1.2% OF COVID DEATHS UNDER 45s in UK

IT - you've tried to hammer this so I'll bite.

Who has debunked the Imperial College paper please?

lurka
22 Apr 20 18:47
Joined: 25 Oct 10
| Topic/replies: 15,251 | Blogger: lurka's blog
I think they suspect it got into care homes from people going to hospitals and bringing it back with them as well as agency staff working in different care homes due to permanent staff calling in sick or being in quarantine. Within nursing homes I just think a lot of them have dementia and aren't good at social distancing or taking precautions when coughing/sneezing etc

^

Yes with 20/20 hindsight carehomes are the weak link.

Whilst people under 45 (1.2% of deaths) are locked down and having minimal contact you have dozens or more older people interacting in carehomes with people coming and going all the time.

We have done this the wrong way round (same as France, Spain and everyone else).

Keep younger people in households of 1-4 people with limited interaction with other people whilst older people in carehomes are interacting with eachother plus workers that go from carehome to carehome, go on public transport to the carehome etc all the time increasing the risk to these older vulnerable people.

The care homes are infected by the people who work there and the residents have weak immune systems so it is easily spread . The workers are not tested so no one knows who is carrying . Easily solvable but none of the "experts" can work it out....

PorcupineorPineapple
22 Apr 20 18:49
Joined: 03 Dec 15
| Topic/replies: 9,388 | Blogger: PorcupineorPineapple's blog
IT - you've tried to hammer this so I'll bite.

Who has debunked the Imperial College paper please?

^

Every person out there will a clue on the subject.

This Swedish guy who used to run their system sums it well in layman's terms. Take your time to listen to what he has to say. It is interesting...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfN2JWifLCY

P.s. this is not a conspiracy website. That have had other guests on who you will recognise.

Summary from the link if you fear clicking it.....

Professor Johan Giesecke, one of the world’s most senior epidemiologists, advisor to the Swedish Government (he hired Anders Tegnell who is currently directing Swedish strategy), the first Chief Scientist of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, and an advisor to the director general of the WHO, lays out with typically Swedish bluntness why he thinks:

- UK policy on lockdown and other European countries are not evidence-based
- The correct policy is to protect the old and the frail only
- This will eventually lead to herd immunity as a “by-product”
- The initial UK response, before the “180 degree U-turn”, was better
- The Imperial College paper was “not very good” and he has never seen an unpublished paper have so much policy impact
- The paper was very much too pessimistic
- Any such models are a dubious basis for public policy anyway
- The flattening of the curve is due to the most vulnerable dying first as much as the lockdown
- The results will eventually be similar for all countries
- Covid-19 is a “mild disease” and similar to the flu, and it was the novelty of the disease that scared people.
- The actual fatality rate of Covid-19 is the region of 0.1%
- At least 50% of the population of both the UK and Sweden will be shown to have already had the disease when mass antibody testing becomes available

^

I WOULD URGE PEOPLE TO WATCH THIS WITH AN OPEN MIND.

SARS usually didn’t become contagious until several days after symptoms appeared. This meant that, actions taken during this period to isolate or quarantine ill patients can effectively interrupt transmission also the proportion of transmission occurring prior to symptoms is different. For SARS, this was less than 11%, probably much less.

Trying to keep an open mind but just googled UnHerd. Hmm.

Whilst people under 45 (1.2% of deaths) are locked down and having minimal contact you have dozens or more older people interacting in carehomes with people coming and going all the time.



Maybe though these people have underlying issues and do have regular  hospital/doctor  contact, no info on this group so with respect we can't draw any conclusions.Care homes need systems put in place ASAP, if older folks are fit they should not be exposed to contamination, rem working in a water board premises, everything split between clean and dirty, ie drinking water and waste water, seperate everything. We need to get moving and put systems in place.

I though the same PP,

Recent other guests Lord Adonis, Alastair Campbell and Maajid Nawaz.

Not my favourite people from pre-virus times when we all thought thing like Brexit were actually important!

But even so give the video a go as the guest has 'good' credentials on the subject compared to the majority of chitchatters.

breadnbutter
22 Apr 20 19:04
Joined: 29 Aug 06
| Topic/replies: 10,601 | Blogger: breadnbutter's blog
Whilst people under 45 (1.2% of deaths) are locked down and having minimal contact you have dozens or more older people interacting in carehomes with people coming and going all the time.



Maybe though these people have underlying issues and do have regular  hospital/doctor  contact, no info on this group so with respect we can't draw any conclusions.Care homes need systems put in place ASAP, if older folks are fit they should not be exposed to contamination, rem working in a water board premises, everything split between clean and dirty, ie drinking water and waste water, seperate everything. We need to get moving and put systems in place.

^

Absolutely if the goal is to minimise total deaths then 80/20 theory suggests you absolutely protect care homes before everything else. No country has sadly done this.

Only 10 minutes in but am wondering, in the interests of balance, have this UnHerd channel had anyone on saying the IC paper was correct?

They had seperate vans, seperate toilets, seperate canteens, no cross contamination and this was very strictly enforced and adhered to. For some reasons care homes have been allowed to do there own thing, the money these places generate for there owners is phenomenal,they charge like wounded rhino's.

PorcupineorPineapple
22 Apr 20 19:15
Joined: 03 Dec 15
| Topic/replies: 9,390 | Blogger: PorcupineorPineapple's blog
Only 10 minutes in but am wondering, in the interests of balance, have this UnHerd channel had anyone on saying the IC paper was correct?

^

Has anyone ever in the history of the world gone on record saying the IC paper is correct apart from Neil Ferguson?

If you can find a scientist on record supporting their paper I would like to read/watch it.

But the IC paper is fundamentally the same as the WHO advice that pretty much all countries are following in some form or other, right?

I agree with IT.

the ic paper is definitely not what the who advise, they say test, isolate and contact trace. this is the standard way of dealing with an epidemic and is in fact what the countries in the east who have been successful have done. this approach was never modelled by the imperial mob.

There was a study in Ireland if no measures were in place,i was stunned at the results,i can't find it but from memory the death rate would be x 15.

Wasn't too impressed if that was the same Swedish prof that was interviewed yesterday,he seemed pigheaded

PP,

the 'unherd' also did a video with Lord Adonis.

As I said when we thought Brexit actually mattered either way he was on your side I believe.

He has some very balanced things to say on this.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fG3IoxleDHE&t=188s

Take a look... we are storing up major problems with our correct approach. It is a tightrope. It is almost as if by locking down we are having our instant gratification now (public happy action is being taken) and in return the future will be much more bleak.

Remember goal of lock down was so NHS is not overwhelmed. It is not. The new hospitals are being built. Excess ICU beds exist in their thousands.

Has the government since changed their goal?

* with our correct approach.

replace correct with current... I am not sure it is correct!

Apr 22, 2020 -- 6:43PM, PorcupineorPineapple wrote:

I think pa makes a good point to be fair.It wasn't that long ago that the government was faffing round on whether to lockdown or not and then had that silly period of allowing pubs and restaurants to stay open but advising people not to visit them.I think it's gonna be a long time before people are confident enough to mingle in the same way as before and it doesn't matter how many Tea Party capitalists try to use their influence. The public will need to be comfortable that the virus is down to a really negligible level and/or a vaccine or effective treatment is found before we go back to the same leisure activities or even making big investments.

IMO if the government declared pubs open Friday night they would be rammed

The NHS isn't overwhelmed to the detriment of the care sector.

i t using crackpots on youtube again?

send more money ?

phase 2 wave 4

new hospitals not being built, large spaces are being filled with hospital lite stuff

----you-have-to-laugh---
22 Apr 20 19:51
Joined: 06 Jul 10
| Topic/replies: 7,216 | Blogger: ----you-have-to-laugh---'s blog
i t using crackpots on youtube again?.

^

Professor Johan Giesecke, Lord Adonis, Alastair Campbell and Maajid Nawaz are crackpots and Neil Ferguson is god?

Just because Trump and Boris followed what Neil Ferguson wrote you believe he is right no questions asked? You are so devoted to Trump and Boris you cannot see them possibly making a mistake?

I wonder of Johnson will describe it as a mild disease, just like the flu ?

you dont have post some rubbish when debunked it

you dont have post some rubbish when debunked it

*** you dont arf

I'm puzzled as to why some people are pointing to Sweden as an example to follow as regards lockdown relaxation. Swedens' figures for deaths per million of population are horrific. Almost as bad as ours!

By staying open they do not have to worry about when to 'open up' again. More young people will have had the virus those reducing risk of a second and third wave as well as protecting the economy.

Lock downs of younger people just holds off what has to happen as it rips through. What do people think happens when France, UK etc open up?

Lock down of younger people was to protect the NHS. We have done that.

I think the people of Norway and Denmark are glad that they didn't follow their neighbour's example.

I watched that UnHerd video and it is indeed interesting.

However, I still feel that Sweden is a special case where that approach was an option for a good while after the virus started spreading there and that option was gone very quickly everywhere else because the spread had already got out of hand due to government inaction, making a lockdown inevitable.

You are talking about a country where 50+% of the population in the biggest city live alone(!), most people can switch to working from home seamlessly because they do it to some degree anyway, people naturally socially distance 100% of the time, 50+% of the population live in areas with less than 50k inhabitants, nearly all old people already live apart from younger folk, if you have a cough you stay home from work and get full pay etc, people do what their government tell them a lot more.

Unless you imposed those restrictions before the virus got into your country and effectively turned your country into a clone of Sweden, which was impossible, then the virus was always going to spread at a much faster rate in your country. Every single comparison with Sweden I've seen fails to take this into account or glosses over it like it's not hugely relevant.

Then there is the question of whether immunity exists after infection or for how long? I'd imagine there must be some a least but it's not a given either.

I also watched the video that came afterwards which is an American guy and his Swedish girlfriend and they say that the numbers in Sweden are high because there was an outbreak in care homes in Stockholm, which takes the gloss off what the Swedish expert in the first video says about protecting the old and the frail, but also makes their numbers in the wider community look better.

How would the UK or anywhere else have introduced measures to turn London into the equivalent of Stockholm in terms of people living alone?

Is there verifiable science that you get immune from having had it once?

Perhaps they can reach out for volunteers to be exposed to the virus to find out.
Hancock and Johnson may put their hands up.

What you had in the UK was a herd immunity policy but also the government encouraging the spread at the same time in a very densely populated country. That was pure madness, it doesn't need any encouragement to spread like wildfire. eg Football only closed down because Arteta got infected - imagine he hadn't and another weekend of games had gone ahead all over the country with fans traveling the length and breath to go to them on packed buses and trains and then return home. Doesn't really bear thinking about but thank God he got infected when he did.

It wasn't Ferguson's report and the numbers which set you off course of where Sweden is. You were never in a position to do what day did and you were never on a better path while encouraging the spread early on.

PorcupineorPineapple
22 Apr 20 20:58
Joined: 03 Dec 15
| Topic/replies: 9,393 | Blogger: PorcupineorPineapple's blog
Is there verifiable science that you get immune from having had it once?


^

No there isn't.

Nor is their verifiable science that it will burn itself out. Spanish Flu was around in weaker and weaker forms until 1958.

HIV virus is still around with no vaccine after 40 years but has improving treatments.

But now we have protected the NHS and built up capacity what do we do next? Immunity might work. A vaccine might occur in 18 months.

Do young people just sit and wait and hope something comes along for something that kills very few young people? It seems very unfair. Surely best to protect the vulnerable and crack on with living and working and paying tax.

When Sweden's mortality rate came down to around 15 to 20 in April about the 11th to the 13th, it began to look like they might get away with it. And if those figures had levelled out at that sort of mark, or at least stayed in double figures. Then they had a reasonable case to say that they might come out of it quite well. Unfortunately, the figures spiked again, so you have to say it looks at the moment as if they are paying too high a price with 10 times as many deaths as Norway.

lurka
22 Apr 20 21:09
Joined: 25 Oct 10
| Topic/replies: 15,256 | Blogger: lurka's blog
It wasn't Ferguson's report and the numbers which set you off course of where Sweden is. You were never in a position to do what day did and you were never on a better path while encouraging the spread early on.


^

The Ferguson report was not peer reviewed.

It was made by someone that got the numbers completely wrong before when advised government.

I suggest Boris gets a second opinion.

anders tegnell is a hostage to fortune, he miscalled the spread of covid and has backed himself into a corner. he believed covid  would not spread from china and then he thought it would be enough to trace individual cases that came from abroad. so all the swedes who returned home after their skiing holidays in italy were encouraged to go back to work if not sick, even if some of their family were ill. he didnt think there was community transmission and so no mitigation was necessary. 

five minutes in and the great professor is talking about protecting the elderly, maybe someone should tell him a third of the dead in sweden are from nursing homes. he believes the fatality rate will be 0.1% and says he is certain that millions of people have already had it, but he offers zero evidence for this. he claims mass antibody testing will show 50% have had it in sweden and the uk, again no basis for this claim and the interviewer fails to probe him. 17 minutes in and he recognises that old people have not been protected. 19 minutes in and he claims south korea have given up on their policy, that is an untruth. 24 minutes he is comparing it to the flu. oh dear he guesses a number for uk dead that we have already surpassed. at 26 minutes he now realises it is different to the flu, well done professor.

the swedish approach is a gamble, pure and simple, even if it turns out to work. the arguments for it are being made by people who failed to act and are seeking to justify their inaction. countries that try and stop the spread are buying time, so giving themselves more options. those that acted quickest (in the east) did not lock down their economies, those in europe who acted quickest have so far had less deaths.

these two swedish chaps are definitely well thought of  but there are far more experts who think the swedish approach is bonkers than think it is sound. 

covid is a novel virus, we know very little about it. not once on the forum (or on this video) have i heard the proponents of the herd immunity approach talk about the long term consequences for those who get this illness. people on here seem to think you either die or have few  or zero symptoms. we know that it isnt just the lungs that are attacked, the kidneys and liver may be affected too. a german paper showed some active divers (all youngish and in good health) who got covid in what is considered a mild form - they did not go to hospital and are considered recovered- have all been left with significant damage to their lungs

All of them were not severe cases, their illnesses were five to six weeks ago and they are considered to have recovered. But they can no longer dive. "The damage to the lungs is irreversible," said Hartig in an interview with the APA. And the,

"This is shocking, we don't understand what's going on here. They are probably lifelong patients, so it doesn't matter whether they dive again or not," said the doctor. The bad news was made clear by lung CTs. "They didn't get any better at all in imaging," said Hartig. "As an emergency doctor with 20 years of experience, you swallow when you see something like this in a 40-year-old patient."

https://www.rainews.it/tgr/tagesschau/articoli/2020/04/tag-Coronavirus-Lungeschaden-Forschung-Uniklinik-Innsbruck-6708e11e-28dc-4843-a760-e7f926ace61c.html

we have no idea how widespread these problems will be.

we dont know how long immunity lasts or how strong immunity is. at the moment we dont even know if you get immunity or if people can get it a second time and it potentially be worse second time around.

IT. It will happen as its the only way but its going to take time for people to accept it. You just have to hope that we reach that moment before the total economic collapse that will cause many times the deaths and suffering this virus will.

I admit im losing confidence in that happening.

Fine. I'm not saying his numbers were right, they were likely way off. But you were in for a disaster anyway if you'd continued on that course, encouraging the spread and not banning sports events and you'd have had to lock down anyway, with a higher chance of hospitals getting overwhelmed at the same time.

Thank your lucky stars Arteta got infected when he did.

Apr 22, 2020 -- 9:46PM, Des Pond wrote:

I'm puzzled as to why some people are pointing to Sweden as an example to follow as regards lockdown relaxation. Swedens' figures for deaths per million of population are horrific. Almost as bad as ours!

I hear this argument all the time on here and am totally baffled by it. What you have just said there is the Swedes must be crazy not to have a lockdown like we have, because there figures are almost as bad as ours !. Surely if the lockdown was such a no brainer Sweden's death rate would be way out on it's own, not much the same as everyone else, still less 'almost as bad' 

Do young people just sit and wait and hope something comes along for something that kills very few young people? It seems very unfair. Surely best to protect the vulnerable and crack on with living and working and paying tax.

That is an not necessarily correct ... for all we know young people might be incubators for or they harbour the virus to reappear as they get older and their immune systems weaken ... so saying that it kills very few young people just might be wrong ... they might die at a later date
Surely it is better to avoid getting the virus because of the unknown x factor

jollyswagman,

That is very interesting but what is your solution?

We have 115,000 active cases in the UK. So contact tracing is over. The virus is out and in the community.

Remember the goal of the lockdown was to protect the NHS. We have done that. Capacity exceeds need.

We are in danger of mission creep here with no exit strategy.

we have the worst of all worlds due to the government's approach of letting the virus spread at the start and then changing their minds and having a lock down. now there is no easy way out.

geordie1956
22 Apr 20 21:16
Joined: 28 Dec 11
| Topic/replies: 7,743 | Blogger: geordie1956's blog
Do young people just sit and wait and hope something comes along for something that kills very few young people? It seems very unfair. Surely best to protect the vulnerable and crack on with living and working and paying tax.

That is an not necessarily correct ... for all we know young people might be incubators for or they harbour the virus to reappear as they get older and their immune systems weaken ... so saying that it kills very few young people just might be wrong ... they might die at a later date
Surely it is better to avoid getting the virus because of the unknown x factor

^

That is basing policy on a guess.

The status quo is people are free to leave their houses etc.

You cannot change that on the basis young people may get ill in a few decades if they leave their house today.

You continue to repeat that there are 115k active cases in the UK.
I continue to point out that this is not true.

"That is an not necessarily correct ... for all we know young people might be incubators for or they harbour the virus to reappear as they get older and their immune systems weaken ... so saying that it kills very few young people just might be wrong ... they might die at a later date
Surely it is better to avoid getting the virus because of the unknown x factor"

Thats ridiculous really. It sounds like a scared older person trying to find another reason to frighten the kids into staying locked down.

of course it will happen, slowly, and hopfully managed

germany taken more steps on facemasks today


we in uk seem to be hiding that it will be usful even to wrap a scarf over your face and mouth.



hope we dont get straight back to sweaty palm handshakes , ..surely not even tory whack jobs
will be espousing that for a year or two.

It would, of course, be helpful to know the current number but our government will not tell us.

We've got 3 months of lockdown and then we just have to crack on as the economic cost and ensuing human cost is just too high otherwise.  Thousands of extra deaths from cancer already likely because of the lockdown.

lurka
22 Apr 20 21:15
Joined: 25 Oct 10
| Topic/replies: 15,257 | Blogger: lurka's blog
Fine. I'm not saying his numbers were right, they were likely way off. But you were in for a disaster anyway if you'd continued on that course, encouraging the spread and not banning sports events and you'd have had to lock down anyway, with a higher chance of hospitals getting overwhelmed at the same time.

^

I am not for a minute saying you go back to having indoor music concerts with 80,000 people tomorrow.

I am saying have sensible policies of max numbers, open schools, get people back to work with social distancing as best they can.

Protect the vulnerable with a ring of steel as treatments are developed upto a point this is no going to happen - make a judgement on that later.

That is basing policy on a guess.

I'm not sure the scientists or politicians are making informed decisions so one guess is as good as another

clydebank, hypothetically speaking, if you heard on social media that there was someone carrying out research who was offering free testing would you be interested?

Angoose
22 Apr 20 21:22
Joined: 18 Jul 02
| Topic/replies: 15,106 | Blogger: Angoose's blog
You continue to repeat that there are 115k active cases in the UK.
I continue to point out that this is not true.

^

Going off these numbers
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

Is Germany's 45k wrong as well Angoose?

I'm not sure what you mean tober. Are you saying that Sweden's per capita death rate is not as bad as their Nordic neighbours. I think you can compare them reasonably with Norway and Denmark. Swedens's death rate is horrible, and it's only their small population and geographical isolation that is keeping it from reaching Spain or Italy levels.

if 0.1 cases result in death should be easy to work out

I think a lot of people's opinions on this are coloured by their political beliefs, tbh.

Apr 22, 2020 -- 10:27PM, InsiderTrader wrote:

Angoose22 Apr 20 21:22Joined: 18 Jul 02| Topic/replies: 15,106 | Blogger: Angoose's blogYou continue to repeat that there are 115k active cases in the UK.I continue to point out that this is not true.^Going off these numbershttps://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/Is Germany's 45k wrong as well Angoose?

So tell me how many people have recovered in the UK after being infected from the data that you have available ?

Who knows how this is going to end but Sweden could easily turn out to have handled it best.

The lockdown was introduced to stop the spread continuing before it got to a level where the NHS would be overwhelmed.
Yes, that hasn't happened but you weren't at peak when you introduced those measures and you can't be sure that it has peaked just yet either. But you are talking about releasing lockdown when you are at or near peak??? Do you realise how mental that would be? Do you honestly think the spread wouldn't very quickly get to a higher than current level and get you straight back to another lockdown within a week or two? You are weeks away from releasing lockdown. The spread and numbers will have to fall a lot more before you can do that.

And there is no way you can go on active cases unless the whole population has been tested. Case numbers don't mean anything. Growth in case numbers at the same level of testing are indicative. Comparing case numbers between two countries who test completely differently is pointless.

I sense a lot of frustration and anger among some tories/brexiteers/ right wingers that Britain are not able to look at their former EU neighbours and say "look how well we have dealt with this! What would it have been like if you lived in Germany?" The fact is that we in the UK are not coming out of this any better than Spain or Italy, not much worse than Belgium and no better than France. This has been a real kick in the teeth for brexit voters. And perhaps explains some of the more irrational comments on here.

Sweden's death rate has to be read with the fact that their economy isn't dead.

I dont think anyone wants to end it yet rather see a gradual easing after the next review on May 7th.

WTF has brexit got to do with it. Talk about obsessed.

Des Pond
22 Apr 20 21:30
Joined: 19 Aug 06
| Topic/replies: 14,241 | Blogger: Des Pond's blog
I think a lot of people's opinions on this are coloured by their political beliefs, tbh.

^

I disagree I think Tory government in UK, Republican in USA and socialist in Spain were all reluctant to do a total lock down because they thought it was wrong. They were shamed into it by public and press and crisis in Italy.

We now all pay the economic, health and social consequences.

It is becoming clearer by the day.

Safety in numbers and avoiding short term pain is what got the politicians of all wings to act and now they are boxed in with no where to go.

Our government claim it is all science led.

Will show us the science in detail as to why under 45s need to be in house arrest.

We have seen no science ever from Raab etc.

Sweden deaths

20-29    4

30-39    7

40-49   20

50-59   66

60-69  148

70-79  459

80-89  777

90 +   455

there are plenty of european countries that have done well, they called lock down earlier - portugal, poland, austria, the czech republic and hungary. spain, france, italy and the uk dithered and have paid the price.

jolly I wouldn't trust anything from SM without clarifying with a legitimate source first.  As for the virus I'm 90% sure I've had it, so not interested in getting tested for it, only in the antibody test.

They were reluctant to do a lockdown because they were reluctant to control the spread early on. Now they are tied into a peak/curve trajectory months later because they failed to take it seriously enough. And now they are also talking about testing more, tracing contacts and quarantining once the peak has gone back down to where it was when it started. This is exactly what they should have done from day 1 if they wanted to avoid a lockdown.

Not taking it seriously enough is what set them on a months long peak and curve trajectory and now everyone has to endure a lockdown and wait for it to come back down. That is entirely their fault and there is no early way out of it.

Apr 22, 2020 -- 10:38PM, Dotchinite wrote:

WTF has brexit got to do with it. Talk about obsessed.

I'm not obsessed with it at all. That's the first time I've mentioned it in well over 3 years.

you are saying its political views but disagree with somebody who points out its political.


lol

I stopped posting on Chit chat years ago because it was difficult to get a balanced and rational argument on here. I politely disagreed with the poster, What is wrong with that?

The same lons who were cheering when Trump banned flights from mainland Europe, but not from the UK, have had the grins wiped from their faces since. And it obviously rankles like hell.

You have brought it into a thread about COVID 19. Thats either obsessed or just bizarre.

no not you des

he disagrees with you then states political arguments of parties as a rebuttal

hes a whack job

BREXIT and the flooding in February has a lot to do with our failure to be prepared and prepare well if you read the Sunday Times article.  It wasn't good timing for the UK.

Apr 22, 2020 -- 10:50PM, ----you-have-to-laugh--- wrote:

no not you deshe disagrees with you then states political arguments of parties as a rebuttalhes a whack job

Oh, sorry.

Des, I don't think Sweden is an especially rural place for people to live compared to Denmark/Norway.

Most of the landmass being empty and populations concentrated in urban areas. Denmark/Norway are more known for remote fishing villages. Sweden also has a bigger ethnic population and there, as here, they seem more vulnerable.

jollyswagman
22 Apr 20 21:41
Joined: 04 Jul 15
| Topic/replies: 8,962 | Blogger: jollyswagman's blog
there are plenty of european countries that have done well, they called lock down earlier - portugal, poland, austria, the czech republic and hungary. spain, france, italy and the uk dithered and have paid the price.

^

Spain 'shut down' one week before us and kept non-essential manufacturing open for way longer. Italy also relatively shut countrywide well later.

Is there any science that supports the idea the type of lock downs happening (with carehomes being open to many people from multiple households coming and going to work) actually reduces the spread.

Will look tomorrow at comparing growth in cases sweden verus 'lock down' countries tomorrow.

It's not because of BREXIT, it's because we were preparing for BREXIT, and this took up vast government resources.

dotch emphasises exactly what des was suggesting

Ok tober, I take your point. And I hope that Sweden come out of this well. As i like the country and the people. AS i do denmark and Norway.

Sweden's peak date for deaths appears to have been April 8th, so the narrative that it is running out of control doesn't seem to stack up really.

a stanford university antibody test clydebank?

Singapore, who have been lauded for their approach, actually used the UK blueprint for dealing with a pandemic.  We couldn't as we failed to fund the infrastructure and resources necessary to implement our own recommendations.

https://www.politico.eu/article/europes-coronavirus-lockdown-measures-compared/?utm_source=POLITICO.EU&utm_campaign=bb75dba54f-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2020_04_03_05_00&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_10959edeb5-bb75dba54f-189643173

trader have a look at the dates there, those that moved quicker have done better when you look at the worldometer data.

not quite sure about that clydebank as our pandemic fighting plan was for a fight against the flu. this is one of the problems, the asian countries who have done well seem to have realised quite quickly this wasnt the flu whereas we stuck with the same plan.

i just want to say, there are lots of conversations going on here and it is all very civil despite everyone having different views, well done all.

Similar story in New Zealand. Interview on Sky News today where the interviewee stated that an early switch from flu measures to COVID measures has been key for them.

I think there's likely to be an antibody test available in the next 6 weeks.  Although I've always been too optimistic with this virus so it'll prolly be nearer 12 weeks

Look at Germany's graph of daily new case history. They are in a steady downtrend of new cases while testing is at a high level and they've reopened small shops. Remember the numbers today are not a reflection of what's happening on the ground in terms of the spread and how many are getting infected today. Today's numbers are a reflection of what was happening a week or two ago when those people got infected.

You need to see a steady downtrend where if it continues you will be at a level where new cases in a week or two will be at a level where you have the human & testing resources to test and track contacts aggressively. The UK may not even be at its peak yet. You are weeks away from being at a level where a release of lockdown can be seriously considered. They are either telling you what you want to hear talking about it now or else they are going to release it too early and make a mess of it again.

re Sweden and 'urban areas'. Urban areas are classed as anywhere with 200 or more inhabitants and less than 200m between residences. 50+% of the population live in towns and villages of 50k people or less but most of these are classed as 'urban areas'.

“As simple as a pregnancy test,” gushed Prime Minister Boris Johnson. “It has the potential to be a total game changer.”

I think we can all agree that the crisis has been a nightmare for just about everybody. And that we all want a vaccine to be found in a reasonably short timescale, or we hope the damned thing dies out one way or another, so we can get back to some semblance of normality. And that far fewer people become infected and die.

In other news the Irish health minister on the radio today said that this is called Covid-19, that means that there have been 18 coronaviruses before this...

not quite sure about that clydebank as our pandemic fighting plan was for a fight against the flu. this is one of the problems,

They adopted our plan from 2009 I believe.  We couldn't adopt that plan as we didn't invest in it because of the recession (I am talking years of prep not a few weeks)

I know we had that daft herd immunity model that delayed lockdown by about a week and prolly cost a few thousand extra lives imo.  Two related but different things really

“As simple as a pregnancy test,” gushed Prime Minister Boris Johnson. “It has the potential to be a total game changer.”

Turned out be the fooking unusable tests from China that they paid £20m in advance for

i thought our plan hadnt changed much since about 2005 and was a plan to fight the flu, maybe they adopted that plan but adapted it for something other than the flu??? even that confuses me as i was told that the plan was to do not much and hope for a vaccine. confused.com

Adapted it too late having mistook early signs