Pandemic 24-05-2020

2 weeks on from end of lockdown - Sunday

There would normally be a PM's briefing but there is nothing like this in the media pages today. I sense the difficulty now is in picking up the pieces assuming the pandemic is disappearing. The lockdown has certain still applicable rules but a reassessment is on the cards which needs words yet has few followers. Most workplaces have remained shut and schools do not wish to carry out instructions that are vague. Only last week they seemed to be opening in June with social distancing but now with June one week away it looks promising to change the advice by media accounts of the vanishing virus (note 1). Some sport was encouraged like Tennis and any non organised pursuits this week. Professional cycling seems to be in action again ( note 2) There have been several articles about the virus not coming back with is it/isn't it debates (note 3). But these need to be countered by common sense really . Across the whole world reaction has been profound and most people understand that viruses are often related to each other as a new strain. There is even talk of the supposed masterminds of the World Health Organistion feeling they overplayed the death count without a lockdown. Has it really gone I would ask? Was it really a virus or in fact have we not really understood what has happened and are floundering above a global infratructure largely called to a halt and a success by doing so. It strikes me the idea the death toll was overestimated is the problem of the media to resolve if it wishes and hopefully a few government responses will come out too in the short term before we stop over worrying if that is what it is and go back to most normal social and working activities.

The telegraph article uses the name of Professor Neil Ferguson of Imperial College who along with the advice of Professor Michael Levitt of Stanford University, a nobel laureate in Chemistry of 2013. "The Imperial College professor’s modelling, a major factor in the Government’s apparent abandoning of a so-called herd-immunity policy, was part of an unnecessary “panic virus” which spread among global political leaders, Prof Levitt now tells the Telegraph."(note 4)It is sad to see him quoted as saying the real virus was the panic virus.

I am not sure a couple of fellas could make a global lockdown. We hare in Britain observed the Italian lockdown for a whole month before it really emerged the virus was spreading here too to my memory. Daily reports of a nation especially in the North,in fear. Then we packed our bags and joined on medical evidence and numerous deaths have followed largely in the elderly age group. Japan who have an elderly population have kept deaths to 784(note 5). "So far, Japan – a country of 126 million people with one of the biggest elderly populations in the world – has confirmed 16,433 infections and 784 deaths, out of a global death toll of more than 300,000 people." The journalist here explains how the lockdown in Japan were partial and slow to begin with but focused on mass events being cancelled, something which if that was slow did not happen here for another 3 weeks. He cites a 4 day horse racing festival attendance of 150,000 at Cheltenham (10th to 13th March). It was outdoor and that is probably key to why it went ahead I imagine. I scrapped my car a few days later (Monday 16th March) and one week later again it was lockdown officially (23/03/2020).

Quite a lot has been made of the environments that covid 19 spreads in. Like many viruses and enclosed space, thus indoors with a high density of people is somewhere to avoid. Then American studies have alluded to abbatoirs as a dangerous environment which were kept open as key industries. The figure across 220 sites is 17,000 infections and 66 deaths. Now the investigative journalism has moved to Germany (20-05-2020) (note 6) It does seem where you look you can find some figures for agreement so it serves to work out how such high figures could be. With testing the figures are very very easy to be misrepresented since we know for a fact here there is little or no testing available. We do not have a thorough testing program at all. A large number of cases can be from a large number of tests and the death rate is significant This figure stands at $${ 66\over 17000 x 100}=0.39 % $$ 4 in 1000 people.

Considering the key plant which was in South Dakota, processing company Smithfield had in one large plant after 3 weeks from the first known infection $${ 644\over 3700 x100}=17.4 percent $$ This plant is then claimed to have led to have caused many of the community infections( note 7). However over 3 weeks I cannot see how this is known. Whatever Ro is it had a larger pool to infect and made a larger group inside the plant and so is an underestimate but taking 3 weeks the whole plant was exposed as ro=1 the entire plant is infected by day 13. In 21 days 17.4% were infected so Ro is significantly below 1.

If the Smithfield plant was a rough base for infections then 17.4% chance to catch x .39% result of death and 2 to 3 deaths in that plant. Overall the percentage risk of dying would be 2.2 in 1000 or 0.022%. This seems a low figure but is higher than the general population by about double here in Britain and does not include any retired people, though of course there will be underlying health conditions which do not stop you going to work. Without thorough testing the infection figures are a guess but the deaths of course are not and would be tested so it is still 2.2 versus the UK figure of tested (therefore artifically raised higher as it does not include any non infected people) of $${ 32666 x 100\over 148724 }=21.96 percent for England $$ $${ 36675 x 100\over 257154 }=14.26 percent for the UK $$ Globally the WHO states $${ 342,104 x 100\over 5,311,089 }=6.44 percent $$ So we in the UK are undertesting or have a highly deadly strain. The figures are very hard to work with. In fact base on the figures we have a nearly one in 4 chance of dying in England or 1 in 7 in the UK and 1 in 15 Globally. So the spread is much lower than forecast and has been contained or is the danger very high. The figures suggest the danger is very high and the spread is not as rapid a Ro>1 once social distancing is in place. Also the average deaths is quite consistent from 10% initially to 15% latterly of confirmed cases here. I am thinking many people have been assymptomatic or mild. Those of us like this do not appear on the chart.

The spread is not so much slowing down as running on with still half the mean number of daily infections being recorded. I hazard a guess that the mean is 600 deaths here so far. If the figures keep reducing this will fal dramatically in the end. We do not meet in public very much so the slow down should be pronounced after 2 weeks so why is this.

The virus has an ability to remain for longer and build up in a person due to most antibodies containing it but not getting rid of it. Why are people saying it is going away when over 200 deaths is a very high number of people and the proportion of confrimed infections is still at least 5 times that, overall in the UK it is at least 10 times that. Sadly this suggests on the basis of flattening the curve that Scotland and Wales have less contact with the virus and unless it is contained by medicine cannot expect to come out of lockdown like England based on any sort or prior infection based immunity until later.

This in no way matches the Sheffield result of vanishing, are they wanting to coax people out?