RugbyRebels

Banquo wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

morepork wrote:

I’m going to call you out on that one. It is a virus transmissible by close contact. Distance is the best possible way to avoid transmission. The data at the end of the day will bear this out.

I don’t disagree with you. Was just pointing out that there is no correlation at this point. Both Sweden and Holland are behind most others so far too early to take anything from it.

I’ve read a couple of bits that domestic arrangements may explain severity of spread. Italy have multigenerational living arrangements whilst Sweden has the most single occupation homes per capita in Europe.

Holland is pretty bad actually.

Was just going on that graph I put up a few posts earlier.

Boris admitted to hospital for tests.

If he is unable to carry out his duties, Raab takes over.

morepork wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:You could argue that if the Chinese government had acted more decisively sooner, then the rest of the world wouldn’t need vaccines. I’m not suggesting the British response has been perfect but I think your criticism of western government might be a bit one eyed.

Maybe stop dismissing the expertise of the WHO as some sort of elite social club and actually preparing for the worst by listening to them would be good advice for every country at the moment. We've had rolling the dice on herd immunity, bravado and bluster over social distancing, lobbying from corporate wankers who want their drones back out in the fields, and threats of summary execution in the street from various leaders.

I'm thinking not many will come out of this smelling of roses.

Oh I agree that we got this wrong at the beginning, but have moved in the right direction thereafter. But I don’t think western leaders have been worse than anyone else. The Chinese could have acted much faster but chose not to.

Banquo wrote:

morepork wrote:All hail the MBA. The golden calf of public health.

*apologies to MBA holders of integrity everywhere.

great call. Deal with the dozy twats day in day out. The talented clinicians tend to stay on or near the front line- the rest are promoted to the level of their own incompetence, and then sit alongside the MBA's- their talents are fine for climbing the greasy pole- essentially over promise and then blame someone else- but sh&t for this serious stuff.

Same in most organisation in my experience.

Sandydragon wrote:

Banquo wrote:

morepork wrote:All hail the MBA. The golden calf of public health.

*apologies to MBA holders of integrity everywhere.

great call. Deal with the dozy twats day in day out. The talented clinicians tend to stay on or near the front line- the rest are promoted to the level of their own incompetence, and then sit alongside the MBA's- their talents are fine for climbing the greasy pole- essentially over promise and then blame someone else- but sh&t for this serious stuff.

Same in most organisation in my experience.

It’s true in many large organisations, and particularly public or pseudo public sector orgs.

Sandydragon wrote:Boris admitted to hospital for tests.

If he is unable to carry out his duties, Raab takes over.

That’s pretty bad, I was thinking earlier on he could be in quite a bit of bother as he was taking a long time reappear.

Sandydragon wrote:

morepork wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:You could argue that if the Chinese government had acted more decisively sooner, then the rest of the world wouldn’t need vaccines. I’m not suggesting the British response has been perfect but I think your criticism of western government might be a bit one eyed.

Maybe stop dismissing the expertise of the WHO as some sort of elite social club and actually preparing for the worst by listening to them would be good advice for every country at the moment. We've had rolling the dice on herd immunity, bravado and bluster over social distancing, lobbying from corporate wankers who want their drones back out in the fields, and threats of summary execution in the street from various leaders.

I'm thinking not many will come out of this smelling of roses.

Oh I agree that we got this wrong at the beginning, but have moved in the right direction thereafter. But I don’t think western leaders have been worse than anyone else. The Chinese could have acted much faster but chose not to.

Everyone is culpable in a pandemic boss.

Sandydragon wrote:Boris admitted to hospital for tests.

If he is unable to carry out his duties, Raab takes over.

I wouldn’t wish that on anyone, but Karma is a bitch.

morepork wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

morepork wrote:

Maybe stop dismissing the expertise of the WHO as some sort of elite social club and actually preparing for the worst by listening to them would be good advice for every country at the moment. We've had rolling the dice on herd immunity, bravado and bluster over social distancing, lobbying from corporate wankers who want their drones back out in the fields, and threats of summary execution in the street from various leaders.

I'm thinking not many will come out of this smelling of roses.

Oh I agree that we got this wrong at the beginning, but have moved in the right direction thereafter. But I don’t think western leaders have been worse than anyone else. The Chinese could have acted much faster but chose not to.

Everyone is culpable in a pandemic boss.

That’s kind of my point.

Sandydragon wrote:

morepork wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:You could argue that if the Chinese government had acted more decisively sooner, then the rest of the world wouldn’t need vaccines. I’m not suggesting the British response has been perfect but I think your criticism of western government might be a bit one eyed.

Maybe stop dismissing the expertise of the WHO as some sort of elite social club and actually preparing for the worst by listening to them would be good advice for every country at the moment. We've had rolling the dice on herd immunity, bravado and bluster over social distancing, lobbying from corporate wankers who want their drones back out in the fields, and threats of summary execution in the street from various leaders.

I'm thinking not many will come out of this smelling of roses.

Oh I agree that we got this wrong at the beginning, but have moved in the right direction thereafter. But I don’t think western leaders have been worse than anyone else. The Chinese could have acted much faster but chose not to.

Sorry but that's demonstrably untrue, which is why South Korea and Singapore have done conspicuously better than those in the west, even if we discount Japan as lucky or lying.

As for the Chinese acting faster, they had an entirely new virus with no data at all to deal with. they've done fucking well and at l;east appear to have a lot fewer infections and deaths than many in the west. One thing worth realising is that they were contacting their counterparts a long time ago - it's been reported that their CDC head equivalent was on the phone to the head of the american CDC in tears on NYE.

Sandydragon wrote:

morepork wrote:

Sandydragon wrote: Oh I agree that we got this wrong at the beginning, but have moved in the right direction thereafter. But I don’t think western leaders have been worse than anyone else. The Chinese could have acted much faster but chose not to.

Everyone is culpable in a pandemic boss.

That’s kind of my point.

Sorry mate. Same page etc etc

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

morepork wrote:

Maybe stop dismissing the expertise of the WHO as some sort of elite social club and actually preparing for the worst by listening to them would be good advice for every country at the moment. We've had rolling the dice on herd immunity, bravado and bluster over social distancing, lobbying from corporate wankers who want their drones back out in the fields, and threats of summary execution in the street from various leaders.

I'm thinking not many will come out of this smelling of roses.

Oh I agree that we got this wrong at the beginning, but have moved in the right direction thereafter. But I don’t think western leaders have been worse than anyone else. The Chinese could have acted much faster but chose not to.

Sorry but that's demonstrably untrue, which is why South Korea and Singapore have done conspicuously better than those in the west, even if we discount Japan as lucky or lying.

As for the Chinese acting faster, they had an entirely new virus with no data at all to deal with. they've done fucking well and at l;east appear to have a lot fewer infections and deaths than many in the west. One thing worth realising is that they were contacting their counterparts a long time ago - it's been reported that their CDC head equivalent was on the phone to the head of the american CDC in tears on NYE.

They didn’t have an entirety new virus, technically. And they had data of sorts re SARS. They acted appropriately given the data that was forthcoming. Is this a better response than the West? Absolutely yes.

Sandydragon wrote:

morepork wrote:

Sandydragon wrote: Oh I agree that we got this wrong at the beginning, but have moved in the right direction thereafter. But I don’t think western leaders have been worse than anyone else. The Chinese could have acted much faster but chose not to.

Everyone is culpable in a pandemic boss.

That’s kind of my point.

We should certainly be happy to criticise the WHO for being a mouthpiece of China, though I guess the WHO is no more corrupt than many other bodies. Hopefully both China and the WHO actually take some action around live animal markets moving forward

Digby wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

morepork wrote:
Everyone is culpable in a pandemic boss.

That’s kind of my point.

We should certainly be happy to criticise the WHO for being a mouthpiece of China, though I guess the WHO is no more corrupt than many other bodies. Hopefully both China and the WHO actually take some action around live animal markets moving forward

Why? Is it any more likely to cause pandemics than any animal husbandry? Swine flu and Bird flu came from common or garden husbandry didn't they?

morepork wrote:

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Sandydragon wrote: Oh I agree that we got this wrong at the beginning, but have moved in the right direction thereafter. But I don’t think western leaders have been worse than anyone else. The Chinese could have acted much faster but chose not to.

Sorry but that's demonstrably untrue, which is why South Korea and Singapore have done conspicuously better than those in the west, even if we discount Japan as lucky or lying.

As for the Chinese acting faster, they had an entirely new virus with no data at all to deal with. they've done fucking well and at l;east appear to have a lot fewer infections and deaths than many in the west. One thing worth realising is that they were contacting their counterparts a long time ago - it's been reported that their CDC head equivalent was on the phone to the head of the american CDC in tears on NYE.

They didn’t have an entirety new virus, technically. And they had data of sorts re SARS. They acted appropriately given the data that was forthcoming. Is this a better response than the West? Absolutely yes.

Fair points!

My guess is that the Chinese numbers are no more inaccurate than ours. This is based on a few known facts and some supposition. Even internal movement in China is strictly limited and monitored. Pretty much every company is really an organ of the Chinese state (or is obliged to turn the vast amount of data that they inevitably collect over to the state). And now the supposition: the Chinese have the capacity to monitor at least the GPS of a large number of phones and see where those people go and who they meet with. I doubt they can do it all the time for everyone as that's just too much data, but fewer than 10k people in an emergency with their manufacturing superiority across the world at stake? Sure, I reckon that is doable. All of these would make track and trace a piece of piss. That and a willingness to ruthless enforce a shutdown without exceptions.

morepork wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

morepork wrote:We will always need vaccines chief. We are stuck with them now. This won't be the last global public health crisis caused by a virus.

I wouldn't like to label anyone suicidal, just saying a bit of optimism tempered with a pinch of cynicism would be the way to go.

Sure, we will always need vaccines, but we didn't need one for SARs.

We would if it was as virulent as it's current coronavirus cousin. 8000 odd cases for SARS versus what, a million for the current beast?

Technically, does virulent mean 1) harmful to those infected or 2) easily transmissible, or both?

Yes, agreed that SARs was less effective in terms of spreading itself, which helped our (ie humanity's) efforts to contain it.

However, had planned nations acted as South Korea, or China or Singapore did, the need for a vaccine would be drastically less.

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

morepork wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote: Sure, we will always need vaccines, but we didn't need one for SARs.

We would if it was as virulent as it's current coronavirus cousin. 8000 odd cases for SARS versus what, a million for the current beast?

Technically, does virulent mean 1) harmful to those infected or 2) easily transmissible, or both?

Yes, agreed that SARs was less effective in terms of spreading itself, which helped our (ie humanity's) efforts to contain it.

However, had planned nations acted as South Korea, or China or Singapore did, the need for a vaccine would be drastically less.

Virulent = good at infecting and reproducing. Covid > SARS in this context.

SK and Singapore will still need a vaccine. We all will. Those places have bought some time for their infrastructure to deal with the situation in the interim.

Interesting piece on a vaccine v a mutating COVID:

https://www.city-journal.org/coronavirus-vaccine

And a piece on widespread home testing:

https://www.research.ox.ac.uk/amp/Artic ... ssion=true

What should the stance be towards those who will line up with and behind the anti-vaxxers?

Push them off the nearest tall building along with their progeny, forcibly isolate them and their progeny, allow them to roam free assuming we get enough coverage elsewhere?

Interesting? I guess...

Can't attach more than 1 pic at a time, so there are three in this little story

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

Donny osmond wrote:Interesting? I guess...

Can't attach more than 1 pic at a time, so there are three in this little story

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

Turns out I can?

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

morepork wrote:

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:
Sorry but that's demonstrably untrue, which is why South Korea and Singapore have done conspicuously better than those in the west, even if we discount Japan as lucky or lying.

As for the Chinese acting faster, they had an entirely new virus with no data at all to deal with. they've done fucking well and at l;east appear to have a lot fewer infections and deaths than many in the west. One thing worth realising is that they were contacting their counterparts a long time ago - it's been reported that their CDC head equivalent was on the phone to the head of the american CDC in tears on NYE.

They didn’t have an entirety new virus, technically. And they had data of sorts re SARS. They acted appropriately given the data that was forthcoming. Is this a better response than the West? Absolutely yes.

Fair points!

My guess is that the Chinese numbers are no more inaccurate than ours. This is based on a few known facts and some supposition. Even internal movement in China is strictly limited and monitored. Pretty much every company is really an organ of the Chinese state (or is obliged to turn the vast amount of data that they inevitably collect over to the state). And now the supposition: the Chinese have the capacity to monitor at least the GPS of a large number of phones and see where those people go and who they meet with. I doubt they can do it all the time for everyone as that's just too much data, but fewer than 10k people in an emergency with their manufacturing superiority across the world at stake? Sure, I reckon that is doable. All of these would make track and trace a piece of piss. That and a willingness to ruthless enforce a shutdown without exceptions.

I completely agree that South Korea and Singapore have handled this very well.

Who else has performed that well - is it just western governments that are screwing this up? I suspect those who are doing well have learnt lessons from previous epidemics (which is perfectly fair) but that doesn't apply globally. My point originally made to SoM below was that its not just western governments who have screwed up their response, globally many countries are struggling. 2 countries who have performed well is an outlier not a trend (albeit we should be learning from them in the future).

As for China, they responded well when they eventually took the outbreak seriously. Talk me through how undermining the credibility of the doctor who first raise the alarm is acting responsibly though? Perhaps if they had taken him seriously then many lives (including his) could have been saved?

Digby wrote:What should the stance be towards those who will line up with and behind the anti-vaxxers?

Push them off the nearest tall building along with their progeny, forcibly isolate them and their progeny, allow them to roam free assuming we get enough coverage elsewhere?

Make them sign a piece of paper that in the event of getting ill they will seek no medial treatment. If they refuse help from the state then they get none at all.

morepork wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

morepork wrote:
We would if it was as virulent as it's current coronavirus cousin. 8000 odd cases for SARS versus what, a million for the current beast?

Technically, does virulent mean 1) harmful to those infected or 2) easily transmissible, or both?

Yes, agreed that SARs was less effective in terms of spreading itself, which helped our (ie humanity's) efforts to contain it.

However, had other nations acted as South Korea, or China or Singapore did, the need for a vaccine would be drastically less.

Virulent = good at infecting and reproducing. Covid > SARS in this context.

SK and Singapore will still need a vaccine. We all will. Those places have bought some time for their infrastructure to deal with the situation in the interim.

Thanks. Definitions on the internet were very hazy on that point, mostly giving both as possible meanings.

SK and Singapore will need an effective vaccine in the sense that it will allow things to go back to normal for them - they would obviously use one as soon as it materializes. But they haven't needed, and don't need one to prevent mass deaths from Covid19. Their existing measures have done that.