Misfit wrote:it is really bad, but actually it'll be alright for virtually all of us?
Yep, although comparing this to flu is somewhat disingenuous; fatality rate compared to flu is - well, "more". Seasonal influenza is fatal in something around 0.1% of cases. COVID-19 is fatal in somewhere around 2-3% of cases. And whilst one could argue that COVID-19 might be killing people who would otherwise be finished off by influenza, flu season is pretty much over.
If we take that argument to its logical extreme, COVID-19 is not even a threat - after all, we all die one way or another, COVID-19 doesn't change that, it just time-shifts.
"massive retard™", "full of shit™", "tiny bitch™", "retarted™", "a bit of a one trick pony™", "petty™", "simple minded idealistic twat™", "miserable humourless fucker™"
It's much more contagious - the flu, on average, passes on to 1.3 people but this one is so far averaging about 3. It's showing a higher fatality rate. We have vaccines and treatments for the flu - but, granted, no cure - but, for this, we have absolutely nothing whatsoever (except diagnostic tests which, in the UK, we don't even seem to have those, for inexplicable reasons).
The flu doesn't like the heat - so it comes in waves, retreating in the Summer, to return each Winter - but this bugger has been happily displaying just as much exponential growth in Australia, South Africa, etc. where the seasons are reversed, and has been raging through tropical and Equatorial countries, where it's always hot, too.
If you actually look up the "mild symptoms" that folks are talking about, one of them is listed as "pneumonia". Ordinarily, no-one would think of pneumonia as being "mild" - and this one is considered the top end of the "mild / moderate" spectrum, in fairness - but compared to what this has been doing to the severely and critically ill, yes, pneumonia counts as "mild" here. People need ventilators - and, in even more extreme cases, ecmo (which is essentially a lung by-pass device) - because they're essentially drowning to death.
This is NOT the flu. This is SARS.
Quite literally, its official name - "COVID-SARS-2" - is telling us that this is "SARS mark 2". Its closest relation is the original SARS virus, not the fucking flu.
And we're currently more fucked than we really ought to have been, exactly because leaders like Boris and Trump were, indeed, treating it like it's the flu. Ah, never mind, just let people have it and we'll have "herd immunity", right? Two months warning to ramp up the testing regime and get thousands of ventilators ready? "Ah, why bother, it's only the flu". Shut down all international flights? "But think of the economy!! We can't shut down all flights for the sake of the flu." et cetera, et cetera.
You'll also note that the original description of "mild flu-like symptoms" has very rapidly lost the "flu-like" bit in official communications. Because it's NOT THE FUCKING FLU.
Message understood yet? This is not the flu. And the fact that our idiot-in-chief and first-among-idiots pissed away two months warning to get fucking ready for this, because they were erroneously thinking "ah, this is just like a bad flu or something, right?" is to be very much borne in mind when we finally see the "peak" numbers and final death toll (and if the peak exceeds health service capacity, as there are still too many people out there acting as if this is just the flu, then that death toll - we know from other countries - is going to sky-rocket).
Once more for good measure, this is not the flu. This is SARS. Quite literally, its official designation ends "SARS-2" because this is SARS v2.0. That's its closest relative.
"Words ought to be a little wild - for they are assaults of thought on the unthinking."
- John Maynard Keynes
OK so "explain me this" .. we - after 20 days of total segregation - had to go to TWO places, 1. the sheep food shop, 2. the food shop, Morrisons, that is just across the road the sheep shop
Latex gloves, protective masks, 2 bags to bin the gloves, a bottle with a solution of bleach, cloth to wipe all out, a plan, a list, etc.
We arrive at the place .. not many people really, ok, that's good.
There's a thing to stay in line, various signs with explanations/etc. 'everyone 2 metres away' .. OK .. "sounds reasonable" ..
We also see we were not the only ones, CUSTOMER, wearing masks and gloves ..
... BUT ! ...
EVERYONE WORKING THERE, TOTALLY *UN*PROTECTED, NO MASKS ! AND NOT REALLY SAFE DISTANCE !
I mean the cashiers, the people in, the guys/girls working inside .. "almost no protection" and trust me "impossible they were keeping the distance from people all time".
So "you tell me all this shit about protection" then I go in a place where the people that work in are daily in contact with who knows how many people, some of which like us "as more protected as possible" MANY NOT , they could catch up every shit AND/OR at the same time TRANSMIT IT to everyone else there ?
SO WTF ? WHERE'S THE LOGIC HERE ??!! The lockdown, the wash your hands, the things, then you go in a shop to get food it's like "let's spread it all over and/or kill the people that work in ?".
I don't know .. you tell me ..
Other place instead , the sheep shop was truly "apocalyptic" ... ALL CLOSED, ALL SEALED IN .. BUT .. there was some cardboard boxes with written on "We are still open, call this phone number and follow instructions" ..
Basically you were calling in, placing your order, pay by phone ( card ), then drive - one at the time - at the back, someone was putting your stuff outside, at a distance, then you can pick it up by yourself and go away.
Now that makes more sense, that truly avoids any contact.
Mind you when we get stuff all that we cannot disinfect before to get inside the house we leave it oustide 72 hours ( apparently time for virus to die from surfaces ), otherwise with gloves and mask and stuff I disinfect all stuff before to get it in.
Another perhaps underreported aspect of C19 is that, while many cases are very mild or even asymptomatic, around 20% of known cases are severe or critical. This may be one reason that hospitals are struggling to cope and the need for ventilators has shot up by orders of magnitude. Hospital staff are painfully aware that far, far more people than usual are seriously ill and dying.
gilesgoat wrote:EVERYONE WORKING THERE, TOTALLY *UN*PROTECTED, NO MASKS ! AND NOT REALLY SAFE DISTANCE !
I mean the cashiers, the people in, the guys/girls working inside .. "almost no protection" and trust me "impossible they were keeping the distance from people all time".
So "you tell me all this shit about protection" then I go in a place where the people that work in are daily in contact with who knows how many people, some of which like us "as more protected as possible" MANY NOT , they could catch up every shit AND/OR at the same time TRANSMIT IT to everyone else there ?
I can understand an absence of masks but are they not at least using disinfectant between customers?
Emoticon and contraction free since... quite a while ago.
Harlequin wrote:Another perhaps underreported aspect of C19 is that, while many cases are very mild or even asymptomatic, around 20% of known cases are severe or critical. This may be one reason that hospitals are struggling to cope and the need for ventilators has shot up by orders of magnitude. Hospital staff are painfully aware that far, far more people than usual are seriously ill and dying.
gilesgoat wrote:EVERYONE WORKING THERE, TOTALLY *UN*PROTECTED, NO MASKS ! AND NOT REALLY SAFE DISTANCE !
I mean the cashiers, the people in, the guys/girls working inside .. "almost no protection" and trust me "impossible they were keeping the distance from people all time".
So "you tell me all this shit about protection" then I go in a place where the people that work in are daily in contact with who knows how many people, some of which like us "as more protected as possible" MANY NOT , they could catch up every shit AND/OR at the same time TRANSMIT IT to everyone else there ?
I can understand an absence of masks but are they not at least using disinfectant between customers?
Not that i've seen and considering the distance, especially those working at cashiers, IMHO should use masks !
gilesgoat wrote:Not that i've seen and considering the distance, especially those working at cashiers, IMHO should use masks !
Isn't that why the government keep banging on about PPE though?
Like several other items, there just aren't enough to go round.
Even when you wear the mask, most are meant to be "one per patient" not worn all day. If it gets wet it's near ineffective etc.
It's really quite simple. Their employers give zero shits.
And we can do the numbers. You're in Wales which, according to BBC Wales, has had 117 deaths and 2,121 people who've tested positive. But they are only doing tests on those who're hospitalised right now, so there's probably more people with the virus than that - but, just to have a number, let's assume it could be up to 10 times that much at 21,210 people. There are 3.1 million people in Wales.
Thus, the odds of you randomly bumping into someone with the coronavirus is currently about 0.6% in Wales. So, in all likelihood, everyone there at the sheep shop - you guys, the staff - are all perfectly fine. No-one who's there has it, so there's nothing to be spread.
But, as I suggested before, non-zero is not zero. If there are 21,210 people out there - possibly many asymptomatic or "mild symptoms" - with the virus right now, then they're going to wander into someone's shop at some point.
Then those employers who're not implementing proper "social distancing" could be in for a very rude awakening when a "virus bomb" goes off in their store and all their employees go off sick simultaneously. When, for at least 5 days up to maybe even two weeks, their employees have been passing it on to any and all customers, who've not taken sufficient precautions themselves. With the possibility, while low, that some of those people will never be coming back ever again.
The explanation is really rather simple. Most people have no idea how to assess risk.
Typically, they'll see a figure - like the one I just guesstimated above of 0.6% chance of randomly bumping into someone with coronavirus in Wales right now - and think "0.6% is a very low number" and, therefore, conclude that "it'll never happen".
But, of course, that's not how it actually works.
For example, the death rate given for 10-21 year olds by Worldometer (which, to be honest, is now terribly out-of-date) is 0.2%. This seems tiny. So much so, many young people are wandering around thinking they're "bulletproof" and people keep on talking about this affecting old and vulnerable people.
But here's the arithmetical problem here. If there's, say, 2 million people who fit that category in the UK, then 0.2% of 2 million is 4,000 deaths. If we consider this globally - where there could be hundreds of millions of young people in this category - the deaths could be half a million to a million or so. And that's very much not a number to be overlooked with the idea that "young people are just fine and won't be affected".
Risk is not just the probability. It's "probability x population x consequences".
Another example is nuclear power. Many advocates say that the odds of nuclear disaster are very low. I completely believe them. Modern nuclear fission reactors are extremely safe - well, until they get hit by a tsunami or the Soviets get too poor and complacent to maintain it properly, at least - but risk is not just "how low is the probability?". Risk is "probability x population x consequences" and the problem for me is that the consequences are "wide area made radioactive for centuries or more afterwards".
At that point, I care not how low the probability is, the consequences, should it go wrong, are fundamentally unacceptable. And, of course, I'm aware that if we all say "yes to nuclear" - why, it'll save us from climate change! - then we'll be increasing the "population" number, which is the one thing that keeps those very low probabilities very low. If you start having thousands or tens of thousands of nuclear reactors all over the planet, you're multiplying up that very low probabilities and could easily multiply them up into making it significantly risky - and, again, the consequences of that risk are fundamentally unacceptable.
It's the lottery, innit. The odds of any one ticket winning are extremely small. But millions of people play it every week and they often buy multiple tickets, and so - most weeks - someone actually wins the lottery. Indeed, such things prey on people's inability to understand odds and risks - they target the numerically illiterate - because when you see people winning every week, you think you stand a good chance. But you absolutely don't. It's only because millions and millions play and buy sheets and sheets of tickets that increases that "population" number to be so big that even a tiny, tiny probability actually happens.
"Social distancing", "flattening the curve" and all that is about keeping that "population" number from increasing. Because 0.2% - tiny odds - of 7 billion people means 14 million die.
It's "probability x population". And all this is about keeping that population - of those catching it - as small as possible. Because then that 0.2% will remain as insignificantly small in absolute numbers.
So, in response to your "what about all these people I see who're not following the guidelines properly?". Well, those are the people to stay not just 2 metres away from, but to stay 10 metres away from. They're the reason why the graphs are still going up.
Don't get me wrong, as I've just calculated, the odds that the folks in the sheep shop are in any trouble right now is very low. They're probably just fine.
But the less seriously they take this, the greater the odds of them catching it and spreading it. Which increases the number of cases, which increases the odds of more people catching and spreading it. Which further increases the number of cases, which further increases the odds of more people catching and spreading it...
...and the point is that this growth is exponential. You're a coder, so you know exponential: 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256, 512, 1024, 2048, 4096... and, within 32 steps, you're at over 4 billion.
Exponential growth has to be tackled early. Its legs must be knocked out from under it, before it can ever get going. South Korea is the example of doggedly pursuing that with testing, tracing and isolating - pro-actively cutting lines of transmission, as they happen, and try to get ahead of the curve - and their graph is textbook recovery.
Basically, the answer to your question is that most human beings are absolutely shit at maths. They have no intuitive sense for what the numbers they're looking at actually mean.
The point is that if we keep this curve flattened - keep the population numbers as low as we can - then you're likely perfectly fine going to the sheep shop. The probabilities are low, and if the population numbers are low, then it's very unlikely.
But watch those graphs rising. People out there are catching it. It is being spread. And the more it spreads, the more and more likely it is that those stores not properly doing their "social distancing" will get clobbered. We've got to keep the numbers down.
And, indeed, if one could imagine a 100% perfect "lockdown", where no-one meets anyone else for weeks on end, then this virus would have nowhere to go and it would die, for good, right then and there. Perfection doesn't exist. The lockdowns are never perfect. But the closer we get to it, the closer we get to that ideal of killing it stone cold dead and making it extinct (and, as I've said, these measures are generic anti-viral tactics - it's not just coronavirus that we could potentially be killing off here either).
But every time we differ from that ideal, the virus can spread - it can escape - and the population numbers go up, and if those numbers get large then very low probabilities get multiplied up into very, very real and significant numbers of people dead. Mutation is entirely random chance. There's a possibility that, whatever we do, it mutates and then we're screwed, as this thing becomes endemic. But the less people have it, the more we're keeping a lid on that mutation chance and, hopefully, nothing nasty happens before we start having treatments and vaccines for this thing.
It's a numbers game. The probabilities are low. But we need to keep the population low too, because "probability x population". If both are low, this all stays low. If either explodes, then this whole thing explodes.
Stay at home. Protect the NHS. Save lives.
"Words ought to be a little wild - for they are assaults of thought on the unthinking."
- John Maynard Keynes
The Grauniad wrote:Morrisons’ chief executive, David Potts, said the company had employed 83 fitting teams to install protective screens at every checkout as soon as possible. “The wellbeing of colleagues is paramount,” he said. It has also put hand sanitiser on all tills and marked out physical distancing points on store floors.
That was ten days ago!
Emoticon and contraction free since... quite a while ago.
Our local Tesco was like that fairly recently, had the queues and distancing stuff marked on the floors etc but no worker had any protection and no shields at the checkouts either.
More recenlty though in the last couple of days they have now started to get shields around the checkout people and some masks on the people out on the shop floor.
I presume it can only be a supply issue, but surely someone like Tesco should have been able to do something even if it was a work around until better options came along?
KlaxonCow wrote:For fuck's sake, people. It's not the flu.
This is NOT the flu. This is SARS.
Quite literally, its official name - "COVID-SARS-2" - is telling us that this is "SARS mark 2". Its closest relation is the original SARS virus, not the fucking flu.
And yet we didn't take anything like the steps we have for this when we were knee-deep in SARS. And we were knee deep, I was working as a trained nurse in both A&E and Respiratory during the outbreak. We used minimal PPE for that too. And zero panic. Nothing shut down, no lockdowns.
SARS was given an r0 by the WHO of between 2 and 4, same as COVID-19, but was 10x more deadly by all accounts.
"Oh dear lord, I slightly soiled myself. Oxfam won’t be pleased."
KlaxonCow wrote:For fuck's sake, people. It's not the flu.
This is NOT the flu. This is SARS.
Quite literally, its official name - "COVID-SARS-2" - is telling us that this is "SARS mark 2". Its closest relation is the original SARS virus, not the fucking flu.
And yet we didn't take anything like the steps we have for this when we were knee-deep in SARS. And we were knee deep, I was working as a trained nurse in both A&E and Respiratory during the outbreak. We used minimal PPE for that too. And zero panic. Nothing shut down, no lockdowns.
SARS was given an r0 by the WHO of between 2 and 4, same as COVID-19, but was 10x more deadly by all accounts.
So are they really exxagerating with all this ? Or are they doing what they should do ? Or are they NOT doing enough in your opinion ?
"If it's so contagious you want people locked down" then why not to protect better people that are more exposed ?
Really makes you think "if that's the level of protection sufficient, is this lockdown really a good thing to do ?".
By the time SARS was contained in July 2003, there had been 8,096 confirmed cases and 774 confirmed deaths from it. There are currently over 1,000,000 confirmed C19 cases and over 51,000 confirmed C19 deaths. By the end of this week we can expect more confirmed C19 deaths per day in the U.K. alone than the final total for the first SARS worldwide.
Emoticon and contraction free since... quite a while ago.
Deckard wrote:Usually a solitary job and zero people outside so whats the harm ?
None I suppose, I'm just grumpy because I'm enjoying the relative quiet and having it interrupted by a hedge trimmer or a leaf blower doesn't help my mood.
If it was just us doing it I'd probably also be thinking along the lines of "is this 'elf n safety gone mad?" - but it's not, it's the whole world, so I tend to think "the entire world can't all be wrong"
Cloudane wrote:If it was just us doing it I'd probably also be thinking along the lines of "is this 'elf n safety gone mad?" - but it's not, it's the whole world, so I tend to think "the entire world can't all be wrong"
