Lockdown ? What Lockdown?

[ditchcrawler]

What was it I said about Facebook

[bizzard]

2 minutes ago, buccaneer66 said:

Should all us Mods go and get a virtual cane then, and shouldn't we appoint a school bully?

There might be a member called Bolsover.

[Chris Lowe]

I shall go find my nail gun so that newbies can be nailed to the wall

[Ianws]

I love it there. The bluebells this time of year are amazing. Also, those hairy wood ants to look out for. It’s not in my area so no visit from me any time soon?

[WotEver]

7 hours ago, Jennifer McM said:

It is absolutely true.

 

These dogs can detect when their owner is about to have an epileptic fit, they can alert a diabetic when their sugar is up or down. I also believe they can detect certain cancers.

One of our two Yorkies suddenly started to shun away from swmbo a couple of years ago and neither of us could understand why.  A month later swmbo was diagnosed with cancer.  A year after that, following chemo and radiotherapy and a long period of convalescence, the same dog is all over her again.

[WotEver]

41 minutes ago, Sir Nibble said:

Smallpox is not a good example, it's been eradicated.

As could measles have been if only parents didn't swerve the MMR vaccine due to a false claim from a 'doctor'.

 

(And hysterical reporting by the media)

[Cheshire cat]

54 minutes ago, Sir Nibble said:

Smallpox is not a good example, it's been eradicated.

And it only took 100 years to get there. Meanwhile measles still survives. Oh and I've had it twice despite the vaccine.

[George and Dragon]

11 hours ago, Mike Todd said:

That is not quite the whole story - the only strategy that can affect the eventual outcome is to alter the rate of transmission. In the first instance, the priority was to 'flatten the curve' which is to spread the total transmission over a longer period, with a lower peak number of cases. The early hope was that a vaccine would be available in short order which would then reduce the total number of transmissions (and, more importantly, the number of deaths attributed to COVID-19) That hope is now dashed (see the clears words given by Sir Patrick Vallance in Friday's briefing) and the immediate concern is that the infections will continue at some rate until over 85% have acquired immunity through surviving an infection.

It's another unknown whether immunity lasts for any amount of time after recovering. So even if 80% of us do end up getting the disease it doesn't necessarily mean we won't get it again. And that's assuming the virus itself doesn't mutate like the flu and common cold viruses do.

 

11 hours ago, Mike Todd said:

As I understand it, the virus needs to 'find' sufficient viable hosts for it to survive, largely through inter-person transmission. If that number is very low then it will eventually die out, unless it somehow mutates to find a secret place to hide until re-released.

 

At present the highest estimate of the proportion of UK population that have been infected is around 4% (although I did see this morning a report that just one US study is finding a much higher level, not so far measured through the failure to undertake sufficient testing to know). Even so, there is still a long way to go to such herd immunity is achieved.

I'd love to know how they come up with these estimates...

 

11 hours ago, Mike Todd said:

 

There is a third element which you did not mention - other social measures to reduce transmission. If we all lived in sealed compartments, then the virus would die out much sooner - as soon as all the existing carriers gain immunity - or die off. This then becomes a political issue as we see in Trump's latest twittering - in which he appears to encourage a political rebellion against increasing or extending the lockdown measures. I suspect that the UK govt's reluctance to be more specific about exit strategies is that they asses the public's willingness to accept serious social disruption for perhaps 9 - 12 months as very limited or even to accept a shorter period with almost no economic activity beyond that needed for immediate survival (even that is worryingly high)

That's one way of looking at it. My suspicion is that they haven't a clue about how they can get out of it. They can't test enough of us and even if they could they couldn't do the necessary contact tracing.

 

11 hours ago, Mike Todd said:

There can be little doubt that Trump puts economic revival at a higher level than individual health and survival. As a political issue, rather than scientific or medical one, the choice is starkly between the rich and the poor. The poor have already become seriously disadvantaged whilst those like Trump hunker down in their bunkers (protecting their cash as well as their safety) at the expense of everyone else.

There are, of course, health consequences of the lockdown: 26% fewer attendees at A&E with chest pain or symptoms of stroke. Not to mention the longer term effects on those who live in substandard housing or struggle in normal times to feed themselves and their families.

11 hours ago, Mike Todd said:

If there are sufficient people who share the same priority then, in a democracy, that is what will happen - but is that a world in which we want to survive? We cannot continue for much long putting an absolute priority on the health side of the balance but, for me anyway, I'd still want it to be very much the dominant factor whilst accepting a degree of health damage that will at least allow the major part of the economy to survive. It is looking increasingly likely that, with the complex inter-contentedness of the economy, far more business with fail or be seriously damaged, than has so far been admitted.

 

[Richard10002]

6 hours ago, Mike Todd said:

The estimate of the number of deaths using the Cummings strategy was in excess of 500,000 - a tad worse, I think.

Yes, but, as above, I was talking to Higgs about his personal potential outcome, (or any one individuals potential outcome), which has two options with either normal influenza, or Covid 19. The bad option of either is exactly the same, as is the good option.

 

There is no doubt that, had we not locked down, and the NHS had been overrun, there would have been many many more deaths as a result of Covid 19..

[Richard10002]

4 hours ago, David Schweizer said:

Did I suggest that? To quote you " Please stop behaving like a Pillock"

 

 

I wasn't actually sure what you were suggesting but, having had my comment to Higgs misunderstood more than once, I'd given up  

[Richard10002]

2 hours ago, WotEver said:

One of our two Yorkies suddenly started to shun away from swmbo a couple of years ago and neither of us could understand why.  A month later swmbo was diagnosed with cancer.  A year after that, following chemo and radiotherapy and a long period of convalescence, the same dog is all over her again.

Oh Heck!! Our cute Cocker Spaniel has recently taken to sidling up to me and tapping me on the upper arm with her paw. It's almost human like, and quite amusing. I usually respond with one of the many things she might be asking for, (a treat, a tickle of the tummy, a walk, dinner), and it usually seems to satisfy her... I hope she isn't trying to tell me something else  

[Richard10002]

28 minutes ago, George and Dragon said:

I'd love to know how they come up with these estimates...

 

That's one way of looking at it. My suspicion is that they haven't a clue about how they can get out of it. They can't test enough of us and even if they could they couldn't do the necessary contact tracing.

On the estimates, they seem to be making it up as they go along, (rationalising it with some statistical theory perhaps). Every single person who has isolated due to symptoms may have had it, or may not. Lots of people who have had a bit of flu may have had it, or may not. Given the incredibly low rate of testing, it is hard to see how they could possibly have any idea.

 

On the contact tracing, that is what they give up completely when they move from the "containment" part of the plan to the "delay" part of the plan. So I tend to agree on the "not having a clue".....

 

Except that they might know exactly what they are going to do, but arent prepared to tell the general public yet:

 

The Pandemic Response Plan says that they will reduce the lockdown restrictions and monitor the numbers. If the numbers get worse, they reintroduce lockdown. They keep doing this until the numbers stop getting worse when restrictions are lifted. One could assume that as we zig zag along, the NHS copes, more people get infected and recover, and herd immunity is approached in a flat curve kind of way. In addition, as time goes by, a vaccine is produced - although how it is given to 67 million of us, is anybodys guess ???

 

[mark99]

6 hours ago, Richard10002 said:

Oh Heck!! Our cute Cocker Spaniel has recently taken to sidling up to me and tapping me on the upper arm with her paw. It's almost human like, and quite amusing. I usually respond with one of the many things she might be asking for, (a treat, a tickle of the tummy, a walk, dinner), and it usually seems to satisfy her... I hope she isn't trying to tell me something else  

 

 

Our Cockerpoo does that.

 

I think she's saying please sod off back to work.

[mark99]

18 hours ago, MartynG said:

But that normal influenza figure has been with no special precautions in place.

It seems to me that normal death toll figure  will be significantly exceed  by Covid in 2020  (already exceeded 14500 in about  month ) even with the lockdown,  and would have escalated out of control if no lockdown had been implemented.

 

 

Indeed.

 

SIMPLISTICLY <Illustrative to show the order of magnitude (ie exponential) diff between flu and Covid19>.

 

When this kicked off about 5 weeks ago, to get some perspective, I looked up and saw that 17K p/a death stat for flu and divided it by 183 (6 months - most die in the cold months) to get the daily flu croak rate. Is was 92 per day. I carried this around in my head listening to the daily Covid deaths.

 

Once the Covid numbers started to climb I took more notice (was 880 yesterday). If 880 per day levelled out that's still > 300K deaths equivalent p/annum.

 

But, if left unchecked, the death rate was predicted to double every 4 days. So from 880 deaths per day in 28 days time the death rate could be 112k per day. (Other factors would limit this perhaps).

 

Hence lockdown was the only course of action.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 19, 2020 by mark99

[Jennifer McM]

26 minutes ago, mark99 said:

 

 

Hence lockdown was the only course of action.

 

Think scientists etc still don't have a cast iron handle on this virus. It doesn't appear to be 'acting' like any other virus so far known. Gov say they're following the science which is reassuring, and hopefully they're giving science space to reassess their findings as and when, and support any realign of strategy. Gov will hopefully hold their nerve as MSM pile-ons fuel pressure from political activists (from all political sides).

 

There are large and tiny nuances between each country, ie amount of international hubs, health and wealth, previous vaccine programmes - it's impossible at this stage to create any 'conclusions' as to which path Govs should take.

 

For anyone interested: About the youtube...

 

Quote

That was one of the more extraordinary interviews we have done here at UnHerd. 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

 

 

 

[mark99]

deleted wrong thread

Edited April 19, 2020 by mark99

[Cheshire cat]

According to today's Sunday Times the rules will start to be dismantled from mid May but the over 70's will be isolating until a vaccine is available. Unfortunately, the article is behind a paywall but the way it reads boating should be possible by mid June.

[Mike Todd]

10 hours ago, Richard10002 said:

Yes, but, as above, I was talking to Higgs about his personal potential outcome, (or any one individuals potential outcome), which has two options with either normal influenza, or Covid 19. The bad option of either is exactly the same, as is the good option.

 

There is no doubt that, had we not locked down, and the NHS had been overrun, there would have been many many more deaths as a result of Covid 19..

Whilst the lockdown had reduced the number of deaths thus far, there is a real debate (and this is where I can understand just a little of the 'let us get back to work' brigade) about what the impact will be on the total through to the end of the pandemic. The main way in which 'flattening the curve' has an impact on the total is if it avoid the point at which there are people who are curable but not being treated.

 

there were two very realistic and clear interviews on Andrew Marr a short tie ago - a professor from Oxford and the head of OECD. But infinitely clearer than any number of the politicians who are having  to govern without any real understanding of the issue with which they are trying to deal. The most refreshing thing about the interviews was the willingness to admit the boundaries of knowledge and even to hint at "We don't yet know".

1 minute ago, Cheshire cat said:

According to today's Sunday Times the rules will start to be dismantled from mid May but the over 70's will be isolating until a vaccine is available. Unfortunately, the article is behind a paywall but the way it reads boating should be possible by mid June.

Can you isolate whilst boating? (The age profile of boaters seems to be weighted towards the higher end)

[Mike Todd]

9 hours ago, Richard10002 said:

On the estimates, they seem to be making it up as they go along, (rationalising it with some statistical theory perhaps). Every single person who has isolated due to symptoms may have had it, or may not. Lots of people who have had a bit of flu may have had it, or may not. Given the incredibly low rate of testing, it is hard to see how they could possibly have any idea.

 

On the contact tracing, that is what they give up completely when they move from the "containment" part of the plan to the "delay" part of the plan. So I tend to agree on the "not having a clue".....

 

Except that they might know exactly what they are going to do, but arent prepared to tell the general public yet:

 

The Pandemic Response Plan says that they will reduce the lockdown restrictions and monitor the numbers. If the numbers get worse, they reintroduce lockdown. They keep doing this until the numbers stop getting worse when restrictions are lifted. One could assume that as we zig zag along, the NHS copes, more people get infected and recover, and herd immunity is approached in a flat curve kind of way. In addition, as time goes by, a vaccine is produced - although how it is given to 67 million of us, is anybodys guess ???

 

What I had not realised until watching the Oxford interview just now is that post-infection immunity is very different from vaccine immunity. The former may only be of use to tide us over until the latter. even so, we might end up having to have an annual jab along with our flu ones!

2 hours ago, mark99 said:

 

Indeed.

 

SIMPLISTICLY <Illustrative to show the order of magnitude (ie exponential) diff between flu and Covid19>.

 

When this kicked off about 5 weeks ago, to get some perspective, I looked up and saw that 17K p/a death stat for flu and divided it by 183 (6 months - most die in the cold months) to get the daily flu croak rate. Is was 92 per day. I carried this around in my head listening to the daily Covid deaths.

 

Once the Covid numbers started to climb I took more notice (was 880 yesterday). If 880 per day levelled out that's still > 300K deaths equivalent p/annum.

 

But, if left unchecked, the death rate was predicted to double every 4 days. So from 880 deaths per day in 28 days time the death rate could be 112k per day. (Other factors would limit this perhaps).

 

Hence lockdown was the only course of action.

 

 

 

 

 

 

yes, but you have to factor in the impact of flu vaccination into the data.

[mrsmelly]

Right so after a billion posts on this and the other covid threads each and everyone of us have proved we havnt got a clue what we are talking about, even the ones who actualy think they do know lol. So question for all you lot like myself who are clueless, when do we think estate agents will return to work so I can get rid of this poxy house and get my life back??

[Jennifer McM]

Just now, mrsmelly said:

Right so after a billion posts on this and the other covid threads each and everyone of us have proved we havnt got a clue what we are talking about, even the ones who actualy think they do know lol. So question for all you lot like myself who are clueless, when do we think estate agents will return to work so I can get rid of this poxy house and get my life back??

No one knows ?

 

The only upside, it does appear as each day goes by those that are important, are learning more about this plague.

[Markinaboat]

3 minutes ago, mrsmelly said:

Right so after a billion posts on this and the other covid threads each and everyone of us have proved we havnt got a clue what we are talking about, even the ones who actualy think they do know lol. So question for all you lot like myself who are clueless, when do we think estate agents will return to work so I can get rid of this poxy house and get my life back??

why is your house poxy? 

[peterboat]

4 minutes ago, Markinaboat said:

why is your house poxy? 

Cos he is a boater and wants to be back in his boat in oxfordshire

[mrsmelly]

3 minutes ago, Markinaboat said:

why is your house poxy? 

All house are poxy, boring etc etc. Its actualy mums house which I came up here to sell and the day the bloody lock down came was the day the estate agents was coming who then cancelled lol. Stuck here now but may well go to my boat which is my actual abode in two or three weeks time if estate agents are still not working ?

[Momac]

1 hour ago, mrsmelly said:

.when do we think estate agents will return to work so I can get rid of this poxy house ??

Probably not a good time to sell a house until this time next year, or the year after that.