Chinese "Devil Virus" - anyone worried?

[peterhague]

That 4 week lockdown isn’t going to be long enough to get the numbers down, particularly if a significant proportion of the population don’t follow the rules.

You’d also have to lockdown movement in and out of the country.

It’ll be 4 weeks before you see the numbers start to come down - let alone get control of the spread.

But isn't there a lag? I really struggle to see how significantly controlling people's movements for a month isn't going to have a major effect.

I don't think the goal needs to be, or should be, to get cases down to very low levels. You just want a rate the hospitals can cope with and that people can bear risk with as they see fit. I think that's the sensible compromise if we assume some kind of vaccine will be available in the next 6 months. Whatever achieves that - maybe something like a month of normal distancing followed by a couple of weeks of lockdown.

 

[Woland]

In Liverpool you can see cases started falling a few of weeks ago before any heavy restrictions kicked in. Dunno if the main drive was a uni / school bump that's now over or what but I'm definitely not sold on the cost benefit of full lockdown when the graph looks like this here, with similar in north east and notts

 

[Atlas]

If the government needed a rapid testing system for detecting alien life, and put out the request for tenders, you better believe that every physics or vaguely physics sounding entity across the country will miraculously and instantly come up with a suitable method for only £199.95 a pop, and the gullible public will suddenly think there are millions of aliens in the galaxy. This is not so different.

We all know this is not true.

It'll go the partner of a current Tory MP whose previous experience includes having been to Oxbridge and then failed as an IT manager somewhere having got that job via parents contacts.

 

[Bradley]

Yeah but they're gonna swab us with alien DNA and turn is into hybrids and harvest our organs for the royal family

Have you seen the movie 'Sorry to bother you'?

Think you might enjoy it.

 

[Woland]

Have you seen the movie 'Sorry to bother you'?

Think you might enjoy it.

Probs best movie of 2018

 

[StevieM]

But isn't there a lag? I really struggle to see how significantly controlling people's movements for a month isn't going to have a major effect.

I don't think the goal needs to be, or should be, to get cases down to very low levels. You just want a rate the hospitals can cope with and that people can bear risk with as they see fit. I think that's the sensible compromise if we assume some kind of vaccine will be available in the next 6 months. Whatever achieves that - maybe something like a month of normal distancing followed by a couple of weeks of lockdown.

I can only go on the Melbourne experience.

Yes - there is a lag - so what you do today, you start to see the effects in 2 weeks.

Melbourne lockdown started to see figures come down after about 4 weeks - after about 6 weeks it started to get to similar figures for when it started. After another 4 weeks, then the number gets down to a really low level - then a few weeks of consistently low and we started to open up.

If you open too early - then I guess you’d expect to see cases go up and hasten another potential lockdown scenario.

If you can get the cases down low - so that it is manageable at a local level, then you can open up “more”.

I’ve got to say - there’s no more than 20 people allowed in a pub/restaurant, but they along with more retail outlets are now open.

Melbourne Cup today - no spectators.

State borders are still closed - still not supposed to more the 25kms - but it’s obviously better than before.

That initial lockdown period was were we we had a 9pm-5am curfew, not allowed out for more than an hour - you had to get paperwork to prove you were an “essential” worker - only one person per household, per day to do essential shopping, no more than 5kms away.

Also remember, the numbers at our peak were lower than the numbers you’re seeing in the UK before lockdown was even considered.

I don’t think like-for-like is entirely useful - because it’s much easier to lockdown 5 million people in Melbourne than any sort of way a UK lockdown could work - but on the other hand it does offer a possible solution.

I can’t see how the UK gets this down enough to only run a 4 week lockdown.

 

[peterhague]

I can only go on the Melbourne experience.

Yes - there is a lag - so what you do today, you start to see the effects in 2 weeks.

Melbourne lockdown started to see figures come down after about 4 weeks - after about 6 weeks it started to get to similar figures for when it started. After another 4 weeks, then the number gets down to a really low level - then a few weeks of consistently low and we started to open up.

If you open too early - then I guess you’d expect to see cases go up and hasten another potential lockdown scenario.

If you can get the cases down low - so that it is manageable at a local level, then you can open up “more”.

I’ve got to say - there’s no more than 20 people allowed in a pub/restaurant, but they along with more retail outlets are now open.

Melbourne Cup today - no spectators.

State borders are still closed - still not supposed to more the 25kms - but it’s obviously better than before.

That initial lockdown period was were we we had a 9pm-5am curfew, not allowed out for more than an hour - you had to get paperwork to prove you were an “essential” worker - only one person per household, per day to do essential shopping, no more than 5kms away.

Also remember, the numbers at our peak were lower than the numbers you’re seeing in the UK before lockdown was even considered.

I don’t think like-for-like is entirely useful - because it’s much easier to lockdown 5 million people in Melbourne than any sort of way a UK lockdown could work - but on the other hand it does offer a possible solution.

I can’t see how the UK gets this down enough to only run a 4 week lockdown.

I think I'd prefer people to be able to risk their health than live in a fascist state, all things considered.

I think what Melbourne did was completely over the top. Reminds me of that Thomas Jefferson quote about the freedom/security trade off.

 

[StevieM]

In Liverpool you can see cases started falling a few of weeks ago before any heavy restrictions kicked in. Dunno if the main drive was a uni / school bump that's now over or what but I'm definitely not sold on the cost benefit of full lockdown when the graph looks like this here, with similar in north east and notts

Wouldn’t that graph suggest that it’ll take till mid/end of Nov to get figure down to Sept levels.

Then I guess you figure out what caused the spike - and unless you want it to happen again - you don’t do it again.

 

[MomoWASright]

We will be on a 10 week lockdown. Christmas “cancelled” and all us plebs will get the blame. We will have the usual NHS winter pressure in addition to the COVID shit and may need to get to next spring.

By that time Dantes might have lost his shit, sorted out BoJo and we might actually have someone fractionally capable in charge of this mess.

 

[Woland]

Wouldn’t that graph suggest that it’ll take till mid/end of Nov to get figure down to Sept levels.

Then I guess you figure out what caused the spike - and unless you want it to happen again - you don’t do it again.

I dunno if it'll keep trending the same, but my guess is that Liverpool City Centre doesn't normally have a large population, and throwing 70,000 students into it from all over the place produced something of a spike which is now on its way down.

 

[StevieM]

I think I'd prefer people to be able to risk their health than live in a fascist state, all things considered.

I think what Melbourne did was completely over the top. Reminds me of that Thomas Jefferson quote about the freedom/security trade off.

Look - there are parts of that I don’t disagree with - I think what Melbourne did was extreme and it probably went on a little too long- but the results this far suggest its worth it.

I think the fascist state angle is an equally extreme position to take. It really depends on what you did for a living.

I had many friends “radicalising” themselves in anger about the lockdown - most we’re smallish hospitality business owners or businesses that relied on that sector (possibly over-relief). A few were just pissed they couldn’t go play golf or fish.

Many scaled back and re-focused on making their core business sustainable rather than chasing constant growth.

Again - I can only really speak with any certainty on the liquor industry - whether it be production, supply, retail or hospitality - but there’s apparently been an interesting move whereby “local” or suburban businesses have found ways to flourish due to more people staying within their home radius - CBD businesses not so well (and I’m thinking more on cafes and coffee shops here).

It all boils down to whether you want to get numbers down and try to maintain low rates - that requires personal sacrifices.

The problem with not doing it - is surely you run the risk of making the sacrifice one that’s much more than personal and one you’d have no control over.

 

[StevieM]

We will be on a 10 week lockdown. Christmas “cancelled” and all us plebs will get the blame. We will have the usual NHS winter pressure in addition to the COVID shit and may need to get to next spring.

By that time Dantes might have lost his shit, sorted out BoJo and we might actually have someone fractionally capable in charge of this mess.

Depends how tomorrow goes - poor Dantes might be a broken man.

 

[StevieM]

I dunno if it'll keep trending the same, but my guess is that Liverpool City Centre doesn't normally have a large population, and throwing 70,000 students into it from all over the place produced something of a spike which is now on its way down.

I’d suggest everyone buffering off to Europe for holidays in August might have had an impact as well.

What was it like over there in Aug/Sept - was there stringent social distancing in places were people gathered like pubs, shops, etc - was mask wearing common - what was home visitation rules.

 

[Woland]

I’d suggest everyone buffering off to Europe for holidays in August might have had an impact as well.

What was it like over there in Aug/Sept - was there stringent social distancing in places were people gathered like pubs, shops, etc - was mask wearing common - what was home visitation rules.

It was pretty much life as normal, pubs etc open, just everyone social distancing with it.

 

[MomoWASright]

Depends how tomorrow goes - poor Dantes might be a broken man.

It could focus his mind on problems closer to home.

 

[dantes]

It could focus his mind on problems closer to home.

My fury emanates from wanting to see problems solved correctly, the way I solve them at great cost to my mind. If people elect a fake solution for their much simpler problems, I don't envisage how that will break me or upset me, I will just pull up the aspergers lack of empathy shutters and watch them burn.

 

[StevieM]

It was pretty much life as normal, pubs etc open, just everyone social distancing with it.

Did you have stringent capacity limits.

Pub I used to run would have a capacity of about 950 over 3 levels.

It’ll be limited to about 90 inside in total over 3 levels & Max 50 outside at tables - the most they were allowed Pre-lockdown 2 was 50 per level.

They get round it by having sittings and selling individual food & beverage packages - so you pay $50 which would include a meal and x beers for booking a table for a 2 hour sitting - that’s the equivalent cost of a main meal & 2 pints - you can buy more, I guess.

That would increase the average spend-per-head in most trading sessions outside the big Fri/Sat night ones - although obviously overall revenue will be down - that should make the business viable if they can flip the tables.

It won’t make the business anywhere near as profitable as it was - not sure how the massive US Private Equity overlords will take to it.... but they should still be able to turn over more than the business was 15 years.

 

[Gerry_A_Trick]

I saw something about 80% of new cases in the UK can be traced back to a new variant from Spain, so foreign holidays are definitely an issue.

 

[Woland]

Did you have stringent capacity limits.

Pub I used to run would have a capacity of about 950 over 3 levels.

It’ll be limited to about 90 inside in total over 3 levels & Max 50 outside at tables - the most they were allowed Pre-lockdown 2 was 50 per level.

They get round it by having sittings and selling individual food & beverage packages - so you pay $50 which would include a meal and x beers for booking a table for a 2 hour sitting - that’s the equivalent cost of a main meal & 2 pints - you can buy more, I guess.

That would increase the average spend-per-head in most trading sessions outside the big Fri/Sat night ones - although obviously overall revenue will be down - that should make the business viable if they can flip the tables.

It won’t make the business anywhere near as profitable as it was - not sure how the massive US Private Equity overlords will take to it.... but they should still be able to turn over more than the business was 15 years.

No standing at the bar and keep your distance was basically it. No pubs were packed like they would have been during a footy match or whatever but they were as busy as they were normally most of the time

 

[peterhague]

Look - there are parts of that I don’t disagree with - I think what Melbourne did was extreme and it probably went on a little too long- but the results this far suggest its worth it.

I think the fascist state angle is an equally extreme position to take. It really depends on what you did for a living.

I had many friends “radicalising” themselves in anger about the lockdown - most we’re smallish hospitality business owners or businesses that relied on that sector (possibly over-relief). A few were just pissed they couldn’t go play golf or fish.

Many scaled back and re-focused on making their core business sustainable rather than chasing constant growth.

Again - I can only really speak with any certainty on the liquor industry - whether it be production, supply, retail or hospitality - but there’s apparently been an interesting move whereby “local” or suburban businesses have found ways to flourish due to more people staying within their home radius - CBD businesses not so well (and I’m thinking more on cafes and coffee shops here).

It all boils down to whether you want to get numbers down and try to maintain low rates - that requires personal sacrifices.

The problem with not doing it - is surely you run the risk of making the sacrifice one that’s much more than personal and one you’d have no control over.

It's a matter of freedom vs safety.

Almost everyone would acknowledge a balance is required.

My personal opinion is Melbourne went way too far.

But then I'm really liberal. Most people aren't. Most people are on the authoritarian side, generally.

 

[Richey]

It's a matter of freedom vs safety.

Almost everyone would acknowledge a balance is required.

My personal opinion is Melbourne went way too far.

But then I'm really liberal. Most people aren't. Most people are on the authoritarian side, generally.

My natural instinct would be to agree that Melbourne went too far on their lockdown, but it is hard to completely sure, as surely it would depend on what the downside of it was? In terms of a lot less people getting ill with coronavirus then it has worked, but I don't know what the damage to the economy is, what unemployment is now like it Australia, what impact it is had on mental health etc etc.

 

[Athens]

Poor The Grimes

 

[peterhague]

My natural instinct would be to agree that Melbourne went too far on their lockdown, but it is hard to completely sure, as surely it would depend on what the downside of it was? In terms of a lot less people getting ill with coronavirus then it has worked, but I don't know what the damage to the economy is, what unemployment is now like it Australia, what impact it is had on mental health etc etc.

To me it's just a matter of whether you can justify that level of coercion. This isn't the bubonic plague. We can still operate with a sense of proportion.

In the main it's not very dangerous to most people, and generally it's quite easy to take measures to protect yourself quite independent from what other people do.

I think you need a REALLY good reason to basically start treating people like North Koreans.

 

[peterhague]

Poor The Grimes

Hahahaha that's ace.

 

[Delinquent]

To me it's just a matter of whether you can justify that level of coercion. This isn't the bubonic plague. We can still operate with a sense of proportion.

In the main it's not very dangerous to most people, and generally it's quite easy to take measures to protect yourself quite independent from what other people do.

I think you need a REALLY good reason to basically start treating people like North Koreans.

Is preventing thousands of unnecessary deaths not a good enough reason to temporarily restrict civil liberties? Predictions point to around 100 deaths a day in three weeks if we don't take action now.

What's more, if hospital beds and ventilators are taken up by COVID patients then capacity will be massively compromised. So it's not just COVID patients who'll be at risk - it's anyone with a condition serious enough to require hospitalisation, or indeed regular hospital visits.

I'm trying desperately to see where you and other libertarians are coming from, but can't see it. Does this stem from a belief that there'll ultimately be fewer deaths if we don't lockdown? Or is it just a prioritisation of civil liberties over thousands of people's lives?

 

[Halmeister]

The world is already overpopulated with a load of thick idiots. A cull of the old and the fatties will do us good.

 

[rubans]

The world is already overpopulated with a load of thick idiots. A cull of the old and the fatties will do us good.

Never works like that though, often it’s the poor and old, those without access to decent health services who suffer in any sort of epidemic. Those with money and power have the best chance to survive, for e.g. old fatties in charge of the free world who supposedly contracted the virus. They often come out quiet a bit richer too.

 

[Halmeister]

Never works like that though, often it’s the poor and old, those without access to decent health services who suffer in any sort of epidemic. Those with money and power have the best chance to survive, for e.g. old fatties in charge of the free world who supposedly contracted the virus. They often come out quiet a bit richer too.

I was joking. Unfortunately, you're right.

 

[peterhague]

Is preventing thousands of unnecessary deaths not a good enough reason to temporarily restrict civil liberties? Predictions point to around 100 deaths a day in three weeks if we don't take action now.

What's more, if hospital beds and ventilators are taken up by COVID patients then capacity will be massively compromised. So it's not just COVID patients who'll be at risk - it's anyone with a condition serious enough to require hospitalisation, or indeed regular hospital visits.

I'm trying desperately to see where you and other libertarians are coming from, but can't see it. Does this stem from a belief that there'll ultimately be fewer deaths if we don't lockdown? Or is it just a prioritisation of civil liberties over thousands of people's lives?

The latter, mainly.

Insofar as they're largely voluntary.

And I'm not against UK style lockdowns when needed, just as long as they're balanced by other considerations.

 

[Woland]

Is preventing thousands of unnecessary deaths not a good enough reason to temporarily restrict civil liberties? Predictions point to around 100 deaths a day in three weeks if we don't take action now.

What's more, if hospital beds and ventilators are taken up by COVID patients then capacity will be massively compromised. So it's not just COVID patients who'll be at risk - it's anyone with a condition serious enough to require hospitalisation, or indeed regular hospital visits.

I'm trying desperately to see where you and other libertarians are coming from, but can't see it. Does this stem from a belief that there'll ultimately be fewer deaths if we don't lockdown? Or is it just a prioritisation of civil liberties over thousands of people's lives?

The Imperial team have had everybody by the balls from the start and they're the worst predictions going. The data used two days ago is somehow already a month out of date