General > General Technical Chat

Working From Home - Impacts of Coronavirus

<< < (250/447) > >>

Zero999:

--- Quote from: Someone on May 09, 2020, 12:40:39 am ---
--- Quote from: Zero999 on May 08, 2020, 04:36:25 pm ---
--- Quote from: EEVblog on May 07, 2020, 11:32:01 pm ---
--- Quote from: james_s on May 07, 2020, 08:30:56 pm ---That's the inherent problem with restrictions. When they work, it creates the impression that they were not needed. People don't think about the fact that it's because of the restrictions that there is not a high infection rate.
--- End quote ---

Sure, but how much? How much is due to the lockdown, and how much was simple hygiene, awareness, and staying home when you are sick?
It would be be incredibly foolish (indeed, demonstrably wrong) to say there is no contribution from the later things.
It's easy and logical to assume that the lock down is the thing that did all the wonders, but where is the direct A/B comparison data to actually prove it? (and no, don't compare different countries)

--- End quote ---
No one knows. It might also be due to less pollution, making people less susceptible to the disease.

Yes public awareness will help to prevent a second wave, even when governments ease restrictions, but my fear is people will become complacent. I don't know about Australia, but I think it will be awhile before we can safely reopen more risky areas of the economy such as hairdressers, nightclubs, pubs and restaurants.
--- End quote ---
In Melbourne the "shutdown" restrictions haven't been eased but measures of mobility (vehicle,bicycle,pedestrian counters, map service requests etc) have been slowly trending upward. There is noticeable complacency on the basic measures, and anecdotal examples such as people standing in groups at the shops to have a social chat.

How much impact would a request to improve hygiene have been without the simultaneous shutdowns/restrictions. Just asking people to wash their hands and be more careful would likely be a small impact, and have low uptake/compliance.

Trying to simplify the solution as improved hygiene is nonsense, the only strategies seriously considered include isolation/quarantine of suspected and known cases, and then consider social distancing and other measures on top of that.
"Impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) to reduce COVID19 mortality and healthcare demand"
https://dsprdpub.cc.ic.ac.uk:8443/handle/10044/1/77482
"Impact of COVID-19 in Australia – ensuring the health system can respond"
https://www.health.gov.au/resources/publications/impact-of-covid-19-in-australia-ensuring-the-health-system-can-respond

--- End quote ---
I think a similar thing has happened in the UK, perhaps to a lesser extent, but I think the government should wait and see what happens, before changing anything.

We mustn't forget the obvious: if R > 1 then exponential growth, if R < 1 then linear decay. It's very important not to lose sight of the fact that it's easy to slip and let cases run into the thousands per day, but very difficult to claw back to levels the health system can cope with.


--- Quote from: rodpp on May 09, 2020, 11:42:01 am ---
--- Quote from: Zero999 on May 09, 2020, 11:10:16 am ---
--- Quote from: rodpp on May 09, 2020, 10:34:04 am ---
--- Quote from: Zero999 on May 09, 2020, 09:29:38 am ---
--- Quote from: rodpp on May 08, 2020, 06:03:52 pm ---Although poor, I want to believe that data is above the noise floor.

--- End quote ---
It's more likely the figures just reflect what your government want you to believe.

--- End quote ---

I was referring to the global data available, used to compares Australia and Brazil numbers, where Australia controlled the transmissions and Brazil not, after a very similar starting.
No my government specific.

--- End quote ---
The numbers on those graphs are provided by the countries' respective governments.

--- End quote ---
Exactly. And they come from nurses and local doctors, to the cities health administration, then to all states/provinces, and are consolidated by federal government. It's similar in all countries.
If all that data is being manipulated, that are too much people involved. At least in democratic countries where the people have access to hospitals data, cities data and states/provinces data to check the consolidated federal data. One of those that is doing a great job in scrutinize that data is the press, as well as universities, research groups, etc.
I believe more in incompetence to deal with such pandemia, all around the world, as almost none country were prepared to deal with it. Included in this incompetence are inadequate informatics systems, not centralized data systems, fewer test kits than necessary, untrained staff, and so on.

And specifically in Brazil, what the government wants that the population believes is exactly the opposite of the picture shown by the available data.

--- End quote ---
I agree with all of that.

I'm not saying the government is directly manipulating the figures, but it's possible it's by indirect means such as: lack of testing, only recording deaths in hospital and of those who have actually tested positive, rather than on clinical signs and symptoms etc. which will all give lower figures than the real ones the government really don't want people to know about. Because testing and recording methods differ considerably between countries, it's impossible to make meaningful comparisons.


--- Quote from: paulca on May 09, 2020, 07:31:30 am ---The NHS(x) source code is out and there is of course controversy.
https://github.com/nhsx/COVID-19-app-Android-BETA/issues/16

Due to how BLE works on Android the phone asks for location permissions for the app.  Granting this permission allows location tracking by BLE using beacons with predetermined locations, but also allows GPS access, although the app does not directly access the GPS.  If I am reading things correctly.  However it does have remote pathways or JS injection that can reveal your precise device location.

I also note they do not publish the code for the central contact matching server.

--- End quote ---
People are understandably anxious about gathering data and tracking, but it's the only viable method of controlling it at this point, compared to strict blanket measures restricting people's freedoms. There's no way it will be made compulsory, but I hope enough people will use it for it to be effective.

Will it work without being continuously connected to the Internet? I hope so. I'd like to use it, but my phone is only ever connected to my own Wi-Fi. I don't' bother with a data package, because I'll hardly ever use it.

cdev:
This situation demands a huge global collaboration to fix this problem - nothing less. This risk may remain forever if we dont rise to the challenge now, cutting huge numbers of peoples lives short.

Here in the US (and in a great many other countries) this epidemic is only beginning in most of the country. There is no large scale testing program in place as there should be. There is no certainty that even if we develop a vaccine that it will work, it may be impossible to eradicate it totally from peoples bodies or - more likely, there will need to be new things learned before we are successful, like happened with HIV, so that the illness cannot remain in the body indefinitely like some other viruses do.

The thing we do need to understand is, we can't go back to living as we did in the recent past right now if we want to be successful. Thats basically giving up, and consigning large numbers of poor people to death, unless we change a great many things, ramp up our health care response. change the way we do a lot of things on a fundamental level.

This starts with the economics. Profiteering off this illness is not okay. What about vaccine cost? We need to vaccine 7.5 billion people in order to eradicate COVID-19. They also should figure out ways to test everybody, rapidly.

 The whole idea that they could award some kind of testing certificate to some people and deem them able to be certified as free of COVID-19 is lacking any scientific basis because we are not certain that illness conveys permanent immunity, that it cant come back, as far as I know the science behind that assumption is unclear.  Also, this illness in its current state often leaves people with permanent health issues. (Because in a subset of cases, it invades the brain.)

 Also the newer "G614" (which has a glycine at position 614) variant, is claimed to have a higher case fatality rate.

We need a better approach, one that doesn't run into this issue of the virus making some tiny change and getting more virulent.

All that said, I think we, the human race could do this, but not without some deep realizations that its not going to happen as long as people think its just going to go away on its own like some irresponsible, inexplicably important people are claiming.

We're way past that stage where it could or would. Its not helpful to pretend its business as usual as some are doing.

Especially, they shouldn't send people into employment situations (crowded workplaces and factories) that put people into danger.  Also, people should be able to wear whatever PPE they want in any work situation. Especially the underinsured and uninsured.



rodpp:

--- Quote from: Zero999 on May 09, 2020, 12:38:59 pm ---
--- Quote from: rodpp on May 09, 2020, 11:42:01 am ---
--- Quote from: Zero999 on May 09, 2020, 11:10:16 am ---
--- Quote from: rodpp on May 09, 2020, 10:34:04 am ---
--- Quote from: Zero999 on May 09, 2020, 09:29:38 am ---
--- Quote from: rodpp on May 08, 2020, 06:03:52 pm ---Although poor, I want to believe that data is above the noise floor.

--- End quote ---
It's more likely the figures just reflect what your government want you to believe.

--- End quote ---

I was referring to the global data available, used to compares Australia and Brazil numbers, where Australia controlled the transmissions and Brazil not, after a very similar starting.
No my government specific.

--- End quote ---
The numbers on those graphs are provided by the countries' respective governments.

--- End quote ---
Exactly. And they come from nurses and local doctors, to the cities health administration, then to all states/provinces, and are consolidated by federal government. It's similar in all countries.
If all that data is being manipulated, that are too much people involved. At least in democratic countries where the people have access to hospitals data, cities data and states/provinces data to check the consolidated federal data. One of those that is doing a great job in scrutinize that data is the press, as well as universities, research groups, etc.
I believe more in incompetence to deal with such pandemia, all around the world, as almost none country were prepared to deal with it. Included in this incompetence are inadequate informatics systems, not centralized data systems, fewer test kits than necessary, untrained staff, and so on.

And specifically in Brazil, what the government wants that the population believes is exactly the opposite of the picture shown by the available data.

--- End quote ---
I agree with all of that.

I'm not saying the government is directly manipulating the figures, but it's possible it's by indirect means such as: lack of testing, only recording deaths in hospital and of those who have actually tested positive, rather than on clinical signs and symptoms etc. which will all give lower figures than the real ones the government really don't want people to know about. Because testing and recording methods differ considerably between countries, it's impossible to make meaningful comparisons.

--- End quote ---

Not meaningful in absolute numbers, but the trend can be observed.

For example in the graph below, where we can see the consequences of the brazillian relaxing isolating measurements while Australia, with a similar scenario, remained adherent to the isolation. Now Australian can afford slowly relaxing and Brazil must go to lockdown:



cdev:
A lot, perhaps most businesses are based on activities which I suspect may not be popular in a post COVID-19 environment. Like anything that puts people together in large numbers, especially indoors, or many kinds of purchasing that I think people not knowing how their economic prospects are, seem unlikely to pursue.

But who knows, people also desperately crave human contact. What do I know?

I suspect that the risk when you are outdoors is likely to be much lower than indoors, especially if it is sunny and bright, unless you are literally right next to people or touch them.

Also, in some countries families all live together three generations under one roof. That would seem to be a dangerous situation for viral infection because kids are efficient spreaders of this virus it seems, even though they rarely show symptoms. When school is in session they pick it up at school and bring it home. The same applies to large workspaces. All schools and large workplaces should install UVC lamps and at night, or when they are closed, they could flood the area with UVC to disinfect it.

SiliconWizard:
So is this the end of the world yet?

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod