Coronavirus

[Bedfordspurs]

So the economy department consists entirely of kindergarden kids?

Well considering the history of the company their not the brightest

 

[monkeybarry]

Well considering the history of the company their not the brightest

*they're

(Sorry, couldn't resist)

 

[monkeybarry]

Really hope Boris fights thru.

Raab and Gove....no bueno.

Definitely not Kinder

 

[monkeybarry]

Do you think that there is a strong trust in government among the general public? Recent events suggest not, because people have generally done fudge all of what the government recommended. If people had done what was asked, they situation would have been much less severe.

So I had the initial inclination to be all self righteous about people not following the rules too (and I still will!) - but from talking to a friend in Germany, they have the same issue with people not following rules. If the Germans can't follow the rules, I think we have to understand that this is just too hard for some people.
Which means total lockdown is the only way forward.

 

[monkeybarry]

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...n-universal-basic-income-europe-a9449336.html

Can someone get @scaramanga a ventilator please

 

[Parklaner81]

That’s what happens when you have one of if not the largest free healthcare system in the world and a lower taxation than those that are officially ranked high aka Scandinavia and Germany. Added to that the U.K. public moan about rising tax it’s a joint effort.

Agree with this.

My main criticism of governments (and oppositions) in this country is not their administration of the NHS, but their failure to initiate a fully open debate about it's funding and it's future.

As you hint, it seems that the public want/expect a world leading service for all. That's fine, but it needs to be paid for. And given that the government are still having to borrow money day to day just to keep things running at current levels, it seems a fairly major re-think is in order. In short, that probably means either higher taxes or some other very different way forward.

The government, with co-operation from the opposition parties need to spell this out. And then the public need to make a realistic choice from the available options.

 

[scaramanga]

You've read through both papers I assume Scara and know the academic credentials, especially within this particular topic, of the different authors?

I did read the paper, although I'll admit to not checking up on all the papers referenced. The authors aren't cranks, so I'll take their word for having verified their sources.

All are working in UCL's population health and policy dept, which is where I'd expect these kinds of decisions to be made. I'd prefer to see papers from epidemiologists, but Neil Ferguson is one and look at his previous.

 

[Mikey10]

.....or you can not use anecdotal evidence and read the paper mentioned in the article

I’m sure there are plenty of other scientists saying exactly the opposite to this. I also thought you were one of the people earlier in this thread that suggested the scientists needed to be kept out of the big decisions on this...?

Anyway, anecdotal or common sense? Starting to move millions of additional people around a country when you are trying to slow down the spread of a virus seems to be firmly rooted in the latter to me - and, it would seem, to practically every government around the world.

 

[scaramanga]

I’m sure there are plenty of other scientists saying exactly the opposite to this. I also thought you were one of the people earlier in this thread that suggested the scientists needed to be kept out of the big decisions on this...?

Anyway, anecdotal or common sense? Starting to move millions of additional people around a country when you are trying to slow down the spread of a virus seems to be firmly rooted in the latter to me - and, it would seem, to practically every government around the world.

And what are the long terms effects of not having those kids in a school?

Again, a simple approach will come to a simple answer. That doesn't make it the best answer.

 

[SteveAWOL]

It's certainly not anymore as humans are destroying animal habitats at an alarming rate. It's forcing animals to coexist with humans and that has signaled an uptick in viruses. The PREDICT project in China analysed viruses from thousands of bats and other mammals. They detected about 1,200 viruses that could spread from animals to humans with pandemic potential, and 160 of them were novel coronaviruses much like this one. Trump brickcanned the project because Obama started it and now we have this.

I really have to stop reading this gloomy brick.

I know correlation does not imply causation but...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1245875443309228032

 

[Mikey10]

And what are the long terms effects of not having those kids in a school?

Again, a simple approach will come to a simple answer. That doesn't make it the best answer.

I would imagine one of the fairly important long-term effects is that more of them - and their grandparents, their parents, their teachers, the catering staff who cook for them each day, the estates staff who look after the buildings - will still be alive.

 

[Grays_1890]

Do you think that there is a strong trust in government among the general public? Recent events suggest not, because people have generally done fudge all of what the government recommended. If people had done what was asked, they situation would have been much less severe.

That’s a lot more to do with peoples selfish nature than lack of trust. I doubt the majority of Chavs I see out flouting rules have any political alliance

 

[Parklaner81]

Do you think that there is a strong trust in government among the general public? Recent events suggest not, because people have generally done fudge all of what the government recommended. If people had done what was asked, they situation would have been much less severe.

That’s a lot more to do with peoples selfish nature than lack of trust.

What he said. Lack of trust in government certainly isn't the first thing that comes to mind when assessing these issues.

 

[scaramanga]

I would imagine one of the fairly important long-term effects is that more of them - and their grandparents, their parents, their teachers, the catering staff who cook for them each day, the estates staff who look after the buildings - will still be alive.

And what will be the state of their mental health? Their education? Their finance and ability to contribute to society? Their interpersonal skills?

It's not as simple as save lots of lives now, no matter what the cost. It's far more complex than that.

 

[Hootnow]

I did read the paper, although I'll admit to not checking up on all the papers referenced. The authors aren't cranks, so I'll take their word for having verified their sources.

All are working in UCL's population health and policy dept, which is where I'd expect these kinds of decisions to be made. I'd prefer to see papers from epidemiologists, but Neil Ferguson is one and look at his previous.

I never said they were cranks, they are all very distinguished in their fields, especially Professor Viner. They are however mostly clinical doctors, albeit some with a PH slant. That is pretty much like me, although I have left the PH aspect behind a long time ago. The main author is a paediatrician who specialises in adolescent public health and the leader of the RCPCH. [They are of course more distinguished than I am, not saying I have the same clout as they do].

Professor Ferguson deals with epidemiology and the spread of infectious diseases. This is literally what he does as his bread and butter. It is his specialty. It doesn't mean he's right necessarily, we're in relatively uncharted territory here. But I'd back him to be right more right than I would Prof Viner. And in this situation, that's kind of what we're having to deal with.

What's wrong with Prof Ferguson's previous work?

Some key aspects of the Viner paper (which was a systematic review, ie they're not doing any new work but collating old papers):

Spoiler: Some key points

However, in the COVID-19 pandemic thus far, children appear to form a much lower proportion of cases than expected from their population, although evidence for this is mixed and some data suggest that children might be as likely to be infected as adults but largely remain asymptomatic or have a mild form of the disease.

Except for one modelling study, none of the included studies were designed to specifically examine the effectiveness of school distancing measures. Thus, data provided on the effect of school measures were of relatively low quality.

(The one modelling study was Ferguson's).

We identified a remarkable dearth of policy-relevant data on the implementation of school social distancing during coronavirus outbreaks. This finding is perhaps not surprising for the rapidly emerging COVID-19 pandemic, but previous coronavirus outbreaks such as SARS and MERS provide limited information about the effectiveness of school closures and no data on cost-effectiveness. No data on other less disruptive school social distancing practices during coronavirus outbreaks were identified.

Data from the SARS outbreak in mainland China, Hong Kong, and Singapore suggest that school transmission played no substantial role in the outbreak, and that school closures and other activities such as school temperature monitoring did not contribute to control of infection transmission. It is possible that these findings reflect an effect of school closures in rapidly stopping transmission; however, this is unlikely as schools remained open for prolonged periods during the early part of the outbreak. Modelling studies from the SARS outbreak produced different results. Although Becker and colleagues estimated that school closure resulted in potentially important reductions in transmission, Liao and colleagues estimated that transmission in school classrooms was low.

As evidence from coronavirus outbreak control is scarce, we must turn to evidence for the benefits of school closures from influenza epidemics and pandemics.

Yet, there is considerable heterogeneity in the impact of school closures on transmission depending on characteristics of influenza serotype transmission.

Notably, analyses using UK clinical data from the 1957 Asian influenza pandemic suggest that school closures would reduce the epidemic size by less than 10% when the R was similar to that of COVID-19 (ie, 2·5–3·5)

Nonetheless, in a context of high rates of staff absence through disease, school systems will be under strain and schools remaining open only for the children of health-care and other essential workers might be a better strategy than a haphazard process of schools closing and therefore providing no childcare for any essential workers.

(Isn't that what we currently have? Schools open for key workers)?

Modelling and observational studies are urgently needed to guide policy on the opening of schools once the pandemic is under control.

I'm sure as you read it closely, you noticed that the 2-4% they have quoted in the Lancet paper....is lifted directly from Ferguson's paper, where he has even included a table outlining their effectiveness and colour coding the different measures (closing schools and universities alone is classed by Ferguson and his team as a lower effectiveness measure.

 

[Hootnow]

The relevant page from the Ferguson paper for those who are interested. The 1st column is for school and university closure only (hence the 2-4% in reductions of deaths).

Of course, at no point have he and his team advocated for only closing schools. In fact, in his paper, some recommendation are as follows:

We show that in the UK and US context, suppression will minimally require a combination of social distancing of the entire population, home isolation of cases and household quarantine of their family members.

This may need to be supplemented by school and university closures, though it should be recognised that such closures may have negative impacts on health systems due to increased absenteeism.

However, school closure is predicted to be insufficient to mitigate (never mind suppress) an epidemic in isolation; this contrasts with the situation in seasonal influenza epidemics, where children are the key drivers of transmission due to adults having higher immunity levels

 

[scaramanga]

I never said they were cranks, they are all very distinguished in their fields, especially Professor Viner. They are however mostly clinical doctors, albeit some with a PH slant. That is pretty much like me, although I have left the PH aspect behind a long time ago. The main author is a paediatrician who specialises in adolescent public health and the leader of the RCPCH. [They are of course more distinguished than I am, not saying I have the same clout as they do].

Professor Ferguson deals with epidemiology and the spread of infectious diseases. This is literally what he does as his bread and butter. It is his specialty. It doesn't mean he's right necessarily, we're in relatively uncharted territory here. But I'd back him to be right more right than I would Prof Viner. And in this situation, that's kind of what we're having to deal with.

What's wrong with Prof Ferguson's previous work?

Some key aspects of the Viner paper (which was a systematic review, ie they're not doing any new work but collating old papers):

Spoiler: Some key points

(The one modelling study was Ferguson's).











(Isn't that what we currently have? Schools open for key workers)?

I'm sure as you read it closely, you noticed that the 2-4% they have quoted in the Lancet paper....is lifted directly from Ferguson's paper, where he has even included a table outlining their effectiveness and colour coding the different measures (closing schools and universities alone is classed by Ferguson and his team as a lower effectiveness measure.

Ferguson's data are good, I'm not disputing them, it's his analysis

He was behind a lot of the CJD fuss from memory.

 

[Rorschach]

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...n-universal-basic-income-europe-a9449336.html

Can someone get @scaramanga a ventilator please

Excellent. This is the way forward. Next 20 hour work weeks, and tax the fudge out of the rich.

 

[Gilzeantoscore]

Well, well, well aren't he austerity pigeons coming home to roost for the Tories now. Years of white anting the NHS and now we have a national based health crisis. I will say one thing, the neo liberals calling the shots in the Tory party to dismantle the NHS by stealth, have no long term view with regards to undermining this institution with regard to a health crisis. Issues like a pandemic only become problematic, when they are personally affected. when it hits the grunts they are not that bothered.

 

[Hootnow]

Ferguson's data are good, I'm not disputing them, it's his analysis

He was behind a lot of the CJD fuss from memory.

So you can analyse the data better than a literal world leading expert in his field? An analysis that you have misrepresented in the first place?

As you've been at pains to point out when people criticse Levy for having no experience in managing big companies and understanding the difficult decisions he has to make, I assume you have also never had to deal with anything where your decision making can cause thousands of deaths.

My very hazy memory is that their modelling initially was ridiculously broad in terms of potential numbers of cases but that they refined it (as you do with models) and they downgraded numbers of cases. Happy to be corrected on that. Just as I'm happy to point that a model is just that, a model. It tries to predict how things will turn out but can't say 100%. If you want something that gets it 100% right all of the time, its called a crystal ball. I can sell you some alongside Poch's lemons.