COVID19

[Banquo]

Sure, operational rules and guidelines are in for a shake-up, certainly in a country which has responded very poorly. I assumed Galfon was talking more about high-level/strategic approaches to pandemics, worldwide.

I wasn't referring to that, hence not quoting it
My kids met up in Laandan as per new guidance....and Clapham Common was seething with bodies. A pub not far from me has opened its beer garden as a takeaway.

I fear our people's 'common sense' is not a thing.

Fair enough - completely different point!

Yeah, London. They haven't gone completely insane in my neck of the woods, just on the edge of London, but yeah, I hate to think what's going on centrally. My Oyster card will continue to gather dust for a while.

The Tube must have been the uber super spreader early doors, with buses not far behind. Then call centres. Now its health and care settings, ironically.

[Sandydragon]

I remember being on the tube just before the lockdown took effect. It was very strange how quiet it was at rush hour.

It will take a lot before I use public transport again. I was taking the train from Stoke to Manchester and then walking from Piccadilly to Salford which was a good morning and evening routine. But I think I’m going to be stuck with driving in for the foreseeable. At least when I actually go back to the office which will be a while given I can be very effective working remotely.

[Eugene Wrayburn]

Sweden’s Coronavirus Strategy Will Soon Be the World’s

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles ... -be-worlds

...
But Swedish authorities have argued that the country’s higher death rate will appear comparatively lower in hindsight. Efforts to contain the virus are doomed to fail in many countries, and a large percentage of people will be infected in the end. When much of the world experiences a deadly second wave, Sweden will have the worst of the pandemic behind it.
...
There are good reasons for countries to begin easing their restrictions. It will take several years to tally the total number of deaths, bankruptcies, layoffs, suicides, mental health problems, losses to GDP and investments, and other costs attributable not just to the virus but to the measures used to fight it. It should already be obvious, however, that the economic and social costs of lockdowns are enormous: estimates from the OECD suggest that every month of pandemic-related restrictions will shrink the economies of advanced countries by two percent.
...
Sweden’s approach to COVID-19 reflects the country’s distinctive culture, and aspects of it may not be easy to replicate elsewhere. In particular, reliance on official recommendations and individual responsibility may not travel well beyond Scandinavia. Sweden is a special country characterized by high levels of trust—not just between people but between people and government institutions. Swedes were primed to take voluntary recommendations seriously in a way that citizens of other nations may not be
...

1) If we pursue a herd immunity policy (as Sweden's apparently is), and if current UK levels of infection are approx 10% of the population (as per Eugene's post), then by the end of it the total deaths will be many times what we are currently seeing, making the 250k number very feasible.

2) Sweden's approach may not be the worst in the world, there may be some things we can learn from it, but if you compare any of their numbers with South Korea's (or Singapore's, or NZ's, or Taiwan's) it's odd (to say the least) to recommend it as the strategy to follow.

3) The article in Foreign Affairs was produced by the Swedish Ratio Institute, so may not be taking an entirely unbiased view of Sweden's strategy.

I haven't gone through all of the last 4 pages since the post but...

1. Sweden doesn't have a herd immunity policy. They have social distancing which people actually abide by and 55% of their households are single person, and they have traditions of compliance with government direction that we just don't have. It means that they haven't needed to lockdown. They haven't just let the virus run rampant though.
2. The death toll for Sweden is clearly not the best. It's not the worst either though. What it and the UK demonstrate is that there is no magic to any one policy. It's about keeping the number of sick and dying people to manageable levels. A lockdown is no more than a brake which helps you get there but you still need a strategy for getting out of it and if you go into it too late you'll have a huge number of deaths from virus circulating in the population. Sweden hasn't needed that brake.
3. It seemed pretty measured to me.

[Banquo]

Sweden’s Coronavirus Strategy Will Soon Be the World’s

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles ... -be-worlds

1) If we pursue a herd immunity policy (as Sweden's apparently is), and if current UK levels of infection are approx 10% of the population (as per Eugene's post), then by the end of it the total deaths will be many times what we are currently seeing, making the 250k number very feasible.

2) Sweden's approach may not be the worst in the world, there may be some things we can learn from it, but if you compare any of their numbers with South Korea's (or Singapore's, or NZ's, or Taiwan's) it's odd (to say the least) to recommend it as the strategy to follow.

3) The article in Foreign Affairs was produced by the Swedish Ratio Institute, so may not be taking an entirely unbiased view of Sweden's strategy.

I haven't gone through all of the last 4 pages since the post but...

1. Sweden doesn't have a herd immunity policy. They have social distancing which people actually abide by and 55% of their households are single person, and they have traditions of compliance with government direction that we just don't have. It means that they haven't needed to lockdown. They haven't just let the virus run rampant though.
2. The death toll for Sweden is clearly not the best. It's not the worst either though. What it and the UK demonstrate is that there is no magic to any one policy. It's about keeping the number of sick and dying people to manageable levels. A lockdown is no more than a brake which helps you get there but you still need a strategy for getting out of it and if you go into it too late you'll have a huge number of deaths from virus circulating in the population. Sweden hasn't needed that brake.
3. It seemed pretty measured to me.

Take away what you will from this. Totally agree with your lockdown point- and the strategy for getting out of it, which isn't obvious to me. (as in, I can think of no obvious strategy with no effective treatment (I think a vaccine might prove a pipe dream))

[Donny osmond]

Just to revive my tired old shit from the other day BUT with an "interesting" new angle....



Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

[Donny osmond]

I'm not about to claim to understand what 'lived density' means, and this may be nothing more than a confirmation that you can prove anything with statistics. Just thought it was interesting.

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

[Sandydragon]

Just to revive my tired old shit from the other day BUT with an "interesting" new angle....



Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

The danger of stats.

Edinburgh and Glasgow are both big cities but the lack of population in the Highlands distorts the figures. It would be interesting to compare UK cities by caseload and population.

A quick look at wiki indicates that there are 2.5 million people living in the metropolitan areas of Glasgow and Edinburgh.

[Digby]

I'm not about to claim to understand what 'lived density' means, and this may be nothing more than a confirmation that you can prove anything with statistics. Just thought it was interesting.

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

Rather than divide population by landmass you split the landmass into blocks, typically with 1km dimensions, and then determine which blocks actually have people in them. You then divide population by landmass that you've shown has people actually residing within it.

So for population density if you've 100 people living in 100km2 of space you'd have a population density of 1 resulting from the sum of 100/100

but for lived density if you have those 100 people actually residing in 50km2 with the remainder being empty of people then the sum is 100/50 giving a lived density of 2


How many people might live in a given cell whilst it's still considered empty I don't know, but you might reasonably ignore the population of some areas of the Scottish highlands

[Banquo]

I'm not about to claim to understand what 'lived density' means, and this may be nothing more than a confirmation that you can prove anything with statistics. Just thought it was interesting.

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

How many people might live in a given cell whilst it's still considered empty I don't know, but you might reasonably ignore the population of some areas of the Scottish highlands

Sound like a Lions selector now.

[Stones of granite]

Just to revive my tired old shit from the other day BUT with an "interesting" new angle....



Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

That's the danger of copying stuff from fringe groups Facebook pages Donny. That image is a fabrication. Genuine Government briefing slides include a note showing the source of the data. United against Separation haven't given a source for it's origin either, instead giving a link to the NRS site, which obviously isn't going to include slides purporting to be from COBRA.

Fake news.

[Digby]

I'm not about to claim to understand what 'lived density' means, and this may be nothing more than a confirmation that you can prove anything with statistics. Just thought it was interesting.

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

How many people might live in a given cell whilst it's still considered empty I don't know, but you might reasonably ignore the population of some areas of the Scottish highlands

Sound like a Lions selector now.

If the Jamboree wants to take 38 players from Scotland they have my blessing

[Donny osmond]

Just to revive my tired old shit from the other day BUT with an "interesting" new angle....



Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

That's the danger of copying stuff from fringe groups Facebook pages Donny. That image is a fabrication. Genuine Government briefing slides include a note showing the source of the data. United against Separation haven't given a source for it's origin either, instead giving a link to the NRS site, which obviously isn't going to include slides purporting to be from COBRA.

Fake news.

Fair enough, it doesn't look right and the numbers are different from official numbers.

Didn't get it off Facebook tho, and I don't follow United against Separation. Interesting that you do, tho [emoji6] someone has to watch to watchmen, eh?

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

[Stones of granite]

Just to revive my tired old shit from the other day BUT with an "interesting" new angle....



Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

That's the danger of copying stuff from fringe groups Facebook pages Donny. That image is a fabrication. Genuine Government briefing slides include a note showing the source of the data. United against Separation haven't given a source for it's origin either, instead giving a link to the NRS site, which obviously isn't going to include slides purporting to be from COBRA.

Fake news.

Fair enough, it doesn't look right and the numbers are different from official numbers.

Didn't get it off Facebook tho, and I don't follow United against Separation. Interesting that you do, tho [emoji6] someone has to watch to watchmen, eh?

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

I don't follow United against Separation, I don't think my blood pressure could take it. They have a habit of fabricating stuff and passing it off as official, which gets picked up by the gullible and reposted. This has happened several times, and it took me a while to discover the source. Now when I see something suspect, UaS Facebook page is the first place I go to check.

Incidentally, I think the UK Government has been highly culpable of massaging the figures as well. All of the UK briefings have concentrated on what they call deaths where COVID has been proven by a test, or listed as a factor. I think we all know that the real figure to be concerned about is the excess deaths above the 5 year average, which the ONS also publish but which is never talked about.

Up to week 18, the accumulated excess deaths in England was 44,890 which is quite a bit more than the 28K figure they use. For Scotland it was 3,722 and for Wales 1,839.

This means that the accumulated excess deaths for Scotland, Wales, and England so far are 689, 592 and 801 per million respectively.

You can check these numbers on the ONS website at
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulation ... ed-by-week

[morepork]

Out of interest, how does one find something "interesting" if they do not know what is being presented?

[Mellsblue]

I have to say, I think the Scottish govt have done a superb job. Given COVID-19 disproportionately affects the obese, those with low vitamin D and the poor it’s a miracle any of you are still alive.

[Donny osmond]

That's the danger of copying stuff from fringe groups Facebook pages Donny. That image is a fabrication. Genuine Government briefing slides include a note showing the source of the data. United against Separation haven't given a source for it's origin either, instead giving a link to the NRS site, which obviously isn't going to include slides purporting to be from COBRA.

Fake news.

Fair enough, it doesn't look right and the numbers are different from official numbers.

Didn't get it off Facebook tho, and I don't follow United against Separation. Interesting that you do, tho [emoji6] someone has to watch to watchmen, eh?

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

I don't follow United against Separation, I don't think my blood pressure could take it. They have a habit of fabricating stuff and passing it off as official, which gets picked up by the gullible and reposted. This has happened several times, and it took me a while to discover the source. Now when I see something suspect, UaS Facebook page is the first place I go to check.

Incidentally, I think the UK Government has been highly culpable of massaging the figures as well. All of the UK briefings have concentrated on what they call deaths where COVID has been proven by a test, or listed as a factor. I think we all know that the real figure to be concerned about is the excess deaths above the 5 year average, which the ONS also publish but which is never talked about.

Up to week 18, the accumulated excess deaths in England was 44,890 which is quite a bit more than the 28K figure they use. For Scotland it was 3,722 and for Wales 1,839.

This means that the accumulated excess deaths for Scotland, Wales, and England so far are 689, 592 and 801 per million respectively.

You can check these numbers on the ONS website at
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulation ... ed-by-week

That is interesting and goes back to my post from last week wondering why England are doing so much worse than the other UK nations. We speculatively landed on the reason "London".

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

[Donny osmond]

Out of interest, how does one find something "interesting" if they do not know what is being presented?

If something has a sort of interestingy feel or look you don't have to understand it to be find it interesting. Think drag queens, or astrophysics.

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

[Stones of granite]

I have to say, I think the Scottish govt have done a superb job. Given COVID-19 disproportionately affects the obese, those with low vitamin D and the poor it’s a miracle any of you are still alive.

's 'cos we aint black innit.

[Son of Mathonwy]

I don't follow United against Separation, I don't think my blood pressure could take it. They have a habit of fabricating stuff and passing it off as official, which gets picked up by the gullible and reposted. This has happened several times, and it took me a while to discover the source. Now when I see something suspect, UaS Facebook page is the first place I go to check.

Incidentally, I think the UK Government has been highly culpable of massaging the figures as well. All of the UK briefings have concentrated on what they call deaths where COVID has been proven by a test, or listed as a factor. I think we all know that the real figure to be concerned about is the excess deaths above the 5 year average, which the ONS also publish but which is never talked about.

Up to week 18, the accumulated excess deaths in England was 44,890 which is quite a bit more than the 28K figure they use. For Scotland it was 3,722 and for Wales 1,839.

This means that the accumulated excess deaths for Scotland, Wales, and England so far are 689, 592 and 801 per million respectively.

You can check these numbers on the ONS website at
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulation ... ed-by-week

Agreed about the excess deaths being the most important number.

Where on that ONS page do you get the excess numbers split for England, Scotland and Wales? I've been struggling to find them.

[morepork]

Out of interest, how does one find something "interesting" if they do not know what is being presented?

If something has a sort of interestingy feel or look you don't have to understand it to be find it interesting. Think drag queens, or astrophysics.

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

At what point does interestingly become anecdotal, and what is the threshold for actual authority on this scale?

[Donny osmond]

Out of interest, how does one find something "interesting" if they do not know what is being presented?

If something has a sort of interestingy feel or look you don't have to understand it to be find it interesting. Think drag queens, or astrophysics.

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

At what point does interestingly become anecdotal, and what is the threshold for actual authority on this scale?

You set your own limits, chief. We've been around the merry-go-round on this thread many times with what figures we look at and why.

I did have the Brucie bonus of finding out what lived density is, so it turned out to be more interesting than it started.

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

[Son of Mathonwy]

Sweden’s Coronavirus Strategy Will Soon Be the World’s

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles ... -be-worlds

1) If we pursue a herd immunity policy (as Sweden's apparently is), and if current UK levels of infection are approx 10% of the population (as per Eugene's post), then by the end of it the total deaths will be many times what we are currently seeing, making the 250k number very feasible.

2) Sweden's approach may not be the worst in the world, there may be some things we can learn from it, but if you compare any of their numbers with South Korea's (or Singapore's, or NZ's, or Taiwan's) it's odd (to say the least) to recommend it as the strategy to follow.

3) The article in Foreign Affairs was produced by the Swedish Ratio Institute, so may not be taking an entirely unbiased view of Sweden's strategy.

I haven't gone through all of the last 4 pages since the post but...

1. Sweden doesn't have a herd immunity policy. They have social distancing which people actually abide by and 55% of their households are single person, and they have traditions of compliance with government direction that we just don't have. It means that they haven't needed to lockdown. They haven't just let the virus run rampant though.
2. The death toll for Sweden is clearly not the best. It's not the worst either though. What it and the UK demonstrate is that there is no magic to any one policy. It's about keeping the number of sick and dying people to manageable levels. A lockdown is no more than a brake which helps you get there but you still need a strategy for getting out of it and if you go into it too late you'll have a huge number of deaths from virus circulating in the population. Sweden hasn't needed that brake.
3. It seemed pretty measured to me.

(NB this is based on the foreign affairs article and some others I've read - I don't know Sweden's policy in fine detail)

1. They may not have made "herd immunity" an explicit goal, but they are operating a mitigation rather than suppression strategy, which amounts to the same thing. Agreed, they haven't let the virus run rampant, but they are letting it run, more slowly, through the population (presumably excluding vulnerable groups).

2. Sweden's death toll is not the worst, but it is one of the worst (it's the 8th worst by deaths/capita, 6th worst if you ignore micro-states). While the future might change this (as the Swedes desperately hope), equally, it might not, and so it would be perverse to single Sweden out as a model for others at this time (when there are over 200 nations with better death rates on this planet).

3. I'm thinking of the headline "Sweden's Coronavirus Strategy Will Soon Be the World's". It's not quite Boris's "Britain as Superman" metaphor, but it's remarkably positive from a non-Swedish POV.

[Stones of granite]

I don't follow United against Separation, I don't think my blood pressure could take it. They have a habit of fabricating stuff and passing it off as official, which gets picked up by the gullible and reposted. This has happened several times, and it took me a while to discover the source. Now when I see something suspect, UaS Facebook page is the first place I go to check.

Incidentally, I think the UK Government has been highly culpable of massaging the figures as well. All of the UK briefings have concentrated on what they call deaths where COVID has been proven by a test, or listed as a factor. I think we all know that the real figure to be concerned about is the excess deaths above the 5 year average, which the ONS also publish but which is never talked about.

Up to week 18, the accumulated excess deaths in England was 44,890 which is quite a bit more than the 28K figure they use. For Scotland it was 3,722 and for Wales 1,839.

This means that the accumulated excess deaths for Scotland, Wales, and England so far are 689, 592 and 801 per million respectively.

You can check these numbers on the ONS website at
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulation ... ed-by-week

Agreed about the excess deaths being the most important number.

Where on that ONS page do you get the excess numbers split for England, Scotland and Wales? I've been struggling to find them.

Sorry, wrong page. The ONS website is a nightmare.

Go this page.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulation ... ndandwales
and download the XLS file

Go to the tab entitled Weekly figures 2020 and you find the numbers of total deaths and COVID deaths allocated to week numbers for both England and Wales.

The numbers for Scotland are on the National Records for Scotland website at
https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/covid19stats
At the icon "Data and Charts" download the XLS file (which actually has the title covid-deaths-data-week-19.xls)
This has a contents page, so clicking on Figure 5: Deaths by week of registration, Scotland, 2020 takes you to the Scottish data

[morepork]

If something has a sort of interestingy feel or look you don't have to understand it to be find it interesting. Think drag queens, or astrophysics.

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

At what point does interestingly become anecdotal, and what is the threshold for actual authority on this scale?

You set your own limits, chief. We've been around the merry-go-round on this thread many times with what figures we look at and why.

I did have the Brucie bonus of finding out what lived density is, so it turned out to be more interesting than it started.

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

Yeah. The threshold for anecdote Vs. authority should ideally be a consensus if we are talking about a coordinated response, but thanks chief.

[Mellsblue]

The response had been about as coordinated as a 1970s haka.