I had mentioned that children are reacting to COVID 19 with something that is similar to Kawasaki Disease and promptly got jumped all over. Well, here is an article that discusses the similarities.
Jesus wept, it has been less than three months. At the very least could we not wait until we have some more reliable data on immunity, transmission and vaccine possibilities before we throw the entire disabled and chronically ill population under a bus.
Rather weird in London right now, as people are saying that the virus has gone. Well, no, I don't believe it, and dread people becoming lax. R is supposed to be 0.4. Well ...
United Arab Emirates - 22,627 (14,482 / 7,931 / 214)
Bangladesh - 20,995 (16,564 / 4,117 / 314)
Poland - 18,257 (10,167 / 7,175 / 915)
Ukraine - 17,858 (12,455 / 4,906 / 497)
Indonesia - 17,025 (12,025 / 3,911 / 1,089)
Romania - 16,704 (6,036 / 9,574 / 1,094)
Israel - 16,608 (3,485 / 12,855 / 268) 2.0%
Japan - 16,237 (5,174 / 10,338 / 725) 6.6%
Austria - 16,201 (1,048 / 14,524 / 629) 4.2%
Colombia - 14,939 (10,790 / 3,587 / 562)
South Africa - 14,355 (7,616 / 6,478 / 261)
Kuwait - 13,802 (9,852 / 3,843 / 107)
Philippines - 12,305 (8,927 / 2,561 / 817)
Dominican Republic - 12,110 (7,956 / 3,726 / 428)
Egypt - 11,719 (8,157 / 2,950 / 612)
South Korea - 11,050 (900 / 9,888 / 262) 2.6%
Denmark - 10,858 (1,208 / 9,107 / 543) 5.6%
Serbia - 10,496 (5,789 / 4,479 / 228)
The listings are in the format:
X. Country - [# of known cases] ([active] / [recovered] / [dead]) [%fatality rate]
Fatality rates are only listed for countries where the number of resolved cases (recovered + dead) exceeds the number of known active cases by a ratio of at least 2:1.
Italics indicate authoritarian countries whose official statistics are suspect. Other country's statistics are suspect if their testing regimes are substandard.
If American states were treated as individual countries twenty-nine of them would be on that list. New York would be ranked at #2, between "everywhere in the U.S. except New York" (#1) and Spain (#3). New Jersey would be between Turkey and Iran.
No countries have joined the 10,000 case club since the last compilation.
Details in that include the USA topping 90,000 deaths. The last 10,000 have taken about a day longer than the previous two 10k rises. The numbers of new cases remain very high. It really doesn't matter if this is a result of increased testing. There will still be a significant feed in to serious and critical cases and the numbers represent a massive challenge to effective tracking and tracing. I think it remains to be seen what the impact of relaxations will be.
I admit to being concerned about the potential politicisation of the numbers of new cases and the numbers dying. As well as the President, a significant number of State Governors have tied their credibility to reopening and taking steps backwards because of signs of an uptick will probably damage credibility.
And that argument is by no means confined to the USA.
And as this thread has illuminated well, just looking at deaths fails to consider the impact of longer term damage to health.
I think the UK is still in pretty deep shit, by reference to new case numbers. Things are clearly improving in Spain, Italy, France, Belgium, Holland.
Russia is now clearly in the grip of the epidemic as are Brazil and Mexico. And from such ground level reports which are surfacing, there is room for considerable concern re many other countries, even if the figures don't look too bad.
Jesus wept, it has been less than three months. At the very least could we not wait until we have some more reliable data on immunity, transmission and vaccine possibilities before we throw the entire disabled and chronically ill population under a bus.
By being under de facto house arrest, quarantined. I make the claim on the basis of human nature, on 'common sense', on utilitarian perceptions. This will be managed in the first world, is being managed, by freeing people inversely proportional to age until health services warn they will fail. It's all about ventilators.
Aye Alan. But marginally more controlled, more resourced. Those receiving at risk care one way or the other must be 5%. The 95% have to be freed. Call it 75% after socially distancing the 60+ not receiving care.
Outside the first world this will rage on killing millions. Anyone remember Yeltsin's Russia? Life expectancy was in the 40s. That.
Here the young will go back to work and mourn a little earlier.
Rather weird in London right now, as people are saying that the virus has gone. Well, no, I don't believe it, and dread people becoming lax. R is supposed to be 0.4. Well ...
I still don't know how anyone measures R that precisely, or at all without knowing the number of people who are infected (which needs a lot of testing). But, R is a product of the restrictions on person to person contact; once you put restrictions on contact in place R will immediately fall and remain unchanged until those restrictions are changed (of course, in practice you get people who don't follow the advise who keep the R higher than it would otherwise be, and that behaviour is subject to change on a different cycle to the official rules). If the R value has been falling over the last few weeks then that suggests that we're closing down routes of transmission - almost certainly better use of PPE, but also factors such as a reduction in the number of people not following the advice may make a small contribution. R can vary regionally as a function of how effective particular restrictions are in different contexts - if it's possible for essential workers to commute by car this will probably produce a lower R value than where public transport is essential. And, also between different communities and sectors of the economy as these will have different capability to social distance and isolate - we know that R is very much higher in hospitals and care homes compared to the regional average, when businesses re-open it seems obvious R will be higher in open plan offices with lots of close packed cubicles than a business where staff each have their own office.
An R value of 0.4 looks very low, it appears that for most of the UK a value of 0.6-0.9 would be most likely. But, if that value has fallen that far then that does suggest a little bit of headroom that would allow the lockdown to be eased sooner as the number of infected people falls more rapidly. A low R value would not, in itself, justify relaxing restrictions. What's needed is a reduction in the number of people who are infected to a level where it becomes practical to rapidly identify any infections and get those people affected isolated before each infection gets into the position of community spread - if you can do that you can actually live with an R slightly above 1, if you can't do that then even an R slightly under 1 will still mean you have a lot of sick people to deal with and you won't be in control in any realistic manner (you'll get a lot of sudden flare-ups in communities with higher R values). So, even if we accept R is at the bottom of the range and significantly below 1 that will only mean that easing restrictions becomes possible sooner - the important figure is the number of people who are infected and whether you have the capability to trace and test everyone who presents symptoms (recognising that that will be a far higher number of people than those who are infected) and ideally conduct extensive mass-screening to pick up asymptomatic carriers. I see no evidence that the UK, or any part of the UK, is anywhere near that point with the possible exception of a few very isolated communities (on small islands, for example). At present it looks like the first large community in the UK where it will be sensible to relax the strict "stay home" message will be the Isle of Wight as the app trials have introduced a lot of the necessary trace and test infrastructure - and, even then there should probably be restrictions on travel to the island until the number of infected individuals on the mainland falls significantly.
Some parallels between the actions of local Chinese officials in Wuhan and local Russian officials in Chernobyl. In a sense, both probably had an idea that what was expected of them was "to keep the lid on" the truth until they received further political instruction on how to "manage the truth". Coupled with a degree of denial and a lack of appreciation at local levels about just how serious the situation really was.
All of which fell about their ears once scientists started to examine and measure the facts critically to see the real implications.
But let us not kid ourselves. The desire to manage the truth effectively in one's own political interests is endemic now. An incurable virus. As we have daily proof.
Outside the first world this will rage on killing millions.
Here's an uplifting story from somewhere outside the first world.
There's also been reports on BBC News this morning (though I can't see it on the website) from the Caribbean where the response there has been very effective. And, that in nations where tourism is the basis of the economy and so face all the problems of large scale international travel.
So, even if we accept R is at the bottom of the range and significantly below 1 that will only mean that easing restrictions becomes possible sooner - the important figure is the number of people who are infected and whether you have the capability to trace and test everyone who presents symptoms
FWIW: So pick *one* thing you're worried about losing, and imagine/brainstorm a way that it could be brought back in some form--safely, and with the same core of heart and spirit. Who knows? If the particular thing does start to slip away long term, maybe you and your ideas could help bring it back.
You're not alone in disliking/fearing the current changes and possible futures you don't like. I *hate* being stuck in one of the many disaster/sci-fi movies from the '70s. I hate that there's one bad thing, after another, after another--and many not having anything to do with the pandemic. I hate that people are suffering.
But, as much as I hate it, jumping the start signal and trying to go back to Normal too early could keep the pandemic going longer, sickening and killing more people, causing more chaos and disruption.
I don't have any easy answers. Finding safe ways to vent and distract yourself (gen.); and maybe finding a way to do a small amount of good from a safe distance (e.g. checking on someone by phone or e-mail, doing online volunteering; doing a citizen science project (Fold It, World Community Grid, etc.), some of which are working on the corona/COVID-19 virus), etc.
Just don't give up, and don't go all Krakatoa, ok?
doing online volunteering; doing a citizen science project (Fold It, World Community Grid, etc.), some of which are working on the corona/COVID-19 virus)
I think the tracking and tracing stories are more illuminating than anything else. I suspect, Boogie, that governments now understand this but are hoping that they will be able to keep the 'collateral damage' within politically acceptable limits.
What is blatant in Trump may well be covert elsewhere. A more or less humane journey towards a hoped for herd immunity. Less humane in some countries than others. The driving force being the genuine risk of national and international economic collapse if we go down the purely protective route for a long time.
doing online volunteering; doing a citizen science project (Fold It, World Community Grid, etc.), some of which are working on the corona/COVID-19 virus)
Yes, but didn't we close it down, back on the Vintage Ship? I know our team page is still on the WCG site, but I didn't see any obvious signs of action.
I'd been away from it for some time, then started doing it again several months ago.
FYI to anyone who's interested, and AIUI: WCG is distributed computing, which means you lend your computer to a project when it's idle, and the sum total of the computers is like having an awesome supercomputer. You can set various things, and even have a screensaver that shows what project your computer is helping with at the time. (It involves the BOINC platform, which also gives you access to projects besides WCG: SETI, Rosetta, etc.)
Fold It is different. It's basically a computer game to play with various genetics projects, fold proteins, etc. You don't have to know anything about biology. You are presented with a puzzle; you try various things; you follow your intuition; and you make use of all sorts of Fold It resources on that site, You Tube, and elsewhere. It's more than I can clearly explain. AIUI, if you get points, you're doing something righ!1
There are many other "citizen science" project online, and other forms of virtual volunteering.
I think the tracking and tracing stories are more illuminating than anything else. I suspect, Boogie, that governments now understand this but are hoping that they will be able to keep the 'collateral damage' within politically acceptable limits.
What is blatant in Trump may well be covert elsewhere. A more or less humane journey towards a hoped for herd immunity. Less humane in some countries than others. The driving force being the genuine risk of national and international economic collapse if we go down the purely protective route for a long time.
doing online volunteering; doing a citizen science project (Fold It, World Community Grid, etc.), some of which are working on the corona/COVID-19 virus)
Yes, but didn't we close it down, back on the Vintage Ship? I know our team page is still on the WCG site, but I didn't see any obvious signs of action.
Not so much "close down" as stopped actively promoting it. We originally started on United Devices (now defunct) who were doing cancer therapy related computations during the last days Miss Molly was with us, then switched to WCG after UD folded (pardon the pun). In the early days we had a thread with regular updates, who'd scored the most point etc. I think I started the last thread a year or two before we moved over here. Anyone who joined the team (unless they actually left) and is still running the software will still be contributing to the team score - and, more importantly, the progress of the projects they contributed to. Someone else must still be running the software because there are recent results included in the total (averaging a bit over 30h computing time per day since the start of April ... there was a big step up then ... almost as though lots of people were at home with their computers on).
Thank you, @Boogie , a very lucid, thoughtful article. Though, as a primary school governor, grandmother of school aged children and mother in law of a teacher, it hasn’t exactly put my mind at rest over the reopening of schools so quickly 😉!
Does anyone know what would happen if a school governor/head teacher, in consultation with the PTA, other staff and anyone else relevant, produced a statement along the lines of "in our assessment we're unable to fully reopen the school while maintaining a suitable level of social distancing to keep our staff, pupils and parents safe. Therefore, we will not be reopening the school until such a time as either we're able to operate with additional social distancing measure or the incidence of covid19 in the community is sufficiently low that the risks are also very small"? Would the UK government say "we say it's safe, therefore you have to open"? Could they force governors and head teachers out of post to replace them with people who will do as they're told?
Does anyone know what would happen if a school governor/head teacher, in consultation with the PTA, other staff and anyone else relevant, produced a statement along the lines of "in our assessment we're unable to fully reopen the school while maintaining a suitable level of social distancing to keep our staff, pupils and parents safe. Therefore, we will not be reopening the school until such a time as either we're able to operate with additional social distancing measure or the incidence of covid19 in the community is sufficiently low that the risks are also very small"? Would the UK government say "we say it's safe, therefore you have to open"? Could they force governors and head teachers out of post to replace them with people who will do as they're told?
I suspect in the case of local authority schools they'd struggle. Academies, free schools and other assorted oddities? I believe the only permitted response is "yes, Master Gove, how high Master Gove?" [I know Williamson is ed sec just now but it's been Gove oozing his way across the media this morning].
I assumed at the start that most cases of Covid 19 would be spread through the air, rather than through infected surfaces, based on my high school biology understanding of respiratory illnesses, and wondered why everybody was crazily buying hand sanitizer. While I now understand the importance of avoiding and cleaning infected hands from surfaces, this article does seem to confirm that airborne particles are the main cause of spread, as is usual with respiratory diseases. It also shows that it wouldn't matter if it was somehow possible to keep school students 1.5m apart (see head lice spread between kids compared to adults for example of a parasite that takes advantage of kids lack of personal space). In a classroom, one infected child or staff member is likely to infect most of the class. Kids being mostly asymptomatic will probably come to school infected and continue the spread.
All of us who have worked in schools know that viruses spread like wildfire. One school I was at even had a major chicken pox outbreak despite the majority of kids being vaccinated. The cases were mild due to the vaccine, but it was really hard to convince parents to check for spots before sending kids to school.
Pre-pandemic school staff didn't take days off or send children home with mild sore throats, a runny nose or slight cough. Everybody would miss too much school and work if we did and parents/carers (in households where there was not a parent at home during the week) would not accept or be able to take that much time off work to look after their mildly sick kids. Now everybody will just have to accept staying home for every minor symptom, at least until they get a negative Covid test result and probably until symptoms have ceased. There will be a lot more absenteeism.
I am sticking to my 3 days disability care and no teaching when schools open as it's too high a chance of taking the virus from a school environment to my vulnerable care clients. It's harder to continue socially distancing from friends and family now that in Australia we can meet with up to 5 people indoors, but I will do so for now after reading the case studies!
What it might take is a tracking and tracing story involving one student or teacher being found, all unknowing, to be the root cause of 100 plus cases and a dozen fatalities. That's what the media like. A juicy tragedy which makes a whole government policy look wrong.
Judgements in advance, however well founded and supported by detailed risk assessments, don't have the same power as a tearful 'I told them but they wouldn't listen' does after the event.
I'm on the COVID-19 tracking research, and they've asked me to book a COVID-19 test, I presume because they suspect I've got a long tail low level infection from the daily symptom recording. I believe I had an incredibly mild case in mid March, mostly because my daughter had the typical fever and cough symptoms starting 18 March, four days after we went into London on 14 March for a concert* and I had a cough a couple of days later, but I'm asthmatic, and coughing is normal. My daughter also had really nasty breathing difficulties 9-10 days later - but she gets breathing difficulties anyway, so we dealt with it. From the symptoms we've been asked about we both had a whole series of the other, now recognised, symptoms†.
We put ourselves in isolation for 14 days from the start of my daughter's symptoms, which covered the required 7 days from the start of mine, so no shops or other contact, only going out for exercise, which meant socially distanced walks (into the fields and avoiding people). But if I have a long tail infection, I've been out and about pretty much asymptomatic for 6 weeks - daily walks, weekly shopping and being careful, but not isolated at home as I would go quietly mad in a flat without going outside at all. If I'm still infectious I worry about the idiots who won't socially distance near me.
This research has been interesting as it progresses; I have been asked additional questions as the information gathering continues, it started with age, gender and various health conditions, but not a lot else. Since then I've been asked about my BMI, ethnicity, other health issues and menstrual status and a whole series of new symptoms as I enter daily results, so they are obviously adding various risk factors into the survey.
* However I was also working with young people whose parents work in London throughout March beforehand, so this isn't the only place I could have caught it.
That concert meant three lots of prolonged exposure in enclosed spaces (concert hall, tube in and out), so it's a possible source of infection.
† loss of taste and smell, dizziness, tiredness, headaches, nausea, abdominal pain, missing meals, vomiting, diarrhoea, sore throat, shortness of breath, hoarse voice, chest pain, tightness in chest, strong muscle pains or aches, red itchy welts on skin or swelling of face or lips, red/purple sores or blisters on feet, confusion, disorientation or drowsiness, light sensitivity or red eyes,
* However I was also working with young people whose parents work in London throughout March beforehand, so this isn't the only place I could have caught it.
That concert meant three lots of prolonged exposure in enclosed spaces (concert hall, tube in and out), so it's a possible source of infection.
† loss of taste and smell, dizziness, tiredness, headaches, nausea, abdominal pain, missing meals, vomiting, diarrhoea, sore throat, shortness of breath, hoarse voice, chest pain, tightness in chest, strong muscle pains or aches, red itchy welts on skin or swelling of face or lips, red/purple sores or blisters on feet, confusion, disorientation or drowsiness, light sensitivity or red eyes,
Good Lord, woman, don't you know how to take care of yourself as well as other people? Surely you're supposed to put yourself to be with all that going on!
I notice that Andy Burnham, mayor of Manchester, has been tweeting R numbers from various regions. It seems bizarre that a regional leader is doing this; no doubt, the govt will announce that comparisons between regions are meaningless. Everything is meaningless!
That's not what I said or meant. I really haven't had much of anything, nothing to suggest I had Covid-19 under the Government advice, no real temperature, not a cough to be bothered with when that's my main asthma symptom. But in hindsight I had rather more of those symptoms: lost my sense of taste and smell briefly, had a sore throat, mild fatigue and lost my appetite, which I hadn't realised were symptoms of COVID 19.
Tightness in chest is an asthma symptom and I did notice my peak flow wasn't great for a few days, because I do keep a bit of an eye on it. My peak flow was not as spectacularly bad as my daughter's was, but she has had many more of the symptoms and was isolated at home far longer than I did.
That's not what I said or meant. I really haven't had much of anything, nothing to suggest I had Covid-19 under the Government advice, no real temperature, not a cough to be bothered with when that's my main asthma symptom. But in hindsight I had rather more of those symptoms: lost my sense of taste and smell briefly, had a sore throat, mild fatigue and lost my appetite, which I hadn't realised were symptoms of COVID 19.
I never had a fever with my presumed covid symptoms, despite having loads of other symptoms including sore throat, tight chest, chest pain, fatigue and shortness of breath. My asthmatic 15 year old never had more than a mild odd cough, though he had that for over 6 weeks.
I notice that Andy Burnham, mayor of Manchester, has been tweeting R numbers from various regions. It seems bizarre that a regional leader is doing this; no doubt, the govt will announce that comparisons between regions are meaningless. Everything is meaningless!
The government press conference (or, series of statements as with Zoom down they didn't have journalists even virtually present - and no one with the wit to run it on one of the other platforms available for video conferencing) acknowledged that there were regional variations but committed to a UK-wide response which didn't involve regional variations in policy. Somehow failing to notice that three of the four nation of the UK are already doing their own thing.
And there's the fact that people with EDS and asthma just naturally have a lot of those freaking symptoms ALL the time. (I got my results back--negative. So I have to assume it was mostly my normal EDS/asthma.)
Does anyone know what would happen if a school governor/head teacher, in consultation with the PTA, other staff and anyone else relevant, produced a statement along the lines of "in our assessment we're unable to fully reopen the school while maintaining a suitable level of social distancing to keep our staff, pupils and parents safe. Therefore, we will not be reopening the school until such a time as either we're able to operate with additional social distancing measure or the incidence of covid19 in the community is sufficiently low that the risks are also very small"? Would the UK government say "we say it's safe, therefore you have to open"? Could they force governors and head teachers out of post to replace them with people who will do as they're told?
I suspect in the case of local authority schools they'd struggle. Academies, free schools and other assorted oddities? I believe the only permitted response is "yes, Master Gove, how high Master Gove?" [I know Williamson is ed sec just now but it's been Gove oozing his way across the media this morning].
Well Liverpool and Hartlepool councils have said 'No we're not reopening' as their local infection rates are going up. It appears that the Prime Minister has rather been p**sing off the regions by just dumping the details of last weekend's announcement on them without anything like funding for extra public transport services to increase capacity.
Jesus wept, it has been less than three months. At the very least could we not wait until we have some more reliable data on immunity, transmission and vaccine possibilities before we throw the entire disabled and chronically ill population under a bus.
They will be 'protected'. There will be no vaccine for a year and more and it will have a minority effect on average, like flu shots. And it will cost a trillion a year just to do that.
That's not true re flu vaccines. The range is 40-60% effective, sometimes more. And they vary mostly to majority. And it's entirely different. They predict a range of viruses and create vaccines against the predicting. COVID-19 is a specific virus.
Jurisdictions which ration flu vaccines to only certain groups (typically elderly or otherwise vulnerable) are doing this for monetary savings and this reduces the perceived effectiveness. It's wrong to ration in my view.
We have a problem with free universally available flu vaccines. Only half the population gets them voluntarily now here. Blame the anti-vaccine people and reduction of frequency of serious outbreaks. Employers are no longer permitted to require vaccination and discipline those who can be vaccinated and refuse to do so. With this COVID-19 perhaps it will be that individual rights will be overridden in interests of collective safety.
Does anyone know what would happen if a school governor/head teacher, in consultation with the PTA, other staff and anyone else relevant, produced a statement along the lines of "in our assessment we're unable to fully reopen the school while maintaining a suitable level of social distancing to keep our staff, pupils and parents safe. Therefore, we will not be reopening the school until such a time as either we're able to operate with additional social distancing measure or the incidence of covid19 in the community is sufficiently low that the risks are also very small"? Would the UK government say "we say it's safe, therefore you have to open"? Could they force governors and head teachers out of post to replace them with people who will do as they're told?
I suspect a single school trying to go it alone wouldn’t work, but a Local Authority, like Liverpool, would be fine for a while. The Department of Education has sent a document out listing 48, yes 48, tasks for schools to do to ensure ‘safe’ opening. These include staggered arriving and leaving, whilst not letting parents congregate or enter the school; staggered breaks, lunch times, etc; everyone to wear clean, washed clothes every day; nothing to be brought in to school, including lunch boxes, bags, etc; children to use toilets at set times to avoid mingling; all soft furnishings, soft toys, etc to be removed; no equipment, toys, etc to be used by more than one child without sterilising, and on and on. I’m not sure how young children will be better off in such an ‘alien’ environment than at home and I don’t know how parents will react when they realise just how restrictive things are going to be. I do recognise that children in poverty or in less than ideal circumstances are a real concern though, though many of these are being catered for already through the present school provision for the children of key workers, those with care plans, those with social workers, at risk, etc.
Does anyone know what would happen if a school governor/head teacher, in consultation with the PTA, other staff and anyone else relevant, produced a statement along the lines of "in our assessment we're unable to fully reopen the school while maintaining a suitable level of social distancing to keep our staff, pupils and parents safe. Therefore, we will not be reopening the school until such a time as either we're able to operate with additional social distancing measure or the incidence of covid19 in the community is sufficiently low that the risks are also very small"? Would the UK government say "we say it's safe, therefore you have to open"? Could they force governors and head teachers out of post to replace them with people who will do as they're told?
Well the headteachers' union thinks headteachers can legally refuse to open, according to this source.
Re academies, I don't think the risk is Williamson / Gove so much as whoever is running the academy trust.
@Curiosity killed , I’m in the same study and have just done a home test which was collected this morning. Part of me says that the symptoms that I, and to a lesser extent, Mr M, had back in February/March, matched up with those of Covid: temperature, intense tiredness, aches, tight chest, headaches, dry cough moving after an apparent recovery (during which time I was out and about*), to the nastiest chesty cough (secondary infection?) I’ve ever had since an attack of pneumonia many years ago. It took me until at least the beginning of April before I
began to feel halfway better.
I gather from the study that several of the symptoms I’ve reported since were in a combination thought significant enough to make it worth testing me. I had attributed several of these symptoms to side effects of medication I’m on. Plus I’m sure there were several other viruses doing the rounds when I was first taken ill. I’d be very surprised indeed if I tested positive now. If I’d been able to get a test eight weeks ago, it may have been a different story, who knows?
* As far as I know, most of the people I was knowingly in contact with during that time are in good health.
@Miffy - it's pretty much what I reckon - if they'd tested me back in March they might have found something, but it would probably take an antibody test to see if I had had it to check now. I'd think it was something else, other than my daughter's symptoms and the trip into London.
@Bishops Finger Given the added droplet spreading dangers of shouting, singing and generally having a good time, I would suggest no 😉! Back to good old Victorian times - sit still, be quiet, A certain NE Somerset MP will be thrilled!
@Bishops Finger Given the added droplet spreading dangers of shouting, singing and generally having a good time, I would suggest no 😉! Back to good old Victorian times - sit still, be quiet, A certain NE Somerset MP will be thrilled!
I wouldn't be so sure about that - you're not allowed to get close enough to give them a good thrashing.
@Bishops Finger Given the added droplet spreading dangers of shouting, singing and generally having a good time, I would suggest no 😉! Back to good old Victorian times - sit still, be quiet, A certain NE Somerset MP will be thrilled!
I wouldn't be so sure about that - you're not allowed to get close enough to give them a good thrashing.
@Miffy - it's pretty much what I reckon - if they'd tested me back in March they might have found something, but it would probably take an antibody test to see if I had had it to check now. I'd think it was something else, other than my daughter's symptoms and the trip into London.
@Miffy - it's pretty much what I reckon - if they'd tested me back in March they might have found something, but it would probably take an antibody test to see if I had had it to check now. I'd think it was something else, other than my daughter's symptoms and the trip into London.
Snap! The thing is, I’m normally in London several times a month, so it’s possible I caught something there, notwithstanding Mr M’s theory that he brought the infection back from the pub or the market.
I do recognise that children in poverty or in less than ideal circumstances are a real concern though, though many of these are being catered for already through the present school provision for the children of key workers, those with care plans, those with social workers, at risk, etc.
There could be a justification for reviewing the last few weeks in relation to children in poverty or otherwise particular need who aren't catered for in the present circumstances. Are there any kids falling through the cracks who would particularly benefit from being in school? Is there capacity for a very small increase in the number of children in school based on real need (which wouldn't include the convenience of the parents)?
That's very different from a politically driven decision to arbitrarily select a couple of age groups and say that they should return to school. Even an announcement of a significant increase in the business sectors where people should return to work, and therefore schools should prepare to take back children where there would be no parent or other adult carer at home would make more sense than what was announced - though, of course, the UK is currently not in a position to extend the go into work category beyond key workers.
That's very different from a politically driven decision to arbitrarily select a couple of age groups and say that they should return to school.
I'm wondering what life will be like for the very large number of families where one sibling will be forced to attend school, and the other sibling will be forced to stay home. All I can think is "this won't end well".
Comments
How? And on what basis do you make this claim?
The listings are in the format:
X. Country - [# of known cases] ([active] / [recovered] / [dead]) [%fatality rate]
Fatality rates are only listed for countries where the number of resolved cases (recovered + dead) exceeds the number of known active cases by a ratio of at least 2:1.
Italics indicate authoritarian countries whose official statistics are suspect. Other country's statistics are suspect if their testing regimes are substandard.
If American states were treated as individual countries twenty-nine of them would be on that list. New York would be ranked at #2, between "everywhere in the U.S. except New York" (#1) and Spain (#3). New Jersey would be between Turkey and Iran.
No countries have joined the 10,000 case club since the last compilation.
I admit to being concerned about the potential politicisation of the numbers of new cases and the numbers dying. As well as the President, a significant number of State Governors have tied their credibility to reopening and taking steps backwards because of signs of an uptick will probably damage credibility.
And that argument is by no means confined to the USA.
And as this thread has illuminated well, just looking at deaths fails to consider the impact of longer term damage to health.
I think the UK is still in pretty deep shit, by reference to new case numbers. Things are clearly improving in Spain, Italy, France, Belgium, Holland.
Russia is now clearly in the grip of the epidemic as are Brazil and Mexico. And from such ground level reports which are surfacing, there is room for considerable concern re many other countries, even if the figures don't look too bad.
By being under de facto house arrest, quarantined. I make the claim on the basis of human nature, on 'common sense', on utilitarian perceptions. This will be managed in the first world, is being managed, by freeing people inversely proportional to age until health services warn they will fail. It's all about ventilators.
Aye Alan. But marginally more controlled, more resourced. Those receiving at risk care one way or the other must be 5%. The 95% have to be freed. Call it 75% after socially distancing the 60+ not receiving care.
Outside the first world this will rage on killing millions. Anyone remember Yeltsin's Russia? Life expectancy was in the 40s. That.
Here the young will go back to work and mourn a little earlier.
The Daily Mail always wins.
An R value of 0.4 looks very low, it appears that for most of the UK a value of 0.6-0.9 would be most likely. But, if that value has fallen that far then that does suggest a little bit of headroom that would allow the lockdown to be eased sooner as the number of infected people falls more rapidly. A low R value would not, in itself, justify relaxing restrictions. What's needed is a reduction in the number of people who are infected to a level where it becomes practical to rapidly identify any infections and get those people affected isolated before each infection gets into the position of community spread - if you can do that you can actually live with an R slightly above 1, if you can't do that then even an R slightly under 1 will still mean you have a lot of sick people to deal with and you won't be in control in any realistic manner (you'll get a lot of sudden flare-ups in communities with higher R values). So, even if we accept R is at the bottom of the range and significantly below 1 that will only mean that easing restrictions becomes possible sooner - the important figure is the number of people who are infected and whether you have the capability to trace and test everyone who presents symptoms (recognising that that will be a far higher number of people than those who are infected) and ideally conduct extensive mass-screening to pick up asymptomatic carriers. I see no evidence that the UK, or any part of the UK, is anywhere near that point with the possible exception of a few very isolated communities (on small islands, for example). At present it looks like the first large community in the UK where it will be sensible to relax the strict "stay home" message will be the Isle of Wight as the app trials have introduced a lot of the necessary trace and test infrastructure - and, even then there should probably be restrictions on travel to the island until the number of infected individuals on the mainland falls significantly.
Here's an uplifting story from somewhere outside the first world.
Some parallels between the actions of local Chinese officials in Wuhan and local Russian officials in Chernobyl. In a sense, both probably had an idea that what was expected of them was "to keep the lid on" the truth until they received further political instruction on how to "manage the truth". Coupled with a degree of denial and a lack of appreciation at local levels about just how serious the situation really was.
All of which fell about their ears once scientists started to examine and measure the facts critically to see the real implications.
But let us not kid ourselves. The desire to manage the truth effectively in one's own political interests is endemic now. An incurable virus. As we have daily proof.
This is the key really, and in this context the news that only a fraction of those required have been recruited does not leave one confident that this will be carried out properly.
As an aside, the number of current cases will exceed the number in early March -- when test, track and trace was dropped as a strategy.
FWIW: So pick *one* thing you're worried about losing, and imagine/brainstorm a way that it could be brought back in some form--safely, and with the same core of heart and spirit. Who knows? If the particular thing does start to slip away long term, maybe you and your ideas could help bring it back.
You're not alone in disliking/fearing the current changes and possible futures you don't like. I *hate* being stuck in one of the many disaster/sci-fi movies from the '70s. I hate that there's one bad thing, after another, after another--and many not having anything to do with the pandemic. I hate that people are suffering.
But, as much as I hate it, jumping the start signal and trying to go back to Normal too early could keep the pandemic going longer, sickening and killing more people, causing more chaos and disruption.
I don't have any easy answers. Finding safe ways to vent and distract yourself (gen.); and maybe finding a way to do a small amount of good from a safe distance (e.g. checking on someone by phone or e-mail, doing online volunteering; doing a citizen science project (Fold It, World Community Grid, etc.), some of which are working on the corona/COVID-19 virus), etc.
Just don't give up, and don't go all Krakatoa, ok?
YMMV.
https://www.erinbromage.com/post/the-risks-know-them-avoid-them
What is blatant in Trump may well be covert elsewhere. A more or less humane journey towards a hoped for herd immunity. Less humane in some countries than others. The driving force being the genuine risk of national and international economic collapse if we go down the purely protective route for a long time.
Alan--
Yes, but didn't we close it down, back on the Vintage Ship? I know our team page is still on the WCG site, but I didn't see any obvious signs of action.
I'd been away from it for some time, then started doing it again several months ago.
FYI to anyone who's interested, and AIUI: WCG is distributed computing, which means you lend your computer to a project when it's idle, and the sum total of the computers is like having an awesome supercomputer. You can set various things, and even have a screensaver that shows what project your computer is helping with at the time. (It involves the BOINC platform, which also gives you access to projects besides WCG: SETI, Rosetta, etc.)
Fold It is different. It's basically a computer game to play with various genetics projects, fold proteins, etc. You don't have to know anything about biology. You are presented with a puzzle; you try various things; you follow your intuition; and you make use of all sorts of Fold It resources on that site, You Tube, and elsewhere. It's more than I can clearly explain. AIUI, if you get points, you're doing something righ!1
There are many other "citizen science" project online, and other forms of virtual volunteering.
Enjoy!
Perfectly balanced as ever B.
Thank you, @Boogie , a very lucid, thoughtful article. Though, as a primary school governor, grandmother of school aged children and mother in law of a teacher, it hasn’t exactly put my mind at rest over the reopening of schools so quickly 😉!
I suspect in the case of local authority schools they'd struggle. Academies, free schools and other assorted oddities? I believe the only permitted response is "yes, Master Gove, how high Master Gove?" [I know Williamson is ed sec just now but it's been Gove oozing his way across the media this morning].
What further reassurance does anyone need?
That’s what I’m doing here 😁
I assumed at the start that most cases of Covid 19 would be spread through the air, rather than through infected surfaces, based on my high school biology understanding of respiratory illnesses, and wondered why everybody was crazily buying hand sanitizer. While I now understand the importance of avoiding and cleaning infected hands from surfaces, this article does seem to confirm that airborne particles are the main cause of spread, as is usual with respiratory diseases. It also shows that it wouldn't matter if it was somehow possible to keep school students 1.5m apart (see head lice spread between kids compared to adults for example of a parasite that takes advantage of kids lack of personal space). In a classroom, one infected child or staff member is likely to infect most of the class. Kids being mostly asymptomatic will probably come to school infected and continue the spread.
All of us who have worked in schools know that viruses spread like wildfire. One school I was at even had a major chicken pox outbreak despite the majority of kids being vaccinated. The cases were mild due to the vaccine, but it was really hard to convince parents to check for spots before sending kids to school.
Pre-pandemic school staff didn't take days off or send children home with mild sore throats, a runny nose or slight cough. Everybody would miss too much school and work if we did and parents/carers (in households where there was not a parent at home during the week) would not accept or be able to take that much time off work to look after their mildly sick kids. Now everybody will just have to accept staying home for every minor symptom, at least until they get a negative Covid test result and probably until symptoms have ceased. There will be a lot more absenteeism.
I am sticking to my 3 days disability care and no teaching when schools open as it's too high a chance of taking the virus from a school environment to my vulnerable care clients. It's harder to continue socially distancing from friends and family now that in Australia we can meet with up to 5 people indoors, but I will do so for now after reading the case studies!
Judgements in advance, however well founded and supported by detailed risk assessments, don't have the same power as a tearful 'I told them but they wouldn't listen' does after the event.
We put ourselves in isolation for 14 days from the start of my daughter's symptoms, which covered the required 7 days from the start of mine, so no shops or other contact, only going out for exercise, which meant socially distanced walks (into the fields and avoiding people). But if I have a long tail infection, I've been out and about pretty much asymptomatic for 6 weeks - daily walks, weekly shopping and being careful, but not isolated at home as I would go quietly mad in a flat without going outside at all. If I'm still infectious I worry about the idiots who won't socially distance near me.
This research has been interesting as it progresses; I have been asked additional questions as the information gathering continues, it started with age, gender and various health conditions, but not a lot else. Since then I've been asked about my BMI, ethnicity, other health issues and menstrual status and a whole series of new symptoms as I enter daily results, so they are obviously adding various risk factors into the survey.
* However I was also working with young people whose parents work in London throughout March beforehand, so this isn't the only place I could have caught it.
That concert meant three lots of prolonged exposure in enclosed spaces (concert hall, tube in and out), so it's a possible source of infection.
† loss of taste and smell, dizziness, tiredness, headaches, nausea, abdominal pain, missing meals, vomiting, diarrhoea, sore throat, shortness of breath, hoarse voice, chest pain, tightness in chest, strong muscle pains or aches, red itchy welts on skin or swelling of face or lips, red/purple sores or blisters on feet, confusion, disorientation or drowsiness, light sensitivity or red eyes,
Good Lord, woman, don't you know how to take care of yourself as well as other people? Surely you're supposed to put yourself to be with all that going on!
Tightness in chest is an asthma symptom and I did notice my peak flow wasn't great for a few days, because I do keep a bit of an eye on it. My peak flow was not as spectacularly bad as my daughter's was, but she has had many more of the symptoms and was isolated at home far longer than I did.
Well Liverpool and Hartlepool councils have said 'No we're not reopening' as their local infection rates are going up. It appears that the Prime Minister has rather been p**sing off the regions by just dumping the details of last weekend's announcement on them without anything like funding for extra public transport services to increase capacity.
That's not true re flu vaccines. The range is 40-60% effective, sometimes more. And they vary mostly to majority. And it's entirely different. They predict a range of viruses and create vaccines against the predicting. COVID-19 is a specific virus.
Jurisdictions which ration flu vaccines to only certain groups (typically elderly or otherwise vulnerable) are doing this for monetary savings and this reduces the perceived effectiveness. It's wrong to ration in my view.
We have a problem with free universally available flu vaccines. Only half the population gets them voluntarily now here. Blame the anti-vaccine people and reduction of frequency of serious outbreaks. Employers are no longer permitted to require vaccination and discipline those who can be vaccinated and refuse to do so. With this COVID-19 perhaps it will be that individual rights will be overridden in interests of collective safety.
What you said was "set the low-risk free". What that does is generate a large number of asymptomatic plague carriers.
I suspect a single school trying to go it alone wouldn’t work, but a Local Authority, like Liverpool, would be fine for a while. The Department of Education has sent a document out listing 48, yes 48, tasks for schools to do to ensure ‘safe’ opening. These include staggered arriving and leaving, whilst not letting parents congregate or enter the school; staggered breaks, lunch times, etc; everyone to wear clean, washed clothes every day; nothing to be brought in to school, including lunch boxes, bags, etc; children to use toilets at set times to avoid mingling; all soft furnishings, soft toys, etc to be removed; no equipment, toys, etc to be used by more than one child without sterilising, and on and on. I’m not sure how young children will be better off in such an ‘alien’ environment than at home and I don’t know how parents will react when they realise just how restrictive things are going to be. I do recognise that children in poverty or in less than ideal circumstances are a real concern though, though many of these are being catered for already through the present school provision for the children of key workers, those with care plans, those with social workers, at risk, etc.
Well the headteachers' union thinks headteachers can legally refuse to open, according to this source.
Re academies, I don't think the risk is Williamson / Gove so much as whoever is running the academy trust.
It all sounds quite unworkable, though I take the point about children in poverty.
I know that. So?
began to feel halfway better.
I gather from the study that several of the symptoms I’ve reported since were in a combination thought significant enough to make it worth testing me. I had attributed several of these symptoms to side effects of medication I’m on. Plus I’m sure there were several other viruses doing the rounds when I was first taken ill. I’d be very surprised indeed if I tested positive now. If I’d been able to get a test eight weeks ago, it may have been a different story, who knows?
* As far as I know, most of the people I was knowingly in contact with during that time are in good health.
Limb movement is contraindicated, citizen.
Is a modicum of speech to be allowed? Or are the little childer to be seen, and not heard?
I wouldn't be so sure about that - you're not allowed to get close enough to give them a good thrashing.
Ah, indeed, my mistake 😅!
Snap! The thing is, I’m normally in London several times a month, so it’s possible I caught something there, notwithstanding Mr M’s theory that he brought the infection back from the pub or the market.
That's very different from a politically driven decision to arbitrarily select a couple of age groups and say that they should return to school. Even an announcement of a significant increase in the business sectors where people should return to work, and therefore schools should prepare to take back children where there would be no parent or other adult carer at home would make more sense than what was announced - though, of course, the UK is currently not in a position to extend the go into work category beyond key workers.
I'm wondering what life will be like for the very large number of families where one sibling will be forced to attend school, and the other sibling will be forced to stay home. All I can think is "this won't end well".