Current Affairs Coronavirus Thread - Serious stuff !!!

[Jebus_lives]

The Agenda Police have arrived!

 

[evilwebby]

some analysis of true death rates by the FT: https://www.ft.com/content/6bd88b7d...ZVGHm5omteXu4aYjFiGk-1YEUky9xQhuYhkdYy5pV-7YU

 

[NilSatisOptimum]

Dont forget, there's going to be a shake out of their industry too - especially the print media. Less papers bought and read, less advertising revenue. Apart from lackey's in the pocket of Johnson like the Telegraph, I'd expect much more criticism...and if this government deny bosses their "right" to open up for business for much longer the criticism will grow stronger in the media.

The morality compass soon swings back when economic realities are staring various industry or individuals in the face.
Minded of when May tried to convince home owners to be personally responsible for their geriatric care, never seen a collective scramble for a societal answer to funding, chuckle still at that.
The calls have been muted somewhat for a loosening of lock down. Those total death figures the forcing to start publishing them have probably got buttocks clacking at Tory central.

 

[Tubey]

It's amazing how many people buy that line from the government by the way. Totally absolves them of responsibility.

People really are stupid enough to think the politicians are just doing what the science tells them to do.

 

[xena]

Are Brazil publishing all there deaths because seeing as the conditions alot of the population live in it must be hard to self isolate you would think it would be alot higher.Same for India and Sth Africa and a few others.

 

[Chris O'Connor]

Agenda? Tens of thousands of people are dying here and you think I have need to create an agenda to have a go at those in power who are largely responsible for it? All I do is hold a mirror up to these developments and describe them in the only trerms that can possibly apply - catastrophic, disastrous, butchery.

And dont take my post personal, you're not the only one who seeks to add "context" to these appalling national statistics.

Again you state a fact 'tens of thousands of people are dying here' yes and its a catastrophe - agreed of course it is!

But that doesn't stop easy comparisons between absolutely different countries with completely different demographics being made and conclusions drawn from them, does it?

Why would you want incorrect and unsound comparisons to be made?

The important point is to save as many as possible and to adopt best practice by seeing what works and what doesn't, we need clarity and level playing fields to scientifically adjudicate on whether something improves the situation.

By using factors which have a high correlation to death rate in combination with absolute figures, the exceptions to the pattern like Germany, South Korea and (negatively) Sweden stand out more NOT less.

We can look at those countries that broke the trend and what worked there.

Don't worry I don't take it personally as I know its only you again and should know the tenor and tone of your posts by now.

Good facts help not hinder, they're not insulting and certainly don't do a disservice to the forum.

 

[Nymzee]

One damn smart footie player: https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...-artificial-intelligence-marbella-real-madrid

 

[tsubaki]

It's amazing how many people buy that line from the government by the way. Totally absolves them of responsibility.

People really are stupid enough to think the politicians are just doing what the science tells them to do.

Yes but this crisis shouldn’t be politicised, or something.

 

[Bungle]

I think I am struggling to understand reality these days. It's like that Adam Curtis documentary.

I suspect this is just a cover so that during the flight the Daily Mail can fly a load of immigrants out of the UK and drop them in the ocean.

 

[Barnfred 55]

h

While it's possible to single out good individual policies or costly ommisions and errors, comparing death rates across countries makes good easy headlines but is pretty much pointless. There are just too many variables at play, too many known factors with high correlations to death rates differing very widely across compared countries. It's an easy weapon to beat a politician with but really it's just like comparing apples with pears.

For instance possibly the most striking correlation is between population density and deaths

So while Scandinavia has low population densities their death rates are also low in relative terms (except for Sweden) and those of high density you would expect much higher which is largely the pattern.

Its the exceptions rather than the rule where notable successes or failures can be found,...

On the minus side - Sweden, although it's death rate is not comparable to high population density countries, it's massively higher than its low population density neighbours. (Likewise you could also explain why Australia's ridiculously relaxed policies have had such remarkable success, the population density is very low.)

The success stories are notably the ones with relative high population densities but have achieved low death rates despite this

Germany has a population density of 233/km3 and a death rate of 73 per million,

- they have used their incredibly strong economy and industrial base, especially in manufacturing and pharmaceuticals, to swim against the tide, setting up mass testing on a scale unmatched and performing far better than might have been expected,

For comparison other densely populated countries

France 104 people /km3 and 357 deaths/million

Italy 192km3 and 446/m

Spain 92/km3 and 503/m

USA 35 and 172/m

(Sweden 20 and 235)

Comparing absolute deaths is ridiculous too how on earth do you say USA's figures are the worst as Sweden's are clearly worse, USA have the largest number but that's all.

The UK is one of the most densely populated countries, certainly in Europe dwarfing other major large economies having a density of 424/km3 compared to Germany's 233, Italy's 192, France's 104 and Spain's 92 - indeed Spain has a huge inherant advantage over Italy and France on population density but will still possibly have a higher death rate per thousand.

If we further look into extremely populated areas such as London (the most densely populated city in Europe and the largest international hub or New York (accounts for 40% of USA's total) then these skew the figures extremely markedly. Remove New York for instance and USA's figures compare remarkably favourably with most other countries. I haven't given a UK figure (because the care homes arent counted in ours and are in some countries) but we can and probably should be forecast near the top for actual death numbers given our extremely high population density, but probably that still wouldn't compare to Spain's poor figures given their hugely lower density and smaller population.

There are other factors at play too which may explain the relatively bad performance of Italy, France and especially Spain all with a high level of inter generational mixing between say even great grandparents, grandparents, parents right down to babies.

The only country to really do remarkably badly (and its all relative which really backs my point on simple comparison of numbers) is Sweden which has purposely not taken any but the most lenient measures and allowed life to go on largely unaffected. Despite being very sparsely populated per km3 if has still suffered a substantial death rate.

Sweden 20 people/km3 it has still suffered a death rate of 225 people / million

The whole thing of comparing absolute figures is absolutely ludicrous

Really good post mate. You can see a lot of effort went into that. When you also factor in global travel statistics you can understand why those countries that have been hardest hit have been singled out by the virus.

 

[Brisan123]

The question of an exit strategy and when will there be one and how will it look, has been a topic in the media recently and with the well reported collapse in the oil price last week, economic matters and can we recover after such huge crisis spending and a worldwide lockdown has been the question.

I must admit to thinking the stock market(s) - since they're global and 24 hrs now - on the verge of a crash only a week ago, but while the oil price continues to cause concern the FTSE100 here has perversely turned higher reaching a seven week high and recovering more than 20% from the March low which is 'bull' market territory, and perhaps the start of a speculative run even higher. The markets nearly always move higher or lower in tandem so pretty much reflected elsewhere.

The only explanation is they're betting on a 'V' shaped recovery where we've hit the bottom with industry and commerce still in sufficiently reasonable shape to respond to the future relaxation of the measures.

Large amounts of cash idle could conceivably fuel a consumer led boom as some return to work in the near future.

Important to note these markets are international in nature and won't just reflect what's going on here.

It seems an extremely optimistic view to me but it's always said they react to what they think is going to happen rather than the situation right now.

So difficult to read and when they do go up to use the old cliché, 'they always climb a wall of fear' with so many predicting the edge of a cliff coming soon - almost at every step of the way up.

Thats a risky bet if a second or third wave hits any of the big economies leading to more lockdowns

 

[Harryflashman]

It's amazing how many people buy that line from the government by the way. Totally absolves them of responsibility.

People really are stupid enough to think the politicians are just doing what the science tells them to do.

‘Follow the science ‘ like ‘get Brexit done ‘ reeks of Cummings to me personally

 

[Barnfred 55]

Honest question: why are the media or government not adding the newly announced 4000+ deaths in care homes, to the 21000+ deaths?

I hope somebody can answer this. I don't know the answer

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Economic damage could be worse without lockdown and social distancing – study

The worst thing for the economy would be not acting at all to prevent disease spread, followed by too short a lockdown, according to research based on US data.

www.cam.ac.uk

 

[Bruce Wayne]

I hope somebody can answer this. I don't know the answer

Honest question, why do people care? It just seems so strange to be hanging on the edge of your sofa at 5pm to hear the latest death stats. If things are happening in your social circle then of course, it's important, but drooling over these national stats like it's the World Cup is just odd.