SARS CoV-2 coronavirus / Covid-19 (No tin foil hat silliness please)

[mu4c_20le]

On the other hand, Taiwan has dealt with it really well, the government banned travel from China, made sure everyone had enough face masks and contained the spread.

And phone tracking. All foreigners entering the country are basically subjected to house arrest for 14 days. It's not a request.

 

[Mr Pigeon]

I guess I should go for a walk now before they stop even that. If anyone is wondering, it is a very quiet area where I live and people are very conscious to stay apart. Also, I haven't been out since yesterday.

Not good enough. Wrap yourself in plastic bags.

 

[Sassy Colin]

They sound affluent and like minded


With all seriousness I think further restrictions will happen, you'll probably have to wear facemask and only go for a walk 100 or 200m from your house

Affluent yes, like minded, no.

 

[sammsky1]

Countries might recognise it's not a good idea to outsource their entire supply chain for a start.

As you've lived there, you'll know China has been building itself into a dominant global power since 30+ years ago, to the point where it now has the world by the balls: geo-politically, economically, militarily.
If USA or EU wants to aggressively respond, it will take time and require accepting a lower living standard. And they will most likely lose. Again, am sure you know this.
Good luck untangling that in a hurry.

 

[Shakesy]

On the other hand, Taiwan has dealt with it really well, the government banned travel from China, made sure everyone had enough face masks and contained the spread.

Even the schools are still open.

The schools closed for about a month. And kids now go to school wearing face masks. They did do well though.

 

[redshaw]

There were other people tweeting about arriving from Italy at the time of their lockdown (March) at a London airport and there was absolutely nothing. This is after the whole of Feb when all the cases trickling in I read about had come back from Italy. Think I read the first 15 cases in Ireland had Italian connection.

Not sure how many more flights we have than Asian countries like Taiwan and SK but Taiwan test at the airport. I would've expected this at a minimum as it's people bringing it to the UK. We only found out about these infected when they got worse and were free to do whatever beforehand.

Then you've got the EU and Merkel saying no use closing the borders and then when it's too late all the borders are closed

 

[Revan]

Jack Dorsey (CEO of Twitter) donating 1 billion dollars for Covid-19 charities. That is around 30% of his total net worth.

 

[sammsky1]

This was a fire drill, and most of the western world either tripped over themselves or argued amongst each other whether to escape or lock themselves inside for safety. I expect that, knock on wood, should there be a next time, the world would do much better.

very good analogy.

Reading the recent Reuters investigative report, seems like UK was following a flu epidemic protocol for a while, denying covid19 even existed!

 

[oates]

very good analogy.

Reading the recent Reuters investigative report, seems like UK was following a flu epidemic protocol for a while, denying covid19 even existed!

Link please!

 

[sammsky1]

Link please!

@esmufc07 Elvis shared last night

 

[FireballXL5]

Apologies if this has been posted already. Grim reading...

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/coro...toll-says-study/ar-BB12jp4M?OCID=ansmsnnews11

 

[oates]

@esmufc07 Elvis shared last night

And from this -

That limited approach mirrored the UK’s longstanding pandemic flu strategy. The Department of Health declined a request from Reuters for a copy of its updated pandemic plan, without providing a reason. But a copy of the 2011 “UK Influenza Pandemic Preparedness Strategy 2011,” which a spokesman said was still relevant, stated the “working presumption will be that Government will not impose any such restrictions. The emphasis will instead be on encouraging all those who have symptoms to follow the advice to stay at home and avoid spreading their illness.”

According to one senior Conservative Party politician, who was officially briefed as the crisis unfolded, the close involvement in the response to the coronavirus of the same scientific advisers and civil servants who drew up the flu plan may have created a “cognitive bias.”

“We had in our minds that COVID-19 was a nasty flu and needed to be treated as such,” he said. “The implication was it was a disease that could not be stopped and that it was ultimately not that deadly.”

While the UK was prepared to fight the flu, Asian states like China, Hong Kong, Singapore and South Korea had built their pandemic plans with lessons learned from fighting the more lethal SARS outbreak that began in 2002, he said. SARS had a fatality rate of up to 14%. As a result, these countries, he said, were more ready to resort to widespread testing, lockdowns and other draconian measures to keep their citizens from spreading the virus.

Scientists involved in the UK response disagree that following the government’s flu plan clouded their thinking or influenced the outbreak’s course. The plan had a “reasonable worst case” scenario as devastating as the worst predictions for COVID-19, they note.

This was at the point following all advice up to 21 January so you decide to post -

Reading the recent Reuters investigative report, seems like UK was following a flu epidemic protocol for a while, denying covid19 even existed!

I think it should be fair to say that not many Governments have been in full possession of the facts or necessarily received the same advice during this long period up until the UK Government has reached this point.

 

[finneh]

I was talking about the compensatory scheme you referred to in your next sentence, which you said would have led to the majority of businesses temporarily shutting down of their own volition.

We can agree that if they provided more compensation direct to businesses at that time, it would have encouraged more businesses to close. But rather than debate how many more would have closed within this hypothetical scenario, let's just stick with the imperfect evidence we have.

Does the evidence support your view?

Does the evidence support that if an imaginary scheme that's never been discussed, announced, quantified or analysed were implemented, what would be the uptake?

I love to pontificate but that's a step too far even for me. Let's just say if the scheme were paying businesses twice their turnover for the same period last year (or for Jan-Feb for new businesses) provided they continue to pay all staff, suppliers and fixed costs, the uptake would be almost 100%. If the scheme were paying £10 and a packet of fags then the proportion would be similar to the levels of closure for current businesses that are allowed to stay open (E.g. Construction which for our 60 sites only 9 are open) . However the reduction in customers would close a large proportion without any government intervention at all. The businesses that remained open would change their practices to attract custom (the vast, vast majority of people aren't going to shop where 40 people are packed together 5 inches apart), just as construction sites that have remained open are doing.

So overall I'd say yes the small anecdotal evidence supports my view. Construction sites that are encouraged to stay open by government from the evidence I've got have shown 85% closures with zero government support and the 15% of sites that remain open have implemented measures similar to pharmacies etc (far better than public transport I might add). With any proper government support (even something as simple as saying late completion penalty clauses can't be activated by clients) I've no doubt that it would be 95+%. With a good scheme it would be as close to 100% as it currently is.

 

[Wibble]

FFS. This is dengue fever like.

Although low antobody levels isn't why Dengue reinfections can be more severe.

 

[Revan]

Although low antobody levels isn't why Dengue reinfections can be more severe.

Yep, you're right. It is one of the reason (not being able to fight the virus), but not the main one (the antibodies being fooled by the virus and allowing it to get in the system).

 

[Brwned]

Does the evidence support that if an imaginary scheme that's never been discussed, announced, quantified or analysed were implemented, what would be the uptake?

I love to pontificate but that's a step too far even for me. Let's just say if the scheme were paying businesses twice their turnover for the same period last year (or for Jan-Feb for new businesses) provided they continue to pay all staff, suppliers and fixed costs, the uptake would be almost 100%. If the scheme were paying £10 and a packet of fags then the proportion would be similar to the levels of closure for current businesses that are allowed to stay open (E.g. Construction which for our 60 sites only 9 are open) . However the reduction in customers would close a large proportion without any government intervention at all. The businesses that remained open would change their practices to attract custom (the vast, vast majority of people aren't going to shop where 40 people are packed together 5 inches apart), just as construction sites that have remained open are doing.

So overall I'd say yes the small anecdotal evidence supports my view. Construction sites that are encouraged to stay open by government from the evidence I've got have shown 85% closures with zero government support and the 15% of sites that remain open have implemented measures similar to pharmacies etc (far better than public transport I might add). With any proper government support (even something as simple as saying late completion penalty clauses can't be activated by clients) I've no doubt that it would be 95+%. With a good scheme it would be as close to 100% as it currently is.

There's been some misunderstanding here. I'm asking does this statement fit reality:

The common sense of the populace would have lead to huge reductions in their businesses and policies such as the 80% furlough payments would have lead to them temporarily shutting down of their own volition.

Did the common sense of the populace lead to huge reductions in business which, supported by policies such as 80% furlough payments, lead to the majority of businesses temporarily shutting down of their own volition? It's not a hypothetical.

 

[2cents]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[2cents]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[JMack1234]

Perfect beer garden weather today

 

[Revan]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

@Fener1907 might be on something here. This is like a month before the whistleblower in China, and if the US knew about it on November, then China would have known it even earlier and the virus would have been spreading since October or so.

 

[Revan]

Why the UK and France are doing so few testings? Are they stupid or only negligent?

For comparison, Canada with less than half of their population has done quite more testings, while Norway has done half as many testings (but it has 5 million, instead of 65 million people).

It is totally inexcusable and a big failure of France/UK governments.

 

[Sky1981]

@Fener1907 might be on something here. This is like a month before the whistleblower in China, and if the US knew about it on November, then China would have known it even earlier and the virus would have been spreading since October or so.

The fact (which is very easily proven) is that the total incubation period are 3-4 weeks max. You'd either showing symptoms, fallen sick, feels nothing at all, or simply died.

Let's put aside who's who for the moment. When does UK/US first death? If it's January then yes, it's on China. If it's beyond January then UK/US cant blame china.

Besides, think about it for a second. How the feck does the US can know about the virus as early as November? They'd either have something to do about it or they have some sort of super spy that sees everything (and yet they claim to be blindsided totally by China).

Virus like this isn't visible. It's easy for us to look back in a hindsight when the bodies start piling up, but back then it was a case of 10 people suddenly fall sick. But somehow the US has a full intel long before 1st death?

The report was the result of analysis of wire and computer intercepts, coupled with satellite images. It raised alarms because an out-of-control disease would pose a serious threat to U.S. forces in Asia -- forces that depend on the NCMI’s work. And it paints a picture of an American government that could have ramped up mitigation and containment efforts far earlier to prepare for a crisis poised to come home.

The above is from the ABC links. So they're saying they can see from satellite that there's a virus outbreak, yet there's tourist people all over Wuhan didn't see anything. How does that makes sense? if we're talking about nuclear facilities then satellite images make sense, but satellite images long even before first casualty of a virus??? seriously???

To come up with a conclusion that there's a virus outbreak from satellite images as early as November would mean they see total chaos, people start dying on the street, ambulance everywhere, things that local TV could easily pick up as well. They should just release the footage if there is.

 

[Kentonio]

The fact (which is very easily proven) is that the total incubation period are 3-4 weeks max. You'd either showing symptoms, fallen sick, feels nothing at all, or simply died.

Let's put aside who's who for the moment. When does UK/US first death? If it's January then yes, it's on China. If it's beyond January then UK/US cant blame china.

Besides, think about it for a second. How the feck does the US can know about the virus as early as November? They'd either have something to do about it or they have some sort of super spy that sees everything (and yet they claim to be blindsided totally by China).

Virus like this isn't visible. It's easy for us to look back in a hindsight when the bodies start piling up, but back then it was a case of 10 people suddenly fall sick. But somehow the US has a full intel long before 1st death?

US intelligence could well have known IF China knew that early, and they were intercepting information direct from them.

 

[Revan]

Fair enough, it will be interesting to see how Iceland develops.

On the highlighted quote, I don't think that's necessarily quite true anymore - but it might just depend on each German state. Just based on an anecdote - a friend of mine was randomly tested just the weekend gone after one of her colleagues was a confirmed case. Though she's staying in a fairly small town (Naumburg).

UAE is another good one, whom have been doing near as much testings per capita as Iceland, and much more in total. In fact, they have tested more people than the UK and France combined.

So far, they have 12 deaths from 2659 cases, with a ratio of 0.45% (in total around 600k testings, with around 60k testings per 1 million people).

On the other side, Luxembourg has a much worse ratio (they have the third-highest testing per capita) at around 1.5%.

For me, Singapore is the most interesting one. They have done a decent number of tests, a bit like Germany, Italy or Israel. However, unlike those countries, their death rate is much lower, at only 0.37%. And they have been hit earlier, so you would expect that they don't have too many critical cases which will increase the ratio.

I know feck all about these things, but it would be interesting to see some studies that try to do a comparison between different strains versions of the virus (of course, adjusted to the population and number of testing). Could it be that the Asian strains are less lethal than the European ones?

 

[sammsky1]

Whistleblowers Silenced By China Could Have Stopped Global Coronavirus Spread!

Mid-November in Wuhan, China, and cases of a strange new flu start surfacing. In a sprawling city of 11 million people, the coronavirus, our invisible brutal enemy was born - festering at least a month and a half before the world was told.In January President Xi Jinping made a decision that would ultimately condemn the world: allowing 5 million people to leave the epicentre of the virus without being screened.
Posted By Joe

https://m.worldstarhiphop.com/apple/video.php?v=wshh6ARp129Qt2cKgXb8

 

[Sky1981]

US intelligence could well have known IF China knew that early, and they were intercepting information direct from them.

As if, they'd go ballistic if they have that in cold hard proof.

Let's pretend they do intercept a cold hard evidence straight from president Xi himself, what did they do about it? Even when it's alreayd proven in january that it's the real deal? Nothing.

Things just don't add up. You can't claim you heard about it in November, accuse cover up, and fall to the same virus all over again. If this is indeed true US would have locked down ports as early as December, they'd have put more pressure on China based on their findings. This is serious issue if true (which I doubt it is), you can't say you know China is behind all this since November and kept quiet about it. You're at best an accompli

 

[Revan]

The above is from the ABC links. So they're saying they can see from satellite that there's a virus outbreak, yet there's tourist people all over Wuhan didn't see anything. How does that makes sense? if we're talking about nuclear facilities then satellite images make sense, but satellite images long even before first casualty of a virus??? seriously???

To come up with a conclusion that there's a virus outbreak from satellite images as early as November would mean they see total chaos, people start dying on the street, ambulance everywhere, things that local TV could easily pick up as well. They should just release the footage if there is.

A large number of infections, followed by an increase in crematoriums could apply that a disease is spreading.

Oh, and they spy on each other. No doubt there are high officials on China who are spying for the US (and the other way around). Easier to say that, then hey we spied on you.

If the US knew it on November, then China likely knew it way before that. And they decided to tell the world in 31st of December when the situation had gone out of control. For all we know, when they locked Wuhan there could have been 4000, 40000 or 400000 people infected instead of 400. I mean, would anyone be surprised if there was a way larger number of infected/dead people than China admitted?

 

[Sky1981]

A large number of infections, followed by an increase in crematoriums could apply that a disease is spreading.

Oh, and they spy on each other. No doubt there are high officials on China who are spying for the US (and the other way around). Easier to say that, then hey we spied on you.

If the US knew it on November, then China likely knew it way before that. And they decided to tell the world in 31st of December when the situation had gone out of control. For all we know, when they locked Wuhan there could have been 4000, 40000 or 400000 people infected instead of 400. I mean, would anyone be surprised if there was a way larger number of infected/dead people than China admitted?

yes, but if you can see that from the satelite and come up with such a grim conclusion you can see that with your own eye. Things like that can't be hidden.

Wuhan isn't exactly Area 51. Various people there. If the US seen it on the satellite, they'll just ask their ground reporter to film it with smartphone. Not exactly rocket science. There are reporters in Wuhan from all over the world. They can't see shit but a US satellite can?

How in the world only US satellite can see shits happening at Wuhan, yet real people living there can't see nothing alarming in November?

I don't think the world would care about who's spying who if indeed one party has a cold hard evidence about something this catastrophically big. It's more like the US is trying what they do best, lying.

 

[Revan]

yes, but if you can see that from the satelite and come up with such a grim conclusion you can see that with your own eye. Things like that can't be hidden.

Wuhan isn't exactly Area 51. Various people there.

Having suspicions that something bad is happening, and having confirmation that something bad is happening are very different things.

Oh, and I never put in doubt that the US response to the crisis was totally inadequate.

 

[The United]

UAE is another good one, whom have been doing near as much testings per capita as Iceland, and much more in total. In fact, they have tested more people than the UK and France combined.

So far, they have 12 deaths from 2659 cases, with a ratio of 0.45% (in total around 600k testings, with around 60k testings per 1 million people).

On the other side, Luxembourg has a much worse ratio (they have the third-highest testing per capita) at around 1.5%.

For me, Singapore is the most interesting one. They have done a decent number of tests, a bit like Germany, Italy or Israel. However, unlike those countries, their death rate is much lower, at only 0.37%. And they have been hit earlier, so you would expect that they don't have too many critical cases which will increase the ratio.

I know feck all about these things, but it would be interesting to see some studies that try to do a comparison between different strains versions of the virus (of course, adjusted to the population and number of testing). Could it be that the Asian strains are less lethal than the European ones?

Not sure if I would trust Singapore's number regarding with the deaths.

 

[Revan]

Not sure if I would trust Singapore's number regarding with the deaths.

Why? I know that they are not a shining democracy, but I thought that the government has a good trust on people and the other way around.

 

[finneh]

There's been some misunderstanding here. I'm asking does this statement fit reality:


Did the common sense of the populace lead to huge reductions in business which, supported by policies such as 80% furlough payments, lead to the majority of businesses temporarily shutting down of their own volition? It's not a hypothetical.

The 80% furlough scheme did not help business, it helped their staff; if there was a similar scheme for business it would of course have helped. The shutting down of businesses occured merely days after everyone was told social distancing would stem the tide. Again this was maybe a fortnight after Boris was shaking hands will everyone he met.

Therefore there's no data in terms of schemes that helped businesses as there currently are none, there's very little data in terms of how businesses would react if they hadn't been forced to close down prior to knowing the seriousness of the UK infection as days before the shutdown we were told to merely social distance and the second government properly articulated the seriousness was the day they closed businesses.

What we do know is how businesses that haven't been forced to close have reacted and my view is private industry have reacted phenomenally. Supermarkets have enforced social distancing, they've given time slots to NHS workers, they're prioritised deliveries for the vunerable and housebound. Pharmacies have done likewise as have others. The minority of construction sites that have stayed open have enforced similar measures (the majority that couldn't enforce them closed of their own volition and are only opening once they can ensure site safety). These businesses have received no compensation for their increased operational costs but have still been great on the whole. I see no reason why the businesses that were forced to close wouldn't have reacted in a similar fashion to those who have been given the opportunity to stay open; especially if they had the support to finance these operational costs.

The industries that have reacted poorly are arguably the public sector ones that are open and have been supported by government. The NHS have been awful in distributing PPE, public transport have crammed people onto busses and tubes; reducing services rather than expanding them.

So again I'd say the evidence we have shows private industry who've been allowed to operate have performed phenomenally well and I therefore see no reason why businesses that were forced to close wouldn't have done likewise.

I imagine if restaurants remained open we'd have seen most closing but some delivering meals to the vunerable at reduced or no cost; whilst aggressively enforcing the same measures as supermarkets and pharmacies. I imagine if clothing companies had allowed to remain open most would have closed but some would have enforced social distancing and put a portion of their resources to manufacturing PPE to be distributed at a subsidised cost.

Hell I imagine if testing were privately manufactured (ala US and Germany) and available many businesses would be purchasing thousands of tests and being a key part of the countrywide testing effort, providing both employee and customer peace of mind.

You say look at the evidence... Which businesses who could have exploited their ability to stay open have done so without regard for public health?

 

[The United]

Why? I know that they are not a shining democracy, but I thought that the government has a good trust on people and the other way around.

Can't really say why but lots of my friends live there for decades and what they usually say is they are the last to know if some shit happens there.

I have lived there for a few months and can't really say the government trust their people at all.

Just a feeling that it is hard to believe anything that is coming out of Asian countries. And, I am an Asian and lived under extreme dictatorship for 18 years.

So, maybe I am a bit paranoid.

 

[stepic]

Why the UK and France are doing so few testings? Are they stupid or only negligent?

For comparison, Canada with less than half of their population has done quite more testings, while Norway has done half as many testings (but it has 5 million, instead of 65 million people).

It is totally inexcusable and a big failure of France/UK governments.

Lack of key ingredients needed to produce the test kits due to surging world demand.

 

[Sky1981]

Can't really say why but lots of my friends live there for decades and what they usually say is they are the last to know if some shit happens there.

I have lived there for a few months and can't really say the government trust their people at all.

Just a feeling that it is hard to believe anything that is coming out of Asian countries. And, I am an Asian and lived under extreme dictatorship for 18 years.

So, maybe I am a bit paranoid.

If you cant believe a singaporean government the you are paranoid. They're the most clean government in the world.

 

[stepic]

Whistleblowers Silenced By China Could Have Stopped Global Coronavirus Spread!
Uploaded April 04, 2020

Mid-November in Wuhan, China, and cases of a strange new flu start surfacing. In a sprawling city of 11 million people, the coronavirus, our invisible brutal enemy was born - festering at least a month and a half before the world was told.

In January President Xi Jinping made a decision that would ultimately condemn the world: allowing 5 million people to leave the epicentre of the virus without being screened.
Posted By Joe

https://m.worldstarhiphop.com/apple/video.php?v=wshh6ARp129Qt2cKgXb8

World star hip hop. Seems legit

 

[The United]

If you cant believe a singaporean government the you are paranoid. They're the most clean government in the world.

I am saying they do censor a lot.

 

[sammsky1]

World star hip hop. Seems legit

Thats just the page who upload the VDO
if it helps, here is the original author:

 

[redshaw]

More on that German study. Seems they sampled 70 infected households, they found traces but were not able to reproduce a living virus and conclude most people aren't infected via surfaces. More testing is going ahead but they don't expect to see any difference.

https://www.zeit.de/wissen/gesundhe...me-infektionsschutz-massnahmen-studie/seite-2

Perhaps a German speaker can translate better.

NHS are still going on about washing hands on their twitter but there's nothing about how this can spread in the confines of a home, car bus or shop. Imagine a communal area in an old peoples home with them talking coughing together. Keeping 1-2 metres apart isn't going to help and you can be sure families and other peoples close friends are still nattering away over coffee in a tiny living room.

 

[Brwned]

The 80% furlough scheme did not help business, it helped their staff; if there was a similar scheme for business it would of course have helped. The shutting down of businesses occured merely days after everyone was told social distancing would stem the tide. Again this was maybe a fortnight after Boris was shaking hands will everyone he met.

Therefore there's no data in terms of schemes that helped businesses as there currently are none, there's very little data in terms of how businesses would react if they hadn't been forced to close down prior to knowing the seriousness of the UK infection as days before the shutdown we were told to merely social distance and the second government properly articulated the seriousness was the day they closed businesses.

What we do know is how businesses that haven't been forced to close have reacted and my view is private industry have reacted phenomenally. Supermarkets have enforced social distancing, they've given time slots to NHS workers, they're prioritised deliveries for the vunerable and housebound. Pharmacies have done likewise as have others. The minority of construction sites that have stayed open have enforced similar measures (the majority that couldn't enforce them closed of their own volition and are only opening once they can ensure site safety). These businesses have received no compensation for their increased operational costs but have still been great on the whole. I see no reason why the businesses that were forced to close wouldn't have reacted in a similar fashion to those who have been given the opportunity to stay open; especially if they had the support to finance these operational costs.

The industries that have reacted poorly are arguably the public sector ones that are open and have been supported by government. The NHS have been awful in distributing PPE, public transport have crammed people onto busses and tubes; reducing services rather than expanding them.

So again I'd say the evidence we have shows private industry who've been allowed to operate have performed phenomenally well and I therefore see no reason why businesses that were forced to close wouldn't have done likewise.

I imagine if restaurants remained open we'd have seen most closing but some delivering meals to the vunerable at reduced or no cost; whilst aggressively enforcing the same measures as supermarkets and pharmacies. I imagine if clothing companies had allowed to remain open most would have closed but some would have enforced social distancing and put a portion of their resources to manufacturing PPE to be distributed at a subsidised cost.

Hell I imagine if testing were privately manufactures many businesses would be purchasing thousands of tests and being a key part of the countrywide testing effort, providing both employee and customer peace of mind.

You say look at the evidence... Which businesses who could have exploited their ability to stay open have done so without regard for public health?

I don't know how you can't see that everything is warped to fit your ideology. It's why you prefer hypotheticals to examining real world evidence. Everything would work perfectly if all of your conditions were met, but alas they never can be, so the evidence that exists can't be assessed to test your theories. Things can only ever be discussed in general terms, where everything conveniently aligns with your core beliefs and no observable, measurable evidence is required to support it. The same textbook answers apply to every scenario, as long as you approach it from the right angle and focus on the right elements.

I thought in this case you laid out a real world scenario that requires fairly straightforward evidence to prove, so you might actually go beyond theory and hypotheticals. Everything else has already been said.