Coronavirus

[Alex 30383]

He caught the virus and didn’t die so he’s a hero 

[Isegrim 8870]

58 minutes ago, Alex said:

He caught the virus and didn’t die so he’s a hero 

If Francois catches it and survive he’ll demand a Purple Heart.

[PaddockLad 14584]

So this is the “new” narrative......looks to me like this is now just a battle to clear the government of any responsibility for  “herd immunity” ....

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8235979/UKs-coronavirus-crisis-peaked-lockdown-Expert-argues-draconian-measures-unnecessary.html

[Anorthernsoul 1221]

The Health Service Journal, published today.

 

By Andy Cowper20 April 2020

Too much of the media, like too many of the politicians, are undergoing the fine art of being found out. Writes Andy Cowper.

The only possible way to start this column is with a simple, short message to every person in the NHS at every level who have been working flat-out since the covid-19 crisis hit a poorly-prepared nation. Thank you very much: you have saved many lives and risked your own.

Without highly reliable data on new covid-19 infections of the kind that an effective testing regime would enable, we cannot be certain that the first wave is yet at its peak. But it seems probable, even though we know that covid-19 death numbers will continue to rise, as the sickest patients go through the system.
This feels like a valid moment for some reflection and review.

The first point on which we should reflect is that an NHS and care system badly hobbled and harmed by the pointless Lansley reforms and a decade of funding austerity has performed magnificently. This has largely been a series of local and regional triumphs, with national-level co-ordination and contributions of varying value.

Perhaps least helpful has been the worst of NHS England’s New Labour tradition of communications control-freakery and wannabe bad news management: this is something which neither helps nor works in a crisis, other than to make those trying it look silly and superfluous.

Front-line clinicians and managers worked together to deliver this, redesigning, redeploying and effectively remaking the system to cope with the peak of covid-19 demand. This NHS Providers briefing is a good overview, and summarises some shrewd, well-informed thoughts about where the system may go next.

There have been criticisms of the new Nightingale pop-up hospitals (particularly for London’s, with their recent demand for more clinical staff when patients are transferred there, where patient criteria and acuity are not yet clear). Nonetheless, their creation was fundamentally a sensible decision because the peak of covid-19 demand could easily have overwhelmed even the expanded and reconfigured traditional acute sector. We have been lucky there.

Now the Nightingale pop-ups offer us capacity and therefore choices about how we re-open more of the traditional capacity. They were a good decision, well-realised.

The media/political Rorschach tests

Many readers may have seen comment articles in national media asserting the inflexibility, lumbering, un-adaptable Stalinist nature etc of the NHS and wider public sector, and wondered on which planet their authors have been self-isolating. Answers on the back of a Boris Johnson fanzine, please.

Speaking of which, another diverting genre of national media content has been the recent comment pieces reflecting on how Mr Johnson’s character, illness and recovery tell us something about something (in reality, it’s the authors’ ideologies and desperate need for insider access).

Ventilator Blues

To these set of media/political Rorschach tests, we should add two detailed articles: the Sunday Times ‘Insight’ on the Government’s general handling of the crisis, and in the Financial Times on the specific topic of ventilators. (The Cabinet Office has taken the highly unusual step of responding to the Twitter thread highlighting this article.)

The Sunday Times piece shouldn’t be treated as gospel. There is some Cabinet infighting for Mr Johnson’s leadership rivals in play, and the identity of one of the main sources is screamingly obvious. General backside-covering is at work here too, but broadly speaking, these pieces are as accurate as they are damning about the government’s preparations.
And they are very damning indeed.
Professor Alison Leary makes telling additional points about the lack of consultation on PPE and ventilators.
There is, of course, complexity in this. As we saw in the debate among epidemiologists, there are diverse views on the science. Adam Oliver of LSE has done valuable public service for the Health Economics, Policy & Law journal. He observes that “it will be a long time before anyone knows what the best approach is/was for dealing with this pandemic (indeed, it may never be known, due to the multifarious factors that have to be balanced against each other) … given the complexity of the challenges that the pandemic poses, we cannot yet know – and we may never know – what is/was the most effective strategy for dealing with it.
“But we might speculate that it might have been most beneficial to very quickly close the borders to those coming from high risk countries, and to implement aggressive contact tracing/digital tracking”.
He rightly goes on to warn of the risks of “creeping authoritarianism and a surveillance culture” from digital solutions. Trade-offs are a very real thing in complex public policy.

(UPDATE: The Government has released rebuttals to both the Sunday Times and Financial Times stories, the detailed and lengthy nature of which may not be entirely unfamiliar to readers of the PM’s chief advisor Dominic Cummings’s blogs.)

The fine art of being found out

Caveats apart, the government’s revealed lack of competence is genuinely striking.
It is not, however, surprising. British media went to shit first. British politics followed.
Our media and our politics both suffered from the same rush towards cheapness and emotion, and away from expertise, experience and reflection. The inevitable consequence has been that much of both became a realm of entertaining, emoting, posturing and simpering.

It would feel almost cruel to point out our work experience health and social care secretary Matt Hancock’s copious form in this regard, were it not for his breathtakingly inappropriate comments to the Commons Health Select Committee meeting this week that “I would love to be able to wave a magic wand and have PPE fall from the sky in large quantities, and be able to answer your question about when the shortages will be resolved”.
“Magic wand”? At a time when patients and NHS staff are dying of this? That’s a grown-up’s answer, is it?

It is in the same league of shallowness as home secretary Priti Patel’s classic Non-Apology Apology that “I’m sorry if people feel there have been failings” over PPE supply.

These daily televised covid-19 briefings have been a fascinating exercise in letting the process of British political journalism get wide coverage. ‘The Lobby’ has not stood up well to daylight being let in on its magic: its pack-hunting, line-agreeing tendencies have become screamingly obvious.

Specialist health correspondents and regional news journalists have been notably the best questioners, but this format has given the politicians too much of an armchair ride. Questions have been too imprecise, too long and too overlapping: as a result, responding has become a learnable, performative skill; perfect for this generation of political automatons.

Too much of the media, like too many of the politicians, are undergoing the fine art of being found out. Good. They have chosen it, and they deserve it.

Three thoughts

The late Bob Sang was a great advocate for public and patient involvement in health, as well as a trusted confidant to many NHS leaders, whom he would often phone with ‘just three thoughts’. In his memory, here are three to conclude this column.

One of Bob’s policy taxonomies has been on my mind a lot recently: a four-quadrant matrix model of effectiveness (high-low) versus certainty (science-faith). It can be simply expressed as follows: ‘things we hope will work; things we know will work; things we hope won’t work; and things we know won’t work’.

We may need to use this repeatedly, as we plan for the next stages of these events. As I have previously written, there will be unsubtle government attempts to shift blame onto the experts and the NHS. The NHS may become vulnerable, as it starts the trajectory towards resuming a more normal pattern of operations and services.
The second is linked to this: once more normal service resumes, a lot of people are going to be scared of going to a hospital for a long time. This situation, alongside the huge RTT and non-RTT waiting lists, will need to be managed. Former NHS manager and management consultant John Bennett observes on this latter theme that there are clear consequences to and requirements from this: “total transparency on the data. Clinical risk management and harm process agreed. Then, sequencing of interventions. All with understanding of consequences. Don’t forget diagnostics … be ruthlessly simple, objective and transparent. Work together on the sequence of actions, and over-communicate”.

Third, but not least, is social care. covid-19 is taking a deadly if very predictable toll on the sector, the extent of which we will not know for some time. There will be consequences for the sector’s capacity, and indeed its risk-aversion as regards who will be accepted. Professor David Oliver’s 2017 article on the crisis in the sector bears re-reading.

However, it is perfectly plausible that the legal consequences of these death rates, on top of the sector’s assorted failing business models, including that of private equity, may mean that the NHS ends up having to nationalise social care more or less completely.

[TheGingerQuiff 2412]

4 hours ago, Renton said:

What, more densely populated than Hong Kong, Japan, or Germany? We had prior warning from Italy, we ignored it, literally fucking ignored it. Its ridiculous to say we needed hindsight not to go ahead with Chelrenham etc. What the government did was nothing short of murderous. 

 

I think it's ridiculous to say we should have locked down earlier when the NHS has had capacity to treat with those affected. I mean there is a balance. It's not economy or lives, you can't just shut down the country forever.

[Meenzer 14031]

The NHS has had capacity in part because pretty much everything non-urgent has been cancelled. If we'd locked down earlier, that might not have been quite as necessary. Ditto having to co-opt private facilities and the like.

[Dr Gloom 19816]

you can now buy a barrel of oil for a penny

[wykikitoon 16628]

A friend of mine was due another round of chemo that was put on hold. 

 

Another friend of mine who is a knee surgeon had all of his ops put on hold and he's been helping out in icu

[Dr Gloom 19816]

OIL HAS GONE NEGATIVE. DOWN 108% ON THE DAY. 

[Dr Gloom 19816]

 

[PaddockLad 14584]

5 minutes ago, Dr Gloom said:

OIL HAS GONE NEGATIVE. DOWN 108% ON THE DAY. 

 

4 minutes ago, Dr Gloom said:

 

There’s a case for posting this in the takeover thread too mate

 

 

[Dr Gloom 19816]

this feels like the moment lehman went under in 2008

[Renton 17746]

41 minutes ago, TheGingerQuiff said:

 

I think it's ridiculous to say we should have locked down earlier when the NHS has had capacity to treat with those affected. I mean there is a balance. It's not economy or lives, you can't just shut down the country forever.

 

The NHS has managed capacity brilliantly. I give the government credit for the Nightingale hospitals. But as Meenzer says, at what cost to other specialities? It will take decades to clear the back log and the collateral mortality might be as bad as the direct mortality. 

 

Its obvious why we should have locked down sooner. It increases exponentially in none lock down environments. If we had locked down sooner we could have protected the NHS, bought time for research, had adequate PPE, and ultimately got out of lock down sooner, which would have actually been much better for the economy. It goes back to the herd immunity strategy which was just catastrophically stupid. And if you go back to page 20 or so on this thread you will see that nearly all of us called it for what it was. That proves no hindsight was necessary. 

[Renton 17746]

40 minutes ago, Dr Gloom said:

OIL HAS GONE NEGATIVE. DOWN 108% ON THE DAY. 

 

I mean, what does this practically mean? People are paying other people to dispose of it? Cars are driving backwards now? I mean wtf? 

[wykikitoon 16628]

Oil producers are paying to dispose of crude

[ewerk 26292]

34 minutes ago, Dr Gloom said:

this feels like the moment lehman went under in 2008

It’s nothing like that. This is the expiration of the May futures contract. They’ll cut supply and everything will be tickety boo when we all get back to work.

[Renton 17746]

4 minutes ago, ewerk said:

It’s nothing like that. This is the expiration of the May futures contract. They’ll cut supply and everything will be tickety boo when we all get back to work.

 

Out of interest ewerk, is your background economics? I'm curious as you seem to know your stuff but your view on the economic side of this seems extremely optimistic and out of kilter with most economists and think tanks. 

[wykikitoon 16628]

1 minute ago, Renton said:

 

Out of interest ewerk, is your background economics? I'm curious as you seem to know your stuff but your view on the economic side of this seems extremely optimistic and out of kilter with most economists and think tanks. 

The OPEC have already agreed to cut production at the end of the month.  This will push prices back up later.  

[Kevin Carr's Gloves 3194]

6 minutes ago, Renton said:

 

Out of interest ewerk, is your background economics? I'm curious as you seem to know your stuff but your view on the economic side of this seems extremely optimistic and out of kilter with most economists and think tanks. 

Just read the Guardian and they all agree the price will rise again after the lockdown 

[ewerk 26292]

1 minute ago, Renton said:

 

Out of interest ewerk, is your background economics? I'm curious as you seem to know your stuff but your view on the economic side of this seems extremely optimistic and out of kilter with most economists and think tanks. 

I’m a master of many trades.

I’m not saying it’s going to be an instant recovery but we are well positioned to recover reasonably quickly. The banks are in a fairly strong position, people aren’t losing their homes, jobs are on furlough not disappeared. Some businesses won’t survive but for the majority it will be like turning the lights on again after a period in pitch black.

[Dr Gloom 19816]

15 minutes ago, ewerk said:

It’s nothing like that. This is the expiration of the May futures contract. They’ll cut supply and everything will be tickety boo when we all get back to work.

Brent is resilient, for the moment, but we'll see. 

[Dr Gloom 19816]

And I say resilient but it was $15 a barrel las time i checked  

[Dr Gloom 19816]

And with the Lehman comparison, it feels valid to me because it's an outrageous news event with huge implications for the global economy, jobs and financial markets. yeah, the oil price might one day recover, but fucking hell - these are not normal times. 

[Dr Gloom 19816]

i just watched the price collapse over 100% minute by minute. not going to forget that in a hurry. 

[Renton 17746]

5 minutes ago, ewerk said:

I’m a master of many trades.

I’m not saying it’s going to be an instant recovery but we are well positioned to recover reasonably quickly. The banks are in a fairly strong position, people aren’t losing their homes, jobs are on furlough not disappeared. Some businesses won’t survive but for the majority it will be like turning the lights on again after a period in pitch black.

 

I fundamentally disagree. Problem is this is global, every country in the world will go into recession at the same time. There will be very little demand to drive recovery. Already the average family are down £500 a month. Certain sectors are facing oblivion. In fact maybe most. Tourism and leisure, honestly think it may take a decade to get back. Retail, construction, a lot of manufacturing. Then add Brexit on top. Yipee.