Wuhan coronavirus

[ricardo 7,384]

1 hour ago, Rock The Boat said:

Zero infections in Norfolk according to the telly last night. Long may it continue

 

Is there a checkpoint on the A140 at Diss?

[ricardo 7,384]

Oil price drops 20 percent as markets panic.

[BroadstairsR 2,162]

 Comments please.Don't skip see it through.

[Yellow Fever 3,772]

8 minutes ago, ricardo said:

Oil price drops 20 percent as markets panic.

I suspect the fat lady has now finished her warm-up (which was ignored)  and is now .. singing.

Edited March 9, 2020 by Yellow Fever

[ricardo 7,384]

13 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

I suspect the fat lady has now finished her warm-up (which was ignored)  and is now .. singing.

There has been a lot of ignoring YF. The sensible began preparing a month ago.

[T 190]

More people will die from heart disease diabetes and other diseases and war and a lot of people would not die from Covid19 if it were not the serious underlying health conditions so what should be done about these conditions?  What action is the government not doing that it should?  It is putting out good info and following expert advice as far as I see. 

[T 190]

The really sensible have prepared their entire life by following expert advice on healthy eating and fitness to substantially reduce the risk of the serious illnesses associated with dying from Covid 19 

[ricardo 7,384]

4 minutes ago, T said:

What action is the government not doing that it should?  It is putting out good info and following expert advice as far as I see. 

See China.

Everyone else is behind the curve.

[T 190]

UK government are making an expert evidence based risk assessment about when the right time is to bring in additional measures.
 

If there are no reported cases in Norfolk then shut down is. disproportionate.
 

People decide to take the risk of getting in their cars every day  People decide to live unhealthy life styles every day. Society makes risks assessments every day typically at an individual level based on perceived risk rather than actual risk as humans are not very good at rationally assessing risk. 
 

There is nothing of course to stop individuals self isolating including separating themselves from family and friends who are major spreaders of Covid 19 if they so decide.

Irrational stock piling and panic will not save you. Following expert medical advice and leading a healthy lifestyle will greatly improve your chances yet people still decide to ignore expert advice. Irrational. 

[Yellow Fever 3,772]

34 minutes ago, T said:

More people will die from heart disease diabetes and other diseases and war and a lot of people would not die from Covid19 if it were not the serious underlying health conditions so what should be done about these conditions?  What action is the government not doing that it should?  It is putting out good info and following expert advice as far as I see. 

 

I am a fatalist when it comes to these things - we will all die sometime. However whereas I have little sympathy with my compatriot boomers over many issues (Brexit, tax, spending and generally a very self-centred unearned attitude) I prefer to look at cold facts but I also believe in empathy and humanity and common decency - some people are lazy and some are just unlucky. Yes many boomers will now unfortunately suffer from the self inflicted NHS staff shortages and lack of resources that they so happily voted for.  

The current government and Johnson in particular being almost be definition 'populist' have said and indeed promised ALWAYS exactly what people want to hear whether it is deliverable or not - Cake and Eat it and so on. It makes them spectacularly ill-equipped to deliver 'bad' news, economically damaging news/action or take any actions that people don't want to hear - quarantine, rationing and even god help us emergency civil powers of arrest and detention.

If the idea is to 'slow' the virus then action should of been taken a week or more ago to stop large crowds - sport, schools. Yes it comes at a terrible economic and political price and even if it does slow the virus gives no political credit!.

However - such unpopular measures aren't their style - after all it might just go away. It won't. Johnson has decided that the economic costs outweigh the human ones. Every OAP should take note. You were simply 'cannon fodder' and expendable  

Edited March 9, 2020 by Yellow Fever

[ricardo 7,384]

14 minutes ago, T said:

 

Irrational stock piling and panic will not save you. 

Those that prepared don't need to panic. They listened to the expert advice that was freely available should anyone care to look. The complacent will always be one step behind the curve and by complacent, I mean all governments outside China, Japan and S.Korea. The most complacent of all, the USA will really suffer.

[BroadstairsR 2,162]

I think that one important aspect that the medical profession is unsure about is the prospect of re-infection after having had the disease once.

 

There have been two reported incidences of this but the facts are unclear.Both in Asia and it is likely that the Japanese lady was not quite clear of the virus once she had been cleared and returned from hospital.

Clear facts about immunity would need establishing and investigating to the full.

If we can become immune then that is just one positive at least.

It would seem immunity might prevail as the figures from Wuhan, with it's unhealthy live market and poor hygiene standards as outlined in my video above, might suggest it does for the most part.

 

Edited March 9, 2020 by BroadstairsR

[Barbe bleu 823]

You heard it here first.  Covid-19 virus declared extinct by late july.  

Overall mortality rates for early 2020 down due to reduced respiratory disease transmission of all types.

World discovers that never ending economic growth not so important afterall.

Birth rate highest since 1940s (but divorce rates at all time high).

Pollution rates throughout infected regions down dramatically and co2 levels at ten year low.

 

[JF 694]

Looking likely that this will be the last week of normality for a while. Would expect to see people that can work from home doing so and other measures being put in place by the beginning of next week.

[Herman 9,756]

Oh no, Nigel Farage did a radio appearance with Ted Cruz. 

[ricardo 7,384]

10 minutes ago, Herman said:

Oh no, Nigel Farage did a radio appearance with Ted Cruz. 

Has he booked an Italian holiday or a Mediterranean cruise?

[ricardo 7,384]

34 minutes ago, JF said:

Looking likely that this will be the last week of normality for a while. Would expect to see people that can work from home doing so and other measures being put in place by the beginning of next week.

Probably the last week of football also.

[T 190]

Not what the cultural secretary is saying. Of course no one is forcing anyone to attend depending on their perception of risk. And no one is forcing anyone to interact with those who do attend 
 

There is simply isn’t the cultural acceptance or technology in place to put the restrictions in place seen in China and S Korea so it is not going to happen.
 

Healthcare systems make cost benefit decisions all the time To think otherwise is delusion. And different people have different perceptions of risks. The repeated message from UK is a balanced approach and different people will clearly have different perception of where that balance should be. No one is saying that the elderly should not be cared for but they are not going to ignore the 99pc. 
 

it makes absolute sense to think how you would cope with self isolation as per the PHE link I posted but excessive panic buying is just irrational.and inconsiderate to other people.  No evidence of starvation and shops are already restocking so there will be a catch up. I have just received a new discount offer for home grocery shopping which means cheaper to shop online than in supermarkets. That does not sound like a service struggling to meet demand but one gearing up supply to take advantage of increased demand.  Part of preparing is considering alternative options to eg purchase fresh food. 

[Rock The Boat 1,329]

46 minutes ago, T said:

Not what the cultural secretary is saying. Of course no one is forcing anyone to attend depending on their perception of risk. And no one is forcing anyone to interact with those who do attend 
 

There is simply isn’t the cultural acceptance or technology in place to put the restrictions in place seen in China and S Korea so it is not going to happen.
 

Healthcare systems make cost benefit decisions all the time To think otherwise is delusion. And different people have different perceptions of risks. The repeated message from UK is a balanced approach and different people will clearly have different perception of where that balance should be. No one is saying that the elderly should not be cared for but they are not going to ignore the 99pc. 
 

it makes absolute sense to think how you would cope with self isolation as per the PHE link I posted but excessive panic buying is just irrational.and inconsiderate to other people.  No evidence of starvation and shops are already restocking so there will be a catch up. I have just received a new discount offer for home grocery shopping which means cheaper to shop online than in supermarkets. That does not sound like a service struggling to meet demand but one gearing up supply to take advantage of increased demand.  Part of preparing is considering alternative options to eg purchase fresh food. 

By all means shop online if it's more convenient for you, but do watch out for the size of fruit and veg that they deliver. I used to do all my shopping online but soon noticed that the fruit and veg were always small in size, sometimes ridiculously so. In the end I switched back to purchasing instore so that I could examine and select the goods before I bought them.

[Yellow Fever 3,772]

38 minutes ago, T said:

Not what the cultural secretary is saying. Of course no one is forcing anyone to attend depending on their perception of risk. And no one is forcing anyone to interact with those who do attend 
 

There is simply isn’t the cultural acceptance or technology in place to put the restrictions in place seen in China and S Korea so it is not going to happen.
 

Healthcare systems make cost benefit decisions all the time To think otherwise is delusion. And different people have different perceptions of risks. The repeated message from UK is a balanced approach and different people will clearly have different perception of where that balance should be. No one is saying that the elderly should not be cared for but they are not going to ignore the 99pc. 
 

it makes absolute sense to think how you would cope with self isolation as per the PHE link I posted but excessive panic buying is just irrational.and inconsiderate to other people.  No evidence of starvation and shops are already restocking so there will be a catch up. I have just received a new discount offer for home grocery shopping which means cheaper to shop online than in supermarkets. That does not sound like a service struggling to meet demand but one gearing up supply to take advantage of increased demand.  Part of preparing is considering alternative options to eg purchase fresh food. 

 

The issue I have is not with your 'cost benefit' analysis. Its obviously largely true.

However the issue I have is that the government says one thing (we are trying to delay the virus peak until the summer) and then does nothing practical to achieve these ends ergo to date it has made the exact cost benefit analysis that you make. The elderly are expendable. Johnson is just reacting not being proactive.

The true scientific information is likely to be options 1,2,3 etc all with different economic and social costs. Yes if we shut down early and are 'successful' that may lead some to relax earlier than they should.

However, which option is chosen is CLEARLY ultimately a political decision. Yes unity in that decision is then required and expected by all even if it rapidly appears flawed. Anything else would cause needless panic. 

We are obviously a week or two behind the Italian curve (with all its economic let alone human costs) and as yet we have done nothing different to tackle a spreading now entrenched disease (as per the Italians 2 weeks ago) despite the hard learnt lessons from Italy and indeed China.

I call that a political failure and an abdication of responsibility.

[ricardo 7,384]

19 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

 

We are obviously a week or two behind the Italian curve (with all its economic let alone human costs) and as yet we have done nothing different to tackle a spreading now entrenched disease (as per the Italians 2 weeks ago) despite the hard learnt lessons from Italy and indeed China.

I call that a political failure and an abdication of responsibility.

I totally agree. A tragic mistake as will soon become apparent.

 

[ricardo 7,384]

Flights still coming in from Milan, no medical checks, massive complacency.

[Yellow Fever 3,772]

2 minutes ago, ricardo said:

Flights still coming in from Milan, no medical checks, massive complacency.

Game over.

[T 190]

The medical profession makes daily decisions on the “expendable” of the elderly. Not my word.
 

The govt have made it clear and we will hear soon based on expert advice as to when and how much restrictions will be imposed. There are no “right” answers here just difficult judgements as to the risks and costs depending on your situation and attitude to risk.
 

Personally I’ve decided to follow medical advice and be prepared to self isolate and work from home but also to get on with life for the next 12 to 18 months. Other people will have a different attitude to risk and take less or greater personal action and that is fine.
 

Unless you completely isolate people then it will spread. I don’t think you can ban people from seeing their family and friends or working. I suspect people are asking others  to take actions that they are not willing to take themselves. People still need to work and feed themselves so a complete lock down will not happen. 

[T 190]

They are no medical checks because the scientific view is that they look reassuring but are ineffective. 

[T 190]

Well UK govt confirmed not in delay stage yet. Of course as I’ve said if you think this is wrong then you can always self isolate yourself including not going to events, not going out, separating yourself from family and friends and not working.  Practice what you preach if you really believe it but I suspect not many people are willing to do this in practice. 

[Yellow Fever 3,772]

20 minutes ago, T said:

They are no medical checks because the scientific view is that they look reassuring but are ineffective. 

I think you missed my very much earlier points.

The virus is now unstoppable - even in China (it will reinfect). Its global.

That said there are things we can do to slow its advance - or indeed spread it out into the summer as I thought the original plan was. Now I think it is let it hit hard hard and fast.

Yes GPs let alone hospital physicians routinely have to take life and death decisions - sometimes even relatives (DNR). Lives come naturally to an end and then there is 'quality of life' as well to consider. 

The point however is a political one - some (past) restrictions on large gatherings would help slow the spread and be seen politically at the very least to be trying to limit the disease. Do nothing and as sure as eggs are eggs and you will be rightfully blamed.

Johnson's government is in total disarray and abdicated any responsibility for what follows. No leadership. Not unexpected.

Yes I will carry on as normal in as far as is possible - and more so I have to fly.... That will be my decision as the government has abdicated its.

Edited March 9, 2020 by Yellow Fever

[T 190]

They are merely following expert advice. If they didn’t do that then they would be taking a political decision which contradicted the expert advice which would be wrong

. this is really a decision about then when and not the if now. If people don’t agree with the expert view then they can take mitigating action themselves but I don’t see much evidence that people are willing to do this so they are asking the govt to do something they are not willing to do themselves which does not seem reasonable. 

[Yellow Fever 3,772]

16 minutes ago, T said:

They are merely following expert advice. If they didn’t do that then they would be taking a political decision which contradicted the expert advice which would be wrong

. this is really a decision about then when and not the if now. If people don’t agree with the expert view then they can take mitigating action themselves but I don’t see much evidence that people are willing to do this so they are asking the govt to do something they are not willing to do themselves which does not seem reasonable. 

They have made a political choice and are hiding behind a scientific 'option'. No more and no less.

[Indy 3,297]

This is long but from Jimmy Huang a Data Scientist.

Unless you’ve been living under a rock, you’ll have surely heard about the "deadly coronavirus" all over the news. On the other hand, others are also downplaying the severity of the virus - "it's just like the flu". How can we rationally process all of this?

The question many people ask is “should we be concerned about the coronavirus?” in which case the answer in my mind is a resounding yes - because any time we have a new risk in our lives, we should be concerned. 

The more appropriate question is - how concerned should we be?

It’s important to note that any loss of life is a tragedy, and there is no doubt the virus will have an affect on us - either directly or through loved ones or through how we live our lives. I am in no way downplaying the severity of the virus. However, coming from a statistics background, I wanted to step aside from the emotional aspect for a second and look at the virus with a data-driven perspective.

It’s difficult to understand how to react to the virus because it’s new, unexpected, and there are still a lot of unknowns. Let’s say hypothetically, news comes out that the chance of dying from the coronavirus is 0.1%. Is this a high number? Everyone will react to this number differently; some will be more concerned than others.

What we can do is compare the risk to other risks in our lives. We know how concerned (or not concerned) we are when we get into a car to pick up groceries. It’s something we’ve become accustomed to and have internalized. We know how concerned we are with the chance of our house burning down, or of a 7.0+ earthquake hitting overnight. 

The virus is scary because it’s an unknown whereas other risks in our lives are something we have become used to. It’s the same reason why the headline “2 die from deadly coronavirus” make us feel more uneasy than the headline “2 die from a deadly car crash”.

If we can quantify the risks in our daily lives along with the risks of the coronavirus, it gives us context as to how severe a hypothetical x% death rate is relative to other risks.

Secondly, I’ll discuss for each risk, how much of it is preventable? If we can quantify the likelihood of death for each risk - both with and without preventative actions taken, we can understand how much of a difference taking action can reduce our risk. These are risks that we should prioritize (if we are rational).

 

Framework:

Using probability, we can calculate the likelihood of death by decomposing the risk into two components:

Likelihood of death = (likelihood of event) x (fatality rate)

I'll abbreviate this as p x q.

When driving a car, p is the likelihood of getting into a car accident. q is the percentage of car accidents that result in deaths.

For the virus, p is the likelihood of being infected, and q is the chance of dying if infected.

A risk is more dangerous if either the likelihood of event (p) or the fatality rate (q) is high.

 

Example of p and q:

7.0+ Earthquake in San Francisco:

Likelihood of earthquake: 20% over the next 30 years, or 0.7% per year

Fatality rate: In the 1989 earthquake, 63 died out of 700,000 residents = 0.009%

Likelihood of death = 0.7% x 0.009% = 0.00006% or less than 1 in a million

 

Driving a car:

Likelihood of accident: 6 million car crashes annually out of 180 million adults who drive = 3.3%

Fatality rate: 6% of car crashes result in fatalities

Likelihood of death: 3.3% x 6% = 0.006% or 1980 in a million

How much can be prevented?

79% of car crashes come from drunk driving, speeding, or distractions. If these 79% car crashes can be prevented, this reduces the likelihood of an accident. 

Reduced likelihood of death: 416 in a million

Delta = 1564 in a million

 

Coronavirus:

Likelihood of infection: Here's where it gets trickier because a lot is unknown. In Hubei where the spread has slowed, 70 thousand were infected out of a population of 60 million (0.117%). Since there’s still a lot of uncertainty, let’s multiply this number by 10X just to be safe, or an infection rate of 1.17%

Fatality rate: 3% to be conservative

Likelihood of death: 1.17% x 3% = 350 in a million

How much can be prevented?

A recent WHO study found that 80% of infections came from family members or being in close contact with an infected person. There’s probably no way to completely eliminate the chance, so let’s say we can prevent 80% of infections by self-quarantining.

Reduced likelihood of death: 70 in a million

Delta = 280 in a million

 

Summary of daily risks:

I looked up the likelihood of event and fatality for a variety of daily risks and diseases and here's what I found:

 

Takeaways:

1. The coronavirus is a concern because it will affect many people. It's our social responsibility to do what we can to limit the spread - washing our hands, not being in public if there's a chance we are infected, and keeping up to date with the latest developments.
2. From a statistical standpoint, the risk of the coronavirus is lower than the risk of driving a car, diabetes and heart disease. Rationally, we should feel more anxious about driving a car than about the coronavirus.
3. If the coronavirus evolves into something like the 1918 Spanish Flu, it'll be one of the top risks of our lives. It's important to keep up to date with the news in case the infection rate or fatality rate becomes more serious.
4. If you want to do something to limit your chances of dying, you'd be much more productive being proactive about diabetes and heart disease. It's understandable to worry about you or your family's safety around the coronavirus, but if so, you should be even more worried about your families' diet and exercise.
5. I've presented my personal framework for evaluating the risk in comparison to other risks we face, using whatever statistics I can find. You are welcome to use this framework along with your own p and q if you disagree with the numbers I used.

I hope this helps to add some perspective. Stay safe out there, drop that french fry, and go for a run (inside your house)!