Donate to Remove ads

Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators

Thanks to johnstevens77,Bhoddhisatva,scotia,Anonymous,Cornytiv34, for Donating to support the site

Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

The home for all non-political Coronavirus (Covid-19) discussions on The Lemon Fool
Forum rules
This is the home for all non-political Coronavirus (Covid-19) discussions on The Lemon Fool
servodude
Lemon Half
Posts: 8271
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 5:56 am
Has thanked: 4434 times
Been thanked: 3564 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#408322

Postby servodude » April 30th, 2021, 1:42 pm

dealtn wrote:It is hard to know whether the largest factor here was countries "able to eliminate" rather than "wanted to eliminate".

Is there one on the list that didn't try?

But you're right... next time try to be an island

-sd

dealtn
Lemon Half
Posts: 6072
Joined: November 21st, 2016, 4:26 pm
Has thanked: 441 times
Been thanked: 2324 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#408323

Postby dealtn » April 30th, 2021, 1:43 pm

servodude wrote:
dealtn wrote:It is hard to know whether the largest factor here was countries "able to eliminate" rather than "wanted to eliminate".

Is there one on the list that didn't try?

But you're right... next time try to be an island

-sd


No, but that's easy to check.

Are there any that did, that aren't on the list?

zico
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2139
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:12 pm
Has thanked: 1074 times
Been thanked: 1086 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#408372

Postby zico » April 30th, 2021, 5:38 pm

dealtn wrote: A study that used the groups "islands" and "non-islands" (selected with hindsight bias) would produce similar results (although the UK would skew this so it would be worse than the 25X outcome in this case).


I don't see how "islands" and "non-islands" would be hindsight bias, because in a pandemic, you'd expect island nations to be able to do very much better than other nations, so it's a reasonable grouping. As you say, very notable that UK is so much worse than other island nations in the world. South Korea is really an island nation in practical terms, due to North Korea hard border, and UK does have a land border with Republic of Ireland. Similarly "elimination" v "mitigation" were different strategies, so again it would be sensible to split them.

An example of "hindsight bias" would be to set up 2 groups as follows.
Group 1 - Peru, Bulgaria, Mexico, Bolivia, Czech Republic, Russia, Serbia, South Africa.
Group 2 - Israel, Germany, Tunisia, Paraguay, Thailand, Finland, Norway, Phillipines.
Countries in these groups have little in common, except Group 1 has high excess deaths per million, and Group 2 has low excess deaths/million.

dealtn
Lemon Half
Posts: 6072
Joined: November 21st, 2016, 4:26 pm
Has thanked: 441 times
Been thanked: 2324 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#408376

Postby dealtn » April 30th, 2021, 6:02 pm

zico wrote:
dealtn wrote: A study that used the groups "islands" and "non-islands" (selected with hindsight bias) would produce similar results (although the UK would skew this so it would be worse than the 25X outcome in this case).


I don't see how "islands" and "non-islands" would be hindsight bias, because in a pandemic, you'd expect island nations to be able to do very much better than other nations, so it's a reasonable grouping.


You misunderstand.

You could choose as "islands" UK, Ireland, Greece and Dominican Republic. Or, Cuba, Australia, South Korea and Sri Lanka. using your hindsight bias you can make claims about how good/bad islands are.

Similarly for "non-islands" USA, Italy, Hungary and Bulgaria. Or, Mozambique, China, Afghanistan and India.

You would have huge issues of course arguing that the data collection was equivalent across countries, but with hindsight bias you can tell lots of different stories on a death per capita basis depending on how you select your "islands" and "non-islands".

zico
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2139
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:12 pm
Has thanked: 1074 times
Been thanked: 1086 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#408384

Postby zico » April 30th, 2021, 6:28 pm

In quotes, is the description of the countries used to create the graphs and on which analysis was based. Authors picked OECD countries, and split them according to which strategy the country selected.
To the point about it only being possible for islands to have a Covid-elimination strategy, Vietnam pursued a Covid-elimination strategy, and that's very definitely not an island.

OECD countries opting for elimination are Australia, Iceland, Japan, New Zealand, and South Korea. OECD countries opting for mitigation are Austria, Belgium, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Mexico, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, the UK, and the USA. Data on strictness of lockdown measures are from Oxford COVID-19 government response tracker.2
Data on COVID-19 deaths are from Our World in Data.3
Data on GDP growth are from OECD Weekly Tracker of economic activity.4
GDP=gross domestic product. OECD=Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

Sunnypad
Lemon Slice
Posts: 744
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:17 pm
Has thanked: 153 times
Been thanked: 309 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#408972

Postby Sunnypad » May 3rd, 2021, 12:33 pm

Polite question
Is there a thread for anyone concerned about measures being OTT?

dealtn
Lemon Half
Posts: 6072
Joined: November 21st, 2016, 4:26 pm
Has thanked: 441 times
Been thanked: 2324 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#408974

Postby dealtn » May 3rd, 2021, 12:41 pm

Sunnypad wrote:Polite question
Is there a thread for anyone concerned about measures being OTT?


Either here, being general, or start a new one.

Sunnypad
Lemon Slice
Posts: 744
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:17 pm
Has thanked: 153 times
Been thanked: 309 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#408977

Postby Sunnypad » May 3rd, 2021, 12:52 pm

Thanks dealtn

I think measures are OTT. Much as they are heading towards relaxation, I think there will be a surge in winter and at some point, personal liberties should be restored.

I seem to be in a minority of two in my friends, who mostly think it would be nice to be more like Singapore and have more automated tracking.

88V8
Lemon Half
Posts: 5766
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:22 am
Has thanked: 4096 times
Been thanked: 2558 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#409031

Postby 88V8 » May 3rd, 2021, 4:59 pm

Sunnypad wrote:.....I think there will be a surge in winter and at some point, personal liberties should be restored.

You mean we should make wayhay while the sun shines :)

Do understand where you are coming from, but I think that will have to wait until more are vaccinated.
There is no desire in govt and I suspect peeps in general, for another lockdown, and one need only look elsewhere in the world to see that the virus us still very much with us.
When one hears all the enthusiasm for holidays in countries where vaccination has not really happened, one does have to wonder whether some people have mislaid their common sense.

V8

dealtn
Lemon Half
Posts: 6072
Joined: November 21st, 2016, 4:26 pm
Has thanked: 441 times
Been thanked: 2324 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#409034

Postby dealtn » May 3rd, 2021, 5:03 pm

Sunnypad wrote:I think measures are OTT.


We were promised "Data not dates". Doesn't appear to be the case though.

Sunnypad
Lemon Slice
Posts: 744
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:17 pm
Has thanked: 153 times
Been thanked: 309 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#409050

Postby Sunnypad » May 3rd, 2021, 6:02 pm

One of my concerns is that people do welcome lockdowns and worry less about things like quarantine coming from other countries.

I thought more people would object to lockdown but the vibe I get from people I know is very much "if it saves one life".

Julian
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1385
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:58 am
Has thanked: 532 times
Been thanked: 676 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#409057

Postby Julian » May 3rd, 2021, 6:15 pm

dealtn wrote:
Sunnypad wrote:I think measures are OTT.


We were promised "Data not dates". Doesn't appear to be the case though.

Let’s see. In theory we are still in a data collection phase. Obviously data is being collected constantly but as I understand this phased unlocking, and I did watch the press conference live when it was announced, because of the PM’s commitment to give a minimum of 1 week warning for every change these 5 week steps comprise 4 weeks when only data is collected and then at the end of the 4th week we get the next “big reveal” when if all has gone well and we are still on schedule the PM confirms that the next unlock stage will happen as planned. Since the next unlock stage is not earlier than May 17th that means our next big reveal must presumably be next Sunday at the latest if Boris is to stick to his minimum 1 week notice period.

Now, whether that big reveal does actually lay out much data, in particular what thresholds the government considered acceptable and hence by how much the actual data fell within bounds is yet to be seen. We always get the standard “next slide please” data on metrics such as cases, deaths, hospitalisations and vaccination stats but seeing those overlaid against any targets the government might have applied at the time of deciding to go ahead with the next stage is in my view unlikely (which I find disappointing).

The other aspect of the promise for a minimum of one week notice to allow businesses time to prepare is that if the next stage of unlock were to be brought forward for instance by a week to May 10th we would have heard by now because that announcement would have needed to be made yesterday unless Boris is willing to break his promise. There do seem to be quite a few scientists calling for unlock to be accelerated now so whether the final step stays at June 21st will be interesting. If the government wants to keep to the data not dates plan and its underlying methodology for this phased unlock I don’t see how the final phase can be shortened. It’s unknown, at least to me, how many people have been breaking the rules anyway but setting that aside it seems to me that this next May 17th unlock is potentially very epidemiologically significant because it is where indoor mixing in private houses is allowed again, at least up to the rule-of-6/2-household limit, and a widespread view seems to have solidified that indoor mixing in more enclosed spaces is the biggest transmission vector. If the government really does want to look at the effect of that then I don’t see how it can collect enough data to see the progress from infections arising to positive tests through to assessing the severity of any resulting infections (hospitalisations) including a day or two at the end to analyse, debate and decide in less than 4 weeks plus then the 1 week promised notice period.

With all that in mind my guess is that, unless the government does quietly sideline its data not dates promise, we are pretty much locked into the May 17th then June 21st dates with maybe the only tweaking around the edges being what happens with travel. At this point in time I don’t see variants derailing that, there still seems to be considerable expert optimism about current vaccines at least protecting against severe disease, and lingering concerns there will likely be addressed via travel/border policy.

All in all if my guess above is correct I’m OK with the above. After over 13 months now it would be such a shame to ditch a sensible phased “data not dates” methodology, assuming sensible data-driven analysis really is happening in the background, all for the sake of maybe moving the June 21st date forward a couple of weeks.

- Julian

Julian
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1385
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:58 am
Has thanked: 532 times
Been thanked: 676 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#409059

Postby Julian » May 3rd, 2021, 6:20 pm

Sunnypad wrote:One of my concerns is that people do welcome lockdowns and worry less about things like quarantine coming from other countries.

I thought more people would object to lockdown but the vibe I get from people I know is very much "if it saves one life".

I see your point. Just asking but do you think any of your friends attitudes might also, or alternatively, be a case of “I have a date when lockdown is likely to end, I can see the finish line now, so I’m happy to keep to that schedule in order to minimise risk of another resurgence”? Basically a “we’re almost there” attitude? That’s essentially the reason why I’m OK with the current unlock timetable which is why I ask.

- Julian

Itsallaguess
Lemon Half
Posts: 9129
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:16 pm
Has thanked: 4140 times
Been thanked: 10023 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#409062

Postby Itsallaguess » May 3rd, 2021, 6:27 pm

Julian wrote:
dealtn wrote:
We were promised "Data not dates".

Doesn't appear to be the case though.


After over 13 months now it would be such a shame to ditch a sensible phased “data not dates” methodology, assuming sensible data-driven analysis really is happening in the background, all for the sake of maybe moving the June 21st date forward a couple of weeks.


They've lifted the 30-person limit on funerals in England from 17th of May - a month earlier than originally planned.

Obviously people will take a view on just how much movement there should be from the original phased road-map, given what seems to be good progress with the general cases and deaths figures, but it should be acknowledged that there has been some movement, and in an important area for those affected...

More than 30 people will be able to mourn their loved ones at funerals in England from 17 May, under plans announced by the government.

As part of the next step of easing lockdown restrictions, ministers are set to remove the 30-person legal limit a month earlier than planned.

This means any number of mourners will be able to gather as long as the venue can comply with social distancing.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56966731

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

Sunnypad
Lemon Slice
Posts: 744
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:17 pm
Has thanked: 153 times
Been thanked: 309 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#409097

Postby Sunnypad » May 3rd, 2021, 8:45 pm

Julian wrote:
Sunnypad wrote:One of my concerns is that people do welcome lockdowns and worry less about things like quarantine coming from other countries.

I thought more people would object to lockdown but the vibe I get from people I know is very much "if it saves one life".

I see your point. Just asking but do you think any of your friends attitudes might also, or alternatively, be a case of “I have a date when lockdown is likely to end, I can see the finish line now, so I’m happy to keep to that schedule in order to minimise risk of another resurgence”? Basically a “we’re almost there” attitude? That’s essentially the reason why I’m OK with the current unlock timetable which is why I ask.

- Julian


No. I appreciate a lot of people are volatile, possibly without even realising. But the general vibe is they themselves do well from lockdown, they don't think about the issues attached to it, they would happily go through a lot more of it.

From that point, the kind of full on citizen tracking employed by other countries would be their way to open up, if they ever want to.

I don't discuss politics with colleagues but I am in touch with former colleague who said to me "I know you worry about the nanny state but surely you would welcome one now?"

No. I certainly would not.

I try to ignore the news and prefer to look at NHS and ONS data. I do think some people are listening to a stream of hysteria and not stopping to think. But also people with houses, gardens, pensions, loved ones in walking distance have a very different experience of lockdown.

I do get frustrated that the broader harms of lockdown are not seen. Government will get their money from other sources so I am not convinced they care either. And they didn't even ask anyone to quarantine from abroad in 2020!

Some of you know my late father specialised in this. He was mentioned in the Lords as one of the country's leading experts before he retired. I do not claim to be him! But I've read his work, and seen his actual actions, on infection control. There have bern several steps omitted from the plan here, because a blanket lockdown suited them better I guess. And was maybe cheaper?

The level of discourse is depressing, at least from my local MP. Hospital and care home transmission is barely acknowledged.

zico
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2139
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:12 pm
Has thanked: 1074 times
Been thanked: 1086 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#409861

Postby zico » May 6th, 2021, 5:23 pm

"Hygiene theatre" is a phrase that's starting to be used by experts in disease control, referring to measures such as cleaning, disinfecting, hand-sanitizers. Expert view now is that it's very very unlikely that anyone will catch Covid from touching surfaces, and what matters most is avoiding close contact with other people, avoiding unventilated areas with large groups of people, and crucially - people should keep wearing masks.

Whatever the government says, looks pretty clear that outside spaces, window-opening and mask-wearing are good things. Spending lots of time in indoor environments with strangers is a bad thing. Going on a plane looks to be one of the riskier things you could do, hours and hours in busy concourses, lots of close proximity queueing, followed by a few hours in close proximity to strangers inside the aircraft itself. Some interesting (and alarming) reports coming from India where passengers tested negative before flights, but lots of people tested positive after the flight. (This could either be because people fake their negative self-test (so you're travelling with lots of Covid-positive people) or it's very easy for Covid to spread on a plane. Both bad things.

India flight to Hong Kong. All passengers tested negative within 72 hours before the flight, 25 tested positive after the flights, and a further 22 cases were discovered 12 days later. (2 cases in first/business class, the other cases across more than a dozen rows in the economy). On the other hand, Michael O'Leary says it'll be fine to go on RyanAir.

We'll be Eurotunnelling off to the continent as soon as we get the green (or amber) light, but I doubt we'll risk flying until next year at the earliest.

Lootman
The full Lemon
Posts: 18674
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm
Has thanked: 628 times
Been thanked: 6557 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#409866

Postby Lootman » May 6th, 2021, 5:34 pm

zico wrote: crucially - people should keep wearing masks.

The US CDC has ruled that vaccinated people can safely socialise indoors together without wearing masks. So it would appear that a mask mandate is only supported in indoor locations where people have not been tested or vaccinated. California recently abandoned its policy of requiring the wearing of masks when outdoors as well. So I am not sure the continued wearing of masks is "crucial" in all cases.

zico wrote:Going on a plane looks to be one of the riskier things you could do, hours and hours in busy concourses, lots of close proximity queueing, followed by a few hours in close proximity to strangers inside the aircraft itself. Some interesting (and alarming) reports coming from India where passengers tested negative before flights, but lots of people tested positive after the flight. (This could either be because people fake their negative self-test (so you're travelling with lots of Covid-positive people) or it's very easy for Covid to spread on a plane. Both bad things.

We'll be Eurotunnelling off to the continent as soon as we get the green (or amber) light, but I doubt we'll risk flying until next year at the earliest.

Some figures I saw showed that the incidence of infected airplane cabin crew was no higher than the average, and was in fact lower in some cases. Seems to me that if planes were a breeding ground for the virus then we would notice it first with flight attendants going down like flies. That has not happened.

Planes have very efficient air filtration systems. It is probably airports that have a higher risk. For instance now that the UK has decided to manually check every incoming passenger for the correct documentation, there are crowded scenes in the immigration hall. So the care being taken here is counter-productive because of the crowding, and in particular mixing passengers from low-risk countries with those from high-risk countries. It hasn't helped that Heathrow has shut 3 of its 5 terminals, cramming everyone into 5 (BA and OneWorld airlines) and 2 (everyone else). Maybe have flights from high-risk countries use Terminal 4? Just a thought.

I am flying later this month!

zico
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2139
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:12 pm
Has thanked: 1074 times
Been thanked: 1086 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#409876

Postby zico » May 6th, 2021, 6:13 pm

Lootman wrote:
zico wrote: crucially - people should keep wearing masks.

The US CDC has ruled that vaccinated people can safely socialise indoors together without wearing masks. So it would appear that a mask mandate is only supported in indoor locations where people have not been tested or vaccinated. California recently abandoned its policy of requiring the wearing of masks when outdoors as well. So I am not sure the continued wearing of masks is "crucial" in all cases.

zico wrote:Going on a plane looks to be one of the riskier things you could do, hours and hours in busy concourses, lots of close proximity queueing, followed by a few hours in close proximity to strangers inside the aircraft itself. Some interesting (and alarming) reports coming from India where passengers tested negative before flights, but lots of people tested positive after the flight. (This could either be because people fake their negative self-test (so you're travelling with lots of Covid-positive people) or it's very easy for Covid to spread on a plane. Both bad things.

We'll be Eurotunnelling off to the continent as soon as we get the green (or amber) light, but I doubt we'll risk flying until next year at the earliest.

Some figures I saw showed that the incidence of infected airplane cabin crew was no higher than the average, and was in fact lower in some cases. Seems to me that if planes were a breeding ground for the virus then we would notice it first with flight attendants going down like flies. That has not happened.

Planes have very efficient air filtration systems. It is probably airports that have a higher risk. For instance now that the UK has decided to manually check every incoming passenger for the correct documentation, there are crowded scenes in the immigration hall. So the care being taken here is counter-productive because of the crowding, and in particular mixing passengers from low-risk countries with those from high-risk countries. It hasn't helped that Heathrow has shut 3 of its 5 terminals, cramming everyone into 5 (BA and OneWorld airlines) and 2 (everyone else). Maybe have flights from high-risk countries use Terminal 4? Just a thought.

I am flying later this month!


Yes, you're right about vaccinated people - I was thinking more of the general situation of being indoors with a wide range of people (e.g. pubs when they re-open indoors). I never understood the "outdoor mask" wearing, unless in crowded areas, as it didn't seem to fit the science.
I'd be a lot more wary about mixing with "tested negative" people, as these are very likely to be self-testing, and have lots of false negatives. If we re-open flights with negative tests, I can't see (say) a family of four self-testing properly and honestly - would a family book a villa for 2 weeks and then the mother tests positive just before the flight, so stays at home, while the father looks after the kids (or they all cancel their holiday and lose the money)? I very much doubt it.

You might not have seen my edited post about the India-Hong Kong flight where everyone tested "negative" pre-flight (yeah right) then 47 passengers tested positive for Covid within 12 days. Can only speculate about cabin crew, but would expect them to spend far fewer hours in terminal queues, and they also spend most of long-haul flights in separate areas away from the main cabins of passengers. You're probably right about terminals being worse than aircraft - if I could get a VIP service, skip the terminal, be driven to the plane and then share a flight with vaccinated passengers (not dodgy negative self-testers) then I'd probably do that. But I doubt I'll be offered that!

You obviously have a far higher tolerance for risk than I do, but I remember even you expressed concerns about the Heathrow scrums last time you flew. Good luck with your next flights!

9873210
Lemon Slice
Posts: 984
Joined: December 9th, 2016, 6:44 am
Has thanked: 226 times
Been thanked: 295 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#409920

Postby 9873210 » May 6th, 2021, 9:28 pm

Lootman wrote:
zico wrote: crucially - people should keep wearing masks.

The US CDC has ruled that vaccinated people can safely socialise indoors together without wearing masks. So it would appear that a mask mandate is only supported in indoor locations where people have not been tested or vaccinated. California recently abandoned its policy of requiring the wearing of masks when outdoors as well. So I am not sure the continued wearing of masks is "crucial" in all cases.


You just slipped tested in from wistful thinking. The CDC has repeatedly warned and continues to warn that a negative test should not be justification for lessening of social distancing.

CDC wrote:If you test negative, you probably were not infected at the time your sample was collected. The test result only means that you did not have COVID-19 at the time of testing. Continue to take steps to protect yourself.

zico
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2139
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:12 pm
Has thanked: 1074 times
Been thanked: 1086 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#409947

Postby zico » May 6th, 2021, 11:09 pm

9873210 wrote:
You just slipped tested in from wistful thinking. The CDC has repeatedly warned and continues to warn that a negative test should not be justification for lessening of social distancing.

CDC wrote:If you test negative, you probably were not infected at the time your sample was collected. The test result only means that you did not have COVID-19 at the time of testing. Continue to take steps to protect yourself.


Yes, vaccinated and "tested" are two very different things. Trump White House relied on negative testing, and look what happened there.
I'm concerned that "vaccinated" and "negative tested" might be seen as equivalent in the UK government guidelines about opening up.
I simply don't trust people to self-test and accurately report the results, particularly as having a negative test will give people access to pubs, clubs, holidays etc.


Return to “Coronavirus Discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests