COVID19

[Doobs]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8UvFhIFzaac&feature=youtu.be

This is an interesting take on Covid.

Always good to look at issues from different perspectives.

I’m not saying he’s right on everything but the point about a tinderbox effect due to much lower death rates in the previous winter isn’t something I’d thought about before.

Apologies if this has been discussed previously.

He really does compare 1800s mortality with 2020...

The tinderbox is nonsense, the comparitor should be a normal flu season, and not a really bad flu season.   There weren't much lower deaths last year, there had been significantly higher flu deaths on average than in the previous 5.  The flu deaths were so high that people were speculating that the mortality improvement trend since the war had started reversing.  I am sure all the excess deaths due to "austerity" were documented on the politics thread.  On that thread I have previously pointed out we had 3 bad flu seasons that corresponded to the excess "austerity" deaths so the excess deaths weren't all austerity.   So any tinderbox was actually going to be low on fuel after 3 bad flu seasons in the last 6 or so years (as it is now).

Sweden did have a lockdown, just a voluntary one, and not a compulsory one.   Economoc activity slowed significantly, people didn't travel, people worked from home. 

Got to 8 minutes.  Got stuff to do

[TightEnd]

1m views for something that has been shown to be wrong in the month since it was published!

[TightEnd]

Can it really be true the govt is surprised 10 o'clock closing has led to 10.05pm crowds?

Wasn't stopping the 11.15 drunken crowds one of the main arguments offered for relaxing closing times when that was done?

[TightEnd]

sunday times

Data is clear.

Political & societal decisions on what to do extraordinary difficult. Very little room for a middle way that keeps things open & also prevents transmission, illness & COVID/NonCOVID deaths

Not possible keep society & economy open as now & suppress transmission,prevent hospitalisations & deaths COVID & non-COVID & pressure on NHS.

Prof Farrar

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/no-fudges-we-have-to-get-on-top-of-the-virus-rgqf5gl63

[TightEnd]

an interesting take, and why Cummings was so important

In a society with such a shortage of police personnel as England, state policy relies heavily on public consent to function. If you have weak enforcement tools and blow away public trust in the first months of a crisis, sustainable policy becomes impossible

[Doobs]

Just for balance.  We had my daughter tested at 6pm yesterday. The test result just came back negative which seems pretty efficient to me.   

The original test booking process was glitchy and unclear (we weren't sure whether we had a booking or not), but I thought the staff at the test site were very supportive too.

One person's experience which doesn't mean much.

I read today that it is better to book through the app, but I haven't tested that, but there is a low chance it can be worse

[EvilPie]

Test and trace app seems ridiculously easy to use and saves having to provide details in a different format.

Used it a couple of times at the gym and then again this morning when I went for breakfast.

Whether it helps or not is yet to be seen but I really can't see any reason to not use it if you have it available.

[neeko]

Two of my favourite comments from the past few days

Student accommodation is just a cruise ship on land

And - students don’t exactly live a monastic existence

Chances of them avoiding COVID are about zero.

[Pokerpops]

sunday times

Data is clear.

Political & societal decisions on what to do extraordinary difficult. Very little room for a middle way that keeps things open & also prevents transmission, illness & COVID/NonCOVID deaths

Not possible keep society & economy open as now & suppress transmission,prevent hospitalisations & deaths COVID & non-COVID & pressure on NHS.

Prof Farrar

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/no-fudges-we-have-to-get-on-top-of-the-virus-rgqf5gl63

Can’t read the article but isn’t the bolded bit a good reason for none of us to attempt to second guess decisions made by our elected government. Yeah, I get that we can compare our responses with other countries in the long term, but does anyone think decisions are being made with anything other than the best of intentions?

I accept that my duty is to do the best I can to avoid putting me, my family and the people I may meet at risk. I’m not distracted from that duty by any of the noise about trips to Barnard Castle, or afternoon trips for a spot of nooky. I’ll follow the advice that originated from a scientific knowledge base. I don’t need to be threatened with fines for non-compliance.
Shouldn’t we all just do that?

[Doobs]

Just for balance.  We had my daughter tested at 6pm yesterday. The test result just came back negative which seems pretty efficient to me.   

The original test booking process was glitchy and unclear (we weren't sure whether we had a booking or not), but I thought the staff at the test site were very supportive too.

One person's experience which doesn't mean much.

I read today that it is better to book through the app, but I haven't tested that, but there is a low chance it can be worse

I just read this, and suspect the claims on accuracy might not take into account the difficulty of performing the test on an 8 year old child.  Maybe nurses and doctors are used to it, and have methods to ensure compliance, but I found it really difficult.  My youngest is pretty well behaved. but a 10 second scraping of the tonsils is optimistic.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/27/uk-market-flooded-by-inadequate-covid-tests-experts-suggest

I am sure I read somewhere earlier in the week that only 1% of child tests came back positive.  I don't know if that was accurate but can really see how this might happen.

[Doobs]

Just for balance.  We had my daughter tested at 6pm yesterday. The test result just came back negative which seems pretty efficient to me.   

The original test booking process was glitchy and unclear (we weren't sure whether we had a booking or not), but I thought the staff at the test site were very supportive too.

One person's experience which doesn't mean much.

I read today that it is better to book through the app, but I haven't tested that, but there is a low chance it can be worse

I just read this, and suspect the claims on accuracy might not take into account the difficulty of performing the test on an 8 year old child.  Maybe nurses and doctors are used to it, and have methods to ensure compliance, but I found it really difficult.  My youngest is pretty well behaved. but a 10 second scraping of the tonsils is optimistic.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/27/uk-market-flooded-by-inadequate-covid-tests-experts-suggest

I am sure I read somewhere earlier in the week that only 1% of child tests came back positive.  I don't know if that was accurate but can really see how this might happen.

I should add that I wasn't having the worst trouble there.  My daughter was just been awkward about having something held in her throat.  There was a mother opposite whose 3-4 year old was rolling round on the floor having a full on tantrum. 

[RickBFA]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8UvFhIFzaac&feature=youtu.be

This is an interesting take on Covid.

Always good to look at issues from different perspectives.

I’m not saying he’s right on everything but the point about a tinderbox effect due to much lower death rates in the previous winter isn’t something I’d thought about before.

Apologies if this has been discussed previously.

He really does compare 1800s mortality with 2020...

The tinderbox is nonsense, the comparitor should be a normal flu season, and not a really bad flu season.   There weren't much lower deaths last year, there had been significantly higher flu deaths on average than in the previous 5.  The flu deaths were so high that people were speculating that the mortality improvement trend since the war had started reversing.  I am sure all the excess deaths due to "austerity" were documented on the politics thread.  On that thread I have previously pointed out we had 3 bad flu seasons that corresponded to the excess "austerity" deaths so the excess deaths weren't all austerity.   So any tinderbox was actually going to be low on fuel after 3 bad flu seasons in the last 6 or so years (as it is now).

Sweden did have a lockdown, just a voluntary one, and not a compulsory one.   Economoc activity slowed significantly, people didn't travel, people worked from home. 

Got to 8 minutes.  Got stuff to do

I did say it was an alternative view.

Perhaps the most important overall point is how we decide what the risks are and how we manage them.

I was told this weekend (from a Doctor but might be nonsense) that in Sheffield hospitals (which must cover a population base of over 1 million people) since this started, only 8 people under  age 75 with the no underlying health conditions have died.

We live in a world where risks getting distorted. What about the cancer, stroke, heart attack patients ? Is prioritising Covid over treating cancer patients really right or reasonable ?

BTW, my wife, daughter and I all tested positive for Covid last week. Wife and daughter fine. I’ve struggled compared to them but I’ll take not getting any worse and feeling like shit for next 7 days :-)

[nirvana]

Get well soon Rick

[Doobs]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8UvFhIFzaac&feature=youtu.be

This is an interesting take on Covid.

Always good to look at issues from different perspectives.

I’m not saying he’s right on everything but the point about a tinderbox effect due to much lower death rates in the previous winter isn’t something I’d thought about before.

Apologies if this has been discussed previously.

He really does compare 1800s mortality with 2020...

The tinderbox is nonsense, the comparitor should be a normal flu season, and not a really bad flu season.   There weren't much lower deaths last year, there had been significantly higher flu deaths on average than in the previous 5.  The flu deaths were so high that people were speculating that the mortality improvement trend since the war had started reversing.  I am sure all the excess deaths due to "austerity" were documented on the politics thread.  On that thread I have previously pointed out we had 3 bad flu seasons that corresponded to the excess "austerity" deaths so the excess deaths weren't all austerity.   So any tinderbox was actually going to be low on fuel after 3 bad flu seasons in the last 6 or so years (as it is now).

Sweden did have a lockdown, just a voluntary one, and not a compulsory one.   Economoc activity slowed significantly, people didn't travel, people worked from home. 

Got to 8 minutes.  Got stuff to do

I did say it was an alternative view.

Perhaps the most important overall point is how we decide what the risks are and how we manage them.

I was told this weekend (from a Doctor but might be nonsense) that in Sheffield hospitals (which must cover a population base of over 1 million people) since this started, only 8 people under  age 75 with the no underlying health conditions have died.

We live in a world where risks getting distorted. What about the cancer, stroke, heart attack patients ? Is prioritising Covid over treating cancer patients really right or reasonable ?

BTW, my wife, daughter and I all tested positive for Covid last week. Wife and daughter fine. I’ve struggled compared to them but I’ll take not getting any worse and feeling like shit for next 7 days :-)

Good luck with your battle.  

It is just a series of big distortions.  I watched another couple of minutes and he went on to the 300 million people visited a pub in the UK, which relied on assumptions of 1,000 people a pub and a population of over 300 million.  Seems the requirements to be a professor of evidence based medicine at one of the top 2 Universities aren't as stringent as you'd think.   FWIW the cases started ticking up as soon as the pubs reopened.   I think that was just about the worst decision, but there is a big difference between drinking with a couple of mates in a beer garden than visiting a 1,000 people barn of a pub to watch football.   

We have done the pre-existings before, but they include overweight, high blood pressure etc.  I don't have figures but wouldn't be surprised if more than half over 50s have a pre-existing condition.   When you get to 70, it is just going to be nearly all?  Most deaths are always going to have pre-existing conditions due to the age distribution of deaths. There was something that I posted a few months ago which estimated that people were losing 5 or so years on average, because even hypertensive diabetics can live for several years in normal times.

Nobody is saying don't go to doctors, or into hospitals if you think you have cancer.  Some extra people will die of cancer because of this, but it is people making bad choices and not usually hospitals. I read the other day that there had been 3,000 or so less potential heart attack visits during the 2 months Covid was at its peak. I'd be very surprised if they were the 3,000 most severe, and I doubt many were turned away.    If you think you are having a heart attack or stroke etc just go to hospital.   There is a very small risk you could get Covid, but there is a much larger risk you are going to die of your heart attack/stroke.   Maybe this should be more emphasised?  I'd say communications from Government have been pretty terrible throughout.  

Anyway get well soon, make sure you see someone medical if you deteriorate.

[Doobs]

I don't think we shouldn't listen to dissenting voices; David Spiegelhalter is very good and seems to be balanced.  I'd say much  of the Actuaries Covid 19 response group is balanced and without emotion.  I'd say more of what I read appears suitably balanced which covers me for everytime I find myself looking at the. nonsense Toby Young and Allison Pearson write.