Coronavirus

[Graham Breeze]

... when we first heard of the age distribution all the O70s and compromised should have been locked away.

So the obese starting with the Prime Minster, all ex-smokers, all those with the various frequently-listed diseases,...?

Well, that would only leave me, but ooops I'm over 70!

Better turn to Plan B.

[Muddy Retriever]

3/ OH (who as ex scientific director of a big biotech lab, has a qualified opinion) thinks that the problem with corona is a possible cytokine storm, that is the body inflammation response overreacting, further that the reason it is not spreading like wildfire in poor countries, is they live in altogether dirtier environments, their immune systems dont go overboard. Just a theory in circulation, needs validation.

Perhaps that's a factor, who knows. However, first world countries like Australia and New Zealand have also fared well. I know there are other factors causing this, which I have mentioned myself. But could it partly be that the people there have been getting enough Vitamin D as the outbreak started in their summer and Australia in particular is nearer the Equator? It may be only a minor factor but sounds plausible to me.

Also, black and people of Asian origin have fared worse in the UK than white people. There could be a number of reasons for that, but it is well known that people with darker skins do not get enough Vitamin D from the sun in climates like ours.

There isn't enough evidence to be sure of anything but I reckon it's no bad thing to be running and cycling at the moment and getting plenty of that sunshine pill.

[Witton Park]

Germany were the first with a test in the EU. 4 million available by end of Feb (and note they didn't make sure their EU colleagues had plenty).
There's been criticism of the testing in Germany - that they wasted many tests on the fit and well.

I would discount Aus and NZ. Totally different on so many counts.

The way I see this is that all countries were going to get it that have, probably not much we could do about the levels we would get it at because we probably had it here and across the EU in December before we even knew anything about it.

It stands out like a sore thumb to me that the European concentrations are based around the major airport hubs.
Heathrow
Paris CdG
Schipol

3 of the biggest 4 intercontinental hubs

Chuck in Madrid which is the stepping stone from Asia and Europe to South America and you have the worst affected spots.

Brussels not so much an intercontinental hub, but certainly a major EU one.

So the odd one out Frankfurt. Huge volumes of passengers, but they mostly transfer through. The others have a lot more that stop off and visit the city, or stay in the country.

I think Germany's lack of international appeal for tourists when compared to some of the other destinations has played a part in their lower figures so far.

[JohnK]

On various points.
1/ Testing is not as easy as journalists have led you to believe, nor is it a panacea.
Tests are only as good as the test set used to validate them, and with a proportion of the population assymptomatic, and a proportion of those with symptoms not necessarily having Corona, there are both false negatives and positives in the tests sets. If tests are only 80 percent, they are of little use for control. Validation takes a long time and a lot of people. There have many false starts in testing. Did Germany do well because of testing or in spite of it? Who knows?

2/ Belgium and Germany were both testing heavily. The results for belgium, not so good. Populations are clearly different. It might interest you to know that amongst other conditions with immune system overreaction aspects : asthma is a lot lower in Germany than in neighbouring countries. Indeed the countries fairing badly with this have a correlation with those fairing badly on asthma too.

3/ OH (who as ex scientific director of a big biotech lab, has a qualified opinion) thinks that the problem with corona is a possible cytokine storm, that is the body inflammation response overreacting, further that the reason it is not spreading like wildfire in poor countries, is they live in altogether dirtier environments, their immune systems dont go overboard because of continuous immune response. Just a theory in circulation, needs validation.

4/ University labs are by and large not the places to validate anything. They do not understand regulatory stuff. They have sent OH biotech company on many wild goose chases in the past.

5/ You are right - Public Health England - let us down badly by failing to harness the private sector. Entire biotech labs left idle. It is a systemic problem in the UK. Too many lefties high up in the civil service and health service utterly opposed to use of private resource. We need a stronger private alternative in medicine and more regional autonomy. PHE have proved useless.

6/ Closing borders is a dramatic step, and if you consider france has now validated it had a case in october, what was the point?
In portugal many had corona in january long before cases were recorded. Not surprising, they have many chinese who run the secondary retail sector alternative to the supermarkets. The virus was already here. As it was in all the other countries.

We are living in desparate times. Even this length of closure of our economy will have permanent damage and a massived downturn.

My own opinion for what its worth is when we first heard of the age distribution all the O70s and compromised should have been locked away. Then let it burn out in general population with no damage to the economy. But heres the thing. Nobody will ever know for sure. You cannot run experiments two ways. Sweden is fairing no worse for going an opposite direction.

So all this endless snipting at the "government" is pointless, and incidentally when saying "government" what is meant is a consensus of a team of appointed medical and scientific staff. So substitute "the medical profession" if you want to attack them for poor response.

Perhaps that's a factor, who knows. However, first world countries like Australia and New Zealand have also fared well. I know there are other factors causing this, which I have mentioned myself. But could it partly be that the people there have been getting enough Vitamin D as the outbreak started in their summer and Australia in particular is nearer the Equator? It may be only a minor factor but sounds plausible to me.

Also, black and people of Asian origin have fared worse in the UK than white people. There could be a number of reasons for that, but it is well known that people with darker skins do not get enough Vitamin D from the sun in climates like ours.

There isn't enough evidence to be sure of anything but I reckon it's no bad thing to be running and cycling at the moment and getting plenty of that sunshine pill.

As I have often said the world is dealing with the unknown and it is far to early to speculate on the if`s and but`s, better to spend our time deliberating on something we have control over and then Maybe in a couple of years, History may show some positive answers on the current world crisis.

As to the media and press waste of space if looking for facts.

[Muddy Retriever]

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1....24.20078717v1

A little light reading.

I can't see that lockdown measures have achieved anything. I don't hammer those who took the decisions. As Oracle says, what do you do when you have experts with so many different views?

The best of intentions, but little effect.

This article would appear to support your view. It's worth a read.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/...thout-lockdown

Sweden's current R number is estimated to be 0.85 and this has been achieved without an enforced lockdown. Instead the Swedes have engaged in voluntary social distancing.

Imperial College estimated that without a lockdown, Sweden's R number would grow to between 3 and 4 and that by 1st May, its Covid-19 deaths would have reached 40,000 (nearly 100,000 by June). Actual deaths are in fact 2,680 and daily deaths peaked two weeks ago.

It is worth pointing out that it's Nordic neighbours, which have enforced lockdowns have suffered less deaths. But it is clear that Sweden has fared nowhere near as badly as most experts predicted.

[anthonykay]

This article would appear to support your view. It's worth a read.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/...thout-lockdown

Sweden's current R number is estimated to be 0.85 and this has been achieved without an enforced lockdown. Instead the Swedes have engaged in voluntary social distancing.

Blimey, a government trusting its people to have common sense!

More seriously the voluntary social distancing is what we have all become used to when we meet other people on our daily exercise, or in the shops. And if the Police didn't have Covid rules to enforce, they could get on with catching criminals, keeping the roads safe from speeding motorists, etc.

[Graham Breeze]

This article would appear to support your view. It's worth a read.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/...thout-lockdown

Well yes...but I think the population of Sweden is about the same as London and the UK was never going to not fall in line with the "European" model. It is alleged that Macron told Johnson by phone that if the UK didn't follow France the border would be closed immediately and that is when Johnson changed tack. Realpolitik.

And being radical and risking 100,000 or was it 250,000 deaths is not a vote winning approach - much better to play safe. Yes the Swedish model might have made Johnson a hero, but only might and this is politics and Johnson is a politican who wants to be Churchill (saviour of the nation).

Yes, the government has made mistakes in getting to where we are now, although I suggest not as many as the gutter media suggest - my hope is they make fewer in future (or "going forward" as we now appear to say) because that is what matters now.

And as for journalistic hindsight? Well I wish I had bought into Microsoft and Apple - but I am glad I didn't buy the other 100,000 starts-ups that went bust so I can still put food on the table.

[Graham Breeze]

Blimey, a government trusting its people to have common sense!

More seriously the voluntary social distancing is what we have all become used to when we meet other people on our daily exercise, or in the shops. And if the Police didn't have Covid rules to enforce, they could get on with catching criminals, keeping the roads safe from speeding motorists, etc.

And continue to trot out (well only half a dozen of them, armed of course) to a "tiger" made of chicken wire seen off a path in a wood in Kent - which had been there for twenty years.

But they didn't bother with a drone - they used a helicopter.

(Daily Telegraph p 12)

[Muddy Retriever]

Well yes...but I think the population of Sweden is about the same as London and the UK was never going to not fall in line with the "European" model. It is alleged that Macron told Johnson by phone that if the UK didn't follow France the border would be closed immediately and that is when Johnson changed tack. Realpolitik.

And being radical and risking 100,000 or was it 250,000 deaths is not a vote winning approach - much better to play safe. Yes the Swedish model might have made Johnson a hero, but only might and this is politics and Johnson is a politican who wants to be Churchill (saviour of the nation).

Yes, the government has made mistakes in getting to where we are now, although I suggest not as many as the gutter media suggest - my hope is they make fewer in future (or "going forward" as we now appear to say) because that is what matters now.

And as for journalistic hindsight? Well I wish I had bought into Microsoft and Apple - but I am glad I didn't buy the other 100,000 starts-ups that went bust so I can still put food on the table.

It's not surprising that Johnson changed tack after the 250,000 prediction. He wouldn't have wanted to go down in history as the prime minister that ignored advice and allowed that number of deaths to happen. I don't wish to be critical, I'm glad it's not me having to make these decisions - what a responsibility.

But it has to be said that Neil Ferguson has a somewhat chequered history when it comes to these type of projections. They include the following:

2002 - up to 50,000 people in Britain could die from exposure to BSE - actual deaths 177.
2005 - up to 200 million could be killed worldwide from bird flu - 282 people died globally.
2009 - swine flu, reasonable worst case scenario was for 65,000 deaths in the UK - just 457 people died in Britain.

Fraser Nelson, whose article I linked has written a few articles over the last month or so about the "Swedish experiment" (his wife is Swedish so he has a personal interest). The Swedes thought that what other countries were doing in enforcing strict lockdowns was the "reckless experiment". They were baffled by the Imperial College projections. So far, it looks like they were right, certainly for their country.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/202...ss-experiment/

Of course Sweden is not Britain, much less dense population etc. But the worrying point is that we are basing our strategy on Imperial College projections, which in the case of Sweden have been shown to be wildly out.

[Witton Park]

Neil Ferguson has a somewhat chequered history

A bit generous I'd say.