5 ms·

>only about 20% of hotel stays are international. Over 60% here in London. https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:xnYJiWZXLNwJ:https://www.lond

>only about 20% of hotel stays are international. Over 60% here in London. https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:xnYJiWZXLNwJ:https://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/visitor_accommodation_-_working_paper_88.pdf+&cd=10&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk&client=ms-android-sonymobile-rev1 https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:xnYJiW... >its far, far beyond schools. I was only using that as an example of one of the things that will cause a big change in people's seriousness in viewing the epidemic the government hasn't done yet. >they're all getting clobbered, without 'total shut down' and it's going to hurt. And a complete lockdown is going to hurt even worse, which would happen when the health service gets overrun. The issue is that this can happen at any time and without much warning. Our visibility is lagging behind the spread of the virus by at least the incubation period. By the time the latest batch of people symptoms end up in hospital, our response is already behind the curve. The UK has been testing more than a lot of European countries but it is trailing places like South Korea and Taiwan by a wide margin.

nicoburns 7y ago
> which would happen when the health service gets overrun. But the point is to prevent the health service from getting overrun. By the time it is, it's too late because you'll already have an order of magnitude more people who are infected but not yet showing symptoms.
- starfallg 7y ago
  Yeah, for sure, but how are you able to predict when the health service will be overrun when the current testing is lagging spread by at least a few day, if not more. But the time the sirens go off, it's already too late.
  - nicoburns 7y ago
    Well look at Italy. In terms or reported numbers, we're about a week behind when their health service was overrun. So I'd say within 1-2 weeks max. Which is why we ought to be putting in restrictions now.
    - starfallg 7y ago
      Yes, my point is that this is being ignored by the government as it lends its ears to behavioural economists. We have no good way to measure the CoV spread beforehand so being prudent and proactive with the response is better than to delay introducing additional measures until it is absolutely necessary because you won't know it until it hits you and then it's too late.
    - dTal 7y ago
      You are correct, but the government is saying "4 weeks". Terrifyingly. UK is completely unprepared for what's about to hit.

nicoburns 7y ago

> which would happen when the health service gets overrun. But the point is to prevent the health service from getting overrun. By the time it is, it's too late because you'll already have an order of magnitude more people who are infected but not yet showing symptoms.

starfallg 7y ago
Yeah, for sure, but how are you able to predict when the health service will be overrun when the current testing is lagging spread by at least a few day, if not more. But the time the sirens go off, it's already too late.
- nicoburns 7y ago
  Well look at Italy. In terms or reported numbers, we're about a week behind when their health service was overrun. So I'd say within 1-2 weeks max. Which is why we ought to be putting in restrictions now.
  - starfallg 7y ago
    Yes, my point is that this is being ignored by the government as it lends its ears to behavioural economists. We have no good way to measure the CoV spread beforehand so being prudent and proactive with the response is better than to delay introducing additional measures until it is absolutely necessary because you won't know it until it hits you and then it's too late.
  - dTal 7y ago
    You are correct, but the government is saying "4 weeks". Terrifyingly. UK is completely unprepared for what's about to hit.