all shutting down the country will do is delay the deaths, unless the shutdown is done at the right moment to slow the spread, the hard part and where the disagreements are is when that moment is. The government is trying to get the vulnerable to self isolate so it can spread among those who it is a minor infection, this will save many lives but only if the vulnerable lock themselves away
everybody has to lock themselves away, to varying degrees, to flatten the curve. It's the vulnerable who get the most benefit from what others are doing, but ALL mingling speeds up the infection rate. The current strategy is that everyone should socially distance themselves - thousands flocking to popular beauty spots apparently haven't grasped that!
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
davidof wrote:
Pastorius wrote:
I mean, I don't know what to tell you other than that's simply no longer the case. That was the original plan but it was swiftly abandoned, about a day after they announced it because of the study from Imperial that showed it would result in a quarter of a million deaths. The current plan is suppression, not herd immunity.
This strategy means that at some point in the future, the virus will resurface when the curfews are lifted.
I'm not sure the Guardian has this right or their article is unclear. The strategy is "flattening". The areas under the chart are the same, for infections, but you reduce the deaths somewhat by keeping the infection rate at what hospitals can cope with. In the end everyone probably gets it unless you can suppress to a point where the virus dies out. The risk is everyone starves to death or dies in a Mad Max type civil war instead because the economy collapses.
DO you mind if I ask where you got that graph from? The graph from the Imperial study looks like this:
In all circumstances the peak is above what the NHS can cope with - now the assumptions were based on current number of ICU beds (ventillators essentially) but suppression will NOT lead to herd immunity by it's nature, as everyone locks themselves away and doesn't get it.
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Quote:
everybody has to lock themselves away, to varying degrees, to flatten the curve.
I'm a healthy person with no underlying health issues. All my elderly relatives are currently self isolating and I don't have any friends that are elderly or have existing health problems. I'm currently carrying on like normal, as I'm not particularly worried about catching it myself, and am unlikely to pass it on to anyone who it would seriously affect. Until the government force me to "lock myself away" I have no intentions of doing it. Perhaps a selfish approach to some, but I can't just drop everything (including work!).
Nobody has suggested that everybody should drop work, @boarder2020. But to suggest you wouldn't pass it on to anyone who it would seriously affect is just plain wrong. You would be asymptomatic, and dropping your virus load everywhere you go for some days. I don't see how anyone can logically question the public health arguments for slowing the rate at which EVERYBODY catches the virus to help the system to cope.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
robs1 wrote:
Sorry but the guardian will just take any stance that is opposed to Boris, all shutting down the country will do is delay the deaths, unless the shutdown is done at the right moment to slow the spread, the hard part and where the disagreements are is when that moment is. The government is trying to get the vulnerable to self isolate so it can spread among those who it is a minor infection, this will save many lives but only if the vulnerable lock themselves away.
The article neither agrees nor disagrees with the government, but details why the change in strategy happened - something which has been denied on this thread. Here's the same thing from a Telegraph live blog - aka the Torygraph.
everybody has to lock themselves away, to varying degrees, to flatten the curve.
I'm a healthy person with no underlying health issues. All my elderly relatives are currently self isolating and I don't have any friends that are elderly or have existing health problems. I'm currently carrying on like normal, as I'm not particularly worried about catching it myself, and am unlikely to pass it on to anyone who it would seriously affect. Until the government force me to "lock myself away" I have no intentions of doing it. Perhaps a selfish approach to some, but I can't just drop everything (including work!).
I think even in Italy people are being allowed to work - the point of segregating everyone is to stop people transmitting between social groups without knowing it. I'd say it's a bit selfish to not care about transmitting it because it won't affect you, yes.
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Quote:
I think even in Italy people are being allowed to work
Of course. Apart from all the health care workers, somebody has to sell them fuel. And keep some buses running. And people need power and water supplies. And telephones. Not to mention food! But "non essential" (e.g. the ones that make the millions of greetings cards we all seem to feel it necessary to send each other, or sell us new frocks,) might well be told to close down.
After all it is free
After all it is free
I can't search thoroughly at the moment but I think work is allowed still. If you can work from home, why not? I don't think people realise the threat this poses.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
(In Italy) all non-essential factories and workplaces are now being closed.
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
ecureuil wrote:
(In Italy) all non-essential factories and workplaces are now being closed.
Same in France. We've been couped up for a week. Not allowed out. Virtually nothing is open or running.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
@Pastorius, the graph shared by davidof is the one used commonly by the government and their experts, and most media outlets (it's on the BBC almost every day). I'm not saying it's right but it's being widely used. Haven't seen the one by the Imperial college before.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
Handy Turnip wrote:
@Pastorius, the graph shared by davidof is the one used commonly by the government and their experts, and most media outlets (it's on the BBC almost every day). I'm not saying it's right but it's being widely used. Haven't seen the one by the Imperial college before.
The graph showing the second peak was discussed at the first No.10 press conference, when the Chief Science Adviser talked about how modelling the data for an immediate lockdown resulted in a second peak of infection coinciding with usual wintertime peak pressure on the NHS.
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
@boarder2020, you are wrong, in that you can pass it on to others who may die. You are wrong that you may not have a serious illness (friends currently caring for 24yr old with no underlying health problems in ITU and reports of assorted junior anaesthetists in ICU on ECMO).
You are right that some will see your approach as selfish.
You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
The Imperial College study has been out for a few days now.
The effect will be that the NHS is totally overwhelmed. The UK has just about the lowest per capita number of physicians in the developed world (21/10000) behind countries like; Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Armenia and North Korea.
Likewise for hospital beds in total.
Likewise a very few ICU beds per capita.
So quite apart from COVID-19 the effects on all other aspects of medical care will be massive. No planned surgery where ICU might be needed; liver, heart and chest, spinal. Patients who need ICU in an emergency will have an even more massive struggle to find a bed.
Anesthetists and others who will be exposed to AGPs (aerosol generating procedures) in hospitals caring for the most severely unwell will, despite the precautions they will take, get it and some, despite being young will become critically ill. As has happened already - as is happening in the UK and as has happened elsewhere.
ICUs in London are full. The spread around the country is now hugely variable. But it will move out and the expectation is that by midweek the ICUs in the North West will be full. I think that earlier this week 17 patients were intubated in one 2 hr period in a London Hospital- that is just massive.
The second peak is not the usual pressure- it is a huge increase in resource.
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Let's look at some real numbers.
These are from: https://covid19info.live/
Yes, I know they're from some random bloke on the internet but the figures are the same as those reported on the news.
These are the latest figures for Italy:
The purple line shows the number of positive tests in a day and the red line shows the number of deaths. Currently, this figure is increasing at about 9% per day. If things continue like that then there will be no one left in under 2 months. Obviously, they can't and the curve will flatten off before then - but when?
For comparison, this is the current position with the UK:
Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
Anyway this is way off topic.
future of skiing;
it is already a sport for the older and the affluent.
Mind you things may change. Pandemics and wars have odd effects if the kill enough people, especially working age people, with labour shortage causing increases in wages. Deaths of the elderly will release inheritance and the available housing stock.
If the ski companies put up their prices even fewer people will be able to afford to go.
The airlines- who knows. They lease their planes- which are owned by banks. Guess the banks will get another socialised loss in less than 2 decades- nice one. The planes will not disappear.
I think the future of skiing is more influenced by; disposable income of younger people, climate change. That's it.
Pandemics do not last for ever and I think asking for opinions on snowheads about what will happen to this pandemic is silly. Unless an epidemiologist / microbiologist who does pandemic modelling is likely to answer (you never know). But skiing doctors tend to be more venal.
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
@altis, apples and pears.
Italy- testing lots of people.
UK never started testing contacts and stopped test symptomatic people (including contacts) over a week ago- unless hospital admission required.
Also- you cannot extrapolate beyond the data.
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Handy Turnip wrote:
@Pastorius, the graph shared by davidof is the one used commonly by the government and their experts, and most media outlets (it's on the BBC almost every day). I'm not saying it's right but it's being widely used. Haven't seen the one by the Imperial college before.
Yes. It is more for illustration. I'm sure the Imperial one is more accurate.
@boarder2020, you are wrong, in that you can pass it on to others who may die. You are wrong that you may not have a serious illness (friends currently caring for 24yr old with no underlying health problems in ITU and reports of assorted junior anaesthetists in ICU on ECMO).
Keep seeing stories like this. Yet to see any hard facts about younger people dying - youngest in UK seems to be in his 40s but suffering with MND and given 2 years left to live 2 years ago. Flu has still killed thousands more people this year, as have measles and yellow fever (sad as we actually have vaccines for these). Would be interesting to actually see what percent of people with the virus die, but of course impossible to know as most people that get it never get tested to confirm.
Any intervention has to balance the vulnerable with the economy and sanity of average person. Locking everyone away doesn't seem to be the solution imo.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
As for the ski industry I don't think it will change once the virus goes away. If anything I would expect a busier season as people try to make up for missed trips this year. Also if summer holidays are all cancelled people may have some extra savings for next winter.
It's also worth noting that all those critical care beds are in use anyway, they aren't sitting around empty waiting for COVID cases. It's not like that is "spare" capacity.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
@snowdave, I am not so sure about that. Form what I gather, private hospital bed paces are being bought for use in critical care. When Mrs a was in our County hospital a year ago, there were wards empty of beds. I bet they aren't now.
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
@achillies Unfortunately, Intensive Care Unit (ICU) occupancy for the UK is around 80% in 'normal' conditions. Private hospitals don't do ICU to any great extent. And obviously, you can't conjure highly qualified specialist and experienced ICU Teams out of thin air either. And 10,000 EU nurses and clinicians going home early in 2017 alone, thanks to Brexit, and not being replaced hasn't helped, either. This has been repeatedly pointed out by 'experts' as a major risk - but the Government view was that funding was 'appropriate' i.e. money was better spent on actual demand for other medical services, as opposed to contingency for some improbable crisis.
Experts then pointed out that a regional epidemic wasn't an 'improbable' event - we narrowly missed an Ebola epidemic in Europe: it got as far as Spain before being contained, fortunately. But in times of Austerity, where do you spend the money? On actual medical services people need now, or on 'wasted' contingency planning (which is labour-intensive and needs regular, cross-agency effort) and unused contingency facilities? I suspect that public opinion will switch to being prepared to pay more taxes for contingency investment, until after a couple of decades of nothing happening, funds and effort gets diverted elsewhere.
The corollary in the domestic space is to ask yourself about your own contingency planning: do you have a camping stove and gas in case you have a prolonged power outage? Do you have a month's food in storage which you rotate to keep in date, to cope with a supply chain problem? Do you keep spare petol in the garage in case there's another Tanker Drivers strike? And so on.
It all underlines the danger of politics by Slogan - something we get from all parties. The slogans are impossibly simplistic and don't reflect the choices an advanced society needs to make, accept, and live with. As well as the False Alternative so beloved of all politicians: the 'You can have elderly care or ICU funding, but not both' / 'You can have a great public transport or free uni/vocational training, but not both.' - all untrue of course, but a neat way of pitching interest groups against each other so you can just walk away from the issue.
Last edited by Ski the Net with snowHeads on Mon 23-03-20 11:30; edited 4 times in total
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
@achilles, wards of empty beds are typically because there's no staff or equipment to use them. Space and beds are easy/cheap. Doctors are very expensive, have a decade-long gestation process, and we can't import them any longer.
Bear in mind that the NHS is not testing doctors for COVID (despite what you may hear from politicians). Thus once a doctor has a suspected case in the household, they are out of action. Thus the number of available doctors is falling.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
Quote:
Keep seeing stories like this. Yet to see any hard facts about younger people dying - youngest in UK seems to be in his 40s but suffering with MND and given 2 years left to live 2 years ago. Flu has still killed thousands more people this year
Have you looked at the time scale on the charts - the Imperial College ones are most useful. We're still in March, and have just entered the grey shaded area. The current number of cases and deaths is a tiny fraction of what they'll be in the next few months. There is a general problem of perception, in that people are used to broadly linear change, rather than exponential change. Or, put another way, people extrapolate from what has already happened, not what is coming up.
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
The skiing industry should be focusing on getting its own house in order first regardless of what happens with corona.
Ski resorts have been spreading unabated like a virus chewing up the mountainside for far too long anyway.
Needs to be rules limiting the length of chairlifts and how many can be built in a given area and how many resorts can exist within a given distance of each other.
Chairlifts should be seen as primarily a way to get people to learn how to ski but people of a good ability should be encouraged to earn their turns, skin up and actuallyk now what it feels like to ski down real snow on a mountain rather than artificial groomed stuff.
The environmental cost of skiing with all the travelling and accommodation taken into account is unjustifiably huge. No one heeded the warnings about pandemics that have been there for everyone to see for decades - people are doing the same thing with climate change which will make Corona Virus look like a Sunday picnic. The skiing industry (including pressure from the actual skiers themselves) should be doing the responsible thing instead of constantly pushing for more numbers, more chairlifts, more crappy bars getting people tanked up, more profit.
Love skiing, hate the industry.
You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
Ionizingskin You've made me wonder if I was wrong about the big Domains winning-out in the end. Because as you say, these behemoth areas have a huge environmental impact and tend to have a massive footprint of cold bed accommodation around their base as well. The last big survey in Verbier returned an average seasonal occupancy rate of only 12.5%. It must be more like 5%-8% occupancy outside school holidays. Which is crazy: that's 11 out of 12 chalets and apartments empty. Perhaps the future will favour more old-fashioned locations where there's perhaps 'only' 50-60kms of runs accessed buy one gondola and 3-4 chairlifts/drags. Who knows?
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
@LaForet, sounds a possible outcome. If nothing else the large resorts with huge investment in infrastructure and lots of properties only used part of the year may be carrying huge fixed costs in terms of loan interest payments. They may be the ones mostly suffering from the loss of cashflow.
Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
Quote:
Do you seriously think there will be a season next year?
Covid will still be out there with no vaccine in sight
They just started human trials. Everything is being fast tracked. Would expect to see a vaccine in the next twelve months, of course there is no guarantee, depends on how this current vaccine works and if the virus mutates.
Quote:
Chairlifts should be seen as primarily a way to get people to learn how to ski but people of a good ability should be encouraged to earn their turns, skin up and actuallyk now what it feels like to ski down real snow on a mountain rather than artificial groomed stuff.
I don't personally disagree. But I don't think the "average" person going on a ski holiday would agree. I feel like it's already too late for Europe, there is just so much lift coverage. Still lots of unspoilt backcountry in North America though. Also plenty of off the beaten path places in the world for less developed ski touring (Kyrgyzstan is an example).
Quote:
The current number of cases and deaths is a tiny fraction of what they'll be in the next few months
I don't deny there is a problem, or that people will die. The question is balancing all these things. There is a big difference about a virus mostly killing elderly people that were sick and would have died in the next few months anyway and one that kills 50% of all the people it affects. I haven't seen the stats to accurately show where coronavirus is on the spectrum. There is a big difference between everyone being able to continue with their lives as normal and being completely locked away with fines for going outside (apparently true for ski tourers in France now). I'm not claiming I have the answers, it is a complex relationship with big ethical questions.
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
LaForet wrote:
Perhaps the future will favour more old-fashioned locations where there's perhaps 'only' 50-60kms of runs accessed buy one gondola and 3-4 chairlifts/drags.
Only if those smaller stations are quite high, maybe with a long gondola to take you from the carpark or accommodation.
The smaller station where I normally ski had long stretches this winter when the freezing level was 1000m above the top lift, even overnight.
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
@geoffers, Every time I see that graph, part of me thinks the 'do nothing' strategy looks like it makes more sense!
...They just started human trials. Everything is being fast tracked. Would expect to see a vaccine in the next twelve months, of course there is no guarantee, depends on how this current vaccine works and if the virus mutates.
With the current lockdown strategies, there will still be only a relatively small number of people who have been exposed and recovered, so with some immunity. Agree there could be a vaccine identified and tested by this time next year. But how long will it will take to manufacture, distribute and apply around 8bn doses to the world population? Or 5bn if 60% coverage is sufficient for herd immunity? Or even say 1-2bn for just the 70+ and health-compromised population?
For the annual flu vaccine, I think the current worldwide WHO target is for something like 2bn doses, to be produced over the six months after the precise strain for the year has been agreed (and not sure if the current manufacturing capacity has reached this target yet). Flu and other vaccines will continue to be needed, so only some of those resources will be available for Covid-19 vaccine production. It may be a few years before even the at-risk population can be vaccinated, let alone the rest of the population.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
@boarder2020, while death happened mostly to older people, the number in ICU are fairly evenly spread across all ages. Many younger patients are sick enough to require breathing help such as ventilators.
So if the health system reaches capacity, there may not be enough ventilators for even the young. Without ventilator, many of the young will die just as easily.
Of course, they can take the ventilator away from the old and give it to the young, which is what Italy is doing right now as they've exceeded their capacity.
So, your going about the business as usual may have the consequence of you getting sick and having to take a ventilator from someone old so you will survive. Whether that's selfish is for you to contemplate.
@boarder2020, while death happened mostly to older people, the number in ICU are fairly evenly spread across all ages. Many younger patients are sick enough to require breathing help such as ventilators.
Do you have any hard evidence to back this up? If enough people get infected of course we will also see some younger healthy people needing treatment, same is true for influenza. What I would be interested to see is actual numbers. If you could show a significant amount of healthy young people will need hospitalisation I would reconsider my views.
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
@boarder2020, "If you can't understand it without an explanation, you can't understand it with an explanation" Haruki Murakami 1Q84. But perhaps we should substitute can't with won't?
After all it is free
After all it is free
@boarder2020,
Quote:
They just started human trials. Everything is being fast tracked. Would expect to see a vaccine in the next twelve months
Excellent non-sensational daily discussion/updates from Dr. John Campbell here - today's states
Quote:
We should know if a vaccine works in 12 months; Approval could be a few weeks after that; 1 - 6 months for supplies; Late Summer 2021
@boarder2020,
Quote:
Do you have any hard evidence to back this up? If enough people get infected of course we will also see some younger healthy people needing treatment
“ Among 508 (12%) patients known to have been hospitalized, 9% were aged ≥85 years, 36% were aged 65–84 years, 17% were aged 55–64 years, 18% were 45–54 years, and 20% were aged 20–44 years. Less than 1% of hospitalizations were among persons aged ≤19 years (Figure 2). The percentage of persons hospitalized increased with age, from 2%–3% among persons aged ≤19 years, to ≥31% among adults aged ≥85 years. (Table).
Among 121 patients known to have been admitted to an ICU, 7% of cases were reported among adults ≥85 years, 46% among adults aged 65–84 years, 36% among adults aged 45–64 years, and 12% among adults aged 20–44 years (Figure 2). No ICU admissions were reported among persons aged ≤19 years. Percentages of ICU admissions were lowest among adults aged 20–44 years (2%–4%) and highest among adults aged 75–84 years (11%–31%) (Table).“
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
I would not get overly concerned with age specifically - it's a driver for clinical risk, but other things like long term tobacco use are significantly greater drivers. Evidence: differences in longevity between different geographic/ social areas; the existence of patient Risk Stratification.
In my experience in clinical statistics, age tends to come along with underlying conditions, but the conditions are the driver, not age itself. At this point the card I would not want to have would be COPD.
FAQ
Poster: A snowHead
