Lockdown #2

[Nearholmer]

Rocker,

 

The huge differences between "historically" and now are the degree of transparency and speed of communication, which between them effectively prevent a government quietly deciding to pursue a policy, especially a policy decided by a power-elite in the comfortably closed world of Westminter or a few country-house drawing rooms, without public scrutiny.

 

Which has to be good.

 

But, the scrutiny and government response to it naturally and rapidly degenerate to some sort of "tyranny by tabloid headlines", headlines which make exaggerated thrusts, often in two different directions simultaneously (see headlines last week on one tabloid shouting at Boris not to lock-down, and on another shouting at Boris to lock-down hard and fast, on the same day).

 

The missing component that is necessary for true sanity to prevail is for a large enough proportion of the public to demand to be treated like intelligent adults, to have the plain hard facts and horrible calculus properly exposed.

 

We're kind of part-way there, in that we have now got the "chief scientists" periodically addressing us, but we're by no means the whole way there, because nobody yet dared open-up a truly informed and intelligent discussion - indeed tabloid newspapers, populist politicians, and partisan lobbyists and loudmouths have already so poisoned the soil in various ways, and spent so long pouring scorn on proper debate about anything, decrying academia, etc. that any seed of  intelligent debate would find it blooming difficult to germinate and grow at all.

 

Maybe the one good thing to come out of this pandemic might be a sustained demand by people to be treated like grown-ups, and a sustained willingness to put-in the hard-work of behaving like grown-ups, but I'm not hopeful

 

Kevin

 

EDITED: to correct some of the bad grammar!

 

 

Edited November 9, 2020 by Nearholmer

[rockershovel]

1 hour ago, Nearholmer said:

It is dealt with by case law, the key case being from IIRC 1947*, there is also a stack of guidance published by HSE.

 

It isn’t too hard to apply properly in most cases, but can get pretty difficult and controversial in the case of low-probability events that, if they do occur, have very high consequences.
 

*No, 1949, Edwards vs National Coal Board.

 

Having just skimmed the Wikipedia entry on ALARP, that contains some little bits (with no cited source) that I don’t think are correct, and seem to me to be at odds with the HSE position - I suspect that a debate/argument is being played-out between entry editors!

 

That wouldn’t be anything new....

 

Low-probability, high-consequence events are usually dealt with by concluding that the low probability allows the likelihood of occurrence to be controlled or managed, such that the anticipated benefits outweigh it. 

 

A classic example would be Piper Alpha, in which the Hazard - that the high-pressure gas riser, if subjected to heat, would rupture and an uncontrollable conflagration result, leading to complete destruction of the superstructure - was adjudged to be controlled by various factors. In fact, these controls did not prove to be adequate, and the outcome was radically different, but they DID represent the best assessment available, and decisions were taken in that light. 

 

 

[rockershovel]

11 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

Rocker,

 

The huge difference between "historically" and now is the degree of transparency and speed of communication, which between them effectively prevent a government quietly deciding to pursue a policy, especially a policy decided by a power-elite in the comfortably closed world of Westminter or a few country-house drawing rooms, without public scrutiny.

 

Which has to be good.

 

But, the scrutiny and government response to it naturally and rapidly degenerate to some sort of "tyranny by tabloid headlines", headlines which make exaggerated thrusts, often in two different directions simultaneously (see headlines last week on one tabloid shouting at Boris not to lock-down, and on another shouting at Boris to lock-down hard and fast, on the same day).

 

The missing component that is necessary for true sanity to prevail is for a large enough proportion of the public to demand to be treated like intelligent adults, to have the plain hard facts and horrible calculus properly exposed.

 

We're kind of part-way there, in that we have now got the "chief scientists" periodically addressing us, but we're by no means the whole way there, because nobody yet dared open-up a truly informed and intelligent discussion - indeed tabloid newspapers, populist politicians, and partisan lobbyists and loudmouths have already so poisoned the soil in various ways, and spent so long pouring scorn on proper debate about anything, decrying academia, etc. that any seed of  intelligent debate would find it blooming difficult to germinate and grow at all.

 

Maybe the one good thing to come out of this pandemic might be a sustained demand by people to be treated like grown-ups, and a sustained willingness to put-in the hard-work of behaving like grown-ups, but I'm not hopeful

 

Kevin

 

 

 

The problem with THAT, are the directions which that “informed debate” are likely to take. 

 

The late James Callaghan observed that “You know there are times, perhaps once every thirty years, when there is a sea-change in politics. It then does not matter what you say or what you do. There is a shift in what the public wants and what it approves of."  He was, in context, referring to the electoral challenge posed by Mrs Thatcher, but it seems to me that such a change is taking place now. 

 

[kevinlms]

https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/it-is-a-relief-after-123-days-police-dismantle-ring-of-steel-20201109-p56cr9.html

 

While I personally didn't get stopped at any of these locations, I did pass a temporary one. But it was deserted - all at lunch?

[Nearholmer]

I genuinely think it is impossible to guess the direction in which a fully informed debate would go. An open debate based on current levels of ignorance is a different matter - that would almost certainly not be pretty.

 

The task of getting every member of the population to the level of "fully informed", or at least as informed as each individual is capable of becoming, would be gargantuan, and it has never been tried before that I can think of. For one thing, it would take ages, possibly a couple of generations of genuinely focused effort, so it might not actually be a lot of help for current purposes. For now, we probably need our power-elite, and just have to hope we've got a good 'un.

 

But, setting and pursuing the policy objective of having a population capable of engaging in fully informed debates in the future would definitely be a good idea - in fact it is such an obviously good idea that it is seriously depressing to think that it isn't a prime policy aim already.

[Joseph_Pestell]

3 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

I genuinely think it is impossible to guess the direction in which a fully informed debate would go. An open debate based on current levels of ignorance is a different matter - that would almost certainly not be pretty.

 

The task of getting every member of the population to the level of "fully informed", or at least as informed as each individual is capable of becoming, would be gargantuan, and it has never been tried before that I can think of. For one thing, it would take ages, possibly a couple of generations of genuinely focused effort, so it might not actually be a lot of help for current purposes. For now, we probably need our power-elite, and just have to hope we've got a good 'un.

 

But, setting and pursuing the policy objective of having a population capable of engaging in fully informed debates in the future would definitely be a good idea - in fact it is such an obviously good idea that it is seriously depressing to think that it isn't a prime policy aim already.

 

I think that we had a good example of this in 2016. 40 years of EU membership had not informed the public very much at all.

 

It's not really about information as such, it's about teaching people to think for themselves and ask the right questions. Everything else follows on from that. So less school time should be spent on learning "stuff" that most of us will never use in real life and more time teaching people how to find out information for themselves and to be sceptical of what they read on social media sites, "fake news"..

[Nearholmer]

JP

 

Yes, that’s really what I mean by “fully informed”: not stuffed with fairly useless facts, but steeped in the tools and methods for thinking.

 

K

[Reorte]

27 minutes ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

It's not really about information as such, it's about teaching people to think for themselves and ask the right questions. Everything else follows on from that. So less school time should be spent on learning "stuff" that most of us will never use in real life and more time teaching people how to find out information for themselves and to be sceptical of what they read on social media sites, "fake news"..

 

That's why I found GCSE History a good subject, at least the way I had to do it.

 

It was mostly Cold War stuff, so plenty of sources - newspaper cuttings, TV and radio transcripts, biographies and so on. A lot of the subject wasn't so much the historical facts they covered (good as they are to know about how the world got to where it is now) but was about analysing those various sources. A typical lesson or exam question would be to go through them all to build up a picture of an event, what and why something like the Cuban Missile Crisis happened, having to pay a lot of heed as to the reliability of the various sources where they seem to contradict or have gaps, for all the reasons of the sort of being close to the event, political bias etc.

 

A very useful subject even if no history was learned. And it wasn't even compulsory

 

Mind you our history teacher seemed to be missing out on some TV sources - at any rate I remember him saying he was convinced only one episode of MASH was ever made, because it always seemed to be the same one every time he saw it on TV.

Edited November 9, 2020 by Reorte

[boxbrownie]

7 hours ago, rockershovel said:

I see the much-cried-up “Nightingale hospitals” have seen little, or no use and at least one has been quietly closed, another repurposed. My daughter, who works in the NHS tells me that this was only to be expected, there being no means of staffing them for any length of time. She also offers the observation that there was no means of beating them effectively, either! 

  

 

 

My Son was put in alert for the Birmingham centre two weeks ago, he was on alert through the first lockdown but thankfully the centre was not needed as the hospitals just about coped, he was in A&E through it all and has several walk ins which turned out to be Covid even though there were massive signs at the entrance to A&E saying if you suspect you have Covid or have a continuous cough etc etc DO NOT ENTER A&E........didn’t seem to work all the time 

[stewartingram]

All this talk recently about meeting others, whilst trying to bend the Lockdown 2 rules....well look at it this way....

 

 

Now, would you honestly want to walk through that spray?

Substitute just one human being for the tractor. That human being is exhaling, either by just breathing, or talking/shouting/singing etc., or even coughing/spluttering/sneezing. That means there is spray coming from him, maybe invisible, but could be including the virus.

I'll say it again - would you want to walk through that spray?

 

That is why Lockdown 2 is happening, don't get hung up on bending the rules just to suit yourself. Remember social distancing.

 

[monkeysarefun]

4 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

I genuinely think it is impossible to guess the direction in which a fully informed debate would go. An open debate based on current levels of ignorance is a different matter - that would almost certainly not be pretty.

 

The task of getting every member of the population to the level of "fully informed", or at least as informed as each individual is capable of becoming, would be gargantuan, and it has never been tried before that I can think of. For one thing, it would take ages, possibly a couple of generations of genuinely focused effort, so it might not actually be a lot of help for current purposes. For now, we probably need our power-elite, and just have to hope we've got a good 'un.

 

But, setting and pursuing the policy objective of having a population capable of engaging in fully informed debates in the future would definitely be a good idea - in fact it is such an obviously good idea that it is seriously depressing to think that it isn't a prime policy aim already.

 

Here the virus came pretty much straight after the apocalyptic bushfires which may be one reason why the community pulled together so readily, and the governments state and federal, although from both sides of the political divide were able to work together so well in a crisis since we'd just lived through a major nationwide one.

 

Here it was pretty much known by the end of  January by most of us that there was a virus and if it got here it would be bad, in fact the federal  government, presumably attempting to regain face after its disastrous initial bushfire response was at all times open and clear what its plans were, which stood in stark contrast to the US and much of Europe  ( ignore it) or the UK (Herd inmmunity then abrupt panic)

 

Here is the only overseas article I can find regarding the Australian experience, we never get a mention in the US media which possibly helps explain why many of its citizens do believe that Trump is handling things as best they can be handled.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/australia-coronavirus-cases-melbourne-lockdown/2020/11/05/96c198b2-1cb7-11eb-ad53-4c1fda49907d_story.html

Edited November 9, 2020 by monkeysarefun

[PatB]

8 hours ago, monkeysarefun said:

 

Here the virus came pretty much straight after the apocalyptic bushfires which may be one reason why the community pulled together so readily, and the governments state and federal, although from both sides of the political divide were able to work together so well in a crisis since we'd just lived through a major nationwide one.

 

Here it was pretty much known by the end of  January by most of us that there was a virus and if it got here it would be bad, in fact the federal  government, presumably attempting to regain face after its disastrous initial bushfire response was at all times open and clear what its plans were, which stood in stark contrast to the US and much of Europe  ( ignore it) or the UK (Herd inmmunity then abrupt panic)

 

Here is the only overseas article I can find regarding the Australian experience, we never get a mention in the US media which possibly helps explain why many of its citizens do believe that Trump is handling things as best they can be handled.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/australia-coronavirus-cases-melbourne-lockdown/2020/11/05/96c198b2-1cb7-11eb-ad53-4c1fda49907d_story.html

I would contend that the majority of the heavy lifting here, at least initially, was undertaken by the states, with the feds following along behind, somewhat reluctantly. Nonetheless, we do seem to have, overall, done quite well, Victorian 2nd wave notwithstanding.

[monkeysarefun]

57 minutes ago, PatB said:

I would contend that the majority of the heavy lifting here, at least initially, was undertaken by the states, with the feds following along behind, somewhat reluctantly. Nonetheless, we do seem to have, overall, done quite well, Victorian 2nd wave notwithstanding.

Thats true, I remember Scomo saying that the lockdown was starting on the following Monday because he was going to the footy Saturday night. The states stepped in and brought it forward.

[jonny777]

The promise of an effective vaccine is good news, but I wonder if it will cause more problems initially, than it solves. 

 

Presumably health workers will be high priority, but what about ordinary members of the public? Does the vaccine mean that those who have had a shot will be able to return to normality, safe in the knowledge that their immune system will cope if they become infected. But how will they know they have been infected, and if they were could they still infect others by the normal close contact methods? 

 

Will this mean everyone who has yet to have the vaccine will continue to be confined to their homes? And who would know out in the wider public if someone walks into a shop without a mask? 

 

The media mentions 20m doses have been pre-ordered, but the population is over three times that. 

[Rivercider]

22 minutes ago, jonny777 said:

The promise of an effective vaccine is good news, but I wonder if it will cause more problems initially, than it solves. 

 

 

The media mentions 20m doses have been pre-ordered, but the population is over three times that. 

And as I understand it two doses are required per person, so only treating 10m initially. Hopefully the vaccine will be effective.

Edit - I see it is 40m doses, so enough for 20m people.

 

 

Now that there does seem to be an initial sign of the cavalry coming over the hill  I think it does add weight to the strategy of trying to hold back the spread of the virus by various means, rather than the 'let it rip' approach.

 

cheers

Edited November 10, 2020 by Rivercider

[jonny777]

The Daily Mail website (not to be taken as gospel) says that bottom of the priority queue for the vaccine will be everyone under 50 years of age. 

 

That is not going to be popular with a large proportion of the working population. 

 

Maybe the Mail is just trying to stir things up?

[Joseph_Pestell]

1 minute ago, jonny777 said:

The Daily Mail website (not to be taken as gospel) says that bottom of the priority queue for the vaccine will be everyone under 50 years of age. 

 

That is not going to be popular with a large proportion of the working population. 

 

Maybe the Mail is just trying to stir things up?

 

As if they would ever do that?

 

But basically true. People under 50 with no underlying health issues will be the last to receive the vaccine. They are at far lower risk of serious consequences from catching the virus.

[The Stationmaster]

1 hour ago, jonny777 said:

The Daily Mail website (not to be taken as gospel) says that bottom of the priority queue for the vaccine will be everyone under 50 years of age. 

 

That is not going to be popular with a large proportion of the working population. 

 

Maybe the Mail is just trying to stir things up?

No  - it reflects the current priority list for vaccination if and when a vaccine becomes available.  In fact someone on RMweb who is pretty good on researching numbers has calculated that the 50 million doses (quoted by one official source as the number on order) might just about stretch to folk under 65 (but over 50) with underlying health conditions.  Then there is the problem of distributing and storing the stuff as it has to be kept at very low temperature, way below normal fridge temperatures.  This all explains why Govt is emphasising that it is not a magic bullet and that all existing personal precautions such as social distancing have to continue.   

 

Assuming no other vaccines are cleared and available by the spring just relying on this one won't see it extended to the whole population for at least a year - assuming the Govt can actually order and obtain any more beyond the existing order they have placed..

[jonny777]

31 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

No  - it reflects the current priority list for vaccination if and when a vaccine becomes available.  In fact someone on RMweb who is pretty good on researching numbers has calculated that the 50 million doses (quoted by one official source as the number on order) might just about stretch to folk under 65 (but over 50) with underlying health conditions.  Then there is the problem of distributing and storing the stuff as it has to be kept at very low temperature, way below normal fridge temperatures.  

 

Yes, -70 deg C was the storage temperature that I read. 

[Andy Hayter]

Much is made of the storage conditions but it looks to me that if stored in a locker packed out with dry ice (solid Carbon Dioxide) the conditions will be nicely met.  Such a locker should give a comfortable 48 hour storage time for transportation and use.  That is much shorter than usual for example with flu vaccine but looks to me to be eminently do-able.  

[boxbrownie]

14 minutes ago, Andy Hayter said:

Much is made of the storage conditions but it looks to me that if stored in a locker packed out with dry ice (solid Carbon Dioxide) the conditions will be nicely met.  Such a locker should give a comfortable 48 hour storage time for transportation and use.  That is much shorter than usual for example with flu vaccine but looks to me to be eminently do-able.  

Time to invest in Co2 production......

 

I heard one part of the plan is doctors surgeries to have weekends of a couple of thousand patients at a time, enough time for the cooled vaccine to be used in cold storage boxes, I expect there will also be vaccine centres to do more mass vaccinations, only issue with the centres is you need the patients to come back two weeks later for the booster or it’ll be wasted, easier and more reliable that patients at local surgeries will actually turn up for the booster.

[rocor]

2 hours ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

 

As if they would ever do that?

 

But basically true. People under 50 with no underlying health issues will be the last to receive the vaccine. They are at far lower risk of serious consequences from catching the virus.

 

With the present state of knowledge regarding the virus, statistics is the only method of determining the susceptibility of specific segments of the population to the highest danger from contract. In the future it may be discovered why that to some young healthy people the virus has proved fatal.

[rockershovel]

11 minutes ago, rocor said:

 

With the present state of knowledge regarding the virus, statistics is the only method of determining the susceptibility of specific segments of the population to the highest danger from contract. In the future it may be discovered why that to some young healthy people the virus has proved fatal.

 

Right now, death rates in younger sections of the population are statistically meaningless. 

[Nearholmer]

Here are figures for case fatality rate (i.e. percentage of people infected who then go on to die from it) for England up to October.

 

What I don’t know is whether these figures are ‘% deaths among those tested positive’ or ‘% deaths among those estimated to have been infected’.

 

Either way, it does make clear why vaccinating older people first ought to give ‘best bang for buck’ (to use an inappropriate phrase), and why there seems to be no intention to vaccinate young children - there I surmise that the risk of vaccinating might be greater than the risk of not.

 

Of course, it doesn’t show % of people at each age who get a ‘nasty case’ that makes them ill for weeks/months/ever.

 

 

 

 

Edited November 10, 2020 by Nearholmer

[Bernard Lamb]

45 minutes ago, Andy Hayter said:

Much is made of the storage conditions but it looks to me that if stored in a locker packed out with dry ice (solid Carbon Dioxide) the conditions will be nicely met.  Such a locker should give a comfortable 48 hour storage time for transportation and use.  That is much shorter than usual for example with flu vaccine but looks to me to be eminently do-able.  

There are various types and sizes of boxes for dry ice currently available that would keep  the vaccine at around -80 degrees for a couple of days without too great a loss through sublimation. These are advertised as loosing around 2-3 % per 24 hour period. It is the bulk storage that looks to be more of a problem. Dry ice is rather nasty stuff to handle so the actual vaccine containers need to be easy to get in and out of the short term storage containers. I have not seen any figures as to how long the vaccine will survive at room or fridge temperature. This figure would show how many people can be treated as a batch and how many batches can be used in a session. It looks to be a logistical problem rather than a medical or scientific one, so it should be easy to sort out.

I worked with dry ice at below -40 degrees when testing steel pressings for use in cold stores. Providing the containers are well designed and a top up procedure is strictly maintained there should not be any problems. Wearing appropriate PPE and being very careful when handling any material at these temperatures is essential. (He write with memories of chunks of steel at -40 degrees fling in all directions),

Bernard