Coronavirus

[glasgowspur]

Would you also think it fair to say that 'no one, absolutely no one can say [with] any certainty what will come of' this virus?

You could argue there is more scientific certainty around Brexit. Economics is a social science, but there are still hard facts. The value of past exports to Europe, how much food is imported, the % of UK lamb that is exported to x market etc etc. To say that experts such as economists had no value in understanding something as complex as Brexit is...well you fill in the blank...

There is two issues with predicting the outcome of covid,
1, we don't have a complete handle on what we dealing atm. Info is scarce (real info, not made up click bait) and until China come come clean it will be a slow process.
2. There is manipulation of figures for various reasons. Without context some of the figures are meaningless.

I will predict in the UK a death toll of around 20000, give or take 2000.
Pretty horrible in isolation, but way better than the 2.2m, 200000 being hawked around not too long ago.
I would also suggest we wait for the seasonal flu death to be published before jumping to conclusions. Context.

I'm not saying that economic experts have no understanding of brexit, or of any other political change, but at the end of the day it is only an opinion of what might happen.
The trade value, % of lamb in the past may or may not have any bearing on what happens in the future.
That is not science.

BTW I am a soft remainder, in as much I think staying put was the best outcome.
Neither staying in the EU or leaving the EU is going to solve our problems. Each will present their own problems, the real debate is which set of problems would you rather have.
My points have nothing to do with my support or otherwise of brexit, it was just the latest political event that we could use as a base.
After all we still don't know what the outcome of brexit will be, so can't say which side is right or wrong.

 

[glasgowspur]

@glasgowspur what I do agree with, is it is impossible to accurately model the outcome and effects of Brexit (and it has proved extremely difficult to model and project Corona too). What experts can do is help you to understand the variables and core issues to form rational ideas and understand the directions of travel. To ignore knowledge is a dangerous thing.

Of course, that's what we should all do, listen to all sides impartially and make an informed decision.
Personally I try to listen and then investigate, there's loads of people out there claiming to be experts talking out their arse (and a few on here).
That's when I can be bothered .

 

[scaramanga]

This is the great smokescreen that governments have created to try to avoid mass panic.

This virus can take anyone.

Yes, it hits the elderly, but it kills all sorts of people. The ‘underlying conditions’ thing I’ve been sceptical of for a while, once you take into account the huge variety of things included as an underlying condition (smoker, being overweight, high blood pressure...). Plenty of those dying are hardly ‘infirm’.

And there are plenty dying without any ‘underlying conditions’; and plenty who are below 60.

Not plenty really - not in the big numbers, wider view sense of things.

And all those conditions you listed are likely to end up with those people being a huge cost to the NHS in the long term. I wouldn't be surprised if the outcome was significantly better to just carry on and let it run its course.

 

[Mikey10]

Not plenty really - not in the big numbers, wider view sense of things.

And all those conditions you listed are likely to end up with those people being a huge cost to the NHS in the long term. I wouldn't be surprised if the outcome was significantly better to just carry on and let it run its course.

Yeah. Probably good for some more teens, nurses and doctors to die too.

 

[braineclipse]

No point in a lockdown without testing. Like I said, we have to weigh the cost against benefit and I think no lockdown is better.

We're not really able to get a controlled experiment or anything close to it as most countries are doing lockdowns or at least significant changes.

That even leaders and countries that seem to care a whole lot more about the economy than the wellbeing of their people are locking down I think says something about what the economic cost of not locking down is estimated to by those who try to estimate such things.

 

[braineclipse]

Not plenty really - not in the big numbers, wider view sense of things.

And all those conditions you listed are likely to end up with those people being a huge cost to the NHS in the long term. I wouldn't be surprised if the outcome was significantly better to just carry on and let it run its course.

The numbers would be a lot worse if the health care system was overwhelmed meaning a lack of access to ICU beds, ventilators etc. Mortality rates, sick days and the economic cost of other illnesses would increase too with health care system in crisis.

 

[scaramanga]

We're not really able to get a controlled experiment or anything close to it as most countries are doing lockdowns or at least significant changes.

That even leaders and countries that seem to care a whole lot more about the economy than the wellbeing of their people are locking down I think says something about what the economic cost of not locking down is estimated to by those who try to estimate such things.

I think it says more about the loss of political capital than anything.

It's far easier for me to make the equation as simple as it really is. I don't have to sell it to people who think we should spend endless amounts of other people's money to save every possible life.

I can't think of a single government in my lifetime that could sell the reality to the public and survive an election.

 

[scaramanga]

The numbers would be a lot worse if the health care system was overwhelmed meaning a lack of access to ICU beds, ventilators etc. Mortality rates, sick days and the economic cost of other illnesses would increase too with health care system in crisis.

That's just about triage.

 

[scaramanga]

Yeah. Probably good for some more teens, nurses and doctors to die too.

Minimal numbers - you're allowing emotion to override common sense and counting individuals. Governments should be able to see further than that.

 

[nayenezgani]

Thought this was a good read: https://www.ft.com/content/7eff769a-74dd-11ea-95fe-fcd274e920ca

"To demand collective sacrifice you must offer a social contract that benefits everyone. Today’s crisis is laying bare how far many rich societies fall short of this ideal."

 

[Rorschach]

Thought this was a good read: https://www.ft.com/content/7eff769a-74dd-11ea-95fe-fcd274e920ca

"To demand collective sacrifice you must offer a social contract that benefits everyone. Today’s crisis is laying bare how far many rich societies fall short of this ideal."

I was just reading this. Rutger Bregman talks a good bit about UBI in his book. I always thought it was coming at some stage but this virus might accelerate its adoption.

 

[markysimmo]

At least they are warm and safe currently



I had to go in my town centre to pick up my prescription and it was so strange, only 20 people allowed in Boots at one time

Weird to not see any homeless people about either not sure where they have gone currently

Did see the usual crackheads waiting around for their early morning fix though

Bit annoyed to see people with kids walking around though

 

[braineclipse]

I think it says more about the loss of political capital than anything.

It's far easier for me to make the equation as simple as it really is. I don't have to sell it to people who think we should spend endless amounts of other people's money to save every possible life.

I can't think of a single government in my lifetime that could sell the reality to the public and survive an election.

You seem to be making it about either lives or the economy. Imo there is no option where this doesn't have a huge economic impact, flattening the curve might be the best way to minimise the economic impact too.

That's just about triage.

Italy are doing triage despite massive attempts to stop the outbreak (though in hindsight they've come too late). Imagine how much worse northern Italy would judge looked if they had tried to keep everything going. Now imagine that on a national and global scale.

Triage would be necessary, but far from a solution. The effects are hard to imagine. Just the economic effects are impossible to imagine for me.

 

[scaramanga]

You seem to be making it about either lives or the economy. Imo there is no option where this doesn't have a huge economic impact, flattening the curve might be the best way to minimise the economic impact too.

It may be. Considering that a lockdown is likely to last until next year I think it's unlikely - especially in over-populated places like the UK.

Let's not underestimate the damage done by governments now understanding just how draconian and spendy they can be with a good enough excuse. We'll never get all of our freedom or money back - governments tend to have a ratchet that way.

are doing triage despite massive attempts to stop the outbreak (though in hindsight they've come too late). Imagine how much worse northern Italy would judge looked if they had tried to keep everything going. Now imagine that on a national and global scale.

Triage would be necessary, but far from a solution. The effects are hard to imagine. Just the economic effects are impossible to imagine for me.

Then they need to triage better.

Make all the doors narrow so that the fatties can't get in - that will immediately improve the distancing inside too. Having seen the inside of UK hospitals I can tell you that would give us huge increases in capacity overnight.

 

[braineclipse]

It may be. Considering that a lockdown is likely to last until next year I think it's unlikely - especially in over-populated places like the UK.

Let's not underestimate the damage done by governments now understanding just how draconian and spendy they can be with a good enough excuse. We'll never get all of our freedom or money back - governments tend to have a ratchet that way.


Then they need to triage better.

Make all the doors narrow so that the fatties can't get in - that will immediately improve the distancing inside too. Having seen the inside of UK hospitals I can tell you that would give us huge increases in capacity overnight.

I just find it way too early and easy to claim that all (or most) of the relevant experts have gotten it wrong on this one.

I get that your calculation puts comparably little weight on the health, life and well being on others. Most people come at this from a different perspective. With your starting point the calculations might have been different, that doesn't make them wrong at the moment.

I prefer a society where leaders and technocrats puts a high value on the life and well being of all its citizens. Based on that I think the shutdowns look reasonable. Though there's so much to learn about handling a pandemic like this in the modern world I'm open to us looking at it differently when this is evaluated at some point down the line. This will probably happen again so learning would be a good thing.

I would be more worried about what governments could put in place if this was allowed to develop freely over a period of months. Failing health care systems, failing institutions, many people having lost family members. That's when irreversible systematic change and extreme politicians would start to look paletable to a larger portion of the population imo. That would be the greater threat.

I think we might have quite different views of how this would look if allowed to spread freely through. Unfortunately there might be one or two examples where we find out what that looks like.

 

[SpurMeUp]

It may be. Considering that a lockdown is likely to last until next year I think it's unlikely - especially in over-populated places like the UK.

Let's not underestimate the damage done by governments now understanding just how draconian and spendy they can be with a good enough excuse. We'll never get all of our freedom or money back - governments tend to have a ratchet that way.


Then they need to triage better.

Make all the doors narrow so that the fatties can't get in - that will immediately improve the distancing inside too. Having seen the inside of UK hospitals I can tell you that would give us huge increases in capacity overnight.

Next year!

Highly doubt that. Maybe lock down for high risk groups. Think we’ll start to see a lock down exit strategy a week or two after Easter


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app

 

[scaramanga]

I just find it way too early and easy to claim that all (or most) of the relevant experts have gotten it wrong on this one.

I get that your calculation puts comparably little weight on the health, life and well being on others. Most people come at this from a different perspective. With your starting point the calculations might have been different, that doesn't make them wrong at the moment.

I prefer a society where leaders and technocrats puts a high value on the life and well being of all its citizens. Based on that I think the shutdowns look reasonable. Though there's so much to learn about handling a pandemic like this in the modern world I'm open to us looking at it differently when this is evaluated at some point down the line. This will probably happen again so learning would be a good thing.

I would be more worried about what governments could put in place if this was allowed to develop freely over a period of months. Failing health care systems, failing institutions, many people having lost family members. That's when irreversible systematic change and extreme politicians would start to look paletable to a larger portion of the population imo. That would be the greater threat.

I think we might have quite different views of how this would look if allowed to spread freely through. Unfortunately there might be one or two examples where we find out what that looks like.

Sweden will be an interesting case to watch.

I'm still not convinced that politicians do put such a high value on what is a comparatively small number of lives, they just have to appear to. Telling the public a few thousand lives isn't a lot to lose is hardly a vote winner.

 

[scaramanga]

Next year!

Highly doubt that. Maybe lock down for high risk groups. Think we’ll start to see a lock down exit strategy a week or two after Easter


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app

What's the exit strategy?

It's plan A or wait for a vaccine.

 

[SpurMeUp]

What's the exit strategy?

It's plan A or wait for a vaccine.

Probably a staged opening up of the lock down. With vulnerable people kept separate. That would be my guess.


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app

 

[Glenda's Legs]

What's the exit strategy?

It's plan A or wait for a vaccine.

Listening to Matt Hanrooster on the radio a few days ago, the exit strategy seemed to be linked to the anti-body tests being available. I don't think he stated it explicitly but he seemed to be saying that once a (reliable) anti-body test can identify whether people have had the virus, then restrictions can maybe start to be lifted. Less clear whether it is just for those people or for the masses (heard something separate about some kind of certificate being provided, like with a Yellow Fever vax I guess). The trouble with that is if the plan is to lift restrictions for some but not others, it will be a recipe for disaster as discontent will rise quickly. Plus what happens to those who have not contracted the virus - just sit indoors waiting for a vaccine whilst others go about their business? I don't know what the answer is, but can't see it being that, it's simply not practical.

I think it's more a case of getting over the initial peak, use the current lockdown to avoid total burnout for the health service from lack of beds and supplies, get enough ventilators, PPE, oxygen etc in stock, as well as testing for NHS staff, and then start to lift restrictions and hope the health service can cope. It's never been so much about avoiding getting the virus, it's more about managing the impact. Things like working from home if possible, avoiding public transport, maintaining social distancing where feasible will continue to be advised for a while. Mass gatherings will continue to be prohibited.
The "good" thing with being a couple of weeks behind other European countries is that we can see what happens when they start to lift their restrictions.