrocious - crammed into the same tiny shoe box site cabin offices as always. People moan when you open a window because it’s cold. Last Friday was the final straw and I’ve refused to go to meetings on site until it’s under control again.

Ridiculous thing is covid compliance seems to mean you have to wear a mask in the canteen, corridors, and general office space but not once you get into the meeting room  :slap:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ged on January 13, 2021, 08:20:59 pm
That Is indeed bonkers,and good on you for putting your foot down. Tends to not get sorted until people do that.

I had to laugh at a radio presenter the other day talking about how "surely schools are covid secure by now, they've had months to get sorted". As though our resources have somehow increased in that time, or we suddenly aren't expected to have thirty 16 year old crammed into a classroom.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on January 13, 2021, 10:14:10 pm
I know our kids' primary head had to spend months planning for socially distanced / blended learning approach, where they spent forever seeing how many kids they could fit in, wile still maintaining social distance criteria, and alternate teaching days. Then school went back as normal, with a few minor changes, then totally closed again after Xmas. Was all that planning totally canned? It took her forever!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on January 14, 2021, 09:01:46 am
So given this:
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/jan/14/recovering-from-covid-gives-similar-level-of-protection-to-vaccine
And this:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2021/jan/10/one-in-five-have-had-coronavirus-in-england-new-modelling-says

If we assume equal infection rates across the population, that's around a third of the population, including all the most vulnerable, with a significant degree of immunity by mid Feb. I'm increasingly optimistic of an easing after half term, and it'll be increasingly difficult to defend onerous restrictions.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 14, 2021, 09:07:37 am
I know our kids' primary head had to spend months planning for socially distanced / blended learning approach, where they spent forever seeing how many kids they could fit in, wile still maintaining social distance criteria, and alternate teaching days.

Seems like the way forward to me. It does not have to be cycles of all shut/open.

Regarding wasted effort, heads spending their Xmas break organising mass lateral flow testing for children was not really necessary, was it?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on January 14, 2021, 09:28:56 am
Indeed, why were heads having to organise it??
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 14, 2021, 09:36:11 am
Is that rhetorical Chris? It was dumped on them by the DfE as school finished in December. In our case, at 6.30pm, that was 2 hours after we had closed for Christmas.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stabbsy on January 14, 2021, 11:03:14 am
So given this:
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/jan/14/recovering-from-covid-gives-similar-level-of-protection-to-vaccine
And this:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2021/jan/10/one-in-five-have-had-coronavirus-in-england-new-modelling-says

If we assume equal infection rates across the population, that's around a third of the population, including all the most vulnerable, with a significant degree of immunity by mid Feb. I'm increasingly optimistic of an easing after half term, and it'll be increasingly difficult to defend onerous restrictions.
While the above is probably true in terms of defending restrictions (especially to the Tory backbenchers), I’d argue it’s the wrong approach. It’s the same mistake the government made in May by releasing the lockdown too quickly before cases were at a low enough level. We’ve just been letting things rumble on at a lowish but noticeable level that was high enough to make further serious waves almost inevitable.

A harder lockdown until March or even April could set you up for a full summer/autumn without looking over your shoulder permanently. With low enough levels, TTI can actually work properly - particularly if you let public health experts look after it. The tier system also starts to make more sense. If you look at, say, Australia, that’s how they’ve kept things under control. Local lockdowns come in for a handful of cases and it gets snuffed out fairly quickly. Making that work in exactly the same way in the UK would be difficult for obvious reasons, but a similar approach could work.

It would be painful/inconvenient from a personal perspective, but I think it’s the right strategy in the long run. The repeated lockdown/release cycle we’ve been going through is false economy in my view. If we release again in February, then we won’t quite get ahead of it, the vaccination program will be less successful, hospitals will struggle to recover and TTI won’t get the opportunity to work. Probably not a popular view (not even with me!), but governments are there to make the right decisions not the popular ones.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 14, 2021, 11:18:59 am
Herd or community immunity is going to come back into the frame - really this is what we're talking about here non? A sufficient number of people with a level of immunity from catching it or vaccination so covid (and its impacts) dwindles and life can return slowly to previous ways...

Some things to consider - It was touted by a few that the reason London wasn't badly affected in Oct/Nov was because of high levels of previous infection from the first wave. That clearly didn't stop the Dec/Xmas wave that is presently filling the hospitals :( though maybe it would have been worse? Despite there being high infection percentages from wave 1, it still found areas to 'rip through' in the most recent wave. I also read that with the more transmissible strain, the percentage of population with some immunity needs to rise from 60-70 to 80+ percent... Also, a percentage (much reduced) are still going to get ill - and some will still die from it even when vaccinated etc...

I guess this is why the mood music from the scientists is all along the lines of things will ease off, but distancing and mask wearing will be with us for a good while (years) etc...

/ramble
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on January 14, 2021, 11:25:31 am
I saw this today for vaccinations up to 12th Jan, I don't know their source:

UK COVID VACCINATIONS

1ST DOSES
YESTERDAY = 2,431,648
TODAY = 2,639,309

INCREASE = 207,661

DAILY VACCINATIONS NEEDED TO HIT 15M TARGET BY FEB 14TH = 374,566


Pretty impressive numbers, looks like they might get near to having the top 4 priority groups done by mid Feb, certainly by late Feb barring a catastrophe. My guess is the restrictions will go back to regional tiers from late Feb and a very strong recovery in the economy through 2021. Lots of pent up demand.

I don't think mask-wearing and distancing will last very long into 2021 once we're past early spring. I do think that by late this year covid will be viewed by many as like a flu - that is, something dangerous that we vaccinate against and life goes on despite it. Some bad regional outbreaks next winter will make people fear the worst again but the direction of travel is vaccines will keep a lid on both covid and most people's fear.
Caveat, all barring a catastrophic new strain that kills young people like spanish flu did.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on January 14, 2021, 11:32:11 am
So given this:
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/jan/14/recovering-from-covid-gives-similar-level-of-protection-to-vaccine
And this:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2021/jan/10/one-in-five-have-had-coronavirus-in-england-new-modelling-says

If we assume equal infection rates across the population, that's around a third of the population, including all the most vulnerable, with a significant degree of immunity by mid Feb. I'm increasingly optimistic of an easing after half term, and it'll be increasingly difficult to defend onerous restrictions.

I don't see it being advisable to reopen significantly in February.

The recent rapid spread has occurred despite the levels of immunity from previous infections. It hasn't prevented it tearing through the population.

The reinfection study was only on the under 55s and ran until November. So the data is largely from before the b117 variant. It seems likely that the levels of immunity for a 60 year old against the b117, 501Y.V2 or the new Brazilian variant will be a lot lower.

Although numbers are just starting to head in the right direction in the areas that went to tier 4 earlier, they are doing so from a very high level and, with a more infectious strain plus a weaker lockdown than for lockdown 1, I don't expect numbers to drop that quickly.

So if we start to reopen in February, we are likely to be doing so from a position of still having high prevalence.

In a let it rip scenario, we'll quickly overwhelm the NHS, even with most of the 70+ being immune.

We'll have vaccinated the most vulnerable, who won't die, but the hospitals will fill up with people in their 60s, 50s and 40s until the death rate shoots up again due to lack of healthcare capacity.

Unless numbers start to drop a lot faster than I expect, I don't see opening up in February being sensible.

There's going to be a lot of pressure to do it though, particularly from those who have been vaccinated and those who think they're immune from past infections.

I expect we will see some easing in February. With a return to a tiered system that opens up too quickly and sees a rapid return to very high infection levels that threaten to overwhelm the NHS. I hope I'm wrong.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on January 14, 2021, 11:40:00 am
If you look at, say, Australia, that’s how they’ve kept things under control. Local lockdowns come in for a handful of cases and it gets snuffed out fairly quickly.

I agree largely with what you've said, but comparing UK to Australia is very different. Due to massive distances, inter city and inter state travel is not that common there, compared to travel  between counties / lockdown regions in the UK.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on January 14, 2021, 11:44:31 am
So given this:
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/jan/14/recovering-from-covid-gives-similar-level-of-protection-to-vaccine
And this:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2021/jan/10/one-in-five-have-had-coronavirus-in-england-new-modelling-says

If we assume equal infection rates across the population, that's around a third of the population, including all the most vulnerable, with a significant degree of immunity by mid Feb. I'm increasingly optimistic of an easing after half term, and it'll be increasingly difficult to defend onerous restrictions.

I don't see it being advisable to reopen significantly in February.

The recent rapid spread has occurred despite the levels of immunity from previous infections. It hasn't prevented it tearing through the population.

The reinfection study was only on the under 55s and ran until November. So the data is largely from before the b117 variant. It seems likely that the levels of immunity for a 60 year old against the b117, 501Y.V2 or the new Brazilian variant will be a lot lower.

Although numbers are just starting to head in the right direction in the areas that went to tier 4 earlier, they are doing so from a very high level and, with a more infectious strain plus a weaker lockdown than for lockdown 1, I don't expect numbers to drop that quickly.

So if we start to reopen in February, we are likely to be doing so from a position of still having high prevalence.

In a let it rip scenario, we'll quickly overwhelm the NHS, even with most of the 70+ being immune.

We'll have vaccinated the most vulnerable, who won't die, but the hospitals will fill up with people in their 60s, 50s and 40s until the death rate shoots up again due to lack of healthcare capacity.

Unless numbers start to drop a lot faster than I expect, I don't see opening up in February being sensible.

There's going to be a lot of pressure to do it though, particularly from those who have been vaccinated and those who think they're immune from past infections.

I expect we will see some easing in February. With a return to a tiered system that opens up too quickly and sees a rapid return to very high infection levels that threaten to overwhelm the NHS. I hope I'm wrong.

I wonder if the government thought of this (for once) and was the reason the current rules were put in until end March, with possible changes to reduce restrictions before if it’s sensible to do so...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on January 14, 2021, 11:45:24 am
One thing to be cautious of Pete, is that for every day you're under your vaccination target, the target itself grows..  but yeah, fingers crossed the ramp is quick. Daily data is now on https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/ and for the 2 days so far it's a quick ramp (daily vaccinations approx 50k higher on 12th than 11th) so early signs look promising
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on January 14, 2021, 11:54:23 am
Everything suggests that the capacity will not be the issue, it will be supply. The trend of the ramp is promising and it sounds like we could already be vaccinating many more people (see 24 hours a day debate) but are limited by stock. This also sounds like it will fluctuate for the next month but should be steady after that. The government are not releasing the numbers on supply, maybe to protect AstraZeneca, but can see this changing if a significant bottleneck develops in an effort to absolve themselves of blame!

As ever, there is a world of difference between what we 'should' do in a lab experiment/ideal world and what the government will do I suppose. Whilst I see the merits of sdm and stabbsy's arguments I don't think they will be politically defensible. We are many months away from a zero covid strategy; to achieve that would probably take until autumn as far as I can see, and would require lockdowns to be a lot stricter than they are now, which even if implemented I suspect would be ignored by large swathes of the public.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on January 14, 2021, 12:06:01 pm
I know our kids' primary head had to spend months planning for socially distanced / blended learning approach, where they spent forever seeing how many kids they could fit in, wile still maintaining social distance criteria, and alternate teaching days.

Seems like the way forward to me. It does not have to be cycles of all shut/open.

Regarding wasted effort, heads spending their Xmas break organising mass lateral flow testing for children was not really necessary, was it?
Yes. Schools were dumped right in the :shit: pre Christmas re:testing.  I can only vouch for the secondary school I work in but we have trained up staff and as of this week the sports hall is a fully functioning testing unit. School is open with attendance around 100 pupils each day. Everyone that has consented including staff will be tested twice a week. I have just had my first one done (I scored negative).  Personally, I am reassured by this as whilst we know the tests aren't great testing twice a week should be a fairly good screening method and pick up any cases whilst we are all still working with children in school.
*Generally speaking teachers/school staff are still very pissed at the government though.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 14, 2021, 12:16:22 pm
We are many months away from a zero covid strategy; to achieve that would probably take until autumn as far as I can see, and would require lockdowns to be a lot stricter than they are now, which even if implemented I suspect would be ignored by large swathes of the public.

I think its impossible now.... (or at least highly impracticable) as its everywhere in the UK now - so getting down to zero covid cases (or very close to) will take a long time, of everyone obeying the rules exactly, isolating as they are supposed to, not working when the shouldn't etc... Then - we'd have to have a very good TTI system (its not) and a functioning border biosecurity system - rather than waving a bit of paper at immigration and going straight through (have more than a handful of people been fined for breaching quarantine?). If we want to lock down fully for much longer, and stop any form of regional, national or international travel then maybe...

Can't see that happening...

RE: Timings, if we're 2-3 weeks off the NHS peak (if numbers are flattening) many of those hospitalised will be in there for weeks (many less - but many for a long time) so the pressure will be high for much longer than end of feb I expect... Remember how long it took for the death rate to come down after the march/april peak? There was a huge lag behind cases.

Vaccines - this is all very positive. I am frustrated by the slow ramp up, but also encouraged (in a strange way) that aside from Israel, every other nation has really struggled to roll out the vaccine fast (we seem to be actually doing better than many places for once). 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on January 14, 2021, 12:23:36 pm
Is that rhetorical Chris? It was dumped on them by the DfE as school finished in December. In our case, at 6.30pm, that was 2 hours after we had closed for Christmas.

Yes, rhetorical, can't make that shit up.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on January 14, 2021, 12:26:56 pm
As ever, there is a world of difference between what we 'should' do in a lab experiment/ideal world and what the government will do I suppose. Whilst I see the merits of sdm and stabbsy's arguments I don't think they will be politically defensible. We are many months away from a zero covid strategy; to achieve that would probably take until autumn as far as I can see, and would require lockdowns to be a lot stricter than they are now, which even if implemented I suspect would be ignored by large swathes of the public.
There is no zero covid strategy. We can get deaths and hospitalisations down to low levels (subject to future mutations) and get it to the point where it no longer needs to prevent normal life but there is no chance of eradicating it in this country in the forseeable future.

If we were able to get it down to zero here, it wouldn't be long before an import event led to a localised outbreak.

I think the closest we can get is to get cases low enough that an effective track and trace system could rapidly control local outbreaks. I'm not convinced we'll ever have the political will to get numbers that low or that we'll ever achieve an effective track and trace system.

It'll be interesting to see how places like New Zealand cope with this issue. With no infection led immunity, they'll need far higher levels of vaccination before they can allow a return to international travel without causing an outbreak.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on January 14, 2021, 12:30:44 pm
This is true. NZ relies heavily on international tourism, but they could just impose this "vaccination passport" for visitors. The population is pretty low compared to here too, sure by the same token anyone travelling from there could get a vaccine.

For now though, they are all stuck in NZ. How hard for them! :)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on January 14, 2021, 12:32:15 pm

There is no zero covid strategy. We can get deaths and hospitalisations down to low levels (subject to future mutations) and get it to the point where it no longer needs to prevent normal life but there is no chance of eradicating it in this country in the forseeable future.

If we were able to get it down to zero here, it wouldn't be long before an import event led to a localised outbreak.

I think the closest we can get is to get cases low enough that an effective track and trace system could rapidly control local outbreaks. I'm not convinced we'll ever have the political will to get numbers that low or that we'll ever achieve an effective track and trace system.

It'll be interesting to see how places like New Zealand cope with this issue. With no infection led immunity, they'll need far higher levels of vaccination before they can allow a return to international travel without causing an outbreak.

I agree with all of this.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on January 14, 2021, 01:18:12 pm
This is true. NZ relies heavily on international tourism, but they could just impose this "vaccination passport" for visitors. The population is pretty low compared to here too, sure by the same token anyone travelling from there could get a vaccine.

For now though, they are all stuck in NZ. How hard for them! :)
I think some sort of vaccination passport is inevitable. And once one country introduces it, everyone else will follow until it is a global requirement.

I expect it will lead to some tension this year regarding travel and the rights of old vs young and rich countries vs poorer countries.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on January 14, 2021, 02:32:11 pm

I think some sort of vaccination passport is inevitable. And once one country introduces it, everyone else will follow until it is a global requirement.

I expect it will lead to some tension this year regarding travel and the rights of old vs young and rich countries vs poorer countries.

I don't think vacc passports will become a proper thing until they are privately available. Its probably not sustainable to exclude ~ 65/70% of the population for being under 70 (although nothing would surprise me!).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 14, 2021, 09:02:58 pm
I don't generally quote Tory MPs, but Neil O'Brien has handily tweeted a compilation of Toby Young's vacuous tweets on the pointlessness of lockdown/achievement of near herd immunity, now curiously deleted by Young
https://twitter.com/NeilDotObrien/status/1349701110588710916
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on January 14, 2021, 09:19:44 pm
I don't generally quote Tory MPs, but Neil O'Brien has handily tweeted a compilation of Toby Young's vacuous tweets on the pointlessness of lockdown/achievement of near herd immunity, now curiously deleted by Young
https://twitter.com/NeilDotObrien/status/1349701110588710916

He really is a dick of the very highest order.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on January 14, 2021, 09:21:15 pm
Had a quick look if he’d responded which unfortunately meant going on his Twitter 🤢
Young said (to save anyone else having to look) :
Quote
    In fact, I installed an app last week that deletes all tweets more than a week old. This was in response to Twitter's increasing intolerance of people who challenge liberal orthodoxies, including Covid orthodoxy. I would advice other dissenters to do the same.

Quote
The app won't protect you from Twitter's internal offence archaeologists, but it will make it harder for censorious political activists to bombard the company with vexatious complaints in the hope of getting you banned.   

This is an interesting development in itself. This obviously doesn’t change all the nonsense he’s spouted and I’m sure there will be ways for suitably enthusiastic people to search old tweets still.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on January 14, 2021, 10:05:32 pm
Its probably not sustainable to exclude ~ 65/70% of the population for being under 70 (although nothing would surprise me!).

For any country that has essentially isolated itself like NZ and has low level of immunity, they will have to. If any person young or old enters the county, they will either need to be vaccinated, or quarantine and test on arrival.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 15, 2021, 11:38:42 am
“Your Local Epidemiologist” on FB, is worth a follow.
Even if just for her “round up” posts:

“ As per usual, Friday seems to be catch up day. And we are drinking from a firehose.

Texas vaccinated 1 million people in 1 month. That’s pretty cool.

The U.S. metrics are showing mixed signals. Cases are increasing but the rate of increase is slowing down. Cases are rising in 14 states, staying the same in 32 states, and falling in 10 states. However test positivity rates are still increasing. It’s been two weeks since the New Year. This is when I predicted we would hit our peak. We’ll wait to see if that was a lucky guess.

A new variant popped up in Ohio. Scientists are calling it the “Columbus variant”, which is easier than its real name COH.20G/501Y. It has three mutations on the spike protein. It’s probably more transmissible, but not more deadly. CDC is looking into this data as we speak. There’s no indication that vaccines will not work against it.

Johnson & Johnson published data from their Phase I/II trial. This is huge, as it is the first one dose vaccine to make it this far. The vaccine is safe and 100% (!!!) effective in making antibodies. J&J is in the middle of Phase III. We should know interim results (i.e. efficacy) soon. They’re still on track for a Feb FDA meeting.

Asymptomatic spread is, in fact, confirmed. A JAMA publication this week found 59% of transmission is from asymptomatic people. This is much higher than what we initially thought (40%). Peak infectiousness was at 3-7 days and infectiousness lasted 10 days. This certainly explains why this pandemic has been so darn hard to contain.

Masks with layering materials is sufficient for stopping the spread of COVID. Cotton had a efficiency of 40% compared to N95 masks. Most single-layered materials had efficiencies of <20%, offering little protection. Mask up! And make sure they are double layered.

A meta-analysis study (i.e. the scientists pooled many studies together) found that the overall COVID19 attack rate in schools is low: 0.15% for students and 0.7% for staff. The quality of the pooled studies was not ideal, but it does give us a first glimpse of school transmission.

That’s it for now. Have a great weekend!

Love, YLE”

Data Sources:
COVID19 Data: Covid Tracking Project
Columbus variant: https://wexnermedical.osu.edu/mediaroom/pressreleaselisting/new-sars-cov2-variant
J&J trial: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2034201 (https://wexnermedical.osu.edu/mediaroom/pressreleaselisting/new-sars-cov2-variant
J&J trial: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2034201)
Asymptomatic spread: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2774707?fbclid=IwAR0lPoWEUZrHRb_SnU6i0kXOPnXdIOisLY5Xmv1xVD0lqQ6LLll5kdeVsxA (https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2774707?fbclid=IwAR0lPoWEUZrHRb_SnU6i0kXOPnXdIOisLY5Xmv1xVD0lqQ6LLll5kdeVsxA)
Mask: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0244626 (https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0244626)
Meta-analysis: http://jogh.org/documents/issue202002/jogh-10-021104.pdf (http://jogh.org/documents/issue202002/jogh-10-021104.pdf)

Caveat:
I’m sure that the US data on school transmission does not reflect the new English variant rates, or even their Columbus variant. So I assume it under estimates the issue.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on January 15, 2021, 11:55:18 am
Its probably not sustainable to exclude ~ 65/70% of the population for being under 70 (although nothing would surprise me!).

For any country that has essentially isolated itself like NZ and has low level of immunity, they will have to. If any person young or old enters the county, they will either need to be vaccinated, or quarantine and test on arrival.

Yeah, I wasn't thinking from NZs perspective so much as intra-European travel, where for the foreseeable massive chunks of the population will remain un vaccinated. Even once we are jabbed up in the UK it looks like other European countries (such as France) will be way behind unless things change markedly. I can't see European tourism opening up again solely for those who have been jabbed - it will either stay mostly shut until vaccinations are a bit more widespread or will be open to most people i think. Probably wrong!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 15, 2021, 09:42:59 pm
Some figures here on what the expected UK vaccine supply is over the coming months from a released then hastily redacted doc from the Scottish govt...

Positive news - enough for all the over 50 groups by mid March and for 2 doses for all UK adults by mid July. It may be even faster as the assumptions are based on 100% uptake and 5% wastage.

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-every-uk-adult-could-be-vaccinated-by-mid-july-if-these-figures-are-anything-to-go-by-12188909?dcmp=snt-sf-twitter
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on January 16, 2021, 01:16:45 pm
Well that's encouraging. I've seen a lot of comment suggesting they'll only vaccinate the old and its herd immunity for the rest.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on January 16, 2021, 01:43:22 pm
Official line on the gov.uk website is now that "all adults will be offered a vaccine by the autumn", which does indicate they are planning to provide vaccines for everyone (which was previously unclear):

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-publishes-plan-for-the-largest-vaccination-programme-in-british-history
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: duncan on January 16, 2021, 02:22:18 pm
My Mum (80+) got a Pfizer this week. Done at a polyclinic in N Somerset that sounds like it’s now dedicated to just providing vaccines. She described it as very quick and efficient.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on January 16, 2021, 03:00:05 pm
My Dad (also 80+) got his first shot yesterday.

Apparently he's in bed today feeling flu-ey and rubbish, but that's extremely common (and should only last a day or two) -- I briefed my folks in advance that this was possible so not to be freaked out by it.

Think he might be using it as an excuse to hog the TV for West Wing-watching purposes, though.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on January 16, 2021, 03:02:26 pm
Well that's encouraging. I've seen a lot of comment suggesting they'll only vaccinate the old and its herd immunity for the rest.

I think several factors may have influenced this including a large minority who won't have the vaccine (worrying survey here. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/16/covid-vaccine-black-people-unlikely-covid-jab-uk ) and hospitalisation rates have near doubled for young adults for the new variant.

Both my parents double dosed with Pfizer now and mother-in-law first dose today (delayed by heavy snow in W Yorkshire)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 16, 2021, 03:15:53 pm
My folks were due to get their second dose on Weds - but was cancelled on Monday. Standard I think now.

MrsTT also had her second Pfizer cancelled too.

Mother in law was convinced she was supposed to phone up a number at Guys (london) to get her jab (she's 70) and when she got through unsurprisingly they said it was only over 80's....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 16, 2021, 03:48:50 pm
My Dad (also 80+) got his first shot yesterday.

Apparently he's in bed today feeling flu-ey and rubbish, but that's extremely common (and should only last a day or two) -- I briefed my folks in advance that this was possible so not to be freaked out by it.

Think he might be using it as an excuse to hog the TV for West Wing-watching purposes, though.

Why would anybody watch “West Wing” now (on premium for sure) when you can just put on CNN? Possibly the CNN plot is more ludicrous and unbelievable, but...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 16, 2021, 04:22:29 pm
MrsTT has recently watched ALL of ER (for at least the second time) and is 70% through the Buffys.... it’s her comfort blanket at the end of every day...

My parents are quite into the Crown “I remember that happening don’t you know” 🥱
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 16, 2021, 04:27:09 pm
MrsTT has recently watched ALL of ER (for at least the second time) and is 70% through the Buffys.... it’s her comfort blanket at the end of every day...

My parents are quite into the Crown “I remember that happening don’t you know” 🥱
Mrs OMM and I were working through “The Ship”, this time last year.
By the end of Feb, she decided it was starting to look too much like a documentary and still haven’t finished...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on January 16, 2021, 05:15:42 pm

Why would anybody watch “West Wing” now (on premium for sure) when you can just put on CNN? Possibly the CNN plot is more ludicrous and unbelievable, but...

As an escapist view of some not really believable liberal utopia  ;) ? (and its free on All4 atm)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Simon W on January 16, 2021, 05:51:32 pm
Guys were offering it to over 70s. My mum called up today and is booked in for next week. 77 though so maybe they’ve changed it to over 75s now.

Certainly feels liked it’s picked up. I’m booked in next week (NHS) and this week lots of people around me have either had it or booked it.



My folks were due to get their second dose on Weds - but was cancelled on Monday. Standard I think now.

MrsTT also had her second Pfizer cancelled too.

Mother in law was convinced she was supposed to phone up a number at Guys (london) to get her jab (she's 70) and when she got through unsurprisingly they said it was only over 80's....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on January 16, 2021, 06:07:47 pm
As an escapist view of some not really believable liberal utopia  ;) ?

THAT.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: cheque on January 16, 2021, 07:47:07 pm
My other half’s Dad (84, no pre-existing conditions) had his first one just before Christmas. Date for the second is in March. My Mum and Dad (73 & 83 respectively, both have pre-existing conditions, my Dad’s also my Mum’s full time career) haven’t heard anything yet. Different areas though.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on January 17, 2021, 10:10:20 am
As an escapist view of some not really believable liberal utopia  ;) ?

THAT.

Or maybe because it's some of the best written TV ever, with high production values. There must be a massive gap at present in taking the themes of the show crossed with those other American greats, The Wire  and The Sopranos  on an anti utopian theme (not that I see Westwing as anything like utopian.. more like US politics when things were more 'normal')
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on January 17, 2021, 10:49:31 am
Or maybe because it's some of the best written TV ever, with high production values.

I think it can be both! But for him, I think part of the appeal is a picture of politics where liberal decency triumphs and the good guys get the good lines (and he's spent some of his life in the political trenches over here, so he's allowed to dream ...).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on January 17, 2021, 01:12:17 pm
As an escapist view of some not really believable liberal utopia  ;) ?

THAT.

Or maybe because it's some of the best written TV ever, with high production values. There must be a massive gap at present in taking the themes of the show crossed with those other American greats, The Wire  and The Sopranos  on an anti utopian theme (not that I see Westwing as anything like utopian.. more like US politics when things were more 'normal')

Indeed, a wonderful show, though obviously it is biased to liberal view of US politics (which is great by me but it is good to be aware of your own biases   :) ).  Hopefully the emoji made it clear that my liberal utopia comment was based on comparisons to the US political shitshow of the last few years.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on January 17, 2021, 04:25:09 pm
 :) OK, for balance, here is a Tory MP talking some sense on covid:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jan/17/id-love-to-ignore-covid-sceptics-and-their-tall-tales-but-they-make-a-splash-and-have-no-shame
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on January 18, 2021, 09:42:58 am
All 4 grandparents and girlfriend jabbed this weekend, which was a bit of good news.

In slightly deflating news, albeit probably makes sense from an scientific perspective, was listening to Zahawi on the radio just now suggesting that "gradual tiered easing of lockdown will start 2/3 weeks after top 9 priority cohorts vaccinated.' The planned timetable for that is end of March if all goes smoothly, which would suggest mid April before anything gets loosened up. Quite a big change from gradual easing after top 4 cohorts vaccinated (65% of deaths) to top 9 (99% of deaths and majority of pressure on NHS). Will be interesting to see whether that holds as suspect it will come under quite a lot of pressure from Tory right and public tbh.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 18, 2021, 09:56:49 am
In slightly deflating news, albeit probably makes sense from an scientific perspective, was listening to Zahawi on the radio just now suggesting that "gradual tiered easing of lockdown will start 2/3 weeks after top 9 priority cohorts vaccinated.' The planned timetable for that is end of March if all goes smoothly, which would suggest mid April before anything gets loosened up. Quite a big change from gradual easing after top 4 cohorts vaccinated (65% of deaths) to top 9 (99% of deaths and majority of pressure on NHS). Will be interesting to see whether that holds as suspect it will come under quite a lot of pressure from Tory right and public tbh.

I think Zahawi has been naughty this morning - starts talking in one interview about teachers, police, shopworkers etc.. being vaccinated before the age groups this morning "its my instinct" they should be I think were his words... before a mini backtrack that its actually set by an independent group (IIRC). Got a bit of Boris "wanting to please the person who's interviewing him"-itis....

Interesting opinion polls in the Sunday papers showing an overwhelming support for continuing and stronger measures amongst the public... that will not have gone un-noticed too.

Universal credit cut U-turn imminent too I bet... 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on January 18, 2021, 10:13:29 am

I think Zahawi has been naughty this morning - starts talking in one interview about teachers, police, shopworkers etc.. being vaccinated before the age groups this morning "its my instinct" they should be I think were his words... before a mini backtrack that its actually set by an independent group (IIRC). Got a bit of Boris "wanting to please the person who's interviewing him"-itis....

Interesting opinion polls in the Sunday papers showing an overwhelming support for continuing and stronger measures amongst the public... that will not have gone un-noticed too.

Universal credit cut U-turn imminent too I bet...

The British public would doubtless support full blown Stasi surveillance, snooping, capital punishment, child labour, benefit claimants being put to work on the railroad etc in an opinion poll.  :lol: I do think they are heavily biased towards the old and right wing, especially the non-online ones.

The sunday newspapers seemed v clear that the cabinet was united in wanting to start unlocking in March so will be interesting to see whether that has changed or whether Zahawi has gone off piste/ got confused.

The UC thing is a car crash. Sunak is being made to look like the child catcher (correctly). If even Therese Coffey thinks you're acting like a dick you probably are...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: J_duds on January 18, 2021, 11:01:23 am
At the start of Lockdown 3, we had Boris say it'll last to mid Feb, the next day Gove said end of Feb, and some one else from UK Gov I'm sure said say it be over by Easter (which is early April).  Whilst I realise we need to see how it pans out before opening up, it does make it difficult to plan ahead and also to stay motivated when we don't know the end date!  Anyone like to guess on when we will open up again?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on January 18, 2021, 11:20:26 am
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-16/norway-vaccine-fatalities-among-people-75-and-older-rise-to-29

Mildly worrying, seems not the panacea it was hoped to be.

Also found out yesterday an old classmate from SA has died due to CV-10 related illness.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on January 18, 2021, 11:34:11 am
In slightly deflating news, albeit probably makes sense from an scientific perspective, was listening to Zahawi on the radio just now suggesting that "gradual tiered easing of lockdown will start 2/3 weeks after top 9 priority cohorts vaccinated.' The planned timetable for that is end of March if all goes smoothly, which would suggest mid April before anything gets loosened up. Quite a big change from gradual easing after top 4 cohorts vaccinated (65% of deaths) to top 9 (99% of deaths and majority of pressure on NHS). Will be interesting to see whether that holds as suspect it will come under quite a lot of pressure from Tory right and public tbh.

not sure what definition of the cohorts you're using here? the cohorts I've seen are these:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EpMHtY4WEAEFh_3?format=jpg&name=large)

and that gives 88% of deaths from the top four cohorts. 65% is from the top 1 and a half cohorts? 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on January 18, 2021, 11:36:57 am
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-16/norway-vaccine-fatalities-among-people-75-and-older-rise-to-29

Mildly worrying, seems not the panacea it was hoped to be.

I know someone going through treatment for throat cancer at the moment who’s been told he won’t be getting the vaccine any time soon due to the risk of adverse effects from it. I would have thought the risk of catching covid in hospital would outweigh the risk from the vaccine itself but clearly the doctors don’t think so.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bradders on January 18, 2021, 11:53:36 am
In slightly deflating news, albeit probably makes sense from an scientific perspective, was listening to Zahawi on the radio just now suggesting that "gradual tiered easing of lockdown will start 2/3 weeks after top 9 priority cohorts vaccinated.' The planned timetable for that is end of March if all goes smoothly, which would suggest mid April before anything gets loosened up. Quite a big change from gradual easing after top 4 cohorts vaccinated (65% of deaths) to top 9 (99% of deaths and majority of pressure on NHS). Will be interesting to see whether that holds as suspect it will come under quite a lot of pressure from Tory right and public tbh.

Haven't seen that interview, but that was always my interpretation of how long this lockdown would last; the legislation says 31st March so I took that as the most reliable indicator of when it might end / restrictions might start being lifted. Especially given a) how long the first lockdown was, and b) that things are worse now than they were then.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on January 18, 2021, 12:02:33 pm
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-16/norway-vaccine-fatalities-among-people-75-and-older-rise-to-29

Mildly worrying, seems not the panacea it was hoped to be.

I know someone going through treatment for throat cancer at the moment who’s been told he won’t be getting the vaccine any time soon due to the risk of adverse effects from it. I would have thought the risk of catching covid in hospital would outweigh the risk from the vaccine itself but clearly the doctors don’t think so.

Fine line to walk... I believe if they are getting chemo then your immune system is compromised too making you more susceptible, but could it as easily be the vaccine could compromise the cancer treatment as the other way round?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on January 18, 2021, 12:03:42 pm

not sure what definition of the cohorts you're using here? the cohorts I've seen are these:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EpMHtY4WEAEFh_3?format=jpg&name=large)

and that gives 88% of deaths from the top four cohorts. 65% is from the top 1 and a half cohorts?


Thats correct; my mistake, think I must have just counted down four cells (and still got the number wrong!)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on January 18, 2021, 12:54:01 pm
In slightly deflating news, albeit probably makes sense from an scientific perspective, was listening to Zahawi on the radio just now suggesting that "gradual tiered easing of lockdown will start 2/3 weeks after top 9 priority cohorts vaccinated.' The planned timetable for that is end of March if all goes smoothly, which would suggest mid April before anything gets loosened up. Quite a big change from gradual easing after top 4 cohorts vaccinated (65% of deaths) to top 9 (99% of deaths and majority of pressure on NHS). Will be interesting to see whether that holds as suspect it will come under quite a lot of pressure from Tory right and public tbh.

Haven't seen that interview, but that was always my interpretation of how long this lockdown would last; the legislation says 31st March so I took that as the most reliable indicator of when it might end / restrictions might start being lifted. Especially given a) how long the first lockdown was, and b) that things are worse now than they were then.

Re the above lockdown 1 needed to get levels low enough to minimise spread in the absence of any immunity - cases/ deaths now are worse, but the vaccine is a massive positive now that was not available last year - by end of feb at current rates over 15M will have had first doses - and its reasonable to assume some acceleration, target is mid feb and that seems reasonable - thus nearly all those who are most at risk from the virus will have had at least one dose of vaccine - at some point in there will need to be a judgement about the continuing damage to wider society against the deaths prevented. 7% of the population have already had 1 dose.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bradders on January 18, 2021, 02:32:39 pm
I hope you're right! I think my initial view had a lot to do with general pessimism about how quickly the vaccines could be rolled out, and it does seem to be going better than I'd thought.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 18, 2021, 02:51:46 pm
Surely the NHS pressure will be the main 'allower' of relaxation? For that - there is a 2-4 week lag on case numbers...

Lots of anecdotal tales of covid hospitalisations in the media being much younger this time around. I wonder if this is due to better resilience (behavioural, PPE, Shielding) amongst the elderly/vulnerable - or whether the new strain does go for a younger cohort? Expect we'll see in the figures eventually but its interesting nothing has shown up yet despite the reports from wards.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on January 18, 2021, 03:09:02 pm
Surely the NHS pressure will be the main 'allower' of relaxation? For that - there is a 2-4 week lag on case numbers...

Lots of anecdotal tales of covid hospitalisations in the media being much younger this time around. I wonder if this is due to better resilience (behavioural, PPE, Shielding) amongst the elderly/vulnerable - or whether the new strain does go for a younger cohort? Expect we'll see in the figures eventually but its interesting nothing has shown up yet despite the reports from wards.

I think the vast majority of those in hospital are aged 50-70. Depends how you define much younger I suppose, but I haven't read anything thus far suggesting that those in their 20'/30's/40s are being disproportionately affected.

The million dollar question, which there is no answer for yet, is the effect that having 15m vaccinated has on NHS pressure. Hard to believe there wont be some impact, hopefully we will have a clearer view in a months time.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on January 18, 2021, 03:12:42 pm
Surely the NHS pressure will be the main 'allower' of relaxation? For that - there is a 2-4 week lag on case numbers...

Lots of anecdotal tales of covid hospitalisations in the media being much younger this time around. I wonder if this is due to better resilience (behavioural, PPE, Shielding) amongst the elderly/vulnerable - or whether the new strain does go for a younger cohort? Expect we'll see in the figures eventually but its interesting nothing has shown up yet despite the reports from wards.

Agree, but even if younger demographics are a larger percentage of hospitalisations this time (and I've not seen any actual data to support that) (and there's a fair bit of data that shows the UK variant at least does not cause more severe disease), and despite media emphasis on younger cases (which I suspect is partly to encourage compliance among the young) the vast majority of the pressure on NHS is still from the elderly. If they are largely protected, pressure on the health service should ease.

Spidermonkey do you have a link for demographics for hospitalisations? Would be interesting.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on January 18, 2021, 03:36:42 pm
Duma: this is the best I could do in 5 min search -https://twitter.com/_HannahRitchie/status/1350079008076165121

I remember Spiegelhalter alluding to the ICU stats on the radio the other day
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on January 18, 2021, 03:52:56 pm
Think the data referred to in this thread is from ONS: https://twitter.com/chrischirp/status/1350416428025962498?s=20

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on January 18, 2021, 04:31:14 pm
Thanks Alex, so a key bit of info would be whether the pinch point in NHS capacity is hospital beds or ICU beds - makes a big difference to vaccination strategy? Looking down that thread it's data since oct 2020, so excludes first peak, which may be good as treatments have improved, but less data? Would like to see breakdown of the 45-64 age bracket too, that's where the interesting disconnect between cases/admissions/ICU/deaths is.

Hospital admissions dropping now and numbers in hospital flattened, rate of increase in ICU admissions slowing too - looks like lockdown is working. Hopefully this will be the worst week for the NHS.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on January 18, 2021, 05:00:51 pm
https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/healthcare#card-people_who_have_received_vaccinations_by_report_date_daily

worrying drop in vaccination numbers last couple of days - hopefully just a weekend thing.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 18, 2021, 05:16:54 pm
https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/healthcare#card-people_who_have_received_vaccinations_by_report_date_daily

worrying drop in vaccination numbers last couple of days - hopefully just a weekend thing.

May also be that some surgeries have got all their ‘easy hits’ done (those over 80 who could easily come in etc..) and waiting for permission (now given) to go to the next group down etc..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 18, 2021, 05:17:47 pm
Some err worrying stats here 30% of those discharged from hospital after covid are readmitted at some point :-/

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/jan/18/almost-30-of-covid-patients-in-england-re-admitted-to-hospital-after-discharge-study?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on January 18, 2021, 06:02:39 pm
It’s so hard to know what to think about these sorts of one line stats when there are so many confounding factors with people’s health. Also the Guardian seem to love a good Covid scare story!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on January 18, 2021, 06:07:16 pm
Approx 1.7m vaccinations carried out in the first 7 days since ramp up. Not bad! Hopefully Tues stats will be better.

From a twitter account that I follow:

U.K. Covid19 Vaccinations

1st Doses

UP TO 17/01/21 = 3,857,266
UP TO 18/01/21 = 4,062,501

Increase = 205,235

Daily doses needed to hit 15m target by feb 14th = 405,093

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EsB5umgXIAQRBsA?format=jpg&name=large)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on January 18, 2021, 06:45:55 pm
It’s so hard to know what to think about these sorts of one line stats when there are so many confounding factors with people’s health. Also the Guardian seem to love a good Covid scare story!

100%. I'm all for slagging the government off but I think a lot of the reporting around vaccine side effects in particular borders on the scaremongering.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 18, 2021, 07:28:17 pm

I think the vast majority of those in hospital are aged 50-70. Depends how you define much younger I suppose, but I haven't read anything thus far suggesting that those in their 20'/30's/40s are being disproportionately affected.


The table 16 on p21 gives some info on this since September.
https://www.icnarc.org/DataServices/Attachments/Download/2df8a199-6336-eb11-912c-00505601089b
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 18, 2021, 07:32:42 pm
It’s so hard to know what to think about these sorts of one line stats when there are so many confounding factors with people’s health. Also the Guardian seem to love a good Covid scare story!

100%. I'm all for slagging the government off but I think a lot of the reporting around vaccine side effects in particular borders on the scaremongering.

Didn’t see any guardian articles about vaccine side effects...

 I was pointing to one about long covid.

It is going to feature for a good while once third out break is under some form of control. I know a couple of people with it - in varying forms - and at the moment everyone is scratching their heads about what to do.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on January 19, 2021, 04:39:24 pm
The gov dashboard isn't updated yet, but they announced that 4,266,577 have now received first vaccine dose, making Monday's daily vaccinations ~204,500. I.e. vaccinations per day has gone down three days in a row and is back below where it was on the 12th  :slap: :wall: Don't hold your breath for Malham season...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on January 19, 2021, 04:45:19 pm
updated now, rubbish news, obviously along with the deaths numbers, although I guess that was already baked in to some extent.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 19, 2021, 04:53:41 pm
Yes - it’s quite disheartening when it needs to be above 400k a day (inc weekends) to make the target. And of course that 400k a day target goes up if it’s not reached every day.

I really wish this government could be transparent with the data on vaccine supply, demand and availability. I think everyone understands it’s not simple and that some places may get more than others at certain times. I’d be much more onboard (problems as well as successes) if I could see the context. As ever - it feels as if it’s a case of “don’t bother your head with these things - you don’t need to know” bullshit.

Positive test results were 33k though - which is a good decline and shows the new variant isn’t completely resistant to lockdown... it’s still masses though...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ali on January 19, 2021, 06:21:58 pm
Looking at the Sky article linked to previously, which gave details of the vaccine supply schedule that Scotland was expecting, it appears that the second week of Jan there was very little supply (no Pfizer available at all). So maybe the low numbers of vaccinations over the last couple of days relate to stocks being low. If so there could be improvements soon as supply looked good for 3rd week of Jan.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 19, 2021, 06:24:18 pm
Reports from Israel suggesting that single Pfizer dose only 50% effective....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stabbsy on January 19, 2021, 06:34:54 pm
Reports from Israel suggesting that single Pfizer dose only 50% effective....
I’d heard 89% today from an NHS source (the wife). There’s also something on More or Less this week suggesting 90% for one dose - although was only half listening while fingerboarding, so not sure if that’s Pfizer or AstraZeneca.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on January 19, 2021, 06:45:32 pm
Reports from Israel suggesting that single Pfizer dose only 50% effective....
I’d heard 89% today from an NHS source (the wife). There’s also something on More or Less this week suggesting 90% for one dose - although was only half listening while fingerboarding, so not sure if that’s Pfizer or AstraZeneca.

Plus the fact the percentage was always highly likely to come down because the cohort which has had the vaccine, and which the data is based on, is hugely skewed towards the elderly and vulnerable.

Vaccine numbers are shite, not impressed!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on January 19, 2021, 07:04:39 pm
I’d heard 89% today from an NHS source (the wife). There’s also something on More or Less this week suggesting 90% for one dose - although was only half listening while fingerboarding, so not sure if that’s Pfizer or AstraZeneca.

IIRC the 90% they mentioned was from the JCVI, and the key difference vs Pfeizer's internal number was when you start counting. I.e. if you start from day 1 after the jab then you got 50% or so, but since we don't expect it to start working for 7-10 days, you can argue that you should count from 10 days after the jab, and if you do that then you get closer to 90%. From 5min on google it's not clear to me when the Israeli's are counting from as the reports all seems to be from some Israeli radio interview
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 19, 2021, 07:08:47 pm
Reports from Israel suggesting that single Pfizer dose only 50% effective....
I’d heard 89% today from an NHS source (the wife). There’s also something on More or Less this week suggesting 90% for one dose - although was only half listening while fingerboarding, so not sure if that’s Pfizer or AstraZeneca.

Plus the fact the percentage was always highly likely to come down because the cohort which has had the vaccine, and which the data is based on, is hugely skewed towards the elderly and vulnerable.

Vaccine numbers are shite, not impressed!

Good point.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Davo on January 19, 2021, 07:23:43 pm
Reports from Israel suggesting that single Pfizer dose only 50% effective....

Hope not. As I got that vaccine today!!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stabbsy on January 19, 2021, 08:06:38 pm
Reports from Israel suggesting that single Pfizer dose only 50% effective....
I’d heard 89% today from an NHS source (the wife). There’s also something on More or Less this week suggesting 90% for one dose - although was only half listening while fingerboarding, so not sure if that’s Pfizer or AstraZeneca.

Plus the fact the percentage was always highly likely to come down because the cohort which has had the vaccine, and which the data is based on, is hugely skewed towards the elderly and vulnerable.
Not sure I understand your point. Could you explain?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on January 19, 2021, 08:18:16 pm
With the usual disclaimers/excuses about not being a scientist and fundamentally not knowing what I'm talking about... :worms:

As I understand it, the cohort that Pfizer tested the vaccine on will have been drawn from a wide range of different ages and backgrounds, including both relatively young people, the middle aged and the elderly. The effectiveness percentage quoted, of 90%, would be an average value, eg. some will have been almost entirely protected, others will have gained less protection. It seems reasonable to think that the clinically vulnerable /those with weakened immune systems/the elderly would be 'less protected' on average than someone younger with a healthy immune system. Given Israel, like us has rolled its vaccines out to the vulnerable and elderly first and is testing on them, it doesn't hugely surprise me that the effectiveness % being quoted is lower, partly due to barrows' point about when you should start measuring effectiveness after the jab, but also partly because the older and vulnerable will have been less protected from the outset. 50% seems like quite a drop and I suspect barrows is more right than me, but it doesnt seem a like for like comparison to me because the sample will be almost entirely comprised of older, more vulnerable people, whereas the trial group would have been more representative.

This may be complete bollocks so if so call me out!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 19, 2021, 08:23:04 pm
It’s a good point but iirc they didn’t find any drop off in effectiveness of the Pfizer jab in the older age groups? Though this is based on 30000 people and <300 positive cases right?

For the astraZ vaccine the (infamous) half first dose better results were from a sub 60 (maybe even sub 50) year old cohort - hence they were unable to apply those rates wider?

It’ll come out in the wash - but there’s another Q about the wrong choice being made by the govt if (and it’s an if) delaying the second dose has a much bigger than expected effect... (as in much worse protection). We’ll find out - through Israel has vaccinated the highest percentage of its population compared to any other country iirc. UAE is next..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 19, 2021, 08:36:58 pm
More from the Israeli study here - not just the radio interview.

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-real-world-analysis-of-vaccine-in-israel-raises-questions-about-uk-strategy-12192751

Tldr is that they give everyone a second dose after 3 weeks - so they can only look at rates between week 2 and 3... (it doesn’t start working until week 2 anyway...)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on January 19, 2021, 08:43:34 pm

It’ll come out in the wash - but there’s another Q about the wrong choice being made by the govt if (and it’s an if) delaying the second dose has a much bigger than expected effect... (as in much worse protection). We’ll find out - through Israel has vaccinated the highest percentage of its population compared to any other country iirc. UAE is next..

I still think delaying the second dose was the only sensible strategy given the mess we were in. Any future inquest will care much more about all the previous decisions which flew in the face of available evidence, rather than the one which was sensible and based on the facts we had at the time.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on January 19, 2021, 08:49:38 pm
Mildly off topic, but Netanyahu has played an absolute blinder with Israel's vaccine strategy. He paid massively over the odds for being first in line and giving Pfizer real world data but Israel will be back to normal well before anyone else with all the economic benefits that entails, so Israel will probably save money in the medium term. He also did really well getting prominent rabbis from the ultra orthodox community on TV to advocate taking the vaccine and got jabbed on live TV himself. I absolutely hate him and his politics but fairs fair, hes played this well.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stabbsy on January 19, 2021, 09:55:07 pm
With the usual disclaimers/excuses about not being a scientist and fundamentally not knowing what I'm talking about... :worms:

As I understand it, the cohort that Pfizer tested the vaccine on will have been drawn from a wide range of different ages and backgrounds, including both relatively young people, the middle aged and the elderly. The effectiveness percentage quoted, of 90%, would be an average value, eg. some will have been almost entirely protected, others will have gained less protection. It seems reasonable to think that the clinically vulnerable /those with weakened immune systems/the elderly would be 'less protected' on average than someone younger with a healthy immune system. Given Israel, like us has rolled its vaccines out to the vulnerable and elderly first and is testing on them, it doesn't hugely surprise me that the effectiveness % being quoted is lower, partly due to barrows' point about when you should start measuring effectiveness after the jab, but also partly because the older and vulnerable will have been less protected from the outset. 50% seems like quite a drop and I suspect barrows is more right than me, but it doesnt seem a like for like comparison to me because the sample will be almost entirely comprised of older, more vulnerable people, whereas the trial group would have been more representative.

This may be complete bollocks so if so call me out!
No, seems pretty logical. I’d say the limitation is how developed the data is that the Israel study is based on. From what I’ve read, Israel are giving the second dose at 3 weeks. So if we’re saying that the first dose takes 10 days to 2 weeks to become effective, then the numbers are based on a week of exposure.

Another criticism would be that the trial data was from a properly constructed trial - both vaccine and control group were given a shot of something. So no behavioural impact to take account of. The Israel study compares vaccinated with similar unvaccinated group where you might expect some behavioural difference with the unvaccinated continuing to shield.

My view would be it’s far too early to draw conclusions at this stage.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 19, 2021, 10:14:58 pm
Apparently (the BMJ blog article) there’s a fair bit of behavioural stuff with a double blind trial too - as it’s mostly quite obvious if you’ve had the trial vaccine (sore arm) compared to the saline in the placebo.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on January 19, 2021, 11:10:06 pm
or if you are told it's a placebo

ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntWO7jnOcWE
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on January 20, 2021, 11:26:46 am
Useful FAQ to help fend off covid deniers, lockdown deniers and anti -vaxers. Tory MP Neil O'Brian (of Twitter scraps with Toby Young fame) is one of the authors.

https://www.covidfaq.co/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on January 20, 2021, 11:32:43 am

My view would be it’s far too early to draw conclusions at this stage.

Yeah, this is the long and the short of it. I do have a bit of an issue with the way these stories are being reported though as it just perpetuates concern over the vaccine when there is really no need yet. The only people who need to be aware of this testing in Israel are the government scientists really so they can keep an eye on it.

Tricky one though isnt it as its a slippery slope to not report things, but it does concern me.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 20, 2021, 03:16:53 pm
Just seen this https://twitter.com/wf_parker/status/1351644273725333505?s=21

Graphically compares US city death rates with vaccination rates. Interesting. But not checked it out more than a skim..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on January 20, 2021, 04:59:22 pm
Much better vaccine figures today, nearly 350k.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 20, 2021, 05:03:55 pm
Much better vaccine figures today, nearly 350k.

I only noticed today - but there’s a 2 day lag in the figures. Today’s increase is actually up to end of 19th (Monday). Might explain the previous two days (weekend?) lower figs.

I hope...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on January 20, 2021, 05:44:52 pm
Much better vaccine figures today, nearly 350k.

I only noticed today - but there’s a 2 day lag in the figures. Today’s increase is actually up to end of 19th (Monday). Might explain the previous two days (weekend?) lower figs.

I hope...

Would work better as an explanation if the 19th weren't actually a Tuesday ;)
I don't know if there's any reporting lag, like with deaths? I guess maybe no-one knows that yet?!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 20, 2021, 05:49:49 pm
:D toddler brain... maybe it was by 19th..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 22, 2021, 05:24:36 pm
Ah...

Right...

This is fine...

 COVID-19: UK coronavirus variant may be more deadly than original, PM warns (http://COVID-19: UK coronavirus variant may be more deadly than original, PM warns)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on January 22, 2021, 06:33:48 pm
https://twitter.com/Samfr/status/1352671129748598786?s=19
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 22, 2021, 06:45:37 pm
Govt playing a bit fast and loose with the 30% figure - it’s been estimated between 10 and 50%. Whichever - it’s not great news.

Copy paste from bbc website
Quote
Risk of death from UK variant may by up to 50% higher - scientist

Early evidence suggests the variant of coronavirus that emerged in the UK may be up to 50% more deadly, according to the scientist whose research led to today’s government announcement.

Nick Davies, assistant professor of mathematical modelling at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, told BBC Radio 4’s PM programme the estimate that the risk of death increased by 30% was "uncertain".

"We think it could be anywhere between 10 to 50%, according to our analysis,” he said.

Mr Davies – a member of the Scientific Pandemic Influenza Group on Modelling (SPI-M), which feeds into the government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) – said it would be very important to get a variety of different streams of evidence, looking at the problem in different ways.

However, he added that “a number of groups have looked at the data in a number of different ways, and unfortunately come to similar conclusions”.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 22, 2021, 08:08:18 pm
From “Your local Epidemiologist” on FB:

“ Bad news about the circulating variants…The virus is getting smarter.

If you remember, the South Africa variant (better known as 501v2), Brazil variant (better known as B1.1.28/501.V3), and the UK variant (better known as B1.1.7/501Y.V1) have all recently grabbed the attention of scientists because each have mutations on the spike protein. These are important to investigate because the spike is the keys to our cells. In other words, the virus can mutate to make a smarter key.

There are two new pieces of information this week/today.

First, the 501v2 (South Africa) variant…

-What happened? On Jan 20, a preprint came out from Rockefeller University. They took the antibodies of 20 volunteers who received an mRNA vaccine and mixed it with viruses containing the mutations. This experiment, called an antibody neutralization assay, enables the researchers to determine whether vaccine-induced antibodies will be effective against the new variants of virus circulating globally.
-What did they find? The antibodies effectiveness against the mutations was reduced by a small (but statistically significant) degree (ranged from a 1- to 3-fold reduction).
-What does this mean? The vaccine is working against 501v2 (thanks to the polyclonal response), but these mutations *may* impact the efficacy of the vaccine. We need more “real-world” studies, in addition to the well-controlled, test-tube studies.

Second, the B.1.1.7 (UK) variant…

-What happened? Today, NERVTAG (New and Emerging Respiratory Virus Threats Advisory Group) met to discuss new studies on B.1.1.7. They previously reported a study in which there was no increase in death due to the new variant. However, with more time comes more data.
-What did they report? There are three new studies (one by The London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, one by Imperial College London, and one by University of Exeter) that all showed that the B.1.1.7 is more deadly by about 1.65 fold.
-What does this mean? "There is a realistic possibility that B.1.1.7 is associated with an increased risk of death compared to the virus without these mutations." While the risk of death remains low, this does increase it by a significant amount. There is a limitation to these studies... Only 10% of COVID19 deaths have their virus coded to know which mutation the person had. In other words, this could be a bias sample. Deaths are lagged from cases, so the more time goes by, the more and more accurate of a picture we will get.

Bottom line: The virus is getting smarter. Slowly but surely. This underscores the need to vaccinate as many people as quickly as we can, because these mutations are signals of antigenic drift.

Love, YLE

Data Sources:
Rockefeller study:  https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.01.15.426911v1.full.pdf
NERVTAG meeting minutes: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/955239/NERVTAG_paper_on_variant_of_concern__VOC__B.1.1.7.pdf
I knew the SA story was coming out at some point this week, so I prepared with two brilliant colleagues, Dr. Jessica Steier (public health scientist) and Dr. Andrea Love (immunologist). They are both doing wonderful work at The Unbiased Science Podcast (www.unbiasedscipod.com).”

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on January 22, 2021, 08:34:13 pm
U.K. Covid19 Vaccinations - 1st doses up to 22/01/21

5,383,103 people have now been vaccinated.

A 401,070 increase on yesterday, the highest daily figure to date and above average needed to hit target of 15m by Feb 15th.


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EsWYSx_XAAQ5tla?format=jpg&name=large)

(from: https://twitter.com/SharePickers )
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 22, 2021, 08:40:59 pm
U.K. Covid19 Vaccinations - 1st doses up to 22/01/21

5,383,103 people have now been vaccinated.

A 401,070 increase on yesterday, the highest daily figure to date and above average needed to hit target of 15m by Feb 15th.


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EsWYSx_XAAQ5tla?format=jpg&name=large)

(from: https://twitter.com/SharePickers )

It’s good, isn’t it. The government are pulling out the stops, finally.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on January 22, 2021, 08:55:12 pm


and above average needed to hit target of 15m by Feb 15th.


Does the average shown by the red columns assume that the previous red column target has been met, or it is the average needed based on the actual number vaccines previously given? Because if it's the former, the actual average would now be much higher than the red columns shown, given that we've missed all previous targets.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on January 22, 2021, 09:01:57 pm
The evolution of the red columns looks like they've taken that into account (hence red column now bigger than a week ago, but the daily rise in the red column has flattened). Promising...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on January 22, 2021, 09:49:05 pm
Yep the missed days are accounted for in the average. But simple to work out:

15m target
Subtract 5,383,103 vaccs done to date = 9,616,897
Days until 15th Feb = 24

9,616,897/24 = 400,704 vaccinations required per day.
Which is what the chart shows.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 22, 2021, 09:55:15 pm
Yes it’s great news. Hope supply holds up.

AstraZ having to cut deliveries to EU next month due to production hiccup... hopefully we’re higher up the order que/list.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on January 22, 2021, 09:59:18 pm
AstraZ having to cut deliveries to EU next month due to production hiccup... hopefully we’re higher up the order que/list.

😬 I’m sure you didn’t mean this the way it comes across to me! It sounds a little bit ‘fuck everyone else as long as we are alright’
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 22, 2021, 10:03:21 pm
AstraZ having to cut deliveries to EU next month due to production hiccup... hopefully we’re higher up the order que/list.

😬 I’m sure you didn’t mean this the way it comes across to me! It sounds a little bit ‘fuck everyone else as long as we are alright’

Yeah - sorry. Almost sounds a bit grateful for brexit too :D

Hopefully it’s not affecting all supplies would be a better way of putting it...

Been following the Yorkshire post scoop about “Yorkshire” allocated doses now being sent elsewhere to balance up the national coverage. Levelling down they may call it. Interesting tit for tat with a co-ordinated govt ministerial attach on the editor - who was then proved absolutely correct. Normally a very blue facing paper too...

Funny to see the Yp retweeting Alastair Campbell’s support...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on January 23, 2021, 07:52:52 pm
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Esbdj2DXcAEVlVL?format=jpg&name=large)

Big increase today. It's good to have a bit of positive news to focus on for a change.

Edit: now with graph included
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 23, 2021, 08:04:12 pm
‘Deaths within 28 days”, have surpassed “Deaths with Covid on the death certificate”.
Over 97k now, so at current rates, we’ll pass 100k before midweek.

I’m not trying to rub it in, just illustrating the modelling’s veracity and pointing out we are on the “worst case if we do nothing” trajectory, that was discussed in October, with a modification from the  Nov. lockdown.

Balls.
I keep trying to avoid commenting on this page as i find it so depressing and negative, something I am not, but the last graphs got my back up again.

Over 100k deaths in the next three months. More than Double what we have had already ?????

Did this same group do a forecast back in March and is it possible to see it. Guess they were one of those saying 250k would die.

Finally we need a function that allows you to block out topics on here, I just want to look at climbing stuff from now on.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on January 23, 2021, 08:20:50 pm
...and so much for the good news bubble!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on January 23, 2021, 08:26:34 pm
Don't think gme has been seen since that post.  :tumble:

If you accept that these deaths are all baked in from Xmas unlocking still things are still going in the right direction. Good vaccine numbers, cases dropping, London getting things under control. I see everything else (Israeli research, new variant, first jab strategy) as noise at this stage as the data is too messy to draw meaningful conclusions from what I've seen
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 23, 2021, 08:27:11 pm
...and so much for the good news bubble!

Yeah. Made the mistake of ducking out of family time ( because the girls want to watch “Casualty” ) and opening the Sky news app...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SamT on January 23, 2021, 08:50:16 pm

Its all unfolding for me, staff at work suddenly dropping like flies.  Nobody's in the office, so not being transferred there ( I hope, I crossed paths with both members who've gone down with it, but only for less than 10mins, not within 2m).

I also thought about gme whilst watching the headlines re the netherlands, who IIRC, was all like 'they're just going for herd immunity and they're going to be fine'

My wife (NHS) has had her first jab, but I'll be well well down the queue.

Cracks starting to show in the supply chain and I'm fully expecting some sort of total govenment fuck up, where by nobody gets a second jab cause of the decision to go to 12 weeks followed by supply chain issues.

(sorry to be pessimistic)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 23, 2021, 09:17:36 pm
The vaccination figures are good. I suspect our capacity to deliver jabs is actually greater than 600k per day - as there are many reports of places with no or limited supply.

This is encouraging - as when supply from the manufacturers increases we will be in a position to get those first and then second doses in.

Theres also going to be an increasing number of people who won’t take it as you move to younger groups... and more people not registered to a GP etc.. this means it’ll end up rattling down through the list of people to get it faster - but isn’t good news for the herd immunity angle.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on January 23, 2021, 10:18:09 pm
Theres also going to be an increasing number of people who won’t take it as you move to younger groups... and more people not registered to a GP etc.. this means it’ll end up rattling down through the list of people to get it faster - but isn’t good news for the herd immunity angle.
I could be wrong but I don't expect there will be a big shift in people refusing in the younger age groups.

My main reason for this is that there are already travel companies saying that they intend to refuse business to people who aren't vaccinated. If many companies/countries do the same, I expect people's objections to having a vaccine will disappear rather quickly.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on January 23, 2021, 10:26:36 pm
As I understand it there is a quite significant issue with uptake in minority groups due to long standing healthcare inequalities and distrust of govt. I would have thought this will be a significantly bigger hurdle than youth refusing to be jabbed? Can't see why the young would refuse TT, unless you mean the middle aged boomers who are seemingly uniquely susceptible to Facebook conspiracy theories? Edit: just saw you said younger not young so I've probably answered my own question.

The single dose strategy is an interesting one. From my reading it seems like a judgement call, with reasonable people on both sides. "balance of probabilities" vs stringent adherence to evidence based medicine. I think the latter is well represented on social media via some noisy sceptics of the policy but I'm not convinced it's representative of the whole cohorts views. In any case, this wasn't a political decision so I'm much more willing to give it the benefit of the doubt because I trust Whitty more than Johnson.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: duncan on January 23, 2021, 11:30:57 pm
Vaccine hesitancy is a concern. If the surveys (https://oxfordhealthbrc.nihr.ac.uk/almost-a-third-of-uk-population-are-very-unsure-or-strongly-hesitant-about-covid-19-vaccination/) suggesting only ~72% intend to get vaccinated, we’ll be on the borderline of achieving herd immunity. You’d hope, and data suggests, opinions will shift in a positive direction as millions are vaccinated with no major ill-effects. A vocal minority on social media may be middle-aged blokes but hesitancy is slightly more prevalent in the young (and women and low waged). All these are small effects so there isn’t a ‘typical’ vaccine refuser.

As spidermonkey09 says,  hesitancy is worryingly high in people self-reporting black and Pakistani ethnicity (https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.12.27.20248899v1).

How to Vaccinate the World podcast (an offshoot of More or Less) is good listening if you’re into all this.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 24, 2021, 08:05:01 am
My uptake hesitance ideas were all based on a survey a few weeks back - where uptake in 80+ was 97% dropping to 65% in 20-30 year olds.. with a sliding scale between these groups.

That was inthink before the new strain concerns that might shift that a bit - but there’s a sizeable (double digit?) percentage of people out there who may not have it.

Again - many people - especially younger - may not have a GP. I didn’t from the age of 21 to 36... used to just use ‘emergency appointments’. This may have changed in 15 years of course (and at that age I’d be at the bottom of the que etc) but a chunk of people may just be hard to find!!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on January 24, 2021, 12:10:20 pm
I think once people are offered it, if they refuse to have it it shouldn't be a barrier to loosening restrictions. Obviously outreach work needs to and should be done on this but our uptake seems to be high enough that I can't see this being a huge issue. Unlike in, say, France!

Would have thought an ad campaign for young people to register at a GP/drop in appointments will solve the registration issue. We are months away from that point yet in any case.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 25, 2021, 07:29:58 am
This looks interesting. - a website set up to debunk COVID denialism: https://www.covidfaq.co/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on January 25, 2021, 02:10:40 pm
Useful FAQ to help fend off covid deniers, lockdown deniers and anti -vaxers. Tory MP Neil O'Brian (of Twitter scraps with Toby Young fame) is one of the authors.

https://www.covidfaq.co/

Plus a new guardian article explaining why the authors set up the site.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 25, 2021, 02:14:46 pm
Oh, had not spotted that!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on January 25, 2021, 05:59:26 pm
A statement from the British Society of Immunology on the UK approach to the vaccination dosing schedule, supporting the delay of the second dose to week 12.

https://www.immunology.org/policy-and-public-affairs/briefings-and-position-statements/COVID-19-vaccine-dosing-schedules

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on January 27, 2021, 08:36:14 am
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/26/ons-figures-show-uk-passed-100000-covid-deaths-by-7-january

Quote
his government “did everything we could”

Shows the level of delusion,.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on January 27, 2021, 08:50:03 am
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/26/ons-figures-show-uk-passed-100000-covid-deaths-by-7-january

Quote
his government “did everything we could”

Shows the level of delusion,.
Within the unspoken caveats...

"We did everything we could" given our:
- rank incompetence
- lack of imagination
- ideological biases
- disdain for experts
- self imposed brexit shitshow
- enormous commons majority... of reactionary sociopaths
- braindead optimism bias
- inability to look beyond next Thursday's headlines
- crony capitalist agenda
- thinly veiled contempt for the NHS
- etc...
...I guess you could say it was an accurate statement.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 27, 2021, 08:57:33 am
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/26/ons-figures-show-uk-passed-100000-covid-deaths-by-7-january

Quote
his government “did everything we could”

Shows the level of delusion,.
Within the unspoken caveats...

"We did everything we could" given our:
- rank incompetence
- lack of imagination
- ideological biases
- disdain for experts
- self imposed brexit shitshow
- enormous commons majority... of reactionary sociopaths
- braindead optimism bias
- inability to look beyond next Thursday's headlines
- crony capitalist agenda
- thinly veiled contempt for the NHS
- etc...
...I guess you could say it was an accurate statement.

And yet, there’s no public outcry, hardly even an angry opinion piece.
Introduce a curfew in NL= riots.
Let your nation carry the heaviest death toll in Europe, whilst probably experiencing the heaviest economic hit to boot and still hold a lead in the opinion polls.
You can do unspeakable things, to the British public, blatantly; as long as you tell them how great they are, that everything will be fine if they just keep a stiff upper lip and not to grumble (which is a terribly “foreign” thing to do).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 27, 2021, 09:16:48 am
Half the deaths have happened since the 7th November. Everyone involved with the NHS said - be prepared for winter. Instead - our government was easing a lockdown at that point. 

The Govt and the PM are of course culpable here - but equally to blame are the 50-100 Tory MP's who have fought what I think are sensible measures, at every step along the way to preserve 'liberty', free trade and business. They (the BRG? Brexit Research Group) will largely go un-noticed once this is all over but have continually had the ear of the PM chipping away at every measure that comes along. Of course the PM could ignore them  - at his own peril (and that is another weakness of his) - but its those bastards who dilute every measure.

Hotel quarantine will be another one of these (as expected today). Instead of a blanket application (which might work) lets just do it to flights from certain countries (where arrivals are already banned!!!). If you want to fly from SA to the UK - just go to Schipol, Frankfurt, Madrid or Paris - then get a separate flight in.... Its bonkers.

In balance, I think the Govt has done two things well. 1. The financial compensation has at first worked - and is holding fast(ish) at present (it could have been done much worse) 2. Vaccine procurement and rollout looks like its working pretty well (maybe because its been left to the NHS, hospitals, GP groups rather than SERCO et al.,). Neither are perfect - but bloody fantastic compared to everything else...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 27, 2021, 09:24:05 am
Basically agree with you TT but - the self employed are in real difficulty. About 3 million unsupported I think. :no:

I emailed Mary Robinson, my MP about this. She did not reply. Mind you, she did not reply when I emailed that my father and uncle died with Covid, so she is, at least, consistent in her contempt for her constituents.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 27, 2021, 09:25:40 am
Mind you, she did not reply when I emailed that my father and uncle died with Covid, so she is, at least, consistent in her contempt for her constituents.

Sorry to hear about your Dad and Uncle Jon... thats horrible.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 27, 2021, 09:40:03 am
Basically agree with you TT but - the self employed are in real difficulty. About 3 million unsupported I think. :no:

I emailed Mary Robinson, my MP about this. She did not reply. Mind you, she did not reply when I emailed that my father and uncle died with Covid, so she is, at least, consistent in her contempt for her constituents.

May you and yours find the strength you need.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 27, 2021, 10:54:02 am
Thank you for your kind words, Matt and Tom. I am okay thanks, not looking for sympathy, others have far worse to deal with (they were unwell already; Covid simply accelerated something which was slowly happening naturally) but I mention it to illustrate what a thoroughly unimpressive constituency MP Mary R really is.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: seankenny on January 27, 2021, 12:20:17 pm
I emailed Mary Robinson, my MP about this. She did not reply. Mind you, she did not reply when I emailed that my father and uncle died with Covid, so she is, at least, consistent in her contempt for her constituents.

Really sorry to hear that.

We have worked with two MPs, one for our constituency and one for my late father-in-law's, one was good and the other excellent. The case has been raised in the House of Commons, with the Ministry of Transport and so on. Not to much actual positive end, but that's having a Tory government for you.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on January 27, 2021, 12:28:38 pm
I emailed Mary Robinson, my MP about this. She did not reply. Mind you, she did not reply when I emailed that my father and uncle died with Covid, so she is, at least, consistent in her contempt for her constituents.

It really pisses me off when I hear this, I had assumed MP’s had a duty to reply to correspondence from their constituents, even if it’s just pro forma but this doesn’t seem to be the case.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on January 27, 2021, 02:33:56 pm
If they have an obligation they don't comply with it. I have send correspondence to our local Tory (Andrew Bowie) and never has he bothered replying.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 27, 2021, 03:03:31 pm
It varies lots. Andrew Gwynne (Labour, a nearby constituency) has been amazing at getting back, on one occasion with a detailed response (why he disagreed with me) in a matter of minutes.

To be exact Mary Robinson did send me an email post Cummings, but a generic round-robin, and 2 months after I had emailed her. so not what you'd call a reply to my email.

I do not want my MP to spend all her time fielding emails, but an occasional acknowledgement seems reasonable!

edit - to clarify rely was a mass email, not personal response.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 27, 2021, 03:05:15 pm
Vaccinations around the 250k mark today - third day in a row. Target is 400k +
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on January 27, 2021, 03:16:53 pm
no update on the gov website - where are you getting figures TT?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 27, 2021, 03:56:03 pm
no update on the gov website - where are you getting figures TT?

Rolling news pages. Sky in this case I think. Happy to be wrong!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on January 27, 2021, 04:26:19 pm
311k - better than your number, but still not great.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 27, 2021, 04:31:06 pm
311k - better than your number, but still not great.

260 in the guardian - from the official site. https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-vaccinations/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on January 27, 2021, 04:35:05 pm
311 will be the UK wide number. Will have to see how the rest of the week goes but I was expecting a bigger number today. Perhaps the snow effect? We are at 10.7% of the total population though which is good.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 27, 2021, 04:44:50 pm
Ah yes. Good - though that’s  c.430-440 a day needed now.

The number of deaths a day is truly terrible....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on January 27, 2021, 04:48:27 pm
Yep, about the only thing that can be said about the death figures is at least the daily numbers seem to have levelled off. Imagine we will have to swallow at least another 30-50k deaths in the next few months. Hard to escape the feeling that the autumn decisions were a catastrophic failure of governance. Attempting to blame it all on the new variant doesn't cut it for me.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on January 27, 2021, 04:54:54 pm
Yep, about the only thing that can be said about the death figures is at least the daily numbers seem to have levelled off. Imagine we will have to swallow at least another 30-50k deaths in the next few months. Hard to escape the feeling that the autumn decisions were a catastrophic failure of governance. Attempting to blame it all on the new variant doesn't cut it for me.

It does look like deaths has maybe hit peak at approx 1200 per days, together with cases 50% down and hospitalisations also significantly down there is hope that things are going to get better.  Have to agree that the Boris and co. completely messed up during Autumn and particularly in decisions made in December when it seems to have been obvious to everyone except them that rapid and radical action was needed.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 27, 2021, 05:15:18 pm
i find it difficult to hear him and that homunculous Jenrick insisting that they always took the best decisions based on the science of the time when SAGe's advice for a circuit breaker was disregarded.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on January 27, 2021, 05:17:40 pm
Of all the things they have done badly, delaying action has been their biggest shortcoming. Doing exactly the same things, only earlier, would have saved a lot of lives. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 27, 2021, 05:39:41 pm
Of all the things they have done badly, delaying action has been their biggest shortcoming. Doing exactly the same things, only earlier, would have saved a lot of lives.

THREE TIMES they have done that.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on January 27, 2021, 06:08:53 pm
not just lockdowns also closing borders, restricting travel, quarantining arrivals, restricting access to care homes, etc etc. All left until there was no option available.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 27, 2021, 06:21:47 pm
not just lockdowns also closing borders, restricting travel, quarantining arrivals, restricting access to care homes, etc etc. All left until there was no option available.

Starmers line today “he’s closing schools but opening borders” was simple but effective...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 27, 2021, 06:27:44 pm
I believe it was Churchill who said
Quote
It is no use saying, 'We are doing our best.' You have got to succeed in doing what is necessary.

As his biographer, you might have thought Johnson had grasped this. By any stretch then, he has failed.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 27, 2021, 06:59:13 pm
He’s trying to please everyone. Tiers is to keep those rural Torys happy, March 8th for schools is because that’s when the covid research group wanted them open... Grow a pair Boris - you can’t make everyone happy but you can do the right thing.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: battery on January 27, 2021, 07:11:05 pm
The problem with the government having been so ineffectual throughout this is that it has highlighted their utter incompetence which in turn can (and I think has) led to less compliance within the population.

Normally, compliance is not something that society relies on because we generally know and understand the rules having lived with them for all our lives and for the most part do the right thing, but this situation is something totally new. Understanding is only just emerging within science (which scientists are very good at pointing out as that is how science works) but politicians aren't programmed to say I don't know and the general public want certainty.

I suppose what I am getting at is that in normal times people choose to do the right thing but right now for many it feels.like they are being forced to do something and that creates resistance.

Sorry, I'm rambling. But I think a lot about the difference between positive behaviour and compliance in my work and it seemed relevant.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 27, 2021, 07:19:56 pm
Your point is a good one.

Impactful on whether your communication is met with compliance is whether you comply with it yourself.

Cummings', Jenrick's and Johnson's own failure to comply with their own strictures rather undermines the message.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on January 27, 2021, 08:04:15 pm
Attempting to blame it all on the new variant doesn't cut it for me.
Being blindsided by the new variant was a valid excuse for the rapid spread in Kent and London during the last 2 weeks of November, when nobody knew about it, and maybe the first week of December.

But the effects of the new variant began to show up in the data by the last week of November. In the first week of December, it was looking bad and by the second week of December, it was clear that much stricter action was required urgently if we were to avoid the sort of deathrate that we have seen.

It certainly wasn't a valid excuse for the failings from mid December and in to January.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 27, 2021, 08:06:12 pm
The FT has a good summary here. Similar in the NYT too.

https://www.ft.com/content/6792b1eb-ffd1-4f45-b2d9-59c7f40ef785
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on January 27, 2021, 09:19:25 pm
C'mon guys, listen to the man, there will be a time to reflect, but it isn't now*

*Or ever. Oh OK maybe a tame inquiry in a couple of decades or more, once everyone involved is safely out of the way c.f. Hillsborough, Iraq. Conclusion spoiler - "lessons will be learnt". The end.

Fairly sure I made this same point on here last April. No-one should have bought it then, surely no-one will now? If they can't hold their hands up to the obvious mistakes then what hope they'll start to get it right? That this is still the govt line is frankly unbelievable.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 28, 2021, 07:19:05 am
As someone else put it, when you are losing 3-0 at half time it isn’t good enough for the manager to declare ‘there will be a time to reconsider our tactics, but not before the game is over’.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on January 28, 2021, 09:12:32 am
As I understand it there is a quite significant issue with uptake in minority groups due to long standing healthcare inequalities and distrust of govt.

There's also been some nasty shit with anti-vaxxer campaigns targeting ethnic minority communities, building off that existing distrust and alienation: https://www.vice.com/en/article/v7mpkm/anti-vaxxers-are-targeting-ethnic-minority-communities-with-wild-conspiracy-theories

Some impressive stuff from folks organizing in response, though:

https://twitter.com/adilray/status/1353677950550495243

https://takethecovid19vaccine.com/ (info in SO MANY languages)

East London Mosque coming out swinging: https://twitter.com/elondonmosque/status/1352696152773242881
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: seankenny on January 28, 2021, 09:19:08 am
My partner is part of the Covid Bereaved Families for Justice campaign which has been asking for a public enquiry since the summer.

She also spoke to Kier Starmer yesterday:

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/boris-johnson-accused-failing-listen-23396333
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on January 28, 2021, 10:51:20 am
As I understand it there is a quite significant issue with uptake in minority groups due to long standing healthcare inequalities and distrust of govt.

There's also been some nasty shit with anti-vaxxer campaigns targeting ethnic minority communities, building off that existing distrust and alienation: https://www.vice.com/en/article/v7mpkm/anti-vaxxers-are-targeting-ethnic-minority-communities-with-wild-conspiracy-theories

Some impressive stuff from folks organizing in response, though:

https://twitter.com/adilray/status/1353677950550495243

https://takethecovid19vaccine.com/ (info in SO MANY languages)

East London Mosque coming out swinging: https://twitter.com/elondonmosque/status/1352696152773242881

A vaccination centre in Nottingham apparently had to be moved partly due to security issues with anti-vaxers. It must be horrible to be an exhausted NHS worker passing these loons every day going in and out of work.

Some really good analysis on restriction compliance showing it is mostly very good despite all the hot air  The sub thread looks at where there are problem areas and by far the most serious reason is low paid workers who can't afford to self isolate.

 https://twitter.com/rowlsmanthorpe/status/1349459843833352192

The NHS gossip grapevine is showing more indications of heavy handed and arguably dangerous PHE intervention. Where Pfizer needs using up or be wasted it is said some vaccination centres have been explicitly told it is not allowed to use this as a second dose for NHS frontline staff. Public Health England seemingly putting politics in front of maximising NHS employee safety.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on January 28, 2021, 12:12:03 pm


I think I’m in favour of restrictions like the one above. There’s clearly an issue waiting to happen here: it seems quite widespread to use vaccine that would otherwise be wasted to give to NHS staff.

That seems like a no-brainer but at some point you’re going to run out of frontline staff and giving the vaccine to whoever is walking past is not a strategy.

This use of “wastage” shows that we need a better system in place for strategically using spare doses and as long as it’s easy for centres to just jab the arms of nearby staff, we won’t get that better system in place.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 28, 2021, 12:23:28 pm
I suspect thats fine in principle, but hard to do in reality.

Scenario playing: If you run a centre - and have 200 booked in a day - if 10-20 no show - and its at the shelf life of the bottle, then you either do whats happening (vaccinate anyone willing) or have a on-call waiting list. Such a list sounds easy - but I bet its a bugger to administrate! If you had 10 left over - maybe with 1 hour notice - do you call around 20 people? If 20 then turn up you have to turn some away etc...

You can probably factor in no-shows and overbook (then maybe have the centre stay open longer - or have people waiting) but its a risky strategy - what happens if everyone shows up and you've run out! Its not quite the same as booking a short haul flight!!

Its worth remembering that a jab given to anyone is not necessarily a jab wasted - its just a jab not given most efficiently/effectively in terms of helping NHS hospital pressure.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on January 28, 2021, 12:24:57 pm
Had a text this morning inviting me to book my vaccination. Very slick booking process and lots of available slots for Saturday morning at a health centre 10mins from my house. Can't fault it.

Also found out this morning that my mum's been invited for hers but hasn't taken it up. She's always tried to avoid taking unneccessary medication (pain relief, antibiotics etc) which is fair enough, but I didn't expect this. Her reasoning is a general suspicion of the Govt and by extension anything they've been involved with. Hoping I can persuade her otherwise.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on January 28, 2021, 12:36:15 pm

I think I broadly agree with Stu.

I suspect thats fine in principle, but hard to do in reality.

As Stu points out, you have to have a system for this that's not just using it on staff, because at some point you'll have done them all twice. And the longer you don't set a decent system up for, the sooner the system needs to be almost perfect..

 Presumably the ideal is a  "no use for staff 2nd doses policy" that's quite light touch, i.e. if you're regularly using your 10 spare doses on 2nd jabs for staff because you've not set up a system that works then you get told off. If you're mostly using them on a reserve list and just using the odd one here or there where the reserve list fails then they let that go.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 28, 2021, 01:00:46 pm
Some systems are national - most are local (ours is via our Gp) so there are going to be lots of different ways it’s organised. I expect the cases being mentioned are a few hundred in several hundred k vaccinations given daily...

Having run events (not vaccinations!!) based on being full with reserve lists - I’m just saying it’s not as simple as it might seem. People are rarely predictable!! So I’ve some sympathy for those organising this!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 28, 2021, 01:17:16 pm
Useful link/tool for those who don’t know their NHS number (having it may help when booking a cv19 jab)

https://www.nhs.uk/nhs-services/online-services/find-nhs-number/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: duncan on January 28, 2021, 01:18:53 pm

Also found out this morning that my mum's been invited for hers but hasn't taken it up. She's always tried to avoid taking unneccessary medication (pain relief, antibiotics etc) which is fair enough, but I didn't expect this. Her reasoning is a general suspicion of the Govt and by extension anything they've been involved with. Hoping I can persuade her otherwise.

That’s frustrating and probably a little worrying.

She raises a common concern. Hesitancy is also linked with suspicions about Big Pharma and multinational health organisations. All of which are quite understandable.

Behaviour change 101: explore her concerns thoroughly if you can. Anything specific about governments/ this government? Could take some time. For most people, personal stories and observed behaviours work better to change health behaviour than statistics and ‘science’. Do you know of any friends or peers of her who have had the jab?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on January 28, 2021, 01:36:22 pm
Anything specific about governments/ this government? Do you know of any friends or peers of her who have had the jab?
She knows how much I detest this government so I'm hoping that by having it myself I can persuade her to put that to one side.

Her dislike of medicines has nothing to do with a distrust of Big Pharma - just a desire not to put unneccessary drugs into her body, which I can understand. Though sometimes she takes it a bit far, like after knee replacements being reluctant to even take a few paracetamols to ease the pain!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on January 28, 2021, 01:46:51 pm
Also found out this morning that my mum's been invited for hers but hasn't taken it up. She's always tried to avoid taking unneccessary medication (pain relief, antibiotics etc) which is fair enough, but I didn't expect this. Her reasoning is a general suspicion of the Govt and by extension anything they've been involved with. Hoping I can persuade her otherwise.

My Parents in Law, both in their 70s are showing signs of dithering when asked when they are getting theirs. One is a smoker, with a history of respiratory issues. My Brother-in-law is asthmatic and he's made it clear to them he will avoid contact with them until either they get a vaccine or he does, so hopefully they will see sense.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on January 28, 2021, 02:12:42 pm
Having run events (not vaccinations!!) based on being full with reserve lists - I’m just saying it’s not as simple as it might seem. People are rarely predictable!! So I’ve some sympathy for those organising this!

In Israel I believe they ran a system where anyone without an appointment could hang around in the hope that there'd be a spare jab at the end of the day. Something like this could work; it's no more optimal than giving it to passing NHS staff, but it does have the advantage that you won't eventually run out of people to offer it to.

Could be off the ground pretty quick too, so you could carry on vaccinating NHS staff with "spare" vaccines until that stopped working; as long as you'd got the system up and running first
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stabbsy on January 28, 2021, 03:41:39 pm
In Israel I believe they ran a system where anyone without an appointment could hang around in the hope that there'd be a spare jab at the end of the day. Something like this could work; it's no more optimal than giving it to passing NHS staff, but it does have the advantage that you won't eventually run out of people to offer it to.
Sorry, struggling with the logic here. You think having people hanging around outside hospitals waiting for spare vaccines is a better (or not worse) approach than giving a second dose to NHS staff working in hospitals treating Covid patients? Couple of thoughts - one practical and one more emotive.

First, using "spare" doses as a second dose would strike me as being more efficient because you're closing off future contingent demand, not creating more contingent demand for second doses in 4/8/12 weeks. I'd imagine this will be particularly important in the event of disruption to supply of one or other vaccine going forwards.

Second point depends on your view of where NHS staff should be prioritised in the vaccine queue, but I'd argue a high priority is right. Maybe not all NHS staff but for anyone patient facing or required to work on site, I wouldn't begrudge them the perk of feeling a bit safer when they go to work. It's easy to forget that risk sat in my attic having not been into my office for nearly 12 months. By all means, have a call list for local people who could come in at short notice and prioritise them accordingly (this is what was happening in Glossop from what I'd heard), but the described Israel approach sounds massively sub-optimal to me.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on January 28, 2021, 03:52:21 pm
There are already internal links and public calls in the vaccination centres that work on a day or two turnround, following no shows, to prevent wastage. These get current or next on list people in very efficiently, but on the last day of shelf life they are impractical. We got a few 80 year olds their first shot early that way (next day appointments). We know people in their 70s who have been first dose vaccinated in similar circumstances. NHS internal links operate much faster than public calls and were used  to prevent wastage for first dose. In the end having front line staff vaccinated twice in such situations when staff absences and anxiety levels are so high seems to me a no brainer and binning usable vaccine is plain dumb. The NHS employs a lot of people so they wont run out of volunteers quickly. I cant see 'wait and see' being useful as it would need to be prioritized and will risk attracting the anti-vax nutters.

The vast majority of people in ICU are under 85 so extreme pressures there are set to remain for months. Indie SAGE did a good piece on age demographics in hospital last week... starts at 10:30 and lasts a few minutes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKTHqyFfzFs&feature=youtu.be
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on January 28, 2021, 04:04:23 pm
Several responses to your post Stabbsy.

The first is that using spare vaccines at vaccine centre to NHS staff or whoever is there by chance does not mean giving it to “staff in hospitals treating COVID patients”. As more people get vaccinated it increasingly means “whoever is around and not vaccinated”.

In time, it is gets more and more like my suggestion, except the pool of potential recipients will get so small vaccine is wasted.

Second, you missed my point that it would be fine, no preferable, to vaccinate NHS staff as a priority, but you need a backup system in place, so why not run a system like the one I’ve described. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on January 28, 2021, 04:28:14 pm
Had a text this morning inviting me to book my vaccination. Very slick booking process and lots of available slots for Saturday morning at a health centre 10mins from my house. Can't fault it

I hope this is genuine, but as a general word of warning, there is a scam text going around at the moment inviting people for vaccinations that looks like it's from the NHS, backed up by quite a convincing looking application process that asks for credit card details (which should set off most people's alarm bells anyway).

https://conversation.which.co.uk/scams/scam-nhs-covid-vaccine-text-message/ (https://conversation.which.co.uk/scams/scam-nhs-covid-vaccine-text-message/)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on January 28, 2021, 04:56:20 pm
I hope this is genuine, but as a general word of warning, there is a scam text going around at the moment inviting people for vaccinations
Yeh I was surprised it came through by text. But definitely genuine. I'm in the vulnerable group so was expecting something through.

For future reference to anyone that receives one: The text was addressed to me by name with a link to a booking site (book.nhs.me/r/....). And signed off with the name of my GP surgery. The only details it asked for were DOB to confirm identity and then gave a list of available appointment times. The address of the clinic to get it done was somewhere I've been for appointments previously and definitely no credit card info needed!!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stabbsy on January 28, 2021, 05:54:53 pm
Several responses to your post Stabbsy.

The first is that using spare vaccines at vaccine centre to NHS staff or whoever is there by chance does not mean giving it to “staff in hospitals treating COVID patients”. As more people get vaccinated it increasingly means “whoever is around and not vaccinated”.

Fair response, but I'll explain my thinking - noting that I might be drawing incorrect conclusions from the bits that I know. Firstly, I think the spare doses thing is likely to be more of an issue with the Pfizer vaccine because of the cold chain storage - once it's removed from cold storage, it has to be used in a set period. Also, because of the storage requirements, I think the Pfizer vaccine is being given in hospitals more than in the community and vice versa for Astra Zeneca. This wasn't the case at the start because there was only the Pfizer vaccine, but anecdotally that seems to be the case now. That has certainly been the case for the various family members that have had the vaccine in the last month - those in hospitals had Pfizer, those in the community had Astra Zeneca. I appreciate it's a small sample and that this conclusion might be wrong.

If that conclusion is right, then you aren't just giving spare Pfizer vaccines to whoever's passing or there by chance, you're giving it to staff on site in a hospital. Not only that, but you're giving it to people who were already deemed priority enough to be given the first dose.

In time, it is gets more and more like my suggestion, except the pool of potential recipients will get so small vaccine is wasted.
I agree with this and agree that some alternate approach is needed once NHS staff have been dealt with, but I think the Israel suggestion is a poor one - no prioritisation and potential of people hanging around a hospital on the off chance of getting a vaccine. As I said, have an on call list as they did (I think) in Glossop. Also sounds like what Offwidth is referring to in Nottingham.

Second, you missed my point that it would be fine, no preferable, to vaccinate NHS staff as a priority, but you need a backup system in place, so why not run a system like the one I’ve described. 
That wasn't how I interpreted your post, so apologies. Your first post on the topic started with "I think I'm in favour of the restrictions posted above" and that was what I was responding to as I'm not in favour of those restrictions for the two reasons I posted.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 28, 2021, 05:59:21 pm
This article made my jaw drop.

You know the lateral flow test kits - that don’t work especially well?

The ones the government seems to try and give away to use in all sorts of places - universities, hospitals, schools (before they were closed)... part of operation moonshot.

Well it’s part of a near £1bn deal with a previously small company - (the biggest single deal to any one company) and guess how many of them we’ve committed to buy?

380 million. 😱

Pre Xmas they were delivering 4.5 million of them a day.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/28/how-uk-spent-800m-on-controversial-covid-tests-for-dominic-cummings-scheme?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other


Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nai on January 28, 2021, 07:09:16 pm
"The Guardian can reveal"?

Because they read last week's Private Eye.

An Eye in December also raised questions about the company, only founded in March by a guy banned from being a director in the UK in partnership with a failed cleaning solution company that was technically insolvent.

But what's a billion pound gamble these days.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 28, 2021, 07:20:08 pm
An insolvent cleaning company eh? 😁
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: seankenny on January 28, 2021, 09:16:52 pm
Also found out this morning that my mum's been invited for hers but hasn't taken it up. She's always tried to avoid taking unneccessary medication (pain relief, antibiotics etc) which is fair enough, but I didn't expect this. Her reasoning is a general suspicion of the Govt and by extension anything they've been involved with. Hoping I can persuade her otherwise.

My Parents in Law, both in their 70s are showing signs of dithering when asked when they are getting theirs. One is a smoker, with a history of respiratory issues. My Brother-in-law is asthmatic and he's made it clear to them he will avoid contact with them until either they get a vaccine or he does, so hopefully they will see sense.

I can intellectually understand why people are hesitant but, as someone who's lost a relative to covid, hearing about it makes me pretty upset. After all this time, all those TV news reports from inside hospitals, I simply do not understand (or do not want to understand) why people fail to grasp the full horror of this way of dying, as if whatever the vaccine could do to you is worse. It's like dad's death - and the deaths of all the others - have been for nothing.

It's pretty hideous, dying of covid, and not just for the ill person: once your relative is under sedation, you are left in a limbo where every day becomes a question of "will they live, or will they die?". There's no way you ever want a last conversation with someone through facetime, on a mobile phone held by a doctor dressed in full PPE. If - and I suspect it's a big if - they let you into the ward to see the body then you cannot even kiss the person goodbye, but must say your last farewells through a mask, visor and gloves. If I could let the vaccine hesitant into my thoughts and feelings for just a minute, and replay that experience for them, they would beg for the vaccine out of love for their children.

Obviously this is something I feel quite strongly about. So it was not pleasant to hear today that two of my cousins - cranks and fools the pair - have been strongly pressuring their mum not to have the vaccine. Thank goodness she held firm and her and her husband had the jab...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: moose on January 28, 2021, 09:34:10 pm
This might be dragging the tone down from the heartfelt previous posts, but I reckon the cranks should consider that if they are defying a probable ideological hero - a Republican Governor / Mr Olympia / Conan the Barbarian / the Terminator - they might be wrong about vaccines:

https://twitter.com/Schwarzenegger/status/1351973032953188352

 (https://twitter.com/Schwarzenegger/status/1351973032953188352)Btw, the "put the needle down" line is a reference to "Jingle All the Way"... I didn't get it either.



Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: seankenny on January 28, 2021, 09:42:16 pm
Not dragging down at all... anything to get those fuckers to see sense!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on January 29, 2021, 08:56:29 am
sean, I know it's an emotive subject for you, but I completely and totally agree with you. The fact that there is even the remotest chance that their grandchildren would lost them because they are believing some trumped up bullshit fed to them by the Daily Mail really has us raging against them, especially my brother in law who is desperate to get his, and get on with a normal life.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on January 29, 2021, 09:37:37 am
Her reasoning is a general suspicion of the Govt and by extension anything they've been involved with.

Honestly, fair enough -- maybe worth pointing out that the Govt hasn't had anything to do with the vaccine development process except for throwing money at it. And the vaccines have gone through all of the standard approval processes, it's just that the whole process has been accelerated by running trials overlapping each other and reviewing data on a rolling basis.

https://covid.joinzoe.com/post/how-covid-vaccine-so-fast
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/dec/08/how-has-a-covid-vaccine-been-developed-so-quickly

I am proud to say I know folks who are volunteers in the Oxford/Astra Zeneca and Novavax trials.

There was legit concern in the US that there would be pressure from Trump on the FDA to jump the gun on vaccine approval to get one announced before the election, whether that was appropriate or not, but in the end that didn't happen.

She's always tried to avoid taking unneccessary medication (pain relief, antibiotics etc) which is fair enough, but I didn't expect this.

Maybe it could be worth pointing out that vaccines aren't "drugs"? They literally just teach your own immune system to recognize and fight off the virus, and don't themselves remain in your body.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on January 29, 2021, 12:49:08 pm
sean, I know it's an emotive subject for you, but I completely and totally agree with you. The fact that there is even the remotest chance that their grandchildren would lost them because they are believing some trumped up bullshit fed to them by the Daily Mail really has us raging against them, especially my brother in law who is desperate to get his, and get on with a normal life.

Had some discussions with my Mum about the vaccine (which she's now had  :thumbsup:), one of the points I made is that getting the vaccine isn't just about protecting herself it's about allowing everyone to return to a more normal life and letting her grandchildren have the some of the choices and opportunities we all want for them.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on January 29, 2021, 01:12:45 pm
Her reasoning is a general suspicion of the Govt and by extension anything they've been involved with.
Honestly, fair enough -- maybe worth pointing out that the Govt hasn't had anything to do with the vaccine development process except for throwing money at it.
I think that was the issue - the govt have been so desperate to manipulate data relating to every aspect of their response (PPE supply figures, testing numbers etc) that my mum has extended that to the vaccine and was suspicious of them putting pressure on manufacturers to manipulate safety or efficacy data. A lesson in why building trust in govt is important I guess, especially at times like this.

She's always tried to avoid taking unneccessary medication (pain relief, antibiotics etc) which is fair enough, but I didn't expect this.
Maybe it could be worth pointing out that vaccines aren't "drugs"?
She has the flu jab every year and was a nurse earlier in her career so it's not vaccines per se she had a problem with. Just this one, given the circumstances.

But it sounds like me booking mine has convinced her and she's going on Monday :2thumbsup:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on January 29, 2021, 01:31:23 pm
Win! :2thumbsup:

My mum's off to get her first shot today.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 29, 2021, 04:17:01 pm
I’m not sure what to think about the whole EU/UK vaccine supply row/bunfight.

It’s not surprised me to see a little bit of smug - we got there first - nationalism from the UK (which isn’t pretty). But I’m surprised how the EU seem to have nearly thrown all their toys out of the pram in response....

What a mess.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: seankenny on January 29, 2021, 04:36:03 pm
sean, I know it's an emotive subject for you, but I completely and totally agree with you. The fact that there is even the remotest chance that their grandchildren would lost them because they are believing some trumped up bullshit fed to them by the Daily Mail really has us raging against them, especially my brother in law who is desperate to get his, and get on with a normal life.

Good luck with persuading them - and keeping your cool too! (Not easy...)

I'm very lucky, my brother (who had cancer last year) is getting his today, mum is getting hers tomorrow, no messing.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on January 29, 2021, 04:47:25 pm
Trust me, cool is not always kept. I know they voted Leave and Tory too.

That's good news for you though. My brother ended chemo over 18 months ago now, so is no longer regarded as "at risk".

My mum in Devon is over 80, so had her's already. Rest of oldywonks are in 70s, so hopefully not far behind.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on January 29, 2021, 04:52:08 pm
I’m not sure what to think about the whole EU/UK vaccine supply row/bunfight.

It’s not surprised me to see a little bit of smug - we got there first - nationalism from the UK (which isn’t pretty).
It did make me laugh when Johnson claimed the other day not to want to see any vaccine nationalism...having signed a contract with AZ to supply the first 100million doses exclusively to the UK and refusing to allow any doses to be diverted from the UK until their rollout has been achieved.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on January 29, 2021, 05:14:14 pm
I’m not sure what to think about the whole EU/UK vaccine supply row/bunfight.

It’s not surprised me to see a little bit of smug - we got there first - nationalism from the UK (which isn’t pretty). But I’m surprised how the EU seem to have nearly thrown all their toys out of the pram in response....

What a mess.

It won't turn us into Farage to admit that the EU are being tossers on this one. The misinformation about the AZ vaccine is really bad, particularly Macron's comments today. I'm also not impressed by the misuse of statistics in the "suitability for over 65s" debate, if you can call it that. We will find out just how effective the AZ jab is very soon from our own monitoring but I would be astonished if it was anything other than very effective, as expected.

More generally, the schism between the RCT data puritans in the medical/ scientific profession and 'perfect is the enemy of good' advocates has been very interesting to observe. For once, I think the UK government/ UK scientists have got this one spot on.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on January 29, 2021, 05:51:40 pm
U.K. Covid19 Vaccinations - 1st doses up to 29/01/21

7,891,184

A 443,985 increase on yesterday and ABOVE the daily average needed (418,166) to hit target of 15m by Feb 15th

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Es6iZACW8AAovu3?format=png&name=small)

source: https://twitter.com/SharePickers
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on January 29, 2021, 05:54:41 pm
All I'd say about the UK / EU vaccine situation is try to imagine the current situation 180 degrees reversed, and be honest with yourself about what you'd be saying about the UK. Apply it to the EU. All good. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on January 29, 2021, 07:10:35 pm
All I'd say about the UK / EU vaccine situation is try to imagine the current situation 180 degrees reversed, and be honest with yourself about what you'd be saying about the UK. Apply it to the EU. All good.
Funnily enough I was thinking exactly that earlier. If the production issues were in the UK facilities and not the EU, would the UK govt just let it slide with AZ while their pre-ordered doses didn’t turn up on time? Or would they be kicking up a fuss? And also would they just sit happily watching a different vaccine produced in the UK carry on being exported elsewhere, rather than say “we’ll have some of that thank you very much”?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 29, 2021, 07:18:28 pm
Well that escalated fast! The EU has pressed the ‘nuclear’ button of invoking article 16 of the NI border agreement. Stopping the free border between NI and RoI - in this case for vaccines.

Unionists are now frothing at the mouth saying we should invoke it for everything.

All of this really isn’t a good look EU...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 29, 2021, 07:25:36 pm
The Texan Epidemiologist has done another round up. Yes, it is US centric, but most of it applies to us to:
 https://www.facebook.com/101805971467321/posts/256008142713769/ (https://www.facebook.com/101805971467321/posts/256008142713769/)

“ Variant B.1.351 (also known as 501Y.V2; first discovered in South Africa)...

...is, yes, in the United States.

Importantly, it was discovered in two individuals who didn’t know each other AND hadn’t recently travelled. This tells us, epidemiologists, that it’s been spreading within the community (and we just didn’t know about it). We aren’t surprised. This also strongly suggests that others are infected with B.1.351 too. Unfortunately, we don’t know how many people because B.1.351 isn’t easily detectable. PCR tests won’t tell us if someone has this new variant compared to an old variant. PCR tests CAN tell us this with B.1.1.7 (the variant first discovered in the U.K.)

Earlier this week, Moderna and Pfizer confirmed that their vaccines still work against this variant. However, it doesn’t work as well as against the old variants (about a 6-fold difference). Despite this reduction, neutralizing titer levels with B.1.351 remain above levels that are expected to be protective. Moderna is working on a booster that would work much better against this particular variant, just in case we need it down the road.

Today, Novavax also came out with important information about B.1.351...
1. They released, for the first time, “real world” data about the vaccine effectiveness against B.1.351. This is opposed to the Moderna and Pfizer vaccine petri dish studies (which are done in a controlled environment and sometimes don’t represent what happens in the real world with environmental exposures). The Novavax vaccine also works against B.1.351. Reduced efficacy, but still works.
2. They are also changing up the vaccine formula just in case we need it down the road.
3. Unfortunately, Novavax also found that prior “natural” COVID19 infection (with an old variant) does not always protect against B.1.351 (while the vaccine does)

So, what does this mean? Three things...
1. Get vaccinated. Our best defense against B.1.351  or any other variant right now is a vaccination.
2. We need to stop transmission (of B.1.351 and all other variants). And we need to stop it now. The more this virus jumps from one person to the next, the more opportunity this virus has to mutate. Our vaccines work for now, but that might not be the case in the next mutation or two or three or ten.
3. There’s now some serious pressure on Johnson and Johnson to perform.

This is worrisome news, but we knew this was coming. Stay vigilant. And, honestly, I would be much more worried about what mutations we have not detected in the US. We rank 48th in the world on mutation surveillance.

Have I convinced you yet that it’s important to invest in public health before a pandemic hits?

Love, YLE

Data Sources:
Moderna: https://investors.modernatx.com/news-releases/news-release-details/moderna-covid-19-vaccine-retains-neutralizing-activity-against (https://investors.modernatx.com/news-releases/news-release-details/moderna-covid-19-vaccine-retains-neutralizing-activity-against)

Novavax: https://ir.novavax.com/node/15506/pdf (https://ir.novavax.com/node/15506/pdf)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on January 29, 2021, 07:38:46 pm
Sensible, informative piece from the Grauniad:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/29/everyday-covid-mistakes-we-are-all-still-making
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 29, 2021, 08:27:57 pm
Funnily enough I was thinking exactly that earlier. If the production issues were in the UK facilities and not the EU, would the UK govt just let it slide with AZ while their pre-ordered doses didn’t turn up on time? Or would they be kicking up a fuss? And also would they just sit happily watching a different vaccine produced in the UK carry on being exported elsewhere, rather than say “we’ll have some of that thank you very much”?

No need to ask the question is there, really? Hardly surprised the EU does not trust UK but this is hardly a masterclass in diplomacy.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on January 29, 2021, 08:48:58 pm
All I'd say about the UK / EU vaccine situation is try to imagine the current situation 180 degrees reversed, and be honest with yourself about what you'd be saying about the UK. Apply it to the EU. All good.
Funnily enough I was thinking exactly that earlier. If the production issues were in the UK facilities and not the EU, would the UK govt just let it slide with AZ while their pre-ordered doses didn’t turn up on time? Or would they be kicking up a fuss? And also would they just sit happily watching a different vaccine produced in the UK carry on being exported elsewhere, rather than say “we’ll have some of that thank you very much”?

You're suggesting that ramp-up production issues at an EU plant is the main cause of the EU's problems with vaccine supply and roll-out?
But nothing to do with its 3-month slower procurement or 2-month slower approval programme.. And that the UK's early procurement policy, early approval of vaccine, decision to use one dose, or roll-out of vaccinations, should not be acknowledged.. Interesting bias!

May I suggest a career selling pvc double-glazing might be a good fit for you. Failing that special advisor to the PM.  :thumbsup:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on January 29, 2021, 10:03:53 pm
You're suggesting that ramp-up production issues at an EU plant is the main cause of the EU's problems with vaccine supply and roll-out?
But nothing to do with its 3-month slower procurement or 2-month slower approval programme.. And that the UK's early procurement policy, early approval of vaccine, decision to use one dose, or roll-out of vaccinations, should not be acknowledged.. Interesting bias!
You’re conflating lots of things here. Vaccine approval date is irrelevant to this as the vaccines in both cases were pre-ordered for delivery whether they were approved or not. As is the decision to use one dose or two. Irrelevant to this.

I’m not comparing the success of UK vs EU rollout or numbers vaccinated, which is what you seem to be doing. UK is quite clearly ahead on that front. The EU-AstraZeneca spat seems to boil down to contractual obligations and then expanding out into a discussion about who’s engaging in vaccine nationalism, neither of which seem to be black and white to me.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on January 29, 2021, 10:20:36 pm
Vaccine approval date has nothing to do with this, true, but it is relevant that the EU procurement process signed their deal with AZ 3 months after the UK, hence the UK production facilities are further down the road and past the teething troubles the Belgian plant is suffering. The Commission appears to be using the UK supply as a convenient scapegoat to distract the considerable  heat they have been receiving from member states about their lacklustre procurement program (i recall a fair amount of grandstanding in the late summer about how they were going to pay less than anyone else in the world) and bully their way into supplies that from the contract interpretations i've looked at they appear to have very little claim to!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on January 29, 2021, 10:26:22 pm
All I'd say about the UK / EU vaccine situation is try to imagine the current situation 180 degrees reversed, and be honest with yourself about what you'd be saying about the UK. Apply it to the EU. All good.
Funnily enough I was thinking exactly that earlier. If the production issues were in the UK facilities and not the EU, would the UK govt just let it slide with AZ while their pre-ordered doses didn’t turn up on time? Or would they be kicking up a fuss? And also would they just sit happily watching a different vaccine produced in the UK carry on being exported elsewhere, rather than say “we’ll have some of that thank you very much”?

Given the solidarity shown last March when the French blocked export of the NHS' facemask order I would think we would be left whistling in the wind with the EU punting us firmly to the back of the queue, with only the option of following Hungary and phoning Vlad for some of the Russian cocktail!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on January 29, 2021, 11:07:38 pm
Well that escalated fast! The EU has pressed the ‘nuclear’ button of invoking article 16 of the NI border agreement. Stopping the free border between NI and RoI - in this case for vaccines.

Unionists are now frothing at the mouth saying we should invoke it for everything.

All of this really isn’t a good look EU...

Irish government not happy as well and EU already u-turned!

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/29/eu-controls-on-vaccine-exports-to-northern-ireland-trigger-diplomatic-row

Definitely not a good look for the EU.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on January 29, 2021, 11:28:19 pm
Some details behind the UK's vaccine programme dotted among this Telegraph puff-piece. Interesting about Germany, France and UK considering a coalition separate from the EU. And the early voluntary work done by the British biotech community in February that gave the UK a head start.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/01/29/scientists-realised-vaccines-could-stop-covid-put-uk-ahead/?li_source=LI&li_medium=liftigniter-rhr
''The Prime Minister first sent Kate Bingham a text asking if she didn’t mind him calling her. Then a few minutes later on May 6, her phone duly rang.

“I want you to stop people dying,” Boris Johnson told her. Ten days later, Ms Bingham was appointed chairman of the UK Vaccine Taskforce, stepping down from her paid job as a biotech venture capitalist to oversee the development of a “safe and effective vaccine” that would inoculate the public against Covid-19.

Fast forward to today and the vaccination programme is the major success story in Britain’s fight against the coronavirus pandemic.

But much of the crucial work was done even before Ms Bingham took up her role, as she is quick to point out, with industry plans put in place as long ago as February to tackle a virus which at that stage had not, officially at least, claimed a single British life.

By Thursday of this week, almost 7.9 million people had received at least one dose of Covid-19 vaccine, compared with a little over 1.1 million in France, while in Madrid, vaccinations have been suspended for two weeks after supplies ran out.

Britain’s success in acquiring the vaccines and critically rolling them out – vaccinations, not vaccines, as experts point out, save lives – also serves to highlight the failure of the European Union in doing the same.

Britain has been “nimble”, where Europe has not. The UK now has contracts for three approved vaccines for use and two more waiting for regulatory approval.

On Friday, Ms Bingham, whose appointment was criticised not least because she is the wife of a Tory minister, undertook a round of media interviews to accept the praise but also, with modesty, to point to the huge role played by the UK’s biotech industry before Mr Johnson had even called her up.

While the UK has a contract for 100 million doses of the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine – all of it manufactured in this country – and another 40 million for the US-developed Pfizer-BioNTech jab, the EU is struggling to play catch-up, crying foul over its own deal with AstraZeneca and facing a shortage of Pfizer vaccine as well.

Ms Bingham’s Vaccine Taskforce had signed its first deal to buy the University of Oxford vaccine on May 17. It took the EU until August to submit an advance purchase agreement for 300 million doses.

The British success, said Ms Bingham (who has a first class degree in biochemistry from Oxford), was down to early planning by the biotech industry.

Experts on Friday suggested that measures put in place last February gave the UK a three-month head start in the hunt for a vaccine and, critically, the infrastructure for mass production.

“We have been very nimble,” Ms Bingham said on Friday. “When the Prime Minister called, he said to me, ‘I want you to stop people dying’.”

She protested to officials and ministers that she wasn’t qualified to take on the role. “But I remember they said, ‘None of us is qualified to do this. Just get on with it.’”

Ms Bingham is keen not to sound triumphalist. She voted Remain but recognises Brexit allowed the UK to go it alone in purchasing well in advance the vaccines most likely to succeed.

She said: “I’m not going to get into the details of the contracts but one of the things the CEO of AZ (AstraZeneca) did not mention is we actually started scaling up manufacture of the Oxford vaccine from February.

“So, yes, we signed the contract, or agreed terms, with AZ in May, but the work to scale up the manufacturing started months before that.

“It is that early work that was done by the industry – voluntarily, not based on contracts or requirements but a voluntary coalition of the different companies. That is what has ultimately made the difference as to why we are so far ahead on manufacturing.”

What happened in February is that the Bioindustry Association (BIA), the trade body for the UK’s life sciences tech firms, recognised early the threat posed by Covid-19.

Steve Bates, its chief executive, convened a committee and installed at its head Ian McCubbin, a retired senior vice-president in charge of manufacturing at GlaxoSmithKline.

Mr Bates put something similar in train when Ebola hit West Africa in 2014. But that crisis was tackled by public health measures and the urgency for a vaccine passed.

Last year, he saw the horror unfolding in Wuhan and then watched the virus engulf northern Italy. “We could see what was happening in Lombardy and we thought a vaccine is going to be the only way to return to normal,” said Mr Bates.

The BIA taskforce held weekly meetings and conversations with experts across the country. Sir Patrick Vallance, the Government’s chief scientific adviser, remained in regular contact. The University of Oxford’s Jenner Institute was working on its vaccine and the BIA taskforce recognised the need to put in place an infrastructure to support the scaling up.

On February 15, Nettie England, the BIA’s expert on bioprocessing, was watching Liverpool, her team, beating Norwich when a plea went out from the Oxford vaccine team.

“We got an email asking for support to scale up their vaccine,” recalled Ms England. “At this stage, they could only make their vaccine at a 10-litre scale. That’s not going to make enough for clinical trials and beyond.”

That evening, she sent out an industry-wide SOS. By the Monday the BIA had assembled a consortium that included Cobra Biologics, in Staffordshire, and Oxford Biomedica, the two companies now making the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine.

Mr McCubbin said: “The foundations were put in place before the [Government] taskforce came along. The initial activity carried out by the voluntary bioindustry community probably gave us a three- to four-month head start.”

Ms Bingham was quick to praise Mr McCubbin on Friday. “Ian was 100 per cent brilliant,” she said, “He is widely liked and respected. When Pascal Soriot [the AstraZeneca CEO] said we were earlier than Europe in placing the order, all this is due to the early work already put in place. We have compressed into months what would normally take years and years.”

Mr McCubbin was drafted on to Ms Bingham’s Government taskforce, ensuring continuity. The new squad had money to spend – so far £3.7 billion has been set aside for the purchase of 350 million vaccine doses – and Ms Bingham and her team went about evaluating the efficacy from some “200 vaccine contenders”.

At one stage, according to sources, France and Germany considered forming their own bloc to guarantee supply just for the two powerhouses of Europe. The UK, The Telegraph understands, briefly considered joining forces.

But France and Germany were reined in by the EU and the UK chose to go it alone.

The Vaccine Taskforce set about evaluating the emerging vaccine data.

“Kate’s energy and ability to create connections enabled us to get into the right rooms and look at the data on the various vaccines being developed and get a clear view of their strengths and weaknesses and so begin negotiations on delivery, volume and price much earlier,” said Mr McCubbin.

He added: “We started earlier with the right group of people in place, the industry experience working hand in hand with great Government people created a nimbleness.”

Downing Street has endured a difficult pandemic. But that phone call to Ms Bingham in May – and the events that preceded it – might just yet be Mr Johnson’s enduring legacy. ''
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 29, 2021, 11:30:41 pm
Thé big criticism levelled at the EU is the unwieldiness of its bureaucracy. The commission has really shoved that to the fore with their handling of this and ensuing panic, bullying and protectionist twitching. I bet Brussels is getting it on all sides from the 27 capitals right now.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 30, 2021, 07:42:11 am
Well done Boris! Finally something worked.

Maybe “the only thing he’s done right” - rather than enduring legacy.

If you throw enough shit at a fan, some gets through :D
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 30, 2021, 08:20:31 am
(I am glad we’ve ordered lots from lots of different suppliers... it’s early and I posted the above ;) .)

I think the Guardian version of the Telegraph puff piece goes into more detail about how hard it was for the Oxford group to find the right manufacturer - and how Hancock steered them away from American pharma because of potential Trump issues...

Novavax success is great - though they’ve unwittingly probably been helped in getting their stage 3 results so fast by the UK’s second wave being so big... I’ll bet that’s the jab most of us end up getting late spring/early summer.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on January 30, 2021, 09:24:58 am
Well done Boris! Finally something worked.

Maybe “the only thing he’s done right” - rather than enduring legacy.

If you throw enough shit at a fan, some gets through :D
The other example of an acquaintance being called up to run a huge pandemic response program didn’t go so well. It looks like Johnson just managed to phone the right person with Kate Bingham. So a 50% success rate on that front  :lol:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mark s on January 30, 2021, 11:14:43 am
I've got my jab tomorrow. Having it because we make part of the Pfizer vaccine. Ironically at work we are having the az jab.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: duncan on January 30, 2021, 11:17:05 am
But it sounds like me booking mine has convinced her and she's going on Monday :2thumbsup:

That’s excellent, you must be relieved.

It’s also a great illustration of how personal stories and leading by example usually work better than flinging statistics at people. I can’t find it at the moment but there’s a small study comparing pro-Vaccine messages delivered by healthcare professionals. The most effective was “I recommend my Mum has it”, even more effective than “I’m having it myself” and both far more effective than quoting data.

I think everyone has a role to play in promoting vaccine take-up but health behaviour change is really hard and the science tells us we need to be a bit careful about how we go about this.

In the UK ~10% are fervently anti-Vax. and often very vocal about it. Don’t waste your time on them, engaging in argument amplifies their message on social media algorithms, and getting angry on social media harms your credibility with waverers. 

Another ~15% are a bit nervous, like Ali’s mum. Reassurance tailored to their concerns and positive examples will give them a nudge in the right direction.

Another ~15% (much higher in certain communities) have very significant concerns and are currently unlikely to get vaccinated. What worked for Ali’s mum will help to a certain extent, as does acknowledging concerns and fears are genuine however irrational they may seem to you. Getting into an argument is easy and tempting but, as this belief is a like a faith, rational argument is unlikely to change anything.

In the How To Vaccinate the World podcast (https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m000qz3p) Larry Brilliant makes the very important point that vaccines are necessary but not sufficient to halt an pandemic:
The UK is doing relatively well at rolling out the vaccine but shockingly badly at the associated public health measures.

(If you’re dealing with a waverer who comes with big business / pharma / government / international agency mistrust you might consider pointing them at Brilliant. He’s the quintessential hippy: former personal doctor to the Grateful Dead (!), who joined the WHO smallpox eradication programme in India on the advice of his guru after several years at an Ashram).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on January 30, 2021, 04:59:10 pm
More excellent jabbage today - 487k across the UK

https://twitter.com/SharePickers/status/1355549869918855170?s=20
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on January 30, 2021, 05:26:31 pm
More excellent jabbage today - 487k across the UK
Me included. If the rest of the centres are as well organised as the one I went to I can see why they’re achieving those numbers. Literally walk in walk out like the flu jab last year. You book a time slot but it’s fairly irrelevant as you just go through in the order you turn up so no hanging around. Amazing effort from the staff and volunteers.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 30, 2021, 06:50:12 pm
It is good - if the supplies could match the ability to administer..

Looking at the cumulative graphs. Straight line until AZ came on line - then big uptick in angle and straight line again. The straight cumulative line means it’s supply limited now...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on January 31, 2021, 02:15:35 pm
Seen a couple of tweets suggesting over 600k jabs in the last 24 hours! 👏👏

C.1% population per day
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tommytwotone on January 31, 2021, 03:34:40 pm
Very lucky day yesterday for us ...my sister-in-law's an NHS nurse and has been vaccinating people. Mate of hers (a GP) had been doing same and ended up with a dose that needed using or it had to go in the bin.

She got in touch and came over so my missus (secondary teacher) has now had her first dose.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on January 31, 2021, 04:10:05 pm
Seen a couple of tweets suggesting over 600k jabs in the last 24 hours! 👏👏

C.1% population per day
big jump in second doses too, ~10k
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on January 31, 2021, 05:03:40 pm
Seen a couple of tweets suggesting over 600k jabs in the last 24 hours! 👏👏

C.1% population per day

598k according to https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/vaccinations  :2thumbsup:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: duncan on January 31, 2021, 08:37:34 pm
The Covid-19 vaccine communication handbook (https://osf.io/f6a48/l): what to say and how to communicate with the sceptical or hesitant.



Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 31, 2021, 08:43:12 pm
(https://i.ibb.co/K6THSqy/A5-CBCD3-F-B3-BD-4-EED-9-F2-C-F2662-D232-A4-D.jpg)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on February 01, 2021, 08:56:43 am
Interesting.

As an aside, do some parents regularly volunteer their 12 year old kids for medical trials?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Falling Down on February 01, 2021, 09:58:23 am
I had mine last Sunday as I’m an NHS employee (unpaid) in the Chaplaincy service at The Maudsley psychiatric hospital.

It was super efficient and felt quite a big deal to be part of such a big programme that’s going to make a difference.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 01, 2021, 10:18:04 am
Interesting.

As an aside, do some parents regularly volunteer their 12 year old kids for medical trials?

If it would shut them up for five minutes and the staff have very high pain thresholds, yup.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on February 02, 2021, 11:15:15 am
A reassuring paper that indicates formite transmission from surfaces is low risk. The experiments with common cold virus are particularly illuminating.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-00251-4
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on February 02, 2021, 05:11:30 pm
Preprint on the oxford vaccine dosing

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3777268

TL;DR

One dose of Oxford vaccine:

 - 76% efficacy against symptomatic covid after day 22.

- 100% effective at stopping hospitalisations after day 22.

Two doses of Oxford vaccine:

- 54% reduction in transmission

-Antibody response stronger after longer interval between dose.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on February 02, 2021, 05:23:45 pm
Excellent news!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on February 02, 2021, 05:28:54 pm
''1st doses up to 02/02/21

9,646,715

350,348 Upwards arrow on yesterday

An average of 411,791 per day needed to hit the target of 15m by Feb 15th''

(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/eF31iBAjANfLORSsg6Cl2-bIbzjO8ORGdqNlkNe6dilymO7U1zzphJRjMhIDy2JZcQidOp9zvmdkGxdgUejUSywYqmR4TUJxJVWnCj7izQUkIDRWA6NnyyvJBB4X5tMGUkh9xgKsqpr5Q6l92nLRjNjp_vRY4E6Xc0IMcR3yH0ZWiC4yyPBCimz5U5_Vjrn__H7OVfDoZLVlqunr8ak7fjqFqu7NcWlyt4592m0bS0cyc474eItpX4Lg-6MLmzX8HB4QRzf0FBMKG8GwtBJ0bhnOfk3vxiWOXQWE5U1MhscDGuZDqXPlG3Pf6dgdea-M9ODl7739CI-6Khh_Bw5YwuOg1Qjw40uUDGYZg2ILyCmulYAs1hHyUdulh0r9Sy8uz9RIYrx7TzYILyZkiC-dqBNmcnqSZi5Cs264paM12ExL-MiFAI445GkGvQEgokkElzIAPrAmB0c8av1o2LYDtrYE3HK-KLGESGIOee0j4sxSyVq5y_78cCdqHWkiIeAPWEjG7G_zHz4qzLjM8WOLvVGEoxRjYvMkCR9gB1_pcanAac6rwIy3nXH2h_rQ7tpfKaKEj-AOarKSeaH0n8P-XYsFNdVk2ojTSeySxDZ_ZjHgVZNU_yNpmcwYPEa1qNandP39-HNz143zl8HMh9sY-9HasJhLnq0monfU4_iD29mKjZC9lbHEGcnvUsvF=w1429-h787-no?authuser=0)

https://twitter.com/SharePickers/status/1356646526739742720
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on February 02, 2021, 08:42:32 pm
We're at that stage of the run chase now where one bad/good over can make the chase a cakewalk or a nail biter...

Am I the only one who can't see the images on Petes posts?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on February 02, 2021, 08:54:58 pm
For some reason I can see them, then when I return to the thread they're somehow blocked out (true of all pics of Pete's on all threads recently)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on February 02, 2021, 09:28:14 pm
I think whether it turns in to a cake walk or a catastrophe from here depends mostly on how we prevent worse variants from developing and how we prevent their import/spread as they develop.

If we run quite hot on cases due to opening up too much or too early, our ability to prevent, track and stop them will be much lower.

Browser issue? I can always see Pete's images fine on Chromium.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on February 02, 2021, 10:33:29 pm
Quote
An average of 411,791 per day needed to hit the target of 15m by Feb 15th

Is it just me that can’t get excited about whether we hit this arbitrary date or not? Just like the testing targets that Hancock set earlier in the year (and fudged the numbers to hit) it feels like a ball thrown to the media and public to distract. We’re doing well on the vaccine front - shouldn’t that just be good enough without the need to add in these pointless races to an artificial ‘finishing line’?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on February 03, 2021, 07:38:25 am
The precise figures and dates mean nothing to me either. Overall progress is a different matter.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on February 03, 2021, 08:45:27 am
What they said. Also iirc the target was originally "the top 4 priority groups by mid Feb"
From TT's table (and I think I've seen this figure quoted elsewhere) that's 13.4M not 15M
And I'd call anything between the 10th and 20th "mid feb" (though given the review date is the 15th I can understand the focus on this date)
Main point is the vaccine program is going well, hopefully it can continue to accelerate.
I think this is the government site that these figures all come from:
https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/vaccinations
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on February 03, 2021, 08:53:26 am
I don't much care if we miss the target: it's been a very good effort irrespective, especially at the front line of delivery. The Oxford research announcement today is the latest good news. Oxford scientists gave the world a head start on an affordable covid vaccine and even the government response was mostly good (when they got involved a couple of months later). Its not fault free.... what worries me now is vaccine nationalism (as the pandemic only really ends when the world is making good progress on vaccination, especially as mutations crop up) and making sure we don't lose focus on what this is about in the UK...saving lives and protecting the NHS. Once the over 70s and vulnerable are jabbed I think focus should improve on: anyone else in a higher risk group in a constrained residential situation; BAME communities in deprived areas; and older essential workers who cant always social distance..... as those groups are much more at risk of catching the virus and transmitting it than say middle class over 60s safely taking precautions at home.

The self coordinated start of the vaccine response at Oxford, as outlined in the guardian, deserves to be better known:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/nov/23/coronavirus-scientists-developed-oxford-vaccine-at-breakneck-speed

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/jan/29/we-had-to-go-it-alone-how-the-uk-got-ahead-in-the-covid-vaccine-race

On one of the problem areas: the real issues with vaccination in disadvantaged BAME communities, was predicted well before we had vaccines, yet little national preparation seems to have been done to help with this. Some local areas seem to have been using existing health and social networks with some success but overall coordination seems poor.

Changing focus is a tricky balance as we shouldn't be delaying using vaccine stocks or wasting vaccine based on political pressures around postcode lotteries (as some vaccine centres were instructed, on use-by date issues with Pfizer).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on February 03, 2021, 11:51:52 am
At the moment vaccination uptake seems to be 99% supply limited - but it will hit a point (in a month? or mid March?) when it becomes more demand limited.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on February 04, 2021, 09:23:32 am
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/19045546.covid-scotland-vaccine-manufactured-livingston-site-west-lothian/

We all know it's actually diluted full sugar IRN-BRU, which cures everything, even hangovers.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on February 04, 2021, 03:32:02 pm
I'm going to throw in another plug for the national vaccine trials registry, because (subject to my blood pressure behaving better than it did today) I might get to be in a trial and I'm feeling the science psyche right now:

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/research/coronavirus-vaccine-research/

The one I might potentially be in is looking for folks who are not imminently going to be offered a vaccine in the national rollout (i.e. not in priority groups).

I asked what happens if and when people in the trial do get offered one of the existing vaccines -- apparently the procedure at that point is that they un-blind you, so if you've been on the placebo you can decide to take the vaccine you've been offered. So you don't get put at any disadvantage by taking part.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on February 05, 2021, 10:38:35 am
I signed up yesterday as they are looking for people in their 50s in Nottingham for mixed vaccine trials.  Lets wait and see.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on February 05, 2021, 04:27:52 pm
Great Twitter thread here from the FT showing how vaccination is making a real difference in Israel. Good thread - lots of detail - and seems thorough.

https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1357715616053014528?s=21
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on February 05, 2021, 04:34:25 pm
I signed up yesterday as they are looking for people in their 50s in Nottingham for mixed vaccine trials.  Lets wait and see.

*socially-distanced fist-bump*

That one sounds fascinating and incredibly valuable; we really need to know how mix-and-matching different vaccines for first and second dose works out. Might even end up being more effective, but we need to know.

Meanwhile, as of today, I'm in the Janssen/Johnson & Johnson ENSEMBLE 2 trial, yay!

They recently announced good results with a single dose of their vaccine; this is the overlapping trial testing a two-dose regime, and Northern General Hospital in Sheffield is one of the participating research centres.

Didn't get jabbed today (complications setting up the study app on my phone); going back next week for my first dose of vaccine or salt water.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on February 08, 2021, 07:37:58 pm
Prof. Van Tam has said that there's no reason to think that the South African variant will become dominant in the UK as it doesn't have a distinct transmissibility advantage. If the current vaccines reduce transmission of the South African variant less than the other strains, how is that not an advantage? Really hope we're not looking at lockdown #4 over the summer whilst we wait for distribution of new vaccines. Also, what happened to the "6 week" turn-around to produce vaccines to new strains? That seems to have mutated into 9 months.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Sidehaas on February 08, 2021, 07:51:52 pm
Prof. Van Tam has said that there's no reason to think that the South African variant will become dominant in the UK as it doesn't have a distinct transmissibility advantage. If the current vaccines reduce transmission of the South African variant less than the other strains, how is that not an advantage? Really hope we're not looking at lockdown #4 over the summer whilst we wait for distribution of new vaccines. Also, what happened to the "6 week" turn-around to produce vaccines to new strains? That seems to have mutated into 9 months.
He was only talking about the next few months. If its natural transmissibility is no more than (or less than) the Kent variant, it will take much longer to become dominant than if it were naturally more transmissible as well. I expect it will still be quite a while before enough people in lower age groups are vaccinated that the SA variant starts to take over, assuming that the vaccine gives decent protection from transmission of the Kent variant but not the SA one. VanTam was obviously focusing most of what he said in the press conference on the next few months - he kept repeating that the people needed protection from the immediate threat.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on February 08, 2021, 07:59:51 pm
Thanks, didn't see the broadcast and the news source I read didn't include the context of the next few months. Still can't help but feel that this is more of an issue than is currently being reported.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Sidehaas on February 08, 2021, 08:10:30 pm
Thanks, didn't see the broadcast and the news source I read didn't include the context of the next few months. Still can't help but feel that this is more of an issue than is currently being reported.
VanTam fairly clearly sees the longer term way forward from this autumn as regular (maybe annual?) booster shots for high risk groups to overcome changing variants of the disease. He made the direct analogy to how flu is managed at least twice.  For me the challenge with that will be keeping cases in the population not getting booster shots low enough that new variants don't pop up too fast. And managing international travel, obviously. I agree it seems a pretty big issue. But to be fair the press conference today was really all about reiterating the importance of people taking up the current vaccine despite all the negative headlines about variaNTS, it's probably not sensible to read too much in to long term strategy.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on February 08, 2021, 08:52:24 pm
I can see the logic that the SA variant can’t out compete the Kent Variant. But it’s sufficiently different to be much less effected by both the vaccine and previous infection/immunity. So surely it can (to a degree) grow on its own? I heard one person on the radio saying you could treat it as a different virus in that respect rather than a variant.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on February 08, 2021, 10:00:57 pm
Yes, it seems like semantics/spin for VT to make this point. The older variants eventually dwindle as the pool of non-immunes diminish, whilst the SA variant grows at whatever speed the reduced immunity of vaccinated/infected individuals allow. It is not direct competition, but one supplants the other as a result of selective pressure differentials nonetheless.
I expect it's a short term public messaging position designed to allay fears until the evidence becomes clearer.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on February 09, 2021, 08:47:08 am
VanTam fairly clearly sees the longer term way forward from this autumn as regular (maybe annual?) booster shots for high risk groups to overcome changing variants of the disease. He made the direct analogy to how flu is managed at least twice.  For me the challenge with that will be keeping cases in the population not getting booster shots low enough that new variants don't pop up too fast.

I've watched it now, it seems more like a "don't panic" statement rather than a realistic appraisal. The statement about the SA variant not becoming dominant still doesn't make sense where the variants aren't in competition. If all he meant was that we will be playing catch-up with new variants (and with a 6-9 month time lag between new variant and getting a vaccine), then that's not much better than the situation we found ourselves in at the start of the pandemic last year. It might be that the small degree of residual immunity from the current vaccines slows it down a bit, but overall I'm not reassured.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on February 09, 2021, 09:13:29 am
I fear the same Ru. The vaccine-variant arms race and the response lag look like a recipe for prolonged pain. Hope I'm wrong.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on February 09, 2021, 09:24:14 am
Biotech shares anyone :(
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on February 09, 2021, 09:30:59 am
I fear the same Ru. The vaccine-variant arms race and the response lag look like a recipe for prolonged pain. Hope I'm wrong.

But - timing and summer is in our favour... If the SA variant impact can be managed/slowed until April/May then we might well be OK for getting updated jabs for Oct without too many problems...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on February 09, 2021, 09:37:58 am
I don't share the pessimism around this news. Think its very likely cases will be on the floor before anything is opened up and opened up slowly when they are. I think the SA variant is unlikely to become a major issue until the vaccine is basically ready as per TTs comment. Also, it seems highly probable, pending data, that the vaccine should still help prevent hospitalisations and deaths from the SA variant which is all we can really ask.

Obviously though, the risk remains that a new variant emerges which evades the vaccines entirely. There is nothing new here though, we always knew it was a risk. Now we have a vaccine it will be a pretty straightforward process to change it each time and turn it into a flu type situation where it causes x amount of deaths every year, but requires few societal measures other than (probably) masks in supermarkets etc.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tommytwotone on February 09, 2021, 09:45:14 am
There was a vaccine expert on R5 the other night saying that there's a different / lighter touch regime for variants of vaccines / boosters.

Didn't get or understand the details, but effectively they're just changing the RNA(?) that links to the "spike" protein in line with the virus mutation.

Kinda makes sense - these vaccines were by definition totally new in concept, but if the mutation tweaks just sounds like a kind of software update type concept.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on February 09, 2021, 09:51:18 am
the mutation tweaks just sounds like a kind of software update type concept.

This is how I understand it; difference between a full new OS install and the annual update. Also means approval processes are much quicker from MHRA etc as the vaccine is 90% the same.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on February 09, 2021, 09:56:14 am
There was a vaccine expert on R5 the other night saying that there's a different / lighter touch regime for variants of vaccines / boosters.

Didn't get or understand the details, but effectively they're just changing the RNA(?) that links to the "spike" protein in line with the virus mutation.

Kinda makes sense - these vaccines were by definition totally new in concept, but if the mutation tweaks just sounds like a kind of software update type concept.

So the Pfizer (and Novomax?) vaccines are the RNA ones - which are AFAIK a completely new method. But does allow a fairly rapid adjustment for the whole production process.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on February 09, 2021, 10:01:23 am
The video at the top of this page with Sarah Gilbert is v good on this.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55967767
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 09, 2021, 10:30:22 am
I fear the same Ru. The vaccine-variant arms race and the response lag look like a recipe for prolonged pain. Hope I'm wrong.

But - timing and summer is in our favour... If the SA variant impact can be managed/slowed until April/May then we might well be OK for getting updated jabs for Oct without too many problems...

Except, the SA variant spread well during the Southern Hemisphere summer...

Actually, though, the vaccine shows reduced response/prevention against mild infection; so should continue to mitigate against the worst outcomes of the pandemic. Also, other vaccines already in use, seem to be more effective and even more are in final approval stage now. I am not without hope for our ability to manage the situation.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on February 09, 2021, 10:33:38 am
https://unherd.com/2021/02/how-worrying-is-the-south-africa-variant/

Tom Chivers is a very good science writer and this is a very good, clear piece. Appreciate the platform may put some off (they employ some truly awful writers along with some very good ones) but I would make an exception for this.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on February 09, 2021, 10:35:57 am
Ugh... (omm)...

Oh well - if/when the SA variant update vaccine is supplied, we'll probably all need the original/old variant vaccine anyway/as well... If was assume a SA variant vaccine does not work as well against the original one...

Key things yet to come out though are whether orig vaccine has a strong effect on the hospitalisation/mortality..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Andy F on February 09, 2021, 06:35:46 pm
Sky News reporting the Bristol variant is a cause of concern but the Liverpool variant is under investigation.

How bloody typical of the N/S divide. If the Liverpool variant was from Seven Oaks it'd get away without charge  >:(
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on February 09, 2021, 06:39:09 pm
You’re forgetting the Moss side variant that’s bubbled up in Manchester.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Andy F on February 09, 2021, 06:40:11 pm
You’re forgetting the Moss side variant that’s bubbled up in Manchester.

I believe the SAS have been called in...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on February 09, 2021, 10:00:42 pm
I truly hope all you optimists turn out to be right. It just worries me that it might take say half a year to go from identifying a new variant to having a revised vaccine at scale, whilst new variants seem to be popping up every time the queen farts. Seems like a hard game of catch up to be playing.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: duncan on February 12, 2021, 11:31:45 am
It’s funny that the Guardians pro lockdown brainwashing of the middle classes / liberal elite and their Twitter hit squad including the good old George bully boy Monibot choose to raise concerns about exactly the mental health crisis that they are serving to generate. There are some true independent voices on these matters including Alison Pollock who speaks to reason and supports pro-social public health policies. Lockdown has led to a wide ranging effect on mental health mostly in which previously well but vulnerable people are tipped over into being unwell while there is an alleviation of shame and guilt for those already ‘locked down’ by their mental health prior to the pandemic

Thought it better to respond to this here. Allyson Pollock does talk sense about the importance of public health and the incompetence of some of the outsourced services. She writes for The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/profile/allysonpollock). Lockdown is shit for some people’s mental health, losing family or friends is also shit.

In other news, I had the Pfizer vaccine yesterday (because I’m old). Got the text the day before, great atmosphere at the centre with a mix of jolly volunteers and NHS staff, all desperate to reassure me (“no questions, just stick the needle in”). Very competent and efficient, in stark contrast to my dealings with track-and-trace. Felt a bit tired and cold-y in the evening but fine now other than having ‘DOMS’ in that shoulder. I’ll let you know if I turn purple or grow horns.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on February 12, 2021, 11:36:04 am
If both don't happen I'll be disappointed.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on February 12, 2021, 12:17:30 pm
It’s funny that the Guardians pro lockdown brainwashing of the middle classes / liberal elite and their Twitter hit squad including the good old George bully boy Monibot choose to raise concerns about exactly the mental health crisis that they are serving to generate. There are some true independent voices on these matters including Alison Pollock who speaks to reason and supports pro-social public health policies. Lockdown has led to a wide ranging effect on mental health mostly in which previously well but vulnerable people are tipped over into being unwell while there is an alleviation of shame and guilt for those already ‘locked down’ by their mental health prior to the pandemic

Thought it better to respond to this here. Allyson Pollock does talk sense about the importance of public health and the incompetence of some of the outsourced services. She writes for The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/profile/allysonpollock). Lockdown is shit for some people’s mental health, losing family or friends is also shit.

In other news, I had the Pfizer vaccine yesterday (because I’m old). Got the text the day before, great atmosphere at the centre with a mix of jolly volunteers and NHS staff, all desperate to reassure me (“no questions, just stick the needle in”). Very competent and efficient, in stark contrast to my dealings with track-and-trace. Felt a bit tired and cold-y in the evening but fine now other than having ‘DOMS’ in that shoulder. I’ll let you know if I turn purple or grow horns.

Yes I noticed she’s written for that bedevilled rag  :spank:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on February 12, 2021, 01:21:22 pm
I missed that first post so thanks to Duncan from copying it here. The science clearly shows lockdowns do increase economic and secondary health problems, with especially serious impacts for mental health. Lockdowns are needed when we let the growth of the virus get out of control, knowing this has unfortunate effects elsewhere. Not locking down would wreck the hospital system and cause health chaos (and probably social chaos), so unless we started applying eugenics and left suspected covid patients to die at home we have no choice but to lockdown. So this mental health issue is not a trade-off dichotomy in science (nor is economic damage), it's a direct correlation. The faster we sort out any outbreak and get it under control the quicker the lockdown ends and the better for everyone. Unfortunately our government has been less than ideal in understanding and acting on this.

The subject has no class links I'm aware of given a lot more middle class people I know read centre right or right wing papers than the Guardian and its ilk...just look at sales figues. It does have clear political links with lockdown denial being an unscientific campaign from many right wing commentators and MPs.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on February 12, 2021, 03:29:41 pm
In other news, I had the Pfizer vaccine yesterday (because I’m old).

Congrats on your jab!

I, meanwhile, have been injected with either vaccine candidate Ad26.COV2.S or saline, who knows.

I can report that the Clinical Research Facility staff at Northern General are super-nice, and I continue to be full of science psyche.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 12, 2021, 04:49:19 pm
It’s funny that the Guardians pro lockdown brainwashing of the middle classes / liberal elite and their Twitter hit squad including the good old George bully boy Monibot choose to raise concerns about exactly the mental health crisis that they are serving to generate. There are some true independent voices on these matters including Alison Pollock who speaks to reason and supports pro-social public health policies. Lockdown has led to a wide ranging effect on mental health mostly in which previously well but vulnerable people are tipped over into being unwell while there is an alleviation of shame and guilt for those already ‘locked down’ by their mental health prior to the pandemic

Thought it better to respond to this here. Allyson Pollock does talk sense about the importance of public health and the incompetence of some of the outsourced services. She writes for The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/profile/allysonpollock). Lockdown is shit for some people’s mental health, losing family or friends is also shit.

In other news, I had the Pfizer vaccine yesterday (because I’m old). Got the text the day before, great atmosphere at the centre with a mix of jolly volunteers and NHS staff, all desperate to reassure me (“no questions, just stick the needle in”). Very competent and efficient, in stark contrast to my dealings with track-and-trace. Felt a bit tired and cold-y in the evening but fine now other than having ‘DOMS’ in that shoulder. I’ll let you know if I turn purple or grow horns.

🤷‍♂️
 https://twitter.com/brianmoore666/status/1360175858628059137?s=21 (https://twitter.com/brianmoore666/status/1360175858628059137?s=21)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on February 12, 2021, 06:48:55 pm
It does have clear political links with lockdown denial being an unscientific campaign from many right wing commentators and MPs.

In the interest of balance don't forget Jeremy's brother Piers (leading the left wing charge on both anti-lockdown and anti-vaccine fronts)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on February 12, 2021, 07:10:52 pm

The subject has no class links I'm aware of given a lot more middle class people I know read centre right or right wing papers than the Guardian and its ilk...just look at sales figues. It does have clear political links with lockdown denial being an unscientific campaign from many right wing commentators and MPs.

The Guardian serves the government and deals in managing the minds of the liberal elite. The liberal elite are the target audience. The Guardian had turned this way pre covid and in conjunction with the New York Times and the BBC dish up a daily serving of gruel gobbled up by the.... liberal elite? Of course ye all believe in the paper and the message because that's the nature of the programming. Chomsky pointed this out clearly in his interview with Andrew Marr. I've pasted the transcript below if ye can be arsed to read it. As for class links, class politics is a thing of the past surely? I mean c'mon socialism just died with Corbyn.

Marr: “This is what I don’t get, because it suggests that - I mean I’m a journalist - people like me are self-censoring.”

Chomsky: “No, not self-censoring. You’re, there’s a filtering system, that starts in kindergarten, and goes all the way through, and it’s not going to work 100% but it’s pretty effective. It selects for obedience, and subordination, and especially I think… [Marr: So stroppy people won’t make it to positions of influence] There’ll be behavioural problems. If you read applications to a graduate school you’ll see that people will tell you, he’s not, he doesn’t get along too well with his colleagues, you know how to interpret those things.”

Marr: “I’m just interested in this because I was brought up like a lot of people, probably post-Watergate film and so on to believe that journalism was a crusading craft and there were a lot of disputatious, stroppy, difficult people in journalism, and I have to say, I think I know some of them.”

Chomsky: “Well, I know some of the best, and best known investigative reporters in the United States, I won’t mention names, {inaudible}, whose attitude towards the media is much more cynical than mine. In fact, they regard the media as a sham. And they know, and they consciously talk about how they try to play it like a violin. If they see a little opening, they’ll try to squeeze something in that ordinarily wouldn’t make it through. And it’s perfectly true that the majority - I’m sure you’re speaking for the majority of journalists who are trained, have it driven into their heads, that this is a crusading profession, adversarial, we stand up against power. A very self-serving view. On the other hand, in my opinion, I hate to make a value judgement but, the better journalists and in fact the ones who are often regarded as the best journalists have quite a different picture. And I think a very realistic one.”

Marr: “How can you know that I’m self-censoring? How can you know that journalists are..”

Chomsky: “I’m not saying your self censoring. I’m sure you believe everything you’re saying. But what I’m saying is that if you believe something different, you wouldn’t be sitting where you’re sitting.”

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on February 12, 2021, 07:12:48 pm
He has dangerous views but fortunately doesn't get a soap box in mainstream news (which was my point, given the Guardian was childishly insulted). In contrast the Telegraph was formally rebuked by the press watchdog for the Toby Young column.

https://www.ipso.co.uk/rulings-and-resolution-statements/ruling/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on February 12, 2021, 07:16:29 pm
What dangerous views does Chomsky have?

Oh no not the press watchdog  :o
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 12, 2021, 08:14:09 pm
 :icon_beerchug: :doubt:
 :slap:
 :shrug:

Anyway, I think I’d like to join the Liberal Elite, is there a sign up sheet?

Looks like fun and they sound nicely organised, like those BLM people and the Antifa club.
Does anybody know if they do socials or annual conferences and stuff?

Possibly this is a result of the mind control mask I’ve been enjoying and the pandemic I’ve been hallucinating.

Seriously though, who’s in charge? Can you delineate the power structure for me? Is it Bojo? Because I’m expecting him to get a knife in the back soon, like his predecessor. It can’t be Trump, coz he’s already gone.
So who is the mastermind(s)?
Are they also responsible for the Jewish Space Lasers? Or is that a different “they”?
Is it not just possible that, actually, humans are a bit shit, governments fuck up, ideologies are hard to shake, populations are pretty hard to control and a lot of them are a bit thick and/or selfish, regardless of their educational or social status? 

Oh yeah, last one:

Why is Chomsky “right” and everyone else “wrong”? Because he says he is? Is he not just presenting opinion? All he appears to be saying, in that instance, is “if you disagree with me, you have been programmed”. This sounds remarkably like the standard “if you don’t believe in the conspiracy, you must be part of the conspiracy” response from deep inside the rabbit hole.
Also, I don’t think you’re doing Chomsky any favours here.

Ok, bollocks, can’t resist:

I see Chomsky made it through the filtering system. Quite loudly, in fact (and yourself, of course). You two must feel quite lonely, as two of the tiny number who have survived indoctrination. I think it’s so commendable, the way you are able to be so sure that everybody else is “programmed” but your personal views are absolutely exact representations of clarity and balance, without bias or ideological tint. It does remind me, though, that I really do need to report that Flat Earther to the “THEY” after all, he’s seen right through our immaculate scheme to dupe the world and must be silenced, like all the others before him.
Can anybody remind me why we invented the “Globe” hoax again? It’s slipped my mind.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on February 12, 2021, 08:31:24 pm
Ask Chomsky, he’s getting a bit long in the tooth tho. Who knows Brian Moore might be set to replace him as a radical thinker for the common man.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on February 12, 2021, 08:34:34 pm
As a minor aside to the usual stuff, I'm cross-posting this here because it is superficially topical and almost everyone from the militant lockdown comply-fascists to the granny-culling anti-masker party-animals can agree the vaccine is a Good Thing* https://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,25088.msg629447.html#msg629447
(* - apart from the covid-5g plandemic nano-tech-particles anti-vaxxer fucktards but fuck them)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on February 12, 2021, 08:48:10 pm
Shark/Mods can you split the dozen or so posts above fiends post and merge them into the politics thread if possible?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 12, 2021, 08:52:16 pm
Ask Chomsky, he’s getting a bit long in the tooth tho. Who knows Brian Moore might be set to replace him as a radical thinker for the common man.

Oh man! Wow!

You know the Common man? Can you introduce me?

I’ve been looking for that bugger for about 50 years now, but I just keep finding stubbornly individual people with unique histories and a mishmash of different and sometimes contradictory opinions and feelings. As I said, some of them were a bit thick, some were pretty averagely intelligent, some were incredibly smart and yet still a bit thick, viewed from certain angles.
Basically, though, most defy categories, though aspects of them do seem to settle at various points along a very broad spectrum. Oddly, I’ve always thought the extremes of that spectrum appear equally dark and strangely similar. A bit like standing an Hasidic Jew next to a Taliban Cleric, really or a Trumpster brandishing a gun in the back of a pickup, waving a bible, next to a  gun waving Isis disciple, clutching his Koran in a slightly different pickup...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on February 12, 2021, 09:06:08 pm
The definition which I was referring to I’ve pasted below. Also Chomsky has a good point re the media right? I love the bit about how it starts in kindergarten and is all about subordination.

A commoner, also known as the common man, commoners, the common people or the masses, is an ordinary person in a community or nation who does not have any significant social status, especially one who is a member of neither royalty, nobility, the clergy, nor any part of the aristocracy.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 12, 2021, 09:30:56 pm
The definition which I was referring to I’ve pasted below. Also Chomsky has a good point re the media right? I love the bit about how it starts in kindergarten and is all about subordination.

A commoner, also known as the common man, commoners, the common people or the masses, is an ordinary person in a community or nation who does not have any significant social status, especially one who is a member of neither royalty, nobility, the clergy, nor any part of the aristocracy.

Oh I see.

Like Bill Gates then.

I still think his point, presented in this context, sound a bit paranoid. As an aside, where do the Liberal Elite fit into that definition? Are they honorary Aristocracy? If so, I defo want to sign up, I likes me a bit of decadence.
I have worked for and with a couple or six titled “Aristocrats”.
Most we’re actually pretty cash strapped, under employed and powerless, despite all those old school connections etc. On the other hand, I once ran the refit on a yacht for a Russian Hooker, who made a fortune on her back and had a good number of important people willing to move mountains and fair sized economies to her whims.
Then there was Fanny (I kid you not) who was gifted the last yacht I built (Al Hannem when we sold it, she changed the name to “Barbie” and tried to get me to paint it pink, we talked her into a nice grey. 626 tonnes of pink might have been more than the world could take). She was a Greek TV presenter, but the yacht was bought for her as a present by a Turkish gentleman of no mean reputation (well, very mean actually). It was quite revealing how much foreign policy revolved around Fanny’s fanny.

None of them were Aristocratic as you envision it. Some were humble, some came from humble beginnings, yet were anything but humble. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on February 12, 2021, 09:40:34 pm
By liberal elite I mean this definition -

the group of people in a society who are considered as having a high level of education and liberal ideas
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 12, 2021, 09:53:10 pm
By liberal elite I mean this definition -

the group of people in a society who are considered as having a high level of education and liberal ideas

What’s a “high level of education”?
Is this on a global scale?
If it is, isn’t that, like, 99.9% of the British population? Most of us have at least 10 years of formal education and that’s pretty high on the global chart thing-a-me-bob.
Or do you mean, what we refer to as “Higher Ed” in the UK? Is that restricted to STEM subjects though, or are the Humanities the issue? Both?

Oh, and “Liberal”?
What does that mean? Socially liberal? Fiscally? Neo? Classical? Aren’t there “Liberals” across the political spectrum?
You mean “people you don’t like” don’t you?
You mean “people who don’t agree with me, but are well educated, so must be programmed and therefore I can discount their views and opinions and never critically examine my own position”.
(Actually, I can see why you chose “Liberal Elite”, the full version’s a bit of a mouth full, isn’t it).

Edit:

Oh! Oh! What about vocationally trained people, who aren’t mindlessly bigoted and still vote for liberal policies and parties and occupy middle management postions, or even senior management? Can they be Elite too?

And you? Where do you fit in that hierarchy? Ye and Ye’s ultimate truths? 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on February 12, 2021, 10:10:56 pm
I would be classed as liberal elite and therefore form part of the intended audience for the messages pushed by the Guardian and or if I was American the New York Times for example. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on February 12, 2021, 10:13:50 pm
''U.K. Covid19 Vaccinations - 1st doses up to 12/02/21

14,012,224

503,116 increase on yesterday

This is 93.4% of the government target, which is 15m by Monday

They need to vaccinate 329,259 people per day to hit this target''

https://twitter.com/SharePickers/status/1360270034904432640

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EuCmU_2WQAUbZBf?format=png&name=large)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on February 12, 2021, 10:17:04 pm
Good visualisation of hospitalisations since last March. 80% of them were over-80 age.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EuCj_qEXEAEsRyW?format=jpg&name=4096x4096)


https://twitter.com/SharePickers/status/1360267877681627149
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 12, 2021, 10:52:21 pm
Good visualisation of hospitalisations since last March. 80% of them were over-80 age.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EuCj_qEXEAEsRyW?format=jpg&name=4096x4096)


https://twitter.com/SharePickers/status/1360267877681627149

This is good. But it’s not vaccine driven, yet, it’s proof of lockdown effectiveness.
Irritatingly, opening up is likely to lag, though. Too much mutation risk and the threat of  wasting the vaccine progress. May. We might be fully open, if still distanced by May, if I had to guess.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on February 13, 2021, 09:34:59 am
Incidentally, turns out Chomsky's fine with lockdowns:

https://tamhunt.medium.com/noam-chomsky-on-the-coronavirus-pandemic-and-government-responses-be8301359dbb
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on February 13, 2021, 12:57:04 pm
Good visualisation.....


I linked this Independent SAGE report a couple of weeks ago showing over 80s are only a small proportion of those in ICU (as they largely don't benefit from the invasive procedures). The statistic of 80% of hospitalisations being over 80 is just plain wrong. The relevant bit of this weekly report starts at 10 and a half minutes in and lasts about 3 minutes and it shows clearly why we have a while yet before hospital pressures will drop.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKTHqyFfzFs&feature=youtu.be

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dr_botnik on February 13, 2021, 03:04:03 pm
Irritatingly, opening up is likely to lag, though. Too much mutation risk and the threat of  wasting the vaccine progress. May. We might be fully open, if still distanced by May, if I had to guess.

I saw an article in the s*n saying Johnson wanted to open schools in a big "bang". Didn't actually read it but believe the headline implied relatively soon. So guess that's what downing st are currently briefing, being as how they're in bed with murd*ck
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Falling Down on February 13, 2021, 07:31:35 pm
I would be classed as liberal elite and therefore form part of the intended audience for the messages pushed by the Guardian and or if I was American the New York Times for example.

So are you liberal elite or not? and if so how do you know?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on February 13, 2021, 08:17:11 pm
Hi, yes I meet the criteria for liberal elite. Educated with liberal ideals and a reasonable job etc
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ged on February 13, 2021, 08:36:51 pm
I'm feeling pretty nervy about the fact that they seem to be implying ploughing on with the 8th March for schools. I say this as a teacher, who really would rather not catch covid, and a citizen, who would really rather not watch the whole thing spiral out of control again. Yes, lockdown appears to be working. But that includes schools being closed. Given the noise from sage advising schools to not open then, and the govs track record of ignoring such advice, I'm nervous.

1000 deaths per day to schools open in 3 weeks....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on February 14, 2021, 12:40:08 pm
People in hospitals and deaths may have roughly halved between now and by the March 8th proposed school opening times. That's way too high for me for full opening and I think teachers have a right to be concerned for their health  If R goes much above 1 because of all the changes that the tory press and backbench tory CRG MPs are pushing hard for, we could be back to near first lockdown levels of infections pretty quickly. The virus just needs social interaction indoors between different households to spread, the Kent dominant variant has a higher R number overall and seems to spread more efficiently in the young than the variants last March.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on February 14, 2021, 02:06:17 pm
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2021/02/13/world/covid-19-coronavirus

This seems to have passed the UK press by....

UK Kent variant may lead to 40-60% more hospitalisations (and increased deaths) compared to the original variant. nYT base this on a UK report....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on February 14, 2021, 02:52:11 pm
As someone who is not a teacher and so has no skin in the game, from what I've read I feel like 8th March is a reasonable date at the moment. I think it might be better if they do it some sort of stages though, which might well be what ends up happening.

By offwidths criteria we would be waiting until some time in mid summer before opening anything if we are waiting for hospitalisations to drop to minimal levels. That is a pretty unacceptable societal cost for me, and that's from someone who agrees with the lock down policy.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on February 14, 2021, 03:24:29 pm
8th March is a reasonable date at the moment.

Absolutely.

I think it might be better if they do it some sort of stages though

That is the issue.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 14, 2021, 04:12:31 pm
8th March is a reasonable date at the moment.

Absolutely.

I think it might be better if they do it some sort of stages though

That is the issue.

Years 11 and 13 only and possibly until Easter. My guess.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: DAVETHOMAS90 on February 14, 2021, 05:11:00 pm
Possibly of interest to anyone who signed up to participate in the Biobank studies.

On correlation between vit D3 and CV-19:

https://youtu.be/au6FKi8aAsA
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on February 14, 2021, 06:02:31 pm
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2021/02/13/world/covid-19-coronavirus

This seems to have passed the UK press by....

UK Kent variant may lead to 40-60% more hospitalisations (and increased deaths) compared to the original variant. nYT base this on a UK report....

Here’s the report. Kent variant 30-70% worse for mortality...

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/961042/S1095_NERVTAG_update_note_on_B.1.1.7_severity_20210211.pdf
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on February 14, 2021, 06:04:49 pm
Possibly of interest to anyone who signed up to participate in the Biobank studies.

On correlation between vit D3 and CV-19:

https://youtu.be/au6FKi8aAsA

On vit D - there’s a preprint out at the moment showing good results (Barcelona study inthink) that’s getting a lot of attention on my Twitter feed for being not very good.   Preprint is only a preprint...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ged on February 14, 2021, 06:07:04 pm
As someone who is not a teacher and so has no skin in the game, from what I've read I feel like 8th March is a reasonable date at the moment. I think it might be better if they do it some sort of stages though, which might well be what ends up happening.

By offwidths criteria we would be waiting until some time in mid summer before opening anything if we are waiting for hospitalisations to drop to minimal levels. That is a pretty unacceptable societal cost for me, and that's from someone who agrees with the lock down policy.

As I understand it, during the November lockdown, when schools were open the Kent variant was not suppressed. I don't see how going back to that scenario in 3 weeks time can be anything other than dangerous.

It seems likely as othrts have said that y11 and y13 will be back. I feel pretty nervous about being shoved back into an enclosed space with between 15 and 32 young adults, with no ppe and no vaccine.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on February 14, 2021, 06:44:34 pm
Totally get your reluctance, which suggests the govt need to improve their messaging (now there's a shock!)

Out of interest, what would your preferred route back be? Seems like at the moment now the most vulnerable have been jabbed the government is content to allow a certain level of virus prevalence in exchange for schools going back. Other societal unlocking will be v slow to allow this to happen. I have to say I don't have a huge problem with this approach as I am profoundly unconvinced by the "zero covid" strategy (which is actually nothing of the sort) preferred by Devi Sridhar et al. I was a big fan of this last summer but now we have a vaccine I don't think it will fly.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on February 14, 2021, 07:08:54 pm

By offwidths criteria we would be waiting until some time in mid summer before opening anything if we are waiting for hospitalisations to drop to minimal levels. That is a pretty unacceptable societal cost for me, and that's from someone who agrees with the lock down policy.

I'm just repeating what the SAGE experts say (in a personal capacity) and other experts. None of them are proposing anywhere near as late as mid summer ...April to May is the usual estimate for wider opening, with some school years opening in March if the data looks good. Behind the estimate they are clear in the need to follow the data: we need to open bit by bit and watch for any sign of a rising R. Schools are much busier this lockdown than the first, so its unlikely to be a catastrophic expansion, if staged. If we followed the tory backbench CRG recommendations we would all be facing a high chance of a fourth lockdown (the NHS are already prepping for this according to the BBC today).

On the point of the new variant spreading  faster and with higher mortality it hasn't slowed the decline data so this lockdown compliance (where it matters most: indoors) must be better than in the first lockdown (or the research was wrong). The risk of this 'kicking-in' again is why we need to open cautiously.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ged on February 14, 2021, 07:36:20 pm
Totally get your reluctance, which suggests the govt need to improve their messaging (now there's a shock!)

Out of interest, what would your preferred route back be? Seems like at the moment now the most vulnerable have been jabbed the government is content to allow a certain level of virus prevalence in exchange for schools going back. Other societal unlocking will be v slow to allow this to happen. I have to say I don't have a huge problem with this approach as I am profoundly unconvinced by the "zero covid" strategy (which is actually nothing of the sort) preferred by Devi Sridhar et al. I was a big fan of this last summer but now we have a vaccine I don't think it will fly.

My preferred route would be to at least put some money where some mouths are and vaccinate teachers pretty soon. There is a lot of rhetoric about how important it is to get schools open, so vaccinating teachers and I guess older students seems like something that should be done if the nation is so adament that opening needs to happen soon.

I'm all for schools opening soon, but we are not 3 weeks away from doing it safely. Secondary schools with sixth forms are not in any way safe places to be if rates are high.

What also concerns me is the way that match 8th has come about. When lockdown first started in early Jan, Boris said that the first review would be on 22nd Feb, and fairly separately to that announced that schools would have 2 weeks notice. From this, March 8th seems to have turned from earliest theoretically possible date to the actual date that schools definitely need to open. I worry that they will go ahead with this date to save face / make themselves loved, rather than listen to the general advice from scientists, which seems to still be saying 8th March is too soon
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dunnyg on February 14, 2021, 08:02:17 pm
The whole "most vulnerable have been jabbed" is slightly grating, as being one of those people according to the rules I can't get a jab. I doubt I am the only one. Stats 101 for the government should include non putting out absolutes.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on February 14, 2021, 08:39:21 pm
Yeah that's bollocks, sorry dunny, I didn't intend to be glib. Do you have any timeline on when you might be offered one?

Ged; was chatting about this earlier and came the conclusion vaccinating teachers would probably solve a lot of the safety issues, if not the transmission ones. I'll have a think about the rest and respond in a bit more detail.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dunnyg on February 14, 2021, 08:48:37 pm
No worries, it isn't you, but the headlines cause a solid rant this morning. I'm sure most have had the jab though! Not sure when I will get one, going to chase again next week, I'm not overly fussed I just don't like lies.

It also seems wrong to me to not vaccinate teachers, again I am not particularly impartial as I have a teacher in the family, but I wonder if they will be bumped up the list, and if not, why not. Emotions aside, the abstract the question of who to vaccinate when is a fascinating problem, which in reality likely has not got one 'correct' answer.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 14, 2021, 09:39:59 pm
Yeah that's bollocks, sorry dunny, I didn't intend to be glib. Do you have any timeline on when you might be offered one?

Ged; was chatting about this earlier and came the conclusion vaccinating teachers would probably solve a lot of the safety issues, if not the transmission ones. I'll have a think about the rest and respond in a bit more detail.

We had to isolate, as a family, three times during the autumn term, due to year bubbles being sent home and our little darlings developing symptoms (usually a fever) at the same time (actually, that happened four times, only 3 with symptoms at home). This made working an absolute nightmare and one of Mrs OMM’s coworkers refused to be in the same office as her if the kids kept going to school. None of the kids managed more than 8 weeks schooling in the term. No. 3, spent the last two weeks at home, before Xmas, returning for a single day to a canceled Xmas lunch and an early finish...

Too early and we’re going to be back into start stop, open close, bollocks.
“Sorry Boss, gotta go home again at 2, coz another kid in year 7/tested positive” ...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on February 14, 2021, 10:31:08 pm
the headlines cause a solid rant this morning...I'm not overly fussed I just don't like lies.
For the last 5 or 6 years I’ve been woken up by R4 every single morning, listened to the 08:10 slot, and also flicked around various news websites throughout the day. Until about a month ago when I just couldn’t hack it any more because of the lies and more especially them not being called out.

Actively avoiding the rolling news now and replaced all my insta feed with various cute animals. Feel much better for it!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on February 14, 2021, 11:37:49 pm
To back up OMM and Ged, speaking from perspective of a teacher, I have just broken up for half term. We are only 2 weeks off from having to send 3 year groups out of 5 and a load of staff home for isolation due to cases in the school. 3 in the admin office, 2 in the caretaking/cleaning team, a couple of TAs, 3 teachers and pupils in each of the 3 year groups.  This is not a city, this is rural North Devon and happening whilst schools are still 'closed'. Yet.... the government says schools are safe and Sir Keir seems to want schools open ASAP unless the government announces different (he might change his mind at that point).
My wife is clinically vulnerable and since returning after Christmas I have effectively been in quarantine in my own home.  During the first lockdown teachers with vulnerable partners could work from home.  Now when things are worse that rule is no more. Since September teachers in this predicament could indeed choose to stay at home, on UNPAID leave! She had a vaccination last Sunday which is a positive for us looking forwards.
It is clear from first hand experience that the schools are ideal environments for transmission.  Whatever 'safe' means you can imagine the atmosphere amongst staff still working in schools and appreciate why teachers might consider wider opening as a bad idea until the prevalence of the virus really is low.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on February 15, 2021, 08:17:05 am
The whole "most vulnerable have been jabbed" is slightly grating, as being one of those people according to the rules I can't get a jab. I doubt I am the only one. Stats 101 for the government should include non putting out absolutes.

My father in law is highly vulnerable, immobile and home cared and over 85. We have been asking for his appointment for nearly a month. On Friday he was at last scheduled for 15:00 today for his jab. In Nottingham on Friday one of the big NHS teams still had plenty of front line staff yet to be scheduled. There is no way some people of lower priority within the top groups haven't been contacted yet. It's infuriating they are claiming they have met their target of everyone most at risk being offered a jab yesterday. There is simply no need to lie... it's acceptable that this is difficult.

The overall numbers are great but they need to do better in this next phase to prioritise those most at risk without slowing down the main population vaccination efforts.... the remaining younger vulnerable, BAME groups and front line workers who because of their job nature struggle to self isolate (including the likes of taxi drivers, teachers and front line police).

Also on an equality front the TUC and some leading charities are calling today for the EHRC to investigate the government's refusal to review their covid policies for equality impact (as required in law), given the evidence showing women are suffering disproportionately.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/feb/15/ehrc-urged-to-investigate-ministers-for-equality-failures-in-covid-response
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on February 15, 2021, 08:28:33 am
The whole "most vulnerable have been jabbed" is slightly grating, as being one of those people according to the rules I can't get a jab. I doubt I am the only one. Stats 101 for the government should include non putting out absolutes.

Yeah, and I was also going to point out that "the most vulnerable" here is a slice off the top of vulnerable groups. You've still got all the folks with stuff on the "clinical conditions" list, who have a seriously increased risk of dying if they get Covid. Plus, everyone 60-70.

Plus, of course, all the people who've got medical conditions that significantly increase their risk of dying if they get Covid but which didn't make it onto the group 6 list, who are stuck down in "rest of the population".

For example: people with learning difficulties are many, many times more likely to die from Covid but (unless their learning disability counts as "severe or profound") they've been left out of the priority groups completely.

There's a weird vibe coming from the government of "Now we've protected all the vulnerable people, job pretty much done!"
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on February 15, 2021, 08:48:14 am
The top four tiers were easy to justify to the masses - old and most at risk.

Now it’s more nuanced. Nearly 7 million in the 16-65 ‘vulnerable’ group - and there will be a lot of tension amongst choices as to who is in or out of that list. I think many of the decisions are in the hands of GP’s here - which is probably a far better option than some SERCO selection algorithm?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on February 15, 2021, 09:03:57 am
Emotions aside, the abstract the question of who to vaccinate when is a fascinating problem, which in reality likely has not got one 'correct' answer.

This is the main point I think. You can come up with justifications to prioritise the vaccination of pretty much any population group you choose. Eg Malaysia is starting with those in their 20s as they are likely to drive transmission more than the older population. Who knows what the best strategy is right now.

That said, I think the government strategy of starting with the oldest and working down is probably correct as it stops deaths as a priority. As TT says we now have a big cohort who are not 'old' and are still very at risk, constituting probably the majority of the ITU beds but not the majority of deaths. We won't be done vaccinating this group until the end of May probably. I am not in that group so its easy for me to say, but I can't say I am on board with things staying as they are until then.

appreciate why teachers might consider wider opening as a bad idea until the prevalence of the virus really is low.

I have massive sympathy for your position and am very aware I am in a privileged position working from home (although I do have a partner working in ITU on covid wards and probably bringing it home on a daily basis!). I am interested though in what 'really low' prevalence means in practice and whether you'd be happy with things staying as they are until end of May to allow the numbers to drop to that level? I just don't think that would be politically possible, even if scientifically that would be the ideal scenario.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on February 15, 2021, 09:21:37 am
The obvious pinch point will come in about a month, when the second doses start having to be given out at the rate we’ve been doing first doses... (2-300k per day).

Hopefully increased supply will come by then (though those figures are totally opaque) but that’s also going to mean a big uptick in the load on the vaccination centres (a doubling in effect if the vaccine supply is available).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on February 15, 2021, 09:29:33 am
On the BBC 24 news just now they are saying one third of care workers offered were not yet vaccinated. From anecdote about careers looking after relatives and friends I really struggle to believe that is a fair indication of levels of vaccine reluctance. A few are reluctantl but a third is huge. I suspect many were very recently issued invites that were  impractical  to accept this weekend.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on February 15, 2021, 09:40:31 am
...
allow the numbers to drop to that level? I just don't think that would be politically possible, even if scientifically that would be the ideal scenario.

Not commenting on the merit of this specific proposition, or accusing you of thinking this way, but..

The idea that we can make decisions that ignore natural processes has a lot to do with why, at 1,729 deaths per million, we are right at the top tier of Covid deaths worldwide
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/covid-deaths-daily-vs-total-per-million?tab=table&stackMode=absolute&time=2020-01-22..latest&country=&region=World
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on February 15, 2021, 10:14:22 am
One of the strange things about some of these discussions is how little we really know about how coronavirus is transmitted despite all the progress in other areas.

When the effects of the new varient were starting to become clear in December some people were saying that even a total lockdown might not be enough to control it because of its increased transmittability.  But, despite the government delays almost certainly increasing the spike, the lockdown from early January appears to have been very successful in terms of bring cases and (lagging as would be expected) hospitilisation and deaths down quickly .   If anything numbers appear to coming down more quickly than in the original lockdown despite rules being less strict and population movement/interactions being noticeable higher.  Does anybody have any view as to why this is?

On the opening front do we have any understanding of what changes will really impact transmission? The major areas of reduced interactions at the moment seem to be households, hospitality and education, lots of people are still travelling/working, shops that are open still seem pretty busy.

Seems like there's lots of questions but very little in the way of answers other than to go slowly and make keep observing the data to understand the impact of changes.




Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nik at work on February 15, 2021, 10:43:09 am
  If anything numbers appear to coming down more quickly than in the original lockdown despite rules being less strict and population movement/interactions being noticeable higher.
Are lockdown rules less strict this time round?
What is your basis for saying population movement/interactions are noticeably higher?

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on February 15, 2021, 11:03:07 am
Good visualisation.....


I linked this Independent SAGE report a couple of weeks ago showing over 80s are only a small proportion of those in ICU (as they largely don't benefit from the invasive procedures). The statistic of 80% of hospitalisations being over 80 is just plain wrong. The relevant bit of this weekly report starts at 10 and a half minutes in and lasts about 3 minutes and it shows clearly why we have a while yet before hospital pressures will drop.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKTHqyFfzFs&feature=youtu.be


Yep just checked this on the NHS England stats page.

Age group 75-85+ (no group for 'over 80') accounted for 40% of hospital admissions on the most recent day's data.
Age group 65 - 85+ accounted for 60%of hospital admissions.
https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-hospital-activity/


Over 80s accounted for 48% of deaths on the most recent day's data.
Ages 60 to 80+ accounted for 91% of deaths on the same date.
https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2021/02/COVID-19-total-announced-deaths-14-February-2021.xlsx

All those over 70 have now been offered (and over 9 out of 10 accepted) a vaccine. Plus the 'clinically most vulnerable' in lower age groups. And the over-65s are now being offered vaccines as of today.

Based on those stats, plus the evidence for vaccine efficacy in preventing the most serious illness, why shouldn't hospitalisations (thus pressure, relative to peak) and deaths drop dramatically within the next 2-3 weeks?


Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 15, 2021, 11:13:44 am
Good visualisation.....


I linked this Independent SAGE report a couple of weeks ago showing over 80s are only a small proportion of those in ICU (as they largely don't benefit from the invasive procedures). The statistic of 80% of hospitalisations being over 80 is just plain wrong. The relevant bit of this weekly report starts at 10 and a half minutes in and lasts about 3 minutes and it shows clearly why we have a while yet before hospital pressures will drop.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKTHqyFfzFs&feature=youtu.be


Yep just checked this on the NHS England stats page.

Age group 75-85+ (no group for 'over 80') accounted for 40% of hospital admissions on the most recent day's data.
Age group 65 - 85+ accounted for 60%of hospital admissions.
https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-hospital-activity/


Over 80s accounted for 48% of deaths on the most recent day's data.
Ages 60 to 80+ accounted for 91% of deaths on the same date.
https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2021/02/COVID-19-total-announced-deaths-14-February-2021.xlsx

All those over 70 have now been offered (and over 9 out of 10 accepted) a vaccine. Plus the 'clinically most vulnerable' in lower age groups. And the over-65s are now being offered vaccines as of today.

Based on those stats, plus the evidence for vaccine efficacy in preventing the most serious illness, why shouldn't hospitalisations (thus pressure, relative to peak) and deaths drop dramatically within the next 2-3 weeks?

You’re not wrong, but...

You are a little optimistic in your time scales. The vaccines given will need two to three weeks to become effective, in most cases. I would guess we’re still two to four weeks from seeing real vaccine impact on the numbers.

In other words, the continuing drop will be lockdown instigated and (at a guess) will plateau at the max mitigation level that such measures might achieve, before a further drop is seen as vaccine kicks in. Patience of a couple extra weeks, might have significant dividends in being able to open fully. Politically difficult, but if they move too quickly, they will (or we, really) will pay for it.

The difference between this lockdown and the first? Masks.
I can’t think of any other significant change, unless we’re all just better at keeping our distance and I don’t feel that’s true around myself. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on February 15, 2021, 11:15:13 am
Are lockdown rules less strict this time round?
What is your basis for saying population movement/interactions are noticeably higher?

Conspicuously more traffic, more workplaces staying open with ‘control measures’, more children in schools due to more understanding of the ‘key worker’ status. People travelling and meeting other households for exercise.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nik at work on February 15, 2021, 11:48:38 am
Cheers Stubbs.

From my perspective less shops/cafes are open, there are less people around, people are in smaller groups and maintaining distance far more and waaaaaaay more mask wearing going on.

I’m not sure the rules are less strict in any significant way, maybe just a bit more refined/defined.
Could you not exercise outside with one other person during previous lockdown as well? Genuine question, I can’t remember, but I definitely saw lots of people exercising with at least one a n other person not from their household during previous lockdown. I’d say, purely anecdotally, more so than this time round. Hence my questions, my local evidence/feeling is that lockdown is being better observed now. As ever YMMV, just wondered if there was a stat/study basis for the lack of compliance claim.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dr_botnik on February 15, 2021, 11:55:57 am
If anything numbers appear to coming down more quickly than in the original lockdown despite rules being less strict and population movement/interactions being noticeable higher.  Does anybody have any view as to why this is?

I think this is placing the cart before the horse; it isn't that this lockdown is going well, just that rules were so lax over Christmas and caused such a high number of cases that the "lockdown lite" we have gone into has looked effective in comparison to the massive amount of household mixing that occured over the festive period, and in the rammed shops that led up to this.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on February 15, 2021, 12:01:28 pm
Cheers Stubbs.

From my perspective less shops/cafes are open, there are less people around, people are in smaller groups and maintaining distance far more and waaaaaaay more mask wearing going on.

I’m not sure the rules are less strict in any significant way, maybe just a bit more refined/defined.
Could you not exercise outside with one other person during previous lockdown as well? Genuine question, I can’t remember, but I definitely saw lots of people exercising with at least one a n other person not from their household during previous lockdown. I’d say, purely anecdotally, more so than this time round. Hence my questions, my local evidence/feeling is that lockdown is being better observed now. As ever YMMV, just wondered if there was a stat/study basis for the lack of compliance claim.

Eh? Lockdown 1 was like a ghost town here.... next to no traffic any time of day - curtains twitching if you went out etc....

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Wil on February 15, 2021, 12:08:21 pm
Same here. It was very quiet where I was. Cafes didn't open, even for takeaway, until the end of April. I'm not in the same place now so my evidence isn't consistent, but it's far busier on the street and all of the cafes are open. Many more people are going to work from what I can see.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on February 15, 2021, 12:12:09 pm
As ever YMMV, just wondered if there was a stat/study basis for the lack of compliance claim.

Eh? Lockdown 1 was like a ghost town here.... next to no traffic any time of day - curtains twitching if you went out etc....

I would agree with that re lockdown 1 Vs 3.  For example supermarkets are definitely busier and applying less control to numbers, though obvs we do have masks/screens in place.

Btw I'm not particularly claiming lack of compliance this time round  just more places open and possibly less strict / clear rules e.g.  more shops open, don't think we have an exercise outdoors once only once a day rule
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on February 15, 2021, 12:18:09 pm
...we never did.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on February 15, 2021, 12:18:53 pm
If anything numbers appear to coming down more quickly than in the original lockdown despite rules being less strict and population movement/interactions being noticeable higher.  Does anybody have any view as to why this is?

I think this is placing the cart before the horse; it isn't that this lockdown is going well, just that rules were so lax over Christmas and caused such a high number of cases that the "lockdown lite" we have gone into has looked effective in comparison to the massive amount of household mixing that occured over the festive period, and in the rammed shops that led up to this.

Not trying to make any claims about why this might be happening just asking the question.  Had thought about possible hangover from December mixing but wouldn't we then have expected the trend to have changed by late Jan/Feb?

Really wanted to highlight how weak our knowledge in this area seems to be.  And when the government says it is 'following the science' that's pretty meaningless without admitting to where the uncertainty in the science is as.well.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 15, 2021, 01:35:02 pm
If anything numbers appear to coming down more quickly than in the original lockdown despite rules being less strict and population movement/interactions being noticeable higher.  Does anybody have any view as to why this is?

I think this is placing the cart before the horse; it isn't that this lockdown is going well, just that rules were so lax over Christmas and caused such a high number of cases that the "lockdown lite" we have gone into has looked effective in comparison to the massive amount of household mixing that occured over the festive period, and in the rammed shops that led up to this.

Not trying to make any claims about why this might be happening just asking the question.  Had thought about possible hangover from December mixing but wouldn't we then have expected the trend to have changed by late Jan/Feb?

Really wanted to highlight how weak our knowledge in this area seems to be.  And when the government says it is 'following the science' that's pretty meaningless without admitting to where the uncertainty in the science is as.well.

No.
Because once you had a large number of infections created during the Xmas mingle, there would have been a secondary, smaller, tranche of infections from those people and tertiary tranche from them etc. Decaying away as lockdown effects kicked in. Lockdown not being 100% effective, means the infections don’t just stop.
On the other hand, it’s clearly working, so what ever the difference with #1, what  we are doing is  effective.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nik at work on February 15, 2021, 01:42:53 pm
Cheers Stubbs.

From my perspective...

Blah blah blah...

...wondered if there was a stat/study basis for the lack of compliance claim.

Eh? Lockdown 1 was like a ghost town here.... next to no traffic any time of day - curtains twitching if you went out etc....
Ok, pure spitballin’ speculation here but... from memory you’re in the “suburbs”( Didsbury??) soooo.... maybe people aren’t coming out into the “sticks” so much due (perhaps) to a combination of weather and a clearer(? Relative term...) and seemingly more enforced (lots of media reports of fines...) limit on travel to exercise. So you see more people locally as they haven’t all driven out to Ladybower to get their exercise walking shoulder to shoulder with countless other people... All I can say is Hathersage and surrounding area has seemed noticeably quieter this lockdown as far as I can tell (and less businesses are open).
Whether this is better or worse, I dunno. Just my impression doesn’t tally with a particularly noticeable lack of compliance this time round.

I guess the only take home is the rather obvious statement that whatever we are seeing as individuals is no more than a very small snapshot...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on February 15, 2021, 01:47:05 pm
The row over who’s in the at risk group has started up. Many asthmatics who thought they would be in (ie have to have a flu jab) have now been told they’re not.

Looking at the list of those in the at risk group - there are many conditions there that the less charitable might say are self inflicted. Including Obesity, Diabetes, heart disease, liver damage..... I expect there to be all sorts of “fat 35 year old alcoholic getting covid jab” etc.. headlines coming out in the future.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on February 15, 2021, 01:53:04 pm
Were you already in the Peak for the first lockdown Nik?

So lockdown 1 here:
- it was an event when a car came through the village, people very reticent to leave their own properties for any reason and certainly weren’t driving to exercise. All car parks closed at walking places (reservoirs etc.)
- local market town completely deserted, only supermarkets open and they all had v strict limits on numbers in store at once, one way system etc.
- only business that seemed to be ongoing was construction, all other offices completely closed with people working at home.


Lockdown 3
- traffic through village prob 75% usual.
- people driving into village to walk and cycle, other car parks at beauty spots etc. well used.
- most pubs, restaurants and cafes in town open for take out so lots of people milling about (despite the cold compared to first lockdown).
- lots of people I know being forced back into offices under the auspices of ‘Covid safe’ working practices.
- way more kids in school that previous and also nurseries a s child care open and available.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on February 15, 2021, 02:19:18 pm
All I can say is Hathersage and surrounding area has seemed noticeably quieter this lockdown as far as I can tell (and less businesses are open).

Are we getting wires crossed between lockdown 3 vs 2 and 3 vs 1? The peak is rammed at the moment compared to lockdown 1 as far as I can tell (I went out v little there in lockdown 1 but it was just a couple of walkers here or there round burbage when I did, vs the current state of affairs where it's like bank holiday parking every single weekend!)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on February 15, 2021, 02:19:40 pm
Were you already in the Peak for the first lockdown Nik?

So lockdown 1 here:
- it was an event when a car came through the village, people very reticent to leave their own properties for any reason and certainly weren’t driving to exercise. All car parks closed at walking places (reservoirs etc.)
- local market town completely deserted, only supermarkets open and they all had v strict limits on numbers in store at once, one way system etc.
- only business that seemed to be ongoing was construction, all other offices completely closed with people working at home.


Lockdown 3
- traffic through village prob 75% usual.
- people driving into village to walk and cycle, other car parks at beauty spots etc. well used.
- most pubs, restaurants and cafes in town open for take out so lots of people milling about (despite the cold compared to first lockdown).
- lots of people I know being forced back into offices under the auspices of ‘Covid safe’ working practices.
- way more kids in school that previous and also nurseries a s child care open and available.

My experience tallies entirely with Stubs. In the first lockdown my office was closed and those that werent furloughed were working from home. Now in this lockdown, the office is open with 10 people in there pointlessly every day!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nik at work on February 15, 2021, 02:26:22 pm
Yeah was in Peak for whole of Covid. Strange difference we’re seeing, but as I said above we’re all just seeing localised snapshots.

Barrows, lockdown 2 was chaos, lockdown 1 was quiet certainly but (for me) busier than now. Like I say, just my very small snapshot.

TomTom asthma didn’t seemingly affect Covid outcomes last time I looked into it.

There are about 66 million people in the UK, someone has to be first and someone has to be last. People have been split into rough groups of priority, some people will end up a bit up the queue and some a bit down, but so what. As if 60-odd million (less the kids obvs) are all going to be vaccinated in the perfect order. Add more people to the next cohort, but then put the target date back to allow for this. What’s the gain?? The Saturday Guardian had a deeply disappointing article featuring a range of entitled middle class squeaky wheels bleating about why they should be next in line. Crap stupid journalism is available on all media platforms...

None of that is directed at you specifically TomTom, just general comment.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bradders on February 15, 2021, 02:31:04 pm
Just walked past the local playground; absolutely rammed with kids and parents. In lockdown 1 it was padlocked shut....

Popped into M&S on Saturday and again it was full to bursting, people having to practically elbow past one another like they were in a packed pub. I'm completely mystified as to why the supermarkets around here have abandoned the limits on numbers to be honest, really bizarre in the context of a far worse level of transmission etc.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on February 15, 2021, 02:32:37 pm
The government's traffic level statistics shows that, while transport levels are still down on normal levels, they are much busier than during lockdown 1.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/959864/COVID-19-transport-use-statistics.ods (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/959864/COVID-19-transport-use-statistics.ods)

Everything I see locally and among friends points towards individual observance of lockdown 3 being quite good. But a lot more people are in 'covid secure' work and school than in lockdown 1 so from that perspective, lockdown is less severe. Shopping is also less restricted.

I don't think there is a single reason why cases are dropping fast this time, I suspect it is a combination of all of the following plus other things that I didn't think of:

- Greater immunity among the population due to natural immunity and the first early signs of vaccines taking effect. We should see this effect increase rapidly over the next few weeks due to vaccines.

- Much better testing. In the beginning, there was next to no testing of asymptomatic/mild cases. These are the cases that drive transmission as they are likely to be the healthier, most active people who are least likely to isolate. Mass lateral flow tests miss a lot of positives and have the potential to lead to compliance problems due to false negatives, but they also pick up a lot of additional positives among people who wouldn't have been tested otherwise so they may be helping to cut transmission routes.

- Mask wearing. Last spring, I rarely saw another person wearing a mask. Now, most people I see are wearing one even when they walk outdoors around town.

- Test and trace. It's still far from the level it needs to be but it's a lot better than the nothing that we had during March/April.

- Better covid measures in workplaces, care homes, hospitals etc. Again, far from perfect but a lot better than before.

- Burnout among the most active people? I think this is less certain but I suspect that during each outbreak, the virus is able to rapidly spread among the population who have the most interactions. After a few weeks, a lot of the most active people in the area will have been infected already so future transmissions are harder won.

It is promising that cases are dropping rapidly despite the extra interactions from last spring, despite the vaccines only just starting to have an effect and despite the dominant strain being more transmissible than last spring. This gives me a lot of hope that we are capable of opening up soon to some degree without making things too much worse against these variants.

But this has to be weighed up against the emergence of new variants. We are already seeing a number of worrying mutations despite the fact that there has so far been little evolutionary pressure for the virus to mutate. A half vaccinated society provides that pressure and opening up too much too early is the perfect way to maximise the chances of worse variants emerging. This is the strongest reason for governments to take a cautious approach to reopening.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: battery on February 15, 2021, 04:32:54 pm


There are about 66 million people in the UK, someone has to be first and someone has to be last. People have been split into rough groups of priority, some people will end up a bit up the queue and some a bit down, but so what. As if 60-odd million (less the kids obvs) are all going to be vaccinated in the perfect order. Add more people to the next cohort, but then put the target date back to allow for this. What’s the gain?? The Saturday Guardian had a deeply disappointing article featuring a range of entitled middle class squeaky wheels bleating about why they should be next in line. Crap stupid journalism is available on all media platforms...

None of that is directed at you specifically TomTom, just general comment.

I caveat everything I'm about to say with the fact that it is all anecdotal based purely on experiences of my group of friends....

It seems that priorities for vaccines are being left to local authorities and decision making is inconsistent. For example, SEN teachers are being offered the vaccine in a neighbouring LA areas but not here, however nursery workers are now classed as health and social care and can get a vaccine. In some local authorities, charities that work with children and young people at risk are being offered the vaccine...

I'm not sure if teachers are being offered it in any of these areas but surely they should be.

It is definitely busier in our area in lockdown 3 than lockdown 1 and I know our local primary school had to turn some people away who wanted a place for their child under the revised keyworker definitions.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on February 15, 2021, 04:41:59 pm
A revised definition of keyworker status had passed me by. When did this happen?

I'm apparently a key worker now so get out there and clap for me, you miserable low-lifes.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on February 15, 2021, 04:53:17 pm
As long as it's a sarcastic slow clap, I'm in.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on February 15, 2021, 05:22:20 pm
The government's traffic level statistics shows that, while transport levels are still down on normal levels, they are much busier than during lockdown 1.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/959864/COVID-19-transport-use-statistics.ods (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/959864/COVID-19-transport-use-statistics.ods)

Everything I see locally and among friends points towards individual observance of lockdown 3 being quite good. But a lot more people are in 'covid secure' work and school than in lockdown 1 so from that perspective, lockdown is less severe. Shopping is also less restricted.

I don't think there is a single reason why cases are dropping fast this time, I suspect it is a combination of all of the following plus other things that I didn't think of:

- Greater immunity among the population due to natural immunity and the first early signs of vaccines taking effect. We should see this effect increase rapidly over the next few weeks due to vaccines.

- Much better testing. In the beginning, there was next to no testing of asymptomatic/mild cases. These are the cases that drive transmission as they are likely to be the healthier, most active people who are least likely to isolate. Mass lateral flow tests miss a lot of positives and have the potential to lead to compliance problems due to false negatives, but they also pick up a lot of additional positives among people who wouldn't have been tested otherwise so they may be helping to cut transmission routes.

- Mask wearing. Last spring, I rarely saw another person wearing a mask. Now, most people I see are wearing one even when they walk outdoors around town.

- Test and trace. It's still far from the level it needs to be but it's a lot better than the nothing that we had during March/April.

- Better covid measures in workplaces, care homes, hospitals etc. Again, far from perfect but a lot better than before.

- Burnout among the most active people? I think this is less certain but I suspect that during each outbreak, the virus is able to rapidly spread among the population who have the most interactions. After a few weeks, a lot of the most active people in the area will have been infected already so future transmissions are harder won.

It is promising that cases are dropping rapidly despite the extra interactions from last spring, despite the vaccines only just starting to have an effect and despite the dominant strain being more transmissible than last spring. This gives me a lot of hope that we are capable of opening up soon to some degree without making things too much worse against these variants.

But this has to be weighed up against the emergence of new variants. We are already seeing a number of worrying mutations despite the fact that there has so far been little evolutionary pressure for the virus to mutate. A half vaccinated society provides that pressure and opening up too much too early is the perfect way to maximise the chances of worse variants emerging. This is the strongest reason for governments to take a cautious approach to reopening.

Good list... I'd add transmission outdoors must be very low or all those protests in various countries would have linked to clear major infection events. That means big numbers in popular walking areas just look worrying rather than being a serious risk. I think lag between infections and hospitalisations was also important in the first wave... SAGE got the data wrong last March and by the time that was obvious the spread was serious, before any major population precautions at all.

SAGE also got masks wrong initially. They were fretting about epidemiological evidence and not paying attention to the practical experiences in the far east (eg for SARs) and the simple barrier physics evidence.

https://theconversation.com/masks-help-stop-the-spread-of-coronavirus-the-science-is-simple-and-im-one-of-100-experts-urging-governors-to-require-public-mask-wearing-138507

Finally we may have got lucky. After the government dithering led to the very fast rise into January it's probable the R number for the Kent variant turned out to be nearer the optimistic end of initial estimates.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on February 15, 2021, 09:25:44 pm
A revised definition of keyworker status had passed me by. When did this happen?

I'm apparently a key worker now so get out there and clap for me, you miserable low-lifes.

Well it is a downgraded critical worker list....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on February 16, 2021, 08:46:43 am
I'd add transmission outdoors must be very low or all those protests in various countries would have linked to clear major infection events.

Interestingly, looks like masks make a significant difference when it comes to protests. Notably, the BLM protests (with near-universal masking) don't seem to have been super-spreader events, whereas there's a study suggesting that some of the German anti-lockdown protests may have been:

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/black-lives-matter-protests-didnt-contribute-to-covid19-surge#No-evidence-of-protest-spread
https://www.politico.eu/article/anti-corona-restrictions-protests-responsible-for-coronavirus-outbreak-study-shows/

Obviously the comparison may be skewed because if you're at an anti-lockdown protest you're probably taking a more cavalier attitude towards regulations and may be much more likely to be infected to begin with.

And being packed into a crowd next to the same people for a prolonged period of time, all shouting, is about as high-risk as you can get outdoors. Otherwise, it does look like transmission outdoors is normally very low.

I'd consider being at a march/protest as very different in risk level from "being in a busy walking area" in the countryside, where you might have to go within 2 metres of someone momentarily to pass them in a narrow lane or whatever, but can broadly still stay distanced.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on February 16, 2021, 09:00:53 am
I'm not convinced just by the way some events are pictured as busy outdoor situations where the virus spread. Some American research indicated genuine outdoor spread events were very rare.

The classic misused example is the white house superspreader event which was partly indoors and people were in multiple physical contact, including hugging, in public view outdoors.

The wider context of such events is important...are people mixing households in vehicles to get there...are there pre- or post- meetings indoors...in those european football matches was the risk on the terraces or more in queues in the packed toilets or in the bars before and after? In lockdown denial protests many people are being the opposite of trying to be as careful as possible but that will carry beyond the visible outside protest.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on February 16, 2021, 11:04:56 am
Thought this was a good and convincing piece: https://www.newstatesman.com/science-tech/coronavirus/2021/02/how-uk-could-vaccinate-every-adult-mid-may-and-end-lockdown .
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on February 16, 2021, 11:25:22 am
Thought this was a good and convincing piece: https://www.newstatesman.com/science-tech/coronavirus/2021/02/how-uk-could-vaccinate-every-adult-mid-may-and-end-lockdown .

I'll bite :)

Its a good argument but.... Its based on what we know at the moment. This all holds true if we think of CV19 as behaving much like a bad flu (which has been a mistake in the past.)

I'm gonna go all Rumsfeld on y'all... There are known knowns, known unknowns and unknown unknowns.

For CV19 - there are precious few of the first (Known knowns), plenty of the second (known unknowns) and who knows about the third category.. for Flu - we know most of the first two - and so can thus manage it much better. With Covid, we still dont know with much certainty that much about its transmission (we know alot more than we did - but there is still alot of uncertainty in the science I'd argue). There are a couple of massive known unknowns. Including - the longevity of the vaccine, how effective it is to mutations, how effective updates/boosters are for this. Further - an important known unknown on our horizon is Long Covid. This could be a massive future issue for well over a million people - and thus a considerable drain on both economy and the workforce... so even with the vaccinate everyone plan, people will still get it and get LC - as well as the existing sufferers...

(edit - and then there are the unknown unknowns..)

Put simply - I dont think we know enough about it to be able to make such predictions. Thats a job for journalists :D
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on February 16, 2021, 11:39:19 am
Thought this was a good and convincing piece: https://www.newstatesman.com/science-tech/coronavirus/2021/02/how-uk-could-vaccinate-every-adult-mid-may-and-end-lockdown .

I'll bite :)

Its a good argument but.... Its based on what we know at the moment. This all holds true if we think of CV19 as behaving much like a bad flu (which has been a mistake in the past.)

I'm gonna go all Rumsfeld on y'all... There are known knowns, known unknowns and unknown unknowns.

For CV19 - there are precious few of the first (Known knowns), plenty of the second (known unknowns) and who knows about the third category.. for Flu - we know most of the first two - and so can thus manage it much better. With Covid, we still dont know with much certainty that much about its transmission (we know alot more than we did - but there is still alot of uncertainty in the science I'd argue). There are a couple of massive known unknowns. Including - the longevity of the vaccine, how effective it is to mutations, how effective updates/boosters are for this. Further - an important known unknown on our horizon is Long Covid. This could be a massive future issue for well over a million people - and thus a considerable drain on both economy and the workforce... so even with the vaccinate everyone plan, people will still get it and get LC - as well as the existing sufferers...

(edit - and then there are the unknown unknowns..)

Put simply - I dont think we know enough about it to be able to make such predictions. Thats a job for journalists :D

- the signs for the vaccines are all good. They work against the current mutations to some degree and they are easily amendable for future mutations. This is a vaccinable disease. New mutations will emerge and probably require new vaccines, but anyone who did GCSE biology knew this already, because viruses mutate. In this respect long term it should be no different from flu and will be managed as such.
- Long Covid. This is a concern, but its a small c concern rather than capitalised. I haven't read any good discussion on this so feel free to link some good pieces, but I don't really think concern over this should affect the current strategy, because the only way to protect people would be to not allow anyone to get it ever again- as you say, people will still get covid once everyone is vaccinated, so this isn't an achievable strategy. So whats the way out? As far as I can see the only foolproof protection against Long Covid is simply to live in lockdown in perpetuity which is a nonstarter.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on February 16, 2021, 11:57:43 am
It seems to involve a lot of assumptions, notably:

a)100% take-up (or at least over 90%) of the vaccines in all age groups. This requires ignoring all surveys and data on some of the groups who've already been offered the vaccine -- we're already looking at only 80% for NHS staff and arounds two-thirds for social care staff.

and

b) steady and continuous increase in vaccination rates, with no logistical limits on either the ability to keep expanding the vaccine rollout programme or on vaccine supply.

Whereas we're currently looking at a drop in vaccine supply across the UK before we get back to current levels at the start of March:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-56025767

I'm very hopeful we will start to see a rapid fall in Covid deaths and hospitalisations, but the article's into "perfectly spherical cow" territory if it's trying to make realistic predictions about what we might manage when.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on February 16, 2021, 12:06:26 pm
How the virus will react and mutate is a bit unknown - a relatively small shift in infection rate caused our 30% of fatalities to occur in January... (and probably how it was managed too..)...

We now have a huge melting pot/number of cases within which the virus can mutate as well... (how many 100's of millions of cases around the world?).

Just saying the article seems to be based on the limited information we know at the moment - not what we are going to find out! 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on February 16, 2021, 12:09:26 pm
It seems to involve a lot of assumptions, notably:

a)100% take-up (or at least over 90%) of the vaccines in all age groups. This requires ignoring all surveys and data on some of the groups who've already been offered the vaccine -- we're already looking at only 80% for NHS staff and arounds two-thirds for social care staff.

and

b) steady and continuous increase in vaccination rates, with no logistical limits on either the ability to keep expanding the vaccine rollout programme or on vaccine supply.

Whereas we're currently looking at a drop in vaccine supply across the UK before we get back to current levels at the start of March:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-56025767

I'm very hopeful we will start to see a rapid fall in Covid deaths and hospitalisations, but the article's into "perfectly spherical cow" territory if it's trying to make realistic predictions about what we might manage when.

Yes, fair comment about the assumptions. The one about uptake is an interesting one though isn't it. Is the argument that with lower uptake there is a higher risk of mutations happening or that there are more people at risk due to fewer being vaccinated? Probably the answer is a bit of both, but societally/politically i don't think it would be feasible to delay an unlocking on the basis of people who have been offered a jab turning it down. Tricky ground though.

On vaccine supply, I was exploring this yesterday. The supply is set to increase to double current levels in March, so even with the reduction for the next few weeks we should be on track to jab all over 50's by end of March. Accept the point this may not translate to all adults as the article suggests. perhaps the more interesting discussion is what restrictions will need to remain once all over 50s are jabbed, as that will certainly happen by May.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on February 16, 2021, 12:12:19 pm
Acceptance rates will drop as age of recipients falls....

I mentioned this a few weeks back - but there are a couple of reports showing that once you get down to the 20-30yo's the uptake rate may be in the 60-70% rate..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on February 16, 2021, 12:17:09 pm
Just saying the article seems to be based on the limited information we know at the moment - not what we are going to find out!

Like every article then?  ;D

I mentioned this a few weeks back - but there are a couple of reports showing that once you get down to the 20-30yo's the uptake rate may be in the 60-70% rate..

I remember - but still don't particularly see why it matters in that age group to be honest. If uptake is high in the 50+s then it should have comparatively little impact as far as I can see.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on February 16, 2021, 12:19:16 pm
I remember - but still don't particularly see why it matters in that age group to be honest.

It might not to that age groups mortality - but some will still get it, some will get LC - and it keeps the virus in circulation...

Though thats possibly a moot point if borders are kept open and its still ripping/pottering around the rest of the world...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on February 16, 2021, 12:26:31 pm
I remember - but still don't particularly see why it matters in that age group to be honest.

It might not to that age groups mortality - but some will still get it, some will get LC - and it keeps the virus in circulation...

Though thats possibly a moot point if borders are kept open and its still ripping/pottering around the rest of the world...

I think there are two points here, both of them interesting. The first is on uptake and how to keep it high. I think if vaccine passports become a thing, which they probably will, then vaccination rates will remain high even scepticism/ polls suggest there are naysayers. At the end of the day, people will want to go on holiday, especially the young. Suspect that will be the main driver of high uptake in all age groups.

The second is that regardless of what we do, the virus will in all likelihood become endemic across the world, so 5-10% of jab uptake here or there isn't really an issue. To be honest, this is the main flaw in the zero covid strategy as I see it. There is no point driving cases right down into the ground now there is a vaccine available, because nobody else will do that and unless you are willing to close borders indefinitely, as soon as you open them again your incidence will rise. NZ is already having this internal discussion about how to have a more flexible and nuanced border policy; in time I suspect their incidence will be the same as every other country. Thats not to say they didn't play a blinder; in the absence of a vaccine their strategy was 100% correct and I wish the UK had followed it, but it isn't sustainable now a a jab is available.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on February 16, 2021, 02:18:28 pm
It seems to involve a lot of assumptions, notably:

a)100% take-up (or at least over 90%) of the vaccines in all age groups. This requires ignoring all surveys and data on some of the groups who've already been offered the vaccine -- we're already looking at only 80% for NHS staff and arounds two-thirds for social care staff.

and

b) steady and continuous increase in vaccination rates, with no logistical limits on either the ability to keep expanding the vaccine rollout programme or on vaccine supply.

Whereas we're currently looking at a drop in vaccine supply across the UK before we get back to current levels at the start of March:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-56025767

I'm very hopeful we will start to see a rapid fall in Covid deaths and hospitalisations, but the article's into "perfectly spherical cow" territory if it's trying to make realistic predictions about what we might manage when.

I'd agree with most of that but remember that low NHS percentage is not a realistic number for vaccine refusal. I know for a fact some NHS organisations tried to clear large numbers of remaining staff not yet vaccinated over the weekend (that they should have dealt with much earlier), without due regard to short notice practicality. Also staff off-sick or self isolating can't have the vaccine nor can anyone within 28 days of covid illness. This 70% to 80% number being used publicly is old fashioned foot shooting.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on February 16, 2021, 02:29:31 pm
Fair point -- thanks for the info.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on February 16, 2021, 02:56:04 pm
Just saying the article seems to be based on the limited information we know at the moment - not what we are going to find out!

And another very big assumption is that all the vaccines will have (and continue to have) near-100% effectiveness against hospitalization and death from Covid, regardless of variants.

I believe at the moment state of info re: the AstraZeneca vaccine and the South African variant is that it has minimal effect when it comes to preventing mild and moderate Covid.

The most hopeful thing here is that we don't know if that means it also performs poorly when it comes to preventing severe Covid; it's possible it might still be some use. Or it might not! Right now we have no idea!

We are currently proving wildly lucky in that the RNA vaccines at least still seem to do very well at preventing hospitalization and death with the variants, even when they are much less effective at preventing symptomatic disease.

But that's us dodging a bullet, and the article is a lot like going "we've dodged this bullet, so we can infer that we will be able to dodge all bullets!"

Also I missed this gem:

This optimism assumes the UK’s borders will be adequately controlled and that the risk of vaccine-evading variants is effectively eliminated by doing so.

Because, as we all know, viruses can only mutate in foreign countries.

Believe it or not, I'm actually pretty optimistic about this whole thing right now. We should start seeing a drop-off in hospitalizations and deaths soon, and be able to start lifting restrictions in the summer. And in the longer term, we might well be able to wrangle this into something where maybe vulnerable people get booster shots every year and it's no bigger deal than flu. Maybe there'll be a "bad Covid winter" from time to time and we all get advised to wear masks on the bus for a few months.

Buit it seems pointless to stack up a set of "spherical cow" assumptions as if they were certainties and then go "It is hard, in other words, to see why restrictions of any significance would continue to be in place by mid-May."

And dangerous, given the Statesman's readership among the sort of Tories currently demanding set dates (the sooner the better) for all restrictions to be removed.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on February 16, 2021, 02:57:04 pm
For anyone who fancies a quality science longread:

https://eu.usatoday.com/in-depth/news/investigations/2021/01/26/moderna-covid-vaccine-science-fast/6555783002/

Deep dive into the development of the Moderna vaccine, all the way through to approval. Excellent explanation of the scientific background and why people were ready to move with an RNA vaccine so fast at this particular moment in time (and how RNA vaccines actually work).

xkcd also explains how RNA vaccines work: https://xkcd.com/2425/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on February 16, 2021, 03:02:48 pm

And dangerous, given the Statesman's readership among the sort of Tories currently demanding set dates (the sooner the better) for all restrictions to be removed.

I actually don't disagree with much of your post, but this seems an odd interpretation. The NS is a centre left publication and the ERG/ CRG are on the right wing of the Tory party. Perhaps you mean the Spectator?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on February 16, 2021, 03:27:04 pm
This optimism assumes the UK’s borders will be adequately controlled and that the risk of vaccine-evading variants is effectively eliminated by doing so.
Ignoring the probability of vaccine evading variants emerging in the UK, our red-list only quarantine system is fatally flawed.

The hotel quarantine system only applies to people who have been to a red-list country in the last 10 days. Arrivals from other countries who have not been to a red-list country still have the old isolation system but not the stricter quarantine.

I think I'm right in saying that there are currently no direct flights from any red-list countries to the UK. So anyone returning from a red-list country must do so via a connecting flight from a non-redlisted country. So they have sat on a plane for hours surrounded by people in a high transmission risk situation. None of those people will then go on to quarantine.

The quarantine system will reduce the number of import events of this variant but it won't stop them. It is guaranteed to take hold in our population.

Quote
Believe it or not, I'm actually pretty optimistic about this whole thing right now. We should start seeing a drop-off in hospitalizations and deaths soon, and be able to start lifting restrictions in the summer. And in the longer term, we might well be able to wrangle this into something where maybe vulnerable people get booster shots every year and it's no bigger deal than flu. Maybe there'll be a "bad Covid winter" from time to time and we all get advised to wear masks on the bus for a few months.
I'm optimistic about where we stand against our current dominant strains. I'm pessimistic about our ability to prevent new variants emerging in the UK and our ability to prevent importing new variants from elsewhere. I think there is a route from where we are now that would allow a relatively normal summer with a relatively low risk of a vaccine escaping variant becoming dominant in the UK before an effective booster becomes available. I'm not at all confident that we will achieve this.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on February 16, 2021, 03:29:33 pm
I think I'm not -- I have the impression the NS sometimes leans into a "contrarian"/quasi-libertarian vibe. But I am not a regular reader and have no stats on their readership so I apologize if I'm maligning them!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on February 16, 2021, 03:34:10 pm
I think I'm not -- I have the impression the NS sometimes leans into a "contrarian"/quasi-libertarian vibe. But I am not a regular reader and have no stats on their readership so I apologize if I'm maligning them!

Nah, thats definitely the Spectator! I have been exploiting a '12 weeks for £12' offer recently from the NS and have really enjoyed it - worth a look.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on February 17, 2021, 02:29:42 am
At last! Justification for sanctioning ‘chatty bastards’ as identified by the experts. Amen

https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/20/talking-can-spread-covid-as-much-as-coughing-says-research?utm_source=upday&utm_medium=referral&fbclid=IwAR1t7Ojfl2ck2xy6HFtKbjj54C4O4ayIhJ4JYUASRdEdVuXQdJ_cOvsnLdo&__twitter_impression=true
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: RobK on February 17, 2021, 01:14:58 pm
Still some things in the vaccine rollout programme that need ironing out...

https://twitter.com/LiamThorpECHO/status/1361959447971643392
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on February 19, 2021, 09:04:44 am
Latest on outdoor risks:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/feb/19/how-the-beach-super-spreader-myth-can-inform-uks-future-covid-response
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Davo on February 19, 2021, 09:19:03 am
This just confirms why I think stoping people travelling to go outdoors or climb is nonsense.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Anti on February 19, 2021, 09:19:39 am
Latest on outdoor risks:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/feb/19/how-the-beach-super-spreader-myth-can-inform-uks-future-covid-response

Meanwhile in Wales were locked inside for another 3 weeks. Let's hope we get rid of these useless crooks in May.

And, well, replace them with some different useless crooks...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on February 19, 2021, 09:30:30 am
Latest on outdoor risks:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/feb/19/how-the-beach-super-spreader-myth-can-inform-uks-future-covid-response

Not really the latest on anything as far as I can tell. The problem with the "no cases linked to X" line if that AFIK we're not actually doing that much backward tracing hence why pubs, gyms, cinemas etc can all go on R4 and say "there's little evidence that we drive transmission"...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on February 19, 2021, 10:48:49 am
It's the latest news item on the subject. Those experts seem pretty confident about where spread is mainly occuring. No one is saying there is zero risk outdoors just that it appears to be very low. You can argue the same way in defence of socially distanced measures in pubs, gyms and cinemas.... that risk is probably a lot lower than some people portray it (to be clear, not that I think we are close to be able to do that yet). The virus spreads very effectively indoors with close contact and poor ventilation. Opening the outdoors for people to meet will likely reduce dangerous and illegal indoor meetings.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on February 23, 2021, 10:27:00 am
Looks like the app might actually be some use:

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-00451-y
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Tony S on February 23, 2021, 07:42:45 pm
The argument was never that the App was "useless". More that the money spent on the centralisation of contact tracing may have been more cost-effective spent supporting/expanding existing LA contact tracing teams.

There were also suggestions that the initial direction of the App's development was also poorly considered. (e.g. originally, deliberately, not based on the Apple/Google framework)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on February 23, 2021, 08:24:57 pm
and uk gov insistence on data held centrally
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Tony S on February 23, 2021, 08:33:32 pm
The sharing of personal health data is a complicated area. Nether Gov, nor NHS, nor LAs cover themselves in glory.

Sometimes it has been unfortunate, sometimes it has been incompetent.

I would say that, on the whole, I doubt better data sharing would have made a great deal of difference.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on February 23, 2021, 09:06:45 pm
I think you misunderstand me Tony. NHSX and the capturing of personal data involved personnel such as cummings and Ben Warner previously involved with Vote Leave, Cambridge Analytica and Palantir whom I would not trust with data.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Tony S on February 23, 2021, 09:22:49 pm
I wouldn't get too excited by those stories.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on February 23, 2021, 10:19:18 pm
I know a doctor who worked on the app and was on the radio etc to explain it. His response to 'big data' security concerns was to laugh at the ridiculousness of the idea and move on. I've known him to trust that it is genuinely not a concern, but I do think he was rather naive about just how low the level of public trust on the issue is.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on February 24, 2021, 08:34:56 am
Quoted from the roadmap

64. For these reasons, a significant proportion of the population could still be infected, either because they have not been vaccinated or because the vaccine is not effective for them. This is illustrated by Figure 7. This could mean that some measures to limit transmission are still needed after all adults have been offered a vaccine. These could include guidance such as “hands, face, space”, maintaining the Test, Trace and Isolate system and controls at the border (see chapter 4). The extent to which such measures will be required after all adults have been vaccinated is still unknown. As set out in chapter 3, the Government is exploring what measures may be required.

 :popcorn:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on February 24, 2021, 08:41:14 am
An interesting letter in the Lancet

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)00193-8/fulltext?rss%3Dyes
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on February 24, 2021, 08:44:52 am
There were also suggestions that the initial direction of the App's development was also poorly considered. (e.g. originally, deliberately, not based on the Apple/Google framework)

No suggestion really, i think it's a fact and anyone not directly involved would tend to agree. And for "poorly considered" substitute "fucking stupid".
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on February 24, 2021, 08:55:22 am
64. For these reasons, a significant proportion of the population could still be infected, either because they have not been vaccinated or because the vaccine is not effective for them. This is illustrated by Figure 7. This could mean that some measures to limit transmission are still needed after all adults have been offered a vaccine. These could include guidance such as “hands, face, space”, maintaining the Test, Trace and Isolate system and controls at the border (see chapter 4). The extent to which such measures will be required after all adults have been vaccinated is still unknown. As set out in chapter 3, the Government is exploring what measures may be required.

Yes - there will be a percentage of the population who won't or can't be vaccinated. Its an issue thats being explored a bit (directly and indirectly) with a guardian article yesterday (hold yer horses WonkySpanner!) about a two tier society - split along vaccination lines that coincided with ethnic/financial groups.. Article in the MEN too this morning about why certain areas of Greater Manchester have such persistently high rates... So if much of this percentage (of non vaccinated people) is concentrated in certain groups (social/ethnic/both) in certain areas of the UK... In some places it simply won't disappear.

The quoted statement reads a bit like a catch all paragraph in a contract terms and conditions....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on February 24, 2021, 09:02:47 am
The argument was never that the App was "useless". More that the money spent on the centralisation of contact tracing may have been more cost-effective spent supporting/expanding existing LA contact tracing teams.

There were also suggestions that the initial direction of the App's development was also poorly considered. (e.g. originally, deliberately, not based on the Apple/Google framework)

Oh, complete agreement -- I wasn't implying that the app was useless as an idea, just thinking about the string of cock-ups in the design and development process (and how it's been tied in -- or not -- with other systems). E.g. the point when it wouldn't accept certain positive test results, the period when it was set to the incorrect risk threshold and wasn't warning people when it should have, the period when people told to self-isolate by the app couldn't claim the £500 self-isolation payment that they theoretically could if the human Test and Trace service told them to self-isolate, etc..

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-nhs-covid-app-failed-to-record-potential-exposures-due-to-error-12120910
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-55259272

All of which have affected its potential usefulness.

Which is why the fact that it's now reasonably functional and doing some good is noteworthy, and should encourage more people to download it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on February 24, 2021, 10:56:04 am
64. For these reasons, a significant proportion of the population could still be infected, either because they have not been vaccinated or because the vaccine is not effective for them. This is illustrated by Figure 7. This could mean that some measures to limit transmission are still needed after all adults have been offered a vaccine. These could include guidance such as “hands, face, space”, maintaining the Test, Trace and Isolate system and controls at the border (see chapter 4). The extent to which such measures will be required after all adults have been vaccinated is still unknown. As set out in chapter 3, the Government is exploring what measures may be required.

Yes - there will be a percentage of the population who won't or can't be vaccinated. Its an issue thats being explored a bit (directly and indirectly) with a guardian article yesterday (hold yer horses WonkySpanner!) about a two tier society - split along vaccination lines that coincided with ethnic/financial groups.. Article in the MEN too this morning about why certain areas of Greater Manchester have such persistently high rates... So if much of this percentage (of non vaccinated people) is concentrated in certain groups (social/ethnic/both) in certain areas of the UK... In some places it simply won't disappear.

The quoted statement reads a bit like a catch all paragraph in a contract terms and conditions....

Poor and marginalised people do seem to bear the brunt of it all.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Tony S on February 24, 2021, 06:17:48 pm
There were also suggestions that the initial direction of the App's development was also poorly considered. (e.g. originally, deliberately, not based on the Apple/Google framework)

No suggestion really, i think it's a fact and anyone not directly involved would tend to agree. And for "poorly considered" substitute "fucking stupid".

I think we are broadly agreeing.
The trouble with the opinions of people "not directly involved" is that those people probably have even fewer of the facts.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on February 24, 2021, 06:59:22 pm
What I mean is, anyone who is getting any share of the billions spent developing it thinks the app is fucking great, even if it doesn't work.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on February 25, 2021, 03:04:16 pm
An interesting letter in the Lancet

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)00193-8/fulltext?rss%3Dyes

I am not saying that we should objectively review the effectiveness of the lockdown strategies but.....

Using the lung cancer stats, they reckon there will be an increase in number of deaths of up to 5.3% through delayed treatment and diagnosis. My wife is a lung cancer consultant so I have a working knowledge of the effects of Covid and the lockdown oh the service and how difficult it is to manage and treat patients during this time. The decision to leave the patients to die without treatment or bring them in and kill them with a hospital caught Covid infection is not an easy one. The only thing she seems sure of is that not controlling the spread of the virus in some manner would have lead to lung cancer covid related death figures to show a increase far in excess of 5%.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on February 25, 2021, 06:57:21 pm
So as per my posts on B3 from here: https://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,30489.msg603070.html#msg603070 (https://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,30489.msg603070.html#msg603070)

and here:
://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,30489.msg603488.html#msg603488 (https://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,30489.msg603488.html#msg603488)


There's now more evidence to back this up.

Preclinical research on NR and its role in covid-19 infected cells has now been released today in pre-print form, available here: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.17.047480v3

Note my disclaimers - I'm a shareholder in Chromadex (which are up 22% on this news)

Further research adding evidence to the B3 / NAD+ hypothesis.

https://twitter.com/FehrLab/status/1260342672688119810 (https://twitter.com/FehrLab/status/1260342672688119810)

Update on this. The next pre-clinical study was released last night US time. It reinforces the hypothesis that's been building around NAD depletion leading to worse outcomes from covid-19 infection; and the role of NAD augmentation using NR to slow virus replication.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/chromadex-announces-study-results-highlighting-103600635.html
These are great times to be a mouse.
Human study coming soon..

(I'm an investor, I'm biased)


Something a bit more practical than whinging about how shit the world is...

Following my posts in March, April and July about vitamin B3 being possibly effective both as a prophylactic and a treatment for covid - results from a phase 2 human study in covid patients were released this week which add more evidence to the mouse studies, cell studies and original hypothesis. Trial was open label.. but with a placebo control. Shows 30% reduction in recovery time in patients with covid. Other compounds in the mix as well as B3.



(disclaimer: investor in Chromodex, manufacturer of Nigen).


Another follow-on from my tip in March, April, July and October last year regarding vitamin B3, specifically NR (nicotinimide riboside). 

Phase 3 study results in (pre print), which build on the pilot and phase 2 studies. Significant acceleration seen in recovery time from mild-moderate covid19 for NR versus a placebo, when taken in conjunction with a standard of care. It not only improved recovery time but also improved liver health and inflammatory markers. Randomised, placebo-controlled, double blind. 309 patients. https://finance.yahoo.com/news/phase-3-clinical-study-finds-113000203.html

Chromadex up 85% today on the news..  I'd noticed they started rising around 5 days ago from their normal level of $4-5 per share. Currently $18 

I've taken NR for years ever since back surgery in 2014, to aid recovery of damaged sciatic nerve. Also a long-term investor, although I sold too early in this case!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on February 26, 2021, 10:05:11 am
MEN article flagging up the north south divide in stagnant and falling Covid cases...

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/north-south-divide-covid-rates-19918490
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on February 26, 2021, 10:32:54 am
MEN article flagging up the north south divide in stagnant and falling Covid cases...

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/north-south-divide-covid-rates-19918490

Good piece. I've been following this lately as Leicester is trending dead flat in recent weeks in terms of case rates and I suspect that will remain the case for the foreseeable. The first local lockdown here made basically no difference to case rates and they remained at a higher level than elsewhere in the country over the 2020 summer as well, even once it had been lifted. Local lockdowns are not a solution to this problem and will simply entrench the inequalities that have caused it in the first place.

This is a great visual indicator: https://twitter.com/CovidLeics/status/1364965069952589828
Particularly interesting is the comment beneath showing deprivation indices; the dark purple areas showing high deprivation map very well onto high case rates.

Its a live issue and very politically charged as Johnson has committed to a national unlocking with no regional Tiers, but left himself some wiggle room to implement regional lockdowns if they suspect a new variant is involved. I hope they will resist the temptation to lock down regionally as they breed massive resentment and are probably quite politically toxic, especially if applies to red wall areas or northern constituencies. Hard to say you're levelling up if they end up letting the south unlock faster than the north!

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on February 26, 2021, 11:04:25 am
I suspect if the HSE were able to classify COVID outbreaks at work as serious rather than merely significant Leicester’s rates would drop rapidly.

What is more serious than death, anyway??
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on February 26, 2021, 11:16:35 am
I suspect if the HSE were able to classify COVID outbreaks at work as serious rather than merely significant Leicester’s rates would drop rapidly.

What is more serious than death, anyway??

I don't follow you, could you expand? Probably being dim, apologies!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on February 26, 2021, 11:24:47 am
Health and Safety Executove. Have the power to close workplaces if unsafe. I think that’s happened twice nationally due to covid? Normally a slapped wrist and try harder seems to be the result of any changes investigation.

WRT Leicester assume this is due to High workplace transmission maintaining high rates.

(I think)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on February 26, 2021, 12:14:26 pm

What is more serious than death, anyway??

Quite a lot of things, but you wouldn't think it.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on February 26, 2021, 12:17:35 pm
I see, thanks. Yes, I would be astonished if the high case rate wasn't connected to workplace transmission. It is striking how much lower the case rates are in the leafier suburban areas in the south east of the city for example.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on February 26, 2021, 12:42:43 pm
I see, thanks. Yes, I would be astonished if the high case rate wasn't connected to workplace transmission. It is striking how much lower the case rates are in the leafier suburban areas in the south east of the city for example.

I saw (lost in my Twitter feed) an article relating cases to wfh rates. As you suspect in the wealthier areas more folks wfh and lower incidences.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on February 26, 2021, 12:51:09 pm
Sorry to be unclear, typing on my phone. I have not read of any workplace closures by HSE, though TT may be ahead of me there. btw number of reported covid outbreaks at work is c3,500.

I understand this is because it is classified as 'significant' rather than 'serious' which makes it extremely difficult for HSE inspectors to serve a prohibition notice.

Look at RIDDOR guidance: https://www.hse.gov.uk/coronavirus/riddor/index.htm

Quote
You should only make a report under RIDDOR when one of the following circumstances applies:
...
a person at work (a worker) has been diagnosed as having COVID-19 attributed to an occupational exposure to coronavirus. This must be reported as a case of disease

a worker dies as a result of occupational exposure to coronavirus.

My highlights. Tell me how an inspector could ever prove that Covid was NOT caught in the community when there is a massive outbreak at work?

Swansea DVLA outbreak (350-500 cases) did not result in closure, presumably for that very reason. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-55785912
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on February 26, 2021, 01:50:00 pm
Sorry to be unclear, typing on my phone. I have not read of any workplace closures by HSE, though TT may be ahead of me there.

Guardian piece from the 14th says there had been no Covid-related prohibition notices by then:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/feb/14/hse-refuses-to-close-workplaces-that-are-putting-employees-at-risk

Amazing quote:

Employment minister Mims Davies last week said Covid had been classified as “significant” rather than “serious”, as it “best supports inspectors in making sensible, proportionate regulatory decisions”. She added that effects of Covid were “non-permanent or reversible, non-progressive and any disability is temporary” for the working population as a whole.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on February 26, 2021, 01:56:08 pm
The reversibility of death is something of a breakthrough I feel.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on February 26, 2021, 02:07:13 pm
There is a national obsession with death and covid death. The government and MSM pump it out. They act like abusive parents looking to sanction, punish and control on one hand and share in a lie of empathy and understanding of grief and loss on the other. Deeply disturbing eh
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 26, 2021, 02:12:43 pm
There is a national obsession with death and covid death. The government and MSM pump it out. They act like abusive parents looking to sanction, punish and control on one hand and share in a lie of empathy and understanding of grief and loss on the other. Deeply disturbing eh

There is an obsession, in certain quarters, with death and covid death. Those people and alternative media pump it out. They act like anything that doesn’t fit their weird world views, can’t be real, seeking to deny it all and showing no empathy or understanding for the grief and loss, that has been the reality of the last 12 months. This is deeply disturbing.

Edit:

Going for a run and then a long shower, so I can forget certain people exist.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on February 26, 2021, 02:16:40 pm
Meanwhile, North Yorkshire Police fine people £200 for a trip to Almscliff while people go into offices and have face to face meetings indoors (Source: a friend who recently had a 6-person meeting in a 16-person meeting room).

I'm amazed at all this. I haven't been into the office since last March. Somehow we've (a regional utility) still managed to keep our work going, still managed to arrange work with contractors, progressed liaison with the regulator, had in depth discussions with consultants etc, keep model runs going, etc etc etc.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on February 26, 2021, 03:19:45 pm
Don't forget the new commandment Will

'all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others'
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on February 26, 2021, 05:29:04 pm
There is a national obsession with death and covid death.

Yeah, weird that people would give a shit about the potentially-avoidable deaths of 120,000 people (disproportionately poor, disabled, BAME and otherwise marginalized ones)!

This whole "caring about people dying" thing must be an invention of the government and "mainstream media" (the Daily Mail and the Guardian, they're in it together). They just want to control you! WAKE UP SHEEPLE!

Seriously, there's absolutely been the low-level "fine people for driving slightly outside their local area to go for a socially-distanced walk" petty bullying crap, but what we've seen again and again is the government making things far far worse by delaying lockdowns, lifting restrictions way too fast, and refusing to police some things (like employers forcing workers back into unsafe workplaces) at all.

Then the brakes get slammed on at the last minute when someone points out that if the line on the graph goes up any further the NHS is going to collapse.

Jolly old BoJo doesn't want to be the big meanie who cancels Cheltenham or Christmas, that's nasty nanny state stuff, so we have one of the highest death rates in the world and we're on lockdown number three.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on February 26, 2021, 05:55:50 pm
Good post, Slabs.

I've become pretty adept at mentally filtering Dan's posts so that I just ignore the QAnon, 5g vaccine microchips, Rupert Murdoch bums lizards stuff and concentrate on the nice poems that poke fun at climbing training culture.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on February 26, 2021, 06:52:43 pm
A great example of polarised thinking there. It’s a good job the poor and marginalised have got you guys and the BBC to highlight their plight.

For the sake of parity maybe the BBC could deliver all sorts of daily death tolls from heart disease and stroke to the latest US / U.K. caused civilian collateral in Syria.

The very fact that we have a war criminal leading the charge on vaccine passports must raise at least an eyebrow? Non of this is covid denial or anti vax it’s simply contextualising the problem.

The uk’s and western cultures relationship with health, death and dying is being used by MSM and the government to fuel fear, leading to further misery, isolation and ill health in the communities it claims to be helping.

We have large amounts of people living in the U.K. traumatised by the policies and actions of the same people now claiming to ‘care’. No wonder trust is low. I care not for the guardian, the mail or the bbc nor do I care about qanon or 5G.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 26, 2021, 07:38:27 pm
A great example of polarised thinking there. It’s a good job the poor and marginalised have got you guys and the BBC to highlight their plight.

For the sake of parity maybe the BBC could deliver all sorts of daily death tolls from heart disease and stroke to the latest US / U.K. caused civilian collateral in Syria.

The very fact that we have a war criminal leading the charge on vaccine passports must raise at least an eyebrow? Non of this is covid denial or anti vax it’s simply contextualising the problem.

The uk’s and western cultures relationship with health, death and dying is being used by MSM and the government to fuel fear, leading to further misery, isolation and ill health in the communities it claims to be helping.

We have large amounts of people living in the U.K. traumatised by the policies and actions of the same people now claiming to ‘care’. No wonder trust is low. I care not for the guardian, the mail or the bbc nor do I care about qanon or 5G.

You mean you, though, really, don’t you?

You are so mixed up and confused, you don’t know what you’re talking about, most of the time Dan. Bouncing between some extreme right, off to the left etc etc.

Just go look at the excess deaths for the last 12 months. You are simply wrong about this. It’s not as if the government have responded well, but it’s been a lack of action, not being too heavy handed, that has result in our death toll.

Dan, I’m sure many of us have huge sympathy for your difficulties. Most of us have experienced severe struggles with our mental health, both now and in the past. You are all over the place and it’s worrying.

These line of thought, this feeling of persecution, it can’t be helping you.

I hesitated to write this. Part of me would rather bat you away again, but that isn’t doing anything useful and I actually feel guilty for swiping at you. Not hugely so, you often ask for a metaphorical slap.
This stuff you tout isn’t “edgy” or “enlightened”, your stance doesn’t set you above everybody else. If you’re just trolling, then you’re not very good at it, because it only ever takes the slightest effort to refute your claims. So why do it? How is this helping you? I mean, if it helps you deal with the shit we’re living through, dig out, I quite enjoy crafting some petty insult, or letting one of my kids respond to you (not done that, yet, for Loos3 bowels but it’s quite amusing, especially when it’s a group effort).

I can’t believe it’s helping you, though. That, strangely, bothers me. So, if it’s what you enjoy, just pm me the shit posts, keep up the “poetry” and sarcasm on training matters on the forum, I’ll pm back some suitable insulting reposte and you can feel righteously wronged by my dismissive attitude etc etc.
Bring back the daft vids, the art, that’s quite good.

And talk to someone.

Some of us have a fairly “good” handle on “death tolls in war”, having seen it first hand. Some of us are more than well aware of the number of people, in just this country, suffering as a result of quite awful trauma, both now and always. If you actually “cared” you would go do something about it, rather than bleat here. There are people here, who do and have. Have you? Tell us about it, if you have.
Few of us need to pretend to care, try to remember that.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: battery on February 26, 2021, 07:47:43 pm
OMM - that is possibly one of the most considered and brilliant posts I have ever seen on UKB. Applause for taking the time to write it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 26, 2021, 08:09:45 pm
Dragging it back on topic:

This is very encouraging (from the FT), look at that drop in the over 80’s and how it’s ramping up (down, but you know what I mean).

Incidentally, shows the very similar, but smaller effects of lockdown...

(https://i.ibb.co/C140SL9/37011-B6-A-914-C-4-F83-A30-A-10-E433-D9-EFA1.jpg)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on February 27, 2021, 08:49:46 am
Oh god, if anyone needs cheering, the vaccine data coming in (both from trials and real-world studies) is fucking BEAUTIFUL.

Pfizer's getting absurd levels of effectiveness in the real world as well as in trials, and stability studies are showing it can hold up for two weeks of ordinary fridge temps, which is going to make a huge difference to distribution logistics:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/feb/25/pfizer-covid-vaccine-94-effective-study-of-12m-people-finds
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/feb/26/australia-considers-approving-pfizer-covid-vaccine-for-standard-cold-storage

The J&J single shot got approved unamimously by the FDA panel yesterday, and should get EMA approval in early March. Not as crazy effective as the mRNA vaccines (which go beyond what anyone imagined) but still damn good, lower side-effects and doesn't need super-refrigeration:

https://www.bloombergquint.com/politics/j-j-shot-set-to-get-eu-nod-in-early-march-easing-supply-squeeze

Multiple studies in England and Scotland are showing really high protection against hospitalization and death after a single shot (either Pfizer or Oxford/AstraZeneca, they're both doing great):

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/feb/22/one-vaccine-protection-severe-covid-evidence

The Oxford/AstraZeneca paper showing improved results from a delayed second shot has made it through peer review into the Lancet:

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)00432-3/fulltext

And people are doing so much smart and valuable research -- Moderna are already starting trials on a variant-specific vaccine, Oxford's doing the mix-and-match trials, etc..

If anyone wants to get really nerdy (which I always do), the NYT have a vaccine tracker so you can monitor all the contenders and see where they are in the research and approvals process:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/science/coronavirus-vaccine-tracker.html
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on February 28, 2021, 06:40:45 pm
In breach of Covid regulations, but also probably not a good idea at the best of times:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/28/two-adults-and-child-warned-after-camping-on-yorkshire-cliff-edge
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 03, 2021, 08:11:09 am
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BjfT6H6QUIA

To the tune of Jolene...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: moose on March 03, 2021, 08:27:26 am
For those who aren't aware, Dolly was a friend of one of the lead scientists at Vanderbilt who developed the Moderna vaccine and donated $1m to the early stage research:

https://www.theguardian.com/music/2020/nov/17/dolly-parton-partly-funded-moderna-covid-vaccine-research (https://www.theguardian.com/music/2020/nov/17/dolly-parton-partly-funded-moderna-covid-vaccine-research)

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 03, 2021, 09:49:44 am
For those who aren't aware, Dolly was a friend of one of the lead scientists at Vanderbilt who developed the Moderna vaccine and donated $1m to the early stage research:

https://www.theguardian.com/music/2020/nov/17/dolly-parton-partly-funded-moderna-covid-vaccine-research (https://www.theguardian.com/music/2020/nov/17/dolly-parton-partly-funded-moderna-covid-vaccine-research)

Donated or invested? It seems she's popped up just in time as the likes of Texas are reversing the mask mandate and opening all businesses
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 03, 2021, 09:56:01 am
For those who aren't aware, Dolly was a friend of one of the lead scientists at Vanderbilt who developed the Moderna vaccine and donated $1m to the early stage research:

https://www.theguardian.com/music/2020/nov/17/dolly-parton-partly-funded-moderna-covid-vaccine-research (https://www.theguardian.com/music/2020/nov/17/dolly-parton-partly-funded-moderna-covid-vaccine-research)

Donated or invested? It seems she's popped up just in time as the likes of Texas are reversing the mask mandate and opening all businesses

Rubbish. Get your paranoia straight, she was involved from the very early days of the pandemic.
Popped up?
Go check.
Jeezus, even the post you quoted states “early stage”.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: T_B on March 03, 2021, 09:57:33 am
For those who aren't aware, Dolly was a friend of one of the lead scientists at Vanderbilt who developed the Moderna vaccine and donated $1m to the early stage research:

https://www.theguardian.com/music/2020/nov/17/dolly-parton-partly-funded-moderna-covid-vaccine-research (https://www.theguardian.com/music/2020/nov/17/dolly-parton-partly-funded-moderna-covid-vaccine-research)

Donated or invested? It seems she's popped up just in time as the likes of Texas are reversing the mask mandate and opening all businesses

Jesus Dan. She’s on record saying it was a donation.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 03, 2021, 10:29:43 am
Yeah and I bet she only gave away those 100 million books 'cos she has shares in a pulp mill.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 03, 2021, 10:48:49 am
Popped up just in time for what exactly?

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 03, 2021, 10:58:42 am
Human motivations are complex, curiosity about them is ok, the cult of Mother Teresa* being an interesting example.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 03, 2021, 11:17:59 am
And your all seeing eye knows all.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 03, 2021, 11:25:44 am
And your all seeing eye knows all.

I assume that I know nothing and start asking questions from there.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 03, 2021, 11:27:01 am
Human motivations are complex, curiosity about them is ok, the cult of Mother Teresa* being an interesting example.

Yes. They are aren’t they.
Often misguided and overly influenced by external stressors that seem organised and malevolent, where in truth, no such intent exists.
There is, of course, a difference between curiosity about human motivation and outright, knee jerk, rejection of any hint of something resembling  altruism. Ultimately, the only mind you can interrogate is your own, not easy, but worthwhile.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 03, 2021, 11:32:16 am
WAKE UP, SHEEPLE! IT'S AN INSURANCE JOB. ALL THE "DEAD" PEOPLE ARE FAKING IT.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 03, 2021, 11:53:16 am
sigh, I liked the bit where Dolly called out people as cowards. Although it was hard to tell exactly what she was saying as her facial muscles didn't seem to be working.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 03, 2021, 11:59:34 am
sigh, I liked the bit where Dolly called out people as cowards.

No, that was her pal, Kenny Rogers. And he only called out one. In the whole County.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nik at work on March 03, 2021, 12:29:56 pm
Although it was hard to tell exactly what she was saying as her facial muscles didn't seem to be working.
Fuck comments like this, fuck them right off.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 03, 2021, 12:56:44 pm
sigh, I liked the bit where Dolly called out people as cowards.

No, that was her pal, Kenny Rogers. And he only called out one. In the whole County.

She said it at the end of the song in the video
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 03, 2021, 01:30:38 pm
Although it was hard to tell exactly what she was saying as her facial muscles didn't seem to be working.
Fuck comments like this, fuck them right off.

The point being publicly called out as a 'coward' based on health choices, generates some discomfort when coming from someone with a net worth of 600million whose chosen to spend a significant amount of money on augmenting surgery based upon or driven by (one presumes) a neurotic desire to live forever. Agreed f. to that.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 03, 2021, 01:30:56 pm
sigh, I liked the bit where Dolly called out people as cowards.

No, that was her pal, Kenny Rogers. And he only called out one. In the whole County.

She said it at the end of the song in the video
*mechanical breathing sounds*

Admiral Tool, I find your lack of Country Music knowledge, disturbing.

*mechanical breathing mixed with choking sounds*

That aside, do you feel that attacking a person’s appearance or implying an underlying personality insecurity, strengthens or weakens your argument and position?


Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 03, 2021, 01:33:05 pm
Although it was hard to tell exactly what she was saying as her facial muscles didn't seem to be working.
Fuck comments like this, fuck them right off.

The point being publicly called out as a 'coward' based on health choices, generates some discomfort when coming from someone with a net worth of 600million whose chosen to spend a significant amount of money on augmenting surgery based upon or driven by (one presumes) a neurotic desire to live forever. Agreed f. to that.

You mean you, again, don’t you?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 03, 2021, 01:35:42 pm

The point being publicly called out as a 'coward' based on health choices, generates some discomfort when coming from someone with a net worth of 600million whose chosen to spend a significant amount of money on augmenting surgery based upon or driven by (one presumes) a neurotic desire to live forever. Agreed f. to that.

Oh great, so are we to infer you've embraced anti-vaxx lunacy now to go alongside all the others? Or are you just arguing the toss?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 03, 2021, 01:39:37 pm
I assume that I know nothing and start asking questions from there.

 :lol: That's a joke right? If not you should try re-reading your posts once in a while Dan!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 03, 2021, 01:46:53 pm
Although it was hard to tell exactly what she was saying as her facial muscles didn't seem to be working.
Fuck comments like this, fuck them right off.

The point being publicly called out as a 'coward' based on health choices, generates some discomfort when coming from someone with a net worth of 600million whose chosen to spend a significant amount of money on augmenting surgery based upon or driven by (one presumes) a neurotic desire to live forever. Agreed f. to that.

Quick question.

If an athlete or individual, chooses to undergo surgery, to prolong their career/hobby life, where such surgery does not prolong life, or, could be considered “unnecessary” by purely objective standards; would you say that was better or worse, than somebody who chooses  cosmetic changes, for similar reasons?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 03, 2021, 01:54:58 pm
Anybody know where I can find the COVID thread?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nik at work on March 03, 2021, 02:03:54 pm
Although it was hard to tell exactly what she was saying as her facial muscles didn't seem to be working.
Fuck comments like this, fuck them right off.

The point being publicly called out as a 'coward' based on health choices, generates some discomfort when coming from someone with a net worth of 600million whose chosen to spend a significant amount of money on augmenting surgery based upon or driven by (one presumes) a neurotic desire to live forever. Agreed f. to that.

If that is your point then write that, we should all be free to express our views. However the cheap shot bollocks insults, they piss me off.

FWIW I largely disagree with your point and it’s construction. But that is of no consequence, I have no desire to enter into a discussion about it with you. Others can if they wish.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 03, 2021, 02:13:54 pm
I assume that I know nothing and start asking questions from there.

 :lol: That's a joke right? If not you should try re-reading your posts once in a while Dan!

Haha you're right i can imagine how it comes across, the written and spoken word are very different and I've sat down with a fair few people from here for a chat who would account for the fact it's from a genuinely curious stance. Also JR is right - it's gone off topic
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on March 04, 2021, 11:52:49 am
(https://scontent.flpl1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/cp0/e15/q65/s1080x2048/156568171_10159697374623623_2235286713860267668_o.jpg?_nc_cat=110&ccb=3&_nc_sid=110474&efg=eyJpIjoiYiJ9&_nc_ohc=beSaxZ4cKuIAX89CIHk&_nc_ht=scontent.flpl1-1.fna&tp=9&oh=3bee6490c83205a642039adf0f614b19&oe=606508CC)

Got my 5G mind-control nano-particles in early. A silver lining to having DVTs (spoiler: there aren't actually any silver linings to having DVTs). Trying to decide whether I should celebrate by joining the send train bellends beneath Demon Wall Roof, or try to find a local Wetherspoons lock-in illegal party...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: battery on March 04, 2021, 11:55:27 am
(https://scontent.flpl1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/cp0/e15/q65/s1080x2048/156568171_10159697374623623_2235286713860267668_o.jpg?_nc_cat=110&ccb=3&_nc_sid=110474&efg=eyJpIjoiYiJ9&_nc_ohc=beSaxZ4cKuIAX89CIHk&_nc_ht=scontent.flpl1-1.fna&tp=9&oh=3bee6490c83205a642039adf0f614b19&oe=606508CC)

Got my 5G mind-control nano-particles in early. A silver lining to having DVTs (spoiler: there aren't actually any silver linings to having DVTs). Trying to decide whether I should celebrate by joining the send train bellends beneath Demon Wall Roof, or try to find a local Wetherspoons lock-in illegal party...

Chuffed for you fiend, fingers crossed you don't get the 2 day hangover to go with it!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 04, 2021, 12:03:14 pm
Your selfie reminded me that I saw someone with a “Save Ferris” face mask the other day 😁
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on March 04, 2021, 12:14:43 pm
Congrats on the nano-particles! May your immune response be robust and your side-effects light!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 04, 2021, 12:25:14 pm
Congrats on the nano-particles! May your immune response be robust and your side-effects light!

He can’t respond, he’s polishing Bill Gate’s evening shoes, he’ll respond once he’s done scrubbing Jeff Bezos’ loo.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 04, 2021, 01:07:00 pm
If he suddenly develops an irresistible urge to buy an XBOX X on Amazon we will know it's working.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on March 04, 2021, 01:16:52 pm
Sorry my new protocol prevents me from reading any further posts on UKB* to avoid me being exposed to the potential world outside my front door and thus risking that I Stop Complying.




(* - except one small line of code has an exception permitting me to gain spiritual guidance from Father TomTom of The Church Of Absolute Miserable Obedience)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 04, 2021, 01:20:14 pm
Stop virtue signalling you cheeky c*nt :)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 04, 2021, 02:17:02 pm
I see America is gradually re-opening 16 states? Apparently North Dakota has voted to make any future mask mandates illegal
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 04, 2021, 08:07:51 pm
Interesting stats from the ONS.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgovernance/freedomofinformationfoi/deathsintheukfrom1990to2020

On paper it seems like 2020 was the worst year since 2008
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 04, 2021, 08:09:34 pm
(https://scontent.flpl1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/cp0/e15/q65/s1080x2048/156568171_10159697374623623_2235286713860267668_o.jpg?_nc_cat=110&ccb=3&_nc_sid=110474&efg=eyJpIjoiYiJ9&_nc_ohc=beSaxZ4cKuIAX89CIHk&_nc_ht=scontent.flpl1-1.fna&tp=9&oh=3bee6490c83205a642039adf0f614b19&oe=606508CC)

Got my 5G mind-control nano-particles in early. A silver lining to having DVTs (spoiler: there aren't actually any silver linings to having DVTs). Trying to decide whether I should celebrate by joining the send train bellends beneath Demon Wall Roof, or try to find a local Wetherspoons lock-in illegal party...

And the award for the most ineffective mask goes to....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 05, 2021, 06:44:46 am
I’m still trying to wrap my head around this miracle. Praise be for covid and the government, they managed to wipe out the flu. If you’re going to tell a lie..... etc

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/news/health/flu-cases-covid-england-phe-latest-b1805124.html%3famp
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on March 05, 2021, 07:51:39 am
I agree that it's jaw-dropping that they found zero cases, but are you actually claiming that this is a "lie" and Public Health England is involved in some sort of conspiracy to hide flu cases for unknown reasons?

The dramatic drop in flu is well documented round the world. Here's what happened in the southern hemisphere during their flu season, where cases were described as "virtually nonexistent":

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/flu-season-never-came-to-the-southern-hemisphere1/

More stuff from Nature:

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-03519-3

So either the whole world's in on the conspiracy, or there really has been a huge drop in flu cases.

Which is not really surprising, given that the methods to try to block transmission of one respiratory virus are also going to work pretty well on another virus that happens to be transmitted through exactly the same methods. Plus a lot of places (UK included) have boosted the shit out of their flu vaccination programmes to try to prevent hospitals from crashing under the weight of the flu season as well as covid.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 05, 2021, 08:06:32 am
Yes I am claiming it is a lie that has manifested from pandemic health policy.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 05, 2021, 08:12:14 am
I’m still trying to wrap my head around this miracle. Praise be for covid and the government, they managed to wipe out the flu. If you’re going to tell a lie..... etc

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/news/health/flu-cases-covid-england-phe-latest-b1805124.html%3famp

Almost as if the actions of society, that have reduced the spread and infection rate of one respiratory virus (action of an unprecedented degree in almost a century, yet very similar to those employed successfully against a flu variant a century ago) had an impact on other respiratory virus spread.
You’re not even trying, are you?
Are you actually this easily convinced by those who wish to control your ire, for their political gain?
You need to apply some critical thinking to your opinions. Wake up! You are being lead by the nose, in service of your idols. Do some research! Stop letting the alternative media control your brain! It’s all lies! Viruses are real! They just don’t want you to believe in them, because they’re afraid you won’t buy their healing crystals anymore! They know they don’t work! You need to use your mind! Look at the science! If you look hard, you can see it, the scientific consensus! It’s real! They don’t want you to know! Because their “Woo” industry is worth Billions! Billions! They need to sell their Jade eggs for you to stuff in your quim (if you have one) or “Magic light” machines to fight the virus (that five minutes earlier they claimed didn’t exist)!
They control you Dan! Fight back!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 05, 2021, 08:19:55 am
I also believe that mandating by law lockdowns, face coverings and any other health procedure is a human rights abuse.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 05, 2021, 08:21:59 am
I agree that it's jaw-dropping that they found zero cases, but are you actually claiming that this is a "lie" and Public Health England is involved in some sort of conspiracy to hide flu cases for unknown reasons?

The dramatic drop in flu is well documented round the world. Here's what happened in the southern hemisphere during their flu season, where cases were described as "virtually nonexistent":

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/flu-season-never-came-to-the-southern-hemisphere1/

More stuff from Nature:

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-03519-3

So either the whole world's in on the conspiracy, or there really has been a huge drop in flu cases.

Which is not really surprising, given that the methods to try to block transmission of one respiratory virus are also going to work pretty well on another virus that happens to be transmitted through exactly the same methods. Plus a lot of places (UK included) have boosted the shit out of their flu vaccination programmes to try to prevent hospitals from crashing under the weight of the flu season as well as covid.

The flu vaccine was rolled out a full month earlier too. I got an invite, almost three months before I actually turned 50 and the practice nurse said they had ramped up because they were already expecting an awful winter (mid Oct).
Father-in-law, reckoned the increased vigilance during the Southern Hemisphere season, meant they identified the prevalent strain earlier and going into lockdown (Nov) right at the season start, from an already socially distanced, mask wearing, starting point, with only a brief let up before the January lockdown; meant the Flu didn’t have it’s usual opportunity to become endemic, this year.
You would almost think “the system’ and “the science” worked.
So glad Dan is here to keep us from believing the evidence of our eyes...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on March 05, 2021, 08:25:54 am
Yes I am claiming it is a lie that has manifested from pandemic health policy.

Okay. So all the staff of Public Health England -- and the health agencies and virological services of a huge number of other countries -- have been convinced to tell a gigantic lie about the number of flu cases?

Because this would have to be a vast, co-ordinated international conspiracy requiring a huge number of people involved in processing tests etc. etc. in order to falsify data and cover up the true figures about this, and requiring everyone involved to maintain total silence and not a single person to whistle-blow.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 05, 2021, 08:27:32 am
I’ll repeat it just to be clear. I believe that the idea that there has been no flu detected in the U.K. is a lie manifested from pandemic health policy and that the mandating by law of lockdowns, face coverings and medical procedures is a human rights abuse.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 05, 2021, 08:32:47 am
I also believe that mandating by law lockdowns, face coverings and any other health procedure is a human rights abuse.

Yeah! And seatbelts! And traffic laws! And Child protection laws that stop me punishing my children the way I see fit! Oh, and laws regulating the practice of medicine! Nobody should be forced to only have approved and tested medications and procedures.
Come on! It’s not as if any of this stuff actually worked! It’s coincidental that seatbelt introduction coincided with a reduction of road deaths! It’s coincidental that every mandated lockdown and mask wearing occurred just before a rapid drop in infections!
Dan’s comfort is all that matters!
Thank the Flying Spaghetti Monster, that Dan is here to explain why society would function so much better without laws and mandates and regulations and order. Of course, everybody would be sensible and do the right thing, if only the “GoveRnmUnT” would leave them alone!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on March 05, 2021, 08:36:22 am
I’ll repeat it just to be clear. I believe that the idea that there has been no flu detected in the U.K. is a lie manifested from pandemic health policy

Can you help me with your use of the word manifested here, are you saying that it is necessity to lie about these 680,000 tests to support the lockdown and mask policies? Would you say this is the case worldwide?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 05, 2021, 08:37:23 am
Straw men, moral equivalence, slippery slope reasoning, ad hominem are all regularly used to rebuff arguments here

'preach it round or preach it flat' whatever fits
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on March 05, 2021, 08:41:53 am
I’ll repeat it just to be clear. I believe that the idea that there has been no flu detected in the U.K. is a lie manifested from pandemic health

Right. So you believe there's a vast co-ordinated international inter-governmental conspiracy, then.

All the nations of the world, finally brought together in harmony by one thing: lying about flu.

and that the mandating by law of lockdowns, face coverings and medical procedures is a human rights abuse.

That's a moral and political question. Which I would also disagree with you about, but I don't see what it's got to do with the number of flu cases.

Would you feel it wasn't a human rights abuse if there were more flu cases, or less flu cases, or something?

Out of interest, do you think the number of Covid cases is also fictional, or is it just flu we're arguing about here?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 05, 2021, 08:42:10 am
I’ll repeat it just to be clear. I believe that the idea that there has been no flu detected in the U.K. is a lie manifested from pandemic health policy and that the mandating by law of lockdowns, face coverings and medical procedures is a human rights abuse.

This is the dangerous lie, Dan. Go, do your own thing. Believe whatever rot you wish. Stop pushing your twisted beliefs on others. You have no evidence to point to, no reasoned argument to back up your position, only repeated assertions of your one sentence whine.
Slabs dropped a few contrary, evidenced, arguments; you ignored them in favour of simply repeating your first statement, only slightly altering the wording. You are worse than my kids (when they were younger), sticking fingers in their ears and yelling “LA LA LA LA LA” when they didn’t want to hear, what they didn’t want hear.

I think it’s obvious (think) you crave attention. I find it hard to believe you are this stubborn and ill informed. I don’t mind giving you that attention, but I don’t see any point in pandering to you. Wrong is wrong. Push back is needed.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on March 05, 2021, 08:42:26 am
I’ll repeat it just to be clear. I believe that the idea that there has been no flu detected in the U.K. is a lie manifested from pandemic health policy.

It must be an international conspiracy with southern hemisphere flu reported to be down by about 99.5% last summer...

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6937a6.htm

Edit: I should read further up the thread before posting...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 05, 2021, 08:43:49 am
Straw men, moral equivalence, slippery slope reasoning, ad hominem are all regularly used to rebuff arguments here

'preach it round or preach it flat' whatever fits
Only from you, Dan.
Everybody else uses reasoned, evidenced, arguments and you make unsubstantiated assertions based solely on what you “feel” is right.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 05, 2021, 08:53:38 am
Yes well, visceral reasoning is a last port of call not to be ignored
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 05, 2021, 08:58:22 am
I’ll repeat it just to be clear. I believe that the idea that there has been no flu detected in the U.K. is a lie manifested from pandemic health policy and that the mandating by law of lockdowns, face coverings and medical procedures is a human rights abuse.

1. Is it March 2020 again?
2. Do you also think that speed limits, seat belt rules, traffic rules, rules around reckless endangerment, H&S rules etc are human rights abuses? What's your cut-off/distinction?
3. How do you think the conspiracy works (like slab said)? My aunt worked in medical stats... I need to get her out of retirement if there's gold to be had in that world at the moment! You realise that not detecting flu and it not existing aren't quite the same as well right.
4. FREEEEEEDOMMMM!!!!

Dan - you dismiss arguments broadly but offer ZERO reasoned comeback or thoughts on them. Please do so, or I'll just work on the assumption that you're either trolling or so much less intellectually capable than you think you are that you make me look modest.

If you're trolling, worth thinking about where people's mental states are at right now before thinking it'll be funny to wind them up and fuck up their head for the rest of the day. If not, then fucking engage with the points for once instead of writing some pseudo-intellectual bollocks
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 05, 2021, 09:01:24 am
More of Dan, walking around, banging a saucepan, shouting.

Classic obfuscation. Sadly not big, not clever.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 05, 2021, 09:09:36 am
I'm not trolling, I was stating a belief which I admit to a large degree is unsubstantiated but gathered from paying attention to a wide range of sources. It is hard to engage with points when they are mixed up with personal attacks. I understand what you're saying about mental states and if my belief that mandates are a human rights abuse (this is genuine) disturbs anyone that wasn't my intention.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 05, 2021, 09:10:28 am
mistake post
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 05, 2021, 09:14:15 am
Yes well, visceral reasoning is a last port of call not to be ignored

Remove the word ‘reasoning” and that’s actually a good description of your stance. Glad you are finally becoming self aware. A little more reading and you might just pull through.
You could, possibly, try this:
Instead of “just asking questions” here, about the first paranoid thought that pops into your head during your morning shower; take that thought and spend some time reading up on the subject. It seems to me, you have yet to make any assertions or statements, in your time on the forum, that were not instantly and easily refuted by the simplest search.
Try harder.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 05, 2021, 09:15:43 am
For me, your belief doesn't piss me off, it's the fact that you want to spray about what you think on here but refuse to actually engage in discussion about it. This has happened plenty of times befoee. It's really boring, and quite frustrating

Add in the odd demonstrably false post (e.g. old Scandinavian stats under another pseudonym, or the US thread right now) and it all looks like trolling. The solution is to actually engage in discussion about the things you post, e.g. to respond to 2 and 3 in my post, or teestub's post etc...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: shark on March 05, 2021, 09:21:45 am
Last chance Dan.

You’d better demonstrate you are going to properly engage with others posts or I’ll delete you account for trolling again.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 05, 2021, 09:33:47 am
The NHS is a corrupt organisation as is NHS England, it's corrupt due to the ongoing problems of health care being conflated with politics, money and power. Money and power is distributed to the NHS by the government via performance based measures, outcomes which are incentivised. This naturally leads to both conscious and unconscious motivating factors to manage and manipulate statistics for the benefit of the organisation which may or may not lead to improvements in health care but usually benefits the few as opposed to the many. I don't believe this is an organised global conspiracy but I do believe this has been going on throughout the pandemic which has been supported by the government campaign which essentially is about money and power or simply power. A good past example would be the pandemrix scandal reported by channel 4. Therefore my visceral reasoning suggests to me that top down decisions are being made about healthcare not on the basis of care for well being but on the basis of money and power. Some of the various ways this has played out during the pandemic include the management of reporting of death and the various covid testing queries. The fear and unhappiness generated by this government led campaign will be around for a long time. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 05, 2021, 09:36:13 am
Last chance Dan.

You’d better demonstrate you are going to properly engage with others posts or I’ll delete you account for trolling again.

Go for it Simon
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 05, 2021, 09:36:17 am
I'm not trolling, I was stating a belief which I admit to a large degree is unsubstantiated but gathered from paying attention to a wide range of sources. It is hard to engage with points when they are mixed up with personal attacks. I understand what you're saying about mental states and if my belief that mandates are a human rights abuse (this is genuine) disturbs anyone that wasn't my intention.
Dan, your “ belief” is demonstrably false.
There are concrete examples of documented evidence to support the exact opposite of your “belief”.
To counter that, you have nothing but ‘feelings” and (said) “belief”.
People are entitled to their “beliefs” but that doesn’t make them real. You haven’t given any credence to your assertions, to give anybody the impression they amount to anything other than “wishful thinking” on your part.
I admit, I don’t understand why you feel the need to believe that all aspects of society are “out to get you” and you haven’t delineated exactly what the objective of all this “mind control” is, or how, exactly, it works, but this is not the same as a personal attack.
This isn’t ad hominem. It is your argument which is being attacked. I suspect the reason you feel personally attacked, is that you hold these “beliefs” dear. A challenge to the “belief” is a challenge to your core identity.

Honestly, though, there’s nothing like the harsh realities of a Pandemic, to rip into an individual’s cherished belief in their own Indepenence and self determination. It’s hard, realising how constrained you are, by the society you live in, your dependence on it and other people.
There are alternatives. People can and do reject society. There are remote woodlands etc, where you can retreat, even now.
My family buggered off to a remote part of France (yes, you don’t have to go far), to live high on a mountain side and be “self sufficient”. My parents needed the break. I was fortunate enough to be able to enjoy it on a part time basis. Had it’s plus points. Bloody hard though.
Anyway, I digress.
Look at it like this:
Without enforced public health measures, historically over a couple of centuries now (and often imposed over vociferous protests from populations who “believed” they knew better), many people reading this forum, simply wouldn’t exist. Much of the society and technology you use everyday, the food you eat, the house you live in, the water you drink (unthinking, regulated, clean and safe by mandate), simply wouldn’t exist.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 05, 2021, 09:39:12 am
Last chance Dan.

You’d better demonstrate you are going to properly engage with others posts or I’ll delete you account for trolling again.

There are enough corners of the internet for wankers in their basements to discuss the 'scamdemic.' If Dan wants to he should piss off there. This offensive bullshit doesn't need to infect UKB as well.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nails on March 05, 2021, 09:40:52 am
The term "visceral reasoning" is nonsense in itself. Visceral means intuitive or emotive, so by definition it has nothing to do with reasoning. Just thought I'd chuck that in, as the repeated use of the term "visceral reasoning" is really grating on me.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 05, 2021, 09:42:03 am
The NHS is a corrupt organisation as is NHS England, it's corrupt due to the ongoing problems of health care being conflated with politics, money and power. Money and power is distributed to the NHS by the government via performance based measures, outcomes which are incentivised. This naturally leads to both conscious and unconscious motivating factors to manage and manipulate statistics for the benefit of the organisation which may or may not lead to improvements in health care but usually benefits the few as opposed to the many. I don't believe this is an organised global conspiracy but I do believe this has been going on throughout the pandemic which has been supported by the government campaign which essentially is about money and power or simply power. A good past example would be the pandemrix scandal reported by channel 4. Therefore my visceral reasoning suggests to me that top down decisions are being made about healthcare not on the basis of care for well being but on the basis of money and power. Some of the various ways this has played out during the pandemic include the management of reporting of death and the various covid testing queries. The fear and unhappiness generated by this government led campaign will be around for a long time.

Eye roll...

Dan, have you ever heard the phrase “throwing the Baby out with the Bath water”?

Have you never received free medical treatment that either saved your life, or significantly improved your lot?

I do note, you have not died of Smallpox or Cholera, for example (unless there’s something you are not telling us? Do you type from beyond)?

You need to remove that word “reasoning” because it is nothing but a gut feeling. Belief can be a dangerous thing, if you never question it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 05, 2021, 09:45:40 am
Ok ok, I'll go and find my natural home with the basement morons. fair enough - genuinely meant
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 05, 2021, 09:51:15 am
You clearly understand how offensive and deluded these opinions are or you wouldn't be on your fourth account of the pandemic.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 05, 2021, 10:04:36 am
Ok ok, I'll go and find my natural home with the basement morons. fair enough - genuinely meant
Look, you woke up this morning, with a Bee in your proverbial Bonnet, bubbling over with the need to recolour the world.
Why? What happened? You say it was “visceral” which (to me) implies an intense feeling? Yet, you don’t have anything new to point to.
Reality is often disappointing.
Discovering that you don’t actually play the lead role in the movie of life, is a bitter pill to swallow.
Several people, that I am aware of, who post here (and probably more who choose not to share), have had this demonstrated to them, traumatically and forcefully, myself included. Of course I may be wrong, but I’ve seen this type of behaviour before. In myself and in others I have been involved with, after such trauma.
Trauma, has a very broad definition, incidentally. Anything from “moving house” or “losing a job”, right through to “bereavement” and “life changing injury” etc.
Society, is not perfect. Governments (any of them, ever) are not perfect. Humans, often, tend to self interest and short term needs or wants. Ultimately, our society, today, is an improvement over that which existed before. That it could be better, is without question. Corruption, will probably never disappear. It is, however, better now than it has been. Really. Take a look at some historical examples. Stick to British history, to narrow it down, it’s endemic to society, in all it’s forms, and always was.
Edit:
I meant to ask, has something changed dramatically for you in recent times? I know little about your life. Children? Recent birth?
Job on the line, or lost, because of pandemic restrictions?
I’m not expecting you to answer, it’s not a demand. Just take some time to ask yourself why your “visceral” reaction to this thing is so intense and so contrarian.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on March 05, 2021, 10:06:54 am
I think the most parsimonious explanation is - flu is less transmissible than COVID therefore COVID control measures suppress flu to the extent that it can’t generate sustained community transmission; plus flu vaccinations; plus probably what few case there are not getting detected and/or mistaken for COVID.

I'd have to say having read the last couple of pages and disagreed with Dan's opinions, by far the most offensive posts have been the ones directed at him.

e.g.
Quote
There are enough corners of the internet for wankers in their basements to discuss the 'scamdemic.' If Dan wants to he should piss off there.

I wholeheartedly agree with the posts appealing to reason.
How about sticking to the topic.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 05, 2021, 10:11:09 am
For people who are not Dan: I expect that Dan's views are founded in a central belief that power is inherently corrupting. Thus medical institutions, governments, their leaders, and any major media organisation are also corrupt. I don't think anybody is going to present an argument here that changes Dan's mind. If that's the case, is there any point trying?

For Dan: What you believe is ultimately up to you. If those beliefs are unsubstantiated (your words, not mine) then it's unlikely that anybody here is going to persuade you otherwise. However, don't expect to express your opinion on a discussion forum and not be asked to provide evidence to support your beliefs - especially if you choose to do so by making snide remarks.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 05, 2021, 10:12:07 am
Yeah, fair point, on reflection I let my frustration get the better of me. My apologies.

I have absolutely no desire to discuss this and frankly find it an offensive topic. But I accept I don't have to read it or engage, so will refrain!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 05, 2021, 10:16:24 am
I think the most parsimonious explanation is - flu is less transmissible than COVID therefore COVID control measures suppress flu to the extent that it can’t generate sustained community transmission; plus flu vaccinations; plus probably what few case there are not getting detected and/or mistaken for COVID.

I'd have to say having read the last couple of pages and disagreed with Dan's opinions, by far the most offensive posts have been the ones directed at him.

e.g.
Quote
There are enough corners of the internet for wankers in their basements to discuss the 'scamdemic.' If Dan wants to he should piss off there.

I wholeheartedly agree with the posts appealing to reason.
How about sticking to the topic.

To be fair, whilst it does seem a little “icky” to the touch, Dan’s brought up a very real aspect of this Pandemic.
Denial.

It’s had a huge role in the way this has played out, globally and the impact that such rhetoric has had on people’s mentality and mental health, is very real.

Imagine all this sacrifice, loneliness etc etc and not even accepting the reality of the disease.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: webbo on March 05, 2021, 10:20:52 am
The NHS is a corrupt organisation as is NHS England, it's corrupt due to the ongoing problems of health care being conflated with politics, money and power. Money and power is distributed to the NHS by the government via performance based measures, outcomes which are incentivised. This naturally leads to both conscious and unconscious motivating factors to manage and manipulate statistics for the benefit of the organisation which may or may not lead to improvements in health care but usually benefits the few as opposed to the many. I don't believe this is an organised global conspiracy but I do believe this has been going on throughout the pandemic which has been supported by the government campaign which essentially is about money and power or simply power. A good past example would be the pandemrix scandal reported by channel 4. Therefore my visceral reasoning suggests to me that top down decisions are being made about healthcare not on the basis of care for well being but on the basis of money and power. Some of the various ways this has played out during the pandemic include the management of reporting of death and the various covid testing queries. The fear and unhappiness generated by this government led campaign will be around for a long time.
There is a degree of reality in this in my experience given the NHS is target driven plus when government announces new money for the NHS and it never arrives on the front line because it has be off set against the annual cost/ financial improvements every trust has to make.
However despite the NHS still manages to deliver because lower down the food chain people believe in the NHS and make it work.
I don’t believe however as Dan does that things will benefit the few rather than the money.
Whoops bit of a Freudian slip there I meant many.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 05, 2021, 10:29:11 am
This naturally leads to both conscious and unconscious motivating factors to manage and manipulate statistics for the benefit of the organisation
I only know a couple of statisticians, but they seem very aware of trying to avoid these issues. There are many situations where you "want" a certain answer, usually I imagine it's best to have a methodology set in these situations before starting the analysis (assuming you can't blind the analysis). Given flu isn't new I'd expect that to be the case here, making it harder to manipulate the data from the stats point of view; though presumably not impossible. Seems plausible that some flu will get misdiagnosed as covid or whatever given current environments, skewing stats slightly, but doctors are just trying to do their best. They've failed to diagnose a recurrent swelling on my hand for years, but it's not because Bojo's paying them off... though Stu might be now I think about it ;)

Therefore my visceral reasoning suggests to me that top down decisions are being made about healthcare not on the basis of care for well being but on the basis of money and power.
I'm sure that, in some situations, this has always been the case, still is, and always will be. Not really sure that that's a good refutation of the published flu stats or explains your distinction between masks and other rules around protecting others?

The fear and unhappiness generated by this government led campaign will be around for a long time.
Yes, but what's your alternative that causes less suffering? I'm sure we'll all agree that there's been some amount of mismanagement, significant in some cases, but again, what's that got to do with whether we trust flu stats? Or whether mask rules are a human rights infringement in a way that speed limits and other laws aren't?

P.s. on the older post about deaths in 2020 vs earlier years, this is a nice exploration of the deaths figures for 2020, slicing and dicing them in various different ways https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-how-mortality-rates-in-2020-compare-with-past-decades-and-centuries-12185275
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Plattsy on March 05, 2021, 10:34:34 am
I'd have to say having read the last couple of pages and disagreed with Dan's opinions, by far the most offensive posts have been the ones directed at him.
Hear hear!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 05, 2021, 10:41:54 am
This naturally leads to both conscious and unconscious motivating factors to manage and manipulate statistics for the benefit of the organisation
I only know a couple of statisticians, but they seem very aware of trying to avoid these issues. There are many situations where you "want" a certain answer, usually I imagine it's best to have a methodology set in these situations before starting the analysis (assuming you can't blind the analysis). Given flu isn't new I'd expect that to be the case here, making it harder to manipulate the data from the stats point of view; though presumably not impossible. Seems plausible that some flu will get misdiagnosed as covid or whatever given current environments, skewing stats slightly, but doctors are just trying to do their best. They've failed to diagnose a recurrent swelling on my hand for years, but it's not because Bojo's paying them off... though Stu might be now I think about it ;)

Therefore my visceral reasoning suggests to me that top down decisions are being made about healthcare not on the basis of care for well being but on the basis of money and power.
I'm sure that, in some situations, this has always been the case, still is, and always will be. Not really sure that that's a good refutation of the published flu stats or explains your distinction between masks and other rules around protecting others?

The fear and unhappiness generated by this government led campaign will be around for a long time.
Yes, but what's your alternative that causes less suffering? I'm sure we'll all agree that there's been some amount of mismanagement, significant in some cases, but again, what's that got to do with whether we trust flu stats? Or whether mask rules are a human rights infringement in a way that speed limits and other laws aren't?

P.s. on the older post about deaths in 2020 vs earlier years, this is a nice exploration of the deaths figures for 2020, slicing and dicing them in various different ways https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-how-mortality-rates-in-2020-compare-with-past-decades-and-centuries-12185275

I absolutely believe that the pit face medical staff are all trying to do their best for the care of the patients. What happens in  health care however frustrating it might be often is led by top down policies which individuals are not willing to or don't have the energy left to question. For some of the reasons seen here. Christopher Hitchens talks about the idea that when given the choice most people will make the decision not to question authority. Go along to get along. I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that mass covid testing has obscured flu data and made it disappear to some degree. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on March 05, 2021, 10:47:29 am
I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that mass covid testing has obscured flu data and made it disappear to some degree.

I still don’t get what you mean by this, that report was about 680k tests specifically looking for flu and not finding any. How would the Covid testing affect this.

You also seem to be suggesting that there would be a complicit silence from everyone involved in flu testing when some of the ‘higher ups’ in the govt/NHS decide to report zero cases. This seems vanishingly unlikely. See for example the Florida scientist who lost her job after whistle blowing on the local government altering the Covid data.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 05, 2021, 10:57:20 am
Yeah, this isn't just a question of dumb top-down decisions influencing care lower down. Hadn't actually read the article until now, but either it's real (in the sense that the data is what the report says it is), or there's something significant like changing test protocols to make detection less likely or a genuine lie/cover-up. The latter seems very unlikely. The former... who knows, I don't know enough about PHE's flu testing procedures to have an opinion, but I'm guessing Dan doesn't either? I cba to go find the source report to check if it has a methodology to compare to previous years... I could easily believe that the pandemic means that in other data sources that there might be some effects, but I struggle with the conspiracy required w.r.t that article. So come on Dan, what are you actually suggesting here? (p.s. no response on masks vs other rules?)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 05, 2021, 11:11:45 am
Yeah, this isn't just a question of dumb top-down decisions influencing care lower down. Either it's real (in the sense that the data is what the report says it is), or there's something significant like changing test protocols to make detection less likely or a genuine lie/cover-up. The latter seems very unlikely. The former... who knows, I don't know enough about PHE's flu testing procedures to have an opinion, but I'm guessing Dan doesn't either? I cba to go find the source report to check if it has a methodology to compare to previous years...

What would be the point?

What is the benefit to the “top” in not finding any Flu cases?

If you had a conspiracy to make Flu cases appear to be Covid cases, this seems a very clumsy way to try and perpetuate it.

Then again, imagine for a minute, that this is just a very nasty Flu season and Covid is a red herring.

What would be any different?
The cases are real. The casualties are real. The spread and transmission and the mitigation required would be the same. The only difference to the last twelve months would be the name we gave the disease.
A new strain of Flu or a New Corona Virus, makes little difference to most people, only it’s relative severity and how you avoid the spread, matters.

Even if (and I don’t think it is so) the current death toll and hospital burden, is a combination of Flu and Covid in origin, nothing would change!
We would be facing exactly the same situation. Just because we have two Pandemics running concurrently, doesn’t magically mean that some of the casualties and desperately ill disappear.

So, what is Dan’s point anyway?

Damn it, we’ve been petrified of a nasty Flu mutation ever since we discovered Flu. Humanity knows ow nasty that bug can get. It really doesn’t need to invent a bogus disease to hide a terrible Flu season.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 05, 2021, 11:22:54 am
Go along to get along.

This has got to be Rishi's next slogan.

As to cover up conspiracies- think QAnon do it better.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on March 05, 2021, 11:33:00 am
How do you all know the name of Dan? Genuine question.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 05, 2021, 12:04:12 pm
They just know me from being an idiot on here but actually a very nice friendly chap to meet in person.

At this point I’m just gonna get on with work and gardening. But would always be up for a conversation in person. Whatever that might be about.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 05, 2021, 12:28:03 pm
How about 'Acquiesce to make progress'? Catchy enough?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 05, 2021, 12:34:31 pm
They just know me from being an idiot on here but actually a very nice friendly chap to meet in person.

At this point I’m just gonna get on with work and gardening. But would always be up for a conversation in person. Whatever that might be about.

Look. I get it and you (at least as far as this format allows). It’s why I try to engage with you when you make it possible. I just reserve the right to slap back, in kind, when you lash out.
The difference between patronising and caring is often no more than a tone of voice or a facial expression. Things forums such as this do not convey well.
Don’t be fooled into thinking all my “concern” is some sort of backhanded insult. It’s just hard to distinguish between the two in the circumstances. Just as I have, for certain, misread your intent, on occasion.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fultonius on March 05, 2021, 01:37:02 pm
Now that we're a bit back on track, can I ask a stats/public health covid question that's been rumbling in my mind (especially since, in Scotland, we're *aiming* to get to 50 cases per 100,000 before rolling back from Level 4 to Level 3.).

Some of you are clearly quite up on this, and all my internet searches have come up a bit short.

So.

I presume PHE/PHS account for false positives in the Covid "positive test" rate. My question is, how, exactly? Do they send a sample of tests on for further screening? Do they just subtract an arbitrary assumed number of false positives?

My understanding is that the false positive rate for the PCR is 0.8% to 4%, which is quite a few!  50 cases per 100k is 0.05%....  So you don't need a lot of statistical error to generate your 50/100k purely out of false positives.

Now, I'm hoping the clever peeps doing this have this well accounted for, but I'd be pretty fuming to have a few more months in semi lockdown as a result of a statistical error....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 05, 2021, 02:21:23 pm
I don't know how, or if, they're doing that I'm afraid.
On the plus side, you shouldn't get to 50 via false positives alone. Quick back-of-envelope: 300k PCR tests/day UK-wide (https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/testing), assuming pop of 66m this is ~455 tests per 100k. At 2% false positive (just picking roughly the middle of you range here), that would be ~9 false positives per day per 100k (approx 3.5-18 with the broad error range you gave). So enough that hopefully they're thinking about how to address this if they really want to be accurate, but you won't be stuck in perpetual lockdown due to the baseline of false positives. I guess it depends on where 50 comes from. If it's from an assessment based on previous figures e.g. trends from last year, then the false +ve would have been there then too, so they might really be saying "we want to hit 40, with 10 as a buffer for errors"
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 05, 2021, 04:45:22 pm
This naturally leads to both conscious and unconscious motivating factors to manage and manipulate statistics for the benefit of the organisation
I only know a couple of statisticians, but they seem very aware of trying to avoid these issues. There are many situations where you "want" a certain answer, usually I imagine it's best to have a methodology set in these situations before starting the analysis (assuming you can't blind the analysis). Given flu isn't new I'd expect that to be the case here, making it harder to manipulate the data from the stats point of view; though presumably not impossible. Seems plausible that some flu will get misdiagnosed as covid or whatever given current environments, skewing stats slightly, but doctors are just trying to do their best. They've failed to diagnose a recurrent swelling on my hand for years, but it's not because Bojo's paying them off... though Stu might be now I think about it ;)

Therefore my visceral reasoning suggests to me that top down decisions are being made about healthcare not on the basis of care for well being but on the basis of money and power.
I'm sure that, in some situations, this has always been the case, still is, and always will be. Not really sure that that's a good refutation of the published flu stats or explains your distinction between masks and other rules around protecting others?

The fear and unhappiness generated by this government led campaign will be around for a long time.
Yes, but what's your alternative that causes less suffering? I'm sure we'll all agree that there's been some amount of mismanagement, significant in some cases, but again, what's that got to do with whether we trust flu stats? Or whether mask rules are a human rights infringement in a way that speed limits and other laws aren't?

P.s. on the older post about deaths in 2020 vs earlier years, this is a nice exploration of the deaths figures for 2020, slicing and dicing them in various different ways https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-how-mortality-rates-in-2020-compare-with-past-decades-and-centuries-12185275

I had a look through this article and think the debate lies in the last paragraph, thanks for the link. My current belief which is largely unsubstantiated is that the cost benefit analysis of the measures (which I believe to be a human rights abuse) will on reflection show collateral that significantly outweighs any proposed benefits. The term visceral reasoning which I used to mean a combination of active thought process and attention to physical signals e.g. head heart / gut instinct etc is a reasonable one that often serves people well in many situations including medical ones. I also believe that this collateral is on the minds of the policy makers and that future decisions are being made with a hope to reduce the impact of any backlash.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 05, 2021, 05:01:37 pm
One example of many with regards corruption

https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n556?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_term=hootsuite&utm_content=sme&utm_campaign=usage


Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 05, 2021, 05:12:10 pm
I've yet to look at this properly - put together by a British Harvard phd student. Looks very interesting

https://www.sophie-e-hill.com/post/my-little-crony/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Jerry Morefat on March 05, 2021, 06:05:13 pm
I don't know how, or if, they're doing that I'm afraid.
On the plus side, you shouldn't get to 50 via false positives alone. Quick back-of-envelope: 300k PCR tests/day UK-wide (https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/testing), assuming pop of 66m this is ~455 tests per 100k. At 2% false positive (just picking roughly the middle of you range here), that would be ~9 false positives per day per 100k (approx 3.5-18 with the broad error range you gave).

I don't think your maths is right. Testing 455 (out of a population of 100k) and getting 9 positives doesn't mean there are 9 positives in the 100k as you haven't tested the other 99.5k!Testing 455 and getting 9 positives gives a positive rate of 2%. Inferring that this is the population rate (of the 100k) gives 2k positives per the 100k.

I think the FPR is actually around 0.05% but the point still holds you will hit 50 cases per 100k just because of the FPR. I have to admit this hadn't occurred to me by the statisticians must be correcting for it. Perhaps a question for more or less on radio 4.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 05, 2021, 07:14:21 pm
I was assuming that the 50 measure was in positive tests, not actual prevalence.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fultonius on March 05, 2021, 07:28:23 pm
I had wondered the same thing, was wondering if I had missed something - but I'm fairly/i] sure the prevalence rate will be scaled up to 100k based on the number of people tested.

E.g. this week Scotland had an average rate of  Covid infections of 500/day, or 3500 for the week. There were on average, 18,000 tests per day, so you may expect 360 cases per day (2% of those tests) to be false positives.

Quote
The rate is calculated by adding up all the cases over the previous seven days and then dividing by the population of the local authority. This number is then multiplied by 100,000.

But, they do say that any tests that have 1 "region" positive, rather than 2+ should be sent for a conformation test before the results are recorded. No stats on how many tests are referred for a second confirmation.

Would still like some more positive confirmation of how this all works.

I was assuming that the 50 measure was in positive tests, not actual prevalence.

Not sure what you mean by this?   

We need the total, local (council area) prevalence to drop below 50/100k before we can go from L4 to L3. As above, this is worked out by dividing the total positive cases by the local council area popn., then multiplying by 100k.

Hypothetically, if there is even just a 0.8% false positive rate, that's still above the 0.05% prevalence rate they're aiming for. Handling / accounting for false positives will come to be very important!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 05, 2021, 07:41:19 pm
At this point, we are predominantly still testing only those reporting symptoms. As that number drops off, it seems reasonable to infer that the rate per 100k has dropped off too, otherwise, if only two people test and one is positive, that would infer a 50k in 100k infection rate.
Clearly I haven’t bothered working out how that is accounted for, but if we’re only testing those with symptoms and we have a rough idea of how many infections lead to symptoms, then we are already eliminating a good number of that total population before you need to account for false positives?
This will be impacted by the lat flow testing done on asymptomatic school kids now, unless they simply use the LF as a reason to carry out a PCR? Not sure, but I think that would make more sense, though?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stabbsy on March 05, 2021, 07:45:01 pm
They’ve covered this on More or Less in the past - 23rd Sept last year. Just relistened to it, it’s the second segment about 8 minutes in. Conclusion seemed to be that false positive rate is nearer 0.05% and that worrying about it probably a distraction.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Jerry Morefat on March 05, 2021, 08:01:50 pm
They’ve covered this on More or Less in the past - 23rd Sept last year. Just relistened to it, it’s the second segment about 8 minutes in. Conclusion seemed to be that false positive rate is nearer 0.05% and that worrying about it probably a distraction.

Sure, but even with zero prevalence, a 0.05% FPR gives 50 positives per 100k. So even with no prevalence of Covid in the population you're still hitting the 50 positive tests per 100k criteria. With increased prevalence the proportion of positive tests is only going to increase. I thought this was Fultonious's point.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 05, 2021, 08:04:43 pm
Went and had a quick look...
https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgovernance/freedomofinformationfoi/falsepositivityrateofthecovid19pcrtest

Key points for ONS data:
2% is way too high, false positive is prob much lower
They don't adjust for false positive or negative
Even at low prevalence they seem to think that false neg outweighs false pos

I assume the above means the PHE and other main data is unadjusted too given the ONS stuff is.

I'm saying they'll do the numbers on people testing positive per 100k of population I.e. this main dataset. They're not aiming for prevalence of 50 per 100k of population, just positive tests of that... Your last point (and all of Jerry's) assumes they've tested everyone or scaled up for not having done that, but AFAIK only the ONS convert to estimate of actual prevalence - not the main test data.. bear in mind we were at about 10 when I went to Germany last Sept so clearly the data is not scaled or false positive is <0.001%  and there was no covid then. I'll bet £100 they don't scale the main data.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 05, 2021, 08:07:58 pm
They’ve covered this on More or Less in the past - 23rd Sept last year. Just relistened to it, it’s the second segment about 8 minutes in. Conclusion seemed to be that false positive rate is nearer 0.05% and that worrying about it probably a distraction.

Sure, but even with zero prevalence, a 0.05% FPR gives 50 positives per 100k. So even with no prevalence of Covid in the population you're still hitting the 50 positive tests per 100k criteria. With increased prevalence the proportion of positive tests is only going to increase. I thought this was Fultonious's point.

Standard metric is per 100k of population not per 100k tests. Also proportion of +ves that are false goes up in low prevalence not high (due to lower real +ves while false is static)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Jerry Morefat on March 05, 2021, 08:08:39 pm
I'm saying they'll do the numbers on people testing positive per 100k of population I.e. this main dataset. They're not aiming for prevalence of 50 per 100k of population, just positive tests of that... Your last point (and all of Jerry's) assumes they've tested everyone or scaled up for not having done that, but AFAIK only the ONS convert to estimate of actual prevalence - not the main test data.. bear in mind we were at about 10 when I went to Germany last Sept so clearly the data is not scaled or false positive is <0.001%  and there was no covid then. I'll bet £100 they don't scale the main data.

I think I understand now. I hadn't realised it's done like this. Seems like a strange way to do it. Can't you game the statistic by testing very few people per 100k?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 05, 2021, 08:23:15 pm
Interesting briefing today that cases and the R rate are no longer the key metrics for the easing of lockdown, instead focusing on hospitalisations. Quite a step change but probably logical as we get smaller numbers as they will be all over the place.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 06, 2021, 05:47:37 am
An interesting article on vaccine corruption. Gotta love being awake at this time ugh

https://mg.co.za/coronavirus-essentials/2021-01-30-bill-gates-big-pharma-and-entrenching-the-vaccine-apartheid/#click=https://t.co/EAVdJQl1Qy

Ps the BMJ article and pandemic cronyism maps are really worthwhile reads
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: remus on March 06, 2021, 07:39:19 am
Interesting briefing today that cases and the R rate are no longer the key metrics for the easing of lockdown, instead focusing on hospitalisations. Quite a step change but probably logical as we get smaller numbers as they will be all over the place.

I imagine there's a cost aspect to it as well. I'd speculate that you need to be doing a lot of testing to get reasonable estimates for cases and r rate.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stabbsy on March 06, 2021, 09:35:34 am
Interesting briefing today that cases and the R rate are no longer the key metrics for the easing of lockdown, instead focusing on hospitalisations. Quite a step change but probably logical as we get smaller numbers as they will be all over the place.

I imagine there's a cost aspect to it as well. I'd speculate that you need to be doing a lot of testing to get reasonable estimates for cases and r rate.
I’d linked this to the switch in strategy from trying to get to zero Covid to trying to manage the impacts, plus the impacts of the vaccine. I think the suggestion of empirical data was that the vaccine reduced hospitalisation significantly more than it reduced cases, so making whatever cases did occur less serious. So cases might be less of a good indicator as more of the population is vaccinated.

I’d agree with both comments on the R-number though - potentially more volatile as cases reduce (although I’d guess they’d have to be lower than we managed in the summer for this to be a real issue) and more testing needed to get an accurate view. However, disagree with Remus’s suggestion on case estimates, although this might just be mixing up cases with prevalence. We try and estimate prevalence in ONS survey, but I think the government target was based on actual numbers of positive tests.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on March 06, 2021, 09:54:21 am
An interesting article on vaccine corruption. Gotta love being awake at this time ugh

Quite apart from the fact that it's a shit, one sided, article with no proper analysis about whether the utopian view of vaccine and intellectual property distribution it espouses was practically, politically and economically possible, please explain where the corruption is. Corruption being dishonest or fraudulent activity usually involving the taking of bribes, not just things you don't like.

Dan, come on, if every view you put forward is predicated on everyone, and every organisation, being corrupt, power-seeking liars, it's not surprising that everyone gets a bit annoyed. Quite apart from that, you do your own cause a disservice, because if there is any truth in it, it gets drowned out by the hyperbole and exaggeration.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on March 06, 2021, 10:00:36 am
R has always been a terrible metric for communicating the situation and for making policy decisions.

Too many assumptions have to be made to work back to R, so it gets very noisy.

There isn't enough data to use it on a local authority level so a reliance on R masks rapid local changes until the problem has already got out of hand.

It isn't intuitive to the average person (or politician). Tell them that R is 1.3-1.5 and the average person doesn't know what to think. Tell them that cases are doubling in some London local authorities every 3.8 days and the situation sounds as terrifying as it was in the autumn.

It becomes even less useful in the situation of emerging variants where the time period for transmission may not be the same.

Simple periods of doubling/halving for cases/hospitalisations/deaths require less guesswork, paint a clearer picture, and are more sensitive to change, allowing for quicker decisions to be made when the situation changes rapidly on a local level.

Interesting briefing today that cases and the R rate are no longer the key metrics for the easing of lockdown, instead focusing on hospitalisations. Quite a step change but probably logical as we get smaller numbers as they will be all over the place.

Greater weight on hospitalisations makes more sense as vaccine numbers grow. But the lag for hospitalisations is too big to drive policy if (when) we return to situation where things are getting worse again.

If you wait until hospitalisations have already started creeping up, it is already too late.

Hospitalisations driving policy only makes sense while everything is decreasing.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on March 06, 2021, 10:47:54 am
R has always been a terrible metric for communicating the situation and for making policy decisions.

Too many assumptions have to be made to work back to R, so it gets very noisy.

There isn't enough data to use it on a local authority level so a reliance on R masks rapid local changes until the problem has already got out of hand.

It isn't intuitive to the average person (or politician). Tell them that R is 1.3-1.5 and the average person doesn't know what to think. Tell them that cases are doubling in some London local authorities every 3.8 days and the situation sounds as terrifying as it was in the autumn.

It becomes even less useful in the situation of emerging variants where the time period for transmission may not be the same.

Simple periods of doubling/halving for cases/hospitalisations/deaths require less guesswork, paint a clearer picture, and are more sensitive to change, allowing for quicker decisions to be made when the situation changes rapidly on a local level.

Interesting briefing today that cases and the R rate are no longer the key metrics for the easing of lockdown, instead focusing on hospitalisations. Quite a step change but probably logical as we get smaller numbers as they will be all over the place.

Greater weight on hospitalisations makes more sense as vaccine numbers grow. But the lag for hospitalisations is too big to drive policy if (when) we return to situation where things are getting worse again.

If you wait until hospitalisations have already started creeping up, it is already too late.

Hospitalisations driving policy only makes sense while everything is decreasing.

Really the best way to drive policy is surely to have a really well functioning test and trace system so you can get a broadly accurate estimate of risk of infection risk to an individual in a given area.

Unfortunately we have someone whose main expertise appears to be horse riding, and main qualifications having been a friend of the prime minister for decades. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 06, 2021, 11:02:30 am
An interesting article on vaccine corruption. Gotta love being awake at this time ugh

Quite apart from the fact that it's a shit, one sided, article with no proper analysis about whether the utopian view of vaccine and intellectual property distribution it espouses was practically, politically and economically possible, please explain where the corruption is. Corruption being dishonest or fraudulent activity usually involving the taking of bribes, not just things you don't like.

Dan, come on, if every view you put forward is predicated on everyone, and every organisation, being corrupt, power-seeking liars, it's not surprising that everyone gets a bit annoyed. Quite apart from that, you do your own cause a disservice, because if there is any truth in it, it gets drowned out by the hyperbole and exaggeration.

Yes I’m aware it wasn’t the best article, the BMJ one was more informative as is the crony diagram. With regards ‘my’ cause, let’s face it that was lost a long time ago. I’ll not pretend to try and save face on here but stand by my comment about being warm and genuine in person. Yes I do believe that in any and all organisations people who seek power rise to the top where corruption is inevitable, the nhs included. You mentioned politics and economics as factors influencing the potential for a ‘vaccine utopia’, the fact that politics and economics are involved is the problem.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 06, 2021, 11:11:18 am
R has always been a terrible metric for communicating the situation and for making policy decisions.

Too many assumptions have to be made to work back to R, so it gets very noisy.

There isn't enough data to use it on a local authority level so a reliance on R masks rapid local changes until the problem has already got out of hand.

It isn't intuitive to the average person (or politician). Tell them that R is 1.3-1.5 and the average person doesn't know what to think. Tell them that cases are doubling in some London local authorities every 3.8 days and the situation sounds as terrifying as it was in the autumn.

It becomes even less useful in the situation of emerging variants where the time period for transmission may not be the same.

Simple periods of doubling/halving for cases/hospitalisations/deaths require less guesswork, paint a clearer picture, and are more sensitive to change, allowing for quicker decisions to be made when the situation changes rapidly on a local level.

Interesting briefing today that cases and the R rate are no longer the key metrics for the easing of lockdown, instead focusing on hospitalisations. Quite a step change but probably logical as we get smaller numbers as they will be all over the place.

Greater weight on hospitalisations makes more sense as vaccine numbers grow. But the lag for hospitalisations is too big to drive policy if (when) we return to situation where things are getting worse again.

If you wait until hospitalisations have already started creeping up, it is already too late.

Hospitalisations driving policy only makes sense while everything is decreasing.

Really the best way to drive policy is surely to have a really well functioning test and trace system so you can get a broadly accurate estimate of risk of infection risk to an individual in a given area.

Unfortunately we have someone whose main expertise appears to be horse riding, and main qualifications having been a friend of the prime minister for decades.

We also have a large section of the population, who are uncooperative, arrogant, dismissive of “experts” etc and (to my mind) have a “Toddlerish” attitude to personal responsibility (like to scream “free country”, “I know my rights” or ‘Well, that’s my opinion and you can’t tell me what to think” etc. Yet seem incapable of understanding any form of responsibility or consideration for others or society. Hence they bring to mind a toddler screaming “NO” or “I don’t wanna go bed” or “Why can’t I eat the dog poo? I wanna eat the dog poo!”)

The sort of people, who would write “Bugs Bunny” in the name section of any  official form they have to fill in.

So, I’m not sure test and trace would have been successful enough, even if the management and roll out had been competent.

In many ways, to me, I think the whole debacle is rather representative of modern British society and a large chunk of it’s population.
“We” voted for them, and all the other pending issues, after all. We even voted to keep our current system of elections in place.

I mean, look at how many people buy newspapers because the newspapers make snide comments about a woman of colour who dared to marry into the Royal Family. I feels as if such a large number of people are happy to suffer any indignity or economic hardship, as long as they get to titter and sneer at “the Other” race/gender/residents of a different region/foreigner blah blah blah blah (insert meaningless distinction between fellow humans here).

Anyway.

Happy Saturday guys!   
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 06, 2021, 11:23:25 am
I don't think that article really relates to corruption, there's no dishonesty. Protecting IP or not sharing process knowledge might be mean or immoral, but not sure how it fits "corrupt". Perhaps that's just semantics, immoral isn't really any better  :lol:

I don't know enough about the inner workings of making these drugs to have a strong view on how logistically easy or not it would be to assist smaller or non-specialist manufacturers in scale-up. In PV they usually send teams of engineers to new facilities for the ramp process, but I imagine they're all currently busy ramping the main facilities (AztraZenica already have a big Indian fab for their vaccine by the looks of it)... pity they didn't do more digging into those kinds of issues - their only expert basically said that they don't know how feasible it would be to ramp at non-specialistals. Probably best to separate out production questions from purchase questions around rich countries being able to buy to the front of the queue (not exactly new!)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on March 06, 2021, 01:22:50 pm
Dan’s posts make a lot more sense if you imagine that he regards any sort of compromise that may be needed to get something done, or any decision taken for practical rather than moral reasons as “corruption”.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on March 06, 2021, 02:08:16 pm
the fact that politics and economics are involved is the problem.

I would love to know how politics and economics would not be involved?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 06, 2021, 02:53:09 pm
Yikes it’s team lattice world police with the cavalry of messers Popp and Davies in tow. Once you’ve finished with me ye can head off to save the environment by burning rubber chips and and mining battery components. A necessary evil debate 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 06, 2021, 04:10:53 pm
Still not got the hang of actually engaging with the points have you  :yawn:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Davo on March 06, 2021, 04:19:44 pm
To be fair, that was a pretty funny comment he made.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 06, 2021, 04:57:20 pm
I don’t believe it’s a particularly radical idea that a large scale health intervention can be delivered without  meddling cronies and fucking Bond villain philanthropists cashing in on the misery. The BMJ article I posted and the crony map which no one has commented on show to some extent the degree of this. Show me a (leading) politician that isn’t a liar a fraud a deviant or a stooge and I’ll eat my hat
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on March 06, 2021, 05:01:01 pm
Yikes it’s team lattice world police with the cavalry of messers Popp and Davies in tow. Once you’ve finished with me ye can head off to save the environment by burning rubber chips and and mining battery components. A necessary evil debate

Straw men, moral equivalence, slippery slope reasoning, ad hominem are all regularly used to rebuff arguments here
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 06, 2021, 05:16:31 pm
I don’t believe it’s a particularly radical idea that a large scale health intervention can be delivered without  meddling cronies and fucking Bond villain philanthropists cashing in on the misery. The BMJ article I posted and the crony map which no one has commented on show to some extent the degree of this. Show me a (leading) politician that isn’t a liar a fraud a deviant or a stooge and I’ll eat my hat

My little crony has been posted here before (it’s 2 months old?) and maybe it’s more for the politics thread. Being ‘generous’ - at moments of crisis you reach out to those you know first to help. The PPE decisions in the first few weeks smacked of that - and if you’re drowning you don’t choose which hand you grab to pull you out. But after that it really looks like it’s taking the piss if not blatant corruption.

It is a bugbear of mine that it’s called favours for mates, or chumocracy or some shit like that when it is really corruption. Over-riding due process to award contacts to friends.

When paid up next year - TTI will cost the equivalent of £560 per person. TTI is vital for tracking the pandemic - but whether this represents value for money... Maybe last summer a decision should have been made to move this to the NHS and bring it in house instead of SERCO/dido based (they could have walked away at that point fairly easily). Instead we get the “double down” culture where we keep on digging...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 06, 2021, 06:33:45 pm
Yikes it’s team lattice world police with the cavalry of messers Popp and Davies in tow. Once you’ve finished with me ye can head off to save the environment by burning rubber chips and and mining battery components. A necessary evil debate

Straw men, moral equivalence, slippery slope reasoning, ad hominem are all regularly used to rebuff arguments here

Yeah well one can have a joke, right?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 06, 2021, 07:03:18 pm
Chumocracy -amiable sounding euphemism - agreed. Corruption is the correct term, but smacks of other, less civilised countries, or so we would like to think.


When paid up next year - TTI will cost the equivalent of £560 per person. TTI is vital for tracking the pandemic

I don’t quite agree that TTI is vital for tracking the pandemic, TT. I’d say it is vital for isolating newly infectious people and so shutting down transmission.

If it doesn’t do that effectively, including fast, it’s worthless.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 06, 2021, 07:04:53 pm

If it doesn’t do that effectively, including fast, it’s worthless.

Absolutely.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 06, 2021, 07:46:50 pm

Interesting briefing today that cases and the R rate are no longer the key metrics for the easing of lockdown, instead focusing on hospitalisations. Quite a step change but probably logical as we get smaller numbers as they will be all over the place.

Greater weight on hospitalisations makes more sense as vaccine numbers grow. But the lag for hospitalisations is too big to drive policy if (when) we return to situation where things are getting worse again.

If you wait until hospitalisations have already started creeping up, it is already too late.

Hospitalisations driving policy only makes sense while everything is decreasing.

Yes, this makes sense. I am struggling to think of a better metric though given that cases are likely to be less useful when they are low. Am I missing something?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on March 07, 2021, 10:15:20 am
Up until now, it has been relatively easy. The rate of doubling/halving of cases (both tested and estimated) has told you all you need to know. When cases go up/down, hospitalisations and deaths inevitably follow.

With vaccines now starting to break that link, there needs to be a switch to a more nuanced approach.

Once nearly everyone is vaccinated, the important thing will be to monitor whether the vaccines are staying effective at preventing hospitalisation as new variants emerge. Total cases will only be important in terms of the increased risk of mutations and the risk to the unvaccinated. The important thing will be to monitor new variants as they emerge/are imported/spread and to act as necessary to prevent them becoming a problem.

I think we should be aiming to be in a position where we sequence every positive case. As a minimum, we need to sequence every hospitalisation and every positive from a returning traveller.

That way, you can monitor which variants are developing in to serious cases. Ideally, new mutations should be flagged as potential concerns before they develop any hospitalisations, rather than 5 or 6 weeks later when the handful of cases has already become a noticeable number of hospitalisations.

Whenever a worrying variant emerges, that is when we need an effective track and trace system plus targeted measures to shut them down before they spread.

So we need to identify each variant and monitor the prevalence and rate of doubling/halving of cases of each variant.

All this is only possible if we run with relatively low cases, which should be achievable over the summer if the desire is there.

If we run with too many cases to follow each variant, we'll be in a position of crossing our fingers and hoping that the vaccines remain effective. By the time we realise that they aren't, it would already be too late and we will be back to reacting once the situation is already out of hand.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 07, 2021, 11:29:25 am
Quote
It’s “NHS Test, Track and Trace”

Yet it’s “ the Government vaccine roll-out”
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 12, 2021, 01:48:40 pm
FYI - those with kids at school - link here to order Lateral flow kits to either pick up or be delivered.

https://www.gov.uk/order-coronavirus-rapid-lateral-flow-tests

FWIW having filled in the website forms etc.. I can’t see how they would know if you have kids or not. ;)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 12, 2021, 02:04:26 pm
FYI - those with kids at school - link here to order Lateral flow kits to either pick up or be delivered.

https://www.gov.uk/order-coronavirus-rapid-lateral-flow-tests

FWIW having filled in the website forms etc.. I can’t see how they would know if you have kids or not. ;)

Ours get their kits given to them in school, we have to do the test (they each get three tests/ lessons in school and are supposed to carry out the test themselves) we then have to confirm the results to the school by text, on Sunday evenings and (iirc) Thursday mornings. That’s two different schools.
They also had to do one a week prior, then two days prior to classroom return, followed by the third on the third day after return. Our first home tests will be Sunday.
Oh the joys of four teens...

As an aside, I got my invite for vaccine yesterday and will be jabbed on next Thursday. So we’re into 50+ here.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 12, 2021, 07:08:36 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QAHi3lX3oGM
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Liamhutch89 on March 12, 2021, 07:29:47 pm
Just had my jab in Leeds. God knows why I was invited so early as I'm 31 with no existing health conditions and I've never had a flu jab! 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 12, 2021, 07:37:41 pm
Do you work in social care or special needs education ?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on March 12, 2021, 07:40:54 pm
Just had my jab in Leeds. God knows why I was invited so early as I'm 31 with no existing health conditions and I've never had a flu jab!
I heard there’d been a fuck up with the vaccine priority algorithm and some younger people were randomly being invited. I know a few people who’ve had it and can’t understand why.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Liamhutch89 on March 12, 2021, 07:46:39 pm
Do you work in social care or special needs education ?

Nope I'm an engineer and generally work on a pc at home.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 12, 2021, 07:48:08 pm
Also know people who've not been able to work out why they've been invited (but not me unfortunately!)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 12, 2021, 08:11:12 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QAHi3lX3oGM

Just ran this past my M-I-L, she’s a consultant Cardiologist.
“Gosh, what a frightful tit”.
Was her response.
F-I-L, who had been avidly following the Oxford model, with high hopes, is quite clear that the medical community is solidly behind the Imperial model now, with the caveat that the global response has pulled us back from worst case (he’s also saying we’d have to be incredibly unlucky to lose the edge with the vaccine/mutation game, at least for this “season”). He knows his shit and is well informed on the consensus amongst his colleagues.

Dan, do you remember the doctor who produced DJT’s letter attesting to his superhuman fitness etc? Harold Shipman? Bloke called Wakefield (used to be a doctor)? Good ‘ol Joe Mengele?

I don’t understand how you can take an individual doctors opinions, as gospel, where they differ enormously from the consensus amongst the majority. There are simply millions of medical doctors around the globe, who don’t agree with the few who are trotted out, for what seem to be political reasons, to make unsubstantiated claims, not supported by the evidence or specialists.
(Don’t get my inlaws started on people expounding opinions outside their specialities, that’ll ruin a dinner)

I’m a little surprised at your position, really. Lockdown and suspension of the economy,  is the socially responsible thing to do. Hard, costly, but effective. The numbers don’t lie.
The vast majority of powerful players, that push for early relaxation or no mandates, are rather shady people, who are losing money and don’t give a shit who dies or suffers as long as they can get back to selling us shit.
Many of them are in senior positions in our current government. You blather on about “them” controlling “us” for some slightly bizarre and nebulous gain, when “they” (or as close as reality can provide, to fit your model) are the ones who want everything opened up again so “we” start buying beer in their pubs again.
Funnily enough “they” don’t seem to be anything like as powerful as you seem to believe, or we wouldn’t be in lockdown now.
I mean, it’s almost certain, that there was a “conspiracy” to open up again over Xmas. That is to say, lots of people who make lots of money over the Xmas period, were probably being very nice to the right ministers and the PM, to persuade them that letting people go shopping and visiting relatives wouldn’t be so bad.
It was and the government then went into a panic and had to shut down way harder than if they hadn’t spaffed it all up the wall over Xmas.

I suppose the main difference is your belief in some powerful cabal or individual, ruining your life; where I see bog standard incompetence, petty cronyism and the standard “British Old School Tie Brigade” of dunces promoted to the limit of their incompetence because daddy was rich.
Capable of wreaking havoc, for sure, but more Mr Bean than Blofeld.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 12, 2021, 08:14:43 pm
Just had my jab in Leeds. God knows why I was invited so early as I'm 31 with no existing health conditions and I've never had a flu jab!

Just take it, then ask why...

And let me know how the side affects pan out.

Inlaws were pretty ill for four to five days.

They both had a feeling they’d had Covid, without symptoms, but that was based on their reaction rather than anything else.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 12, 2021, 08:31:18 pm
I read that if you had no bmi entered in your records for some reason it would default to 31 (badly obese) and so get you a jab. Similar of your ethnicity wasn’t recorded it would assume the most vulnerable. Algorithm designed to be careful if in doubt. With close to 45% of the adult population now jabbed its less of an issue I expect.

MrsTt had her second jab this week. Both my parents last.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: webbo on March 12, 2021, 09:33:21 pm
Just had my jab in Leeds. God knows why I was invited so early as I'm 31 with no existing health conditions and I've never had a flu jab!

Just take it, then ask why...

And let me know how the side affects pan out.

Inlaws were pretty ill for four to five days.

They both had a feeling they’d had Covid, without symptoms, but that was based on their reaction rather than anything else.
I had mine 2 weeks ago and I didn’t even get a sore arm. The missus had hers yesterday had a few aches in the evening, so took some painkillers and has been since.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on March 13, 2021, 07:06:59 am
Just had my jab in Leeds. God knows why I was invited so early as I'm 31 with no existing health conditions and I've never had a flu jab!
I heard there’d been a fuck up with the vaccine priority algorithm and some younger people were randomly being invited. I know a few people who’ve had it and can’t understand why.

My son - 28, no underlying health conditions - is getting his today, following a call from his GP yesterday. No idea why, but you're not going to say no, are you.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on March 13, 2021, 07:45:47 am
Can't be bothered to watch the video because life is too short, but lemme guess, is it about how hydroxychloroquine is a magic cure which the establishment are suppressing?

Because it took me 30 seconds' Googling to find this:

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/feb/22/melbourne-doctors-under-review-for-promoting-discredited-covid-treatment

McCullough doesn't feature until halfway through, but it's worth the wait.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: battery on March 13, 2021, 08:42:25 am
Can't be bothered to watch the video because life is too short, but lemme guess, is it about how hydroxychloroquine is a magic cure which the establishment are suppressing?

Because it took me 30 seconds' Googling to find this:

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/feb/22/melbourne-doctors-under-review-for-promoting-discredited-covid-treatment

McCullough doesn't feature until halfway through, but it's worth the wait.

After 5 minutes of hyperbole and extraordinary self promotion I gave up watching. Cheers for the link, think I might give that to my students as an example of how to interrogate your sources!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on March 13, 2021, 08:54:50 am
It’s amazing what effect an authoritative sounding name still has on me, conservative think tanks seem to be good at this in this country too.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_American_Physicians_and_Surgeons

Quote
  The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) is a conservative non-profit association founded in 1944. The group was reported to have about 5,000 members in 2014. The association has promoted a range of scientifically discredited hypotheses, including the belief that HIV does not cause AIDS, that “gay” male lifestyle increases the incidence of infectious disease, that there is a link between abortion and breast cancer, and that there is a causal relationship between vaccines and autism.   
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on March 13, 2021, 09:53:45 am
It’s amazing what effect an authoritative sounding name still has on me, conservative think tanks seem to be good at this in this country too.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_American_Physicians_and_Surgeons

Quote
  The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) is a conservative non-profit association founded in 1944. The group was reported to have about 5,000 members in 2014. The association has promoted a range of scientifically discredited hypotheses, including the belief that HIV does not cause AIDS, that “gay” male lifestyle increases the incidence of infectious disease, that there is a link between abortion and breast cancer, and that there is a causal relationship between vaccines and autism.   

A quick look at there website will show that that if anything that description is understating the righwing nuttery and conspiracy theory spreading.

Just one example of an article on it:

'COVID-19 Won the Presidential Election

By Marilyn M. Singleton, MD, JD

One is hard-pressed to deny that Joe Biden is a weak, corrupt, pathologically lying, creepy dirty old man who has lived off the government teat for 50 years. And he allegedly won the 2020 presidential election. Are Americans that ignorant? Or has Joseph Stalin’s political philosophy that has been simmering in America for years finally come to fruition? COVID was the not-so-secret agent.'
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on March 13, 2021, 09:55:02 am
Just take it, then ask why...

And let me know how the side affects pan out.

Inlaws were pretty ill for four to five days.

They both had a feeling they’d had Covid, without symptoms, but that was based on their reaction rather than anything else.
I had mine 2 weeks ago and I didn’t even get a sore arm. The missus had hers yesterday had a few aches in the evening, so took some painkillers and has been since.

I've heard the full range from people I know, from "didn't even get a sore arm" through to "felt really ill for several days". The latter seems to be most likely after the second dose of one of the mRNA vaccines -- they're super-effective but the immune response can hit you hard.

Lots of people in the mid-range with "felt cruddy for one day". One friend got her first jab on Thurs, says she slept through most of Friday, now feels way better.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sxrxg on March 13, 2021, 10:52:11 am
I had my first jab last night (AZ) and am feeling a bit ropey today. Banging headache, sore joints and prickly skin. Going to smash a couple of paracetamol and take it easy today.

At least I didn't have the reaction of my mum who passed out about 15-20 minutes after being jabbed and got taken by ambulance to the local hospital for observation. She didn't have any other problems after being discharged later the same day though.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Liamhutch89 on March 13, 2021, 11:47:13 am
prickly skin

I thought I had no side effects, but come to think of it, I keep itching my chest!

Nothing much to report other than a very minor sore shoulder. I'll be climbing on the board today.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 13, 2021, 05:38:34 pm
I read that if you had no bmi entered in your records for some reason it would default to 31 (badly obese) and so get you a jab. Similar of your ethnicity wasn’t recorded it would assume the most vulnerable. Algorithm designed to be careful if in doubt. With close to 45% of the adult population now jabbed its less of an issue I expect.

MrsTt had her second jab this week. Both my parents last.

I just clicked something here.

If this is correct, it probably means there are way less morbidly obese people in the UK, than the NHS thought...

Or is it just the vaccine algorithm defaulting to 31?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Tony S on March 13, 2021, 06:07:51 pm
I read that if you had no bmi entered in your records for some reason it would default to 31 (badly obese) and so get you a jab. Similar of your ethnicity wasn’t recorded it would assume the most vulnerable. Algorithm designed to be careful if in doubt. With close to 45% of the adult population now jabbed its less of an issue I expect.

MrsTt had her second jab this week. Both my parents last.

I just clicked something here.

If this is correct, it probably means there are way less morbidly obese people in the UK, than the NHS thought...

Or is it just the vaccine algorithm defaulting to 31?

No. This is entirely bollox.

It is far more likely that GPs (or practice staff) inadvertently entered incorrect records. In a population of 50M this will occur.

Obesity figure are (usually) based on surveys rather than routine data.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 13, 2021, 10:09:55 pm
There appears to be parity in the Mets policing of lockdown / coronavirus violations. But you’ve got to wonder if they should have let this one go. Just to be clear I believe the vigil should be allowed to go ahead peacefully without this insanity

https://mobile.twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1370835536185810949
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on March 14, 2021, 08:16:44 am
Liberty's doing solid work campaigning against the government using coronavirus as an excuse for blanket suppression of protests:

https://www.libertyhumanrights.org.uk/fundamental/coronavirus/

(Also against the stripping of rights to social care and other issues.)

Have a round-up from my favourite liberal elitist intellectual rag re: how police have been using the regulations to clamp down on responsibly-organized, socially-distanced protests:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/13/police-in-england-using-covid-lockdown-rules-to-halt-any-protests

This has fuck-all to do with keeping anyone safe from Covid; it's just authoritarian policing that thinks it has license from an authoritarian home secretary.

In this case, they seem to have made the tactical mistake of manhandling nice respectable-looking middle-class white women, which plays differently in PR terms from manhandling other groups.

N.B. I say this as a middle-class white woman, so this is not a diss of middle-class white women, just a cynical consideration of what's seen to "look bad". We literally get advised to go on protests because we can sometimes act as a human shield and block over-aggressive police responses to other groups.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 14, 2021, 09:25:04 am
Liberty's doing solid work campaigning against the government using coronavirus as an excuse for blanket suppression of protests:

https://www.libertyhumanrights.org.uk/fundamental/coronavirus/

(Also against the stripping of rights to social care and other issues.)

Have a round-up from my favourite liberal elitist intellectual rag re: how police have been using the regulations to clamp down on responsibly-organized, socially-distanced protests:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/13/police-in-england-using-covid-lockdown-rules-to-halt-any-protests

This has fuck-all to do with keeping anyone safe from Covid; it's just authoritarian policing that thinks it has license from an authoritarian home secretary.

In this case, they seem to have made the tactical mistake of manhandling nice respectable-looking middle-class white women, which plays differently in PR terms from manhandling other groups.

N.B. I say this as a middle-class white woman, so this is not a diss of middle-class white women, just a cynical consideration of what's seen to "look bad". We literally get advised to go on protests because we can sometimes act as a human shield and block over-aggressive police responses to other groups.

Beat me too it.

And on the night before Mothers day, meaning some Mothers are still in cells this morning.

Very difficult to see this playing out well for the Police or the government.

I think the editorial tone at Sky is probably where this is going:
(https://i.ibb.co/y6XGjVT/9399-FAC3-39-BE-43-C5-94-DD-1-B2-B61-B5-F938.png)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 14, 2021, 09:31:08 am

In this case, they seem to have made the tactical mistake of manhandling nice respectable-looking middle-class white women, which plays differently in PR terms from manhandling other groups.

Exactly, unlike

Quote from: Priti_Patel
those dreadful Black Lives Matter protests
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 14, 2021, 09:33:50 am
Many people (not me) are arguing that the police acted correctly and in accordance with the laws associated with stopping the spread of coronavirus. Some are speculating (not me) it’s a manufactured spectacle for what reason I don’t know, maybe to trigger an acceleration of easing of restrictions. Other believe it to be a mistake and over reaching of power while others believe it is a forceful show of what happens if citizens decide to go against the state. I’ve genuinely no idea. I wonder how the same reaction to an anti lockdown protest would have been received by the public. Lockdown has of course led to the loss of many lives young and old. Maybe this is a moral equivalence argument, I’m not entirely sure.

I thought the reaction to the cardiologist was an interesting one. Of course I have no idea whether what he was saying was factual or not. He appeared to be incredibly passionate about what he was saying and seemed to almost break down at one point. I wasn’t sure of his motives for speaking out? He didn’t seems to have a wider agenda than his own ‘truth’

The reaction sought to discredit him in various ways, critiquing the science (fair) then through smear and association with non pc beliefs and values (interesting). His key message did ‘appear’ to be a caring pro social and humanitarian one.

With regards the Guardian, I’ve always turned to it for my news. Have always had left leaning ideas and values. I went to see Tony Benn speak in Sheffield a fair few years ago. What a fantastic man. These days for various reasons I find it unbearable, but do understand some of what is published in it will be valuable and educational.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on March 14, 2021, 09:41:52 am

In this case, they seem to have made the tactical mistake of manhandling nice respectable-looking middle-class white women, which plays differently in PR terms from manhandling other groups.

Exactly, unlike

Quote from: Priti_Patel
those dreadful Black Lives Matter protests

My thought exactly.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 14, 2021, 09:51:13 am

In this case, they seem to have made the tactical mistake of manhandling nice respectable-looking middle-class white women, which plays differently in PR terms from manhandling other groups.

Exactly, unlike

Quote from: Priti_Patel
those dreadful Black Lives Matter protests

My thought exactly.

Patel is a canny operator though. Her position and comments so far give her room to follow the public tone, she’s been demanding reports and investigation, for instance.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 14, 2021, 10:35:57 am
Some interesting perspectives from this man. His credentials seem sound. I will be interested to see what’s dug up on him and how long it will be before he is a broken man. This is one of his longer interviews and the link below is his open letter

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MkLIFDwORXc

https://mcusercontent.com/92561d6dedb66a43fe9a6548f/files/bead7203-0798-4ac8-abe2-076208015556/Public_health_emergency_of_international_concert_Geert_Vanden_Bossche.01.pdf
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: battery on March 14, 2021, 10:36:22 am
The vigil last night was not just about Sarah Everard. In the same way as the murder of George Floyd brought issues of racism into the fore, the murder of Sarah Everard has brought the issue of violence against women into the limelight. I have no doubt that this is because she was a middle class white women, walking through a middle class area wearing clothes that the Daily Fail could not deem provocative, she makes a palatable 'front woman' for the media. 

Reclaim These Streets tried to work with the Met Police to develop a plan for the vigil which would be within the law and it ended up in court, the judge said the plans presented couldn't go ahead but that the two sides should keep talking, the Met Police did not engage (this information is taken from RTS's twitter feed and whilst I have no reason to think they are lying I admit that this is one side of the story).

As I understand it, the right to public protest is enshrined in the Human Rights Act and is not addressed in the Covid restrictions. I have memories of demonstrations last year being tolerated, including the musicians who gathered and played outside Westminster to highlight the plight of the arts industry.

Comparisons of the treatment of the Rangers supporters and the women attending the vigil last night are understandable. Women are not expected to act in this way so when they do they often get treated with a more severe reaction (there is data out there that suggests women get treated more harshly by the courts).

This discussion is a tough one, it is a hard thing to face and a hard thing to tackle but it is too important to ignore. It is not enough to be passive, by not raising our voices we reinforce the status quo, we have to be an ally for women in whatever way we can. Challenge everyday sexism, think about not what your intentions are but how you might be perceived, change the narrative from how women can keep themselves safe to how men can stop being violent.


Edit: apologies if this seems slightly off topic - the on topic bit is that there is growing concern that covid legislation is being used to restrict people's right to peaceful protest. There is a growing reaction to this that could well blow up in the coming days and weeks.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 14, 2021, 10:50:19 am
I also believe that mandating by law lockdowns, face coverings and any other health procedure is a human rights abuse.

Yeah! And seatbelts! And traffic laws! And Child protection laws that stop me punishing my children the way I see fit! Oh, and laws regulating the practice of medicine! Nobody should be forced to only have approved and tested medications and procedures.
Come on! It’s not as if any of this stuff actually worked! It’s coincidental that seatbelt introduction coincided with a reduction of road deaths! It’s coincidental that every mandated lockdown and mask wearing occurred just before a rapid drop in infections!
Dan’s comfort is all that matters!
Thank the Flying Spaghetti Monster, that Dan is here to explain why society would function so much better without laws and mandates and regulations and order. Of course, everybody would be sensible and do the right thing, if only the “GoveRnmUnT” would leave them alone!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 14, 2021, 10:51:35 am
Some interesting perspectives from this man. His credentials seem sound. I will be interested to see what’s dug up on him and how long it will be before he is a broken man. This is one of his longer interviews and the link below is his open letter

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MkLIFDwORXc

https://mcusercontent.com/92561d6dedb66a43fe9a6548f/files/bead7203-0798-4ac8-abe2-076208015556/Public_health_emergency_of_international_concert_Geert_Vanden_Bossche.01.pdf

Mothers day.

Busy, now she’s awake. Watched/read your links.
Place holder answer:

 https://thelogicofscience.com/2019/03/05/how-not-to-science-lessons-from-flat-earthers-and-climate-change-deniers/?fbclid=IwAR1gJn0JP23hgdy9sw5kzNNzEbHJa58BfaMhWJCHy9sJRvSidlOxUnm2EIk (https://thelogicofscience.com/2019/03/05/how-not-to-science-lessons-from-flat-earthers-and-climate-change-deniers/?fbclid=IwAR1gJn0JP23hgdy9sw5kzNNzEbHJa58BfaMhWJCHy9sJRvSidlOxUnm2EIk)

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 14, 2021, 05:57:20 pm
Maybe a better watch as to why this chap believes the covid vaccination program will cause problems.

 From his link on Twitter

Geert Vanden Bossche
@GVDBossche
·
Mar 10
My statements are based on nothing else but science. They shall only be contradicted by science. In order to enable a transparant scientific debate I've put online my keynote speech at the Vaccin Summit Ohio.


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=shg0VWkz0VM&t=220s
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on March 14, 2021, 06:26:50 pm
Re: Clapham Common vigil police response. Part of me wonders if it could be a sympathetic gold commander in the Met police who’s sceptical about this new bill and thought going in hard would be a good way to draw attention to it. If so, chapeau.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 14, 2021, 06:44:33 pm
Sounding a tad conspiratorial there. Decisions being made to stage heavy handed policing in an attempt to alter the course of lockdown by driving public opinion.

Beware the headmaster might put you in the dunces corner.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on March 14, 2021, 06:59:23 pm
Nothing to do with lockdown. And I really can’t see it btw. More likely just poorly judged response.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 14, 2021, 07:03:56 pm
I agree 👍🏻 Thought corrected
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 14, 2021, 08:57:51 pm
The graun article - I’m confused.

https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/14/ireland-suspends-oxford-astrazeneca-covid-vaccine-over-blood-clot-concerns?__twitter_impression=true

Saying that it won’t really matter if Geert is correct in his predictions. Vaccine apocalypse.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on March 14, 2021, 10:07:05 pm
Some interesting perspectives from this man. His credentials seem sound. I will be interested to see what’s dug up on him and how long it will be before he is a broken man. This is one of his longer interviews and the link below is his open letter


Have some of these scientists you’re into been hounded out of their jobs because of their position on Covid? I note that this dude is currently between jobs. The only person I’ve heard of being fired was the lady in Florida who wouldn’t lie to downplay the Covid stats like her governor wanted her to.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 14, 2021, 10:21:30 pm
I don’t know, it seems some people are vilified for holding contrary opinions. Regardless his seminar / talk is interesting and potentially disastrous. Between jobs would account for a good deal of people at the moment. I’m guessing that’s about all you’ve dug up and the link to Florida was nice too. I love the way you’ve used ‘you’re into’ Good work as always, have you considered a post with SAGE?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on March 14, 2021, 10:40:39 pm
😂 “you’re into” related to this forum, I’m sure you’re not alone worldwide.

Lots of people between jobs currently, but maybe not do much for  vaccine experts?

I’ve seen plenty of heavy criticism of ideas, not so much men broken by vilification.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 14, 2021, 11:02:49 pm
I’d be more interested to hear what you thought of the seminar.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 14, 2021, 11:03:50 pm
Did you read the full text he linked on Twitter? (I didn’t watch the video).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 14, 2021, 11:09:31 pm
The last 5-10 mins of the seminar vid link is interesting.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 14, 2021, 11:31:58 pm
Did you read the full text he linked on Twitter? (I didn’t watch the video).

I’ve read the text 👍🏻
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 15, 2021, 09:36:14 am
A look at the statistics of blood clots with respect to the Astra Zeneca vaccine.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/15/evidence-oxford-vaccine-blood-clots-data-causal-links
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 15, 2021, 09:40:50 am
Ok.

Yesterday I wrote a reply to Dan, in a few stolen moments.
It got swallowed by the Aether. Dunno.

Anyway it’s sunny, the kids ate all back at school. Mrs OMM is at work. I can’t climb (finger still in a splint. 5 more weeks. Harrumph), however I can hit the beach and play silly buggers with the dogs and crank out a couple hours training in the Bunker.

So, CBA on the refutation game today.

Just this:

Dan, what will you do, when this apocalypse doesn’t happen?

Will it all be a “cover up”? Will it all have been faked?

I went to visit the wife’s grave yesterday. We do that fairly regularly. Over the years we have watched that field fill, row by row.
Lili’s grave was two rows in from the newest, last Mothers day. They have added four rows in the course of 2020 (or, double the number of the preceding 7 years). Exmouth took a battering, too many over 70’s in one community.

I’ll ask a relative to let you know if the vaccine kills me.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 15, 2021, 10:44:10 am


Dan, what will you do, when this apocalypse doesn’t happen?

Breath a huge sigh of relief that Geert was wrong.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: kelvin on March 15, 2021, 11:11:13 am
A look at the statistics of blood clots with respect to the Astra Zeneca vaccine.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/15/evidence-oxford-vaccine-blood-clots-data-causal-links

Seems reasonable to me and I happily had the AZ vaccine this morning.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on March 15, 2021, 11:15:21 am
I had the AZ vaccine the other week and don't seem to have had any issues with blood clotting. I'm on Apixaban anti-coagulants twice daily and have been on some form of anti-coag for 12 years. Hope that's useful  :2thumbsup:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: duncan on March 15, 2021, 11:20:55 am
I was waiting for an event like the blood clotting issue (?) to happen, I’m quite surprised it’s taken this long. Given ~17 million people (~11 million in the UK) have had the Oxford-AZ vaccine it would be amazing if there were not some clusters of some kind of problem that, superficially, could be associated with the vaccine. Study millions people for a couple of months and all kinds of medical problems will befall them because... shit happens.

(I have run clinical trials and chaired trial steering committees and safety committees so I know a little bit about how adverse events are dealt with. Whenever something bad happens that, even tangentially, could be associated with the treatment or medicine the process rolls into action. The first trial I ran was into exercise for people with back pain. When we were following-up people we learned one had died and another was now in Brixton prison. The study safety committee duly met and concluded the death had nothing to do with the treatment and we could carry on. They did not consider if getting banged-up was a possible adverse event.)

It’s possible the blood clotting is a very unusual side effect in which case it will have to be weighed against the much more likely serious effects of contracting Covid (climbers should be good at relative risks but this doesn’t always seem to be the case). Some counties are being ultra cautious here. Probably unnecessarily so purely from a science perspective, but if they are dealing with a cautious/hesitant population they may feel this is the best thing to do. 

My other half had the AZ vaccine on Thursday. We talked about these reports and we were both happy for her to go ahead with it. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sxrxg on March 15, 2021, 11:35:26 am
I had the AZ vaccine Friday and am totally happy with my choice. As reported i had a banging headache and some side effects on Saturday, after an easy day though i felt ok on Sunday and had a board session in the evening. Unfortunately i needed to cut the board session short as the left shoulder where i had the injection felt very achey and i was worried about potentially injuring myself, it wasn't noticeably weaker during the session more that i was concerned about prolonging the pain in the muscle or making it worse. I am hopeful that by the middle of this week things will be back to normal.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 15, 2021, 11:38:10 am
Seems the same as the Bell's Palsy "link" a while back.

My brother developed BP spontaneously a few years back and never fully recovered, he's just been vaccinated, wonder if it will cure him fully now :)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on March 15, 2021, 11:44:52 am
I had the AZ vaccine Friday and am totally happy with my choice. As reported i had a banging headache

My son had it Saturday and reported only a bit of headache. Mind you, I haven't heard from him since.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: HaeMeS on March 15, 2021, 01:01:48 pm
I was waiting for an event like the blood clotting issue (?) to happen, I’m quite surprised it’s taken this long. Given ~17 million people (~11 million in the UK) have had the Oxford-AZ vaccine it would be amazing if there were not some clusters of some kind of problem that, superficially, could be associated with the vaccine. Study millions people for a couple of months and all kinds of medical problems will befall them because... shit happens.

4 people in the studie (N=12.000) had blood clotting issues, 8 in the control group (N=12.000). In the Netherlands the governments decision to stop vaccinating with the AZ vaccin is 2 days before the election... you do the math.

As shared by well known Belgian virologist Marc van Ranst:
https://www.facebook.com/679627380/posts/10159006112447381/

 :shrug:   :wall:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Liamhutch89 on March 15, 2021, 01:57:22 pm
Seen loads of people catching onto this blood-clotting idea on social media - the usual suspects - you know the types. Hilarious really when I know for a fact that many of them spend an average weekend getting coked up on pub-grade gear and their weekdays juicing up on stedz from a back-street gym, with seemingly no qualms about their source, purity or side effects. I'm not knocking their choices, they can do what they want to do, but at least show some consistency!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 15, 2021, 03:24:14 pm
Its funny the AZ shot gets so much flack (both for this and for other issues....) - when I believe its the only one being produced on a not for profit basis.
 
Strange that.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on March 15, 2021, 04:40:24 pm
I had the AZ shot yesterday at around 4pm and was happy to do so despite blood clot reports. Of course I like the fact it is a not for profit endeavour. Had a fairly rough night with aching muscles/joints, temperature and headache.  Didn't go to work this morning and have had a very chilled day today. Starting to feel a little more human now.  A small price to pay.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 15, 2021, 05:31:17 pm
Geert’s website.

https://www.geertvandenbossche.org/

I’ve not been able to find any critique of this yet. Has anyone else?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on March 15, 2021, 06:03:47 pm
Dan, it’s very easy to argue against his position from first principles.

His case is that widespread deployment of vaccines creates evolutionary pressure that will lead to highly infectious new strains.

There is one major counterpoint - vaccines also greatly reduce the amount of circulating virus.

So pressure to mutate goes up, but the number of viruses that can mutate goes down.

Whether the risk of new strains goes up or down depends on the balance of those two, but it’s not inevitable as he portrays it.

He also neglects the fact that virus mutation is not a one-sided risk - ie it does not automatically lead to more dangerous strains, even if selection prefers more infectious strains. That’s because selection also prefers strains that don’t kill the host.

So the scenario he paints is not impossible but it’s not likely either.

No-one has certainty about what the future holds, but comparing the low possibility of a vaccine apocalypse to the certainty that many hundreds of thousands will die without widespread vaccination makes the right choice now a bit of a no brainer.

It’s a bit like being chased by a mugger, and opting not to dive into the nearest McDonald’s to escape, on the off chance that it’s full of murderers.

Which is why you’re not seeing anxious discussions of this amongst virologists and public health workers.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 15, 2021, 06:15:28 pm
Ah thanks Stu, well explained. I do wonder about the motives of people that stick their necks out sometimes

Although on reflection your point about vaccines greatly reducing circulating virus is the basis to his argument. That these specific vaccines do not reduce the amount of circulation as vaccinated individuals are hosting the virus?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stu Littlefair on March 15, 2021, 06:36:36 pm
Yes, that’s what he claims but it’s not necessarily true. In fact there’s plenty of evidence now that the vaccines do reduce transmission, and so the amount of circulating virus.

They guy seems genuine in his motivation and has great credentials. Every academic can tell you there’s a big jump from there to “right”.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 15, 2021, 06:48:30 pm
The other point he makes is one of asymptomatic transmission and vaccinating an otherwise healthy population including children. Many of which are likely to have had covid or one of its strains. He claims by vaccinating this population mid pandemic with a prophylactic vaccine you are increasing the chances of hosting more dangerous mutating variants?

Ps sorry if this has already been covered or appears a daft question.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 15, 2021, 06:57:57 pm
Text seemed poorly composed to me but English is not his first language. That said, it’s probably the first language of every journal he’s ever been published in.

The idea that acquired immunity can impede natural immunity was new to me. There was no reference to validate this- or is it so basic that everyone in that field would take it as a given?

The biggest problem for me was that he did not address what will happen if we don’t vaccinate with currently formulated vaccines.

There was a lot of science there was just asserted so  I have no way of knowing whether it’s maverick or total orthodoxy, so was left a bit nonplussed.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 15, 2021, 07:10:52 pm
He did describe the development of an alternative type of vaccine based on NK response but like you said that is way beyond any understanding a lay person like myself might have. Maybe the most hopeful option if they do go for full populations vaccines will be a 2-3 per year top up vaccination with vaccines adjusted to deal with any new mutations? This would mean signing up for an ongoing program

See the second to last paragraph

https://mcusercontent.com/92561d6dedb66a43fe9a6548f/files/bead7203-0798-4ac8-abe2-076208015556/Public_health_emergency_of_international_concert_Geert_Vanden_Bossche.01.pdf
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 15, 2021, 08:32:27 pm

Lots of people between jobs currently, but maybe not do much for  vaccine

Here’s a link to his CV tees tub. I haven’t been through it with a fine tooth comb yet, but I’m sure you can find something? Maybe a racist or sexist remark made whilst drunk circa 1975

https://37b32f5a-6ed9-4d6d-b3e1-5ec648ad9ed9.filesusr.com/ugd/28d8fe_ee3268cae3624827813d352f63b2088d.pdf
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on March 15, 2021, 09:22:58 pm
It's difficult to evaluate the scientific side of sort of thing from a laymans perspective but a few things about his approach appear a bit strange (to say the least).

- His letter appears poorly written with lots of hyperbole; it starts ,in block capitals, 'To all authorities, scientists and experts around the world, to whom this concerns: the entire world population.'  and continues in similar vein with talk of ' disastrous consequences', 'a wild monster' and 'now threatening humanity'.
- Similarly his tweet linking the letter has in caps 'THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY OF INTERNATIONAL CONCERN. '
- He talks about completing a scientific manuscript but says 'the publication of which is, unfortunately, likely to come too late'
- On the publication front I'm no expert on tracking scientific publication but this link https://www.researchgate.net/scientific-contributions/G-Vanden-Bossche-2067145614 (https://www.researchgate.net/scientific-contributions/G-Vanden-Bossche-2067145614) shows very little and nothing even vaguely recent.  Are links available to a more comprehensive overview of his publication history/scientific credentials. 
- Overall it seem quite hard to find much about Geert at all via a quick search - most things link back to this letter/statement.
- On twitter he says 'for serious scientific debate go to my LinkedIn page' - a quick look on there doesn't show much sign of such a thing, certainly I didn't find any significant debate between people with real expertises in the relevant area.
- He also says on LinkedIn 'we've put together a web site to gather all information, scientific documents and interviews I've posted on this public health emergency' https://www.geertvandenbossche.org (https://www.geertvandenbossche.org)

Overall I find little justification as to why I should take his position more seriously that the scientific consensus around the world - maybe he is the maverick scientist who sees something everyone else is missing but it doesn't feel like there's much evidence for that at the moment.


 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 15, 2021, 09:40:57 pm
Yes he’s certainly no Fauci.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on March 15, 2021, 09:44:23 pm
Here’s a link to his CV tees tub. I haven’t been through it with a fine tooth comb yet, but I’m sure you can find something? Maybe a racist or sexist remark made whilst drunk circa 1975

https://37b32f5a-6ed9-4d6d-b3e1-5ec648ad9ed9.filesusr.com/ugd/28d8fe_ee3268cae3624827813d352f63b2088d.pdf

Thanks Loos3-tools(Dan) 16 pages!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nails on March 15, 2021, 10:35:16 pm
A quick bit of Google based research results in some important facts on Geert and his academic record. He has never published any research on vaccines, and hasn't published an academic article since 1995. I think I might just press on and have the vaccine when I get the opportunity. Geert can get his coat and I'll get my sleeve rolled up.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 16, 2021, 07:00:31 am
Poor old Geert, from doomsday prophet and vaccine messiah to dead duck. Give the man a job somebody!

Roll up to roll up, and down and up and down and up and down. Sleeveless shirts to make a comeback? Permanently.

Martin Kulldorff has some crossover with Geert in that he believes in proportionate vaccination. Although I haven’t fully checked his credentials or when he last published in the lancet.

https://mobile.twitter.com/MartinKulldorff/status/1248617666308235264

 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 16, 2021, 08:11:24 am
In the context of the AZ blood clot decisions made by several EU states - it’s worth bearing in mind that some medications widely accepted and commonly taken (such as the pill) have proven associations with causing blood clots - at rates order(s) of magnitude greater than those purported for the AZ vaccine.

E.G. https://www.stoptheclot.org/about-clots/webinar_contra/birth_control_clots/

(One of many articles about this..)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on March 16, 2021, 09:09:57 am
The decisions to suspend use of the AZ are clearly political in the sense that they are attempts to respond to and shape people's perceptions and behaviours, as has to be done, whether or not those perceptions have any basis in reality. It's not possible to simply ignore the fact that rumours and doubts are circulating.

Of course, knowing what strategy will work in such a febrile context as we live in now is almost impossible. Ignore the doubts, carry on using the vaccine and hope the concerns will fade? Or will they just continue to propagate, fuelled by a kind of "they're out of touch/not listening to our genuine fears" attitude? People don't like to be told they don't understand and are simply wrong. Or suspend them, do further testing, and come back with the reassurances people might be looking for. Or does that just lead to a "there's no smoke without fire, what are they not telling us" reaction? It's not an easy choice.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 16, 2021, 09:33:06 am
The decisions to suspend use of the AZ are clearly political in the sense that they are attempts to respond to and shape people's perceptions and behaviours, as has to be done, whether or not those perceptions have any basis in reality. It's not possible to simply ignore the fact that rumours and doubts are circulating.

Of course, knowing what strategy will work in such a febrile context as we live in now is almost impossible. Ignore the doubts, carry on using the vaccine and hope the concerns will fade? Or will they just continue to propagate, fuelled by a kind of "they're out of touch/not listening to our genuine fears" attitude? People don't like to be told they don't understand and are simply wrong. Or suspend them, do further testing, and come back with the reassurances people might be looking for. Or does that just lead to a "there's no smoke without fire, what are they not telling us" reaction? It's not an easy choice.

Honestly, I suspect it’s more along the lines of seizing the opportunity and calling a suspension, that gives the governments in question some breathing space to catch up with supply issues.

To the governments, it doesn’t matter which vaccine they hand out, but across Europe, supply is an issue, for most forms. This is a perfect opportunity to shift blame from “failure to secure supplies” to “safety concerns” for the slow roll out.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 16, 2021, 09:36:37 am
The decisions to suspend use of the AZ are clearly political in the sense that they are attempts to respond to and shape people's perceptions and behaviours, as has to be done, whether or not those perceptions have any basis in reality. It's not possible to simply ignore the fact that rumours and doubts are circulating.

Of course, knowing what strategy will work in such a febrile context as we live in now is almost impossible. Ignore the doubts, carry on using the vaccine and hope the concerns will fade? Or will they just continue to propagate, fuelled by a kind of "they're out of touch/not listening to our genuine fears" attitude? People don't like to be told they don't understand and are simply wrong. Or suspend them, do further testing, and come back with the reassurances people might be looking for. Or does that just lead to a "there's no smoke without fire, what are they not telling us" reaction? It's not an easy choice.

This is all fair comment, but I can't help but feel that European leaders have boxed themselves into a corner here. They have gone from complaining AZ was shorting them on their jab supply, to Macron saying the AZ jab was 'quasi ineffective' on the elderly (totally wrong), to seizing a shipment of AZ jabs that was meant for Australia to use themselves, to now implying there is a risk associated with it. The messaging is absolutely shambolic and its frankly no wonder there is vaccine hesitancy around the AZ jab on the continent. They act like the decisions and pronouncements they make regarding the jab happen in a vacuum and aren't read by the public. Absolutely moronic.

It really annoys me as it has cut through beyond the borders of the countries involved. I've already reassured my mum when the Handelsblatt scare stories came out that the jab was fine. My grandparents are due to have their second jab in a few days. People will actively decide not to get the jab as a result of this nonsense.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Footwork on March 16, 2021, 09:42:18 am
France sounds like a shit show right now.

My grandparents are out there at 84 and one has dementia. Neither have been jabbed.

Gran is calling the GP almost everyday to see when she can get her jab.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on March 16, 2021, 09:45:04 am
The decisions to suspend use of the AZ are clearly political in the sense that they are attempts to respond to and shape people's perceptions and behaviours, as has to be done, whether or not those perceptions have any basis in reality. It's not possible to simply ignore the fact that rumours and doubts are circulating.

Of course, knowing what strategy will work in such a febrile context as we live in now is almost impossible. Ignore the doubts, carry on using the vaccine and hope the concerns will fade? Or will they just continue to propagate, fuelled by a kind of "they're out of touch/not listening to our genuine fears" attitude? People don't like to be told they don't understand and are simply wrong. Or suspend them, do further testing, and come back with the reassurances people might be looking for. Or does that just lead to a "there's no smoke without fire, what are they not telling us" reaction? It's not an easy choice.

This is all fair comment, but I can't help but feel that European leaders have boxed themselves into a corner here. They have gone from complaining AZ was shorting them on their jab supply, to Macron saying the AZ jab was 'quasi ineffective' on the elderly (totally wrong), to seizing a shipment of AZ jabs that was meant for Australia to use themselves, to now implying there is a risk associated with it. The messaging is absolutely shambolic and its frankly no wonder there is vaccine hesitancy around the AZ jab on the continent. They act like the decisions and pronouncements they make regarding the jab happen in a vacuum and aren't read by the public ... People will actively decide not to get the jab as a result of this nonsense.

Oh, absolutely, definitely not defending any prior decisions or actions.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 16, 2021, 09:51:48 am
France sounds like a shit show right now.

My grandparents are out there at 84 and one has dementia. Neither have been jabbed.

Gran is calling the GP almost everyday to see when she can get her jab.

Beyond belief really. In Germany vaccine centres are over stocked with AZ because people don't want it. They aren't accepting walk ins either despite having it just sat there. I haven't felt glad to live in the UK very often in the last year but this is definitely one of those times!

Andy, why do you think vax hesitancy is so much higher in Europe than the UK? I've read a few pieces but nothing hugely convincing.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on March 16, 2021, 10:08:29 am
Andy, why do you think vax hesitancy is so much higher in Europe than the UK? I've read a few pieces but nothing hugely convincing.

I know that there was already significant vax hesitancy in France prior to the pandemic tied, I believe, to a series of medical-government scandals that had eroded trust, but hard to believe that can be the full explanation. In Germany I would imagine it ties to a strain of esoteric thinking, for want of a better word, that has long been a sub-stratum of the culture, a feature of both the left and the right. But, again, can that be all? QAnon is particularly strong there too.

I've not seen or read anything about vaccine hesitancy in Denmark (just did a quick search and didn't find anything) but would imagine it's pretty low. I've also only read about one anti-lockdown protest here, though there may have been small ones I've not heard about as I don't/can't read the Danish press.

One of the things that has most impressed me here has been the absolute clarity and consistency of all government messaging around the pandemic, including on vaccines. But here's an example of those spillover effects you were talking about. Once a post-AZ vaccine death had occured here (60 year old woman a few days ago) the government probably felt it had to be seen to be doing something given the actions Danes can clearly see other countries taking.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 16, 2021, 10:10:47 am
Polly’s colleague, who has been desperately scared throughout the pandemic and desperate to get vaccinated; was called by her GP yesterday with her invite. She turned it down because it was the AZ on offer. She doesn’t know anything about the blood clotting etc, she just knows that she’s heard the side affects are “really bad” and she’s too scared.
As far as I know, this person doesn’t even watch TV news, this is a position she’s reached from comments on various “Spotted” Facebook groups.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 16, 2021, 10:31:43 am
I had quite unpleasant* side effects from the AZ vaccine - but have been really careful not to share it (aside from on here) widely because it so clear any negative effect could be picked up on by those concerned.

*horrible sleepless night with headachy flu symptoms - lasted 18-20 hours.

I'm going to sound a bit tin foil hat here - but... AZ made at cost. £3.50 per dose. The others - from Pfizer to Modena, to J&J to the Russian and Chinese ones go from £15-35 a dose.... AZ is the market disruptor here - developing and maintaining a negative narrative about it serves to benefit all the other manufacturers - even if it leads to a reduced uptake of all vaccines...

I really can't fathom why Macron said what he did... 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 16, 2021, 10:42:05 am
I had quite unpleasant* side effects from the AZ vaccine - but have been really careful not to share it (aside from on here) widely because it so clear any negative effect could be picked up on by those concerned.

*horrible sleepless night with headachy flu symptoms - lasted 18-20 hours.

I'm going to sound a bit tin foil hat here - but... AZ made at cost. £3.50 per dose. The others - from Pfizer to Modena, to J&J to the Russian and Chinese ones go from £15-35 a dose.... AZ is the market disruptor here - developing and maintaining a negative narrative about it serves to benefit all the other manufacturers - even if it leads to a reduced uptake of all vaccines...

I really can't fathom why Macron said what he did...

I’d be surprised if Brexit rancour didn’t play into the situation. Plus EU wide embarrassment about procurement and comparison of the speed to roll out here with that in  the block.
That’s very negative press that will fuel anti-EU feeling in large parts of Europe. So, make it look like the UK is cutting corners and the EU being cautious and caring, rather than bureaucratic and lumbering.

I don’t think “we” have grasped fully, yet, that across the channel, we now have 27 rivals. Many of whom have historically been our enemies and still don’t see us as allies or friends.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 16, 2021, 11:13:37 am
Andy, why do you think vax hesitancy is so much higher in Europe than the UK? I've read a few pieces but nothing hugely convincing.

I know that there was already significant vax hesitancy in France prior to the pandemic tied, I believe, to a series of medical-government scandals that had eroded trust, but hard to believe that can be the full explanation. In Germany I would imagine it ties to a strain of esoteric thinking, for want of a better word, that has long been a sub-stratum of the culture, a feature of both the left and the right. But, again, can that be all? QAnon is particularly strong there too.

I've not seen or read anything about vaccine hesitancy in Denmark (just did a quick search and didn't find anything) but would imagine it's pretty low. I've also only read about one anti-lockdown protest here, though there may have been small ones I've not heard about as I don't/can't read the Danish press.

One of the things that has most impressed me here has been the absolute clarity and consistency of all government messaging around the pandemic, including on vaccines. But here's an example of those spillover effects you were talking about. Once a post-AZ vaccine death had occured here (60 year old woman a few days ago) the government probably felt it had to be seen to be doing something given the actions Danes can clearly see other countries taking.

I wasn't aware there was such 'esoteric' thinking widespread in Germany. I know there was a subsection (biodynamic farming advocates, for example), but had always pinned antivax sentiment as a more French thing due to their rebellious culture - protests, strikes, contrarian thinking.

It will obviously be a mixture of lots of things but its hard to square my internal image of Germany- logical, well governed, not prone to hyperbole - with widespread qanon belief! Interesting stuff.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: duncan on March 16, 2021, 11:31:10 am
Homeopathy (Hahnemann was German) is very popular; Steiner (Austrian) is still a big influence.

QAnon? Well deep ecologists can mutate into eco-fascists who think the world would benefit from a few human pandemics and we should do nothing to get in their way.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on March 16, 2021, 11:35:34 am
I had quite unpleasant* side effects from the AZ vaccine - but have been really careful not to share it (aside from on here) widely because it so clear any negative effect could be picked up on by those concerned.

*horrible sleepless night with headachy flu symptoms - lasted 18-20 hours.

I've heard the counter-argument that it's important to be honest about the range of (actual) side-effects, because if you tell everyone LA LA LA IT'S FINE NO SIDE-EFFECTS then the first time someone hears that it made their friend's cousin's co-worker feel ill -- well, that's proof there's a cover-up, there are all these side-effects they're hiding, it probably gives you cancer and makes you autistic!

Whereas if you're honest with people and go "yeah, AZ might make you feel like you've got flu for a day, Moderna could make you feel like shit for several days after the second dose, it sucks but here's why it happens and there are no permanent side-effects", then they're more willing to trust that they're getting the full picture.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Liamhutch89 on March 16, 2021, 11:38:14 am
Take it easy on your shoulder exercises following the jab people (perhaps this is common sense but apparently not for me). I had only a tiny bit of soreness following my jab, but was doing handstand presses yesterday as part of my regular training routine and noticed more soreness but nothing major, so carried on and completed all my sets, then I looked in the mirror and saw my lateral deltoid looking like a balloon and quite sore at this point! It's gone back down today, but i'll leave it another couple of days before doing more on it!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on March 16, 2021, 11:42:46 am
its hard to square my internal image of Germany- logical, well governed, not prone to hyperbole - with widespread qanon belief! Interesting stuff.

Oh yeah! From the relatively innocuous - naturism, vegetarianism - through biodynamics, to deep ecology, and full blown eco-fascism. The far right has always remained strong and there are strains of Aryan/Nordic neo-paganism (think Wagner and Valhalla) and the occult. There are homegrown conspiracy theories too. One of the most prominent - the Reichsbürger movement - argues that the Federal German Republic is actually an illegitimate corporation imposed by the Allies after the war and that the pre-war Reich in fact continues to rule in secret from exile. A follower shot a policeman dead in 2016.

The anti-lockdown movement has been very strong in Germany throughout the pandemic, with large and frequent marches and protests, and along with ordinary citizens has strongly combined the far left and far right with a heavy dose of QAnon.

Edit: missed that Duncan had already said some of this.

Further edit: my bad, the Bielefeld conspiracy is satirical.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 16, 2021, 12:07:29 pm
doing handstand presses

Yeah, I will probably lay off doing those for a while as a precaution. When I say doing I meant trying, and when I said for a while, I meant for the rest of my life. Unless I get bionic shoulders all of a sudden :)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 16, 2021, 12:07:44 pm
I always thought Down and Out in Paris and London depicted the different cultural experiences of the 'at risk / undesirables' quite well.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on March 16, 2021, 12:16:03 pm
I've had the vaccine, it made me feel a bit crap for a few days, but hardly anything disastrous. I know quite a few people who've had absolutely no effects at all. It's remarkable how many people are getting all antsy about the astrazenica vaccine, but I' sure they all happily scarf ibuprofen if they feel like it, which certainly has some unpleasant side effects. All medication can have side effects, and the idea that people turn down an appointment because they think they should be entitled to a bloody menu is frankly despicable; its amazing we have any vaccines at all, and a year ago, I think most people would have bet we'd never even get one this quickly, or any as effective as they are.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 16, 2021, 12:26:59 pm
Where do you guys stand on someone declining simply because they don't want it? This seems the controversial issue. The unvaccinated should be happy for everyone who wants it to have it, I would always support someone to be vaccinated especially if they are at risk or vulnerable and have done. I would never question somebody who simply said I don't want it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on March 16, 2021, 12:44:45 pm
Where do you guys stand on someone declining simply because they don't want it? This seems the controversial issue. The unvaccinated should be happy for everyone who wants it to have it, I would always support someone to be vaccinated especially if they are at risk or vulnerable and have done. I would never question somebody who simply said I don't want it.

It's selfish not to have it. The more people who are vaccinated worldwide, the more effective it is for everyone.  If they'd actually seen anyone who has suffered badly with covid, they'd jump to have any vaccine as fast as possible, I'd guess. Covid properly messes up your life if you suffer badly.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 16, 2021, 12:46:48 pm
Where do you guys stand on someone declining simply because they don't want it? This seems the controversial issue. The unvaccinated should be happy for everyone who wants it to have it, I would always support someone to be vaccinated especially if they are at risk or vulnerable and have done. I would never question somebody who simply said I don't want it.

The problem is that people who choose not to be vaccinated increase the risk for everyone else, so I think we all have a social responsibility/duty/whatever word you want to use to get the vaccine when offered. For me, personal choice becomes less sacrosanct in a public health emergency.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 16, 2021, 12:56:29 pm
they think they should be entitled to a bloody menu

"you would like ze 2021 Pfizer, an excellent choice monsieur".

Anyone choosing not to have it increases the risks not only to others who haven't had the vaccine yet, but also someone who cannot have it for health reasons (allergies, weak immune system etc). Just appreciate we live in a society of greater good and get it FFS.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 16, 2021, 01:03:55 pm
Where do you guys stand on someone declining simply because they don't want it? This seems the controversial issue. The unvaccinated should be happy for everyone who wants it to have it, I would always support someone to be vaccinated especially if they are at risk or vulnerable and have done. I would never question somebody who simply said I don't want it.

I would view it as irresponsible, but wouldn't want it to be compulsory. I'd think people not taking it were being dicks, but no more so than the relatives I have who vote Tory, i.e. not so dickish that I'd stop being friends with them
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on March 16, 2021, 01:39:59 pm
Talking about vaccines, at what point will it become mandatory to have a vaccine passport to shop in supermarkets etc??

(Asking for a friend ofc...)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 16, 2021, 01:42:50 pm
I expect it will likely be the case for non-essential travel, not sure about shopping.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 16, 2021, 02:14:34 pm
Talking about vaccines, at what point will it become mandatory to have a vaccine passport to shop in supermarkets etc??

(Asking for a friend ofc...)

It won’t.

I reckon, the vaccines will begin to take effect, then the disease becomes a piece of background Muzak; gradually dropping down the page in the headlines.
Possibly a small third wave, attenuated by Summer, an updated vaccine program in the Autumn; by this time next year, we’ll have forgotten about drastic ideas like Vaccine passports to go to the cinema.
It will probably become mandatory for some travel regions and destinations, much like there are already such conditions for some places. Probably for places that struggle to control the disease, rather than those who have suppressed it, with a requirement in both directions, if you get what I mean.

I recall the absolute certainty, in the Mid East, after 9/11, that Iraq was about to be carpet bombed into the worlds biggest parking lot. So many American companies evacuating their staff and shuttering offices, from Dubai. Something like saying “They’re going to bomb Berlin, so we must evacuate the London office”.
 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 16, 2021, 02:17:30 pm
 :agree: with OMM

cheers for the replies about the vaccine chaps
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 16, 2021, 02:29:42 pm
:agree: with OMM

cheers for the replies about the vaccine chaps

Really? I thought you we’re expecting an apocalyptic resurgence of super Covid? Or mass death through vaccine reactions? (Not that I managed to work out how you squared the latter with your previous “Covid is fake/exaggerated (whatever)” stuff).

I’d already mentally renamed you “Private Frazer” and ascribed the appropriate Highland accent to all your posts...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 16, 2021, 03:02:10 pm
Actually, I do have a question.
Background.

I was reading recently about death amongst young adults during the 1918 Influenza pandemic.
Only 10-15% of deaths were caused by Influenza, the majority were attributed to subsequent aggressive Bacterial Pneumonia.
It’s posited, that the use of Aspirin to treat Influenza symptoms actually precipitated the subsequent agression/hyper immune response to the Pneumonia.
 https://watermark.silverchair.com/49-9-1405.pdf?token=AQECAHi208BE49Ooan9kkhW_Ercy7Dm3ZL_9Cf3qfKAc485ysgAAApgwggKUBgkqhkiG9w0BBwagggKFMIICgQIBADCCAnoGCSqGSIb3DQEHATAeBglghkgBZQMEAS4wEQQM_XgFcutFCD5rwUb2AgEQgIICS9B6KhfOyxdlyU9RZN765xHEeF7D7oS4xFc9bDiBSoBrxJsTV4ckAcHmwhgLNI5IEkOUMaW18MeNKjYyXGE17xkM41NeD88KlspWzaqLiWNlRW8T-H_kGDJH8JqbL40pfY0cvpkI0nEFLmvKsuO1wbhdHzCDqAGiW6aUj_xz1vqca0seyFnDNGcRYq49VcFQCrPret4PasT4s6XYwC7BfWhqmePZoInr93x0Z5BGdUPOxOA6xvp7zuZrYRFBXQiMdo74Xaz2FvzQfyVk9CYkEq5U-y4K9Epii0U40nJ8xD79nfL1Sq_fEYM3X917x_J_9ux4hyw29xbpVT_Ockeb4VZ3rai4F5zuR5OyUcz3zDJRfeHluSj1BLJV0IFr3zpxVzA0Z41L_n7FPZYLxcoU3YepiHvJdWf9UIQ4s-YU34gU4zRHzjMVUI_vUIdY27k5pj0BavARtRb1mfRA84xvrSKgDPNlZyOvZCSxXXqpnPTvzGAYqSyX4PuZ2FwdWgxw5_TxNNTeBJI6m0wvu0wEEUvvQtAn5_6H_gUy4MLPBuONP0PU8MRcJ5tiSRChSieU2RXkk_lyRV-YgnPs3u8KwZm0ozw-OhWF7HGLsi2Lufx8uclyNecdEOAKJIQzr7WtW73h8irOLKL0Cnr3H51y74GZZpWZMK5ohZRcvQF2X-sim3ycWnbk4NhdR7LCwQoyCAlG39KhQp2n7Qhxmr5Yhifb5sh3_Bqb-Xm9kVu9nL7h9teX6bR3iPox6I3Q81FmYq9Q4jkXdyXNNOzu (https://watermark.silverchair.com/49-9-1405.pdf?token=AQECAHi208BE49Ooan9kkhW_Ercy7Dm3ZL_9Cf3qfKAc485ysgAAApgwggKUBgkqhkiG9w0BBwagggKFMIICgQIBADCCAnoGCSqGSIb3DQEHATAeBglghkgBZQMEAS4wEQQM_XgFcutFCD5rwUb2AgEQgIICS9B6KhfOyxdlyU9RZN765xHEeF7D7oS4xFc9bDiBSoBrxJsTV4ckAcHmwhgLNI5IEkOUMaW18MeNKjYyXGE17xkM41NeD88KlspWzaqLiWNlRW8T-H_kGDJH8JqbL40pfY0cvpkI0nEFLmvKsuO1wbhdHzCDqAGiW6aUj_xz1vqca0seyFnDNGcRYq49VcFQCrPret4PasT4s6XYwC7BfWhqmePZoInr93x0Z5BGdUPOxOA6xvp7zuZrYRFBXQiMdo74Xaz2FvzQfyVk9CYkEq5U-y4K9Epii0U40nJ8xD79nfL1Sq_fEYM3X917x_J_9ux4hyw29xbpVT_Ockeb4VZ3rai4F5zuR5OyUcz3zDJRfeHluSj1BLJV0IFr3zpxVzA0Z41L_n7FPZYLxcoU3YepiHvJdWf9UIQ4s-YU34gU4zRHzjMVUI_vUIdY27k5pj0BavARtRb1mfRA84xvrSKgDPNlZyOvZCSxXXqpnPTvzGAYqSyX4PuZ2FwdWgxw5_TxNNTeBJI6m0wvu0wEEUvvQtAn5_6H_gUy4MLPBuONP0PU8MRcJ5tiSRChSieU2RXkk_lyRV-YgnPs3u8KwZm0ozw-OhWF7HGLsi2Lufx8uclyNecdEOAKJIQzr7WtW73h8irOLKL0Cnr3H51y74GZZpWZMK5ohZRcvQF2X-sim3ycWnbk4NhdR7LCwQoyCAlG39KhQp2n7Qhxmr5Yhifb5sh3_Bqb-Xm9kVu9nL7h9teX6bR3iPox6I3Q81FmYq9Q4jkXdyXNNOzu)

Wow, long link, sorry.

Anyway...

The pattern of spread etc associated with the 1918 Flu, got me looking at the Columbian Exchange, which again, in part, was an Influenza epidemic across South/Central American (obviously complicated by several other concurrent epidemics such as Small Pox).

I realised the commonality is the vulnerability of older people. If the Aspirin hypothesis is borne out, then the 1918 pandemic should have hit the older victims much harder and disproportionately. That both 1918 and Covid 19 are just accelerated Colombian Exchanges.


So, younger and more agile immune systems can deal drastically better with novel pathogens.

Given how these things are massively accelerated by modern transportation, are we already at the point where it’s no longer a “Novel” pathogen?

Can we expect, younger people exposed to the virus, to develop longer lasting immunity than occurs in older adults?

Or will the youngsters just simply become more vulnerable as they age?

Edit:

Not convinced that link to the PDF is working properly, here’s the link to the html, where you can link to the PDF.
 https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/49/9/1405/301441 (https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/49/9/1405/301441)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 16, 2021, 05:04:45 pm
:agree: with OMM

cheers for the replies about the vaccine chaps

Really? I thought you we’re expecting an apocalyptic resurgence of super Covid? Or mass death through vaccine reactions? (Not that I managed to work out how you squared the latter with your previous “Covid is fake/exaggerated (whatever)” stuff).

I’d already mentally renamed you “Private Frazer” and ascribed the appropriate Highland accent to all your posts...

Nah, I believe covid is real and a horrible illness for some, I just don't agree with how its been handled by the politicians, technocratic philanthropists and their unpleasant fauci chums and respective media outlets. As usual it stinks of money, power, control and opportunism
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on March 16, 2021, 05:18:29 pm
What would you prefer? A more Bolsonaro response?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 16, 2021, 07:13:18 pm
Dan, you speak about these groups as if there’s one big coordinated conspiracy, rather than a bumper crop of self interested politicians and a lot of other people playing their roles with a bit more integrity.

One step away from mentioning the Rothschilds, one more from going full QAnon. It’s tedious.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 16, 2021, 09:14:10 pm
Nah, that’s your addition. I’m saying that the idea that anyone from Fauci to Vallance, Biden to Boris or Gates to Gates actually gives a genuine fuck about people’s health is a total illusion.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 16, 2021, 10:10:19 pm
Then you struggle to discern.  :(
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on March 16, 2021, 10:12:46 pm
I'm surprised you can believe in such a black and white idea of good and evil people. You can't know the motivation of other people, only infer from their actions and words. Don't you think it's more plausible that even the worst people (and your list is a broad spectrum including people who are plausibly altruistic by most people's reading)do generally care to some extent about other people at some basic primal level?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 16, 2021, 10:38:20 pm
I'm surprised you can believe in such a black and white idea of good and evil people. You can't know the motivation of other people, only infer from their actions and words. Don't you think it's more plausible that even the worst people (and your list is a broad spectrum including people who are plausibly altruistic by most people's reading)do generally care to some extent about other people at some basic primal level?

I never called them evil. I’m simply saying they are not motivated by the health and well being of the worlds population. It is about power, control and money. That’s exactly the opposite of a black and white view. It’s saying motivations are complex and when you look the broader context of these peoples behaviour if global, national or individual health  was a primary concern things would have been very different a long time ago.

Just to add with regards to caring for others on a basic primal level. I’d say no, not at the expense of their primary self serving motivations. That’s not to say they don’t feel, they just don’t feel bad about others suffering.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on March 16, 2021, 11:41:28 pm
That's not the same as them not 'giving a fuck', i.e. no regard for others' wellbeing in any context, even if personally costless.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on March 17, 2021, 06:07:05 am
It is about power, control and money. That’s exactly the opposite of a black and white view. It’s saying motivations are complex

No, that's a childlike, cartoonish way of understanding of people and the world. There's no complexity when you automatically reduce everything to two base motives.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 17, 2021, 06:20:13 am
Freud might disagree
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on March 17, 2021, 07:43:05 am
Freud was a cokehead who thought that all women secretly want to have penises.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on March 17, 2021, 07:47:39 am
Freud was a cokehead who thought that all women secretly want to have penises.

Exactly.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on March 17, 2021, 07:52:24 am
Nah, that’s your addition. I’m saying that the idea that anyone from Fauci to Vallance, Biden to Boris or Gates to Gates actually gives a genuine fuck about people’s health is a total illusion.

Don't know if that's a reply to me or mrjonathanjr, but you haven't answered my question.

You don't seem to be in favour of lockdowns, masks or vaccines, so what government strategy would you like? No restrictions, just let the virus run?

Speculating about people's motives is pretty much irrelevant to that.

Look, I'm as cynical as the next person; I think a lot of the belated UK government response has been driven not by altruism but by "oh shit, if THAT many people die it'll look bad and we might lose the next election". There are more than a few politicians whose disregard for the lives of others hits a level that I would consider sociopathic.

But even if you think they're all part of one big cabal co-ordinating everything, the leaders of different countries have reacted to covid with a range of different policies.

Forget why they do it. What do you think they should have done?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 17, 2021, 08:37:57 am
Freud was a cokehead who thought that all women secretly want to have penises.

Exactly.

Topic split?

That is an over simplification, you can trace back a significant proportion of modern psychological therapies including CBT, CFT, counselling etc to their origins in Freuds work and his influences. A great example of polarised thinking. It reminds me of the feminist attack on attachment theory and Bowlby based on the idea that infant attachment focused on a maternal figure was part of an unconscious desire to repress women.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on March 17, 2021, 08:51:15 am
I suspect Andy was making an offhand generalisation to illustrate a point, in response to your simplistic dismissal of all individuals involved in the global response to Covid.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 17, 2021, 09:04:22 am
On that note I don't think it's possible to persuade Dan of anything without altering his core worldview which seems to be one of ultra cynicism - that power of any sort is absolutely corrupting and that people and institutions with power are fundamentally rotten.

Thus the vaccine programme and lockdown measures are necessarily nefarious because they are organised by  government, the pharmaceutical companies, the NHS trusts, private donors etc etc etc who are all bad.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 17, 2021, 09:12:06 am
Freud was a cokehead who thought that all women secretly want to have penises.

Exactly.

Topic split?

That is an over simplification, you can trace back a significant proportion of modern psychological therapies including CBT, CFT, counselling etc to their origins in Freuds work and his influences. A great example of polarised thinking. It reminds me of the feminist attack on attachment theory and Bowlby based on the idea that infant attachment focused on a maternal figure was part of an unconscious desire to repress women.

Dude, babies and bath water, again.

Almost all of Freud’s pet hypotheses are now discredited.

Although, I think he’d have quite a bit to say about you.

You make glib oversimplifications and dismissively rude assessments of others opinions and statements, followed by hyperbole and further straw arguments to assert (again) both your perceived moral superiority, greater understanding and intellect.
You plant the glib shit, as a trap, to spring the “devastating” thought that you dreamed up in the shower this morning; when you get slapped down.
Often, that point is only tangentially related to the topic in hand and is usually nothing more than a poorly crafted insult to the majority of contributors here.

You seem to think you sound clever, yet, to most of us, you appear to be deeply troubled and confused.

It’s odd to hear an adult converse this way. It’s an approach I tend to associate with the pretentious, 19/20 year old wazzocks I recall holding forth on their latest drivel in student bars; mainly hoping to attract groupies and become some sort of intellectual guru.
I’m sure you don’t mean to sound like that, but that’s what you are conjuring in my mind.

You certainly keep hijacking treads and pulling them off into your little rants about how awful we all are.

Might I suggest you purchase a mirror and spend a little time looking in it?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 17, 2021, 09:15:47 am
I suspect Andy was making an offhand generalisation to illustrate a point, in response to your simplistic dismissal of all individuals involved in the global response to Covid.

My dismissal does seem simplistic, polarised or black and white positions is a good way to think about it. When considering the motives of say Billy Goats, I'd contextualise that in terms of his history and then in terms of developmental psychology. Who is this man, how did his personality develop, why is he involved in the world in this way? Split or polarised all good all bad thinking is a personality characteristic related to developmental / attachment experiences. This will provide lifelong motivations for his behaviour. The world is now his narcissistic supply. In my cynical opinion this is on balance not so good.

With regards his philanthropy consider dirty drinking water and lack of good sewerage systems and the consequent diseases it generates. Billy Goats foundation does describe some involvement in making this better. I'm pretty sure it doesn't take an army of scientists to sort this problem out so why hasn't he done it? and why has he developed a toilet that turns excrement into drinkable water? A better metaphor for the behaviour of these characters I could not come up with
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 17, 2021, 09:20:22 am
Forget why they do it. What do you think they should have done?

You may have to "go Paxman" on this one.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 17, 2021, 09:21:13 am
Forget why they do it. What do you think they should have done?

You may have to "go Paxman" on this one.

I'm sorry, I'm going to be frightfully rude, but did you threaten to overule him?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 17, 2021, 09:32:16 am
Haha

Focussed protection of the elderly and vulnerable, the channeling of cash spent propping up the economies into the improvement of the social welfare and health system part of which would be dedicated to those isolated and vulnerable as well as clear separation of public private partnerships with 'emergency' funding of scientists and resources needed to develop the appropriate treatment and care. A balanced approach to all other aspects of health care maintained throughout. oh and no criminalisation of normal human behaviour
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on March 17, 2021, 09:43:29 am
I was reading recently about death amongst young adults during the 1918 Influenza pandemic.
Only 10-15% of deaths were caused by Influenza, the majority were attributed to subsequent aggressive Bacterial Pneumonia.

Totally off topic but this happens most winters to my youngest. She gets a virus, fights it off fine but, for a currently undiagnosed reason but there are lots of theories, she gets a secondary bacterial respiratory infection. She's collapsed a lung twice through bacterial pneumonia (she's just turned 5).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on March 17, 2021, 09:48:33 am
I suspect Andy was making an offhand generalisation to illustrate a point, in response to your simplistic dismissal of all individuals involved in the global response to Covid.

Yes. My comment was undoubtedly offhand, and was not meant as an endorsement of Slab_Happy's comment on Freud as 100% accurate and complete. I was merely pointing out Freud would not be my go to in trying to understand the behaviours and motivations of the actors involved here. Personally, if I believed power corrupts (as per Will's post) then I would first want to understand the relevant institutional context.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 17, 2021, 10:05:40 am
With regards his philanthropy consider dirty drinking water and lack of good sewerage systems and the consequent diseases it generates. Billy Goats foundation does describe some involvement in making this better. I'm pretty sure it doesn't take an army of scientists to sort this problem out so why hasn't he done it? and why has he developed a toilet that turns excrement into drinkable water? A better metaphor for the behaviour of these characters I could not come up with

I'm sorry, but this must be the most naive, simplistic, dumb thing I have ever heard in my life. I don't consider myself an expert on the topic but just by musing for a few minutes I can think of lots of reasons why problems of water scarcity and sanitation haven't just been "sorted out". Think about the places where water is scarce. Different geography, different cultures, different everything.

As for "turning excrement into drinkable water", what is it that you think the water cycle does? Do you think the water you're drinking hasn't been inside a living thing before? On a shorter time-frame, what do you think happens to the waste you flush away? You live in Sheffield, yes? Well then your waste heads on down to the big set of tanks opposite Meadowhall. The solid component of the waste gets separated from the liquid component and the liquid component is treated to reduce the concentrations of things like ammonia and BOD, and then it is discharged to the River Don where fish, (increasingly including salmonid fish), swim around in it. As it happens, this water then flows down to the sea. If you lived in York your water supply would most likely come from the River Ouse. Upstream of York there are sewage works which discharge their treated waste to the river from which you extract your drinking water. To say you were drinking other people's excrement would be fantastically simplistic and would be to ignore the complexity of the issue - your specialty.

How nice for you to sit comfortably in a region with a water surplus and to wrinkle your nose at the thought of drinking clean water that's been recycled from waste. I expect if your circumstances were different you might have a very different  view.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 17, 2021, 10:10:27 am
I'm more concerned with the verbal sewerage LT releases here daily.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 17, 2021, 10:17:10 am
Back to CV19.

Here in Manchester there has been an uptick in case numbers (c20%) in the last week. I suspect thats driven partly by the large number of lateral flow tests being taken by school children at the moment (the figures show reported test results increasing massively). Wondering how much of this uptick in cases is down to increased testing or increased transmission (e.g. schools going back)? Or of course both.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 17, 2021, 10:21:29 am
With regards his philanthropy consider dirty drinking water and lack of good sewerage systems and the consequent diseases it generates. Billy Goats foundation does describe some involvement in making this better. I'm pretty sure it doesn't take an army of scientists to sort this problem out so why hasn't he done it? and why has he developed a toilet that turns excrement into drinkable water? A better metaphor for the behaviour of these characters I could not come up with

I'm sorry, but this must be the most naive, simplistic, dumb thing I have ever heard in my life. I don't consider myself an expert on the topic but just by musing for a few minutes I can think of lots of reasons why problems of water scarcity and sanitation haven't just been "sorted out". Think about the places where water is scarce. Different geography, different cultures, different everything.

As for "turning excrement into drinkable water", what is it that you think the water cycle does? Do you think the water you're drinking hasn't been inside a living thing before? On a shorter time-frame, what do you think happens to the waste you flush away? You live in Sheffield, yes? Well then your waste heads on down to the big set of tanks opposite Meadowhall. The solid component of the waste gets separated from the liquid component and the liquid component is treated to reduce the concentrations of things like ammonia and BOD, and then it is discharged to the River Don where fish, (increasingly including salmonid fish), swim around in it. As it happens, this water then flows down to the sea. If you lived in York your water supply would most likely come from the River Ouse. Upstream of York there are sewage works which discharge their treated waste to the river from which you extract your drinking water. To say you were drinking other people's excrement would be fantastically simplistic and would be to ignore the complexity of the issue - your specialty.

How nice for you to sit comfortably in a region with a water surplus and to wrinkle your nose at the thought of drinking clean water that's been recycled from waste. I expect if your circumstances were different you might have a very different  view.

Ha ha ha!

Biological treatment plants on ships have been doing this for several decades, in a rather compact form. On long deployment submarines (bombers) there is a facility to recycle into the drinking water supply, should RO and Evap options go down.
I’ve not looked, but is there some sort of recyc, built into the likes of the ISS?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on March 17, 2021, 10:22:10 am
Focussed protection of the elderly and vulnerable,

How, if you're going to let the virus run free through the rest of the population? We've had this discussion before. In this very thread, I think.

EDIT: nope, it was in a different thread: https://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,30540.msg619432.html#msg619432

The "elderly and vulnerable" are not some nice neat segregated population that can be hermetically sealed off from everyone else.

Even people in care homes -- especially people in care homes -- have high levels of interaction with other human beings.

"Vulnerable" includes, say, a 40-year-old with diabetes, who goes to work in an office and lives with their partner and school-age children.

How do you propose to seal them and everyone who comes into contact with them in a bubble for years?

Practicalities aside -- "Lock the disableds in a box and forget about them so the rest of us don't have to inconvenience ourselves by changing our daily lives in any way" is, I would suggest, a shitty approach morally.

with 'emergency' funding of scientists and resources needed to develop the appropriate treatment and care.


This actually happened, and is happening. It produced vaccines (which you think are going to kill everyone) and info on the usefulness of treatments like dexamethasone (which one of your links seems to suggest is some sort of evil scheme by the Wellcome Trust, though it'd be a pretty crappy one since dethamethazone is a generic -- i.e. the patent's expired).

oh and no criminalisation of normal human behaviour

What's "norma|" human behaviour?

And why do you think the government isn't allowed to regulate behaviour that causes harm and potential death to others?

As already noted in this thread: I think some of the government and police decisions (e.g. re: protests) have been stupid and unecessary and have far more to do with power tending to consolidate itself than anything to do with covid risks.

However, the general principle that the government has the right (especially in a dire emergency) to prevent people from causing harm to others seems hard to argue with.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on March 17, 2021, 10:35:03 am
P.S.

the channeling of cash spent propping up the economies into the improvement of the social welfare and health system

I would note that I am ALL IN FAVOUR of this anyway, and that decades of government erosion of the welfare and social care systems and exacerbation of wealth (and thus health) inequalities have undoubtedly made things worse.

However, "have benefit payments that people can live on without starving", while a baseline moral requirement for a decent society (which ours is not), is not in itself going to prevent a contagious airborne virus from spreading.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on March 17, 2021, 10:38:24 am
I think I'm beginning to understand where Dan's coming from...
- If you're in a position of power it's because you're a  :wank:
- If you're in a position of power and don't do anything good, you're very much a :wank:
- If you're in a position of power and try to do something good but don't succeed you're even more of a :wank:
- If you're in a position of power and succeed in doing something good it was for the wrong reasons so you're the biggest :wank: of them all
- If you stay at home doing the gardening and reading Freud you're all good.

This is good, because that means my mum and dad are/were very much not a :wank: since they tick(ed) those boxes with ease. Although my dad did do management and editorial work as well as clinical, so maybe he was a :wank: during the week but ok on weekends. Nope, I'm still confused I guess.

+1 to both Will's and slab's posts. I like the idea that fixing drinking water and sewerage for the whole world is really damn easy, BG's just too much of a prick to do it. Also that by the time anyone's in a position to do any major good in the world they're automatically too much of a prick to do it (I'm sure this does apply to many of the types of people who seek power, but the idea that it applies to all seems a little bit of a jump to say the least).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: duncan on March 17, 2021, 10:44:48 am
At slight tangent from fixing the world, I donated plasma yesterday, specifically for the convalescent plasma research but it's all useful. Apparently I have good veins, that AeroCap has been useful for something. I'll find out shortly how good my antibodies are; the holy grail is a combination of both.

They are very keen on male donors with good forearm circulation which might apply to a few here. Because they only take a minimal amount of cells and platelets you can donate weekly and it doesn't stop you training your arms for more than 24 hours.

Plasma Donation (https://www.blood.co.uk/why-give-blood/how-blood-is-used/blood-components/plasma/).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 17, 2021, 11:04:21 am
With regards his philanthropy consider dirty drinking water and lack of good sewerage systems and the consequent diseases it generates. Billy Goats foundation does describe some involvement in making this better. I'm pretty sure it doesn't take an army of scientists to sort this problem out so why hasn't he done it? and why has he developed a toilet that turns excrement into drinkable water? A better metaphor for the behaviour of these characters I could not come up with

I'm sorry, but this must be the most naive, simplistic, dumb thing I have ever heard in my life. I don't consider myself an expert on the topic but just by musing for a few minutes I can think of lots of reasons why problems of water scarcity and sanitation haven't just been "sorted out". Think about the places where water is scarce. Different geography, different cultures, different everything.

As for "turning excrement into drinkable water", what is it that you think the water cycle does? Do you think the water you're drinking hasn't been inside a living thing before? On a shorter time-frame, what do you think happens to the waste you flush away? You live in Sheffield, yes? Well then your waste heads on down to the big set of tanks opposite Meadowhall. The solid component of the waste gets separated from the liquid component and the liquid component is treated to reduce the concentrations of things like ammonia and BOD, and then it is discharged to the River Don where fish, (increasingly including salmonid fish), swim around in it. As it happens, this water then flows down to the sea. If you lived in York your water supply would most likely come from the River Ouse. Upstream of York there are sewage works which discharge their treated waste to the river from which you extract your drinking water. To say you were drinking other people's excrement would be fantastically simplistic and would be to ignore the complexity of the issue - your specialty.

How nice for you to sit comfortably in a region with a water surplus and to wrinkle your nose at the thought of drinking clean water that's been recycled from waste. I expect if your circumstances were different you might have a very different  view.

It was a metaphor
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 17, 2021, 11:11:17 am
and why has he developed a toilet that turns excrement into drinkable water?

This is not a metaphor. It is a question.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 17, 2021, 11:23:38 am
You’re right it was overzealous rhetoric in an attempt to highlight the metaphor with unforeseen offensive consequences. Accept my apology
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on March 17, 2021, 11:30:30 am
Accept my apology

I will not. I demand satisfaction. You and me at dawn. Two unmarked syringes. One AstraZeneca, one Pfizer. The winner will just clot out, the loser becomes an immortal genome super-soldier - a slave of the government for all eternity.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 17, 2021, 11:33:43 am
Accept my apology

I will not. I demand satisfaction. You and me at dawn. Two unmarked syringes. One AstraZeneca, one Pfizer. The winner will just clot out, the loser becomes an immortal genome super-soldier - a slave of the government for all eternity.

Actually, the latter sounds neat.

Will there be strength gains for minimal training penalties?

Who should I talk to?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 17, 2021, 11:41:46 am
Accept my apology

I will not. I demand satisfaction. You and me at dawn. Two unmarked syringes. One AstraZeneca, one Pfizer. The winner will just clot out, the loser becomes an immortal genome super-soldier - a slave of the government for all eternity.

haha as long as he doesn't tie off pegs, have a wad for returning me to sanity
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 17, 2021, 02:19:52 pm
Apparently there's been a bit of research into what drives conspiracy theorists during Covid, the dark triad test of personality has been used to identify problematic aspects of personalities in these groups including sadism, narcissism etc. I found this one online on the BBC website. I scored 'infrequently vile' haha. I wonder what BilL would score  :worms:

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20151123-how-dark-is-your-personality
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 17, 2021, 02:27:25 pm
I think Dunning Kruger is also in effect.

I know some people who have just managed to get a PhD in something that could be seen as vaguely related to the pandemic who suddenly regard themselves as some sort of Illuminati, with a towering intellect, who see "the real truth" more clearly than the mere sheeple out there.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 17, 2021, 02:29:15 pm
Apparently there's been a bit of research into what drives conspiracy theorists during Covid, the dark triad test of personality has been used to identify problematic aspects of personalities in these groups including sadism, narcissism etc. I found this one online on the BBC website. I scored 'infrequently vile' haha. I wonder what BilL would score  :worms:

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20151123-how-dark-is-your-personality

A bit OT, but moderately fun:

Moderately Nefarious, apparently.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 18, 2021, 11:02:44 am
I think I missed a thread split, or some deletion.

Anyway.

Jab done.

I fully intend to experience the full range of the milder side effects as a superb excuse to lie in bed and watch Netflix for the next 2-3 days.

I believe I am already developing the headache and it’s only been 50 minutes since the jab.

I better find the remote before I become incapacitated...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 18, 2021, 11:19:23 am
I think a couple of days of "light duties" is wholly justified.

Just hope my getting the jab coincides with a spell of decent weather. Or good waves. Either will do.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 18, 2021, 12:59:18 pm
A report on some research based on extensive data on reinfection numbers from  Denmark:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/17/older-people-more-likely-to-catch-covid-a-second-time
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: battery on March 18, 2021, 06:22:58 pm
Back to CV19.

Here in Manchester there has been an uptick in case numbers (c20%) in the last week. I suspect thats driven partly by the large number of lateral flow tests being taken by school children at the moment (the figures show reported test results increasing massively). Wondering how much of this uptick in cases is down to increased testing or increased transmission (e.g. schools going back)? Or of course both.

My folks' area have rising rates which are being blamed on the local prison. It is certainly true that prisons are in crisis with covid cases rising rapidly (3 times the infection rates within the community was the stat I read yesterday) and with HMP Manchester being a huge prison (well over a thousand people housed there plus staff) I wonder if there might be a link...?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 18, 2021, 06:39:46 pm
Back to CV19.

Here in Manchester there has been an uptick in case numbers (c20%) in the last week. I suspect thats driven partly by the large number of lateral flow tests being taken by school children at the moment (the figures show reported test results increasing massively). Wondering how much of this uptick in cases is down to increased testing or increased transmission (e.g. schools going back)? Or of course both.

My folks' area have rising rates which are being blamed on the local prison. It is certainly true that prisons are in crisis with covid cases rising rapidly (3 times the infection rates within the community was the stat I read yesterday) and with HMP Manchester being a huge prison (well over a thousand people housed there plus staff) I wonder if there might be a link...?

It’s rising in most areas in greater Manchester (eg bury, Bolton etc..). not just in Manchester... the GM region had lagged behind the England rate for a few weeks until a couple of weeks ago when it dropped quite sharply. Now rising...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 18, 2021, 06:44:58 pm
My folks' area have rising rates which are being blamed on the local prison. It is certainly true that prisons are in crisis with covid cases rising rapidly (3 times the infection rates within the community was the stat I read yesterday) and with HMP Manchester being a huge prison (well over a thousand people housed there plus staff) I wonder if there might be a link...?

A prison sounds to me like the perfect breeding ground for transmission. Add to the inmates x amount of people who work there and enter and leave on a daily basis and I'd have thought you would have a crazy amount of possible transmission vectors?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 18, 2021, 06:47:46 pm
Back to CV19.

Here in Manchester there has been an uptick in case numbers (c20%) in the last week. I suspect thats driven partly by the large number of lateral flow tests being taken by school children at the moment (the figures show reported test results increasing massively). Wondering how much of this uptick in cases is down to increased testing or increased transmission (e.g. schools going back)? Or of course both.

My folks' area have rising rates which are being blamed on the local prison. It is certainly true that prisons are in crisis with covid cases rising rapidly (3 times the infection rates within the community was the stat I read yesterday) and with HMP Manchester being a huge prison (well over a thousand people housed there plus staff) I wonder if there might be a link...?

Locally, we’ve had a couple of outbreaks, in wealthier areas, that turned out to be care home related.
This has included several deaths amongst vaccinated residents. I’m not sure on ages, but it’s slightly odd, in as much as the police have become involved:
 https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/more-deaths-sidmouth-care-home-5175457 (https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/more-deaths-sidmouth-care-home-5175457)

Unfortunately, locally this is giving rise to plenty of antivax talk.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: battery on March 18, 2021, 06:53:33 pm
My folks' area have rising rates which are being blamed on the local prison. It is certainly true that prisons are in crisis with covid cases rising rapidly (3 times the infection rates within the community was the stat I read yesterday) and with HMP Manchester being a huge prison (well over a thousand people housed there plus staff) I wonder if there might be a link...?

A prison sounds to me like the perfect breeding ground for transmission. Add to the inmates x amount of people who work there and enter and leave on a daily basis and I'd have thought you would have a crazy amount of possible transmission vectors?

The secure estate spent a long time being very proud of their very low infection rates. They effectively locked down all prisons right at the start - 23 and a half hour a day bang up, no visits, no education or support staff allowed in etc. - this has led to a lot of concerns around residivism (education and family connections are known to be the best motivator in desistence) as well as mental health.

I'm not sure what has changed recently, but you're right, once it's in it is inevitably going to run rife.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 18, 2021, 07:59:47 pm
I don't think rising case rates are hugely relevant when deaths stay low. As I think we discussed a few pages back they were always going to go up when schools went back. As long as the death rates stay steady I think it's all good, no?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 18, 2021, 08:00:15 pm
My folks' area have rising rates which are being blamed on the local prison. It is certainly true that prisons are in crisis with covid cases rising rapidly (3 times the infection rates within the community was the stat I read yesterday) and with HMP Manchester being a huge prison (well over a thousand people housed there plus staff) I wonder if there might be a link...?

A prison sounds to me like the perfect breeding ground for transmission. Add to the inmates x amount of people who work there and enter and leave on a daily basis and I'd have thought you would have a crazy amount of possible transmission vectors?

The secure estate spent a long time being very proud of their very low infection rates. They effectively locked down all prisons right at the start - 23 and a half hour a day bang up, no visits, no education or support staff allowed in etc. - this has led to a lot of concerns around residivism (education and family connections are known to be the best motivator in desistence) as well as mental health.

I'm not sure what has changed recently, but you're right, once it's in it is inevitably going to run rife.

Would that mean eating in cells? I don’t really know much about conditions in Cat A/B, I sort of assume it’s communal dinning/bathroom, but apart from watching old episodes of “Porridge” and visiting the Dartmoor prison museum, i have no clue. We got some info on Cat C and open, before the parole hearings (as an aside, it seems it was odd for a convicted murderer to go from B straight to open).

I’m imagining it to be as hard to stop the spread of infection in a prison as it has proved to be on several ships, or care homes. Once it’s in, it’s in virus heaven.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 18, 2021, 08:03:07 pm
I don't think rising case rates are hugely relevant when deaths stay low. As I think we discussed a few pages back they were always going to go up when schools went back. As long as the death rates stay steady I think it's all good, no?

And hospital admissions stay low, too.

I suppose the mutation risk goes up with the case rate though?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 18, 2021, 08:12:06 pm
I don't think rising case rates are hugely relevant when deaths stay low. As I think we discussed a few pages back they were always going to go up when schools went back. As long as the death rates stay steady I think it's all good, no?

And hospital admissions stay low, too.

I suppose the mutation risk goes up with the case rate though?

Yes, agreed.

I think the mutation risk is misrepresented, because it exists in every single case of covid around the world. The chances of a totally vaccine evading variant are pretty low anyway, but the chances of one emerging due to us opening up and having a slightly higher case rate are really minimal.

 In any case, viruses mutate whatever you do, there is no scenario where unlocking doesn't lead to an increased risk of mutation. Zero covid is a non starter: instead we can handle it via booster vaccines in the winter, something that pleasingly is already being planned for by the government (makes a change). The manufacturers are already sorting out a booster to that end for the autumn.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: battery on March 18, 2021, 08:13:42 pm
My folks' area have rising rates which are being blamed on the local prison. It is certainly true that prisons are in crisis with covid cases rising rapidly (3 times the infection rates within the community was the stat I read yesterday) and with HMP Manchester being a huge prison (well over a thousand people housed there plus staff) I wonder if there might be a link...?

A prison sounds to me like the perfect breeding ground for transmission. Add to the inmates x amount of people who work there and enter and leave on a daily basis and I'd have thought you would have a crazy amount of possible transmission vectors?

The secure estate spent a long time being very proud of their very low infection rates. They effectively locked down all prisons right at the start - 23 and a half hour a day bang up, no visits, no education or support staff allowed in etc. - this has led to a lot of concerns around residivism (education and family connections are known to be the best motivator in desistence) as well as mental health.

I'm not sure what has changed recently, but you're right, once it's in it is inevitably going to run rife.

Would that mean eating in cells? I don’t really know much about conditions in Cat A/B, I sort of assume it’s communal dinning/bathroom, but apart from watching old episodes of “Porridge” and visiting the Dartmoor prison museum, i have no clue. We got some info on Cat C and open, before the parole hearings (as an aside, it seems it was odd for a convicted murderer to go from B straight to open).

I’m imagining it to be as hard to stop the spread of infection in a prison as it has proved to be on several ships, or care homes. Once it’s in, it’s in virus heaven.

Eating is normally communal however it isn't at the moment. The 30 minutes release is by enlarge for exercise or washing.

I obviously can't comment on a specific case of which I know nothing but a couple of points that may or may not be relevant: a person has a catagory as well as the prison: there are companies out there who's entire business is getting people into cat D: being recalled from cat D back to secure is a one way ticket, there is no going back to cat D after that.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 18, 2021, 08:16:46 pm
I don't think rising case rates are hugely relevant when deaths stay low. As I think we discussed a few pages back they were always going to go up when schools went back. As long as the death rates stay steady I think it's all good, no?

And hospital admissions stay low, too.

I suppose the mutation risk goes up with the case rate though?

Testing numbers have (more than?) doubled since the schools went back... that’s got to be a factor surely here in increased (or not suppressed) case rates

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/

Hospital admissions continue to plummet too.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 18, 2021, 08:29:16 pm
I don't think rising case rates are hugely relevant when deaths stay low. As I think we discussed a few pages back they were always going to go up when schools went back. As long as the death rates stay steady I think it's all good, no?

And hospital admissions stay low, too.

I suppose the mutation risk goes up with the case rate though?

Testing numbers have (more than?) doubled since the schools went back... that’s got to be a factor surely here in increased (or not suppressed) case rates

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/

Hospital admissions continue to plummet too.

Problem being, as always the lag between the two. We’re just waiting find out if rising cases will mean rising admissions two to three weeks from now, again.

I feel pretty positive (and no side effects yet, can’t even tell where the needle went in) that the vaccine program is going to prevent/drastically reduce that third wave of hospitalisations and deaths (he said, rapping his knuckles on his own head, in the absence of a handy bit of wood)...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on March 18, 2021, 09:15:44 pm

Testing numbers have (more than?) doubled since the schools went back... that’s got to be a factor surely here in increased (or not suppressed) case rates

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/


Indeed, without wanting to appear like 'Donald Trump', since we've had very significant increase in testing there are definitely difficulties in comparing case rates over the last couple of weeks. 

Overall we're still seeing a slight decrease in the seven day rolling rate at nationwide level but it is basically flat - we should get a better idea whether this an actual change from the previous falling case rate trend in the next few days once any effect from the increased testing has worked through.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 19, 2021, 09:41:49 am
Well, 24 hrs later and I can’t find where the jab was and my only possible side effect is feeling so sleepy, I was in bed before 10 last night and CBA on getting up this morning.
No headache, no fever, muscles aches or tenderness.

On the other hand, a friend had hers on Monday, spent all of Tuesday talking to God on the great white telephone and only went back to work yesterday.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on March 19, 2021, 12:23:20 pm
It's happening....

(https://scontent.fman4-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-0/s600x600/162646478_10159742088558623_3065116276273776713_o.jpg?_nc_cat=104&ccb=1-3&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=t5JY7iZByk8AX_q5p59&_nc_ht=scontent.fman4-1.fna&tp=7&oh=70c8257f57c8c4f6f5e217a31c4b2515&oe=607913EB)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on March 19, 2021, 01:39:18 pm
And... https://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-headlines/five-ways-boris-johnson-will-fk-up-getting-his-jab-20210319206325
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: AJM on March 19, 2021, 05:36:33 pm
Do you mean specifically in terms of Covid? (The "in this context" bit)

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/articles/comparisonsofallcausemortalitybetweeneuropeancountriesandregions/januarytojune2020

I don't know if they'll do an update at some point to bring in the full year. But in terms of what I was looking for it's pretty good, from initial inspection, in that it shows standardised mortality rates, then compared to the five year average weekly and cumulatively, amongst other things, for cities and countries in western Europe (including, for the purpose of this discussion, Stockholm and Sweden).

Not looked at it, but an update.....

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/articles/comparisonsofallcausemortalitybetweeneuropeancountriesandregions/2020
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on March 22, 2021, 05:20:36 am
Andy, why do you think vax hesitancy is so much higher in Europe than the UK? I've read a few pieces but nothing hugely convincing.
.

Just came across some data on this; UK and Denmark are 1 and 2 in openness to taking the vaccine at 76.3% and 72% respectively (why it isn't 90%+ everywhere I willl never understand).

There's then quite a steep drop to Sweden at 61.8%. Netherlands, Italy, Norway & Germany are all in the 59-61% range. The US is at 47.2% (you wonder if they'll run out of people willing to be vaccinated quite soon, or if people will begin changing their minds?). Japan, Singapore, & S Korea all under 50%.

In France, shockingly, the figure is just 40.7.

In some ways, the real question is not why is vaccine hesitancy so much higher in Europe, but rather why is it so low in the UK (and DK, to a pretty similar degree).

Source: Imperial College, 17/03/21
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on March 22, 2021, 09:01:18 am
Hmmm, just seen a report of poll last week that found 71% of Germans willing to be vaccinated, a fall of 2 percentage points on the start of March, so who knows what the true figures are. I can imagine exactly how the question is asked could produce varying results - "are you willing to consider vaccination?" is a very different question to "do you feel any hesitancy?"  - but it's hard to imagine that explaining a 20% gap.

I wonder if much vaccine hesitancy is pretty soft? I know more than one person who expressed significant hesitancy but did then get vaccinated when offered the opporunity.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Andy W on March 22, 2021, 09:06:37 am
Andy, why do you think vax hesitancy is so much higher in Europe than the UK? I've read a few pieces but nothing hugely convincing.
.

Just came across some data on this; UK and Denmark are 1 and 2 in openness to taking the vaccine at 76.3% and 72% respectively (why it isn't 90%+ everywhere I willl never understand).

There's then quite a steep drop to Sweden at 61.8%. Netherlands, Italy, Norway & Germany are all in the 59-61% range. The US is at 47.2% (you wonder if they'll run out of people willing to be vaccinated quite soon, or if people will begin changing their minds?). Japan, Singapore, & S Korea all under 50%.

In France, shockingly, the figure is just 40.7.

In some ways, the real question is not why is vaccine hesitancy so much higher in Europe, but rather why is it so low in the UK (and DK, to a pretty similar degree).

Source: Imperial College, 17/03/21

For France it's the "French paradox" explained here   https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/feb/15/french-distrust-vaccines-politicians. The few neighbours and family around me all express negative reactions to the vaccine.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 22, 2021, 09:08:20 am
Hmmm, just seen a report of poll last week that found 71% of Germans willing to be vaccinated, a fall of 2 percentage points on the start of March, so who knows what the true figures are. I can imagine exactly how the question is asked could produce varying results - "are you willing to consider vaccination?" is a very different question to "do you feel any hesitancy?"  - but it's hard to imagine that explaining a 20% gap.


Lies, damned lies and statistics?

I do wonder if the UK thing is a bit of national pride? "At the front of vaccination" in the world, general faith in the NHS, and no hesitancy or suspension of vaccinations when any "issues" have been flagged up.

I was speaking to a friend in Kansas, and she said her husband has had the jab already, and she is due next week, they are both in their 40s. I was surprised they are that far down the line already, but it might be that he travels a lot for business?

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 22, 2021, 09:20:34 am
Both the people we knew who initially refused appointments, changed their minds and have now been jabbed.
Both were primarily worried by reports of terrible side effects, in the media, but having seen a few friends get by with nothing more serious than a headache, they went ahead.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on March 22, 2021, 09:25:31 am
I do wonder if the UK thing is a bit of national pride? "At the front of vaccination" in the world, general faith in the NHS, and no hesitancy or suspension of vaccinations when any "issues" have been flagged up.

I was speaking to a friend in Kansas, and she said her husband has had the jab already, and she is due next week, they are both in their 40s. I was surprised they are that far down the line already, but it might be that he travels a lot for business?

I'm definitely picking up a bit of smug vibe from some US and UK press and social media - there was some real vaccine nationalism going on on a climbing friend's FB over the weekend.

As to the US, I have many friends in their 40s and younger who have received at least one dose. For some it's because of their job, but in many instances it's not. The programme has accelerated tremendously in recent weeks.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on March 22, 2021, 09:34:14 am

Lies, damned lies and statistics?

I do wonder if the UK thing is a bit of national pride? "At the front of vaccination" in the world, general faith in the NHS, and no hesitancy or suspension of vaccinations when any "issues" have been flagged up.

I was speaking to a friend in Kansas, and she said her husband has had the jab already, and she is due next week, they are both in their 40s. I was surprised they are that far down the line already, but it might be that he travels a lot for business?

Various experts have pointed out these opinion poll numbers don't match real numbers in the first age groups to be vaccinated. Nor do they take into account face-to-face evidence of the vast majority of family and friends having reactions from a slightly sore arm to minor flu like symptoms. Nor the practicalities of things like air travel for holidays.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 22, 2021, 09:46:29 am
Various experts have pointed out these opinion poll numbers don't match real numbers in the first age groups to be vaccinated. Nor do they take into account face-to-face evidence of the vast majority of family and friends having reactions from a slightly sore arm to minor flu like symptoms. Nor the practicalities of things like air travel for holidays.

What is your point? You seem to be saying uptake will be lower in the first two sentences, but higher in the last.

Edit: if you are saying uptake thus far in Europe has been higher than the opinion poll this morning suggests, that is hardly surprising given it took place before the last weeks messaging clusterfuck?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: duncan on March 22, 2021, 10:21:15 am
Lots of good work has been done on vaccine hesitancy over the last year. In the longer term I'm hoping this will increase the focus on health beliefs and behaviours.

Vaccine hesitancy is a concern. If the surveys (https://oxfordhealthbrc.nihr.ac.uk/almost-a-third-of-uk-population-are-very-unsure-or-strongly-hesitant-about-covid-19-vaccination/) suggesting only ~72% intend to get vaccinated, we’ll be on the borderline of achieving herd immunity. You’d hope, and data suggests, opinions will shift in a positive direction as millions are vaccinated with no major ill-effects. A vocal minority on social media may be middle-aged blokes but hesitancy is slightly more prevalent in the young (and women and low waged). All these are small effects so there isn’t a ‘typical’ vaccine refuser.

As spidermonkey09 says,  hesitancy is worryingly high in people self-reporting black and Pakistani ethnicity (https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.12.27.20248899v1).

Hesitancy is a spectrum from the die-hard to the slightly anxious. The hesitancy figures vary with the precise question asked (like religious belief). The term hesitancy is misleading too as societal and practical issues are major reasons why folk don't take up the offer to be vaccinated. Imagine someone a bit uncertain about vaccines in general, nervous about blood clots due to family history, suspicious of governments, suspicious of medical research that has - at best - historically ignored people of their ethnicity, and their boss insists they take the day off as unpaid leave. Why did they they not get vaccinated?

The best driver of health behaviour change is direct experience, next best is experience of friends, family and peers. Vaccine take-up has been spectacular in elderly white people the UK despite initially significant levels of hesitancy because very quickly everyone had heard from someone who had had a vaccine and - 99.9% of the time - it was no big deal. It becomes a virtuous circle.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: seankenny on March 23, 2021, 12:02:53 pm
We've been helping the campaign for a public inquiry into the UK's handling of covid:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/23/london-bus-drivers-covid-ucl-report-public-inquiry

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Falling Down on March 23, 2021, 12:18:43 pm
That’s a great piece by Lesh Sean. I imagine it was difficult to write but I’m glad she did.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: seankenny on March 23, 2021, 12:28:20 pm
Thanks. Lesh talked it through with me, I wrote it and she edited it. I was there for all the things mentioned in the piece although it's clearly her take on events not mine. I was surprised how tired I was the day after writing it.

Anyhow, it was definitely worth it and I'm please that people are appreciating it. (Not sure I can use the word "like" in this context, but you know what I mean.)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on March 23, 2021, 01:23:27 pm
👏👏👏
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on March 23, 2021, 06:13:04 pm
A wonderfully put together piece Sean, perfectly pitched - thinking of you both.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 26, 2021, 08:07:37 pm
Some interesting perspectives from this man. His credentials seem sound. I will be interested to see what’s dug up on him and how long it will be before he is a broken man. This is one of his longer interviews and the link below is his open letter

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MkLIFDwORXc

https://mcusercontent.com/92561d6dedb66a43fe9a6548f/files/bead7203-0798-4ac8-abe2-076208015556/Public_health_emergency_of_international_concert_Geert_Vanden_Bossche.01.pdf

I see Snopes has zoomed in on Geert. A bit Wakefield, really. “Your vaccine won’t work (because all current vaccines are bad), but mine will”.
 https://www.snopes.com/news/2021/03/26/geert-vanden-bossche/?utm_source=agorapulse&utm_campaign=1p&fbclid=IwAR06KQ-nfUO6QWUqDJhKrxcgGThrtrwVO0Aa1WSQuT5gabtVdK3Xy53kfME (https://www.snopes.com/news/2021/03/26/geert-vanden-bossche/?utm_source=agorapulse&utm_campaign=1p&fbclid=IwAR06KQ-nfUO6QWUqDJhKrxcgGThrtrwVO0Aa1WSQuT5gabtVdK3Xy53kfME)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fultonius on March 27, 2021, 08:16:49 pm
I know there are some very good statisticians and health researchers etc.

As we're getting closer to low case numbers, with still fairly widespread testing I suspect (and this is what I'm musing over) that that false positives will become more and more influential on public policy.

I read this, no idea if it's all BS as it's not published etc., but it does have a table from the ONS showing the number of "positive cases" considered so from just one gene expression. The WHO recommends counting that as inconclusive until re-tested.  https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/2102/2102.11612.pdf

In Scotland, we not down to very low numbers in hospital, deaths and ICU:

(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/3Xhx1Y_3pLtHKq-8K63xect5uVdirBZfhodpsU3Y00nqJl21djILuN4b3i2sDG5jZcaByemym5bJutVlhjqrH-KBVMElDHOL4Ra_iIfZI1bpS8BjKeOKVm1yRYIbAhsRgQ6UWvf85DibjltLnfTFcZZP1DlcuQN4cP0iN4cP01r5wEwWUd3GgyFzsxhL1Zz3H4-moif5gX4ciQyncWV7nVtS7_U0kGxNxypx2LHkfD-PTfGB4GktT-ltWod3wSke5oMtPW56k7w8kg4nB5BRhFuHyeO-lBHlTYszNaxMHMnoMuSiM8H5ArAPBO6Gttwc-CZwFV0tjB1jvZhijB4O1QPC5yWiPBQkJR5l7TA6D3YjsMGCti7oZI2RMKzNmuzNFUjFBuIXWvsmD6IDB50vYgHh81po7GntQYIadvbfz_LQvNg72narUhCdU2AaeWx-nMpINYpP-otoKg7C24gpnWgckEaX7Q7WIOtCTLj9GoF__7UNxoFfnFZEDiX2-5ywrVidrf5pOACiqz39-UIDnWaPyVi-ub07yonz0hL8JhIug7g8linmHEcIIFjy5yajeNRbfzr5iXNy5Jil1Q56SUrucl3ddXFMSChKfFPhHy4WJZHtlFcmRsj7vfOkRF29jDk-vp5jPNsBKWH-M-tOHYHIfA95jr8icp2ykmXd9nNLQyRnpwv9FKjY9YEIvCkKCIahI8zN6aU2U7W_wlPCD2l8=w1677-h822-no?authuser=0)

And a very consistently low, and never zero positive rate, not matter the number of tests carried out.

(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/MrcvOFWEDQPggkeWN9eQWgBiQf6Zi6LUyQfX4maupTaEf1z7iZ91D7Tl8qRgId4fzIXHaELUZjaTdHBBKkaw3_3wBjO8As7L_EolVU6B8eD0shHYo3jBbLQsA-XeFxfj_THrmjAsRLiEZTTGahehpba5MaIozu3rWazwh7TpTAHrnH0_Q_kH_mZufq7ccFYAfaJTNUkFyasVdbOeqL4h96RXRmCSCUplc3XURZchAt-pC-2vcVgNzqT4d4wssF76lRkG99301GoosmB-doKGE2j9a27_vxGUhrOKlKqwjyspGD73Y6zNHRDQ_wCd_acQa6tfdjJc1a7bxz_Lr1cRBdhUxMfvGoQsl9w6Ou5SXDPj0-vwVTkH8s4fCwKDYMQqM4qtdgJ0TU_2ulJ_ibQwgz4Q_XSkkYXhxTBjae4HwjlrnSqJNW7Oqi2WZPuEmgd7LhJYrNgpqihUL7kTofGgQic2p2j-amcgdmEeIsws15daJA_PTV9pMR8Zji91hA8zxM1balDfFyQCq_caUphUTV1EcludfYreZqi2a4n-dqmk1MLhgk2yqGiAFGsj-GdCEYtOSEAentvmphm9urpL5OJHRXn3u0eSHrOMSEyjqTI6mZ2DwOuDdtj4qx1y21nO4eHKwv38Zizlbv8v6Cvtyh7h83LDXAKT6pnlDG0xzo973hKumDGqKlKVK1tJQGgEyYgF6wnh5vm5-CKdSqxkIpHT=w1206-h656-no?authuser=0)

Will it ever go below 2% if we keep testing 20k people per day (many now asymptomatic).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 27, 2021, 08:31:05 pm
I think you’re probably right that testing is moving into the “ not the right thing to watch” category for a variety of reasons, not least the people who will test positive, who have been vaccinated and at very low risk of serious illness.
I imagine the government/SAGE have thought of that.
Maybe.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fultonius on March 27, 2021, 08:57:20 pm
Currently in Scotland they're still basing our lifting of restrictions on case rates per 100k....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Sidehaas on March 28, 2021, 09:36:04 am

As we're getting closer to low case numbers, with still fairly widespread testing I suspect (and this is what I'm musing over) that that false positives will become more and more influential on public policy.

I read this, no idea if it's all BS as it's not published etc., but it does have a table from the ONS showing the number of "positive cases" considered so from just one gene expression. The WHO recommends counting that as inconclusive until re-tested.  https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/2102/2102.11612.pdf

In Scotland, we not down to very low numbers in hospital, deaths and ICU:


I can't comment on the science behind that paper other than to point out that the B1.1.7 (Kent) variant is missing one of the original target genes of PCR tests in most of the UK (not quite all, as some test centres eg in the East of England used a different PCR test, I'm not sure about Scotland), so the best match you can hope in all those areas for is 2 out of 3, rather than 3 out of 3. The target genes weren't changed, at least to begin with, because they found that looking for cases with only 2 genes showing was a very good way of tracking the spread of the variant across the country without having to wait for genome sequencing to be done. You see this tracking technique referred to as S gene target failure (SGTF.) I explain this because obviously if a perfect test only sees 2 target genes, you will have a lot more tests only seeing 1 gene than if a perfect test sees 3, which was originally the case, and the manufacturer's intent. In practice a test now seeing 1 gene has only missed 1, not missed 2 as would originally have had to be the case.

The premise in your post that the occasional false positive becomes more problematic and could affect total case rates significantly at low infection rates is not necessarily true anyway because PCR tests are only used in symptomatic cases, so the true positivity of the population undergoing them is much higher than the true positivity of the general population. They are more significant in LFTs used for mass asymptomatic testing, but a positive LFT is recommended to be confirmed using PCR anyway (except in the first two weeks just gone of school testing) and the chances of someone getting both false positive LFT and false positive PCR are negligible.

Finally, note that case rates last July were a small fraction of case rates now (in Scotland, around 2%), from which you can conclude we are currently way above any rate at which false positives are significant, and rates are no longer dropping quickly, or in some regions at all.

Conclusion equals, in my view there is no real chance of false positives affecting policy, even if the Scottish government continues to use case rates as the driving factor, which I doubt they will long term. Obviously if there are a few of them happening each day then that's a bummer for the people isolating, but it isn't significant to anyone else.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Sidehaas on March 28, 2021, 09:37:13 am
I think you’re probably right that testing is moving into the “ not the right thing to watch” category for a variety of reasons, not least the people who will test positive, who have been vaccinated and at very low risk of serious illness.
I imagine the government/SAGE have thought of that.
Maybe.
I do agree with this though. It has been made clear that rates will be allowed to rise in England as long hospitalisations don't rise too much.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Sidehaas on March 28, 2021, 11:04:33 am

As we're getting closer to low case numbers, with still fairly widespread testing I suspect (and this is what I'm musing over) that that false positives will become more and more influential on public policy.

I read this, no idea if it's all BS as it's not published etc., but it does have a table from the ONS showing the number of "positive cases" considered so from just one gene expression. The WHO recommends counting that as inconclusive until re-tested.  https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/2102/2102.11612.pdf

In Scotland, we not down to very low numbers in hospital, deaths and ICU:


I can't comment on the science behind that paper other than to point out that the B1.1.7 (Kent) variant is missing one of the original target genes of PCR tests in most of the UK (not quite all, as some test centres eg in the East of England used a different PCR test, I'm not sure about Scotland), so the best match you can hope in all those areas for is 2 out of 3, rather than 3 out of 3. The target genes weren't changed, at least to begin with, because they found that looking for cases with only 2 genes showing was a very good way of tracking the spread of the variant across the country without having to wait for genome sequencing to be done. You see this tracking technique referred to as S gene target failure (SGTF.) I explain this because obviously if a perfect test only sees 2 target genes, you will have a lot more tests only seeing 1 gene than if a perfect test sees 3, which was originally the case, and the manufacturer's intent. In practice a test now seeing 1 gene has only missed 1, not missed 2 as would originally have had to be the case.

By the way, I noticed after a more careful read that the author of that paper does refer to this use of SGTF:
"Furthermore in a Public Health England report on variants [11], published January 8th 2021, it
states the goal of using one gene was explicitly to approximate the growth of the new B1.1.7
variant (emphasis mine):
“There has recently been an increase in the percentage of positive cases where only the
ORF1ab- and N-genes were found and a decrease in the percentage of cases with all
three genes. We can use this information to approximate the growth of the new
variant.”"

However the PHE reference he gives is the first in a series of technical briefing papers they published about this (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/investigation-of-novel-sars-cov-2-variant-variant-of-concern-20201201) and the later ones present data in support of the accuracy of using SGTF to track the variant. It's not credible that this guy wouldn't be aware of those later briefings, so to be honest, the way he referenced the only one of them published before evidence was available and then emphasised (his bold) the word "approximate" makes me smell a rat as to his motivations.

It's also worth noting that everything he writes about single genes is from the ONS surveys, not the pillar 2 testing that form the vast majority of the testing programme. I'm not sure if that's significant.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fultonius on March 29, 2021, 09:42:12 am
Thanks Sidehaas.

There's a fair amount of asymptomatic PCR testing in Scotland. Struggling to find the exact amount though.

I know in healthcare (care homes etc.) routing PCRs are pretty common, same in oil and gas and my mum is in a government scheme to randomly test people. I can't find any stats on how many OCRs are administered for asymptomatic vs symptomatic cases.

No deaths in Scotland yesterday (often the case on Sundays but hey ho...) good news!   The case rate remains steadfastly above 2.5%....

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 31, 2021, 02:17:01 pm
Got AZ at lunchtime, very slick operation. Will see how I feel, but it is looking sunny tomorrow, ooh side effects.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stabbsy on March 31, 2021, 02:40:24 pm
Got AZ at lunchtime, very slick operation. Will see how I feel, but it is looking sunny tomorrow, ooh side effects.
Don't expect too much of yourself, Chris. Felt fine on the day and then barely left the sofa the day after.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on March 31, 2021, 03:30:08 pm
Aye, I saw your Strava for that day ;)

Seriously, I know it might knock me bad.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: saltbeef on March 31, 2021, 11:14:35 pm
I had first dose Pfizer in feb, I went skiing for the next week. totally fine (I'm in Canada) I don't know anyone here who has had a bad experience with either Pfizer or moderna or AZ.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on April 01, 2021, 08:37:35 am
OK OK, calm down Hercules :)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on April 02, 2021, 10:21:45 am
ONS have assessed the likely scale of long covid. Some frightening numbers...

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/apr/01/long-covid-snapshot-poll-finds-million-people-symptoms-uk
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on April 06, 2021, 12:06:02 pm
Has anyone else had to have an awkward conversation yet with their Employers about the road map?

We've just had our end of year company review (<10ppl) and there was a big push to get back to normality with the impression given that the Gov. "work from home" message ends Mon 12/04.

I did some digging (as it sounded wrong) and this proved to be incorrect.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 06, 2021, 12:44:24 pm
my employer (university) has basically said all remote that can be until 1st June then review. Quite what will happen next (academic) year no-one knows (not even the management probably)... Neighbour who works at Salford said its pretty much the same...

Speaking to a friend over the weekend (IT/Systems management) who said they had a vote as to whether people wanted to come back into the office FT as per before - 5% wanted to.

If I were an employer - and someone working from home 40-100% of the time was working just as well as if they were in the office I would not want to force people in. But some may have different ideas...

I do wonder if there will be a split in some companies - where workers are given the choice -  between those who come in all the time and those who don't....

Anyway, back to your point Paul - I'd assume they have a risk assessment that all staff can see?? ;)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on April 06, 2021, 02:34:36 pm
Anyway, back to your point Paul - I'd assume they have a risk assessment that all staff can see?? ;)

TBF, having now dug out the actual road map dates and passed it on they just weren't aware (I get frustrated at times but they're a darn good employer). It's a bit awkward talking about measures as I've struggled to convey that 2m social distancing isn't really a silver bullet when you're talking about sitting in an office (converted Victorian terrace building, ventilation is jamming something in the sash windows) for a working day rather than seeing someone for minimal time.

If you look through the Gov. documents, the summaries are poor with "work from home" disappearing as a hit after Monday (including in the simplified pictorial format).

You need to literally go to the full roadmap to get the dates. To save others:
Step 3 (17/05) – WFH is still advised
Step 4 (21/06) – Further advice on WFH will be issued[/li][/list]

Source:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-response-spring-2021/covid-19-response-spring-2021#roadmap
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 12, 2021, 03:20:42 pm
Apple and Google decline to update the NHS Covid app due to privacy violations ie uploading of user data to a central location rather than storing on solely on users’ phones.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/apr/12/apple-and-google-block-nhs-covid-app-update-over-privacy-breaches
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 13, 2021, 10:15:25 pm
Really good article here explaining why the AZ vaccine can cause blood clots in certain people - how it was discovered and how it can be treated.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/apr/13/how-uk-doctor-marie-scully-blood-clotting-link-astrazeneca-covid-jab-university-college-london-hospital?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on April 14, 2021, 08:11:34 am
For anyone who might be interested -- the Com-Cov study on mix-and-matching vaccines is expanding:

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/apr/14/uk-study-on-mixing-covid-vaccines-between-jabs-to-be-expanded

They're looking for people over 50 who've  already had one shot of a Covid vaccine:

https://comcovstudy.org.uk/

N.B. You're blinded as to which vaccine you get for your second shot but there's no placebo group, so no-one misses out.

IMHO this is one of the most important bits of vaccine research currently underway; if we know for sure that we can mix different vaccines, the increased flexibility would make it far easier to get everyone vaccinated.

And if it turns out -- as people are hoping -- that you get better immune response or increased protection against variants by using different vaccines for the first and second shot, then we've gained a major new weapon.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 14, 2021, 09:53:26 am
Good info. To save those clicking- you need to be near / in one of the health trusts/hospitals in Hull, Sheffield, Birmingham, Newcastle or London (I may have missed one or two - sorry) to be part of the trials.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on April 14, 2021, 11:44:30 am
Yeah, the areas where they're recruiting are:

West Midlands
Hull and East Riding
London and the Surrounding Areas
North East of England
Nottinghamshire, Derbyshire, Lincolnshire and Leicestershire Area
Sheffield Area
Merseyside Area

Detailed info on exactly which postcode areas at the site.

FWIW: being in a vaccine trial (ENSEMBLE 2) has been a really positive experience for me. Unexpectedly, I think it may have been the single best thing I've done for my mental health during the pandemic.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 15, 2021, 03:16:42 pm
 :wall:

 https://www.newsweek.com/covid-19-deniers-event-leaves-host-dead-12-infected-1583553 (https://www.newsweek.com/covid-19-deniers-event-leaves-host-dead-12-infected-1583553)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on April 15, 2021, 06:43:46 pm
For anyone in the South West who fancies a vaccine trial --

https://comflucov.blogs.bristol.ac.uk/

Looking at whether Covid vaccines can be given at the same time as the flu vaccine. They want adults who've already had one shot of a Covid vaccine.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on April 22, 2021, 02:08:41 pm
Got Covid, tested positive, got better without needing to be hospitalized?

These people want your blood:

https://covid.genomicc.org/

They're looking for genetic factors that might affect why some people get extremely ill while others are more mildly affected or even asymptomatic. Research consortium being led by the University of Edinburgh.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 25, 2021, 08:46:12 am
Has anyone else looked at the situation in India on the Worldometer site?
There doesn’t seem to be the normal lag between deaths and cases, only around a week of so. Is this just what happens when health care is overwhelmed?
 https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/india/ (https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/india/)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on April 25, 2021, 09:21:25 am
A fair bit of speculation that deaths are being heavily under reported.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on April 26, 2021, 07:32:06 am
Another vaccine trial:

https://www.ukcovid19study.com/

No placebo group -- they're testing Valneva against AstraZeneca (anyone under 30 will definitely get Valneva).

In terms of self-interest: if you're not eligible in the national rollout yet and would like to get a probably-effective vaccine now, good opportunity to do that. Also, yanno, contributes to science and all that.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on April 28, 2021, 08:37:14 am
Good piece on the Recovery Trial (the one that, among other things, found that dexamethasone works):

https://www.vox.com/22397833/dexamethasone-coronavirus-uk-recovery-trial
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on April 28, 2021, 04:36:45 pm
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-56891326

EU wanting to suspend use of the AZ vaccine, while simultaneously suing them for not producing enough.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on May 13, 2021, 03:38:54 pm
Table 3 on this link gives a useful variant tracker for those getting twitchy for news about the Indian variant etc whilst the normal government Thursday update on variant data is delayed (again).

http://sars2.cvr.gla.ac.uk/cog-uk/

The government data page translates the variant IDs to the countries of origin (Indian variants at the bottom)

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-variants-genomically-confirmed-case-numbers/variants-distribution-of-cases-data
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on May 13, 2021, 05:27:55 pm
Situation in Bolton isn’t looking good… today’s figures show just under 200 cases per 100k - a 125% increase in a week… most of those are the Indian variant.

I expect we’re going to find out in the next few weeks how different or not it is to the existing variants. Whatever restrictions or not are made.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on May 13, 2021, 06:23:33 pm
It's interesting to read that the legislation works in steps, which like the tiers allow for local measures. Didn't Bolton just dare vote Labour too?  :devangel:

The response in Blackburn looks to be to push for more vaccination (with anyone over 18 eligible in 3-wards):
https://twitter.com/JenWilliamsMEN/status/1392840043803287563?s=20

Jen Williams was also reporting that SAGE were meeting re: Bolton (perhaps yesterday).

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on May 13, 2021, 08:40:51 pm
It's interesting to read that the legislation works in steps, which like the tiers allow for local measures. Didn't Bolton just dare vote Labour too?  :devangel:

The response in Blackburn looks to be to push for more vaccination (with anyone over 18 eligible in 3-wards):
https://twitter.com/JenWilliamsMEN/status/1392840043803287563?s=20

Jen Williams was also reporting that SAGE were meeting re: Bolton (perhaps yesterday).

Manchester have been pushing heavily for vaccinations in all ages in Bolton too... No news from Govt yet..

I was looking at the age profile of those in Bolton who had the India variant (it was a good graphic on sky news) and it seemed pretty consistent across the age groups...

The AZ vaccine ((differently branded) has been the main one rolled out in India - so presumably they should be able to get some real world data on its efficacy sooner rather than later.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on May 13, 2021, 10:39:31 pm
Until the case numbers start markedly affecting admissions and deaths I don't think it will make too much difference. There is plenty of real world data out there suggesting the vaccines work fine against this variant. Whitty said as much in the last press conference. I confess to feeling slightly perplexed at the sense of panic.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on May 14, 2021, 09:01:27 am
Until the case numbers start markedly affecting admissions and deaths I don't think it will make too much difference. There is plenty of real world data out there suggesting the vaccines work fine against this variant. Whitty said as much in the last press conference. I confess to feeling slightly perplexed at the sense of panic.

Well - back in November with a Kent variant people were saying the same as you have above… and that didn’t turn out very well. However, the background (60%+ vaccinated) is significantly different.

Living in Greater Manchester - there’s no PANIC here - but certainly amongst those I’ve talked to a sense of dread that once again we’ll be in some sort of special measures / local lockdown again soon.

Which are totally valid worries given the rumblings from the govt. Also, don’t forget that this region had only 4-6 weeks early last summer when everything was open - then went into local restrictions from late July.  Nationally - it’s been the most restricted region since this all started. Personally - I don’t care about going to the pub or eating out - but it would be nice for our Lad to be able to see his Grandparents for an extended period - and for us to go away for a week or so.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on May 14, 2021, 09:41:23 am
Until the case numbers start markedly affecting admissions and deaths I don't think it will make too much difference. There is plenty of real world data out there suggesting the vaccines work fine against this variant. Whitty said as much in the last press conference. I confess to feeling slightly perplexed at the sense of panic.

Well - back in November with a Kent variant people were saying the same as you have above… and that didn’t turn out very well. However, the background (60%+ vaccinated) is significantly different.

Living in Greater Manchester - there’s no PANIC here - but certainly amongst those I’ve talked to a sense of dread that once again we’ll be in some sort of special measures / local lockdown again soon.

Which are totally valid worries given the rumblings from the govt. Also, don’t forget that this region had only 4-6 weeks early last summer when everything was open - then went into local restrictions from late July.  Nationally - it’s been the most restricted region since this all started. Personally - I don’t care about going to the pub or eating out - but it would be nice for our Lad to be able to see his Grandparents for an extended period - and for us to go away for a week or so.

I have a nasty feeling that this may not go well.  The prime minister is trying to sound confident and cannot back down on the unlocking because of the uproar he'd get from his backbenchers.  It has a bit of an echo of Autumn last year as TT says. They'll try regional restrictions,  again and then they won't work,  again,  perhaps? Its a gloomy guess but the government's record isn't exactly great.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on May 14, 2021, 10:17:14 am
Did regional restrictions not work? It seems like they did to me. Case numbers dropped steadily over the tier 3 period in November across the worst affected regions. The national lockdown was caused by the appearance of the kent variant, the surge due to the mixing at Christmas and arguably exacerbated by the normal London-centric bias. Unless vaccination can bring the numbers in the north under control quickly I think we'll be back to tiers pronto.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on May 14, 2021, 11:00:45 am
I don’t know JB. I guess it must have helped COVID things to an extent.

With the Kent variant/London pre Xmas lockdown that didn’t work as well as a national one would have? It was already widespread by then? Are we close to that now?


 Though They certainly caused economic harm and quite some resentment (as there was next to no compensation as there has been under national schemes). Remember how Boris traded Manchester off against Liverpool as to who got the surge testing and who came out of restrictions first.

As Toby said - we’ve had 3-4 months of fairly clear instructions - a plan - a set of rules for unlocking and Boris may have painted himself into a corner here and we’ll be back to flip flopping again.

Remember how 2-3 months ago “there will be no regional restrictions” etc…

We have a catch22 at the moment - as we need data about the Indian variant spread in order to determine what to do - but by the time we get the data it may well be too late! (As happened with Kent variant).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on May 14, 2021, 11:22:27 am
I think the tiers system worked in the past and appears to be a sensible approach. Strangely, Moray is the only region in Scotland that has more restrictions than elsewhere, subject to change on Monday. Shame as you need to travel through it to get to the NW.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on May 14, 2021, 11:27:35 am
Did regional restrictions not work? It seems like they did to me.

Lancs went into no household mixing around the end of July (Leicester etc.). They didn't appear to work locally here (although I guess things could've been worse with no such restrictions).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: battery on May 14, 2021, 11:35:10 am
I have no hard evidence but I am dubious about local tiers systems - people travel, for work, for family - people ignore the restrictions.

We live right on the border of three different counties, all three were in different tiers before Christmas and it caused huge disruption - one child's swimming lesson was on, one wasn't, I could travel 30 miles west but not half a mile east, people were coming from the nearest big town to go to the pub... It all just spirals from there.

Maybe I'm being synical and grumpy.  I have a sinking feeling in the pit of my stomach. Just as we were beginning to make plans a look forwards, I'm urging caution to myself to go back to thinking day by day.

Lockdowns seem like a very blunt instrument when we have huge testing capabilities, surely a better plan would be to get everyone in a town/area to have a PCR test once a week?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on May 14, 2021, 12:09:47 pm
I think the tiers system worked in the past and appears to be a sensible approach.

Sort of, except that as others have mentioned, people get resentful, ignore the restrictions, and just go to another area to go shopping or the pub.
It's been well acknowledged that part of the reason why the winter deaths were so bad, is that the number of infections remained high in a few places which acted as incubators, and then a catalyst for an increase in cases which became uncontrollable too quickly to stop. Then we had a really long lockdown.
It just seems that the data not dates stuff is bullshit, and they're determined to open up anyway.
It's plainly stupid to bring in international travel right now as well, much as I'm desperate to go away somewhere.
But maybe I'm just cynical and grumpy too.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on May 14, 2021, 01:01:00 pm
Quote
Lancs went into no household mixing around the end of July (Leicester etc.). They didn't appear to work locally here

Okay, here's Leicester. First region to go into local restrictions, on 4th July. Seems to have worked.
(http://adamlong.co.uk/files/export(1).png)

Here's Salford. Much of the North is similar. Looking back, the early summer numbers seem too perhaps too low to be affected.
(http://adamlong.co.uk/files/export.png)

Schools went back nationally in Sept, after which general return to normal and numbers steadily rose despite some areas still in special measures. National tier system cam in mid-Oct, seems to have been very effective until Kent variant appeared early Dec. Note that during Nov numbers in both areas dropped quicker than they did under national lockdown after xmas. The other point is that much of the north had a big second wave in autumn which exceeded early 2021. But the national approach followed London numbers.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on May 14, 2021, 01:08:11 pm
Your embedding didn't work for me:

Leic:
http://adamlong.co.uk/files/export(1).png

Here's Salford.
http://adamlong.co.uk/files/export.png
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on May 14, 2021, 01:24:37 pm
Quote
Lancs went into no household mixing around the end of July (Leicester etc.). They didn't appear to work locally here

Okay, here's Leicester. Firts region to go into local restrictions, on 4th July. Seems to have worked.
(http://adamlong.co.uk/files/export(1).png)

Can you link the source? I'm struggling to find a timeline of cases in Pendle/Hyndburn etc.; my memory (and I was looking fairly often) was that we went into local restrictions at ~50 per 100k and we didn't get back down to that level despite a prolonged period of restrictions. There was brief respite as they harmonised the tiers (which was more like the admin glitch Bolton saw for 48H) which led to about a week of being able to mix in gardens. I'm not saying that such restrictions didn't have any impact but perhaps sufficient impact, given the long lasting nature of the restrictions?.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on May 14, 2021, 01:32:24 pm
Ribble valley?

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/cases?areaType=ltla&areaName=Ribble%20Valley

As I said, the numbers back then just look tiny now.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on May 14, 2021, 01:34:50 pm
Ribble valley?

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/cases?areaType=ltla&areaName=Ribble%20Valley

As I said, the numbers back then just look tiny now.

No, the RBV was unique in its surroundings as an area that remained low in terms of cases. The other side of the hill!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on May 14, 2021, 02:40:53 pm
There's a dropdown at the top. I don't know where you live.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on May 14, 2021, 04:23:17 pm
Local restrictions are a waste of time. National or nothing as far as I'm concerned, they spread enormous resentment and don't work. All the examples linked above of them "working" are pre the emergence of the more transmissible Kent variant. Given the main concern re the Indian variant is its enhanced transmissibility over the *Kent* variant, the chances of local restrictions stopping the spread seem basically zero, so not sure what those advocating it think they would achieve.

Given the above, I'm interested in what people think the endgame is here. Lock down and wait for a newer vaccine? For me the game is completely different with so many vaccinated so I am very much in the proceed as planned until we see evidence on the ground of the strategy not working.  Not least because getting any significant buyin from the public without evidence of, to be blunt, deaths and hospital admissions, will be nigh on impossible.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: macca7 on May 14, 2021, 06:52:48 pm
Have to agree the country is too small for regional lockdowns, too easy to just move across the border to a county with fewer restrictions and therefore is actually achieves the opposite and spreads the virus further.

Buy in will be tricky not only from the public but a large part of the Conservative party!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on May 14, 2021, 07:40:02 pm
Local restrictions are a waste of time. National or nothing as far as I'm concerned, they spread enormous resentment and don't work. All the examples linked above of them "working" are pre the emergence of the more transmissible Kent variant. Given the main concern re the Indian variant is its enhanced transmissibility over the *Kent* variant, the chances of local restrictions stopping the spread seem basically zero, so not sure what those advocating it think they would achieve.

Given the above, I'm interested in what people think the endgame is here. Lock down and wait for a newer vaccine? For me the game is completely different with so many vaccinated so I am very much in the proceed as planned until we see evidence on the ground of the strategy not working.  Not least because getting any significant buyin from the public without evidence of, to be blunt, deaths and hospital admissions, will be nigh on impossible.

It appears SAGE don’t share your optimism…

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/may/14/india-covid-variant-could-lead-to-third-wave-uk?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Quote
Assuming the vaccines hold up, more people could be hospitalised than in the first wave – putting the NHS at risk – if the variant is much more than 30% more transmissible, University of Warwick models show. At 40% more transmissible, hospitalisations could reach 6,000 per day, far above the peak of the second wave, and 10,000 per day if the variant is 50% more transmissible.

That is if we do nothing. If step three easing of restrictions in England on Monday is cancelled, the third wave will be far more modest, reaching 300 hospitalisations per day, even if the virus spreads 50% more easily than the Kent version.

Feels a lot like December all over….
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on May 14, 2021, 10:11:37 pm
Depressing news evening!

I still don't really understand where we are trying to get to. Are we waiting in hope of a vaccine that reduces transmissibility? for how long? And what about the variant after that; viruses mutate, that's what they do.

I do think a discussion is going to have to take place very soon about the levels of deaths we will be forced to tolerate in exchange for a semi normal existence, if that Guardian piece is even halfway correct. The alternative is living like this for years, no?

I don't mean to be callous in the slightest, the whole thing is shit, but if vaccines don't get us out of this, then what's the plan after that?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on May 14, 2021, 10:54:09 pm
Depressing news evening!

I still don't really understand where we are trying to get to. Are we waiting in hope of a vaccine that reduces transmissibility? for how long? And what about the variant after that; viruses mutate, that's what they do.

I do think a discussion is going to have to take place very soon about the levels of deaths we will be forced to tolerate in exchange for a semi normal existence, if that Guardian piece is even halfway correct. The alternative is living like this for years, no?

I don't mean to be callous in the slightest, the whole thing is shit, but if vaccines don't get us out of this, then what's the plan after that?

I understand what you mean,  but the obvious issue is that you can tolerate a level of mortality,  but if it's infectious enough to quickly reach a stage where hospitals are full, then you have the current situation in India
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on May 15, 2021, 06:31:13 am
There seem to have been three main ways of dealing with CV19

1. Lockdown - relax - lockdown - relax etc.. (most of Europe).

2. Close Borders / Isolation (Australia, NZ)

3. Somewhere between option 1 and doing nothing (Brazil, USA)

Perhaps we (as an Island nation) should have looked at 2 - and rather than weighing up whether or not NHS being overwhelmed and lives lost is a suitable price to pay to avert economic devastation and be looking at how economically it would compare with Borders Closed and semi normal life vs Open borders and periodic lockdowns.

Of course we won’t know - and we’re too far down the path we’re on now…

Wonder whether we’d be in this position if there had been no vaccine delays in production - as we’d now be finishing up the 20-25 year olds or have finished first doses….

The catch22 I mentioned earlier still holds
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on May 15, 2021, 07:39:53 am
The issue with trying to rely on vaccination to stop infections is that it's not instant, they take 2-3 weeks to be effective. We should have restricted borders more, especially from India. That was clearly not done as BJ was worried about a trade deal. Bringing in travel now is unutterably stupid, and it's storing up a reservoir of infections, so more lockdown is more likely.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ged on May 15, 2021, 08:10:57 am
I'm obviously missing something here, so would someone mind explaining how we are set for another wave just as big as January. We're on to about 55% vaccination, much higher than that of elderly and vulnerable.

 Are we just talking those who haven't had it/the few it doesn't work for/had it less than 3 weeks ago? That seems like a much smaller population to be getting ill and hospitalised
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on May 15, 2021, 08:44:58 am
I'm obviously missing something here, so would someone mind explaining how we are set for another wave just as big as January. We're on to about 55% vaccination, much higher than that of elderly and vulnerable.

 Are we just talking those who haven't had it/the few it doesn't work for/had it less than 3 weeks ago? That seems like a much smaller population to be getting ill and hospitalised


As far as I can understand there's a lot of uncertainty and the worst case numbers mentioned are based on models where the new variant is 50% more transmissable than the already more transmissable Kent variant which is not in any way proven at the moment.  They also model 10%, 20% etc which has much more minor impact.   It appears there's also some modelling from London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine which predicts lower (though still significant) impact at 50% more transmissable.

I'm not a huge fan of the Guardians coverage of this sort of thing, it often lacks detail from the stuff it quotes, strangely the Daily Mail coverage seems pretty good, including more charts and discussion of the factors involved!

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9578503/Coronavirus-SAGE-models-warn-hospital-admissions-soar-India-variant-infectious.html

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on May 15, 2021, 10:31:01 am

I do think a discussion is going to have to take place very soon about the levels of deaths we will be forced to tolerate in exchange for a semi normal existence, if that Guardian piece is even halfway correct. The alternative is living like this for years, no?

Or actually implementing test track isolate and see how much of a brake it can apply to transmission. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on May 15, 2021, 10:38:41 am
Not going near the Mails website.. browser overload by popup/clickbait last time I was there :D

However, to date most of the real world outcomes have been worse than the more optimistic modelling scenarios. And the models themselves have had a fair amount of real data with which to be calibrated/refined since last March.

We’ll all find out one way or the other soon anyway - as there’s no real change in govt actions. Aside from speeding up vaccinations (that take 2-3 weeks to work as Toby said).

 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on May 15, 2021, 11:01:31 am

Or actually implementing test track isolate and see how much of a brake it can apply to transmission.

I think getting infections down to a level where TTI could actually work will require an extremely draconian and long lasting national lockdown which would be impossible both politically and practically.

There always was a big gap between what was politically possible and what was advantageous from a virus control perspective and that gap is only getting bigger now vaccines have arrived. The interesting (and perhaps concerning) issue for me is that given the way vaccines have been sold as the way out, if it turns out that they aren't, how will that affect public compliance/attitudes towards risk?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on May 15, 2021, 11:06:06 am
I'm obviously missing something here, so would someone mind explaining how we are set for another wave just as big as January. We're on to about 55% vaccination, much higher than that of elderly and vulnerable.

 Are we just talking those who haven't had it/the few it doesn't work for/had it less than 3 weeks ago? That seems like a much smaller population to be getting ill and hospitalised

One of the problems is that although places like S Devon are likely to be fine, if you take a Northern town, with high ethnic minority population, and perhaps a nearby university city or town, more of the population won't have been offered a jab yet as it's a younger demographic; more people live in multi generational households, and there are probably more people with irrational beliefs about vaccines who are likely to turn it down. Also more working people, who cannot work from home. These areas already have worse overall health, lower life expectancy ...
I'm perfectly aware that parts of the South West have social problems, but all of the above is why I'm concerned that the country is going to be in a bad place again.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Camo on May 15, 2021, 11:16:37 am
Depressing news evening!

I still don't really understand where we are trying to get to. Are we waiting in hope of a vaccine that reduces transmissibility? for how long? And what about the variant after that; viruses mutate, that's what they do.

I do think a discussion is going to have to take place very soon about the levels of deaths we will be forced to tolerate in exchange for a semi normal existence, if that Guardian piece is even halfway correct. The alternative is living like this for years, no?

I don't mean to be callous in the slightest, the whole thing is shit, but if vaccines don't get us out of this, then what's the plan after that?

Good post. That type of discussion is quite valuable I feel.

Discussions on the internet seem to vary massively between people wanting endless lockdowns and draconian restrictions to nutters that think bill gates is trying to take over the world with the vaccine.

Not many people seem to be talking about what we do another year or two down the line. If different strains can outpace vaccine developments etc.

I don’t want any unnecessary deaths but I don’t want to spend my entire life in the house either. Really difficult to decide where to find a good balance point, as always somethings got to give.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on May 15, 2021, 11:25:02 am
The core of the issue is how you, me, the population of the UK and the rest of the world defines an 'unnecessary death'. Whose death is ever necessary?

Perhaps over time the language we use to understand death will mutate as the virus does.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on May 15, 2021, 11:35:18 am
Indeed. Perhaps a place to start is what death rates per activity are deemed socially acceptable - or acceptable by most people.

Eg. A 100 mile motorway journey
A short haul flight
Taking an aspirin
Etc.. etc..

Not got the time today (sorry) but suspect there are figures on stuff like this from which we could compare… if you get my jist.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: wasbeen on May 15, 2021, 11:41:10 am
Looking at the case data for India. The cases look like they might have peaked. I am not sure I fully understand why this is  the case despite not having a national lockdown or a high proportion of vaccinated population.

Also, why is there a tendency for the peaks to be symmetrical? i.e. the quicker the cases numbers rise, the quicker they fall (at least initially).


Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on May 15, 2021, 11:57:57 am
Looking at the case data for India. The cases look like they might have peaked. I am not sure I fully understand why this is  the case despite not having a national lockdown or a high proportion of vaccinated population.

Also, why is there a tendency for the peaks to be symmetrical? i.e. the quicker the cases numbers rise, the quicker they fall (at least initially).

India was considered unusual in the first wave for having surprisingly very small numbers - despite a large and densely populated cities. Back then there were all sorts of theories about age profile of population. Also at one point IIRC Delhi had 30-40% antibody presence (first wave) so something is clearly different with either this variant or how it’s being handled.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nutty on May 15, 2021, 12:45:34 pm
Indeed. Perhaps a place to start is what death rates per activity are deemed socially acceptable - or acceptable by most people.

Eg. A 100 mile motorway journey
A short haul flight
Taking an aspirin
Etc.. etc..

Not got the time today (sorry) but suspect there are figures on stuff like this from which we could compare… if you get my jist.
The HSE's Reducing Risks, Protecting People (R2P2) is probably the starting point for looking at this. Even has climbing risk in there somewhere (don't know how good an estimate it is though).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Camo on May 15, 2021, 12:46:27 pm
Very true, no death is necessary but some seem more tragic than others. I’ve had family members die at different ages - neither from covid but a death at 49 seems significantly more tragic than a death at 85. Even when they’re both family. Of course losing someone is always distressing but some comfort can be found in knowing they lived a long life.

With covid we may hopefully get to a point where deaths are so low that it is comparable to deaths from things like smoking and obesity. That sentence sounds strange to say but as tomtom was saying lots of things that could result in death are deemed acceptable risks by lots of people.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on May 15, 2021, 12:59:15 pm
With covid we may hopefully get to a point where deaths are so low that it is comparable to deaths from things like smoking and obesity.

We're more than there from a quick Google:
70 deaths in last week due to COVID (https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/)
~600 deaths per week due to obesity (https://www.bhf.org.uk/what-we-do/news-from-the-bhf/news-archive/2021/april/31000-heart-and-circulatory-deaths-obesity-each-year)

Whose death is ever necessary?
Everyone's, eventually.

The interesting (and perhaps concerning) issue for me is that given the way vaccines have been sold as the way out, if it turns out that they aren't, how will that affect public compliance/attitudes towards risk?
Yeah, without an alternative and convincing "exit plan" I think peoples' ability to tolerate deaths from covid as a by-product of not having too many rules will increase significantly. Unless there's real risk of major impact to other NHS services due to overload I can't see how most people would buy into more restrictions.. I wouldn't.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Camo on May 15, 2021, 01:05:36 pm
I’m half surprised by that but probably shouldn’t be, there are a lot of big unhealthy people around. Thanks for looking it up, I should’ve done that. Makes it even more surprising so many seem in favour of lockdown but not in favour of promoting and incentivising a healthy lifestyle. Anecdotally I know someone who treats covid like the plague - a lifelong smoker who has had mouth cancer one, treated & recovered, yet continues to smoke. Fair to say I fear tobacco more than covid, but that is totally lost on him.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on May 15, 2021, 01:56:22 pm
The unwinnable battle for a lot of people - short-term pleasure of eating/drinking/smoking versus the long-term pleasure of living a healthy active lifestyle. Or: most people on the planet don't care how good 8c feels compared to how tasty chicken mcnuggets are.

Short-term pleasures are less threatened by lockdown - you can still smash in chocolate and lager on the coach while watching tv. Travelling across Europe to enjoy living off rice and tuna while projecting 8c.. less achievable.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on May 15, 2021, 05:36:34 pm
This was a rather detailed and unsettling read, for anyone interested in what evidence is in the public doman re  natural selection vs lab creation for the origin of SARSCoV2.

https://thebulletin.org/2021/05/the-origin-of-covid-did-people-or-nature-open-pandoras-box-at-wuhan/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: AJM on May 16, 2021, 08:10:06 am
Yeah, without an alternative and convincing "exit plan" I think peoples' ability to tolerate deaths from covid as a by-product of not having too many rules will increase significantly. Unless there's real risk of major impact to other NHS services due to overload I can't see how most people would buy into more restrictions.. I wouldn't.

Isnt the whole point that the modelling does suggest a risk of service overload still? I.e. by the time you take the older not-taken-up (either deliberately, or the people who have fallen through the cracks without the intent and are in the same position - we've got high coverage so far, but that's still 1:10 or something, right?), the people for whom the vaccine hasn't worked (1:10? 1:20?), and all the people of hasn't reached yet (most of whom should be low risk, save for those with vulnerability that hasn't been identified yet) there's still a pool large enough, especially if the variant is more transmissible and the herd immunity threshold therefore higher, to crash the system in the absence of any restrictions?

If we had finished vaccinating, this might be a different scenario - but we have obviously already committed to a "acceptable deaths" strategy, we aren't going for zero covid, so I think implicitly that conversation has already been had - I don't really recognise the viewpoint that says "you know, one day were going to have to have that discussion" - perhaps not in public it hasn't, but politically that's a done deal and that's the path we're heading down already
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: joeisidle on May 16, 2021, 09:18:08 am
Yeah, without an alternative and convincing "exit plan" I think peoples' ability to tolerate deaths from covid as a by-product of not having too many rules will increase significantly. Unless there's real risk of major impact to other NHS services due to overload I can't see how most people would buy into more restrictions.. I wouldn't.

Isnt the whole point that the modelling does suggest a risk of service overload still? I.e. by the time you take the older not-taken-up (either deliberately, or the people who have fallen through the cracks without the intent and are in the same position - we've got high coverage so far, but that's still 1:10 or something, right?), the people for whom the vaccine hasn't worked (1:10? 1:20?), and all the people of hasn't reached yet (most of whom should be low risk, save for those with vulnerability that hasn't been identified yet) there's still a pool large enough, especially if the variant is more transmissible and the herd immunity threshold therefore higher, to crash the system in the absence of any restrictions?

If we had finished vaccinating, this might be a different scenario - but we have obviously already committed to a "acceptable deaths" strategy, we aren't going for zero covid, so I think implicitly that conversation has already been had - I don't really recognise the viewpoint that says "you know, one day were going to have to have that discussion" - perhaps not in public it hasn't, but politically that's a done deal and that's the path we're heading down already

Exactly this. A line seems to have been drawn by government long ago that as long as we don't completely collapse the ability of the NHS to function, the level of associated deaths are acceptable.

My issue is less with this decision outright, but more that we can't even seem to stick to these parameters when handling these waves. Latest SAGE consensus minutes appear to suggest that the NHS may well not function with our current roadmap combined with the new variant - particularly Step 4, but even Mondays measures could leave us with a similar peak to the one that shut down many hospital functions in January.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stabbsy on May 16, 2021, 09:25:02 am
70 deaths in last week due to COVID (https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/)
~600 deaths per week due to obesity (https://www.bhf.org.uk/what-we-do/news-from-the-bhf/news-archive/2021/april/31000-heart-and-circulatory-deaths-obesity-each-year)
Not commenting on the underlying point, but isn’t this a bit of a meaningless comparison given the nature of Covid deaths and death trends? A long-term rate of obesity deaths driven by a long history of poor health in the UK, compared to the possible low point of a highly variable death rate that has all the benefits of having come out of a long period of restrictions. You could just as easily have chosen a week in January with >8,000 Covid deaths.

I’m not suggesting you’re trying to make a particular point with those numbers, just that they don’t add much/anything. The valid comparison in my mind would be to a long-term rate of Covid deaths with an acceptable level of restrictions in place.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 16, 2021, 10:16:01 am
70 deaths in last week due to COVID (https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/)
~600 deaths per week due to obesity (https://www.bhf.org.uk/what-we-do/news-from-the-bhf/news-archive/2021/april/31000-heart-and-circulatory-deaths-obesity-each-year)
Not commenting on the underlying point, but isn’t this a bit of a meaningless comparison given the nature of Covid deaths and death trends? A long-term rate of obesity deaths driven by a long history of poor health in the UK, compared to the possible low point of a highly variable death rate that has all the benefits of having come out of a long period of restrictions. You could just as easily have chosen a week in January with >8,000 Covid deaths.

I’m not suggesting you’re trying to make a particular point with those numbers, just that they don’t add much/anything. The valid comparison in my mind would be to a long-term rate of Covid deaths with an acceptable level of restrictions in place.

I just wonder about the logic of assuming 600 deaths per week from COVID on top of the 600 deaths per week from obesity and the many hundreds of deaths from other causes, doesn’t represent a massively overloaded system, given the strain the system was under prior to the pandemic and that it has been stretched to breaking point repeatedly for over a year.

We have “coped” because it came in waves. Had the situation in January persisted for a few weeks more, we would have seen the system begin to implode. Even if we could provide and sustain provision of physical resources to cope with sustained hospitalisations at those levels, we couldn’t hope to keep our Human Resources going without a break, physiologically or mentally.

I’m certain the Nightingales were always intended to become sanitariums and  death houses, should the need have arisen. 
The only thing that has prevented that, has been the lockdown.
Should the vaccines prove unable to arrest this pandemic, then we stand very little chance of preventing an overwhelming breakdown in public services.
As has been pointed out, our “death toll” is first, not really the point and secondly, artificially low, primarily due to spread mitigation and medical interventions. Should the system collapse, those medical interventions cease, many who would have survived, will not. The death demographic would shift significantly, since many seriously ill of younger age, also responded more significantly to treatments.

I think we’d be looking at some rather stiffer triage than some imagine. I wouldn’t think anyone over 50 should be contemplating this with anything other than gnawing fear.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on May 16, 2021, 12:54:37 pm
Funny. But you aren't prohibited from getting on with living your life while probably not winning the lottery. While probably not dying from covid, you are.

(weird - that was a reply to Ru, whose post has disappeared)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: battery on May 16, 2021, 08:39:54 pm
[quote/]

I think we’d be looking at some rather stiffer triage than some imagine. I wouldn’t think anyone over 50 should be contemplating this with anything other than gnawing fear.
[/quote]

A friend is an ICU nurse and this is one of the things that really broke her last year. Never before have they had to triage, they helped in any way they could, but they were having to decide who gets treatment and who doesn't.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on May 17, 2021, 10:58:30 am
I'm certainly not trying to advocate for endless lockdowns, but it seems totally absurd today that all the health advisers, and many government ministers are advising people not to do any of the things that they're lifting restrictions on. It seems as though they're trying to absolve themselves of responsibility and acknowledging that they're not competent enough to cope while trying to keep business leaders happy. Meanwhile the majority of the population who don't really read or watch much if any news get on with packing out pubs and Ryanair flights to go and bring some more variants in. Self quarantine is a total fallacy, I don't seriously believe anyone does it properly. I just can't see it going well.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 17, 2021, 11:06:57 am
I'm certainly not trying to advocate for endless lockdowns, but it seems totally absurd today that all the health advisers, and many government ministers are advising people not to do any of the things that they're lifting restrictions on. It seems as though they're trying to absolve themselves of responsibility and acknowledging that they're not competent enough to cope while trying to keep business leaders happy. Meanwhile the majority of the population who don't really read or watch much if any news get on with packing out pubs and Ryanair flights to go and bring some more variants in. Self quarantine is a total fallacy, I don't seriously believe anyone does it properly. I just can't see it going well.

It’s not going to.
Just like every other time, we will have to wait for the curve to become  obvious and admissions begin to rise.
Preventative measures, well ahead of requirements, are not something the public understands.
I don’t really blame the government, it’s not something they can possibly sell.
The talk, is to prepare us for what they’re almost certain they will have to do, a month from now.
If it starts to peak again, they will have to shut down again, it is just that bit too serious and leads to too many serious cases, across a just broad enough demographic, to be un-ignorable.
The only real hope is the vaccine program outpaces the surge.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on May 17, 2021, 11:21:37 am
If anyone else is in Lancs (or S. Cumbria) the eligibility criteria for booking a vaccination has been temporarily lowered with three days of 'surge' vaccination available Tues-Thurs this week.

We're both booked for tomorrow.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on May 17, 2021, 11:42:28 am
I thought this was quite succinct in the NS newsletter this morning.

Quote
Good morning. Groups of up to six can meet inside and up to 30 outside in England, Wales and much of Scotland (Glasgow and Moray will remain under a degree of further restrictions to combat the greater number of cases there) as the United Kingdom heads towards the end of lockdown.

But two things are causing consternation in government: the first is the new, faster-spreading B.1.617.2 variant, the second is the small group of British people who may refuse to get the vaccine. (Those of us who have yet to be offered a vaccine may be entitled at this point to feel somewhat irate that the English government's thinking is already turning to how to deal with the recalcitrant, but that's a debate for another time.)

The plain facts are these: the evidence so far is that the B.1.617.2 variant responds well to vaccines, it just spreads faster. But it is a cause of particular anxiety for the government because of how long India - from where this variant springs - remained off the United Kingdom's red list. If B.1.617.2 does mean a delay to the great unlocking, that will be in no small part the government's fault, not least because 18 months on we are still no closer to having an effective approach on isolation, whether through central quarantine or sufficiently generous sick pay.

So you can see why it suits Downing Street to nudge the conversation away from that issue and towards the minority of vaccine-hesitant Brits. But again, there are some important facts to be aware of: the most vaccine-hesitant British person, regardless of class, race or religion, is more likely to be keen on getting vaccinated than the median person in most other countries. (For reasons that aren't fully clear, the British public is really keen on getting vaccinated: and thankfully, thus far, no amount of disinformation, whether it be spread by traditional media a la the MMR vaccine, by religious organisations as it has been in the case of HPV or on social media in the case of the coronavirus vaccines has yet to make a dent in that.)

So there is a choice to be made about whether to live in some form of perpetual on-again, off-again arrangement, because we are never going to have a 100 per cent vaccinated population at home or abroad. As the lockdown ends, the British government will need to have a grown-up conversation, both about its own shortcomings but equally importantly about the level of risk that we are willing to have in exchange for a return to normality.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tommytwotone on May 17, 2021, 11:45:40 am
I thought this was quite succinct in the NS newsletter this morning.

Quote
...the British government will need to have a grown-up conversation, both about its own shortcomings...


I won't hold my breath.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on May 17, 2021, 11:59:47 am
If anyone else is in Lancs (or S. Cumbria) the eligibility criteria for booking a vaccination has been temporarily lowered with three days of 'surge' vaccination available Tues-Thurs this week.

We're both booked for tomorrow.

For anyone in Bolton who lives or works in BL3 or BL4, maybe go talk to the people at the Vaccination Bus, because it seems like they're getting as close as they can to saying out loud FUCK IT JUST GET DOWN HERE AND WE WILL FIND AN EXCUSE TO GET YOU VACCINATED:

https://twitter.com/DrWallBolton/status/1394041553354637321

Will be there until Sun May 23rd.

https://twitter.com/boltonnhsft/status/1394242735197114368

They've broken the UK record for most vaccines given in a single day at one site, apparently.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mr chaz on May 17, 2021, 12:11:37 pm
Similar experience in Shropshire for me, mass call out for anyone 18+ to come and get vaccinated at my local GP, had my Pfizer last week (age 28)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on May 17, 2021, 01:45:21 pm
They're going to officially open up vaccinations to ages 18-39 in some areas of Glasgow:

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/19307759.coronavirus-glasgow-vaccines-targeting-18-39-hotspots/

Also, should apparently go to 35+ in all of the UK some time this week.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on May 17, 2021, 02:06:54 pm
I'm obviously missing something here, so would someone mind explaining how we are set for another wave just as big as January. We're on to about 55% vaccination, much higher than that of elderly and vulnerable.

Are we just talking those who haven't had it/the few it doesn't work for/had it less than 3 weeks ago? That seems like a much smaller population to be getting ill and hospitalised

55% having had at least one dose, remember. One dose does provide pretty good protection against hospitalization and death (which is why prioritizing first doses is a solid policy) but it's still only partial protection relative to having both doses.

And if you have enough people exposed, then even a small percentage of breakthrough in fully vaccinated people and a small percentage of severe illness in younger, unvaccinated and half-vaccinated people is going to add up.

It's a numbers game: looks very likely B.1.617.2 is more transmissible than the Kent variant, but we don't yet know how much.

Folk have been feeding different transmissibility increases into their models, and depending on that figure and how you adjust other parameters, you get everything from "barely a ripple" to "oh shit that's not great".

https://twitter.com/JamesWard73/status/1393932001271554049 (example thread, concluding in a cautiously optimistic way that we've got tools to avoid the really bad outcomes but it might be a bit bumpy)

There's also the risk that the variant will make the vaccine less effective to some degree -- so far, antibody tests from various labs suggest that this shouldn't be the case, thank fuck, but we don't know for certain so people are a little bit twitchy.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on May 17, 2021, 02:15:43 pm
70 deaths in last week due to COVID (https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/)
~600 deaths per week due to obesity (https://www.bhf.org.uk/what-we-do/news-from-the-bhf/news-archive/2021/april/31000-heart-and-circulatory-deaths-obesity-each-year)
Not commenting on the underlying point, but isn’t this a bit of a meaningless comparison given the nature of Covid deaths and death trends?

It depends on what you want to compare. I was just responding to
With covid we may hopefully get to a point where deaths are so low that it is comparable to deaths from things like smoking and obesity.
and found it interesting to benchmark where we are now and where we'd need to be (~85 deaths per day) for COVID and obesity to be killing a similar number. Obviously this was not true in Jan and is only a snapshot in time, but I took that as read/implicit.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on May 17, 2021, 03:03:37 pm
(the national vaccine booking system now seems to be open to the >=35yr olds, even though the front page doesn't yet reflect that).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 17, 2021, 03:28:14 pm
I’ve just had my second dose slot moved from 8 June to 22 May.
Didn’t request it, just got a text.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on May 17, 2021, 03:51:16 pm
I’ve just had my second dose slot moved from 8 June to 22 May.
Didn’t request it, just got a text.

Nice. If it's any reassurance, I had my second vaccine a couple of weeks ago, and had extremely low level of side effects compared to feeling pretty ropey after the first one.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: webbo on May 17, 2021, 04:24:28 pm
I’ve just had my second dose slot moved from 8 June to 22 May.
Didn’t request it, just got a text.

Nice. If it's any reassurance, I had my second vaccine a couple of weeks ago, and had extremely low level of side effects compared to feeling pretty ropey after the first one.
I was just the opposite no side effects at all from the first one where as with the second one I felt like I’d got Dom’s for a week.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: battery on May 17, 2021, 04:38:56 pm
I’ve just had my second dose slot moved from 8 June to 22 May.
Didn’t request it, just got a text.

Nice. If it's any reassurance, I had my second vaccine a couple of weeks ago, and had extremely low level of side effects compared to feeling pretty ropey after the first one.

I had Pfizer and felt shocking after the first one but only slight fuzzy after the second.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on May 17, 2021, 04:55:59 pm
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2021/may/17/uk-covid-live-boris-johnson-caution-britain-lifts-restrictions-coronavirus-latest-updates?page=with:block-60a288408f08e757a73578ce#block-60a288408f08e757a73578ce

DPH for Blackburn with Darwen also getting as close as possible to FUCK IT JUST GET DOWN HERE AND WE WILL FIND AN EXCUSE TO GET YOU VACCINATED:

"We’re urging everybody over 18 to book an appointment and have that discussion on a one-by-one level with clinicians who will be doing the vaccination, because of course they will be able to go through the eligibility process with each individual.

We have a strong expectation that a very high percentage of our population would meet at least one of those criteria, but of course they will be sticking strictly to the criteria supplied under the JCVI."

Also:

https://twitter.com/BBCLancashire/status/1394233464124317697
https://twitter.com/BWDDPH/status/1393923421994725378
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Dac on May 17, 2021, 05:18:57 pm
I am told that the anecdotal evidence is that with the Pfizer vaccine the majority of people feel ok after the first jab but a bit run down after the second, whereas with the Astra Zenica it's the first jab that's more likely to leave you feeling knackered, but you're fine after the second.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on May 17, 2021, 05:31:09 pm
Got my second AZ on Friday - will report how it compares to the first (that was pretty bad for 24 hours tbh).

Shame the vaccine supply issues cropped up 2-3 months ago - otherwise everyone would have been done by now.. (1 dose at least).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on May 17, 2021, 05:45:37 pm
I am told that the anecdotal evidence is that with the Pfizer vaccine the majority of people feel ok after the first jab but a bit run down after the second, whereas with the Astra Zenica it's the first jab that's more likely to leave you feeling knackered, but you're fine after the second.

Not just anecdotal -- also confirmed by https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)01115-6/fulltext as an incidental finding:

"In groups with homologous vaccine schedules, systemic reactogenicity was greater after the prime dose in the ChAd group, and after the boost dose in the BNT group."

Translated: with AZ you tend to feel rubbish after dose 1, with Pfizer it tends to be after dose 2.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tommytwotone on May 17, 2021, 05:57:28 pm
My n=1 re: AZ was true.

Woke up feeling fine after jab at 7:30pm night before, and then went off a cliff at about 10am!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on May 17, 2021, 07:13:04 pm
Getting my first Pfizer on Friday evening (second booked for June 28th). We'll see how it goes.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on May 17, 2021, 07:33:14 pm
May your side-effects be mild and your immune response robust!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on May 17, 2021, 07:38:55 pm
Thanks slab_happy!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: moose on May 17, 2021, 07:48:21 pm
Got my second AZ on Friday - will report how it compares to the first (that was pretty bad for 24 hours tbh).

I'm due for my 2nd AZ jab in early July - so any more data on the prospects would be welcome. The 1st shot left me with an "aftermath of flu" feeling for two days (tired, achy, generally washed-up) and a painfully bruised arm for a week.  That said, I had a pretty strong climbing session on the 2nd day, despite feeling like death warmed up (I had the day off and couldn't help myself), maybe its bark was worse than its bite.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Coops_13 on May 17, 2021, 08:07:56 pm
I gave up guessing about side effects. I had both Moderna shots with no side effects at all. My other half had a fever and other symptoms for three days following her second Moderna shot...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Falling Down on May 17, 2021, 08:22:27 pm
I had two Pfizer jabs. Both resulted in mild side effects. Headache, a light fever and fatigue for less than 24 hours. The second was easier than the first.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ged on May 17, 2021, 09:52:50 pm
I’ve just had my second dose slot moved from 8 June to 22 May.
Didn’t request it, just got a text.

Nice. If it's any reassurance, I had my second vaccine a couple of weeks ago, and had extremely low level of side effects compared to feeling pretty ropey after the first one.
I was just the opposite no side effects at all from the first one where as with the second one I felt like I’d got Dom’s for a week.

Me too, from first Pfizer. I was convinced I'd pretty much ruptured my hamstring, only for it to fade after a few days. Still feeling pretty weird 5 days on, but I think I caught a grim toddler cold at the same time. The doms thing was very noticeable though.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on May 18, 2021, 08:11:11 am
New walk-in vaccination clinic in Bolton, open 8am to 8pm daily:

https://twitter.com/LythgoeDawn/status/1394280959827140608
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on May 18, 2021, 08:17:14 am
My n=1 re: AZ was true.

Woke up feeling fine after jab at 7:30pm night before, and then went off a cliff at about 10am!

Was tempted to feign feeling crap and do the same (not the 'cliff obv)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sxrxg on May 18, 2021, 09:07:33 am
Had my second AZ vaccine yesterday morning and felt slightly groggy yesterday with a slight tightness in my chest (felt like i should take my inhaler for the first time in a while), much better today though with only a slightly sore upper arm. This is much better than after the first jab when i had a banging head ache and needed a day on the sofa shivering and feeling sorry for myself.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on May 19, 2021, 06:39:12 pm
I have been accused of running a vaccine trial pyramid scheme and I have no shame. Do some Science, it's fun!

For any of you jammy bastards who've already had two jabs and wouldn't mind a third:

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/may/19/covid-booster-trial-will-give-third-vaccine-dose-to-uk-volunteers

https://www.covboost.org.uk/

Who they want:

"Adults that are aged 30 and over who received their first dose of COVID-19 vaccination in either December 2020 or January 2021 and who are 84 days post second vaccination are able to take part (due to the NHS deployment timelines, some sites may need to invite people who have been prime-boosted with their second dose of AstraZeneca vaccine with a minimum of 70 days from their second dose)."
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on May 22, 2021, 07:44:06 am
Jab #2 report (AstraZenica):

Had my second one at 9am yesterday (Friday). Felt fine - bit ‘out of it’ from 10-12 but then managed a trip to IKEA and the school run without any wobbles (perhaps it helped! 😁) so all fine. Got tired quick in the evening and in bed by 9. Fairly fitful night - but nothing that bad. Arm a bit sore/stiff this morning.

Much much better than Jab 1 where by 7pm I was lying in bed shaking like a shitting dog.

The vaccination place (small hospital) was noticeably busier and faster than 11 weeks ago. May be a day by day thing but they seemed to be rattling them through.

We also had a pop up vaccination place from 11-3 outside the mosque just around the corner from home. The mosque had organised it presumably for more reluctant members of their followers, but instead the que (which was long and formed fast) seemed to be mostly white millennials - of which there are plenty in West Dids. Plenty of demand anyway… and there didn’t seem to be any turning away of people.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 22, 2021, 03:01:44 pm
All done, in and out within 5 minutes and ten minutes before my appointment time of 09:30. No queue but steady stream and no unoccupied stations.
Went yesterday afternoon for Mrs OMM’s first. Pfizer, because she’s 12 years younger than me and apparently not allowed the AZ.
Apart from a sore arm and much wailing and gnashing of teeth before the jab (she had serious anxiety issues), no obvious side affects for her.
I don’t even have a sore arm or even the mild fatigue I felt the first time.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on May 22, 2021, 06:41:40 pm
and much wailing and gnashing of teeth before the jab (she had serious anxiety issues)

Good for her for going for it despite the anxiety! And congrats to you both!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on May 23, 2021, 02:48:08 pm
There’s something fishy (more fishy than normal) about how the Govt and PHE are (not) releasing data about the growth of the Indian variant.

https://twitter.com/dgurdasani1/status/1396373990986375171?s=21

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on May 23, 2021, 04:29:15 pm
Um remind me, who is head of the new body overseeing PHE, the National Institute for Health Protection, with
Quote
a single and relentless mission, protecting people from threats to this country’s health.
It will report directly to ministers and support the clinical leadership of the chief medical officers and will be dedicated to the investigation and prevention of infectious diseases and external health threats.
?
https://www.shponline.co.uk/news/public-health-england-to-be-replaced-by-national-institute-for-health-protection/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 23, 2021, 06:04:10 pm
All done, in and out within 5 minutes and ten minutes before my appointment time of 09:30. No queue but steady stream and no unoccupied stations.
Went yesterday afternoon for Mrs OMM’s first. Pfizer, because she’s 12 years younger than me and apparently not allowed the AZ.
Apart from a sore arm and much wailing and gnashing of teeth before the jab (she had serious anxiety issues), no obvious side affects for her.
I don’t even have a sore arm or even the mild fatigue I felt the first time.

Belay that.

I was absolutely fine this morning. Went for a session whilst No’s 1&3 were in Youth Coaching, as is my want of a Sunday morning. A few quick callisthenics to warm up, around an hour of finger board and then 1:2’s on the Lattice board. My arms just quit on circuit/rep 6, aka very early. No biggie, it’s been a heavy week, so...
Anyway, went to Ikea after lunch, started to feel really bad tempered and aches in my arms. Put it down to crowding and DOMS. By the time we got home at 16:00, I was clearly irrationally angry and my shoulder at injection site is agony, as if I’ve torn the muscle. Not tender to touch, particularly, but lifting roasting dishes in and out of the oven is tricky, since the arm keeps “collapsing/going weak” with a stab of pain.
This is not helping with the anger. I turned the music up, because I was muttering a litany of obscenities under my breath.
This helped and currently the people around me exist in relative safety.

Relative to people living in active war zones, I mean.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on May 23, 2021, 06:28:11 pm
Might be because there are no 5G transmitters down your way yet. All good here - lots of bandwidth and sparks coming from my gold tooth.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mark20 on May 23, 2021, 06:41:34 pm
Is the urge to go to Ikea a listed side-effect?  :sick:
Feeling pretty hesitant now... 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on May 23, 2021, 07:18:58 pm
Don't worry if you have the Pfizer jab it's more likely to be Wickes.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on May 23, 2021, 07:23:17 pm
There’s something fishy (more fishy than normal) about how the Govt and PHE are (not) releasing data about the growth of the Indian variant.

https://twitter.com/dgurdasani1/status/1396373990986375171?s=21

I have no doubt Gurdasani is infinitely more qualified than me but she had been consistently wrong about every stage of the reopening and what it might do to covid rates. She's also a zero covid zealot so I stopped reading her a while ago.

Regarding this specific "sneaking the data out during Eurovision" accusation, I feel like the more likely explanation is that was simply when it was ready. If it had been delayed til 9am Monday the same teeth would be gnashing on twitter about the government suppressing publication. Nothing pleases these people.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on May 23, 2021, 08:44:01 pm
Focusing on the ball rather than the player - the points about the vaccine efficacy rates being played as a success for 167.2 in the media are very pertinent. That for only one dose it’s c.30% is buried deep down in only some pages on news websites.

Re slow info release - The government has played a similar trick before giving information during/jist after one of Boris’ pressers.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on May 23, 2021, 08:55:08 pm
Focusing on the ball rather than the player - the points about the vaccine efficacy rates being played as a success for 167.2 in the media are very pertinent. That for only one dose it’s c.30% is buried deep down in only some pages on news websites.

Re slow info release - The government has played a similar trick before giving information during/jist after one of Boris’ pressers.

I'm still not sure it's bad news tbh, given the rumblings about it escaping vaccines completely, excellent protection after two doses is a great result. The takeaway from this is that it is critical to get your second dose, which tbf Hancock was banging the drum for this morning.

More generally, I think this is part of a growing disinterest in "bad" or negative covid news in public life. I am a total newshound and I am definitely finding myself being dismissive of articles about the newest variant or some doomsday story of vaccine escape. Some outlets have been worse than others, the Guardian being one I have been particularly unimpressed by. I'm all for informing the public but there comes a point when being fed constant stories about new variants has a boy who cried wolf effect, which I think we are probably at. If/when a variant arrives we need to be seriously worried about it will take root in large part due to the way other, non scary variants have been reported and presented.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: T_B on May 23, 2021, 09:07:41 pm
Great post. 100%.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on May 23, 2021, 09:22:34 pm
Spidermonkey - cry wolf is important - though the same arguments were said in November when we’d just discovered the Kent variant.

We are in a different (vaccinated) position now, but the Govt response now is remarkably similar to the (relative) non response then…

I suspect the media are pushing certain lines sensing there is a fatigue for COVID news in the population - though mistrust (to a high degree) how our government is treating us. I wish we could be told things straight - instead of having to rely on leaks…

Its great your optimistic - I am less so.
 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on May 23, 2021, 09:31:54 pm

We are in a different (vaccinated) position now, but the Govt response now is remarkably similar to the (relative) non response then…

I suspect the media are pushing certain lines sensing there is a fatigue for COVID news in the population - though mistrust (to a high degree) how our government is treating us. I wish we could be told things straight - instead of having to rely on leaks…


This is the crux of the matter for me. I absolutely agree the govt have made multiple fuck ups and have acted disgracefully throughout the pandemic. But people aren't looking at things in the round. The response in Nov was inexcusable given the non vaccinated context. Its reasonable given our current levels of vaccination. Its what I would do. Interested to know what you would do? (it's very interesting that the zero covid lot never actually say what their way out of the situation is beyond nebulous terms like "fix test and trace").

Too many people are understandably using previous govt errors as a stick to beat them with and whilst tempting, it's a self defeating approach.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on May 24, 2021, 08:56:34 am


I'm still not sure it's bad news tbh, given the rumblings about it escaping vaccines completely, excellent protection after two doses is a great result. The takeaway from this is that it is critical to get your second dose, which tbf Hancock was banging the drum for this morning.

More generally, I think this is part of a growing disinterest in "bad" or negative covid news in public life. I am a total newshound and I am definitely finding myself being dismissive of articles about the newest variant or some doomsday story of vaccine escape. Some outlets have been worse than others, the Guardian being one I have been particularly unimpressed by. I'm all for informing the public but there comes a point when being fed constant stories about new variants has a boy who cried wolf effect, which I think we are probably at. If/when a variant arrives we need to be seriously worried about it will take root in large part due to the way other, non scary variants have been reported and presented.

I agree the news about a lack of evidence of vaccine escape is great news. The 30% figure is to be expected it you talk to the experts. It's a number that represents risk of infection. The percentage protection against serious illness is much higher. The risk is a population risk ( more than half of single jab vaccinated individuals can spread new variant covid).

On your second paragraph I disagree. The Guardian does have a habit of going off on one with some editorials and some opinions but do people really focus on such things these days? It's scientific pandemic journalism output on covid has been very good and it's important that it's available without a paywall (the FT deserve praise for this as well). Those 'crying wolf' are experts on SAGE and Indie SAGE. Half the press were in full on covid denial for much of 2020 and you single out the Guardian reporting expert opinion?

Our government dithering in the face of data (whilst claiming to follow the data) is responsible for about half the covid deaths in the UK and about half of long covid (estimated at a million) and much economic damage through lockdowns being longer than they needed to be. Even last week they buried data on school infections (Guardian reported) and for the day of the elections they delayed release of India variant bad news. Last week "Inews" showed front page large mixed colour zone queues at Heathrow due to home office underfunding and inaction..... the incompetence never stopped.

On long covid my married couple triathlon friends are still unable to undertake aerobic exercise, a year in, without an exhaustion crash for days. Interestingly that's actually a big improvement following getting jabbed. They can now do some some basic stuff and just feel a bit tired, if careful.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Wellsy on May 24, 2021, 09:12:07 am
Focusing on the ball rather than the player - the points about the vaccine efficacy rates being played as a success for 167.2 in the media are very pertinent. That for only one dose it’s c.30% is buried deep down in only some pages on news websites.

Re slow info release - The government has played a similar trick before giving information during/jist after one of Boris’ pressers.

I'm still not sure it's bad news tbh, given the rumblings about it escaping vaccines completely, excellent protection after two doses is a great result. The takeaway from this is that it is critical to get your second dose, which tbf Hancock was banging the drum for this morning.

More generally, I think this is part of a growing disinterest in "bad" or negative covid news in public life. I am a total newshound and I am definitely finding myself being dismissive of articles about the newest variant or some doomsday story of vaccine escape. Some outlets have been worse than others, the Guardian being one I have been particularly unimpressed by. I'm all for informing the public but there comes a point when being fed constant stories about new variants has a boy who cried wolf effect, which I think we are probably at. If/when a variant arrives we need to be seriously worried about it will take root in large part due to the way other, non scary variants have beetargn reported and presented.

I'm 100% the GuardIan target audience (young, graduate, city dwelling, lefty, conservation-y, a proudly "woke SJW" type, work at a social enterprise, vote green and labour etc) and I find myself rolling my eyes at the Guardian's coverage of most things these days, especially the op-eds, and especially especially anything to do with anything that might be vaguely positive.

Their covid 19 stories are often "oh so you want to feel HOPE do you well this is why you're wrong and basically a stupid tory for not wringing your hands over X, Y and Z" like yes I know it's been shit and we're not out of the woods yet and I also know you desperately need to fill these column inches so you can get some more £30 bottles of red for the cellar/olives from the local deli/whatever but like, chill out a bit?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on May 24, 2021, 09:38:18 am


I'm still not sure it's bad news tbh, given the rumblings about it escaping vaccines completely, excellent protection after two doses is a great result. The takeaway from this is that it is critical to get your second dose, which tbf Hancock was banging the drum for this morning.

More generally, I think this is part of a growing disinterest in "bad" or negative covid news in public life. I am a total newshound and I am definitely finding myself being dismissive of articles about the newest variant or some doomsday story of vaccine escape. Some outlets have been worse than others, the Guardian being one I have been particularly unimpressed by. I'm all for informing the public but there comes a point when being fed constant stories about new variants has a boy who cried wolf effect, which I think we are probably at. If/when a variant arrives we need to be seriously worried about it will take root in large part due to the way other, non scary variants have been reported and presented.

I agree the news about a lack of evidence of vaccine escape is great news. The 30% figure is to be expected it you talk to the experts. It's a number that represents risk of infection. The percentage protection against serious illness is much higher. The risk is a population risk ( more than half of single jab vaccinated individuals can spread new variant covid).

On your second paragraph I disagree. The Guardian does have a habit of going off on one with some editorials and some opinions but do people really focus on such things these days? It's scientific pandemic journalism output on covid has been very good and it's important that it's available without a paywall (the FT deserve praise for this as well). Those 'crying wolf' are experts on SAGE and Indie SAGE. Half the press were in full on covid denial for much of 2020 and you single out the Guardian reporting expert opinion?

Our government dithering in the face of data (whilst claiming to follow the data) is responsible for about half the covid deaths in the UK and about half of long covid (estimated at a million) and much economic damage through lockdowns being longer than they needed to be. Even last week they buried data on school infections (Guardian reported) and for the day of the elections they delayed release of India variant bad news. Last week "Inews" showed front page large mixed colour zone queues at Heathrow due to home office underfunding and inaction..... the incompetence never stopped.

On long covid my married couple triathlon friends are still unable to undertake aerobic exercise, a year in, without an exhaustion crash for days. Interestingly that's actually a big improvement following getting jabbed. They can now do some some basic stuff and just feel a bit tired, if careful.

I completely agree with this. Now things are unlocking, people just want good news to justify them doing things which are still risky (I include myself in that).

I read the guardian daily and hate that there's so much negative news, but I'm hugely glad that it's being put out there. The number of people I know who think the current Government are amazing and highly competent because of the vaccine roll-out, but ignore or don't read the horrendous incompetence and misconduct that's coming out daily is staggering.

The Guardian may be a lot more doom and gloom than others, but that's because whilst we're in a good position, we're also in position that's easy to fuck things up still. As offwidth said, it's only the ministers, not SAGE, who are saying it's all rosy.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on May 24, 2021, 10:10:13 am

I agree the news about a lack of evidence of vaccine escape is great news. The 30% figure is to be expected it you talk to the experts. It's a number that represents risk of infection. The percentage protection against serious illness is much higher. The risk is a population risk ( more than half of single jab vaccinated individuals can spread new variant covid).

On your second paragraph I disagree. The Guardian does have a habit of going off on one with some editorials and some opinions but do people really focus on such things these days? It's scientific pandemic journalism output on covid has been very good and it's important that it's available without a paywall (the FT deserve praise for this as well). Those 'crying wolf' are experts on SAGE and Indie SAGE. Half the press were in full on covid denial for much of 2020 and you single out the Guardian reporting expert opinion?

Our government dithering in the face of data (whilst claiming to follow the data) is responsible for about half the covid deaths in the UK and about half of long covid (estimated at a million) and much economic damage through lockdowns being longer than they needed to be. Even last week they buried data on school infections (Guardian reported) and for the day of the elections they delayed release of India variant bad news. Last week "Inews" showed front page large mixed colour zone queues at Heathrow due to home office underfunding and inaction..... the incompetence never stopped.

On long covid my married couple triathlon friends are still unable to undertake aerobic exercise, a year in, without an exhaustion crash for days. Interestingly that's actually a big improvement following getting jabbed. They can now do some some basic stuff and just feel a bit tired, if careful.

I think the problem is in the presentation of SAGE as a single unified body, whereas in reality it represents a spectrum of opinion with different attitudes to risk. That, after all, is its job, to provide a spectrum of the scientific opinion. The Guardian only ever quotes the more risk averse members, the rest of the press only ever quotes the more bullish ones. This isn't an anti Guardian thing, I think its a great paper, but I think its reporting on Covid recently has been poor. Thats not to say other papers/media aren't poor as well, but The Guardian isn't sacred. I'm not 'singling it out,' I'm saying its not a paragon of virtue. That said I am obviously glad it exists; the rest of the media is as bad if not considerably worse.

Independent SAGE was necessary this time last year but I think has well outlived its usefulness and seems to be a meal ticket to media appearances for many of its contributors. It has also been consistently wrong on almost every aspect of the unlocking since March. They oppose for the sake of opposition without ever providing concrete alternatives and a way out of the situation. I also think some of their recent scaremongering over vaccine effectiveness on the Indian variant has sailed dangerously close to encouraging vaccine hesitancy which is unforgivable.

I don't think anyone mentioned long covid. What you describe sounds really bad; I hope they continue to improve. I know several people suffering from similar symptoms. However, I don't think the small risk of long covid is a reason to maintain restrictions.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on May 24, 2021, 11:28:31 am
10% of those who had symptomatic Covid have long covid symptoms (symptoms persisting more than 12 weeks).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on May 24, 2021, 11:46:15 am
10% of those who had symptomatic Covid have long covid symptoms (symptoms persisting more than 12 weeks).

I know. But nobody has yet told me how we can realistically unlock without people getting covid and therefore being at some risk of long covid. What would you like to see happen that would open things up but also mitigate that risk to a satisfactory level?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: moose on May 24, 2021, 12:24:40 pm
What's never been clear to me is if long Covid is significantly more probable, more severe, or longer lasting than the post-viral problems that sometimes follow other infections (colds, flu, Epstein Barr etc).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on May 24, 2021, 12:25:39 pm
Alternatively perhaps you think things shouldn't open up at all, and should maybe even roll back to a more locked down state. If so I'd be interested to hear the hoped for 'endgame' of such a strategy.

Meant to edit previous post; sorry!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on May 24, 2021, 01:27:38 pm

I think the problem is in the presentation of SAGE as a single unified body, whereas in reality it represents a spectrum of opinion with different attitudes to risk. That, after all, is its job, to provide a spectrum of the scientific opinion. The Guardian only ever quotes the more risk averse members, the rest of the press only ever quotes the more bullish ones. This isn't an anti Guardian thing, I think its a great paper, but I think its reporting on Covid recently has been poor. That's not to say other papers/media aren't poor as well, but The Guardian isn't sacred. I'm not 'singling it out,' I'm saying its not a paragon of virtue. That said I am obviously glad it exists; the rest of the media is as bad if not considerably worse.

I'm not aware of a single member of SAGE who has, publicly speaking as an individual, supported the full opening on June 21st. Everyone I've seen (most on the BBC) has said the opposite.
How about some examples of problems from the Guardian? If they are so bad it must be easy to find some? Also some examples of bullish SAGE members (easy for me to miss those as most papers they would post in are paywalled or so bad I can't being myself look at them online).


Independent SAGE was necessary this time last year but I think has well outlived its usefulness and seems to be a meal ticket to media appearances for many of its contributors. It has also been consistently wrong on almost every aspect of the unlocking since March. They oppose for the sake of opposition without ever providing concrete alternatives and a way out of the situation. I also think some of their recent scaremongering over vaccine effectiveness on the Indian variant has sailed dangerously close to encouraging vaccine hesitancy which is unforgivable.

Weekly breifings are here: https://www.independentsage.org/category/weeklynumbers/

I disagree entirely with you having watched nearly every weekly youtube post since March. They do crazy amounts of voluntary work for no pay. They present data well and talk about probabilistic risk in a way usually much more detailed and better presented than elsewhere. Again it must be easy to give us some examples of all these majorly false predictions if they made them so often.


I don't think anyone mentioned long covid. What you describe sounds really bad; I hope they continue to improve. I know several people suffering from similar symptoms. However, I don't think the small risk of long covid is a reason to maintain restrictions.

That's sort of my point. Probably hundreds of thousands are suffering still. All that human pain and waste is ongoing even when cases get back to near zero (plus the pain in the families who faced needless death). Maybe 10% of the covid infected in the UK a small risk... hmmm!?

I'm far from a doom-based restrictions type person. I think the ongoing paranoia some climbers still have about outdoor covid risks is very strange. We knew surface risks outdoors were very low from the summer and proximity risks outdoors very low since last spring. Covid spreads in poorly ventilated enclosed spaces, often where clear necessary precautions are ignored. It's why its a disease that afflicts the most deprived... risk is highest in crowded multi-generational homes, when facing poor conditions due to exploitative employers and forced by affordability to use buses. Indoors, if gyms are safe to open so are climbing walls.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on May 24, 2021, 01:50:25 pm
Not much to add on tone - I read the Guardian, Telegraph and sometimes the FT and plot a course between them, generally ignoring Guardian opinion pieces as a wailing wall of first-world woe and Telegraph opinion pieces as entitled outrage at snowflake culture.

That's sort of my point. Probably hundreds of thousands are suffering still. All that human pain and waste is ongoing even when cases get back to near zero (plus the pain in the families who faced needless death). Maybe 10% of the covid infected in the UK a small risk... hmmm!?

If you're not a 'zero covid' proponent why would you discuss covid cases returning to 'near zero'? Do you believe that cases could actually ever reach near zero and remain there? If so how?

I'm assuming covid variants are now with us for the rest of our lifetimes. Isn't discussing 'near zero' as unrealistic as discussing cases of flu 'returning to near zero'?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on May 24, 2021, 02:03:07 pm
I don't think you are trolling Spidermonkey - but you're coming across to me (n=1) as that...

FWIW, I think open air hospitality is fine as it is presently organised. I think indoor - is much less so and I would argue against that at this stage - especially as those most likely to go out are those most likely to be unvaccinated. Gyms / Walls with a limit on entry numbers seems to be working well. The Green/Amber/Red travel thing is a farce - whilst green and red are clear (I have issues with how well its enforced but its clear) Amber is a joke (for many reasons - from mixed messaging to how many amber list countries are on the FO do not travel list anyway..). I would keep facemasks in all places where they are presently required (including secondary schools - until we are sure 167.2 isnt an issue there) and put the kybosh on any sort of 'freedom day' stuff rhetoric being used...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: T_B on May 24, 2021, 02:19:14 pm
The FCDO Travel advice and the Traffic Light system are entirely separate with no alignment planned. Traffic light system being public health, FCDO being about the destination. It’s farcical though. Is international travel open or not?!

On indoor hospitality I think you’ll find there are a lot of fully vaccinated people 60+ who’ve had enough of restrictions. It’s not all the young and ‘reckless’.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on May 24, 2021, 02:25:05 pm
I don't think you are trolling Spidermonkey - but you're coming across to me (n=1) as that...

First things first, I'm not trolling in the slightest.


FWIW, I think open air hospitality is fine as it is presently organised. I think indoor - is much less so and I would argue against that at this stage - especially as those most likely to go out are those most likely to be unvaccinated. Gyms / Walls with a limit on entry numbers seems to be working well. The Green/Amber/Red travel thing is a farce - whilst green and red are clear (I have issues with how well its enforced but its clear) Amber is a joke (for many reasons - from mixed messaging to how many amber list countries are on the FO do not travel list anyway..). I would keep facemasks in all places where they are presently required (including secondary schools - until we are sure 167.2 isnt an issue there) and put the kybosh on any sort of 'freedom day' stuff rhetoric being used...

Right, I understand all the above and don't disagree with parts of it, particularly the amber travel category which is utterly pointless. But what is your criteria for going back to indoor hospitality/meeting family and friends inside/removing restrictions? Because its all very well saying the above but if there is no 'roadmap' to removing them then we are speaking at crossed purposes. Zero, or even near-zero, covid is fantasyland as far as I'm concerned. It is impossible to get cases low and keep them there long term. To pre-empt NZ and Australia being brought up, they are already internally discussing how to move to a mitigation strategy from their current near-zero approach, because they know that its not a long term strategy just like the rest of the world does.

Offwidth, depending on how bored I get at work this afternoon I'll provide some examples
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on May 24, 2021, 02:26:06 pm
I'm with Spidermonkey, To accuse him of trolling reflects pretty badly on you TT IMO
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on May 24, 2021, 03:14:02 pm
I'm with Spidermonkey, To accuse him of trolling reflects pretty badly on you TT IMO

Shrugs. No accusing - just saying that it came accross to me a bit. A lot can get lost in forum conversation and I think it’s better to (nicely? Could I have been any gentler?) point it out rather than get cross about it..? I thought I was pretty clear that I didn’t think that was what he was doing but that’s how it came across a bit to me..

@spidermonkey - I think it’s that you keep mentioning zero COVId in such negative ways - when it’s not something anyone is really suggesting here any more. Feels a bit like I’m being prodded for a response….

I’m probably wrong - but thought it better to say than not.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on May 24, 2021, 03:39:23 pm

Shrugs. No accusing - just saying that it came accross to me a bit. A lot can get lost in forum conversation and I think it’s better to (nicely? Could I have been any gentler?) point it out rather than get cross about it..? I thought I was pretty clear that I didn’t think that was what he was doing but that’s how it came across a bit to me..

@spidermonkey - I think it’s that you keep mentioning zero COVId in such negative ways - when it’s not something anyone is really suggesting here any more. Feels a bit like I’m being prodded for a response….

I’m probably wrong - but thought it better to say than not.

No offence taken, its all good.  :)

I mention zero covid only because that is the position of a lot of people who sit on Independent Sage who are quoted quite often on the thread. It was also the position of the Guardian, unbelievably, back when the roadmap was first announced.

I also mention it because when people (entirely fairly) criticise elements of the unlocking process, in the absence of saying what they would prefer the criteria for unlocking to be, the default seems to be 'when we attain zero or near zero covid cases', which I see as profoundly unrealistic and leads me to conclude they aren't actually that bothered about a state of perpetual lockdown. If you aren't suggesting that then great, but I'm still none the wiser as to what your position actually is.

To clarify, I think its entirely fair to be worried about the unlocking, or about long covid; I am as well. But I don't see an alternative that allows society to reopen to essentially normal levels which I consider to be absolutely paramount given our current vaccination status. I am very much all ears if there is a way to reopen society in a way which wont result in increased cases and increased numbers of people getting long covid, but I'm yet to hear it. I think tolerating increased cases and LC will be part of adjusting to increased levels of health risk in exchange for a normal existence. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: AJM on May 24, 2021, 03:49:01 pm
@spidermonkey - I think it’s that you keep mentioning zero COVId in such negative ways - when it’s not something anyone is really suggesting here any more. Feels a bit like I’m being prodded for a response….

I can see what you mean. The quote below has similar echos for me - it feels a bit like there’s a black and white framing which says that either “we keep unlocking as we are now” or “endless lockdown/zero Covid/what’s your endgame”. Given there are a million permutations of how fast you unlock versus how fast you roll out vaccine (if you want to just mitigate system overload, you unlock once enough of the vulnerable are jabbed, if you worry about high caseloads either for mutants, long Covid prevalence etc then you wait until more vaccines have gone into arms since they protect against some of that as well), all of which give you a view on the current state (too fast, could go faster, etc etc) and a viable endgame - it seems very lacking in nuance.

Alternatively perhaps you think things shouldn't open up at all, and should maybe even roll back to a more locked down state. If so I'd be interested to hear the hoped for 'endgame' of such a strategy.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on May 24, 2021, 03:53:26 pm
That's a good post AJM. Wasn't that the idea of "data not dates" which seems to have been somewhat sidelined?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: AJM on May 24, 2021, 04:00:12 pm
That's a good post AJM. Wasn't that the idea of "data not dates" which seems to have been somewhat sidelined?

Our dates have remained constant haven’t they, despite picking up the pace on vaccination (I don’t think the government ever formally said it, but I thought some point in mid March the papers were leaking the idea that we might all be done by end of June), then the April shortages pushing that back, us having a wealth of new information about vaccination effectiveness and us also having far more information on the level of concern or otherwise we should have about probably at least half a dozen different variants of interest, concern etc. It’s been criticised for being too fast and too slow by various people but despite everything it’s remained entirely unchanged. I’d love to know what the data source is, or exactly how much data would be required to shift anything at all!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on May 24, 2021, 04:12:33 pm

It’s been criticised for being too fast and too slow by various people but despite everything it’s remained entirely unchanged.

Which tbf probably means its about right according to UKB's 'Law of BBC Bias' !  :lol:


 it feels a bit like there’s a black and white framing which says that either “we keep unlocking as we are now” or “endless lockdown/zero Covid/what’s your endgame”. Given there are a million permutations of how fast you unlock versus how fast you roll out vaccine (if you want to just mitigate system overload, you unlock once enough of the vulnerable are jabbed, if you worry about high caseloads either for mutants, long Covid prevalence etc then you wait until more vaccines have gone into arms since they protect against some of that as well), all of which give you a view on the current state (too fast, could go faster, etc etc) and a viable endgame - it seems very lacking in nuance.

Thats a fair cop. I am probably hypersensitive to suggestions that things change/slow down because I'm fed up of the whole thing and haven't even been jabbed yet! Nuance isn't dead though; if the government decided tomorrow that the 21st June date was being knocked back a bit to allow more jabs to go into arms (probably the most likely scenario I think) I would be fine with it because the fundamental strategy of 'living with the virus' remains unchanged, just slightly delayed. I don't think that strategy is endorsed at all by some of the pieces shared/people quoted on the thread, which gets my back up because I essentially don't think people who don't agree with mitigation should be listened to anymore.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: AJM on May 24, 2021, 04:43:10 pm
Thats a fair cop. I am probably hypersensitive to suggestions that things change/slow down because I'm fed up of the whole thing and haven't even been jabbed yet!

That’s fairly in tune with how I read your “which I consider to be absolutely paramount given our current vaccination status” in your other post - it’s taking the point around what might mitigate long Covid and framing it with this position that effectively says “we can go no slower” (noting your additional nuance further down, but you know what I mean)

I don't think that strategy is endorsed at all by some of the pieces shared/people quoted on the thread, which gets my back up because I essentially don't think people who don't agree with mitigation should be listened to anymore.

I think in some respects the current situation is easy, in that most of the discussion is just around timing of a return to relative normality. Mitigation is currently the only real game in town because all the other options carry a higher cost of some form - if it works as we hope, mitigation delivers us relative normality, with no system overload and manageable excess deaths. It runs risks - of variants etc - but as a species we are not good at judging low probability high impact risks (especially when even an entirely objective calculation would founder given the lack of information about exactly how low probability and how high impact) so many people would probably be happy with this. We run lots of these sorts of risks - pandemic flu, nuclear war, etc - without often stopping to think about it.

Difficulty will only really arise if something changes - significantly greater step ups in transmissibility for example that mean vaccines as currently set out (optional, at current levels of effectiveness, blah blah) can’t deliver that relative normality alone any more. Then I think the choices get far harder because you start to get a lot of unappealing options as to what permanent changes you want or don’t want to make to manage it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: battery on May 24, 2021, 08:03:48 pm
I know there are a few females on here and many of you have mentioned partners so here we go...

...there is seemingly growing anecdotal evidence that the vaccine can have an effect on menstruation (pleas note, I am not saying that it is a negative effect and NO ONE is suggesting that women should not get the vaccine). However, given that it appears the data from trials wasn't even split into genders, there is (of course) no evidence around it. This study is trying to begin to plug that gap.

https://redcap.healthinstitute.illinois.edu/surveys/index.php?s=LL8TKKC8DP&utm_campaign=Invisible%20Women&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Revue%20newsletter

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on May 24, 2021, 08:13:33 pm
Not heard about that Battery :-/ only just heard that it can help with long Covid.

In other news the MEN are saying inessential travel to and from Bolton is to be stopped - and hospital admissions there are rising..

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/government-advises-against-travel-out-20667478
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on May 24, 2021, 09:37:01 pm
https://twitter.com/JenWilliamsMEN/status/1396911012952133636?s=19

That's a tweet for Spidermonkey right there! Bolton, Blackburn, Leicester  :tumble:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on May 24, 2021, 10:00:05 pm
Now that is pointless.
Nobody wins there: stokes a load of local resentment and has zero effect because its guidance not law which people will ignore, and with justificstion. If I have learned anything from the last year its that local restrictions are useless!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on May 24, 2021, 11:22:08 pm

If you're not a 'zero covid' proponent why would you discuss covid cases returning to 'near zero'? Do you believe that cases could actually ever reach near zero and remain there? If so how?

I'm assuming covid variants are now with us for the rest of our lifetimes. Isn't discussing 'near zero' as unrealistic as discussing cases of flu 'returning to near zero'?

Simply because if covid cases hit near zero lots of covid suffering remains from long covid and fairly recent deaths. I'm pretty optimistic medium term about new hospitalisations and deaths as current and planned vaccines and boosters should keep new outbreak risks low enough to be handled by a hopefully improved track and trace. I can also see improvement in flu response thanks to this pandemic. There is still risk... most worrying newer variant vaccine escape (thanks to not enough help in places away from the west). Also that home office incompetence (after a month of complaints from airport management), which led to mixed queues from red, amber and green zones at Heathrow last week, is still scary.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on May 24, 2021, 11:46:17 pm
Now that is pointless.
Nobody wins there: stokes a load of local resentment and has zero effect because its guidance not law which people will ignore, and with justificstion. If I have learned anything from the last year its that local restrictions are useless!

I thought a 'zero covid strategy' might be part of your concern from the Guardian etc. Most of these Indie SAGE people are pragmatists (I know one of them pretty well from many meetings a decade plus back). What is meant by that term is to hit new outbreaks hard until levels are very low, not literally zero. We failed to do anything like that in the UK when we could (September onwards) and just had more deaths and longer lockdowns than SE asian developed countries. In a near fully vaccinated population the game changes and restrictions can be a lot lighter (unless there is a new variant breakout such that vaccines are no longer effective).

Indie SAGE point out currently, that the data models, taking into account current vaccination, indicates risk is still at hospital overload level if we just let things rip and nothing is done to stop it. It's a situation that won't happen as government will be forced to apply the brakes again with control measures. It's just a 'what if' scenario. It's not scaremongering but it does mean we need to be careful. Indie SAGE also rightly advised much more care at immigration and in schools.

I think anyone not fed up with covid is a freak but I think its important to pay attention with this government despite that emotion.

Finally I don't think local restrictions are completely useless but might agree they are so leaky as not to be worthwhile.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on May 25, 2021, 06:40:45 am
Finally I don't think local restrictions are completely useless but might agree they are so leaky as not to be worthwhile.

I would say their effectiveness is limited when you don't actual tell anyone, don't inform local leaders, don't do a press release and just update your website!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: kelvin on May 25, 2021, 07:32:46 am
I live just outside Northampton and just off the Bedford Rd - there are long traffic queues every morning as Bedfordians head into Northampton.
It's completely pointless saying stay local unless for work.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on May 25, 2021, 07:36:46 am
Finally I don't think local restrictions are completely useless but might agree they are so leaky as not to be worthwhile.

I would say their effectiveness is limited when you don't actual tell anyone, don't inform local leaders, don't do a press release and just update your website!

Apparently the advice was updated on the 15th and the website update timestamped 21st... face palm etc...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: gollum on May 25, 2021, 07:40:42 am
Finally I don't think local restrictions are completely useless but might agree they are so leaky as not to be worthwhile.

I would say their effectiveness is limited when you don't actual tell anyone, don't inform local leaders, don't do a press release and just update your website!

Apparently the advice was updated on the 15th and the website update timestamped 21st... face palm etc...

You really couldn’t make it up.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on May 25, 2021, 08:20:00 am
I know there are a few females on here and many of you have mentioned partners so here we go...

...there is seemingly growing anecdotal evidence that the vaccine can have an effect on menstruation (pleas note, I am not saying that it is a negative effect and NO ONE is suggesting that women should not get the vaccine). However, given that it appears the data from trials wasn't even split into genders, there is (of course) no evidence around it. This study is trying to begin to plug that gap.

https://redcap.healthinstitute.illinois.edu/surveys/index.php?s=LL8TKKC8DP&utm_campaign=Invisible%20Women&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Revue%20newsletter

Oh yeah, this is Dr Kate Clancy's study! I was thinking of posting about this. She's a badass, and very pro-vax, and very clear that what she's trying to do is gather info on whether this is a common temporary side-effect so that people can be forewarned about it and not panic that something is seriously wrong.

Anecdotally, for most people who get it (I didn't, at least on dose 1), it seems to be a period that's heavier or earlier than usual for a cycle or two max. And some people who don't currently menstruate (because of birth control or menopause, or trans guys who are on testosterone) get a bit of breakthrough bleeding.

On Twitter: https://twitter.com/KateClancy/with_replies

However, given that it appears the data from trials wasn't even split into genders, there is (of course) no evidence around it.

To be a bit pedantic, there is considerable evidence around it (e.g. that the vaccines don't affect fertility or pregnancy at all), so we know a lot of the parameters of what isn't affected.

But yeah, sounds like it's not on the list of common side-effects that get asked about specifically, and maybe was something people felt uncomfortable about mentioning spontaneously.

Good, clear and sensible round-up of the whole thing from the BBC:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56901353

Dr Viki Male (immunologist working on pregnancy at Imperial, quoted in the article) is also a badass and maintains a great explainer on what's currently known about Covid vaccines, pregnancy, fertility, and breastfeeding:

https://twitter.com/VikiLovesFACS/status/1367099701238116353

She's very good at answering questions on Twitter in a non-patronizing and non-combative way. Top science communication.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on May 25, 2021, 09:46:53 am
I live just outside Northampton and just off the Bedford Rd - there are long traffic queues every morning as Bedfordians head into Northampton.
It's completely pointless saying stay local unless for work.

Houghtons just outside or Yardley Hastings just outside? (I'm from East Hunsbury)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on May 25, 2021, 11:14:42 am
Finally I don't think local restrictions are completely useless but might agree they are so leaky as not to be worthwhile.

I would say their effectiveness is limited when you don't actual tell anyone, don't inform local leaders, don't do a press release and just update your website!

A tweet with the wonderful video link from ITV news in case anyone missed it.

https://mobile.twitter.com/ukiswitheu/status/1397100407567040512
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on May 25, 2021, 12:01:33 pm
I live just outside Northampton and just off the Bedford Rd - there are long traffic queues every morning as Bedfordians head into Northampton.
It's completely pointless saying stay local unless for work.

Houghtons just outside or Yardley Hastings just outside? (I'm from East Hunsbury)

So were your family 'neen' or 'nen' in pronunciation? We were "nen" (Bugbrooke and Harpole).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: kelvin on May 25, 2021, 12:17:12 pm
I live just outside Northampton and just off the Bedford Rd - there are long traffic queues every morning as Bedfordians head into Northampton.
It's completely pointless saying stay local unless for work.

Houghtons just outside or Yardley Hastings just outside? (I'm from East Hunsbury)

Cogenhoe
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: kelvin on May 25, 2021, 12:18:59 pm
I live just outside Northampton and just off the Bedford Rd - there are long traffic queues every morning as Bedfordians head into Northampton.
It's completely pointless saying stay local unless for work.

Houghtons just outside or Yardley Hastings just outside? (I'm from East Hunsbury)

So were your family 'neen' or 'nen' in pronunciation? We were "nen" (Bugbrooke and Harpole).

And definitely Nen.

We were moored last year next to a guy from Peterborough and he called it the Nene.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on May 25, 2021, 01:50:34 pm
Cogenhoe

Small world. I used to have a summer job in Cogenhoe, at ALA Metal Fabrications at Roe Farm on Whiston Road.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on May 25, 2021, 01:51:39 pm
So were your family 'neen' or 'nen' in pronunciation? We were "nen" (Bugbrooke and Harpole).

Nen. No-one from my childhood said neen.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on May 25, 2021, 04:07:50 pm
This is an amazing and fascinating story:

https://twitter.com/charliehtweets/status/1396860850699395074
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2021/may/25/influencers-say-russia-linked-pr-agency-asked-them-to-disparage-pfizer-vaccine
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on May 25, 2021, 04:55:42 pm
I live just outside Northampton and just off the Bedford Rd - there are long traffic queues every morning as Bedfordians head into Northampton.
It's completely pointless saying stay local unless for work.

Houghtons just outside or Yardley Hastings just outside? (I'm from East Hunsbury)

Cogenhoe

Ah "cook-know".
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: battery on May 25, 2021, 06:35:21 pm
You can't make this up...

https://www.bedford.gov.uk/news/Latest-News/2021-05-25-updated-statement-on-covid-restrictions/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on May 25, 2021, 09:03:55 pm
https://twitter.com/pmholling/status/1397113881043128321

Bolton and Rochdale absolutely crushing it getting vaccines into arms.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on May 29, 2021, 09:03:44 am
I don't know if a link has been posted before but this is interesting in a  geeky way

https://airborne.cam/

I think we're heading for another Autumn and Winter of soaring infections, and ineffectual local lockdown. Data not dates has been a bit dubious so far at best, if they go for full or nearly full opening up on June 21, I think we're stuffed and the reliance on data will have been a total lie.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/may/29/covid-in-england-what-is-the-impact-of-lifting-restrictions-on-21-june?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 29, 2021, 11:53:09 am
I don't know if a link has been posted before but this is interesting in a  geeky way

https://airborne.cam/

I think we're heading for another Autumn and Winter of soaring infections, and ineffectual local lockdown. Data not dates has been a bit dubious so far at best, if they go for full or nearly full opening up on June 21, I think we're stuffed and the reliance on data will have been a total lie.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/may/29/covid-in-england-what-is-the-impact-of-lifting-restrictions-on-21-june?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

It will surely look very different, this time. 74% of the adult population has had it’s first vaccine dose, 48% the second and those numbers increasing by 1/4 million per day and a 1/2 million per day respectively. That’s going to massively impact the hospitalisation and death curve peaks, this Autumn.
Also, the highly localised nature of current outbreaks, with large swathes of the country seeing suppressed or extremely low rates. The official maps are a little miss leading in that respect (for instance, the South Hams show as a moderate outbreak, over a largeish area, because they have 9 new cases, some Northern areas show the same scale/colour because they’ve had 800 new cases).
If (if) the vaccine(s) succeeds in suppressing the disease into something more akin to a very bad Flu season, we will not be looking at such extreme mitigation measures.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on May 29, 2021, 06:03:52 pm
I don't know if a link has been posted before but this is interesting in a  geeky way

https://airborne.cam/

I think we're heading for another Autumn and Winter of soaring infections, and ineffectual local lockdown. Data not dates has been a bit dubious so far at best, if they go for full or nearly full opening up on June 21, I think we're stuffed and the reliance on data will have been a total lie.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/may/29/covid-in-england-what-is-the-impact-of-lifting-restrictions-on-21-june?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

It will surely look very different, this time. 74% of the adult population has had it’s first vaccine dose, 48% the second and those numbers increasing by 1/4 million per day and a 1/2 million per day respectively. That’s going to massively impact the hospitalisation and death curve peaks, this Autumn.
Also, the highly localised nature of current outbreaks, with large swathes of the country seeing suppressed or extremely low rates. The official maps are a little miss leading in that respect (for instance, the South Hams show as a moderate outbreak, over a largeish area, because they have 9 new cases, some Northern areas show the same scale/colour because they’ve had 800 new cases).
If (if) the vaccine(s) succeeds in suppressing the disease into something more akin to a very bad Flu season, we will not be looking at such extreme mitigation measures.

Maybe. But if the variety is 50% + more transmissible than the Kent one, it's not unlikely that we'll end up going the way of India itself by unlocking everything with a lurking reservoir of cases which will turn into a worse wave come autumn.
I am being a pessimistic bastard though.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: battery on May 29, 2021, 09:28:41 pm
I don't know if a link has been posted before but this is interesting in a  geeky way

https://airborne.cam/

I think we're heading for another Autumn and Winter of soaring infections, and ineffectual local lockdown. Data not dates has been a bit dubious so far at best, if they go for full or nearly full opening up on June 21, I think we're stuffed and the reliance on data will have been a total lie.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/may/29/covid-in-england-what-is-the-impact-of-lifting-restrictions-on-21-june?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

It will surely look very different, this time. 74% of the adult population has had it’s first vaccine dose, 48% the second and those numbers increasing by 1/4 million per day and a 1/2 million per day respectively. That’s going to massively impact the hospitalisation and death curve peaks, this Autumn.
Also, the highly localised nature of current outbreaks, with large swathes of the country seeing suppressed or extremely low rates. The official maps are a little miss leading in that respect (for instance, the South Hams show as a moderate outbreak, over a largeish area, because they have 9 new cases, some Northern areas show the same scale/colour because they’ve had 800 new cases).
If (if) the vaccine(s) succeeds in suppressing the disease into something more akin to a very bad Flu season, we will not be looking at such extreme mitigation measures.

Maybe. But if the variety is 50% + more transmissible than the Kent one, it's not unlikely that we'll end up going the way of India itself by unlocking everything with a lurking reservoir of cases which will turn into a worse wave come autumn.
I am being a pessimistic bastard though.

You seem to be assuming that that vaccine is not effective against the Kent or India variant which is not the case.

https://www.bmj.com/content/373/bmj.n1346
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: erm, sam on May 30, 2021, 09:11:15 am
Toby do you watch the ZOE ap covid videos? Prof Tim Spector does weekly update video based on the data they get from the ap. Very informative and mostly less depressing then the Guardian and more nauanced than anything else.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCa09am-cOsC-FSgr_nLkFFA

I think the below one is the weekly update one..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=275TdKLUonI&list=PLArLFV5giiuKBE4ef4jTaSxbXp8-5_jOj

I imagine this has been mentioned before but worth reminding..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on May 30, 2021, 09:34:46 am
You seem to be assuming that that vaccine is not effective against the Kent or India variant which is not the case.

https://www.bmj.com/content/373/bmj.n1346

Also, those numbers are re: symptomatic disease. The vaccines tend to hold better against severe illness/hospitalization even when they don't stop infection completely, and there are hopeful signs that this is proving to be the case with B.1.617.2:

https://twitter.com/JamesWard73/status/1398012064942235648 (thread with some interesting estimates -- based on earlier model of calculations outlined in https://twitter.com/JamesWard73/status/1397884961227689984)

Losing a chunk of the partial protection you get from a single dose really sucks, but it looks like we're seeing very little breakthrough in fully-vaccinated people (who are also the most vulnerable groups). So that's really going to change how things play out.

Lot of sensible folk seem to be saying that the next week or so is when we'll get a much clearer sense of which way things are heading, and there are very strong reasons for delaying/modifying the June 21st re-opening. But the hope is that (fingers crossed) we hit "rough but manageable" rather than "oh fuck it's gone exponential, full lockdown again immediately or we're all gonna die."

Decent overview:

https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1397995388267810818 (thread)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on May 30, 2021, 09:53:38 am
...

Lot of sensible folk seem to be saying that the next week or so is when we'll get a much clearer sense of which way things are heading, and there are very strong reasons for delaying/modifying the June 21st re-opening. But the hope is that (fingers crossed) we hit "rough but manageable" rather than "oh fuck it's gone exponential, full lockdown again immediately or we're all gonna die."


I'd be more confident in your assessment,  if the breadth of definition of manageable included what the deeply incompetent government could cope with. Unfortunately I slightly suspect that full opening up will be delayed slightly then everyone will try to forget about it for a couple of months,  and it will then go tits up again, because the government haven't been paying attention to isolation,  borders... etc
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on May 30, 2021, 08:13:11 pm
I'd be more confident in your assessment,  if the breadth of definition of manageable included what the deeply incompetent government could cope with. Unfortunately I slightly suspect that full opening up will be delayed slightly then everyone will try to forget about it for a couple of months,  and it will then go tits up again, because the government haven't been paying attention to isolation,  borders... etc

Oh yeah, there's a wide potential gulf between "this could be kept under control with some sensible and obvious strategies" and "this government can actually manage to deploy the sensible and obvious strategies as opposed to finding new and inventive ways to fuck up."

However. We're still in a very different situation dealing with B.1.617.2 from countries with much lower vaccination levels. Or from the situation we'd be in if this had more effective vaccine escape than it currently seems to.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: danm on May 30, 2021, 10:04:20 pm
Unfortunately, nothing operates in a vacuum. My neighbour is an A&E doctor at the Northern, and says that they are the busiest they have EVER been right now dealing with non-Covid emergency cases, as all the people who were sick over the last year but stayed at home because of Covid are now turning up in a really poor state. There are also lots of people who cannot get a GP appointment who have given up and gone to A&E instead. Numbers wise they are at 400 odd new patients a day, when 250 is about average in winter flu season. It won't take much extra to push already knackered healthcare staff to the brink, when they are maxed out in what is usually their quiet season where they get to recharge for the incoming winter. Let's hope for the best anyway, no thanks to the arseholes in Westminster.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ged on May 30, 2021, 10:24:36 pm
I don't know if a link has been posted before but this is interesting in a  geeky way

https://airborne.cam/

I think we're heading for another Autumn and Winter of soaring infections, and ineffectual local lockdown. Data not dates has been a bit dubious so far at best, if they go for full or nearly full opening up on June 21, I think we're stuffed and the reliance on data will have been a total lie.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/may/29/covid-in-england-what-is-the-impact-of-lifting-restrictions-on-21-june?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

Surely it would need some extremely catastrophic news in terms of vaccine efficacy for that to be the case, which currently doesn't look to be the case. Come autumn, we will have vast swathes if the adult population double dosed. Even thought they'll still be cases, that's very different to cases that a putting people in hospital. Prevention from severe cases seems likely from current data.

As an aside, I no longer even look at the guardian. I think they are doing some shameful scaremongering
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on May 30, 2021, 10:34:50 pm
HM gov seems to be putting quite a bit of reliance on vaccines to compensate for failure to manage the pandemic more effectively. They mitigate the risk hugely, but I am not hugely confident that will be sufficient to manage things well without more basic competencies.

Ged. Scaremongering, or presenting views you’d rather not hear?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on May 31, 2021, 07:51:39 am
Really informative, long thread on what the CEOs of NHS trusts in hotspot areas are currently seeing -- not just re: Covid admissions but pressures on hospitals overall:

https://twitter.com/ChrisCEOHopson/status/1398871050931290112
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on May 31, 2021, 09:47:38 am
Even thought they'll still be cases, that's very different to cases that a putting people in hospital. Prevention from severe cases seems likely from current data.

As an aside, I no longer even look at the guardian. I think they are doing some shameful scaremongering

The Guardian certainly presents a pessimistic and cautious point of view in their headlines,  although it's worth noting that a lot of the rest of the paper is full of enthusiasm for restaurants,  holidays,  festivals  etc.
I'd say that its eminently worth reading,  as an effective opposition to the number of papers who campaign constantly for opening up everything yesterday,  of which there are many. 
Surely the lesson of countries that act incautiously and assume that they have it under control is near or actual disaster soon afterwards. 
It is not just the Guardian that is worried about the June 21 date.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-57304369
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on June 01, 2021, 10:44:00 am
So it seems that quite a few scientists are concerned about any further opening up in June (reported in most places today).
Whether they are right or not,  I am by now completely despairing about what the government will do about it.  I have a horrible feeling of inevitability that BJ will try to please everyone, and opt for some sort of half way house opening up, hoping to keep scientists and businesses happy but succeeding in neither stopping exponential growth of infections or from preventing a lot of hospitality from going bankrupt.  I know it's a virus thread and not politics,  but one of the issues with having a group of ministers who don't appear to be terribly intelligent is that they still haven't understood the meaning of the word exponential.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Sidehaas on June 01, 2021, 06:01:05 pm
I don't think it's about stopping exponential growth of infections any more. If you wanted to do that you would have to reverse the 17th May changes as a minimum, but it's not clear whether that would be enough with this new variant. That action would only be taken if a new variant came along (or new data on the current new one) that made hospitalisation load and death risk much higher than currently expected.

The Govt policy at the moment is more about managing infections low enough (ie doubling time low enough and hence peak number of live infections at any one time low enough), to ensure that the total hospitalisations they get, from both unvaccinated people and people who go to hospital despite being vaccinated because they are extremely frail or just unlucky, is manageable in the NHS. Even with no reduction in vaccine effectiveness, hospital overload is still possible if rates get extremely high and if you do get a reduction in vaccine effectiveness then obviously it becomes more likely. The challenge at the moment is that we just don't know how many cases is 'ok' because previous hospitalisation rate data is all 'overtaken by events' with the vaccine and the new variant together. So, when it comes to determining next steps, the thing the Govt will be watching is hospitalisation data, especially in vaccinated people, and eventually death data. Cases are going to keep rising unless something goes badly wrong and we have to reverse previous relaxations, but a removal of all restrictions (and hence allowing still faster doubling times in case rates) might have to be delayed if they aren't sure enough about the hospitalisation data, or if cases appear to be rising too fast already.

I certainly value the Guardian's coverage on covid more than most papers. It's still a bit hit and miss though. If you are good with numbers, you can get a better picture of what is happening just by regularly looking at the data yourself (and there are good weekly discussions on ukc, if you find it interesting rather than depressing, that are usually better informed than any of the papers (edit, there is a lot of waffle in between!)). Some of the scientists currently making headlines are doing so because they think the objective should be to keep cases down now that there is a new variant around rather than allow them to rise. But that bird has definitely flown.

My bet is Boris will go for a delay of a few weeks or months in removing all restrictions, but with some sort of halfway house sop to his backbenchers in the meantime. Cabinet ministers have been warming us up to that for the past fortnight.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: joel182 on June 02, 2021, 12:47:42 am
Zero daily covid deaths in the UK (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57320320) for the first time since March 2020. I guess it's likely this will get corrected upward at some point. Still an absolutely remarkable milestone after averaging around a thousand deaths a day in January.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on June 02, 2021, 07:43:30 am
Zero daily covid deaths in the UK (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57320320) for the first time since March 2020. I guess it's likely this will get corrected upward at some point. Still an absolutely remarkable milestone after averaging around a thousand deaths a day in January.

This is certainly great news, although it's a bit of a useless statistic on its own the weekly report is slightly better as an indicator of infections about a month ago. This particular figure has a lot to do with the fact that fewer people are working on the bank holiday.
That said, it's still good to hear.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tommytwotone on June 02, 2021, 11:41:37 am
...and don't forget there were zero COVID deaths reported back in July last year, which prompted all sorts of "unlock now, it's all over" type talk.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 03, 2021, 12:52:19 pm
Vaccination clinic volunteers needed at a bunch of places in England:

https://nhsvolunteerresponders.org.uk/i-want-to-volunteer/volunteer-roles/steward-volunteer/locations

Looks like we might possibly be getting a big vaccine push in June, fingers crossed? Or they just need people.

Friend of mine's been stewarding in London and found it a pretty positive experience.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on June 04, 2021, 10:00:19 am
Media coverage of the new variant and yesterday’s PHE report into increased transmissibility of Delta etc.. seems to either be “nothing to see here - carry on” or “impending doom”…

I found this Twitter thread that explained quite nicely Inthought some positives and negatives from the report. Somewhere in the middle…

https://twitter.com/jamesward73/status/1400720398480809985?s=21
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on June 04, 2021, 11:57:11 am
I don't see that distinction of nothing to see here or impending doom in the majority of experts. The problem is with some politicians and parts of the press. Most experts are rightly cautious about the growth of the current main variant but recognise any Boris delay now won't be as serious as it was last summer because of the vaccination efforts. The only genuine full-on doom from most experts is a real risk of variant vaccine escape (from running 'too hot' again here, or via our leaky borders).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on June 04, 2021, 12:13:07 pm
I did start my para with “Media coverage of…” 😁
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on June 04, 2021, 12:24:30 pm
The only genuine full-on doom from most experts is a real risk of variant vaccine escape (from running 'too hot' again here, or via our leaky borders).

I actually think your post is very sensible but the above construction really gets my goat. In the grand scheme of covid across the world, 'running hot' here is highly unlikely to produce a vaccine evading variant. There are millions of covid cases across the world and nowhere is more likely than anywhere else to produce a variant.

Re leaky borders, I think there are serious questions over the governments approach to red-listing India, for example, but the fact remains that fully closing borders is impossible and all the variants will get in eventually. There is no scenario where you can keep it out; it will get into NZ and Aus as well, and they haven't got anyone vaccinated compared to the rest of the world. As such, 'closing the borders' might well have gained us a few weeks to second jab more people, but it would not have avoided the importation full stop. Global economies do not allow for the long term closure of borders; the Indian/Delta would have arrived here anyway.

More broadly on variants. clearly they are going to keep emerging. In fact its probably a pretty safe bet that one will evade a vaccine, whether its this vaccine or one of the many successors that will be required, probably for the next 100 years at least. We can't delude ourselves that we can avoid them or that the risk of them is going away.

https://www.itv.com/news/2021-06-02/uk-cant-scamper-down-a-rabbit-hole-at-every-sign-of-a-new-covid-variant-says-oxford-expert
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on June 04, 2021, 01:38:28 pm
I guess the chances of rogue variant will diminish as more and more people are vaccinated? The less transmissions, the less opportunity to mutate on each transmission which means the metaphorical net will begin to gradually close, hopefully before a vaccine evading variant "escapes" and if it does, we are essentially back to square 1, unless it is effectively contained.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on June 04, 2021, 01:41:40 pm
I guess the chances of rogue variant will diminish as more and more people are vaccinated? The less transmissions, the less opportunity to mutate on each transmission which means the metaphorical net will begin to gradually close, hopefully before a vaccine evading variant "escapes" and if it does, we are essentially back to square 1, unless it is effectively contained.

That is only true if looking at it through a UK prism and our very good vaccination rates. The global south has very low vax rates and so its still entirely plausible, even likely, that variants will emerge there and eventually make their way to fully vaxxed nations.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 04, 2021, 01:53:04 pm
I guess the chances of rogue variant will diminish as more and more people are vaccinated? The less transmissions, the less opportunity to mutate on each transmission which means the metaphorical net will begin to gradually close, hopefully before a vaccine evading variant "escapes" and if it does, we are essentially back to square 1, unless it is effectively contained.

That is only true if looking at it through a UK prism and our very good vaccination rates. The global south has very low vax rates and so its still entirely plausible, even likely, that variants will emerge there and eventually make their way to fully vaxxed nations.

Vaccine evasive variants are more likely to occur where vaccines induce suitable evolutionary pressure, so, um, here (the West/N hemisphere). The slower and less efficient a nation’s vaccine roll out, the more likely.
Obviously, at some point in the future, that pressure will move south as poorer countries extend their vaccine programs.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on June 04, 2021, 02:11:11 pm
True. Which sort of leads me back to my original point, which is essentially; variants are going to happen, almost irrespective of what we do to mitigate against it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stabbsy on June 04, 2021, 03:14:51 pm
Vaccine evasive variants are more likely to occur where vaccines induce suitable evolutionary pressure, so, um, here (the West/N hemisphere). The slower and less efficient a nation’s vaccine roll out, the more likely.
Obviously, at some point in the future, that pressure will move south as poorer countries extend their vaccine programs.
Struggling with this - seems to contradict itself. More variants occur where there's suitable evolutionary pressure and this pressure is higher where the vaccine rollout is slower? Care to explain?

I've heard this argument of evolving in response to "evolutionary pressure" a few times and I can't get it to sit well based on what I understand about evolution more generally. I think viruses sometimes mutate when they transmit, it's what they do. Question is, do they mutate in a "smart" way in response to evolutionary pressure or is it just that they mutate anyway and the ones that mutate to become more infectious become the most successful version while others die out? Think of it in terms of human evolution - we didn't/don't evolve in a "smart" way, that's the intelligent design hypothesis (or whatever it's called) and it's bollocks. We evolved by chance mutations that gave competitive advantage. Those with the mutation then out-competed the remainder over a very long period of time and there you have it - evolution.

Are we implying something different to this for viruses? Or is it just that timescales are that much shorter? I'd argue that the vaccines are not inducing "evolutionary pressure", but that mutations will happen anyway. If that's the case then the maths says that variants will most likely occur where transmission is highest and, if the vaccine reduces transmission, that will not be where vaccine take-up is highest.

Disclaimer : I'm not a biologist, so I could be way out. Someone with a better understanding of evolutionary biology, please correct me if I'm wrong.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on June 04, 2021, 03:29:44 pm
Thanks, was going to ask the same. As I understand it mutations in nature occur and where the mutation happens to occur in an environment which allows that mutation to thrive, it exploits that environment and multiplies successfully. If it's not a conducive mutation, that strain just dies out.

Given that the vaccination is just reducing opportunities to transmit and this mutate, and no human body or external environment is any better or worse for it, how is it going to react to evolutionary pressure?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 04, 2021, 05:16:40 pm
At a guess and from badly remembering what I read...

A mutation, any mutation, can occur anywhere at any time, of course.

If a population develops or induces a sufficiently high level of immunity to the prevalent/existing strains quickly enough, it should suppress transmission, reduce cases and therefore the pool of potential mutation incubators. Even if some of those strains show some vaccine evasion.

Our vaccines currently require two doses, at a spacing greater than the incubation period of the virus, to be sufficiently effective to suppress transmission enough, that if the proportion of partially protected people is allowed to straggle out, alongside an unprotected population the risk of mutation remains higher, longer and the partially protected population (and their (likely) consequently reduced respect for transmission risk), provide a neat little petri dish for developing a pool of more evasive strains, because those are the ones that produce the symptoms in the partially protected, that increase spread so nicely.
There was something about this already being an issue with a disease that had so many asymptomatic and mildly affected carriers anyway (like the Flu), whereas things like Ebola, tend to kill people too quickly and uniformly, for this to be an issue (although, that might change now we have treatments and vaccines for Ebola).
I believe something similar happens/is more likely to happen with antibody treatments too and those have been way more prevalent in the First World too.

But, I’d love to know this is all wrong, especially given the slow pace of some Western nations vaccine programs.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: AJM on June 04, 2021, 05:57:14 pm
Vaccine escape is just a mutation that means the immune system doesn't recognise the virus any more. Those mutations occur randomly the whole time. When noone is vaccinated, a vaccine escape mutation confers no benefit. When everyone is vaccinated, there's hopefully not enough of a pool of cases to support lots of mutation. Somewhere in the middle there's a "sweet spot" where there's a sufficient cases to give rise to mutations and a competitive advantage to being able to access the vaccinated hosts as well.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stabbsy on June 04, 2021, 09:24:27 pm
At a guess and from badly remembering what I read...

A mutation, any mutation, can occur anywhere at any time, of course.

If a population develops or induces a sufficiently high level of immunity to the prevalent/existing strains quickly enough, it should suppress transmission, reduce cases and therefore the pool of potential mutation incubators. Even if some of those strains show some vaccine evasion.

Our vaccines currently require two doses, at a spacing greater than the incubation period of the virus, to be sufficiently effective to suppress transmission enough, that if the proportion of partially protected people is allowed to straggle out, alongside an unprotected population the risk of mutation remains higher, longer and the partially protected population (and their (likely) consequently reduced respect for transmission risk), provide a neat little petri dish for developing a pool of more evasive strains, because those are the ones that produce the symptoms in the partially protected, that increase spread so nicely.
There was something about this already being an issue with a disease that had so many asymptomatic and mildly affected carriers anyway (like the Flu), whereas things like Ebola, tend to kill people too quickly and uniformly, for this to be an issue (although, that might change now we have treatments and vaccines for Ebola).
I believe something similar happens/is more likely to happen with antibody treatments too and those have been way more prevalent in the First World too.

But, I’d love to know this is all wrong, especially given the slow pace of some Western nations vaccine programs.

Yes, I'm fine with most of that  - I think what you're saying there is that variants can still occur in a partially vaccinated population and that the more people you vaccinate the better. But that's not consistent with what your earlier post said, which was :
 
Vaccine evasive variants are more likely to occur where vaccines induce suitable evolutionary pressure, so, um, here (the West/N hemisphere).
The key point is that the vaccine is not inducing the variants, it's all just chance. The same mutation is just as likely to occur in an individual transmission in an unvaccinated population as it is in a vaccinated population. The difference is that less transmission is happening in the vaccinated population, so less mutations at an overall level. So vaccine evasive variants are more likely to occur where there is more transmission, so, um, not in the West/N hemisphere.

Vaccine escape is just a mutation that means the immune system doesn't recognise the virus any more. Those mutations occur randomly the whole time. When noone is vaccinated, a vaccine escape mutation confers no benefit. When everyone is vaccinated, there's hopefully not enough of a pool of cases to support lots of mutation. Somewhere in the middle there's a "sweet spot" where there's a sufficient cases to give rise to mutations and a competitive advantage to being able to access the vaccinated hosts as well.

I don't think it matters if the vaccine escape mutation confers no benefit, does it? It's still going to spread in the unvaccinated population, whether it's evading the vaccine or not. I'm just not convinced that this sweet spot exists for variant mutation that is worse than being in an unvaccinated population. This might not be what you're suggesting, but that's how it reads to me.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: AJM on June 05, 2021, 07:15:45 am
I don't think it matters if the vaccine escape mutation confers no benefit, does it? It's still going to spread in the unvaccinated population, whether it's evading the vaccine or not. I'm just not convinced that this sweet spot exists for variant mutation that is worse than being in an unvaccinated population. This might not be what you're suggesting, but that's how it reads to me.

It will still spread, and the mutation is just as likely to happen in the first place, as you say it's just chance - but in the absence of a vaccine there's no reason why that variant would become the dominant strain (unless it has other advantages too - broadly speaking extra transmissibility looks like the main advantage driving dominance at the minute). Once you introduce the pressure from the vaccine, it probably will. Which is only bad if the vaccine is your only plausible route back to normality...!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on June 05, 2021, 09:14:03 am
Isn't by far the most likely source of variants the fact that the borders and quarantine policy is a total joke?

Irrespective of vaccination pressure etc, in reality virtually noone actually obeys a home quarantine policy, unless you have an autocratic police / military state.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 07, 2021, 07:51:48 pm
25 and over this week:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jun/07/people-in-england-aged-25-and-over-to-be-invited-for-covid-jab-this-week
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on June 07, 2021, 07:56:13 pm
 Fucking finally!  :bounce:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 07, 2021, 08:31:12 pm
Also, looks like protection against hospitalization in fully-vaccinated people remains super strong, fingers crossed:

https://twitter.com/DevanSinha/status/1401946051091836936

And as a side note, it looks like Delta may be crushing Beta (B.1.351) and Gamma (P1) out of existence in the UK:

https://twitter.com/fact_covid/status/1401873652912734214

This is interesting because both of them seem to have more vaccine evasion than Delta does (especially Beta with AstraZeneca), but it looks like Delta's increased transmissibility trumps that right now.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 08, 2021, 09:40:16 pm
Apparently 493,000 appointments got booked by noon today, so well done to the Youth there, good stuff.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on June 09, 2021, 10:26:11 am
 Re local lockdown and pandemic competence, from Stephen Bushs' morning email:

The underlying problem is that while the vaccine provides a high level of protection against the Delta variant, and while younger people are less at risk from Covid-19, we still don't know if, with our present level of vaccination, NHS capacity would withstand an uncontrolled outbreak. So it is touch-and-go whether England will be able to unlock on 21 June. 

But there are some things we can say definitively. The first is that we’re here because the British government has never had an effective strategy for central quarantine and isolation, whether at the border or in the United Kingdom. (A fun, but depressing game if you want to illustrate that is to look at any Covid hotspot and work out how much we have paid hotels to furlough staff rather than turning them over the to job of running central quarantine.)

I’ve written before that one advantage Boris Johnson has is that people simply do not want to revisit the past year and are therefore inclined to give the government the benefit of the doubt. I think that’s still true. But the flip side of that is that I think most people also want the government to keep its end of the bargain up and to ensure that we do not have to revisit the past year. Failure could well have a political cost as well as a social and economic one. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on June 09, 2021, 10:56:48 am
The underlying problem is that while the vaccine provides a high level of protection against the Delta variant, and while younger people are less at risk from Covid-19, we still don't know if, with our present level of vaccination, NHS capacity would withstand an uncontrolled outbreak. So it is touch-and-go whether England will be able to unlock on 21 June. 

I don't understand this. The vaccine provides a high level of protection, and we have lots and lots of people vaccinated, so how would an outbreak be uncontrolled? The vaccine is the control is it not? Are we not aiming for low hospitalisation numbers as opposed to low numbers of cases?

Personally I'm satisfied with what the government have done thus far with regards full re-opening. They've set a provisional date of 21st June, made it clear from the outset that that date might be pushed back, they started to sound-off about it being delayed at least a fortnight ago pending more info, it's now as good as certain with final confirmation coming on the 14th. Given the complexities and uncertainty in modelling the outcome of two opposing forces (vaccine rollout and virus spread) I don't think that this is an unreasonable approach.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on June 09, 2021, 11:05:50 am
Its because of how transmissible the Delta variant is; if a large number of young people (still unvaccinated) get covid as a result, and a small % of these end up hospitalised , then a small % of a big number is still a big number. Thats the theory anyway.

Its interesting that Delta is yet to properly kick off elsewhere in the world yet (edit: apart from in India, obviously). Suggests there is something unique about the current hotspot areas that are uniquely susceptible to outbreaks; multi generational housing, lower vaccine uptake etc?

Not sure I totally agree with Bush's second paragraph. I agree it hasn't helped not having an effective quarantine system, but the variant would have got in anyway as we have gone over in this thread before.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on June 09, 2021, 06:20:26 pm
. I agree it hasn't helped not having an effective quarantine system, but the variant would have got in anyway as we have gone over in this thread before.

It might have got in but the crucial thing about having a working quarantine system is that you can delay and slow its spread. It effectively gives you more time to decide whether you want to try to contain it or to just slow it down as much as possible. If like Australia whenever you get a few new cases you lock down the area hard then you'll perhaps get closer to the former but annoy people in the area more.
I acknowledge it's far more difficult to do containment here as we're more densely populated, more airports etc etc
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on June 09, 2021, 07:12:39 pm
Why have isolation at all? I can’t see any functional difference between isolating and quarantine apart from the passport. It seems if one serves a useful purpose, then so must the other.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on June 10, 2021, 08:31:52 am

I acknowledge it's far more difficult to do containment here as we're more densely populated, more airports etc etc

I would say practically impossible given our reliance on imports for essentially everything. Australia also followed the hugely morally suspect policy of banning their own citizens from returning from India which I'd have been very uncomfortable with the UK doing. I accept it would have slowed it, but there would have been a significant cost.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on June 10, 2021, 08:57:44 am
..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on June 10, 2021, 10:35:31 am
Why have isolation at all? I can’t see any functional difference between isolating and quarantine apart from the passport. It seems if one serves a useful purpose, then so must the other.

This depends on what you mean. Enforced hotel quarantine, effective at least to an extent. Home quarantine is a myth, it would be incredibly difficult to achieve properly for the vast majority of people, I really don't believe it's practiced properly by most people.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on June 10, 2021, 10:36:22 am

I acknowledge it's far more difficult to do containment here as we're more densely populated, more airports etc etc

I would say practically impossible given our reliance on imports for essentially everything. Australia also followed the hugely morally suspect policy of banning their own citizens from returning from India which I'd have been very uncomfortable with the UK doing. I accept it would have slowed it, but there would have been a significant cost.

Yup that's fair, that's more or less what I meant.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 10, 2021, 02:42:43 pm
I don't understand this. The vaccine provides a high level of protection, and we have lots and lots of people vaccinated, so how would an outbreak be uncontrolled?

Because there are still lots and lots of people who are unvaccinated or half-vaccinated. Case rates are rocketing up in people in their teens and twenties, and to a lesser degree in the half-vaccinated age groups (and Delta takes a nasty chunk out of the protection you get from a single dose, knocking it down to about 33% against infection).

And Delta looks like it might be more than twice as likely to hospitalize people as Kent/Alpha was.

Even with that: those younger age groups still have a much lower risk of getting severely ill than others, but, as people keep pointing out: a small percentage of a very very big number can still be a big number.

People in their teens and twenties also seem to be the most effective spreaders as they go out and interact most (a 70-year-old might be much more vulnerable if they get infected, but they're also less likely to be going out partying). So it can rip through those age groups.

Hat metaphor explanation: https://twitter.com/JamesWard73/status/1402904768113254402

And the over-50s still aren't fully vaccinated yet; the government is aspiring to have offered second doses by the 21st, but remember it takes a couple of weeks post-shot for the immunity to build up.

(There's also a fair amount of uncertainty at the moment about whether 2 doses of AZ performs significantly worse against Delta than 2 doses of Pfizer does.)

Hospital admissions are still low, but they're now going up exponentially. Hopefully deaths won't follow as much (because people being hospitalized are largely younger and healthier than in previous waves), but it could still be unpleasant.

And deaths aside, the NHS is just beginning to try to tackle the horrible backlog of non-Covid treatments. You don't have to be looking at the NHS being potentially overwhelmed for it to be quite bad if a lot of people get told that their vital cancer treatments (and hip surgeries and whatever) which just got re-scheduled now have to be cancelled and postponed again.

Basically: vaccines work great, in people who've had the vaccines. Unfortunately, a significant chunk of the population is still out in the cold, or only has one foot in over the threshold.

That's going to change very fast as the vaccine rollout continues, and we're in a vastly different position from where we'd be if the vaccine rollout wasn't already at this stage. A lot of people seem hopeful that this might be manageable, if maybe a bit bumpy, given sensible decisions like delaying the June 21 re-opening for a few weeks (and doing proper surge vaccination in hotspots -- let them vaccinate anyone they can, ffs).

Personally I'm satisfied with what the government have done thus far with regards full re-opening. They've set a provisional date of 21st June, made it clear from the outset that that date might be pushed back, they started to sound-off about it being delayed at least a fortnight ago pending more info, it's now as good as certain with final confirmation coming on the 14th.

From the modelling various people are doing, delaying 2-4 weeks at this point could probably make a significant difference.

Unfortunately, looks like Johnson may still be in "let the bodies pile high in their thousands" mode:

https://twitter.com/SebastianEPayne/status/1400136894953005056

This was prior to the most recent PHE reports, but I don't have great faith in his capacity to learn.

And all the briefing about how Rishi Sunak is willing to accept a 4-week delay suggests to me that the cabinet is still fighting over it. I'm really worried that it's not "as good as certain".

made it clear from the outset that that date might be pushed back

Not to a lot of the great British public, they haven't.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on June 10, 2021, 03:33:22 pm
Something to add is the NHS is pretty much still at capacity right now and it's workforce very tired. I can't see hospitalisations getting anywhere near previous peaks (as I think even one jab gives very good average protection against hospitalisation) but any big rise would be very bad news. It's dumb to 'shake the dice' when a few more weeks make the vaccination situation so much better and the information on hospitalisation levels a lot clearer. Lets see.... at least Boris won't be needlessly killing tems of thousands this time by making the wrong decision again, like he did in September and December last year.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on June 10, 2021, 03:50:38 pm
It's dumb to 'shake the dice' when a few more weeks make the vaccination situation so much better and the information on hospitalisation levels a lot clearer. Lets see.... at least Boris won't be needlessly killing tems of thousands this time by making the wrong decision again, like he did in September and December last year.

Am I right in thinking that 'just a couple of weeks' mightn't be the case? Previously vaccinations were accelerated due to other vaccinations becoming available, but with Pfizer being the choice below a certain age then the no. of vaccinations per day is more limited by supply? That's not me advocating against delays btw.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on June 10, 2021, 04:09:07 pm
That all makes sense, Slab. I'm not arguing that we shouldn't put the date back if that's what's necessary.

I'd be amazed if the date wasn't pushed back. All the "move heaven and earth" stuff is just politics. They know that there'll be a heap of people who are disappointed - particularly the fully vaccinated oldies and business owners who form a large portion of the Conservative's voters and membership - so they need to make a show of having exhausted all the alternatives. The reason that they don't drop the decision to push the date back like a bombshell is exactly the same reason that I don't suddenly say to my kids "it's bedtime" - I say "we'll have three more books then bed...two more books then bed...last book then bed".
This is, of course, just my hunch.

made it clear from the outset that that date might be pushed back

Not to a lot of the great British public, they haven't.

Is that true? I don't remember the government ever briefing that the 21st June would definitely be honoured. In fact I distinctly remember the rhetoric that was used when they produced the "road map" was that each step would be "irreversible", but that they would only proceed to the next stage if they deemed it right to do so. As soon as the variants appeared the tone became more cautious.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 10, 2021, 04:36:52 pm
Am I right in thinking that 'just a couple of weeks' mightn't be the case? Previously vaccinations were accelerated due to other vaccinations becoming available, but with Pfizer being the choice below a certain age then the no. of vaccinations per day is more limited by supply? That's not me advocating against delays btw.

Hard to gauge what the limits are because there's no public info on what vaccines England actually has in stock -- they were denying for ages that there was any stockpile, then Hancock admitted it in his testimony today.

Paul Mainwood is your man for attempting to work out what the situation is with that, if you want to dive into that rabbit hole:

https://twitter.com/PaulMainwood/with_replies

However, remember that a lot of half-vaccinated people got AZ, so the Pfizer/Moderna supply isn't the limiting factor there.

Just in terms of already-scheduled second doses (and the fortnight or so it takes for them to kick in), I have the impression that a few weeks gets us a lot -- remember the difference in protection between half- and fully-vaccinated is much bigger with Delta.

They could also be a lot smarter within a fixed supply if they were willing to properly surge-vaccinate in the Delta hotspots, even if that meant temporarily slowing vaccination in area with very low rates. Right now, it's a hell of a lot riskier to be a 20-year-old in Blackburn than a 35-year-old in Devon. But they're distributing vaccine doses strictly on a population basis and insisting that local authorities stick to the national age limits.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 10, 2021, 04:49:40 pm
Is that true? I don't remember the government ever briefing that the 21st June would definitely be honoured.

Oh yeah, the official line has always been "data not dates". But they've been saying that while also hyping up the dates as markers of freedom, and there are clearly a lot of people who feel they've been "promised" that all restrictions will end on the 21st and that it will be a terrible betrayal if that doesn't happen.

I fervently hope that your hunch is right and they're just softening the blow of the delay.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on June 11, 2021, 07:50:22 am
Times is suggesting a 4 week delay, which would at least be better than saying two weeks and it ending up being extended.

I think that's probably the right course of action but suspect that they will be more or less compelled to open up after that, both to calm the oldies and business owners but also to demonstrate to young people there is some sort of benefit to getting vaccinated. Uptake is brilliant currently in the under 30s but without a quid quo pro I can see why people who were on the fence wouldn't be convinced.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 11, 2021, 08:35:19 am
Quite a good breakdown of the situation by Sky, today:

 https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-could-the-delta-variant-delay-the-final-step-on-pms-roadmap-12328716 (https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-could-the-delta-variant-delay-the-final-step-on-pms-roadmap-12328716)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on June 11, 2021, 08:48:42 am
. I agree it hasn't helped not having an effective quarantine system, but the variant would have got in anyway as we have gone over in this thread before.
It might have got in but the crucial thing about having a working quarantine system is that you can delay and slow its spread. It effectively gives you more time to decide whether you want to try to contain it or to just slow it down as much as possible.
Exactly. The number of import events has a huge impact on rate of spread of a new variant and the severity of the outbreak. Limit it to a handful of import cases, and it is possible to prevent/minimise community transmission for some time and keep the rate of growth much lower.

The 3+ week delay would have made the spread of Delta in the UK much more manageable. Every day that you delay rapid growth reduces the rate of growth and the total number of cases because hundreds of thousands of people are getting vaccinated every day. This is the key factor that should have urged caution with the delta travel bans.

It's the same story we've seen countless times during the last 17 months: not taking the correct action when it needed to be taken and having to take more severe action because of the delay. Without the delay in introducing travel bans over delta, we almost certainly would not be discussing delaying the 21 June easing. I would like to think that lessons had been learned for the emergence of the next worrying looking variant but I expect the same mistake will be made yet again.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on June 11, 2021, 09:03:44 am

Exactly. The number of import events has a huge impact on rate of spread of a new variant and the severity of the outbreak. Limit it to a handful of import cases, and it is possible to prevent/minimise community transmission for some time and keep the rate of growth much lower.

The 3+ week delay would have made the spread of Delta in the UK much more manageable. Every day that you delay rapid growth reduces the rate of growth and the total number of cases because hundreds of thousands of people are getting vaccinated every day. This is the key factor that should have urged caution with the delta travel bans.

It's the same story we've seen countless times during the last 17 months: not taking the correct action when it needed to be taken and having to take more severe action because of the delay. Without the delay in introducing travel bans over delta, we almost certainly would not be discussing delaying the 21 June easing. I would like to think that lessons had been learned for the emergence of the next worrying looking variant but I expect the same mistake will be made yet again.

All true, but it only holds if you believe that preventing it being imported was a reasonable policy decision to make at the time with the facts at the time. A huge number of British citizens are dual Indian citizens. If we had adopted a very strict border policy (like Australia) we would have been effectively locking our own citizens out and preventing them returning somewhere they had a right to be. I don't think that would have been well received by people like me, elements of the media or indeed the people involved!

I say this not to excuse the government but just to play devils advocate; I don't think its as clear cut in practice as it is in theory.

https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1402634844421623809
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 11, 2021, 09:39:41 am
All true, but it only holds if you believe that preventing it being imported was a reasonable policy decision to make at the time with the facts at the time. A huge number of British citizens are dual Indian citizens. If we had adopted a very strict border policy (like Australia) we would have been effectively locking our own citizens out and preventing them returning somewhere they had a right to be.

But you wouldn't have needed the (completely horrifying) Australian policy to delay Delta's arrival. If India had been red-listed at the same time as Pakistan and Bangladesh (when, IIRC, its positivity rates were higher -- we didn't know about Delta specifically but we could see the numbers), that could have bought us crucial time:

https://twitter.com/DevanSinha/status/1399667142321135622 (Sinha's generally pretty sensible so I'd have some trust in his assessment)

The only reason it wasn't red-listed then is because Johnson wanted to go visit Modi and get a trade deal.

I agree with you that trying to hermetically-seal the borders and hope nothing gets in ever isn't viable (or a long-term solution). But we could be in a better position than we currently are if we'd bothered to make our current system work the way it was supposed to.

(Obviously there's a whole issue about the costs of hotel quarantine for people who may not be able to afford it, and how to make that fair, but that's a separate issue.)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 11, 2021, 09:50:30 am
Btw, public service announcement:

If you're over 40 and had a first shot of AstraZeneca, it seems to be possible to re-book your second appointment so it's sooner -- down to about an 8-week interval, instead of 11-12 weeks:

https://twitter.com/fact_covid/status/1403071854559039495
https://twitter.com/JamesWard73/status/1401134195200741378

Advantage: you get up to max protection several weeks sooner, and out of that dubious half-vaccinated zone (especially significant with Delta about).

Disadvantage: you potentially lose a notch off that max protection level, because AZ seems to do best with the longer interval between doses.

I don't think there's a "right" answer here, but figured some people might want to be aware that it seems to be an option.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on June 11, 2021, 09:57:43 am
I got 1st AZ on 31st March, and got appt for 2nd one today, so just over 10 weeks?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on June 11, 2021, 10:01:14 am

But you wouldn't have needed the (completely horrifying) Australian policy to delay Delta's arrival. If India had been red-listed at the same time as Pakistan and Bangladesh (when, IIRC, its positivity rates were higher -- we didn't know about Delta specifically but we could see the numbers), that could have bought us crucial time:

https://twitter.com/DevanSinha/status/1399667142321135622 (Sinha's generally pretty sensible so I'd have some trust in his assessment)

The only reason it wasn't red-listed then is because Johnson wanted to go visit Modi and get a trade deal.

I agree with you that trying to hermetically-seal the borders and hope nothing gets in ever isn't viable (or a long-term solution). But we could be in a better position than we currently are if we'd bothered to make our current system work the way it was supposed to.

(Obviously there's a whole issue about the costs of hotel quarantine for people who may not be able to afford it, and how to make that fair, but that's a separate issue.)

Yeah, that seems reasonable. I agree about the trade deal visit, if that hadn't been planned I suspect India would have been red listed at that time. I guess it highlights though, that whatever you or I think about the desire or necessity of the potential trade deal, covid policy decisions are entwined with politics as usual, as has been the case throughout; they can't be wholly separated.

I get very uneasy about the calls to 'shut the borders' from liberal/left leaning people or media, or from the Labour Party as it runs completely counter to my world view. It plays completely into the hands of the nativist and isolationist right wing who think we can wall ourselves off and be safe from all the worlds ills, which coincidentally (for them) all seem to materialise in non-white majority countries  :-\ I know nobody on here is saying that (obviously!) but |I think its worth considering whether its a wise position to take, no matter how nuanced we think it is.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on June 11, 2021, 10:05:00 am
Had my first vaccine yesterday, I'm 45 and received the AZ (missed my original appointment from over a month ago). The vaccine card has the date for the second jab booked in for 5th August, so 8 weeks after. Not sure if the rules in Wales are different to England or if they've made it 8 weeks for everyone currently getting jabbed.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on June 11, 2021, 10:08:23 am

Exactly. The number of import events has a huge impact on rate of spread of a new variant and the severity of the outbreak. Limit it to a handful of import cases, and it is possible to prevent/minimise community transmission for some time and keep the rate of growth much lower.

The 3+ week delay would have made the spread of Delta in the UK much more manageable. Every day that you delay rapid growth reduces the rate of growth and the total number of cases because hundreds of thousands of people are getting vaccinated every day. This is the key factor that should have urged caution with the delta travel bans.

It's the same story we've seen countless times during the last 17 months: not taking the correct action when it needed to be taken and having to take more severe action because of the delay. Without the delay in introducing travel bans over delta, we almost certainly would not be discussing delaying the 21 June easing. I would like to think that lessons had been learned for the emergence of the next worrying looking variant but I expect the same mistake will be made yet again.

All true, but it only holds if you believe that preventing it being imported was a reasonable policy decision to make at the time with the facts at the time. A huge number of British citizens are dual Indian citizens. If we had adopted a very strict border policy (like Australia) we would have been effectively locking our own citizens out and preventing them returning somewhere they had a right to be. I don't think that would have been well received by people like me, elements of the media or indeed the people involved!

I say this not to excuse the government but just to play devils advocate; I don't think its as clear cut in practice as it is in theory.

https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1402634844421623809

Sudden changes in travel regulations are just the reality in recent times. Nobody is traveling anywhere without considering the chance of sudden developments changing their plans. Our failure to prevent travel from India has now led to other countries introducing restrictions on travel from the UK.

I don't think it needed to be unpopular among the wider population had it been framed as a temporary ban, necessary to reduce our chances of missing the 21 June easing. And explained that if delta had turned out to be less problematic, the ban would be reversed. When it is pitched as a choice between travel to/from India vs future opening up and travel elsewhere, I don't think it would have been a hard sell. My Indian colleagues were the ones most in favour of Indian travel restrictions when delta was emerging.

I would have favoured an immediate hotel quarantine requirement (2 weeks, fully paid by the government*, no exceptions, no advanced warning), with an announcement that a full ban was anticipated shortly if the data was bad and that restrictions would be removed if it turned out not to be a problem. Our plan of waiting over 3 weeks and pre-announcing when changes would be introduced led to over 20,000 people flying back from India after delta emerged. I don't know how many times we imported delta but Australia's stricter testing requirements when they reopened travel led to 50% of passengers on some flights being refused permission to fly.

It should have been made clear that these will be the default measures taken for any country where a troubling looking variant emerges until more is known. Better to reduce travel to a handful of countries than to have greater restrictions imposed on everyone both at home and abroad.

*quarantine should be free when it is caused by recent changes to increase compliance. Cheaper to pay for people to quarantine than to keep paying furlough for the sectors that have to delay reopening.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 11, 2021, 10:11:08 am
Congrats on your jab!

I don't know if there's been an official announcement (as there has been with re-scheduling second doses for the over-50s), but it looks like they're generally trying to tighten the interval to get more people fully-vaccinated.

Which makes a lot of sense given that Delta seems to take a chunk out of the partial protection you get from a single dose.

Not sure if the rules in Wales are different to England

Some things are devolved, I know -- Wales seems to have been crushing it with their rollout:

https://twitter.com/redouad/status/1397500517446819843
https://twitter.com/itssophiemorris/status/1401867527286931458
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on June 11, 2021, 10:19:34 am
An all out ban on travel from India would have been a bad do. The British government owes a duty of care to its citizens and trapping people in a country whose healthcare system is collapsing doesn't fulfill that duty. By all means repatriate people and put them up in a hotel for two weeks.

Hypothetically, if it weren't possible, for whatever reason, to isolate people in hotels then you'd have to ask them to do it at home (possibly multi-generational which is its own problem). That's not going to work unless you get quite authoritarian about it. Targeting those measures at a group who are mostly non-white would go down very badly.

TL;DR it's harder than it looks.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 11, 2021, 10:45:24 am
Times is suggesting a 4 week delay, which would at least be better than saying two weeks and it ending up being extended.

I think that's probably the right course of action but suspect that they will be more or less compelled to open up after that

Interestingly, some folks not normally noted for their sunny optimism (e.g. Neil Ferguson) aren't pushing for a longer break than that, because longer potentially pushes the exit wave into autumn:

https://twitter.com/JamesWard73/status/1402965632749035530

Rght now, a fair bit of modelling suggests that even if transmissibility is at the really nasty end of the range of possibilities, a 4-week delay (plus possibly some measures like masks on public transport and working from home where possible being extended for a bit longer) might be all we need to minimize pressure on the NHS:

https://twitter.com/JamesWard73/status/1401806768519405569 (big thread of modelling for various levels of transmissibility and vaccine escape)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Wellsy on June 11, 2021, 10:48:48 am
It feels like the borders should be realistically havs been closed but for essential work travel (transport of food and medicines etc) since March 2020. No holidays. The only private reason I can think of is "not seen my family in X months" and even then I'd be thinking maybe you need to pick a place and live there for a while. International travel for private reasons just seems hard to justify to me anyway. People traveling for funerals and weddings? Sorry no. It sucks, but sorry no.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on June 11, 2021, 10:53:40 am
All true, but it only holds if you believe that preventing it being imported was a reasonable policy decision to make at the time with the facts at the time. A huge number of British citizens are dual Indian citizens. If we had adopted a very strict border policy (like Australia) we would have been effectively locking our own citizens out and preventing them returning somewhere they had a right to be. I don't think that would have been well received by people like me, elements of the media or indeed the people involved!

There are more UK residents/citizens who identify as Asian with a Pakistani or Bangledshi origin combined than Indian origin, both of whom were on the red list despite a lower % of positive cases tested on arrival and no-one shed a tear for them at the time and are ignored in the discussion now.

I can't see how the decision to not red list amber was not driven by the proposed visit and to the PM. that was more important than acting on the evidence and adding it to the red list.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on June 11, 2021, 11:05:05 am

There are more UK residents/citizens who identify as Asian with a Pakistani or Bangledshi origin combined than Indian origin, both of whom were on the red list despite a lower % of positive cases tested on arrival and no-one shed a tear for them at the time and are ignored in the discussion now.


Good point. Like I say, I agree with a lot of what has been posted above by sdm, yourself and others, but I also think it was a pretty complicated situation and easy one liners like 'just shut the borders' are overly simplistic (I know you aren't doing this). Also I don't think you can take the geopolitics out of it; I detest both the Johnson and Modi governments, along with the fact that we need to be scratching around for trade deals at all, but given the scenario we are in I can see why the government might have thought 'shit, we could really do with gladhanding Modi so hold off for a few weeks to see how bad it gets.' Put it this way, its entirely plausible to me that a Labour government might have made the same call had they been in power, so I think it weakens the argument to lump that decision in with all the other numerous examples of this governments late action and incompetence.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on June 11, 2021, 11:20:09 am

There are more UK residents/citizens who identify as Asian with a Pakistani or Bangledshi origin combined than Indian origin, both of whom were on the red list despite a lower % of positive cases tested on arrival and no-one shed a tear for them at the time and are ignored in the discussion now.


Good point. Like I say, I agree with a lot of what has been posted above by sdm, yourself and others, but I also think it was a pretty complicated situation and easy one liners like 'just shut the borders' are overly simplistic (I know you aren't doing this). Also I don't think you can take the geopolitics out of it; I detest both the Johnson and Modi governments, along with the fact that we need to be scratching around for trade deals at all, but given the scenario we are in I can see why the government might have thought 'shit, we could really do with gladhanding Modi so hold off for a few weeks to see how bad it gets.' Put it this way, its entirely plausible to me that a Labour government might have made the same call had they been in power, so I think it weakens the argument to lump that decision in with all the other numerous examples of this governments late action and incompetence.

I'm not denying it's not complicated and that there are multiple factors in play but the bare faced lies that the government have come out with as justification for their decision making (re infection rates/positive test rates) makes me think their decision making is not as transparent and justifiable as it should be and, imho, we are paying the price.

Re Labour, I don't really care, they are not in power and aren't making these decisions. There are plenty of reasons for having a pop at Labour but a hypothetical scenario isn't one of them
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on June 11, 2021, 11:26:28 am
That wasn't a pop at Labour (I think they'd be doing a better job); just trying to illustrate that I don't think the challenges/fuck ups of pandemic response government are unique to this government. As you say though its a hypothetical so impossible to prove either way.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on June 11, 2021, 11:34:25 am
Had my first vaccine yesterday, I'm 45 and received the AZ (missed my original appointment from over a month ago). The vaccine card has the date for the second jab booked in for 5th August, so 8 weeks after. Not sure if the rules in Wales are different to England or if they've made it 8 weeks for everyone currently getting jabbed.

It seems to depend on where you go to get jabbed here at least. I had Pfizer at Blackburn hospital and was told I could go online to book my 2nd (+11wks was the earliest I could get). I tried cancelling and re-booking when the news came out that you could reduce the period to 8 weeks but it didn't seem like an option (perhaps because of Pf vs. Az).

Peewee went to one of the surge clinics near to us both and had the Pfizer where they automatically booked his 2nd jab for 8 weeks.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on June 11, 2021, 11:50:44 am
I booked my jab as soon as it was available (I was up early because kids and saw the announcement that it went live at 7am) through the main online booking thing. I tried to get in for the first available slot but, when it moved onto booking the second jab it fell in the same week that I'll be on holiday. I tried to scan 5 days forward or 5 days backward but the website didn't show any available dates, so I booked the first jab a week later.
I know this has happened to other people so it seems to be by design/a regional decision/a fault with the whole system rather than just something at my end.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: T_B on June 11, 2021, 12:22:54 pm
So Tim Spector reckons symptoms from Delta variant are headache, sore throat, runny nose and then fever. Not cough. So all those young people filling the pubs who think they’ve got a headache/summer cold aren’t going to bother getting a test as there’s nothing from the gov, nor media about this.

FFS.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: JohnM on June 11, 2021, 01:01:17 pm
Just had my first experience of going into a city in the UK (Preston) since covid hit the UK to get my day 5 test to release test. If that is anything to go by no wonder it was such a shit show in the UK. The place I got tested was so unhygienic and somewhere I would have thought would take the most precautions. There were 5 staff, none wearing masks, all coughing into their hands. There were numerous members of the public in there, half of which didn't bother to wear a mask. Even though I had to register online I had to fill in a form with all the same details with a pen used by everyone else. I had to do the test in some kind of broom cupboard at the back of the pharmacy myself crammed in with a member of staff wearing no mask who observes everyone going in there to get tested in a tiny room with no ventilation. I have never felt so at risk of actually catching covid than going for a test that I had to privately pay for because the UK government have insisted I need 4 tests costing me £400. What is the point? I have already tested negative twice in the past week and yet I still need 2 more!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on June 11, 2021, 01:07:17 pm
So Tim Spector reckons symptoms from Delta variant are headache, sore throat, runny nose and then fever. Not cough. So all those young people filling the pubs who think they’ve got a headache/summer cold aren’t going to bother getting a test as there’s nothing from the gov, nor media about this.

FFS.

That list of symptoms is so broad its effectively useless surely. Particularly given its hay fever season.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: T_B on June 11, 2021, 01:27:35 pm
That’s in order of most common. Headache wasn’t even a symptom associated with the Alpha variant and loss of taste/smell is no longer relevant.

You think it would be pointless to communicate this?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on June 11, 2021, 01:57:03 pm
No, not pointless, but for me it probably falls into the category of 'interesting, but essentially useless in a practical sense' because people simply aren't going to go and get tested if they have a headache I don't think. I don't think I would without a bit more understanding of type/longevity/other elements of the headache. (eg if it sticks around for two days or something).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on June 11, 2021, 07:22:15 pm
I get very uneasy about the calls to 'shut the borders' from liberal/left leaning people or media, or from the Labour Party as it runs completely counter to my world view. It plays completely into the hands of the nativist and isolationist right wing who think we can wall ourselves off and be safe from all the worlds ills, which coincidentally (for them) all seem to materialise in non-white majority countries 
I agreement with your sentiment there, but in a pandemic, some control measures are needed for public health. We can debate what they may be (quite stringent for UK citizens) but shutting borders and insisting on quarantine are not the same thing at all. What’s particularly egregious here is the delay in applying the measures to India which were applied to its neighbours Pakistan and Bangladesh.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 12, 2021, 09:02:37 am
So Tim Spector reckons symptoms from Delta variant are headache, sore throat, runny nose and then fever. Not cough. So all those young people filling the pubs who think they’ve got a headache/summer cold aren’t going to bother getting a test as there’s nothing from the gov, nor media about this.

FFS.

To be fair, looks like he said that on the 9th, so it's very very recent info. The ZOE data's been really early picking up on some things (IIRC they picked up loss of smell/taste as a marker before anyone else did), but I'd still expect people to want to confirm that from other sources before they launch a government publicity campaign to notify everyone about changed symptoms.

But yeah, if it turns out we've got changed symptoms on top of everything else, not really ideal ...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on June 12, 2021, 11:14:50 am
I'd still expect people to want to confirm that from other sources before they launch a government publicity campaign to notify everyone about changed symptoms.

Not least because public health messages need to be as simple as possible. The Delta variant is replacing the previous iteration but it's still not the only game in town. I know quite a few people who reported other cold-like symptoms with the Alpha variant but the messaging remained as the distinctive new, continuous dry cough, high temperature, loss of taste/smell. These weren't the only symptoms, but I expect they policy makers wanted to avoid slews of false positives.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: seankenny on June 12, 2021, 01:34:44 pm

I get very uneasy about the calls to 'shut the borders' from liberal/left leaning people or media, or from the Labour Party as it runs completely counter to my world view. It plays completely into the hands of the nativist and isolationist right wing who think we can wall ourselves off and be safe from all the worlds ills, which coincidentally (for them) all seem to materialise in non-white majority countries  :-\ I know nobody on here is saying that (obviously!) but |I think its worth considering whether its a wise position to take, no matter how nuanced we think it is.

In normal times, I totally agree with this as shutting borders doesn't tend to solve the problems its proponents want solving. But in this case, stricter border controls clearly would have had an effect, so should definitely be a policy option.

I have a lot of in-laws in South Asia (thankfully not India), my partner would clearly love to be able to visit her mum but is holding off for now as it's just not sensible. But if for any reason she absolutely had to, then I think it's totally reasonable that she should be able to and should be made to quarantine on her return. Ideally in some kind of paid for/subsidised accomodation with a degree of oversight by the authorities.

I'm more pissed off at the government cutting the aid budget, both for the moral reasons (we are rich) and the self-interested one (we benefit from poor countries being healthier). I can foresee a situation in a year or two where we will still find it hard to visit relatives but most Brits can enjoy travel in Europe/the US/Australia, completely unaffected by travel restrictions.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on June 12, 2021, 06:11:40 pm
I'm more pissed off at the government cutting the aid budget, both for the moral reasons (we are rich) and the self-interested one (we benefit from poor countries being healthier). I can foresee a situation in a year or two where we will still find it hard to visit relatives but most Brits can enjoy travel in Europe/the US/Australia, completely unaffected by travel restrictions.

It's the stupidest foreign policy decision outside of leaving the EU that they've made, it's even stupider given that we've left.
Both for the reasons you cite and that it's a great way to increase migration, people trafficking etc
Ultimately it probably cost less than Dido Harding and her useless track and trace.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: seankenny on June 12, 2021, 07:01:29 pm
I'm more pissed off at the government cutting the aid budget, both for the moral reasons (we are rich) and the self-interested one (we benefit from poor countries being healthier). I can foresee a situation in a year or two where we will still find it hard to visit relatives but most Brits can enjoy travel in Europe/the US/Australia, completely unaffected by travel restrictions.

It's the stupidest foreign policy decision outside of leaving the EU that they've made, it's even stupider given that we've left.
Both for the reasons you cite and that it's a great way to increase migration, people trafficking etc
Ultimately it probably cost less than Dido Harding and her useless track and trace.

What's really frustrating is that after all that fucking bollocks Cummings came out with about wanting some data driven, analytically minded civil servants, they close the Dept for International Development which actually did all that stuff. I studied a great paper on improving teaching in rural Indian schools, it was a huge RCT involving hundreds of primary schools, a variety of incentives for teachers to turn up (they frequently don't), obviously very expensive to do and partly funded by DfID to give them a better idea of how to spend their budget. Now it's all folded into the FCO and used as a carrot to encourage trade. Shocking, and short sighted.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on June 12, 2021, 07:21:26 pm
Don’t know how it is for everyone else, but we’ve got four friends up here  (inc out next door neighbour) who’ve been pinged by the app this week…
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on June 12, 2021, 08:32:55 pm
What’s the deal if you get a track and trace alert but are fully magnetic 5g’ed up, do you still need to isolate?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on June 12, 2021, 08:43:50 pm
Chatting to my partner today. She has a lot of contacts amongst pubs, reps, brewery trade. Depressing to hear how many publicans say, that after spending in preparation for full reopening on June 21st, they may well go to the wall if it can’t go ahead. That shillyshallying over the borders could cost a lot of livelihoods in hospitality.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on June 12, 2021, 09:03:03 pm
Furlough doesn't end on June 21st (extended to September), business relief neither*. To open, staff have to be employed and drinks/food/consumables ordered. They require money, or the promise of money, upfront. So why, if you run a business, would you be so utterly stupid as to place all your financial eggs in the so-obviously-not-certain basket of opening on June 21st. That doesn't make any sense.



*NICs and 10% of missed wage have to be paid though.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on June 12, 2021, 09:44:54 pm
It is easy to oversimplify and underestimate the costs and exposure of hospitality businesses. Supply is not meeting demand due to unpredictability of sales. That means a lot of pubs have had to get orders in significantly in advance if they are to serve customers. Overheads in a range of hospitality venues Van be very significant. Staffing costs are not the only business costs that have to be covered. There are loans, leases, rates, taxation and a lot of businesses  are at the end of their capacity to manage. It isn’t just about now, a lot of money has been lost this last year or so. The unpredictability of lockdown decisions has hit businesses hard with a lot of setting up and product costs entirely wasted and unrecouped.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on June 12, 2021, 10:28:34 pm
I don't doubt any of that. But it doesn't lead on that your point about border policy is the reason for their struggle and possible failure. There's no way you can isolate that one factor among a myriad of interconnectedness to do with a pandemic and trying to come out the other side of it, and single it out as the reason for any business to fail. Opening on June 21st was uncertain from the day they announced the staged process months ago. No prudent business owner would ever bank on that date as 100% certain.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on June 12, 2021, 11:10:30 pm
Opening on June 21st was uncertain from the day they announced the staged process months ago. No prudent business owner would ever bank on that date as 100% certain.

I’m sorry, but this is pompous nonsense. And an irrelevant aunt sally which ignores the pressures of trying to stay afloat after 16 months of pandemic.

My point, which you are free to -and clearly do- object to, is that the failure to exercise basic control over borders despite evidence of the potential dangers of the delta variant has seeded and accelerated a new wave. The policy cannot have been truly evidence based when Pakistan and Bangladesh were on the red list but not India. Whilst Johnson was hoping to meet Modi, it’s obvious why.

The variant would arrive at some point, but the rapid loss of control causes chaos. And businesses, as you know, need to plan.

The government owes the country a duty of competence. Instead, it’s cavalier.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on June 12, 2021, 11:14:31 pm
I don't doubt any of that. But it doesn't lead on that your point about border policy is the reason for their struggle and possible failure. There's no way you can isolate that one factor among a myriad of interconnectedness to do with a pandemic and trying to come out the other side of it, and single it out as the reason for any business to fail. Opening on June 21st was uncertain from the day they announced the staged process months ago. No prudent business owner would ever bank on that date as 100% certain.

I pretty much agree with Pete here, the only thing that's set up the 21st as 'freedom day' is various newspapers and a chunk of conservative backbenchers. Originally all the dates were earliest possible unlocking dates. Unfortunately,  Johnson's rhetoric has played along with this narrative however in an attempt to cultivate popularity,  so it is in significant part still his fault.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on June 12, 2021, 11:30:35 pm
Opening on June 21st was uncertain from the day they announced the staged process months ago. No prudent business owner would ever bank on that date as 100% certain.

I’m sorry, but this is pompous nonsense. And an irrelevant aunt sally which ignores the pressures of trying to stay afloat after 16 months of pandemic.

My point, which you are free to -and clearly do- object to, is that the failure to exercise basic control over borders despite evidence of the potential dangers of the delta variant has seeded and accelerated a new wave. The policy cannot have been truly evidence based when Pakistan and Bangladesh were on the red list but not India. Whilst Johnson was hoping to meet Modi, it’s obvious why.

The variant would arrive at some point, but the rapid loss of control causes chaos. And businesses, as you know, need to plan.

The government owes the country a duty of competence. Instead, it’s cavalier.

You're clearly upset about this. And yes I do clearly think you're talking rubbish. I'll leave you to it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on June 13, 2021, 09:19:26 am
Likewise, but we can agree to differ.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: danm on June 13, 2021, 10:34:30 am
I think perhaps that you are both right to some extent. A tighter control of borders would have helped prevent or slow new strains entering the country, that is fairly indisputable.

Regarding reopening dates, yes business owners should be aware that these dates were just putative. That doesn't alter the fact that for hospitality businesses, hiring staff in order to be ready in time is non-trivial at the minute, plus if you want to serve your customers with beer etc, that has a lead time too. Many were put in an unenviable position - hold off until certain and risk not being able to open giving competitors a head start, or take a bit of a punt. The point is, many saw the later as the best option out of desperation as they will go under otherwise.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on June 13, 2021, 11:08:02 am
I think perhaps that you are both right to some extent. A tighter control of borders would have helped prevent or slow new strains entering the country, that is fairly indisputable.

Regarding reopening dates, yes business owners should be aware that these dates were just putative. That doesn't alter the fact that for hospitality businesses, hiring staff in order to be ready in time is non-trivial at the minute, plus if you want to serve your customers with beer etc, that has a lead time too. Many were put in an unenviable position - hold off until certain and risk not being able to open giving competitors a head start, or take a bit of a punt. The point is, many saw the later as the best option out of desperation as they will go under otherwise.

I'm sure that there has been and is a fairly hefty chunk of people of all dispositions on rules hearing what they want to hear from government announcements and not listening to the bits that are inconvenient for them. I'd say that business support is one of the few things that the government haven't completely screwed up, but the kicker is that when the support fails off, many of them are going to fail unfortunately.  This may in part be to do with Brexit as much as covid, which is influencing staff shortages and would have affected tourism without covid. I'm looking for a job at the moment and seriously considering doing a catering qualification,  as there are literally hundreds of jobs going absolutely everywhere. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on June 13, 2021, 12:10:31 pm
Likewise, but we can agree to differ.

Said I'd leave it there but the point is an interesting one. Look at it another way:

The issue you're vexed about - some hospitality venues not being able to open on a particular date - can be boiled down to three numbers, their rate of change, and their relation to each other i.e. how does one influence the other. There are only three numbers that matter* in this issue: cases, hospitalisations, deaths.

Focussing on border closures being a possible contributing factor to those 3 important numbers, while ignoring all other possible contributing factors, seems a short-sighted way of working out what causes change within a dynamic system with myriad contributing factors. If you really were interested in trying to understand what's going on, then here's an idea - how about considering other possible contributors that don't involve dogmatic allegiance to a coloured rosette. Here are two:

1. A small delay in vaccine shipments (from India.. hmm) during a 4-week period in March/April. Resulting in a slightly slower rate of vaccination than would have occurred in a parallel UK where this delayed shipment didn't occur, all other things being equal.
2. Lower take-up of vaccination compared to the national average among the BAME population, from December through to present day. The results of which are evident in the stats. Compared to a parallel UK where take-up of vaccination among the BAME population was in line with the national average, all other things being equal.   

That's not meant to blame either of the above factors for the 3 important output figures (case/hospitalisations/deaths). Merely to highlight that there are lots of moving parts, and I'm sure we could think of other contributing factors in long chains of events within a dynamic system that could possibly contribute to three important output numbers and their rate of change. If any of them had been slightly different it may not have mattered about border policy with India. It may not matter anyway. Or it may.

But to ignore any other factor that could possibly contribute to the three output numbers (cases, hospitalisations, deaths) and focus attention on one factor - perceived failure of border policy - is pushing a political agenda, not looking for truth. You're free to push your political agenda on here. I'm free to call it what it is.



* https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2021/04/08/what-is-behind-the-low-covid-19-vaccine-take-up-in-some-ethnic-minorities/
* https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n781
* https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-03-18/astra-shipment-from-india-said-to-be-behind-u-k-vaccine-delay

* Yes obviously there's people's stupid politics as well - or stupid people's politics if you want - but if you're trying to make the case that the UK's border policy for India is directly responsible for some hospitality venues not being able to open on a particular day, then it boils down to those three numbers as they underlie most of the decision to allow the venues to re-open.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Stabbsy on June 13, 2021, 12:35:12 pm
I doubt anyone would argue that there are lots of factors affecting your 3 figures, Pete. However, for some of those the government has minimal control or the effect will take too long to feed through (vaccine delay, vaccine take-up) and for some it has significant control (border control). It isn’t the only factor, but it would have a marginal impact in the right direction and the government can do something about it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on June 13, 2021, 02:37:03 pm
MrsTT has just had a ping from the app. 2 days to isolate. Says exposure date 4th Jun but taken 8 days to get to now? Not sure I understand that. Guess the ‘contact’ has only just been diagnosed??

Also one of her friends (56) is pretty ill with CV at the moment. One AZ dose 11 weeks ago - was due their second this week.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 13, 2021, 03:46:40 pm
MrsTT has just had a ping from the app. 2 days to isolate. Says exposure date 4th Jun but taken 8 days to get to now? Not sure I understand that. Guess the ‘contact’ has only just been diagnosed??

Also one of her friends (56) is pretty ill with CV at the moment. One AZ dose 11 weeks ago - was due their second this week.

I’,m slightly confused by the vaccine stories I’m hearing.
I’m 50 and I had my second shot (AV) three weeks ago. It had been booked for Aug 6, but I got a text on May 17 with a rescheduled appointment for May 22. I didn’t have to do anything or request it.
It seems strange that so many people in the bracket above me, still seemto be waiting for shot 2.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on June 13, 2021, 04:47:28 pm
MrsTT has just had a ping from the app. 2 days to isolate. Says exposure date 4th Jun but taken 8 days to get to now? Not sure I understand that. Guess the ‘contact’ has only just been diagnosed??

Also one of her friends (56) is pretty ill with CV at the moment. One AZ dose 11 weeks ago - was due their second this week.

And another two neighbours (only 12 houses in the road) have been told to isolate by the app. Perhaps they’ve tweaked the app due to Delta spreading faster.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on June 13, 2021, 06:35:18 pm
MrsTT has just had a ping from the app. 2 days to isolate. Says exposure date 4th Jun but taken 8 days to get to now? Not sure I understand that. Guess the ‘contact’ has only just been diagnosed??

Also one of her friends (56) is pretty ill with CV at the moment. One AZ dose 11 weeks ago - was due their second this week.

I’,m slightly confused by the vaccine stories I’m hearing.
I’m 50 and I had my second shot (AV) three weeks ago. It had been booked for Aug 6, but I got a text on May 17 with a rescheduled appointment for May 22. I didn’t have to do anything or request it.
It seems strange that so many people in the bracket above me, still seemto be waiting for shot 2.

It depends on the area how quickly you'll get done. They've been pretty speedy in Sheffield, with large pop up vaccine centres a lot.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on June 13, 2021, 06:53:29 pm
MrsTT has just had a ping from the app. 2 days to isolate. Says exposure date 4th Jun but taken 8 days to get to now? Not sure I understand that. Guess the ‘contact’ has only just been diagnosed??

Also one of her friends (56) is pretty ill with CV at the moment. One AZ dose 11 weeks ago - was due their second this week.

I’,m slightly confused by the vaccine stories I’m hearing.
I’m 50 and I had my second shot (AV) three weeks ago. It had been booked for Aug 6, but I got a text on May 17 with a rescheduled appointment for May 22. I didn’t have to do anything or request it.
It seems strange that so many people in the bracket above me, still seemto be waiting for shot 2.

It depends on the area how quickly you'll get done.

It does seem relatively random or variable. My son (27, Widnes) has had both.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 13, 2021, 09:26:17 pm
Yeah, the 50+ group (and everyone else in the top 9 priority groups) were all supposed to be re-scheduled with the reduced interval if they hdn't yet had their second shot, but it seems like that may have been happening in a rather patchy way -- Mr Mainwood is wondering wtf:

https://twitter.com/PaulMainwood/status/1403676278717399040
https://twitter.com/PaulMainwood/status/1403774149936418821

I know at one point at least, if you'd booked through the NHS booking website, you'd be contacted and asked to rebook, which could only be done by cancelling your original appointment and then booking another (without being able to see availability in advance, so some people are worried that if they cancel they'll lose the original appointment and won't be able to get one sooner).

So I wonder if some people fell through the cracks and didn't get contacted when they should have been, or didn't want to rebook.

Both my younger sisters recently got texts with "hey new appointment on this date", re-scheduling their second appointment, while I haven't (we're all in our 40s, but in different areas of the country), so that's certainly variable.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on June 14, 2021, 02:31:13 pm
But to ignore any other factor that could possibly contribute to the three output numbers (cases, hospitalisations, deaths) and focus attention on one factor - perceived failure of border policy - is pushing a political agenda, not looking for truth.

Pete, if border policy isn't a factor and low vaccine uptake in certain communities is (I'm paraphrasing to make a point, sorry!), how come the Delta variant has taken control in the UK but in France and Germany, where they have a lot lower number of 1 or 2 dose vaccinated people due to a comparably very poor roll out of vaccinations, they have managed to control the Delta variant?

Genuine question, not spoiling for a fight, and the most compelling reason, imho, why I think the reluctance to red list India in line with Bangladesh and Pakistan was a very poor decision and, though not wholly responsible, is a significant contributing factor to why we are looking at a third wave now.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Evil on June 14, 2021, 02:40:44 pm
Yeah, I tried to move my 2nd appointment a bit closer but I can't, so I guess it depends on where you live. The earliest possible is at exactly 11 weeks.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on June 14, 2021, 06:23:57 pm
...why I think the reluctance to red list India in line with Bangladesh and Pakistan was a very poor decision and, though not wholly responsible, is a significant contributing factor to why we are looking at a third wave now.

Is the reason why delta has become prevalent here because we have a relatively large Indian population who were likely to be traveling there to see families etc? It doesn't mean the government is blameless, but perhaps even if Germany had the same border policy it wouldn't be as bad there anyway?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on June 14, 2021, 09:03:28 pm
Uk has easily the largest Indian diaspora in Europe. >Ten times the next on the list - Italy.

https://www.nriol.com/indiandiaspora/statistics-indians-abroad.asp

Dwarfed by the number (and percentage) in Saudi, Malaysia and UAE. Be interesting to see (a) what their respective travel policies are and (b) what their Delta rates are...

Answers:

Saudis rates are flat.
Malaysia has a (less severe) peak and drop like India (possibly a month behind)
UAE growing (2k cases a day).

https://boi.gov.in/content/advisory-travel-and-visa-restrictions-related-covid-19-1
Saudi has no restrictions. UAE does, Malaysia did (for a ten day period).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 14, 2021, 09:18:52 pm
Is the reason why delta has become prevalent here because we have a relatively large Indian population who were likely to be traveling there to see families etc?

I'm sure that contributed to more seeding of it, but how that played out would still have been very heavily affected by the border policy, because India being on the amber list meant people returning from India were home-quarantining rather than in hotel quarantine.

And the combination is a reason why Delta is hitting us sooner than other European countries, but it does also look like it moves horribly fast once it gets established anywhere.

Various US epidemiologists seem to be bracing for impact and watching the UK, because Delta's now accelerating over there too (and their overall vaccination percentage is not too dissimilar from the UK):

https://twitter.com/EricTopol/status/1404089689934471171
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Wellsy on June 14, 2021, 09:41:24 pm
MrsTT has just had a ping from the app. 2 days to isolate. Says exposure date 4th Jun but taken 8 days to get to now? Not sure I understand that. Guess the ‘contact’ has only just been diagnosed??

Also one of her friends (56) is pretty ill with CV at the moment. One AZ dose 11 weeks ago - was due their second this week.

I’,m slightly confused by the vaccine stories I’m hearing.
I’m 50 and I had my second shot (AV) three weeks ago. It had been booked for Aug 6, but I got a text on May 17 with a rescheduled appointment for May 22. I didn’t have to do anything or request it.
It seems strange that so many people in the bracket above me, still seemto be waiting for shot 2.

It depends on the area how quickly you'll get done.

It does seem relatively random or variable. My son (27, Widnes) has had both.

I've had both. I had my second one in May. And I'm 31, I don't work in health and social care provision, and I have absolutely no medical conditions (other than being shit at slab climbing). There's definitely a lot of outliers.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on June 14, 2021, 10:20:27 pm
MrsTt’s WhatsApp is busy tonight. New cases in her work and mum friends. It’s not felt this covid ‘busy’ since April last year tbh. Bloody hope that link between catching it and hospitalisation is severed or close to - else it feels like it’s going to be a right mess: part 3.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on June 15, 2021, 09:32:22 am
Hard to conclude anything else from the PHE data on the vaccines yesterday surely? Particularly if those in your wife and MIL's friends are double jabbed, which presumably they would be by now? Obviously I share your hope; had my first jab yesterday!

Quote
On Monday, Public Health England also released encouraging data suggesting Covid jabs appeared to offer substantial protection against hospitalisation from the Delta variant. The Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine is 94% effective against hospital admission after one dose, rising to 96% after two doses. The Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine is 71% effective against hospital admission after one dose, rising to 92% after two.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on June 15, 2021, 10:17:13 am
MrsTt’s WhatsApp is busy tonight. New cases in her work and mum friends. It’s not felt this covid ‘busy’ since April last year tbh. Bloody hope that link between catching it and hospitalisation is severed or close to - else it feels like it’s going to be a right mess: part 3.

If you look at the I newspaper today,  it has quite a good article detailing best / medium  / worst case scenarios for the next few weeks. 

The messaging from the government is probably directly responsible for a lot of various people's anger about the delay in lifting restrictions.  Boris Johnson, always in a rush to sound upbeat,  makes each stage sound like definitely the end of any restrictions.  It's just not honest.  If, and I really hope this isn't the case,  the number of vaccine refusers and unvaccinated youngsters is enough to send cases higher, and deaths are soaring,  theres no way they can keep to the July date, and may instead have to start increasing restrictions,  but let's hope vaccination keeps the numbers down and at some point all the bullshit will be gone. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 15, 2021, 10:45:22 am
Hard to conclude anything else from the PHE data on the vaccines yesterday surely?

Yeah, hopefully the case/hospitalization link is severely weakened if not broken for the fully vaccinated (not 100% broken, because you've still got some breakthrough with the vaccines, and the older/more vulnerable groups who are most of the fully-vaxxed right now are also the most likely to be hospitalized if they do get ill, and also more likely to have a lower immune response to the vaccines, either because of age or being immunocompromised).

But right now you've got cases spiking in the unvaccinated (and to a lesser degree half-vaccinated) age groups. Who are much less likely to need hospitalization -- but Delta looks like it's around twice as likely to hospitalize people as Alpha is:

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)01358-1/fulltext

That plus the increased transmissibility makes it fucking nasty.

People are hoping that the hospitalization cases may still tend to be shorter stays, lead to fewer deaths relative to numbers of hospitalizations, etc., but that picture's not clear.

Hopefully the 4-week delay will be enough to keep the lid on it, but it could still be rough.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 15, 2021, 10:46:53 am
had my first jab yesterday!

Congrats! May your side-effects be mild and your immune response robust!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 15, 2021, 10:53:15 am
Fuck yeah -- it's expected that the NHS booking service will be open to 18+ by the end of the week, apparently:

https://twitter.com/ShaunLintern/status/1404725071692898309
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on June 15, 2021, 03:49:24 pm
Various US epidemiologists seem to be bracing for impact and watching the UK, because Delta's now accelerating over there too (and their overall vaccination percentage is not too dissimilar from the UK):

I think the US is at about 52% with at least one dose, definitely behind the UK. More importantly, the program is stalling badly because most people willing to get a jab have done so. There are huge regional variations. Some states are at about 30% somewhat vaccinated and it's even lower at the level of individual counties in some places. It could be horrible if the Delta variant gets into those communities.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 15, 2021, 06:54:11 pm
I think the US is at about 52% with at least one dose, definitely behind the UK.

Almost identical when it comes to full vaccination, though -- 44% and 43%. Which, given that Delta seems to reduce the protection you get from a single dose, might mean the UK's not too bad a model. Certainly enough that they're watching us very closely.

Some states are at about 30% somewhat vaccinated and it's even lower at the level of individual counties in some places. It could be horrible if the Delta variant gets into those communities.

Yep. Was just chatting yesterday with a close friend who lives in Arkansas. The state is 32.6% fully vaccinated and Covid cases are rising again; not surprisingly, she's worried it could get really bad.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on June 16, 2021, 08:35:58 am
BBC News - Covid vaccine to be required for England care home staff
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57492264

On the face of it this seems like a good idea,  although I'm open to being told of unintended consequences or downsides.  When I was working in the NHS,  it used to really piss me off when colleagues would refuse the seasonal flu vaccine,  despite the fact that we were working with people aged 70-100+ everyday. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 16, 2021, 10:58:56 am
Aha:

https://www.england.nhs.uk/coronavirus/wp-content/uploads/sites/52/2021/06/C1324-Letter-to-vaccination-sites-15-June-2021.pdf

From the 21st, they're going to be inviting people in their 40s who've got their 2nd appointment more than 9 weeks from the first dose to rebook.

Also they're "shortly" going to have the booking system fixed so people can see availability before cancelling their original appointment.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on June 16, 2021, 11:42:06 am

Also they're "shortly" going to have the booking system fixed so people can see availability before cancelling their original appointment.

I rebooked mine last night using the cancel/rebook system and whilst it briefly felt risky and 'wrong', I had the new appointment booked within about 35 seconds. If anyone else is putting this off I would suggest just crack on.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on June 16, 2021, 11:49:12 am
My second (Pfizer) is booked 11 weeks after the 1st dose, which was the default when I originally booked. If I cancel and move this forward (what are people going for? 8 weeks after 1st?), is this not taking a slot in late July from a younger person who could be looking for their first dose? Is uptake the limiting factor at this point, as opposed to capacity to administer vaccines/supply?
Also, isn't it worth waiting the few extra weeks during the lower risk summer period and getting better overall protection for the winter waves?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on June 16, 2021, 11:50:44 am
When I was working in the NHS,  it used to really piss me off when colleagues would refuse the seasonal flu vaccine,  despite the fact that we were working with people aged 70-100+ everyday.
At the trusts around here, staff are free to refuse the flu vaccine. But if they refuse the flu vaccine and subsequently take time off work with flu symptoms, they face disciplinary action.

I'm not sure it's the best way to incentivise uptake (it could incentivise unvaccinated people to go in to work with flu symptoms) but the uptake is very high. I'm also not sure what the legal position of it is, but as far as I know, it hasn't been challenged.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 16, 2021, 12:04:40 pm
Also, isn't it worth waiting the few extra weeks during the lower risk summer period and getting better overall protection for the winter waves?

As far as I know, Pfizer's pretty bombproof at any interval -- 8 weeks seems to be the minimum interval the current system allows with any vaccine, but Pfizer's handed out at a 4-week interval (the one originally studied) in plenty of places round the world. There was one study showing that a 12-week interval can improve antibodies in a group of older people, but it's gilding the lily; really doesn't need it.

It's AZ where stretching out the interval can really make a difference to the final level of protection. Though in the current situation, getting double-dosed sooner (so you have excellent protection against hospitalization) probably trumps trying to maximize absolute protection.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on June 16, 2021, 12:30:33 pm
Also, isn't it worth waiting the few extra weeks during the lower risk summer period and getting better overall protection for the winter waves?

As far as I know, Pfizer's pretty bombproof at any interval -- 8 weeks seems to be the minimum interval the current system allows with any vaccine, but Pfizer's handed out at a 4-week interval (the one originally studied) in plenty of places round the world. There was one study showing that a 12-week interval can improve antibodies in a group of older people, but it's gilding the lily; really doesn't need it.

It's AZ where stretching out the interval can really make a difference to the final level of protection. Though in the current situation, getting double-dosed sooner (so you have excellent protection against hospitalization) probably trumps trying to maximize absolute protection.

Thanks Slab. I've rebooked. Just checked the figures and I'd forgotten that, while 1 dose is still very good for preventing hospitalisation, it will only be about 36% effective at preventing symptomatic disease - as opposed to the 88% effectiveness after 2 doses. Still a number to make an XCOM player sweat, but massively better than the 1 dose figure.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on June 16, 2021, 12:47:17 pm
BBC News - Covid vaccine to be required for England care home staff
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57492264

On the face of it this seems like a good idea,  although I'm open to being told of unintended consequences or downsides.  When I was working in the NHS,  it used to really piss me off when colleagues would refuse the seasonal flu vaccine,  despite the fact that we were working with people aged 70-100+ everyday.

There is a bit of a heavy handed approach to an 'easy target' about it... largely non unionised minimum wage staff... plus the sector has massive staff shortages already and can ill afford to lose more over this combative style. There were also various legal questions that might add large costs and I'm not sure if they are all covered by the government action.

https://www.carehome.co.uk/news/article.cfm/id/1642095/can-care-homes-force-staff-have-covid-vaccine

https://www.carehome.co.uk/news/article.cfm/id/1647914/Fears-grow-mandatory-staff-vaccination-could-make-care-home-workers-unemployable
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 16, 2021, 01:27:17 pm
Just checked the figures and I'd forgotten that, while 1 dose is still very good for preventing hospitalisation, it will only be about 36% effective at preventing symptomatic disease

Yeah, that's why they're shortening the interval to push second doses hard. "Stretch out the interval to get first doses to the maximum number of people" was a great strategy with Original Flavour Covid and the subsequent variants -- until Delta came along.

Still a number to make an XCOM player sweat, but massively better than the 1 dose figure.

There's a interesting phenomenon where we've all gotten used to the near-100% numbers the mRNA vaccines get against Original Flavour, and lost track of (or never knew to begin with) how absurdly, ridiculously good even the somewhat reduced numbers are.

The original bar the FDA set was that they'd consider for approval anything that got over 50% effectiveness, and at that point Fauci was apparently hoping that maybe they might get lucky and get something that hit 70-75%.

Really interesting piece on how very lucky we got and why: https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/danvergano/mrna-covid-vaccine-success

Plus, speaking from Team AZ And Not Bitter About It At All Really (I was in the placebo group for the J&J trial) -- the key figure from a personal survival standpoint is the effectiveness against hospitalization; as long as that stays very high, then you've basically reduced Covid to a very bad flu.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on June 16, 2021, 01:53:34 pm
Also, isn't it worth waiting the few extra weeks during the lower risk summer period and getting better overall protection for the winter waves?

As far as I know, Pfizer's pretty bombproof at any interval -- 8 weeks seems to be the minimum interval the current system allows with any vaccine, but Pfizer's handed out at a 4-week interval (the one originally studied) in plenty of places round the world.

To kind of corroborate, I get second dose of Pfizer next week after a five week interval (Denmark).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on June 16, 2021, 03:59:25 pm
Aha:

https://www.england.nhs.uk/coronavirus/wp-content/uploads/sites/52/2021/06/C1324-Letter-to-vaccination-sites-15-June-2021.pdf

From the 21st, they're going to be inviting people in their 40s who've got their 2nd appointment more than 9 weeks from the first dose to rebook.

Also they're "shortly" going to have the booking system fixed so people can see availability before cancelling their original appointment.


Also they're "shortly" going to have the booking system fixed so people can see availability before cancelling their original appointment.

I rebooked mine last night using the cancel/rebook system and whilst it briefly felt risky and 'wrong', I had the new appointment booked within about 35 seconds. If anyone else is putting this off I would suggest just crack on.

Thanks slab_happy - just went in and redid mine - 22 days earlier and bang on 8 weeks
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: seankenny on June 16, 2021, 05:24:25 pm
Is the reason why delta has become prevalent here because we have a relatively large Indian population who were likely to be traveling there to see families etc? It doesn't mean the government is blameless, but perhaps even if Germany had the same border policy it wouldn't be as bad there anyway?

Good question.

I live quite close to Hounslow, one of the borough councils hit hard by the delta variant first off, to the point it was one of the six areas we were supposed not to travel into. So I put a little London knowledge to work to attempt a rough and ready answer. I got some basic data on four London boroughs with high Asian populations (city wide they are 18% of Londoners).

Borough           % Asian     Deprivation rank (1 = most deprived, to 317)         Delta cases (latest figs)

Harrow               39%            199                                                                       191

Hillingdon           32%             151                                                                      386

Hounslow           31%             95                                                                        312

Tower Hamlets   40%             27                                                                        235


Clearly this isn't a particularly rigorous analysis, and I couldn't find any delta case numbers for say three or four weeks ago, which would be best to answer this question. Hounslow, which is very Indian, and next door Hillingdon, now have pretty high rates. But leafy Harrow, which is full of Asian (mostly Indian) professionals, has a much lower rate. Loads more multi-generational/shared homes in Hounslow for sure and Harrow's lawyers can effectively quarantine themselves in a way that Hounslow taxi drivers cannot. Not that I am trading in cheap ethnic stereotypes here  :'(

Tower Hamlets is both really poor and has a lot of Asian residents, but... they are mostly of Bangladeshi origin. I'm sure data on this exists but this is one of the basic features of London life (Brick Lane etc). Anyhow their delta virus cases are nearer those of posh Harrow. And of course Bangladesh has been on the red list. Clearly it would be interesting to replicate this with areas with high numbers of Pakistani origin households...

I wouldn't say this is anything like evidence, but to me it's a strong suggestion that a lack of quarantine for those arriving from India was a part of what allowed the delta variant to seed itself in the UK very quickly.


Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 16, 2021, 07:02:27 pm
I didn’t have to cancel to rebook my appointment.
I just went in (followed the link in the text) and made the new appointment and the old one was automatically cancelled. Surely the system can’t be so regionally specific?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on June 17, 2021, 07:28:03 am
. Surely the system can’t be so regionally specific?

Surely it can't all be running through local organisations, and this is why it's gone ok, rather than entirely by the government who've screwed up everything else? Oh hang on a second...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on June 17, 2021, 08:00:13 am
MrsTT’s friend and colleague has tested positive. As have her 18 and 21 yo kids who love with her.

She is double Pfizer dosed (March). Presently with a very bad head cold. Her husband also double dosed is negative.

Delta growth is now exponential - and we have minimal distancing measures in place - so it’s going to ‘rip’ to some degree. As an aside Delta is clearly highly effective - the rate at which it’s displaced Alpha is quite something, twice as fast as how Alpha replaced the original dominant version.

It strikes me there’s quite a gamble from the government here - that we have broken the link between cases and hospitalisation. If vaccination doesn’t - and hospitalisation rates amongst the younger were much higher in India - then we’re in quite a spot of bother (for the third or fourth time…).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on June 17, 2021, 08:31:14 am
MrsTT’s friend and colleague has tested positive. As have her 18 and 21 yo kids who love with her.

She is double Pfizer dosed (March). Presently with a very bad head cold. Her husband also double dosed is negative.

Delta growth is now exponential - and we have minimal distancing measures in place - so it’s going to ‘rip’ to some degree. As an aside Delta is clearly highly effective - the rate at which it’s displaced Alpha is quite something, twice as fast as how Alpha replaced the original dominant version.

It strikes me there’s quite a gamble from the government here - that we have broken the link between cases and hospitalisation. If vaccination doesn’t - and hospitalisation rates amongst the younger were much higher in India - then we’re in quite a spot of bother (for the third or fourth time…).

What do you mean by 'broken?' In this context 'severely weakened' and 'broken' in practice mean the same thing, as there will always be some level of hospitalisations proportionate to cases; just a lower proportion once everyone is jabbed. My point being that there will always be a link, just at a lower level. I've yet to see any data or article which suggests that this link has not been severely weakened, so I don't see it as a gamble. Am I missing something?

Hope your friend recovers; with any luck the jabs will do their job and prevent any severe effects. Sound like they might be doing their job already if the husband remains negative!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 17, 2021, 08:33:13 am
Looks like you can now check appointment availability on the website before you cancel your original appointment:

https://twitter.com/fordie/status/1405281727761711109

Minimum interval is 8 weeks.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 17, 2021, 08:40:52 am
MrsTT’s friend and colleague has tested positive. As have her 18 and 21 yo kids who love with her.

She is double Pfizer dosed (March). Presently with a very bad head cold.

Fingers crossed that's as bad as it gets for her -- the vaccination should still be reducing the severity of disease and vastly cutting her odds of hospitalization.

Also FWIW, "infection plus vaccination" seems to give you super-immunity, so I'd guess it works the other way around too and she'll be bulletproof after this.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on June 17, 2021, 08:55:32 am
@spidermonkey - no need to be quite so snappy!!*

It’s the word the govt/media have been using.


*I’m sure you didn’t mean it - but I’d stopped posting on here as it felt like things I said would just be jumped/picked on.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on June 17, 2021, 09:01:06 am
MrsTT’s friend and colleague has tested positive. As have her 18 and 21 yo kids who love with her.

She is double Pfizer dosed (March). Presently with a very bad head cold.

Fingers crossed that's as bad as it gets for her -- the vaccination should still be reducing the severity of disease and vastly cutting her odds of hospitalization.

That’s the gamble though isn’t it… right now we have (very little) data on how less severe her illness or hospitalisation is. I’m more cautious than some (it would appear) but the way it’s growing (despite high vaccination levels) concerns me. As stated in earlier posts - many other countries must be watching the UK experiment with some nervousness…
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 17, 2021, 09:05:18 am
What do you mean by 'broken?' In this context 'severely weakened' and 'broken' in practice mean the same thing, as there will always be some level of hospitalisations proportionate to cases; just a lower proportion once everyone is jabbed. My point being that there will always be a link, just at a lower level. I've yet to see any data or article which suggests that this link has not been severely weakened, so I don't see it as a gamble. Am I missing something?

Well, we're gambling that the link has been weakened enough that (with the 4-week delay to Step 4) we can get through this with hospitalizations at a level that can be managed without fucking up the NHS (or their capacity to keep working on the vast backlog of delayed care), and hopefully with very few deaths.

The data is pretty hopeful, but it's being extrapolated from what are (at the moment) small numbers of cases in the UK; it's all provisional and rough estimates right now. This is science being done very very fast on the fly.

So, for example, right now, we've got indications that Delta increases the risk of hospitalizations -- but does it double it? just under double? x 2.5? Different info pointing to different numbers -- we know it's probably in that range but it hasn't been pinned down yet. But that extra 0.5 (or not) will make a significant difference to the hospitalization numbers.

There are going to be surprises, there are things we don't know, there are rough estimates that'll turn out to be wrong, just because that's the nature of where we are right now.

I am personally relatively optimistic right now that we can hit "rough but manageable". But yeah, it's a gamble, because everything right now has to be, and my fingers are crossed very hard.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on June 17, 2021, 09:17:49 am
Snappy not intended; we are both simply posting on a discussion forum at the same time TT...(ie hours when I at least should be working!). Thats the second time recently that you've clutched your pearls and implied I'm trolling or motivated by some personal animus when its nothing of the sort. Its slightly tiresome, so for clarity- its a topic I am interested in, I'm interested in your point of view and these are the hours when I tend to be browsing UKB! Nothing more, nothing less :)

Back on topic, I know its the phrase the govt/media have been using- but I've been a bit confused about the extent of the 'break' we are looking for, for the reasons above. From what I've read it seems fairly probable that hospitalisations will be kept within the 'rough but manageable' frame, although there is obviously some uncertainty there. What is clear is that with the increased transmissibility and risk of hospitalisation that Delta has brought, without the level of vaccination we have we would be royally fucked!


Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on June 17, 2021, 09:56:37 am
Clutched my pearls! Implying you’re trolling!

I don’t know how more politely I could have warned you how your post came across. This time I’ll be blunt - your last one comes across as bullying to me - which I think isn’t on.

I’ll leave now. Which is probably what you’d like - so well done. Have a great day.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on June 17, 2021, 10:07:36 am
FWIW I didn't think Jim's first post was snappy in the slightest. I'm sure you've accused him of trolling before and I couldn't see it there either.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on June 17, 2021, 10:08:25 am
Clutched my pearls! Implying you’re trolling!

I don’t know how more politely I could have warned you how your post came across. This time I’ll be blunt - your last one comes across as bullying to me - which I think isn’t on.

I’ll leave now. Which is probably what you’d like - so well done. Have a great day.

I always think your contribution to the forum is intelligent and worth reading to be honest.
Let's not all fall out arguing the toss about a potentially nasty disease, which will hopefully fuck off asap so we can get back to arguing about something else  ;) like grabbing chains, brushing holds... The really important things in life. Frankly covid has totally killed my climbing motivation which I'd really like to regain.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on June 17, 2021, 10:11:19 am
I always think your contribution to the forum is intelligent and worth reading to be honest.

I think TT contributes many pearls of wisdom.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on June 17, 2021, 10:31:41 am

As much as I'm attempting to remain optimistic I know people and NW West hospitals and Sheffield hospitals who are betting on a worse than predicted "third wave" and are currently assuming their hospital is going to get very/too busy.

I only live down the road from TT and have a similar experience, we've gone from not really knowing anyone with Covid but seeing it in all my wife's patients, to suddenly knowing a lot of people with it, some suffering quite badly (i.e. 17yo nephew).

Unlike Toby, my climbing mojo is still very high though, probably as I'm trying to climb as much as possible before we get locked down again!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on June 17, 2021, 10:34:11 am
Clutched my pearls! Implying you’re trolling!

I don’t know how more politely I could have warned you how your post came across. This time I’ll be blunt - your last one comes across as bullying to me - which I think isn’t on.

I’ll leave now. Which is probably what you’d like - so well done. Have a great day.

What a crock of shit. His post comes across fine. Will's reply was spot on
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on June 17, 2021, 10:52:11 am
TT, if you'd like you can scroll back in the thread to find your own posts; I'm not making them up. As for the bullying accusation, I think thats bollocks and out of order. Please drop me a PM if you want to discuss it some more; obviously I don't want to upset anyone but I don't think thats a fair criticism in the slightest.

Apologies for inadvertently derailing the thread!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nik at work on June 17, 2021, 10:52:42 am
I also can’t see any snappy/bullying/trolling in spider monkeys post.

Think you’ve misjudged this one tbh TT, would be a shame if that really was you done.

I don’t post much any more but I do read, and I value your (and others) contributions.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on June 17, 2021, 12:14:26 pm
Fine. I'm clearly reading this one wrong. FWIW, 'over-reacted' is a less pejorative alternative to 'clutching your pearls'.

Apologies @spidermonkey.

Clearly I need to start all my posts with "no offence but, " :D
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: kelvin on June 17, 2021, 12:46:21 pm

Clearly I need to start all my posts with "no offence but, " :D

And also an offer of a £20 note to all readers.

I'll post my bank details shortly.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on June 17, 2021, 05:04:05 pm
I don't think spidermonkey sounded snappy or bullying, but in defence of TT it's easy to misinterpret on t'internet. Easily done even in person when you're in the wrong mood!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on June 17, 2021, 05:21:18 pm
No probs TT  :thumbsup:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on June 17, 2021, 05:59:37 pm
I didn’t have to cancel to rebook my appointment.
I just went in (followed the link in the text) and made the new appointment and the old one was automatically cancelled. Surely the system can’t be so regionally specific?

It's probably the difference in the system between being invited to rebook or going in through the nhs web page front door as it were. I'm trying to juggle my 2nd dose around everchanging offshore dates and it's kind of nerve wracking trying to decide whether to cancel the appointment in the hope it can come forward 10 days. At the moment it's bang on the 12 weeks and I don't also want it to go back another 6 weeks after, which is the alternative scenario.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 17, 2021, 06:26:37 pm
As of last night, it should be fixed so you can see availability before having to cancel:

https://twitter.com/fordie/status/1405281727761711109
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 17, 2021, 06:31:26 pm
Btw, for anyone in Lancashire, they need more stewards:

https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/blackburn/19377428.call-goes-steward-volunteers-lancashire-vacccination-sites/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on June 18, 2021, 07:56:59 am
As of last night, it should be fixed so you can see availability before having to cancel:

https://twitter.com/fordie/status/1405281727761711109

Only for appointments at the same vaccination centre. If they don't have any appointments there, it then says you have to cancel before you can try your luck elsewhere...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on June 18, 2021, 08:00:10 am
Not being in a high risk group, I don't even know if there is the possibility of bringing the second appointment forward from the original 12 weeks. Does anyone know, if you call the number instead of using the website, do you get to talk to an actual human being who can make a decision based on your circumstances, or do you either interact with an automated booking system, or simply deal with an operative who is working the website?

I
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on June 18, 2021, 08:36:58 am
I'm not on a high risk group, just over 40
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on June 18, 2021, 08:53:54 am
Rebooked via the website.

Initial appointment was at Plymouth Argyle football stadium. System says "There are no available appointments at your chosen centre, please cancel your appointment to check availability at other centres."

Cancelled...

Please input your post code to check availability. Done...

System says "There are appointments available at Plymouth Argyle football stadium" (and nowhere else!) with a choice of about 10 dates between the end of June and mid-July. So I'm booked 2 weeks earlier at the same centre, ideally somewhere closer to Exeter would have been helpful but I'm not complaining really. But the look-up in the system doesn't quite work yet...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on June 18, 2021, 09:30:38 am
Skipton are inviting anyone 3 weeks after 1st jab to drop in clinics today 👍🏻
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on June 18, 2021, 09:49:58 am
I cancelled rebooked via the NHS booking website (having your NHS number and previous booking reference to hand makes this a very quick process).
I entered my postcode and it gave me a whole host of possible vaccination centres to choose from. I was then able to look at availabilities at all of these until i found a time and a place that best suited me. Ended up bringing it forward from the 4th July to the 21st June and at a centre some miles closer to home. There were heaps of slots available on loads of dates in the next two weeks.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 18, 2021, 09:54:48 am
National Booking Service now open to everyone over 18:

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/coronavirus-vaccination/coronavirus-vaccine/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on June 18, 2021, 10:16:36 am
I’m quite impressed the booking/rebooking system is working as well as it is (seems to generally be doing the right thing non?) especially considering it’s got 55 million people on the books, a whole manner of different ways of getting the jab (mobile, pop up, gp, health trusts etc etc). Haven’t heard of many/any double bookings, ghost appointments etc…

Could be because it’s organised by the NHS? (Not serco…) 😁

Btw - the drive in test place at Manchester airport has moved from a nice new car park - to what is best described as a partially paved field with tents in it nearby… quite a come down. Wonder if the rent was eating into Sercos profits a bit much… MrsT got her recent test from there back in 16 hours though!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on June 18, 2021, 12:06:34 pm
I’m quite impressed the booking/rebooking system is working as well as it is (seems to generally be doing the right thing non?) especially considering it’s got 55 million people on the books, a whole manner of different ways of getting the jab (mobile, pop up, gp, health trusts etc etc). Haven’t heard of many/any double bookings, ghost appointments etc…
My friends and family have had very mixed experiences with it. People's experiences seem to be a postcode and age group lottery.

I know 2 people who ended up with double bookings which seemed to be caused by them booking through the National Booking Service which was not passed on to their GP surgery who then booked them a second appointment.

One of them received their first jab with their second dose booked for a 12 week gap. They then received notification of their appointment for the duplicate first and second jabs. They tried to cancel their duplicate appointments online but it cancelled all their appointments without warning. The only available slots were then at a later date (nearly a 14 week gap) and over an hour's drive away instead of walking distance. 119 and the GP surgery both shrugged their shoulders and blamed each other.

After hearing the above story, the second person has decided not to cancel their duplicate appointments so they are still on the 12 week gap and are taking up 2 unnecessary appointments.

Significant extra driving is also a common theme. I have a mass vaccination centre and 2 pharmacies doing vaccinations within a 10 minute walk of my home but the nearest appointment I was been able to book is over an hour's drive away. There are loads of centres close by around here but I don't think any of my friends have been able to book 2 appointments without having to drive a long way.

Ultimately, most people are able to get an appointment, so from that perspective it's a success, but I think the booking system could be a lot better.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Evil on June 18, 2021, 02:19:44 pm
Rather weirdly there is actually a vaccination centre in the other side of the building my GP is in, however I am not allowed to book in there and it is not a part of the NHS website. I am not sure who it is for. It is frequently closed and made the news at one point for having to send the vaccines to other centres and closing unexpectedly (whereupon they blamed the closure on possible 'low take up by minorities'  :o :shrug:) so I think there are some fundamental problems not being addressed but the main centres and the NHS booking website seems to be ok. I didn't really appreciate having to wait outside 45 minutes in the rain for jab #1, but I guess that is kind of expected when they have so many people to deal with.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: erm, sam on June 18, 2021, 02:28:06 pm
I rebooked for my 2nd easily and moved it forwards a week but I when I tried to do the same for my partner there were much less options despite doing it straight away. Maybe because she is Moderna but I was AZ?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 18, 2021, 02:44:49 pm
I rebooked for my 2nd easily and moved it forwards a week but I when I tried to do the same for my partner there were much less options despite doing it straight away. Maybe because she is Moderna but I was AZ?

Yeah, I'd assume so. Loads of AZ around, but not all the vaccination centres have the mRNA vaccines (because of the super-refrigeration thing), and I believe Moderna's the vaccine there's least of in the UK system the moment.

(Moderna and Pfizer are damn near identical so it would make zero difference if she had Pfizer for her second jab, but that's not been officially okayed.)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on June 19, 2021, 08:53:00 am
Had my second Pfizer yesterday and it totally wiped me out overnight. Really sore arm and fever.

Does anyone know the deal with symptoms now? Seems like these are very common for the second jab and also now much lower down on the likely Covid symptoms list.

I’d have got a test if I felt like this last year but now it’s almost certainly the jab I think. Feeling a bit rough this morning still but think a lot of it is due to lack of sleep…
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: battery on June 19, 2021, 08:57:05 am
Had my second Pfizer yesterday and it totally wiped me out overnight. Really sore arm and fever.

Does anyone know the deal with symptoms now? Seems like these are very common for the second jab and also now much lower down on the likely Covid symptoms list.

I’d have got a test if I felt like this last year but now it’s almost certainly the jab I think. Feeling a bit rough this morning still but think a lot of it is due to lack of sleep…

Sorry you're feeling so rubbish. Just plain old paracetamol helped me loads when I felt rough after the first Pfizer. Take heart in the fact that it should all be over by tomorrow.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on June 19, 2021, 09:09:10 am
I think it's quite common to feel worse after the second Pfizer than the first.

Zoe released a video and an article a week or two back about the differences in symptoms between Delta and the earlier variants.

They are also very keen for people to log symptoms on their app in the days after vaccination and the app will direct you to get tested if it thinks there's a chance your symptoms are covid rather than side effects.

If you don't have any already, you can also get free lateral flow tests posted to your home. Mine have always arrived in a day or two. Usual caveats about LFTs mostly only picking up the most infectious stages of covid apply.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 19, 2021, 09:18:39 am
I think it's quite common to feel worse after the second Pfizer than the first.

Yeah, that's a known thing. Most commonly, people feel worse after the second dose with the mRNA vaccines (Pfizer and Moderna), and after the first dose with AZ. Paracetamol and feel better soon!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on June 19, 2021, 09:30:26 am
Thanks all! I’ve logged it in the Zoe app and taken some paracetamol too.

May do a LFT after too.

I’m not feeling that bad this morning - it’s more that I wasn’t sure if the guidance was to isolate still until you get a proper test if you had any symptoms. But these are almost certainly due to the vaccine rather than actual infection.

Will go with the LFT and see what it says 👍🏻
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on June 19, 2021, 10:37:02 am
Lagerstarfish just messaged saying the Walk in Pfizer vacc centre at the Crucible is open to anyone over 18 and presently has no que. as of now (10:30am)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: lagerstarfish on June 19, 2021, 10:44:10 am
Still no queue
First jab or second if first was over 21 days ago
Open until 2pm
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 19, 2021, 11:59:06 am
Good intel, have passed that along!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on June 20, 2021, 08:11:53 am
Still no queue
First jab or second if first was over 21 days ago
Open until 2pm

Does anyone happen to know if this Crucible walk-in vaccine thing is happening today as well? Thanks!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: lagerstarfish on June 20, 2021, 09:31:59 am
 Not as far as I know.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on June 20, 2021, 11:39:25 am
FYI for Sheffielders looking for a grey day activity then Darnall Medical Centre is doing walk in vaccine clinics for either 1st or 2nd dose Pfizer, no booking necessary. No queue this morning, anecdotally from docs Sheffield seems to have an excess of vaccine at the moment so plenty to go round.

Darnall open for walk in every day except Monday:

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E4KO0sZXwAMmawX?format=png&name=900x900)

Also NHS Sheff CCG Twitter https://twitter.com/NHSSheffieldCCG (https://twitter.com/NHSSheffieldCCG) has updates on pop-up last min walk-ins e.g. excess vaccines at GP surgeries etc, worth keeping an eye on....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on June 20, 2021, 12:16:29 pm
I know this is not quite the right thread but I don’t know which is, without starting one which will be quickly forgotten and lost. However, a lot of people have found themselves in straitened circumstances due to the pandemic so it goes here.

https://sharewearclothingscheme.org/donations/

Clothes bank - like a food bank, but for clothes. Brilliant idea- just not available on my side of the Pennines unfortunately. Like a lot of parents we have stuff grown out of long before it’s looking tired.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 20, 2021, 06:58:39 pm
In case anyone needs further incentive: looks like if you're vaccinated but unlucky enough to get a breakthrough infection, being vaccinated still knocks a third off your chances of ending up with long Covid:

https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/long-covid-vaccine-cuts-chance-third-major-new-study-1058474

Analysis from KCL and the Zoe lot.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on June 20, 2021, 11:42:14 pm
https://inews.co.uk/opinion/comment/g7-cornwall-its-little-wonder-the-locals-are-talking-of-a-covid-cover-up-1062528

Just spotted this in the I. Infections in Cornwall in the G7 destination up 4000%...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on June 21, 2021, 10:29:04 am
Daughters class bubble has gone down. Bugger. Feels like it's all starting again!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tomtom on June 21, 2021, 10:43:27 am
Daughters class bubble has gone down. Bugger. Feels like it's all starting again!

Thats crap Nick. Yes - I get that feeling too...

In an update - my Wifes double pfizer jabbed positive colleague has improved (no more flu symptoms) but has no taste or smell (apparently makes wine somewhat disappointing - but at least she's well enough to partake..). Her 18 YO son is really suffering though.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on June 21, 2021, 12:01:17 pm
Daughters class bubble has gone down. Bugger. Feels like it's all starting again!

My son also stuck at home for ten days as of last Friday for the same reason.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on June 21, 2021, 12:23:11 pm
Daughters class bubble has gone down. Bugger. Feels like it's all starting again!

My son also stuck at home for ten days as of last Friday for the same reason.

My adult son also at home for ten days after his housemate tested positive. Son is more than two weeks out from second jab and is feeling fine so far. His housemate had his first about a week before testing positive. I feel for him: he works in hospitality and has spent months and months furloughed. He was really enjoying being back in work. Bugger, as Nick said.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: kelvin on June 21, 2021, 01:13:14 pm
The local has closed for ten days, one member of staff has covid. Lots of people affected obviously.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 24, 2021, 07:48:04 pm
Looking at the relatively flat hospital admission rates, in light of the now country wide rapid rise in infections; is it safe to safe the link between infection and hospitalisation is definitively, massively cut?

The last time we passed 16k infections per day, was October 11, 2020 and that corresponded with some 823 hospital admissions for the same day.

We’ve been at over 16k new cases per day for at least two days running  but admissions remain below 250 daily.

Whilst the total tests carried out are much higher now, the PCR daily count in October was similar to todays.
(I am assuming that the rest of the testing logged is Lateral flow (?)).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Sidehaas on June 24, 2021, 08:57:12 pm
By my reading hospital admissions are running at about 50% of those when cases were at a similar level last year (beginning of October.) This was also the case a week ago. I suspect your figures might be skewed a bit because we've seen a big spike in cases today and yesterday. Hospital figures lag cases by a couple of weeks.
Also worth looking at ITUs. ITU occupancy now as a proportion of hospital occupancy is actually slightly higher than it was in the last wave, probably because of the reduced number of old people in hospital who can't be put on ITU (ie the age demographic of hospitalisations is shifted downwards). There are very few deaths happening still.
So it appears there are still lots of people in their late or even early middle age with zero or one dose who are going to hospital with illness that is bad enough to put them on a ventilator, but not to kill them. However the data for older ages would suggest two doses are still very effective. The vaccine effects study from PHE seems to back this up, suggesting one dose is 75% effective against hospitalisation and two doses over 90% I think.
I would say the link is definitely weakened but definitely not broken. Given the way case rates have played out in places that got hit first by Delta (Bolton, Blackburn, Bedford) though, I'm fairly optimistic this coming wave won't be as bad as the previous one (even post restrictions removal, but this is obviously difficult to say.)  Some of the older people still waiting for their second dose might just want to keep their heads down for a while when the restrictions are removed completely if not before.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on June 24, 2021, 09:00:17 pm
Seems like the next couple of weeks are going to be key in how it plays out if the cases keep going up the way they re (up what 50% in a week?).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on June 25, 2021, 08:36:06 am
Seems like the next couple of weeks are going to be key in how it plays out if the cases keep going up the way they re (up what 50% in a week?).

Or 5000% if you're in Cornwall: https://inews.co.uk/news/leading-covid-scientist-claims-g7-helped-create-surge-cornwall-cases-1069717
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 26, 2021, 07:44:03 am
Very nice:

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/coronavirus-vaccination/find-a-walk-in-coronavirus-covid-19-vaccination-site/

"If you live in England and are aged 18 or over, you can get a COVID-19 vaccine from a walk-in COVID-19 vaccination site without an appointment.

You do not need to be registered with a GP or bring any ID. It might help to bring your NHS number, if you know it.

If you've already had your 1st dose, you need to wait 8 weeks before having your 2nd dose."
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 28, 2021, 09:40:20 am
Cov-Boost desperately needs people who are at least 70 days after their second jab (so that's going to skew towards older people and healthcare workers):

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/covid-vaccine-booster-winter-variant-b1871463.html

https://www.covboost.org.uk

There's one control group who get an active placebo, but most people involved are going to get a third dose of an effective vaccine, so on an entirely self-interested basis, this is a really sweet deal. Also science and all that.

And I can report from my own experience that you get really well looked-after as a trial volunteer and everyone is really nice to you.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fultonius on June 28, 2021, 12:37:45 pm
Very nice:

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/coronavirus-vaccination/find-a-walk-in-coronavirus-covid-19-vaccination-site/

"If you live in England and are aged 18 or over, you can get a COVID-19 vaccine from a walk-in COVID-19 vaccination site without an appointment.

You do not need to be registered with a GP or bring any ID. It might help to bring your NHS number, if you know it.

If you've already had your 1st dose, you need to wait 8 weeks before having your 2nd dose."

We're visiting friends and family next week in England. Seeing as they don't ask for address or I'd, if we went for a second dose somewhere and gave NHS number, I wonder if it will be registered?

No walk ins yet in Scotland for Pfizer.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on June 28, 2021, 02:53:49 pm
Daughters class bubble has gone down. Bugger. Feels like it's all starting again!

My son also stuck at home for ten days as of last Friday for the same reason.
Spike's back at school tomorrow, but I do wonder how long it'll be before he's back home again.
Essentially we are looking at the herd immunity strategy on a subset of the population (school age children)by default. Coupled with the increased transmissibility of Delta (haven't heard any reports this is different for different ages), and said subset mingling on a daily basis with no masks of SD to speak of, you have to wonder how planners think this is going to go. Maybe the summer hols will intervene in time. A lot about it makes me uncomfortable, not least the idea of a never ending series of ten day house arrest orders until the whole class has had it. Seems unsustainable to me. What is being achieved, and at what cost.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on June 28, 2021, 03:26:48 pm
I think we are lucky it's summer holidays in Scotland, several school had classes and even whole years sent home for the last week.

My youngest niece in St Albans is currently self-isolating after one + test in her class, even though she tested -   
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on June 28, 2021, 03:58:51 pm
I've been thinking about this a bit over the last week. I don't have any kids/ know any school age kids so it all feels a bit distant to me.

Seems to me we have a choice of
a) continue as we are, which as Bonjoy alludes to will inevitable result in loads of cases among kids
b) vaccinate all kids to try and reduce cases. Interested in what parents on here think about that as the ethics of it are quite interesting; eg vaccinating those not at risk to try and prevent them spreading it to those who are. Side effects are worth the risk in adults, but its a trickier calculation for kids, especially younger ones. What do those with kids think?
c) continue with a, but in the new school year change the rules around bubbles to stop the relentless cycle of isolating.

I think I'd be in favour of c; totally agree the status quo of massive groups of kids having their education interrupted every other week is no good. Think b is an ethical minefield and might have limited effectiveness due to parents being worried. All guesswork though as I haven't read a huge amount on it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on June 28, 2021, 04:19:53 pm
c) personally, I'm not happy about kids getting vaccinated at this stage of their development (9 & 11 1/2).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: AJM on June 28, 2021, 04:22:37 pm
I've been thinking about this a bit over the last week. I don't have any kids/ know any school age kids so it all feels a bit distant to me.

Seems to me we have a choice of
a) continue as we are, which as Bonjoy alludes to will inevitable result in loads of cases among kids
b) vaccinate all kids to try and reduce cases. Interested in what parents on here think about that as the ethics of it are quite interesting; eg vaccinating those not at risk to try and prevent them spreading it to those who are. Side effects are worth the risk in adults, but its a trickier calculation for kids, especially younger ones. What do those with kids think?
c) continue with a, but in the new school year change the rules around bubbles to stop the relentless cycle of isolating.

I think I'd be in favour of c; totally agree the status quo of massive groups of kids having their education interrupted every other week is no good. Think b is an ethical minefield and might have limited effectiveness due to parents being worried. All guesswork though as I haven't read a huge amount on it.

If we’re removing remaining restrictions pretty soon, it feels quite a lot like part of the discussion in point b is whether you’d prefer your child to have its antibody delivered “in the wild” or via a needle?

More widely, I am interested to see what happens to the self isolation rules. Certainly from my perspective (2 nursery age children, otherwise comfortably able to work from home, not the biggest socialite due to said children and their demanding nature, 1 jab so far) the most visible impact Covid has on my life is probably  the potential impact combining self isolating with 2 children and trying to work would have. I’m probably not the only one who’s going to put off some elements of a return to 2019-normality until the threat of that is removed.

And it’s not hard to see engagement with test and trace dropping away as the wider message shifts to saying that cases aren’t important enough to retain any other restrictions against their growth. I guess effectively at the moment we think we’ve got enough jabs in arms to “let it rip” on everyone else - at which point what purpose is self isolation serving?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on June 28, 2021, 04:34:17 pm

If we’re removing remaining restrictions pretty soon, it feels quite a lot like part of the discussion in point b is whether you’d prefer your child to have its antibody delivered “in the wild” or via a needle?

More widely, I am interested to see what happens to the self isolation rules. Certainly from my perspective (2 nursery age children, otherwise comfortably able to work from home, not the biggest socialite due to said children and their demanding nature, 1 jab so far) the most visible impact Covid has on my life is probably  the potential impact combining self isolating with 2 children and trying to work would have. I’m probably not the only one who’s going to put off some elements of a return to 2019-normality until the threat of that is removed.

And it’s not hard to see engagement with test and trace dropping away as the wider message shifts to saying that cases aren’t important enough to retain any other restrictions against their growth. I guess effectively at the moment we think we’ve got enough jabs in arms to “let it rip” on everyone else - at which point what purpose is self isolation serving?

Yeah, I agree with all of that. For clarity, I am not Andrew Wakefield in disguise re vaccinating kids! I think there is a very strong case for vaccinating teenagers quite soon in particular.

Can also see how the engagement with TTI might drop once everyone has had their two jabs. Should probably switch to a daily test which, if negative, means you can go around as normal. Can't see it being as widely adhered to if people are asymptomatic, passing negative tests, double jabbed... Yet also have to spend 10 days inside.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: AJM on June 28, 2021, 04:42:35 pm
Yeah, I agree with all of that. For clarity, I am not Andrew Wakefield in disguise re vaccinating kids! I think there is a very strong case for vaccinating teenagers quite soon in particular.

Can also see how the engagement with TTI might drop once everyone has had their two jabs. Should probably switch to a daily test which, if negative, means you can go around as normal. Can't see it being as widely adhered to if people are asymptomatic, passing negative tests, double jabbed... Yet also have to spend 10 days inside.

It’s strange, because if I frame the question as “do I want them to be vaccinated” then the answer is probably not, since it offers them little benefit, but if I reframe it as “would I prefer they get a potentially unknown viral load infection from nursery, versus a measured and more controlled equivalent” then it’s far less clear cut. I guess it’s the same as the AZ vaccine risk trade off, in that the answer may depend on whether you view them getting it as an inevitability or not.

With TTI, the only way I can see it making sense in a few months is if actually we can’t really “remove all restrictions” but actually do need this one in order to be able to remove the remainder and still control hospitalisations. But since the isolation but is only dubiously adhered to at the best of times, I hadn’t really viewed it as a crucial control in that sense.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on June 28, 2021, 04:42:58 pm
I've been thinking about this a bit over the last week. I don't have any kids/ know any school age kids so it all feels a bit distant to me.

Seems to me we have a choice of
a) continue as we are, which as Bonjoy alludes to will inevitable result in loads of cases among kids
b) vaccinate all kids to try and reduce cases. Interested in what parents on here think about that as the ethics of it are quite interesting; eg vaccinating those not at risk to try and prevent them spreading it to those who are. Side effects are worth the risk in adults, but its a trickier calculation for kids, especially younger ones. What do those with kids think?
c) continue with a, but in the new school year change the rules around bubbles to stop the relentless cycle of isolating.

I think I'd be in favour of c; totally agree the status quo of massive groups of kids having their education interrupted every other week is no good. Think b is an ethical minefield and might have limited effectiveness due to parents being worried. All guesswork though as I haven't read a huge amount on it.
I agree that looks like the options.
I'm not sure what I think about vaccinating children yet. It would be good to know what the relative risks are for younger age groups of CV versus vaccine.
For now, I think some change of rules is needed if kids are to remain unvaccinated. At the very least they should be able to cut isolation short with a PCR test w/wo follow up LFTs.
It's not just schooling that gets interrupted by isolating. Spike has missed out on loads of out of school stuff, both organised and informal, having been through three ten/fouteen day isolations so far. It's an uphill struggle trying to moderate screen use these day too, and repeated stints of ten days at home REALLY doesn't help.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: battery on June 28, 2021, 04:46:07 pm
I've been thinking about this a bit over the last week. I don't have any kids/ know any school age kids so it all feels a bit distant to me.

Seems to me we have a choice of
a) continue as we are, which as Bonjoy alludes to will inevitable result in loads of cases among kids
b) vaccinate all kids to try and reduce cases. Interested in what parents on here think about that as the ethics of it are quite interesting; eg vaccinating those not at risk to try and prevent them spreading it to those who are. Side effects are worth the risk in adults, but its a trickier calculation for kids, especially younger ones. What do those with kids think?
c) continue with a, but in the new school year change the rules around bubbles to stop the relentless cycle of isolating.

I think I'd be in favour of c; totally agree the status quo of massive groups of kids having their education interrupted every other week is no good. Think b is an ethical minefield and might have limited effectiveness due to parents being worried. All guesswork though as I haven't read a huge amount on it.

Point b is actually what happens with the flu vaccine, children are encouraged to get it and it is delivered in schools (nasal spray, not needle) not to protect them against the flu but because they are very efficient spreaders of the flu.

I'd want to see some solid science behind the decision to vaccinate children but in principle I'm all for vaccines.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 28, 2021, 05:46:20 pm
Personally, I’d pin all four of mine down and jab them myself.

They’re nasty little plague rats, as it is.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on June 28, 2021, 07:06:53 pm
Parent here. We put our 14 year old on a plane to the US on Thursday. The purpose was to see friends and family but we made sure she got a shot first thing Friday morning (Pfizer, it's what was available. Would have got J&J as she's not there long enough to get a second shot, but beggars can't be choosers. Though far from perfect I figure one shot is better than none). We had no hesitation in doing this. She's had zero side effects so far.

I got my second Pfizer first thing this morning - felt wiped out for a few hours this afternoon but steadily improving now.

A couple of months ago, as the the vaccination campaign there really took off, we were suffering a lot from US friends and family asking why we weren't vaccinated yet (I hate to complain but it got really bad at times). Denmark passed the US on the percentage to have received at least one dose several days ago. We still lag on the percentage fully vaccinated, but I doubt that will last very long.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on June 28, 2021, 08:57:20 pm
Yeah, I agree with all of that. For clarity, I am not Andrew Wakefield in disguise re vaccinating kids! I think there is a very strong case for vaccinating teenagers quite soon in particular.

Can also see how the engagement with TTI might drop once everyone has had their two jabs. Should probably switch to a daily test which, if negative, means you can go around as normal. Can't see it being as widely adhered to if people are asymptomatic, passing negative tests, double jabbed... Yet also have to spend 10 days inside.

It’s strange, because if I frame the question as “do I want them to be vaccinated” then the answer is probably not, since it offers them little benefit, but if I reframe it as “would I prefer they get a potentially unknown viral load infection from nursery, versus a measured and more controlled equivalent” then it’s far less clear cut. I guess it’s the same as the AZ vaccine risk trade off, in that the answer may depend on whether you view them getting it as an inevitability or not.
If we continue to open things up, which I think is guaranteed (barring a new disastrous variant), then it is safe to assume that approximately 100% of unvaccinated people will get covid.

The greatest unknown for any risk calculations (for adults and children) is long covid and other long term complications from it. I'm surprised at how little data there is on the issue and how low a priority it seems to be. I'm far more concerned by the potential long term effects of catching covid than I am of my chances of severe acute infection. Given that the risks of long covid in adults do not appear to be correlated to age or health conditions in the same way that the acute disease is,  I would have expected it to be a high priority to study any potential for long covid among children. I hope it's a case of "no news is good news" but I suspect it is more a case of nobody is even asking the question.

My gut feel from a selfish UK-centric viewpoint is that the benefit of vaccinating children would far outweigh the risk. From a global viewpoint, those extra doses could almost certainly be used more effectively in other countries.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on June 29, 2021, 06:23:03 am
Personally, I’d pin all four of mine down and jab them myself.

They’re nasty little plague rats, as it is.

+1 on both counts for both of ours.

Though with the ease with which the Delta variant seems to spread (the Sydney outbreak suggests some contacts were just from walking past each other in shopping malls) it will probably have been through the schools before the end of the summer term...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Davo on June 29, 2021, 07:19:33 am
Totally happy for my son to be vaccinated. I view it in the same way as the flu vaccine each year.

Dave
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 29, 2021, 08:17:52 am
c) personally, I'm not happy about kids getting vaccinated at this stage of their development (9 & 11 1/2).

What's concerning you?

(Aside from the fact that they're under the approved age anyway -- I think 12 is the youngest the mRNA vaccines have been approved for anywhere at the moment, but there are now trials going on with younger age groups.)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on June 29, 2021, 08:28:34 am
Speak of the devil:

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2021/jun/28/ministers-set-to-end-automatic-isolation-for-pupils-in-england

This feels like a reasonable solution to me.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on June 29, 2021, 08:47:53 am
c) personally, I'm not happy about kids getting vaccinated at this stage of their development (9 & 11 1/2).

What's concerning you?

(Aside from the fact that they're under the approved age anyway -- I think 12 is the youngest the mRNA vaccines have been approved for anywhere at the moment, but there are now trials going on with younger age groups.)

Lack of trials mostly and unknown long term effects. Do people actually volunteer their children to trials?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 29, 2021, 09:22:17 am
Do people actually volunteer their children to trials?

Yeah, including a bunch of scientists -- loitering around epidemiology and immunology Twitter, I've seen various folks mention they signed their own kids up a.s.a.p..

I don't have kids myself but I have nieces and a nephew a bit younger than yours, and I wouldn't blink if their parents volunteered them (and would obviously trust my sisters not to do it unless it's something the kids would find non-stressful and interesting -- which they might, they're very into Doing Science).

Lack of trials mostly and unknown long term effects.

Re: lack of trials -- they won't be approved for an age group unless trials have been run on that age group. So you'd be able to check out the data yourself before vaccines would be available for your kids.

Re: long term effects -- as I understand it, the deal with vaccines is that you see any side-effects (like AZ's blood clotting issue or the possible myocarditis with the mRNA vaccines) within two months max. They don't stay knocking around your body and then suddenly do something weird ten years down the line; that's just not how they work.

Also, although these are the first mRNA vaccines licensed, the research establishing the technology has been going on for some time; apparently the first mRNA vaccine trials on humans were in 2006. So there are people around who got injected with mRNA vaccines 17 years ago.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on June 29, 2021, 09:26:38 am
Guess I'm more paranoid about my children's health than most. Prerogative of being an older parent.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on June 29, 2021, 09:28:31 am
I guess our willingness is informed by the fact that every teen we know in the US has been vaccinated without problems. Sure, that is still highly anecdotal data, but observing your peer group can by psychologically very persuasive.

Also, I'm obviously talking about slightly older children, which does make a difference.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: AJM on June 29, 2021, 09:40:24 am
Guess I'm more paranoid about my children's health than most. Prerogative of being an older parent.

Out of interest (and this is genuine curiousity rather than a hidden challenge or criticism), how do you feel about them getting covid itself, and are you considering taking action to try to reduce their catching it? (I.e. home schooling, restricting them going to higher risk environments eg crowded indoor spaces, various other things along a risk reduction spectrum)

As has been discussed above, the end state looks to be that that they'll either have caught covid or been vaccinated by the end of the summer. The long term impacts of covid are unknown - it's not been around long enough - but quite clearly "long covid" can be a real and debilitating condition, and it doesn't (I think) seem to occur with vaccination. And I thought that the clotting etc was a problem with real covid as well as vaccines, although less sure on that.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on June 29, 2021, 09:52:13 am
When a vaccine for my daughter becomes available she is getting it (11, soon to be 12). I want to protect her from possible consequences of Covid. Risks from an approved vaccine I would regard as negligible. Risks from a virus with a range of possible nasty outcomes I would place much higher.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on June 29, 2021, 10:25:12 am
When a vaccine for my daughter becomes available she is getting it (11, soon to be 12). I want to protect her from possible consequences of Covid. Risks from an approved vaccine I would regard as negligible. Risks from a virus with a range of possible nasty outcomes I would place much higher.
Completely agree. The best estimate we have for the long term effects of covid is probably the data on long term effects of SARS. Which are awful.

30% of SARS patients hadn't returned to work 2 years after infection. 5 years on, 30% were still displaying 20-30% loss in lung capacity. After 15 years, this had reduced to 5% but at great cost: the long term effects of steroids used to treat the lung damage made femoral head necrosis and arthritis common.

There are certainly differences between long covid and SARS: long term SARS effects correlate strongly with the severity of initial symptoms but long covid doesn't seem to (which I think should urge further caution when it comes to children and younger people getting exposed to covid). We don't know yet whether long covid will be better or worse than SARS, I suspect it won't be as severe, but all of the above leads me to be very cautious when it comes to long covid and I think this caution ought to extend to our children.

If long term covid damage is in the same ballpark as long term SARS damage, it could be terminal for someone's ability to improve as a climber.

One note for optimism: the much greater numbers of people suffering with long covid are likely to lead to better treatments which may improve the long term outlook.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on June 29, 2021, 11:21:41 am
We don't know yet whether long covid will be better or worse than SARS, I suspect it won't be as severe, but all of the above leads me to be very cautious when it comes to long covid and I think this caution ought to extend to our children.


Interesting post. I guess the key point is what being very cautious about LC means in practice, both for kids and adults. My personal instinct is that the public would take some serious convincing that the risk of LC is bad/common enough to justify many restrictions beyond, say, masks in shopping centres or similar. That said I don't know any LC sufferers so perhaps ignorance is bliss. Other than jabbing everyone, I don't think there is a lot you can do to prevent LC beyond investing in research and treatments, without suppressing baseline cases, which would require quite strong restrictions.  :shrug:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on June 29, 2021, 12:25:43 pm
We don't know yet whether long covid will be better or worse than SARS, I suspect it won't be as severe, but all of the above leads me to be very cautious when it comes to long covid and I think this caution ought to extend to our children.


Interesting post. I guess the key point is what being very cautious about LC means in practice, both for kids and adults. My personal instinct is that the public would take some serious convincing that the risk of LC is bad/common enough to justify many restrictions beyond, say, masks in shopping centres or similar. That said I don't know any LC sufferers so perhaps ignorance is bliss. Other than jabbing everyone, I don't think there is a lot you can do to prevent LC beyond investing in research and treatments, without suppressing baseline cases, which would require quite strong restrictions.  :shrug:

I think you're right, once everyone has been double jabbed, there isn't likely to be any significant treatment/prevention improvements arriving in the short term. So I think that's the stage where maintaining most restrictions is likely to do more harm than good.

If we do end up jabbing older children, I expect restrictions (including the ending of classroom bubbles and isolation) will have already ended before they have much protection.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on June 29, 2021, 12:29:19 pm
If we end bubbles as touted, I expect most schoolchildren will get Covid. I can’t see on site LFT testing preventing its spread.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on June 29, 2021, 12:48:30 pm
If we end bubbles as touted, I expect most schoolchildren will get Covid. I can’t see on site LFT testing preventing its spread.

Yes, the decision would seem to prioritise continuity of education over the kids getting covid. To me this makes sense, but again I have no skin in the game so I'm sure a good chunk of parents/teachers think otherwise.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on June 29, 2021, 12:57:05 pm

If we continue to open things up, which I think is guaranteed (barring a new disastrous variant), then it is safe to assume that approximately 100% of unvaccinated people will get covid.

To be slightly pedantic, that's not true. At some % below 100, herd immunity will prevent total saturation being reached.
I don't know what the current estimate is, but at the start of the pandemic 60%-80% was mentioned. Obviously various factors (new variants, vaccination level in adult population, partial immunity via old variants, etc) will push that figure up or down somewhat.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on June 29, 2021, 02:14:09 pm
If we end bubbles as touted, I expect most schoolchildren will get Covid. I can’t see on site LFT testing preventing its spread.

Yes, the decision would seem to prioritise continuity of education over the kids getting covid. To me this makes sense, but again I have no skin in the game so I'm sure a good chunk of parents/teachers think otherwise.

A proportion of those infections will have life changing consequences so it's a serious thing. The current loss of education is untenable but I suspect some who are saying that we just have to take the consequences of letting it spread might be less keen if they thought it was their child who will have to take one for the team..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on June 29, 2021, 02:24:56 pm

A proportion of those infections will have life changing consequences so it's a serious thing. The current loss of education is untenable but I suspect some who are saying that we just have to take the consequences of letting it spread might be less keen if they thought it was their child who will have to take one for the team..

100%, its very easy for me to have that opinion! It doesn't seem like there's much of an alternative though, other than vaxxing kids which brings its own set of proportional serious side effects (I think a smaller proportion but am not sure). Its a really tricky ethical question but a really interesting one.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on June 29, 2021, 02:29:09 pm
I was not having a go at you, just in case it appeared that way.
difficult to say where we would be now and with what options had we had an education secretary who had actually organised some effective provision instead of just sitting on his hands.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 29, 2021, 03:35:41 pm
If we end bubbles as touted, I expect most schoolchildren will get Covid. I can’t see on site LFT testing preventing its spread.

Yes, the decision would seem to prioritise continuity of education over the kids getting covid. To me this makes sense, but again I have no skin in the game so I'm sure a good chunk of parents/teachers think otherwise.

A proportion of those infections will have life changing consequences so it's a serious thing. The current loss of education is untenable but I suspect some who are saying that we just have to take the consequences of letting it spread might be less keen if they thought it was their child who will have to take one for the team..

To be pessimistic…

This is already true of a variety of virus and bacterial infections and no more likely, as far as I can see.
I lost a classmate to meningitis and another went blind. A close friend has a now 16 year old son, with significant disabilities as a result of severe meningitis as a baby, for instance.
Not that I like it, it just is.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on June 29, 2021, 07:17:15 pm

If we continue to open things up, which I think is guaranteed (barring a new disastrous variant), then it is safe to assume that approximately 100% of unvaccinated people will get covid.

To be slightly pedantic, that's not true. At some % below 100, herd immunity will prevent total saturation being reached.
I don't know what the current estimate is, but at the start of the pandemic 60%-80% was mentioned. Obviously various factors (new variants, vaccination level in adult population, partial immunity via old variants, etc) will push that figure up or down somewhat.

I pride myself on my pedantry ;D. I don't expect us to reach the levels required to end significant community transmission due to the combination of:
- The increased transmissibility of delta (and probably even more transmissible variants in the future)
- The number of adults who will remain unvaccinated
- Unvaccinated children
- The percentage of adults who will remain infectious despite vaccination
- The end of social distancing measures and isolation for school contacts etc

Over the course of a lifetime/childhood, I think ~100% is accurate for where we are headed. I don't think anything close to eradication is achievable unless we have a major unexpected scientific breakthrough or helpful mutations. I see the end goal being similar to the flu for unvaccinated people (i.e. something that everyone can expect to get at some stage in their life).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: battery on June 29, 2021, 07:19:39 pm
My eldest is at primary and they haven't had a class out self isolating since September (and that was a false alarm as it turned out and they were back in sooner rather than later). My son hasn't had to isolate at all (touch wood and keeping everything crossed!).

It's not an either or, with careful planning and management schools can prevent outbreaks. However I am sure the head would love for things to go back to how they were to reduce workload and stress for all staff and students.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on June 29, 2021, 10:25:19 pm

Over the course of a lifetime/childhood, I think ~100% is accurate for where we are headed.
If we're talking infection over a lifetime for an endemic virus, then maybe yes 100% or close to is to be expected. I think consideration of a shorter time frame, perhaps one or two years, is more practical for thinking about current actions.
What is meant by herd immunity rather depends on the group in question and the time frame. From a simplistic perspective though if 90% of the population is either double vaccinated or has already had the virus it's hard to see how the virus would sustain an r value >1 in order to pick off the last 10%. Eventually uninfected kids become vaccinated adults.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 30, 2021, 09:17:22 am
other than vaxxing kids which brings its own set of proportional serious side effects (I think a smaller proportion but am not sure).

Oh god yeah, far far far smaller.  A vaccine's not going to get licensed unless they know it's very safe; a vaccine for kids even more so, especially given that in this case the risk to kids of severe illness if they get Covid is very low (compared to the risk for adults). So the sort of risk-benefit trade-offs that make AZ worthwhile for older adults don't factor in.

Doesn't mean there's no possibility of serious side effects -- for example, looks like teens and young adults have a very small risk of myocarditis from the mRNA vaccines. But the current picture is that it's extremely rare, almost always mild (treatable with NSAIDs, gets better on its own), and the risk of myocarditis from getting Covid-19 itself is much higher:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucelee/2021/06/26/fda-rare-heart-inflammation-warning-for-pfizer-moderna-covid-19-coronavirus-vaccines/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on June 30, 2021, 09:25:57 am
Woke up to the news that Denmark has bought 1.7 million doses of near-expiry Pfizer. Happy for Denmark (assuming they can scale up in order to deliver them to people, which I would trust they can). Having fully vaccinated just over 20% of the population Romania have apparently hit a very strong wall of vaccine hesitancy. The mind boggles.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on June 30, 2021, 09:28:30 am
other than vaxxing kids which brings its own set of proportional serious side effects (I think a smaller proportion but am not sure).

Oh god yeah, far far far smaller.  A vaccine's not going to get licensed unless they know it's very safe; a vaccine for kids even more so, especially given that in this case the risk to kids of severe illness if they get Covid is very low (compared to the risk for adults). So the sort of risk-benefit trade-offs that make AZ worthwhile for older adults don't factor in.

Doesn't mean there's no possibility of serious side effects -- for example, looks like teens and young adults have a very small risk of myocarditis from the mRNA vaccines. But the current picture is that it's extremely rare, almost always mild (treatable with NSAIDs, gets better on its own), and the risk of myocarditis from getting Covid-19 itself is much higher:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucelee/2021/06/26/fda-rare-heart-inflammation-warning-for-pfizer-moderna-covid-19-coronavirus-vaccines/

Thanks ; which I guess begs the question that if the risk/reward calculation is so obviously in favour of vaxxing children, why are the JCVI seemingly reluctant to recommend doing so? What am I missing?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 30, 2021, 10:15:31 am
which I guess begs the question that if the risk/reward calculation is so obviously in favour of vaxxing children, why are the JCVI seemingly reluctant to recommend doing so? What am I missing?

 :shrug:

It's really unclear. One factor is that in the UK, with very high vaccine take-up in all the eligible groups, we might not need to vaccinate children to achieve herd immunity, or close to (though I think the numbers on that have changed with Delta's increased transmissibility).

Another factor is that we're squeezed for Pfizer and Moderna at the moment, so we wouldn't have the supplies to vaccinate children until much later in the year anyway (and may be prioritizing boosters for vulnerable groups instead).

So they may be figuring eh, no rush to make the decision now, we can err on the side of caution and wait and watch as even more data rolls in from the countries that are vaccinating the over-12s.

It's possible that they also anticipate that vaccinating children against Covid may be more controversial, and that therefore it's helpful if they're seen to be being slow and cautious rather than rushing. But that's all just me speculating.

Some of the debate:

https://inews.co.uk/news/health/covid-vaccine-children-coronavirus-jab-scientists-jcvi-vaccination-1039032

What I find disappointing is that they're not yet approving it for over-12s who are clinically vulnerable, because that should be an incredibly easy decision.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on June 30, 2021, 10:27:17 am
other than vaxxing kids which brings its own set of proportional serious side effects (I think a smaller proportion but am not sure).

Oh god yeah, far far far smaller.  A vaccine's not going to get licensed unless they know it's very safe; a vaccine for kids even more so, especially given that in this case the risk to kids of severe illness if they get Covid is very low (compared to the risk for adults). So the sort of risk-benefit trade-offs that make AZ worthwhile for older adults don't factor in.

Doesn't mean there's no possibility of serious side effects -- for example, looks like teens and young adults have a very small risk of myocarditis from the mRNA vaccines. But the current picture is that it's extremely rare, almost always mild (treatable with NSAIDs, gets better on its own), and the risk of myocarditis from getting Covid-19 itself is much higher:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucelee/2021/06/26/fda-rare-heart-inflammation-warning-for-pfizer-moderna-covid-19-coronavirus-vaccines/

Thanks ; which I guess begs the question that if the risk/reward calculation is so obviously in favour of vaxxing children, why are the JCVI seemingly reluctant to recommend doing so? What am I missing?

As I understand it,  vaccination for children may make sense for the population as a whole but they are at sufficiently low risk in themselves that the tiny risk of adverse effects from the vaccine may be more significant than the disease risk,  or on a similar scale at any rate. Given this, its really not medically ethical to effectively give a group a medical treatment in order to benefit other groups. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on June 30, 2021, 12:17:46 pm
Yes, that was my feeling too; as per this thread from a JCVI member; it doesn't seem clearcut by any means. Particularly interesting was the following I thought. I still don't know what I think though!

Good points SH - think the lack of mRNA supplies is the real issue as you say, so best to just wait for more data from the US and elsewhere until supplies build up again.

Quote
Given the low risk of Covid for most teenagers, it is not immoral to think that they may be better protected by natural immunity generated through infection than by asking them to take the *possible* risk of a vaccine.

https://twitter.com/rwjdingwall/status/1410177453876731915
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 30, 2021, 12:51:50 pm
Quote
Given the low risk of Covid for most teenagers, it is not immoral to think that they may be better protected by natural immunity generated through infection than by asking them to take the *possible* risk of a vaccine.

Yeah, he's a sociologist rather than someone with any medical expertise, apparently, which figures because that's fucking bizarre. 

There's already a certain amount of evidence that if anything, natural immunity produced by Covid infection is less protective than immunity from vaccination. And Covid absolutely can hospitalize and even kill teenagers and kids.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/may/23/children-with-covid-why-are-some-countries-seeing-more-cases-and-deaths
https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/interactive/2021/covid-children-deaths/

There are legit debates to be had, e.g. over whether we should be vaccinating healthy teenagers in the UK versus getting vaccines to healthcare workers and elderly people in developing countries.

But arguing that it's "safer" for kids to get Covid than be vaccinated is just ... without basis in the scientific evidence, to the best of my knowledge.

Also, I'll point out that the MHRA has already concluded that Pfizer is safe and effective for the 12-15 age group and that the benefits outweigh any risks:

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/the-mhra-concludes-positive-safety-profile-for-pfizerbiontech-vaccine-in-12-to-15-year-olds

The JCVI gives advice on government vaccine strategy; it's not its job to determine the safety of the vaccines.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on June 30, 2021, 01:03:10 pm
Interesting; I had clocked he wasn't an epidemiologist but I am also wary of exclusively listening to narrow infectious disease experts on the issue; since I know nothing about it I have to presume he is on the JCVI for a reason and isn't a charlatan :shrug:

I think from your posts you are firmly in the 'jab the kids when the jabs are available' camp which I think is my instinct as well; I am just confused since a lot of people much cleverer than me seem to think it isn't that simple, which makes me think I am missing something. Good links, thanks!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 30, 2021, 01:12:42 pm
Interesting; I had clocked he wasn't an epidemiologist but I am also wary of exclusively listening to narrow infectious disease experts on the issue; since I know nothing about it I have to presume he is on the JCVI for a reason and isn't a charlatan :shrug:

I think from your posts you are firmly in the 'jab the kids when the jabs are available' camp which I think is my instinct as well; I am just confused since a lot of people much cleverer than me seem to think it isn't that simple, which makes me think I am missing something. Good links, thanks!

I agree, in part, however listening to a sociologist discussing medicine is a bit like asking an Advertising exec, who worked on Honda’s last campaign, why your car’s engine won’t start.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on June 30, 2021, 01:32:13 pm
I am no medic but my understanding was what slaphappy says about developed immunity being very variable in its response to infection but consistent to inoculation.

Dangers of COVID exist for any age group.

Where is this stuff about vaccine dangers coming from? Not seen any evidence for it, bar a tiny% of thromboses.  :shrug:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 30, 2021, 01:32:26 pm
I think from your posts you are firmly in the 'jab the kids when the jabs are available' camp

*tilty hand-gesture*

Actually, more like the "jab the clinically vulnerable kids NOW, because they're in much more danger than healthy 20-somethings; maybe think about jabbing the healthy 16-17 year-olds later in the year as and when there's surplus, but also see the debate about whether it's better to get those jabs to more vulnerable people in developing countries" camp.

And re: the under-12s there won't be trials data for a fair while anyway (and fortunately transmission in that age group seems to be very low anyway), so no hurry.

As I said, I think there are legit debates to be had about the best strategy, tactically and morally. But the factual evidence about risks seems fairly clear.

since I know nothing about it I have to presume he is on the JCVI for a reason and isn't a charlatan :shrug:

One would hope so! But he is certainly way outside his area of expertise when it comes to commenting on the medical data about the relative risks of vaccination and natural infection.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on June 30, 2021, 01:50:17 pm
But the factual evidence about risks seems fairly clear.


What I don't understand is how this can be clear, yet the JCVI haven't said to do it yet. Taking on board your points about whether the vaccines might be better being shipped off elsewhere.

mjr; mostly from idle and occasional reading of pieces like this: https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-really-close-call-on-whether-to-vaccinate-children-sage-adviser-says-12337901. The prof quoted here doesn't seem to think the data on safety is robust enough, although I'm sure others think otherwise.

I guess I feel like if I've learned one thing from the last few years of reading about science and public health more, its that very few things are unequivocally and obviously the right or wrong decision and the people most worth listening to are normally those saying 'well its complicated...'. Obviously these people are never quoted in the media as it doesn't give good copy!

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on June 30, 2021, 04:15:44 pm
other than vaxxing kids which brings its own set of proportional serious side effects (I think a smaller proportion but am not sure).

Oh god yeah, far far far smaller.  A vaccine's not going to get licensed unless they know it's very safe; a vaccine for kids even more so, especially given that in this case the risk to kids of severe illness if they get Covid is very low (compared to the risk for adults). So the sort of risk-benefit trade-offs that make AZ worthwhile for older adults don't factor in.

Doesn't mean there's no possibility of serious side effects -- for example, looks like teens and young adults have a very small risk of myocarditis from the mRNA vaccines. But the current picture is that it's extremely rare, almost always mild (treatable with NSAIDs, gets better on its own), and the risk of myocarditis from getting Covid-19 itself is much higher:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucelee/2021/06/26/fda-rare-heart-inflammation-warning-for-pfizer-moderna-covid-19-coronavirus-vaccines/

Thanks ; which I guess begs the question that if the risk/reward calculation is so obviously in favour of vaxxing children, why are the JCVI seemingly reluctant to recommend doing so? What am I missing?

As I understand it,  vaccination for children may make sense for the population as a whole but they are at sufficiently low risk in themselves that the tiny risk of adverse effects from the vaccine may be more significant than the disease risk,  or on a similar scale at any rate. Given this, its really not medically ethical to effectively give a group a medical treatment in order to benefit other groups.
This is exactly what is already done with the annual flu vaccine given to children.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on June 30, 2021, 05:47:24 pm

As I understand it,  vaccination for children may make sense for the population as a whole but they are at sufficiently low risk in themselves that the tiny risk of adverse effects from the vaccine may be more significant than the disease risk,  or on a similar scale at any rate.

I’d like to see some numbers for that. From a layman’s pov, I’d be far more concerned about a child having Covid than receiving a vaccine.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on June 30, 2021, 06:25:17 pm
What I don't understand is how this can be clear, yet the JCVI haven't said to do it yet. Taking on board your points about whether the vaccines might be better being shipped off elsewhere.

mjr; mostly from idle and occasional reading of pieces like this: https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-really-close-call-on-whether-to-vaccinate-children-sage-adviser-says-12337901. The prof quoted here doesn't seem to think the data on safety is robust enough, although I'm sure others think otherwise.

I wonder if it comes down to tactics again. We're very unlikely to be vaccinating teenagers until later in the year anyway, if we do do it, so we might as well sit back and wait for the real-life data to roll in from the US and Israel and the EU.

Even with good trials data, the laws of statistics dictate that you almost certainly won't see the one-in-a-million side-effects until you start vaccinating millions of people. Ergo, sit back and see if anything else like the myocarditis risk shows up and how it plays out, because data from millions of vaccinated teenagers is a lot more robust.

It occurs to me that we're also waiting on research to see if we'll need booster jabs for some people in more vulnerable groups (and which vaccines work best as boosters), so that's going to factor into supply issues -- you don't want to go ahead and start vaccinating teenagers if it's going to be much more crucial to have those jabs available to shore up waning immunity in the elderly or immunocompromised.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jun/30/nhs-draws-up-plans-to-roll-out-covid-booster-jabs-from-september
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Sidehaas on June 30, 2021, 07:20:29 pm
My personal view on this as a parent is that I'd prefer not to vaccinate my 3yo until there is longitudinal data over several years. Yes the data for all these vaccines is pretty good and for the mRNA vaccines I understand the currently known risk balance is in favour of getting vaccinated in all age groups. (That's not the case for AZ/Jansen in young adults except when infection rates are very high, which admittedly they now are again in many areas.)

However the fact is that young kids are not at significant risk from covid, and to some extent I'd prefer the known risk to the unknown. In my own case this is especially true since he has already had covid and it was a mild cold (milder than several other colds he has had in the last 12 months.) It simply isn't possible to say there are no long term risks with the vaccine until you have long term data, which as far as I understand it is the reason that all the authorisations are still on an "emergency use" basis.

I think the strategy should be to vaccinate as many adults as we can (and I agree with SH about vulnerable kids), then prioritise the booster programme, and give any spares to adults that need them in other countries. By the time that we actually have any spares, if the government goes ahead with unlocking then I suspect most kids will have caught it or been heavily exposed anyway (this is not what I want, it's just a statement of fact.) Given this, I think the ethical discussion about vaccinating kids is largely academic. Longer term, once the virus is settled in endemic status both in the UK and most other countries, we will get the longitudinal data for the vaccines that we ideally need.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Sidehaas on June 30, 2021, 08:28:09 pm
it is the reason that all the authorisations are still on an "emergency use" basis.

Apologies, that's US terminology - I thought I should double check having posted; in the UK the situation is similar. Pfizer is still on its initial 'temporary authorisation.' AZ has progressed from that to its 'conditional marketing authorisation', which comes with a long list of conditions including committed plans to submit to MHRA reports from additional safety trials running out until the end of 2024.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on July 01, 2021, 09:17:06 am
Dr Viki Male (immunologist working on pregnancy at Imperial, quoted in the article) is also a badass and maintains a great explainer on what's currently known about Covid vaccines, pregnancy, fertility, and breastfeeding:

https://twitter.com/VikiLovesFACS/status/1367099701238116353

She's very good at answering questions on Twitter in a non-patronizing and non-combative way. Top science communication.

The excellent Dr Male is now doing a prospective study of short-term period changes related to the Covid vaccine, for anyone who has periods and has a shot coming up:

https://twitter.com/VikiLovesFACS/status/1410213258204790795

You can participate on dose 1 or 2.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 01, 2021, 02:51:13 pm
We have had multiple bubbles popping in the three Secondary schools around us in Torquay. Two of which we have children in.
At least 6 cases between the three, last week and I’ve just been notified my youngest daughter’s entire year 7 will be sent home in the next few minutes and not returning for at least a week. So, I have one in a different school, year 7 and they’re already part shutdown and another in year 9, in the same school as the youngest, who’s year is now the only one not affected in his school!
So, not sure how many new cases the schools have this week, but it’s quite a few.
Oh and I just had a text from my head youth coach, that he and his family are isolating because his 9 year old got sick on Tuesday and has just got back a positive PCR…

And that’s rural Devon.

Ladies and Gentlemen, hold on to your hats, this ride is leaving the station.

Edit:
Youngest just walked through the door.
There were only two children in her last lesson, prior being sent home and part of the decision has been due to staff being in isolation and a rumour of positive cases amongst the staff as well as children.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on July 01, 2021, 03:46:00 pm
Keep them away from fruit juices

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9725379/Pupils-using-FRUIT-JUICE-false-positive-Covid-test-results.html
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on July 02, 2021, 10:57:20 am
And that’s rural Devon.

Ladies and Gentlemen, hold on to your hats, this ride is leaving the station.


A quick look at the figures shows that cases have been steadily building since late May. There's a definite increase in pace at around the 20th June. Deaths have been fairly flat, even though we're nearly 2 weeks beyond when cases started to look exponential.

Is it not just going to be a wave of cases (which was always inevitable), mainly in the young, with a relatively small increase in deaths, predominantly among the unvaccinated and the very unlucky few whose vaccine doesn't protect them? Given that COVID is not going to go away isn't this completely inevitable?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on July 02, 2021, 11:03:43 am
Keep them away from fruit juices

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9725379/Pupils-using-FRUIT-JUICE-false-positive-Covid-test-results.html

The president of Tanzania was well ahead of the game on this on - he claimed to get a positive test result from a paw-paw and also a goat in May last year...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on July 02, 2021, 11:34:45 am
And that’s rural Devon.

Ladies and Gentlemen, hold on to your hats, this ride is leaving the station.


A quick look at the figures shows that cases have been steadily building since late May. There's a definite increase in pace at around the 20th June. Deaths have been fairly flat, even though we're nearly 2 weeks beyond when cases started to look exponential.

Is it not just going to be a wave of cases (which was always inevitable), mainly in the young, with a relatively small increase in deaths, predominantly among the unvaccinated and the very unlucky few whose vaccine doesn't protect them? Given that COVID is not going to go away isn't this completely inevitable?

Yep; this to me is exactly why Whitty and Vallance are relaxed about opening things up on the 19th.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 02, 2021, 12:33:23 pm
And that’s rural Devon.

Ladies and Gentlemen, hold on to your hats, this ride is leaving the station.


A quick look at the figures shows that cases have been steadily building since late May. There's a definite increase in pace at around the 20th June. Deaths have been fairly flat, even though we're nearly 2 weeks beyond when cases started to look exponential.

Is it not just going to be a wave of cases (which was always inevitable), mainly in the young, with a relatively small increase in deaths, predominantly among the unvaccinated and the very unlucky few whose vaccine doesn't protect them? Given that COVID is not going to go away isn't this completely inevitable?

Yep; this to me is exactly why Whitty and Vallance are relaxed about opening things up on the 19th.

I did this a couple of days ago, but there hasn’t been a significant change in slope in the meantime:

(https://i.ibb.co/kSjd7bL/C3104010-DB46-4-F93-9539-4-E25-C1-D093-F2.jpg)

Now, that’s obviously a down and dirty, photoshop comparison of cases (red) to hospitalisations (blue) and I compressed the Y axis by ~ 10, simply by altering the frame ratio; so it ain’t brilliant. It was easier than check data day by day against the autumn wave though.
It seems pretty obvious that the hospitalisation curve bears little similarity to the autumn, relative to cases, whereas the case rate escalation seem very similar.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ged on July 03, 2021, 08:53:48 am
Do you mind me asking which secondary school matt? We teach in Ashburton, and have had pretty much no cases the whole time so far, but I suspect that will change soon.

Our school has already made our return plans for September, based on probably having to test every student before the start back (uptake of home tests is 15%).  Hilariously the gov have said they will confirm the requirements for what schools need to do on... Wait for it... September 4th! Cheers lads.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 03, 2021, 10:17:10 am
We have two in Cuthbert and that’s the one with yrs 7 and 8 shutdown. Our yr7 is home and back on Google classroom. Because my eldest has finished, we only have one at Spires and they have yr10 shut down and two other “close contact” bubbles out. Our son is yr7 there and has a few classmates out due to being siblings of isolating yr10s. TA have two bubbles out and according to the staff that bring the TGBS PE class twice a week, they’re (much smaller) yr9 bubbles are out.
We also have had four requests (at the Bunker) for extension to monthly passes, because the kids have to isolate. That two TGBS sixth formers and a  sibling combo yr11+8 at Churston. We also know of several primary kids of friend who tested positive (lateral flow) last week.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on July 03, 2021, 01:27:52 pm
Handy round-up of walk-in vaccination sites open this weekend:

https://twitter.com/kallmemeg/status/1411264535663624194
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ged on July 03, 2021, 01:59:35 pm
We have two in Cuthbert and that’s the one with yrs 7 and 8 shutdown. Our yr7 is home and back on Google classroom. Because my eldest has finished, we only have one at Spires and they have yr10 shut down and two other “close contact” bubbles out. Our son is yr7 there and has a few classmates out due to being siblings of isolating yr10s. TA have two bubbles out and according to the staff that bring the TGBS PE class twice a week, they’re (much smaller) yr9 bubbles are out.
We also have had four requests (at the Bunker) for extension to monthly passes, because the kids have to isolate. That two TGBS sixth formers and a  sibling combo yr11+8 at Churston. We also know of several primary kids of friend who tested positive (lateral flow) last week.

Jeez. Seems like South Devon isn't escaping this wave
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on July 03, 2021, 07:09:21 pm

I did this a couple of days ago, but there hasn’t been a significant change in slope in the meantime:



Now, that’s obviously a down and dirty, photoshop comparison of cases (red) to hospitalisations (blue) and I compressed the Y axis by ~ 10, simply by altering the frame ratio; so it ain’t brilliant. It was easier than check data day by day against the autumn wave though.
It seems pretty obvious that the hospitalisation curve bears little similarity to the autumn, relative to cases, whereas the case rate escalation seem very similar.

This seems to be where things are really different, as would be hoped if the vaccines work.

Interesting that this sort of comparison doesn't seem to readily available in the media so put the 7 day rolling data into a chart, multiplying admissions and deaths numbers to bring the the trends into scale.

(https://i.ibb.co/p673zRh/Covid-data-chart.jpg)

As per your image, shows really clearly how hospital admissions and deaths seem to have a very much lower correlation to cases when compared to autumn/winter.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on July 03, 2021, 07:34:57 pm
Where is this stuff about vaccine dangers coming from? Not seen any evidence for it, bar a tiny% of thromboses.  :shrug:

For anyone who fancies a blast from the past (or isn't old enough to remember it), see this excellent run-down of the Andrew Wakefield saga, because as I have mentioned elsewhere it's one of my life goals to ensure that everyone hates him as much as I do:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc

Wakefield's very much around and part of the current anti-vax movement, but more generally, I think it left a vague sense floating around that maybe there are insidious secret dangers with vaccines for kids.

N.B. I think it's perfectly reasonable to want maximum safety data before vaccinating healthy younger kids for something where their risk is very low. Rare side-effects like the myocarditis thing do show up, so we want to know what the risk picture is. Side-effects are a thing!

But there's a lot of anxiety around about how vaccines might cause some kind of harm to a child's "development" if given at the wrong time or in the wrong way, which I think may be more of a hangover from the Wakefield stuff than a reflection of the kind of side-effects we might actually run into.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: battery on July 04, 2021, 08:27:53 am

I did this a couple of days ago, but there hasn’t been a significant change in slope in the meantime:



Now, that’s obviously a down and dirty, photoshop comparison of cases (red) to hospitalisations (blue) and I compressed the Y axis by ~ 10, simply by altering the frame ratio; so it ain’t brilliant. It was easier than check data day by day against the autumn wave though.
It seems pretty obvious that the hospitalisation curve bears little similarity to the autumn, relative to cases, whereas the case rate escalation seem very similar.

This seems to be where things are really different, as would be hoped if the vaccines work.

Interesting that this sort of comparison doesn't seem to readily available in the media so put the 7 day rolling data into a chart, multiplying admissions and deaths numbers to bring the the trends into scale.

(https://i.ibb.co/p673zRh/Covid-data-chart.jpg)

As per your image, shows really clearly how hospital admissions and deaths seem to have a very much lower correlation to cases when compared to autumn/winter.

The stats are encouraging, however the situation on the ground is seemingly pretty grim. My friend working in A&E says it is VERY busy and they are seeing an increasing number of covid related admissions. My friend who is an intensive care nurse looks ready to drop, she's actively job hunting, lots of covid cases mean they're back in all the PPE and she dreads going to work, she has nothing left to give.

Both friends have said that the majority of admissions are 30 and 40 years olds who haven't been vaccinated. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on July 04, 2021, 09:18:00 am
Is it not just going to be a wave of cases (which was always inevitable), mainly in the young, with a relatively small increase in deaths, predominantly among the unvaccinated and the very unlucky few whose vaccine doesn't protect them?

That's the hope, yeah.

Hospitalizations are now going up exponentially -- it's from a very low base, but the problem with exponentials is that small numbers get big fast. A much lower percentage of cases are leading to hospitalizations, which is what would be expected because of vaccines: infections are skewing towards younger and less vulnerable groups anyway (because others are vaccinated), and vaccinated people who get breakthrough infections have good odds that it'll be less severe. 

There are also some indications that average stays may be a bit shorter (again because of the younger age groups). But on the other hand some doctors have expressed concern that you're going to get higher demands for ICU and ventilators relative to the number of hospitalized patients  -- in the last few waves, many frail and elderly patients never got admitted to ICU at all because they wouldn't survive it anyway, whereas younger and more resilient patients may be more able to survive and benefit from aggressive treatment, which increases the demand on those resources.

And the link between hospitalizations and deaths is obviously not broken, though hopefully it's also weakened (younger patients, not to mention improved treatment knowledge since the first wave). Fully vaccinated people who end up in hospital will skew towards people who got severely ill despite the vaccine because they have a reduced immune response -- e.g. people who are very elderly and/or immunocompromised for another reason.

People are crossing their fingers that it will stay all under the level where the NHS has to start cancelling cancer operations etc. again.

As I understand it, an exit wave of some kind is inevitable (unless we stayed locked down until the entire population was vaccinated), and various sensible people seem to feel that it's better to get through the wave now rather than pushing it into winter.

In which case, this may be the "least worst" option open to us. And it's already clear from the numbers that it's not going to look like previous waves; the link between cases and hospitalizations has been substantially weakened. But. Could still be pretty rough for a few months (especially if the government goes with what's currently being briefed to the Sunday Times et al and drop all requirements for masks and social distancing from the 19th).

Sitrep from an intensive care doctor:

https://twitter.com/rupert_pearse/status/1411214888098217988

Some graphs:

https://twitter.com/VictimOfMaths/status/1410897378295619588

Decent thread:

https://twitter.com/ThatRyanChap/status/1411235980468797444
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on July 04, 2021, 10:36:37 am
Where is this stuff about vaccine dangers coming from? Not seen any evidence for it, bar a tiny% of thromboses.  :shrug:

For anyone who fancies a blast from the past (or isn't old enough to remember it), see this excellent run-down of the Andrew Wakefield saga, because as I have mentioned elsewhere it's one of my life goals to ensure that everyone hates him as much as I do:

Wakefield's very much around and part of the current anti-vax movement, but more generally, I think it left a vague sense floating around that maybe there are insidious secret dangers with vaccines for kids.

N.B. I think it's perfectly reasonable to want maximum safety data before vaccinating healthy younger kids for something where their risk is very low. Rare side-effects like the myocarditis thing do show up, so we want to know what the risk picture is. Side-effects are a thing!

But there's a lot of anxiety around about how vaccines might cause some kind of harm to a child's "development" if given at the wrong time or in the wrong way, which I think may be more of a hangover from the Wakefield stuff than a reflection of the kind of side-effects we might actually run into.

Glad to help.

https://www.channel4.com/programmes/the-anti-vax-conspiracy
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on July 04, 2021, 11:03:22 am
Glad to help.

https://www.channel4.com/programmes/the-anti-vax-conspiracy

Good call, that's also very good, especially when it comes to breaking down how the contemporary anti-vax movement is a huge money-making business.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on July 04, 2021, 12:02:43 pm
Calling something ‘money-making’ shouldn’t be pejorative. My weekly grocery shop is a huge money-making business for Tesco, bastards. It should be more than enough to point out anti-vax ideas are bullshit.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: kac on July 04, 2021, 01:43:00 pm
Pete how about making money out of spreading disinformation about vaccines if you know it is going to lead to lots of people dying? Is that OK?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on July 04, 2021, 01:57:44 pm
Calling something ‘money-making’ shouldn’t be pejorative.

It's not perjorative -- just informative, when the people making huge quantities of money out of the anti-vaxx movement are portraying themselves as poor persecuted martyrs standing up against the evil capitalist ways of Big Pharma out of purest altruism and love of truth.

And relevant knowledge for people to have, when it comes to evaluating their claims.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on July 04, 2021, 03:01:10 pm
Pete how about making money out of spreading disinformation about vaccines if you know it is going to lead to lots of people dying? Is that OK?

Want to get into a philosophical debate about the damaging consequences of things that ‘make money’? Go right ahead but it quickly gets murky whose disinformation is ok to make money from and whose isn’t. And you know what they say about fools and their money.

The wrongness of the anti-vax lot is that the science is bullshit, not that it makes money. There are plenty of sources of misinformation and bullshit at varying levels of seriousness causing varying degrees of harm to people and the environment.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: kac on July 04, 2021, 03:26:09 pm
No interest whatsoever Pete. Just curious what you thought as you seem to suggest making money this way is the same as making money selling groceries.

Anyway I have learnt something about the anti vax movement so thanks for posting.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on July 05, 2021, 07:57:34 am
Very interested to hear what ukbers thing of this: https://www.bitchute.com/video/pJCvN4EveYt2/

Lots of these kind of messages popping up everywhere except mainstream media. I think we need to start thinking a little bit more critically about the whole Covid situation. We all know how corrupt most politicians are and how powerful big Pharma is. That in it's self is enough to question everything. Who owns big Pharma? What's the agenda of the WEF?

Gosh, it has never occurred to me to be critical of anything ever, you have opened my eyes! WAKE UP SHEEPLE!!!

You're linking to videos of Mike Yeadon? MIKE YEADON? Come the fuck on.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/michael-yeadon-vaccine-death/
https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/health-coronavirus-vaccines-skeptic/

Aside from the revolting bigotry (and silly lying about being hacked to cover it up), of course:

https://zelo-street.blogspot.com/2021/02/covid-sceptic-favourite-is-sick-bigot.html
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on July 05, 2021, 08:08:29 am
Also, anyone using the term "big Pharma" should be required to provide a precise, workable definition.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on July 05, 2021, 08:30:34 am
I suppose "large pharmaceutical companies" would be a workable definition, and many of them (like large companies across all other industries) have track records of dodgy behaviour of one kind or another.

"Big Pharma" is much better for making them sound like a single gigantic world-spanning conspiracy network, of course.

Not clear how they're going to be making money by ... killing off most of the world's population? I gather that's the latest theory? ... but I'm sure the anti-vaxxers can tell us.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on July 05, 2021, 09:00:38 am
Dan messaged me to say this is not one his pseudonymous accounts.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on July 05, 2021, 09:12:45 am
Very interested to hear what ukbers thing of this: https://www.bitchute.com/video/pJCvN4EveYt2/

Lots of these kind of messages popping up everywhere except mainstream media. I think we need to start thinking a little bit more critically about the whole Covid situation. We all know how corrupt most politicians are and how powerful big Pharma is. That in it's self is enough to question everything. Who owns big Pharma? What's the agenda of the WEF?

One of the reasons my shares in tin producers are doing so well.
Idiot.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: lagerstarfish on July 05, 2021, 09:22:00 am
I suppose "large pharmaceutical companies" would be a workable definition, and many of them (like large companies across all other industries) have track records of dodgy behaviour of one kind or another.

"Big Pharma" is much better for making them sound like a single gigantic world-spanning conspiracy network, of course.

Not clear how they're going to be making money by ... killing off most of the world's population? I gather that's the latest theory? ... but I'm sure the anti-vaxxers can tell us.

Because they have been secretly buying up all of the funeral services and graveyards, obviously
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on July 05, 2021, 09:51:08 am
Very interested to hear what ukbers thing of this: https://www.bitchute.com/video/pJCvN4EveYt2/
If you are genuinely interested in what UKBers think, could you please post an article or two summarising the issues, for people who aren't able to watch a 35 minute video right now?? Ta.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: lagerstarfish on July 05, 2021, 10:07:59 am
I suppose "large pharmaceutical companies" would be a workable definition, and many of them (like large companies across all other industries) have track records of dodgy behaviour of one kind or another.

"Big Pharma" is much better for making them sound like a single gigantic world-spanning conspiracy network, of course.

Not clear how they're going to be making money by ... killing off most of the world's population? I gather that's the latest theory? ... but I'm sure the anti-vaxxers can tell us.

Because they have been secretly buying up all of the funeral services and graveyards, obviously

soon to be known as Large Funa
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on July 05, 2021, 10:11:24 am
Very interested to hear what ukbers thing of this: [...]  I think we need to start thinking a little bit more critically about the whole Covid situation.

If you got past 45s and didn't already spot some flaws in his argument then you need to sharpen your critical thinking skills. I stopped after that, not worth the time.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on July 05, 2021, 10:24:26 am
I didn't get past flicking the pointer to the end to see how long it is (and it's actually 47 minutes which shows how much attention I was paying).

Still, if EWS wants to engage about this, they deserve a fair chance.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on July 05, 2021, 11:22:39 am
I gave it a bit more time. Yeadon makes a lot of claims, some quite extreme, it would take a very long post to do even a layman's critique. One thing that did stand out was that despite vehemently objecting to being labelled anti vaccine, he claims the vaccinations are largely unnecessary and will not have saved a significant number of lives. He suggests it's a scam to trick people into a vaccine passport which is designed to be at best the pathway to a totalitarian state control system, or at worst a mechanism for mass de-population either directly or via fertility control. Very bold claims made with no substantive evidence. It also flies in the face of the emerging statistics on deaths from CV19 in pre and post vaccination waves. It does illustrate the power of being called a scientist and talking in a particular kind of language today.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on July 05, 2021, 11:26:48 am
Very interested to hear what ukbers thing of this: https://www.bitchute.com/video/pJCvN4EveYt2/
If you are genuinely interested in what UKBers think, could you please post an article or two summarising the issues, for people who aren't able to watch a 35 minute video right now?? Ta.

Also for the people who would be able to watch a 35 minute video right now, but can't be arsed to do so just in order to find out if this one is "vaccines make you infertile!!!", "everyone vaccinated will die within 2 years!!!", or "it's all a vast conspiracy by Bill Gates/Fauci/Soros/the Elders of Zion!!!"

I mean, if I'm going to die within 2 years, can't afford to waste my time, right?

Still, if EWS wants to engage about this, they deserve a fair chance.

Yup. If they want to state their claims/concerns, they can do so.

But if they're not willing to take more than the few seconds needed to post a link and some boiler-plate conspiracy hints and run, no reason why anyone else should put in more energy.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 05, 2021, 05:44:03 pm
You can now track vaccine take up in your MSOA:

 https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/interactive-map/vaccinations (https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/interactive-map/vaccinations)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: shark on July 05, 2021, 07:34:11 pm
Be nice people. First post and all that.

 :icon_welcome:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 07, 2021, 02:13:08 pm
Aaannd…

With 4 of 4 already home until next Monday, with her whole year out because of Staff isolating; 3 of 4 has just been sent home (from a different school) to isolate as a close contact.
This pisses Mrs OMM off beyond reason, as she’s actually getting shot 2 at 15:30 today.
After months and months of being careful, at the last moment and due to government enforced stupidity, her greatest threat is one of our home grown plague rats.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SamT on July 07, 2021, 02:43:09 pm

12 new cases reported in Y8 in my lads school on Monday.  They didn't have time to go through the whole tracing/contact rigmarole for all 12 cases, so made the whole year stay home on Tuesday whilst they sorted it all out.   Most of the year have to isolate for 10 days anyhow.   

Not long before the headlines turn towards the 'superspreader' events currently happening in Wembley.  :jab:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: lagerstarfish on July 07, 2021, 04:01:31 pm
Walk in Pfizer vaccination clinic tomorrow Thursday 8 July at Victoria hall, Norfolk Street, Sheffield.
11am till 3pm.
Aimed at asylum seekers, homeless, rough sleepers.
No appointment needed and not necessary to be registered with a GP.
If you know anyone who might benefit, let them know.
 Cheers
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on July 07, 2021, 08:12:59 pm
Well, the government seem to be doing their best to take a potentially-manageable wave and make it into an unmanageable one.

I'm now feeling a lot less sanguine about waiting re: vaccines for teenagers since government policy looks very much like it's going to be "abandon even trying to isolate contacts for kids and just let it rip through the schools".
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on July 07, 2021, 08:40:51 pm
The British Society for Immunology and the UK Coronavirus Immunology Consortium have produced an infographic on the relative merits of immunity through infection and through vaccination:

https://twitter.com/britsocimm/status/1412674411254140928
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on July 07, 2021, 08:51:44 pm
government policy looks very much like it's going to be "abandon even trying to isolate contacts for kids and just let it rip through the schools".

Most school age children will get it, that much is clear. The outcome, rather less so.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on July 07, 2021, 09:34:28 pm
I have a question (whilst I'm waiting for the follow-up from EWS)...

What proportion of Long Covid cases come from severe / hospitalisable cases of the initial covid, compared to LC cases that come from a mild / non-hospitalisable case of the initial covid??

(This is in the context of vaccines seeming to reduce the severity of the initial covid, but wondering how well that correlates to reducing the chances of Long Covid)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on July 08, 2021, 07:34:33 am
https://inews.co.uk/nhs/nhs-staff-claims-hospital-manage-covid-situation-cases-1091598
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on July 08, 2021, 07:58:14 am
I have a question (whilst I'm waiting for the follow-up from EWS)...

What proportion of Long Covid cases come from severe / hospitalisable cases of the initial covid, compared to LC cases that come from a mild / non-hospitalisable case of the initial covid??

(This is in the context of vaccines seeming to reduce the severity of the initial covid, but wondering how well that correlates to reducing the chances of Long Covid)

Found this:

https://fullfact.org/health/matt-hancock-long-covid/

Based on the Zoe app data:

The research paper says people with long Covid were “more likely to have required hospital assessment in the acute period.” Overall, 13.9% of the confirmed cases in the study had visited hospital. However, among those reporting symptoms for at least four weeks this rose to 31.5%, and among those reporting symptoms for at least eight weeks it was 43.9%.

If I recall correctly, the same team also had data suggesting that being fully vaccinated knocks about a third off your chances of long Covid if you do get a breakthrough infection.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SamT on July 08, 2021, 08:43:02 am
New three word slogan for the gov seems to be ..

See
What
Happens

blatantly nicked but seems apposite
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on July 08, 2021, 08:59:12 am
NYT has a breakdown of the relative risks of vaccination versus Covid for kids:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/04/opinion/covid-vaccine-kids-risks.html
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on July 08, 2021, 09:57:14 am
https://inews.co.uk/nhs/nhs-staff-claims-hospital-manage-covid-situation-cases-1091598

Or in other words, we're approaching something close to normal life then.. i.e. hospitals overstretched with non-covid patients who've suffered the misfortunes of a life out of lockdown. Long may that continue.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: danm on July 08, 2021, 01:05:37 pm
No, we're looking at hospitals with record admissions with tired staff which are likely to implode when autumn/winter comes because the normal regrouping and recuperation period through the summer isn't happening. My A&E registrar neighbour says they are running at 450 cases per day atm when 250 is normal for a busy flu season in winter. It simply isn't sustainable.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: lagerstarfish on July 08, 2021, 01:09:58 pm
Walk in Pfizer vaccination clinic tomorrow Thursday 8 July at Victoria hall, Norfolk Street, Sheffield.
11am till 3pm.
Aimed at asylum seekers, homeless, rough sleepers.
No appointment needed and not necessary to be registered with a GP.
If you know anyone who might benefit, let them know.
 Cheers

Currently no queue and plenty of vaccines available

Open for everyone
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on July 08, 2021, 01:49:46 pm
https://inews.co.uk/nhs/nhs-staff-claims-hospital-manage-covid-situation-cases-1091598

Or in other words, we're approaching something close to normal life then.. i.e. hospitals overstretched with non-covid patients who've suffered the misfortunes of a life out of lockdown. Long may that continue.
Long may hospitals continue to be overstretched? That's not desirable.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on July 08, 2021, 01:58:23 pm
It was said to mean that I'd far rather live in a country with a health service stretched by non-pandemic issues - because that would mean we're free of the worst effects of the pandemic and so freer to go about living our lives - than in a country with a health service stretched by serious covid cases (and thus lockdowns/restrictions) Thought that was obvious..
Of course I'd much rather a health service that wasn't stretched at all!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on July 08, 2021, 03:40:54 pm
It was said to mean that I'd far rather live in a country with a health service stretched by non-pandemic issues - because that would mean we're free of the worst effects of the pandemic and so freer to go about living our lives - than in a country with a health service stretched by serious covid cases

Unfortunately, looks like we're going to get to have both at the same time:

https://twitter.com/ChrisCEOHopson/status/1413000336915243010

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/leeds-cancer-surgery-coronavirus-nhs-b1879646.html

The NHS won't collapse and it's unlikely that there'll have to be the covert triage that there was in the first wave, but it could still be pretty rough. "Normal" this ain't.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 08, 2021, 04:58:07 pm
It was said to mean that I'd far rather live in a country with a health service stretched by non-pandemic issues - because that would mean we're free of the worst effects of the pandemic and so freer to go about living our lives - than in a country with a health service stretched by serious covid cases

Unfortunately, looks like we're going to get to have both at the same time:

https://twitter.com/ChrisCEOHopson/status/1413000336915243010

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/leeds-cancer-surgery-coronavirus-nhs-b1879646.html

The NHS won't collapse and it's unlikely that there'll have to be the covert triage that there was in the first wave, but it could still be pretty rough. "Normal" this ain't.

Posted without comment:

 https://bidstats.uk/tenders/2021/W23/752550337 (https://bidstats.uk/tenders/2021/W23/752550337)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sherlock on July 08, 2021, 05:25:23 pm
Suspect that contract has already been given to Hancock Harding ltd Purveyors of Antique Rocking Horses, or some fucking thing equally inappropriate.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 08, 2021, 06:21:51 pm
Suspect that contract has already been given to Hancock Harding ltd Purveyors of Antique Rocking Horses, or some fucking thing equally inappropriate.

Yeah, but the MD’s granddaughter babysits Rishi’s cousin’s next door neighbour’s cat, when they’re at the holiday cottage (12 bed rooms and four receptions, two pools), so it’s alright.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on July 08, 2021, 07:48:42 pm
Posted without comment:

 https://bidstats.uk/tenders/2021/W23/752550337 (https://bidstats.uk/tenders/2021/W23/752550337)

FWIW, this is apparently less terrifying than it looks (I saw it when it was being circulated as "proof" that vaccines were expected to kill vast numbers of people):

https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-body-storage-idUSL2N2O6230

And some Googling confirms that contingency temporary body storage is indeed a thing which local authorities are meant to have planned as part of preparedness for catastrophic emergencies of any kind.

See this from 2016:

https://www.walthamforestccg.nhs.uk/downloads/aboutus/publications/governingbodymeetings/2016/NHS-Waltham-Forest-CCG-Governing-body-papers-part-1-28-September-2016.pdf

Audit - Minimum Standards for London (MSLs)

4.1The MSLs outline the response capabilities which each London local authority is expected to have available during an emergency and what plans they are expected to maintain.

4.2 Local authorities review these capabilities and plans each year, with a number of the plans selected for more detailed review by the London Fire Brigade Emergency Planning team. This November, one of the plans selected for more detailed review will be our Excess Deaths Plan.

Additional planning options for the BRF

4.3The BRF is currently considering additional operational planning for excess deaths:

1) Detailed assessment of the body storage capacity of local funeral directors.

2) Detailed planning for additional, temporary body storage capacity in the borough


So, not Covid-specific, this is the "what happens if London gets nuked" planning.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on July 08, 2021, 09:42:59 pm
It was said to mean that I'd far rather live in a country with a health service stretched by non-pandemic issues - because that would mean we're free of the worst effects of the pandemic and so freer to go about living our lives - than in a country with a health service stretched by serious covid cases

Unfortunately, looks like we're going to get to have both at the same time:

https://twitter.com/ChrisCEOHopson/status/1413000336915243010

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/leeds-cancer-surgery-coronavirus-nhs-b1879646.html

The NHS won't collapse and it's unlikely that there'll have to be the covert triage that there was in the first wave, but it could still be pretty rough. "Normal" this ain't.

I mean, it’s a well considered twitter thread.. but there’s not a single thing in it that makes me even raise an eyebrow. Am I alone in feeling this, surely not?
We’ve just had a once in many generations global pandemic and are now coming out of the other side. Things aren’t going to be ‘normal’ after an event like that. The waves and ripples are going to be felt for a long while. To think it could be any other way would be madness. Negative consequences such as backlogs of patients and other increased pressures on various parts of society are going to be the trade-off for us not living in semi-hibernation and completely sinking the economy and people’s futures.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on July 09, 2021, 02:03:35 pm
But there's a big difference between "okay, this might be our least worst option but it's going to be rocky, the NHS is going to be under a lot of pressure for a few months at a point where it's still trying to recover from the last wave" and "everything's basically normal again".

As Hopson says, it's about explicitly acknowledging the trade-off here, that lifting restrictions it does mean higher hospitalizations and deaths for a while (albeit hopefully at a much lower level than the last wave), and that some things (like backlog recovery) will have to give.

Good piece with an emphasis on the disconnect between public messaging and the reality in the NHS:

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/we-knees-its-time-honesty-21006248

James Ward's been updating his modelling; if his central assumptions and most likely outcomes hold, we may be heading into a wave with a peak of Covid hospitalizations at about 40% of January's:

https://twitter.com/JamesWard73/status/1412182736572399623

On the one hand: the NHS won't collapse! On the other hand: that's going to be rough.

None of this may be news to you, but when the government says "Freedom day! The NHS will be fine!", I don't think most people hear "So, your cancer surgery will have to be cancelled (again); that hip replacement that's been waiting for a year will have to wait another year or two; and are you sure you really need to go to A&E?"
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on July 09, 2021, 04:35:24 pm
Pop-ups and walk-ins, with info on places that are quietly doing second doses of mRNA vaccines before the official 8-week limit:

https://www.reddit.com/r/GetJabbed/

Meaghan Kall (epidemiologist at PHE) explains why in her opinion it's fine to do this:

https://twitter.com/kallmemeg/status/1409114703700402178
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Evil on July 09, 2021, 05:13:03 pm
Pop-ups and walk-ins, with info on places that are quietly doing second doses of mRNA vaccines before the official 8-week limit:

https://www.reddit.com/r/GetJabbed/

Meaghan Kall (epidemiologist at PHE) explains why in her opinion it's fine to do this:

https://twitter.com/kallmemeg/status/1409114703700402178

Useful thread confirming the lack of Moderna walk-ins and that I wasn't just not finding them. They seemed to use it for all 30-40 year old first doses (in this area at least) and then realised they needed to ration the supply.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on July 09, 2021, 06:49:24 pm
I wish they'd at least okay mix-and-matching Moderna and Pfizer (which Canada's done -- their advisory committee ruled that they "can be considered interchangeable"); they're basically the same vaccine in different hats. That would add a lot of flexibility and reduce the need for rationing.

It looks like they're not going to okay mix-and-matching for people who had a first dose of AZ, at least not at the moment, but that's purely a supply issue: as far as people can estimate, the UK's got loads of AZ, restricted supplies of mRNA, and they need all the latter for the under-40s.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on July 12, 2021, 07:58:29 am
If anyone fancies doing some science and/or would like an extra jab --

Oxford are studying a version of AZ which has been tweaked to deal with Beta (and that should hopefully be more effective against Delta too):

https://twitter.com/john_actuary/status/1413907726451752961
https://www.c19vaccinestudy.com/#!/

They're looking for people over 30 who've either had two Covid vaccine jabs at least three months ago OR who haven't had any jabs yet (because they're testing it both as a booster and as a standalone).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on July 13, 2021, 09:05:49 am
Sheffield Arena and Octagon now taking walk-ins:

https://www.thestar.co.uk/health/coronavirus/no-appointment-needed-for-covid-jabs-at-sheffield-arena-and-octagon-centre-from-today-3303326

Though the Sheffield Arena centre is moving to a new location on the 26th, so the arena can go back to being an arena again:

https://www.sth.nhs.uk/news/news?action=view&newsID=1316

Had my second jab there yesterday and it was dead quiet; I didn't have to queue at all.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on July 22, 2021, 08:31:46 am
Is it appallingly cynical to suggest that the current situation with people being  notified by the app may possibly not represent escalating infections as much as their desire to get out of going to work when the weather is this hot and sunny? I wonder if the situation will improve when it starts raining again?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 22, 2021, 08:37:16 am
Is it appallingly cynical to suggest that the current situation with people being  notified by the app may possibly not represent escalating infections as much as their desire to get out of going to work when the weather is this hot and sunny? I wonder if the situation will improve when it starts raining again?

I dunno. I note, however, that the official daily hospital admissions number, has not been updated since the 14th of July. Strikes me as odd. It was 747 per day, then; I imagine it’s quite a bit higher now? Possibly alarmingly so.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on July 22, 2021, 08:49:10 am
Is it appallingly cynical to suggest that the current situation with people being  notified by the app may possibly not represent escalating infections as much as their desire to get out of going to work when the weather is this hot and sunny?

Less "appallingly cynical", more "wildly optimistic", I think.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on July 22, 2021, 09:06:06 am
Less "appallingly cynical", more "wildly optimistic", I think.

Yes :agree: Infection rates are pretty bloody high. Plus, don’t you have to do more than just say “I’ve been pinged” to get out of work. I’d have thought there’d at least be an expectation to send a screenshot of the app to your employer?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on July 22, 2021, 09:18:42 am
Less "appallingly cynical", more "wildly optimistic", I think.

Yes :agree: Infection rates are pretty bloody high. Plus, don’t you have to do more than just say “I’ve been pinged” to get out of work. I’d have thought there’d at least be an expectation to send a screenshot of the app to your employer?

I don't know,  I'm sure rates are going up fast, but I imagine that proof will depend on the employer.

I wonder if the PM might be the most likely offender here? What a coincidence that hes at Chequers which has a swimming pool and not in Downing Street. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Liamhutch89 on July 22, 2021, 09:23:07 am
Is it appallingly cynical to suggest that the current situation with people being  notified by the app may possibly not represent escalating infections as much as their desire to get out of going to work when the weather is this hot and sunny? I wonder if the situation will improve when it starts raining again?

Wait, what? People have jobs where time off work, planned or unplanned, doesn't just mean twice as much to do upon return!?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on July 22, 2021, 09:39:27 am
I wonder if the PM might be the most likely offender here? What a coincidence that hes at Chequers which has a swimming pool and not in Downing Street.
I’m as cynical as they come, but I have no doubt he would’ve been ‘pinged’ if Javid tested positive. The question is when was he ‘pinged’ and which address was he in when it happened?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on July 22, 2021, 02:01:26 pm
Is it appallingly cynical to suggest that the current situation with people being  notified by the app may possibly not represent escalating infections as much as their desire to get out of going to work when the weather is this hot and sunny? I wonder if the situation will improve when it starts raining again?

I dunno. I note, however, that the official daily hospital admissions number, has not been updated since the 14th of July. Strikes me as odd. It was 747 per day, then; I imagine it’s quite a bit higher now? Possibly alarmingly so.

Scotland only reports weekly I think. If you split the figures by nation you can see the other nations to the 19th - adds up to ~800, and given where scotland was on the 14th, I'd expect over 900 for UK by now.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on July 22, 2021, 04:52:49 pm
good cases figures today, lowest since 13th, and 6 days since the peak(?) on the 17th. Dare we hope?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on July 22, 2021, 05:50:53 pm
Is it appallingly cynical to suggest that the current situation with people being  notified by the app may possibly not represent escalating infections as much as their desire to get out of going to work when the weather is this hot and sunny? I wonder if the situation will improve when it starts raining again?

Wait, what? People have jobs where time off work, planned or unplanned, doesn't just mean twice as much to do upon return!?

If I had a shit job in a warehouse which I was paid badly for, I'd probably use any excuse to get off work! The work would be the same whatever you did...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 22, 2021, 08:16:47 pm
good cases figures today, lowest since 13th, and 6 days since the peak(?) on the 17th. Dare we hope?

Looking at the logarithmic data, it is very encouraging. The admissions data is updated to the 18th now and didn’t rise as rapidly as I had thought it might.
So, I’m cautiously allowing a hint of a smidgeon of hope, to peek out of the corner of my pessimism.

Of course, we won’t know the effects of the 19th for another couple of days, at least, and a week more to be sure.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on July 22, 2021, 08:48:45 pm
I'm hoping that the school hols will offset the effects of freedom day...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on July 23, 2021, 10:06:42 am
Is it appallingly cynical to suggest that the current situation with people being  notified by the app may possibly not represent escalating infections as much as their desire to get out of going to work when the weather is this hot and sunny? I wonder if the situation will improve when it starts raining again?

Wait, what? People have jobs where time off work, planned or unplanned, doesn't just mean twice as much to do upon return!?

If I had a shit job in a warehouse which I was paid badly for, I'd probably use any excuse to get off work! The work would be the same whatever you did...

If you had a shit job in a warehouse which you were paid badly for, you might not be able to afford to spend ten days only getting statutory sick pay. Assuming you weren't on a zero hours contract and not earning enough to qualify for SSP anyway. Or classified as "self-employed".
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on July 23, 2021, 10:08:41 am
By-the-by, how widespread is the experience of empty shelves etc.? Is it something posters here are experiencing? Genuine question from the outside.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 23, 2021, 10:37:44 am
Yup. Shop last Tuesday , Sainsbury’s Torquay, around 40% empty shelves. Noticeably very little Sainsbury’s own brand of anything.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on July 24, 2021, 10:25:31 am
By-the-by, how widespread is the experience of empty shelves etc.? Is it something posters here are experiencing? Genuine question from the outside.

Yeah some,  but nothing drastic I've noticed.  I'd say not that much worse than its been regularly since the UK left the EU. The fact it's now the weekend might result in more shortages though, as lots of families seem to shop then usually. 

I think a lot of negative effects of Brexit have been brushed under the carpet due to the pandemic.  The fishing industry is on its way to ruin, for example. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 24, 2021, 12:00:10 pm
By-the-by, how widespread is the experience of empty shelves etc.? Is it something posters here are experiencing? Genuine question from the outside.

Yeah some,  but nothing drastic I've noticed.  I'd say not that much worse than its been regularly since the UK left the EU. The fact it's now the weekend might result in more shortages though, as lots of families seem to shop then usually. 

I think a lot of negative effects of Brexit have been brushed under the carpet due to the pandemic.  The fishing industry is on its way to ruin, for example.

Bikes. Had to buy a new bike for No.4 coz she keeps growing. Very hard. A family friend runs an MTB shop and we usually buy from him. Apparently, a combination of the Suez issue and Brexit mean it’s like trying to legally import cocaine. He was struggling to get his brand in, because there was a European distributor and no UK importer etc. for the US brand. So, we went to Halfords, only to find we couldn’t get a bike in her frame size at all, eventually finding one of only two available in the UK… That was about a month ago now, so perhaps it’s improving. Anyway OT, but yes, I think a lot is being overlooked as the latest wave peaks.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on July 24, 2021, 04:26:32 pm
Some of that may be shipping issues, which are a global issue at the moment and appear set to stay that way for the rest of 2021 at least...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 24, 2021, 04:50:39 pm
Some of that may be shipping issues, which are a global issue at the moment and appear set to stay that way for the rest of 2021 at least...

Yup.
One last OT post. Just been messaging a mate who’s an OEM supervisor for some defence/military hardware (weapons) of a fairly strategic nature, and they’re pulling their hair out for lack of parts.
As he described it, they can’t get certain parts, because the manufacturer (UK based) can’t get machine parts/consumables for the production (far Eastern origin) or materials (because the suppliers there aren’t getting the raw materials for the alloys) and so on. Brexit didn’t feature on that one, but the knock on from the blocked Suez canal and production facilities shutting due to Covid in countries other than the UK, certainly do.
The latter is something we’ve overlooked on this thread. Certain countries with “foundation” positions in the global production economy are being absolutely twatted by Covid. It ain’t all China.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on July 24, 2021, 05:56:48 pm
Some of that may be shipping issues, which are a global issue at the moment and appear set to stay that way for the rest of 2021 at least...

No doubt but bikes are a victim of Brexit it's mainly to do with the fact that the parts in bikes are sourced from multiple countries. Many of them have skyrocketed in price since Brexit, there have been several articles in cycling magazines about it
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on July 26, 2021, 06:33:31 pm
Warning: highly personalized rant time. I would really love to be able to see my UK-based children. It's been very nearly 20 months. There have been many barriers but most recently, when they announced fully vaccinated UK citizens could return to the country without self-isolating they specifically excluded those vaccinated abroad. I can't afford the time to self-isolate. My wife is still in long-term recovery from the very serious illness she contracted last year. I could perhaps leave her for one night, max two - not the 5+1 or 2 for the actual visit isolation imposes. I was elated this morning when it was announced the UK would start recognizing the vaccination status of UK citizens jabbed abroad.

Now, it turns out that vaccination status has to be approved by your GP. Um, the vast majority of hundreds of the thousands (if not millions) UK citizens vaccinated abroad don't have GPs. We're resident elsewhere. Who is this even meant to apply to? Does the government seriously think flocks of UK citizens were going abroad to get vaccinated? Sorry, just really pissed off by more incoherent and nonsensical decision making.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 26, 2021, 07:54:44 pm
Warning: highly personalized rant time. I would really love to be able to see my UK-based children. It's been very nearly 20 months. There have been many barriers but most recently, when they announced fully vaccinated UK citizens could return to the country without self-isolating they specifically excluded those vaccinated abroad. I can't afford the time to self-isolate. My wife is still in long-term recovery from the very serious illness she contracted last year. I could perhaps leave her for one night, max two - not the 5+1 or 2 for the actual visit isolation imposes. I was elated this morning when it was announced the UK would start recognizing the vaccination status of UK citizens jabbed abroad.

Now, it turns out that vaccination status has to be approved by your GP. Um, the vast majority of hundreds of the thousands (if not millions) UK citizens vaccinated abroad don't have GPs. We're resident elsewhere. Who is this even meant to apply to? Does the government seriously think flocks of UK citizens were going abroad to get vaccinated? Sorry, just really pissed off by more incoherent and nonsensical decision making.

Can I interest you in a sympathetic tale of woe? Just to illustrate that it really isn’t just “The Government”, because the entire country has taken leave of it’s senses and Covid has been a catalyst.
I have to have my blood type certified.
I’ve known  it  since I joined the RN, 32 years ago, but strangely, have no way to prove it and your GP doesn’t retain this information.
I had to apply to the RN, on a freedom of information basis, for a copy of my medical records. Well that took three days of back and forth of form filling and phone calls and emails; only to eventually get a “Thank you for your request, we will endeavour to answer your query within three calendar months. Please be aware that current Covid working conditions may extend that time”…

Ok. No good to me, I need this by the beginning of August.

Back to the GP.

“We don’t do that kind of test”
🤦🏻‍♂️

I ask if it’s something I can get done privately and I’m told they’ll call me back.

🥳

They can do it! Can I be in the surgery at 3pm the next day?

I go, they bleed me and tell me it should take three days for the results.

Three days pass.

Nada.

I leave it a week and call on a Wednesday morning. This means joining a phone queue and it’s half an hour before I finally get through. The nice receptionist tells me I have to call back on a different number to speak to the doctor’s secretaries.
Another phone queue.
Only 15 minutes.
“I’m sorry sir, we can’t tell you if your results are back, we’re not even allowed to know what kind of test you had”.

Through clenched teeth: “Ok, how am I supposed to get the results”.

Apparently I must  submit an “E consult” request through their website.

Could I not just leave a message for the doc to call me back?

No.

Fortunately I had set up my new NHS login earlier in the week, so I was quickly into the E consult page. After answering several “do you have covid” questions it finally asks me the reason for my request. Option three “are you requesting the results of a recent test”.

Ah ha! Yes, yes I am.

‘You must verify your identity”

Ok, it’s gonna be DOB and postcode, like it always is with the NHS, isn’t it..

Clicks “Ok”.

“You will need a form of photo id, either a passport or UK driver’s license”

Eh? Ok…

Scan in driver’s license.

“Please hold your device’s camera up to your face and follow directions to scan your face”

Grumble. FFS!

“Thank you, please allow 24 hours for verification”


Aaaarrrrgghh! Wanker! Fucking screw you!

Try again.

Small print, on the login page “continue as guest”, instead of logging in. Just needed DOB and Postcode.
😁

Clicks submit.

It’s Monday, the 19th.

“ Your request for an E consultation has been submitted, the practice will endeavour to respond before 18:00…. on the 26th…”

I could probably kill an innocent old lady at this point. I’m considering sticking a pencil in each nostril and shouting “Whibble”.

Anyway, I get a text two days later, saying the results aren’t in yet and to call the secretary at the end of the week, because of the nature of the test, I don’t have to repeat the above.

Friday, was a bit shitty, so I called this morning.

The lab has rejected the sample, because it wasn’t labelled correctly.

Wha…!

Look, I get you have no control here, but I need that by the end of this week, what the (excuse my French, here) fucking fuck fuck fuckity, do I do now?

Three call transfers later and I hop in the car to rush to the practice and they drag another vial of the red stuff.

Apparently, the system produces a printed label, that must be affixed to the vial (a pink vial, which is apparently significant) but this must accompanied by a hand written label too. The nurse is pretty annoyed, because the information required on the hand written label is…

Exactly the same as on the printed label.

In three days time, I have to call, again, to find out if my results are back and I’m not sure if I can get hold of the valium I need to do that.

PS,
It is not possible to enter the GP practice and just have a conversation over the counter. Phone, text, email. Sometimes you call and they answer you in an email, or you email and get a text message back. It’s a lottery.


So, good luck finding a GP to validate your vaccine status.

If I find a good pusher for the valium, I’ll pm you.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on July 27, 2021, 07:01:38 am
Warning: highly personalized rant time. I would really love to be able to see my UK-based children. It's been very nearly 20 months. There have been many barriers but most recently, when they announced fully vaccinated UK citizens could return to the country without self-isolating they specifically excluded those vaccinated abroad. I can't afford the time to self-isolate. My wife is still in long-term recovery from the very serious illness she contracted last year. I could perhaps leave her for one night, max two - not the 5+1 or 2 for the actual visit isolation imposes. I was elated this morning when it was announced the UK would start recognizing the vaccination status of UK citizens jabbed abroad.

Now, it turns out that vaccination status has to be approved by your GP. Um, the vast majority of hundreds of the thousands (if not millions) UK citizens vaccinated abroad don't have GPs. We're resident elsewhere. Who is this even meant to apply to? Does the government seriously think flocks of UK citizens were going abroad to get vaccinated? Sorry, just really pissed off by more incoherent and nonsensical decision making.

That’s really shit. Hope you can manage to get across soon.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: battery on July 27, 2021, 07:22:02 am
Warning: highly personalized rant time. I would really love to be able to see my UK-based children. It's been very nearly 20 months. There have been many barriers but most recently, when they announced fully vaccinated UK citizens could return to the country without self-isolating they specifically excluded those vaccinated abroad. I can't afford the time to self-isolate. My wife is still in long-term recovery from the very serious illness she contracted last year. I could perhaps leave her for one night, max two - not the 5+1 or 2 for the actual visit isolation imposes. I was elated this morning when it was announced the UK would start recognizing the vaccination status of UK citizens jabbed abroad.

Now, it turns out that vaccination status has to be approved by your GP. Um, the vast majority of hundreds of the thousands (if not millions) UK citizens vaccinated abroad don't have GPs. We're resident elsewhere. Who is this even meant to apply to? Does the government seriously think flocks of UK citizens were going abroad to get vaccinated? Sorry, just really pissed off by more incoherent and nonsensical decision making.

Can I interest you in a sympathetic tale of woe? Just to illustrate that it really isn’t just “The Government”, because the entire country has taken leave of it’s senses and Covid has been a catalyst.
I have to have my blood type certified.
I’ve known  it  since I joined the RN, 32 years ago, but strangely, have no way to prove it and your GP doesn’t retain this information.
I had to apply to the RN, on a freedom of information basis, for a copy of my medical records. Well that took three days of back and forth of form filling and phone calls and emails; only to eventually get a “Thank you for your request, we will endeavour to answer your query within three calendar months. Please be aware that current Covid working conditions may extend that time”…

Ok. No good to me, I need this by the beginning of August.

Back to the GP.

“We don’t do that kind of test”
🤦🏻‍♂️

I ask if it’s something I can get done privately and I’m told they’ll call me back.

🥳

They can do it! Can I be in the surgery at 3pm the next day?

I go, they bleed me and tell me it should take three days for the results.

Three days pass.

Nada.

I leave it a week and call on a Wednesday morning. This means joining a phone queue and it’s half an hour before I finally get through. The nice receptionist tells me I have to call back on a different number to speak to the doctor’s secretaries.
Another phone queue.
Only 15 minutes.
“I’m sorry sir, we can’t tell you if your results are back, we’re not even allowed to know what kind of test you had”.

Through clenched teeth: “Ok, how am I supposed to get the results”.

Apparently I must  submit an “E consult” request through their website.

Could I not just leave a message for the doc to call me back?

No.

Fortunately I had set up my new NHS login earlier in the week, so I was quickly into the E consult page. After answering several “do you have covid” questions it finally asks me the reason for my request. Option three “are you requesting the results of a recent test”.

Ah ha! Yes, yes I am.

‘You must verify your identity”

Ok, it’s gonna be DOB and postcode, like it always is with the NHS, isn’t it..

Clicks “Ok”.

“You will need a form of photo id, either a passport or UK driver’s license”

Eh? Ok…

Scan in driver’s license.

“Please hold your device’s camera up to your face and follow directions to scan your face”

Grumble. FFS!

“Thank you, please allow 24 hours for verification”


Aaaarrrrgghh! Wanker! Fucking screw you!

Try again.

Small print, on the login page “continue as guest”, instead of logging in. Just needed DOB and Postcode.
😁

Clicks submit.

It’s Monday, the 19th.

“ Your request for an E consultation has been submitted, the practice will endeavour to respond before 18:00…. on the 26th…”

I could probably kill an innocent old lady at this point. I’m considering sticking a pencil in each nostril and shouting “Whibble”.

Anyway, I get a text two days later, saying the results aren’t in yet and to call the secretary at the end of the week, because of the nature of the test, I don’t have to repeat the above.

Friday, was a bit shitty, so I called this morning.

The lab has rejected the sample, because it wasn’t labelled correctly.

Wha…!

Look, I get you have no control here, but I need that by the end of this week, what the (excuse my French, here) fucking fuck fuck fuckity, do I do now?

Three call transfers later and I hop in the car to rush to the practice and they drag another vial of the red stuff.

Apparently, the system produces a printed label, that must be affixed to the vial (a pink vial, which is apparently significant) but this must accompanied by a hand written label too. The nurse is pretty annoyed, because the information required on the hand written label is…

Exactly the same as on the printed label.

In three days time, I have to call, again, to find out if my results are back and I’m not sure if I can get hold of the valium I need to do that.

PS,
It is not possible to enter the GP practice and just have a conversation over the counter. Phone, text, email. Sometimes you call and they answer you in an email, or you email and get a text message back. It’s a lottery.


So, good luck finding a GP to validate your vaccine status.

If I find a good pusher for the valium, I’ll pm you.

And they wonder why walk in centres and A&E are rammed, particularly with children who's parents need reassurance and can't even get through to a receptionist never mind actually see a doctor.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on July 27, 2021, 01:44:15 pm
Warning: highly personalized rant time. I would really love to be able to see my UK-based children. It's been very nearly 20 months. There have been many barriers but most recently, when they announced fully vaccinated UK citizens could return to the country without self-isolating they specifically excluded those vaccinated abroad. I can't afford the time to self-isolate. My wife is still in long-term recovery from the very serious illness she contracted last year. I could perhaps leave her for one night, max two - not the 5+1 or 2 for the actual visit isolation imposes. I was elated this morning when it was announced the UK would start recognizing the vaccination status of UK citizens jabbed abroad.

Now, it turns out that vaccination status has to be approved by your GP. Um, the vast majority of hundreds of the thousands (if not millions) UK citizens vaccinated abroad don't have GPs. We're resident elsewhere. Who is this even meant to apply to? Does the government seriously think flocks of UK citizens were going abroad to get vaccinated? Sorry, just really pissed off by more incoherent and nonsensical decision making.

That’s really shit. Hope you can manage to get across soon.

Thanks. And now my daughter's had take a PCR test this morning, having woken up with symptoms - after being incredibly careful and sensible the whole time (and being denied a second jab at a walk in centre just over a week ago). Bollocks.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on July 27, 2021, 01:55:24 pm
 :'( I hope she feels better soon, Andy.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 27, 2021, 02:42:48 pm
Yes. Awful news Andy. Hope she’s well soon.

Polly has just been picked for an Antigen test (she’s been part of a testing trial since having odd symptoms in the first few months). She never threw up a positive test, but in a few days we’ll know if she ever had it (and therefore, the rest of the family).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on July 28, 2021, 08:58:55 am
Thanks Jon and Matt. Negative for Covid. When she told me more of her symptoms I was actually reasonably confident this would be the outcome, but still a real relief.

It also looks like the UK gov is about to correct its stupid inconsistencies about which vaccination statuses are recognized.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on July 28, 2021, 12:09:01 pm
It also looks like the UK gov is about to correct its stupid inconsistencies about which vaccination statuses are recognized.

I notice Labour are condemning this as reckless until there's an international vaccine passport scheme up and running...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on July 28, 2021, 05:09:38 pm
I honestly don’t understand what Labour (or the guardian) would like to happen? Since the 3rd lockdown, vaccine roll-out and the subsequent staged unlocking, any positive news to do with covid either they don’t acknowledge, or they complain about it being ‘reckless’. Does anybody in the country actually give a monkeys any more what Labour think should happen?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on July 28, 2021, 05:28:01 pm
Obviously, I have a dog in the race or whatever metaphor fits, but I don't understand Labour's stance on this either.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on July 28, 2021, 05:32:15 pm

Can I interest you in a sympathetic tale of woe? Just to illustrate that it really isn’t just “The Government”, because the entire country has taken leave of it’s senses and Covid has been a catalyst.


Your GP does sound like it's seized the opportunity with both hands to have the perfect excuse to just start providing an egregiously shit service with no comeback.

I had a good phone call with my doctor's surgery in May last year when we wanted to register the family for their online service. As part of the registration there was a requirement to present yourself complete with ID at the surgery reception. But at the time no-one was allowed to visit the surgery... At least there was someone answering the reception phone at the time to discuss how to resolve this.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on July 28, 2021, 06:49:22 pm
I honestly don’t understand what Labour (or the guardian) would like to happen? Since the 3rd lockdown, vaccine roll-out and the subsequent staged unlocking, any positive news to do with covid either they don’t acknowledge, or they complain about it being ‘reckless’. Does anybody in the country actually give a monkeys any more what Labour think should happen?

I'm finding this incredibly frustrating as a Labour voter and Guardian reader. Both are apparently incapable of critical thinking on the issue and its both irritating and damaging.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on July 28, 2021, 07:34:41 pm
Hi! Are you still...

Quote
Very interested to hear what ukbers thing of this:

???

As far as the latest video goes....

0:50 - pretty sure I got a flu vaccination and BCG (?) as a kid.

1:12 - the whole point is not that covid-19 poses a threat to children, it's that children can very easily transmit it to other people including vulnerable people, and by both the very nature of being children (in families, sociable) and by societal necessity (education) are usually in high transmission environments.

1:20 - "symptoms indistinguishable from the common cold" therefore it's a more likely transmission as it's less obvious when they have covid rather than a cold.

1:38 - "no data is available concerning long term effects" - equally no data is available concerning long term effects of covid on children. And the closest indication from the adult population seems to be (correct me if I'm wrong) that the long term effects of covid are much more prominent and likely than the long term effects of the vaccine.

2:17 - completely biased weasel words "perceived benefits might outweigh", ignores both the high effectiveness of the vaccine and the high covid-mortality risk in that age group.

2:48 - "children may spread the virus" - there's no "may", this happened with the school returns and the amount of families getting it from their children.

3:08 - not sure there's much talk of vaccinating infants so I guess that's just chucked in for emotive response.

3:36 - it's the sort of disease and vaccine where people like this.....whoever this person is.....is somehow given a platform to promote anti-vaccination stuff. It's in part HIS fault there's reluctance, I guess he can't see that.



Well. I kinda watched that because I was very bored over dinner as there's no IFSC on, and I thought as a short video it would be over quickly. I didn't account for having to pause every 10 seconds as it's full of more holes than a swiss cheese. Any further comments,  Eyes Wide Shut??

I now feel quite dirty and am going to watch speedcore and toy soldier videos the rest of the evening in hope that I don't get any fucking anti-vaxx recommendations through Youtube  :sick: :sick: :sick:



Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on July 28, 2021, 07:58:50 pm
Something I posted elsewhere recently that sums up why I, despite not always having the same stance as the Govt on covid-tackling measures (and not the same stance as the militant lockdowneers), have nothing but contempt for the conspiracy loons:

Quote
The main issue I have with these....people...is that there is the possibility of, or maybe even need for, debate, discussion and disagreement about the government's position on the death-vs-disruption balance of covid-tackling measures, about quantity vs quality of life, about covid vs co-morbidities, about actual restrictions on personal freedom and the justifications or lack of for those. BUT outright lies and falsehoods with anti-vaxx, anti-mask, 5G, nano-particles, micro-chips, great resets, plandemics, covid-denial, etc etc obscure and sabotage that potential debate and should be nothing to do with it whatsoever.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on July 28, 2021, 08:02:13 pm
Welcome back! Glad I didn't manage to scare you off completely, and sorry if I was overly snappish at you before.

You've obviously got some concerns about Covid vaccines, so instead of just posting videos, why not say what it is that you're concerned about, and then people can engage with that?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on July 28, 2021, 08:47:08 pm
I honestly don’t understand what Labour (or the guardian) would like to happen? Since the 3rd lockdown, vaccine roll-out and the subsequent staged unlocking, any positive news to do with covid either they don’t acknowledge, or they complain about it being ‘reckless’. Does anybody in the country actually give a monkeys any more what Labour think should happen?

I'm finding this incredibly frustrating as a Labour voter and Guardian reader. Both are apparently incapable of critical thinking on the issue and its both irritating and damaging.

I'm quite frustrated with people that can't understand Labour mainly disagree with the government on pretty sensible factors like mask compulsion, border controls, funded self isolation for people who won't otherwise be paid, and funding support to improve indoor ventilation ..... all of which might suddenly become very important if we have any new variant with vaccine escape.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on July 28, 2021, 09:07:38 pm
 :o GB News has a viewer! .... and Fiend has just doubled the viewing figures.  It seems that in the panic to save the channel it has lurched further into the fictitious world of the 'cosmic right', that and employing Nigel Farage which must spell it's doom.  Andrew Neil has gone on an endless holiday out of embarrassment.
If something from a more reliable source backed up with data can be supplied I'm all ears. Too late for me I'm double jabbed but I'm interested to hear (factually) what I might have done to myself.

Quote
I'm finding this incredibly frustrating as a Labour voter and Guardian reader. Both are apparently incapable of critical thinking on the issue and its both irritating and damaging.
I think exactly the same, only on most issues rather than just this one.  :lol:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on July 28, 2021, 09:25:42 pm
0:50 - pretty sure I got a flu vaccination and BCG (?) as a kid.

Yeah, I'm old enough to have a BCG scar.

Just to add a bit of relevant info:

1:38 - "no data is available concerning long term effects" - equally no data is available concerning long term effects of covid on children. And the closest indication from the adult population seems to be (correct me if I'm wrong) that the long term effects of covid are much more prominent and likely than the long term effects of the vaccine.

More than that: vaccine side-effects show up within two months of the jab, max. There's no precedent (or biological mechanism) for them to stick around and suddenly do weird shit in your body five or ten years down the line:

https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-reports/exclusives/93064

Like, fair enough for people to go "But how do we know there aren't any long-term side-effects?", but as it happens, we actually have the answer to that.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on July 28, 2021, 09:33:44 pm
Labour mainly disagree with the government on pretty sensible factors like mask compulsion, border controls, funded self isolation for people who won't otherwise be paid, and funding support to improve indoor ventilation ..... all of which might suddenly become very important if we have any new variant with vaccine escape.
Neglecting to use this opportunity to improve ventilation in indoor public spaces has always seemed very shortsighted to me. Not only would it help with Covid, but would also have much longer term benefits by improving indoor air quality and all the associated health benefits that go along with it. The Irish govt are providing CO2 monitors for schools and support for upgrading ventilation where necessary, which is a start at least. The UK govt…nothing.

It needs to be done anyway so in the words of Bojo…”If not now, when?”
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on July 28, 2021, 09:49:40 pm

I'm quite frustrated with people that can't understand Labour mainly disagree with the government on pretty sensible factors like mask compulsion, border controls, funded self isolation for people who won't otherwise be paid, and funding support to improve indoor ventilation ..... all of which might suddenly become very important if we have any new variant with vaccine escape.

I've immediately remembered why I stopped posting about covid...I disagree with almost everything in the above sentence (bar the funded self isolation which is long overdue). In brief:

-compulsory masks are largely irrelevant in an open society as large sectors of it cant function with them eg crowded pubs and nightclubs. If you think these shouldn't be open thats fine (though I disagree) but if you don't then compulsory masks are both unworkable and irrelevant anyway as there is an enormous amount of societal contact. I agree that wearing them on public transport is a good courtesy to keep up but it seems increasingly pointless to me. On the tram in Manc a few days ago I wore one but almost nobody else was. Pissing in the wind was the phrase I thought of!
- border controls cannot remain indefinitely, both for the travel industry/holidays and those who want to see family abroad. At the moment there is no scenario I've yet read about where Labour would be happy for border controls to be lessened. This seems incredibly wrong headed to me.
- indoor ventilation is absolutely something we should be improving, but should be done alongside opening things up. Clearly we can't wait for this enormous amount of building work to be completed before relaxing things of HS2 will be done before it (maybe!). Again, I'm not clear on Labour's timeline for improving ventilation and how it related to relaxing things. They obviously have to happen concurrently. I agree it would have multi faceted benefits though Ali.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on July 28, 2021, 10:39:19 pm
At the risk of going off on a tangent…I think, in the short term at least, the ventilation issue could have been done relatively cheaply and without much in the way of retrofitting additional air handling systems into buildings. A simple CO2 monitor would tell you when you need to open a few windows/doors or ‘purge’ a room.

Plus, having increased CO2 monitoring where data was previously lacking would be a first step in achieving more long-term solutions if we can at least get an idea of where the problems are and so where the investment needs to be directed to.

No idea where this sits with what Labour have or haven’t proposed though.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 28, 2021, 10:56:36 pm
The vaccine thing just makes me giggle.

I’ve had every one available, as far as I know. All the normal ones as a kid (yep, the seven needles and the BCG) and several others including Anthrax and few that I was never told what they were for (Gulf War, 90/91). I’m half way through/about to get, all my boosters for most of them.
Pretty sure I’m no further along the spectrum than I already was and my phone reception hasn’t improved.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on July 28, 2021, 11:29:35 pm
The vaccine thing just makes me giggle.

I’ve had every one available, as far as I know. ...
Pretty sure I’m no further along the spectrum than I already was and my phone reception hasn’t improved.

Me too.

If anyone who is sceptical about vaccination thought about it for a few seconds,  the tiny risk of any vaccine is so vastly outweighed by the risk associated with catching whatever the vaccine is for that there really shouldn't be any debate whatsoever. 
I'm currently reading the undoing project,  which has some interesting observations about the psychology of decision making and people's assessments of risk and reward.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Undoing_Project
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on July 29, 2021, 08:29:42 am
If anyone who is sceptical about vaccination thought about it for a few seconds,  the tiny risk of any vaccine is so vastly outweighed by the risk associated with catching whatever the vaccine is for that there really shouldn't be any debate whatsoever.

Being a pedant, I have to point out that with AstraZeneca, because the blood clotting issue risk (small as it is) increases as you get younger, then if Covid rates in a society are low enough, there's a crossover point where if you're young enough, the risk from the vaccine is actually higher than the risk of catching Covid and being seriously harmed by it (IIRC, if there are high levels of Covid around, the vaccine's safer at any age).

BUT. The salient point is that we know about this risk (because, as previously mentioned, vaccine side-effects show up fast after the jab) and that's why there's the age cut-off for use of AZ in the UK and various other countries, to err on the side of caution.

(And I am over that age cut-off and have had my two doses of AZ because I understand basic statistics.)

It's not that the Covid vaccines are magically side-effect free, or that they can't ever have rare serious side-effects like the clotting issue for AZ (and J&J, at a much lower frequency).

But we have the information on what those side-effects are -- and what they aren't (e.g. the substantial body of evidence proving there's no effect on fertility) -- and can make decisions based on that data.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on July 29, 2021, 08:33:53 am

- border controls cannot remain indefinitely, both for the travel industry/holidays and those who want to see family abroad. At the moment there is no scenario I've yet read about where Labour would be happy for border controls to be lessened. This seems incredibly wrong headed to me.
-

No but the plans announced today are just as clearly poorly planned as any from this government.  Airlines are expected to check vaccine status on check in, any vaccine accepted from these countries as they are trustworthy,  both according to Raab on the today programme this morning.  So ok perhaps with Germany and the United states but what about Hungary,  are they trustworthy? Is a bargain bucket Ryanair operation in Hungary really going to be that hot on proof of vaccination?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 29, 2021, 08:41:57 am

- border controls cannot remain indefinitely, both for the travel industry/holidays and those who want to see family abroad. At the moment there is no scenario I've yet read about where Labour would be happy for border controls to be lessened. This seems incredibly wrong headed to me.
-

No but the plans announced today are just as clearly poorly planned as any from this government.  Airlines are expected to check vaccine status on check in, any vaccine accepted from these countries as they are trustworthy,  both according to Raab on the today programme this morning.  So ok perhaps with Germany and the United states but what about Hungary,  are they trustworthy? Is a bargain bucket Ryanair operation in Hungary really going to be that hot on proof of vaccination?

Probably, as soon as they cotton on to an expensive “non-vaccinated” surcharge, for those that haven’t printed out their certificates on exactly the right size sheet of paper…
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on July 29, 2021, 08:57:59 am
No but the plans announced today are just as clearly poorly planned as any from this government.
I'm also not clear what criteria they've used to base this decision on. Vaccination rates in Canada for example are higher than the UK, US, and EU, but as far as I'm aware aren't exempt from quarantine. So clearly not a data driven policy.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 29, 2021, 09:12:55 am
No but the plans announced today are just as clearly poorly planned as any from this government.
I'm also not clear what criteria they've used to base this decision on. Vaccination rates in Canada for example are higher than the UK, US, and EU, but as far as I'm aware aren't exempt from quarantine. So clearly not a data driven policy.

Most probably it’s been based on where Cabinet members, Tory MPs and Tory Donors have booked summer holidays or have holiday homes/friends/relatives.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on July 29, 2021, 09:16:19 am
-compulsory masks are largely irrelevant in an open society as large sectors of it cant function with them eg crowded pubs and nightclubs. If you think these shouldn't be open thats fine (though I disagree) but if you don't then compulsory masks are both unworkable and irrelevant anyway as there is an enormous amount of societal contact. I agree that wearing them on public transport is a good courtesy to keep up but it seems increasingly pointless to me. On the tram in Manc a few days ago I wore one but almost nobody else was. Pissing in the wind was the phrase I thought of!

Think about the issue for vulnerable people, though, who may be fully vaccinated but have reduced protection because they're immunocompromised or very elderly (which itself reduces your immune response to the vaccine).

People who go to a nightclub or a crowded pub are making a choice about whether they want to do an optional activity with potentially high levels of Covid exposure. Okay.

But for a lot of people, they have zero choice about whether they can avoid using public transport or going to the supermarket.

So there's some decent logic for keeping masks compulsory in those situations, even if you've got pubs and clubs open and un-masked.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on July 29, 2021, 10:03:55 am
Yeah I agree, I'm happy to keep wearing them, I was just making the point that if nobody else does it starts to feel a bit pointless. I imagine this stage is particularly worrying for vulnerable people and so I've got no intention of going to the supermarket without a mask currently. Equally, if I happened to forget I probably wouldn't feel that bad either as their use seems to have dropped off a cliff where I am at least.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 29, 2021, 10:08:13 am
Yeah I agree, I'm happy to keep wearing them, I was just making the point that if nobody else does it starts to feel a bit pointless. I imagine this stage is particularly worrying for vulnerable people and so I've got no intention of going to the supermarket without a mask currently. Equally, if I happened to forget I probably wouldn't feel that bad either as their use seems to have dropped off a cliff where I am at least.
As far as I can see, the majority (at a guess 75/80%) of the people I’ve seen in shops or coming into the Bunker, are still wearing masks.
In the Bunker, that’s been much higher. As a matter of fact, only three people have walked in without masks on in the last ten days and all of them produced and donned their masks when they saw that everybody else was wearing one.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on July 29, 2021, 10:10:55 am
I was at a mostly outdoor event at the local cricket club the other day and very obviously the only one at the bar wearing a mask when buying drinks. I’ll keep doing it because it is the very least thing I can do in the middle of a pandemic.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Dac on July 29, 2021, 10:23:40 am
Masks now being optional is definitely an issue for some, a neighbour of mine is continuing to shield as she has a diminished immune response; now she can no longer drive as she is overdue an assessment from an optometrist for an eye condition, which has to be performed at a specified opticians.

However said opticians can no longer assure her that everyone in the practice will be wearing a mask (‘cos they don’t legally have to). So she can no longer drive, and due to the same mask rules can’t use public transport.

Quite why the decision to drop mask rules in shop and the like was made I fail to understand. Everything required was already in place, and in has a measurable impact on transmission. I can only assume that it is a part of the governments ‘COVID is over, now go and spend money’ narrative.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on July 29, 2021, 04:42:01 pm
And to rapidly increase the numbers of young people with antibodies ahead of autumn’s seasonal pressure, perhaps?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on July 29, 2021, 05:41:41 pm

Quite why the decision to drop mask rules in shop and the like was made I fail to understand. Everything required was already in place, and in has a measurable impact on transmission. I can only assume that it is a part of the governments ‘COVID is over, now go and spend money’ narrative.

Because the Conservative backbench fruit loops like Desmond Swaine were getting angry about it, so Boris threw them some meat, although given the sort of thing he used to write he probably agrees with them anyway.

It's an obviously stupid decision.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on July 29, 2021, 05:43:06 pm
And to rapidly increase the numbers of young people with antibodies long COVID ahead of autumn’s seasonal pressure, perhaps?

Edited for you...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: battery on July 29, 2021, 07:17:18 pm

Being a pedant, I have to point out that with AstraZeneca, because the blood clotting issue risk (small as it is) increases as you get younger, then if Covid rates in a society are low enough, there's a crossover point where if you're young enough, the risk from the vaccine is actually higher than the risk of catching Covid and being seriously harmed by it (IIRC, if there are high levels of Covid around, the vaccine's safer at any age).

The risk of blood clots is a lot less than it is for the contraceptive pill and there is a brilliant, no side-effects alternative to the pill (for the vast majority of people that use it to prevent pregnancy although I accept there are some who use it for other things). I can't help but feel that the huge amount of caution that is being taken is because it affects males as well as females.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on July 29, 2021, 09:21:29 pm
The risk of blood clots is a lot less than it is for the contraceptive pill and there is a brilliant, no side-effects alternative to the pill (for the vast majority of people that use it to prevent pregnancy although I accept there are some who use it for other things). I can't help but feel that the huge amount of caution that is being taken is because it affects males as well as females.

The risk is different to the one created by the pill. From what I understand, the risk of having a major clotting event is similar, but the cause is different. That may sound like pedantry, but it creates significant differences. The AZ vaccine generates an auto-immune response that affects platelets, causing them to bunch into clots. The simultaneous effect of having low platelets (preventing a proper clotting response) and having clots as well means that there is no effective treatment - they can't use normal anti-clotting medication. Also, anecdotally, there are "a lot" (whatever that means) of cases of people with non-life threatening AZ related clotting issues that haven't resulted in major clotting events, but they don't appear to getting better as time passes. No-one knows what long terms issues this might cause, or if those people will have a long-term risk of major clotting events. This is from a consultant working alongside a specialist team that are getting "a lot" of referrals. I have no idea what that translates into as a statistical risk and there is likely to be a degree of bias caused by the patients all being concentrated into that clinic. This is also from a month or two ago, so there may be more knowledge now.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on July 29, 2021, 09:30:50 pm
That’s an eye-widening snippet of info Ru.. Do you have any links to anything published?
What are the symptoms for ‘clotting issues’, versus clotting events?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on July 29, 2021, 09:34:03 pm
That’s an eye-widening snippet of info Ru.. Do you have any links to anything published?
What are the symptoms for ‘clotting issues’, versus clotting events?

I'm not aware of anything published yet, it's all a bit vague, but from a decent source. Symptoms of clotting issues can be things like bruising and petechial rash - basically when you bleed through your skin. It's very difficult to know what it means on a population level as the numbers might turn out to be very low percentages. I also don't know if they're reported using the Yellow Card system, but as Yellow Card events can be self reported there's a lot of dross. If you read through all the reported yellow card events, there's stuff in there like getting cosmetic surgery which I'm pretty sure isn't a genuine vaccine reaction.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on July 30, 2021, 07:07:41 am

I'm quite frustrated with people that can't understand Labour mainly disagree with the government on pretty sensible factors like mask compulsion, border controls, funded self isolation for people who won't otherwise be paid, and funding support to improve indoor ventilation ..... all of which might suddenly become very important if we have any new variant with vaccine escape.

I've immediately remembered why I stopped posting about covid...I disagree with almost everything in the above sentence (bar the funded self isolation which is long overdue). In brief:

-compulsory masks are largely irrelevant in an open society as large sectors of it cant function with them eg crowded pubs and nightclubs. If you think these shouldn't be open thats fine (though I disagree) but if you don't then compulsory masks are both unworkable and irrelevant anyway as there is an enormous amount of societal contact. I agree that wearing them on public transport is a good courtesy to keep up but it seems increasingly pointless to me. On the tram in Manc a few days ago I wore one but almost nobody else was. Pissing in the wind was the phrase I thought of!
- border controls cannot remain indefinitely, both for the travel industry/holidays and those who want to see family abroad. At the moment there is no scenario I've yet read about where Labour would be happy for border controls to be lessened. This seems incredibly wrong headed to me.
- indoor ventilation is absolutely something we should be improving, but should be done alongside opening things up. Clearly we can't wait for this enormous amount of building work to be completed before relaxing things of HS2 will be done before it (maybe!). Again, I'm not clear on Labour's timeline for improving ventilation and how it related to relaxing things. They obviously have to happen concurrently. I agree it would have multi faceted benefits though Ali.

Well that may be your view on masks but pretty much all the experts seem to think compulsion should  have remained. Pubs and restaurants always had their R number factored in for this and  people choose to go to them. Many on public transport, in work or other essential indoor visits don't get to chose. Those experts also think nightclubs shouldn't be open yet and should be given continued financial support. Covid risk hasn't all gone away and a workforce catching covid is a massive strain on an organisation, hence,  masks are still compulsory indoors in quite a few workplaces. Part of the reason many people stopped wearing masks in public is because they could: they didnt want to wear them and didn't understand the benefits. It didnt help that much of our government messaging was the opposite to the scientific position.

Labour never said border controls should remain indefinitely but borders have been managed chaotically throughout the pandemic. Well managed borders are important. At the really bad end, one variant with vaccine escape and we are stuffed as we don't have a good enough track and trace system to stop it running wild through the vaccinated population. On a more mundane level a lot of Labour's complaints have been about specific poor planning that bears little resemblance to a data driven approach, the worst example being red yellow and green arrivals queuing together for immigration.

Others dealt with ventilation. Much more could be done pretty quickly in terms of clearer advice and financial support. If things do go wrong we will certainly need it.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on July 30, 2021, 08:24:53 am
The latest US view on masks and delta:

https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/07/cdc-mask-reversal-vaccinated-should-wear-masks-in-many-settings-amid-surge/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on July 30, 2021, 09:15:24 am
[The simultaneous effect of having low platelets (preventing a proper clotting response) and having clots as well means that there is no effective treatment - they can't use normal anti-clotting medication.

I thought the current protocol was non-heparin anticoagulants and intravenous immunoglobulin?

https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n1914
https://www.hematology.org/covid-19/vaccine-induced-immune-thrombotic-thrombocytopenia

Don't know how effective that is, but certainly the fatality rate has been dropping: https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/ema-logs-more-clotting-cases-after-astrazeneca-shot-death-rate-lower-2021-05-28/

I will note that not long after my first jab, I got a severe headache with nausea and vomiting which wasn't a normal migraine for me but which ticked all the boxes in the leaflet you get after AZ about potential warning symptoms, and ended up being advised by NHS 111 to go to A&E a.s.a.p. and get a blood test (which I did -- turned out all was fine). So, not trying to downplay this issue, because that was a somewhat scary way to spend a day.

But the stats still make it clear that (subject to previous caveats re: trade-offs and age cut-offs), AZ is much safer than getting Covid.

And it sucks that AZ has this issue, however rare, because in other respects it seems like a workhorse.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on July 30, 2021, 09:17:30 am
That’s an eye-widening snippet of info Ru.. Do you have any links to anything published?
What are the symptoms for ‘clotting issues’, versus clotting events?

I'm not aware of anything published yet, it's all a bit vague, but from a decent source. Symptoms of clotting issues can be things like bruising and petechial rash - basically when you bleed through your skin. It's very difficult to know what it means on a population level as the numbers might turn out to be very low percentages. I also don't know if they're reported using the Yellow Card system, but as Yellow Card events can be self reported there's a lot of dross. If you read through all the reported yellow card events, there's stuff in there like getting cosmetic surgery which I'm pretty sure isn't a genuine vaccine reaction.

There's this, on a possible small increased risk of ITP (autoimmune bleeding disorder which is different from TTS):

https://www.bmj.com/content/373/bmj.n1489
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on July 30, 2021, 09:29:46 am
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-58020090

Now offering you $100 in the US to get the vaccine. Can't see that getting abused.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on July 30, 2021, 09:54:29 am
Story about AZ potentially giving up on producing vaccines, hopefully it'll give EU bureaucrats and French politicians pride in their work: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2021/07/29/eu-destroyed-astrazenecas-covid-vaccine-dream/?WT.mc_id=e_DM1472445&WT.tsrc=email&etype=Edi_Cit_New_v2&utmsource=email&utm_medium=Edi_Cit_New_v220210730&utm_campaign=DM1472445

TLDR: it's due to voluntarily selling a public good at cost price and then being kicked around as a political football by cunts (warning, usual Telegraph bias applies).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on July 30, 2021, 11:13:06 am
But the stats still make it clear that (subject to previous caveats re: trade-offs and age cut-offs), AZ is much safer than getting Covid.

Yeah, as far as I'm aware, the AZ clotting reaction is the same as/similar to the one you can get from covid, except it's less likely to occur after getting the vaccine than it is after getting covid. So all in all, you're better off getting the vaccine than getting covid even if you're just worried about clotting and not the other raft of possible covid nastiness.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on July 30, 2021, 11:20:50 am
TLDR:

It's not TL, it's paywalled, and I suspect in the Venn diagram of UKB posters vs Telegraph subscribers you are the sole overlap. Paste as a quote?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on July 30, 2021, 11:38:55 am
It also appears on MSN which seems to get round the paywall for me...

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/how-eu-leaders-destroyed-astrazeneca-s-covid-vaccine-dream/ar-AAMIljw?ocid=msedgntp
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Wellsy on July 30, 2021, 11:48:44 am
Basically the whole AZ vaccine was maligned for blood clots, but turns out that Moderna and Pfizer have about the same level of potential clotting issues. Several EU vaccine campaign leaders like Macron and Von Der Leyen slagged off the AZ vaccine because it was politically expedient to do so; facing accusations re. the failure of the campaign to get going while the UK forged ahead, they said it was because the UK was rushing a vaccine into play that was dangerous and untested.

Turns out, that's utter bollocks. It's no more dangerous than other ones, it was properly tested, and logistically/financially it's by far the best vaccine for rapid rollout especially amongst poorer nations. It's also the only one produced at cost. Several EU nations are having massive problems using their stocks because their leaders criticised it and now nobody wants to take it.

Macron has always been a piece of shit, but he's truly outdone himself on the vaccine front. His lies about the AZ vaccine to save his own political hide are astounding. Prick.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on July 30, 2021, 12:44:35 pm
As earlier, AZ was treated like a political football, one minute EU leaders were threatening to sue as AZ were not meeting supply commitments, next minute they were wanting to suspend use saying it as dangerous.

Given Pfizer are set to make $33.5 bn this year from selling vaccines, it's not surprising AZ are pretty hacked off with the whole thing.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on July 30, 2021, 01:04:14 pm
Masks now being optional is definitely an issue for some, a neighbour of mine is continuing to shield as she has a diminished immune response; now she can no longer drive as she is overdue an assessment from an optometrist for an eye condition, which has to be performed at a specified opticians.

However said opticians can no longer assure her that everyone in the practice will be wearing a mask (‘cos they don’t legally have to). So she can no longer drive, and due to the same mask rules can’t use public transport.

Would it be worth her getting an FFP3 (or similar level) mask for the assessment? That could give her decent protection even if other people are unmasked. Might be worth it in order to be able to drive again and not have to use public transport.

Obviously, it's a question of juggling different risks, and it sucks that she's been put in this position.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on July 30, 2021, 02:51:08 pm
[The simultaneous effect of having low platelets (preventing a proper clotting response) and having clots as well means that there is no effective treatment - they can't use normal anti-clotting medication.

I thought the current protocol was non-heparin anticoagulants and intravenous immunoglobulin?

https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n1914
https://www.hematology.org/covid-19/vaccine-induced-immune-thrombotic-thrombocytopenia

Don't know how effective that is, but certainly the fatality rate has been dropping: https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/ema-logs-more-clotting-cases-after-astrazeneca-shot-death-rate-lower-2021-05-28/

I will note that not long after my first jab, I got a severe headache with nausea and vomiting which wasn't a normal migraine for me but which ticked all the boxes in the leaflet you get after AZ about potential warning symptoms, and ended up being advised by NHS 111 to go to A&E a.s.a.p. and get a blood test (which I did -- turned out all was fine). So, not trying to downplay this issue, because that was a somewhat scary way to spend a day.

But the stats still make it clear that (subject to previous caveats re: trade-offs and age cut-offs), AZ is much safer than getting Covid.

And it sucks that AZ has this issue, however rare, because in other respects it seems like a workhorse.

Actually, as a side note, I can mention that NHS 111 and A&E seemed to be super on the ball re: VITT/TTS -- if you pick a headache as your primary symptom on the 111 website, the decision tree asks if you had a Covid vaccine within X number of days (and that led to me getting a callback from a nurse and then a doctor).

And if you go into A&E saying "I had AZ this many days ago and I have these symptoms" they know exactly what to test for.

I was rather impressed and reassured by the whole thing.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on July 30, 2021, 05:43:23 pm
Actually, as a side note, I can mention that NHS 111 and A&E seemed to be super on the ball re: VITT/TTS -- if you pick a headache as your primary symptom on the 111 website, the decision tree asks if you had a Covid vaccine within X number of days (and that led to me getting a callback from a nurse and then a doctor).

And if you go into A&E saying "I had AZ this many days ago and I have these symptoms" they know exactly what to test for.

I was rather impressed and reassured by the whole thing.

Does make you wonder a bit about prevalence, if all you need to get special attention in an overloaded organisation is a headache in proximity to the vaccine. Good that they're on the ball though.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on July 30, 2021, 06:07:44 pm
Eh, you don't get special attention -- at least, I didn't, given that I'd stopped throwing up and the headache was starting to ease by the time I finally got to A&E. So I was correctly triaged to the bottom of the priority list, as it was a question of checking to be on the safe side, and spent many many hours sitting in a plastic chair listening to podcasts before they had time to take some blood out of me.

Also, headache in proximity to vaccine alone won't do it; there's a ticky-box list of criteria you have to meet.

But yeah, they've obviously decided to go for aggressively screening for VITT/TTS.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ru on July 30, 2021, 06:29:07 pm
Sorry, I read your post as meaning that just ticking headache x days after the AZ got you a call back from a nurse then a doctor, checking for possible TTS.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on July 30, 2021, 07:14:32 pm
Oh no, bunch of other criteria too. I wasn't clear; I just meant that "did you have the Covid vaccine within X timeframe?" came up as one of the questions on the website fairly rapidly, presumably on the basis of the symptoms I'd already ticked. And the cumulative picture plus that was enough to trigger a callback.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on July 31, 2021, 08:09:58 am
don't dismiss it straight away!
You've dismissed any engagement following your previous posts, despite claiming to be interested in what UKBers think. 3rd time lucky to actually discuss the matter?? Or maybe that's quite enough for now?? (It is from me).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on July 31, 2021, 08:52:31 am
Hi again! Maybe you missed it, but previously I wrote:

"Welcome back! Glad I didn't manage to scare you off completely, and sorry if I was overly snappish at you before.

You've obviously got some concerns about Covid vaccines, so instead of just posting videos, why not say what it is that you're concerned about, and then people can engage with that?"

Is there a reason why you don't want to express your own views, or even reply to anyone? Try talking to us -- we don't bite (much) ...

Also, an important thing you should know is that Robert Malone isn't the inventor of mRNA vaccines or of using mRNA as a drug.

He authored a few papers in the '90s on DNA/RNA expression vectors; that's it. He had nothing to do with the research that went into creating the current mRNA vaccines and no involvement in it (if anyone was central in putting the building blocks for that in place, it'd be Katalin Kariko and Drew Weissman).

https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1409090438980644868
https://twitter.com/EricTopol/status/1419062510489980930

Calling himself the inventor of mRNA vaccines is what impolite people might call "a flat-out lie".

There's a tonne of misinformation floating around, and it's really easy for people to make bogus or inflated claims about their credentials. Lot of people out there trying to do an Andrew Wakefield and set themselves up as the Heroic Whistleblower Doctors Telling The Truth The Evil Medical Establishment Wants To Suppress. It's a grift.

So some healthy skepticism and fact-checking is a good thing.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 31, 2021, 08:53:20 am
The biggest problem, is that everything EWS posts has already been discussed in detail, earlier in the thread.
Meaning, the answers are all there, EWS isn’t really listening and is still trotting out the same questions over and over, possibly in the hope that the answer might change.
Anyway, useful graphic:

(https://i.ibb.co/XVQsk7f/8-BF43-EC3-6-C06-486-F-BAF4-5-C4290823-C6-E.jpg)


Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on July 31, 2021, 09:19:53 am
There's 173 pages in this godforsaken thread, who on Earth is going to read through that and expect to emerge with their sanity intact?? :blink:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 31, 2021, 09:37:49 am
There's 173 pages in this godforsaken thread, who on Earth is going to read through that and expect to emerge with their sanity intact?? :blink:

Ummm.
I get the impression Slabs would. Then summarise it, link to relevant posts etc and probably enjoy it.
(If she’s not working as an intelligence analyst, for some sneaky-beaky Government agency, this country is missing a trick. Or at least, working for some “Accountant” , “The Saint”  or international jewel thief type character).
And…
That’s exactly what she has done.

Edit:
I mean the summarise and link thing, not the “international jewel thief/government agency” thing, AFAIK.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on July 31, 2021, 10:18:05 am
More high brow than my last two posts so don't dismiss it straight away!

Dr Robert Malone, the inventor of using RNA as a drug.
It's quite long unfortunately but worth the time. Skip the first 23min.
He gives some of the backstory to the development of the RNA technology and talks about the currant vaccines (from 1:08ish).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYkUePQMfkE&t=376s

Let’s pretend he doesn’t call himself ‘the inventor of using RNA as a drug’, as that makes him appear very self-important and self-regarding. And that you didn’t repeat it.

Can you summarise his points and why you think they’re valid (assuming you do).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on July 31, 2021, 10:23:32 am
More high brow than my last two posts so don't dismiss it straight away!

Dr Robert Malone, the inventor of using RNA as a drug.


Some of the concerns Malone raised about vaccines are vaild theories based on problems that have occured in real vaccines. Unfortunately none of the data stacks up with his concerns for Pfizer. Yet Malone still made false claims that it did by misusing data. Science isn't about appeals to authority, it's about verifiable results.

https://www.logically.ai/articles/who-is-dr.-robert-malone

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ged on July 31, 2021, 10:55:44 am
Nice. Is there a comparison graphic for non vaccinated people?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 31, 2021, 11:48:50 am
Nice. Is there a comparison graphic for non vaccinated people?

Not as well presented, as far as I can see.
Unfortunately, you have to go back to an earlier stage in the pandemic, before any vaccinations took place, really and look at the rates /100k general population for a real insight into the difference. That or parse the current death/symptomatic to cases to general population and know the vaccine status of each (or at least make assumptions based on the % vaccinated of your chosen population).

A more revealing stat, is the one(s) mentioned already in the thread; how many/what is the ratio of vaccinated to non-vaccinated patients represented in hospitalisations and deaths.

It is pretty clear, that with a large majority of the population now at least single dosed, the number of hospitalisations and deaths amongst the unvaccinated is disproportionately high.

Edit:

Or, to put it another way, on the 19th July 2021, ~60% of those hospitalised in the UK for COVID, were unvaccinated, whereas only 12.4% of the adult population of the UK remained unvaccinated on that day..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nails on July 31, 2021, 11:58:05 am
Whilst I like the graphic, does it not need a timescale to be meaningful? Effectively it's saying that the risk of symptomatic Covid in the vaccinated is roughly 1 in a 1000. Over what period of time and what is the comaparable risk in the unvaccinated?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 31, 2021, 12:10:23 pm
Whilst I like the graphic, does it not need a timescale to be meaningful? Effectively it's saying that the risk of symptomatic Covid in the vaccinated is roughly 1 in a 1000. Over what period of time and what is the comaparable risk in the unvaccinated?
For the second part, see the above post.
But the time scale is from the start of the vaccination program up to 26th July. It’s a US stat, not UK and the graphic was lifted from an ABC article (one of many) :
 https://abcnews.go.com/US/symptomatic-breakthrough-covid-19-infections-rare-cdc-data/story?id=79048589 (https://abcnews.go.com/US/symptomatic-breakthrough-covid-19-infections-rare-cdc-data/story?id=79048589) iirc. Apologies, I’ve covered a lot of ground this morning and I’m actually at work. If it’s not there, it should be linked through that article. However, I picked it up originally through a Redit post. Along with much discussion on why the “unvaccinated” equivalent is relatively hard to produce (not least, because the “vaccinated” number changes rapidly and the delay between vaccination and effectiveness of that vaccination. There seemed some educated opinion that this is something we will only truly understand once the vaccination program has reached full maturity and held for two weeks or more. However, the hospitalisation and death rates are good indicators of where that will end up).

Edit:
A quick perusal of the ONS release calendar, shows an expected release date of 04/08/21 for the data needed for the above. I guess they think 88/89 % first dose is mature enough.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on July 31, 2021, 01:03:21 pm
There's 173 pages in this godforsaken thread, who on Earth is going to read through that and expect to emerge with their sanity intact?? :blink:

Ummm.
I get the impression Slabs would. Then summarise it, link to relevant posts etc and probably enjoy it.

Awwww, I think that's the nicest thing anyone's ever said to me. *sniffs*

(Can't claim to have my sanity intact, but that was true beforehand ...)

(If she’s not working as an intelligence analyst, for some sneaky-beaky Government agency, this country is missing a trick.

Not my line of work though I'd have to say that, wouldn't I?.

Though (on a tangent) I've always found it hilarious that for over 20 years, GCHQ has apparently had one of the best programmes in the UK for supporting neurodiverse employees. If they recruit people with the abilities they need (especially for high-level cryptography), a ridiculously-high percentage will have autism, ADHD, dyslexia, or other stuff from that cluster, so they've HAD to figure out ways of supporting people like me in the workplace, or they couldn't function.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on July 31, 2021, 01:30:33 pm
News on an ONS survey on mask compliance (data from last week). It will be interesting to see how this changes in the next few weeks.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jul/30/95-of-british-adults-still-wearing-a-mask-outdoors-says-survey

(Note ...Ive just spotted that's a very naughty url ....... the survey wasn't about outdoor mask wearing ).

The actual survey

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/healthandwellbeing/bulletins/coronavirusandthesocialimpactsongreatbritain/30july2021
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: battery on July 31, 2021, 08:46:15 pm
There's 173 pages in this godforsaken thread, who on Earth is going to read through that and expect to emerge with their sanity intact?? :blink:

Ummm.
I get the impression Slabs would. Then summarise it, link to relevant posts etc and probably enjoy it.

Awwww, I think that's the nicest thing anyone's ever said to me. *sniffs*

(Can't claim to have my sanity intact, but that was true beforehand ...)

(If she’s not working as an intelligence analyst, for some sneaky-beaky Government agency, this country is missing a trick.

Not my line of work though I'd have to say that, wouldn't I?.

Though (on a tangent) I've always found it hilarious that for over 20 years, GCHQ has apparently had one of the best programmes in the UK for supporting neurodiverse employees. If they recruit people with the abilities they need (especially for high-level cryptography), a ridiculously-high percentage will have autism, ADHD, dyslexia, or other stuff from that cluster, so they've HAD to figure out ways of supporting people like me in the workplace, or they couldn't function.

Off topic (apologies) but a someone who works with a lot of neurodivergent people I'd love to know more about that... And get the impression you may have the links at your fingertips!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on July 31, 2021, 09:49:47 pm
Nah, but I know how to re-find them -- have some samples:

https://www.gchq.gov.uk/information/daring-to-think-differently-and-be-different
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51014028
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/apr/29/people-with-dyslexia-have-skills-that-we-need-says-gchq
https://www.newstatesman.com/spotlight/cyber/2018/10/autism-asset-uk-cyber-security
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/neurodiversity-holds-the-key-to-keeping-britain-safe-tbltlt25m -- paywalled but looks promising
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on July 31, 2021, 11:05:14 pm
On the subject of neurodiversity, I thought this book was brilliant:
https://www.waterstones.com/book/a-kind-of-spark/elle-mcnicoll/9781913311223
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on August 01, 2021, 09:16:17 am
Interesting that having gone on about our amazing vaccine rollout for ages, we're now dropping behind:

https://inews.co.uk/news/world/spain-covid-vaccine-uk-roll-out-overtake-vaccination-approach-explained-1127933

If I remember correctly,  Germany is also nearly there.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on August 01, 2021, 10:36:15 am
Interesting that having gone on about our amazing vaccine rollout for ages, we're now dropping behind:

https://inews.co.uk/news/world/spain-covid-vaccine-uk-roll-out-overtake-vaccination-approach-explained-1127933

If I remember correctly,  Germany is also nearly there.

Denmark is significantly closer. 4% more of pop with at least one shot and within one percentage point for fully vaccinated - with about another 1% becoming fully vaccinated every day it will only take a day or two.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on August 14, 2021, 10:55:27 am
Turns out that in private, the HART Group (Mike Yeadon's rebranded campaign) are the kind of lovely people who like to fantasize about nurses "ending up hanging on the end of a noose" for giving vaccines:

https://twitter.com/_johnbye/status/1421397442642259978
https://twitter.com/KatyMcconkey/status/1425920688767094792

Yeadon thinks people on SAGE who propose vaccinating children "need shooting":

https://twitter.com/_johnbye/status/1421397302468567040

Naturally, they're full Wakefield re: autism:

https://twitter.com/_johnbye/status/1424060701488959495

They share videos made by folks from "America's Frontline Doctors" (yes, the "demon sperm" crowd) and Operation Rescue (the anti-abortion terrorist group, who've decided they're also against Covid vaccines, very "pro-life):

https://twitter.com/_johnbye/status/1424060766198632451
https://twitter.com/_johnbye/status/1424060837514420226

They discuss how to "seed" misinformation about vaccines causing Covid:

https://twitter.com/stuartjdneil/status/1425719801213816833

And after research shows that people wear masks because they want to be be fair to others and prevent harm, they talk about ... how to change that:

https://twitter.com/KatyMcconkey/status/1425946512643792896

I have sympathy for people who are vaccine-hesitant because they're trying to sort through conflicting information and work out what to trust. I am happy to go full research-nerd for anyone who's got questions and actually wants answers!

But everyone should know that behind the public mask of respectability and professionalism that Yeadon and co. try to maintain, they are the most poisonous of cranks and grifters, and they're responsible for shit like this:

https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/i-am-worried-staff-badly-21273817
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on August 14, 2021, 11:09:28 am
Christ ...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: kelvin on August 14, 2021, 07:43:22 pm
Christ ...

Icke or Trump?

So let me get this right - the vaccine alters your DNA but it's also fixable by eating a pineapple, which I'm assuming alters your DNA back?

Power to the pineapple!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: lagerstarfish on August 14, 2021, 08:45:30 pm
Christ ...

Icke or Trump?


we had an interesting day last year when Gareth Icke came to Sheffield

  :slap:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on August 15, 2021, 10:10:26 am
Christ ...

Icke or Trump?

So let me get this right - the vaccine alters your DNA but it's also fixable by eating a pineapple, which I'm assuming alters your DNA back?

Power to the pineapple!

Wait, I think I missed the pineapple -- when did that come in?

I'm only familiar with pine needle tea, which is being marketed as a way for unvaccinated people to protect themselves against the evil spike proteins "shedding" from vaccinated people ...

(N.B. None of this is true. Virus "shedding" can only occur with live attenuated vaccines, such as the oral polio vaccine. It is physically impossible for the Covid vaccines to "shed" anything. This is all completely fucking imaginary. Also if you're afraid of spike proteins, the best way of avoiding them is getting vaccinated, because the number temporarily produced in response to the vaccine is miniscule compared to the deluge produced by getting actual Covid.)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on August 15, 2021, 10:53:30 am
On the subject of completely fucking imaginary, there's some top bantz on one of the sites mentioned in those tweets...

https://www.notonthebeeb.co.uk/post/dr-t-on-genocide

Quote
I am sharing the following hypothesis urgently of how the Covid-19 experimental injections may be harming and killing in the hope that it may be able to help in some way to help stop this attempted mass genocide. I do not believe this is an accident and I will explain why

My hypothesis is that the experimental mRNA Covid-19 injections contain a magnetised nano particle attached to the mRNA which crosses the blood-brain barrier and is then attracted to the brain, particularly mid-line structures. I further hypothesise that two things aid this passage of the magnetised mRNA to the brain: local temperature effects from EMF radiation and from an artificial network such as from hydrogel.

Experimental injections! Mass genocide!! Magnetised nano particles!!! EMF radiation!!!!  :lol: :lol: :lol:


Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on August 15, 2021, 11:33:14 am
All so obvious in hindsight, how could we have been so stupid.  :slap:
This is really going to fuck up the MRI industry.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on August 15, 2021, 12:26:29 pm
Collecting the cream of the crop:

https://twitter.com/BadVaccineTakes
https://twitter.com/BadCOVID19Takes

(Because sometimes it's necessary to laugh so I don't implode with fury, because this shit is literally killing people.)

Re: the magnetism thing, I enjoy this piece, which is both funny and a fine bit of science education:

https://jamesheathers.medium.com/why-your-vaccinated-arm-isnt-magnetic-you-big-silly-goose-87d2a552d650
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on August 15, 2021, 12:47:24 pm
All so obvious in hindsight, how could we have been so stupid.  :slap:
This is really going to fuck up the MRI industry.

I have seen various MRI technicians and patients on Twitter pointing out that if vaccines made people magnetic, they'd know by now, because it would be MESSY.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: kelvin on August 15, 2021, 01:32:07 pm
Christ ...

Icke or Trump?

So let me get this right - the vaccine alters your DNA but it's also fixable by eating a pineapple, which I'm assuming alters your DNA back?

Power to the pineapple!

Wait, I think I missed the pineapple -- when did that come in?

I'm only familiar with pine needle tea, which is being marketed as a way for unvaccinated people to protect themselves against the evil spike proteins "shedding" from vaccinated people ...

(N.B. None of this is true. Virus "shedding" can only occur with live attenuated vaccines, such as the oral polio vaccine. It is physically impossible for the Covid vaccines to "shed" anything. This is all completely fucking imaginary. Also if you're afraid of spike proteins, the best way of avoiding them is getting vaccinated, because the number temporarily produced in response to the vaccine is miniscule compared to the deluge produced by getting actual Covid.)

Third link down in your post for the pineapple poster!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on August 15, 2021, 02:06:15 pm
Ah, found it -- it was some way down in the thread. Maybe my brain had shorted out after the coconut oil & Luciferian New World Order combo and that's why I forgot the pineapple ...

https://twitter.com/_johnbye/status/1424060886956843016
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on August 20, 2021, 11:14:42 am
https://www.private-eye.co.uk/books/dr-hammonds-covid-casebook

Philip Hammond's new covid book based on his Private Eye columns. A great mix of good science, exposure of bad government decisions and mixed in with a strong dollop of compassion.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dunnyg on August 20, 2021, 11:51:46 am
Interestingly I believe that in the gulags pine needles were used to creat vitamin supplements, and were the easiest form of work for the weakest prisoners. The pine needle supplements were later found to be pretty useless.
 :offtopic:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nails on August 23, 2021, 10:55:18 am
This graph from the ONS site gives some perspective on current Covid deaths.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/monthlymortalityanalysisenglandandwales/july2021 (https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/monthlymortalityanalysisenglandandwales/july2021)

(https://www.fastascent.co.uk/fa/ons.PNG)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on August 23, 2021, 10:17:37 pm
Protesters against lockdown heckling journalists: https://inews.co.uk/news/anti-vax-protest-london-itn-studios-jon-snow-channel-4-presenter-1163510

They are so crashingly stupid,  they haven't realised that lockdown finished some time ago,  and Jon Snow has absolutely nothing to do with decisions on vaccination.  I have no compassion for density of this magnitude. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: kelvin on August 24, 2021, 10:16:59 am
As someone said in the comments, they're like zombies in a shopping mall.

https://twitter.com/Marsh4LL1/status/1429107423462187016?t=7vZehv6H_QKUtoO1-wZjLA&s=19

A few of them 'invaded' a covid vaccine centre. They're definitely getting braver, daring each other to be more rebellious - my partner's sister is right down the rabbit hole, we had a three hour argument/discussion on Friday and at one point she declared "if I could get to any of them, it wouldn't be Boris I'd stab, it'd be Blair, he's the worst of them".

She's almost 50, has led a privileged life and then 6 months ago she 'woke' to the fact the government are tossers.

The family despairs, she preaches at everyone.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Durbs on August 24, 2021, 12:35:59 pm
Some anecdotal evidence for someone...

My family of 4 (two kids 6 & 3), Father in Law, Sister in Law and her son (13) and daughter (31) had 1 week holiday together.
All adults double-jabbed, mix of Pfizer and AZ.

31YO had to test before returning to work, came back positive. We all then tested and everyone except myself (AZ) and S-i-L (also AZ) negative. The other adults (Pfizer) all positive and consequently symptomatic, our youngest did too.
PCR tests confirm all of these except our daughter is now clear.

So of our sample group, the AZ vaccine worked, the Pfizer didn't prevent infection. I was the most recently jab'd (3 weeks ago), the others were quite early as all NHS frontline or over 75.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on August 24, 2021, 01:22:54 pm
They're definitely getting braver, daring each other to be more rebellious

Also, escalating levels of violent rhetoric:

https://respectfulinsolence.com/2021/08/20/the-violent-rhetoric-of-the-antivaccine-movement-antimask-covid-19-update/

They are absolutely going to get people killed (er, directly, not just by getting people to refuse/delay vaccination).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on August 24, 2021, 10:57:57 pm
They're definitely getting braver, daring each other to be more rebellious

Also, escalating levels of violent rhetoric:

https://respectfulinsolence.com/2021/08/20/the-violent-rhetoric-of-the-antivaccine-movement-antimask-covid-19-update/

They are absolutely going to get people killed (er, directly, not just by getting people to refuse/delay vaccination).

I think it's a symptom of something which seems to be seeding in Western democracies of people needing something to protest against, perhaps best exemplified by the Qanon bullshit.  Qanon has absolutely nothing to do with reality,  total fantasy rubbish but lots of people apparently think it's worth protesting violently about. 

Anti vaxxer / lockdown protesters are no better, the ideas they propound don't withstand 5 seconds of logical thought. They've all been to a school of some sort and can't really all have been lobotomised,  there must be a sort of group suspension of disbelief which allows them to indulge in this crap.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 24, 2021, 11:17:17 pm
They're definitely getting braver, daring each other to be more rebellious

Also, escalating levels of violent rhetoric:

https://respectfulinsolence.com/2021/08/20/the-violent-rhetoric-of-the-antivaccine-movement-antimask-covid-19-update/

They are absolutely going to get people killed (er, directly, not just by getting people to refuse/delay vaccination).

I think it's a symptom of something which seems to be seeding in Western democracies of people needing something to protest against, perhaps best exemplified by the Qanon bullshit.  Qanon has absolutely nothing to do with reality,  total fantasy rubbish but lots of people apparently think it's worth protesting violently about. 

Anti vaxxer / lockdown protesters are no better, the ideas they propound don't withstand 5 seconds of logical thought. They've all been to a school of some sort and can't really all have been lobotomised,  there must be a sort of group suspension of disbelief which allows them to indulge in this crap.

SOS.

Same Old Shit, different day.

The same people, or at least different people, who are virtually indistinguishable from these people, except by virtue of passing fashion and styling; have been with us since at least the start of the industrial age.

Look at some of Victor Hugo’s characters. Dilettantes looking for a cause and willing to hold incredible degrees of cognitive dissonance in support of their chosen crusade.

You’ll find them following pop stars and celebrities too, Football teams and Incel forums all draw them in.

A cynic might note that about half the population are, necessarily, below average intelligence; however you measure it…
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dunnyg on August 25, 2021, 08:46:21 am
Quote
     A cynic might note that about half the population are, necessarily, below average intelligence; however you measure it…   

Depends what you mean by average, and assumes everyone doesnt have identical intelligence :sorry:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: erm, sam on August 25, 2021, 09:08:28 am
had a quick chat with somebody in Taiwan this morning and they said things were going well, they had no local case for 3 weeks and people are still wearing masks in public. vs stockport's estimaged 2000 current cases (Zoe App) and mask wearers rapidly becoming the minority.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 25, 2021, 09:20:58 am
Quote
     A cynic might note that about half the population are, necessarily, below average intelligence; however you measure it…   

Depends what you mean by average, and assumes everyone doesnt have identical intelligence :sorry:

People are all quiet different, I think. I’m afraid I’m really very cynical on this subject. It’s not about me thinking that half the population are thick, it’s more about many years of watching people who might excel in a particular field, assuming that they have some enhanced abilities and insight into every other field of human knowledge.  You know, the “I can sing good, so I is as good as any Doctor, innit” at base, right through to “I have multiple higher degrees in Eastern Siberian literature of the early 12th century, therefore I am confident in my ability as an Epidemiologist” at the other end.
Yes, I’m aware of my own shortcomings in that department; it seems to be a basic human trait. However, unless feeling particularly cantankerous (which is more frequent than I care to admit, generally) I am reasonably aware of my own bullshit. Many people seem blissfully unaware.
There must be some underlying, evolutionary, advantage to being able to convince yourself that you’re better off/at less risk p/better prepared/stronger than you really are…
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on August 25, 2021, 01:37:41 pm
SOS.

Same Old Shit, different day.

The same people, or at least different people, who are virtually indistinguishable from these people, except by virtue of passing fashion and styling; have been with us since at least the start of the industrial age.

Pre-internet though, they might be the harmless crazy bloke who wrote endless letters to the local newspaper, or they might once in a while realise they were the only person in their circle with such special views and think perhaps it's me that's out of step. Or they'd be safely in their mum's basement with a CB radio... Whereas now they get reinforcement and affirmation by connecting with other special people and the confidence that they are right to foist their nonsense on the rest of the world. And easily influenced people who never would have encountered their ideas are a casual google away from getting sucked down a rabbit hole... Social media has a lot to answer for.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on August 25, 2021, 01:52:03 pm
I've said before Confirmation Bias + Dunning Kruger is a lethal combination.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: kelvin on August 25, 2021, 02:03:02 pm
I've said before Confirmation Bias + Dunning Kruger is a lethal combination.

Exactly that.

Confirmation bias? Cognitive dissonance? Motivated learning? All present and correct.

For me the latter one is the biggest issue. When you're searching to find things wrong, then it's really easy to miss the context. It's no wonder psychologists sometimes call it the evil triplet.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on August 25, 2021, 05:43:59 pm
This graph from the ONS site gives some perspective on current Covid deaths.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/monthlymortalityanalysisenglandandwales/july2021 (https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/monthlymortalityanalysisenglandandwales/july2021)

(https://www.fastascent.co.uk/fa/ons.PNG)

Thanks, as you say this provides useful info to put the risks of covid in perspective.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on August 25, 2021, 11:04:13 pm

People are all quiet different, I think. I’m afraid I’m really very cynical on this subject. It’s not about me thinking that half the population are thick, it’s more about many years of watching people who might excel in a particular field, assuming that they have some enhanced abilities and insight into every other field of human knowledge. 

On observation,  I'd say that more than 50% of the population are f ing stupid.  (If I was being inflammatory I'd flippantly say 52% but I won't). I'm constantly amazed when I'm out road cycling at the number of drivers who don't wear seatbelts,  hold a phone in their hand while driving, throw rubbish out of the window, are clearly not looking at where they're going etc etc. Not to mention people walking into a road while looking intently at their phones; its bloody amazing how few road accidents there are. 

Or, specifically covid related, wear masks but completely wrongly.  I mean,  even if you haven't been told, how hard is it to figure out that you need to cover your mouth and nose? Wandering around the supermarket with a blue paper beard cover helps noone. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on August 28, 2021, 03:44:23 pm
Local news for local people: Denmark announced yesterday that it will shortly lift the final remaining internal restrictions (though, in reality, there have been very few for a long time now). The pandemic has been declared not over but not currently a "critical threat" to society (this is technical term that triggers certain government powers, I believe). Over 80% of the population aged 12 and over are fully vaccinated. We'll see how it goes, and I guess others will be watching. A colleague I shared a relatively small meeting room with on Tuesday tested positive on Friday - the closest I've knowingly come to an infected person. I feel I can at least trust the government to reverse course if necessary.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 29, 2021, 12:05:30 am
Well, it found us.

Youngest (12) developed a fever last night. She’d done a lateral flow earlier in the day (neg), but it didn’t go and didn’t feel right, despite no other symptoms. So late last night we booked a test slot for this morning.
I really thought we were being way too cautious as we’ve been very careful etc.
Results just came back positive.
She feels shit, but only a fever.
Meanwhile my Aunt (78) was taken into hospital this evening with Covid and chest pains, plus a dodgy ECG. Devon is not a great place to be right now…

Now wondering if the vertigo I’ve had the last few days is, perhaps, not down to a dodgy free dive I did earlier in the week, after all.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on August 29, 2021, 07:39:57 am
Well, it found us.

Youngest (12) developed a fever last night. She’d done a lateral flow earlier in the day (neg), but it didn’t go and didn’t feel right, despite no other symptoms. So late last night we booked a test slot for this morning.
I really thought we were being way too cautious as we’ve been very careful etc.
Results just came back positive.
She feels shit, but only a fever.
Meanwhile my Aunt (78) was taken into hospital this evening with Covid and chest pains, plus a dodgy ECG. Devon is not a great place to be right now…

Now wondering if the vertigo I’ve had the last few days is, perhaps, not down to a dodgy free dive I did earlier in the week, after all.

Sorry to hear that Matt, I hope you're all ok. My parents got pinged the other day too, don't think I'll be going down there soon now.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on August 29, 2021, 07:49:00 am
Well, it found us.

I definitely feel a sense of inevitability at this point.

Much more importantly, hoping for swift recoveries for all of you
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 29, 2021, 08:58:36 am
The worst part is, that after being very, very careful for so long, she developed the fever on Friday evening.
It was No.1’s 16th birthday. So we’d allowed her to bring one friend over. No.2’s girlfriend pretty much lives with us, now, so she was here. Then, unexpectedly, we had our 15 year old niece, in need of a place to stay, turn up. The add an extra twist, my parents popped in for cake and to give their granddaughter her presents etc.
This all felt really low key and low risk, until running through the whole thing with Test and Trace at 07:30 this morning…🤦🏻‍♂️

No1 is grinding her teeth audibly, because she was due to get her first vacc on Thursday.

Five of us off for a test in an hour.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on August 29, 2021, 09:33:49 am
Fuck, sorry to hear it. May it be as mild as possible.

You got a pulse oximeter? Best way of keeping an eye on oxygen saturation levels at home -- Covid is known for "happy hypoxia", where people's oxygen levels tank without them showing signs of respiratory distress.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 29, 2021, 09:53:47 am
Fuck, sorry to hear it. May it be as mild as possible.

You got a pulse oximeter? Best way of keeping an eye on oxygen saturation levels at home -- Covid is known for "happy hypoxia", where people's oxygen levels tank without them showing signs of respiratory distress.

Yes, actually. Both Polly and I have some training (I’m a Ship’s medical officer  and exped medic) so we have everything short of a Defib (too expensive).
Honestly, we’re pretty pissed off that we let this happen. Pretty sure is boils down to Polly and Lily joining a local pool, to get back into swimming a couple of weeks back, but it could be anything.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on August 29, 2021, 12:11:13 pm
Honestly, we’re pretty pissed off that we let this happen.

I don't think you should be beating yourselves up - even the most monastic of lives wouldn't guarantee complete safety.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 30, 2021, 08:46:39 am
So, the results are in and it’s 4:2 to the negatives.

No.4 was already quite poorly, but No.2 started to get a fever around 8 last night and is pretty crook this morning (so muggins was up at the newsagents at stupid o’clock to explain why he wasn’t there for his paper round). They’re both positive, results came through around 11 last night (same time the night before for No.4).

It feels a little odd that that the split has fallen this way. 2&4 are Polly’s children and 1&3 mine. Polly and I are both double vaccinated so, it’s good to find out that despite literal physical contact and close living, we’re both negative.
I guess my vertigo really is “leaving it too long to clear my ears at 10 mtrs” related and a coincidence? On the other hand, Polly’s really quite ill this morning despite her result, so…?

Fuck knows, basically.

There really isn’t any obvious distinction, nothing that 2&4 did, that the rest didn’t etc. We’re a pretty “huggy” family, eat together, travel in the same van, crash on the same sofa and so on.

Edit:

There are actually two obvious distinctions, I guess I was trying to gloss over.
Vaccination and genetic lineage. 🤷‍♂️
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Liamhutch89 on August 30, 2021, 11:02:23 am
Currently suffering with covid, but it's not too bad at the moment.

Symptoms began on Saturday evening with some minor aches that felt different to usual training related muscle aches, and some minor chills. Went to bed early and slept well.

Woke up with a very runny nose and still some aches and pains but nothing too bad. Paracetamol in the morning took the aches away and they never returned once it wore off.

Extremely snotty and blocked nose all through the night. Woke up today with slightly blocked ears and a bit of a tickly chest when taking an exaggerated deep breath.

No lethargy or fever. Well, my temperature has risen to 36.5 from my usual 35.5, which I know is quite ridiculous  :shrug:

Hopefully it remains mild and I can continue training this week or I might go crazy!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on August 30, 2021, 01:02:08 pm
Sucks guys, ride it out.

Did you get a positive test Liam? Any idea where you picked it up?

I went out to meet some old work colleagues on Friday night (second time out anywhere since first lockdown) and woke with a sore throat, which got worse over the weekend. Did a RAT this morning and it shows negative, but WFH as a precaution. Will test again tomorrow, but feels like classic strep throat, which i get a lot in ordinary times (once or twice a year).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 30, 2021, 01:04:36 pm
Sucks guys, ride it out.

Did you get a positive test Liam? Any idea where you picked it up?

I went out to meet some old work colleagues on Friday night (second time out anywhere since first lockdown) and woke with a sore throat, which got worse over the weekend. Did a RAT this morning and it shows negative, but WFH as a precaution. Will test again tomorrow, but feels like classic strep throat, which i get a lot in ordinary times (once or twice a year).

No.4 did a Lat flow around 6pm on Friday night, got a negative, and then had a positive PCR at 9am Saturday morning. She started to feel ill around 4 pm Friday.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Liamhutch89 on August 30, 2021, 01:24:47 pm
Sucks guys, ride it out.

Did you get a positive test Liam? Any idea where you picked it up?

I went out to meet some old work colleagues on Friday night (second time out anywhere since first lockdown) and woke with a sore throat, which got worse over the weekend. Did a RAT this morning and it shows negative, but WFH as a precaution. Will test again tomorrow, but feels like classic strep throat, which i get a lot in ordinary times (once or twice a year).

I did two lateral flow tests. The first showed a very faint positive, but I probably didn't try hard enough getting mucus on the stick. On the 2nd try a couple hours later I made myself gag and tickled my brain good and proper. A clear positive that one.

Weve had a holiday at home over the last week, visiting theme parks, zoos, farms, etc with the kids every day, so I was probably asking for it to be fair.

My temperature is now up by 2 degrees and I feel fooking freezing, but otherwise OK and most importantly can still do a one armer.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on August 30, 2021, 02:00:29 pm
Not good. I did a proper make myself gag and no mark at al, will do another before.

I'll check one armers too, if I can do one something must be amiss, could never do one before.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on August 30, 2021, 04:34:50 pm
Sucks guys, ride it out.

Did you get a positive test Liam? Any idea where you picked it up?

I went out to meet some old work colleagues on Friday night (second time out anywhere since first lockdown) and woke with a sore throat, which got worse over the weekend. Did a RAT this morning and it shows negative, but WFH as a precaution. Will test again tomorrow, but feels like classic strep throat, which i get a lot in ordinary times (once or twice a year).

I did two lateral flow tests. The first showed a very faint positive, but I probably didn't try hard enough getting mucus on the stick. On the 2nd try a couple hours later I made myself gag and tickled my brain good and proper. A clear positive that one.

Weve had a holiday at home over the last week, visiting theme parks, zoos, farms, etc with the kids every day, so I was probably asking for it to be fair.

My temperature is now up by 2 degrees and I feel fooking freezing, but otherwise OK and most importantly can still do a one armer.

You're better off resting until it's gone. Anecdotally, I think you're more likely to get long Covid by trying to do too much through the symptoms.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nik at work on August 30, 2021, 05:11:31 pm
Not sure if I might be mis-reading or misunderstanding some of the previous posts but…
If you are symptomatic a LFT is not an appropriate test to rule out Covid. If you have symptoms get a PCR and await the results.
LFT’s are not great tests, but they are relatively easy and quick. So they make sense as a way of catching a proportion of asymptomatic carriers that will have a reasonable level of compliance and and degree of effectiveness. But the are not the test to use if you are symptomatic.

Will did you just throw down some anecdotal science?? Bold move…
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on August 30, 2021, 05:20:52 pm
Sucks guys, ride it out.

Did you get a positive test Liam? Any idea where you picked it up?

I went out to meet some old work colleagues on Friday night (second time out anywhere since first lockdown) and woke with a sore throat, which got worse over the weekend. Did a RAT this morning and it shows negative, but WFH as a precaution. Will test again tomorrow, but feels like classic strep throat, which i get a lot in ordinary times (once or twice a year).

I did two lateral flow tests. The first showed a very faint positive, but I probably didn't try hard enough getting mucus on the stick. On the 2nd try a couple hours later I made myself gag and tickled my brain good and proper. A clear positive that one.

Weve had a holiday at home over the last week, visiting theme parks, zoos, farms, etc with the kids every day, so I was probably asking for it to be fair.

My temperature is now up by 2 degrees and I feel fooking freezing, but otherwise OK and most importantly can still do a one armer.

You're better off resting until it's gone. Anecdotally, I think you're more likely to get long Covid by trying to do too much through the symptoms.

I believe that's been a known thing for ages with ME/chronic fatigue syndrome (which is probably closely related to long Covid) -- a lot of people describe getting an ordinary virus (e.g. flu), rushing to get back to doing stuff after it, getting very fatigued and then finding the fatigue never goes away.

Obviously not possible to predict whether they would have developed ME/CFS no matter what they did, but I'd err on the side of taking it easy.

Also: this is a nasty fucking virus and Delta is one of the nastiest variants we've seen so far. Let your body save its energy for fighting it off. You want it to stay mild and go away soon!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 30, 2021, 05:36:58 pm
Not sure if I might be mis-reading or misunderstanding some of the previous posts but…
If you are symptomatic a LFT is not an appropriate test to rule out Covid. If you have symptoms get a PCR and await the results.
LFT’s are not great tests, but they are relatively easy and quick. So they make sense as a way of catching a proportion of asymptomatic carriers that will have a reasonable level of compliance and and degree of effectiveness. But the are not the test to use if you are symptomatic.

Will did you just throw down some anecdotal science?? Bold move…

Yup. Our guys have kept up the twice weekly testing over the summer (ish). However, no LFT positives. So, I don’t have much faith in their usefulness.
I do wonder how small that proportion might actually be.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Liamhutch89 on August 30, 2021, 05:39:09 pm
Thanks for the advice. In lieu of proper evidence I'll take the anecdotes, be cautious and relax during this time. I'll call it a deload to make myself feel better about it  :yes:

My temperature rose to 38.6 degrees, 3 above my usually frosty 35.5 before grabbing the paracetamol. It seems to have plateaud but I feel a bit spaced out!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on August 30, 2021, 06:33:12 pm
Not sure if I might be mis-reading or misunderstanding some of the previous posts but…
If you are symptomatic a LFT is not an appropriate test to rule out Covid. If you have symptoms get a PCR and await the results.
LFT’s are not great tests, but they are relatively easy and quick. So they make sense as a way of catching a proportion of asymptomatic carriers that will have a reasonable level of compliance and and degree of effectiveness. But the are not the test to use if you are symptomatic.

You're right, but I haven't got any of what you would call COVID symptoms, just a sore throat, same as what I've had every year  about this time for as long as I can remember (except last year.....). I only did the LFT as a precautionary measure as we had some handy from kids' school.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: nik at work on August 30, 2021, 06:53:56 pm
Fair enough, misunderstood on my part, sorry  :)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: webbo on August 30, 2021, 06:59:55 pm
I may be out of touch with current services but chronic fatigue syndrome treatment was under mental health services in the trust I worked for as it was seen to have a major Psychological base.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on August 30, 2021, 08:16:27 pm
And that is the problem Webbo, exactly.

 https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/aug/30/withdrawal-planned-guidance-me-leaves-patients-distraught

There is a startling lack of therapeutic progress since the Royal Free, nearly 70 years ago. https://me-pedia.org/wiki/1955_Royal_Free_Hospital_outbreak
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 30, 2021, 08:27:12 pm
Aaaaand…

No.3 just threw a positive on his Monday LFT.

I’m moving out to a tent in the garden.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: webbo on August 30, 2021, 08:40:18 pm
And that is the problem Webbo, exactly.

 https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/aug/30/withdrawal-planned-guidance-me-leaves-patients-distraught

There is a startling lack of therapeutic progress since the Royal Free, nearly 70 years ago. https://me-pedia.org/wiki/1955_Royal_Free_Hospital_outbreak
My experience of co working with a few patients in conjunction with chronic fatigue service and working with the Team leader from the CF service in another role. Is that you get referred for CF when all your medical tests come back negative because there is no medical test for it.
You can test for Covid so to me there is no connection.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on August 30, 2021, 08:45:26 pm
Does absence of definitive aetiology prove absence of physical illness?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: webbo on August 30, 2021, 08:53:41 pm
That depends on how much you have invested in being ill. :worms:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on August 30, 2021, 08:59:08 pm
The reason I puntered you is for the arrogance behind that remark.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: webbo on August 30, 2021, 09:09:33 pm
 :ang:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 30, 2021, 09:47:20 pm
That depends on how much you have invested in being ill. :worms:

Dude, are you saying that everybody with ME, is imagining it, because you met some people who were?
As in, because some people have symptoms as a result of psychological/psychosomatic conditions, all people with similar symptoms must have (only) a psychological/psychosomatic condition?
Obviously, from my clumsy terminology, I’m no expert, but that seems like a bogus claim. A bit like those old diagnoses of “Hysteria” you read about.

I guess there’s research supporting that position though?

Edit:

I nearly rewrote that completely, because it’s way more confrontational in tone than I actually intended, for personal reasons.
But better to qualify, I think.
I mean, I thought this was an established condition, with a substantial number of recognised sufferers. Surely they can’t all just be “ invested” in being ill.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on August 30, 2021, 10:18:45 pm
Matt especially might be interested in this opinion piece:

https://inews.co.uk/opinion/boris-johnson-cheek-devon-cornwall-encouraging-covid-spread-1173952

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on August 31, 2021, 07:55:14 am
And that is the problem Webbo, exactly.

 https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/aug/30/withdrawal-planned-guidance-me-leaves-patients-distraught

There is a startling lack of therapeutic progress since the Royal Free, nearly 70 years ago. https://me-pedia.org/wiki/1955_Royal_Free_Hospital_outbreak
My experience of co working with a few patients in conjunction with chronic fatigue service and working with the Team leader from the CF service in another role. Is that you get referred for CF when all your medical tests come back negative because there is no medical test for it.
You can test for Covid so to me there is no connection.

But patients with long Covid don't have Covid anymore. They've merely had Covid in the past. There's no medical test that determines whether you have long Covid, just a loose list of symptoms (as is the case with a bunch of other medically-recognized syndromes).

So -- there must have been an outbreak of previously mentally-healthy people suddenly becoming very invested in being ill, which happens by amazing coincidence to have coincided with a pandemic virus, I guess?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on August 31, 2021, 07:55:58 am
Does absence of definitive aetiology prove absence of physical illness?

Look, if you're going to upset the doctors by having something they can't easily diagnose, you deserve all you get.

(Sarcasm, obviously.)

As a teenager with undiagnosed autism in the '80s (back when they thought  "autistic kids can't talk"), I got sent to a therapist who spent many sessions trying to convince me that I only thought I was weird and had trouble making friends and understanding other kids because I was so depressed (oh, and sexually repressed, that was in there too for some reason).

I mean, I was also very depressed, but turns out, none of that was causing my social problems. And all the sessions being told it was all in my head ... did not do me any favours.

Psychosomatic disorders are a real thing! But "We can't identify what you've got so it must be all in your head" is something of a recurrent medical failure mode.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: webbo on August 31, 2021, 09:30:43 am
Apologies to anyone I offended. I shouldn’t have posted half way through a bottle of wine.
 What I was trying to say is that sometimes someone’s illness is part of a bigger picture. It is not the illness it’s self but how does it effect the person and everyone in there network.
It can foster dependence in not only the ill person but also their carers. So if someone recovers from their illness suddenly all relationships have changed. This may not have a positive outcome for those relationships. So for some people getting better may be perceived as a negative outcome as they may fear that as no one needs care for them no one will be around anymore.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Durbs on August 31, 2021, 09:36:11 am
Some anecdotal evidence for someone...

My family of 4 (two kids 6 & 3), Father in Law, Sister in Law and her son (13) and daughter (31) had 1 week holiday together.
All adults double-jabbed, mix of Pfizer and AZ.

31YO had to test before returning to work, came back positive. We all then tested and everyone except myself (AZ) and S-i-L (also AZ) negative. The other adults (Pfizer) all positive and consequently symptomatic, our youngest did too.
PCR tests confirm all of these except our daughter is now clear.

So of our sample group, the AZ vaccine worked, the Pfizer didn't prevent infection. I was the most recently jab'd (3 weeks ago), the others were quite early as all NHS frontline or over 75.

Update: I got COVID too, a few days later. Felt a bit sniffly, not much, and had a band practise booked that evening for a gig on Saturday, so thought it'd be best to check. LFT'd and very faint positive, so re-took and clear result. Not that surprising given I'd spent so much time with a load of infected, including a 5 hour drive back in a car with 4 other positives.

Friday, felt like a bad cold, Saturday felt utterly awful - aches, lethargy, couldn't stay awake, Sunday aches and cold, Monday post-cold vibes. I have lost sense of smell and taste (which is much more annoying than I'd imagined).

Everyone else has already recovered - kid are our of self-iso, wife's out tomorrow, I'm 4 days behind them.

So of our group of 8; 5 double-vax'd adults and 3x under 14's - all but one adult, and one child caught it. The ones who didn't catch it had Covid at Christmas, supporting the theory that immunity from contracting the disease is stronger than the vaccination, but equally the vaccination made everyone's illness much more manageable.

Our only lingering concern now is Mrs Durbs who is 8-months preggo - which isn't ideal.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on August 31, 2021, 09:59:59 am
Not tested positive but last week was the first time I’ve been “pinged” by the app.

First time I’d spent any real time in Leeds (went for dinner) since leaving on Day 1 of the first lockdown.

Made it feel a lot closer than it had for a while.

I was due to go to the doctors the next day but cancelled as my PCR results hadn’t come in time. I was surprised that the GP didn’t have a view on what I should do having been pinged, but not being required to isolate. In the end I asked to move it as it didn’t seem right to go in just before getting results…
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on August 31, 2021, 10:03:31 am
Apologies to anyone I offended. I shouldn’t have posted half way through a bottle of wine.
 What I was trying to say is that sometimes someone’s illness is part of a bigger picture. It is not the illness it’s self but how does it effect the person and everyone in there network.
It can foster dependence in not only the ill person but also their carers. So if someone recovers from their illness suddenly all relationships have changed. This may not have a positive outcome for those relationships. So for some people getting better may be perceived as a negative outcome as they may fear that as no one needs care for them no one will be around anymore.

Yes, but this can apply to any state of interdependency of which persistent illness is manifestly one. Hoiking it out in relation to chronic fatigue syndrome smacks of being just more patient blaming. Many people with ME/CFD have heard an ‘all in the mind’ narrative. Do teenagers with Epstein Barr get the same spiel? Of course not. The word is stigma.

Edit : those issues of interdependency can be real enough and people may well need support to resolve them. For people with a physical illness they aren’t causative however and care needs to be taken not to present them as such where that is not the primary source of the illness.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on August 31, 2021, 10:11:54 am
Apologies to anyone I offended. I shouldn’t have posted half way through a bottle of wine.
 What I was trying to say is that sometimes someone’s illness is part of a bigger picture. It is not the illness it’s self but how does it effect the person and everyone in there network.
It can foster dependence in not only the ill person but also their carers. So if someone recovers from their illness suddenly all relationships have changed. This may not have a positive outcome for those relationships. So for some people getting better may be perceived as a negative outcome as they may fear that as no one needs care for them no one will be around anymore.

I entirely agree with you if you're saying what I think you're saying i.e. all illness has a psychological component and can be affected by attitude, mood and circumstance.
This fact doesn't mean anyone is making anything up, or conversely if they don't get better they aren't trying hard enough. It's well evidenced in research into back pain, cancer and probably many other things. There was a study which showed that whiplash effectively didn't exist in countries where there wasn't a legal mechanism for claiming compensation for it, for example. This clearly doesn't mean noone in the UK should have a painful neck after a RTA.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: webbo on August 31, 2021, 10:47:39 am
I hope you still agree when I give this example. Someone I know who was a successful athlete and very single minded and out spoken when discussing relationships. Often stating that no matter what relationship they were in it wouldn’t stop them training or competing. However once in a relationship  and having 2 young children pressure to give up the training was immense. At this point they developed CF which stopped the conflict about training/ competing and childcare etc.
Therefore the CF in this case is Psychologically saving someone from changing their rigid belief system or having relationship issues.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on August 31, 2021, 11:00:00 am

So of our group of 8; 5 double-vax'd adults and 3x under 14's - all but one adult, and one child caught it. The ones who didn't catch it had Covid at Christmas, supporting the theory that immunity from contracting the disease is stronger than the vaccination, but equally the vaccination made everyone's illness much more manageable.


You need to be very careful with that. It may be that being double jabbed and having prior infection gives more immunity to an adult than being double jabbed for an adult but any accurate conclusion needs proper research on a significant population.

It's very unlikely an infection more than a few months back (but no vaccination) offers more immunity than being double jabbed as there is a lot of research showing the exact opposite.  Yet lots of anti-vaxers are claiming prior infection is better than being jabbed, which very likely leaves the population more at risk. There was a recent pre-print looking at delta which contradicted the existing research apparently showing for delta that recent  prior infection is slightly better than  vaccination, but it's not peer reviewed yet.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on August 31, 2021, 11:36:31 am
I hope you still agree when I give this example. Someone I know who was a successful athlete and very single minded and out spoken when discussing relationships. Often stating that no matter what relationship they were in it wouldn’t stop them training or competing. However once in a relationship  and having 2 young children pressure to give up the training was immense. At this point they developed CF which stopped the conflict about training/ competing and childcare etc.
Therefore the CF in this case is Psychologically saving someone from changing their rigid belief system or having relationship issues.

Absolutely, assuming that you are using CF as an acronym for chronic fatigue as opposed to cystic fibrosis in this case. That sort of thing tallies with what I saw in practice as a physio treating people with lower back pain, and things like fibromyalgia, but also with recovery from operations or fractures. It is also supported by a lot of healthcare research that I've seen. That doesn't diminish these conditions or mean anyone is faking anything, anymore than it would if they were suffering from anxiety and depression.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 31, 2021, 12:12:01 pm
I hope you still agree when I give this example. Someone I know who was a successful athlete and very single minded and out spoken when discussing relationships. Often stating that no matter what relationship they were in it wouldn’t stop them training or competing. However once in a relationship  and having 2 young children pressure to give up the training was immense. At this point they developed CF which stopped the conflict about training/ competing and childcare etc.
Therefore the CF in this case is Psychologically saving someone from changing their rigid belief system or having relationship issues.

Absolutely, assuming that you are using CF as an acronym for chronic fatigue as opposed to cystic fibrosis in this case. That sort of thing tallies with what I saw in practice as a physio treating people with lower back pain, and things like fibromyalgia, but also with recovery from operations or fractures. It is also supported by a lot of healthcare research that I've seen. That doesn't diminish these conditions or mean anyone is faking anything, anymore than it would if they were suffering from anxiety and depression.

PTSD.

I went through that mill in the mid ‘90s, when it was “just” a syndrome and not  a disorder. The contrast between that time and the way all parties simply assumed it would be a complication of the whole widowhood thing, and acted preemptively, was very striking.
(At one point, in the first instance, after several weeks with the Psychologists (Technicians in the RN, so NCOs), I had to go for an assessment by the fleet Psychiatrist (a Commander, a commissioned officer) who spent several minutes  explaining to me that PTSS wasn’t really a thing and all the stuff the Psychologists had had me doing was probably pointless and asked me not a single question or let me say anything at all beyond “Yes/No Sir, for the entire assessment).

Anyway. No.3 just had his second PCR in since Sunday. Polly is really quite sick now, very much “a bad cold”. Fevers abound, and all except myself and No.1 feel like shit. Polly did an LFT last night, negative, but has booked another PCR for tomorrow.
Polly is Pfizer, I’m AZ, by the way; for reference in the current UKB study. Who wants lead author, by the way?

Oh, I still have excessive vertigo. So, I feel unfortunately confident of an eventual positive.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: webbo on August 31, 2021, 03:32:50 pm
Military Psychiatrists everything’s got to fit the text book description and if it’s not in the book it doesn’t exist.
This is generalisation.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on September 01, 2021, 11:25:41 am
I am (probably shouldn’t be) shocked at how crap the Track and Trace system is.
We had our three cases drop in 24 hr intervals, so No.3 got her PCR on Saturday morning, results in the evening. Call from T&T Sunday morning, we give all the contact details etc and expected info for all her contacts in the last x days etc, including the whole household here. We already book PCRs for the five remaining family on the Saturday after her positive anyway. Because most of the contacts are under 18, I give my number for all of them. I get an individual text for each, then one for each from our GP and an email for each.

So, we do PCRs on Sunday morning. This time, three negatives and a positive, results back on Sunday eve. Cue call 2 from track and trace. I say, we’re all the same household, do you not already have the details. Apparently not. So all the same details and contacts repeated. Everybody involved gets a second text/call/email. I get a repeat of the same six texts and emails from T&T and from the GP.

On Monday, our third case wakes up feeling shite, has a fever etc, despite testing negative the day before. Book test for Tuesday morning.
Test came back positive last night.
I get the same call from T&T, everybody involved in our little outbreak gets the same call, and texts, and emails again. I get another six copies of everything from T&T and the same from the GP.
Oddly enough, it’s the same operator today, as yesterday’s call, by the end of the call she’s calling me Matt, not Mr Glover and it’s all “same number? Same address” and lots of apologies for not being able to just link households. She actually had a mini rant about it. It still took more than 20 minutes.

This time though, she wanted to stress that none of the positive cases should seek another PCR for a minimum of 90 days, because you will test positive for at least that long, regardless of your virus status.
She had another mini rant, because of how many calls she’d made, to put people back into isolation, because they’re being asked by employers to get a negative test before returning to work after isolation. Apparently, this is throwing all the stats off and really overloading the system.
Seemingly, there is no option to disregard test results from tests sought too soon etc.

Edit:
Oh, and I just found out that my cousin, who wanted to travel to the UK from his home in France, got a positive on his required pretrip PCR, so booked another and tried not to swab properly, in order to get a negative so he could travel. Took him three attempts apparently. I told my aunt her son was a See You Next Tuesday (in the short form) and apparently I’m now the bad person. People’s stupidity still surprises me after fifty years of almost daily exposure.
Anyway, we’re now demonised by the other side of the family too, for listing the kid’s cousin, who came up on Friday night for my eldest’s 16th. She was due to fly out to Spain to visit her Grandmother on Sunday, but her mum got the text/call from T&T as a she was a “close contact” and it turned out dad hadn’t informed mum of the trip (complicated divorce) and mum has custody, and the rules say the kid couldn’t travel without an updated PCR and it couldn’t be arranged in time to make the flight.
Anyway, we are public enemy No.1 with both our families right now.

I’m actually amused, to be fair. Supposedly educated people who want to bend the rules to suit their convenience,  aka C#nts.
I always thought the “guy bitten by the zombies and trying to hide it” was an exaggerated dramatic trope for fictional purposes. Apparently it’s a significant human trait.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Liamhutch89 on September 01, 2021, 12:23:03 pm
Day 5 of covid symptoms. It's been quite a strange ride, where each day a new symptom seems to dominate. Only yesterday and today have felt like the same illness.

Currently, I have a dry cough that is not too severe, but the most annoying symptoms are a strange uncomfortable feeling in my hips and back - not pain, I don't really know how to describe it other than uncomfortable, but it's not pleasant, and tingling sensitive skin, particularly around my torso. Even a shirt brushing against my ribs is quite intense! I've been feeling fairly cold too and having to wear more layers than usual. Otherwise, I'm relatively happy, clear headed and alert!

My kids (5 and 2) have absolutely no symptoms, but they haven't been tested as I don't see any point in doing so. It's uncomfortable and they are locked up anyway. Wife has had a stuffy nose for around a month (this is typical due to allergies), no other symptoms, and has continually tested negative.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Durbs on September 01, 2021, 03:11:15 pm
I am (probably shouldn’t be) shocked at how crap the Track and Trace system is.

Fuck yes. My Mrs reported for herself and our two kids (6 & 3). They rang and asked to speak to the 3 year old. "Are you sure? He's 3!" "I need to speak to him"... Mrs puts him on "Helllooooooooo....."

Then exactly the same as you; three calls all to my wife to log details of her and the kids, even through all same household. No sharing of contact details, no option to mark as a household/family. No logical check of "This person is 3, unlikely to go out on their own".
It was so bad, I didn't actually both formally reporting my positive test as couldn't be arsed with the faff.

Symptom update 5 days after +ve test: Taste sloooooooooowly coming back. Regular bouts of dizziness, occasionally overtired, but otherwise fine.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on September 01, 2021, 03:21:54 pm
Yeah, dizzyness.
It’s been plaguing me for about a week, but I continue to test negative bith PCR and Lat Flow.
Polly just went for another PCR, about a half hour ago, because she’s really a sick, coughing, snotty mess but testing negative so far. No.4 is bright as a button and no fever anymore. No.3 claims he feels fine, but looks bloody awful. No.2 is proper crook and just can’t stop coughing, has a raging fever, but claims it’s his throat tickling rather than a chesty cough. Don’t think it pneumonia, but watching closely.

No.1 (I kid you not) has moved out into a tent in the garden. I might join her.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: lorentz on September 01, 2021, 04:45:21 pm
I don't post over much on here lately, but wanted to add that I have contracted Covid again. (I picked it up originally in the first wave back in late March/early April 2020. There wasn't any testing back then. Had mild symptoms and wife who's a nurse tested positive for antibodies a month or so later)

I'm Double AZ jabbed. Came on like cold suddenly last week. Classic symptoms. Weirdly no sore throat, but dry cough for a day or two, really blocked nose that would occasionally run heavily... Did an LFT as was supposed to join wife for her latest pregnancy scan and it came up positive. Followed by two more positive tests before this morning's came back clear 7 days later. My sense of smell and taste has gone. I'm aware of extremes of taste (chilli and horseradish, marmite, strong cheddar) but in a faraway vague way. I'm also really tired most of the time, so taking it easy. I also had conjunctivitis in one eye which has now more or less cleared after regular washes and in saline eyewash.

The one small mercy has been that wife has tested negative throughout and has been absolutely fine. She's double jabbed with Pfizer. We're obviously staying away from each other til I feel like I've properly come through it.

Hopefully I'll feel okay in next few days as new baby due from anytime now.

Been interesting and important information seeing how it has moved through other people's families on here as it gives a sense of it's still going on despite/because of Johnson's freedom day. Thanks for sharing the information.

I know people who got severely ill and others who've sadly passed away with it. I think "Covid fatigue"  was creeping up on me slowly, as it's really affected my job, life, recent wedding plans etc etc but this thread and the fact I'm currently shaking it off myself has really woken me up to it. Despite the vaccines, it's still out there and it's still seriously unpleasant.

Stay frosty people. Keep your guard up.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nails on September 02, 2021, 11:50:20 am
Similarly, I don't often post on here but have found the Covid discussion really useful and informative, particularly the more recent additions on individual cases and symptoms. Reading at the end of last week I was thinking, “How can we not be catching this”. We’re pretty much living life as normal other than I wear a face mask in shops etc, but largely as a mark of courtesy to staff.

Anyway, we took the kids to the British BMX championships at the weekend, staying 2 nights in a hotel and meeting up with other families whose kids were racing. All good though my daughter had a bad night on Saturday which we thought was probably down to tiredness from racing and the nerves building up to the event. Calpolled up and fine all Sunday, she’s been slightly below par since but still fine and active, and still BMX training. I had a slight sore throat Wednesday morning and just out of precaution (seeing as I’ve literally had no colds or anything for 18 months) I took a LFT which was negative. Assumed that I had a minor cold and thought no more about it. Took the kids to training last night where another parent mentioned that one of the children who’d been in the hotel with us over the weekend (hanging with our kids etc) had tested positive on Tuesday. As a precaution I tested them when we got home and both positive. My wife (double Pfizer) and I (double AZ) tested negative LFT last night. This morning still had sore throat (and slightly sensitive skin), LTF was positive. Wife has sore throat but still negative.

Daughters LTF was very clear line, son’s was pretty faint. Mine was super faint but definitely visible. I’d be interested in anyone’s knowledge on what the faintness of the line means in terms of infection/vaccination. I know any visible line means positive but in our small sample the appearance of the line would seem to correlate with the level/existence of symptoms or vaccination. We’re now obviously all isolating though nobody is actually feeling ill.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on September 02, 2021, 12:29:45 pm
No.3 had a faint line on his Monday LFT and a positive PCR the next day. He didn’t have any symptoms on the Monday at the time of the test (the kids had been doing them twice weekly all summer, his was the first positive, despite two siblings, by this time, having positive PCRs and frank symptoms). We’d already booked his PCR by the time his temperature spiked late Monday evening and he was proper poorly by the time of his test on Tuesday morning.
All three of the kids were very poorly for around 48-72 hrs and all three are, seemingly, fine again now. The eldest has moved into a tent, seems fine, tests fine (LFT) and is actually at the Walk in getting her first shot as I write.

Polly, on the other hand, is really very ill (double Pfizer, second 8 weeks ago).
She’s been sick for ~4 days, and had her second PCR this week, yesterday afternoon. It came back negative this morning, as have all the LFTs she’s done everyday this week. Her Sats were down to 95/96 this morning which is not yet alarming but…
Still no fever though.
I’m fine and negative, Vertigo almost gone, despite caring for all the sick. Nobody has been wearing a mask, except No.1 when she comes into the house.
I am just wondering how long before I can relax and know I’m not going to succumb. Apparently Delta has a 3-5 day incubation for the majority and the old two week thing is almost redundant?

Get well soon, where appropriate, and may you remain symptom free as applicable.

Bloody weird shit, this, isn’t it?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Liamhutch89 on September 02, 2021, 01:39:15 pm
Lorentz, good luck with the baby and I hope you are better in time for the birth.

Nails, I had concerns that posting my personal covid updates might lower the quality of the thread, so i'm glad to see you've found anecdotes to be useful. Hopefully your symptoms remain minor. The sensitive skin is very strange!

Matt, bloody weird indeed.

Day 6: The aches have almost gone, sensitive skin has reduced by about half, coughing frequency/intensity is about the same but is now less dry, bouts of mild dizziness (a bit like when you get up too quickly after laying down) have increased. I don't have a pulse oximeter but managed to hold my breath for a minute - whatever that's worth.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Durbs on September 02, 2021, 02:45:08 pm

I’d be interested in anyone’s knowledge on what the faintness of the line means in terms of infection/vaccination. I know any visible line means positive but in our small sample the appearance of the line would seem to correlate with the level/existence of symptoms or vaccination.

Anecdotally, from my brood testing on the same day:
Eldest child, no symptoms throughout infection except red-eye, very faint line (Suspect she caught it first)
Youngest, had fever and vomitted one evening, then a bit tired 2 more days 2 days before testing, strong red line
Wife, no sympotoms beyond a bit of a sniffle, strong red line
Me (that day), negative test.

I retested before a band practise, as felt like a cold was coming on; first test was REALLY faint, so re-tested and really went to work with the swab, held back some gags etc - stronger red line.
So for me, the line changed with the quality of the sample, rather than the symptoms.
For the others, the weakest line was for the child over the worst, the other 2 were right in the middle of the infected period.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: lorentz on September 02, 2021, 04:33:20 pm
Cheers Liam!  :icon_beerchug: Equally excited and terrified by the prospect of becoming a dad!

Getting there after all clear, except for the weird levels of tiredness after really minor and mundane chores. Hang out washing. Feel exhausted for a bit. Fold clothes. Have a rest etc. It was like this the last time I had it though, so fingers crossed it will pass soon enough.

In terms of the lines in LFT with me the line got fainter and fainter before being totally gone in test yesterday. Tested again just now and it's still all clear so hope to be past the contagious stage at least (day 8 since first symptom...)

As a country, I think we're going to be in to a rough autumn and winter with this variant this time around. Hopefully the vaccines will keep most of us out of the hospitals. Hope  that we're not going to head in to further restrictions so long as the hospital rates are kept down.

But yeah, it's a horrible, horrible  illness. Just felt crap for a week now, but fortunately no breathing difficulties at all. Old friend's wife spent 12 days on ventilation in induced coma over Christmas last year, so I know how lucky I am to be so mildly ill and the small inconvenience of self isolation!

Good luck with it, all.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on September 02, 2021, 04:47:23 pm
Sorry for de-railing the personal covid experiences but having laid into the conspiracy morons previously I feel it's only fair to tackle this:

Quote
https://inews.co.uk/opinion/boris-johnson-cheek-devon-cornwall-encouraging-covid-spread-1173952

Quote
encouraging-covid-spread
Is clickbait bollox for a start since no-one is actually encouraging it.

Quote
We may be the playground for the rich, but the region feels entirely neglected by those politicians that love to frolic among their loaded business friends down here.
That playground is also your industry i.e. tourism.

Quote
School pupils are likely to be forced to wear masks at school from this week. The hospitals are limiting visiting times and allowing just one relative in at a time. Those sound like restrictions to me, minister.
So on one hand he's moaning about the covid rates, and on the other hand sounds like he's moaning about restrictions to tackle those covid rates.

Quote
The feeling down here is that we were doing just fine before Boris Johnson insisted on bringing world leaders and 20,000 hangers-on down to Carbis Bay in Cornwall.
From what I understand G7 isn't some pointless social shindig, it's an important summit to start looking at global issues. I might be wrong about this, but I get the impression that it had to be held somewhere and the global benefits could outweigh the costs.

Quote
Instead of sticking to the mask wearing and social distancing advice, Johnson went in the opposite direction. He permitted 53,000 largely unvaccinated young adults to mosh together at the Boardmasters music and surfing festival in Newquay earlier this month.
The unlocking and relaxing of restriction was planned and known about for months (and delayed). I presume the author knows full well about the benefits to the economy and peoples' well-being of those YAs moshing together.

Quote
As Professor John Drury – one of the Government’s most senior scientific advisors – has told i: “The Government has basically said ‘it’s safe now, it’s fine, you’re not going to die’. The problem is of course that 100 people a day are dying.”
In comparison to the death rates previously it is very different yes. 100 daily deaths is a lot better than 1000+ daily deaths when the transmission was previously this high. Maybe he should nail his colours to the mast as a zero-Covider.

Quote
or thought it was a good idea to infect as many unvaccinated young people as we possibly could in Newquay.
This is just pointless shite that completely undermines any point he's trying to make. Why even say something this stupid?? No-one thinks it;s a good idea to infect as many people as possible, it's whether people think that increased infection in the context of vaccines greatly reducing the health risks is a risk worth taking compared to the benefits.

Quote
We didn’t unlock the entire country, end all Covid-precautions, or push our health services beyond breaking point. We didn’t do that Mr Johnson. You did.
That's entirely correct. And all the benefits (economy, education, hospitality, travel, social, well-being, physical and mental health) to that are also down to Bozzer's decision. I presume the author previously vigorously campaigned to further delay the unlocking?? If so he can argue his case with everyone has benefitted from the unlocking, including the 53,000 YAs he's moaning about.

In short a terribly-written knee-jerk opinion piece that does about as much for the pro-lockdown case as some video about magnetism does for the anti-vaccine case.

P.S. I have no intention of discussing this, as per my opening line it's solely in the interest of fairness and balancing having previously taken advantage of the anti-vaxx loon as an easy target.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on September 02, 2021, 05:46:58 pm
Tourism is double edged sword and plenty of locals suffer more than they benefit from it, especially from the end of September onward. It’s not that what you said is entirely incorrect, it’s just far more complex and deserves greater consideration and discussion than your glib riposte.

Anyway, it’s a shame you don’t want debate it. That’s some good, righteous, indignation there! Possibly, exactly what the author of the article was hoping for?

However, I think the reporting of the Pandemic is pants, in general, opinion pieces aside.

Take the “Death rate” thing. Headline news, everyday as if it’s either all over or all doom.
The head line is always “Today the UK recorded” and the figures are always “Death by date reported”.
That looks like this:

(https://i.ibb.co/4fcKjpQ/A9-DD6-E3-D-C045-4-BF8-A764-5-AA6-BB2-B1236.png)

Looks like a rapidly worsening situation, doesn’t it, even though, intellectually you now those nadirs are “not reported because it’s the weekend” blips and the peaks are “catch up” reporting. I think the “media” like this one, because it lets them alternate the story, from day to day, week to week, as the biggest/smallest numbers dominate. So, say we get a zero day, they get to say “GOOD NEWS!” even when it’s just a zero reported, or the opposite. Both of which sell copy/generate clicks/grab viewers.

Death by day of event, seems much more, um, mundane, less dramatic (? Shit  way to put it, but couldn’t think of better). It even looks pretty good, compared to the pre-vaccination waves:

(https://i.ibb.co/16nmsJ4/F0-A45597-3166-4-D4-F-A690-DD18602-E1-A9-C.png)

It very rarely got past 100 per day in August and though infections are climbing again now, they have yet to hit the levels of July (or rate of increase) so I think we can be cautiously optimistic.

For clarity, I think one death is too many. However that’s an emotional response and not really a practical target.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on September 02, 2021, 06:58:34 pm
Well in spite of being in bed for 2 days yesterday and the day before, all LFTS and the PCR test I went for yesterday are all negative. Seems there is a really bad strain of flu going around up here, I guess immune systems are weakened by very little contact with anyone and so no germ transfer for the last 18 months.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on September 05, 2021, 06:25:10 pm
Well in spite of being in bed for 2 days yesterday and the day before, all LFTS and the PCR test I went for yesterday are all negative. Seems there is a really bad strain of flu going around up here, I guess immune systems are weakened by very little contact with anyone and so no germ transfer for the last 18 months.

Like you, Polly PCR’d negative three times, despite being very ill and three confirmed, sick, kids.
Both myself and my eldest, continue to test negative (me by LFT daily and she had another PCR yesterday, because she starts 6th form tomorrow and wanted to be sure). Everybody seems to be recovering now. I’m gobsmacked I haven’t succumbed, since I was chief carer when everybody was snotting and coughing all over the shop. No.1 and I, had been voluntarily isolating, despite not being required to, but we couldn’t resist heading to the moors to climb today. Sitting around the house for ten days since No.4 dropped last Friday, has been pretty friggin shit, really.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on September 06, 2021, 01:17:18 pm
I seem to be in a similar boat. Now that I'm back teaching and in much more contact others with I'm getting tested every Sunday morning as a matter of routine and was negative yesterday. However, started getting really sore throat, cough (though not especially persistent) and shivers, chills etc. late afternoon. Had a terrible, almost sleepless night, though some of that was about work; I was meant to be teaching multiple classes today. Gradually became obvious I was not going anywhere near work. Wrote to boss and students at 5am and then went to get PCR later in the morning, awaiting results. I'm pretty certain it's not Covid but I need the negative back before I can go back to work (and will be home all day tomorrow, no matter what). Throat and cough have already eased quite a bit - I'm mainly just absolutely knackered.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on September 06, 2021, 02:09:08 pm
Well in spite of being in bed for 2 days yesterday and the day before, all LFTS and the PCR test I went for yesterday are all negative. Seems there is a really bad strain of flu going around up here, I guess immune systems are weakened by very little contact with anyone and so no germ transfer for the last 18 months.

I duly passed it on to wife, and she was then in bed all day Friday and Saturday, almost identical symptoms and duration. Son then developed a persistent hacking cough on Friday, which has hung about all weekend. He had a PCR test on Saturday, which came back negative last night, but he's still kept off school, would cause too much stress sending him in only to get sent back.

Andy, your symptoms sound identical to mine.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on September 06, 2021, 02:20:08 pm
Andy, your symptoms sound identical to mine.

That's what I thought.

An English Phd who's going to be visiting my department for a couple of months arrived Saturday and also started getting the identical symptoms later yesterday (not from me, I haven't met him yet). He's also reporting starting to feel better already.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on September 06, 2021, 02:45:32 pm
FWIW, I was WFH on Thursday and Friday but still felt groggy, sleepy and tired (wouldn't have wanted to deliver a lecture!), was OK Sat, did a fairly long slow bike ride yesterday and felt OK doing it. Still a bit phlegmy today, but first day I woke up without a headache.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on September 06, 2021, 02:51:34 pm
In the spirit of what this thread seems to have become i.e. self-reportage of minor bugs and sniffles: I can report that today I too don’t have covid. Actually feel quite good all round. Temp seems OK, no aches or pains, no fatigue. Perhaps slightly dehydrated. I’ll drink some water before I go bouldering in the cave later.
Hope that’s useful.  :ras:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on September 06, 2021, 03:09:32 pm
thread split for people who are healthy and think they're funny.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on September 06, 2021, 03:18:10 pm
See you there  :smartass:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on September 06, 2021, 03:21:47 pm
I'm not really either of those.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on September 07, 2021, 07:27:47 am
In the spirit of what this thread seems to have become i.e. self-reportage of minor bugs and sniffles: I can report that today I too don’t have covid. Actually feel quite good all round. Temp seems OK, no aches or pains, no fatigue. Perhaps slightly dehydrated. I’ll drink some water before I go bouldering in the cave later.
Hope that’s useful.  :ras:

It's a thread about an illness, is that a big surprise? Although if the reports come from people without COVID, that's silly.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on September 07, 2021, 08:47:54 am
Although if the reports come from people without COVID, that's silly.

It's a bit more complicated than that though. When I posted yesterday I may have felt it was unlikely I had Covid (despite feeling really shitty with Covid like symptoms and having taught 80 maskless students for three hours on Thursday, a context in which I might well have caught it), but the point is that at that point I couldn't know for sure and in the meantime had to act like I did. I had a duty to tell my line manager, a duty to go and get tested and then isolate, a duty to identify and inform potential close contacts. For the time being, getting ill involves a very different calculus to pre-pandemic. I think that's going to be a common feature of whatever this phase of the pandemic is, especially as people return to offices and schools. There's going to be a lot of susceptibility to common colds etc. and potentially a lot niggling disruptions (esp for parents I would guess). Presumably, at some point, we'll get to point of treating more minor illnesses more "normally" again.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on September 07, 2021, 05:20:45 pm
Military Psychiatrists everything’s got to fit the text book description and if it’s not in the book it doesn’t exist.
This is generalisation.

Ummmm…

I know this is off topic, but I really owe Dr Urwin (apparently) a huge apology.

This afternoon I received my entire military health record and it included all of his notes, from the twelve assessments he made of me. I seriously thought it was only the one, but apparently I saw him once a month, including three with my then wife in attendance. His notes were very sympathetic and his treatment protocols and recommendations were all made under a diagnosis of PTSS, but that depression was my biggest issue.
I have to say, I was more messed up at our first meeting than I recall and in fact, don’t recall that first assessment at all!

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: webbo on September 07, 2021, 06:03:06 pm
I did say it was a generalisation.
I think they probably very good at diagnosing and treating PTSD but when it comes to more main stream MH issues that you get in society I don’t think they have seen enough cases.
For example they may see the odd case of drug induced Psychosis but a Psychiatrist working in an inner city area will see several a week.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on September 15, 2021, 08:46:57 am
If there are two people in the world who really deserve a horrible dose of covid,  its these two:
https://www.politico.eu/article/russia-president-vladimir-putin-self-isolation-coronavirus-case-entourage/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on September 15, 2021, 09:28:15 am
The Sputnik 5 Vaccine - is that just a shot of vodka?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tommytwotone on September 15, 2021, 11:45:39 am
Just my n=1, but we've had a brush with the 'Rona in our house.

My other half went back to (secondary teaching) last week and on day one of the Inset Days they had a whole-of-staff meeting, in person...which has taken out 3 members of staff.

She started up with what seemed like a bad cold on the Tues (bunged up, runny nose etc, bit of a sore throat, bit hoarse), same on Weds and did a lateral flow test, which came back negative, same again on Thurs.

On Fri after feeling worse, and losing her sense of taste she decided to go for a PCR test, which then came back as positive on Sat.

She's been generally OK barring feeling tired (sleeping till about lunchtime every day).

I did a Track & Trace mandated PCR test on Sat, which came back negative on Sun, but then Sun eve started feeling really rough (spaced out, coughing), so went back for a test on Mon, which also came back negative.

Maybe the vaccine's working and it was just my body fending it off?

Kids both fine, but we've been trying to keep them out of the way.

She's on the mend I think - has to isolate till Sat, but she's still tired and no smell / taste. Hopefully it'll be gone by the weekend.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on September 15, 2021, 02:40:39 pm
out of interest, what were you both vaccinated with?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tommytwotone on September 15, 2021, 03:26:51 pm
We've both been double-vacc-ed with AZ - hers were right back at the start thanks to a friend of family who's a GP and had "spares" that needed to be used up, so her second one was back in about April.

Mine were on the "normal" schedule for (43 year old) me, so my second was early July.

Find it hard to believe that I'm sharing a house with her and haven't caught it, but she is keeping out of the way, we've got all the doors and windows open all day, and I'm squirrelled away in the office all day at work.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on September 15, 2021, 03:43:26 pm
Maybe you had it already and were asymptomatic. Unlikely but not impossible.

I've heard of other people in a similar situation in a single household though.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on September 15, 2021, 04:28:43 pm
A bit of a reiteration, I know.
We had three confirmed and quite poorly children, with one untouched (despite a shared bedroom). The plague dodger had three PCRs over that period, one two days before returning to sixth form, as well as twice weekly LFTs. Nada.
Polly (mum) got sick two days after the first kid dropped. She’s still quite ill and has been told to work from home, more than two weeks later. Three negative PCRs during that time. I developed vertigo and awful lethargy, over the same time frame and am only just beginning to feel normal. Two negative PCRs in that period. Yet, I was looking after, hugging etc, the poorly kids and Polly. Absolutely no distancing.
Kids were all fine within three or four days.
🤷‍♂️
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: seankenny on September 21, 2021, 05:48:55 pm
The Covid-19 Bereaved Families for Justice group have been refused entry into the Conservative Party Conference. They had simply wanted to talk to MPs to discuss the holding of a public enquiry. Really, how much shit does this government want to fling at grieving families?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/sep/21/covid-bereaved-families-group-refused-access-to-tory-conference
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on September 28, 2021, 03:51:50 pm
Any other over 50s now getting directly invited to a flu vaccination appointment by the NHS? A first for me.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on September 28, 2021, 04:13:56 pm
Any other over 50s now getting directly invited to a flu vaccination appointment by the NHS? A first for me.

Ha!

Yes.

Got a text from GP, mid August inviting me to book for the middle of September at our mega vaccine centre (where they’re doing the Covid vac too).

Phoned. “Oh, sorry, we didn’t get any of the under 65 vacc doses, we’ll let you know when they arrive”

Bit pissed off to be sent the text, when they knew they couldn’t book me, but…

Got the follow up text last Friday. “Additional clinic for those that were missed” blah blah.

Phoned to book this morning “Oh, sorry, we don’t have any under 65 doses available and we don’t know when we will”.
*sound of teeth grinding*
“So… why did you text me?”

“Well, we thought we were getting doses for under 65’s, but the batch that arrived are for over 65’s only”.

Ok, just breath Matt, don’t laugh out loud. Your GP practice is (maybe) just overwhelmed during this pandemic, and not a bunch of twats at an impromptu fucking twat party, acting like a bunch of fucking twats.
(I had to wait in the cue for the appointments line, for 45 minutes to play this fucking game, because they fucking asked me too.. “You are number… 12… in the cue… (insert repetitive elevator music here)”… etc…

I have no clue if it’s actually a different vacc, but I am fairly sure nobody over there has fucking clue what they’re doing.

I said, “I’m about to go to sea for four months, at the end of October, any chance before then?”

No.

Best to see if the chemist can do it, for a fee, apparently, though probably not, because the doses are not available.

Anyway, tried to buy fuel on the way home from the gym. None of those doses available either, so no fucking climbing tomorrow either.

Wank muffins.


Anyway, how’s your day?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: webbo on September 28, 2021, 05:37:39 pm
I received a text asking me to contact to book an appointment last week. November 6th was the earliest appointment available and I’m over 65.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: seankenny on September 29, 2021, 10:03:40 am
My partner was on Radio Four's File on Four last night, part of a programme called "Occupational Hazard: The bus drivers who died from Covid":

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m001009z

She's talking about her dad and his death, but the show is a really good investigation of one of the many, many fuck-ups that have occured during the pandemic. It gives a real sense of how different organisations failed and then tried to cover up what happened.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on September 29, 2021, 12:03:06 pm
I have no clue if it’s actually a different vacc, but I am fairly sure nobody over there has fucking clue what they’re doing.either.

As a point of interest: yeah, the NHS actually does use a different vacc for over-65s, as they have a lower antibody response to the standard flu jab:

https://bnf.nice.org.uk/treatment-summary/influenza-vaccine-2.html

(This has no bearing on whether or not the practice are wank muffins, which seems pretty clear.)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on September 29, 2021, 12:17:06 pm
I received a text asking me to contact to book an appointment last week. November 6th was the earliest appointment available and I’m over 65.

I'm 52, and i got a letter saying "your flu jab appointment is booked for". it's like we are living in different countries ;) 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on October 09, 2021, 08:22:37 am
This seems to be a thing:

https://inews.co.uk/news/scores-more-report-positive-rapid-covid-tests-followed-by-negative-pcrs-as-mystery-deepens-over-discrepancies-1238649

Glad it's being investigated.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on October 09, 2021, 09:59:36 am
Research attempting to establish true mortality rates worldwide just published.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7852240/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: lagerstarfish on November 21, 2021, 09:40:11 pm
Today I heard the phrase "fuck the unvaccinated" twice, from two very different people.
They sounded like they meant it.
Is this an organised thing that I have missed?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on November 22, 2021, 07:32:16 am
Today I heard the phrase "fuck the unvaccinated" twice, from two very different people.
They sounded like they meant it.
Is this an organised thing that I have missed?

In what sense I wonder?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: lagerstarfish on November 22, 2021, 07:53:01 am
Today I heard the phrase "fuck the unvaccinated" twice, from two very different people.
They sounded like they meant it.
Is this an organised thing that I have missed?

In what sense I wonder?

One person was an outraged bystander at one of Saturday's anti vax demos. The other was having a rant about the resources required by Covid treatment in hospitals.
I don't think they meant "fuck" in the sexual way.
It sounded like they were quoting someone or some meme. I wasn't in a position to ask questions about where the phrase came from.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 22, 2021, 11:37:45 am
Today I heard the phrase "fuck the unvaccinated" twice, from two very different people.
They sounded like they meant it.
Is this an organised thing that I have missed?

In what sense I wonder?

One person was an outraged bystander at one of Saturday's anti vax demos. The other was having a rant about the resources required by Covid treatment in hospitals.
I don't think they meant "fuck" in the sexual way.
It sounded like they were quoting someone or some meme. I wasn't in a position to ask questions about where the phrase came from.

I’m mutual FB friends with a certain well known climber, who may have the  initial “S”. Anyway, I largely ignore his rants, but occasionally it’s too tooth grindingly penetrating to skim over.

At this point, it’s just too obvious that the damn thing is real (pandemic) and the debate was laid to rest, six feet below ground, in around 5 million graves, globally. Yet, still, certain people insist it’s all fake. Anti-vaxers are just the latest incarnation of the Ostrich brigade, so, meme or no meme, I applaud the sentiment.
Perhaps, for clarity, swapping the “the” for “off” is in order.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: IanP on November 22, 2021, 03:51:42 pm

I’m mutual FB friends with a certain well known climber, who may have the  initial “S”. Anyway, I largely ignore his rants, but occasionally it’s too tooth grindingly penetrating to skim over.


Saw this and first though of Ste Mac which seem a bit unlikely to say the least.  A quick facebook search on likely candidates found him first go - not on my friend list but significant number of mutual friends, I'd definitely have unfriended by this point (assuming were talking about the same well known climber  :whistle:).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 22, 2021, 04:43:32 pm

I’m mutual FB friends with a certain well known climber, who may have the  initial “S”. Anyway, I largely ignore his rants, but occasionally it’s too tooth grindingly penetrating to skim over.


Saw this and first though of Ste Mac which seem a bit unlikely to say the least.  A quick facebook search on likely candidates found him first go - not on my friend list but significant number of mutual friends, I'd definitely have unfriended by this point (assuming were talking about the same well known climber  :whistle:).

We Hastobe…
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on November 22, 2021, 05:19:43 pm
I'd never heard anything good about him before this so perhaps it's no surprise...
Someone once told me "he's not got better with age he's just got better at lying"  :lol:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on November 22, 2021, 05:34:26 pm
Hardly a secret given his blog's been full of it for a year and a half.

Incidentally I thought "fuck the unvaccinated" was something to do with Tinder filters where you can keep swiping based on your mutual vaxx status compatibility.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on November 22, 2021, 06:07:27 pm
Double jabbed…
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 22, 2021, 10:29:30 pm
Having had a boring evening (they’re watching “I’m a Celeb”, ffs).

I ended up reading the latest vaccine surveillance reports, as y’do…

Anyway, despite “knowing” already, it’s actually shocking to see the difference in the effects of the disease between vaccinated and unvaccinated.

We’re standing at ~90% of the population over 12 years old, having had at least one dose and some 80%, two.
Check out the difference in admissions and deaths between week 42 and 45.
Discount the eldest and youngest age groups and look at the “healthy” middle ground.

(https://i.ibb.co/Kx8ZpgZ/E5943-B0-C-8-BC7-4-E84-BF66-0597-ACE62557.png)

And deaths:

(https://i.ibb.co/5LfvQrZ/133-C6-F82-4502-42-DA-BD93-6-F82-D3-F85-CB9.png)

Almost 50% of admissions and deaths in the “healthy” band are unvaccinated!

Overall around 35%, but that’s so misleading, since it’s heavily skewed by the extremely vulnerable upper age groups.

 https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1034383/Vaccine-surveillance-report-week-46.pdf (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1034383/Vaccine-surveillance-report-week-46.pdf)


Edit: to be clear, I know it’s not 50%, I just mean it’s a frickin big chunk that is bigger than I actually expected. Apologies for the hyperbole.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on November 25, 2021, 03:15:37 pm
Richard Madeley has been taken to hospital from the set of I'm A Celebrity, Get Me Out Of Here. He is reported to have become suddenly unwell.

Hilariously, the anti-vaxxers are adamant that this is because he's had the vaccine, not because he was swimming around in rotting fish a few hours earlier.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on November 29, 2021, 03:10:35 pm
So, is it proving that giving the UK population up to 3 doses of vaccines while neglecting to given support to other countries with their vaccination program is going to backfire spectacularly if this Omnicron varint proves to be particularly virulent and we are back to square 1?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 29, 2021, 03:18:51 pm
So, is it proving that giving the UK population up to 3 doses of vaccines while neglecting to given support to other countries with their vaccination program is going to backfire spectacularly if this Omnicron varint proves to be particularly virulent and we are back to square 1?

Bit of yes and no, innit.
Apparently SA has had massive hesitancy issues, coupled with a large HIV denial movement/problem etc. I’ve read too much the last few days to recall which article to quote, but I’m sure they even had to slow deliveries from suppliers etc as stocks were expiring before they could be used.

Our biggest threat will be the anti-vacc movement as a whole, closely followed by vaccine nationalism. As a combination, we’re probably screwed.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on November 29, 2021, 04:29:57 pm
So, is it proving that giving the UK population up to 3 doses of vaccines while neglecting to given support to other countries with their vaccination program is going to backfire spectacularly if this Omnicron varint proves to be particularly virulent and we are back to square 1?

No, because: https://www.reuters.com/world/africa/exclusive-south-africa-delays-covid-vaccine-deliveries-inoculations-slow-2021-11-24/

Also there is next to zero chance this will push us back to square 1 from what I've read.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on November 29, 2021, 05:08:51 pm
I think we should probably mention the whole patent issue too. Share the technology and information so that others can produce their own.  Surely the vaccine developers (publicly funded) aren't interested in profit before the wellbeing of people?  :no:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Adam Lincoln on November 29, 2021, 05:10:13 pm
From what I've read online on social media in last few days seems like getting people to wear masks again will be a tricky one.

Hopefully the walls won't follow suit with forcing masks on us again.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on November 29, 2021, 05:20:31 pm
From what I've read online on social media in last few days seems like getting people to wear masks again will be a tricky one.

Hopefully the walls won't follow suit with forcing masks on us again.

I don't really get why people in the UK object so much to wearing masks in shops etc. Seems a pretty trivial inconvenience. Wearing one while climbing would be a PITA but was never a thing anyway as far as I recall. Wearing one in reception or similar seems pretty easy and low hassle.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on November 29, 2021, 05:25:58 pm
Won't be much of a hassle here as we never stopped wearing masks in Wales, perhaps there was some data showing how much spittle is emitted merely saying a place name.

I'm uncertain if the data from Wales or Scotland conclusively shows a beneficial impact on rates, versus non-mask England? Anyone?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Adam Lincoln on November 29, 2021, 05:38:58 pm
From what I've read online on social media in last few days seems like getting people to wear masks again will be a tricky one.

Hopefully the walls won't follow suit with forcing masks on us again.

I don't really get why people in the UK object so much to wearing masks in shops etc. Seems a pretty trivial inconvenience. Wearing one while climbing would be a PITA but was never a thing anyway as far as I recall. Wearing one in reception or similar seems pretty easy and low hassle.

Most walls was a, everywhere except actually on the wall policy. So constantly putting it up or down as you step on, for me reverted back to having it on all the time, it was just easier.

Anyway, time to run for the hills (Spain at least).....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: joel182 on November 29, 2021, 05:41:32 pm
I was very grateful for my session at Rainbow Rocket last summer which seems to have been the only wall in the UK that required mask wearing at all times (and also had all of their shutters open to give plenty of ventilation).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 29, 2021, 05:42:10 pm
Won't be much of a hassle here as we never stopped wearing masks in Wales, perhaps there was some data showing how much spittle is emitted merely saying a place name.

I'm uncertain if the data from Wales or Scotland conclusively shows a beneficial impact on rates, versus non-mask England? Anyone?

Not seen any comparative studies, but this popped up in my inbox:

 https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj-2021-068302 (https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj-2021-068302)

Make of it what you will.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: lagerstarfish on November 29, 2021, 05:53:29 pm
In amongst all the death and misery, I do appreciate the nod to RoboCop by the team that came up with the name for the new variant.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on November 29, 2021, 06:21:42 pm
So, is it proving that giving the UK population up to 3 doses of vaccines while neglecting to given support to other countries with their vaccination program is going to backfire spectacularly if this Omnicron varint proves to be particularly virulent and we are back to square 1?

Bit of yes and no, innit.
Apparently SA has had massive hesitancy issues, coupled with a large HIV denial movement/problem etc. I’ve read too much the last few days to recall which article to quote, but I’m sure they even had to slow deliveries from suppliers etc as stocks were expiring before they could be used.


I think Omnicron is not limited to South Africa alone, but has been detected in several Southern African countries, where the availability and take up has been even lower.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on November 29, 2021, 06:22:01 pm
Won't be much of a hassle here as we never stopped wearing masks in Wales, perhaps there was some data showing how much spittle is emitted merely saying a place name.

I'm uncertain if the data from Wales or Scotland conclusively shows a beneficial impact on rates, versus non-mask England? Anyone?

Not seen any comparative studies, but this popped up in my inbox:

 https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj-2021-068302 (https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj-2021-068302)

Make of it what you will.


Thanks. Associated with a 50% reduction..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on November 29, 2021, 06:26:55 pm
Won't be much of a hassle here as we never stopped wearing masks in Wales, perhaps there was some data showing how much spittle is emitted merely saying a place name.

I expect the same applies with pronouncing west coast place names, or ordering whisky. Mask wearing never went away here.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 29, 2021, 06:51:18 pm
So, is it proving that giving the UK population up to 3 doses of vaccines while neglecting to given support to other countries with their vaccination program is going to backfire spectacularly if this Omnicron varint proves to be particularly virulent and we are back to square 1?

Bit of yes and no, innit.
Apparently SA has had massive hesitancy issues, coupled with a large HIV denial movement/problem etc. I’ve read too much the last few days to recall which article to quote, but I’m sure they even had to slow deliveries from suppliers etc as stocks were expiring before they could be used.


I think Omnicron is not limited to South Africa alone, but has been detected in several Southern African countries, where the availability and take up has been even lower.

Yes. I think I read that the first case was seen in Botswana, but a lot of the same conditions apply (across sub Saharan Africa) except compounded with even greater poverty, no? Similar mistrust of Western medicine etc.
Still *our* fault, in the West, it’s fairly fair to say, I guess.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on November 30, 2021, 10:52:31 am
From what I've read online on social media in last few days seems like getting people to wear masks again will be a tricky one.

Hopefully the walls won't follow suit with forcing masks on us again.

I don't really get why people in the UK object so much to wearing masks in shops etc. Seems a pretty trivial inconvenience. Wearing one while climbing would be a PITA but was never a thing anyway as far as I recall. Wearing one in reception or similar seems pretty easy and low hassle.

I've found wearing a mask while bouldering weirdly educational, in terms of showing up my bad breathing habits when climbing.

If I keep breathing, it's fine; if I hold my breath through a problem when I'm climbing hard, that's when I end up gasping and unable to get my breath back afterwards.

I've been sticking with it to punish myself until I learn to fucking breathe!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on November 30, 2021, 12:37:39 pm
I find bouldering in a mask pretty unpleasant and wouldn't support that. Happy enough to wear one everywhere else over the winter though.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on November 30, 2021, 12:46:33 pm
I don't really get why people in the UK object so much to wearing masks in shops etc. Seems a pretty trivial inconvenience. Wearing one while climbing would be a PITA but was never a thing anyway as far as I recall. Wearing one in reception or similar seems pretty easy and low hassle.
Quoted for truth.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: jwi on November 30, 2021, 01:19:34 pm
I remember when I lived in Japan almost 20 years ago. A lot of climbers bouldered in face mask during flu season. Even outdoors.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on November 30, 2021, 02:00:00 pm
People have been using face masks as a matter of course in Japan for a very long time. I went in 1998 and remember asking my sister whether they were being worn because of the pollution.  Nope they are wearing them because they have a cold to protect other people!
My nieces whom have spent most of their lives spending summers in Japan attending Japanese school had a personal supply of face masks at home pre pandemic.
Makes some of us seem like whiny babies that don't give a shit about other people.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: AJM on November 30, 2021, 02:57:50 pm
I was very grateful for my session at Rainbow Rocket last summer which seems to have been the only wall in the UK that required mask wearing at all times (and also had all of their shutters open to give plenty of ventilation).

Wall in Poole also had masks at all times incl when climbing.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 30, 2021, 03:22:51 pm
Just had jab 3 and 16 yo daughter had jab 2.
I had Pfizer this time, to add to my AZ collection…

We told the guys at the Bunker to switch back to masks while moving around, but not climbing.
When I say “back to” I mean switch from “strongly encourage” to “really insist quite strongly” and insist on temperature measuring for those that refuse.
There will be loud protests.
Usually Goop loving middle class mum, bringing little Farquhar in for the first time, while she shops online for Himalayan salt enema kits (or whatever it is currently in vogue).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on November 30, 2021, 04:29:11 pm
Usually Goop loving middle class mum, bringing little Farquhar in for the first time, while she shops online for Himalayan salt enema kits (or whatever it is currently in vogue).
I believe Lattice do a reasonably priced version with Lattice-coloured salt crystals, for pre-redpoint detox and weight-loss - you should stock them in your wee wall shop along side the finger tape and liquid chalk  :yes:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on November 30, 2021, 05:03:50 pm
Usually Goop loving middle class mum, bringing little Farquhar in for the first time, while she shops online for Himalayan salt enema kits (or whatever it is currently in vogue).

Yeah, there's a terrifying pathway from "wellness" circles into anti-vaxxer stuff and then sometimes deeper down the conspiracy theory rabbithole -- one researcher coined the fantastic phrase "Pastel QAnon"

https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/qanon-pastel-antivax-natural-parenting-community-freebirth-1098518/
https://www.wired.co.uk/article/yoga-disinformation-qanon-conspiracy-wellness
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on November 30, 2021, 07:23:09 pm
FWIW (which is very little, as I'm the only poster living here), Denmark went back to masks mandated on public transport and a whole bunch of other indoor public spaces yesterday, after many months without any mandates. Casual observations suggest very high (95%+) levels of compliance so far.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: battery on November 30, 2021, 08:17:18 pm
Usually Goop loving middle class mum, bringing little Farquhar in for the first time, while she shops online for Himalayan salt enema kits (or whatever it is currently in vogue).

Yeah, there's a terrifying pathway from "wellness" circles into anti-vaxxer stuff and then sometimes deeper down the conspiracy theory rabbithole -- one researcher coined the fantastic phrase "Pastel QAnon"

https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/qanon-pastel-antivax-natural-parenting-community-freebirth-1098518/
https://www.wired.co.uk/article/yoga-disinformation-qanon-conspiracy-wellness

I just offer a word of caution about that rolling stone article which is based in America and does not reflect my experience of birthing and parenting within the UK. Natural parenting has got fuck all to do with herbal remedies and antivax and everything to do with supporting children in finding their own way (the word support there being key). The fact that the image they have chosen to use for that article is infuriating - breastfeeding is hard enough, and still comes with judgement and stigma making it even more difficult - it could do without this kind of association.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on November 30, 2021, 08:31:17 pm
That's a fair point -- not meaning to imply that natural parenting has to have anything to do with this sort of bullshit at all, any more than yoga does (for example).

But within both of those worlds, I think there are particular subcommunities which lean into the "conspirituality" type of stuff, and that can be starting points for various rabbit holes.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: battery on November 30, 2021, 08:35:05 pm
More so than in any other community?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 30, 2021, 09:22:55 pm
More so than in any other community?

No, probably not.

Polly was very active in the BF community, becoming a peer support volunteer etc. However, the local group became overwhelmed by certain individuals who became really quite militant and very, well, odd, about it all. Very much bullying some women who struggled with breast feeding (please don’t ask me what their struggles were, I only know that one lady ended up with awful open sores, apparently). Then there was a whole load of crap of magical thinking about the super powers of breast milk to cure all known diseases and on and on.
The group pretty much broke up. One of the worst members, is still a FB friend of P and she’s now a total weirdo, her anti-vaccine, Covid denial ramped up and up over the last two years, to the point she pulled her children out of school because “they” were going to fatally harm her kids. Now, she’s all over flat earth, paedophile Santa Claus symbology and F knows what else.
Obviously, she’s suffering from something and the most alarming part of it are the comments of support for her bizarre rants, that she gets from her FB acolytes.

It’s not any one community, they’re everywhere and they corrupt even the most well meaning endeavours.

Social media just amplifies their crap.
Still a small minority though, just loud.

Unfortunately, anything with a hint of “natural” is like shit to a house fly for them and they gravitate in and firmly grasp the wrong end of the stick and start beating people with it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on November 30, 2021, 09:29:51 pm
More so than in any other community?

No, absolutely not! But you get a different route for people falling into anti-vaxx stuff when it's coming out of communities focused on natural parenting or "wellness" practices like yoga, versus the route into anti-vaxx stuff out of right-wing politics, for example. Or the one out of CrossFit!

And I was being kind of snarky, I admit, and no disrespect intended towards the natural parenting community (although disrespect absolutely intended towards Goop).

But I genuinely do think it's important for communities to be aware when you get these entries for rabbitholes forming in them. Because they're all over the place, and they can get slippery partly because the community is good and valuable to you and the connections you form are important, and then you get a corner where people have come a little ... unglued.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on November 30, 2021, 11:23:51 pm
Some interesting articles on this (to me, anyway) in the Grauniad quite recently.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/nov/11/injecting-poison-will-never-make-you-healthy-how-the-wellness-industry-turned-its-back-on-covid-science

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2021/oct/17/eva-wiseman-conspirituality-the-dark-side-of-wellness-how-it-all-got-so-toxic

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 01, 2021, 09:22:18 am
A new look at the Pandemic from The People's Covid Inquiry

Summary pdf here:

https://36085122-5b58-481e-afa4-a0eb0aaf80ca.usrfiles.com/ugd/360851_62aeecaeb6944934b6c55d41708d7eeb.pdf

The full report is linked here:

https://www.peoplescovidinquiry.com/

Roy Lilley's take on this:  "Jaw dropping"

https://myemail.constantcontact.com/Jaw-dropping.html?soid=1102665899193&aid=KxkmfsfpwcE
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on December 01, 2021, 09:59:18 am
Clicking on the summary report brings up a front page saying 'why did so many thousands die unnecessarily?' I happen to think the government fucked up in myriad different ways and a lot of people did die unnecessarily, but surely an independent report should at least have the pretence of independence?

Or as is perhaps more likely, given that the report was founded and presumably funded by a campaign group called Keep Our NHS Public, whose website would suggest aren't the biggest fans of the government anyway, that this report has concluded what it was always designed to conclude? Again, I suspect I agree with the reports conclusions and dislike ther government intensely but provenance matters and we might as well be clear about what we're reading.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 01, 2021, 10:37:04 am
Clicking on the summary report brings up a front page saying 'why did so many thousands die unnecessarily?' I happen to think the government fucked up in myriad different ways and a lot of people did die unnecessarily, but surely an independent report should at least have the pretence of independence?

Or as is perhaps more likely, given that the report was founded and presumably funded by a campaign group called Keep Our NHS Public, whose website would suggest aren't the biggest fans of the government anyway, that this report has concluded what it was always designed to conclude? Again, I suspect I agree with the reports conclusions and dislike ther government intensely but provenance matters and we might as well be clear about what we're reading.

It's a pressure group and not trying to hide that. The work is one of the few ways the voices of those who have lost loved ones are collectively being heard right now and it gives a comprehensive detailed collection of things the government actually got wrong. 

Such progressive cynicism is what the populists want.... if the information is useful and you can agree with the conclusions in the context of knowing it's from a pressure group, what exactly is the big issue here?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on December 01, 2021, 10:51:19 am

It's a pressure group and not trying to hide that. The work is one of the few ways the voices of those who have lost loved ones are collectively being heard right now and it gives a comprehensive detailed collection of things the government actually got wrong. 


I agree it wasn't hard to find but wanted to clarify. I also agree that the list of failures is useful, although there's nothing particularly new there from my skim read.


Such progressive cynicism is what the populists want.... if the information is useful and you can agree with the conclusions in the context of knowing it's from a pressure group, what exactly is the big issue here?

I have fairly deep seated scepticism that any pressure group for any topic can produce an inquiry/report into that topic and give recommendations that can be taken wholly at face value. If The Hunting Office produce a report into the benefits of fox hunting to local communities and ecology then I for one would take its findings with a distinct pinch of salt. Thats why its important to know who produced the report so one can balance the scales. Me having sympathy with the conclusions doesn't mean anything; knowing who wrote/says/contributed to something and why they might have done so is hugely relevant information. We all do it all the time when discussing pieces we disagree with, one shouldn't just ignore it when its something to agree with.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on December 01, 2021, 10:56:29 am
TLDR: ‘a sermon to the already converted’.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 01, 2021, 11:00:00 am
You could apply that argument to any charity or foundation or institute. The key issue your scepticism should be focussed on is the content. This 'balancing the scales' guff  is what populists want, it's part of false equivalence that boosts their side of the argument... they say liberal organisations are bad and not to be trusted, instead of a focus on the quality of the content. We know the libertarian institutes and foundations are too often bad from their information and research quality,  opaque funding support, lobby rule breaches etc.... not because they are libertarian.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on December 01, 2021, 11:02:33 am
The key issue your scepticism should be focussed on is the content
[..]
opaque funding support,

Didn't take you long to fall fowl of your own views  :lol:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on December 01, 2021, 11:05:20 am
You could apply that argument to any charity or foundation or institute.

That is precisely what I do. Its common sense.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 01, 2021, 02:20:49 pm
The key issue your scepticism should be focussed on is the content
[..]
opaque funding support,

Didn't take you long to fall fowl of your own views  :lol:

Good try. Lets see any evidence that Keep our NHS Public is actively hiding it's donors, like the shady Tuften St think tanks are. More false equivalence that helps the populist poison.

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/dark-money-investigations/revealed-how-uk-s-powerful-right-wing-think-tanks-and-conse/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on December 01, 2021, 02:23:23 pm
You seem to have entirely missed my point, which was that you argued that content rather than funding source was the place to focus scepticism/critique, and then two lines later took aim at opaque funding sources.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 01, 2021, 02:39:02 pm
You seem to have entirely missed my point, which was that you argued that content rather than funding source was the place to focus scepticism/critique, and then two lines later took aim at opaque funding sources.

Well that was an easy mistake for me to make since I said content was key (rather than political slant). I added the other bits to be clear that poor governance is also a reasonable issue to be concerned about.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on December 01, 2021, 04:25:58 pm
The key issue your scepticism should be focussed on is the content
[..]
opaque funding support,

Didn't take you long to fall fowl of your own views  :lol:

Chickens coming home to roost, clearly.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: reeve on December 01, 2021, 05:46:06 pm
The key issue your scepticism should be focussed on is the content
[..]
opaque funding support,

Didn't take you long to fall fowl of your own views  :lol:

Chickens coming home to roost, clearly.

Now that's a poultry effort at a joke
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 02, 2021, 09:14:21 am
For anyone who's got friends who are convinced that being "fit" means they don't need the vaccine:

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/nov/30/life-tragic-death-john-eyers-fitness-fanatic-who-refused-covid-vaccine
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 02, 2021, 09:42:21 am
For anyone who's got friends who are convinced that being "fit" means they don't need the vaccine:

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/nov/30/life-tragic-death-john-eyers-fitness-fanatic-who-refused-covid-vaccine

That was painful reading.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: duncan on December 02, 2021, 10:24:00 am
More so than in any other community?

There has always been a fringe in complementary medicine that sees itself as a replacement and not just complement to mainstream medicine which leads to some dangerous places. A friend of mine died of breast cancer probably because she didn’t engage in conventional treatment before it was too late.

This varies between and within the different types of complementary medicines, chiropractors and homeopaths are some of the worst. Some chiropractors see themselves as a complete system explicitly in opposition to conventional medicine, leading to a long history of aggressive anti-vaxx promotion by a minority. Their professional bodies have not done enough to bring their houses in order in my view. However, supporting battery's point, the proportion of antivaxx chiropractors is broadly similar to the wider population (20%, US pre-covid data (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X21010379)).   

The lunatic fringe always make the most noise and are most noticeable. As battery says, we should be careful to ascribe the views of the fringe to the whole, there is a danger that you’ll alienate the merely cautious or uncertain. People respond to pro-vaccine messages from those they trust. The biggest predictor of vaccine hesitancy is distrust of institutions in general and medical institutions in particular. Matt’s FB friends are a good example of this. The danger comes when complementary practitioners leverage the trust they have established to promote anti-vaxx messages. Use of complementary medicines per se is not the same as this and is a much weaker predictor of vaccine hesitancy.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 02, 2021, 11:01:44 am
It's not really chiropractic leverage we need to worry about. It's more major bankrolling of the anti-vax message and how that seeped into major political party views, especially Trumpist Republicans, as per the recent channel 4 documentary. Plus as the world watched all this mad shit with Trump and Boris play out and the refusal to provide much cheaper vaccination and logisitical support for that (making the western pharmaceutical industry a lot more money) it all adds to the distrust of anything western, including vaccines.  South Africa had plenty of vaccine supply but lack of logistics support and hesitancy means it was not reaching enough arms quickly enough (population rates were only around a third). This all comes round to hit the west every time a new more problematic variant arrives. I despair with the quality of worldwide pandemic response coordination.

The pandemic isn't over until its over but a few western countries, including the UK are planning for 3rd boosters while the developing world increasingly desperately needs help. We even skim developing world supply with barely a political whimper: hardly anyone seems to realise that the UK used COVAX supply.

https://www.devex.com/news/uk-took-500-000-vaccines-from-covax-experts-worry-it-could-take-more-101607
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 02, 2021, 02:22:10 pm
The pandemic isn't over until its over but a few western countries, including the UK are planning for 3rd boosters while the developing world increasingly desperately needs help.

Total agreement, but it's also worth people being aware that, on the individual level, you not taking a booster you're eligible for doesn't mean it can or will go to another country, it'll just be wasted:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/oct/12/individuals-vaccine-inequality-booster-jab

Redistribution has to happen much higher up the chain (and Pollard knows whereof he speaks).

I'm advising everyone I know to take boosters if they're eligible and to sign petitions and write stroppy letters to their MPs demanding the UK get serious about donating to Covax and supporting patent waivers.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 02, 2021, 03:11:11 pm
The pandemic isn't over until its over but a few western countries, including the UK are planning for 3rd boosters while the developing world increasingly desperately needs help.

Total agreement, but it's also worth people being aware that, on the individual level, you not taking a booster you're eligible for doesn't mean it can or will go to another country, it'll just be wasted:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/oct/12/individuals-vaccine-inequality-booster-jab

Redistribution has to happen much higher up the chain (and Pollard knows whereof he speaks).

I'm advising everyone I know to take boosters if they're eligible and to sign petitions and write stroppy letters to their MPs demanding the UK get serious about donating to Covax and supporting patent waivers.

Yeah I totally agree with that, for now. I do think we need to be pushing back about the need for 2nd and 3rd boosters (outside the most vulnerable groups). They can be redirected if enough people campaign.

On the subject of boosters not much seems to be being said in the news (unless I missed it) about how we have supply issues with Pfizer and so most of what's left for the next months in England will be Moderna.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 02, 2021, 03:37:49 pm
On the subject of boosters not much seems to be being said in the news (unless I missed it) about how we have supply issues with Pfizer and so most of what's left for the next months in England will be Moderna.

Dunno if that makes any practical difference, as they're basically the same vaccine in different hats (apart from Moderna having a higher dosage than Pfizer, which is why IIRC they use a half-dose when they're using it as a booster).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on December 02, 2021, 04:07:39 pm

Yeah I totally agree with that, for now. I do think we need to be pushing back about the need for 2nd and 3rd boosters (outside the most vulnerable groups). They can be redirected if enough people campaign.


I'd have no problem with my booster going to Covax. I'd absolutely be against any future additional restrictions beyond the current status quo in the future if it did though. In a nutshell I think that's why no government of any political stripe will divert vaccines earmarked for its own citizens elsewhere because they are essentially holding a gun to their own head.

Whoops just seen you were referring to hypothetical 2nd and 3rd boosters rather than the current one, same point stands though to a certain extent.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 02, 2021, 05:34:44 pm

Dunno if that makes any practical difference, as they're basically the same vaccine in different hats (apart from Moderna having a higher dosage than Pfizer, which is why IIRC they use a half-dose when they're using it as a booster).

Not much from the vaccination perspective. What concerns me about it would normally be a specific lack of openness but in this case it's almost certainly part of the active avoidance of news by DHSC control. It's the same reason we are not hearing just how bad things are in terms of being too often overstretched, sometimes to OPEL 4 levels (where patients are at risk), across English NHS trusts.

https://mobile.twitter.com/roylilley/status/1430892965711400960

Roy Lilley blogs on this regularly, helped by trust bosses and NHS staff leaking to him
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 03, 2021, 10:07:15 am
This has very worrying implications for the UK  (thanks for the link due to minimike on the other channel).

https://twitter.com/twenseleers/status/1466501989500653568?s=21
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on December 03, 2021, 10:29:19 am
So out of interest, in terms of what you want to happen based on the data you look at, you'd be in favour of an immediate lockdown, return to furlough etc?

I think its fairly likely that we'll see a wave this winter but I'm unconvinced it is politically possible to lockdown again for numerous reasons, so the more likely outcome is muddling through. Not least because if the variant is as bad as you suggest, we won't be able to stop it spreading anyway, even in a lockdown.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 03, 2021, 10:51:07 am
It doesn't matter what you think. If that hospitalisation and immunity escape data is correct in combination, even if we get better protection from having much more delta infection and better vaccination than SA, a lockdown may be unavoidable.  SA doesn't look as bad as we will with that data, if it pans out to us, as it's a very young country (medium age 28). Remember vaccines effectively reduce risks by about a decade and our medium age is 40 and we have proportionally way more of the most vulnerable (very old people and those with poor immune response through health problems).

The big UK problem will be hospitalisation increases in an NHS already over capacity and exhausted because the government chose to run things too hot (and unlike the EU and US our country has cut off routes to bring in new staff fast for Nightingale style responses).  Also the Stevens & Hancock combination did let local trusts do their own thing in the earlier pandemic peaks (what the NHS achieved in Jan 2021 was plain amazing)...I've less confidence in the leadership of the current pair.  I really hope I'm wrong but this looks bad.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on December 03, 2021, 11:04:41 am
So out of interest, in terms of what you want to happen based on the data you look at, you'd be in favour of an immediate lockdown, return to furlough etc?
That's a question for LozT, surely??
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on December 03, 2021, 11:29:11 am
It doesn't matter what you think.

Good start.  ::)

Actually, it does matter what the public, which includes me, think, because its public behaviour that determines the effectiveness of any restrictions. I don't think you will get much buy in for a lockdown from a population which will have largely had 3 jabs by end of January. Maybe if things are catastrophically bad, but not before that.

You clearly don't fall into this category, but I'd be willing to bet a pretty big chunk of the population fall into the 'just crack on best we can' category. I would need some serious persuading to come out of this category also, and before you say it again I'm more than aware of the NHS issues.

You haven't addressed the point about whether a lockdown would even help if the variant is as bad as you say.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 03, 2021, 12:33:49 pm
All the UK evidence is that public compliance with clear advice linked to genuine hospital need  was way better than most of SAGE expected (one of the reasons the March 2020 lockdown was so slow was a worry of lockdown fatigue, subsequently proven wrong). That's why I'm a dove on population compliance: based on that evidence (the biggest hawks tend to be libertarian or some level of covid or vaccination deniers).

We don't know about what level of lockdown might be needed as we don't have clear data yet. The effective R rate in SA is said to be about 2 in a country estimated at close to 100% of the population with some immunity (mainly infection based or infection plus vaccination). Unlike the UK, SA has had a death rate almost identical to the estimated demographic adjusted IFR for covid. There is a chance full Plan B might even be enough to just scrape through if we act fast, give trusts full flexibility to restructure and our more delta based immunity makes the situation better than I expect.  Any delay or top down government interference in trusts (or continued conflicting public messaging) makes a harsher lockdown more likely. It seems close to certain some level of lockdown will stop Omicron in the UK, thanks to high vaccination and previous infections levels, given the information we have so far on this variant.

Our leaders can't bluff and bluster if a pandemic puts the NHS at risk. Boris's dithering didn't just cost us tens of thousands of extra lost lives, it also cost us a fortune as lockdowns were longer than they would have been if we acted faster and the NHS is more battered than if we acted faster. Sweden also showed us that more consistent messaging trusted by the population led to much fewer deaths, less stringent restrictions, lower health system strains and lower lockdown economic costs.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nutty on December 03, 2021, 01:17:31 pm
So out of interest, in terms of what you want to happen based on the data you look at, you'd be in favour of an immediate lockdown, return to furlough etc?

I think its fairly likely that we'll see a wave this winter but I'm unconvinced it is politically possible to lockdown again for numerous reasons, so the more likely outcome is muddling through. Not least because if the variant is as bad as you suggest, we won't be able to stop it spreading anyway, even in a lockdown.
Surely the first step is to fully implement the previously announced Plan B: covid pass, masks and advice to work from home. Apart from the advice to work from home, it's no more than is already in place in Wales.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on December 03, 2021, 01:55:24 pm

Surely the first step is to fully implement the previously announced Plan B: covid pass, masks and advice to work from home. Apart from the advice to work from home, it's no more than is already in place in Wales.

Yeah, I could see that happening, and I'd be ok with it. I don't think it would be enough to satisfy the critics though. I still think, contrary to Offwidth, that workplaces that aren't already doing some form of WFH will need to be legally required to do so this time around. I would be very surprised if my former workplace reverted back to WFH for example, they were back in the office as soon as they could last year.

All the UK evidence is that public compliance with clear advice linked to genuine hospital need  was way better than most of SAGE expected (one of the reasons the March 2020 lockdown was so slow was a worry of lockdown fatigue, subsequently proven wrong). That's why I'm a dove on population compliance: based on that evidence (the biggest hawks tend to be libertarian or some level of covid or vaccination deniers).

That evidence is only of limited relevance given the fact that we now have a vaccine and are close to 2 years on from that first lockdown. An element of fatigue has obviously set in. Holding up evidence of good adherence to the first, game changing, genuinely unique first lockdown and suggesting that adherence is likely to be replicated in subsequent lockdowns seems obviously flawed; the material circumstances are totally different. Adherence was way less in Jan/Feb this year than it was in March 2020; you can see that straightaway through the medium of people going climbing in Jan 21 when they didn't in March 20.

Sweden also showed us that more consistent messaging trusted by the population led to much fewer deaths, less stringent restrictions, lower health system strains and lower lockdown economic costs.

Is this the same Sweden we all (me included) spent much of spring 2020 criticising for their laissez faire approach?

The bottom line is, as you say, we don't have clear data- waiting for it is the only option.



Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 03, 2021, 02:17:17 pm
Well the covid behavioural specialists I know beg to differ with your opinion. Mind you one of them is SAGE and IndieSAGE so I guess you won't trust her. There is clear anecdotal evidence a significant group of the population are being a !ot more careful already... lots of xmas party bookings cancelled in the news... only saw a few people without a mask in the big Sainsbury the day before yesterday, despite mask usage being down to about a half previously (oddly the petrol station there was the opposite but on a tiny sample).

On the subject of Sweden, yes it's the same country that did much worse than Norway but better than the UK. In particular I was angry early on that they tried to form a herd immunity approach pact with the UK and NL. I'm completely happy with my posting history on the subject compared to how things panned out.

My main point was if any lockdown is needed to protect the NHS it simply can't be avoided and any delay, poor messaging or poor compliance will just make restriction requirements worse. I think compliance will be good as I trust the experts I know and there is a significant chance we will get to see who is right.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on December 03, 2021, 02:43:09 pm
I do wish people would stop trying to compare the UK to Sweden, an enormous country with three modestly sized urban areas separated by vast tracts of forest and lakes.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 03, 2021, 02:45:45 pm
 Very romantic Will but Sweden has a slightly higher percentage of urban living.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_countries_by_percentage_of_urban_population
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on December 03, 2021, 02:57:46 pm
Very romantic Will but Sweden has a slightly higher percentage of urban living.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_countries_by_percentage_of_urban_population

The point is not about what percentage of the population is urbanised, it's about total population and how those urban areas are structured. From Liverpool to Leeds and down to Sheffield (and beyond) is not far off being a continuous conurbation with a few thin strips of green along the way. Consider the difference in edge effects when trying to control the spread through restricting movement.

Handy link (not Guardian, soz) here if you're not sure what I mean:
https://www.google.com/maps
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fultonius on December 03, 2021, 03:08:59 pm
Very romantic Will but Sweden has a slightly higher percentage of urban living.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_countries_by_percentage_of_urban_population

The point is not about what percentage of the population is urbanised, it's about total population and how those urban areas are structured. From Liverpool to Leeds and down to Sheffield (and beyond) is not far off being a continuous conurbation with a few thin strips of green along the way. Consider the difference in edge effects when trying to control the spread through restricting movement.

Handy link (not Guardian, soz) here if you're not sure what I mean:
https://www.google.com/maps

Also don't forget the national mindset is VERY different. We were there in the summer and asked a few people about it, and observed general behaviour. It seemed to us that Sweden was like a child who's been brought up to be conscientious and cautious, and that looking out for ones family and neighbours was just part of the psyche. With the parents away, the kids would maybe have a small fire in a safe fire pit in the woods and cook hot dogs on a stick. Going home early and taking all their rubbish home, and probably recycling it...

The UK on the other hand is like a repressed teenager, desperate to have a wild house party as soon as the parents are are.

They didn't need told what to do....

(massive oversimplification and overgeneralisation, but I think there's a shred of truth in it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on December 03, 2021, 03:49:32 pm
Very romantic Will but Sweden has a slightly higher percentage of urban living.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_countries_by_percentage_of_urban_population

The point is not about what percentage of the population is urbanised, it's about total population and how those urban areas are structured. From Liverpool to Leeds and down to Sheffield (and beyond) is not far off being a continuous conurbation with a few thin strips of green along the way. Consider the difference in edge effects when trying to control the spread through restricting movement.


And UK has 6(ish) times the population in a country half (ish) the size.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 03, 2021, 06:12:01 pm

Also don't forget the national mindset is VERY different. We were there in the summer and asked a few people about it, and observed general behaviour. It seemed to us that Sweden was like a child who's been brought up to be conscientious and cautious, and that looking out for ones family and neighbours was just part of the psyche. With the parents away, the kids would maybe have a small fire in a safe fire pit in the woods and cook hot dogs on a stick. Going home early and taking all their rubbish home, and probably recycling it...

The UK on the other hand is like a repressed teenager, desperate to have a wild house party as soon as the parents are are.

They didn't need told what to do....

(massive oversimplification and overgeneralisation, but I think there's a shred of truth in it.

That's my view on the real difference, it's not physical geography, it's human geography  & behaviour. I'd extend your fun analogy:  the UK repressed teenager is being looked after by a bad granddad in a bit of a hovel frequented by drinking buddies, while the Swedish family have responsible if liberal parents in a clean but busy home with visitors. They had the same spread factors we had at different times including their poorer communities hit harder, and a devastating spread in care homes. The Norwegian family next door had similarities to the Swedish family but were much more conservative and didn't like visitors when there was a virus doing the rounds

As for not comparing, even the nations best known virologist, Ferguson, was in on the act:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-95699-9

(Sorry I couldn't find the Guardian link :) )
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on December 03, 2021, 06:34:14 pm
Also don't forget the national mindset is VERY different. We were there in the summer and asked a few people about it, and observed general behaviour. It seemed to us that Sweden was like a child who's been brought up to be conscientious and cautious, and that looking out for ones family and neighbours was just part of the psyche. With the parents away, the kids would maybe have a small fire in a safe fire pit in the woods and cook hot dogs on a stick. Going home early and taking all their rubbish home, and probably recycling it...

The UK on the other hand is like a repressed teenager, desperate to have a wild house party as soon as the parents are are.

They didn't need told what to do....

(massive oversimplification and overgeneralisation, but I think there's a shred of truth in it.

Obviously it’s a simplification as you left out the preparing of gravadlax and surströmming, but we get the picture.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: jwi on December 04, 2021, 10:51:36 am
A Scandinavian city does not look like or function like a continental city, except for the most deprived areas of said Scandinavian city. IMHO, of course.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: BrutusTheBear on December 04, 2021, 11:00:15 am
Another factor into the mix, that I don't see discussed much anywhere, is the levels of statutory sick pay available to people required to isolate.  In Sweden it is 80% of full pay by law with many companies offering more than this. 
The level of statutory sick pay in the UK is insulting and I am sure leaves many already low paid workers, struggling to get by, less inclined to get tested if they are sick but able to function. 
Another reflection of the very differing attitude of ruling classes here where profit overrides welfare.  Likely to be a false economy but we seem to be unable to think that far ahead.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on December 04, 2021, 11:07:17 am
80%? That would be a decisive difference for compliance.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 04, 2021, 11:11:37 am
This has very worrying implications for the UK  (thanks for the link due to minimike on the other channel).

https://twitter.com/twenseleers/status/1466501989500653568?s=21

The one consolatory element I can pick out: that's looking at potential immune escape when it comes to infection, and all the info we have suggests that even when the vaccines don't prevent infection, they can still offer substantial protection against severe illness. They don't "fail" all at once.

(And that's assuming that vaccine-produced immunity and immunity from infection with a previous variant perform the same; I have seen some speculation that vaccine-produced immunity might perform better when it comes to a heavily-mutated variant like this, but I don't have the background to evaluate how plausible or likely that is: https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1466493406704807941 ).

Obviously it's still bad news because, as I repeat ad nauseam to people, a small percentage of a very very big number is still a big number. Even if only a small percentage of people with breakthrough infections get severely ill -- if you have enough breakthrough infections, that's a big number.

There are a lot of key things about Omicron that we don't know right now, but are going to be finding out very fast.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 04, 2021, 11:14:11 am
I think the UK was more the exception on statutory sick pay for covid isolation in western Europe. In public health terms it was a disaster as it added to hospital pressure and cost many lives (and extended the lockdowns and economic damage).

jwi is right that better urban planning made a difference but their care homes were not so dissimilar and they got hit hard in the first wave. In subsequent waves covid variants were just more infectious, so the factors like better urban planning and better compliance wasn't good enough with first wave measures to stop the spread. Their government was too slow to spot this new problem and hospitals struggled and many outside care homes died.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/sweden/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 04, 2021, 11:23:05 am
This has very worrying implications for the UK  (thanks for the link due to minimike on the other channel).

https://twitter.com/twenseleers/status/1466501989500653568?s=21

The one consolatory element I can pick out: that's looking at potential immune escape when it comes to infection, and all the info we have suggests that even when the vaccines don't prevent infection, they can still offer substantial protection against severe illness. They don't "fail" all at once.

(And that's assuming that vaccine-produced immunity and immunity from infection with a previous variant perform the same; I have seen some speculation that vaccine-produced immunity might perform better when it comes to a heavily-mutated variant like this, but I don't have the background to evaluate how plausible or likely that is: https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1466493406704807941 ).

Obviously it's still bad news because, as I repeat ad nauseam to people, a small percentage of a very very big number is still a big number. Even if only a small percentage of people with breakthrough infections get severely ill -- if you have enough breakthrough infections, that's a big number.

There are a lot of key things about Omicron that we don't know right now, but are going to be finding out very fast.

IndieSAGE data presentation on Omicrom was good this week. They had a nice curve of infectiousness vs immunity escape on which Omicron must sit somewhere but wherever it is on that curve the implications are we need to tighten measures in the UK. We are in a better position with vaccine immunity and overall immunity levels than most other western EU countries. It starts about 10 minutes in to the youtube link below.

One thing that was totally new for me is there was a small but significant increase in primary school age hospitalisations.

https://youtu.be/fg0tnIl6CTM

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 04, 2021, 11:24:21 am
Another factor into the mix, that I don't see discussed much anywhere, is the levels of statutory sick pay available to people required to isolate.  In Sweden it is 80% of full pay by law with many companies offering more than this. 
The level of statutory sick pay in the UK is insulting and I am sure leaves many already low paid workers, struggling to get by, less inclined to get tested if they are sick but able to function. 
Another reflection of the very differing attitude of ruling classes here where profit overrides welfare.  Likely to be a false economy but we seem to be unable to think that far ahead.

When we had to isolate, in the summer, prior to the both of us returning to work. We were on the highest level of Child Tax Credits etc. We applied for and received the £500 grant. I know of others who have done that more than once (one acquaintance has 7 children and has had to isolate three times, anti-vaccer unfortunately, so whole family shut up and living in separate rooms every time).
Anyway, it was better than a “normal” month, not worse.
The grant will be partially recovered now that we have both returned to full time employment. It’s not a bad system, we’ve blown right through the Tax Credit cap, so last years will be recovered from us, which seems fair.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 04, 2021, 11:31:17 am
This report illustrates the UK problem that led to far too few self isolating

https://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/research/tackling-covid-19-a-case-for-better-financial-support-to-self-isolate
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on December 04, 2021, 12:23:47 pm
So out of interest, in terms of what you want to happen based on the data you look at, you'd be in favour of an immediate lockdown, return to furlough etc?

I think its fairly likely that we'll see a wave this winter but I'm unconvinced it is politically possible to lockdown again for numerous reasons, so the more likely outcome is muddling through. Not least because if the variant is as bad as you suggest, we won't be able to stop it spreading anyway, even in a lockdown.

You haven't answered this.. (pointless answering with hypotheticals about an underfunded health service). What exactly would you do now if you were UK king, with what the UK has. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on December 04, 2021, 12:41:52 pm
I spent much of 2020 fending off of UK lockdown sceptic friends who repeatedly tried to argue Sweden had been "proved right." It happened again from a US friend last week: "if Sweden got it so wrong why is it doing so much better than Denmark" (short answer: it's not)

A Scandinavian city does not look like or function like a continental city, except for the most deprived areas of said Scandinavian city. IMHO, of course.

People always pick up on the population density issue, so that's worth looking at. On paper Sweden has a very low population density, many many times lower than the UK (and many times lower than Denmark, my reference point, which is in turn a lot lower than the UK). But how do people actually live? Stockholm's and London's population densities are much, much closer (5,200 per sq km vs 5,700 respectively). Both cities represent roughly the same percentage of each country's. population. As an aside Copenhagen's population density is higher at 6,800*, but Helsinki's (approx 3,000) and Oslo's (1.500) are considerably lower. Again, in all these cases the capital represents about the same percentage of the total population. Actual lived population density might explain some of Norway's and Finland's experiences, but it I don't think it can be used to say it's impossible to make any kind of policy comparison between the UK and Sweden. Of course, this isn't all the picture. I live in the second most densely populated neighbourhood in Copenhagen, at over 18,000 per sq km. In the next door neighbourhood it is basically 20,000. The most densely populated neighbourhood in London is Islington at about 16,000.

Scandinavian cities are generally considered more "liveable", easy to walk or cycle and some of that is down to urban planning (cycle lanes, high quality pubic transport), but there's only so much urban planning can do to mitigate such high population densities.

*lot of caveats attache to these numbers. which depend a lot on what's being measured of course (e.g. the figure for Copenhagen is for the city proper, not the greater city region).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on December 04, 2021, 01:06:56 pm
Where do people mix though? If the norm is 6 hours in the pub, cinema etc spread over a weekend that is going to produce more transmission than less time in shared settings and more time just with family or out of town.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on December 04, 2021, 01:29:02 pm
Where do people mix though?

In Scandinavia? I don't want to speak for other countries, but can assure you Danes enjoy being out socializing together.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on December 04, 2021, 01:34:29 pm
I've no experience of Denmark but what I have seen of Norway is that people love to go out drinking but it is unaffordable compared with meeting in home settings. So I'd hazard slightly greater transmission but fewer contacts.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 04, 2021, 02:40:14 pm
So out of interest, in terms of what you want to happen based on the data you look at, you'd be in favour of an immediate lockdown, return to furlough etc?

I think its fairly likely that we'll see a wave this winter but I'm unconvinced it is politically possible to lockdown again for numerous reasons, so the more likely outcome is muddling through. Not least because if the variant is as bad as you suggest, we won't be able to stop it spreading anyway, even in a lockdown.

You haven't answered this.. (pointless answering with hypotheticals about an underfunded health service). What exactly would you do now if you were UK king, with what the UK has.

Sorry, its not totally clear but I'm guessing that's a question for me..... I thought I had answered, so I'll repeat in simpler terms:
 
> implement Plan B now (but maybe without some of the more costly vaccine passport bits) as it helps cut hospital strain even if all this current data turns out wrong......it will slow any omicron growth and cut delta. Then fingers crossed we don't need anything else as the booster programme 'cuts the oxygen' from future growth. This will have very low cost and clear benefits.

> If as data improves (especially hospitalisation demographics) it becomes obvious further measures are needed (so far they don't look to need anything like a really tight lockdown, so I don't know where spidermonkey got that idea from ): go fast with clear messaging and proper financial support... as dither, contradiction and parsimony makes things worse.

> If things end up a lot worse than the data currently indicates we just have to do what we can with a hard lockdown. Whatever anyone says about compliance we simply cant function as a society if we overwhelm hospitals. This will be expensive and messy.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on December 04, 2021, 03:17:25 pm
Below is the government's 'Plan B (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-response-autumn-and-winter-plan-2021/covid-19-response-autumn-and-winter-plan-2021)', that you say they should implement right now except for the vaccine passport bits:

a. Communicating clearly and urgently to the public that the level of risk has increased, and with it the need to behave more cautiously. We've had messaging from the government that the risk has increased, everyone's aware.
b. Introducing mandatory vaccine-only COVID-status certification in certain settings. You say you wouldn't do this.
c. Legally mandating face coverings in certain settings. Done

''The Government would also consider asking people once again to work from home if they can, for a limited period. The Government recognises this causes more disruption and has greater immediate costs to the economy and some businesses than the other Plan B interventions, so a final decision would be made based on the data at the time.'' Not yet done.



So for all your rhetoric, all you'd actually do differently  if you were responsible for making the decisions at this point in time with what we currently know, is you'd want people 'to work from home where possible'. People already are already working from home btw - I've been WFH since March 2020 and see no reason not to now.

You say a lot without really saying anything.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 04, 2021, 05:19:03 pm
Sometimes think you delight in disagreement just because it's me. You pull apart the first of three points where I said it's quite likely we need to move to the second one. So for now, in your spirit of a 10 minute argument, lets look at the veracity of what you wrote (in the context that this is a serious public heath situation already, with the NHS really wobbling right now):

If we all had a vote here I doubt many would think government messaging has been at all clear, especially when Boris directly contradicts his new Public Health head (Harris) and goes against clear SAGE advice on messaging.

I said I drop the expensive bits of passports... ie make it a requirement but without the expensive cards and systems that make it an evidenced one.

The mask use in 'certain settings' has disappointed many experts, as the govenment watered down the lists to public transport and shops..... why on earth not theatres and cinemas?

As well as working from home if you can, there was also a lot on ventilation system compulsion for certain locations (especially schools). This will cost but is .a good investment for dealing with future cold and flu outbreaks (in schools cutting kids and staff unnecessarily losing class time).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on December 04, 2021, 06:31:00 pm
I don't enjoy disagreeing with you because it's you. I disagree with you because I often find what you say to be disagreeable.

I pulled apart your first point because it was easy to. Please point out where you said 'it's quite likely we need to move to my second point'.  Because I'm not seeing that anywhere?

'Wearing masks in cinemas and theatres'. Do you really think cinemas and theatres will move the needle on whether we get a disaster wave or just another wave? Come off it you don't even believe that. I see the sense in masks, but Wales never stopped mandating them yet still have higher per-head cases than England - they're hardly a panacea!

'Messaging' - what message would you personally send out to the public that those already in the choir don't already accept, and that those not in the choir would suddenly take any notice of and change their behaviour? Bearing in mind there's an economy to consider and the country cannot just down tools for the sake of covid at the level it's currently at.

'Installing ventilation systems in schools to prevent future outbreaks' has nothing to do with dealing with the present, and everything to do with future outbreaks.  The question was what would you do differently given what we currently know and given what we currently have.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: duncan on December 05, 2021, 06:55:36 pm
Australian cluster possibly linked to climbing wall (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-12-04/indoor-climbing-gym-covid-omicron-investigation-cases/100674138).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on December 06, 2021, 09:02:06 am
Those green bucket handles up the arete are ridiculous
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 08, 2021, 07:19:31 am
John Burn-Murdoch from the FT with the latest on Omicron in SA.

https://mobile.twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1468310548609744904
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 08, 2021, 08:22:11 am
John Burn-Murdoch from the FT with the latest on Omicron in SA.

https://mobile.twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1468310548609744904

JBM is a rockstar of data-visualization and explaining. He's one of the people I tend to check first, along with https://twitter.com/kallmemeg .
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 08, 2021, 02:04:47 pm
Yo, if you're 40+ (or high risk, or a frontline health or social care worker) and it's been over 2 months since your second dose,  you should be able to pre-book your booster through the website now (or tomorrow, they're adjusting it as we speak):

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/coronavirus-vaccination/book-coronavirus-vaccination/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on December 08, 2021, 02:23:31 pm
Within 30 minutes of having my booster yesterday (and obviously being processed through the system at the vaxx centre), I got both a text and email informing me that I was eligible and hadn't booked a booster yet and really should  ::)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on December 08, 2021, 02:26:38 pm
You'll probably have gotten that text because it was in the system when they switched on your nanorouter.
5GFiend.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on December 08, 2021, 06:05:01 pm
Well. My shoulder has been pretty fucking painful for the last 24 hours. No military press PBs for me at the mo.

But that's massively less painful than a single 24 hours in which I'm prohibited from using indoor sports facilities to either do the life-affirming fitness activity I love the most, or to do essential rehab and training to keep my body going, or 24 hours where I get fucking "Stay Home" seared across my eyes whilst doing a positive, healthy, zero transmission risk activity. So yeah I'll take the shoulder ache.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on December 08, 2021, 07:32:02 pm

But that's massively less painful than a single 24 hours in which I'm prohibited from using indoor sports facilities to either do the life-affirming fitness activity I love the most,

Never realised you were that into Zumba.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 10, 2021, 11:13:31 am
S gene dropout reported on the beeb to be in excess of 5% already, so they say omicron is probably already around the two and a half thousand cases a day level.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-59580290

I'm really hoping hospitalisation rates are a lot lower than for delta.

Shopping in the big Sainsbury yesterday, we had the return of tannoy mask advice and everyone aside from one toddler had a mask on. It was a large majority last week (with no announced advice) and about half the week before.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on December 10, 2021, 11:30:17 am
As someone who largely tries to forecast things for a living, I find it quite reassuring when other people trying to forecast things essentially say "we've basically not got a clue whether it's a total disaster or pretty chill"
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 10, 2021, 11:55:48 am
I struggle to understand your general point's relevance to this specific. The case number estimates from current and  past UK trajectory of S gene drop-out are reliable with known error levels based on known data. The hospitalisation level and the crucial demographic distribution of that for Omicron cases is a genuine unknown (at least for the next week or so)....the case growth is faster than SA data indicated it might be, but it's hardly surprising since we are in winter. Saying it was obvious some restrictions were needed a few days ago wasn't really forecasting it was just setting a range on how bad things could get. Back then it was anything from Plan B light to hard lockdown (as omicron hospitalisations were increasing in SA; a country with a much younger demographic, but with similar high levels of the population having some immunity, be it from vaccines or prior infection)... it's now shifted a bit upwards in risk terms for the UK but the possible range is still huge until we start to get UK omicron hospitalisation data.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on December 10, 2021, 12:00:31 pm
I struggle to understand your general point's relevance to this specific.
My point was basically this:
the possible range is still huge
and was in response to the final part of the article
Quote
"You can get everything from no wave, to a wave there's no need to worry about, to doomsday; that's the problem there is massive uncertainty," he said.

It makes me feel better about times when the gap between my "low" and "high" scenarios is enormous.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Wellsy on December 10, 2021, 12:53:31 pm
The estimates have often not been correct

We were supposed to be hitting 100k cases in August, instead cases dropped. The forecasts by many professionals were incorrect. Famously Prof. Ferguson amongst them.

Anyone who says they know what will happen either way is delusional. We don't know enough yet re. Omicron.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 10, 2021, 01:04:17 pm
You're comparing apples with oranges in the forecast stakes. S gene drop-out data was from days ago and the doubling looks closer to two days on that. There is a very high probability prediction omicron will be more than half of Scottish cases in just a week, in the news today. Those predictions from models you refer to had high uncertainty and were associated with all sorts of provisos (including, crucially, if we do nothing about it) and were often misused in the media.

As an aside, wintertree just pointed out the fact that UK case data doesn't include re-infections, that might already  be leading to a serious undercount of current omicron cases.

From Guardian live

"Nicola Sturgeon has just started her televised update on Omicron in Scotland with some sobering words and numbers: she says that the country is facing “a potential tsumani of infections”, explaining that the new variant is showing “the fastest exponential growth we have seen in this pandemic so far”.

There were 5,018 positive cases in Scotland on Friday, a sharp rise on the average of 2,800 daily cases that health officials have been reporting recently.

There were a total of 110 Omicron cases, up from just nine when the variant was first detected in Scotland on 30 November.

The Scottish government has just published an evidence paper on Omicron, which suggests that Omicron is “rising exponentially” – officials believe the doubling time is closer to two than three days, and that Omicron is going to very quickly overtake Delta as dominant variant, maybe as early as next week."
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 10, 2021, 01:05:14 pm
I struggle to understand your general point's relevance to this specific.
My point was basically this:
the possible range is still huge
and was in response to the final part of the article
Quote
"You can get everything from no wave, to a wave there's no need to worry about, to doomsday; that's the problem there is massive uncertainty," he said.

It makes me feel better about times when the gap between my "low" and "high" scenarios is enormous.

In that context a totally fair point. My apologies.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 11, 2021, 09:24:09 am
Getcha fucking boosters, people:

https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/booster-jabs-omicron-protection-symptoms-immunity-1347058

Protection against severe illness probably holds up much better, but protection against symptomatic infection from two doses taaaaaaanks against Omicron, especially for people vaccinated with AZ.

On the other hand, AZ plus Pfizer (either as heterologous first and second doses or doses plus booster) is looking strong against Omicron:

https://twitter.com/andrew_croxford/status/1468828325263159296
https://twitter.com/theosanderson/status/1469360029262397442

And that's the combo that got the wild T-cell response in the COM-COV trial.

So those of us who got AZ initially may be in a pretty nice position -- if we get that booster (got mine on Thurs).

Looks like various places are being pragmatic and vaccinating under-40s as soon as they've got capacity:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/09/gps-offer-covid-boosters-to-under-40s-against-nhs-guidance
https://www.reddit.com/r/GetJabbed/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 11, 2021, 10:00:14 am
The UKHSA advice given to Javid has been leaked to the Guardian. It includes information on when stricter measures than Plan B need to be introduced, depending on percentages hospitalised by omicon (still not known) and for three levels of  extra daily admissions. The advice is worst case in those scenarios we need tighter restrictions on 8th, best case on 19th.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/10/stringent-uk-covid-measures-needed-within-a-week-leak-reveals
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on December 11, 2021, 10:25:04 am
So those of us who got AZ initially may be in a pretty nice position -- if we get that booster (got mine on Thurs).

Looks like various places are being pragmatic and vaccinating under-40s as soon as they've got capacity:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/09/gps-offer-covid-boosters-to-under-40s-against-nhs-guidance
https://www.reddit.com/r/GetJabbed/

Everyone I know here (Northants) in their 30s is now boosted. All invited by our GPs, I don't think under 40s can book without an invite yet. Colleagues in their 40s and 50s were all boosted weeks ago.

Meanwhile, I know 65+year olds in Derbyshire who aren't boosted yet and not for lack of trying.

The postcode lottery seems even more extreme than for 1st/2nd doses.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on December 11, 2021, 10:31:30 am
Are all boosters Pfizer? For somebody who has had two doses of Pfizer is there any sense in seeking out a Moderna booster to improve protection?

I haven't been invited yet but see that there is a walk-in doing Pfizer boosters in Bradford today.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: kelvin on December 11, 2021, 11:11:24 am
Are all boosters Pfizer? For somebody who has had two doses of Pfizer is there any sense in seeking out a Moderna booster to improve protection?

I haven't been invited yet but see that there is a walk-in doing Pfizer boosters in Bradford today.

I had a moderna booster, as did Lagers
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: duncan on December 11, 2021, 11:16:36 am
Boosters are supposedly for over 40s so all are supposed to be Pfizer or Moderna (https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/coronavirus-vaccination/coronavirus-booster-vaccine/). They are both mRNA vaccines and work in a similar fashion so [theorising] it should make little difference which one you have [/theorising].

My booster was Pfizer.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on December 11, 2021, 11:29:30 am
Just booked mine, for next Saturday.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 11, 2021, 11:39:17 am
Boosters are supposedly for over 40s so all are supposed to be Pfizer or Moderna (https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/coronavirus-vaccination/coronavirus-booster-vaccine/). They are both mRNA vaccines and work in a similar fashion so [theorising] it should make little difference which one you have [/theorising].

My booster was Pfizer.

They're very very similar in structure, but apparently the standard Moderna dose is a bit higher (which is why it can also tend to hit a bit harder with side-effects), so that might make a difference. But yeah, otherwise they're basically the same.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 11, 2021, 11:52:54 am
Are all boosters Pfizer? For somebody who has had two doses of Pfizer is there any sense in seeking out a Moderna booster to improve protection?

I haven't been invited yet but see that there is a walk-in doing Pfizer boosters in Bradford today.

Most are Moderna now due to supply issues. Pfizer more likely in walk-ins as they are trying to encourage frist and second doses.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 11, 2021, 11:56:13 am
So those of us who got AZ initially may be in a pretty nice position -- if we get that booster (got mine on Thurs).

Looks like various places are being pragmatic and vaccinating under-40s as soon as they've got capacity:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/09/gps-offer-covid-boosters-to-under-40s-against-nhs-guidance
https://www.reddit.com/r/GetJabbed/

Everyone I know here (Northants) in their 30s is now boosted. All invited by our GPs, I don't think under 40s can book without an invite yet. Colleagues in their 40s and 50s were all boosted weeks ago.

Meanwhile, I know 65+year olds in Derbyshire who aren't boosted yet and not for lack of trying.

The postcode lottery seems even more extreme than for 1st/2nd doses.

My parents are in Northants... their Weedon GPs have been superb on vaccination throughput throughout, as good as any I've heard of in the UK.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 11, 2021, 12:20:04 pm
Are all boosters Pfizer? For somebody who has had two doses of Pfizer is there any sense in seeking out a Moderna booster to improve protection?

I haven't been invited yet but see that there is a walk-in doing Pfizer boosters in Bradford today.

If I'm reading https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)02717-3/fulltext correctly (someone check in case I'm not), people who've had two Pfizers might get an even higher antibody response with Moderna rather than a third Pfizer, though you may also get whapped harder with side-effects.

However, three doses of any mRNA vax performs very strongly, so personally I wouldn't delay getting boosted in order to get a particular one.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fultonius on December 11, 2021, 12:59:12 pm
I've had double pfizer & covid. I guess I won't get a booster for a while now?

Any stats on the protection this scenario provides?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 11, 2021, 01:14:12 pm
I've had double pfizer & covid. I guess I won't get a booster for a while now?

Any stats on the protection this scenario provides?

Yup! Preliminary Omicron neutralization stats here -- you're in figure h, "super-immune"  :punk: :

https://twitter.com/JanineKimpel/status/1468700628922904591

(B.1.1.529 is Omicron.)

You need to wait 28 days after having Covid (starting from the date when you first had symptoms, or from when you had a positive test if you didn't get any symptoms) before you can get a booster, but then you're good to go:

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/coronavirus-vaccination/book-coronavirus-vaccination/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 11, 2021, 01:28:49 pm
Its a ninety day wait for kids ....part of the reason it will be so hard to catch up in those groups.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nails on December 11, 2021, 02:54:37 pm
I've had double AZ followed by Covid followed by a Moderna booster. My wife's had double Pfizer followed by Covid with a booster booked for a week today. My 9 yr old daughter has had Covid and no jabs. My 12 yr old son has had Covid and a Pfizer jab at the beginning of October. We're booked to fly to Spain on 1st of Jan but according to current rules we can't as anyone 12 or over has to be fully jabbed. After much research there appears to be no way of getting my 12 year old a second jab and therefore no way of getting to Spain. First world problems I know but I'd be interested if anyone knew a way around this?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on December 11, 2021, 04:09:04 pm
I thought current guidance was under 16s only got one jab?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fultonius on December 11, 2021, 04:18:19 pm
YYFY super immune.

Nails, could you go by road via France? Not sure of their rules are any different.

Would just be nice if you could do a antibody test instead. Seems logical!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 11, 2021, 04:27:42 pm
I thought current guidance was under 16s only got one jab?

I think that's the problem. Doesn't qualify as "fully vaccinated" by Spain's standards, but they can't get a second one in the UK yet:

https://inews.co.uk/inews-lifestyle/travel/travel-spain-announces-children-aged-12-and-over-must-have-both-covid-vaccinations-for-holidays-from-december-1325649

The JCVI's very recently changed its recommendations to say that 12-15-year-olds should be offered a second dose, but unclear when that's going to start happening.

And it's supposed to be with at least a 12 week gap, and if I'm reading this correctly, Spain only counts you as "fully vaccinated" from two weeks after jab 2:

https://www.mscbs.gob.es/en/profesionales/saludPublica/ccayes/alertasActual/nCov/spth.htm
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 11, 2021, 04:32:53 pm
I thought current guidance was under 16s only got one jab?

I was adding to what slab_happy said....if you are under 18 you have to wait longer after any covid infection before you get your jab. A lot of under 18 year olds have had covid in the last 3 months. Its a real shame as some locally queued for over an hour not knowing this and were turned away.

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/coronavirus-vaccination/book-coronavirus-vaccination/

"If you or your child are under 18 years old and not at higher risk from COVID-19, you need to wait 12 weeks before getting a 1st dose after a positive COVID-19 test."
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 11, 2021, 05:18:11 pm
YYFY super immune.

Yeah, you can see in the charts there's still some drop-off in the antibody neutralization against Omicron, because its immune escape capacity is really nasty, but you're WAY ahead of anyone who's only had two jabs.

Mandatory disclaimer that I am not a doctor or an immunologist, but I'd think if you stick a booster on top of that then you probably become bulletproof.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on December 11, 2021, 06:39:00 pm
The NHS website has just opened to bookings for under 40s without an invite (I'm not sure what the new age cutoff is). Lots of people reporting being able to book slots within the next week.

On booking, your confirmation email will say:

"If you have a booked a 3rd dose you will not be able to get vaccinated without your referral letter."

I know people have booked them anyway with the expectation that the website change is a precursor for the invite rule changing. They're hopeful that people will no longer get turned away by the time their appointment comes around.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on December 11, 2021, 06:46:43 pm
What's the difference between 3rd dose and booster? My email talks about needing a referral letter for 3rd dose for people with severely weakened immune system. Doesn't mention boosters.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on December 11, 2021, 07:07:00 pm
A 3rd dose is part of the primary series to create an effective immune response for the more vulnerable, that much is clear. I don’t know if it is a higher dose than a booster, or just a difference of terminology signifying it is part of the primary series of vaccination (as opposed to a stimulus to a successful but waning response).

I would be curious to know too.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 11, 2021, 07:08:49 pm
What's the difference between 3rd dose and booster? My email talks about needing a referral letter for 3rd dose for people with severely weakened immune system. Doesn't mention boosters.

Very little in terms of what's in the actual jab (though according to this, they're using half-doses of Moderna for boosters but full doses for third doses: https://www.crohnsandcolitis.org.uk/news/third-covid-19-vaccine , and some people have been having third doses of AZ).

People who are immunocompromised/immunosuppressed have a much lower response to the vaccines, so 3 doses in fairly close succession are needed to (hopefully) kickstart the immune reaction which other people get from 2.

So, different purpose and timing from a booster, which is designed to pick up that original immune response later once it's started to wane over time.

Of course Omicron might shake all that up; depending on how the data looks, we might end up with "normal" Covid vaccination becoming 3 doses.

But anyway, it's a meaningful distinction in terms of the purpose.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dunnyg on December 11, 2021, 07:18:26 pm
Can confirm boosters and 3rd dose are different, tried to book the wrong one and got told to re book for the other.
It was explained in laymen's terms to me that 3rd dose is another "full" dose and the other is a half dose.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on December 11, 2021, 07:27:10 pm
Be interested in sdm's email then, cause mine def implies you need a referral for a third dose, but doesn't mention boosters. (And I don't have such a letter...)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on December 11, 2021, 08:21:46 pm
Under 40s can now book boosters on the NHS website.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: steveyo on December 11, 2021, 08:27:40 pm
Will, are you sure? Can you add the link?

I tried to get a booster tonight at the walk in, wife had hers booked (over 40), they initially said yes to me (37) but then changed their mind.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on December 11, 2021, 08:29:17 pm
Won't work for me. This might be because I'm lucky enough to be under 30 still?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: JK on December 11, 2021, 09:07:53 pm
You can, I just booked mine after seeing Will's post
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on December 11, 2021, 09:27:03 pm
At time of writing they've updated the validation so that when you enter your date of birth while booking it still let's you proceed if over 30. No idea for under 30s. They haven't updated the accompanying text on the booking home page yet.

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/coronavirus-vaccination/book-coronavirus-vaccination/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 12, 2021, 07:34:12 am
Are all boosters Pfizer? For somebody who has had two doses of Pfizer is there any sense in seeking out a Moderna booster to improve protection?

I haven't been invited yet but see that there is a walk-in doing Pfizer boosters in Bradford today.

If I'm reading https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)02717-3/fulltext correctly (someone check in case I'm not), people who've had two Pfizers might get an even higher antibody response with Moderna rather than a third Pfizer, though you may also get whapped harder with side-effects.

However, three doses of any mRNA vax performs very strongly, so personally I wouldn't delay getting boosted in order to get a particular one.

Though (just replying to myself for reasons of pedantry) that study data was with a full dose of Moderna, and I see they're using half-doses of Moderna as boosters, which you can do because the original dose is higher than with Pfizer so you can halve it and still get a decent respose.

So you wouldn't get the possible extra response if it's just a product of the higher dosage.

So yeah, I'd say go for whatever you can get soonest.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 12, 2021, 08:37:36 am
We were Xmas shopping in Exeter yesterday.
There was an anti-vaccine/anti-mask protest.

All of 40/50 people. Noisy with whistles, but drowned by the crowds of hundreds (even thousands) of masked shoppers.
There was a lot of heckling from the shoppers, “Plague rats” prominent in the hubbub.

The queue for Churros had twice the number of people in it.

Churros, being a real thing, at least.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 12, 2021, 08:38:50 am
Looks like booking through the website officially opens to 30-39-year-olds tomorrow (Mon):

https://inews.co.uk/news/covid-19-booster-jabs-extended-over-30s-omicron-variant-1348237

So they've presumably changed the back-end settings already, just not the boilerplate text yet.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 13, 2021, 08:12:11 am
Over-18s should be able to book via the website from Weds, and some places will be offering walk-in appointments to over-18s from Mon:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-59631570

Though a friend reports that the website is currently crashing under load ...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Liamhutch89 on December 13, 2021, 10:26:21 am
Daily deaths have been at about the same level since August so why all the recent fuss? I see there's another new variant (isn't there always?), but why are restrictions suddenly coming back now?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on December 13, 2021, 10:42:35 am
Exponential growth mixed with small-%-of-a-big-number-is-still-a-big-number mixed with uncertainty about what exactly Omicron will do to the projections, I believe.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 13, 2021, 11:05:40 am
Exponential growth mixed with small-%-of-a-big-number-is-still-a-big-number mixed with uncertainty about what exactly Omicron will do to the projections, I believe.

Plus Omicron's immune escape capacity -- it's REALLY good at infecting vaccinated (or previously-infected) people.

Even if breakthrough infections are relatively milder (which is what we're crossing fingers for, based on the early reports from South Africa), it means vaccinated people don't serve as a "firewall" to stop it moving through the population.

And it makes Delta look slow-moving.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 13, 2021, 11:09:56 am
Find a walk-in site:

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/coronavirus-vaccination/find-a-walk-in-coronavirus-covid-19-vaccination-site/

Currently says:

You can get a booster dose from a walk-in site if it's been 3 months (91 days) since your 2nd dose and you're either:

    aged 30 years old or over
    aged 16 years old or over with a health condition that puts you at high risk from COVID-19


Appointment booking through the website is now totally overwhelmed and they're advising "try again later today or tomorrow":

https://twitter.com/NHSuk/status/1470331876883804160
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on December 13, 2021, 11:21:30 am
Slabs, I don't doubt the thrust of what you're saying and I'm absolutely sure that you've done loads more reading about this (I know this because I have done almost precisely none), but I'm not sure that speaking in absolute terms is helpful.

Looking at this through the eyes of somebody who is weary of the whole thing by now and would quite like to crack on as normal:

Plus Omicron's immune escape capacity -- it's REALLY good at infecting vaccinated (or previously-infected) people.

Even if breakthrough infections are relatively milder (which is what we're crossing fingers for, based on the early reports from South Africa), it means vaccinated people don't serve as a "firewall" to stop it moving through the population.

It might seem like there's no point in getting a booster at all. Wouldn't it be truer to say the vaccine is not as good at preventing transmission of Omicron but it still has some effect and it's the best chance we've got of reducing R without having restrictions on social contact. Not to mention that, although there is some cause to be optimistic about the severity of illness from Omicron, there's still a chance that it'll fuck you or your gran up so best to give yourself the best protection available.


My take at the moment is that shit is likely to kick off, because of the reasons above, but nobody has any idea yet to what extent the shit might be kicked off. Thus the best thing to do is to get the best mitigation you can and keep an eye on things.

I don't know whether more social restrictions might be necessary before Christmas, but I'm absolutely certain that the government will find it almost impossible to enact and enforce them before Christmas is done - such is the mood in the public and their own party. People would need to see the bodies piling up outside morgues before they accepted a cancelled Christmas, by which point (of course) it's too late.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Liamhutch89 on December 13, 2021, 11:29:29 am
Exponential growth mixed with small-%-of-a-big-number-is-still-a-big-number mixed with uncertainty about what exactly Omicron will do to the projections, I believe.

Plus Omicron's immune escape capacity -- it's REALLY good at infecting vaccinated (or previously-infected) people.

Even if breakthrough infections are relatively milder (which is what we're crossing fingers for, based on the early reports from South Africa), it means vaccinated people don't serve as a "firewall" to stop it moving through the population.

And it makes Delta look slow-moving.

Ok, I won't be rushing for a vaccination then (recent covid antibodies so other variants still in circulation aren't a concern). Seems the best precaution for me is to be diligent about hygiene and take a LFT before social interactions.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 13, 2021, 11:42:00 am
Slabs, I don't doubt the thrust of what you're saying and I'm absolutely sure that you've done loads more reading about this (I know this because I have done almost precisely none), but I'm not sure that speaking in absolute terms is helpful.

Looking at this through the eyes of somebody who is weary of the whole thing by now and would quite like to crack on as normal:

Plus Omicron's immune escape capacity -- it's REALLY good at infecting vaccinated (or previously-infected) people.

Even if breakthrough infections are relatively milder (which is what we're crossing fingers for, based on the early reports from South Africa), it means vaccinated people don't serve as a "firewall" to stop it moving through the population.

It might seem like there's no point in getting a booster at all. Wouldn't it be truer to say the vaccine is not as good at preventing transmission of Omicron but it still has some effect and it's the best chance we've got of reducing R without having restrictions on social contact. Not to mention that, although there is some cause to be optimistic about the severity of illness from Omicron, there's still a chance that it'll fuck you or your gran up so best to give yourself the best protection available.

I think either I'm communicating badly (very possible, too little sleep and not nearly enough coffee) or you're misreading or both, but either way, you're right that this is super-important to clarify:

Omicron is really good at infecting people who have had two doses of vaccine.

We're hoping that those two doses still provide some solid protection against getting severely ill if you do get infected, but they just got a lot less useful at stopping you from getting infected in the first place (especially if you had AZ, like me). Which also means you can potentially transmit to other people, too.

(Whence the worry, because it means Omicron can move very fast through a population even though loads of people have had two doses.)

HOWEVER.

Evidence is showing that a booster dose does wonders at kicking protection way back up again. Omicron can get past two doses worryingly well, but three block it (about as well as two doses do with Delta).

The data on that is REALLY POSITIVE and a huge relief. At three doses, it is as good at blocking the virus as before.

(In fact, those of us who had AZ get an upgrade to our protection, because we get in on that funky mix-and-match action.)

So yeah, the takeaway shouldn't be "the vaccines don't work, don't bother", it should be "thank fuck the vaccines still work IF you get the booster, so do that a.s.a.p. and hopefully we can get through this with as little disruption as possible".
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 13, 2021, 11:55:51 am
Exponential growth mixed with small-%-of-a-big-number-is-still-a-big-number mixed with uncertainty about what exactly Omicron will do to the projections, I believe.

Plus Omicron's immune escape capacity -- it's REALLY good at infecting vaccinated (or previously-infected) people.

Even if breakthrough infections are relatively milder (which is what we're crossing fingers for, based on the early reports from South Africa), it means vaccinated people don't serve as a "firewall" to stop it moving through the population.

And it makes Delta look slow-moving.

Ok, I won't be rushing for a vaccination then (recent covid antibodies so other variants still in circulation aren't a concern). Seems the best precaution for me is to be diligent about hygiene and take a LFT before social interactions.

See my subsequent clarification -- Omicron's good at getting past two doses of vaccine, but stops short at three. Which is why the all-out push for boosters right now.

Have you been vaxxed at all?

If not, I wouldn't rely on antibodies alone because again, Omicron seems pretty good at getting past antibodies to Delta; it's heavily mutated so the antibodies made for Delta don't work against it as well.

However, if you add vaccination to previous infection, you get to be "super-immune", and that does seem to hold pretty strongly against Omicron -- it's the funky hybrid immunity people are trying to simulate with mix-and-matching different types of vaccines:

https://twitter.com/JanineKimpel/status/1468700628922904591

(B.1.1.529 is Omicron; "super-immune" is figure h, and you can see how that protection holds up very well against Omicron where most have a sharp drop-off.)

So yeah, if you can get in on that action and haven't already, go for it, it's fucking awesome!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on December 13, 2021, 11:56:55 am
Thanks for that. This:

Evidence is showing that a booster dose does wonders at kicking protection way back up again. Omicron can get past two doses worryingly well, but three block it (about as well as two doses do with Delta).

The data on that is REALLY POSITIVE and a huge relief. At three doses, it is as good at blocking the virus as before.

is a huge difference to how I was thinking about this before. I'd understood it to be that Omicron was still very good at evading boosters but, meh, it's the best chance you've got. Thanks for the info.

I find myself now very pro booster because I'd really like to keep using 36Chambers' board and going out to look at wet boulders.


Incidentally, do we know why is this the case:
Quote
Omicron can get past two doses worryingly well, but three block it (about as well as two doses do with Delta).

I'd assumed that vaccine effectiveness followed an exponentially relaxing curve, with more doses improving protection but at a decreasing rate. Unless the 2-dose-bad 3-dose-good thing is an artefact of the timing of when vaccines were given (i.e. if you've had two doses its likely that your 2nd dose is now a bit old and "wearing off") then why is there such a step change between 2 and 3 doses?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Adam Lincoln on December 13, 2021, 11:59:04 am
Daily deaths have been at about the same level since August so why all the recent fuss? I see there's another new variant (isn't there always?), but why are restrictions suddenly coming back now?

Exactly. People need to get a bloody grip.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: RobK on December 13, 2021, 12:00:41 pm
(In fact, those of us who had AZ get an upgrade to our protection, because we get in on that funky mix-and-match action.)

Does this work for other types too?. I.e. as someone who had two Pfizer doses, given the choice, should I get a Moderna booster?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Wellsy on December 13, 2021, 12:04:34 pm
The reason why some restrictions are coming back feels to me to be 50% Omicron caution and 50% PM wanting to distract from the office party story
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: JohnM on December 13, 2021, 12:09:49 pm
The reason why some restrictions are coming back feels to me to be 50% Omicron caution and 50% PM wanting to distract from the office party story

Exactly this and the fact that countries rarely change their leaders during times of war or national crisis. Expect to hear things like "national effort" and "national crisis" coming out of Johnson's mouth.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on December 13, 2021, 12:11:24 pm
Daily deaths have been at about the same level since August so why all the recent fuss? I see there's another new variant (isn't there always?), but why are restrictions suddenly coming back now?

Exactly. People need to get a bloody grip.

This is a little bit like using that as an argument back in mid March 2020 ("we're not fucked yet and might not be so let's just do nothing"). It might be right... or it might be pretty wrong... a little bit of caution (e.g. masks and WFH) seems a minor imposition and might push things out a bit until most people are boosted, at which point it looks like we're back to about where we were on protection levels (but maybe with higher case numbers so still a bit more overloaded on the NHS)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on December 13, 2021, 12:17:30 pm
Since we're chatting about Johnson now I can say as an aside that my favourite bit of stupidity is people posting memes that express the view that because Boris had his Christmas quiz/party, that they will then do whatever the fuck they like. As if they might see Grant Shapps driving around without a seatbelt on and drawl "wElL I'm NoT FucKinG WeArinG OnE ThEN".
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 13, 2021, 12:21:47 pm
(In fact, those of us who had AZ get an upgrade to our protection, because we get in on that funky mix-and-match action.)

Does this work for other types too?. I.e. as someone who had two Pfizer doses, given the choice, should I get a Moderna booster?

Unclear -- Pfizer and Moderna are very similar (not just the same type of vaccine, but almost identical) so they don't have the effect of mixing different mechanisms of action that you do when mixing mRNA vaccines with viral vector vaccines.

The Lancet study got a response that was a bit higher when stacking a full dose of Moderna on top of two Pfizers:

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)02717-3/fulltext

However, that may just be because Moderna went for a relatively higher dose as their "standard" dose than Pfizer did (which is also why it can hit a bit harder with side-effects).

Which is why they're using half-doses of Moderna for boosters, versus full doses of Pfizer.

On the basis of what we currently know, looks like three doses of any mRNA vax performs VERY strongly, so personally I wouldn't delay getting boosted in order to get a particular one.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 13, 2021, 12:23:48 pm
Thanks for that. This:

Evidence is showing that a booster dose does wonders at kicking protection way back up again. Omicron can get past two doses worryingly well, but three block it (about as well as two doses do with Delta).

The data on that is REALLY POSITIVE and a huge relief. At three doses, it is as good at blocking the virus as before.

is a huge difference to how I was thinking about this before. I'd understood it to be that Omicron was still very good at evading boosters but, meh, it's the best chance you've got. Thanks for the info.

I find myself now very pro booster because I'd really like to keep using 36Chambers' board and going out to look at wet boulders.

Yeah, it's early days and information is coming in very very fast, but the data on boosters so far has been very encouraging!

This is Pfizer's lab study on neutralizing antibodies suggesting that three doses protects against Omicron about as effectively as two doses does against Original Flavour ("wild type"):

https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-detail/pfizer-and-biontech-provide-update-omicron-variant
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on December 13, 2021, 12:33:14 pm
This is a little bit like using that as an argument back in mid March 2020 ("we're not fucked yet and might not be so let's just do nothing"). It might be right... or it might be pretty wrong... a little bit of caution (e.g. masks and WFH) seems a minor imposition and might push things out a bit until most people are boosted, at which point it looks like we're back to about where we were on protection levels (but maybe with higher case numbers so still a bit more overloaded on the NHS)

I don't share that optimism with the season being for end of year parties and general festivities. There's going to be a lot of mixing over the next few weeks.

Wasn't there a leak over the past 1-2 days that said Omicron needed to be significantly less serious than delta for the current measures (Plan B) to be effective?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on December 13, 2021, 12:37:59 pm
I was trying to be optimistic for Adam's sake ;)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on December 13, 2021, 12:48:15 pm
Daily deaths have been at about the same level since August so why all the recent fuss? I see there's another new variant (isn't there always?), but why are restrictions suddenly coming back now?

Should be in the politics thread really as that is where the answer lies....but the reason is that deaths aren't the metric, emergency healthcare system capacity is (putting aside that they are somewhat correlated). IF the omicron model projections are correct (no idea on this btw) then there will be 1000's of hospitalisations per day. I.e. too many for the NHS to cope with and therefore the healthcare system will fail. For e.g. have a heart attack, call 999, nothing happens. No government in the world will risk this happening, for what should be a suite of very obvious reasons.

As I say I have no idea whether the above will happen. And because models aren't reality then there is a large grey area for politicians to work with to suit their own ends. But that is more or less the reasoning for every restriction we have ever had from the start until now.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Adam Lincoln on December 13, 2021, 12:52:45 pm
I was trying to be optimistic for Adam's sake ;)

I just feel like this is going to go on for years, mutation after mutation, and more and more bullshit coming out of the government. Jab after jab.Booster after booster. Yes I have had all my jabs and yes ill get the booster (but not in a massive blind panic like most seem to be doing) but like most I am sure people are wondering if the end game will ever be in sight.

Sorry if that comes across brash.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on December 13, 2021, 01:01:32 pm
yes ill get the booster (but not in a massive blind panic like most seem to be doing

Think it through, Adam. I'm going to get mine tomorrow not because I'm panicking, but because the booster program only stands a chance of doing its job if it happens before the health service hits the skids and/or Christmas is cancelled.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Adam Lincoln on December 13, 2021, 01:03:59 pm
yes ill get the booster (but not in a massive blind panic like most seem to be doing

Think it through, Adam. I'm going to get mine tomorrow not because I'm panicking, but because the booster program only stands a chance of doing its job if it happens before the health service hits the skids and/or Christmas is cancelled.

Yeah I get that, but people are queuing all night outside in the cold at a walk in vax place near me.  :shrug: Like its the end of the world if they don't get it that day.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on December 13, 2021, 01:08:16 pm
Christmas is cancelled.

This is an interesting side note, but I'm willing to bet very very few people will be cancelling their christmas this year whatever the government say. Nothing particularly to do with their views on Tory xmas parties or whatever, just out of a general 'fuck that, I'm not missing it again.'
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 13, 2021, 01:15:30 pm
Incidentally, do we know why is this the case:
Quote
Omicron can get past two doses worryingly well, but three block it (about as well as two doses do with Delta).

I'd assumed that vaccine effectiveness followed an exponentially relaxing curve, with more doses improving protection but at a decreasing rate. Unless the 2-dose-bad 3-dose-good thing is an artefact of the timing of when vaccines were given (i.e. if you've had two doses its likely that your 2nd dose is now a bit old and "wearing off") then why is there such a step change between 2 and 3 doses?

This goes way beyond the scope of my very amateur knowledge, alas.

I know just enough to know that there's some very complex stuff about how different parts of the immune system learn to remember a virus and recognize different variants of it, and that I do not know that stuff!

I know that it's not just a question of "more doses improve protection but at a decreasing rate"; lots of vaccines require more than one dose as the primary series, with the first shot "priming" the immune system so that with the second shot, it learns to mount an effective response.

There is a thing of protection waning over time after Covid vaccination, it looks like, but that's not the major/only reason why Omicron gets around protection from two doses; it's heavily mutated so the immune system has a harder time "recognizing" it.

It may be that three doses of an mRNA vaccine works because they just produce such a blast of antibodies that it'll wipe out anything Covid-ish and it's triumphing through sheer volume. But there also seems to be some stuff about the immune system "refining" its response with each exposure.

Then there are other mechanisms that come into play when you're producing immunity from different angles, so to speak -- e.g.  by adding vaccination on top of previous infection. Here's a piece on "super-immunity" and why it's so cool (and why people are studying it intensely so we can try to produce something like it that doesn't require getting infected):

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02795-x
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on December 13, 2021, 01:20:43 pm
Christmas is cancelled.

This is an interesting side note, but I'm willing to bet very very few people will be cancelling their christmas this year whatever the government say. Nothing particularly to do with their views on Tory xmas parties or whatever, just out of a general 'fuck that, I'm not missing it again.'

I completely agree, though the Tory Christmas Party is what people will say in mitigation to assuage any guilt they might have.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on December 13, 2021, 01:23:32 pm

I just feel like this is going to go on for years, mutation after mutation, and more and more bullshit coming out of the government. Jab after jab.Booster after booster. Yes I have had all my jabs and yes ill get the booster (but not in a massive blind panic like most seem to be doing) but like most I am sure people are wondering if the end game will ever be in sight.

Oh, I don't disagree with that, I was just meaning that deaths not having gone up just yet isn't necessarily a great metric for deciding what the gov should do or whether to run around shouting
(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/13AE0/production/_101980608_mediaitem101980605.jpg)

My optimistic end-game scenario - omicron or some future variant is indeed less severe, and combined with occasional jabs and bits and bobs of immunity from infection it just ends up like a bad cold/flu... but there might be some more "kerfuffle" first... I'm happy to WFH and get boosted ASAP if it reduces chances of Jan lockdown and not getting to go to Spain in spring. (p.s. bet EU says 3rd jab needed for "full vaccination" sometime soon so worth having it just to get that in the bag if nothing else!)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on December 13, 2021, 01:24:57 pm
This is an interesting side note, but I'm willing to bet very very few people will be cancelling their christmas this year whatever the government say. Nothing particularly to do with their views on Tory xmas parties or whatever, just out of a general 'fuck that, I'm not missing it again.'

I've just cancelled my own pre-Christmas plans (including my own leaving do) as looking at the timeline it was looking like a perfect way to ensure we didn't get to see family this Christmas. I think if I was boosted + 1-2 weeks I'd have a different opinion.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Adam Lincoln on December 13, 2021, 01:27:24 pm

I just feel like this is going to go on for years, mutation after mutation, and more and more bullshit coming out of the government. Jab after jab.Booster after booster. Yes I have had all my jabs and yes ill get the booster (but not in a massive blind panic like most seem to be doing) but like most I am sure people are wondering if the end game will ever be in sight.

Oh, I don't disagree with that, I was just meaning that deaths not having gone up just yet isn't necessarily a great metric for deciding what the gov should do or whether to run around shouting
(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/13AE0/production/_101980608_mediaitem101980605.jpg)

My optimistic end-game scenario - omicron or some future variant is indeed less severe, and combined with occasional jabs and bits and bobs of immunity from infection it just ends up like a bad cold/flu... but there might be some more "kerfuffle" first... I'm happy to WFH and get boosted ASAP if it reduces chances of Jan lockdown and not getting to go to Spain in spring. (p.s. bet EU says 3rd jab needed for "full vaccination" sometime soon so worth having it just to get that in the bag if nothing else!)

Yes I do worry about that 3rd jab being needed for full EU green light. I was late to the party on second jab as I was in America for 4 months. I can't get booster for another 2 months or so. Luckily by that point I'll be in Spain anyway. (Next week is the plan!)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on December 13, 2021, 01:52:58 pm
Get out while you still can!   :thumbsup:
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Liamhutch89 on December 13, 2021, 02:12:37 pm
Daily deaths have been at about the same level since August so why all the recent fuss? I see there's another new variant (isn't there always?), but why are restrictions suddenly coming back now?

Exactly. People need to get a bloody grip.

This is a little bit like using that as an argument back in mid March 2020 ("we're not fucked yet and might not be so let's just do nothing"). It might be right... or it might be pretty wrong... a little bit of caution (e.g. masks and WFH) seems a minor imposition and might push things out a bit until most people are boosted, at which point it looks like we're back to about where we were on protection levels (but maybe with higher case numbers so still a bit more overloaded on the NHS)

The same argument was used when Delta came around (this was the summer one right?), but restrictions weren't introduced and the health service didn't collapse. I wondered why the different approach for Omicron now, which has been answered (vaccine resistance).   
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 13, 2021, 02:17:33 pm
I don’t believe Boris and Co. are going for increased restrictions just to cover up the party scandal.
It would be a counterproductive tactic, since it is unlikely to increase his popularity and most likely to alienate his core supporters.

I could believe, and do suspect, that “they” already have an insight into the likely impact of Omicron and are slowly dripping out the bad news. As others said, unfortunately today’s death rates, don’t really indicate where we’ll be in three weeks. Boris very nearly said as much today and I think was his lack of discipline, rather than a tactic. I expect there was an irate group of SPADs calling him a twat and praying for a higher being to shut-him-the-fuck-up; in the back room.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 13, 2021, 03:10:16 pm
On another note, I have to LFT daily, this week.
Having four kids, we usually have a stack of boxes of tests, because they’re testing three times per week. We only had one box available yesterday, so I figured I’d swing by the big Boots in Exeter on my way passed.

None available. None in any other branch in Exeter and they’d been out for three days already. Went to Lloyds, same story. Ended up driving back to the Bay and pinching what was left after the kids had tested. Which was expensive and time consuming. Anybody else come across this? Is it just Exeter?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on December 13, 2021, 03:18:01 pm
Anybody else come across this? Is it just Exeter?

No, it's widespread if Twitter is to be believed.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on December 13, 2021, 03:23:47 pm
The same argument was used when Delta came around (this was the summer one right?), but restrictions weren't introduced and the health service didn't collapse. I wondered why the different approach for Omicron now, which has been answered (vaccine resistance).

Broadly correct - Delta was countered by the vaccines and in fact restrictions were eased rather than introduced. Healthcare was "run hot" but not overwhelmed (a matter of opinion actually!). Omicron has vaccine resistance potentially leading to healthcare being overwhelmed. Its brutal but up to a certain point decided by public opinion / the media, Gov doesn't really care how many people die. But they do care if they can't provide one of the basic functions of a state, as no-one will accept that.

OMM is correct - very low Omicron death / hospitalisation rates today are meaningless as they haven't had time to feed through yet. Both metrics were very low in Feb 2020. They weren't low by March 2020. The worry is that Omicron's vaccine resistance may replicate that sort of scenario.

None of this might happen as hopefully the models which the government have seen are wrong, or they are right but the boosters work as planned, or its all just made up to distract from Xmas parties (!). But that is why restrictions have been introduced.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on December 13, 2021, 04:06:25 pm
(https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/292234299896365056/919983148199194674/FGe5h0IXMAIpTE8.png)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 13, 2021, 05:02:00 pm
yes ill get the booster (but not in a massive blind panic like most seem to be doing

Think it through, Adam. I'm going to get mine tomorrow not because I'm panicking, but because the booster program only stands a chance of doing its job if it happens before the health service hits the skids and/or Christmas is cancelled.

Yeah I get that, but people are queuing all night outside in the cold at a walk in vax place near me.  :shrug: Like its the end of the world if they don't get it that day.

Guessing part of it's that the NHS booking website has crashed under the pressure, though "capacity" is allegedly being added.  So people decide they'll go for the walk-in option, and then collide with all the other people who've made the same decision.

Plus it takes 1-2 weeks for protection to kick in after a dose, so if people are planning to see elderly relatives at Christmas, they may want to get boosted a.s.a.p..

https://www.reddit.com/r/GetJabbed/ seems to be reporting on queue lengths in various places, if anyone's feeling keen.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on December 13, 2021, 07:09:20 pm
I could believe, and do suspect, that “they” already have an insight into the likely impact of Omicron and are slowly dripping out the bad news.
I don't think this is the case. I don't think they know any more than a reasonably informed Twitter user with some understanding of statistics.

Figures from South Africa, Botswana etc have to be taken with a huge pinch of salt due to their different demographics, healthcare access, testing capabilities, and vaccine status.

Nowhere else is far enough along with Omicron to make judgements on the likely severity in a highly vaccinated population.

Much of the early reasoning in the press for anticipating Omicron being less severe can be ruled out as being journalists having a poor grasp of statistics. But we can't yet say whether it will be more or less severe so any attempt to quantify how bad it will be on healthcare would just be a stab in the dark. Assuming a similar severity to Delta seems to be a reasonable starting point for predictions/planning restrictions but the confidence intervals are very wide.

Everyone is crossing their fingers and waiting for more data.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 13, 2021, 09:17:45 pm
I could believe, and do suspect, that “they” already have an insight into the likely impact of Omicron and are slowly dripping out the bad news.
I don't think this is the case. I don't think they know any more than a reasonably informed Twitter user with some understanding of statistics.

Figures from South Africa, Botswana etc have to be taken with a huge pinch of salt due to their different demographics, healthcare access, testing capabilities, and vaccine status.

Nowhere else is far enough along with Omicron to make judgements on the likely severity in a highly vaccinated population.

Much of the early reasoning in the press for anticipating Omicron being less severe can be ruled out as being journalists having a poor grasp of statistics. But we can't yet say whether it will be more or less severe so any attempt to quantify how bad it will be on healthcare would just be a stab in the dark. Assuming a similar severity to Delta seems to be a reasonable starting point for predictions/planning restrictions but the confidence intervals are very wide.

Everyone is crossing their fingers and waiting for more data.

I agree, except…

I think that what is being hammered home to them, is that the evidence for increased transmissibility is pretty stark and that, unless it turns out to be markedly milder, that translates to a sudden and large, increase in admissions and probably deaths.
Admissions and deaths that were expected, for sure, but over a much longer timeframe.

I suppose, give or take, we were always going to lose most of the people who are now dying. Because vaccines will never be 100% effective, some would always refuse, some are just plain vulnerable. The Government’s ability to impose stringent lockdowns, that might slow the spread, is actually proscribed by public opinion. Given the hard evidence available, they’re actually moving quite fast, but they are almost certainly aware that that wall of Tsunami is bearing down on us and the only hope is that it might be milder. Unfortunately, to my layman’s eye, it would have to be so much milder, that the hope seems quite forlorn.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: AJM on December 13, 2021, 10:40:01 pm
I tend to think if the current time is right, or at least close (and that is probably the thing we know most about?) then because it's so short that's all that really matters, as long as the others aren't more than an order of magnitude out.

Let's say you know the doubling time is 2.5 days as is widely quoted and you've taken the view it's as good at hospitalising people per case as Delta. You know you've got a fixed capacity of hospitalisations before it all goes tits up.

If you're wrong and it's only half as infectious as Delta..... You can survive twice as many cases! That's a whole doubling time..... of 2.5 days. Does it make much appreciable difference whether you hit that limit on say the 4th Jan rather than the 1st?

Obviously there's a lot more to it than that - it considers only fresh hospitalisations, where obviously a slower time would make the rate of discharge/length of stay more important, as well as 101 other things.

But whilst the doubling time is so fast your eventual conclusions are probably fairly robust to fairly significant changes to your assumptions about severity. I tend to think that basically the doubling time needs to slow right down. If it doesn't, then we've probably got to pin our hopes on severity Vs delta of like 10% or less? We have no idea on severity yet, obviously, but we can start to shape up what it would have to be in order not to break things.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Steve R on December 14, 2021, 08:46:11 am
We have no idea on severity yet, obviously,
Absolutely nothing personal (actually reliably impressed with your input here and on ukc) but I'm getting increasingly triggered by the above 'we have no idea about x yet' sentiment.  It's as though no scientist or amateur covid analyser has ever heard of Bayes' theorem!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tommytwotone on December 14, 2021, 11:19:41 am
Only my n=1, but I had COVID a couple of weeks ago.

Double-jabbed, I'm 43, fit(ish), GSOH etc etc.

No idea if I got an early taste of Omicron or what but blimey it knocked me sideways.

Like flu x 10 in terms of body aches. Mrs TTT had to take me for a PCR (I tested positive on a lateral flow on the Tuesday after waking up feeling like I'd downed 10 pints the night before), and every time the car hit a bump I was virtually in tears.

That went on for about 4 days, coupled with terrible awake-till-5am insomnia, horrible feverish sleep when I could, bad stomach, and of course total loss of taste and smell. Paracetamol etc didn't touch it at all.

Took about a week to even think about getting out of bed, and for all of last week (i.e the week post-self-isolation) I was wrecked. Bringing the Xmas tree out of the car into the house left me light-headed and needing a lie down, and a few hours of early Zoom meetings one day led to me needing to go for an hour's kip at 10am!

In contrast, daughter (7), who I assume gave it to me had a sniffle for a few days and that was it, and when Mrs TTT had it back in Sept she felt "a bit crap and tired" for 2 days, and then was completely normal for the rest of her self-isolation.

 

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 14, 2021, 11:37:12 am
If anyone's got some spare time and energy, they're desperate for volunteer stewards:

https://nhsvolunteerresponders.org.uk/i-want-to-volunteer/volunteer-roles/steward-volunteer

No special skills needed, this is all checking details and shepherding people through so that everyone qualified can do the vaccinating.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on December 14, 2021, 02:10:21 pm
I got my booster today (Moderna on top of 2No. Pfizers).

The pharmacy was total chaos as on top of bookings it's also a walk-in and there didn't seem to be any segregation of how people were accessing their jab. Anyhow, mine was a mid morning appointment and he'd done 126 ppl before me. There was nothing in the way of waiting/observation after.

Lots of the walk-ins were from another nearby pharmacy that was offering appointments for this week but which they cancelled completely over the weekend.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on December 14, 2021, 02:27:54 pm
I've got mine booked for next wed, went in to Swindon today to see if I could get a walk in earlier - massive queue at 8 (when they opened), stewards sent most of us home straight away as they only had enough doses for about 30% of the queue
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on December 14, 2021, 02:38:22 pm
We both just got our boosters. I was booked in for Saturday, but my wife was not eligible until the end of the month. But the government announced a massive, immediate overhaul of the system yesterday afternoon, including hundreds of new pop-up locations, including a pharmacy a couple of hundred metres from our apartment. Considering it was the first day it was reasonably well organized. Go inside to collect a number and then go and stand in orderly line outside. We queued about 30 minutes I think. Very glad to get it done.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on December 14, 2021, 02:41:14 pm
I had an appointment booked but it seems to be a single queue for walk-ins and appointments. It's moving very quickly so shouldn't be more than 10 minutes waiting. I keep looking over my shoulder to check I don't get seen by Adam now I'm an official panic booster.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 14, 2021, 02:53:12 pm
Only my n=1, but I had COVID a couple of weeks ago.

Double-jabbed, I'm 43, fit(ish), GSOH etc etc.

No idea if I got an early taste of Omicron or what but blimey it knocked me sideways.

Like flu x 10 in terms of body aches. Mrs TTT had to take me for a PCR (I tested positive on a lateral flow on the Tuesday after waking up feeling like I'd downed 10 pints the night before), and every time the car hit a bump I was virtually in tears.

That went on for about 4 days, coupled with terrible awake-till-5am insomnia, horrible feverish sleep when I could, bad stomach, and of course total loss of taste and smell. Paracetamol etc didn't touch it at all.

Took about a week to even think about getting out of bed, and for all of last week (i.e the week post-self-isolation) I was wrecked. Bringing the Xmas tree out of the car into the house left me light-headed and needing a lie down, and a few hours of early Zoom meetings one day led to me needing to go for an hour's kip at 10am!

In contrast, daughter (7), who I assume gave it to me had a sniffle for a few days and that was it, and when Mrs TTT had it back in Sept she felt "a bit crap and tired" for 2 days, and then was completely normal for the rest of her self-isolation.

Ooof, that sounds brutal. I hope you can take it easy until you're fully recovered; in my experience with viruses, it's easy to rush back into doing stuff too fast and dig yourself into a hole of post-viral fatigue.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on December 14, 2021, 02:53:56 pm
Phew. Think I got away with it unseen. No forms to fill in. In, confirm name and a few questions, sit down, jab, fuck off.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: seankenny on December 14, 2021, 03:22:18 pm
Only my n=1, but I had COVID a couple of weeks ago.

Double-jabbed, I'm 43, fit(ish), GSOH etc etc.

No idea if I got an early taste of Omicron or what but blimey it knocked me sideways...


Ooof, that sounds brutal. I hope you can take it easy until you're fully recovered; in my experience with viruses, it's easy to rush back into doing stuff too fast and dig yourself into a hole of post-viral fatigue.

Seconding this. I got some kind of flu/virus-thing in September and then in October - first one definitely wasn't covid but I didn't check the second. I pushed myself a bit too hard when recovering, by which I mean first time bouldering at the wall for an hour, second time by walking for about an hour, each time I was ill for about a week after. I'm slowly recovering but I'm still a long way from being fully myself again. On Sunday I did a few easy hangs on my fingerboard and that night slept for over nine hours, absolutely knackered.

Digging myself out of this kind of hole is turning out to be extremely frustrating and slow...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on December 14, 2021, 04:12:53 pm
I got my booster today (Moderna on top of 2No. Pfizers).

Same place this PM and my wife was given Pfizer (making that her third). Up until this point we'd had the same (within 5 minutes of each other).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on December 14, 2021, 04:23:02 pm
I had an appointment booked but it seems to be a single queue for walk-ins and appointments. It's moving very quickly so shouldn't be more than 10 minutes waiting. I keep looking over my shoulder to check I don't get seen by Adam now I'm an official panic booster.

Having just read Paul and Duma's posts from earlier I thought I'd clarify. When I've been to Airedale hospital before you'd have to file down a row of chairs while filling in forms. Today was at a pharmacy in central Bradford and, although there was a queue to get into the tent at the back, once you were in you were called forward straight away. Name confirmed and then it was straight through to the pharmacy where I barely had time to roll up a sleeve before it was done. Then waiting in the pharmacy, though I chose to just start making my way home.

So it was initially alarming to see what looked like a big queue (there have been stories about people waiting for hours), but the whole process took about 10 - 15 minutes.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 15, 2021, 08:19:43 am
Congrats to everyone who's just been boosted; may your immune response be robust and your side-effects mild!

For you 3-dose mRNA people, enjoy these sexy sexy diagrams of how good your immunity against Omicron will be (given a week or two to kick in) -- new study just out using pseudovirus neutralization assays:

Moderna: https://twitter.com/BalazsLab/status/1470727025312686080
Pfizer: https://twitter.com/BalazsLab/status/1470727030165544969

A recent booster even beats "super-immunity" from "distant" (6-12 months ago) vaccination plus infection, which is exciting because that's still extremely strong.

Also, very interesting: https://twitter.com/BalazsLab/status/1470727055088099328

Overall, our findings suggest that boosting is doing a lot more than simply increasing your titers.  It seems to be broadening the antibody response to be better equipped to  recognize diverse variants. Hopefully it will still work against whatever variant comes next!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: dunnyg on December 15, 2021, 08:35:12 am
Without diving in, are the 3 dose diagrams on 'healthy' types, or those with the dodgy immune systems who will actually end up with a dose?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 15, 2021, 08:50:43 am
This is re:  boosters, rather than third doses in immunocompromised people who get 3 doses in their primary series.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tommytwotone on December 15, 2021, 09:10:14 am
Assuming the "wait 4 weeks after you've had COVID" guidance is still in place, earliest I'd be eligible is (I think) next Weds. In two minds about rushing to get it done as a) I'd rather not scupper Xmas with potential side effects, b) I'm guessing I'm full to the hat-band with antibodies anyway, and c) I have a booking for 6th Jan anyway.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on December 15, 2021, 09:26:57 am
I'd seen lots of complaints about nasty side effects but (n=1) I had Moderna and have been fine.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on December 15, 2021, 09:33:54 am
likewise, after feeling rough after fist AZ and fine after the second, Pfizer booster had no noticeable side effects (except the sore arm). You must be right about the antibodies though, glad you're starting to feel better dude, you've had a shit run of it!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 15, 2021, 10:10:59 am
Assuming the "wait 4 weeks after you've had COVID" guidance is still in place, earliest I'd be eligible is (I think) next Weds. In two minds about rushing to get it done as a) I'd rather not scupper Xmas with potential side effects, b) I'm guessing I'm full to the hat-band with antibodies anyway, and c) I have a booking for 6th Jan anyway.

Yeah, I don't know if anyone's got info or advice on optimal timing of boosters in people who are already "super-immune".

Effectively, getting Covid already functioned as a kind of "third dose" for you, and we know super-immunity holds up pretty strongly against Omicron:

https://twitter.com/JanineKimpel/status/1468700628922904591

Based on the Balazs Lab stuff, looks like you could potentially gain even more immunity by getting a booster at some point, but you're going to be in a decent position right now.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on December 15, 2021, 10:24:23 am
likewise, after feeling rough after fist AZ and fine after the second, Pfizer booster had no noticeable side effects (except the sore arm). You must be right about the antibodies though, glad you're starting to feel better dude, you've had a shit run of it!

Had almost zero with the first two AZ, Pf booster felt fine for 12 hours then woke up in night with sweats and heart pounding, really rough for 24 hrs, fine after 48. Have spoken to a few with similar.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: TobyD on December 15, 2021, 10:30:26 am
likewise, after feeling rough after fist AZ and fine after the second, Pfizer booster had no noticeable side effects (except the sore arm). You must be right about the antibodies though, glad you're starting to feel better dude, you've had a shit run of it!

Had almost zero with the first two AZ, Pf booster felt fine for 12 hours then woke up in night with sweats and heart pounding, really rough for 24 hrs, fine after 48. Have spoken to a few with similar.

I had pretty much the same,  felt roughest after jabs 1 and 3, although it wasn't anything that bad in retrospect. It certainly wouldn't deter me from having any jabs necessary in the future. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on December 15, 2021, 10:31:30 am
Congrats to everyone who's just been boosted; may your immune response be robust and your side-effects mild!

For you 3-dose mRNA people, enjoy these sexy sexy diagrams
Tried to crack one off to those diagrams, still not sexy enough. Could only get to half-mast. Had to dig out the Allegra Stratton video to finish the job  :blink:

P.S.

AZ1 - Mildly warm, mildly sore head overnight (wouldn't have noticed but digestion woke me up), slightly tired 1 day.
AZ2 - Nothing
PFZ - Very slightly tired 1 day

HTH.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on December 15, 2021, 10:55:59 am
Didn't really notice Pfizer 1 at all, had to have a brief afternoon lie down after early morning Pfizer 2. Pfizer 3 yesterday: don't feel ill at all but very tired, slightly stiff neck, and a little fuzzy in the head (What's new, I hear you cry!) - but I think I was already pretty tired after a very busy and sometimes stressful few months.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: colin8ll on December 15, 2021, 11:42:10 am
I had no side effects from Pfizer 1, but Pfizer 2 gave me side effects which mimicked breast cancer and led to cellulitis which required a course of antibiotics. It was rather unpleasant. I just got boosted this morning with Moderna and I'm hoping I don't have similar side effects this time.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tommytwotone on December 15, 2021, 12:48:38 pm
Assuming the "wait 4 weeks after you've had COVID" guidance is still in place, earliest I'd be eligible is (I think) next Weds. In two minds about rushing to get it done as a) I'd rather not scupper Xmas with potential side effects, b) I'm guessing I'm full to the hat-band with antibodies anyway, and c) I have a booking for 6th Jan anyway.

Yeah, I don't know if anyone's got info or advice on optimal timing of boosters in people who are already "super-immune".

Effectively, getting Covid already functioned as a kind of "third dose" for you, and we know super-immunity holds up pretty strongly against Omicron:

https://twitter.com/JanineKimpel/status/1468700628922904591

Based on the Balazs Lab stuff, looks like you could potentially gain even more immunity by getting a booster at some point, but you're going to be in a decent position right now.

What's more Super-Immune than Super-Immune? Ultra-Immune?

Having had the AZ for jabs 1 and 2 I reckon if they give me a different one for the Booster I could end up being able to fly, see into the future or something as well as being COVID-resistant.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on December 15, 2021, 12:53:28 pm
Congrats to everyone who's just been boosted; may your immune response be robust and your side-effects mild!

For you 3-dose mRNA people, enjoy these sexy sexy diagrams of how good your immunity against Omicron will be (given a week or two to kick in) -- new study just out using pseudovirus neutralization assays:

Moderna: https://twitter.com/BalazsLab/status/1470727025312686080
Pfizer: https://twitter.com/BalazsLab/status/1470727030165544969

A recent booster even beats "super-immunity" from "distant" (6-12 months ago) vaccination plus infection, which is exciting because that's still extremely strong.

Also, very interesting: https://twitter.com/BalazsLab/status/1470727055088099328

Overall, our findings suggest that boosting is doing a lot more than simply increasing your titers.  It seems to be broadening the antibody response to be better equipped to  recognize diverse variants. Hopefully it will still work against whatever variant comes next!

Is there a test available for home use that shows a person's level of covid antibodies? I know there's the antibody test available via NHS but his appears to give a binary yes/no to having had previous covid infection (hence having antibodies). 

It'd be interesting to be able to find out one's current level of immunity to omicron, as virtually everyone will now have some level of antibodies. Could start a UKB thread on who has the best antibody levels..
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on December 15, 2021, 01:31:50 pm
 I (am trying to) take part in the ONS covid antibody study.

Have yet to successfully take a useable blood sample though so I still don't know if I have any antibodies.

Their volunteers mostly aren't medically trained so they can't stick a needle in your arm as with most blood tests. Instead you get the single use finger prick samplers. Which don't seem capable of making me bleed enough. My theory is that climbing has toughened my finger tips up too much.

Next time they come around, I might try pinging off a crimp and wrapping my knuckles against the board. That usually gets plenty of blood flowing.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tommytwotone on December 15, 2021, 01:34:00 pm

It'd be interesting to be able to find out one's current level of immunity to omicron, as virtually everyone will now have some level of antibodies. Could start a UKB thread on who has the best antibody levels..


We could combine it with your boulder grade and Powerball high score to come up with the ultimate UKB ranking system.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: duncan on December 15, 2021, 01:53:39 pm

Is there a test available for home use that shows a person's level of covid antibodies? I know there's the antibody test available via NHS but his appears to give a binary yes/no to having had previous covid infection (hence having antibodies). 

I volunteered for study where I had to take my own blood and send it off for analysis. This confirmed I had antibodies (I should hope so after a bout of delta and then two Pfizer vaccinations) but I wasn't told if it was RP2, black Totem, or titanium glue-in level of protection. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on December 15, 2021, 02:04:03 pm
Glued peg?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 15, 2021, 02:44:47 pm
Assuming the "wait 4 weeks after you've had COVID" guidance is still in place, earliest I'd be eligible is (I think) next Weds. In two minds about rushing to get it done as a) I'd rather not scupper Xmas with potential side effects, b) I'm guessing I'm full to the hat-band with antibodies anyway, and c) I have a booking for 6th Jan anyway.

Yeah, I don't know if anyone's got info or advice on optimal timing of boosters in people who are already "super-immune".

Effectively, getting Covid already functioned as a kind of "third dose" for you, and we know super-immunity holds up pretty strongly against Omicron:

https://twitter.com/JanineKimpel/status/1468700628922904591

Based on the Balazs Lab stuff, looks like you could potentially gain even more immunity by getting a booster at some point, but you're going to be in a decent position right now.

What's more Super-Immune than Super-Immune? Ultra-Immune?

Having had the AZ for jabs 1 and 2 I reckon if they give me a different one for the Booster I could end up being able to fly, see into the future or something as well as being COVID-resistant.

Yeah, they're using mRNA vaccines as boosters for everyone, so you're going to have the most well-rounded immunity possible!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on December 15, 2021, 03:30:54 pm
Glued peg?

"eco bolt" surely.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on December 15, 2021, 10:40:00 pm
Does anyone know if you should get a booster if you're a contact of someone who's got covid? E.g. if you're in the time zone where you could have got it but might be testing negative (especially on LFTs)? Or better to cancel and wait to see if symptoms come through?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: AJM on December 15, 2021, 11:08:28 pm
What actually happens if you have a booster on top of recent covid? I've seen the advice saying you shouldn't, but I don't know why - worse reaction, less effective, etc?

I sort of assume a reasonable amount of covid still goes undiagnosed, so presumably people do it without knowing, so I presume it isn't dangerous otherwise you'd have to have something more robust than the absence of testing positive. But I don't know what it is that drives the rule in the first place.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on December 15, 2021, 11:38:51 pm
Waste of resource?
I'm not sure what the limiting factor is on administering vaccines is at the moment. Supply, distribution, venues, staff, recipients? All of that will be impacted by giving doses to people who are already chocker with antibodies.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on December 15, 2021, 11:43:40 pm
What actually happens if you have a booster on top of recent covid? I've seen the advice saying you shouldn't, but I don't know why - worse reaction, less effective, etc?

I sort of assume a reasonable amount of covid still goes undiagnosed, so presumably people do it without knowing, so I presume it isn't dangerous otherwise you'd have to have something more robust than the absence of testing positive. But I don't know what it is that drives the rule in the first place.

Increased risk of myocarditis I expect?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 16, 2021, 08:47:59 am
Congrats to everyone who's just been boosted; may your immune response be robust and your side-effects mild!

For you 3-dose mRNA people, enjoy these sexy sexy diagrams
Tried to crack one off to those diagrams, still not sexy enough. Could only get to half-mast. Had to dig out the Allegra Stratton video to finish the job  :blink:

P.S.

AZ1 - Mildly warm, mildly sore head overnight (wouldn't have noticed but digestion woke me up), slightly tired 1 day.
AZ2 - Nothing
PFZ - Very slightly tired 1 day

HTH.

Sad that some people can't appreciate the raw, throbbing filth of nAb titre figures ...

AZ1: bad muscle aches starting overnight and messing with my sleep, continuing the following day, rapidly improving after that.
AZ2: bit achy and tired the day after, otherwise a non-event.
PFZ: pretty much exact repeat of AZ1 side-effects -- guess that's just how my body experiences that kind of immune activation?

Still feeling wiped out, but I had a minor (non-Covid) bug and a really exhausting few weeks prior to the jab anyway, so it's probably mostly due to that.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 16, 2021, 09:17:51 am
What actually happens if you have a booster on top of recent covid? I've seen the advice saying you shouldn't, but I don't know why - worse reaction, less effective, etc?

I sort of assume a reasonable amount of covid still goes undiagnosed, so presumably people do it without knowing, so I presume it isn't dangerous otherwise you'd have to have something more robust than the absence of testing positive. But I don't know what it is that drives the rule in the first place.

I thought, in order, it was risk to vaccination staff, reduced effectiveness of the vaccine and small extra risks from possible side effects ...  tried to find links but it's not easy (when it should be!...with ideally Q&A linked to more detailed science behind that!). Here is one link I found on the first two points without links to extra info....

https://www.ideastream.org/news/what-happens-if-you-get-the-vaccine-and-dont-know-you-have-covid-19
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ballsofcottonwool on December 16, 2021, 09:19:39 am
My theory is that climbing has toughened my finger tips up too much.
It definitely does, the occupational health nurse at work was trying do a a finger prick blood cholesterol test on me and the needle just bounced off. She ended up pricking the side of my finger to get a drop of blood out. It wouldn't have been enough for the covid-antibody test though, my wife was in that study and we were shocked at the size of the vial that had to be filled! Her test came back negative despite definitely being exposed a few months earlier when one of our kids had Covid.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 16, 2021, 12:17:11 pm
Good intel -- anyone who's not yet had 2 doses of vaccine gets a priority appointment:

https://twitter.com/kallmemeg/status/1470775219841339397

(And the walk-ins generally all do first and second doses as well as boosters.)

So if that's you or anyone you know, get it done (yes, even if you've already had Covid). And if you know anyone pregnant and unvaccinated, you should be begging them on your knees to get it done, because the data and stories on Covid in pregnancy just get more and more grim.

Two doses of an mRNA vax provide a bit of protection but not a huge amount (maybe 30-something %) against infection with Omicron.

But what they will still do is take a huge slice out of your chances of hospitalization if you get it (figures from SA suggest up to 70%, though that's in a mixed wave of Omicron and Delta).

As of yesterday, doubling time was 1.9 days in most regions of England; I think we should expect that we're all going to meet Omicron very soon.

Also, because I'm saying this to everyone I know: I strongly rec upping your masks to FFP2/n95 or something equivalent.

If you're not keen on wastage from disposables, buy a pack of five or ten, number them, use them in order, hang them up somewhere well-ventilated to air-dry when not in use, and you can probably get about 5 uses out of each -- Covid doesn't survive more than a day on surfaces.

https://www.boots.com/boots-protective-ffp2-nr-face-masks-5s-10292473
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on December 17, 2021, 07:12:07 pm
Also, because I'm saying this to everyone I know: I strongly rec upping your masks to FFP2/n95 or something equivalent.

If you're not keen on wastage from disposables, buy a pack of five or ten, number them, use them in order, hang them up somewhere well-ventilated to air-dry when not in use, and you can probably get about 5 uses out of each -- Covid doesn't survive more than a day on surfaces.

https://www.boots.com/boots-protective-ffp2-nr-face-masks-5s-10292473

Genuine question: why? What will this do for my benefit that the old mask I've been using pretty much all year won't do? Given that I'm highly likely to encounter omicron, catch omicron and be perfectly fine and continue with life after catching omicorn.


(BTW Boots are probably charging you a 100% mark-up on those FFP2s. We buy them wholesale to give to guys for jobs and pay approx £10 per box of 10. God knows what mark-up the factory in SE Asia is charging the wholesaler).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: danm on December 17, 2021, 07:14:23 pm
You don't wear a mask to protect yourself, it's to protect others around you. A better mask does this more effectively.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on December 17, 2021, 07:21:22 pm
OK, yes aware of this. However that's different to 'are FFP2 masks needed over and above surgical masks to adequately protect others'. If they were considered necessary wouldn't the WHO recommend them for public use?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on December 17, 2021, 07:33:42 pm
Think ffp2 actually give decent protection to the wearer as well.

What level of improvement in protection of self or others makes ffp2 worth it is obviously a personal choice
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on December 17, 2021, 07:54:42 pm
Friend on FB about their Christmas works' do tonight:

"We could stay at home like good boys and girls but we say, FUCK YOU BORIS!
We have waited far too long for this. Bring on the dancin!"

Who says politicians don't matter? Not condemining my friend; it wouldn't be my choice, but it's completely understandable.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 17, 2021, 08:26:09 pm
Think ffp2 actually give decent protection to the wearer as well.

What level of improvement in protection of self or others makes ffp2 worth it is obviously a personal choice

Yeah. I feel like --- okay, we've got doubling time now closer to 1.5 days in some areas.

Even if risk of severe illness for a given individual who is vaccinated and boosted (and and not immunocompromised or elderly or having any major health conditions) is going to be extremely low -- which looks like it's the case, thank fuck -- shit's potentially going to get rough just from sheer weight of numbers getting infected in a very short space of time. A tiny percentage of a very very very big number, etc..

(And a lot of people are immunocompromised or elderly etc. etc..)

Since you've got to stick something over your face in shops, on public transport, etc. anyway right now, and there's now no shortage of FFP2s in the UK, I figure you might as well go for something that's significantly more effective than cloth, and do a tiny bit to slow the tsunami.

I do recognize it's an individual judgement and context thing -- one of my best friends works retail, has to wear a mask all day, cloth masks are as much as she can handle and she's uncomfortable with the environmental effects of disposables; fair enough. Everyone's got different trade-offs.

But I think a lot of us have found a mask that works for us then stuck with that for the past year without thinking about it further -- that's been true for me, anyway. Then I looked at some of the most recent numbers and decided that for me, this seemed like a good moment to up my game.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on December 17, 2021, 08:28:46 pm
Think ffp2 actually give decent protection to the wearer as well.

What level of improvement in protection of self or others makes ffp2 worth it is obviously a personal choice

I'd expect them to give decent protection, better than surgical mask. For 5 quid a mask I'd like them to do my shopping for me as well! The point being, how much protection to yourself and others do you really reasonably need over and above a cheap surgical mask? I hear diving masks are amazing.

edit: Slab, fair enough for your personal choice, as you clearly make it out to be. £5 is pretty steep price to pay for something like that imo.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: duncan on December 17, 2021, 08:40:44 pm
For 5 quid a mask I'd like them to do my shopping for me as well!

You disappoint me Pete, I thought you were the wheeler dealer!

20 for £6.99 a month ago, still widely available at this price. More comfortable than regular surgical masks as they fit better and there is less of a tendency for my glasses to mist up.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on December 17, 2021, 08:46:16 pm
Do you have a link?

I'll buy 500, sell them on ebay for £2 per mask and undercut boots  :P
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fultonius on December 17, 2021, 10:33:26 pm
Do you have a link?

I'll buy 500, sell them on ebay for £2 per mask and undercut boots  :P

Why don't your set up a fake PPE company and convince the tories to give you a massive contract?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 18, 2021, 07:54:31 am
Do you have a link?

I'll buy 500, sell them on ebay for £2 per mask and undercut boots  :P

Boots are already selling them for £2 -- that's a 5-pack! Still plenty of room to undercut them, though. I linked to Boots as a reference just because they're obvious and reputable and there is fake stuff floating around, but yeah, shop around and you can definitely get them cheaper.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 18, 2021, 08:33:25 am
Handy round-up of vaccination opportunities for the Sheffield crew:

https://sheffnews.com/news/access-to-covid-vaccinations-in-sheffield
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on December 18, 2021, 09:44:18 am
Do you have a link?

I'll buy 500, sell them on ebay for £2 per mask and undercut boots  :P

Boots are already selling them for £2 -- that's a 5-pack! Still plenty of room to undercut them, though. I linked to Boots as a reference just because they're obvious and reputable and there is fake stuff floating around, but yeah, shop around and you can definitely get them cheaper.

 :slap:

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 18, 2021, 11:26:14 am
If they were considered necessary wouldn't the WHO recommend them for public use?

I think you lack sufficient cynicism ... Remember, back in the beginning, they weren't doing this because there was a massive shortage of medical-grade PPE. So the rec was to leave it for the medical professionals, who were most at risk, and for the general public to use cloth masks instead (they're better than nothing, and I believe the good ones can get near surgical mask levels).

The picture re: aerosol transmission was also a lot less clear/more heavily debated at the start.

And that was also prior to multiple jumps in transmissibility -- Alpha (Kent variant) was more transmissible than Original Flavour, Delta much more transmissible than Alpha, and Omicron is now leaving Delta in the dust.

Some European states went to requiring medical grade masks for everyone earlier this year: https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2021/01/26/960893423/some-european-countries-move-to-require-medical-grade-masks-in-public

And the CDC's now shifted to saying that n95s can be used for personal use if they're in sufficient supply: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/types-of-masks.html

Decent article: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-we-need-to-upgrade-our-face-masks-and-where-to-get-them/

So yeah, with Omicron spiking and no shortage of FFP2s in the UK, I think it's a good moment to re-assess what you're doing, and decide whether or not you might want to upgrade temporarily.

For extra context: I spent a decent chunk of the past 20 months or so making cloth masks for people, and nerding out about materials science and how to make the best ones possible.

So it's probably a marker of something that I e-mailed a bunch of friends and family recently to say "hey, that lovely mask I made you? You might want to consider sticking it in a drawer for a bit and buying a pack of n95s instead."

(And some of them will and some of them won't -- individual trade-offs and all that -- but it's worth taking the moment to consider.)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on December 18, 2021, 12:42:39 pm
If they were considered necessary wouldn't the WHO recommend them for public use?

I think you lack sufficient cynicism ... Remember, back in the beginning, they weren't doing this because there was a massive shortage of medical-grade PPE. So the rec was to leave it for the medical professionals, who were most at risk, and for the general public to use cloth masks instead (they're better than nothing, and I believe the good ones can get near surgical mask levels).

Some European states went to requiring medical grade masks for everyone earlier this year: https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2021/01/26/960893423/some-european-countries-move-to-require-medical-grade-masks-in-public



This is kind of my point. 'Medical grade masks' seems not to just mean FFP2 - that link says it includes surgical masks, which is what I've been using all year. And you can get surgical masks loads of places for free - I have a vehicle door full of them, although tbh I just tend to use the same black one I've used all year!

i.e. ''In Germany, the federal and state governments introduced measures last week making medical masks — identified as surgical masks or KN95 or FFP2 masks — mandatory in stores and on public transit. It also issued a recommendation that medical masks be worn whenever there is close or prolonged contact with other people, particularly in enclosed spaces.''


Hence why I'm wondering why bother with FFP2's, if surgical masks are almost as good and cheaper or free.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on December 18, 2021, 01:21:53 pm
To those more knowledgeable than me.. do these look good? Thanks.
https://www.siteking.co.uk/kn95-face-masks
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: colin8ll on December 18, 2021, 01:30:47 pm
The problem I have with surgical masks is that I can never get a really tight seal around my face, whereas the FFP2 masks I've worn give a tight fit so I am much more confident that all the air is being pulled and pushed through the mask which should obviously increases safety. When I had a brief look at masks near the start of all this, some literature seemed to look at the qualities of the mask material and concluded no significant difference in performance between surgical and FFP2 for coronavirus, but gave the caveat of saying so long as face fit is equal. Therefore, I concluded that FFP2 would be better for me and likely many others.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 18, 2021, 01:54:57 pm
Hence why I'm wondering why bother with FFP2 if surgical masks are almost as good

Because surgical masks aren't "almost as good" as FFP2 -- there's a major difference in both filtration efficiency and fit (look up the respective specs if you don't believe me). Which is why some countries (like Germany) are specifying FFP2, not just "medical grade".

You might feel they're not worth the extra cost or hassle or whatever, or that it's overkill, but the difference in specs is significant.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on December 18, 2021, 02:00:05 pm
Which is why some countries (like Germany) are specifying FFP2, not just "medical grade".

You might feel they're not worth the extra cost or hassle or whatever, or that it's overkill, but the difference in specs is significant.

I've no issues believing that an FFP2 mask more effectively filters particles than a surgical mask - I do after all work in an industry where I'm required to specify either an FFP2 or FFP3 mask as a routine part of carrying out work.

This is the part that's causing confusion - if you read the source you've posted, and look into what 'medical grade' refers to, you'll see Germany *aren't* specifying FFP2 masks. They are specifying surgical masks or FFP2.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 18, 2021, 02:16:17 pm
Okay, I stand corrected; the article says that Bavaria and Austria have specified FFP2, whereas Germany as a whole is only insisting on "medical grade".
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 18, 2021, 03:12:12 pm
To those more knowledgeable than me.. do these look good? Thanks.
https://www.siteking.co.uk/kn95-face-masks

Potentially useful: https://bda.org/advice/Coronavirus/Documents/spotting-fake-face-masks.pdf
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Muenchener on December 18, 2021, 03:40:19 pm
Okay, I stand corrected; the article says that Bavaria and Austria have specified FFP2, whereas Germany as a whole is only insisting on "medical grade".

This is correct re Bavaria. Source: Bavarian resident. I can't be bothered to look up the exact dates, sorry, but we went from "any face covering" to surgical-or-FFP2 some time back in the summer for a few weeks, then to FFP2-only shortly afterwards.

Masks required in: shops, public transport, restaurants when not seated, walls when not actually climbing. At one point we even had two blissful weeks of "masks completely optional at the wall". I think there's an exception for schools due to comfort over long periods - not sure about the letter of the law but my son generally takes a surgical mask when he goes out in the morning.

And despite more stringent mask regulations than the rest of the country, we still manage to also have higher covid incidence than other states most of the time due to a high level of antivax idiocy.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 19, 2021, 09:38:49 am
The problem I have with surgical masks is that I can never get a really tight seal around my face, whereas the FFP2 masks I've worn give a tight fit so I am much more confident that all the air is being pulled and pushed through the mask which should obviously increases safety. When I had a brief look at masks near the start of all this, some literature seemed to look at the qualities of the mask material and concluded no significant difference in performance between surgical and FFP2 for coronavirus, but gave the caveat of saying so long as face fit is equal. Therefore, I concluded that FFP2 would be better for me and likely many others.

Yeah, there are some studies suggesting that you can get relatively close to FFP2/n95 level protection if you close all the gaps round the edges of a surgical mask.

That's why "double-masking" is pretty effective, because a well-fitted cloth mask with a nose wire on top of a surgical mask closes the gaps, even if it's not adding that much in filtration power. On the other hand, that's harder to breathe through than an FFP2.

Or there's the technique for knotting and tucking in surgical masks: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7007e1.htm?s_cid=mm7007e1_w

So, various options for upping one's game, should one wish. But "buy a pack of FFP2s" is a pretty simple one.

Of course, if you've got the mask covering your nose, that puts you ahead of a decent chunk of the population ...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on December 19, 2021, 10:19:19 am
]
Pf booster felt fine for 12 hours then woke up in night with sweats and heart pounding, really rough for 24 hrs, fine after 48. Have spoken to a few with similar.

I think I'm in the middle part of this - was fine from being boosted on Friday eve until Sat afternoon (unlike AZ1 where it only took a few hrs to feel rough) then went downhill and felt horrible overnight (sweating, headache, couldn't sleep). Fingers crossed like you it will be better by tomorrow!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Wood FT on December 19, 2021, 10:39:43 am
I’m down to 55% functionality after a Moderna booster ( 2 x Pf previously).

Cricket not helping the general feeling of woe.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Muenchener on December 19, 2021, 10:44:30 am
So, various options for upping one's game, should one wish. But "buy a pack of FFP2s" is a pretty simple one.

If you want to up your game a bit more, I've been using ones similar to these babies for the last few months:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/HARD-FFP2-Face-Mask-Germany/dp/B092VQVX1Q/ref=sr_1_2?keywords=ffp2&qid=1639910468&sr=8-2

Much more comfortable than the usual seam-down-the-middle style if you're wearing them for more than a few minutes
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on December 19, 2021, 10:50:35 am
Do they carry the EN 149:2001 and. CE marking?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Muenchener on December 19, 2021, 11:08:22 am
The ones I'm buying over here do. No idea about that particular link, they're just the first picture I could find of something similar being sold in the uk.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on December 19, 2021, 11:11:23 am
Cheers, thanks for replying.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nails on December 19, 2021, 11:19:52 am
Should we maybe have a topic split for mask discussion?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 19, 2021, 01:15:05 pm
Anyone over 50 (or over 18 with one of the listed underlying health conditions) -- might wanna bookmark this in case you are unlucky enough to get a breakthrough infection:

https://twitter.com/NIHRresearch/status/1471450449744117762
https://www.panoramictrial.org/

Get a chance to take promising new antivirals, contribute to Science. All done remotely with meds couriered to your home.

Based on my vaccine trial experiences, you get really, really well looked after in trials.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 20, 2021, 09:25:16 am
Do they carry the EN 149:2001 and. CE marking?

FWIW, I've been using https://thefacemaskstore.co.uk/online-store/ffp2-face-masks/ -- they seem pretty solid in terms of showing the specs on what they're selling.

Also, my top FFP2 hack: Get a bit of narrow elastic and tie it in a loop joining the two ear loops, so you can fit it behind your head (positioning it so the join sits on the crown of my head works well for me).

Better fit (just pulling the mask a bit tighter seems to solve a lot of fit issues), less ear stress.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Durbs on December 20, 2021, 09:46:10 am
I’m down to 55% functionality after a Moderna booster ( 2 x Pf previously).

Word. Both me and Mrs got the Moderna booster on Friday. Saturday was just about manageable with a steady stream of paracetamol, Sunday still not 100%.

I was team AZ, she's Pfizer, both also had Covid in August - wonder if it's the latter that made the booster so brutal?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: 36chambers on December 20, 2021, 10:41:26 am
I’m down to 55% functionality after a Moderna booster ( 2 x Pf previously).

Word. Both me and Mrs got the Moderna booster on Friday. Saturday was just about manageable with a steady stream of paracetamol, Sunday still not 100%.

I was team AZ, she's Pfizer, both also had Covid in August - wonder if it's the latter that made the booster so brutal?

I had Pfizer previously and a Moderna booster on Friday. Felt grim on Saturday, achey body and bad headache, certainly worse than the original two shots. Just about managed to climb on Sunday evening and feel normal today (well, my arm still aches if I prod it). Not had covid as far as I'm aware.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Rocksteady on December 20, 2021, 11:46:16 am
I’m down to 55% functionality after a Moderna booster ( 2 x Pf previously).

Word. Both me and Mrs got the Moderna booster on Friday. Saturday was just about manageable with a steady stream of paracetamol, Sunday still not 100%.

I was team AZ, she's Pfizer, both also had Covid in August - wonder if it's the latter that made the booster so brutal?

I had Pfizer previously and a Moderna booster on Friday. Felt grim on Saturday, achey body and bad headache, certainly worse than the original two shots. Just about managed to climb on Sunday evening and feel normal today (well, my arm still aches if I prod it). Not had covid as far as I'm aware.

I think I am lucky re: reactions to the vaccines, I have had 2 Pfizer and got boosted with Moderna and had no reactions to any of them other than a sore arm, and with the booster, mild insomnia - found it oddly difficult to get to sleep. This was however irritating as I have a 7-month old baby and am averaging about 5 hours broken sleep. So losing 2 1/2 hours due to inability to go to sleep 'ain't great.

Does anyone know any link between reaction to vaccines and their effectiveness? I wonder whether a bigger reaction = bigger immune response = better protection?

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: chris j on December 20, 2021, 11:59:21 am
I’m down to 55% functionality after a Moderna booster ( 2 x Pf previously).

Word. Both me and Mrs got the Moderna booster on Friday. Saturday was just about manageable with a steady stream of paracetamol, Sunday still not 100%.

I was team AZ, she's Pfizer, both also had Covid in August - wonder if it's the latter that made the booster so brutal?

I think Moderna can just be pretty brutal, I was flat on my back with intermittent fever etc for 5 days after my second jab (after just a sore arm with the first). Hoping to not get it again for the booster next week...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on December 20, 2021, 12:25:03 pm
The 'we see no evidence' fallacy is rearing its head with this omicron wave then...
As it emerges (if it wasn't already apparent!) that much of the rationale for increased restrictions and lockdowns originates in two factors:

1. A sentence in the Imperial report #49 (https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/mrc-gida/2021-12-16-COVID19-Report-49.pdf) that says 'we find no evidence for omicron having different severity to Delta..'
2. The modelling of worst case scenarios by Imperial. It doesn't take a mathematician to work out why that modelling therefore shows high cases leading to high hospitalisations and deaths.

The models on which the worst case scenarios are based and which are being used for justifying tighter restrictions:
Don't use the available data from South Africa's real-world experience of Omicron in a population - which show Omicron doesn't have the same severity of outcome as Delta.


No evidence of different severity to Delta? Really??? How pedantic do people want to be, and for what reason. I can't comprehend why modellers tasked by government wouldn't include available real-world evidence of omicron in a population that shows it doesn't have the same severity of outcome as Delta. Maybe at the time they didn't have much information from South Africa? They do now, and could change the inputs.

https://www.cityam.com/modellers-exclude-south-africa-data-indicating-omicron-is-milder-than-delta-variant-reveals-sage-expert/
Quote
Modellers have not included data from South Africa suggesting the Omicron variant is milder than previous strains of Covid-19, according to Graham Medley, chair of SAGE’s modelling committee and professor infectious disease modelling at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LHST).

In a Twitter exchange with The Spectator editor Fraser Nelson, Medley explained that best-case scenarios where Omicron is less lethal than the Delta variant are unnecessary.

He said modellers have been told to establish data to inform governments in case of more severe outcomes.

He said “decision-makers are only interested in scenarios where decisions have to be made” and that modellers “model what we are asked to model” by lawmakers.

This follows LHSTM publishing modelling last week calling for more restrictions.

Nelson contrasted this outlook with an investor note from JP Morgan pointing out if the Omicron variant adjusted in line with data from South Africa – bed occupancy from Covid-19 patients at the end of January would be a third of the peak seen in January 2021, which would be manageable without further restrictions this winter.

When questioned about its lack of inclusion in current UK models, Medley tweeted: “What would be the point of that?”

He argued best-case scenarios “do not inform anything.”


Here's that excellent piece again on why using ''we see no evidence for/against'' is useless for communicating (or a very useful rhetorical tool..): https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/the-phrase-no-evidence-is-a-red-flag

South Africa's experience so far doesn't give cause to be especially fearful of this omicron wave:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-12-17/s-africa-says-hospitalizations-in-omicron-wave-much-lower
https://www.ft.com/content/c366d311-e8ac-488d-9907-4ddb81a9bcd0
https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2021/12/17/1065315661/omicron-may-be-less-severe-in-south-africa-that-may-not-be-the-case-for-the-u-s

-  1.7% of cases resulting in hospitalisation in the second week of the Omicron wave, versus 19% of cases ending up in hospital in the same week of the previous wave for Delta.
-  90% of hospitalised are unvaccinated.
-  Highly transmissive. 20,000 case per day in this wave compared to 4,400 cases per day in same week of Delta wave.
-  Capacity within healthcare to take routine patients, so as a result many cases of recorded infections are caught while in hospital (where testing is carried out daily) and so are captured within category of 'hospitalised'. But not hospitalised 'due to covid'.
-  Cases rose fast and are falling fast.
-  Southern hemisphere summer doesn't account for the lower severity of outcome, previous waves also occurred in summer and had worse outcomes than this wave.
It seems the public are now in a moral panic about the NHS, cases, hospitalisations. The media is spreading a mass delusion.

Given SA's experience I'm trying to understand the thought process in media and government. Is it really the thinking that S.A.'s increased sun exposure and its population being on average 13 years younger - the difference in median population age between SA and UK - somehow changes the outcome of Omicron from the mild outcomes experienced there, into a highly virulent virus that according to worst-case modelling is going to cause the UK huge numbers of severe illness that cripples the health service and causes a huge numbers of deaths?

That doesn't appear to be plausible. Unless omicron has mutated into a strain that can selectively target by nationality.

The rhetoric of fear going on around this omicron wave smells strongly of bullshit. It appears that the modellers have been incentivised to paint the worst case picture and this has been run with by virtually the whole media because it's by far the best bad-news story going. I don't know the incentive to panic the population by briefing a narrow picture of the severity of this wave - cover up partygate? Ultra cautious precautionary principle after poorly handling previous waves? Pressurise vaccine compliance in the population? Make the government appear they took action and controlled the omicron wave? Cover up the news, or compound the impact of the slow-to-emerge news, that the commons select committee heard evidence on Wednesday last week (https://committees.parliament.uk/event/6626/formal-meeting-oral-evidence-session/) that a human-engineered virus and lab leak theory is now considered the most likely origin of covid. (notable that this didn't make the BBC or most of the other main media outlets)?

Alternative theory:
Elsewhere, this wave is giving mild outcomes with much lower impact on healthcare than Delta, even considering its far higher speed of transmission. This in a population which, according to another recent Imperial study(...), has much less robust immunity (https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2021/12/15/which-countries-are-best-protected-against-omicron) to omicron than the UK. Reasons for lower impact are unclear but whatever the reasons, it's realistic to forecast Omicron causing not anywhere near the numbers of hospitalisations or deaths as the Delta wave.
If something doesn't change, then due to this moral panic around cases the NHS is going to go short of staff due to people told to isolate with what amounts to a mild cold. This will cause massive self-inflicted damage on these organisations, leading to short-sighted people calling for further restrictions to protect the NHS. Ad infinitum.
In the slightly longer term (i.e. January onward) manufacturing supply chains, production and transport are also about to suffer massive numbers of people told to isolate with what amounts to a mild cold. The worst global stagflation in over a century risks being the result.



Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on December 20, 2021, 12:45:37 pm
Interesting post Pete. I'm sure Offwidth and Nigel will be tripping over each other in the race to reply to it.

One possible concern might be non-isolating covid+ve NHS staff transmitting Omicron to vulnerable people (as patients often are)??
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on December 20, 2021, 12:50:29 pm
I like the term used in a torygraph article today:

'not evidence-based policymaking, but policy-based evidence-making'


Interesting post Pete. I'm sure Offwidth and Nigel will be tripping over each other in the race to reply to it.

Before they do they should consider what I'm not saying. I'm not saying there won't be increases in hospitalisations and deaths. I'm not saying there won't be lots of people needing to be off work with covid. What I am saying is the government and media response to the situation doesn't look to me to be at all proportional to the risk, and actually creates a bigger risk (vicious cycle of restrictions - creating isolations - creating pressure - creating restrictions - creating isolations - creating pressure). Along with the massive social damage of restrictions.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ged on December 20, 2021, 12:51:55 pm
The 'we see no evidence' fallacy is rearing its head with this omicron wave then...
As it emerges (if it wasn't already apparent!) that much of the rationale for increased restrictions and lockdowns originates in two factors:

1. A sentence in the Imperial report #49 (https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/mrc-gida/2021-12-16-COVID19-Report-49.pdf) that says 'we find no evidence for omicron having different severity to Delta..'
2. The modelling of worst case scenarios by Imperial. It doesn't take a mathematician to work out why that modelling therefore shows high cases leading to high hospitalisations and deaths.

The models on which the worst case scenarios are based and which are being used for justifying tighter restrictions:
Don't use the available data from South Africa's real-world experience of Omicron in a population - which show Omicron doesn't have the same severity of outcome as Delta.


No evidence of different severity to Delta? Really??? How pedantic do people want to be, and for what reason. I can't comprehend why modellers tasked by government wouldn't include available real-world evidence of omicron in a population that shows it doesn't have the same severity of outcome as Delta. Maybe at the time they didn't have much information from South Africa? They do now, and could change the inputs.

https://www.cityam.com/modellers-exclude-south-africa-data-indicating-omicron-is-milder-than-delta-variant-reveals-sage-expert/
Quote
Modellers have not included data from South Africa suggesting the Omicron variant is milder than previous strains of Covid-19, according to Graham Medley, chair of SAGE’s modelling committee and professor infectious disease modelling at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LHST).

In a Twitter exchange with The Spectator editor Fraser Nelson, Medley explained that best-case scenarios where Omicron is less lethal than the Delta variant are unnecessary.

He said modellers have been told to establish data to inform governments in case of more severe outcomes.

He said “decision-makers are only interested in scenarios where decisions have to be made” and that modellers “model what we are asked to model” by lawmakers.

This follows LHSTM publishing modelling last week calling for more restrictions.

Nelson contrasted this outlook with an investor note from JP Morgan pointing out if the Omicron variant adjusted in line with data from South Africa – bed occupancy from Covid-19 patients at the end of January would be a third of the peak seen in January 2021, which would be manageable without further restrictions this winter.

When questioned about its lack of inclusion in current UK models, Medley tweeted: “What would be the point of that?”

He argued best-case scenarios “do not inform anything.”


Here's that excellent piece again on why using ''we see no evidence for/against'' is useless for communicating (or a very useful rhetorical tool..): https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/the-phrase-no-evidence-is-a-red-flag

South Africa's experience so far doesn't give cause to be especially fearful of this omicron wave:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-12-17/s-africa-says-hospitalizations-in-omicron-wave-much-lower
https://www.ft.com/content/c366d311-e8ac-488d-9907-4ddb81a9bcd0
https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2021/12/17/1065315661/omicron-may-be-less-severe-in-south-africa-that-may-not-be-the-case-for-the-u-s

-  1.7% of cases resulting in hospitalisation in the second week of the Omicron wave, versus 19% of cases ending up in hospital in the same week of the previous wave for Delta.
-  90% of hospitalised are unvaccinated.
-  Highly transmissive. 20,000 case per day in this wave compared to 4,400 cases per day in same week of Delta wave.
-  Capacity within healthcare to take routine patients, so as a result many cases of recorded infections are caught while in hospital (where testing is carried out daily) and so are captured within category of 'hospitalised'. But not hospitalised 'due to covid'.
-  Cases rose fast and are falling fast.
-  Southern hemisphere summer doesn't account for the lower severity of outcome, previous waves also occurred in summer and had worse outcomes than this wave.
It seems the public are now in a moral panic about the NHS, cases, hospitalisations. The media is spreading a mass delusion.

Given SA's experience I'm trying to understand the thought process in media and government. Is it really the thinking that S.A.'s increased sun exposure and its population being on average 13 years younger - the difference in median population age between SA and UK - somehow changes the outcome of Omicron from the mild outcomes experienced there, into a highly virulent virus that according to worst-case modelling is going to cause the UK huge numbers of severe illness that cripples the health service and causes a huge numbers of deaths?

That doesn't appear to be plausible. Unless omicron has mutated into a strain that can selectively target by nationality.

The rhetoric of fear going on around this omicron wave smells strongly of bullshit. It appears that the modellers have been incentivised to paint the worst case picture and this has been run with by virtually the whole media because it's by far the best bad-news story going. I don't know the incentive to panic the population by briefing a narrow picture of the severity of this wave - cover up partygate? Ultra cautious precautionary principle after poorly handling previous waves? Pressurise vaccine compliance in the population? Make the government appear they took action and controlled the omicron wave? Cover up the news, or compound the impact of the slow-to-emerge news, that the commons select committee heard evidence on Wednesday last week (https://committees.parliament.uk/event/6626/formal-meeting-oral-evidence-session/) that a human-engineered virus and lab leak theory is now considered the most likely origin of covid. (notable that this didn't make the BBC or most of the other main media outlets)?

Alternative theory:
Elsewhere, this wave is giving mild outcomes with much lower impact on healthcare than Delta, even considering its far higher speed of transmission. This in a population which, according to another recent Imperial study(...), has much less robust immunity (https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2021/12/15/which-countries-are-best-protected-against-omicron) to omicron than the UK. Reasons for lower impact are unclear but whatever the reasons, it's realistic to forecast Omicron causing not anywhere near the numbers of hospitalisations or deaths as the Delta wave.
If something doesn't change, then due to this moral panic around cases the NHS is going to go short of staff due to people told to isolate with what amounts to a mild cold. This will cause massive self-inflicted damage on these organisations, leading to short-sighted people calling for further restrictions to protect the NHS. Ad infinitum.
In the slightly longer term (i.e. January onward) manufacturing supply chains, production and transport are also about to suffer massive numbers of people told to isolate with what amounts to a mild cold. The worst global stagflation in over a century risks being the result.

Maybe.

Or maybe the shit will hit the fan due to sheer numbers getting a mainly mild illness meaning there still ends up being loads of hospitalisations.

Who knows.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: remus on December 20, 2021, 12:56:53 pm
I can't comprehend why modellers tasked by government wouldn't include available real-world evidence of omicron in a population that shows it doesn't have the same severity of outcome as Delta. Maybe at the time they didn't have much information from South Africa? They do now, and could change the inputs.

I can think of plenty of reasons, most of them to do with data quality and studying these things being hard (because there are still a lot of unknowns).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on December 20, 2021, 01:00:51 pm
Because the data modelling and the ease of studying how Omicron causes the worst-case impacts (despite these outcomes never having actually happened with this variant and despite real world outcomes saying the opposite) is obviously so high-quality and easy to study that it makes the bad case scenarios the most probable outcomes, right Remus? 

Probability estimates notable by their absence here.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Ged on December 20, 2021, 01:12:34 pm
But the consequences of assuming its all going to be fine are a lot worse than the consequences of assuming it's all going to be OK. If both sets of data are equally unreliable, and we needs to chose which one to listen to, I know what I'd be plumping for.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on December 20, 2021, 01:13:06 pm
The 'we see no evidence' fallacy is rearing its head with this omicron wave then...
I'm not sure it makes sense to class it as a "fallacy", rather than a mediocre way of communicating with the general public, especially the less well educated/less thoughtful.

'we find no evidence for omicron having different severity to Delta..'
It's not clear to me from a skim how they did their analysis, but from what I heard on R4 I was under the impression that this statement related to inherent severity of the variant, which may not necessarily correlate with impact from a public health POV. i.e. it may be the same severity, but while previous infection with delta, or 2x vaccination, isn't a good blocker against reinfection it might still alter outcomes significantly without inherent severity being different. The NPR article you linked also covers this. I may have misinterpreted what Imperial are trying to say though. It's not the clearest communication, that's for sure.

Assuming my interpretation is correct, it seems like a broadly sensible approach to assume equal severity and model for different levels of vaccine efficacy against hospitalization.. unless the SA data is good at showing the inherent severity is lower. (Is it? I assume not given how tricky that would be if almost everyone there has had some kind of infection before?) I assume this is what Imperial and others have done in their models? If so I'm not sure quite what the objection is; if not then can someone dig out what they actually did?

Given SA's experience I'm trying to understand the thought process in media and government.
Well the vast majority of the media don't have a freakin' clue about anything to do with science, so I wouldn't worry too much about their thought process! Same is true of gov, but they have more advisers so would agree/argue that decisions are more likely to be informed/nefarious.

Is it really the thinking that S.A.'s increased sun exposure and its population being on average 13 years younger - the difference in median population age between SA and UK
Presumably you'd also need to include % of pop with other comorbidities. I don't know whether this would significantly impact the model (I assume it's built into the proper ones?) but it makes thought experiments/back-of-envelope harder.

One possible concern might be non-isolating covid+ve NHS staff transmitting Omicron to vulnerable people (as patients often are)??
Ripe for lawsuits if nothing else I'd expect.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on December 20, 2021, 01:19:50 pm
Because [...] the ease of studying how Omicron causes the worst-case impacts [...] is obviously so [...] easy to study

An aside perhaps, but setting high/low boundaries when forecasting./modelling is indeed often much easier than setting a most likely case!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bonjoy on December 20, 2021, 01:35:00 pm


An aside perhaps, but setting high/low boundaries when forecasting./modelling is indeed often much easier than setting a most likely case!
As in it's easier to say your route is between 8c+ and 9b, as opposed to saying it's most likely 9a.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: remus on December 20, 2021, 01:36:41 pm


An aside perhaps, but setting high/low boundaries when forecasting./modelling is indeed often much easier than setting a most likely case!
As in it's easier to say your route is between 8c+ and 9b, as opposed to saying it's most likely 9a.

We obviously need slash grades for assessing the impact of covid variants. I reckon omicron is around we're fucked/we're totally fucked.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on December 20, 2021, 01:44:39 pm
Definitive Hardly-Very-Screwed/Extremely-screwed?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on December 20, 2021, 02:42:25 pm
Interesting post Pete. I'm sure Offwidth and Nigel will be tripping over each other in the race to reply to it.

One possible concern might be non-isolating covid+ve NHS staff transmitting Omicron to vulnerable people (as patients often are)??

Not in the slightest, instead I'll have a look at the links Pete has provided. I felt my posts in the other thread which simply pointed to the actual LSHTM modelling paper Gov were using were caveated and hedged all over the place, but you've obviously taken a different message from it! Am I concerned? Yes, for personal reasons related to your second point. I have a vested interest in Pete / JP Morgan / the Spectator being right on this so I'm not in the business of cheap point scoring.

Some of the reasoning can be dismissed straight away though e.g. a cover up for partygate - were the Dutch / Irish governments invited? As they've introduced similar restrictions. The rest I'll take on its merits.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on December 20, 2021, 03:16:58 pm
I don't know whether omicron is more/less/just as severe as delta, but Pete's post does have an air of desperation about it.

Just a couple of the points which can be challenged:

South Africa's experience so far doesn't give cause to be especially fearful of this omicron wave:
-  1.7% of cases resulting in hospitalisation in the second week of the Omicron wave, versus 19% of cases ending up in hospital in the same week of the previous wave for Delta.

I thought Delta doesn't grant complete immunity from Omicron but does confer a degree of immunity? So if you're looking at a population that just had a big Delta wave then you would expect to see reduced hospitalisations because a lot of the people that omicron would have hospitalised are either recovered with some immunity or dead.

-  90% of hospitalised are unvaccinated.

Not unsurprising when the country's vaccination record is piss poor (they've administered enough doses that about a quarter of the population could be double vaccinated. The reality is that a smaller percentage will be double vaxxed with some single vaccinated as well).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on December 20, 2021, 03:29:26 pm
 Whether a population has immunity from infection via Delta (as in the SA case) or by vaccination (as in the UKs case), the effect is surely much the same? If anything the consensus seems to be that vaccine immunity is preferable to infection immunity.

If the above is true (and I may well be missing something), surely we can sensibly look at SA outcomes because whilst not *exactly* the same situations the UK, it is broadly the same and therefore worth looking at? If SAs Omicron experience has been manageable because they have a lot of prior immunity from Delta infection, why wouldn't ours be manageable when we have a lot of prior immunity from vaccinations, including boosters?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on December 20, 2021, 03:35:38 pm
I don't know, but I'm skeptical of Prof. Pete because I wonder whether his libertarian tendencies might influence his opinion.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tommytwotone on December 20, 2021, 03:54:36 pm
I see that rather than dealing with the issue head-on, and taking an informed decision, Downing Street has now called off the 2pm briefing from Chris Whitty (due to a "scheduling problem", whatever that is), and now, as parliament is on recess, there won't be time to introduce any new changes to the law before Xmas anyway.

So will now doubtless be a longer, potentially harder period of restrictions than if they had bitten the bullet and acted now.

I'd be really angry but it's not exactly like they don't have previous for this dithering and delay.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on December 20, 2021, 04:01:35 pm
https://twitter.com/PoliticsForAlI/status/1472941687001522176?s=20

Looks like restrictions incoming from the 27/12.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 20, 2021, 04:13:49 pm
Because the data modelling and the ease of studying how Omicron causes the worst-case impacts (despite these outcomes never having actually happened with this variant and despite real world outcomes saying the opposite) is obviously so high-quality and easy to study that it makes the bad case scenarios the most probable outcomes, right Remus? 

Probability estimates notable by their absence here.

Well I'll join Nigel. I'm not a fan of the medium to long terms models, not because the science is bad but because a clear position in a range of outcomes is almost impossible to unravel. Short term models are good but not good news.

Pete's detail on SA is not quite right... the omicron hospitalisation peak is about a third of the previous peak (size for size) but that's to be partly expected as population immunity levels are higher than last time (from jabs and infections). They have a very different demographic and they are in summer. It is great news for us that their cases seem to be dropping.

We still don't know reliable hospitalisation data for the UK for our very different immunity profile, demographic differences and our  much higher percentage of the vulnerable. The UK's biggest problem is we have been running hot on covid in the middle of a building crisis in patient throughput, and staff levels. We have very little slack for increased admissions. The good news is we have the best levels of population immunity from jabs and  infections in Western Europe.

Anyone taking covid science from The Spectator has a screw loose but equally some of the more apocalyptic extrapolations doing the rounds seem impossible to me (we already have at least tens of percent of London's young adults infected so it can't double more than twice more in that age group).

Restrictions are happening by self imposition anyhow, irrespective of government policy (just as I said before, it doesn't matter some people think differently, as most were always going to be careful and knew this will last into January). I just hope Sunak gives hospitality etc some financial relief to keep good businesses from going under, if they stick with no extra formal restrictions.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on December 20, 2021, 04:36:03 pm
I don't know, but I'm skeptical of Prof. Pete because I wonder whether his libertarian tendencies might influence his opinion.

I'm pretty skeptical too, but I don't know what I'm missing which means you can't, to all intents and purposes, compare SA and the UK given they both have high immunity, albeit from different sources.

The UK's biggest problem is we have been running hot on covid in the middle of a building crisis in patient throughput, and staff levels. We have very little slack for increased admissions. The good news is we have the best levels of population immunity from jabs and  infections in Western Europe.

I agree with this, but that would seem to imply that we would be locking down because our healthcare system is shit, not because Omicron is particularly bad. Also, surely the UK healthcare system is at least comaprable to SAs, which seemed to manage ok?

Anyone taking covid science from The Spectator has a screw loose but equally some of the more apocalyptic extrapolations doing the rounds seem impossible to me (we already have at least tens of percent of London's young adults infected so it can't double more than twice more in that age group).

Thats playing the man not the ball, which you've accused me of in the past with some justification. I instinctively distrust the Spectator on almost everything but I'd be interested to know how their analysis is factually wrong. Also interesting that we agree that some of the apocalyptic modelling is ridiculous.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on December 20, 2021, 04:46:53 pm
I don't know, but I'm skeptical of Prof. Pete because I wonder whether his libertarian tendencies might influence his opinion.

I'm pretty skeptical too, but I don't know what I'm missing which means you can't, to all intents and purposes, compare SA and the UK given they both have high immunity, albeit from different sources.

I'm happy to admit that I haven't read up on this. My posts here should be discounted on the basis of my ignorance (I'm doing fuck all except work and guidebook at the moment). However the impression I get is that nobody can say with certainty what the impact of omicron on the UK will be. I don't think people are saying there is nothing to learn from data coming from South Africa. I think they're saying: just because South Africa has been fine it doesn't mean that the UK will also be fine.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on December 20, 2021, 05:02:04 pm
However the impression I get is that nobody can say with certainty what the impact of omicron on the UK will be.

Yeah, I think this is true. What I think Pete's saying is that given the data is at least arguable, its disproportionate to be talking about big restrictions again.

But the consequences of assuming its all going to be fine are a lot worse than the consequences of assuming it's all going to be OK. If both sets of data are equally unreliable, and we needs to chose which one to listen to, I know what I'd be plumping for.

This is fine up to a point, but its not a cost-benefit analysis if we fail to include the costs! There are big consequences to restrictions as well as we all know by now. Obviously theres a discussion to be had but to me thats a misuse of the precautionary principle.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on December 20, 2021, 05:17:14 pm
Away from Omicron for a min, there's been some good trends regarding deaths/hospitalisations Vs cases in the last few weeks:
Cases, start and end of the 4 weeks starting from 4th Nov
35362/46006 - up 23%
Hospitalised, 4 weeks starting 11th Nov (1 week offset)
8764/7401 - down 18%
Deaths, 4 weeks starting 19th Nov (2 weeks offset)
147/111.4 - down 32%

Appears treatment is improving, or is this just the impact of early boosters on the elderly?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on December 20, 2021, 05:26:40 pm
https://twitter.com/PoliticsForAlI/status/1472941687001522176?s=20

Looks like restrictions incoming from the 27/12.

PM says otherwise. No change but he's reserving the right for further restrictions etc.

What concerns me about this all of this is the PM's lack of support in his own party to implement any restrictions that may be required; with his form I'd bet on him acting in his own interests before that of the wider electorate.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on December 20, 2021, 05:33:21 pm
https://twitter.com/PoliticsForAlI/status/1472941687001522176?s=20

Looks like restrictions incoming from the 27/12.

PM says otherwise. No change but he's reserving the right for further restrictions etc.

What concerns me about this all of this is the PM's lack of support in his own party to implement any restrictions that may be required; with his form I'd bet on him acting in his own interests before that of the wider electorate.

Labour will make up the Conservative numbers if there's a vote, but he might not want to expose the fact again that his party is against him.
(Apologies if that's what you were getting at).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on December 20, 2021, 06:08:44 pm
(Apologies if that's what you were getting at).

That's exactly what I was getting at.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on December 20, 2021, 07:14:36 pm
Judging by the amount of colleagues and family (and me) testing positive over the past few days, I reckon a good proportion of Christmases will be canceled by default, irrespective of rules
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on December 20, 2021, 07:21:53 pm
Quite. Hope it’s short lived for you.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on December 20, 2021, 07:43:14 pm
Ah that's rubbish, sorry Alex. Just spent the last two days waiting with bated breath on daughters PCR results, thankfully we're still ok (touch wood)

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on December 20, 2021, 08:17:46 pm
(touch wood)
You're already prepared for isolating on the fingerboard instead of the TCA circuits then....
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on December 20, 2021, 08:41:26 pm
Did my first fingerboard session in about 8 months today!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 20, 2021, 10:59:37 pm

Anyone taking covid science from The Spectator has a screw loose but equally some of the more apocalyptic extrapolations doing the rounds seem impossible to me (we already have at least tens of percent of London's young adults infected so it can't double more than twice more in that age group).

Thats playing the man not the ball, which you've accused me of in the past with some justification. I instinctively distrust the Spectator on almost everything but I'd be interested to know how their analysis is factually wrong. Also interesting that we agree that some of the apocalyptic modelling is ridiculous.

It's just a general point someone aimed at pete ( he's not like that imho) and certainly nothing to do with you!? The Spectator don''t do analysis ....they just misread models and point out 'predictions' were wrong that were covered in provisos (including if we don't do anything this will happen type things after something was done). The Spectator started the pandemic with lockdown denial, hence denying exponential growth. Middle period it said everyone had herd  immunity, so the proposed September 2020 lockdown was bs.. These days they are just an annoying press mosquito on covid.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: sdm on December 21, 2021, 12:06:31 am
The UK's biggest problem is we have been running hot on covid in the middle of a building crisis in patient throughput, and staff levels. We have very little slack for increased admissions. The good news is we have the best levels of population immunity from jabs and  infections in Western Europe.
I agree with this, but that would seem to imply that we would be locking down because our healthcare system is shit, not because Omicron is particularly bad.

The two aren't separable. If we lockdown because our healthcare system cannot cope with the omicron outbreak, it matters not in the short term whether we reached that point because our healthcare system is shit, because omicron is particularly bad, or because of some combination of the two. The outcome is the same.

Also, surely the UK healthcare system is at least comparable to SAs, which seemed to manage ok?

SA coping reasonably well does not mean that the UK will. A person's prospects with covid deteriorate significantly with age. SA has 6% of its population aged over 65, the UK has 19%. The UK's covid healthcare capacity needs to be significantly better than SA's to achieve the same outcome in a comparable covid outbreak.

My guess is that our levels of vaccination plus natural immunity will give us better protection overall for the same age than SA's largely naturally acquired immunity. But that is unqualified speculation.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on December 21, 2021, 09:05:08 am
It's just a general point someone aimed at pete ( he's not like that imho) and certainly nothing to do with you!?

I didn't take it as a personal slight, I just meant that you weren't criticising the substance of the argument but the medium through which it was delivered; the Spectator. I actually agree their analysis is generally nonsense but then I also think that about the Guardian a lot of the time; the point is surely to treat each case on its merits?

The two aren't separable. If we lockdown because our healthcare system cannot cope with the omicron outbreak, it matters not in the short term whether we reached that point because our healthcare system is shit, because omicron is particularly bad, or because of some combination of the two. The outcome is the same.

Yes, I understand this - my point was more about the framing, which seems to me to be a lot more focused on the dangers of Omicron as opposed to the structural problems it is exposing. If we also accept that these structural problems are unlikely to be solved in the short to medium term, which unfortunately I do, then the logical conclusion is that lockdowns will be an annual, or at least frequent, normalised policy tool to NHS pressure/new variants, just in case they overwhelm the system. I don't think this is sustainable or politically possible, whichever party is in office, so by far the most likely outcome is an annual 'muddling through,' with the NHS under huge winter pressures pretty much every year. I don't like this outcome much either but I think its preferable to annual lockdowns.

SA coping reasonably well does not mean that the UK will. A person's prospects with covid deteriorate significantly with age. SA has 6% of its population aged over 65, the UK has 19%. The UK's covid healthcare capacity needs to be significantly better than SA's to achieve the same outcome in a comparable covid outbreak.

My guess is that our levels of vaccination plus natural immunity will give us better protection overall for the same age than SA's largely naturally acquired immunity. But that is unqualified speculation.

Again, I understand this point but I still don't think that this justification for a lockdown will fly politically, even if it makes sense from a raw numbers perspective. You can't be introducing nationwide restrictions on peoples lives because we have an aging population. One might also respond that the vast majority of our over 65s have also been boosted, which lowers their risk significantly.

I'm as unqualified as the next person but I think lockdowns are a pretty blunt policy response now vaccines are available and shouldn't be seen as a normal policy measure or a tool like any other. The evidence is not clear cut like it was last christmas. Basically, I don't think a broadly restriction free society should be seen as an optional extra in the long term, and in the short term I'd rather we start getting used to what that will mean. Obviously it will have costs and it would be good for the government to be more honest about that. 

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Rocksteady on December 21, 2021, 10:11:50 am

Cover up the news, or compound the impact of the slow-to-emerge news, that the commons select committee heard evidence on Wednesday last week (https://committees.parliament.uk/event/6626/formal-meeting-oral-evidence-session/) that a human-engineered virus and lab leak theory is now considered the most likely origin of covid. (notable that this didn't make the BBC or most of the other main media outlets)?

Interesting that this detail has been lost in the subsequent debate. This whole matter is unfairly lumped in with conspiracy theories in my opinion whereas actually it does seem more of a prima facie case that it's worth investigating whether a lab creating and researching novel coronaviruses was the origin of a novel coronavirus that emerged in the same city where the lab is based.  :shrug:

I read this paper which has a very bland title but as Pete says actually is an examination by a parliamentary committee of (1) the flaws in the peer review system and (2) the potential origins of the Covid-19 pandemic as an escape from the Wuhan lab.

In summary: the editor of The Lancet admits that the letter they published at the outset of the pandemic that said it was extremely unlikely the virus escaped from the Wuhan lab was initiated by Dr Danszak, a virologist from the EcoHealth Alliance who failed to disclose his conflict of interest as a US government funded sponsor of said Wuhan lab to carry out research into novel coronaviruses. At the time this shut down the debate on the topic. It was revealed that The Lancet doesn't check conflicts of interest it just takes declarations on faith. Over 16 months later once they had worked everything through they amended the letter with information about the conflict of interest.

Subsequent examination of expert witnesses in the report makes it clear that it is plausible that (a) the virus is genetically modified and (b) that it could well have escaped from the Wuhan lab (accidentally). One interesting piece of unverifiable info from some of the expert witnesses is "there is a report from inside the US intelligence community that three of the first cases were workers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology who got sick in November 2019 with symptoms very like Covid-19."

They found the animal origins of SARS and MERS outbreaks within 8 weeks. Despite the global interest and the WHO investigation of I think 80k animals in China they have not found a plausible animal progenitor of this virus.

It might seem irrelevant next to the practical consequences right now but I think it's important. Not to finger point at China
 or virologists but to work out what needs to be done to prevent a future pandemic. Should more scrutiny and regulation be put on the type of experiments done in virus research? Is any benefit produced by splicing viruses together worth the cost of a global pandemic? Can similar benefits be achieved with less risky experiments?

"There is a database at the Wuhan Institute of Virology with 22,000 entries in it, 15,000 of them relating to viruses from bats. It has been offline since before the pandemic. It was there to help prepare for pandemics. Which pandemic are they waiting for before they share it with the rest of the world? Quite a lot of the entries in it relate to viruses collected with US Government funding through the EcoHealth Alliance. Why do they not have access to that data, which goes back to the earlier session about the importance of making data available?"

In principle I hate conspiracy theories as they obscure the truth and take convoluted explanations for things that are in fact simple, and usually relate to incompetence. I've fallen out with people at work in the past who were moon-landing deniers (FFS). But to me this is about truth and most simple/likely explanation. The waters are getting muddied by people saying  the virus was deliberately created to attack humans and deliberately released. I'm not saying that and the parliamentary investigation doesn't say that.
But given the lack of evidence of an animal source despite lots of investigation and much faster identification of said source in previous coronavirus outbreaks, it seems more likely than not that this coronavirus could have been created in the Wuhan lab and accidentally escaped from there. Conspiracy theory alert: Yes I do also think that this has been covered up or obfuscated by the Chinese government and other people involved (US-based lab sponsor EcoHealth Alliance) for fear of repercussion.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tommytwotone on December 21, 2021, 11:04:23 am

I'm as unqualified as the next person but I think lockdowns are a pretty blunt policy response now vaccines are available and shouldn't be seen as a normal policy measure or a tool like any other. The evidence is not clear cut like it was last christmas. Basically, I don't think a broadly restriction free society should be seen as an optional extra in the long term, and in the short term I'd rather we start getting used to what that will mean. Obviously it will have costs and it would be good for the government to be more honest about that. 


Good point. Cars are exponentially / prove-ably safer than they were c.20 years ago now, and road deaths are at an all-time low.

Based on those improvements in preventative measure and the statistics, I think I'll stop me and my family wearing seatbelts in the car, it's a bit of blunt policy in terms of keeping me and those around me safe.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Duma on December 21, 2021, 11:11:19 am
What a ridiculous comparison ttt, lockdowns are enormously damaging to society, especially those at least risk from the disease (school kids and young adults/students) and failure to acknowledge, or trivialising this harm (for example by comparing them to seatbelts) helps no one.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Adam Lincoln on December 21, 2021, 11:16:19 am
Spanish officials meeting tomorrow (22nd) to decide if UK citizens will be banned from entering Spain. As per Germany and France.

Big day for climbers!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on December 21, 2021, 11:35:57 am
so by far the most likely outcome is an annual 'muddling through,' with the NHS under huge winter pressures pretty much every year. I don't like this outcome much either but I think its preferable to annual lockdowns.

I don’t think we will have many healthcare workers left if official policy is ‘suck it up’! 

Your phrase ‘muddling through’ is also a very nice way of saying ‘decide who we can care for and who we need to leave to die’.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Nigel on December 21, 2021, 11:37:04 am
...the logical conclusion is that lockdowns will be an annual, or at least frequent, normalised policy tool to NHS pressure/new variants, just in case they overwhelm the system. I don't think this is sustainable or politically possible, whichever party is in office, so by far the most likely outcome is an annual 'muddling through,' with the NHS under huge winter pressures pretty much every year. I don't like this outcome much either but I think its preferable to annual lockdowns.

The worry in government is presumably that the NHS won't "muddle through" though. Rather that it will stop functioning. For clarity everything you say in your post makes sense and I completely agree that it is a balancing act. Absolutely no-one wants further restrictions. But we've already seen how relatively innocuous things like a lack of petrol at the pumps can really put the skids on things. Healthcare being unable to operate a functioning nationwide emergency service would be of a different order entirely. Its nice to look at the optimistic models and hope that this won't happen, but because of the lack of firm information on severity it is a gamble. Sometimes you can shrug off a loss on a gamble. On an individual level probably a lot of people can indeed cope without an emergency service for a bit. Fingers crossed it doesn't come to that anyway...

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on December 21, 2021, 11:54:44 am
Good point. Cars are exponentially / prove-ably safer than they were c.20 years ago now, and road deaths are at an all-time low.

Based on those improvements in preventative measure and the statistics, I think I'll stop me and my family wearing seatbelts in the car, it's a bit of blunt policy in terms of keeping me and those around me safe.

Come on, that is a totally spurious comparison. Wearing a seatbelt has absolutely no downsides or costs, whereas as we all know, lockdowns do.

I don’t think we will have many healthcare workers left if official policy is ‘suck it up’! 

Your phrase ‘muddling through’ is also a very nice way of saying ‘decide who we can care for and who we need to leave to die’.

Agree that is definitely a concern. I think we need to pretty urgently increase the numbers of doctors and nurses in training and provide more funding for training progression across basically all of the specialities. Its not something we can fix short term but it could be medium term. That obviously requires significant additional funding and probably tax rises.

In the absolute worst case scenario it is, but as I've said before, I don't think thats particularly likely. In perhaps the more likely scenario it means 'deciding who's non urgent care/ elective surgery will be cancelled.' I don't think thats good either, for the avoidance of doubt (my Nan urgently needs a new hip, for example!), but I don't think it is remotely comparable to leaving people to die.

The worry in government is presumably that the NHS won't "muddle through" though. Rather that it will stop functioning. For clarity everything you say in your post makes sense and I completely agree that it is a balancing act. Absolutely no-one wants further restrictions. But we've already seen how relatively innocuous things like a lack of petrol at the pumps can really put the skids on things. Healthcare being unable to operate a functioning nationwide emergency service would be of a different order entirely. Its nice to look at the optimistic models and hope that this won't happen, but because of the lack of firm information on severity it is a gamble. Sometimes you can shrug off a loss on a gamble. On an individual level probably a lot of people can indeed cope without an emergency service for a bit. Fingers crossed it doesn't come to that anyway...

Yep, I agree with all of this. Ultimately we can't know for sure how likely NHS collapse is, and the discussion comes down to how justifiable massive restrictions are in the absence of such clarity. Personally, I think you have to be absolutely certain the shit is going to hit the fan before restrictions are brought back, they shouldn't just be introduced 'just in case.' Appreciate others disagree but I bet that view is becoming more and more mainstream across society, even if not on this forum!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: teestub on December 21, 2021, 11:58:58 am
Personally, I think you have to be absolutely certain the shit is going to hit the fan before restrictions are brought back, they shouldn't just be introduced 'just in case.' Appreciate others disagree but I bet that view is becoming more and more mainstream across society, even if not on this forum!

I agree here but I guess calling when that tipping point is, with the nature of the exponential growth and not knowing the severity of a variant until you have a decent mass of it, will be very difficult.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on December 21, 2021, 12:04:56 pm
I agree here but I guess calling when that tipping point is, with the nature of the exponential growth and not knowing the severity of a variant until you have a decent mass of it, will be very difficult.

Definitely. I think it almost comes down to point of political philosophy regarding what level of state intervention one is happy with. I am pretty statist in quite a lot of my political and economic views but am definitely not when it comes to meeting my friends in my own house, for example.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on December 21, 2021, 01:59:21 pm
Haven't properly read thread as I'm busy packing and xmas stuff. This is rushed so likely won't read well.

In reply to your 'prof Pete' comment Will:
I'm not posting to try to appear clever. I don't think I'm clever. I do think I have an OK capacity for researching and absorbing lots of info, spotting patterns, and a reasonable nose for bullshit or opportunity.

In reply to 'spectator covid science' playing the ball'ism: I've never knowingly read the spectator (I realise Fraser Nelson published his article in the spectator - it was also published in torygraph but the original tweets were on, well.. twitter). For news I read the Guardian and the Telegraph. For business news I read Bloomberg and the FT. For in-depth I read the economist and various other sources. The markets are a very good indicator of how omicron will play out, markets will know and act before we will.
I have libertarian ideals but as they say - 'I have strong opinions loosely held'. I'm not at all in favour of liberty at a cost to all other people, I'm very much centre-right economically in practise but on the left economically in my ideals (ideals meet real-life and quickly fall!), while libertarian on the 'authoritarian/libertarian' scale. 

The evidence is what it is. I'm totally open-minded to things getting bad enough that a lockdown is the only sensible option. The evidence from various sources not used in the worst-case modelling isn't currently suggesting things will be worst case or anywhere close to. That should be acknowledged in the framing of the decisions to be made. The public shouldn't be frightened in the way they have by the media/gov failing to give the estimated likelihoods of the worse-case/less worse and best case outcomes. Even their best-case estimates assume omicron is at least as severe in outcome as Deta.

Alex - yes I was careful in wording it 'severity of outcome'. Not 'severity of omicron' or some-such. The inherent severity of virus is what it is, ultimately it's obviously important but like you say not the most important thing in understanding the risk. To understand the risk a very important thing to understand is the severity of actual outcome. Doesn't matter too much how that outcome is reached - whether immunity, an inherently less severe virus, social behaviour, moon made of cheese etc.
Risk = hazard x likelihood.

We haven't been given the risk. Just some worst-cases and less-worse cases (hazards), but not their respective likelihoods. The likelihoods for even less-severe scenarios, which don't assume Omicron has same severity of outcome as Delta, haven't even been given to the public. Hence the risk to public health can't be framed in a wider frame just the narrow frame.
Some evidence suggests lower severity of outcome. Therefore the worst cases should at least be reverse engineered to see what needs to be different in the UK for that worst case to come about, versus places that have had less severe outcomes in real life. To me it's utter madness to not change your view when receiving updated evidence. I get the precautionary principle - it should apply to social harm too. The framing of this wave has been awful, I can't work out why.
I suspect because they know the health service is at high risk of falling over for a short time - but due to staff shortage not due to severity of illness from omicron. This is a very different problem and as Spider points out shouldn't demand locking down the normal operation of society and business to protect against this problem, that would be a wrong and potentially endless road.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 22, 2021, 08:58:14 am
I still think you are missing my main point and misreading my opinions on lockdown. Every citizen should care about freedoms, I think that way as well, but the virus doesn't care what anyone thinks. If the data says a lockdown is needed to prevent NHS overload in the next weeks, due to the sheer increase of numbers of seriously ill, it's better to lockdown fast as any delay means the peak is higher and longer so does more damage to the NHS, the economy, and the population's welfare (they all correlate... all this talk of trade-off is bogus). Some scientists say it's better to jump earlier to minimise damage further; which I'd agree with in an unvaccinated population facing a fast spreading dangerous new virus but I'm not convinced right now with omicron and the levels of covid immunity we have from vaccination and previous infections. So on the topic of lockdowns, in my opinion we are not at a point yet to call anything more than some extra restrictions as we still don't have enough omicron hospitalisation data and there is still a significant chance we won't need a lockdown.

Current modelling can't work medium term as it relies on hospitalisation data we don't have yet to give sensible outputs (the model can be excellent but put rubbish in and rubbish comes out). Paul Mainwood is a much better place to go than The Spectator for critique on the current modelling issues but it really comes down to my previous point.  Comparing Guardian errors with the Spectator's on covid is ridiculous....the latter was still pushing anti-lockdown when hospitals would be at absolute limits and tens of thousands more of us were likely to die (Sept and Dec 2020 influence on Boris's stupid delays) with all the avoidable extra economic and social damage...... as they put ideology above epidemiological basics.  The Guardian in contrast got some things wrong but although no one got hurt, they did piss off a few oversensitive middle class people.

Where politics matter is the national scandal that the NHS is in such a woeful state. Those extra staff we need will take years to train so we can only look to immigration to gap fill until then. If the NHS was healthy we might have only needed light restrictions for omicron. The government foot shooting responses throughout this pandemic (vaccines aside) is costing everyone a fortune in life, health and finance. It's not stopped either.... when the NHS is in crisis you don't push 5%  we desperately need from the front-line because they are unvaccinated; when any safe infection control protocol should make that irrelevant.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on December 22, 2021, 10:27:11 am
In reply to your 'prof Pete' comment Will:
I'm not posting to try to appear clever. I don't think I'm clever. I do think I have an OK capacity for researching and absorbing lots of info, spotting patterns, and a reasonable nose for bullshit or opportunity.

I'm afraid my bullshit detector went off when I read your post. Clearly you don't want another lockdown (who does?) but the fact that you started reaching for stuff about man-made virus escaping from a lab (could be true I suppose, but what's it got to do with whether you need a lockdown?), spreading lockdown fear to cover up partygate (this makes no sense), media conspiracy to push fear of omicron etc etc etc. I thought Dan had hacked your account.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on December 22, 2021, 11:06:22 am
https://twitter.com/alexwickham/status/1473556411946717184

Looking milder
Booster = good
Highly transmissible
Total hospitilisation numbers may exceed previous peaks?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on December 22, 2021, 11:16:20 am
Will that’s a complete misrepresentation of what I said. Read my post again, I’m not suggesting links between those things! There’s a very big difference between mentioning different things and making a link, implied or direct.

The fact of last week’s select committee, which took evidence on the wuhan lab, is a completely separate point to my point that the public haven’t had the relative likelihoods explained for the various possible outcomes of this omicron wave. Or that the evidence for omicron having lower severity of outcome elsewhere has been completely disregarded in the media furore and government rhetoric over the last week and a bit.

If it sounded like I was saying scary omicron rhetoric = cover up wuhan then I wasn’t and apologies for writing it poorly. Maybe I should have put that point about the select committee in a separate post, just so that people wouldn’t think I was implying the one was a direct reason for the other.

I mentioned the select committee last week because it’s a genuinely interesting piece of info not because I think there’s some grand conspiracy. 
I would hope that people are grown up enough to read a piece of information and take it on the merit or not of that information, and not some imagined intent.  Seems you aren’t and need a nappy and someone to wipe your arse and spoon feed for you.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on December 22, 2021, 11:22:28 am
Seems you aren’t and need a nappy and someone to wipe your arse and spoon feed for you.

Yes please, Daddy.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Wellsy on December 22, 2021, 11:24:29 am
Abort thread
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on December 22, 2021, 11:34:02 am
Quote
If the data says a lockdown is needed to prevent NHS overload in the next weeks

Thats what we're discussing. I don't think the data does indisputably say that.

Quote
So on the topic of lockdowns, in my opinion we are not at a point yet to call anything more than some extra restrictions

This is an interesting semantic point, but any restrictions which restrict people from meeting others in their own home or close pubs etc, as have been mooted in the last few days, are essentially a lockdown whatever name we give it.

I rate Paul Mainwood as well. I will pass over your reference to oversensitive middle class people, but actually saying 'noone got hurt' fundamentally ignores the harms lockdowns cause. Everyone will have personal stories of family members having their employment or income decimated by them - this obviously counts!

Quote
Where politics matter is the national scandal that the NHS is in such a woeful state. Those extra staff we need will take years to train so we can only look to immigration to gap fill until then. If the NHS was healthy we might have only needed light restrictions for omicron. The government foot shooting responses throughout this pandemic (vaccines aside) is costing everyone a fortune in life, health and finance. It's not stopped either.... when the NHS is in crisis you don't push 5%  we desperately need from the front-line because they are unvaccinated; when any safe infection control protocol should make that irrelevant.

I agree with this apart from the unvaccinated staff issue, but the fact remains that it isn't going to get solved in the short term so we need a workable strategy for that period. For me, lockdowns shouldn't be part of that strategy unless absolutely essential.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 22, 2021, 11:48:35 am
In reply to your 'prof Pete' comment Will:
I'm not posting to try to appear clever. I don't think I'm clever. I do think I have an OK capacity for researching and absorbing lots of info, spotting patterns, and a reasonable nose for bullshit or opportunity.

I'm afraid my bullshit detector went off when I read your post. Clearly you don't want another lockdown (who does?) but the fact that you started reaching for stuff about man-made virus escaping from a lab (could be true I suppose, but what's it got to do with whether you need a lockdown?), spreading lockdown fear to cover up partygate (this makes no sense), media conspiracy to push fear of omicron etc etc etc. I thought Dan had hacked your account.

I'm fairly sure I'll agree with Pete on the wuhan lab issues. I don't think the infection came from the lab but there sure was a cover up (of embarrassing idiocy) about the fact it could theoretically have come from there. Then there were all the consequentials that dropped out...there was a lack of openess that the covid work in the wuhan lab included a type of gain of function research and that was  part-funded by  US research grants....and then Fauci played rhetorical games to pretend it wasn't gan of function (but only by his incredibly tight definition). Then the fact that the work that was then banned in the US was undertaken in bio-protection level 2 and level 3 labs. There is nothing we can do now but this wuhan lab foolishness doesn't help public trust in science. Neither does the fact Oxford Uni still employ two Profs in senior leadership positions who still support herd immunity ideas that have been dangerously wrong time and time again (Gupta and Heneghan should be back as profs with no portfolio for now, imho, and under ethical investigation).

A Channel 4 Dispatches documentary was pretty fair on the wuhan lab debate.

https://www.channel4.com/programmes/did-covid-leak-from-a-lab-in-china

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Will Hunt on December 22, 2021, 11:57:26 am
The rhetoric of fear going on around this omicron wave smells strongly of bullshit. It appears that the modellers have been incentivised to paint the worst case picture and this has been run with by virtually the whole media because it's by far the best bad-news story going. I don't know the incentive to panic the population by briefing a narrow picture of the severity of this wave - cover up partygate? Ultra cautious precautionary principle after poorly handling previous waves? Pressurise vaccine compliance in the population? Make the government appear they took action and controlled the omicron wave? Cover up the news, or compound the impact of the slow-to-emerge news, that the commons select committee heard evidence on Wednesday last week (https://committees.parliament.uk/event/6626/formal-meeting-oral-evidence-session/) that a human-engineered virus and lab leak theory is now considered the most likely origin of covid. (notable that this didn't make the BBC or most of the other main media outlets)?

This is the paragraph that most triggered my bullshit-ometer, Pete, because it seems to me that you've forgotten to apply Occam's Razor. You're suggesting something conspiratorial (in which you invoke the Wuhan thing as a reason for the government/media bigging up omicron more than they ought to) and I suspect that you do that because it will lead you to the outcome that you want - which is to be opposed to a lockdown under any circumstances. By the way I have absolutely no opinion on whether the virus escaped a lab in Wuhan or not. It seems perfectly plausible to me. The only element of the discussion I'm interested in is whether a lockdown might be needed and this has nothing to do with that.

What I see is Chris Whitty wrestling with having to give advice which he knows will directly lead to more or fewer deaths. He's got some information to do this, but it's incomplete and may be confounded by the differences between the UK and SA; he's got to give the advice at a particularly feverish time because this is coincidentally the point in the year when people all decide to socialise at the same time. He can't wait, as Jim wants him to, until the data "indisputably" points to needing a lockdown to prevent failure of the healthcare system because of the lag time between people becoming infected, falling ill, and needing hospital care. If you wait until you're 100% sure then it's already too late to do anything about it.

That's all. I remain hopeful that another lockdown won't be needed because I'm sick to the back teeth of the whole thing. Our arguments on here will soon be moot anyway because we're getting better and better information all the time about whether a lockdown is needed or not.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 22, 2021, 12:07:03 pm
Quote
If the data says a lockdown is needed to prevent NHS overload in the next weeks

Thats what we're discussing. I don't think the data does indisputably say that.


....and neither do I (as yet) so what exactly are you arguing about on that point?


Quote
So on the topic of lockdowns, in my opinion we are not at a point yet to call anything more than some extra restrictions

This is an interesting semantic point, but any restrictions which restrict people from meeting others in their own home or close pubs etc, as have been mooted in the last few days, are essentially a lockdown whatever name we give it.

I rate Paul Mainwood as well. I will pass over your reference to oversensitive middle class people, but actually saying 'noone got hurt' fundamentally ignores the harms lockdowns cause. Everyone will have personal stories of family members having their employment or income decimated by them - this obviously counts!


Restrictions are mooted because a real bad outcome is in the short term accurate modeling range and even best case the NHS won't have a great time of the next two months.

Lockdowns were not the Guardian's fault they were a public health necessity and the deaths and health outcomes,  time required to drop restrictions,  financial hit and social damage were all made worse by govenment dithering.


Quote
Where politics matter is the national scandal that the NHS is in such a woeful state. Those extra staff we need will take years to train so we can only look to immigration to gap fill until then. If the NHS was healthy we might have only needed light restrictions for omicron. The government foot shooting responses throughout this pandemic (vaccines aside) is costing everyone a fortune in life, health and finance. It's not stopped either.... when the NHS is in crisis you don't push 5%  we desperately need from the front-line because they are unvaccinated; when any safe infection control protocol should make that irrelevant.

I agree with this apart from the unvaccinated staff issue, but the fact remains that it isn't going to get solved in the short term so we need a workable strategy for that period. For me, lockdowns shouldn't be part of that strategy unless absolutely essential.

That sounds like cakeism to me. If that 5% ends up being part of the the 'camel straw' that forces lockdown are you  really OK with that ....or would you prefer we do all we can to avoid lockdown?. A similar factor is also doing damage and increasing lockdown risks......stopping employment of unvaccinated care workers has added significant pressure to the care system and therefore has increased NHS bed blocking. Brexit also made staffing worse. Javid picking numerous fights with NHS management and staff has made staffing worse. Ministerial boasting about how many new doctors and nurses we have this year when even more are retiring or leaving or long term sick, hides a key recruitment problem, which also makes staffing worse.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on December 22, 2021, 12:23:58 pm
That sounds like cakeism to me. If that 5% ends up being part of the the 'camel straw' that forces lockdown are you  really OK with that ....or would you prefer we do all we can to avoid lockdown?. A similar factor is also doing damage and increasing lockdown risks......stopping employment of unvaccinated care workers has added significant pressure to the care system and therefore has increased NHS bed blocking. Brexit also made staffing worse. Javid picking numerous fights with NHS management and staff has made staffing worse. Ministerial boasting about how many new doctors and nurses we have this year when even more are retiring or leaving or long term sick, hides a key recruitment problem, which also makes staffing worse.

You're doing your usual thing of going off on a rant about the Tories and Brexit. Ignoring all that, I agree there may be an element of wishful thinking in the short term, but can't see that it will be too much of an issue in the summer, which is when I thought it was coming into force? NHS staff are required to have the Hep B jab, this one is no different from what I can see. It will become obligatory at some point, its just a question of when. Wouldn't have a problem with it being delayed in due course but i think its right to put unvaxxed staff on notice so they can get themselves jabbed.

Should add that I think Whitty is doing an amazing job and providing the govt with all the relevant advice from a healthcare perspective. I understand that he can't personally wait for indisputable evidence before giving advice,  but I do think the govt should before implementing that advice.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 22, 2021, 12:30:36 pm

What I see is Chris Whitty wrestling with having to give advice which he knows will directly lead to more or fewer deaths. He's got some information to do this, but it's incomplete and may be confounded by the differences between the UK and SA; he's got to give the advice at a particularly feverish time because this is coincidentally the point in the year when people all decide to socialise at the same time. He can't wait, as Jim wants him to, until the data "indisputably" points to needing a lockdown to prevent failure of the healthcare system because of the lag time between people becoming infected, falling ill, and needing hospital care. If you wait until you're 100% sure then it's already too late to do anything about it.


I think you can be pretty sure if Chris Whitty was PM Plan B light would have been running for months and Plan B+ as soon as omicron hospitalisations started in large numbers in SA. His job is to support the PM so he has been stretching the envelope on what he can say since September 2020 and more so in the last few days than ever.

Omicron measures are not about deaths (and  deaths were always secondary in the UK given our response). It is about keeping the NHS running on the covid emergency alongside other emergency work. SA data shows omicron death rates  are proportionally low ... given we have more vulnerable than SA ours will likely be higher (but nothing like as high as delta). The key question in terms of hospital overload is how many people will go into hospital with omicron and how long will they need to stay?

Another problem is just when we need clear data the PCR system is starting to creak.... there are increasing  logistics based shortages and increasing delays in returning results. Symptomatic infections will almost certainly exceed system capacity this week. ONS weekly  infection surveys will become even more important but they are delayed by a week.

Plus the NHS off sick rate in London went from 1900 to 4700 last week.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 22, 2021, 12:43:00 pm
That sounds like cakeism to me. If that 5% ends up being part of the the 'camel straw' that forces lockdown are you  really OK with that ....or would you prefer we do all we can to avoid lockdown?. A similar factor is also doing damage and increasing lockdown risks......stopping employment of unvaccinated care workers has added significant pressure to the care system and therefore has increased NHS bed blocking. Brexit also made staffing worse. Javid picking numerous fights with NHS management and staff has made staffing worse. Ministerial boasting about how many new doctors and nurses we have this year when even more are retiring or leaving or long term sick, hides a key recruitment problem, which also makes staffing worse.

You're doing your usual thing of going off on a rant about the Tories and Brexit. Ignoring all that, I agree there may be an element of wishful thinking in the short term, but can't see that it will be too much of an issue in the summer, which is when I thought it was coming into force? NHS staff are required to have the Hep B jab, this one is no different from what I can see. It will become obligatory at some point, its just a question of when. Wouldn't have a problem with it being delayed in due course but i think its right to put unvaxxed staff on notice so they can get themselves jabbed.

Should add that I think Whitty is doing an amazing job and providing the govt with all the relevant advice from a healthcare perspective. I understand that he can't personally wait for indisputable evidence before giving advice,  but I do think the govt should before implementing that advice.

I'm just pointing out areas that have increased our risk of a lockdown this winter (none of which involve The Guardian in any way). That removal of 5% of NHS front line staff will make a big negative difference, just like removal of care staff did to increased NHS bed blocking. So did you want to do all we can to avoid lockdown or not (with direct health outcomes, indirect outcomes and  deaths, financial damage, and social damage)?

I think all NHS staff should be vaccinated as well but removing them if they don't get their first jab by Feb 3rd is to me akin to playing russian roulette. Infection control makes risk from the unvaccinated very small so we can wait a few more months.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on December 22, 2021, 12:48:47 pm

I think all NHS staff should be vaccinated as well but removing them if they don't get their first jab by Feb 3rd is to me akin to playing russian roulette. Infection control makes risk from the unvaccinated very small so we can wait a few more months.

Yeah, I'd agree with this; I thought the date was April but just checked and thats when the second jab needs to be done by currently. Seems silly to do it in the middle of winter. My money would be on that changing by a few months like you say.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on December 22, 2021, 12:49:21 pm
The rhetoric of fear going on around this omicron wave smells strongly of bullshit. It appears that the modellers have been incentivised to paint the worst case picture and this has been run with by virtually the whole media because it's by far the best bad-news story going. I don't know the incentive to panic the population by briefing a narrow picture of the severity of this wave - cover up partygate? Ultra cautious precautionary principle after poorly handling previous waves? Pressurise vaccine compliance in the population? Make the government appear they took action and controlled the omicron wave? Cover up the news, or compound the impact of the slow-to-emerge news, that the commons select committee heard evidence on Wednesday last week (https://committees.parliament.uk/event/6626/formal-meeting-oral-evidence-session/) that a human-engineered virus and lab leak theory is now considered the most likely origin of covid. (notable that this didn't make the BBC or most of the other main media outlets)?

This is the paragraph that most triggered my bullshit-ometer, Pete, because it seems to me that you've forgotten to apply Occam's Razor. You're suggesting something conspiratorial (in which you invoke the Wuhan thing as a reason for the government/media bigging up omicron more than they ought to) and I suspect that you do that because it will lead you to the outcome that you want - which is to be opposed to a lockdown under any circumstances. By the way I have absolutely no opinion on whether the virus escaped a lab in Wuhan or not. It seems perfectly plausible to me. The only element of the discussion I'm interested in is whether a lockdown might be needed and this has nothing to do with that.

What I see is Chris Whitty wrestling with having to give advice which he knows will directly lead to more or fewer deaths. He's got some information to do this, but it's incomplete and may be confounded by the differences between the UK and SA; he's got to give the advice at a particularly feverish time because this is coincidentally the point in the year when people all decide to socialise at the same time. He can't wait, as Jim wants him to, until the data "indisputably" points to needing a lockdown to prevent failure of the healthcare system because of the lag time between people becoming infected, falling ill, and needing hospital care. If you wait until you're 100% sure then it's already too late to do anything about it.

That's all. I remain hopeful that another lockdown won't be needed because I'm sick to the back teeth of the whole thing. Our arguments on here will soon be moot anyway because we're getting better and better information all the time about whether a lockdown is needed or not.


The difference between your interpretation and my intent, is that my intent behind that paragraph is that all, any, or none of those things going on in the background could have something to do with the way this wave has been framed by the gov and media for public consumption. Or they could have nothing at all to do. It’s simply spitballing.
The wuhan stuff is genuinely interesting and highly relevant to anyone even slightly interested in science communication, public trust in politics, geo politics and just what’s happening in the world. I thought that was obvious. 

I think the framing of the risks of omicron overwhelming healthcare have led to a moral panic in the last couple of weeks, which helps nobody make informed decisions. The almost sole focus verging on panic by media and even it seems gov messaging, on models which assume same severity of outcome as delta is to me a completely bizarre way to frame a problem where evidence exists that runs counter to the narrative being breathlessly pushed. The counter evidence in a real life population suggests it’s plausible to think the UK population, with much better overall immunity levels than SA, would not experience in real life the outcomes given by the models - models requested by ministers (understandably) to show worst case outcomes. We’ll see won’t we. I’d be saying lockdown right away if my take on the available facts suggested locking down was a proportional response to the risk.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on December 22, 2021, 01:02:21 pm
On the modelling issue, I thought this was good. I've listened to Sam Freedman a lot during the pandemic.

https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/new-approach-needed-avoid-covid-data-disputes-and-modelling-misunderstanding
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: James Malloch on December 22, 2021, 01:08:06 pm

Plus the NHS off sick rate in London went from 1900 to 4700 last week.


For me this kind of thing is the biggie. It seems like the NHS is all but certain going to have a real shit time in Jan/Feb. That’s on top of the really shit time it’s had over the last 21 months. And the people needing support from the NHS for non-COVID reasons might also have a really shit time because of this, again.

Workers must be exhausted, suffering from all sorts of mental health problems. But because we want Christmas to go ahead we’re going to wait and learn a bit more from the data - when it’s already pretty clear that it’s not going to be good.

I admit that I’ve no idea what the right thing is (and I’m saying this from a comfortable position) but I’m all for a lockdown of some sort. We’re a wealthy country and should be able to afford to support business through one. Put an emergency tax on those who are able to continue to work to help fund it, increase other taxes to help fund it, or whatever.

If not, then the government should go on TV and specifically state what they are happy to happen and why they are making that choice. Explain the likely hospitalisation numbers and say directly to the NHS staff why they have chosen that rather than other options, and say the strain they expect them to be under due to staff illness/burn out combined with massive admissions. Tell them that they chose to fuck their mental health again because they wanted the rest of the country to get together over Christmas.

I’d hate another lockdown, but I feel like we’ve had it relatively okay compared to much of the world so far. And if, in 2 weeks (or whatever) the data that they are now waiting for shows that things aren’t as bad as the modelling suggests, then loosen the restrictions.

Edit - this probably isn’t well thought through, but the premise is simply that I think that if a lockdown now can reduce the expected burden on the NHS, then I’m all for one and think it’s morally the right thing to do.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on December 22, 2021, 01:23:59 pm
On the modelling issue, I thought this was good. I've listened to Sam Freedman a lot during the pandemic.

https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/new-approach-needed-avoid-covid-data-disputes-and-modelling-misunderstanding

Yep, he’s really good. This paragraph describes well the current situation:
Quote
If I were a politician or adviser my main takeaway would be that restrictions, if imposed now, would make a significant difference to the numbers. But not that the numbers will unquestionably be high enough to require restrictions. Where you’d go from there depends how wedded you are to the precautionary principle and your assessment of the costs of restrictions (which have, unhelpfully, not been modelled at any point during the pandemic). As we can see these are, reasonably enough, the questions that the cabinet are asking.

The gov’s restrictions so far are more or less exactly what you’d expect given the apparent risk.

And the majority of the media in the way they’ve framed this latest wave have been truly awful and scaremongering.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on December 22, 2021, 01:46:58 pm
the majority of the media in the way they’ve framed this latest wave have been truly awful and scaremongering.

Who are you referring to here? (apart from the Guardian obvs).

If anything it’s been the complete opposite from the Telegraph, Mail, Sun etc.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: spidermonkey09 on December 22, 2021, 01:52:17 pm
the majority of the media in the way they’ve framed this latest wave have been truly awful and scaremongering.

Who are you referring to here? (apart from the Guardian obvs).

If anything it’s been the complete opposite from the Telegraph, Mail, Sun etc.

I think the i have really bad form on reporting of variants, and this one has been no different. That is actually what frustrates me, the reporting of covid from the papers I like has been dire.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on December 22, 2021, 02:30:33 pm
Quote from: ali k

Who are you referring to here? (apart from the Guardian obvs).

If anything it’s been the complete opposite from the Telegraph, Mail, Sun etc.

The BBC, sky news, ITN, channel 4, the telegraph has only just in the last day or two really pivoted away from parroting the last two weeks of doom stats from government. The mail/express/sun I can’t really say as I don’t look at them, but pretty sure I glimpsed a few front page Armageddon headlines on them as I walked past in the local shop.
R4, R5, R1. (I’m confident you could add R2 to that but I’d rather listen to white noise).

So yeah nothing of any influence or reach…
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on December 22, 2021, 02:43:01 pm
(I’m confident you could add R2 to that but I’d rather listen to white noise).
I can recommend you some pretty thrilling pieces by Merzbow if you like?? (One of which I was listening to on the way back from Trefor in the summer....not my usual driving music I admit).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on December 22, 2021, 02:58:41 pm
Pete - just listing a lot of media outlets and saying they’ve reported Covid numbers doesn’t amount to much of an argument to back up your accusation of ‘scaremongering’.

Do you extend the accusation of scaremongering out to other leaders / foreign media because those countries are imposing further restrictions?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Johnny Brown on December 22, 2021, 07:16:38 pm
I haven't seen any scaremongering either. What we've all seen is that omicron is much more transmissible. And we all know that the data hasnt come through yet to be certain if it is sufficiently less severe to prevent that transmissibility becoming the nightmare we all know it could be. So we're all then reacting with our natural level of risk and risk tolerance and being bemused by those with radically different levels.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on December 22, 2021, 07:20:59 pm
Pete - just listing a lot of media outlets and saying they’ve reported Covid numbers doesn’t amount to much of an argument to back up your accusation of ‘scaremongering’.

..is nowhere remotely resembling what I actually said. What I did say was that the media have focussed on the doom predictions not the covid numbers.
This is completely ridiculous it’s like trying to communicate with runes. Perhaps I should try posting a cave painting.
Forget it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 22, 2021, 07:49:22 pm
I haven't seen any scaremongering either. What we've all seen is that omicron is much more transmissible. And we all know that the data hasnt come through yet to be certain if it is sufficiently less severe to prevent that transmissibility becoming the nightmare we all know it could be. So we're all then reacting with our natural level of risk and risk tolerance and being bemused by those with radically different levels.

It’s not always “scaremongering “ but it’s often over sensational.

Take today’s 100k threshold headlines. Compare “date reported” with “Specimen date”, the latter giving a much better picture:

(https://i.ibb.co/N6JH64Y/48390346-EDFB-4378-817-A-2-D2600-C2-F8-CF.jpg)

Quite alarming…

(https://i.ibb.co/tbtyV6B/F391423-E-B944-4-DA9-A17-F-C86090-CE136-E.jpg)

Quite different.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: ali k on December 22, 2021, 08:58:41 pm
The BBC, sky news, ITN, channel 4, the telegraph has only just in the last day or two really pivoted away from parroting the last two weeks of doom stats from government.
Pete - just listing a lot of media outlets and saying they’ve reported Covid numbers doesn’t amount to much of an argument to back up your accusation of ‘scaremongering’.
..is nowhere remotely resembling what I actually said. What I did say was that the media have focussed on the doom predictions not the covid numbers.

I haven’t followed the rest of the thread but don’t get pissy about miscommunication if you type ‘stats from government’ when you actually meant ‘predictions [from scientists]’. They’re completely different things and you know that.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: AJM on December 22, 2021, 09:03:54 pm
It’s not always “scaremongering “ but it’s often over sensational.

Take today’s 100k threshold headlines. Compare “date reported” with “Specimen date”, the latter giving a much better picture:

(https://i.ibb.co/N6JH64Y/48390346-EDFB-4378-817-A-2-D2600-C2-F8-CF.jpg)

Quite alarming…

(https://i.ibb.co/tbtyV6B/F391423-E-B944-4-DA9-A17-F-C86090-CE136-E.jpg)

Quite different.

What about the “by specimen date” picture do you think is less alarming? Genuine question, to be clear.

Given you can’t trust any of the greyed out days yet because they are incomplete, and that the earlier data is broadly identical in both graphs with about a day or two time shift (you’d expect a test with a specimen date of today to be reported tomorrow or the day after, give or take, so one graph should broadly be a time shift of the other, which you can roughly see in the shape), I’m not sure what different message I would take from one versus the other.

Give it another few days for the rest of the cases with specimen dates from 18th onwards to finish processing, and those bars will rise, and you’ll get back to a position where one graph is just a time shift of the other (perhaps with more blurring now because the gap between specimen date and processing date is becoming a bit more volatile (I’ve seen suggestion of larger processing delays in some places currently))
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 22, 2021, 09:15:05 pm
It’s not always “scaremongering “ but it’s often over sensational.

Take today’s 100k threshold headlines. Compare “date reported” with “Specimen date”, the latter giving a much better picture:

(https://i.ibb.co/N6JH64Y/48390346-EDFB-4378-817-A-2-D2600-C2-F8-CF.jpg)

Quite alarming…

(https://i.ibb.co/tbtyV6B/F391423-E-B944-4-DA9-A17-F-C86090-CE136-E.jpg)

Quite different.

What about the “by specimen date” picture do you think is less alarming? Genuine question, to be clear.

Given you can’t trust any of the greyed out days yet because they are incomplete, and that the earlier data is broadly identical in both graphs with about a day or two time shift (you’d expect a test with a specimen date of today to be reported tomorrow or the day after, give or take, so one graph should broadly be a time shift of the other, which you can roughly see in the shape), I’m not sure what different message I would take from one versus the other.

Give it another few days for the rest of the cases with specimen dates from 18th onwards to finish processing, and those bars will rise, and you’ll get back to a position where one graph is just a time shift of the other (perhaps with more blurring now because the gap between specimen date and processing date is becoming a bit more volatile (I’ve seen suggestion of larger processing delays in some places currently))

Because the error on the more recent days is unlikely huge (edit: bar yesterday, which will still be way off). My guess is that it peaked/plateaued about Friday last week. It’s not the precipitous ramp the first graph would suggest and that messaging/measures are having an impact.
Of course, Xmas itself might blow that out of the water.
And, there might be tens of thousands of tests five days late in being reported, but I suspect that’s what inflated todays figure. Wednesdays are always likely to be abnormally high as the combination of late weekend reporting and increased Monday testing, catch up.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: AJM on December 22, 2021, 09:33:16 pm
Because the error on the more recent days is unlikely huge (edit: bar yesterday, which will still be way off). My guess is that it peaked/plateaued about Friday last week. It’s not the precipitous ramp the first graph would suggest and that messaging/measures are having an impact.
Of course, Xmas itself might blow that out of the water.
And, there might be tens of thousands of tests five days late in being reported, but I suspect that’s what inflated todays figure. Wednesdays are always likely to be abnormally high as the combination of late weekend reporting and increased Monday testing, catch up.

Time will tell, but I’m not so sure. I don’t know how much geographic respreading they do for processing they tend to do - I assume not much given the desire for speedy turnaround and given the issues with the lab they uncovered a few months back predominantly hit the SW. I could easily see a localised spike in demand around London, delays on postal samples due to Xmas post load, staff absences through covid through the chain and so on pushing that delay out far more than we are used to.

If you think that the end of school term/last Friday before Christmas for many is potentially quite a powerful downwards pressure on infection rates, that shouldn’t be feeding through until after the weekend, given a few days from infection to infectious. Cases peaking on the Friday would imply infections peaked early-mid week, and I can’t obviously see why.

Other slight concern on disengagement with testing as the “you’ll miss Christmas” deadline approaches. That was middle of last week under the old rules, which is a concerning coincidence if the data does turn out as you suggest, because that’s not real.

I think we’d be very lucky, personally. But I guess we get to see the level of restatement on the 18/19 over the next couple of days.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: AJM on December 22, 2021, 09:45:00 pm
My only other thought is that even if Wednesdays are inflated as you suggest, comparing to 7 days beforehand should strip that distortion out, and hardly shows a pretty picture (that’s the datapoint at just under 80k, if I’ve counted back correctly, so something like a 25-30% increase week on week)

Edit - >30%, I think - 106/78 is roughly 4/3 so 133%?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 22, 2021, 10:13:23 pm
My only other thought is that even if Wednesdays are inflated as you suggest, comparing to 7 days beforehand should strip that distortion out, and hardly shows a pretty picture (that’s the datapoint at just under 80k, if I’ve counted back correctly, so something like a 25-30% increase week on week)

Edit - >30%, I think - 106/78 is roughly 4/3 so 133%?
Oh I’m not trying to suggest there isn’t a wave, just that it’s (I really hope) possibly not the wave that’s being painted. If the transmissibility is as high as suspected, then the measures must be having a moderating effect. Less the restrictions,yet, more the public awareness and experience coupled with vaccine protection; at a guess. 
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on December 23, 2021, 10:44:33 am
Because I'm a prick, I just wanted to quickly come back to say I told you so to Pete  :ras:

Alex - yes I was careful in wording it 'severity of outcome'. Not 'severity of omicron' or some-such.

As I guessed, they did indeed include severity of outcome in the model, it was inherent severity of omicron that was modelled as being the same:
https://twitter.com/_nickdavies/status/1473941675634483200

So the answer to
I can't comprehend why modellers tasked by government wouldn't include available real-world evidence of omicron in a population that shows it doesn't have the same severity of outcome as Delta.
is that they did include it.

And as a bonus, if I've understood it right, the inherent severity does now look likely to be a bit lower too.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: danm on December 23, 2021, 02:28:31 pm
Something not being talked about is long covid - so far there is no evidence that omicron will be less likely to lead to it. Death rate gets all the headlines but the long term impacts of a population ravaged with post viral illness are likely to be huge.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 23, 2021, 02:29:28 pm
Because I'm a prick, I just wanted to quickly come back to say I told you so to Pete  :ras:

Alex - yes I was careful in wording it 'severity of outcome'. Not 'severity of omicron' or some-such.

As I guessed, they did indeed include severity of outcome in the model, it was inherent severity of omicron that was modelled as being the same:
https://twitter.com/_nickdavies/status/1473941675634483200

So the answer to
I can't comprehend why modellers tasked by government wouldn't include available real-world evidence of omicron in a population that shows it doesn't have the same severity of outcome as Delta.
is that they did include it.

And as a bonus, if I've understood it right, the inherent severity does now look likely to be a bit lower too.

Obligatory caveat that this is very early days and very small numbers: the Imperial study suggests that for unvaxxed people who haven't had Covid before, the risk of hospitalization is circa 11% lower with Omicron than Delta.  Which would indicate lower inherent severity, but not hugely so.
 
We're definitely seeing lower severity of outcome, but 40-50% reduction in overnight-or-longer hospitalizations is not terrific if Omicron keeps spreading at the same speed -- the impact on the health system of halving the infection hospitalization rate gets cancelled out if cases double, whch at current rates takes 2 days.

It'll all look better if cases level off and then start to fall very soon; it looks like this is happening in SA, fingers crossed, but we don't know why:

https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1473985139948535815
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2021/12/the-south-africa-omicron-wave-is-already-peaking-why.html
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on December 23, 2021, 05:59:33 pm
Talking of confusing messages in the mainstream state media....

Quote
There are also signs that the effect of booster doses is waning.

Two doses of a vaccine were shown to offer limited protection against catching Omicron, which was then restored with a booster dose.

However, the report says this protection drops by between 15% and 25% after 10 weeks. This is still better than having no booster dose and the protection against severe disease or death is likely to be even greater.

(From BBCCCP (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-59769969))

Is this gobbledegook or what?? Their previous article (sorry couldn't find it) specifically referred to a 3rd vaxx booster being highly effective at avoiding Omicron symptoms (it was just "symptoms", not "serious illness").

Throughout this debacle I've got the impression that vaccines offer "some" protection against being infected with Covid-5G, and "more" protection against getting serious illness from it (the latter seems to have been very much proven by high cases vs low hospitalisations throughout a summer / autumn of Delta).

The BBC seems to be mixing up two different measurements in it's Omi reporting: transmission and illness. Which doesn't strike me as very helpful.


Can someone who follows these things just provide some simple figures for me:

% vaxx effectiveness against catching Covid

% vaxx effectiveness against passing on Covid (if this is useful)

% vaxx effectiveness against getting symptoms (if this is useful)

% vaxx effectiveness against getting serious illness 

Feel free to do a second lot of figures for all of the above, swapping "vaxx" for "booster" and "Covid" for "Omicron".


Ta!

Edit: Feel free to answer in runes or cave paintings if it's more appropriate.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on December 23, 2021, 06:12:27 pm
What do you find confusing? Seems to make sense to me...
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on December 23, 2021, 06:32:38 pm
Quote
Two doses of a vaccine were shown to offer limited protection against catching Omicron, which was then restored with a booster dose.
-vs-
Quote
Their previous article (sorry couldn't find it) specifically referred to a 3rd vaxx booster being highly effective at avoiding Omicron symptoms (it was just "symptoms", not "serious illness").
(Noting the latter article didn't mention much about transmission reduction, just symptom prevention.

Which is the important factor, and why do they keep switching between talking about two different aspects??
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 23, 2021, 06:49:22 pm
Can someone who follows these things just provide some simple figures for me:

*hollow laughter*

Less simple than you think, because you'd have a different set of figures for each vaccine in relation to each variant. And it's now clear that the vaccines wane in effectiveness over time. So, different figures per vaccine per variant per time period since vaccination. And now for every different combo of vaccines and boosters ...

But your understanding is completely correct -- you've got two very different measures, protection against catching Covid and protection against getting severely ill from Covid.

And the latter tends to be MUCH stronger and hold up much better than the former.

Relevant thing to explain: lots of info and studies will refer to "symptoms" or "symptomatic illness" as their measure, because unless you've got a study population where everyone is getting PCR-tested on a regular and frequent basis (which takes a LOT more infrastructure), you're not going to catch completely asymptomatic cases.

So a lot of vaccine studies will go for testing anyone in their population who gets possible Covid-type symptoms (this has happened to me various times in the ENSEMBLE2 trial, even though I'm now in the "control group of people on rival vaccines"  -- getting a headache or a cold requires me to report it in the app and then I have to do multiple PCRs).

"Symptomatic illness" is the quicker-and-dirtier measurement of vaccine effectiveness, basically, so we've generally got a lot more data on that than on the risk of catching Covid full stop (including completely asymptomatic cases).

And people will often use that as interchangeable with "catching Covid", even though you are correct that it's not exactly the same. But it often gets used as a sort of proxy for it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on December 23, 2021, 06:51:37 pm
I'm still not sure I understand your objection? I suspect it's best to read "avoiding omicron symptoms" as "avoiding symptomatic infection" if that helps and that's what you're driving at? If not I don't understand still...

Bear in mind that most large-scale data will probably (I'm making an assumption here) look at avoiding symptomatic infection as avoiding infection per se is harder to measure unless you have groups you're regularly testing even if asymptomatic and you use them for your study (rather than the general public which typically gets tested when symptomatic)

[Beaten to it and with a clearer explanation]
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 23, 2021, 07:18:51 pm
I'm still not sure I understand your objection? I suspect it's best to read "avoiding omicron symptoms" as "avoiding symptomatic infection" if that helps and that's what you're driving at? If not I don't understand still...

Bear in mind that most large-scale data will probably (I'm making an assumption here) look at avoiding symptomatic infection as avoiding infection per se is harder to measure unless you have groups you're regularly testing even if asymptomatic and you use them for your study (rather than the general public which typically gets tested when symptomatic)

[Beaten to it and with a clearer explanation]

Yeah, this is why the SIREN study is a big deal -- it's a cohort of 10,000 healthcare workers who get tested every 2-4 weeks with PCR and antibody tests, starting May 2020. So LOTS of data coming out of that, especially about things like reinfection risk.

But it's a shit-tonne more work to do that than just to test anyone who shows possible symptoms. And Covid vaccine trials have involved much larger numbers of people.

And then real-world data is even "dirtier", because you're looking at "people who had a positive test either because they tested after having symptoms, or tested as a precautionary measure before doing a thing, or because it's a work requirement". Which will pick up some people who might be asymptomatic but not all.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on December 23, 2021, 08:07:56 pm
Cheers jab_happy and barras, that does clear it up.

Maybe I was a bit surprised that symptomatic infection is used as a benchmark as I've seen enough official posters around warning "1 in 3 people get the covid without any symptoms, take care get jabbed get tested wotever", so I assumed "they", whoever they are, were differentiating between symptomatic infections and total infections.

I see now that the quotes in my 2nd, shorter, post are used to mean pretty much the same thing. And yes the distinction between those/that, and "getting serious illness" is clear.




Now is the Grinah guide pdf available to download yet....??
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 23, 2021, 09:51:35 pm
(In fact, those of us who had AZ get an upgrade to our protection, because we get in on that funky mix-and-match action.)

Does this work for other types too?. I.e. as someone who had two Pfizer doses, given the choice, should I get a Moderna booster?

Unclear -- Pfizer and Moderna are very similar (not just the same type of vaccine, but almost identical) so they don't have the effect of mixing different mechanisms of action that you do when mixing mRNA vaccines with viral vector vaccines.

The Lancet study got a response that was a bit higher when stacking a full dose of Moderna on top of two Pfizers:

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)02717-3/fulltext

However, that may just be because Moderna went for a relatively higher dose as their "standard" dose than Pfizer did (which is also why it can hit a bit harder with side-effects).

Which is why they're using half-doses of Moderna for boosters, versus full doses of Pfizer.

On the basis of what we currently know, looks like three doses of any mRNA vax performs VERY strongly, so personally I wouldn't delay getting boosted in order to get a particular one.

Some UKHSA data suggesting that if you have a Moderna booster after 2 Pfizer, the protection from the booster may wane more slowly than if you have a third Pfizer:

https://twitter.com/freja_kirsebom/status/1474070643079536649

So that suggests mixing it up is worthwhile if you have the opportunity.

But that's one note in the middle of a picture with some bad news (as well as some very hopeful news re: hospitalizations): data generally suggests pretty rapid waning of protection against symptomatic infection with Omicron from boosters. Not great.

Scientists are hoping that protection against severe illness will remain much higher -- it should, based on the patterns we've see through the pandemic (and the apparent reduced risk of hospitalization), but we don't have the data yet to be certain of what the picture is.

Excellent breakdown of the whole UKHSA Variant Technical Briefing from Meaghan Kall in this thread:

https://twitter.com/kallmemeg/status/1474071983067389958
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: AJM on December 24, 2021, 09:04:00 am
My only other thought is that even if Wednesdays are inflated as you suggest, comparing to 7 days beforehand should strip that distortion out, and hardly shows a pretty picture (that’s the datapoint at just under 80k, if I’ve counted back correctly, so something like a 25-30% increase week on week)

Edit - >30%, I think - 106/78 is roughly 4/3 so 133%?
Oh I’m not trying to suggest there isn’t a wave, just that it’s (I really hope) possibly not the wave that’s being painted. If the transmissibility is as high as suspected, then the measures must be having a moderating effect. Less the restrictions,yet, more the public awareness and experience coupled with vaccine protection; at a guess.

Just looking at this a few days on, the 18/19 have risen slightly, maybe 5k cases up or something.

The 20th was massively incomplete though since that has put on a good 30k cases to circa 110k.

21st currently lower but based on this experience this is probably very incomplete still.

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/cases?areaType=overview&areaName=United%20Kingdom
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Sidehaas on December 24, 2021, 09:18:16 am
If you want to estimate how many cases are still likely to be added for specimen dates in the previous 5 days,  the bed way is to go to the dashboard page for England (vs UK) and look at the "Daily change in reported cases by specimen date" graph. This data isn't available for whole UK. From it, you can see what proportion of a specimen date's cases tend to get added after 1 day, after 2 days etc. This is fairly consistent and only changes slowly when testing starts to struggle.
Tuesday and Wednesday from this week are each looking likely to be higher than the day before again.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 24, 2021, 09:32:35 am
IndieSAGE last Friday had a plot of PCR test % meeting the 24 hour return target: that was dropping fast in data from a week and a half ago. This shows we simply can't trust daily PCR data right now. Add to that people who won't get tested so they don't ruin xmas, plus a likely much larger proportion of omicron infected who think they have a cold so don't get a test (latest reports say 1 in 2 of 'colds' in London are probably omicron), plus xmas disruption, plus some reported logistics trouble accessing tests.

ONS data will be much more accurate on population levels of infection but more delayed.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/articles/coronaviruscovid19/latestinsights

The key was always the number of new omicron hospital admissions (on top of all the other NHS pressures, esp staff off sick or isolating with omicron), but not just that... it's also important how ill they are (if on average they stay in hospital fewer days, the NHS pressure will be reduced cf a similar number of delta hospitalised)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on December 24, 2021, 01:50:11 pm
Because I'm a prick, I just wanted to quickly come back to say I told you so to Pete  :ras:

Alex - yes I was careful in wording it 'severity of outcome'. Not 'severity of omicron' or some-such.

As I guessed, they did indeed include severity of outcome in the model, it was inherent severity of omicron that was modelled as being the same:
https://twitter.com/_nickdavies/status/1473941675634483200

So the answer to
I can't comprehend why modellers tasked by government wouldn't include available real-world evidence of omicron in a population that shows it doesn't have the same severity of outcome as Delta.
is that they did include it.

And as a bonus, if I've understood it right, the inherent severity does now look likely to be a bit lower too.

It isn’t clear from your link? You’d need to look at the original LSHTM study, not ‘Imperial report #50’.

It doesn’t tally with what was said by Graham Medley (LSHTM) about the assumptions used in their scenario modelling, if you read his exchange.

Either way it makes no difference to the point, which is that the media and government over the past two weeks stoked panic by pushing a narrative of the high numbers given in the more worse-case scenarios, with little to no regard given to likelihood of these scenarios actually occurring, and there was little to no discussion of the (much more likely) better case scenarios.
Best reflected in the widely reported selective quoting by government and media of Ferguson’s red flag line: ‘we see no evidence for different severity compared to Delta’.

Despite all the evidence that everyone could see, that suggested something different is in fact going on in real life. 🙄
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on December 24, 2021, 02:20:17 pm
It isn’t clear from your link? You’d need to look at the original LSHTM study, not ‘Imperial report #50’.

It doesn’t tally with what was said by Graham Medley (LSHTM) about the assumptions used in their scenario modelling, if you read his exchange.

The guy in the twitter thread is from LSHTM, and explains (quite clearly IMO) that they modelled the same inherent severity but vaccines and previous infection make severity of outcome lower in the model outputs[1]. I don't know what you think is unclear or contradictory to the Graham Medley exchange, which appears to be a discussion of inherent severity (caveat - I've only perused his Twitter)?

Either way it makes no difference to the point,

It makes a significant difference to part of your original point, which was ranting about the modellers not including things in the model:
I can't comprehend why modellers tasked by government wouldn't include available real-world evidence of omicron in a population that shows it doesn't have the same severity of outcome as Delta.
but as he explains they already were predicting lower severity of outcome (this was a model output not an input - presumably vaccine efficacy and inherent severity are the main inputs), it was just a question of how much less the severity would be.

But yes, lots of politicians and media both misunderstand modelling and report it with an underlying agenda. I imagine you'll have a certain empathy on at least the former point  ;) :jab:

[1] "There was some confusion over what our models, which assumed Omicron had equal "baseline" severity to Delta, meant for severity in practice. This leads to around a 40% reduction in realised severity within each age group, because more Omicron cases are breakthrough/reinfections." - from my link
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on December 24, 2021, 04:52:07 pm
Why do you think I’d have a certain empathy on at least the former point?

Have you actually read the Medley/Nelson exchange on Twitter?
Or read/listened to any media reporting over the last 2-3 weeks about the omicron wave? To say the narrative was doom-mongering and focussing on the worst case would be an massive understatement.

Headline in Torygraph today: ‘We are not issuing doomsday warnings says top scientist’.
Probably just a random headline, because nobody thinks they were, right?

I don’t think SAGE or other scientists *were* issuing doomsday warning - I think they were just doing their jobs and giving the various possible outcomes.
I 100% think the media and government spin-artists were though.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on December 24, 2021, 06:25:03 pm
Why do you think I’d have a certain empathy on at least the former point?
It was a joke Pete, because - as far as I can tell - you've misunderstood how they did the modelling.

Have you actually read the Medley/Nelson exchange on Twitter?
I read something earlier between those two, I don't know if it was the thread you were referring to but I assume so as it involved him saying something like "we model what we're asked to model" and the stuff about only modelling interesting scenarios. I didn't see anything in there that backed up your statement about their model involving equal severity of outcome to delta. Please post it up. I've shown you why I think you were wrong (one of the modellers explicitly laying it out), you've not shown my why you think you were right, if you still do?

Yeah, media are often lame. Cool. But your objection to the model having the same severity of outcome is also lame, because as far as I can tell it's wrong. There's a reason I didn't respond to the media-focused parts of your  posts - it's not an area where I had something I wanted to opine on. I mostly listen to PM if I listen to news. I don't recall the narrative being much other than "we don't really know what will happen because we don't know quite how well vaccines will stand up to it and how severe it will be, if we do nothing it's rolling a dice/hoping for the best". Which all seems like a pretty sensible conclusion. They've seemed at pains to explain the uncertainties in a way that even idiots could understand. I read the guardian sometimes but have no objection to doing my own interpretation on statements including words like "up to". After all, if I play the lottery I know I could win up to the X million jackpot, not that that's the most probable outcome.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 27, 2021, 07:39:01 am
Really good thread on why it matters to unpack the difference between severity of outcome and intrinsic severity (and why intrinsic severity still matters even in a country with high vaccination levels):

https://twitter.com/roby_bhatt/status/1475052548331610112
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on December 27, 2021, 07:54:54 pm
Quote
Latest figures also showed there were 8,474 people with Covid currently in hospital in England - the highest since March, but well below last winter's peak of more than 34,000.

Not all the patients in hospital will be being treated for Covid - about three in 10, according to latest data, have Covid but are in hospital for something else.

Quick question, anyone got the stats for how quickly the numbers are increasing for patients in hospital with and DUE TO covid, compared to patients with covid full stop (as above)?? (Obviously I know patients with but not due to covid are still a strain on the NHS due to whatever isolation / PPE / covid-secure measures they require).
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 27, 2021, 08:59:48 pm
Nothing subsequent to the Great Christmas Data Hiatus, but this is from the 23rd:

https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1473982353580175365

And a breakdown in percentage "with" and "for:" https://twitter.com/JamesWard73/status/1473964874535419909

Specifically on London hospital data.

I believe it's taken from the Primary Diagnosis Supplement here:

https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-hospital-activity/
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on December 27, 2021, 10:17:19 pm
Asked and answered!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 28, 2021, 08:01:14 am
Can generally rec Ward and JBM for data nerding, along with Meaghan Kall ( https://twitter.com/kallmemeg ), who very deservedly got a write-up as one of Nature's 10 people shaping science in 2021 for her Covid science communication work:

https://www.nature.com/immersive/d41586-021-03621-0/index.html#section-EQqzpXoePk
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 28, 2021, 10:05:59 am

And a breakdown in percentage "with" and "for:" https://twitter.com/JamesWard73/status/1473964874535419909


Such deadpan delivery.... that thread is a absolute classic scientific put-down of Alison Pearson's twaddle about 'hospitalisations with covid'.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 28, 2021, 06:06:49 pm
You'd think a mic drop like that might give Pearson pause, but that's not what the Telegraph pays for!

https://twitter.com/JamesWard73/status/1475887309555998728
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 29, 2021, 08:07:43 am
Interesting thread on the dip in the "for Covid" percentage, and whether that's another indicator of reduced severity in Omicron, or because it's a fast-growing variant and an impending spike in "for Covid" cases is on its way:

https://twitter.com/john_actuary/status/1475172843709206534

Spoiler: we don't know which it is yet, but it's an interesting breakdown of why either could result in the dip we're seeing now, and how we might expect it to shift in either case.

It hadn't previously clicked for me that a rise in "for Covid" cases is going to be time-lagged behind the "with Covid" cases, because it typically takes some time for people to get ill enough from Covid to need hospitalization, while the "with" cases just need to turn positive and then get hit by a bus.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on December 29, 2021, 11:23:02 am
Testing capacity isn't looking great:
https://twitter.com/JenWilliamsMEN/status/1476145365858586628?t=NLdf53Yjj4AZ5X7CZBh2sQ&s=19
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: abarro81 on December 29, 2021, 01:23:17 pm
Not sure if there's a "post covid" thread I should put this in instead..

Climbed yesterday (having got out of iso on Christmas day, felt pretty much better, done a hangs session and some bouldering with no issue) doing some bouldering and then some aero cap where I totally tanked..  and woke up last night with a fever, sore throat, knackered etc... Looks like this is something that can happen post recovery. Anyone had similar? If so was it a one off or recurring thing? Any useful tricks to avoid it ("do less" being the obvious one)?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on December 29, 2021, 01:28:17 pm
I think it would be well worth starting a "Climbers recovering from covid" thread, to cover the immediate states afterwards as well as long dong covid potential. Give that quite a few people have had it and obviously want to get back to climbing effectively soon but sensibly.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 29, 2021, 03:21:07 pm
Not sure if there's a "post covid" thread I should put this in instead..

Climbed yesterday (having got out of iso on Christmas day, felt pretty much better, done a hangs session and some bouldering with no issue) doing some bouldering and then some aero cap where I totally tanked..  and woke up last night with a fever, sore throat, knackered etc... Looks like this is something that can happen post recovery. Anyone had similar? If so was it a one off or recurring thing? Any useful tricks to avoid it ("do less" being the obvious one)?

My triathlete pals who have had really bad long covid said something similar: in good patches when some mild exercise seemed possible they were OK during but then knackered for days afterwards. They still have pretty limiting problems 21 months after catching it. My dad had bad GBS which is another rare but nastier form of long covid...I can assure you that is horrible. The NHS report makes it sound not so scary until you get to the last line... No mention that significant numbers who don't die end up paralysed and need months of extensive physio... as nerve use returns it comes with endless pain.

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/guillain-barre-syndrome/
https://gaincharity.org.uk/faq/gbs-and-acute-associated-inflammatory-neuropathies/


Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on December 29, 2021, 03:36:33 pm
My wife was diagnosed with Guillain Barre in January 2020 and is still suffering significantly. However, I think it's misleading to describe GBS as a form of "long Covid," even if it's true that some people have developed GBS as a result of contracting Covid. GBS clearly exists independently of Covid (unless my wife somehow contracted Covid in the US in the fall of 2019, before it had been detected in China). GBS is an auto-immune disease triggered, in ways that are not fully understood, by a viral infection, very commonly gastroenteritis (my wife had a stomach bug in November 2019). In some people it is being triggered by Covid. Other auto-immune diseases, such as Type 1 diabetes, are similarly often triggered by viral infections. Our daughter developed Type 1 diabetes in May 2018, a few weeks after a chest infection.

My first wife died of the side effects of treatment for another auto-immune disease. I really fucking hate auto-immune diseases.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on December 30, 2021, 11:23:55 am
With all due respect to Andy and wishing good health to his family, sorry to bring semi-frivolity into this...

But this one is just for you jab_happy  :-*
https://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,25088.msg651971.html#msg651971
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Offwidth on December 30, 2021, 11:39:17 am
My wife was diagnosed with Guillain Barre in January 2020 and is still suffering significantly. However, I think it's misleading to describe GBS as a form of "long Covid," even if it's true that some people have developed GBS as a result of contracting Covid. GBS clearly exists independently of Covid (unless my wife somehow contracted Covid in the US in the fall of 2019, before it had been detected in China). GBS is an auto-immune disease triggered, in ways that are not fully understood, by a viral infection, very commonly gastroenteritis (my wife had a stomach bug in November 2019). In some people it is being triggered by Covid. Other auto-immune diseases, such as Type 1 diabetes, are similarly often triggered by viral infections. Our daughter developed Type 1 diabetes in May 2018, a few weeks after a chest infection.

My first wife died of the side effects of treatment for another auto-immune disease. I really fucking hate auto-immune diseases.

If it's a direct result of a covid infection what else is it? Long covid broadly falls into two broad families... those suffering from organ damage (especially lungs) from the initial infection and those suffering from long term disregulation of their immune response (of which GB is an extreme example).

My dad nearly died, spent most of a year unable to move unaided and still is in constant pain and struggling to walk 20 years on.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 30, 2021, 11:55:08 am
My wife was diagnosed with Guillain Barre in January 2020 and is still suffering significantly. However, I think it's misleading to describe GBS as a form of "long Covid," even if it's true that some people have developed GBS as a result of contracting Covid. GBS clearly exists independently of Covid (unless my wife somehow contracted Covid in the US in the fall of 2019, before it had been detected in China). GBS is an auto-immune disease triggered, in ways that are not fully understood, by a viral infection, very commonly gastroenteritis (my wife had a stomach bug in November 2019). In some people it is being triggered by Covid. Other auto-immune diseases, such as Type 1 diabetes, are similarly often triggered by viral infections. Our daughter developed Type 1 diabetes in May 2018, a few weeks after a chest infection.

My first wife died of the side effects of treatment for another auto-immune disease. I really fucking hate auto-immune diseases.

If it's a direct result of a covid infection what else is it? Long covid broadly falls into two broad families... those suffering from organ damage (especially lungs) from the initial infection and those suffering from long term disregulation of their immune response (of which GB is an extreme example).

My dad nearly died, spent most of a year unable to move unaided and still is in constant pain and struggling to walk 20 years on.

My partner, Polly, was born by emergency Caesarian two months premature, when her mother collapsed, paralysed from the neck down; with GBS. Apparently pregnancy can provoke the onset of GBS, and the lingering issues that brings (I’m not aware of any subsequent event of similar magnitude, but many more minor incidents). Massive resentment by mother of daughter that culminated in a “Shirley Valentine” when Polly was 12 (quite literally, her Mum ran off to Rhodes). I’m not sure why this should be classified as one of only two categories of long covid? There are a multitude of post viral (or suspected as such) long term conditions, brought on by a multitude of unrelated viruses, are there not?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on December 30, 2021, 01:43:44 pm

If it's a direct result of a covid infection what else is it?

Guillain Barre. In the same way that if pregnancy triggers Multiple Sclerosis, the resulting disease is MS, not an extended pregnancy.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 30, 2021, 01:46:30 pm
With all due respect to Andy and wishing good health to his family, sorry to bring semi-frivolity into this...

But this one is just for you jab_happy  :-*
https://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,25088.msg651971.html#msg651971

Awww, I'm honoured!

ORCS FOR IMMUNOLOGY!!!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fultonius on December 30, 2021, 10:05:34 pm
Not sure if there's a "post covid" thread I should put this in instead..

Climbed yesterday (having got out of iso on Christmas day, felt pretty much better, done a hangs session and some bouldering with no issue) doing some bouldering and then some aero cap where I totally tanked..  and woke up last night with a fever, sore throat, knackered etc... Looks like this is something that can happen post recovery. Anyone had similar? If so was it a one off or recurring thing? Any useful tricks to avoid it ("do less" being the obvious one)?

My triathlete pals who have had really bad long covid said something similar: in good patches when some mild exercise seemed possible they were OK during but then knackered for days afterwards. They still have pretty limiting problems 21 months after catching it. My dad had bad GBS which is another rare but nastier form of long covid...I can assure you that is horrible. The NHS report makes it sound not so scary until you get to the last line... No mention that significant numbers who don't die end up paralysed and need months of extensive physio... as nerve use returns it comes with endless pain.

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/guillain-barre-syndrome/
https://gaincharity.org.uk/faq/gbs-and-acute-associated-inflammatory-neuropathies/

I had (admittedly mild) sciatic pain (first time in my life) on around day 5-7 of having covid. Around the same time my taste went. Weird horrible illness!

My dad suffered 27 years from rheumatoid arthritis, finally losing the batter to lung complications due to treatment related side effects. Tbh I'm glad he didn't have to suffer the pandemic, much as I'd love him to still be around.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on December 31, 2021, 05:53:33 am
Tbh I'm glad he didn't have to suffer the pandemic, much as I'd love him to still be around.

I've often felt the same about my dad, who died in 2018, aged 86 and in poor health. I think he would have found the whole thing very upsetting and confusing. I know it may sound strange, but I'm glad he was spared it.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: andy popp on December 31, 2021, 07:06:03 am
Just to add, that in saying this I in no way intend to diminish the suffering of those who lost parents and other loved ones to Covid.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: seankenny on December 31, 2021, 08:18:12 am
Just to add, that in saying this I in no way intend to diminish the suffering of those who lost parents and other loved ones to Covid.

Since that’s me, I should say that I don’t find these sentiments upsetting in the slightest. But I do appreciate the thought.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on December 31, 2021, 09:12:45 am
Back on the topic of masks:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/dec/30/masks-best-covid-protection-ffp2-ffp3
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Bradders on December 31, 2021, 09:05:07 pm
Tbh I'm glad he didn't have to suffer the pandemic, much as I'd love him to still be around.

I've often felt the same about my dad, who died in 2018, aged 86 and in poor health. I think he would have found the whole thing very upsetting and confusing. I know it may sound strange, but I'm glad he was spared it.

My grandma had a stroke on 14th March 2020, and died on 20th March, with the first lock down starting on 23rd March. I've often thought the exact same thing, I'd hate for her to have spent so long in such isolation.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tommytwotone on January 01, 2022, 09:11:00 am
Assuming the "wait 4 weeks after you've had COVID" guidance is still in place, earliest I'd be eligible is (I think) next Weds. In two minds about rushing to get it done as a) I'd rather not scupper Xmas with potential side effects, b) I'm guessing I'm full to the hat-band with antibodies anyway, and c) I have a booking for 6th Jan anyway.

Yeah, I don't know if anyone's got info or advice on optimal timing of boosters in people who are already "super-immune".

Effectively, getting Covid already functioned as a kind of "third dose" for you, and we know super-immunity holds up pretty strongly against Omicron:

https://twitter.com/JanineKimpel/status/1468700628922904591 (https://twitter.com/JanineKimpel/status/1468700628922904591)

Based on the Balazs Lab stuff, looks like you could potentially gain even more immunity by getting a booster at some point, but you're going to be in a decent position right now.

What's more Super-Immune than Super-Immune? Ultra-Immune?

Having had the AZ for jabs 1 and 2 I reckon if they give me a different one for the Booster I could end up being able to fly, see into the future or something as well as being COVID-resistant.


Well I went ahead and got boosted, after Xmas (27th Dec) though - Moderna / SpikeVax on top of 2 x AZ and actual COVID at end of Nov.


Have to say side effects have been really quite profound. Had a day of just feeling crap - tired, queasy, basically just stayed in bed all day. That passed after about 24/48hrs, but then every night I've had terrible fever-y/sweaty nights of sleep.


Reading online this seems "normal", just didn't think it'd last this long. Would quite like it to pass, if only for the sake of my poor washing machine, which is earning its money this week!

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on January 01, 2022, 10:35:02 am
Congrats on booster! Sorry you've been so hammered by side-effects, but your immune system must be going WILD right now.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: tommytwotone on January 01, 2022, 11:11:48 am
Cheers. I was rather hoping it would give me immunity to festive hangovers as well as COVID, but that experiment has sadly failed!
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Paul B on January 04, 2022, 01:54:42 pm
He's got a new haircut and a new tie and there's apparently a press conference at 5PM today.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on January 05, 2022, 12:55:40 pm
There are rock-type jokes to be made here but I'm too tired and brain-dead this morning so I'm just going to drop the links and let you fill them in:

https://inews.co.uk/news/health/new-covid-booster-jab-manchester-gritstone-tackle-variants-1382138
https://ir.gritstonebio.com/news-releases/news-release-details/gritstone-announces-positive-clinical-results-first-cohort-phase

(Only Phase I, but looks promising, woohoo!)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Dexter on January 05, 2022, 04:45:36 pm
There are rock-type jokes to be made here but I'm too tired and brain-dead this morning so I'm just going to drop the links and let you fill them in:

https://inews.co.uk/news/health/new-covid-booster-jab-manchester-gritstone-tackle-variants-1382138
https://ir.gritstonebio.com/news-releases/news-release-details/gritstone-announces-positive-clinical-results-first-cohort-phase

(Only Phase I, but looks promising, woohoo!)

But what have they ever done for the grit?

I'll see myself out
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on January 14, 2022, 05:47:48 pm
Well all those doom-and-gloom aspiring-zero-covider eeyores better pull something spectacular out of the bag if they want us all to suffer the tedium of another lockdown because we're now two weeks past the festive period superspreader and the stats are starting to look more promising....

(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/2C30/production/_122721311_uk_card_with_vax_booster_14jan-nc.png)

(obviously even if the numbers did "support" it, no-one's going to heed the #partygate party anyway)

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 14, 2022, 06:19:15 pm
Yup.
But you know what really impresses me is the ~100k people having their first jab, every week. A good number of those must be hesitants finally defying the antivacc screaming.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on January 14, 2022, 06:30:45 pm
Yup.
But you know what really impresses me is the ~100k people having their first jab, every week. A good number of those must be hesitants finally defying the antivacc screaming.
Yes I've noticed that too, a good thing, including for the reason you state. Not sure why the boosterage has slowed so much, aren't they heeding jab_happy's sexy sexy vaccine research article links??
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 14, 2022, 06:56:19 pm
Yup.
But you know what really impresses me is the ~100k people having their first jab, every week. A good number of those must be hesitants finally defying the antivacc screaming.
Yes I've noticed that too, a good thing, including for the reason you state. Not sure why the boosterage has slowed so much, aren't they heeding jab_happy's sexy sexy vaccine research article links??
Well, not sure, but I know the category includes the likes of my three youngest, who aren’t able to get boosted for another two weeks, yet.
Basically, you had a huge pool of potential candidates, who were several months passed their second, who could pile in immediately and I guess there are now more people having to wait the required interval after second jab?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fultonius on January 14, 2022, 09:38:29 pm
And maybe a lot of people who've just recovered and cannot or chose not to get boosted right away?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: SA Chris on January 14, 2022, 10:10:32 pm
Yup.
But you know what really impresses me is the ~100k people having their first jab, every week. A good number of those must be hesitants finally defying the antivacc screaming.

Be nice if it was, but it could be just kids who are now 12?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 15, 2022, 08:33:34 am
Yup.
But you know what really impresses me is the ~100k people having their first jab, every week. A good number of those must be hesitants finally defying the antivacc screaming.

Be nice if it was, but it could be just kids who are now 12?

Some will be, but I think 100k kids turning twelve every week, might mean we have a serious resource crisis looming…


Edit.
Yeah ~800k live births in the UK in 2010, so ~15k/week. Less than one days vacc uptake.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on January 15, 2022, 09:45:54 am
 :lol:

That would mean 5.2 million babies were being born every year - or the current population of the UK increasing by around 4.5m or 6.7% in one year after factoring deaths.
Plantation would be busy.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on January 15, 2022, 02:53:47 pm
Anyone knowledgeable on the subject care to analyse and give their view on the below Nature study on the relative risks of myocarditis, pericarditis, and cardiac arrhythmias specifically among males under 40s associated with Covid versus the risks of same associated with a 2nd dose of mnra vaccines? 

No angle other than understanding - I'm not interested in proving a point as I'm not trying to make an argument, I'm interested in understanding the subject better. I occasionally have discussions with relatively intelligent people under 40 who refuse the vaccine altogether and this is their most common reason given. In case it matters I'm mid 40s, double jabbed.

For me the crucial takeaway from the lengthy discussion chapter is this:
The risks are more evenly balanced in younger persons aged up to 40 years, where we estimated the excess in myocarditis events following SARS-CoV-2 infection to be 10 per million with the excess following a second dose of mRNA-1273 vaccine being15 per million. Further research is required to understand why the risk of myocarditis seems to be higher following mRNA-1273 vaccine. Although the wider societal benefits of controlling the spread of virus to those who are more vulnerable are substantial, these data may help inform public health policy and the choice of vaccine offered to younger adults.
This study has several strengths. First, the United Kingdom offered an ideal place to carry out this study given that three vaccinations have been rolled out at speed and scale. Second, this was a population-based study of data recorded prospectively and avoided recall and selection biases linked to case reports. Third, the large sample size provided sufficient power to investigate these rare outcomes, which could not be assessed through clinical trials. Fourth, the SCCS study design removes potential confounding from fixed characteristics, and the breakdown of our study period into weekly blocks accounted for temporal confounding.


https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-021-01630-0.pdf


Further to that, the points made by the guy below* seem valid to me - a layman with no deep understanding of this subject.
1. The size of the covid infected group would in reality be far higher than the size of the group the study uses as it's only using 'reported cases'. In reality we all know reported cases of Covid is not all covid cases. Therefore the denominator would be a far greater number, meaning risk of myocarditis from covid infection would be lower and making the difference in risk for under 40s between 'mnra 2nd jab' versus 'covid infection' more pronounced than it already is.
2. Effects in males under 30 or under 25 would be higher again than in the overall group of 'under 40s', due to stratification. Again this could potentially make the difference in risk between covid infection/mnra 2nd dose greater again.
3. Over 40s are mostly given non-mnra vaccines, so wouldn't show up in the data.

*This guy: https://twitter.com/VPrasadMDMPH/status/1482076197253169158?s=20



Can someone point out why the above is wrong.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 15, 2022, 06:58:11 pm
If the only risk from Covid infection were myocarditis it would appear to be a no brainer for that demographic. However, you’d need to consider the incidence of long Covid, organ/ lung damage and death amongst that age group to have a fair picture of relative risk.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 15, 2022, 07:35:47 pm
If the only risk from Covid infection were myocarditis it would appear to be a no brainer for that demographic. However, you’d need to consider the incidence of long Covid, organ/ lung damage and death amongst that age group to have a fair picture of relative risk.
0.001% vs 0.0015% risk of myocarditis. Is that right? Any idea of what the background risk is?
Around 0.2% of covid cases, of 40 year olds, without underlying conditions, result in death ( https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/covid-pandemic-mortality-risk-estimator (https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/covid-pandemic-mortality-risk-estimator)
It doesn’t seem like a convincing argument against vaccination. I get that 15 sounds much bigger than 10, but on a scale of millions it’s minuscule, surely?

Edit:
I had a couple of pints with dinner, so not feeling hugely certain I haven’t misunderstood something; but even if we’re underestimating cases by a factor of 10, isn’t that still 0.02% risk of death from the disease vs 0.0015% risk of myocarditis (not necessarily death, either)?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Fiend on January 15, 2022, 08:03:57 pm
It's a more convincing argument than nano-routers spawning pico-tentacles inside your bloodstream though. By at least a  factor of about 1 to 0.0015.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 15, 2022, 08:05:54 pm
It's a more convincing argument than nano-routers spawning pico-tentacles inside your bloodstream though. By at least a  factor of about 1 to 0.0015.
Point conceded.

Edit:

Ok, after reading, I’m unclear how the study separates those who:

Had Covid, but were unaware they had had it.
Were vaccinated and never had Covid.
Were vaccinated, but also had had Covid.
Fit into any combination of the above statuses.
Had a Cardiac event in the categories listed, but also fitted into one of the above categories or any possible combination of vaccine or infection status etc etc etc.

So. I quit at this point.
 Surely you would need a massive control group, without any possibility of exposure to Covid in their history, vaccinate them (possibly even several large groups, vaccinated in all the various possible combinations) before such rare responses become reliably significant at such small numbers?
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on January 15, 2022, 08:55:50 pm
Matt the study only includes myocarditis events that occur within 28 days directly following either,
1. Vaccination.
2. Positive result from covid test.


Still waiting for comment on these points, which seem worth thinking about:
That there would be massively more people who've had covid (as OMM says) who haven't reported a myocarditis event. The incidence of myocaditis among covid infections may be lower than 10 per 1 million; for the study it's 10 events within 28 days per 1 million people who had a covid test which came back positive. Wouldn't the real figure for myocarditis events likely be lower than 10 per million? It's estimated around 30 - 40% of people have been infected with covid without either reporting it, testing for it, or even knowing about it.

And the age bands are only split into either 'over 40' or 'under 40', yet even within this very imprecise grouping a significant difference is seen between under 40 and over 40, and between Mrna vaccine and covid infection. It seems reasonable to think that if you band the 'under 40' group into more precise age bands, you may find higher association again among a younger age group with the Moderna vaccine.

And it's only the Moderna vaccine showing the much higher association, not the Pfizer.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 15, 2022, 09:51:55 pm
Obviously I’m not massively clued up on this, but isn’t the prevalence of Myocarditis, along the lines of 10-20 cases per 100k of the general population (from non covid viral infections).* So this excess is in the order of either an extra 1 or 1.5 people per 100k, over and above the expected occurrence, with or without Covid infection or Vaccination?
If I was looking at this, in engineering terms, of say, particular component failure vs operating conditions; I’d query the use of a “10/15 in 1M” metric for something that happens to “10-20 in 100k” people. They could have said 1 in 100k excess or 1.5 in 100k excess, but it seems, simply, more dramatic, to bump it up by a factor of ten from the customary numbers (pretty sure the x in 100k is typical in such reporting).

I know it seems like I’m just arguing with you for the sake of it, but the stated categorisations do not preclude or control for, any of the possible combinations I mentioned.

The thing is, myocarditis is a rare event and 10 or 20 people in every 100k, is a small number of unlucky people.
11 or 11.5, to  21 or 21.5, per 100k, isn’t really a very different number and, nothing confirms the link between vaccination date, or positive test and cardiac event.
Oh, and 10-20? That’s quite a range. Bit bigger than 1-1.5, for instance.






* https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK459259/ (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK459259/)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: petejh on January 15, 2022, 10:03:16 pm
You're not arguing with me* (or at least if you are then I'm not arguing back..). I'm not interested in an argument I'm interested in what people make of the study and what it means.



'yes I am' / no you're not / yes I am etc. etc. :)
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 15, 2022, 10:18:32 pm
You're not arguing with me* (or at least if you are then I'm not arguing back..). I'm not interested in an argument I'm interested in what people make of the study and what it means.



'yes I am' / no you're not / yes I am etc. etc. :)

Good. I was hoping so.

Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on February 22, 2022, 03:10:57 pm
Anyone wanna help Moderna test their new booster that's been tweaked to be better against Omicron?

https://connect.trialscope.com/studies/7dff1448-9e85-4beb-81a4-ec4f9170c769

You need to have had 2 or 3 doses of a vaccine already; you'll either get a dose of the Omicron-specific booster or of the standard Moderna booster, so it's a good deal. Looks like one of the trial sites is in Sheffield.

I continue to rec being in a vaccine trial as a fun and good experience.
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: galpinos on March 15, 2022, 09:14:03 am

Fascinating, if tragic, thread on what happens to a relatively infection naïve/unvaccinated population when exposed to Omicron.

https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1503420660869214213?s=21
Title: Re: Coronavirus Covid-19
Post by: slab_happy on March 15, 2022, 10:53:55 am
Oh hell -- I saw a thread a week or two ago where the HK mortality rates were already looking horrific:

https://twitter.com/VictimOfMaths/status/1499412424016994305

But the 7-day average has basically doubled since then.

In the last fortnight, both my parents have had Covid, and even with them being vaccinated and boosted, it was scary; my (80-year-old) Dad's oxygen saturation spent a while one point away from the "go to A&E NOW" number, and I was mentally preparing for him to have to go to hospital. If they weren't vaccinated ...

Meanwhile, UK government policy seems to be "If we shut our eyes, the virus can't see us":

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/mar/13/pandemic-is-not-over-ministers-criticised-after-scrapping-uk-covid-surveillance
SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2024, SimplePortal