I'm a natural pessimist so I understood by a "good result of 20,000 deaths" to be a minimum figure. It certainly didn't come across to me as a maximum figure. It seems so long ago now that this statement was made. Was it in a press briefing? Perhaps one of the esteemed journalists present should have asked for confidence limits on that figure.

I'm not so sure:

The government's chief science adviser, Sir Patrick Vallance, has said the aim is to keep the number of coronavirus deaths below 20,000.

https://news.sky.com/video/coronavirus-20-000-uk-deaths-would-be-good-outcome-11959254

I think that was the intended meaning, DEW, and feel he is probably correct. The trouble with the reports sloshing about is we never seem to have a complete picture, nor compare like with like, and there's some erroneous stuff about too. I continue to be impressed at the transferable skills of TWO meteorologists and their ability [mostly] to make sense of data outside their immediate field of expertise.

When we get to a point when information is more settled we ought to be able to agree a national policy of transparency and ways of reporting for any such event in the future. The intelligent don't need to be patronised and the ignorant will never listen anyway.

I am one of the world's least politically sympathetic folks and my default is never to trust any politician or party. I feel we have wasted a lot of hot air moaning at a bunch of reasonably bright folks dealing with an impossible situation, making mistakes anyone could have made. Experts and academics seldom agree on a best way forward either. The constant media sledging does not necessarily help, but the daily briefings have been a helpful if sometimes imperfect counterbalance.

Anyway - it's raining - and we needed it. I wonder in the change in humidity will affect the pattern of transmission in the coming week?

Stay safe.

Roger

The French seem confident they can deal with 3000 infections per day. I'm doubtful but perhaps they can. I'm even more doubtful that we can.

'France's exit strategy might just measure up to the disaster'

French central planning is at its finest in a crisis. As the prime minister said, never in history - not in war, occupation or disease - has France had to confront such massive disruption. And now from the best fonctionnaire brains in the land comes an exit strategy that might just measure up to the disaster.

As ever in hyper-rational France, the plan is built around numbers, categories and systems. The key figure is 3,000. That is what the government reckons will be the amount of daily infections in the weeks ahead.

By setting up local ‘brigades’ of investigators to track the trail of infection, they reckon they will test 20 contacts per infection - so 420,000 tests a week, which is well within planned capacity. Those found to have the virus will be expected to self-isolate, either at home with their families or in requisitioned hotels. And as for the rest of the population, life will very gradually resume.

Protection, testing, isolation. That is the system. Which is itself then conditioned by three imperatives: acceptance of the enduring nature of the virus, progressive implementation and regional adaptation. It always sounds a mouthful when a French technocrat expounds on a plan. But sometimes it may be exactly what the country needs.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-52450742

It is they don’t have to say, they like buying as much copper as possible if chance allows I’ve seen it first hand 

pure copper very important for jamming radar twt and high power magnetrons to list a few.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/25/chinas-the-worlds-biggest-buyer-of-soybeans-and-copper-its-commodities-appetite-is-still-growing.html

China needs the West as a market to sell its stuff. The West needs China to supply our insatiable appetite for cheap stuff and it has a monopoly on key raw materials.

Without China's stuff our consumer goods market will collapse and the proletariat would revolt. If we tried to meet the demand in the West it would take decades we could not possibly do so without our inflation rate going through the roof.

If we are lucky in spite of all the rhetoric we'll go back to business as usual. If we don't then the coronavirus shock will seem like nothing in comparison to the economic calamity that will unfold.

Just how much "consumerism" is really needed though ? 

Do people really reed to  "upgrade" their 'phone every year ?

I linked  earlier to Fairphone.  It's not so slick as an iPhone, but it's half the price AND it pays the people  who make them a fair wage AND get the materials  in a more environmentally friendly way AND it's designed to repairable and have a long life.

A lot  of us don't want "business as usual".  Business as usual is wrecking the planet and exploiting people.  The only people that are doing well are those at the top - the ones using the "Chinese machine"  to their advantage.   We need something fairer  and more  ecologically sustainable.

True! Thinking back, my mobile went on the blink for a few days. Did I go into one! Too damned reliant!

I also think that human mental health scaring will go on much after, all folk are different and some in rural areas and towns with no family   Or limited friends will ask is it really ok do that safely now.

can I really get that train or transport bus to town will I be ok  I feel sorry for many old folk some are so honest for own good.

The Tele has picked up on the change to the government's five tests. IMHO the government is playing with fire.

Key rule in Government's five tests for lifting lockdown is softened

Government changes requirement in sign that restrictions may soon be eased

The Government relaxed its key rule for easing the lockdown on Tuesday amid increasing signs that Boris Johnson is preparing to refine restrictions within days.

...

he first four have either been met or are close to being met. The fifth hurdle, which ministers have always said is the most important, was described on official Government documents on Monday as a confidence that “any adjustments to the current measures will not risk a second peak of infections”.

On Tuesday the wording was changed to say the aim was to avoid a second peak “that overwhelms the NHS” - making it easier for ministers to say the test has been met.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/04/28/key-rule-governments-five-tests-lifting-lockdown-softened/

I read a bit more about the measures in Greece and they say that hotels and  holiday places will be the last ones to open (towards July), but only if infection rates are low both in Greece and the origin countries. 

I think the concern in the airline industry is that this might cause a fundamental rethink. Of course, at the most basic level businesses will be looking to control costs even more than usual with question marks over their revenue streams. Beyond that there has long been an expectation that conference calls could/would/should replace some proportion of travel.

As you know, it's a double-whammy because it's business travel that tends to support the premium product (business class), so both lower demand and lower yields (revenue per seat mile). 

I expect to see two major moves: firstly older, less efficient aircraft will just stay moth-balled; secondly expect some tempting offers in the premium cabins.

That sounds like the right approach. I read recently that the Canary Islands does not plan to open to foreign tourists until Autumn.

Just to flag one point: I think that there would be a brief period of inflation but once you've moved to a higher cost base there's no reason why higher inflation would continue - all things being equal. Indeed higher prices might dampen down consumer demand, which would be no bad thing for many reasons. 

I'm intrigued/puzzled by your choice of words "if we are lucky...... we'll go back to business as usual."  I'd have thought that should start "if we are unlucky...". We have an unexpected opportunity to trigger change and it needs to be taken: our wasteful, damaging consumer culture is not sustainable and this is a rare chance for a re-set.

Mrs Maunder rang into Vine earlier

"Get behind them and support them and stop criticising them!"

Our caller Jill, 72, has had enough of people criticising the Government's handling of the pandemic...@TheJeremyVine | @OwenJones84 | @StormHuntley | #JeremyVine pic.twitter.com/ktTIY5irD5

— Jeremy Vine On 5 (@JeremyVineOn5) April 28, 2020