The Coronavirus thread

Sit down and tell us what's wrong with you.

Re: The Coronavirus thread

Post by manfromdelmonte @ Sun Jun 07, 2020 10:01 am

They're the same, Dirk.
User avatar
manfromdelmonte
 
Posts: 1463
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2015 4:34 pm

Re: The Coronavirus thread

Post by Aesgarth @ Sun Jun 07, 2020 10:23 am

Dirk wrote:
Doctor Congo wrote:
Dirk wrote:Surprised no-one commented on that last article because it was quite good.

So is this one
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52926198
Why do you think it’s so good?

Which one?

They're the same article...
Aesgarth
 
Posts: 5130
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 5:19 pm
Location: http://www.aesgarth.co.uk/uploader/
Highscores: 4

Re: The Coronavirus thread

Post by Careless Whisperer @ Sun Jun 07, 2020 2:44 pm

So after a weekend of social distancing breaking protests in London, which followed a weekend of crowded beaches around the country last week and the returning to work causing packed tube trains; what measurable effect should we be expecting to see in the coming fortnight?
User avatar
Careless Whisperer
 
Posts: 16295
Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 10:07 pm
Location: The Real World
Highscores: 5

Re: The Coronavirus thread

Post by Doctor Congo @ Sun Jun 07, 2020 2:51 pm

Careless Whisperer wrote:So after a weekend of social distancing breaking protests in London, which followed a weekend of crowded beaches around the country last week and the returning to work causing packed tube trains; what measurable effect should we be expecting to see in the coming fortnight?
Probably the same rise that occurred or is occurring after the ridiculous VE Day parties that no one is worried about.
User avatar
Doctor Congo
 
Posts: 7472
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 7:39 pm

Re: The Coronavirus thread

Post by Careless Whisperer @ Sun Jun 07, 2020 4:06 pm

Doctor Congo wrote:
Careless Whisperer wrote:So after a weekend of social distancing breaking protests in London, which followed a weekend of crowded beaches around the country last week and the returning to work causing packed tube trains; what measurable effect should we be expecting to see in the coming fortnight?
Probably the same rise that occurred or is occurring after the ridiculous VE Day parties that no one is worried about.


Well that's partly the reason for asking, because there has been no reporting of any increases since then. I'm sure it must have slowed the effect of reducing new cases, but is there any data suggesting it actually increased?

It strikes me that the public are increasingly choosing to ignore the warnings due to a number of factors:

1) Increasing cases of government representatives or officials being exposed for ignoring the rules, and the whole Cummings saga whereby they just drove a coach and horses through any sense of accountability.
2) Consequences of ignoring warnings not proving (or at least not being reported) to match predicted outcomes.
3) The need to get back to work for an increasing number of people.
4) World events creating a greater tension for people stuck at home than perhaps would otherwise be the case.

Add to this the backdrop of a consistent narrative over the past few years in both the UK and US where 'you can't trust the media', the PM/President is consistently proven to lie but does not appear to be accountable for it and experts are just doom-mongers to be ignored.

What I'm seeing is an increasingly frustrated population who seem to instantly split into opposing viewpoints over every issue, who have no leadership to look to for direction and having previously had every decision taken for them, now being left to decide for themselves what is the appropriate action to take.
User avatar
Careless Whisperer
 
Posts: 16295
Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 10:07 pm
Location: The Real World
Highscores: 5

Re: The Coronavirus thread

Post by WD40 @ Sun Jun 07, 2020 6:13 pm

Careless Whisperer wrote:So after a weekend of social distancing breaking protests in London, which followed a weekend of crowded beaches around the country last week and the returning to work causing packed tube trains; what measurable effect should we be expecting to see in the coming fortnight?


A rise in the numbers of cases and R-nought.

Also, in the media coverage reporting those things, lots of pictures of black and brown people protesting in large crowds, but very few - if any - of lots of white people popping to the seaside/other beauty spots and having garden parties and barbecues, ignoring SD guidelines/legislation, behaving like normal - normal for a sunny bank holiday weekend - every day.
WD40
 
Posts: 34123
Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 2:12 pm

Re: The Coronavirus thread

Post by Dirk @ Sun Jun 07, 2020 6:20 pm

Apologies for re-quoting the same article. Shame because I can't find the second one at present, but it was about the science of researching the genomes for the virus and then the mutations it has undergone and stuff like that. Was interesting to note that the one that hit Europe was a significant mutation from that which hit Asia, and the mutation came from Iran. Then the US was hit by a different one again but that also came from Iran.

As to why I thought the article was good, it was because it was a more balanced view of where mistakes had been significant and where they had been made, by scientists, PHE and the government.

On which note its interesting to see Prof Edmunds admit the scientific advise on when to lockdown was wrong and why
Asked on the BBC's Andrew Marr Show whether he had any regrets about his advice during the epidemic, Prof Edmunds said: "Yes, we should have gone into lockdown earlier.

"I think it would have been hard to do it, I think the data that we were dealing with in the early part of March and our situational awareness was really quite poor.

"So I think it would've been very hard to pull the trigger at that point, but I wish we had.

"I wish we had gone into lockdown earlier. I think that has cost a lot of lives unfortunately."


But at the time I remember they were concerned that if we locked down too early, it would be unsustainable and thus might break up at a critical point. Given that it seems to be unsustainable now, they were right in that aspects at least
User avatar
Dirk
 
Posts: 32636
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:03 pm
Highscores: 5

Re: The Coronavirus thread

Post by Dirk @ Tue Jun 09, 2020 12:28 pm

Interesting new evidence that it started much earlier than originally thought

Now there’s an intriguing new clue, gleaned not from direct evidence, but from studying satellite imagery and internet search terms, which suggests hospital traffic and internet searches for symptoms were on the rise in Wuhan as early as late summer/early autumn.



However, China's Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying said: "I think it is ridiculous, incredibly ridiculous, to come up with this conclusion based on superficial observations such as traffic volume."
ETA
Last edited by Dirk on Tue Jun 09, 2020 12:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Dirk
 
Posts: 32636
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:03 pm
Highscores: 5

Re: The Coronavirus thread

Post by DI Burnside @ Tue Jun 09, 2020 12:49 pm

I had the antibody test on Sunday so it will be interesting to see if I've had it. I was rough as fcuk in January with all the symptoms of Covid but have been fit as a fiddle since.
User avatar
DI Burnside
 
Posts: 18881
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 7:44 pm
Location: Beds
Highscores: 7

Re: The Coronavirus thread

Post by Dirk @ Wed Jun 10, 2020 5:34 pm

Anyone seen anything on the lag that we should expect in changes to rules having an impact in infection rate?

e.g.when will the changes from 1st June start to appear in infection rates?
User avatar
Dirk
 
Posts: 32636
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:03 pm
Highscores: 5



Re: The Coronavirus thread

Post by Dirk @ Thu Jun 11, 2020 9:26 am

Doctor Congo wrote:https://twitter.com/hayley_barlow/status/1270778122040942597?s=21

So that
C4 News wrote:appears to be written for the modelling group which feeds into the government’s scientific advisers

Ignoring the "appears" bit, how long do you think it would take to feed that into that modelling group, be reviewed, impact their modelling; and feed into the govt scientific advisers, for them to review it and change their recommendation to the govt? Remembering that at the time the advisers would have had lots of other other reports, all concluding different things..

Also, if you actually read his paper it states
"Here, we use simple compartmental models and recent infection fatality rate estimates for the UK to explicitly examine the implications of the UK population responding to a severe pathogen more strongly than did populations in 1918. We show that critical care facilities in the UK would be saturated quickly.

“If populations spontaneously reduce transmission close to threshold values when this occurs, any possible benefits of attempting mitigation are lost. The country would then have to either struggle on to the availability of a vaccine without a functioning health system or attempt the most stringent possible interventions to lower incidence back to containment levels.
"

So he recommended a change in strategy in order to avoid the NHS being overloaded. And of course the govt did order lockdown early enough to avoid the NHS being over-saturated
User avatar
Dirk
 
Posts: 32636
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:03 pm
Highscores: 5

Re: The Coronavirus thread

Post by Doctor Congo @ Thu Jun 11, 2020 11:27 am

Dirk wrote:
Doctor Congo wrote:https://twitter.com/hayley_barlow/status/1270778122040942597?s=21

So that
C4 News wrote:appears to be written for the modelling group which feeds into the government’s scientific advisers

Ignoring the "appears" bit, how long do you think it would take to feed that into that modelling group, be reviewed, impact their modelling; and feed into the govt scientific advisers, for them to review it and change their recommendation to the govt? Remembering that at the time the advisers would have had lots of other other reports, all concluding different things..

Also, if you actually read his paper it states
"Here, we use simple compartmental models and recent infection fatality rate estimates for the UK to explicitly examine the implications of the UK population responding to a severe pathogen more strongly than did populations in 1918. We show that critical care facilities in the UK would be saturated quickly.

“If populations spontaneously reduce transmission close to threshold values when this occurs, any possible benefits of attempting mitigation are lost. The country would then have to either struggle on to the availability of a vaccine without a functioning health system or attempt the most stringent possible interventions to lower incidence back to containment levels.
"

So he recommended a change in strategy in order to avoid the NHS being overloaded. And of course the govt did order lockdown early enough to avoid the NHS being over-saturated
2 weeks too late
User avatar
Doctor Congo
 
Posts: 7472
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 7:39 pm

Re: The Coronavirus thread

Post by thekungfury @ Thu Jun 11, 2020 11:31 am

Dirk wrote:How long do you think it would take to feed that into that modelling group, be reviewed, impact their modelling; and feed into the govt scientific advisers, for them to review it and change their recommendation to the govt?

Hours.

Alternatively they could have just turned on the news and seen what was happening in Europe, let alone China/Iran etc.
User avatar
thekungfury
 
Posts: 37919
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 1:27 pm
Highscores: 1

Re: The Coronavirus thread

Post by Dirk @ Thu Jun 11, 2020 12:09 pm

thekungfury wrote:
Dirk wrote:How long do you think it would take to feed that into that modelling group, be reviewed, impact their modelling; and feed into the govt scientific advisers, for them to review it and change their recommendation to the govt?

Hours.

Alternatively they could have just turned on the news and seen what was happening in Europe, let alone China/Iran etc.

With hundreds of long reports and studies coming in? All saying different things
No chance
Indeed that report will never have got to the govt in that form. So the question is what did the govt advisers actually recommend and when. Because this was an input to them, not the govt
User avatar
Dirk
 
Posts: 32636
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:03 pm
Highscores: 5

Re: The Coronavirus thread

Post by Doctor Congo @ Thu Jun 11, 2020 12:16 pm

Dirk wrote:
thekungfury wrote:
Dirk wrote:How long do you think it would take to feed that into that modelling group, be reviewed, impact their modelling; and feed into the govt scientific advisers, for them to review it and change their recommendation to the govt?

Hours.

Alternatively they could have just turned on the news and seen what was happening in Europe, let alone China/Iran etc.

With hundreds of long reports and studies coming in? All saying different things
No chance
Indeed that report will never have got to the govt in that form. So the question is what did the govt advisers actually recommend and when. Because this was an input to them, not the govt
And you know this because?
User avatar
Doctor Congo
 
Posts: 7472
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 7:39 pm

Re: The Coronavirus thread

Post by Dirk @ Thu Jun 11, 2020 12:53 pm

Doctor Congo wrote:
Dirk wrote:
thekungfury wrote:
Dirk wrote:How long do you think it would take to feed that into that modelling group, be reviewed, impact their modelling; and feed into the govt scientific advisers, for them to review it and change their recommendation to the govt?

Hours.

Alternatively they could have just turned on the news and seen what was happening in Europe, let alone China/Iran etc.

With hundreds of long reports and studies coming in? All saying different things
No chance
Indeed that report will never have got to the govt in that form. So the question is what did the govt advisers actually recommend and when. Because this was an input to them, not the govt
And you know this because?

Because that's how advisory committees work.
I have worked with equivalents in Defence and I'm pretty sure the civil service protocols are the same
User avatar
Dirk
 
Posts: 32636
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:03 pm
Highscores: 5

Re: The Coronavirus thread

Post by Disastrous @ Thu Jun 11, 2020 1:11 pm

thekungfury wrote:
Dirk wrote:How long do you think it would take to feed that into that modelling group, be reviewed, impact their modelling; and feed into the govt scientific advisers, for them to review it and change their recommendation to the govt?

Hours.

Alternatively they could have just turned on the news and seen what was happening in Europe, let alone China/Iran etc.



This is the bit I don’t get.

It was blatantly obvious to everyone that it was pandemic before the WHO said so. It was equally clear what was happening in other countries would shortly happen here.

And still people defend the Gov for ‘following the best scientific advice at the time’.

Why did the Gov not say “Your advice is shite - get out!”
User avatar
Disastrous
Monkey Licker!
 
Posts: 39843
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 3:58 pm

Re: The Coronavirus thread

Post by Dirk @ Thu Jun 11, 2020 1:19 pm

Because as they said at the time they were worried that if they locked down too soon, that people would start breaking it it at the worst time. WIth hindsight obviously wrong because we were past that point but the duration they managed to keep it going was about right. Its very easy when you are an adviser on this sort of thing to play it safe on the main item lockdown early
But what of the impact on vulnerable people?
On suicide rates?
And yes on the economy.
Lockdown early had and has consequences

And as I say, that report advised locking down to avoid overloading the NHS. Which was done successfully
User avatar
Dirk
 
Posts: 32636
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:03 pm
Highscores: 5

Re: The Coronavirus thread

Post by thekungfury @ Thu Jun 11, 2020 2:58 pm

Early lockdown does have consequences. The avoidable excess death of tens of thousands and the suffering of countless more. The faster reopening of the economy is also a consequence of an early lockdown as we're seeing in the places that looked at what was coming and said "screw that!" A stitch in time.

I predict the figures will back that up too. Our economic destruction will be deeper than our neighbours and the recovery longer. Right in time for Brexit too, neatly.
User avatar
thekungfury
 
Posts: 37919
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 1:27 pm
Highscores: 1

Re: The Coronavirus thread

Post by Dirk @ Thu Jun 11, 2020 4:24 pm

thekungfury wrote:I predict the figures will back that up too. Our economic destruction will be deeper than our neighbours and the recovery longer. Right in time for Brexit too, neatly.

Our economic downturn will be worse than most of G10 whatever, that has already been predicted because of the high proportion of our economy in tourism, hospitality and the like

And the CBI has earlier this week put in a plea for avoiding a no-deal Brexit
User avatar
Dirk
 
Posts: 32636
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:03 pm
Highscores: 5

Re: The Coronavirus thread

Post by Disastrous @ Thu Jun 11, 2020 4:41 pm

Dirk wrote:Because as they said at the time they were worried that if they locked down too soon, that people would start breaking it it at the worst time. WIth hindsight obviously wrong because we were past that point but the duration they managed to keep it going was about right. Its very easy when you are an adviser on this sort of thing to play it safe on the main item lockdown early
But what of the impact on vulnerable people?
On suicide rates?
And yes on the economy.
Lockdown early had and has consequences

And as I say, that report advised locking down to avoid overloading the NHS. Which was done successfully



Yes of course it has consequences but very obviously, not as severe as the consequences of dithering, going out, not going out, staying home, going out, going to work, not going to work and then arsing up what’s left of the economy by imposing quarantines and such like on visitors.

I’m not a scientist or an economist and it’s blindingly obvious (and was back then too) that a short, sharp lockdown would have been just the ticket.
User avatar
Disastrous
Monkey Licker!
 
Posts: 39843
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 3:58 pm

Re: The Coronavirus thread

Post by Dirk @ Thu Jun 11, 2020 5:07 pm

Disastrous wrote:
I’m not a scientist or an economist and it’s blindingly obvious (and was back then too) that a short, sharp lockdown would have been just the ticket.

Really? So blindingly obvious that 8 days after that report was written you were still planning to fly out to France (which was ahead of us in both cases and precautions) with your pregnant wife?

http://www.chew-the-fat.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1152495#p1152495
User avatar
Dirk
 
Posts: 32636
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:03 pm
Highscores: 5

Re: The Coronavirus thread

Post by Dirk @ Thu Jun 11, 2020 5:18 pm

And whilst we are at it, Teeks posted this article at the same time
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/world/corona-simulator/
Which there was general consensus was excellent
And which recommends social distancing as being more effective than quarantine and lockdown
User avatar
Dirk
 
Posts: 32636
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:03 pm
Highscores: 5

Re: The Coronavirus thread

Post by thekungfury @ Thu Jun 11, 2020 5:52 pm

At the time the government was recommending you cough into your elbow and wash your hands but have a great time at Cheltenham. There was no mention of social distancing. Boris was boasting about shaking hands on a Covid ward a week before that article was published.
User avatar
thekungfury
 
Posts: 37919
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 1:27 pm
Highscores: 1

Re: The Coronavirus thread

Post by Doctor Congo @ Thu Jun 11, 2020 7:53 pm

I see the Conservative party coms department is out in force here. They did nothing wrong, it was all the scientists fault, they weren’t given advice to the contrary though it appears they were but couldn’t possibly have read it despite cobra meetings dating back to February that the PM didn’t attend because he was busy divorcing his wife that has recovered from cancer recently. No nothing wrong at all. 50k deaths were inevitable and unavoidable.
User avatar
Doctor Congo
 
Posts: 7472
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 7:39 pm

Re: The Coronavirus thread

Post by Disastrous @ Thu Jun 11, 2020 8:03 pm

Dirk wrote:
Disastrous wrote:
I’m not a scientist or an economist and it’s blindingly obvious (and was back then too) that a short, sharp lockdown would have been just the ticket.

Really? So blindingly obvious that 8 days after that report was written you were still planning to fly out to France (which was ahead of us in both cases and precautions) with your pregnant wife?

http://www.chew-the-fat.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1152495#p1152495



Yes, that obvious.

I’d still go, tbh. Aside from that, what in my post suggests I didn’t think there was a pandemic on? Pretty clear that I said I would cancel but was concerned about losing the money if the holiday company didn’t cancel - I’d read the posts properly before trying to be a smart arse.
User avatar
Disastrous
Monkey Licker!
 
Posts: 39843
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 3:58 pm

Re: The Coronavirus thread

Post by Dirk @ Thu Jun 11, 2020 9:39 pm

I read it properly.

So you put the loss of money over personal health. Of yourself and your wife and of course others

Of course you are not alone. Everyone does. Nothing wrong with that. But it is then hypocritical to criticise the govt for balancing the economy and health.

It is an easy to criticism to make "health is more important than money". But none of us make personal choices that way; health and safety legislation doesn't work that way. It is always a balance.

So at that time your personal balance was actually much the same as the govt. The pandemic is here, at some point we will have to lockdown, but at the moment the costs outweigh the benefits.
User avatar
Dirk
 
Posts: 32636
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:03 pm
Highscores: 5

Re: The Coronavirus thread

Post by Disastrous @ Thu Jun 11, 2020 9:58 pm

Sigh. Read it again then.

I honestly don’t feel inclined to justify my thinking to you and even if I did, what would be the fcuking point?

Your pigheaded defence of the government is as weird as it’s wearisome.

This place is fcuking shit these days.
User avatar
Disastrous
Monkey Licker!
 
Posts: 39843
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 3:58 pm

PreviousNext

Return to The Doctor's Surgery

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

yt
  Enable youtube titles