michaelc
Member of DD Central
Say No To T.D.S.
Posts: 5,718 
Likes: 2,987
Member is Online
|
Post by michaelc on Mar 19, 2020 14:47:56 GMT
Just to remind people: The models based on Spanish flu do suggest that if you're too effective in suppressing the first wave, you end up with even more people infected overall as the second wave hits you harder. It isn't as blindingly obvious as everyone seems to make out when screaming for more and more restrictions faster and faster. There are some super experts trying to balance everything here, and I think Dunning-Kruger is likely to apply to most people commenting on this (myself included). Blue is the optimal on the models, not green (no controls) or red (too many controls). When this is all over in two years, we'll have more data I hope for next time around. (and that's just infection rates - there are massive social and health costs both of the lock downs themselves, and of the economic consequences, that have to be considered in the overall balance) Anyway - just preparing for 15 days of awfulness in London, followed by several months more, and several months after that (in between selling what P2P I still can!) An alternative argument, probably very naive and certainly simple, is that in a country with a population of around 1.3 billion, we know that there were zero transmissions today. Perhaps a few went under the radar due to testing sample size but if the zero number continues for say a week or two it does seem likely the number is zero. Therefore, if you waited for the current conditions imposed for 2 weeks plus a further week or two to account for the incubation period, then where is the second wave going to come from? Abroad obviously. But if that naive strategy was a winner, if most countries did it and the remainder were isolated, that's game over for Mr 19 isn't it?
|
|
cb25
Posts: 3,528
Likes: 2,668
|
Post by cb25 on Mar 19, 2020 15:08:07 GMT
I won't be signing that 4. Bring private health resources into public service without compensation to fight COVID-19 and aid NHS response
Disagree strongly
Government is more than capable of paying for any private health resources it uses OR buying the private health facilities at market rate, there's no need to steal the resources. This seems too much like the GMB request to do the same. I suspect the GMB are against private health provision at any time. Coronavirus is (imo) simply a convenient way of them drumming up support for state theft of private facilities.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,626
Likes: 6,440
|
Post by registerme on Mar 19, 2020 15:09:22 GMT
cb25 that's fair enough. I didn't like that point either, but I supported the rest of it enough that I thought it worth signing.
|
|
cb25
Posts: 3,528
Likes: 2,668
|
Post by cb25 on Mar 19, 2020 15:12:58 GMT
cb25 that's fair enough. I didn't like that point either, but I supported the rest of it enough that I thought it worth signing. I didn't much like point "3. NHS support staff (including those outsourced) must receive at least living wage, paid sick leave for illness or self-isolation and an increase in statutory sick pay" either, but 4. is the real show-stopper, so no point me arguing the toss over 3.
|
|
|
|
Post by bernythedolt on Mar 19, 2020 15:16:23 GMT
No one is saying don't do social distancing - that's key, and all about "flattening the curve" (which the Philly/StL compariosn is textbook example of). It's the total lockdown/suppression that MIGHT be counterproductive if done too soon, too radically. I emphasise that we just don't know, but my problem is with those screaming and criticising the UK experts for not advising lockdown earlier as if they know better (hence Dunning-Kruger). Furthermore, as Prof Whitty said earlier, there are “significant health and social downsides” to the social distancing measures, and "If you do them too early you get all the negatives but almost an immeasurable impact on the epidemic". But why listen to experts making balanced judgements, right?These being the same experts that have only just this week recognised the need to manufacture extra ventilators and are desperately scrabbling around for anyone to make them? The same experts who haven't even managed to organise basic protective gear for our health workers who we'll be relying on to save our lives? The experts who assured us just before the disease reached these shores that the UK was "well prepared" to meet this thing head on? All lies. Why should we listen? I posted several pages back that it seemed odd that we weren't building emergency wards of acute beds that China found necessary to save its people. It was obvious to a blind man that the NHS wasn't coping with the 'normal' demands prior to the virus, yet we are supposed to believe these 'balanced judgements' that all was well? All the signs were there and glaringly obvious, but our experts just sat on their hands. I recognise I'm conflating experts with politicians here, but one group does advise the other. My faith in the lot of them is being sorely tested.
|
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Mar 19, 2020 15:37:36 GMT
All very well, but it mixes the patently obvious "and why on earth isn't it so" (provision of PPE) with far more "political" objectives: "Bring private health resources into public service without compensation to fight COVID-19 and aid NHS response" At a time when the government is heli bombing money each where and everywhere, why on earth would you not compensate ? (or indeed even if they weren't dropping money everywhere else)
|
|
|
|
Post by bernythedolt on Mar 19, 2020 15:42:46 GMT
The petition shoots itself in the foot - the reasonable demands are drowned out by the 'noise'.
|
|
aju
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,500
Likes: 924
|
Post by aju on Mar 19, 2020 15:44:13 GMT
I find it interesting that the lack of equipment to fight this smells of gulf war urgency where in that scenario the equipment the soldiers had was woefully inadequate but we still pressed on despite lives being lost as a result. I guess this time the politicians are equally in the sights of the virus ...
One thing that I find interesting is just what is the great Mr Cummings now working on ... I'm guessing he might be feeling a little left out as he is far from an expert in the current situation.
|
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Mar 19, 2020 15:48:21 GMT
The number of people who have died from Covid-19 in England has risen to 128.
The 29 latest patients to have died were aged between 47 and 96 years old and had underlying health conditions, NHS England said.
Well you can't read anything into one data point, but at least that is effectively flat compared to yesterdays 32.
It has been another day of grim statistics and images as the virus spreads in Europe: Spain saw 209 deaths in just 24 hours while reports from a town in Italy suggest the army is now being used to ferry the coffins of the dead, there are so many.
|
|
aju
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,500
Likes: 924
|
Post by aju on Mar 19, 2020 15:50:03 GMT
The petition shoots itself in the foot - the reasonable demands are drowned out by the 'noise'. I agree, I might have signed it if they were just items 1 and 2. I'm not sure that having a petition with this many demands will be successful but hey each to their own I guess.
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,693
Likes: 3,019
|
Post by IFISAcava on Mar 19, 2020 15:56:06 GMT
No one is saying don't do social distancing - that's key, and all about "flattening the curve" (which the Philly/StL compariosn is textbook example of). It's the total lockdown/suppression that MIGHT be counterproductive if done too soon, too radically. I emphasise that we just don't know, but my problem is with those screaming and criticising the UK experts for not advising lockdown earlier as if they know better (hence Dunning-Kruger). Furthermore, as Prof Whitty said earlier, there are “significant health and social downsides” to the social distancing measures, and "If you do them too early you get all the negatives but almost an immeasurable impact on the epidemic". But why listen to experts making balanced judgements, right? Not unreasonably, what people are arguing for is to follow the WHO guidelines. Why are we not doing so? Personally, I trust the experts at WHO more than I would the experts who flank a pathological liar (and that's just what his own party say of him). Remember, we will do everything that we can to protect the... economy. Absolutely! But I recognise that hence why I keep saying we don't know.
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,693
Likes: 3,019
|
Post by IFISAcava on Mar 19, 2020 15:59:39 GMT
No one is saying don't do social distancing - that's key, and all about "flattening the curve" (which the Philly/StL compariosn is textbook example of). It's the total lockdown/suppression that MIGHT be counterproductive if done too soon, too radically. I emphasise that we just don't know, but my problem is with those screaming and criticising the UK experts for not advising lockdown earlier as if they know better (hence Dunning-Kruger). Furthermore, as Prof Whitty said earlier, there are “significant health and social downsides” to the social distancing measures, and "If you do them too early you get all the negatives but almost an immeasurable impact on the epidemic". But why listen to experts making balanced judgements, right?These being the same experts that have only just this week recognised the need to manufacture extra ventilators and are desperately scrabbling around for anyone to make them? The same experts who haven't even managed to organise basic protective gear for our health workers who we'll be relying on to save our lives? The experts who assured us just before the disease reached these shores that the UK was "well prepared" to meet this thing head on? All lies. Why should we listen? I posted several pages back that it seemed odd that we weren't building emergency wards of acute beds that China found necessary to save its people. It was obvious to a blind man that the NHS wasn't coping with the 'normal' demands prior to the virus, yet we are supposed to believe these 'balanced judgements' that all was well? All the signs were there and glaringly obvious, but our experts just sat on their hands. I recognise I'm conflating experts with politicians here, but one group does advise the other. My faith in the lot of them is being sorely tested. You are conflating the two! And you are missing one big thing. Ventilators and hospitals to be frank aren't really the issue. Staffing is the issue. The. Staff. Are. All. Sick. Or. Self-isolating.
|
|
|
|
Post by stan88 on Mar 19, 2020 16:01:58 GMT
Unfortunately it looks like the Italian death toll will over take China today although the Italians are showing they have half the cases but the testing figures are no guide now. All eyes on Europe now I guess and how we cope, China is starting to move again after 3/4 months.
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,693
Likes: 3,019
|
Post by IFISAcava on Mar 19, 2020 16:04:59 GMT
Just to remind people: The models based on Spanish flu do suggest that if you're too effective in suppressing the first wave, you end up with even more people infected overall as the second wave hits you harder. It isn't as blindingly obvious as everyone seems to make out when screaming for more and more restrictions faster and faster. There are some super experts trying to balance everything here, and I think Dunning-Kruger is likely to apply to most people commenting on this (myself included). Blue is the optimal on the models, not green (no controls) or red (too many controls). When this is all over in two years, we'll have more data I hope for next time around. (and that's just infection rates - there are massive social and health costs both of the lock downs themselves, and of the economic consequences, that have to be considered in the overall balance) Anyway - just preparing for 15 days of awfulness in London, followed by several months more, and several months after that (in between selling what P2P I still can!) An alternative argument, probably very naive and certainly simple, is that in a country with a population of around 1.3 billion, we know that there were zero transmissions today. Perhaps a few went under the radar due to testing sample size but if the zero number continues for say a week or two it does seem likely the number is zero. Therefore, if you waited for the current conditions imposed for 2 weeks plus a further week or two to account for the incubation period, then where is the second wave going to come from? Abroad obviously. But if that naive strategy was a winner, if most countries did it and the remainder were isolated, that's game over for Mr 19 isn't it? Society would break down in the time it took to eradicate by lockdown globally. You'd beat the virus and have a post-apocalyptic Mad-Max world. Not an option Intermittent lock down and temporary cases is the only way to go on that front.
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,055
Likes: 4,441
|
Post by agent69 on Mar 19, 2020 16:06:18 GMT
Just had to make the ultimate sacrifice:
Had to scoff the last of the Haagen Dazs ice cream to make a space in the freezer for a pack of frozen peas. On a more positive note, Morrisons have soap back on the shelf, and M & S have eggs.
|
|
