Hotel Accommodation for Coronavirus isolation

[Arborbridge]

But it should only ever be expected to be an "ironclad rule" if ever other relevant condition in the two societies were identical.

You are correct - comparing countries is absolutely fraught with difficulties as there are so many variables and differences to account for.
We can all speculate and have our pet theories, but that is just what they are. Indeed, I've notice various protaganists (no doubt including me) seize on a particular news item which backs up a POV - but we are all guilty of being simplistic. We grab a "particular" and try to "generalise". .

No doubt, but then people claim that New Zealand has had good numbers because it "sealed its borders".

So it looks like sealing borders works except when it doesn't.

That exactly supports what I wrote.

[Lootman]

You are correct - comparing countries is absolutely fraught with difficulties as there are so many variables and differences to account for.
We can all speculate and have our pet theories, but that is just what they are. Indeed, I've notice various protaganists (no doubt including me) seize on a particular news item which backs up a POV - but we are all guilty of being simplistic. We grab a "particular" and try to "generalise". .

No doubt, but then people claim that New Zealand has had good numbers because it "sealed its borders".

So it looks like sealing borders works except when it doesn't.

That exactly supports what I wrote.

I agree, but there are some here who claim that the UK should have done what NZ did. That ignores all the other variables, as you say. My own view is that NZ is in such a unique and untypical situation that it doesn't necessarily have any lessons for us at this point.

[dealtn]

If this were Polite Discussions, I might suggest the key to defeating COVID is to look at what Boris and his team did here over the last 12 months, and do the opposite.

But it isn't, so I won't.

The problem is that we don't have a comparison with doing nothing, except for Sweden.

TJH

You think Sweden did nothing?

[Lootman]

If this were Polite Discussions, I might suggest the key to defeating COVID is to look at what Boris and his team did here over the last 12 months, and do the opposite.

But it isn't, so I won't.

The problem is that we don't have a comparison with doing nothing, except for Sweden.

You think Sweden did nothing?

Some work has been done on this in the United States, which is an interesting example because whilst it is all one country, each State is responsible for its own restrictions. Oklahoma has the fewest restrictions and California has the most.

This article talks about that, ranks the States in order of how lax the restrictions are, and then correlates that to cases. I will let you draw your own conclusions.

https://wallethub.com/edu/states-corona ... ions/73818

[zico]

The problem is that we don't have a comparison with doing nothing, except for Sweden.

You think Sweden did nothing?

Some work has been done on this in the United States, which is an interesting example because whilst it is all one country, each State is responsible for its own restrictions. Oklahoma has the fewest restrictions and California has the most.

This article talks about that, ranks the States in order of how lax the restrictions are, and then correlates that to cases. I will let you draw your own conclusions.

https://wallethub.com/edu/states-corona ... ions/73818

So you're arguing that we can't compare UK to New Zealand because they are too different, but we can compare Oklahoma to California because they're very similar?

[Lootman]

You think Sweden did nothing?

Some work has been done on this in the United States, which is an interesting example because whilst it is all one country, each State is responsible for its own restrictions. Oklahoma has the fewest restrictions and California has the most.

This article talks about that, ranks the States in order of how lax the restrictions are, and then correlates that to cases. I will let you draw your own conclusions.

https://wallethub.com/edu/states-corona ... ions/73818

So you're arguing that we can't compare UK to New Zealand because they are too different, but we can compare Oklahoma to California because they're very similar?

Basically, yes. The point with OK vs CA is that they are similar enough to be comparable, and yet different in important aspects that can then be reasonably compared to each other to see what works and is potentially transferable.

I do not think that anyone seriously believes that if the UK adopted NZ policies it would suddenly and miraculously solve the problem. But applying the more successful policies from some US states could help others, and we have seen Biden start to work on that.

[zico]

Some work has been done on this in the United States, which is an interesting example because whilst it is all one country, each State is responsible for its own restrictions. Oklahoma has the fewest restrictions and California has the most.

This article talks about that, ranks the States in order of how lax the restrictions are, and then correlates that to cases. I will let you draw your own conclusions.

https://wallethub.com/edu/states-corona ... ions/73818

So you're arguing that we can't compare UK to New Zealand because they are too different, but we can compare Oklahoma to California because they're very similar?

Basically, yes. The point with OK vs CA is that they are similar enough to be comparable, and yet different in important aspects that can then be reasonably compared to each other to see what works and is potentially transferable.

I do not think that anyone seriously believes that if the UK adopted NZ policies it would suddenly and miraculously solve the problem. But applying the more successful policies from some US states could help others, and we have seen Biden start to work on that.

If you think OK v CA is an acceptable match and UK v NZ isn't, we'll definitely need to agree to differ!!!!

As it stands, there are several countries that adopted the precautionary principle - NZ, Taiwan, China, Vietnam, Iceland - and they did much better than us (and similar countries) on all metrics - lives saved, economy protected, and freedoms protected. Either you accept the data showing their way was a lot more effective, or you have to discard all these countries on the grounds of "they're so incredibly different and/or we could never do that". Sweden's approach was at least a consistent strategy, but now clear it has failed, so either people have to acknowledge that, or alternatively to suddenly stop talking about Sweden (which seems to be the general approach from previous Sweden enthusiasts).

Of course, nobody is arguing that UK adopting NZ policies at this very late stage would be a miracle cure, in much the same way that nobody is arguing for eternal lockdown. But we do need to move to the precautionary principle, which for us will be not letting the virus rip once the over 60's are protected, because that'll mean tens of thousands of deaths amongst the younger age groups that haven't been infected so far, as well as giving the virus far more hosts to develop potential mutations that are vaccine-resistant.

[dealtn]

Of course, nobody is arguing that UK adopting NZ policies at this very late stage would be a miracle cure, in much the same way that nobody is arguing for eternal lockdown. But we do need to move to the precautionary principle, which for us will be not letting the virus rip once the over 60's are protected, because that'll mean tens of thousands of deaths amongst the younger age groups that haven't been infected so far, as well as giving the virus far more hosts to develop potential mutations that are vaccine-resistant.

Where are these "tens of thousands of deaths amongst the younger age groups that haven't been infected so far ..." going to come from?

See the official data which gives and age break down (and an >60 and <60 graph). 10-20% of the country has been infected, say? Multiplying the deaths to date by even 10, wouldn't even come close.

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details ... me=England

[XFool]

Some work has been done on this in the United States, which is an interesting example because whilst it is all one country, each State is responsible for its own restrictions. Oklahoma has the fewest restrictions and California has the most.

This article talks about that, ranks the States in order of how lax the restrictions are, and then correlates that to cases. I will let you draw your own conclusions.

https://wallethub.com/edu/states-corona ... ions/73818

Curb your enthusiasm!

"Oops! This IP address has been blocked due to too many requests. To unblock, please send your IP address via email to help@wallethub.com."

[Lootman]

So you're arguing that we can't compare UK to New Zealand because they are too different, but we can compare Oklahoma to California because they're very similar?

Basically, yes. The point with OK vs CA is that they are similar enough to be comparable, and yet different in important aspects that can then be reasonably compared to each other to see what works and is potentially transferable.

I do not think that anyone seriously believes that if the UK adopted NZ policies it would suddenly and miraculously solve the problem. But applying the more successful policies from some US states could help others, and we have seen Biden start to work on that.

If you think OK v CA is an acceptable match and UK v NZ isn't, we'll definitely need to agree to differ

Maybe an analogy would help. If you pick up a car magazine then you might expect to see a side-by-side comparison of a Golf versus a Civic, or a Beamer versus a Merc. You probably would not expect to see a comparison between a Roller and a steamroller.

My interpretation of the US example is that there are no clear correlations. The model is too complex and variable for simple glib solutions.

Curb your enthusiasm!

"Oops! This IP address has been blocked due to too many requests. To unblock, please send your IP address via email to help@wallethub.com."

I do not have any problem accessing it. What else do you do with that IP, I wonder . . . ?

VPNs are your friend.

[zico]

Maybe an analogy would help. If you pick up a car magazine then you might expect to see a side-by-side comparison of a Golf versus a Civic, or a Beamer versus a Merc. You probably would not expect to see a comparison between a Roller and a steamroller.

That's not a helpful analogy, just a made-up example where you are right and I am wrong!
Let's look at some facts.
Islands have a huge advantage in having more barriers to a pandemic. Britain and New Zealand are islands.
Good health care systems are also important. Both Britain & NZ have these.
Population density is important. Britain has much higher popn density.
So we'd expect NZ to do better than Britan - maybe even 4-5 times better. But they are doing 4,000 times better (Four thousand) than we are, and they're partying, eating out and hugging anyone they want. 25 deaths in 5 million people compared to our 100,000 deaths in 67 million people.

California has mega-cities, lots of migrant & illegal workers, much bigger % ethnic minority, and more high-density housing.
Oklahoma has farms, California has tourism.
California's population density is 5 times that of Oklahoma.
They really aren't a like-for-like comparison!

As this is a financial site, remember the Buffett quote "You only learn who's been swimming naked when the tide goes out". Nobody makes excuses for bad investors, so hard to understand why poor government responses to the pandemic are being excused.

[88V8]

I though Servodude nailed it when he posted somewhere, in re border closures, that if one wants to empty the bath, one not only has to pull out the plug but also turn off the taps.

World at One yesterday, on analysis of variant imports via our unclosed borders https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m000rllv @ 21:10
'through sequencing, what we have shown is a very clear signal of importations, both in Wave 1 and Wave 2...... largely through holidaymakers.... is a natural conclusion that border control is essential in control of the disease.....'

I do like Boris, I voted for him, but he has been pitched into a situation for which he has not the backbone.
Cometh the hour cometh the man, but he hasn't as yet.

V8

[dealtn]

'through sequencing, what we have shown is a very clear signal of importations, both in Wave 1 and Wave 2 ...

Yes. But you can't ignore exports too when considering "net trade".

[Lootman]

Maybe an analogy would help. If you pick up a car magazine then you might expect to see a side-by-side comparison of a Golf versus a Civic, or a Beamer versus a Merc. You probably would not expect to see a comparison between a Roller and a steamroller.

Islands have a huge advantage in having more barriers to a pandemic. Britain and New Zealand are islands.

There are islands and islands. NZ consists of islands but the more important factor is that it is a heck of a long way from anywhere else. Pretty much the only way to get there is to fly, and there are not that many flights. The UK on the other hand had 300 million annual movements in and out pre-Covid, by plane, ferry, train and road. The nearest other countries are very close rather than far away, and the UK is a transit hub whilst NZ is on the way to nowhere.

So we'd expect NZ to do better than Britain - maybe even 4-5 times better. But they are doing 4,000 times better (Four thousand) than we are, and they're partying, eating out and hugging anyone they want. 25 deaths in 5 million people compared to our 100,000 deaths in 67 million people.

Yes but NZ is also a prison right now. You appear to put zero value on that but I and others do not. You look only at the number of deaths whereas I look at the big picture.

Another huge difference you conveniently overlook is also a function of remoteness. The UK got the virus before we knew about it. NZ knew about it before they got it. That makes a massive difference because NZ could seal its borders and the UK never could have done until it was too late.

So I maintain there is nothing for the UK to learn from NZ. And I can come up with similar reasons why other examples you might provide are equally inapplicable. In fact I think the UK has a done a pretty reasonable job of responding to the virus whilst preserving freedoms. And by adapting its policies as new data has become available.

California has mega-cities, lots of migrant & illegal workers, much bigger % ethnic minority, and more high-density housing.
Oklahoma has farms, California has tourism.
California's population density is 5 times that of Oklahoma.
They really aren't a like-for-like comparison!

There are US cities with low infection rates and rural areas with high infection rates. It isn't all as shallow as you imply. The different approaches taken by states and counties is a material factor. In fact even within California there is a big difference in cases between the south (high) and the north (low), and that is at least partly down to different approaches taken at the county level.

[zico]

Maybe an analogy would help. If you pick up a car magazine then you might expect to see a side-by-side comparison of a Golf versus a Civic, or a Beamer versus a Merc. You probably would not expect to see a comparison between a Roller and a steamroller.

Islands have a huge advantage in having more barriers to a pandemic. Britain and New Zealand are islands.

There are islands and islands. NZ consists of islands but the more important factor is that it is a heck of a long way from anywhere else. Pretty much the only way to get there is to fly, and there are not that many flights. The UK on the other hand had 300 million annual movements in and out pre-Covid, by plane, ferry, train and road. The nearest other countries are very close rather than far away, and the UK is a transit hub whilst NZ is on the way to nowhere.

Isle of Man has no lockdown and is doing well. As is Japan, Taiwan - in fact, most islands are doing well apart from us.

[Mike4]

Islands have a huge advantage in having more barriers to a pandemic. Britain and New Zealand are islands.

There are islands and islands. NZ consists of islands but the more important factor is that it is a heck of a long way from anywhere else. Pretty much the only way to get there is to fly, and there are not that many flights. The UK on the other hand had 300 million annual movements in and out pre-Covid, by plane, ferry, train and road. The nearest other countries are very close rather than far away, and the UK is a transit hub whilst NZ is on the way to nowhere.

Isle of Man has no lockdown and is doing well. As is Japan, Taiwan - in fact, most islands are doing well apart from us.

Which reminds me, how is Guernsey doing? They had no lockdown, no pubs shut, nothing. Then they somewhat over-confidently held a massive music festival a couple of weeks ago which resulted in 160 or so cases and a lockdown. Not heard a peep about this in the media since.

[GoSeigen]

F'n most stupid policy ever. Putting a few thousand people in a hotel for two weeks is going to make sod-all difference to the virus which is already endemic in the country.

GS

[servodude]

F'n most stupid policy ever. Putting a few thousand people in a hotel for two weeks is going to make sod-all difference to the virus which is already endemic in the country.

GS

It's prevalent certainly but not necessarily endemic yet; if it were though, surely the policy of inaction that lead to that state might be a bit more f'n stupid than a belated attempt to restrict incoming novel variants?

[Lanark]

Just thinking about the numbers involved, there are about 10 big hotels near Heathrow with lets say 500 rooms each = 5000 rooms if all booked for this.

Heathrow normally handles 22 million passengers per year, 60,000 per day or 600,000 every 10 days.

So this plan looks like it could work only if running at less than 1% of normal capacity.

[Mike4]

Just thinking about the numbers involved, there are about 10 big hotels near Heathrow with lets say 500 rooms each = 5000 rooms if all booked for this.

Heathrow normally handles 22 million passengers per year, 60,000 per day or 600,000 every 10 days.

So this plan looks like it could work only if running at less than 1% of normal capacity.

I think you're looking at this down the wrong end of the telescope. The point of plan to quarantine incomers in hotels, is to suppress the vast number of people flying into the country (and bringing new variants of the virus with them), by making it highly inconvenient to come here. Hopefully down to about 1% of 'normal'.