Covid-19 is spiking . . . .

[spot]

Our Churchillian Prime Minister is quoted in today's headlines as saying "'There are difficult months to come. The fight against Covid is by no means over'".

He should not be so reticent. The fight against Covid is just about to start. The next twelve months is the mountain, and Britain has so far been strolling on its foothills. We've experienced the phoney war and we haven't yet reached Dunkirk.

We were, I think, estimating six months ago in this thread that the final death figure in this country due to the present pandemic could be somewhere between a quarter and a half a million. I think that's still a realistic prospect, and still the most likely outcome.

What is unarguable is that the government has mortgaged tax revenues for the next twenty years to pay for the measures they've adopted to fight the outbreak, mostly as furlough payments to keep people employed. What is not at all certain is that there has been a net saving of lives in exchange. Statisticians a few years from now will be able to make that estimate. I don't know what they'll discover. I'm quite sure nobody else knows either. The lockdown and furlough scheme was based on an uninformed one-sided guess.

At the start of the outbreak there were two other choices.

One, which would have definitely saved lives over the course of the whole pandemic, was the New Zealand route, to follow up every case contact and prevent all domestic transmission until sufficient vaccinations had been administered. The government didn't even try, it threw in the towel on day 1. Nothing else would have been sure to prevent an increase over the expected deaths for the duration of the outbreak. The reason we didn't do that is we haven't the administrative skills nationally, our public servants are too unfit, slothful, hidebound, bureaucratic and self-satisfied to have done the necessary work in the available time.

The other, which would have saved most money, was to do nothing, carry on regardless and put up with Covid-19 infections among people unable to socially distance themselves.

What we have in fact committed to spend on the pandemic in the UK so far is at least half a trillion pounds sterling. If there turns out to have been a reduction in the expected deaths for the duration of the outbreak - which is not the same number as the Covid-19 deaths at all - then the money spent is offset by that number of lives. Let's guess a possible figure. Half a million lives saved compared with doing nothing? I'm being wildly optimistic there. That would be as low as a million pounds of tax revenue spent saving each of those lives, and I suggest the actual cost per life once the whole event is analysed will actually be ten times that, because I think the lives saved will turn out to be far fewer.

I do not think the lockdown can be justified, because I do not think the lockdown will turn out to have saved lives overall. By "overall" I mean between the start of the pandemic and the vaccination of enough people to prevent further Covid-19 deaths in the UK in any significant numbers. I will not be surprised if it's actually increased that figure.

While I'm at it, I also think most of the deaths so far in the UK stem from infections acquired and spread in care-home and health settings, not at work or during leisure activities or travel or at home. How that relates to furlough payments I have no idea. "Most", for anyone wondering, means more than half. If anyone sees a credible source of totals now or in the future I'd love to see them.

[spot]

And from today's New Scientist (subscription only):

One in 500 people in England had the coronavirus in the week ending 19 September, up from one in 900 people the previous week, according to the latest results from a random swab testing survey by the Office for National Statistics. “It’s a worrying increase and is occurring across all age groups, particularly in the North of England and London,” said Simon Clarke at the University of Reading in a statement. “While it’s true that there are many more tests conducted nowadays, this is clear evidence of an accelerating spread of the virus,” said Clarke. “We can expect to see an increasing burden placed on our hospitals and a consequent increase in deaths.”

[...] Only 11 per cent of people told to self-isolate actually do so for the full 14-day period, which the UK government has been aware of since June. The finding comes from a survey that began in February. Results were published online yesterday to the pre-print server medRxiv and have not yet been peer-reviewed. The government’s scientific advisors recommend that 80 per cent or more of the contacts of people diagnosed with the coronavirus self-isolate for the full time period in order to help limit onward spread.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/22 ... 00-people/

And, of course, there is no possibility of a second national lockdown in the UK just as there's none in America either. At this rate I might start making graphs again.

[Betty Boop]

Our Churchillian Prime Minister is quoted in today's headlines as saying "'There are difficult months to come. The fight against Covid is by no means over'".

He should not be so reticent. The fight against Covid is just about to start. The next twelve months is the mountain, and Britain has so far been strolling on its foothills. We've experienced the phoney war and we haven't yet reached Dunkirk.

We were, I think, estimating six months ago in this thread that the final death figure in this country due to the present pandemic could be somewhere between a quarter and a half a million. I think that's still a realistic prospect, and still the most likely outcome.

What is unarguable is that the government has mortgaged tax revenues for the next twenty years to pay for the measures they've adopted to fight the outbreak, mostly as furlough payments to keep people employed. What is not at all certain is that there has been a net saving of lives in exchange. Statisticians a few years from now will be able to make that estimate. I don't know what they'll discover. I'm quite sure nobody else knows either. The lockdown and furlough scheme was based on an uninformed one-sided guess.

At the start of the outbreak there were two other choices.

One, which would have definitely saved lives over the course of the whole pandemic, was the New Zealand route, to follow up every case contact and prevent all domestic transmission until sufficient vaccinations had been administered. The government didn't even try, it threw in the towel on day 1. Nothing else would have been sure to prevent an increase over the expected deaths for the duration of the outbreak. The reason we didn't do that is we haven't the administrative skills nationally, our public servants are too unfit, slothful, hidebound, bureaucratic and self-satisfied to have done the necessary work in the available time.

The other, which would have saved most money, was to do nothing, carry on regardless and put up with Covid-19 infections among people unable to socially distance themselves.

What we have in fact committed to spend on the pandemic in the UK so far is at least half a trillion pounds sterling. If there turns out to have been a reduction in the expected deaths for the duration of the outbreak - which is not the same number as the Covid-19 deaths at all - then the money spent is offset by that number of lives. Let's guess a possible figure. Half a million lives saved compared with doing nothing? I'm being wildly optimistic there. That would be as low as a million pounds of tax revenue spent saving each of those lives, and I suggest the actual cost per life once the whole event is analysed will actually be ten times that, because I think the lives saved will turn out to be far fewer.

I do not think the lockdown can be justified, because I do not think the lockdown will turn out to have saved lives overall. By "overall" I mean between the start of the pandemic and the vaccination of enough people to prevent further Covid-19 deaths in the UK in any significant numbers. I will not be surprised if it's actually increased that figure.

While I'm at it, I also think most of the deaths so far in the UK stem from infections acquired and spread in care-home and health settings, not at work or during leisure activities or travel or at home. How that relates to furlough payments I have no idea. "Most", for anyone wondering, means more than half. If anyone sees a credible source of totals now or in the future I'd love to see them.

You are very hard to read sometimes

You are saying that because the UK took action so late with lockdown (and without track and trace in place) that we might as well have not bothered at all? Or have I read that all completely wrong.

The Prime Minister keeps stating that we are testing more than any other country in the EU, is that true? I don't believe it can be

[spot]

You are very hard to read sometimes

You are saying that because the UK took action so late with lockdown (and without track and trace in place) that we might as well have not bothered at all? Or have I read that all completely wrong.

The Prime Minister keeps stating that we are testing more than any other country in the EU, is that true? I don't believe it can be

I'm saying that financial intervention, including lockdown and the furlough scheme, late or early, is only a good idea if it saves more lives than not having a financial intervention. You have to count the whole period from the first death of the pandemic to the last. You have to count deaths due to Covid-19 and also the deaths due to the lockdown. The lockdown kills people because, for example, many people end up not seeing their GP or getting biopsies before they're too late to treat.

I'm saying I doubt the lockdown has, on balance, saved lives. I'm also saying it cost a monumental amount of money which could, had it not been spent, have been used far more usefully. I'm saying entire categories of job have been damaged for years to come because of the lockdown.

I'm also saying that other countries did implement a proper track, trace and isolate, and that they stayed on top of the pandemic. Vietnam, South Korea, Cuba, Jamaica, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Iceland, Norway, Denmark, there's a long list of countries which have succeeded. I'm saying the UK government didn't even try. Domestic spreading wasn't traced adequately, wasn't isolated. I'm also saying that most of the spreading happened in places the government was especially responsible for, like hospitals and care homes, and that it is simply because government action is pathetically inadequate in the UK these days. The government has lost sight of social responsibility, it's far too focused on creating hostile environments for minorities and bullying the poor.

If the final real number of deaths does actually end up lower than a modelled prediction without the lockdown and the furlough and the spending then I'm wrong. I'm putting it in writing that I don't think I am wrong, and that the government's strategic mistakes are already evident even at this early stage. I'm also saying that the voluntary social isolation of the more vulnerable people in the country wouldn't have cost much and of course it was a good idea, but that's not what happened. What happened was the over-the-top magic money fountain.

As for tests performed, if you look at https://www.statista.com/statistics/102 ... worldwide/ you'll see why the qualification "in Europe" was put on it. Boris seems to think Russia isn't in Europe though.

[spot]

An AP news item indicates that around a third of a million Covid-19 vaccinations have happened so far in China. There's so little disease left there at the moment that the efficiency of the vaccines isn't yet measurable. That's why human challenge studies would be so productive, deliberately infecting people who have had vaccinations to see how many of them are protected. The UK expects to do that from January if the circumstances warrant it, after public pressure organized by 1DaySooner.

[spot]

Cornwall went a bit daft this last week and I'd not be surprised if it was students coming into the county, bugger all else has happened round these parts.

One in eight of all positive cases since the pandemic began in Cornwall was detected last week. The weekly figure was triple that of the week before.

I'm not impressed. We jumped into Medium Risk, we now have an infection rate higher than the median for the country, and it took all of seven days to do that.

28 cases per 100,000 people in the latest week 16 Sep-22 Sep. The average area in England had 24.
158 cases in the latest week 16 Sep-22 Sep +105 compared with the previous week
1,265 total cases to 25 Sep

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51768274

[Bryn Mawr]

Cornwall went a bit daft this last week and I'd not be surprised if it was students coming into the county, bugger all else has happened round these parts.

But you don’t have any universities do you?

[spot]

Cornwall went a bit daft this last week and I'd not be surprised if it was students coming into the county, bugger all else has happened round these parts.

But you don’t have any universities do you?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combined_ ... n_Cornwall

The latest incarnation of what was the Camborne School of Mining has a campus in Falmouth, so does Falmouth University, Truro has a teaching hospital and there's two sites for Penwith College. It might add up to 10,000 undergraduate and postgraduate degree students plus their staff.

[Betty Boop]

Cornwall went a bit daft this last week and I'd not be surprised if it was students coming into the county, bugger all else has happened round these parts.

But you don’t have any universities do you?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combined_ ... n_Cornwall

The latest incarnation of what was the Camborne School of Mining has a campus in Falmouth, so does Falmouth University, Truro has a teaching hospital and there's two sites for Penwith College. It might add up to 10,000 undergraduate and postgraduate degree students plus their staff.

You forgot to mention that Exeter University runs degrees out of the Cornwall Campus too.

[Bryn Mawr]

Cornwall went a bit daft this last week and I'd not be surprised if it was students coming into the county, bugger all else has happened round these parts.

But you don’t have any universities do you?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combined_ ... n_Cornwall

The latest incarnation of what was the Camborne School of Mining has a campus in Falmouth, so does Falmouth University, Truro has a teaching hospital and there's two sites for Penwith College. It might add up to 10,000 undergraduate and postgraduate degree students plus their staff.

You forgot to mention that Exeter University runs degrees out of the Cornwall Campus too.

I’d always thought that Exeter was all Devon, hadn’t realised that they spilled over into Cornwall.

[Betty Boop]

Cornwall went a bit daft this last week and I'd not be surprised if it was students coming into the county, bugger all else has happened round these parts.

But you don’t have any universities do you?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combined_ ... n_Cornwall

The latest incarnation of what was the Camborne School of Mining has a campus in Falmouth, so does Falmouth University, Truro has a teaching hospital and there's two sites for Penwith College. It might add up to 10,000 undergraduate and postgraduate degree students plus their staff.

You forgot to mention that Exeter University runs degrees out of the Cornwall Campus too.

I’d always thought that Exeter was all Devon, hadn’t realised that they spilled over into Cornwall.

Exeter have been running out of Penryn for a few years now, and that actually could have been running out of Penzance had our town not been so short sighted.

[spot]

"UK coronavirus: 770 Northumbria University students test positive".

Stupid bloody hormonal prats, the lot of them. The entire "university" should be closed indefinitely if they're that socially irresponsible.

This is Newcastle Polytechnic we're talking about, for people who can't interpret newspeak.

[Betty Boop]

In hindsight I suppose we should be quite glad there is no University of Penzance given your last post Spot

[Bryn Mawr]

"UK coronavirus: 770 Northumbria University students test positive".

Stupid bloody hormonal prats, the lot of them. The entire "university" should be closed indefinitely if they're that socially irresponsible.

This is Newcastle Polytechnic we're talking about, for people who can't interpret newspeak.

One of my grandsons has just started, he’s only just got there and a large proportion of his fellow students have been diagnosed with it. I’m not convinced he’s been there for long enough for it to be down to irresponsible behaviour, I think that large scale testing of thousands of young people in a specific sector, who may be asymptomatic, is throwing up large numbers of positive hits that disproportionally highlights that sector.

[spot]

"UK coronavirus: 770 Northumbria University students test positive".

Stupid bloody hormonal prats, the lot of them. The entire "university" should be closed indefinitely if they're that socially irresponsible.

This is Newcastle Polytechnic we're talking about, for people who can't interpret newspeak.

One of my grandsons has just started, he’s only just got there and a large proportion of his fellow students have been diagnosed with it. I’m not convinced he’s been there for long enough for it to be down to irresponsible behaviour, I think that large scale testing of thousands of young people in a specific sector, who may be asymptomatic, is throwing up large numbers of positive hits that disproportionally highlights that sector.

I don't doubt any of that. I don't think they were exposed in Newcastle, either. I think the 10% brought it with them, and that the stupidity of the 10% relates to their catching it in the first place. The thing they have in common is that they were on their way to university and they behaved with no regard for the common good.

I also think that if they - the 10% of those tested - behave that way before they get there, then they're a danger to Newcastle if let loose from their dorms and they're a danger to the other 90% if they're not. Hence the suggestion that the sinkpit needs closing indefinitely.

[Betty Boop]

https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/polit ... DfykSJ8w3c

[spot]

If government software were open-sourced and written by volunteers it would work a lot better and come in on time and on budget - something no government-commissioned software has ever managed to achieve in this country.

Running such a vital system in amateurish spreadsheets is just par for the course. People have died from it.

Sarcasm alert:

[spot]

I have been hoping for some while to work out the proportion of UK deaths from Covid among people who acquired the disease either in hospital or in a care home setting. It has been very hard to find estimates or figures.

This takes me some way forward, though I think the report is deliberately pushing the numbers as low as they can manage from the data they have.

Nocosomial patients are those who become infected whilst already in hospital. The study defined nocosomial patients as those who were diagnosed 15 or more days after admission to hospital (12.5% of patients). Patients with a diagnosis date less than 5 days after admission were likely to be community acquired (76.7 % of patients). Those with a positive diagnosis between five and 14 days after admission could be in either group but for this study were included in the community acquired infection group (10.8% of patients).

https://www.kcl.ac.uk/news/first-uk-est ... n-hospital

The cut-off period they have chosen is to say every case which tested positive within 14 days of admission was acquired before admission. That's how they bring their figure down to an eighth of all hospital Covid patients becoming infected within hospital. If you actually put the cut-off period to 5 days you get more than a fifth.

It does not include hospital staff getting infected in hospital either.

The other pathway, Covid acquired by people already resident in care homes, I've still not found. A third group which would not be included in either total would be those infected in hospital but moved to a care home before testing.

The figures will come out eventually. I suspect the answer for the first wave is that the majority of Covid deaths in the UK were acquired in spaces controlled by standards for which public sector administrators were responsible, but we'll have to wait and see. I think it will be close either way. For anyone unaware, half of all first-wave Covid deaths in the UK would come to more than 20,000 people, and yes, I'm suggesting that's roughly how many caught the disease in the first wave under public sector oversight, where they were all vulnerable and should have been safely protected by a duty of care.

What other people were in environments they couldn't avoid for which public sector controls were responsible. Prisons? How many people died having caught Covid in the UK during detention. Army barracks?

Any others?

[LarsMac]

Our county had 11 cases last week.
Doubling the overall count. 6 were in the local Elementary school

Everyone is wearing masks, finally.

[Bryn Mawr]

Our county had 11 cases last week.
Doubling the overall count. 6 were in the local Elementary school

Everyone is wearing masks, finally.

At least they’re learning whilst the counts are low.

[magentaflame]

All I know at the moment people are becoming very weary of it all. In two days I've seen people out walking without masks. 7 in total.

[LarsMac]

I had to go to the County courthouse, to the DMV to take care of a license sticker for the RV.
I donned my mask before entering.
I got into the DMV office, and no one else there, or anyone who came in while I was there, wore a mask.
I was pretty disappointed.

[magentaflame]

I had to go to the County courthouse, to the DMV to take care of a license sticker for the RV.
I donned my mask before entering.
I got into the DMV office, and no one else there, of anyone who came in while I was there, wore a mask.
I was pretty disappointed.

Before mandatory mask wearing, more and more people were doing it voluntarily because we discovered a no brainer. If I wear a mask you're protected from me if I sneeze or cough. but I'm not protected from you if you're not wearing one. It all came down to mutual obligation. it makes no difference if a person who is vulnerable wears a mask. You can still cough upon their person and make them sick. Wear a mask and that vulnerable person is safer. It just made sense. Keep up the good work Lars. It took awhile here but more and more people caught on without being told to do so. Lead by example, you could be asymptomatic but by wearing a mask you'll never ever know how many people you saved in your lifetime......it could be hundreds! I just wish they could extend the same life saving curtesy to yourself and dear wife.

[spot]

Before mandatory mask wearing, more and more people were doing it voluntarily because we discovered a no brainer. If I wear a mask you're protected from me if I sneeze or cough. but I'm not protected from you if you're not wearing one. It all came down to mutual obligation. it makes no difference if a person who is vulnerable wears a mask. You can still cough upon their person and make them sick. Wear a mask and that vulnerable person is safer. It just made sense. Keep up the good work Lars. It took awhile here but more and more people caught on without being told to do so. Lead by example, you could be asymptomatic but by wearing a mask you'll never ever know how many people you saved in your lifetime......it could be hundreds! I just wish they could extend the same life saving curtesy to yourself and dear wife.

That is helpful advice and it explains how Australia has checked its second outbreak.

We in England are less sensible, but I think there's a reason for it. The government announced that a vaccination program would be be offered, firstly to front-line workers and those the government considers vital - such as MPs, presumably. Subsequently to everyone with health problems or over the age of 30. And that is all. Nobody under 30 in England with good health will be vaccinated.

The Boston Tea Party was a revolt of people who were excluded from benefit but were still expected to pay taxation. I think a lot of under-30s in England are saying if they've been left to develop their own immunity by catching the disease, they see no reason to be stopped from working or partying or generally getting on with their lives. If they can only survive by catching it, they might just as well get it caught and be done with it.

I think seeing it announced from Westminster that there was no reward on offer in exchange for their inconvenience, they've chosen in large numbers not to be inconvenienced any longer. And if I were one of them I might well have come to the same conclusion. Excluding them from the vaccination program is disgraceful in itself, but it's also shot England in the foot at the same time, and we're still only a quarter of the way into this pandemic.

[magentaflame]

Before mandatory mask wearing, more and more people were doing it voluntarily because we discovered a no brainer. If I wear a mask you're protected from me if I sneeze or cough. but I'm not protected from you if you're not wearing one. It all came down to mutual obligation. it makes no difference if a person who is vulnerable wears a mask. You can still cough upon their person and make them sick. Wear a mask and that vulnerable person is safer. It just made sense. Keep up the good work Lars. It took awhile here but more and more people caught on without being told to do so. Lead by example, you could be asymptomatic but by wearing a mask you'll never ever know how many people you saved in your lifetime......it could be hundreds! I just wish they could extend the same life saving curtesy to yourself and dear wife.

That is helpful advice and it explains how Australia has checked its second outbreak.

We in England are less sensible, but I think there's a reason for it. The government announced that a vaccination program would be be offered, firstly to front-line workers and those the government considers vital - such as MPs, presumably. Subsequently to everyone with health problems or over the age of 30. And that is all. Nobody under 30 in England with good health will be vaccinated.

The Boston Tea Party was a revolt of people who were excluded from benefit but were still expected to pay taxation. I think a lot of under-30s in England are saying if they've been left to develop their own immunity by catching the disease, they see no reason to be stopped from working or partying or generally getting on with their lives. If they can only survive by catching it, they might just as well get it caught and be done with it.

I think seeing it announced from Westminster that there was no reward on offer in exchange for their inconvenience, they've chosen in large numbers not to be inconvenienced any longer. And if I were one of them I might well have come to the same conclusion. Excluding them from the vaccination program is disgraceful in itself, but it's also shot England in the foot at the same time, and we're still only a quarter of the way into this pandemic.

Yep had the same problem. but nobody told us that healthy people in their twenties and thirties were becoming part of the stats of the dead. . I remember a news report when it got really bad in France and surrounding countries . Reports of a 14 year sick boy dying of it and then a 12 year old healthy girl dying of it. (not sure if I have the ages and sex the wrong way around). That made people sit up and listen

[spot]

Yep had the same problem. but nobody told us that healthy people in their twenties and thirties were becoming part of the stats of the dead. . I remember a news report when it got really bad in France and surrounding countries . Reports of a 14 year sick boy dying of it and then a 12 year old healthy girl dying of it. (not sure if I have the ages and sex the wrong way around). That made people sit up and listen

Two things spring to mind. One is that risks come in ranges, and the fact that some teenagers end up dead or injured doesn't negate the fact that they do it at a far lower rate than pensioners, by thousands of times less. Secondly, teenagers are notoriously bad at evaluating and acting on risk.

[magentaflame]

New rule has come into play as of today.
When I had a "possible contact" way back, I couldn't go to work until I got tested and once I had the results I could go back to work. Now if you are identified as coming into contact with a positive person you have to quarantine regardless and on the 11th day get a test.....you don't have to it's up to you ....but if you don't have a test you have to quarantine for a further 9 days. People from Melbourne are allowed to go into regional areas for "lawful purposes" but they are not allowed to enter cafes etc. They have to keep to the same rules as Melbourne's quarantine. The business owners are to ask for address proof or receive a fine. This won't be a problem all regional areas are desperately waiting for Melbourne to become well again so as to go back to normal .....but regional Vic is very aware that an infected person could have us all locked down again regionally.

[spot]

We in England would be delighted to have as competent a handling of our situation. We are currently managed by well-meaning incompetents who talk the talk about following the science and then blatantly ignore whatever they're advised when it inconveniences their political, regional and commercial interests and prejudices.

The consequence is, from today's New Scientist,

Coronavirus infections in communities in England are continuing to rise, according to the latest results from Imperial College London’s REACT-1 study. Using random swab testing, researchers monitored coronavirus levels and found that about one in 170 people had the virus between 18 September and 5 October, an increase from one in 769 between 22 August and 7 September. The most recent results are based on an analysis of swabs from 175,000 people.

Read more: https://www.newscientist.com/article/22 ... z6aaigtDrU

... and that is significantly worse than America, or anywhere else in Europe. It was 1 in 3,000 a couple of months ago.

[spot]

It's rare for me to express an opinion on FG but I think I might, if you'll bear with me.

Detect, Track, Trace and Isolate. That's all the country needs to eliminate exponential growth of the virus.

England is operating on a regional response, and there are a dozen or so regions.

I think this is a mistake. I think the response should be at a far more local level. In China, for example, an outbreak early this week (by which they mean ten cases!) was detected in one city. They have already tested 3 million of the residents in a day and intend to test the remainder. So far they've detected no more instances, but they'll continue until they know. That's the news report on the radio just now which prompted me to write this. The only possible way to have acted so promptly is by having local organized and tested response teams created in advance.

Britain could have been doing this from the start, and clamped down hard on any re-appearance. That would have forestalled any reintroduction of any lockdown, it would have left the economy free to grow back quickly. There has not been the slightest effort at any stage to even attempt it.

Instead of decision-making (below the level of strategy) at a national level, teams should be available like firefighters are available and I have no problem with them being volunteers. They should be controlled at a similar scale to firefighting. Is your fire station hours away, or is it within a ten minute drive. How can controlling five or ten million people with just one throttle lever provide a fast enough, effective enough, trace and track system? It clearly can't and it clearly hasn't. Regions have been restricted for months on end here but still seen infection rates sky-rocket.

We have another year and a half before a vaccination program will have any practical impact on the general public. Pressing on with the current ineffective restraint policy should not be even considered. It has already clearly failed.

[magentaflame]

It's rare for me to express an opinion on FG but I think I might, if you'll bear with me.

Detect, Track, Trace and Isolate. That's all the country needs to eliminate exponential growth of the virus.

England is operating on a regional response, and there are a dozen or so regions.

I think this is a mistake. I think the response should be at a far more local level. In China, for example, an outbreak early this week (by which they mean ten cases!) was detected in one city. They have already tested 3 million of the residents in a day and intend to test the remainder. So far they've detected no more instances, but they'll continue until they know. That's the news report on the radio just now which prompted me to write this. The only possible way to have acted so promptly is by having local organized and tested response teams created in advance.

Britain could have been doing this from the start, and clamped down hard on any re-appearance. That would have forestalled any reintroduction of any lockdown, it would have left the economy free to grow back quickly. There has not been the slightest effort at any stage to even attempt it.

Instead of decision-making (below the level of strategy) at a national level, teams should be available like firefighters are available and I have no problem with them being volunteers. They should be controlled at a similar scale to firefighting. Is your fire station hours away, or is it within a ten minute drive. How can controlling five or ten million people with just one throttle lever provide a fast enough, effective enough, trace and track system? It clearly can't and it clearly hasn't. Regions have been restricted for months on end here but still seen infection rates sky-rocket.

We have another year and a half before a vaccination program will have any practical impact on the general public. Pressing on with the current ineffective restraint policy should not be even considered. It has already clearly failed.

I'm just going to head over the the Maths department ..... you know Spot? For someone who is so critical of his own government you sure do trust a country that hasn't been honest in decades. It's mind boggling. But if you are comparing a certain countrys' lies and fantasies to others that for some reason or another not coping, then you are not the learned man I thought you were. FUCK the economy! Stop blaming the leasers having to pass on the information of your health administrators!...Listen to the health guys . Well if you want to live that is.

[spot]

It's rare for me to express an opinion on FG but I think I might, if you'll bear with me.

Detect, Track, Trace and Isolate. That's all the country needs to eliminate exponential growth of the virus.

England is operating on a regional response, and there are a dozen or so regions.

I think this is a mistake. I think the response should be at a far more local level. In China, for example, an outbreak early this week (by which they mean ten cases!) was detected in one city. They have already tested 3 million of the residents in a day and intend to test the remainder. So far they've detected no more instances, but they'll continue until they know. That's the news report on the radio just now which prompted me to write this. The only possible way to have acted so promptly is by having local organized and tested response teams created in advance.

Britain could have been doing this from the start, and clamped down hard on any re-appearance. That would have forestalled any reintroduction of any lockdown, it would have left the economy free to grow back quickly. There has not been the slightest effort at any stage to even attempt it.

Instead of decision-making (below the level of strategy) at a national level, teams should be available like firefighters are available and I have no problem with them being volunteers. They should be controlled at a similar scale to firefighting. Is your fire station hours away, or is it within a ten minute drive. How can controlling five or ten million people with just one throttle lever provide a fast enough, effective enough, trace and track system? It clearly can't and it clearly hasn't. Regions have been restricted for months on end here but still seen infection rates sky-rocket.

We have another year and a half before a vaccination program will have any practical impact on the general public. Pressing on with the current ineffective restraint policy should not be even considered. It has already clearly failed.

I'm just going to head over the the Maths department ..... you know Spot? For someone who is so critical of his own government you sure do trust a country that hasn't been honest in decades. It's mind boggling. But if you are comparing a certain countrys' lies and fantasies to others that for some reason or another not coping, then you are not the learned man I thought you were.

I'm wondering what you think the reality of Covid-19 death totals in China have been. Here's an Australian report that the number of deaths was hugely censored and that their estimate is as high as 36,000 before the pandemic was finally controlled. The Chinese official figure is 4,634. I have no opinion on either figure. Perhaps you have. What I'm quite sure of is that an outbreak this month of tens of case reports has had a huge track-and-trace response, described as millions of tests within one city. I'm not at all surprised, that sounds very believable. The current rate of infection in China must be spectacularly low for the events that are definitely happening in that country to continue to happen.

So, let's work with the high estimate of the unbelieving Australian paper. 36,000 deaths in China from Covid-19. That's 2.67 deaths per 100,000 people, yes, and it's not rising? The British figure of 43,000 deaths and rising is 66 per 100,000 people. That British real death rate would be 30 times higher than the rate in China even if we were to accept the Australian tabloid's biggest estimate of China's figure. Or you can apply the British rate to the population of China and say that if China were as badly affected as Britain then China would have a real total of 890,000 deaths from Covid-19 so far. Do you honestly believe they have? - which if it were true would make China as badly affected as Britain really is - or do you think that in fact Britain has screwed up its Covid-19 response compared with China's. Because if you do believe they're as bad, China would have had to have lied by a factor of 190 times. Maybe you do believe they only counted one death for each 190. Or maybe I'm right and Britain has actually performed worse.

By all means "head over the the Maths department". Do some sums. Multiply the claimed reality by 190 if you think you can stay out of the realm of fiction. Then tell me which country's response has been worse for its people.

[magentaflame]

I believe from all reports China is lying and is still lying. The truth will come out eventually I'm patient, which is one thing you have to be with the Chinese government. Especially when they try to blackmail countries into not asking questions. When whistleblowers keep disappearing. When doctors and scientists have to tow a party line or be detained when journalists are deported or told to get out of China before being detained. When their own reporters are arrested and detained.

I would even go as far as to say history will give us the answers . biological warfare is not new, it just takes a despot to initiate it. it's become more common in recent decades . Chinas behaviours over the last 2 decades in the Pacific has been absolutely over the top. ... It's quite simple . release a virus and sit back and allow human behaviour to do the rest.

[spot]

Ah. Conspiratorial paranoia. That option hadn't crossed my mind. You seem not to recognize that if one Western head of state claims to have proof of what you just said, it would trigger a nuclear war. If you believe it to be true perhaps you should consider why you're willing to hold such a belief, it's akin to persecuting Jews for ritually eating babies - there's people who believe that too.

I thought you offered to do the math? You started out by saying China had actually around the same number of deaths as the rest of the the entire planet, remember, if it was to have been as bad an outcome as the UK. You were criticizing my lack of patriotic response. I thought we were doing sums, not fantasizing about maybes.

[spot]

https://www.statista.com/statistics/113 ... y-country/

That shows the proportion of infectious people this week in each country in Europe.

Ignoring the tiddlers, the countries worse affected than the UK this week are France, Belgium and Holland.

An average of one person in 600 is reported as currently testing infectious across the UK, if I understand confirmed "active cases" correctly. It means people who have tested positive to having the virus in their system. It is not an estimate based on background swabbing which is currently one person in 160.

I may temporarily leave for foreign parts while it's still legal. I'm not sure my passport will be accepted in Europe from the new year, once the Brexit talks finally shut down. I expect I'll need to apply for a visa by that stage.

I'm wondering how it could get worse. Hospitals might run out of capacity, or we might get a right-wing takeover of the Conservative party. My imagination is too limited to see the obvious, whatever that turns out to be. How about an uncontrolled pneumonic smallpox outbreak from an unlicensed archaeological dig in Spitalfields, that would definitely do it. How about we get all three at the same time, then we could have a poll on which is worst.

[spot]

How about an uncontrolled pneumonic smallpox outbreak from an unlicensed archaeological dig in Spitalfields, that would definitely do it.

Risk of bird flu hitting UK upgraded after cases in Netherlands. The risk from of H5N8 avian influenza has gone from low to medium. https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/news/uk ... uk-4633190

Close enough.

[magentaflame]

Three bird farms have had to slaughter all their stock in Victoria in the last year.

[magentaflame]

https://theconversation.com/nearly-half ... ied-145325

apologies seems their were six farms affected

[spot]

Three bird farms have had to slaughter all their stock in Victoria in the last year.

I'm not really familiar with the economics of bird farms. Do they make money in a normal year if they refuse to slaughter their stock? I thought slaughtering their stock was why they had a business model, they profit from killing birds.

[magentaflame]

Three bird farms have had to slaughter all their stock in Victoria in the last year.

I'm not really familiar with the economics of bird farms. Do they make money in a normal year if they refuse to slaughter their stock? I thought slaughtering their stock was why they had a business model, they profit from killing birds.

I corrected the amount of farms infected I knew of the turkey farm and one egg farm but didn't know there were six farms all up .
I have two chooks and two geese sitting on eggs at the moment i had to keep them under cover for awhile

[Bryn Mawr]

Three bird farms have had to slaughter all their stock in Victoria in the last year.

I'm not really familiar with the economics of bird farms. Do they make money in a normal year if they refuse to slaughter their stock? I thought slaughtering their stock was why they had a business model, they profit from killing birds.

They don’t profit from killing the birds, they profit from selling the carcasses and, presumably, if the birds are infected they can’t sell the resulting carcasses.

[spot]

I was perhaps thinking of it more from the birds' point of view. Silly of me.

[Bryn Mawr]

I was perhaps thinking of it more from the birds' point of view. Silly of me.

Very :-p

[Mikey]

People are becoming tired of this now. And have started finding excuses to venture out without masks. This is going to end up bad, is all I know. The winter will be cruel to all of us.

[LarsMac]

People are becoming tired of this now. And have started finding excuses to venture out without masks. This is going to end up bad, is all I know. The winter will be cruel to all of us.

In our recent wanderings, we have found most people are being pretty reasonable and cautious.

[magentaflame]

Three bird farms have had to slaughter all their stock in Victoria in the last year.

I'm not really familiar with the economics of bird farms. Do they make money in a normal year if they refuse to slaughter their stock? I thought slaughtering their stock was why they had a business model, they profit from killing birds.

They don’t profit from killing the birds, they profit from selling the carcasses and, presumably, if the birds are infected they can’t sell the resulting carcasses.

Nor the eggs apparently

[magentaflame]

People are becoming tired of this now. And have started finding excuses to venture out without masks. This is going to end up bad, is all I know. The winter will be cruel to all of us.

That's a real shame. They won't like lockdown much then when it comes.

[Hope6]

This is a picture of a streetcar conductor during the 1918 flu, refusing to allow a man to get on the streetcar without a mask. Why aren't the businesses today enforcing the wearing of masks? I went to an auto parts store the other day and right on the door it says masks are required to enter. I go in and nobody in the store is wearing a mask. I felt awkward because I was the only one in a mask.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/ ... ALVWFU.jpg

[magentaflame]

Ah. Conspiratorial paranoia. That option hadn't crossed my mind. You seem not to recognize that if one Western head of state claims to have proof of what you just said, it would trigger a nuclear war. If you believe it to be true perhaps you should consider why you're willing to hold such a belief, it's akin to persecuting Jews for ritually eating babies - there's people who believe that too.

I thought you offered to do the math? You started out by saying China had actually around the same number of deaths as the rest of the the entire planet, remember, if it was to have been as bad an outcome as the UK. You were criticizing my lack of patriotic response. I thought we were doing sums, not fantasizing about maybes.

Okay now I'm angry.
I couldn't give a fuck what a certain head of state says . I live in Asian waters and get a shit load more info than you do on a constant basis. I suppose the islands China has constructed in the Pacific, the restrictions of differing countries borders in the oceans around them, the colonization of countries, HONG KONG!, banning free passage through open straits ....TO THE BRITISH AS WELL! . When was the last time you saw a Chinese police car on your countries soil? when was the last time you saw fenced off areas to mines where they fly in chinese workers on FIFO and no one is allowed to have any contact with them? the num,ber of spys and pro chinese demonstrations ... Must be all fantasy?
The Mao/ bougiuos protest bullshit of the sixties was misdirected then and is now . I won't argue with an ignorant fuckknuckle. Come out here and see it for yourself!


And it was our government who first said something wasn't right about the whole covid thing . Have a look at what has happened since they wanted an enquiry. what's worst than a person who accuses a person of a conspiricy? Someone who denies to the death ....you are both!

[magentaflame]

This is a picture of a streetcar conductor during the 1918 flu, refusing to allow a man to get on the streetcar without a mask. Why aren't the businesses today enforcing the wearing of masks? I went to an auto parts store the other day and right on the door it says masks are required to enter. I go in and nobody in the store is wearing a mask. I felt awkward because I was the only one in a mask.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/ ... ALVWFU.jpg

I looked up the Spanish flu for Australia. We were the last to get it because of our isolation from everyone in those days . For us it was a soldier who got off a ship in Melbourne and travelled to Sydney on a train. Next minute all our people were dying. there's footage of the way they handled it . And yes there were the exact same protests back then that there are now. Humans don't change much eh? Or our education hasn't moved much in a hundred years. Great aunt and uncle died from that flu, they were children. It didn't just last one year.

[spot]

Ah. Conspiratorial paranoia. That option hadn't crossed my mind. You seem not to recognize that if one Western head of state claims to have proof of what you just said, it would trigger a nuclear war. If you believe it to be true perhaps you should consider why you're willing to hold such a belief, it's akin to persecuting Jews for ritually eating babies - there's people who believe that too.

I thought you offered to do the math? You started out by saying China had actually around the same number of deaths as the rest of the the entire planet, remember, if it was to have been as bad an outcome as the UK. You were criticizing my lack of patriotic response. I thought we were doing sums, not fantasizing about maybes.

Okay now I'm angry.
I couldn't give a fuck what a certain head of state says . I live in Asian waters and get a shit load more info than you do on a constant basis. I suppose the islands China has constructed in the Pacific, the restrictions of differing countries borders in the oceans around them, the colonization of countries, HONG KONG!, banning free passage through open straits ....TO THE BRITISH AS WELL! . When was the last time you saw a Chinese police car on your countries soil? when was the last time you saw fenced off areas to mines where they fly in chinese workers on FIFO and no one is allowed to have any contact with them? the num,ber of spys and pro chinese demonstrations ... Must be all fantasy?
The Mao/ bougiuos protest bullshit of the sixties was misdirected then and is now . I won't argue with an ignorant fuckknuckle. Come out here and see it for yourself!


And it was our government who first said something wasn't right about the whole covid thing . Have a look at what has happened since they wanted an enquiry. what's worst than a person who accuses a person of a conspiricy? Someone who denies to the death ....you are both!

Let's untangle those areas. I'm quite happy to.

Land has a coast. If there's no other land within 24 nautical miles (nm) (otherwise the gap is split down the middle), the water out to 12nm is territorial. The country can legally control passage in that area. The British do it in the English Channel. Russian warships have to get permission to pass the Dover Strait, either from the British or from the French depending on which side they travel. Out to 200nm a country has exclusive economic control of the sea, the seabed, but not of access. We both agree so far?

The land in the sea which China has developed, like the Spratley Islands, is claimed by China. Maybe China does own them, maybe China doesn't. Maybe Britain does own the Malvinas, maybe it doesn't. The land is respectively claimed as British or as Chinese, there are courts to adjudicate. Clearly there was land there to be developed - you couldn't sail a ship over them, the ship would have grounded. The land qualified as land in the legal definitions, it broke the surface for at least some of the tidal range. China has improved its territory. The Dutch drained and developed most of their country too, and you don't doubt that the polders are part of the European mainland and owned by the Netherlands, even though it's reclaimed land which used to be tidal and will still flood to this day if the sluices are left open on a rising tide.

Continental Australia, including Tasmania, has an exclusive economic zone of 6,048,681 square km. It actually claims 25% more than that because it claims to own Macquarie Island, Christmas Island, Norfolk Island, Heard Island, the McDonald Islands and Cocos Islands. That's just like the British claiming an exclusive economic zone in the South Atlantic by reason of possessing the Falklands, or into the North Atlantic because some naval cadets once climbed Rockall. What makes you think China is in a different position, as far as exclusive economic zones goes? Why is sauce for the goose not fit for the gander? Maybe they don't in fact own the islands they claim. Maybe the British do in fact have no legitimate claim to the Falklands. Maybe the Cocos Islands are really Australian and not the indigenous home of the Cocos Islanders. Those are legal questions which can be resolved. What can't be argued is that the land exists and that it is owned by someone who has rights over the territorial and economic waters around it.

The British and the Australians impose territorial control within 12nm of their claimed territories, they can allow or deny passage at that range. Beyond that 12nm they have no say, the exclusive economic zone is international water for ships of any nation. If you know of any instance of China barring shipping from transit in international water, give me an instance. I don't know of any.

A final question, why does China want to extend its use of islands in the South China Sea? The answer is that the US has in the past sailed damn great aircraft carrier groups right up to the Chinese mainland, which is an asymmetric relationship. No Chinese aircraft carrier group would be tolerated 12nm off San Francisco or prancing around outside Sydney Harbour. The forward bases on China's islands in the Korean and South China seas makes it less likely the Americans will push that far forward in future. It's a very rational homeland defence in depth, it is not possible to describe it as aggression. Building military bases abroad is aggressive. Arming your own perimeter, on the other hand, is just plain common sense when the aggressor has as much weaponry as the rest of the world combined.

At least America was pushed out of the Philippines, having invaded twice and claimed it for decades. Their current claim on the entire Pacific as home waters now depends on Hawaii and Guam, neither of which they have a legitimate claim to.

Do you seriously claim Hong Kong is not Chinese territory? You think it's a Chinese colony? "Hong Kong became a colony of the British Empire after the Qing Empire ceded Hong Kong Island at the end of the First Opium War in 1842" - China's territory, insulted by British Empire opium-running destabilization and colonial theft? Is the Isle of Wight British?