Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Is UK government insane or genius?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 772 posts

Re: Ask HN: Is UK government insane or genius?

#291

Post by tuna-piano »

throwaway936482 wrote: post #94

This strategy is not insane only if there is also a concerted effort to protect those who are vulnerable while the virus spreads. The problem is there isn't one. At all. None. Zip. Zero. Some care homes are, off their own back, banning visitors but apart from that the old and the vulnerable are not being asked to self isolate or engage in social distancing, only those who have symptoms themselves are being told to se…

Unless the old people homes have live-in staff and are careful with deliveries, then I don't see the difference between a visitor and a staff member. Scary.

Re: Ask HN: Is UK government insane or genius?

#292

Post by colin_fraizer »

lozenge wrote: post #282
edouard-harris wrote: post #239

Here is a rule of thumb that will be familiar to many who manage risk in a professional capacity: The time to get creative is when you face a capped downside on the one hand, and an uncapped upside on the other. The time to get conservative is when you face the opposite condition. The reason for this rule is that creative policies almost never work; but when they work, they have a much higher chance of working extrao…

(warning: conspiracy theory, but at least an original one) I'm thinking this only makes sense in the context of Brexit. Brexit will be a massive hit to the competitiveness of British businesses... somebody in government is hoping to counteract this by taking an approach different to the rest of Europe. If the UK's approach works, it will end up economically ahead of all the other European countries, something like th…

Conspiracy theory from an opposite point-of-view: killing off a bunch of elderly people with this experiment will save the NHS a fortune.

Re: Ask HN: Is UK government insane or genius?

#293

Post by starfallg »

knzhou wrote: post #209

Their reasoning is that if the only things you can do are China-style lockdown or nothing, then the disease will just resume exponentially growing the second lockdown ends, so it's pointless to do it at all. While that may be technically right (under some optimistic, unverified assumptions, e.g. no reinfection), it's a false dichotomy. Singapore, Hong Kong, and South Korea aren't under lockdown, they're stopping the…

> Singapore, Hong Kong, and South Korea aren't under lockdown, they're stopping the spread by just having good testing and case tracking capacity, and good hygiene.

You forgot Taiwan, who is faring much better than all three of the countries you mentioned.

Re: Ask HN: Is UK government insane or genius?

#294

Post by fefb »

Okay about the mortality rate. What about the hospitalization rate? Is it low enough to do not break the health system ? And about the smokers? diabetics ? Cancer patients ? And about the old one already hospitalized ? The kids ? And about the 0.3% that will dye ? How many young people will die in a old population ? And about the doctors and nurses extra exposed to the virus from different people?

Re: Ask HN: Is UK government insane or genius?

#295

Post by lozenge »

9HZZRfNlpR wrote: post #259
cirrus-clouds wrote: post #135

Here is a discussion on Channel 4 on the approach taken by the UK government. https://youtu.be/C98FmoZVbjs?t=590 Debating are: - John Edmunds: a professor in the Centre for Mathematical Modelling of Infectious Diseases, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine - Tomas Pueyo: his modelling of the pandemic has gone viral on the web: https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-act-today-or-peop... During the debate,…

Won't all the Brits be banned from entering all the countries in the world for very very long if they have such a big change of carrying the virus?

If you get it, you're only highly infectious for 7 days, and infectious for 30-60 days. After that, you might have antibodies for (some variants of) the virus, but you won't have the actual virus.

Re: Ask HN: Is UK government insane or genius?

#296

Post by rusk »

tuna-piano wrote: post #284

I don't understand how Europe+US governments (and epidemiologists!) say things like "It's basically inevitable that 40-70% of our population gets infected overtime". It feels like the Western countries gave up without even trying. But yet, there's at least temporary evidence among several Asian countries (South Korea, China, Singapore, Taiwan, Hong Kong) that it's possible to get the R0 In the US we spent only $7B to…

The voters have the leaders they deserve

Re: Ask HN: Is UK government insane or genius?

#297

Post by foobarbazetc »

edouard-harris wrote: post #239

Here is a rule of thumb that will be familiar to many who manage risk in a professional capacity: The time to get creative is when you face a capped downside on the one hand, and an uncapped upside on the other. The time to get conservative is when you face the opposite condition. The reason for this rule is that creative policies almost never work; but when they work, they have a much higher chance of working extrao…

It’s already too late. They’re on the Italy path.

This “herd immunity” thing is nonsense. So much so that doctors and scientists are warning against it:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/14/coronavirus-nh...

Re: Ask HN: Is UK government insane or genius?

#298

Post by simtel20 »

arcticbull wrote: post #254
simtel20 wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have a .2% mortality chance once you exhibit symptoms, right? That's much greater than no risk.

That 0.2% is in line with the flu, and also, generally is attributable to those with comorbid conditions, especially ones that compromised immunity. If you're young and healthy, it's not 0.2% -- it's much lower. If you're young and unhealthy it's not 0.2% -- it's much higher. There's no such thing as no risk. I'm putting myself at risk of all sorts of things by leaving the house.

Your reasoning seems off. From what I can find, in your age group, the mortality rate for covid-19 after exhibiting symptoms is 0.2%. This is about equal to the rate for the overall flu mortality rate which includes those who have a higher risk.

Your dismissal of "everything puts you at risk" is common when we're young, but it is misplaced as well. I suspect you know and understand that a lot of background risk is actively reduced by the actions we take, personally and professionally (justice system, laws, streetlights, seat belts etc.) so while you may be speaking what you feel, if you know better you may want to reconsider stating it as though it was a fact.

Re: Ask HN: Is UK government insane or genius?

#299

Post by toohotatopic »

macca321 wrote: post #177
throwaway936482 wrote: post #94

This strategy is not insane only if there is also a concerted effort to protect those who are vulnerable while the virus spreads. The problem is there isn't one. At all. None. Zip. Zero. Some care homes are, off their own back, banning visitors but apart from that the old and the vulnerable are not being asked to self isolate or engage in social distancing, only those who have symptoms themselves are being told to se…

According to Peston: "elderly to be quarantined at home or in care homes for four months, in "wartime-style" mobilisation to combat Coronavirus." https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1238917834111156231

How do you quarantine them if they need support from nurses and caregivers who aren't quarantined?

Re: Ask HN: Is UK government insane or genius?

#300

Post by JetSetWilly »

hyko wrote: post #170

They are neither; they are making difficult decisions on the basis of limited information across multiple disciplines. The main aim is to prevent the NHS from being overwhelmed, which would be a humanitarian disaster. A secondary aim is to prevent bringing economic life to an end in the UK, which would also be a humanitarian disaster. We are at most about five months into this pandemic; to suggest we know what strate…

> the UK already pursues a strategy of herd immunity regarding chicken pox (along with other countries), despite the availability of a vaccine: http://www.ox.ac.uk/research/everything-you-need-know-about-.... I disagree with that strategy but I am not qualified to make that decision on behalf of a country, and I'm glad it's not my responsibility to do so.

The UK does not vaccinate against chickenpox because it judges that the overall public health consequences are worse if you vaccinate than if you don't - it would increase the frequency of shingles which is much worse than chickenpox.

Post reply on HN