Coronavirus

Any political discussion should go here. This subforum will be moderated differently than other forums.
Forum rules
1.) No personal threats.
2.) No doxxing/revealing personal information.
3.) No spam.
4.) No circumventing press restrictions.
5.) No racism, sexism, homophobia, or derogatory posts.
Message
Author
Jamiet99uk
Posts: 8779
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2017 11:42 pm
Location: Durham, UK
Karma: 2466
Contact:

Re: Coronavirus

#141 Post by Jamiet99uk » Tue Mar 24, 2020 12:49 pm

Octavious wrote:
Tue Mar 24, 2020 4:58 am
Well, it couldn't have been any earlier and been effective. You need the public on board to have any hope of success, and the way it's been filtered in has allowed public opinion to get behind the measures before they get imposed. This is vital to maintaining good spirits, and has allowed people to come to terms with what's to come. The mood of people, from what I've seen recently, has been considerably more cheerful than usual. Whether that lasts as people experience friends and loved ones catching it remains to be seen.

As lock downs go it's not particularly harsh. The effect will be most people staying in their homes, but the reality is that the rules allow for you to pretty much go wherever you wish. I can still walk down to the local pub (as part of daily exercise) and pick up a takeaway pint, for example, or go for a bike ride through the local woods. There is no curfew, and unless you are particularly vulnerable no insistence that you stay in doors, although I imagine most people will.
Oh come on. They've flip flopped horribly. A few weeks ago Dom and Bojo's plan was "let's let everyone get infected, herd immunity lol, protect the economy and let all the pensioners die" and you know it was.

Octavious
Posts: 1464
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 4:16 pm
Location: The Five Valleys, Gloucestershire
Karma: 1328
Contact:

Re: Coronavirus

#142 Post by Octavious » Tue Mar 24, 2020 1:36 pm

If you just impose a load of draconian measures it simply doesn't work. You will get attitudes such as "I'm in my 80s and will be dead soon anyway, so I'm going to go out and enjoy the sunshine and if the virus gets me it gets me". You need public consent for these measures to have a chance, and amazingly enough for the most part we seem to have achieved it.

As for claiming that the original plan was to let the pensioners die, you're better than that, mate. There's a time and a place for acting like an ignorant twat, and this ain't it.

Randomizer
Posts: 475
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2017 1:04 am
Karma: 138

Re: Coronavirus

#143 Post by Randomizer » Tue Mar 24, 2020 5:08 pm

https://time.com/5808688/chloroquine-ph ... rus-death/

"Doctor" Trump's safe medical advice being touted by him and his allies has caused one death and another serious injury in Arizona. "Medical genius" Trump's unproven medical advice on a so called safe drug against the coronavirus has claimed its first victim.

flash2015
Gold Donator
Gold Donator
Posts: 1980
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:55 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Karma: 480

Re: Coronavirus

#144 Post by flash2015 » Tue Mar 24, 2020 8:03 pm

I think flip-flopping has been given a bad name. There is flip-flopping based on the political winds (bad)...but then there is flip-flopping when new info is received and you realized you were wrong (good).

Based on the situation in Italy, it was clear that the wait for herd immunity thing (at least at this point) was obviously not going to work. They are doing their job right to recognize their mistake and change course.

Jamiet99uk
Posts: 8779
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2017 11:42 pm
Location: Durham, UK
Karma: 2466
Contact:

Re: Coronavirus

#145 Post by Jamiet99uk » Tue Mar 24, 2020 10:48 pm

Octavious wrote:
Tue Mar 24, 2020 1:36 pm
As for claiming that the original plan was to let the pensioners die, you're better than that, mate. There's a time and a place for acting like an ignorant twat, and this ain't it.
I didn't make this up. There are multiple claims that Dominic Cummings said this.

Did, or did not, the Government originally declare it was pursuing a "herd immunity" strategy? Yes or no?

Octavious
Posts: 1464
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 4:16 pm
Location: The Five Valleys, Gloucestershire
Karma: 1328
Contact:

Re: Coronavirus

#146 Post by Octavious » Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:17 am

Not even in your most anti Tory fantasies, Jamie, can you possibly believe that it is Tory policy to kill off Tory voters. Even if you go full tinfoil hat and assume Tories are evil incarnate that doesn't make any sense.

Jamiet99uk
Posts: 8779
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2017 11:42 pm
Location: Durham, UK
Karma: 2466
Contact:

Re: Coronavirus

#147 Post by Jamiet99uk » Wed Mar 25, 2020 1:17 pm

I ask you again since you are avoiding the question:

Did, or did not, the Government originally declare it was pursuing a "herd immunity" strategy? Yes or no?

peterlund
Gold Donator
Gold Donator
Posts: 932
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:52 pm
Location: Sverige
Karma: 158
Contact:

Re: Coronavirus

#148 Post by peterlund » Wed Mar 25, 2020 4:13 pm

As the Swedish authorities put it "herd immunity" is not the strategy, but it is the unavoidable end state of this pandemic. The virus will continue to spread until we reach that state. The Swedish "strategy" it to get there in a slow enough way so that our health care system is not overwhelmed and so we can properly take care of everyone that will need it.

Octavious
Posts: 1464
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 4:16 pm
Location: The Five Valleys, Gloucestershire
Karma: 1328
Contact:

Re: Coronavirus

#149 Post by Octavious » Wed Mar 25, 2020 4:54 pm

The herd immunity strategy of Sweden is the same as the herd immunity strategy in the UK was. There is perhaps now more of a focus on holding on until the vaccines are developed than waiting for natural immunity to establish itself, but ultimately it boils down to the same thing. Keep the virus spreading at a manageable rate and hold on. In many ways its not dissimilar to a nuclear reactor.

Randomizer
Posts: 475
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2017 1:04 am
Karma: 138

Re: Coronavirus

#150 Post by Randomizer » Wed Mar 25, 2020 5:41 pm

Octavious wrote:
Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:17 am
Not even in your most anti Tory fantasies, Jamie, can you possibly believe that it is Tory policy to kill off Tory voters. Even if you go full tinfoil hat and assume Tories are evil incarnate that doesn't make any sense.
Right now in the US, Republican leaders are pushing for grandparents to go out and prop up the economy for their grandchildren even if they die. Except for certain prominent Republican grandparents like Trump.
1

orathaic
Bronze Donator
Bronze Donator
Posts: 460
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 3:20 pm
Karma: 137

Re: Coronavirus

#151 Post by orathaic » Wed Mar 25, 2020 11:16 pm

Octavious wrote:
Wed Mar 25, 2020 4:54 pm
The herd immunity strategy of Sweden is the same as the herd immunity strategy in the UK was. There is perhaps now more of a focus on holding on until the vaccines are developed than waiting for natural immunity to establish itself, but ultimately it boils down to the same thing. Keep the virus spreading at a manageable rate and hold on. In many ways its not dissimilar to a nuclear reactor.
The result of the ICL simulation seemed to conclude that this kind of mitigation isn't enough, that you need complete suppression of the virus before anything returns to normal.

Which is mostly the opposite of herd immunity.

Octavious
Posts: 1464
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 4:16 pm
Location: The Five Valleys, Gloucestershire
Karma: 1328
Contact:

Re: Coronavirus

#152 Post by Octavious » Thu Mar 26, 2020 1:11 am

I suggest that you look again at the Imperial College research. Complete suppression followed by a return to normality in no way resembles anything they talked about.

MajorMitchell
Posts: 706
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2017 4:05 am
Location: As directed by The Fire Breathing MemSahib, Her Imperiousness Indoors lying on a sofa eating​ cakes
Karma: 330

Re: Coronavirus

#153 Post by MajorMitchell » Thu Mar 26, 2020 2:37 am

I'm have no desire to get entangled in the differences of opinion between Jamiet99uk and Octavious, yet my interest was aroused by a point Octavious noted, public consent to drastic measures imposed by Governments in response to CV19.
I think it's worth exploring, discussing. I think it goes further than simple consent if mass, effective changes of behaviour occur.
A strong willingness to comply is required, an enthusiasm or discipline to comply with the new rules.
There are great differences across nations in the relationship between people and their Government, put crudely, some nations have more, or less subservient populations, ranging from willing well educated and wealthy to impoverished and repressed. Not all wealthy nations are the same in terms of their public freedoms eg, Saudi Arabia v Norway.

One expert in a TV panel discussion I watched when discussing the relatively successful response to CV19 in Taiwan noted that the experience of the SARS epidemic had been a huge factor in Taiwan's response to CV19. So as well as all the things the Taiwanese Government had done after SARS to prepare for "the next epidemic" the Taiwanese people were willing to comply with a "go extremely hard early" response.

He made the observation that because Australians hadn't had the same SARS epidemic experience they would have been far less willing to comply in late January/early Feb with what the Taiwanese people willingly would.

orathaic
Bronze Donator
Bronze Donator
Posts: 460
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 3:20 pm
Karma: 137

Re: Coronavirus

#154 Post by orathaic » Thu Mar 26, 2020 2:40 am

Octavious wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 1:11 am
I suggest that you look again at the Imperial College research. Complete suppression followed by a return to normality in no way resembles anything they talked about.
You made me question myself for a second, so I went back and looked.

Look at the second last paragraph of their discussion, it reads:

We therefore conclude that epidemic suppression is the only viable strategy at the current time. The
social and economic effects of the measures which are needed to achieve this policy goal will be
profound. Many countries have adopted such measures already, but even those countries at an earlier
stage of their epidemic (such as the UK) will need to do so imminently.


You are right, the entire paper discusses whether mitigation is possible, various possible strategies and simulations. They conclude no. Leaving suppression as the only other option.

I have read the entire thing.

orathaic
Bronze Donator
Bronze Donator
Posts: 460
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 3:20 pm
Karma: 137

Re: Coronavirus

#155 Post by orathaic » Thu Mar 26, 2020 2:48 am

MajorMitchell wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 2:37 am
One expert... made the observation that because Australians hadn't had the same SARS epidemic experience they would have been far less willing to comply in late January/early Feb with what the Taiwanese people willingly would.
There are massive cultural differences. I know that attitudes toward law and order even between the UK and Ireland differ, mostly a cultural hangulover in Ireland from the laws being seen as this thing imposed by them over in London, and therefore something to get away with not following when possible.

Similarily, countries in Asia have hugely different cultures. I have heard someone say that Asian population tend to be more compliant. Less likely to protest. Hong Kong may be the exception to this, but they also appear to have had little difficulty containing the outbreak.

So yes, buy-in is vitally important, when you have huge numbers of ppl on social media calling on the govt to do more, it becomes much easier for them to do it (standing at the front of a crowd after it forms and calling that leadership...) China does not have this kind of leadership in their political system afls far as I am aware, and it is looking like a significant advantage at this point.

Octavious
Posts: 1464
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 4:16 pm
Location: The Five Valleys, Gloucestershire
Karma: 1328
Contact:

Re: Coronavirus

#156 Post by Octavious » Thu Mar 26, 2020 3:13 am

orathaic wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 2:40 am
You are right, the entire paper discusses whether mitigation is possible, various possible strategies and simulations. They conclude no. Leaving suppression as the only other option.

I have read the entire thing.
Then you will note that a return to normality does not follow the suppression. Suppression buys time, at great cost, and is not a solution in itself. The solution is to achieve herd immunity, in part via the natural spread of antibodies following infection, in part via the distribution of vaccination. Quite how this is best achieved will be determined when mass antibody testing is rolled out over the next few weeks.

peterlund
Gold Donator
Gold Donator
Posts: 932
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:52 pm
Location: Sverige
Karma: 158
Contact:

Re: Coronavirus

#157 Post by peterlund » Thu Mar 26, 2020 6:37 am

orathaic wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 2:40 am
Look at the second last paragraph of their discussion, it reads:
We therefore conclude that epidemic suppression is the only viable strategy at the current time. The
social and economic effects of the measures which are needed to achieve this policy goal will be
profound. Many countries have adopted such measures already, but even those countries at an earlier
stage of their epidemic (such as the UK) will need to do so imminently.


You are right, the entire paper discusses whether mitigation is possible, various possible strategies and simulations. They conclude no. Leaving suppression as the only other option.

I have read the entire thing.
Yes suppression is very much needed, but it is impossible to achieve anything like "complete suppression" as some people seems to call for. But we must slow it down as much as it is reasonable.
1

peterlund
Gold Donator
Gold Donator
Posts: 932
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:52 pm
Location: Sverige
Karma: 158
Contact:

Re: Coronavirus

#158 Post by peterlund » Thu Mar 26, 2020 6:54 am

orathaic wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 2:48 am
So yes, buy-in is vitally important, when you have huge numbers of ppl on social media calling on the govt to do more, it becomes much easier for them to do it (standing at the front of a crowd after it forms and calling that leadership...) China does not have this kind of leadership in their political system afls far as I am aware, and it is looking like a significant advantage at this point.
Yes it is vital that the population follow the advices from the expertise. In Sweden we trust and expect our people to listen in to the news and the information coming from the authorities. We emphasise the personal responsibility of every individual. We cannot put a policeman in every corner of every neighbourhood.

We are very reluctant to order people to comply, policing them and punish them with high fines as they do in other European countries. I feel that such harsh measures only will make people pissed off and less likely to think for themselves. People should be encouraged to use their own common sense.

I find it very silly to see all those politicians in Europe behaving in a populist manner introducing harsh measures, that many times seems quite useless, just in order to comply to hysterical populist demands. There is no point in "closing borders" when the disease already is commonplace in every country and basically no-one wants to travel anyhow.
1

orathaic
Bronze Donator
Bronze Donator
Posts: 460
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 3:20 pm
Karma: 137

Re: Coronavirus

#159 Post by orathaic » Thu Mar 26, 2020 9:33 am

@Peterlund, China's example would seem to counter your assertion that suppression is impossible (assuming their numbers are accurate, whihh I have to assume for now.)

@Octavious, they also clearly define what they mean by suppression:

Suppression. Here the aim is to reduce the reproduction number (the average number of
secondary cases each case generates), R, to below 1 and hence to reduce case numbers to low levels
or (as for SARS or Ebola) eliminate human-to-human transmission


While mitigation uses the same kinds of techniques it aims to achieve herd immunity:

Mitigation. Here the aim is to use NPIs (and vaccines or drugs, if available) not to interrupt

transmission completely, but to reduce the health impact of an epidemic... In the 2009 pandemic, for instance, early supplies of vaccine were targeted at individuals
with pre-existing medical conditions which put them at risk of more severe disease4
. In this scenario,
population immunity builds up through the epidemic, leading to an eventual rapid decline in case
numbers and transmission dropping to low levels.
So in both cases everything returns to 'normal' after a vaccine is available. But suppression attempts to stop the virus in its tracks, while mitigation let's it spread, just slower, so herd immunity is reached.

You don't get herd immunity with suppression, until a vaccine is widely available. Whereas mitigation doesn't depend on the vaccine.

But once human-to-human transmission of the virus is stopped (globally) things can return to normal. Even without a vaccine. Unfortunately, without a global effort to stop the spread, you have to look at closing borders once you get a country (like China) clear of new cases (they have been reporting that all new cases came from travel).

But if we can replicate China's success, and then redistribute expertise and equipment to the virus hot spots, then hopefully we can delay with a minimum of disruption. (compared to the mitigation strategy, where you get ~9 months of repeated interventions, spending 6 of those 9 months in lockdown...)

Octavious
Posts: 1464
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 4:16 pm
Location: The Five Valleys, Gloucestershire
Karma: 1328
Contact:

Re: Coronavirus

#160 Post by Octavious » Thu Mar 26, 2020 9:45 am

Ora, the Imperial College modelling is extremely clear. Once suppression methods are relaxed the virus bounces back. Stopping the virus in its tracks globally with suppression methods isn't going to happen.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest