Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Coronavirus - worldwide breaking news, discussion, stats, updates and more

Well there's obviously something wrong with politics then. And I know little about Dorries and doubt there's much to impress but I'd rather the country were being run by qualified nurses than PPE graduates right now. Or at any time for that matter.
tbh formal qualifications are pretty much irrelevant. I'd rather have a socialist who left school at 15 with a CSE in technical drawing if they worked with good principles on which to base their decisions. It's up to others to present the expert opinion, and the politician to weigh them up and make the political decision. Nothing to do with formal qualifications really.
 
tbh formal qualifications are pretty much irrelevant. I'd rather have a socialist who left school at 15 with a CSE in technical drawing if they worked with good principles on which to base their decisions. It's up to others to present the expert opinion, and the politician to weigh them up and make the political decision. Nothing to do with formal qualifications really.
Anyone except PPE graduates would be a start.
 
Greece - using face masks to be mandatory when lockdown is lifted.
The committee was clear, saying that there is a strong recommendation for the use of a mask, which is now mandatory in certain areas.

According to the committee, “should be used as a mandatory measure in public transport and other busy areas, such as hospitals, grocery stores, diagnostic laboratories, clinics, hairdressers, barbershops, beauty salons, and all closed and busy places.”

In all busy indoor areas the use of mask should be mandatory for both customers and employees in close contact with the public, such as salespeople and cashiers.
 
Rate of infection back up to 1 in Germany from a mid April low of 0.7.

Is this an indication that lifting lockdown is only going to be possible with viable test, trace, isolate in place before any easing takes place.

Coronavirus: Germany's infection rate increases

Its hard to be sure, hard to separate out different possible influences, and R0 will vary per setting, so I dont know if care home outbreaks are driving an increase in that number, for example. And its only an estimate. But it is a cause for concern and needs to be watched carefully.

Estimation of the reproduction number (R)
The reproduction number, R, is the mean number of persons infected by a case. R can only be estimated and not directly extracted from the notification system. The current estimate is R= 1.0 (95% confidence interval: 0.8-1.1) and is based on current electronically notified cases (27/04/2020, 12:00 A.M.) and an assumed mean generation time of 4 days. Cases with disease onset on the preceding 3 days were excluded from the estimation as their low number due to incomplete reporting would lead to an unstable estimate. For more details on the methodology see Epid. Bull. 17 | 2020 (in German)RKI - Archiv 2020 - Schätzung der aktuellen Entwicklung der SARS-CoV-2-Epidemie in Deutschland - Nowcasting

 
Portugal , new cases showing signs of levelling off , no big bang break through but tentative progress. Government and 'experts' begin meetings to look at re-opening
key:

Confirmados = confirmed this is today 24,322
Recuperados = recuperated
Óbitos =dead this is today 948
Suspeitos =suspected
Amostras =tested

30,703 monitored by the NHS, 995 in hospital, 176 in intensive care

 
See-through solution: Deaf Indonesians turn to clear coronavirus masks to help lip-reading
28/04/20
MAKASSAR (AFP) - Lip-reading suddenly got tricky when everyone covered their faces during the coronavirus pandemic, but Indonesian tailors have hit upon the perfect solution - see-through masks.

One husband and wife duo in Makassar on Sulawesi island started producing cloth masks with transparent plastic in the middle to help fellow deaf people.

"Since the pandemic started, everyone is wearing face masks. For deaf people, we can't understand what others are saying because we can't read their lips," said 52-year-old Faizah Badaruddin.

"There were a lot of misunderstandings," she added.
 
Are you suggesting Thatcher would have done a good job? :hmm:




PPE does happen to be arguably the most appropriate course in the best university for those wanting to enter politics, so it's not really a surprise that half the cabinet have done it, although I'm sure we'd all like more people along the lines of Nadine Dorries government.


No of course not. How the fuck did you arrive at that from my question.
 
Portuguese State of Emergency will end on May 2nd. "The end of the state of emergency is not the end of the outbreak, it is not the end of the necessary control" , It is a resumption or opening by small steps” and, warns Marcelo, the key to the success of this phase will depend on a “constant evaluation”.
 
Thatcher was a research chemist, so I would have thought it was a logical conclusion from the argument you were making.


I wasn't making an argument though. At all. I was asking a question.


ETA

To rephrase the question:
Is it the case that the countries that have had better outcomes and better laid plans have politicians in positions of power and policy making who have some kind of background in the sciences?
 
Portugal , new cases showing signs of levelling off , no big bang break through but tentative progress. Government and 'experts' begin meetings to look at re-opening
key:

Confirmados = confirmed this is today 24,322
Recuperados = recuperated
Óbitos =dead this is today 948
Suspeitos =suspected
Amostras =tested

30,703 monitored by the NHS, 995 in hospital, 176 in intensive care

tbf Portugal is doing a lot better than showing signs of levelling off. New cases showed signs of levelling off at the end of March. It's been steadily going down since then. Only gently, but steadily. Good thing about that is that Portugal has done shit-loads of testing, so a steady decline in new cases has meaning.

Number of confirmed cases in Portugal has doubled in the last 21 days. The previous doubling took just 9 days.

It is interesting that they give the 'suspected' figure alongside the confirmed. Do you know what criteria they use for that?
 
Last edited:
tbf Portugal is doing a lot better than showing signs of levelling off. New cases showed signs of levelling off at the end of March. It's been steadily going down since then. Only gently, but steadily. Good thing about that is that Portugal has done shit-loads of testing, so a steady decline in new cases has meaning.

It is interesting that they give the 'suspected' figure alongside the confirmed. Do you know what criteria they use for that?
Havent a clue to be honest, thought it might be people who had rang the hotline but hadnt continued by nope, then thought it might be based on likely infection rate ie ratio of infected passing on but cant find anything and as i've only spoken to about five people in the last six weeks and none of them fluent enough for me to ask (even if they knew) I cant answer your question.
 
A little bit more detail on Germany, from the middle of a story about the fears of renewed spread, easing of lockdown etc. My bold.

Yet Wieler insisted on Tuesday that the infection rate should not be taken out of context and "should only be looked at alongside other figures".

"Another important figure is the number of new infections per day," he said, a number which had fallen to just over 1,000 this week, having been twice or four times as high in weeks gone by.

The drop in new infections means that officials are now able to carry out contact tracing again -- something that had been abandoned in March when cases were rising too quickly.

Meanwhile the mortality rate from the disease has also been rising day by day, in part due to more outbreaks in elderly and care homes, according to the RKI.

By Tuesday, it had reached 3.8 percent according to RKI figures, which remains well below some neighbouring countries such as France.

 
I cannot say whether that is a factor. I can say that it isnt the only one, because there are a bunch of longer term reasons why some countries responded better. Germany maintained a much larger ICU capacity over many years, and had a decentralised and large diagnostics industry which made a large difference in their ability to test in relatively large numbers. Merkel didnt scupper these things during her time in power, but I expect she is also not the originator of them, original decisions about these things probably happened a long, long time ago.

Plus the differences in timing and overall approach from Germany were not radically different - they were a bit different, and the testing regime clearly had a notable effect, but its not like they were miles ahead of everyone else when it came to lockdown, it still took what happened in Italy (and then Spain) for lockdowns to suddenly be considered viable and essential in the EU.

Recently Whitty said that when he talked to his German counterparts, they werent too sure why they were quite as successful as they appear to have been so far. In some ways this sounds like a very silly thing to say, but in others there is probably some truth to it. Partly because erring on the side of caution means they do not want to judge themselves as a big success yet, early gains, even impressively large ones, could still be lost in theory. And the reasons for the successes so far may be a combination of the obvious things we all seize upon (testing, hospital capacity) but also some others that havent really been in the spotlight yet. We know that infection control in care homes and hospitals can be quite the difference makers, and could presume that Germany had some success on these fronts, but some of those successes could have been down somewhat to luck or some existing characteristics of their care home sector or societal behaviour.

I could also suggest that gains made by Germany were amplified by the timing. In theory locking down one week earlier in the epidemic wave would make a very notable difference to how big that wave got. But its not just a question of pure timing, the key is timing of lockdown relative to stage of epidemic at that moment. So if Germanys epidemic was at an earlier stage when they locked down, because for example their testing regime had slowed the growth there during some key weeks, then this ends up being somewhat equivalent to having locked down weeks earlier than some other countries, even if they were not actually weeks earlier based purely on the calendar.
Everyone is quite obsessed with linking the actions of different governments or qualities of individual politicians to the widely different spread in different countries, and of course each nation's response will play a part in how hard they are hit, but it does seem that luck must be a major factor.

Just for example, where your first case happens to land must make quite a big difference. If it's in a small place, not densely populated, and the person doesn't meet a lot of people, then after a week or two of unseen spread, surely there are going to be many fewer people infected than if your first case happens to be a very socially active person living in a densely populated large city and going to work on crowded public transport. In the first example you might still get away with a dithering response - by the time symptoms appear and you start to take action, the numbers are small enough that you can keep the lid on it. But in the second example even a slightly prompter response might already be too late.
 
Greece - plans for lifting lockdown

 
Last edited:
Everyone is quite obsessed with linking the actions of different governments or qualities of individual politicians to the widely different spread in different countries, and of course each nation's response will play a part in how hard they are hit, but it does seem that luck must be a major factor.

Just for example, where your first case happens to land must make quite a big difference. If it's in a small place, not densely populated, and the person doesn't meet a lot of people, then after a week or two of unseen spread, surely there are going to be many fewer people infected than if your first case happens to be a very socially active person living in a densely populated large city and going to work on crowded public transport. In the first example you might still get away with a dithering response - by the time symptoms appear and you start to take action, the numbers are small enough that you can keep the lid on it. But in the second example even a slightly prompter response might already be too late.

Good fortune helped some places, and that is one of the things to be considered. Timing of measures relative to epidemic stage and scale is the big one, and so of course this ends up being a combination of fortune and preparation and monitoring and making the right decisions at the right time.

That does not mean people running the show and doing the planning get off, because a vital key to managing pandemics and epidemics is that you are not supposed to rely on good fortune, you are supposed to get your surveillance systems in order so that you at least know where you are in the epidemic so you can do the right things at the right time. The UK government went on and on about doing the right things at the right time when they were still following plan a in the first half of March, often when they wanted to explain why they were not acting at the same pace as some other countries with things like school closures. They were quite rightly questioned about it at the time, and some of the results of their choice of timing are clear to see already. It is not currently possible for me to say whether they got both the original plan and the timing wrong, or only the plan wrong. Because the original plan (mitigation) called for different timing to the one they had to switch to (lockdown/suppression). This is evident in various pronouncements from the first half of March where they made statements about epidemic timing that sound very odd now. Talk about 'pushing the peak off into the summer' and of how the peak could be '10-14 weeks away'. And the notorious claim that we were 4 weeks behind Italy. My provisional view is that it was both the plan and their sense of the epidemics timing that was wrong, but future revelations may cause me to reevaluate.
 
Germany, a bit more information:

Germans urged to stay at home amid fears Covid-19 infection rate is rising again
Germans have been advised to stay at home as much as possible and continue to apply physical distancing as official data appeared to indicate the spread of the Covid-19 pandemic was once again accelerating.
..
On Tuesday, the German government’s disease control agency, the Robert Koch Institute (RKI), announced the reproduction number for Monday 27 April had risen to 1, after having put it as low as 0.7 in mid-April.
Lothar Wieler, the RKI’s president, later specified that the reproduction rate for Monday was 0.96, and therefore technically still below one.
..
“Let us continue to stay at home as much as possible, keep observing the restrictions and keep a distance of 1.5 metres from one another,” Wieler said.
from 28/04/2020 Germans urged to stay at home amid fears Covid-19 infection rate is rising again

and

Coronavirus: Germany's rate of COVID-19 infections grows after lockdown eased
Germany faces the prospect of having to restore stricter lockdown measures as its number and rate of coronavirus infections grew again.
..
And while officials believe it is too early to say whether the lifting of restrictions caused the increase, the country's overall number of COVID-19 cases grew by 1,018 on Monday and 1,144 on Tuesday.
..
And while officials believe it is too early to say whether the lifting of restrictions caused the increase, the country's overall number of COVID-19 cases grew by 1,018 on Monday and 1,144 on Tuesday.
from 29/04/2020 Coronavirus: Germany's rate of COVID-19 infections grows after lockdown eased
 
If Germany are getting 1000 new cases every day that is going to put quite a strain on their contact tracing effects.
 
As usual, just some thoughts from the armchair, not much scientific basis...

Also something of an illustration of how the UK can't just jump from the current situation to contact tracing... and as to why we might have to rely to at least some extent on Apps that some are extremely uncomfortable with. I mean clearly it's essentially the only way to ever ease lockdown pre-vaccine, except placing anyone with a pre-existing health condition under quarantine (which is - as I've mentioned before - far more people than many imagine), but it would be incredibly hard to manage given the general spread of the disease.

We can now say a few things clearly - from New York we know the infection fatality rate is at least 0.15% (because that percentage of the population is already dead), with estimates of the actual rate being 0.4-0.8%. The antibody study of shoppers puts the infection rate in New York City at 25%, though obviously there are some uncertainties around that. That does not present a good picture. Any easing of lockdown needs to be done with extreme care, and with a coherent policy in place to keep R0 low. Personally I don't think the current administration is capable of that... Really it requires weeks of a harder lockdown*, followed by a comprehensive, technology supported test and trace policy, ongoing WFH, ongoing closure of large institutions, probably no reopening of restaurants etc.

*I don't think a harder lockdown actually requires that much further infringement on personal freedom to exercise etc. Rather means a more comprehensive mass closure effort - construction companies, moving supermarkets to click and collect, provision of PPE to those who have to work - that kind of thing. Probably some degree of enforcement if the weather gets nice again (actually we should probably go into hard lockdown now, since it's shite out).
 
Good fortune helped some places, and that is one of the things to be considered. Timing of measures relative to epidemic stage and scale is the big one, and so of course this ends up being a combination of fortune and preparation and monitoring and making the right decisions at the right time.

That does not mean people running the show and doing the planning get off, because a vital key to managing pandemics and epidemics is that you are not supposed to rely on good fortune, you are supposed to get your surveillance systems in order so that you at least know where you are in the epidemic so you can do the right things at the right time. The UK government went on and on about doing the right things at the right time when they were still following plan a in the first half of March, often when they wanted to explain why they were not acting at the same pace as some other countries with things like school closures. They were quite rightly questioned about it at the time, and some of the results of their choice of timing are clear to see already. It is not currently possible for me to say whether they got both the original plan and the timing wrong, or only the plan wrong. Because the original plan (mitigation) called for different timing to the one they had to switch to (lockdown/suppression). This is evident in various pronouncements from the first half of March where they made statements about epidemic timing that sound very odd now. Talk about 'pushing the peak off into the summer' and of how the peak could be '10-14 weeks away'. And the notorious claim that we were 4 weeks behind Italy. My provisional view is that it was both the plan and their sense of the epidemics timing that was wrong, but future revelations may cause me to reevaluate.
Interestingly Ireland initially had the same basic phased plan, but were far more cautious about moving from one stage to the next, tried to prolong "contain" as long as they could, and crucially, never abandoned contact tracing, ensuring they never lost track of their outbreak. This made it far easier for them to rapidly change course to a suppression strategy as they learned more about the nature of the virus.
 
If Germany are getting 1000 new cases every day that is going to put quite a strain on their contact tracing effects.

The situation in Germany is without a doubt a bit of a worry. Coming out of lockdown was never going to be a smooth and linear process and as with everything with this pandemic results are going to vary country to country. But it would be very depressing to see countries reinstating lockdown measures.
 
The situation in Germany is without a doubt a bit of a worry. Coming out of lockdown was never going to be a smooth and linear process and as with everything with this pandemic results are going to vary country to country. But it would be very depressing to see countries reinstating lockdown measures.
Important to note that Gemrany never had anything close to the national lockdowns imposed in France, Spain and Italy, and with 16 state governments free to set their own policies, easing measures was always gonna be patchy. Nor did they ever have their outbreak as well contained as several Asian countries.
 
Back
Top Bottom