Between us we have criticised or applauded every country for their different approaches.  We’ve said ‘if only’ too many times, analysed news snippets both real and fake, criticised our own government for doing things to late or too early, for u-turns, for not knowing etc.  We’re beating ourselves into a frenzy over something we still don’t know nearly enough about.  

We’re still learning and there will be no answers until this is over!  Hindsight would be a wonderful thing, if only we had it!

The Guardian has an article saying that the media in China were saying that the first case was recorded on 17 November 2019. 

A shop in Pennsylvania has to throw away $35,000 worth of food after a woman went round deliberately coughing on it:

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-shop-throws-away-35k-of-food-deliberately-coughed-on-11964308

$35,000 worth of food. Just think about how much that is for a second. Disgusting woman.

Usual caveat - it's from the Fail:

Sweden considers cutting off Stockholm in dramatic coronavirus restriction U-turn after deaths soar by 60% in a day with the capital hardest hit

Sweden has so-far resisted following other European countries - including neighbours Norway and Denmark - into full lockdowns, but the latest figures have spooked politicians into a re-think.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8156641/Sweden-considers-cutting-Stockholm-dramatic-coronavirus-restriction-U-turn.html

Exactly the point David - contain and control measures can only work, if the borders are already themselves controlled.

I have asked my Danish colleagues whether this is true - will get back to you.

I find it odd that people have suggested the Swedish approach might be worth pursuing whilst they lambasted the UK government for seeking a similar alternative approach at first; before the weight of scientific research made it clear that preventing the spread was the only real option.

Obviously this won't prevent more of Maunder's inane burbling about Sweden having got it right by doing next to nothing.

Controlling the borders to prevent the virus being imported is impossible. You would have needed to close them completely back in December, before Covid-19 was even acknowledged as a major issue.

I am just flagging it up. Personally I think the UK (and that of other European countries) is correct. In fact I would lockdown the UK further.

In practical terms I don't think there is any other way to prevent transmission other than lock-down. Arguments for not preventing transmission are likely to get out of hand very quickly IMO.

That misses the point somewhat. The virus would still come in, but putting all arrivals from countries with cases into automatic 14 day monitored quarantine, would have allowed the sort of containment and control measures seen in Taiwan and South Korea.

Clearly, letting all comers pass through our borders, allows the virus to spread until it is no longer containable, as we have seen across Europe and the USA.

First response from one of my colleagues: "

But anyways since I as a Dane can read some Swedish gibberish, it is currently just a thought being kicked around and the politicians is against it

So give it a day or a week"

- so looks like the Mail has picked up on chatter rather than actual policy in Sweden - not happened yet!

And yet you seem to think that now that it is epidemic here, we should not lock down and just let it rip. Can't you see how contradictory your position is?

[quote=Brian Gaze;1197078]

I would recommend people to watch Question Time, 26/03. I think this is the link:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000gpnd/question-time-2020-26032020

Richard Horton is excellent and the other 3 panellists are pretty good too - inc Tory and Labour. The programme is vastly improved because there is no studio audience. 

Horton suggests the lockdown will need to go on for 11 or 12 weeks and be tightened further. He cites Wuhan as evidence and it ties in nicely with what the Chinese Dr in Lombardy was telling the Italians yesterday. Regarding Imperial, Ferguson says their latest modelling shows the virus is slightly MORE transmissible than had been thought and the estimate of its lethality is unchanged. 

[/quote

totally agree Brian... I and others have been saying this for years now...I do believe that there is scope for some tiny positives to come out of this appalling situation... One of them might be a move away from the media obsession  with hearing from members of the public and that their views count equally as any other..when so much stupidity is in evidence...Also, if it means we hear less from self appointed experts like  Tim Martin, then that is surely no bad thing.

One last point.. we support a charity in Burundi... one of the poorest countries in the world.. the whole country has 20 ventilators in total... The virus will have a devastating impact...

Updated trajectory following the UKs update last night

Yes, inappropriate, take back control Michael 

Not contradictory at all - there are two strategies which have long term potential:

1. Keep it out and clean up inside the borders (SK, Taiwan for example).


2. Let it rip and take the consequences on the chin.

What most of Europe is doing is probably the worst of all worlds - trash the economy without containing the virus.

If you want to contain it, first close the borders, then absolute lock-down for two to three weeks, then relax internally whilst keeping borders secure - that is an approach which might work.

But no point cleaning up internally, if borders are left open.

I think that people can see what damage this virus can do if lockdown comes too late, ie Lombardy and parts of Spain, maybe other areas to come, so those calls will probably be rejected by most people. Support for the lockdown has been very high in polling (over 90% I think). If we had just gone to lockdown the moment we heard about Wuhan then claims we were over-reacting would have had far more traction.

Let 'em die, eh? All those economically inactive blue rinses.

Another point is that delaying the time when the coronavirus starts spreading rapidly would mean that we could be better prepared, ie more protective equipment, more ventilators, more thoughts about support for various groups of people, better predictions about the rate it would spread at, etc. Its a new enemy and the greater the chance you have to understand the threat you face then the more prepared you can be.

That is the stark choice - close borders and lock-down, or accept a healthcare system which has a massive spike it cannot cope with, leading to a lot of deaths.

I would have preferred the first course - but all European countries and North America allowed free travel for too long, so we have mass infection within our borders. There is still the possibility of closing borders and cleaning up inside - but it is so much harder to do that from where we have arrived at.

Hi Brian, I know you were only flagging it up; my comment was not directed at you at all.

🙂

I just can’t comprehend you change of stance. You were so adamant that you wanted to keep this out, and now you almost happy for it to rip through the population because you worried about the economy. 

Where is the consideration around life?

I am not happy at all - none of the options is good from where we are.