Gobsmacked by UK response

[Aspoonfullofjam]

Stay at home for one week if you’ve a cold (even though all evidence is that incubation is two weeks)

People over 70 don’t go on cruises.

WHAT!!!

134 new cases in a day and no action. 13 EU countries have closed all schools, another 11 partial closures but apparently no action needed in Uk.

Jesus.

Re school closures, Austria's response seems sensible

Austria is closing schools from Monday, until 4 April, when the Easter break starts.

More than a million schoolchildren are affected. The government wants at least 75% to stay at home, Austrian media report.

However, schools will remain open, with a skeleton staff, to look after children up to 14 whose parents simply can't stay at home - including nurses and bus drivers.

we must trust the scientific approach, it's based on data and facts

We should question the scientific approach and ask questions again and again and again about that data and those facts. Because many people will die. Getting it wrong - as many people believe may be the case - means that lives will be lost unnecessarily.

We have to trust that Boris Johnson has been through the facts, data and science behind this decision with the finest toothcomb possible. And asked searching, incisive questions. And really, really did everything in his immense power to make the right decision to save the lives of all those people counting on him.

It would be terrible to think - for example - he said something along the lines of 'this is how we need to operate as an economy. I need some scientific model, graphs and stuff, to prop up it up.'

The model is apparently based on his supposition that the electorate is a bunch of fucking morons, so there's that.

It’s a total and utter joke. 42 countries have taken action to curb mass meetings, close schools etc but BoJo and his shower of cockwombles are just saying wash your hands singing happy birthday, no cruises and watch some of your loved ones die. It’s disgraceful (but to be expected from the Tories)

we must trust the scientific approach, it's based on data and facts

It's an interpretation of the data and facts, which is a different thing altogether.

In fact, to be exact, it's a socio-economic interpretation of the facts and data.

@DGRossetti exactly I dont think the experts are looking at different data they are just interpreting it in a different way

Which as always is the problem with statistics its not rare they can be looked at.

I get the school closures - I think that is a difficult multi layered decision that isnt necessarily the right one

I dont get not shutting down events (though I think that will happen without the Gvt) and not encouraging offices to let people wfh where they can

I cant quite get the testing policy either

I thought "herd immunity" only worked if there was a vaccine available? Otherwise, it just means survival of the fittest, doesn't it? (I am not a scientist.)

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31607599
Influenza vaccination and respiratory virus interference among Department of Defense personnel during the 2017-2018 influenza season.
Wolff GG1.
Author information
Abstract
PURPOSE:
Receiving influenza vaccination may increase the risk of other respiratory viruses, a phenomenon known as virus interference. Test-negative study designs are often utilized to calculate influenza vaccine effectiveness. The virus interference phenomenon goes against the basic assumption of the test-negative vaccine effectiveness study that vaccination does not change the risk of infection with other respiratory illness, thus potentially biasing vaccine effectiveness results in the positive direction. This study aimed to investigate virus interference by comparing respiratory virus status among Department of Defense personnel based on their influenza vaccination status. Furthermore, individual respiratory viruses and their association with influenza vaccination were examined.

RESULTS:
We compared vaccination status of 2880 people with non-influenza respiratory viruses to 3240 people with pan-negative results. Comparing vaccinated to non-vaccinated patients, the adjusted odds ratio for non-flu viruses was 0.97 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.86, 1.09; p = 0.60). Additionally, the vaccination status of 3349 cases of influenza were compared to three different control groups: all controls (N = 6120), non-influenza positive controls (N = 2880), and pan-negative controls (N = 3240). The adjusted ORs for the comparisons among the three control groups did not vary much (range: 0.46-0.51).

CONCLUSIONS:
Receipt of influenza vaccination was not associated with virus interference among our population. Examining virus interference by specific respiratory viruses showed mixed results. Vaccine derived virus interference was significantly associated with coronavirus and human metapneumovirus however, significant protection with vaccination was associated not only with most influenza viruses, but also parainfluenza, RSV, and non-influenza virus coinfections.

Update to my post yesterday - School has sent homework to do for now, obviously this is because of her having viral infection. since last week and her risk due to long term health issues.

I thought "herd immunity" only worked if there was a vaccine available? Otherwise, it just means survival of the fittest, doesn't it? (I am not a scientist.)

It just means that if lots of people have had it (or been vaccinated) then it is harder to pass on and the transmission rate will be low.

So it can be either via natural immunity or vaccination. I'm a bit confused that I'd have thought a lot of people would have needed to have it for this to be effective but perhaps it depends on how infectious the virus is

But the virus has already mutated once. So it will surely just come back every year?

Possibly yes, but the immunity to the original version may still be helpful in preventing its spread. Plus there will be vaccines in the future.

So we are relying on future vaccines?
If that was the case we should try and stop people getting it until a vaccine comes along.
But that would impact the economy and rich too much. So people will die.
And Boris thinks we are stupid and just believe what he tells us.

The worst thing is we are undermining the rest of the world’s approach.

There will be a travel ban imposed on the U.K. eventually.

So we are relying on future vaccines?

Which we already know a proportion of the population will refuse "because ...."

The worst thing is we are undermining the rest of the world’s approach.

If that becomes apparent, then people from the UK simply won't be allowed into other countries.

sorry defthand didn't see your second line until I posted !

So it seems today that Boris is continuing inaction and others more sensible are acting. Nursing homes no longer accepting visitors and Wales Scotland match cancelled. It’s clear Cheltenham shouldn’t have gone ahead.

He is just letting organisations make decisions about what they do. It is like an experiment on what happens if you don't really do anything from the Government.
Maybe this is a real life trail of nudge theory and the nudges are the daily briefings?

Apologies for posting this on a couple of threads, but I thought these were interesting questions, many of which chime very much with what I was wondering. Therefore I hoped some of the supporters of the government's strategy might have some answers.

twitter.com/globalhlthtwit/status/1238425621375651840?s=20

Unlike all other countries, the UK strategy aims to build herd immunity by allowing the steady spread of #COVID19. The government argue it will block a second peak in several months time. Here are EIGHT questions about this HERD IMMUNITY strategy: (THREAD)

1. Will it impair efforts to restrict the immediate epidemic, and cause more infections and deaths in the near term? Evidence suggests people shed virus early, and those without symptoms may cause substantial spread…

…this argues for policies against mass gatherings, for school closures, and for strict national and local measures for social distancing.

2. Will it weaken containment systems (testing, screening, radiography, isolation)? China quickly built a robust nation-wide system of mobilised communities/workers for identifying cases promptly, isolating contacts + treating vulnerable people promptly to contain the outbreak.

3. Does coronavirus cause strong herd immunity or is it like flu where new strains emerge each year needing repeat vaccines? We have much to learn about Co-V immune responses.

4. Doesn’t this herd immunity strategy conflict with WHO Policy? After the announcement of this being a pandemic, Dr Tedros, Director General WHO, said “The idea that countries should shift from containment to mitigation is wrong and dangerous.”

5. Shouldn’t we wait to see the China situation? They've contained the epidemic after 7 weeks of intense national effort. Will their strengthened systems not contain outbreaks quickly? What is their herd immunity? We don’t have serology available yet? It might be substantial.

6. Without an all-out national mobilisation plan for social distancing, are the UK government behavioural and nudge strategies really evidence-based to flatten the peak? Or simply based on models?

7. On the precautionary principle shouldn’t we go all-out to snuff this UK epidemic out, with national mobilisation at all levels, using all possible preventive measures (whether evidence is strong, uncertain or weak) and worry about herd immunity when we have more evidence?

8. Vaccines are a safer way to develop herd immunity, without the risks associated with the disease itself. Is it ethical to adopt a policy that threatens immediate casualties on the basis of an uncertain future benefit?

@Wannabangbang - in Germany, some of the states are already closing schools - let's not forget that Germany isn't one state, it's a federation and each federation state have powers over their own school system.
Also, Germans are pretty disciplined when it comes to recommendations - if they are told to stay at home, they will. Most business with staff that can work remotely are already at home, reducing the risks.
Why there aren't many deaths? Because the health system in Germany is, unlike the NHS, excellent and people stay at home when they are sick.
I remember the recent post in AIBU, with a poster asking for advice on sick days. It turned into a pissing contest of how sick the posters were when they went to work. It was the kind of: "I was just leaving for work and forgot to turn off the gas as I was sick with flu and half fainting with fever. The gas exploded just when I opened the door and tore off my legs but I dragged myself to work on the bleeding stumps and only called 111 for advice when I was told I was a health risk because of the heavy bleeding."
You will rarely find this attitude in Germany. When they are sick, they would stay at home because they are danger to public otherwise and have a pretty generous sick leave. Unlike Britain, Germans care that all members of society are protected while Britain are now practicing eugenics through spreading corona so the weakest can comfortably die, thus relieving Britain of surplus population.

One of my dds has come home today with a letter which suggests school is about to close. It talks about online learning and she has a book for use at home.

Why there aren't many deaths? Because the health system in Germany is, unlike the NHS, excellent and people stay at home when they are sick

It will most likely be that they have tested more people and picked up more cases.

I really dislike on mn the reverting of how wonderful things are in other countries. All countries have different types of people and stereotyping British people is really unpleasant.

But I'm sure your comments about healthcare are correct.

Health care for this is still good though it’s only when we become over burdened it’s more an issue.

Why would someone in U.K. be more likely to die with CV than elsewhere right now?

Running 😳