https://lbo-news.com/2020/05/09/measuring-the-carnage/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
About US unemployment numbers
About US unemployment numbers
SARS CoV-2 coronavirus / Covid-19 (No tin foil hat silliness please)
- Thread starter Don't Kill Bill
- Start date
1. That would make sense. It would further reinforce just how dismal our PPE strategy has been, given the likelihood that transmission has been a cycle of hospital to home and home to community.
2. No, I think it’s important to create a distinction between lockdown costing lives and the virus costing lives. The lockdown has been a necessary measure to save lives; part of a wider (non) plan to suppress the virus. Without the lockdown measures, deaths would, no doubt, be much higher. I do think that the economic effects of the virus will cost lives, though. Recessions cost lives in some form or another. The changes to society we have made, and will need to continue, will close businesses, end livelihoods and plunge households either a) into growing debt or b) further into poverty. I don’t trust this government to support those people out of it either. The number of lives that will negatively affect won’t be known for a long time, however. A little bit like the austerity-related deaths that, let’s be honest, were shrugged off by many members of society.
You’re bloviating over something you saw on Andrew Marr this morning.
You decided someone was clever, and extrapolated your new piece of information as a framework to say people don’t already know these things.
I’m saying : The public just wants the best and safest version of normal, as soon as possible.
Every single person I know, sees this as something we will learn to live with, before we ever eradicate or vaccinate against.
You’ve picked an odd point of position that doesn’t seem to exist.
Vulnerable members of society need to be insulated. Less vulnerable members need to be protected. If they feel protected, they’ll get themselves back to work.
Edit ::: Purely anecdotal, but text and ask 3 people the death total for the last week, day by day. I just ran a crass test myself. None were anywhere near. 490, 280, 750, 250, 602, 504.... Novody is getting the Hundred value right more than one day, which is probably luck. It’s not the focus you think it is.
Last edited:
Chapeau!
Careless. Talks. Costs Lives.
What time is boris discussing the lockdown
Seven tonight.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
The scientist on Marr made many good points that I agreed with. I suggested people listen to the interview.
People don’t know these things. I had no idea that there had been 28 COVID-related deaths within the tens of millions of people living under the age of 25. His explanation of numbers was far more granular than what government provides us.
My position, which I’m having to repeat, is that the government use a daily death toll as a yardstick by which to assess the relaxation of lockdown measures. I feel many people are consumed by the figures and there is a lost opportunity to educate the public in a responsible, adult way. Anxiety is therefore increased, perhaps unnecessarily. You disagree again; that’s also fine.
I agree that everybody wants a safe version of normal. The issue, not for you or I, is that people are going to have different views on what that normal should look like. Communication will be important; more nuanced than daily deaths.
To be frank, I’m not willing to engage in this discussion with you a great deal further. I think you have a habit of rampaging around this thread with an inherently argumentative agenda, with views that aren’t particularly well thought out:
Perhaps my views aren’t well thought out either. I’m not a politician, or a scientist, and I won’t pretend for a second that I truly understand the complexity of this situation. Good luck to you in writing your plan, however.
Hard to tell if it's some colleagues briefing against Johnson or his side formulating policy by testing public/media reaction to leaks again.
You couldn't set out out deliberately to make a bigger mess of the messaging though, it's remarkable.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Looks like he's being set up as the fall guy here. Hancock might have fecked up but at least he came out to face the press whilst the rest of them ran for cover.
I listened to what David Spiegelhalter, I agreed with a lot of it. Especially the part of number theatrics. Interestingly I note that statisticians get a lot of coverage but not a lot of them are working with patients, wonder what the opinions of emergency medics, anaesthetists, ITU consultants would be on what's going to happen from tomorrow onwards after this evening's announcement
What I disagree with and its a huge problem is that nuance has to take into account how COVID19 operates in terms of morbidity and clinical course with implications of health service and not solely focus on nuance on the mortality aspect
The lockdown has undoubtedly saved countless lives and impacted the economy for the better. As a slightly overweight Asian background frontline doctor working in COVID wards with inadequate PPE if you throw in the fact that without a lockdown I'm grateful that my risk of catching it in the community has been low.
Why the only focus on death? Why not mention that yes that while the case fatality rate of this disease is lower and higher exponentially depending on age and co-morbidities how about mention that even for the mild-to-moderate patients it means 3-4 weeks of refractory fevers, chills, SOB, fatigue and the impact of a widespread infection rate would have had in terms of time off work.
Then there are those in hospitals who do not die but require ventilators, a fairly substantial amount, percentage wise sure not a lot in total but significant enough in a short period of time to impact the economy. And the knock-on effect of without a lockdown a potential second peak of this thing means in terms of ventilator shortage in terms of mortality and morbidity.
And even if you survive on a ventilator what about if you get a thromboembolic event like a stroke? Or a lung clot? Or inflammation of the heart? Or the effect this has on the central nervous system in patients?
Plenty of those who dont die will also suffer a decrease in lung capacity and function post-recovery and post-ARDS. We don't yet know if they get that lung function back and what impact will that have on their occupation in terms of functionality, manual labour etc?
In addition if you are on a ventilator you will likely develop withdrawal symptoms from heavy sedation or PTSD. Or a nasty haematoma or granuloma post-extubation which needs operating on. My cousin's got one suspected, there's a huge waiting list to get operated on given the number of people suffering and also that ENT with anaesthetics swamped. What about damage to one's voice as a result of the tubes? My cousin again is having speech and language input, not sure if he'll regain his voice, he's a barrister (incidentally in his 30s and no health issues prior to this), had to be intubated, re-extubated 3 times, got meningitis but then recovered and is home but having tracheostomy complications, nowhere near ready for work and likely won't be for a while. There are plenty like him not measured in the "but young people don't die" narrative.
What the lockdown has done is flattened the peak, bought us time to advance therapeutics, get more information and evidence-base around the disease. It should have been earlier. We are seeing from the government some semblance of an infrastructure to advance track and trace and mass testing in addition to policies around quarantining.
I fear though that we are ending the lockdown too early, I want it to be eased of course. But those of us who are fighting this disease we are very worried about easing too much, easing too quickly, ineffective comms sending the wrong message and what implications that will have in terms of spread
By the way with this lockdown I haven't seen anybody apart from my work team since just after the lockdown start and even if it eased off will probably not want to risk my family catching it, especially with Eid coming up and anticipation of a possible peak for many months more. Because of that and anxieties of working on a covid ward with second tier PPE I'm on a waiting list for CBT. I'm lucky to have an income, but I wouldn't class this as a luxury. And my advocating of strict social distancing, isolation measures even in the absence of a lockdown is predicated on what I know about this disease.
My day job is a GP trainee but I'm working in psycho-oncology with cancer patients. What we have been able to do by flattening the peak is keep chemo, radio and surgical intervention going for most stage III or IV patients, 2 week urgent diagnostic clinics running. I think its not accurate that the lockdown has potentiated cancer deaths, by keeping more NHS healthcare workers away from redeployment away from their day jobs (and also alive) and they are able to work with cancer patients, MacMillan nurses are able to offer help still. What a second peak will do is overwhelm our hospital beds for covid patients, kill off elderly consultants who are vital as lead clinicians in subspecialties in addition to radiographers or radiologists being sick or CT scanning capacity reduced to them being hot zones for covid patients.
Its an awful situation with how this virus is, the make-up of our country in terms of demographics and population density along with a really slow, ineffective government but medics especially who are advocates of this lockdown don't do it without considering this economy. We need to move beyond it and ease things obviously but if we heading towards congas and street parties then its an indication that there isn't any way a nuanced approach won't be adopted en masse enough to prevent this from getting out of hand for a second peak, and with political will diminished from reinstating strict measures due to actual or perceived population fatigue then that will honestly be catastrophic.
I guess in addition to that, Raab has done a fantastic job at coming out and not answering every question he's been asked.
They certainly hope so.
I don’t have time for an economic lesson and it’s quite complicated.
I hope the PL has deep enough pockets for all the lawsuits that'll come their way when something inevitably goes wrong. If a club gets relegated/misses CL because their player(s) missed games due to the virus they'll be tied up in a lawsuit for years. If one of the bigger players in the league catches this and something goes horribly wrong, they'll be paying out 100s of millions to both the club (for the loss in transfer fee) and the player (for loss of earnings).
In my view yes.
The majority of the more 'popular' paper's are full of made up news and sensational headlines.
They are only about circulation and anything they can do to sell a few more copies is all they care about.
Not sure how that would suppress news when by definition, their so called news is always way out of date.
Save your money and spend it on something useful.
If media outlets are concerned that newspaper sales will plummet as a result of Covid-19, then they have clearly had their heads under a rock for the last 10-15 years.
With or without the pandemic, their industry would be dead in the next 5-10 years anyway. Clutching at straws against the inevitable tide. A world without tabloid papers? Good fecking riddance.
With or without the pandemic, their industry would be dead in the next 5-10 years anyway. Clutching at straws against the inevitable tide. A world without tabloid papers? Good fecking riddance.
You can only run a country on bullshit and vacuous slogans for so long. Even worse when you vote for idiots.
You could see Hancock would be made a scapegoat a mile off.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
So stay alert equals stay at home.What a waste.
They hate us.
If we still can't see the contempt that the politician and media class have for us after all this then it really seems that this place is beyond all hope.
Yes, but with the caveat that this explanation underplayed the ideological agenda of many titles. An arrogance that as the 'voice of the people's they should be a driving force of policy etc...
Pardon my ignorance but Germany are fully equipped to handle a large increase in hospitalised patients with a reasonable survival rate, right? Plus, warnings are in place for at risk people to stay at home and stay safe from family members going out?
Does this not mean that herd immunity is in play in a controlled manner?
Didn't it jump above 1 last week only to settle down again? There is a degree of natural variation and you need to look at the trend over a bit of time.
I didn't think it would be possible for this shit government to make a bigger mess of this than they already have...but it seems at 7pm, Boris will officially do that.
They are but how large an increase is the question. When Merkel talked about it a month ago she said a reproduction rate of 1.1 - which they're at now - would overwhelm their system by October. At 1.3 it would be overwhelmed by June. She explained it pretty plainly here.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Their understanding of the situation has evolved since then and I suspect their model predicts less drastic outcomes at this stage, but it isn't the case that they can just let the consistently R0 increase because they've got such a healthy healthcare system.
They've got thresholds to control things, so if more 50 cases per 100,000 people appear then restrictions are reimposed at a local level. The places where they've passed the thresholds still seem to be triggered by large numbers indoors for sustained periods - meat packing plants and care homes - but the general increase in the R0 is a broader issue.
Ultimately every country has said that a) the lockdown relaxation is conditional, so if thresholds are broken then there is always the possibility of restrictions being reimposed and b) we don't have very good information on what individual effect each restriction has. So it is entirely expected that the R0 will increase as the lockdown is relaxed and they should get a better idea of what impact each restriction has, and likely reconfigure the set of restrictions as the evidence comes in. Part of what factors into that is adherence to certain relaxations e.g. so far people have been more likely to abuse the public protest crowd limits than some of the other restrictions.
Last edited:
If you think they're bad wait until we live in a world of unaccountable clickbait 'news' websites.
Fair enough, thanks for the detailed explanation.
Nah, it means "do whatever you want" in the hopes that people will take it upon themselves to go out more and shop, party etc. But when it ultimately results in a resurgence of cases and people turn to the government and blame them they can say "oh but we were still telling people to stay at home".
We can't stay in hiding forever ever. The economy will cost more life's than this virus. Look at the unemployment figures in the USA. People's livelihoods are being savaged. It isn't going to go away anytime soon is it? We need to just get on with it now.
Gerronwivit!
Are these new slogans from the government?
So we should just stay in scared to death?
Just saw my neighbour loaded up in a body bag into a van full of other sealed bodies by police and ambulance in full on biohazard PPE... What time tonight does Boris tell us everything is fine?
This view assumes the world will be the same. It's not going to be. It's time the "lets get back to work" crew recognised the fact that that world is gone.
This is where a good testing system should be in place so someone like yourself and the general close proximity neighbours can find out if they have it
Obviously there has to be certain measures in place. Lets not get all hysterical and say the world is gone though. Its survived before this and it will after this.
Fecking hell. Where’s this?
if the economy is opened soon is a lot business who had their rents temporarily cancelled will go bankrupt because they won't get enough costumers and employees who were furloughed by companies that can survive with lower sales will lose their jobs