Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
LetsBuild

Coronavirus - potential Black Swan?

Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, Warlord said:

What do you make of Prof. Johan Gesecke's statements?  He is world renowned and against lockdowns.

Once the knockdown is lifted we need social distancing, masks and extreme contact tracing - like Singapore and China.

Someone walks into a building, takes a tube train - then everyone on that tube on in that building is tested then isolated. Office work will be WFH.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Warlord said:

What do you make of Prof. Johan Gesecke's statements?

It's always interesting when a scientist goes against the grain.

I've had a look and he raises lots of points, but two central ones pop out to me. The first is that most people will get infected eventually and all we are doing is delaying the deaths. To which I'd respond: er, yes? Where trying to stop the NHS from being overloaded and if we can keep the rate of infections low enough then we can manage this.

His second position seems to be that lockdown isn't data driven, i.e. that we have no evidence that it will work or does anything useful.  To that I'd say it hasn't happened before so naturally there is no data, only information from previous flu epidemics, which themselves showed that the introduction of lockdowns reduced the rate of infections and consequently deaths. That's not a 1:1 comparison but it's better then going "Oh well, lets' just see".

 

But of course all of this depends on your priorities. In the anarcho-libertarian 'economy first' scenario people dying, especially if they are retired or otherwise economically inactive isn't really a concern. And after all, they're going to die anyway so why worry?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, LandOfConfusion said:

It's always interesting when a scientist goes against the grain.

I've had a look and he raises lots of points, but two central ones pop out to me. The first is that most people will get infected eventually and all we are doing is delaying the deaths. To which I'd respond: er, yes? Where trying to stop the NHS from being overloaded and if we can keep the rate of infections low enough then we can manage this.

His second position seems to be that lockdown isn't data driven, i.e. that we have no evidence that it will work or does anything useful.  To that I'd say it hasn't happened before so naturally there is no data, only information from previous flu epidemics, which themselves showed that the introduction of lockdowns reduced the rate of infections and consequently deaths. That's not a 1:1 comparison but it's better then going "Oh well, lets' just see".

 

But of course all of this depends on your priorities. In the anarcho-libertarian 'economy first' scenario people dying, especially if they are retired or otherwise economically inactive isn't really a concern. And after all, they're going to die anyway so why worry?

Do you not think that is a bit unreasonable?

You can put no relevance to the economy whatsoever but it would still be reasonable to consider the number of deaths caused by people not getting to hospital with strokes etc, missed cancer diagnosis, then impact of a recession on cancer (estimated 500k extra deaths globally last time), impact on suicide levels etc. etc.

Its clear that (luckily) the death rate is lower than was estimated at the start when no data was available. As such is not reasonable to estimate the lock-down on a cost/benefit health analysis with the new data?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Warlord said:

Sorry pig. I sometimes have stuff to do so can't give critical opinions on everything.  I value your opinion as well as @Peter Hunand others in the thread .

What do you make of Prof. Johan Gesecke's statements?  He is world renowned and against lockdowns.

 

Can't follow the link for some reason. From googling what he has said, I think I agree - and I'd imagine most would agree - that we'll all come in contact with the virus at some point in the future one way or another.

But I wouldn't confuse that with the idea that there is no point to lockdowns. Its all about managing that contact  in a humane way that minimises the devastation (and yes I would include economic in that). Lockdowns are just one measure in a range of measures that are part of 'managing' the virus.

We have managed it badly in the UK so far (but avoided the worst so some credit due), countries like Germany have managed it well so I tend to start from those countries and work backwards to the UK.  Sweden is an interesting case lots to be learnt there but unfortunately its also a bit of a crackpot magnet.

We may be facing a radical overhaul in how we go about things in the medium term at least - I'm actually more concerned/anxious about that than short term 'lockdown's as such.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, captainb said:

Its clear that (luckily) the death rate is lower than was estimated at the start when no data was available. As such is not reasonable to estimate the lock-down on a cost/benefit health analysis with the new data?

The Imperial College model that drove the advice in the beginning was based on an estimated Infection Fatality Rate of 1%, which ties in with the results of the seroprevalence study that was carried out in Spain recently - they found an IFR of 1.1%. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, robmatic said:

The Imperial College model that drove the advice in the beginning was based on an estimated Infection Fatality Rate of 1%, which ties in with the results of the seroprevalence study that was carried out in Spain recently - they found an IFR of 1.1%. 

Got a link? Data review from yesterday gave an IFR range from published data significantly lower than that.

"Infection fatality rates ranged from 0.03% to 0.50% and corrected values ranged from 0.02% to 0.40%"

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.13.20101253v1

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, captainb said:

Got a link? Data review from yesterday gave an IFR range from published data significantly lower than that.

"Infection fatality rates ranged from 0.03% to 0.50% and corrected values ranged from 0.02% to 0.40%"

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.13.20101253v1

 

https://english.elpais.com/society/2020-05-14/antibody-study-shows-just-5-of-spaniards-have-contracted-the-coronavirus.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Bruce Banner said:

Lol..... 

The speaker just threatened to throw Hancock out of the chamber :D.

For those who cannot stomach watching it (for fear of the urge to throw something at the TV among various reasons) can you quickly enlighten us what he did to elicit such a rap on the knuckles?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, anonguest said:

For those who cannot stomach watching it (for fear of the urge to throw something at the TV among various reasons) can you quickly enlighten us what he did to elicit such a rap on the knuckles?

Hancock was arguing with Starmer (from a sedentary position) and was told to desist by the speaker. Hancock then argued with the speaker.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1284655/PMQs-matt-hancock-speaker-lindsay-hoyle-house-of-commons-speaker-video

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, captainb said:

Do you not think that is a bit unreasonable?

You can put no relevance to the economy whatsoever but it would still be reasonable to consider the number of deaths caused by people not getting to hospital with strokes etc, missed cancer diagnosis, then impact of a recession on cancer (estimated 500k extra deaths globally last time), impact on suicide levels etc. etc.

Its clear that (luckily) the death rate is lower than was estimated at the start when no data was available. As such is not reasonable to estimate the lock-down on a cost/benefit health analysis with the new data?

Well I suspect there are already extra deaths caused by people not seeing the doctor or going to hospital due to worries about being infected, so there's that.

But as for the extra deaths caused due to a recession, that's not something I know how to quantify. We were overdue for a nasty, deep recession anyway so does having it now make any worse a difference, especially considering the loss of life which might have occurred due to exhaustion of hospital facilities in the no lockdown / 'do nothing' scenario?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Bruce Banner said:

BJ on PMQs now. Looks like he'd been dragged through a hedge backwards.

Looks normal then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, captainb said:

Got a link? Data review from yesterday gave an IFR range from published data significantly lower than that.

"Infection fatality rates ranged from 0.03% to 0.50% and corrected values ranged from 0.02% to 0.40%"

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.13.20101253v1

 

That's a pre-print study based on a set of pre-prints. Not to say it is wrong (we just don't know yet), but the larger serological studies that have taken place mostly seem to agree on something around 0.7-1.0% as an overall IFR. What has become clearer is the dramatic age-stratification of death rates, and it does seem like younger people are at even less risk than was thought, and older people moreso. I read something recently that estimates the IFR for > 80s at around 20%, which is extraordinary if true.

A London serological study estimated over 20% of 20-30 year olds had been infected, but that dropped to just 3% for over 70s. That's good insofar as older people appear to have been well protected (apart from care home residents, unfortunately), but it does leave a big problem for older people coming out of lockdown. The obvious solution would be to allow the young to get on with things and keep the old protected, but I don't know how easy that would be to manage in practice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So we're expected to believe that Serco, of all people, are going to deliver a "world class" track and trace service by June 1st? 

Credulity. Stretched.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bruce Banner said:

Hancock was arguing with Starmer (from a sedentary position) and was told to desist by the speaker. Hancock then argued with the speaker.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1284655/PMQs-matt-hancock-speaker-lindsay-hoyle-house-of-commons-speaker-video

2 weeks off for Johnson now. In the middle of the biggest public health crisis for 100 years. Has this country ever had such a shameless, lazy Prime Minister?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ticket2ride said:

2 weeks off for Johnson now. In the middle of the biggest public health crisis for 100 years. Has this country ever had such a shameless, lazy Prime Minister?

Where does it say in that report Johnson is taking 2 weeks off?

Edited by anonguest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

No new cases of coronavirus were recorded in London over a 24-hour period, data published by Public Health England (PHE) has shown.

On Monday, the capital recorded no new infections, down from 19 cases reported the day before. Previously, London has been one of the regions hardest hit by the outbreak in the UK since the first case was reported in February.

Although it appears promising, the new figure should be approached with caution as it could be attributed to a glitch in the Covid-19 patient notification system – which occurred temporarily on 16 May.

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/coronavirus-new-cases-london-public-health-england-covid-19-a9523876.html

 

Could be good news, are we going to blow it by opening up a week or two early?

Quote

Over 200,000 cases were recorded in the capital in a day at the peak of the outbreak in March. But recent data showed the figures in London were halving every 3.5 days.

The northeast of England is now the region with the highest number of daily cases being recorded, with around 4,000 new infections being reported every day.

Wait, what.. how do the record cases without any testing..??? Is this some mathematical model?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, ticket2ride said:

2 weeks off for Johnson now. In the middle of the biggest public health crisis for 100 years. Has this country ever had such a shameless, lazy Prime Minister?

I could sum him up in one word, but I don't want to get banned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Borisgraph are waving the flag for Bojo the Clown

Quote

The Prime Minister was combative and – more important – confident in response to more astute and detailed criticism from Keir Starmer

And he once again delivered some astute and detailed criticism, the substance of which Johnson did little to address. 

 But.. err.. the best they can come with is that Bojo was really good at talking ********.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bruce Banner said:

Hancock was arguing with Starmer (from a sedentary position) and was told to desist by the speaker. Hancock then argued with the speaker.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1284655/PMQs-matt-hancock-speaker-lindsay-hoyle-house-of-commons-speaker-video

Was a funny moment, Speaker looked genuinely hacked off.

However can't help but think it was an calculated interruption as BJ was being ripped apart again.

Elsewhere, curiously contra all efforts to evade parliamentary democracy I was reading that JRM has been begging for MP's to return to the HoC ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, ticket2ride said:

2 weeks off for Johnson now. In the middle of the biggest public health crisis for 100 years. Has this country ever had such a shameless, lazy Prime Minister?

The next two weeks ? Thats odd because for the last couple of weeks people have been complaining he's disappeared again...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, anonguest said:

Where does it say in that report Johnson is taking 2 weeks off?

Parliamentary recess for 2 weeks. You don't think Johnson will beworking do you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 399 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.