*DO IT ALL* says the W.H.O. Director General

[Barracker]

www.cnbc.com/2020/03/13/europe-is-now-the-epicenter-of-the-coronavirus-pandemic-who-says.html

Tedros said countries need to take a comprehensive approach to try to fight the pandemic.

"Not testing alone, not contact tracing alone, not quarantine alone, not social distancing alone, do it all," he said.
"Any country that looks at the experience of other countries with large epidemics and thinks that won't happen to us is making a deadly mistake, it can happen to any country."

We're not doing it all.

We'll never know what the right thing to do would have been. Seems many people (including companies and sports folk) are ignoring the government anyway. So it's not quite 'business as usual' - lots of WFH, cancelled events etc.

People are taking this into their own hands, where possible.

Shame about the testing though. Can't see how more testing could ever be the wrong approach (taking out resource issues).

@raybentos.

The prediction for the number of people who have died is in the scenario where nothing is done to contain the disease. And having examined lots of figures it seems to be exactly accurate.

All the statistics we have show that in the absence of robust public policy aimed at containing the disease, the number of COVID-19 cases in a population multiplies by 4 or 5 per week. This means in particular, given that the average incubation is about 5 days, there are at any given time about three times more people that are infected and will go on to develop symptoms than there are people showing symptoms of the disease. Note that initial studies from Wuhan suggest that a large number of cases go undetected because only causing mild disease.

That means that if we accept the government's own (low case) estimation of 5,000 people in the UK currently infected, if nothing is done then in 4 weeks time there will be of the order of 5000256- 5000625 - ie between 1 million and 3 million infections. Assuming on basis of Wuhan figures a (again, best-case scenario) 10% of patients who need hopitalisation and 2% who need intensive care, this would completely swamp Britain's health care system. Large numbers of people with disease that could in theory have been treated would die because there was not capacity to treat them.

Of course, this is not how things have panned out so far in the countries that have been seriously hit (notably China and Italy- I have no figures on Iran) because in every case, as soon as the health care system started to be in serious difficulty governments introduced robust measures to limit infection. China introduced extreme measures and the epidemic seems to have petered out by now. Within a week or two the measures in Italy (which are not quite as extreme as China's) will have seriously improved things there (yesterday's figures showed, for the first time, no increase in new cases in Lombardy).

The problem is, if you wait for your health service to be almost overwhelmed before acting, you will have no choice but to introduce radical measures, because you need to stop the epidemic straight away before the health care system collapses. Whereas taking strong measures earlier, you have some chance of being able to avoid the radical measures later on.

Are the WHO going to provide the means to do so? Or are they able to throw around best practice without considering the implications or feasibility?

Are the WHO going to provide the means to do so? Or are they able to throw around best practice without considering the implications or feasibility?

Exactly - the WHO are saying the ideal scenario, they don't have to worry how to do it or if it's even actually possible.

I've listened to a few of the UK experts now and the approach is logical. They want to flatten the curve sensibly and slowly. Will it work? Who knows, this has never happened in modern society before. Has China contained it? Who knows, they could get a second peak - the rest of the world has it so unless China is closed to all travel from outside until it's been eliminated in the whole world, they're at risk of reinfection. No one's knows what is best, every country is doing what it thinks is best for its own society and resources.

This is a massive risk and gamble with millions of lives. I, too have listened to the experts. Perhaps they are right. But the risk is too high to attempt this experiment. We are so careful these days in this country when introducing new medicines. Why not with the population when there are only theories and unknowns. This could be the thalidomide and vaginal mesh scandals on steroids.

What I don't understand is how these countries where it seems to have been contained won't get another massive rise in cases. At some point people who start going out again, they still won't have immunity to the virus and it isn't going to have gone away. There will be a second wave for them.

I have no clue whether Boris is right or not but if we can have a lot of our cases now and over spring and summer, maybe slightly more people will survive just because viruses do have more traction in winter. I honestly think they are looking at things over the next year plus (until there is a vaccine) and acknowledging something people in other countries can't, which is this is going to get much bigger and more deadly before it goes away. No one can stop it for now.

I know that's frightening.

I think we just have to trust the government and their scientific experts. If you want to take your kids out of school now do so. The govt Is not going to start fining parents now. However how long do you think you can keep kids locked up in houses? 12 weeks? What about those kids that don’t have “decent” homes, are at risk of being abused if they hang around their homes etc etc. Ultimately we are all responsible for ourselves. But I know that these scientists know more about this stuff than I do with my o level biology.

Thanks for all the responses.
A week ago I was blasé, "flu kills more every year" about this. I didn't watch the news for weeks, just read it, and avoided the topic dismissively. I was pregnant during swine flu, and worried over whether to have the vaccine whilst pregnant. I travelled from India during SARS and wondered if the aeroplane was a great way to catch it. Both of those diseases turned not to be the enormous threat anticipated. I thought governments were overreacting then.
So I was dismissive and disinterested in the early weeks of this disease.

I realise there are those who will not read, not research, not learn, not observe what is happening in all the other countries. There are people who don't understand what exponential means. But those who do, simply need to look to Italy, and their numbers, and track our own numbers following. We are a couple of weeks behind Italy, rather than four. Only with far fewer ICU beds per head, and devastated NHS. And not enough ventilators.

This will hit hard, within a fortnight. There is so much more we could be doing, and should. I understand people's scepticism. Those that are sceptical but able, should look to the maths of how this disease spreads, how it is spreading in other countries, and compare our country. And make decisions based upon the guidance and actions of the WHO and ALL the countries facing this crisis, rather than discarding the wisdom of the many and substituting the outlying, ill-advised strategy of our single small island.

I am stealing someone's genius post from another thread

"These threads make me think that wiping out half of the UK wouldn't actually be that deleterious.

Do people not know how utterly corrupt the WHO and similarly large multinational organisations are?

Do people really think China is the epitome of best practice?

Do people really think we live in some kind of hell-hole where politicians want to kill people?

We live in one of the most transparent democracies in the world. We have so many checks and balances. We even have a democratic parliament under a benign monarchy. That's about as stable as it gets.

The government of the UK does not want to kill people. It doesn't."

We're such a terrible and corrupt country that's why so many seek asylum here.

The massive issue is, it's not just about this virus passing through us for herd immunity...

It seems to me that someone advising gov is obsessed with graphs and models and maths which is brilliant however, what about knock on effects eg what's the math modelling for 111. It struggles under normal busy times.
What's the modeling for normal illness getting the help they need, whilst forcing us to use the same telephone number for covid?

Again, beds in hospital are already under immense pressure so I'd like to see the graph on bed space with strong tactics and the weak ones our gov has deployed... Italy are massively struggling to process their dead.. Make shift morgues, unable to collect bodies all create more hygiene issues!

Then the maths modelling for the emotional burden and stress forcing staff to work in crowded education settings and having to send small dc with asthma, or other issues into crowded germ ridden places... I'm terrified dd will get strep throat which is going around or any other illness. She already has a hacking cough

So WHO are corrupt, every other country is wrong, only proud Britain knows how to do it right. Standing against the corrupt tide of every other country and organisation that is saying we are doing it wrong?

I actually find the rubbishing of WHO incredibly offensive.

But I am not stupid. If you are going to defend Britain's approach, you do have to rubbish WHO and every other country. Because otherwise it makes no sense.

@HeyPizza
Shame about the testing though. Can't see how more testing could ever be the wrong approach (taking out resource issues).

What do you mean 'taking out resource issues'?

That is literally the problem.

I'm a swing voter.
I don't believe for one second the tories are sitting in a cabal rubbing hands with glee, but I do believe whole heartedly they are taking the wrong approach here and their measures are not stringent enough.
. They keep talking about reducing the peak but seem to be take the weakest softest action to reduce it

Touch wood I'm healthy and it won't cause me to need ventilation but in 2, 3, 4 weeks time should I get to that stage, my chances of getting help in that NHS?

I'll probably die at home.

And the British Medical Officer has this morning said he wants 60% of UK to get the virus, and then it will become a seasonal virus like flu, killing some people every year.

The British Government is just accepting more British people will die than in lots of other countries.

But our economy will be in better shape.

I hate the Tories with a passion, but there is SUCH a fine line between protecting the people and the economy. If they start closing everything now and the economy tanks more people will be forced into destitution and budgets will be slashed (again). That spells years of pain and suffering and deaths. More so than corona can cause. So I can see why they’re taking the softly approach tbh.

And I myself am immunocompromised, have unwell family members and a young child, so I don’t say that lightly.

@teddyisahe Do you think saying you hate the Conservatives gives your view more weight?
I have voted Conservative, although not for Boris. I would have liked Theresa May to be in charge of all of this.

The economy is being prioritised. If you think the economy is more important than hundreds of thousands of people dying (using the Governments own figures) then fine. I think that is an immoral approach.

The WHO are experts, but they are highly political.

Where were the when it started? Why didn't they ask China to close their borders?

They sat, they dithered long enough, and now they are wailing.

But our economy will be in better shape

Yes, because if it isn't then more people will die. Is that what you want?

@ScarlettBlaize Other countries are ordering more tests, there is more capacity and newer tests being produced, with a faster turnaround time. There are ways that more testing can be done, but the government have to decide that it's a priority.

@TeddyIsaHe I cannot fathom why you think potentially leaving your young child without a father(?) is an acceptable price to keep the economy in better shape.
Any young child who loses a parent is affected their whole life by this.

Where there's a will, there's a way.

@alloutoffucks I don’t think it gives my argument more weight, I was just giving background to my point.

How many people died due to or in relation to austerity measures? Because it’s a hell of a lot more than corona. Another 10 years of that because they acted in panic is far more deadly than a virus.

WHO advise they can't make Governments do things. They are advising., the UK Government are ignoring them.
Keep rubbishing them all you want, along with lots and lots of other experts who are speaking out. Of course they are all wrong and only the plucky British Government is right.

@TeddyIsaHe Austerity was a political decision. There was still lots of money being spent on other things. And no I don't believe the figures bandied around about the amount of people who died from austerity.