The big Coronavirus thread
Comments
-
What were the EU ones about specifically? Did we attend 42 others and miss 8? Were there only 8? Would a conference call have saved us all? Yes obviously it would.rick_chasey said:
I hadn’t realised the U.K. had been invited to those calls and meetings. Which ones were they?TheBigBean said:
Might have been more productive to have been to talking to some East Asian countries, but I suspect that wasn't happening either.rick_chasey said:Between February 13 and March 30, Britain missed a total of eight conference calls or meetings about the coronavirus between EU heads of state or health ministers - meetings that Britain was still entitled to join.
How does this not show how pigheaded the whole Brexit mentality is.
I mean FFS- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono0 -
Maybe it is a London or bigger company thing but everybody seems to have a business continuity plan.mrfpb said:
This is a point of the "behavioural" element of policy. People on this thread were preparing to or actually working from home at least a week before restrictions were announced. My workplace was busy sourcing laptops and mobiles. If the lockdown was announced two weeks earlier, most of us would have been stranded at home without the ability to work. By the time lockdown was declared we were "primed" for it psychologically, and our employers were more prepared for it.surrey_commuter said:
Also if you you at the sports bodies and journeys recorded by TFL the country was shutting down without any political directionkingstongraham said:
That's a political decision though. If the politicians reject that advice on political grounds, then that's different to it not even being an option that is modelled and presented to them. Which it eventually was.pangolin said:
I sort of agree. They have to be realistic with their recommendations though don't you think? They could have looked at the evidence in late Jan and said - right if we want to really protect the UK we are shutting down the borders now. No-one comes in or out. We will test and trace any patients that are here already. But it was too soon and the scientists (I assume) would have thought - a) the Gov won't go for this and b) even if they did, the people wouldn't go for this.surrey_commuter said:
It is a well written summary but the only revelation to me was that scientists were making decisions on whether lockdown was feasible, which seems utterly bizarre.pangolin said:
Like what? I'm halfway through and it seems to be mostly telling us things we knew or had made an educated guess at based on the Government's behaviour. It's a well written interesting article but I wouldn't describe it as absolutely loaded with shocking details.rick_chasey said:Absolutely loaded with shocking detail after shocking detail.
I think you are being exceedingly generous in thinking it is part of a master plan. They were still pursuing a policy of herd immunity (ie do nothing) as the country was shutting down around them.0 -
Just on that Reuters article and the discussion of whether we should have locked down sooner, back then I'm not sure anyone had lockdown but if they had it was just Wuhan and the reporting of that at the time was very much along the lines of the authoritarian Chinese state destroying civil liberties. Am I the only one who remembers the negative reporting of the police dragging people from their homes? Can you imagine the reaction if we had been the first western nation to introduce a lockdown? Even when they shut down northern Italy people found it a massive shock that such a thing could happen and when you see some people suggesting our current relatively relaxed lockdown is a precursor to a possible police state do you really think locking us down before a single confirmed Covid-19 case in the country would have been accepted by anyone?1
-
Pross said:
That's already being widely reported isn't it? The BBC were making it clear yesterday I thought along with now adding a caveat that it only includes deaths in hospitals. It almost felt like someone had asked them to do it to reduce any complacency with early signs that the rate of spread is slowing.surrey_commuter said:focuszing723 said:Can't you start a new thread for yourselves called "Negative Covid19 News I Googled".
Leave it to the rest of us to contribute with current information and positive developments.
There are a lot of interesting thoughts on here that are weeks ahead of the media. When do you think they will notice that we don’t count deaths properly at the weekend and that this skews the numbers?
Being positive and getting on the front foot does not work for a global pandemic
Steve0 will appreciate the irony that I do not watch news on TV because I find it too depressing. They have a different agenda to print media as they will give preference to televisual stories.0 -
But you still read this thread?surrey_commuter said:
Steve0 will appreciate the irony that I do not watch news on TV because I find it too depressing."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
tailwindhome said:
It'll be interesting to see how NI compares to the rest of the UK
- a significant proportion of the community followed the ROI into lockdown, took their kids out of school early.
-Flybe went bust at the start of March, drastically reducing connectivity to the rest of the UK at a key time in the spread.......no 'seeding' from people flying to London and bring C19 back
This is my experience, people were ahead of companies who were ahead of Govt, with a week’s gap between each.
Assuming the vulnerable were disproportionately represented amongst the early adopters then this should put us in a better position than the rest of Europe.0 -
I get a bit annoyed when they spend most of the news going around interviewing Joe Bloggs, who is self-isolating, through the kitchen window with a boom mic whilst constantly reiterating the Government advice to only make essential journeys. I accept that some reporting is necessary to keep people informed but that sort of pointless air-filler doesn't strike me as essential travel. Without it they might even find time in their news schedule to report on other things that are going on in the world as I'm pretty sure it hasn't ceased functioning altogether.surrey_commuter said:Pross said:
That's already being widely reported isn't it? The BBC were making it clear yesterday I thought along with now adding a caveat that it only includes deaths in hospitals. It almost felt like someone had asked them to do it to reduce any complacency with early signs that the rate of spread is slowing.surrey_commuter said:focuszing723 said:Can't you start a new thread for yourselves called "Negative Covid19 News I Googled".
Leave it to the rest of us to contribute with current information and positive developments.
There are a lot of interesting thoughts on here that are weeks ahead of the media. When do you think they will notice that we don’t count deaths properly at the weekend and that this skews the numbers?
Being positive and getting on the front foot does not work for a global pandemic
Steve0 will appreciate the irony that I do not watch news on TV because I find it too depressing. They have a different agenda to print media as they will give preference to televisual stories.0 -
I posted something about the under-reporting of the numbers yesterday and I think I mentioned this previously. I don't doubt that there is a similar administrative lag in other countries' figures. It also emphasises the point about a full assessment only being possible when we have all the information.rick_chasey said:
Guardian wrote a piece explaining why they don't think the numbers are right, and the guys at the FT have been saying that forever.surrey_commuter said:
TBB and I have televisions which allow us to see two weeks into the future.rick_chasey said:I think anyone who bothers to read what I write can see that for the most part, on this anyway,I've been more or less around half a week ahead of what gets reported in the papers.
Presumably this is because I have friends etc who are journos.
Can you ask your journo friends why the media report number of deaths without noticing they trend down at the weekend?
The guys I know are too junior to really have decision over that stuff. They do recognise their role in helping the gov't get through this though, and there is definitely a reticence to stoke the fire too much as that isn't helpful.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
The trouble dude is that I don't know if you're joking...surrey_commuter said:
We can’t all be weird.ddraver said:You're bloody weird you lot...
You need to chose a side.
You can be a Boris Trumpian who thinks that all will be OK if we all cheer up a bit and rally behind them as they are a great leader.
Alternatively you can believe that the Govt response has not been 100% perfect, they continue to make mistakes and as such you have opinions on what they should do.We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
- @ddraver0 -
No. You don't. Expecting the response to a novel epidemic to be 100% perfect is utterly unrealistic. Most of us accept that mistakes have been made, but also realise that many of the lessons we learn will only now help next time round.surrey_commuter said:
We can’t all be weird.ddraver said:You're bloody weird you lot...
You need to chose a side.
You can be a Boris Trumpian who thinks that all will be OK if we all cheer up a bit and rally behind them as they are a great leader.
Alternatively you can believe that the Govt response has not been 100% perfect, they continue to make mistakes and as such you have opinions on what they should do.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
The under reporting isn't an issue as such though. What you need from a policy perspective is precision, not necessarily accuracy.rjsterry said:
I posted something about the under-reporting of the numbers yesterday and I think I mentioned this previously. I don't doubt that there is a similar administrative lag in other countries' figures. It also emphasises the point about a full assessment only being possible when we have all the information.rick_chasey said:
Guardian wrote a piece explaining why they don't think the numbers are right, and the guys at the FT have been saying that forever.surrey_commuter said:
TBB and I have televisions which allow us to see two weeks into the future.rick_chasey said:I think anyone who bothers to read what I write can see that for the most part, on this anyway,I've been more or less around half a week ahead of what gets reported in the papers.
Presumably this is because I have friends etc who are journos.
Can you ask your journo friends why the media report number of deaths without noticing they trend down at the weekend?
The guys I know are too junior to really have decision over that stuff. They do recognise their role in helping the gov't get through this though, and there is definitely a reticence to stoke the fire too much as that isn't helpful.
We will no doubt see revised numbers and much wringing of hands in years to come when the dust has settled.0 -
surrey_commuter said:Pross said:
That's already being widely reported isn't it? The BBC were making it clear yesterday I thought along with now adding a caveat that it only includes deaths in hospitals. It almost felt like someone had asked them to do it to reduce any complacency with early signs that the rate of spread is slowing.surrey_commuter said:focuszing723 said:Can't you start a new thread for yourselves called "Negative Covid19 News I Googled".
Leave it to the rest of us to contribute with current information and positive developments.
There are a lot of interesting thoughts on here that are weeks ahead of the media. When do you think they will notice that we don’t count deaths properly at the weekend and that this skews the numbers?
Being positive and getting on the front foot does not work for a global pandemic
Steve0 will appreciate the irony that I do not watch news on TV because I find it too depressing. They have a different agenda to print media as they will give preference to televisual stories.
I've said it before, but if anyone wants to wean themselves off TV news, just watch The Day Today - it's a surgical deconstruction of TV News, which is mostly just (gruesome) entertainment masquerading as 'news'. The whole medium is designed to get you hooked, and it uses misery to do so. It's much more insidious than print media, as they work your emotions in real time.0 -
Either do Iddraver said:
The trouble dude is that I don't know if you're joking...surrey_commuter said:
We can’t all be weird.ddraver said:You're bloody weird you lot...
You need to chose a side.
You can be a Boris Trumpian who thinks that all will be OK if we all cheer up a bit and rally behind them as they are a great leader.
Alternatively you can believe that the Govt response has not been 100% perfect, they continue to make mistakes and as such you have opinions on what they should do.0 -
I never understood why a reporter goes and stands outside Scotland Yard to do a story about crime. As they could do the same thing in the studio I assume it is to get the wages up of the entire crew.Pross said:
I get a bit annoyed when they spend most of the news going around interviewing Joe Bloggs, who is self-isolating, through the kitchen window with a boom mic whilst constantly reiterating the Government advice to only make essential journeys. I accept that some reporting is necessary to keep people informed but that sort of pointless air-filler doesn't strike me as essential travel. Without it they might even find time in their news schedule to report on other things that are going on in the world as I'm pretty sure it hasn't ceased functioning altogether.surrey_commuter said:Pross said:
That's already being widely reported isn't it? The BBC were making it clear yesterday I thought along with now adding a caveat that it only includes deaths in hospitals. It almost felt like someone had asked them to do it to reduce any complacency with early signs that the rate of spread is slowing.surrey_commuter said:focuszing723 said:Can't you start a new thread for yourselves called "Negative Covid19 News I Googled".
Leave it to the rest of us to contribute with current information and positive developments.
There are a lot of interesting thoughts on here that are weeks ahead of the media. When do you think they will notice that we don’t count deaths properly at the weekend and that this skews the numbers?
Being positive and getting on the front foot does not work for a global pandemic
Steve0 will appreciate the irony that I do not watch news on TV because I find it too depressing. They have a different agenda to print media as they will give preference to televisual stories.0 -
Or why send a national reporter to simply repeat what the local reporter will say on the local news?surrey_commuter said:
I never understood why a reporter goes and stands outside Scotland Yard to do a story about crime. As they could do the same thing in the studio I assume it is to get the wages up of the entire crew.Pross said:
I get a bit annoyed when they spend most of the news going around interviewing Joe Bloggs, who is self-isolating, through the kitchen window with a boom mic whilst constantly reiterating the Government advice to only make essential journeys. I accept that some reporting is necessary to keep people informed but that sort of pointless air-filler doesn't strike me as essential travel. Without it they might even find time in their news schedule to report on other things that are going on in the world as I'm pretty sure it hasn't ceased functioning altogether.surrey_commuter said:Pross said:
That's already being widely reported isn't it? The BBC were making it clear yesterday I thought along with now adding a caveat that it only includes deaths in hospitals. It almost felt like someone had asked them to do it to reduce any complacency with early signs that the rate of spread is slowing.surrey_commuter said:focuszing723 said:Can't you start a new thread for yourselves called "Negative Covid19 News I Googled".
Leave it to the rest of us to contribute with current information and positive developments.
There are a lot of interesting thoughts on here that are weeks ahead of the media. When do you think they will notice that we don’t count deaths properly at the weekend and that this skews the numbers?
Being positive and getting on the front foot does not work for a global pandemic
Steve0 will appreciate the irony that I do not watch news on TV because I find it too depressing. They have a different agenda to print media as they will give preference to televisual stories.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Or travel to hide behind a beach hut to take photos of the Scottish CMO. Essential work, innit.Pross said:
I get a bit annoyed when they spend most of the news going around interviewing Joe Bloggs, who is self-isolating, through the kitchen window with a boom mic whilst constantly reiterating the Government advice to only make essential journeys.0 -
It's getting hard to tell if this is allowed on here any more as it might be considered too gloomy or too...accurate but Wuhan is free
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/wuhan-coronavirus-lockdown-end-china-cases-deaths-a9454281.htmlWe're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
- @ddraver0 -
Put it in the conspiracy theory thread as it obviously demonstrates that the Chinese deliberately launched the virus and have been able to switch it back off again once it took hold elsewhere.ddraver said:It's getting hard to tell if this is allowed on here any more as it might be considered too gloomy or too...accurate but Wuhan is free
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/wuhan-coronavirus-lockdown-end-china-cases-deaths-a9454281.html0 -
Stick around it gets more fun/confusing as their are those amongst us who don’t believe forecasting has any merit, therefore lockdown may have increased deaths from C19 and we will never know because an identical country in a parallel universe did not follow the non-lockdown approach.ddraver said:Ahhh, I see!
Bizarrely this post is serious0 -
surrey_commuter said:
Stick around it gets more fun/confusing as their are those amongst us who don’t believe forecasting has any merit, therefore lockdown may have increased deaths from C19 and we will never know because an identical country in a parallel universe did not follow the non-lockdown approach.ddraver said:Ahhh, I see!
Bizarrely this post is serious
Absolutely however unlikely it seems.You can fool some of the people all of the time. Concentrate on those people.0 -
German Q2 GDP: Down 10%
Sorry I guess I should caveat this with some positive thinking.
"The entire economy of Germany has not been eradicated, and it has merely been decimated. What joy".
0 -
So Singers, which was getting praise for not having to lock everthing down, is getting a third wave and is having to be increasingly draconian again.
Suspect that will be the way for a while; various degrees of lockdown off, lockdown on, as the infection rate oscillates.0 -
On the plus side if you find yourself in alberta, you can get a barrel of oil for less than a pint of beer.
Bargains to be had all around.0 -
Agreed. So long as we are measuring the same thing each time and understand the limitations of the data, then we can draw useful conclusions.First.Aspect said:
The under reporting isn't an issue as such though. What you need from a policy perspective is precision, not necessarily accuracy.rjsterry said:
I posted something about the under-reporting of the numbers yesterday and I think I mentioned this previously. I don't doubt that there is a similar administrative lag in other countries' figures. It also emphasises the point about a full assessment only being possible when we have all the information.rick_chasey said:
Guardian wrote a piece explaining why they don't think the numbers are right, and the guys at the FT have been saying that forever.surrey_commuter said:
TBB and I have televisions which allow us to see two weeks into the future.rick_chasey said:I think anyone who bothers to read what I write can see that for the most part, on this anyway,I've been more or less around half a week ahead of what gets reported in the papers.
Presumably this is because I have friends etc who are journos.
Can you ask your journo friends why the media report number of deaths without noticing they trend down at the weekend?
The guys I know are too junior to really have decision over that stuff. They do recognise their role in helping the gov't get through this though, and there is definitely a reticence to stoke the fire too much as that isn't helpful.
We will no doubt see revised numbers and much wringing of hands in years to come when the dust has settled.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
This "precision not accuracy" is correct in assessing whether a policy has moved numbers in the right direction.First.Aspect said:
The under reporting isn't an issue as such though. What you need from a policy perspective is precision, not necessarily accuracy.rjsterry said:
I posted something about the under-reporting of the numbers yesterday and I think I mentioned this previously. I don't doubt that there is a similar administrative lag in other countries' figures. It also emphasises the point about a full assessment only being possible when we have all the information.rick_chasey said:
Guardian wrote a piece explaining why they don't think the numbers are right, and the guys at the FT have been saying that forever.surrey_commuter said:
TBB and I have televisions which allow us to see two weeks into the future.rick_chasey said:I think anyone who bothers to read what I write can see that for the most part, on this anyway,I've been more or less around half a week ahead of what gets reported in the papers.
Presumably this is because I have friends etc who are journos.
Can you ask your journo friends why the media report number of deaths without noticing they trend down at the weekend?
The guys I know are too junior to really have decision over that stuff. They do recognise their role in helping the gov't get through this though, and there is definitely a reticence to stoke the fire too much as that isn't helpful.
We will no doubt see revised numbers and much wringing of hands in years to come when the dust has settled.
It is not right when assessing a cost/benefit for any policy. If deaths are being hugely under reported, then it might lead to policy decisions that are not appropriate.0 -
Your correct use of the word decimated is a trivial thing that cheers me up.rick_chasey said:German Q2 GDP: Down 10%
Sorry I guess I should caveat this with some positive thinking.
"The entire economy of Germany has not been eradicated, and it has merely been decimated. What joy".
Do you mean Q2?0 -
if you have storage the market will be in serious contago so you can make a packet if you can keep hold of it.Jeremy.89 said:On the plus side if you find yourself in alberta, you can get a barrel of oil for less than a pint of beer.
Bargains to be had all around.
Storage is so low physical traders are literally chartering ships to sit off the coast fully laden with a view to selling later.0 -
Yesterdays ONS figures that added on deaths outside hospital (care homes, own home etc) added 10% to the hospital deaths for the week quoted. Which was a lot less than I expected, frankly.rjsterry said:
Agreed. So long as we are measuring the same thing each time and understand the limitations of the data, then we can draw useful conclusions.First.Aspect said:
The under reporting isn't an issue as such though. What you need from a policy perspective is precision, not necessarily accuracy.rjsterry said:
I posted something about the under-reporting of the numbers yesterday and I think I mentioned this previously. I don't doubt that there is a similar administrative lag in other countries' figures. It also emphasises the point about a full assessment only being possible when we have all the information.rick_chasey said:
Guardian wrote a piece explaining why they don't think the numbers are right, and the guys at the FT have been saying that forever.surrey_commuter said:
TBB and I have televisions which allow us to see two weeks into the future.rick_chasey said:I think anyone who bothers to read what I write can see that for the most part, on this anyway,I've been more or less around half a week ahead of what gets reported in the papers.
Presumably this is because I have friends etc who are journos.
Can you ask your journo friends why the media report number of deaths without noticing they trend down at the weekend?
The guys I know are too junior to really have decision over that stuff. They do recognise their role in helping the gov't get through this though, and there is definitely a reticence to stoke the fire too much as that isn't helpful.
We will no doubt see revised numbers and much wringing of hands in years to come when the dust has settled.
I've just seen the Scottish figures for March, which added 50% to the monthly total, which is a bit more worrying.0