UK's dangerous experiment
18/3/20 21:05![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
kiaa posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpoliticshttps://ourworldindata.org/grapher/covid-confirmed-cases-since-100th-case
Flattening the curve. You've heard the term already. At times of epidemics, that's the main strategic goal. In simple words, it's an effort to mitigate the epidemic tsunami, and slow down the exponential expansion of the infection among the populafce, so that a dramatic concentration of huge numbers of sick people within short time periods could be avoided. In other words, a situation that would put the healthy care system under enormous pressure (reference: Italy).
There are various models around the world, from China and South Korea to the more lenient ones that we've seen in Europe. But one model sticks out, Britain.
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-51892402
The UK has chosen a very different approach, what I could call the "herd immunity". Expose the populace to the contagion, and let them develop immunity in a natural way. Sounds good for the long-term health of said population, right? But at what cost?
See, the UK has only resorted to advices, not bans. Even Boris Johnson's dad said he'll keep going to pubs in this situation (he's an old man as you can imagine - but he must be very patriotic indeed!) In fact, the UK has only advised its 70+ y.o. population to isolate themselves.
The whole idea came from one Sir Patrick Valance, the PM's chief science advisor. His idea is that those at the highest risk would be protected if they're surrounded with people who've already passed the disease, and have grown resistant to it. The rough estimate shows that about 60% of the population should get the disease at some point so that this scenario could work out (Merkel hinted at 70% for Germany). Translated to UK terms, that's 36 million people.
The scientific community has vehemently opposed this plan, as you might imagine. 200+ scientists have written an open letter ot the UK government, saying his approach is against all recommendations of the WHO, as well as counter to all European practices and all civilized philosophy, warning that the price will be tens or even hundreds of thousands of casualties, and a total overwhelming of the health care system. They also insist that the UK should follow everyone else's example, and impose more restrictive measures for social isolation immediately, which would dramatically limit the impact of the epicemic, and save thousands of lives.
The British ministries of health and social care then backpedaled and said Sir Patrick had been misunderstood, and the measure is not part of Britain's effort against Covid-19. Yet, Johnson's government keeps receiving a barrage of criticism for its inaction. Schools are not closed, public life goes on as normal, and traveling measures are not nearly as strict as in other countries. Only the biggest culture and sports events have been canceled.
Curiously, in another open letter, 200+ behavioral experts are countering the previous one with the argument that the sudden tightening of the measures would be harmful. They believe it'd develop a "behavioral fatigue" among the public, i.e. people would "burn out" from the isolation, and start violating it just at the time when the epidemic will be at its peak.
So, Britain pretty much remains a testing ground for a dangerous experiment.
Flattening the curve. You've heard the term already. At times of epidemics, that's the main strategic goal. In simple words, it's an effort to mitigate the epidemic tsunami, and slow down the exponential expansion of the infection among the populafce, so that a dramatic concentration of huge numbers of sick people within short time periods could be avoided. In other words, a situation that would put the healthy care system under enormous pressure (reference: Italy).
There are various models around the world, from China and South Korea to the more lenient ones that we've seen in Europe. But one model sticks out, Britain.
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-51892402
The UK has chosen a very different approach, what I could call the "herd immunity". Expose the populace to the contagion, and let them develop immunity in a natural way. Sounds good for the long-term health of said population, right? But at what cost?
See, the UK has only resorted to advices, not bans. Even Boris Johnson's dad said he'll keep going to pubs in this situation (he's an old man as you can imagine - but he must be very patriotic indeed!) In fact, the UK has only advised its 70+ y.o. population to isolate themselves.
The whole idea came from one Sir Patrick Valance, the PM's chief science advisor. His idea is that those at the highest risk would be protected if they're surrounded with people who've already passed the disease, and have grown resistant to it. The rough estimate shows that about 60% of the population should get the disease at some point so that this scenario could work out (Merkel hinted at 70% for Germany). Translated to UK terms, that's 36 million people.
The scientific community has vehemently opposed this plan, as you might imagine. 200+ scientists have written an open letter ot the UK government, saying his approach is against all recommendations of the WHO, as well as counter to all European practices and all civilized philosophy, warning that the price will be tens or even hundreds of thousands of casualties, and a total overwhelming of the health care system. They also insist that the UK should follow everyone else's example, and impose more restrictive measures for social isolation immediately, which would dramatically limit the impact of the epicemic, and save thousands of lives.
The British ministries of health and social care then backpedaled and said Sir Patrick had been misunderstood, and the measure is not part of Britain's effort against Covid-19. Yet, Johnson's government keeps receiving a barrage of criticism for its inaction. Schools are not closed, public life goes on as normal, and traveling measures are not nearly as strict as in other countries. Only the biggest culture and sports events have been canceled.
Curiously, in another open letter, 200+ behavioral experts are countering the previous one with the argument that the sudden tightening of the measures would be harmful. They believe it'd develop a "behavioral fatigue" among the public, i.e. people would "burn out" from the isolation, and start violating it just at the time when the epidemic will be at its peak.
So, Britain pretty much remains a testing ground for a dangerous experiment.
(no subject)
Date: 18/3/20 19:09 (UTC)https://sofiaglobe.com/2020/03/18/covid-19-bulgarias-interior-ministry-provides-buses-to-move-uk-tourists-from-quarantined-bansko/
Those guys came from the UK, believing they could behave the same way in a foreign country as if they were back home. And now a whole town is locked down because of them, along with the central part of the capital city. FUCK THEM.
(no subject)
Date: 18/3/20 19:17 (UTC)And I think I just announced the deathknell of that meme, haven't I?
(no subject)
Date: 18/3/20 19:11 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 18/3/20 19:12 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 18/3/20 19:48 (UTC)The actual explanation is more along the lines of the government has to manage it this way; a decade of austerity and underfunding has left the Health Service unable to manage the potential surge. Every health service is managing this. Few from the rather perilous position of the UK. In fact we have fewer hospital beds available, fewer doctors per capita, and more vacancies than France, Germany, Italy or any of the Nordic nations.
This is because we have been following extreme capitalist US example. Allied, of course, to selling as much of the NHS as possible off to our hedge-fund chums.
In the space of a generation we have become a banana republic. Full of high-level corruption. Such a shame and all that, what? So it seems even the chaps in their comfy chairs in St James’ had their price.
Selling England by the Pound.
(no subject)
Date: 18/3/20 20:19 (UTC)200+ scientists have written an open letter ot the UK government
I saw that letter. Virtually none of the 200+ are specialists in epidemiology, virology or immunology. Most are not even in medicine, but things like mathematicians. Many are MSc-level students, not renowned experts. It is plain wrong to make out that the bulk of UK specialists had anything to do that letter. They did not.
So, Britain pretty much remains a testing ground for a dangerous experiment.
As such, the above is fundamentally wrong. This is simply not the way the UK is now heading. There are reasons to criticise, but they're things like the worrying shortage of PPE (personal protective equipment) for doctors. The overall strategy is now, I think, broadly the right one.
(no subject)
Date: 18/3/20 21:14 (UTC)More like two weeks, and after 2600+ cases and 100+ deaths. Talk about flattening the curve.
> it's changed utterly
It IS changing, not HAS changed. Schools "are closing down", not "have closed down". Friday is a long time away still. How many thousands will get infected in the meantime? The situation is changing by the hour.
> people over 70 have been told to prepare
> am also preparing for it
You're preparing because you feel a responsibility and you've made a choice to prepare. Not because you've been ordered to. That's not a changed approach. People being "told to" prepare is not what is being done elsewhere in Europe. they're being ORDERED to stay home.
> The overall strategy is now, I think, broadly the right one
Not yet. Not in the next 48 hours anyway. And experts have already established that the first stages are critical for flattening the curve. You know, actual epidemiology experts, not mathematicians.
> The UK media has just been its usual hopeless self in reporting
This one I agree with, yes.
You stay safe and do what's right without having to wait for your government to arrive at the right approach. It has taken them a lot of time, critical time, and that mistake is going to cost your people:
> things like the worrying shortage of PPE
Indeed. If there weren't so many cases perhaps there wouldn't have been a shortage. See what I mean?
(no subject)
Date: 20/3/20 15:41 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 18/3/20 20:40 (UTC)https://bylinetimes.com/2020/03/18/stalinist-and-reductionist-how-the-uk-government-created-the-worst-case-scenario/
(no subject)
Date: 18/3/20 21:17 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 18/3/20 21:18 (UTC)They've brought this upon themselves.
(no subject)
Date: 19/3/20 06:37 (UTC)Boris is quite so stupid as to not take sensible advice on a virus that targets his main voting demographic.
The volte-face happened when Dominic realised that all the folk who would naturally vote for Boris Johnson's Tories were in the firing line.
Covid19 tends to be fatal not to young liberal-leaning types liable to vote for Corbyn, Labour, or anything; but is more likely to be to ageing Tories.
(no subject)
Date: 19/3/20 07:36 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 19/3/20 10:16 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 20/3/20 18:32 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 20/3/20 19:51 (UTC)I'm pretty cynical; but a lot of politicians have me beat hollow.
And the electorate seems to miss the point from time to time.
(no subject)
Date: 22/3/20 12:26 (UTC)My point being, I don't need e lecture in political cynicism.
(no subject)
Date: 22/3/20 14:28 (UTC)So I'll take it that your original statement about not being cynical enough to think like me was unfortunate. I'm sure I do it myself. All the time. I like to think I do good things and have good thoughts.
But word of Dominic Cummings' volte face and "Damascene conversion" leads me to assume that's the only reason he could have gone from his "let the pensioners croak" position. "Er Dominic... you know the pensioners are our main voting constituency?"
It's not cynical and I'm not being cynical. I'm pretty sure this is how Cummings' mind works. Prometheus or Epimetheus?
(no subject)
Date: 19/3/20 10:20 (UTC)"Boris is quite so stupid"
should read
"Boris is not quite so stupid."
Polly loggies oh my brothers and sisters. It doesn't change the meaning much, but gives BoJo maybe a little more credit for intelligence, and therefore culpability.
(no subject)
Date: 18/3/20 21:20 (UTC)These guys are fucked up big time.
(no subject)
Date: 19/3/20 00:44 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 18/3/20 21:23 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 20/3/20 10:09 (UTC)https://bylinetimes.com/2020/03/17/the-coronavirus-crisis-mistake-over-herd-immunity-has-cost-us-vital-time/