Chit Chat
from the Spectator:
Britain is now locked down for at least three weeks, but could the government’s original policy of relying on herd immunity have been right all along? That is the inference of a team of epidemiologists from Oxford university, whose modelling produces remarkably different results from that of Professor Neil Ferguson and his team at Imperial College. It was the Imperial College model which, on Monday 16 March which led to the dramatic U-turn, and the government’s adoption of a complete suppression policy for Covid-19.
Like everything being published about coronavirus at the moment, the Oxford study comes with a health warning. It has not yet been peer-reviewed and, like all form of modelling, it relies on the quality of the data and assumptions which are fed into it. But if it is anywhere close to reflecting the truth, it raises questions about a policy of seeking to suppress Covid-19, with all the lockdowns and economic damage which comes with it. Infection with SARS-CoV-2 - the virus which causes Covid-19 - may be already so established in the population that it might be pointless trying to contain it.
The good news, on the other hand, is that if the Oxford model is correct, it suggests the disease is a lot less deadly than has been feared. It would also suggest that the epidemic will be in decline much sooner than most currently believe, because there will soon be few people left for the virus to infect. The Oxford model suggests that the virus might have been in circulation in Britain for four weeks before the first death was recorded and that a large proportion, if not the majority, of the UK population might already be infected.
Running the model with slightly different assumptions produced estimates that by last Thursday, between 36 per cent and 68 per cent of the UK population had already been infected with the virus, with the vast majority of the population showing no symptoms whatsoever. An Italian study published yesterday – which analysed the results from a village near Venice where all 3,000 residents were tested for the virus – suggested that between 50 per cent and 75 per cent of those infected show no symptoms.
It has to be emphasised that the Oxford study is theoretical, and it shouldn't be taken as a call to end the lockdown restrictions - at least, not yet. What it does show is the wide gap between scientists on the likely path of the epidemic. Above all, it underlines the importance of finding out how widespread the infection is in the UK population. All policy hinges on this, yet no-one has any idea of how many people have the virus. As a matter of urgency, we need to test a randomised sample of the population to find this out. The Oxford team says it will begin testing a sample of the population for evidence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2. It should come as no surprise if, as more evidence comes in and we have a better idea of infection rates, we end up a different policy on Covid-19.
I’m no virologist, but how is that the virus can kill some and display no symptoms in others? That’s quite a contrast in outcomes.
Mar 25, 2020 -- 9:05PM, jollyswagman wrote:
i heard of this research yesterday, sadly my enthusiasm was dampened as it has received lots of criticism from other academics, dodgy assumptions.
When reputations are on the line academics will trash each others work. And they are on the line in a big way here. If the economy is reduced to dust because some Imperial College boffins underestimated the numbers already infected, by a factor of 100, then no one will be asking their opinion on this stuff again.
Are there other models to look at ? If not, then the official, panic mongering, Imperial College one is looking like an outlier.
6 million sheep and cattle slaughtered.
i am sure they are all trying but many are putting out research which isnt peer reviewed in the rush to get some answers.
i dont understand the imperial people at all, it is a 13 year old model built to examine flu. they ignored covid data available from 24 january up until early march then when they put some of the actual data into the model they were horrified that the government policy of mitigation / herd immunity (which they decided on due to imperials earlier work) would lead to 250,000 deaths a number deemed too high. actual hospital admissions are double what imperial assumed. this model wasnt released until last week so wasnt peer reviewed and some academics have since criticised it.
one chap who spent 30 years in public health has made some comparisons to foot and mouth (where imperial were also involved).
let's hope we are now going in the right direction but some experts say a lock down without mass testing is pointless as many new cases will emerge as soon as we slack off. it really isnt an easy situation. probably 12-18 months for a vaccine, ffs.
you have let me down.... again
farmers stopping min and ag coming on their farms thinking they were bringing it with them etc espceially when those farms were clean etc
all forgotten now of course except by some farmers
Let’s not forget we were told early on ‘there’s no immunity’ to covid-19. Well there is as many, many people are thankfully recovering or never knew they had it.
Mar 25, 2020 -- 9:22PM, Injera wrote:
Reminds me a bit of the Foot and Mouth in 2001.6 million sheep and cattle slaughtered.
Indeed Injera, What is the right reaction, I'm sure I don't have a clue, an impossible call for all governments, easier of course in Autocratic regimes which bear no comparison to our society. I hope our government have got it more right than wrong.
That’s 420 a day. 145 of those were respiratory deaths... The flu jab failed.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/excesswintermortalityinenglandandwales/2017to2018provisionaland2016to2017final
everyone thinks he knows what is going on , I once saw a rat coming out of a restaurant kitchen
and wake up when it’s all over
would that be so bad ?
I believe there's been more papers and research done about this coronavirus than anything before. Shows you the clamour to get on top of it but how much is also peer reviewed, etc.
Mar 25, 2020 -- 10:36PM, lfc1971 wrote:
A cute animal diversion from the fear
Don't know if it's just me, but with the extra quiet and serenity the last couple of days, spring seems to have really sprung more than I've noticed before.
Mar 25, 2020 -- 9:02PM, Injera wrote:
Well worth crashing the economy then.....I’m no virologist, but how is that the virus can kill some and display no symptoms in others? That’s quite a contrast in outcomes.
There was a study in Wuhan that indicated Blood Type was a big factor as to whether symptoms were mild or severe. Blood Type 'A' was bad news apparently. It's a bit speculative but I do think Africa/South America have very low incidence 'A' and it hasn't really taken off there as expected.
That will come anyway regardless of whether they're relying on it.
It's a case of which comes first, a vaccine or herd immunity.
Mar 26, 2020 -- 12:13PM, Dr Crippen wrote:
but could the government’s original policy of relying on herd immunity have been right all along?That will come anyway regardless of whether they're relying on it. It's a case of which comes first, a vaccine or herd immunity.
The UK government's original herd immunity policy, by their own admission, would have involved more deaths being suffered in the short-term as a hedge against a second wave coming in winter which would cause a lot more deaths. If they have indeed achieved herd immunity by somewhat of a 'fluke' (ie they never thought it would happen so quickly and if it has done then there will be no second wave), then all of those extra deaths in the short-term would have been unnecessary deaths, so I don't see how anyone could say that their original herd immunity policy would have been right. They came out and said they weren't concerned with sporting events spreading the virus in the early stages, which was unbelievable really. Just as well they deviated from it and went with a policy which sought to reduce the spread as much as possible.
I doubt that anywhere near 50% have been infected and I think the results of that study should not have been made public, as it can only lead to complacency amongst the public and the results of the study could be way off.
How does the study reconcile the fact that approximately 97,000 people in the UK have been tested with 9,529 having been confirmed positive?
Not sure what point you are trying to make here but 90% of people testing negative does not show anything either way. If 50% or more have been infected, most of them wouldn't test positive at this stage, as the virus will have passed and they would have recovered, and if 50% haven't been infected then they won't test positive either. Only antibody testing, which hasn't been rolled out yet, will tell you how many have been infected to date.
The government's policy is to try to slow down the number of cases coming through in order to spread the load on the NHS.
Herd immunity will happen regardless.
.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/epidemiologist-behind-highly-cited-coronavirus-model-admits-he-was-wrong-drastically-revises-model
https://english.alarabiya.net/en/features/2020/03/25/Coronavirus-Iceland-s-mass-testing-finds-half-of-carriers-show-no-symptoms
Which might explain why we're not doing as much testing as we could.
Because if you're positive they wont cart you off to hospital until you're in a bad way. And they don't need test results to tell them that.
Mar 26, 2020 -- 4:29PM, ooO{Alpha Centauri}Ooo wrote:
Thishttps://english.alarabiya.net/en/features/2020/03/25/Coronavirus-Iceland-s-mass-testing-finds-half-of-carriers-show-no-symptoms
And that's why we should be testing so much more. Korea approach and have a less severe shutdown as a result.
They are often wrong. Ferguson has thankfully admitted his mistake.
Mar 26, 2020 -- 4:22PM, Ibrahima Sonko wrote:
The experts..https://www.dailywire.com/news/epidemiologist-behind-highly-cited-coronavirus-model-admits-he-was-wrong-drastically-revises-model
Key paragraphs.
He now says both that the U.K. should have enough ICU beds and that the coronavirus will probably kill under 20,000 people in the U.K. — more than 1/2 of whom would have died by the end of the year in any case [because] they were so old and sick,” he wrote.
To put this number in context, there are usually thousands of deaths from the flu each year in the U.K.
The government's policy is to try to slow down the number of cases coming through in order to spread the load on the NHS.
Herd immunity will happen regardless.
---
Crippen is correct, unless a magical cure appears, that's surely the endgame.
Just because the phrase scared people and they went into pants wetting mode when it was said doesn't mean "Herd Immunity" isn't the likely end result, either via vaccine or "caught it".
What other possible outcome is there that will eventually allow going back to normal? Divine intervention?
Mar 26, 2020 -- 1:36PM, Dr Crippen wrote:
Just as well they deviated from it and went with a policy which sought to reduce the spread as much as possible.The government's policy is to try to slow down the number of cases coming through in order to spread the load on the NHS. Herd immunity will happen regardless.
Yes. But their strategy under the 'herd immunity' policy was to get a larger number of people infected and hence a larger number of dead, while still trying to keep the NHS from being overwhelmed, until their modellers came back and said they'd got it wrong and that the original herd immunity policy would result in far too many hospitalisations and deaths, so they changed from the 'herd immunity' policy to one which clamped down on the spread a lot more. As I said above, the UK government initially didn't want to close down sporting events and they said they weren't worried about the spread from sporting events. This was part of their 'herd immunity' policy to encourage the spread more than other countries. In fact it was clubs who decided to call off PL games after Arteta and some players got affected, not the government.
I'm not sure there is an historic example of any country trying to achieve herd immunity by deliberately exposing its population to a disease and encouraging its spread in an uncontrolled manner. Herd immunity is achieved by giving a vaccine (a weakened and much easier to beat version of the disease) to its population in a controlled manner normally. Herd immunity by exposure to the actual disease is a bonkers policy and it hasn't been their policy for most of this time, so to achieve it now (as the Oxford study suggests) is a complete fluke. But I doubt the Oxford study.
Very hard to know what the truth is.
They rarely are, it rarely is.
Mar 26, 2020 -- 10:32PM, Angoose wrote:
As always, there are many versions of the truth.
None these people doing modelling for this believe they have the truth. Just probablities.
Shutting down the world economy makes no sense at all.
And just how long do they think people are going to comply before there is an almighty kick off?
I hope.
I've read about significant heart and lung damage to those that contract the virus though I suspect that may also be the more serious cases.
I know which way to turn but people like Angoose trouble me. Especially when they are flooding a forum.
You can measure the angry by their response times.
god i love trolling the stupid.
But if you ask their opinion they will give one.
But i speak from my truth. I dont think i defamed a person.
Angoose has a view on everything and starts too many freds and never follows up in the freds he starts. Just post snipes.
Whether that is ok, its only my view, which is nothing,
Like the libtard left do, times of hardship but you forget austerity.
Either way, I simply know for a fact that you will have disappointed others. Sensible souls like akabula. He will be disappointed to no end that you, one of his dearest and most respected friends on here, are lashing out at your perceived political enemies for no real reason. That you troll them, call them "libtard left", try to score cheap points.
Mar 27, 2020 -- 12:22AM, Ibrahima Sonko wrote:
Before i start, i dont mind you edy. But i speak from my truth. I dont think i defamed a person.Angoose has a view on everything and starts too many freds and never follows up in the freds he starts. Just post snipes.Whether that is ok, its only my view, which is nothing,Like the libtard left do, times of hardship but you forget austerity.
If you could send me the latest version of the forum users guide, it would be most appreciated.
I’ve lost my original copy.
But that I appear to upset you on an anonymous, and ultimately meaningless, forum likely reveals more about you than it does about me.
Is this your first day on the internet Angoose, that IS the internet
This forum that you treat as meaningless that is a big part of the current situation.
These conversations are vital, for me to call you something and for you to call me something back.
All healthy.
It would be dressed up, but what they were really annoyed about was that the views that my posts expressed differed from theirs.
And that just wouldn’t do.
I didn’t want to be in their gang, and for some strange reason they became irrational about it.
Ibrahima...you are...sometimes on occasions more disappointing than sauerkraut that is only slightly sour.
I don't have much practice at this.
xxx
You should not really care about me.
Ibrahima, you are only slightly more funny than Jack Whitehall!
I don't want to hurt you extraordinarily like that, Ibrahima.
These insults are getting below the belt. What next, comparing him to Michael Macintyre?
FFS Just realised he's probably technically self employed .. will he be "claiming" for lost earnings, based on the bizarre theory he's a "comedian"?
This was always going to spread among younger people anyway ( many it appears not even showing symptoms) for a myriad of reasons .... more likely out and about ,mixing ,grouping , schools ,pubs ,partners ..so on and so on ... older people would much less likely catch this esp as many don't tend to go far on average .
Then if you read about cases of people you know about and even on this forum it seems at the moment the numbers who believe they have or have had the virus (or maybe flu ) is around 5% , many more in London .
If it was half the population many ,many more oldies would be dead by now .....i reckon allowing for lag ,the death rate will be around 0.5 ....an example cited of 20,000 by the experts would then be 4m infected in total (Not all at same time of course)
Sadly this overall picture is not being presented. It’s as if death never occurs.....
Sadly, once the world starts going into a panic, governments feel compelled to act.
COVID-19 patients average time on ventilator: 11 - 21 days (vs. 3 - 4 days for non-COVID-19 patients).
"We have patients that have been 20 days 30 days on a ventilator. The longer you are on a ventilator, the more likely you are not going get off a ventilator".
this will be a low death percentage hopefully (0.1 % maybe at a guess )only because of the drastic measures taken .... without such measures death rates would probably be up as high as 3- 5% of the population .
think of all the ill and elderly folk behind shields for a start
