shurlock

What year is she in? I don’t see how you could study a subject like medicine online. At best they might partly restructure the curriculum and bring forward/load up on the more academic parts of the degree while students are away from uni/hospital but that’s less than ideal and obviously unsustainable over the long-term.

That's a worst case scenario - in other words, its not inevitable; its simply an extreme modelling assumption (usually to help with stress testing and designing more resilient policies). That's not the same as saying that 60-80% will be infected regardless of what government does or the behavioral changes that the public makes.

The context for the 60% herd immunisation figure is completely different. Its basically an estimate of how many people would need to be infected for the country to achieve herd immunity. Its a statement about what is required to make herd immunity work (fwiw an approach that has been debunked). It doesn't say that 60% will be infected. Its also based on the assumption that the government takes a hands-off, laissez-faire approach and lets the virus 'rip'. Again that's very different from saying that 60% of the population will be infected regardless whether the government intervenes, closes schools, introduces social distancing and takes other proactive measures.

Very interesting. Science is a pretty hands-on subject, so hard to see how you can teach a full course. I assume the platform supports only limited video - you can't literally see all your students at the same time, never mind pick up on their nonverbal cues? As you say, online platforms are serviceable if students are engaged (whio if anything require less help); but for others, they are pretty clunky. Wish you the best of luck!

Where did you read it? Because all I've been able to find is the quote above and while it is superficially similar, it doesn't really support what you say. But perhaps you're referring to a different source in which case it would be good to know what it is. Its a very startling stat if correct.

This? “Gabriel Leung, the chair of public health medicine at Hong Kong University and a leading health expert during the 2002 SARS outbreak, told The Guardian that the deadly virus known as Covid-19 “could infect 60 percent of global population if unchecked.” But he also urged caution. “Is 60-80 percent of the world’s population going to get infected? Maybe not,” Leung told The Guardian. “Maybe this will come in waves. Maybe the virus is going to attenuate its lethality because it certainly doesn’t help it if it kills everybody in its path, because it will get killed as well.””

What plans does your school have for learning from home? What subject/age do you teach?

Interesting. I had not seen this. Source?

I’ll be using sterling banknotes if I run out of loo roll.

@epidemiologistITK? or @WTOrumourmill? @247pandemicUK? I thought the transfer window was bad enough.

Or he read today's guardian.

It’s more than that. A vast amount of physical and regulatory infrastructure needs to be in place by the end of the year - even assuming there’s a Canada style deal, up to 50,000 customs alone need to be recruited and that’s the tip of the iceberg. Meanwhile even before the virus hit there were grave doubts whether the new trade arrangements for NI would be ready on time. Never mind all the complex regulatory agencies that the UK has set up as it will no longer be a member of EASA, Eurotom, EMA etc. Take EASA (European Union Aviation Safety regime), industry has estimated that it will take a decade to establish an equivalent authority with all the expertise of EASA in addition to higher costs. Of course all this assumes significant and seemingly intractable policy differences can be overcome by June when the UK has said it will consider walking away from talks if insufficient progress has been made. With coronavirus, businesses in UK & EU are facing the greatest challenge in decades. Temporarily parking one source of uncertainty over which the UK has control makes obvious sense. Hitting businesses with more uncertainty and a possible no deal that would put greater stress on already disrupted trade links, supply chains and workforces doesn’t. There’s a reason why sterling has tanked against not only the dollar but also the euro: Brexit has left the UK in a particularly vulnerable position to deal with shocks like coronavirus (N.B. most of our medical supplies will be in dollars or euros). This discussion has exposed some posters for what they really are.

https://www.ft.com/content/40272e84-68ff-11ea-a3c9-1fe6fedcca75

What an escalation. And they say a week is a long time in politics. It must be an eternity for government health policy

edit

Let’s be clear I wasn’t bringing the age of Brexiters into things pal. Not sure how you worked that one out. I was simply making a joke about the health complications caused by extremist Brexiters getting angry, stressed and depressed over any delay in the negotiations. As for the rest of your post, it’s a characteristic combination of economic ignorance (why did the currency markets react so negatively when Johnson set the December 31 deadline which in your book increased certainty?) and muddled delusion (what has the remoaner establishment got to do with anything if Johnson and his 80+ majority decide its in the country’s interests to extend the transition period?).

He was very opposed to Johnson’s Withdrawal Agreement at first and then swung behind it and was like a giddy toddler by the end of things, so who knows. But he’s really boxed himself in on this one, so perhaps he won’t fold. There’s no shame in changing your mind. Far from it if it’s the pragmatic thing to do. Certainly better than looking like a complete lunatic

In the UK?

Calm down Les it’s not good for the blood pressure. All reasonable people can agree that an extension is desirable in the circumstances and that at this unprecedented time the last thing we need is additional uncertainty and distractions. I hope you can temporarily put your dogmatism to one side pal.

The announcements get lots of things right; but its unclear why some sectors are being targeted with additional support and not others when they too will be facing similar pressures. Also more needs to be done to support family incomes directly, especially those who are being laid off or are renting - see the Resolution Foundation's response among others.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/03/17/uk-prepares-seek-eu-trade-talks-extension-coronavirus-crisis/ Didn’t take long. If it is the case, it’s entirely sensible in the circumstances. Little Les will be angry -who knows a delay could have a higher mortality rate among the Brexiter swivels than coronavirus. But it’s obviously the right decision.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/16/opinion/coronavirus-economy-debt.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

Has Johnson called you up yet to help him make 30,000 ventilators from scratch? I hope two weeks is enough time.

If true, it’s a good thing that the government u-turned or escalated it’s response -depending on your perspective- as quickly as it did. Still it’s a concern you can’t get a routine test done as quickly as you can in countries like South Korea that are leading the way.