As I have already noted this morning, what we and so many other countries are doing at present is unprecedented. We are not facing a recession, or a war. We are instead deliberately trying to close our economy down. This is the complete antithesis of everything that governments that are usually obsessed with growth have literally ever wanted to do before.
The response from many to this truly exceptional situation is confusing, Unfortunately, nowhere is that more apparent than in the reaction of the UK government, which is flailing badly. So an explanation for the required action is needed.
The best I have found is here. It is an article called ‘The Hammer and the Dance'. It is by Tomas Pueyo. And it may be a few days old now - which currently feels like a lifetime - but on a second reading today it remains as relevant as when I read it a few days ago. If you have some time on your hands, I recommend a read.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
A good piece which pretty much addresses and ‘justifies’ the current draconian measures – which we could easily have avoided if the WHO had done its part in January and the world had reacted accordingly.
The Chinese had done their part in calling them in at their first confirmation that a new pneumonia was around by december.
It is important to keep track of the timelines and actions of all involved around this now pandemic.
A worldwide crime has occured and is still underway. People have died , will die and be left crippled and many have lost their income and wealth.
Who are the perpetrators, what are their motives, what means did and are they using?
———–
Another excellent regular analysis on the web is bernard at MoA who has been on this since January – here is his latest which links also to all his pieces – most of what is in Tomas’ piece has been covered by bernard – the only bits are the made up ‘social controls’ table for controling the R-naught.
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2020/03/coronavirus-how-to-lift-lockdowns-and-why-we-should-all-wear-masks.html#more
———
I’ve posted my opinions already on several pieces here so won’t repeat myself …yet!
Take a look at the FT reporting a study by Oxford University today indicating that maybe 50% of the population have had the virus with most have the anti bodies to deal with it. They are to begin sample serological (antibody) surveys with the results a few days. If their analysis is correct then less than 1in 1000 infected need hospital treatment. To date this testing hasn’t been available. This form of testing is much more valuable than testing if you have the virus as apparently even people on ventilators in hospital were showing negative as it only shows up for a short period of time. gives us hope that things might return to normal sooner than we think.
I cant post link as it has a paywall.
I have to say that is a complete outlier and I do not believe it
I am sure I have had the virus
I know others who have
I agree many, many more have done so than official figures suggest
But the data on the NHS being overwhelmed very soon remains absolutely right
And even if 600,000 did you do know that most will die?
This tweet from the excellent Professor Anthony Costello (Ex-Director of WHO) suggests you are right to be cautious…
“More concerns sent to me about the Oxford model not fitting epidemiological patterns in China, Italy and others. Many worry that media attention will give people false comfort. We need DATA from virus and immune tests urgently.”
And I am inclined to trust him
You sound like you are trying to start an argument?.. i am merely the messenger!! And sadly regardless of whether the Imperial study is correct or the Oxford study is correct the NHS is in for a torrid time and many people will be touched by grief and misery in some way. Anyway here is a version of the story originally reported in the FT last night
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/health/coronavirus-half-uk-population-oxford-university-study-finds-a4396721.html
Clearly we are all speculating in an area we have no understanding but the picture will be clearer in a few days when Oxford get the results back from their serological testing and maybe that will provide a push towards a medical consensus. If Oxford are indeed correct in their analysis then is a complete game changer as to how the country moves forward. That is the point i am making.
“Speaking to the Financial Times, Professor Gupta said testing was needed to assess the theory.”
AN understatement if ever there was one
Lets hope the FT report is nearer reality [1]. I felt I had a mild flu 4 weeks ago and still have chest pain, so has my daughter (not living with us), I hope now it is CoV19. This is very different to the largely theoretical study of Imperial College.
This corresponds with CoV19 coming earlier than many state [2].
Empirical evidence is urgently needed with large-scale surveys [3].
[1] Oxford study https://www.ft.com/content/5ff6469a-6dd8-11ea-89df-41bea055720b
“If the results are confirmed, they imply that fewer than one in a thousand of those infected with Covid-19 become ill enough to need hospital treatment, said Sunetra Gupta, professor of theoretical epidemiology, who led the study. The vast majority develop very mild symptoms or none at all.”
[2] “… Covid-19 reached the UK by mid-January at the latest. … it spread invisibly for more than a month before the first transmissions within the UK were officially recorded at the end of February.”
[3] “We need immediately to begin large-scale serological surveys – antibody testing – to assess what stage of the epidemic we are in now,” she said.
“Speaking to the Financial Times, Professor Gupta said testing was needed to assess the theory.”
But that is the same for all science and medical studies!!..the good news is the testing is imminent and the results will be known soon.
I think the UK’s reaction to all of this has been not very good.
But the American Government…………………………I’m aghast!! They are just so dumb. What are they thinking?!!
You’re assuming they are thinking
At least they have an Opposition that is trying…
Where is ours?
As always in politics, one should distinguish the actions and the rhetoric. Especially when the Trump administration is involved. The US military are very well resourced and have thoroughly scenario planned this type of events. They will be quietly getting on with the task. Letting the politicians showboat and posture, keeps them out of the way!
As with all optimisation, it depends on what you are seeking to optimise, over what time period.
…remember, history is written by the survivors
Interesting to read Tomas Pueyo’s article and then look at what’s now happening in the federal government in the US today. In which context this segment from Lawrence O’Donnell’s MSNBC show yesterday evening is worth watching.
https://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/watch/lawrence-trump-s-deadly-nonsense-on-re-opening-the-country-81168453738
If anyone thought that the madness of Donald Trump had reached its peak before Covid 19 struck then think again: as O’Donnell notes, in his latest ramblings on the coronavirus Trump actually suggests that mass suicide will occur if people in the US aren’t allowed to get back to work soon.
(For a longer segment featuring Trump’s mad ramblings yesterday on Fox see this segment from the 11th hour with Brian Williams https://www.msnbc.com/11th-hour-with-brian-williams)
And for those of us who can remember as far back as the (so called) coalition government of Cameron and Clegg we may also recall one of Cameron’s key advisers – Steve Hilton – who now just happens to be one of the people pushing the idea – which Trump has now enthusiastically latched on to – that the ‘cure is worse than the disease’.
Of course, in so doing Hilton and others of his ilk fail to mention that the choice is not simply between the cure and the disease but also includes death, which I suggest most people would consider worse than either the disease or the cure. (to see Hilton in action see 2.13 minutes into this segment from the Chris Hayes programme, although the whole segment is worth watching:
https://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/chris-hayes-republicans-are-misreading-our-choices-for-coronavirus-response-81118789736)
Of course, from a UK perspective one is left wondering how far similar right wing/off the wall ideas are discussed within Downing Street, given that Cummings – like Hilton before him – likes to consider himself something of a maverick when it comes to government and public policy. Perhaps the ‘herd immunity’ idea of a couple of weeks ago was one such move. Thankfully the government had second thought about that, although it seems not before it put the UK behind the curve in slowing the spread of the virus.
That said, whatever one might think of Boris Johnson – and in my case that’s not very much – I feel confident in concluding that I seriously doubt that he’d ever match the delusional views and antics of Donald Trump.
God help America – you need it!
Ps. And once the approaching coronavirus disaster in the US is over nobody should forget the role of Fox News – and thus the Murdochs – in this sorry affair.
This is a very bad paper The underlying assumptions are changed in various graphs to support the argument. The Do nothing and Mitigation graphs are truncated to give the impression the graphs go up for ever.
In addition, I believe the impact of the disease, should be measured to years-of-life-lost, not simple deaths. And that social and economic inactivity is equivalent to lost life-time.
Then there are many alternative strategies on offer, which are not evaluated.
Finally, I am concerned that the impact of the lock-downs will have a greater impact on life-years than the direct effect of the virus. Mal-nutrition, food riots and a consequent breakdown of societies, could easily kill many more. Especially in vulnerable locations
Sorry Peter, but some of us value life more than business as normal – which there will never be again, I hope in the sense of going back to what it was
Thanks for the pointer to the tool Having tried out the tool, I can see how people could miss-interpret the results.
TO get the great result, the assumption is that by lock-down, you reduce the cumulative total infected,. However, this leaves a pool of people still vulnerable to infection, you then have to assume that they are protected indefinitely. Yes, China has succeeded in this policy, and is now having to play indefinite “Whack-a-Mole” trying to keep infection out. I question whether the West can do the same, and I know most of the third world can’t
Bearing in mind the global nature of the infection, I think there will be a reservoir of infection for some years.
Also, the tool doesn’t allow you to discriminate between vulnerable and non-vulnerable patients. But we DO know which is which, to a high degree of certainty.
One statistic we need, is how many patients lives are actually saved by hospitalisation.
My son is a respiratory consultant at a hospital not yet overwhelmed, I’ll ask him in a few days. Those saved have to be reduced by those with other illnesses who were not saved due to lack of access to hospital. (Before the outbreak he was realistic about how much intervention helps).
So, I’m still in the “use resources to just protect the vulnerable”, and let the infection rip through the non-vulnerable population. If vulnerable people choose to not isolate, that should be their choice, (not forced on them either way)
Mr Dawe,
As I understand it, the suppression strategy is a ‘buy time’ strategy; it pushes the peak infection timeline downstream in the expectation a viable vaccine will be produced, testing will be totally reliable, we will be overflowing with ICU ventilators and the staff to use the facilities will be available, trained and protected before the microbe finds us out; and very importantly – if I understand ‘the science’ – the life cycle of this species of corona virus (COVID-19) will have reached its natural termination, through mutation or extinction; in circa 12-18 months?
I would be interested to hear informed opinion on this matter.
Personally I find the ‘herd immunity’ strategy too uncomfortably close to serving the convenience of business and the economy first; under a cloak of disinterested science: to say nothing of the the repellant Social Darwinist philosophy that appears to be attempting to make a comeback in the UK and US, especially on the Right, and from a generation whose ignorance of the past appears to be profound.
Good that you have noted that you have a built in bias. Please ensure you neutralise it when evaluating strategies.
If Sweden hold their nerve, we will see which policy works best … in time for the next pandemic!
Thank you; but I hope you will forgive me if I say that I now I feel I have just been advised by the Oracle at Delphi.
If you feel numerate try the online epidemic calculator http://gabgoh.github.io/COVID/index.html
It shows that intervention, by cutting the transmission rate say by 3/4 or more, is vital. Such modelling is highly dependent on the values of variables used, these are adjustable by you.
To achieve numbers, that might reflect today the 25 March, try
R0 = 2.2 to 2.8
UK population 66M [68.4]
Intervention on day 66, we’re are at day 70 (all rough estimates, does not agree with The Mail [1])
Fatality rate 2% (might be too high, possibly in the range 0.8 to 1.4%)
Decrease transmission by 75% (effect of lockdown)
This gives total deaths of 460 and a daily rate of 72.
The good news is the total death tops out at 10,000
Johnson’s “take it on the chin” is easy to calculate – hundreds of thousands?
The model seems to assume the whole population can catch CoV which may be very unrealistic, as Nobel Laureate Dr Michael Levitt states [2].
We should go to total lockdown now!
Note: the slider controls will not set exact number you might prefer, the values it let me chose are in [xx]), and leave the other values at their default settings.
[1] https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8147821/UKs-coronavirus-death-toll-jumps-422-biggest-daily-jump-yet.html
[2] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/coronavirus-michael-levitt-china-italy-a9422986.html
Lots of good reading in the links…if we have the time….
See also from Common Weal: https://c0mmonw3al.activehosted.com/index.php?action=social&chash=b1a59b315fc9a3002ce38bbe070ec3f5.368&s=fa67ff2fa6b824a8f30adba4a46c59c7
and from the same Source, why the rich want to send you back to work: https://sourcenews.scot/covid-19-why-the-rich-want-to-send-you-back-to-work-even-if-that-means-death/
The Oxford paper has been shredded already. Follow @devisridhar for links on this & related stuff. Professor of Global Public Health at Edinburgh University & knows her stuff.
https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/03/how-many-americans-are-sick-lost-february/608521/
Is a must read on the catastrophe about to happen in the US. An image to complement it, seen today: a picture from flightradar24.com showing hundreds, of planes in the air from coast to coast.
I have to say I was not convinced by it…
“The Oxford paper has been shredded already”…so it’s one academic’s word against another..pretty pointless for the rest of us because we aren’t equipped to support an argument either way, particularly when practitioners and academia in this field are offering support on both sides..as I say testing for the Oxford thesis is under way and the results will be with us in a few days..so it’s easy to judge or dismiss but let’s wait and see..
I think what is being tested in Oxford is something quite different……
“I think what is being tested in Oxford is something quite different”
Not really…”The serum virus neutralization (SVN) assay is a serological test to detect the presence and magnitude of functional systemic antibodies that prevent infectivity of a virus.”
This is the process they are using…Might be all totally pointless or might be a game changer..we will find out soon
They’re testing for anti- bodies, but not to prove that theorem
“They’re testing for anti- bodies, but not to prove that theorem”
What are they testing for then?
People with anti-bodies
So that they can get back into the community
“People with anti-bodies..So that they can get back into the community”
Yes of course that is a corollary of their analysis !! Their thesis is estimating the number of people who have had the virus and fought it off. The more who have had it the more go back into the community. Their thesis states the number is high. As i said from the outset if at the very least bring serological resting to the fore then it is a positive outcome. If their thesis is correct then it is a game changer, and we will know soon.