COVID19

[kukushkin88]

Also, to reiterate - I'm not saying that the UK's response is definitely right; more that the conclusion that it is definitely wrong is a little rash.

Thanks to Jon and Doobs for the excellent posts on this thread, I definitely feel that they have helped me get to grips with this faster than I would have done otherwise.

It's always an odd situation on a forum like this because we are to large extent taking each other's knowledge/ignorance on trust. I probably get marked down on that front for the aggressive way I have criticised Woodsey/Mantis/Adz in the past, fair enough if people want to make that assessment. I also have that annoying condescending posting style that I can't seem to shake but I'm still working on it. I have contributed Local Resilience Forums (basically one level below COBRA) for London for major incidents and have represented my employer at Silver Command and been a major contributor to Gold Command for large scale pollution incidents.

The UK had an extraordinary opportunity to act sooner and didn't take it. It still can go harder sooner. We are still projecting at least as badly as Italy atm (early days yet). Of course it's easy to be wise after event but from the moment anyone reads and fully understands the Tomas Pueyo article it was clear we were in a lot of trouble. I fully accept Doobs point about the rate of growth overwhelming respirator rapidly on an exponential increase, twice to four times as many which seems to be the European norm will still be reached very quickly. Having more though will allow more flexibility for the people making incredibly difficult decisions. If we could have delayed the time taken to reach our ICU capacity by say 5-7 days and spent that time ensuring only that all front line staff had appropriate PPE and that there was sufficient testing capacity for them then we would be in a much more robust position than we are now. As always Taleb has relevant wisdom, we can predict the near future far better than the distant future and we should have chosen to take maximum control early, the reasons why we didn't are largely political. It didn't take long for the all the scientists agree nonsense to unravel.

It is a bit like linking the Express or Mail but this interview is interesting:

[urlhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOHiaPwtGl4&feature=youtu.be][/url]


 

[Jon MW]

... but from the moment anyone reads and fully understands the Tomas Pueyo article it was clear we were in a lot of trouble....

This isn't entirely critical
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ryanhatesthis/im-not-an-epidemiologist-but-the-rise-of-the-corona
but it does highlight about still being careful about the information you read and just how 'correct' the information in it is.

Pueyo's most recent article for example contains incorrect statements (like the Imperial analysis didn't even look at the effect of banning large gatherings); and some of the underlying understanding does lead to a differing outcome to what his general conclusion is.

For example many people are talking about the mitigation and suppression strategies in terms of what you do and their effect; but the fundamental difference is whether you're trying to keep the  R naught value below 1 or just trying to keep it as low as possible. Pueyo talks about the R naught value (he just calls it R but same difference) and those strategies in completely difference sections - and it does have an effect on your action to realise that it's basically the definition of those strategies. He basically comes to the conclusion that a complete lockdown would result in it all being controlled in a few weeks - but that's using the assumption that a whole load of measures will have a lot bigger effect then it seems like they would.

There's some good analysis included in what he writes but if actual experts can come to different conclusions based on the same information, then how much more different could the opinions of non-experts become?

[kukushkin88]

... but from the moment anyone reads and fully understands the Tomas Pueyo article it was clear we were in a lot of trouble....

This isn't entirely critical
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ryanhatesthis/im-not-an-epidemiologist-but-the-rise-of-the-corona
but it does highlight about still being careful about the information you read and just how 'correct' the information in it is.

Pueyo's most recent article for example contains incorrect statements (like the Imperial analysis didn't even look at the effect of banning large gatherings); and some of the underlying understanding does lead to a differing outcome to what his general conclusion is.

For example many people are talking about the mitigation and suppression strategies in terms of what you do and their effect; but the fundamental difference is whether you're trying to keep the  R naught value below 1 or just trying to keep it as low as possible. Pueyo talks about the R naught value (he just calls it R but same difference) and those strategies in completely difference sections - and it does have an effect on your action to realise that it's basically the definition of those strategies. He basically comes to the conclusion that a complete lockdown would result in it all being controlled in a few weeks - but that's using the assumption that a whole load of measures will have a lot bigger effect then it seems like they would.

There's some good analysis included in what he writes but if actual experts can come to different conclusions based on the same information, then how much more different could the opinions of non-experts become?

The divide between the scientific experts on the government payroll and a vast number other scientific experts (including most of the rest of the world) has been significant for a while:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-51892402

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/13/world/europe/coronavirus-britain-boris-johnson.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/13/world/europe/coronavirus-britain-boris-johnson.html

https://twitter.com/mymindthought4/status/1241428320354361345/photo/1

For the NYT articles best to focus only on the direct quotes from people with scientific expertise.

[kukushkin88]

and now for something a bit different..does anyone have insight on whether this supposedly Sunday Times article is legit?

https://twitter.com/johnharris1969/status/1241632642581303296/photo/1

[kukushkin88]

and now for something a bit different..does anyone have insight on whether this supposedly Sunday Times article is legit?

https://twitter.com/johnharris1969/status/1241632642581303296/photo/1

It does seem to be legit but hard to corroborate atm. It’ll be interesting to see how it develops.

[kukushkin88]

https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1241465632589254656?s=21

With no U.K. lockdown in sight.

[EvilPie]

So many people completely ignoring guidelines and going to parks etc. in large close groups. Apparently even the beaches are busy.

Basically they see what the rules are and then figure out a way around them. Numerous reports of street parties as well because aren't allowed to the pub on such a lovely day.

I can see a complete lock down coming very soon as the defiant public really leave no choice. Obviously means the army will be out at some point to help which people will moan about but what option have they given?

Will be interesting to see if they still allow people to go to work or if it's a complete closure.

We've been looking at projects that we can carry out whilst maintaining the social distancing guidelines and there's plenty in our line of work.

The longer they can SAFELY keep people working the better. The fewer people that have to be paid the 80% out of government coffers the longer it will last and the easier it will be for us all to pay back one day......

[StuartHopkin]

and now for something a bit different..does anyone have insight on whether this supposedly Sunday Times article is legit?

https://twitter.com/johnharris1969/status/1241632642581303296/photo/1

It does seem to be legit but hard to corroborate atm. It’ll be interesting to see how it develops.

It doesnt seem legit, but even if it was said who cares.
Pretty sure there will have been many theories, suggestions and morally questionable ideas as there should be in this situation to work out what they believe is best.
People love to demonize that guy though!

[Woodsey]

and now for something a bit different..does anyone have insight on whether this supposedly Sunday Times article is legit?

https://twitter.com/johnharris1969/status/1241632642581303296/photo/1

It does seem to be legit but hard to corroborate atm. It’ll be interesting to see how it develops.

It’s almost like you are hoping it to be true so you can find another reason to pile in on the Tories...

[kukushkin88]

and now for something a bit different..does anyone have insight on whether this supposedly Sunday Times article is legit?

https://twitter.com/johnharris1969/status/1241632642581303296/photo/1

It does seem to be legit but hard to corroborate atm. It’ll be interesting to see how it develops.

It doesnt seem legit, but even if it was said who cares.
Pretty sure there will have been many theories, suggestions and morally questionable ideas as there should be in this situation to work out what they believe is best.
People love to demonize that guy though!

There doesn’t seem to be any real doubt that it’s legit, it’s written by a massive Tory fanboy, who is backtracking fast.

https://twitter.com/paddybriggs/status/1241651746486857729?s=21

[Doobs]

So many people completely ignoring guidelines and going to parks etc. in large close groups. Apparently even the beaches are busy.

Basically they see what the rules are and then figure out a way around them. Numerous reports of street parties as well because aren't allowed to the pub on such a lovely day.

I can see a complete lock down coming very soon as the defiant public really leave no choice. Obviously means the army will be out at some point to help which people will moan about but what option have they given?

Will be interesting to see if they still allow people to go to work or if it's a complete closure.

We've been looking at projects that we can carry out whilst maintaining the social distancing guidelines and there's plenty in our line of work.

The longer they can SAFELY keep people working the better. The fewer people that have to be paid the 80% out of government coffers the longer it will last and the easier it will be for us all to pay back one day......

I went for a run in the park late morning, and it was very quiet for a Sunday morning on a nice day.   There were a handful of idiots walking 3 abreast on a path that can fit 3 abreast, but the vast majority were keeping away from each other.

I went to Tesco this afternoon and it was also very quiet for a Sunday afternoon.  Guess all the hoarders were queueing outside at 9.30.

I haven't seen any street parties or seen reports of any.

Did see a couple of weapons racing motorbikes and doing wheelies yesterday.  I thought you want to go to an A&E at this time?

I don't know how common this is, but my niece is a hospital dentist and  is retraing to work in A&E.   I expect there is quite a bit of commonality as  they do have to do stitches etc.

[Karabiner]

I went up to Wollaton Park GC and played nine holes with a mate but it was pretty quiet on the course with only 15/20 cars in the car park.

I expected it to be far busier as one of the few places where you can safely get excercise and play your favourite spot/hobby.

The bar and catering are obviously closed but as long as none of the greens staff get sick hopefully things will be okay for a while.

[Ironside]

28 year old football player and some of these younger people thinking its only effects the elderly


https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/51995137

[hhyftrftdr]

Surprised Fellaini has caught it, when he has been greeting people with his elbows for years.

[Chompy]

It's kind of endearing the amount of faith Boris has in the great British public doing the right thing.

It's completely misplaced of course.

Piers Morgan for PM!