cb25
Posts: 3,528 
Likes: 2,668
|
Post by cb25 on Mar 20, 2020 16:51:22 GMT
I went to the dentist yesterday for toothache which he managed to resolve. Because it was so quiet I managed to have a longish (15 minute) chat with him. He's in his mid-late forties and essentially his view was that it should be allowed to wash over us as quickly as possible. He thought the stuff about the curve was "BS" and likewise thought China was suppressing the numbers. It made me think more about that curve. If we're likely to go over the capacity line then isn't the important thing not so much keeping us from overshooting it by as little as possible but rather keeping the time period during which we overshoot as small as possible. If we spend a very long time above that capacity line, it will really take its toll - not just directly but in terms of things we're starting to see already such as food shortages etc. If its a wham bam "thank you" mam we can start to move on. Yes, in terms of raw maths you'd be looking at integrating under the curve above that line and minimizing the total area but there are other factors and time is quite an important one. I'm trying to comprehend the implications of a "short sharp shock", which is what you're exploring (correct me if I'm wrong?). Initial thoughts are effectively no NHS or social care for 6 months or so, because the infection rates are sky high. Exposure to the vast majority of the population because we can forget about testing, tracing etc. More than a million dead would be an incredibly conservative figure given that critical care would be inaccessible. Anarchy on the streets because law enforcement/armed forces won't be immune and a complete break down of society. What am I missing?Mathematical models can say "if nothing is done, NNN people will die", but there's no way to verify that figure because every country is doing something. The Telegraph showed a chart yesterday, believe derived from ICL data, that showed circa 10,000 dead as best case even if we locked down everybody - not just over 70s. May/may not be the case, there's no way to prove it. Plus we have the PM/CMO/CSO here saying we need to lock down at least the over 70s for at least 12 weeks, but it'll still be around. However, China seem to have at least stalled it and I'm not sure they've done 12 weeks.
(ICL modellers seem to get bad press from some of the farming community due to ICL's models leading to the death of millions of cows/sheep during BSE time. How can anybody tell if it was justified? Modellers might say "well, we beat BSE didn't we?". I could have said at the time "kill all livestock, then import clean ones", but that doesn't mean it would have been necessary).
I remember back to before the financial crisis of 2008, with all those credit default swaps around and financial firms having models - no doubt created by rocket scientists with PhDs - that said the AAA-rated investments were so good they'd fail something like once in 5 million years. But then the 1-in-5 million year scenario occurred something like twice in a week!. Mathematical models are great, but that have to be continually checked against reality. Best way imo is the modellers say "with the current situation, my model predicts XYZ will happen in a week's time"....wait one week....did it/didn't it happen?
|
|
star dust
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,998
Likes: 3,531
|
Post by star dust on Mar 20, 2020 17:00:29 GMT
" I am writing to let you know that we have this evening declared a ‘critical incident’ in relation to our critical care capacity at Northwick Park Hospital. This is due to an increasing number of patients with Covid-19. This means that we currently do not have enough space for patients requiring critical care." Sourced from the Guardian,.... www.hsj.co.uk/news/hospitals-critical-care-unit-overwhelmed-by-coronavirus-patients/7027189.article"A senior director at another London acute trust told HSJ: “Given we’re in the low foothills of this virus, this is f***ing petrifying." ~~~~ I can't see how anything other than a lock-down in London will prevent (I should say provide our best opportunity of mitigating against) saturation of our health services in a very short period of time (of the same order as the incubation period). Forget panic buying, if I were 60+ or with a pre-existing condition in the London area (or Birmingham for that matter) then I'd be avoiding all contact for the foreseeable. My thoughts are with those working on the front line. Apparently the notice was only valid for a 24 hour period and has just been "stood down" - according to BBC Corona special program. General points of course remain, I'm sure it's more a matter of until the next time or hospital.
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,388
Likes: 2,787
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Mar 20, 2020 17:55:13 GMT
I'm trying to comprehend the implications of a "short sharp shock", which is what you're exploring (correct me if I'm wrong?). Initial thoughts are effectively no NHS or social care for 6 months or so, because the infection rates are sky high. Exposure to the vast majority of the population because we can forget about testing, tracing etc. More than a million dead would be an incredibly conservative figure given that critical care would be inaccessible. Anarchy on the streets because law enforcement/armed forces won't be immune and a complete break down of society. What am I missing?Mathematical models can say "if nothing is done, NNN people will die", but there's no way to verify that figure because every country is doing something. The Telegraph showed a chart yesterday, believe derived from ICL data, that showed circa 10,000 dead as best case even if we locked down everybody - not just over 70s. May/may not be the case, there's no way to prove it. Plus we have the PM/CMO/CSO here saying we need to lock down at least the over 70s for at least 12 weeks, but it'll still be around. However, China seem to have at least stalled it and I'm not sure they've done 12 weeks.
(ICL modellers seem to get bad press from some of the farming community due to ICL's models leading to the death of millions of cows/sheep during BSE time. How can anybody tell if it was justified? Modellers might say "well, we beat BSE didn't we?". I could have said at the time "kill all livestock, then import clean ones", but that doesn't mean it would have been necessary).
I remember back to before the financial crisis of 2008, with all those credit default swaps around and financial firms having models - no doubt created by rocket scientists with PhDs - that said the AAA-rated investments were so good they'd fail something like once in 5 million years. But then the 1-in-5 million year scenario occurred something like twice in a week!. Mathematical models are great, but that have to be continually checked against reality. Best way imo is the modellers say "with the current situation, my model predicts XYZ will happen in a week's time"....wait one week....did it/didn't it happen?
GIGO is definitely applicable to mathematical models, they are only as good as the data input even if the model is correct, which it very often isn't. At the minute we don't have the data and we don't know how valid any of the models are. We probably never will know the full picture, how many cases, how many deaths etc, governments could check for antibodies in the whole population once it's all over, but I'm sure at that stage they will want that money for more urgent things. The one I remember was off shore oil and gas rigs being designed to withstand the predicted 100 year wave, they had several in the first year.
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Say No To T.D.S.
Posts: 5,722
Likes: 2,987
|
Post by michaelc on Mar 20, 2020 17:56:03 GMT
I went to the dentist yesterday for toothache which he managed to resolve. Because it was so quiet I managed to have a longish (15 minute) chat with him. He's in his mid-late forties and essentially his view was that it should be allowed to wash over us as quickly as possible. He thought the stuff about the curve was "BS" and likewise thought China was suppressing the numbers. It made me think more about that curve. If we're likely to go over the capacity line then isn't the important thing not so much keeping us from overshooting it by as little as possible but rather keeping the time period during which we overshoot as small as possible. If we spend a very long time above that capacity line, it will really take its toll - not just directly but in terms of things we're starting to see already such as food shortages etc. If its a wham bam "thank you" mam we can start to move on. Yes, in terms of raw maths you'd be looking at integrating under the curve above that line and minimizing the total area but there are other factors and time is quite an important one. Initial thoughts are effectively no NHS or social care for 6 months or so, because the infection rates are sky high. Exposure to the vast majority of the population because we can forget about testing, tracing etc. More than a million dead would be an incredibly conservative figure given that critical care would be inaccessible. Anarchy on the streets because law enforcement/armed forces won't be immune and a complete break down of society. What am I missing? Yes that is what my dentist firmly believes and I'm wondering about it. You've highlighted the case for not doing it and it would be brutal. However, wouldn't it also be brutal if the number of cases exceeds capacity for a very much longer period? i.e. Lots of the tragic things you highlight would still take place but just over a longer period. ALso the inverted V would be less than 6 months but certainly a lot less than an inverted U. I have to say though seeing the figures for Italy coming in today (627 new deaths in one day) I can see why many (including me possibly) would not agree with my dentist. Its very, very difficult but IMO not obvious what strategy works best.
|
|
one21
Member of DD Central
Posts: 398
Likes: 265
|
Post by one21 on Mar 20, 2020 18:19:22 GMT
I think fat cat and other high paid individuals should take a cut down to the 'Living Wage' to help bail out essential workers! If there's going to be a 12 month break from capitalism!
|
|
james100
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,088
Likes: 1,289
|
Post by james100 on Mar 20, 2020 18:22:22 GMT
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,692
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Mar 20, 2020 18:33:18 GMT
In my view, yes. If the data here is right (worldometers) today we've had the 7th highest number of new cases, but the 4th highest number of deaths. That trend was the same yesterday too. Re: the new measures, it's better but for me not far enough. If the UK has now fully accepted suppression is required, then why still this attitude (BJ) "We can't forbid every form of socialising," admits the prime minister, asked if young people will be stopped going to parties. Er, actually yes you can. Spain, France, Italy and China did. What do they think makes the UK special? Do they think that all 18 year olds will just "do the sensible thing"? How can one choose the risk of infringing a little more on a Friday night party unnecessarily with the potential additional deaths of thousands of people in the long-term (with exponential growth of the virus). Just as with the voluntary "maybe don't go to pubs", which they've now changed their tune on, I believe they will here too in the not too distant future. Why are we pussyfooting around with this? Why take the risk? Ditto for shops remaining open (bar supermarkets/banks/essential services)
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Say No To T.D.S.
Posts: 5,722
Likes: 2,987
|
Post by michaelc on Mar 20, 2020 18:47:02 GMT
In my view, yes. If the data here is right (worldometers) today we've had the 7th highest number of new cases, but the 4th highest number of deaths. That trend was the same yesterday too. Re: the new measures, it's better but for me not far enough. If the UK has now fully accepted suppression is required, then why still this attitude (BJ) "We can't forbid every form of socialising," admits the prime minister, asked if young people will be stopped going to parties. Er, actually yes you can. Spain, France, Italy and China did. What do they think makes the UK special? Do they think that all 18 year olds will just "do the sensible thing"? How can one choose the risk of infringing a little more on a Friday night party unnecessarily with the potential additional deaths of thousands of people in the long-term (with exponential growth of the virus).Just as with the voluntary "maybe don't go to pubs", which they've now changed their tune on, I believe they will here too in the not too distant future. Why are we pussyfooting around with this? Why take the risk? Ditto for shops remaining open (bar supermarkets/banks/essential services) I agree with you but it is easier to say that when partying may not be the be all and end all of everything as it often is with youngsters. Daft example in reverse, but if it turned out that playing golf might be dangerous, the arguments would seem to lose their power coming from an 18 year old.
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,692
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Mar 20, 2020 18:55:03 GMT
I agree with you but it is easier to say that when partying may not be the be all and end all of everything as it often is with youngsters. Daft example in reverse, but if it turned out that playing golf might be dangerous, the arguments would seem to lose their power coming from an 18 year old. It's not just partying. Golf with a friend, the gym, standing on a street corner chatting with 4 friends. It all needs to stop. At the risk of banging on about this, I'm currently not allowed to walk on the street alongside someone else (even my wife) at the moment here. I'm not allowed to drive my car with a passenger. I know it seems almost unimaginable, but if you accept that each social interaction presents the risk of one more infection (which can then lead to another and another and another) then IMV some fairly draconian short-term restrictions are a price worth paying. Otherwise that leads us to questions like 'how many infections and subsequent deaths is an acceptable price to allow people to socialise?' . It's not melodramatic IMV and I'm a non-panicky rational kind of guy.
|
|
Stonk
Stonking
Posts: 735
Likes: 658
|
Post by Stonk on Mar 20, 2020 19:52:08 GMT
In my view, yes. If the data here is right (worldometers) today we've had the 7th highest number of new cases, but the 4th highest number of deaths. That trend was the same yesterday too. Re: the new measures, it's better but for me not far enough. If the UK has now fully accepted suppression is required, then why still this attitude (BJ) "We can't forbid every form of socialising," admits the prime minister, asked if young people will be stopped going to parties. Er, actually yes you can. Spain, France, Italy and China did. What do they think makes the UK special? Do they think that all 18 year olds will just "do the sensible thing"? How can one choose the risk of infringing a little more on a Friday night party unnecessarily with the potential additional deaths of thousands of people in the long-term (with exponential growth of the virus). Just as with the voluntary "maybe don't go to pubs", which they've now changed their tune on, I believe they will here too in the not too distant future. Why are we pussyfooting around with this? Why take the risk? Ditto for shops remaining open (bar supermarkets/banks/essential services)
Don't bother comparing or even looking at case numbers from the UK or anywhere in Europe, or indeed anywhere. The testing policies are different between countries, and almost no country anywhere is attempting to test any more than a small and biased fraction of the population, least of all a representative sample of the population.
The only useful and comparable figures are deaths. Except in places where they are concealing them, like, well, pick your favourite repressive dictatorship.
I agree we should be a much more aggressive and quick about closing things down, rather than this step-by-step pussy-footing. On the plus side, the modelling that is guiding the strategy (the aim of which is to keep hospitalisations within available capacity) does not assume that everyone complies with what they are asked. In fact, I think the model is rather pessimistic about the level of compliance: for example, the social distancing of over-70s is assumed to achieve only 75% compliance.
|
|
|
|
Post by moonraker on Mar 20, 2020 20:02:22 GMT
Inevitable, when supermarkets are designating special hours for us oldies. There are lots of pictures on the Web of my contemporaries queuing not quite cheek by jowl outside stores, and rubbing shoulders as they peruse the half-empty shelves or head for those that have something on them. But if there weren't any special hours they would be doing the same with other age groups. And perhaps if there weren't spivs, crooks, hoarders, the greedy and the panic-stricken emptying those shelves, shopping could return to something near normality
|
|
james100
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,088
Likes: 1,289
|
Post by james100 on Mar 20, 2020 20:06:25 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by moonraker on Mar 20, 2020 20:10:29 GMT
Quite apposite to 2020:
"It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us, we were all going direct to Heaven, we were all going direct the other way - in short, the period was so far like the present period, that some of its noisiest authorities insisted on its being received, for good or for evil, in the superlative degree of comparison only."
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,056
Likes: 4,441
|
Post by agent69 on Mar 20, 2020 20:16:20 GMT
Does anyone know if the recent ban on pubs and bars opening applies to clubs (Social club, British Legion or Con / Lib / Lab club).
Also does it apply to the bar at our golf club, or the course itself?
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,626
Likes: 6,440
|
Post by registerme on Mar 20, 2020 20:23:16 GMT
Does anyone know if the recent ban on pubs and bars opening applies to clubs (Social club, British Legion or Con / Lib / Lab club).
Also does it apply to the bar at our golf club, or the course itself?
Whether it actually does or doesn't, presumably it should? Hopefully those managing such institutions will behave sensibly and close them for the foreseeable future.
|
|
