Showing posts with label Jacinda Ardern. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jacinda Ardern. Show all posts

Suppression vs Mitigation, Acceptable Horror, Externalised Costs - problem solving for whom?


"We need to address the societal well-being of our nation, not just the economic well-being: our people are telling us that politics are not delivering and meeting their expectations. This is not woolly, it’s critical.”  Jacinda Ardern

Amrit Lohia tweeted the following:

Giving everyone "access to water and food" requires socialism. Eradicating SARS-CoV-2 also requires a shift to a socialist model where we recognise our responsibility to protect each other. Tagging in @coreluminous who can probably explain this better than I can.

I replied:  I think you have distilled it into its purest form.

"where we recognise our responsibility to protect each other." 

That is the essence of the situation with regards to COVID, Climate Change, pollution, poverty, environmental degradation, Racism, Misogyny etc.

Then I wrote some more.

I would call it a pro-social model rather than ideological Socialism.


Management of the shared commons implies duty of care to all who share the commons. This demands that decisions on policy and practical implementation are grounded in equity and mutual aid and are based on evidence rather than upon ideological belief or the opinion of any one group.

Externalised Costs
.

Costs incurred by producers or consumers any other actors acting within the shared commons, that are not resolved, that are passed on to others who bear the burden are anti-social, profoundly so.

This is where I part with existing ideological Socialism which seeks equitable pay and conditions for all, whilst still allowing externalised costs to be accrued. Externalised costs is  the root of all the problems we face, globally. 

Resolution will be of that issue will be complex, that's well understood. 

That said it is attachments to power and status which make it more complicated than it needs to be.

Thus a reckoning with power and status lies ahead, it cannot be avoided.

Does this reckoning have to descend into a power struggle?

Only if those who hold asymmetric power choose to make it so.

Those who hold positions of power and status could choose to share that power, and they could manage it slowly enough to empower the corrective changes required that would protect us all as we move through this phase.

That choice is real.

To recap:

Elimination of community transmission is possible.

It's really simple. Virus needs to date a new human host, or it dies out. It is a complex operation to support a population to do EoCT.  Professor Gabriel Scally is a highly respected, deeply experienced public health professional and scholar. He is in no doubt whatsoever that elimination of community transmission is the best possible strategy under the current circumstances, where in the UK we are still at less than 20% population infected, and globally much less than that. There is an immense amount of harm to prevent, to avoid and it makes no sense to push the global population into harms way.



What complicates it are matters of power, wealth and status. That much is clear.

1. there's a world of difference between eradication and elimination of community transmission.


2. New Zealand is not in complete isolation from the rest of the world. Tourism is not an essential human activity. Quarantine can manage necessary travel.

3. Proof of concept is 1.8 billion people who were not faced with multiple national level lockdowns, health care and economic harms over extended periods. 

4. Proof of concept is variants from areas that rejected elimination strategy arriving and breaking through quarantine systems.

5. Australia’s official COVID-19 strategy, suppression, doesn’t have an epidemiological definition. 

“Suppression isn’t a known technical term,” says epidemiologist Raina MacIntyre, head of the Biosecurity Program at the Kirby Institute and Professor of Global Biosecurity.

6. “It’s either elimination or disease control.”

‘Disease control’ means reducing the number of cases to a locally acceptable level, but community transmission may still occur. 

7. In England that successful disease control is defined by Johnson as being 1000 deaths by Covid19 per week. No mention of the acceptable number of cases of chronic disease, Long Covid.


8. So, if I was one of those 'acceptable deaths' would I agree with Johnson?

If you or your beloved, or your son or daughter was one of those 'acceptable deaths' would you agree with Johnson?

9.  And the other more harsh reality of each death by covid is this:

These are truly awful, horrific deaths. Really, really grim.

https://vox.com/2021/2/20/22280817/covid-19-deaths-us-nursing-home-icu-ventilator

Oxygen depletion, organ failure, death. Terror, despair and horror over the course of ten days or so. One thousand times every week. Thousands of families. Hundreds of ICU teams

Who decides these deaths are acceptable? On what metric?

10. In another context, how many terrorist bombings would be considered an acceptable level?

Is it the case that the 241,000 Afghani deaths of the past 20 years are acceptable to UK citizens, but the 404 combat deaths of troops are not? 

11. Who makes these calls about policy and public health strategy, which have such immense impact the shared commons, and on what basis? 

12. Is there a need now for urgent collective decision making and collective action to prevent further avoidable harm, when we are in a situation that affects us all?

Kindest regards

Corneilius

"Do what you love, it is your gift to universe."

Do not fob this UK Ruling Faction's behaviour off as incompetence - it is clearly deliberate


a repeated behavioural pattern indicates intentionality


Whose Immunity?

"deliberate action
by the Ruling Faction -
a harmful infraction
of a States duty of care
to the citizen,
and to other states.
They spread the virus,
they spread the cash,
These venal people
are a lethal rash,
one we cannot even scratch.
they have an 80 seat
immunity."

More than 9 months ago, New Zealand reported their first death caused by COVID19, on February 29th, 2020. 

The first UK death from COVID19 was recorded a month earlier in England, the death occurred on January 21m and was reported January 29th. 

On the 3rd of February, the UK Prime Minister in a speech in Greenwich, publicly rejected taking the known, proven steps to prevent an epidemic escalating within the UK.

His words: 

"there is a risk that new diseases such as coronavirus will trigger a panic and a desire for market segregation that go beyond what is medically rational to the point of doing real and unnecessary economic damage, then at that moment humanity needs some government somewhere that is willing at least to make the case powerfully for freedom of exchange, some country ready to take off its Clark Kent spectacles and leap into the phone booth and emerge with its cloak flowing as the supercharged champion, of the right of the populations of the earth to buy and sell freely among each other."

Throughout that month, the UK was importing the virus via 80,000 English Ski tourists travelling to and returning from Northern Italy and Austria, where an epidemic was known to be taking place.  The UK abandoned existing contact tracing and isolation systems that had been operating. They lost control of the virus, and made no effort to suppress and control it, and stop community transmission - at best their policy choice has always been to somehow control it and manage a slow spread, in order to 'protect the economy'.

Both countries had the same information available at the same time.

Both Governments and their expert advisors and external independent expertise knew about this new infectious respiratory disease, how it spread, what the implications were in terms of case fatality rates, asymptomatic spread etc.

All of this was known at the time, and the need to prevent community transmission was very well understood.

The experts all understood that no matter how slowed down the spread of the virus might be by obviously inadequate measures, it always contains the potential to rapidly move beyond control causing widespread and deep harm, and thus necessitating a series of full lockdowns. Waves upon waves of disaster.

Here, Jacinda Ardern, New Zealand's Prime Minister, speaks to a news anchor on the first New Zealand fatality..

One of the items they discuss is managing borders. 

I urge all my readers to watch it.  Pay close attention to Ardern's logic, and compare that with what we know about the English Ruling Faction's apparent 'logic'.




In this global pandemic, every state has a duty of care to not export the virus, to achieve zero community transmission within it's own borders, every state has a duty of care in this to all other states.

Just as you and I, as people sharing the same streets and areas, we too have that same duty of care -to not spread the infection - it has to be said that those who wilfully risk spreading the disease are harming the entire community, and cannot be said to be acting on the available evidence.

Those who, due to lack of financial support, are forced to take risks cannot be scapegoated to protect the governments that refuse to take the correct action. Those whose work is essential - shopkeepers, rubbish collectors, nurses, porters, care workers, teachers, bank clerks serving the public, post offices and their staff, public transit staff, police, ambulance crews and many, many others - need the rest of us to prevent the spread of the virus so that they can get to and from their essential it us all work, in relative safety.

Comparing New Zealand's leadership with the UK ruling faction leadership:


Being Social.

New Zealand  is not a Socialist state by self definition - however their Government  has behaved as a genuinely socially caring state should in terms of dealing with the viral infection spread by SARSCOV2 in order to avoid the deaths and harms caused by the disease stage of the infection, COVID19.

The New Zealand Government acted on the available evidence and the skills learned in China, Taiwan, South Korea, Singapore and others and they have suppressed community transmission and they have fully supported the health and welfare of all the people, with all the resources of the state, without profiteering.

That is socialistic in action.

Social. It is not an ideological stance - it is a social stance.

Community. All of us matter. 

Nobody is superior, nobody is inferior.

What the Ruling Faction of the UK is doing is disaster capitalism - profiteering from the disaster.

Deliberately, callously exploiting people's vulnerabilities in spite of warnings, in spite of their 'errors' being clearly defined, identified, quantified and presented to them, they have persisted with policies that ensure slow spread of the virus, which guaranteed surges would occur.

If this was being done within a family group, we could have no problem calling this outright lethal intentional abuse and cruelty.

We would not fob it off as incompetence. 

We cannot fob the behaviour and actions of this English Ruling Faction as mere incompetence.

It is abusive behaviour.

Kindest regards

Corneilius

"Do what you love, it is your gift to universe."

This blog, like all my other content creation work is not monetised via advertising. If you like what I present, consider sharing my content. If you can afford the price of a cup of coffee or a pint of beer/ale/cider for a few months, please donate via my Patreon account.

Thank you for reading this blog.

https://patreon.com/corneilius - donations gratefully received








New Zealand, learning from the present. Statues, and learning from the past.

Learning all the time, learning through honesty, learning because we care.
If we use a metaphor and suggest that Racism is a Mental, Social, Economic and Political Virus, then Honesty across all History Education Curricula, and in all Universities and Museums, is part of the vaccine and we, we the healthy, evidence based decent people who reach out to ensure that Racism and other similar oppressions are confronted and then excised from our culture, we are the Medics. Poverty is also key to this, as is kindness. Kindness is political. Poverty is oppression, because it is a structured part of the existing economic system. Poverty also causes profound chronic stress. Kindness as a political dynamic alleviates both.
Abolishing poverty is a crucial political act of kindness, above and beyond all charitable action. Jacinda Ardern, as New Zealand's current Prime Minister articulates what that means in practice.



On June 8th, 2020, the New Zealand Government announces that they had eliminated community transmission of COVID19 within New Zealand.


In this video New Zealand government lays out that they have no new cases of SARSCOV2 infection or COVID19 disease, and that to all intents an purposes they are ready to return to 'normal' life, to restart normal economic and social activity within New Zealand. They will of course remain vigilant.

In this presentation, Jacinda Ardern lays out the time line for New Zealand's action taken, starting from their very first confirmed case of COVID19.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_in_New_Zealand#Transmission_timeline

The New Zealand Government and the people, together, took action immediately after WHO issued global notifications and it was clear that a global pandemic was under way.

On 28 January, the Ministry of Health set up the National Health Coordination Centre (NHCC) in response to the outbreak. An Infectious and Notifiable Diseases Order was issued to take effect from 30 January, which required health practitioners to report any suspected cases.

From that point forwards, they paid close attention to what was happening around them, they drew on the experience of the Chinese, the Taiwanese, The South Koreans and others and they moved with clarity to stop any importation of the virus, to limit the community transmission of the virus within New Zealand and to work towards eradicating it from the population.

They have achieved that in 11 weeks.

I have posted previously about the efficacy of this kind of protocol, within a time line of 12 weeks, to achieve the same result, in any population, anywhere.

I have posted my thoughts about the British government's quite different approach.

In essence it boils down to this : The UK Government chose to allow the spread, the community transmission of the infection in order to game the situation, to exploit the emerging vulnerability so that they could re-rig the economy in classic neoLiberal fashion, as outlined in detail in Naomi Klein's 2006 study of this pattern of political, economic and ideological anti-democratic policy enforcement, Shock Doctrine.
The exact opposite of kindness, the exact opposite of the policy chosen and implemented by New Zealand's government.

In choosing this policy direction this they have caused 60,000 excess deaths, most due to COVDI19, and many due to loss of NHS normal service as it was converted to COVID19 status en masse, which was a dreadful policy - it ignored everything that is known and proven practice in managing and controlling an infectious disease that is at community transmission stage.

I wrote about that wilful ignoring the evidence, with focus on the utility of Fever Hospitals as a key element in controlling and stopping community transmission.

The UK Government have lied repeatedly about their actions, when challenged. They claim they are following the Science. That is a blatant lie.

The UK Government have also co-opted every push back by epidemiologists, public health professionals, health care professionals, social care professional,.teachers and many others who have challenged them and demanded changes to policy, based on the science.

Every action the Government has taken has led to continued transmission, rather than suppressing and stopping community transmission.

The ordinary people are the ones who have slowed the transmission - by staying home, by observing physical distancing, by their discipline.  By enduring the limitations of a Government declared shut-down that was inadequately resourced. By putting up with the disruption to daily life, to family life, by staying home and by that means alone was the community transmission reduced.

The NHS staff have been forced to work with inadequate support across the country, care workers in residential care settings have been forced to work with inadequate support across the 11,500 care homes and other settings across the country.

So the question raised today, by New Zealand's present status is this - can this country, The United Kingdom, it's Government and it's people, learn from the present, in the present, in order to create a safe and healthy and prosperous future?

What is the answer to this question?

The answer is the UK Government has no intention of learning from New Zealand, or China, or from the WHO. Their policy on Corona Virus is deliberate, and they have no intention of stopping the spread, eradicating the virus within the islands of Britain. They are causing harm to the citizens of the UK in pursuit of ideological political economic profits and power grabbing.

They should be arrested, for misfeasance, misconduct in public office and for manslaughter.

The people have been abandoned by their Government, their press and are divided and in danger.

Statues and the past.






image source : "being colour-blind isn't good enough."

This weekend, people demonstrating their feeling, and their understanding of the situation, past and present, concerning Racism, Slavery and Empire took to the streets across Britain.

Some people took direct action in Bristol, within the context of Global Anti-Racist Violence movement, Black Lives Matter and the international response to the widely published video of the 8 and a half minute murder of George Floyd by 4 Minneapolis Police Officers.

 A gathering of demonstrators toppled a statue of a Bristol based slaver trader, Sir Edward Colston, off it's plinth, and dragged it to the harbour, where his ships had berthed, where the bodies of slaves who had died on his ships, in chains and utter misery were often thrown, more than 300 years ago, and they pushed the statue over the rails, and into the waters, where it sank to beneath the waterline, to huge cheers.

An iconic moment, generated by genuine popular action.

It has since been retrieved. It will be place in a Museum. The people of Bristol have spent many, many years working through the various democratic processes afforded them to have the statue of this notorious slaver removed. Time and time again promises have been made, and time and time again delays and obstruction by local right wing politicians have stymied their best efforts.

Direct action was what remained. The toppling of the statue was filmed, the event has become an educational focal point, and no doubt the press will move on - however hundreds of thousands if not millions of people have restarted their education on slavery and racism history within the UK.

Public Education.

The toppling of this one statue stands in contrast to the toppling of the statue of Saddam Hussein, orchestrated by the invading American Army, in Baghdad in 2003, and the dreadful slaughter that followed that propaganda moment.

The widespread publication of video from US air gunships shooting a crowd of unarmed civilians in Baghdad stimulated a similar reaction, of horror and revulsion among decent people world wide. Julian Assange is in jail, Chelsea Manning is under constant oppression. Tony Blair and George Bush walk free, and receive vat pensions from the tax payers.

We are learning about our shared past in ways that the Establishment of the UK, the USA and other places  have resisted, and are still resisting.

Priti Patel's threat's of 'justice', and Johnson's claim of 'thuggery subverting' the Black Lives Matter demonstrations' are typical of this continued 'refusal to learn', this determined refusal to address long standing and present abuses of Power. They do not want to learn. They know enough already.

Corona Virus and BAME communities within the UK.

And there is the learning that we need with regards to Corona Virus and BAME communities within the UK, where the experience and evidence of the past four dreadful months,as outlined in a recent report  on how long standing experience of racism underlies what the data is revealing : there is a proportionally greater lethal impact of the disease COVID19 across BAME communities.


And there are genuine concerns that the UK Government is limiting the discussion of those factors related to structural racism and social and economic inequity, by excluding them from discussion.


Bell Ribeiro-Addy, the MP for Streatham, said the fact the review overlooked factors arising from structural racism and wrongly focused on comorbidities including obesity and diabetes sent a message that “we don’t matter”.
Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi, the MP for Slough, who has lost three relatives to coronavirus, said: “It’s all very well saying black lives matter but if you’re not going to be taking any action to make sure that, yes, those lives do matter, then those are just hollow words.
 What does the UK Government fear the public might learn that they already know?

A friend pointed out that the rulers of the UK, the Establishment, probably know as much as they want to know - which is mostly what ever they need to know to be able to retain their power and status, their established position of occupying an artificial power disparity which they can exploit to garner more wealth to service ever greater power.

They do not want us to learn what a callous, cruel and nasty hierarchy they really are. They certainly do not want that knowledge publicised, discussed in public, in an open and transparent manner.

They are interested in learning better the skills of manipulation, deceit, grooming, psychometric analysis - and they study us very closely indeed in order to be in the best position to undermine any movements that might 'threaten' their ability to hold on to power, as a class.

Learning from history to avoid causing harms in the future is not on their curriculum. They will justify and rationalise the harms they cause, as they have always done, as long as they occupy positions of power in our society, in this culture.

Past and Present, and learning.

Here, with regards to COVID19, and infectious diseases, we have an example of the Establishment appearing to 'refuse to learn' in the present, with regards to China, Taiwan and New Zealand, and how to manage an epidemic, and refusing to learn from the past, with regards to Racism, and institutionalised Racist violence by police and others. 

I would suggest that they are not refusing to learn rather that those 'mistakes' are essential tools of their continued oppression, and they have no desire to not have those tools at hand.

Thus we can see that using the phrase 'refusal to learn' in relation to the UK Government and Establishment is a fig leaf, it is a way of avoiding facing the truth - it holds out the hope that the rulers might, if we plead enough, if we vote in the right politicians, if we protest and demonstrate and remain loyal to the ideal of a democratic system, that they might choose to learn the lessons and change their behaviour.

In both cases the 'refusal to learn' leaves an injustice unresolved, and causes great and lasting harm to many, many innocent people.

This refusal to learn is deliberate.

They really do not care for our lives.

Ordinary peoples lives do not matter.

That is what COVID19 has revealed in stark detail in the UK and USA.

New Zealand's Government embarrasses them both.

The British Establishment, and the British Government, Civil Service and the Press are not fit and proper people to be the most powerful actors in this country. They are abusing us all through their established power, which was artificially created, through conquest, though slavery and oppression, and it is a power which is artificially maintained, through political grooming, corruption and bullying.

They must be held to account, before more harm is caused.

But how? That is the most pressing question we face today.

Total non compliance,  rent and mortgage strike might be enough to call them to the table.

Who knows?

I don't.

Democratic learning.

How can anyone be expected to exercise Democracy without having any practice?

Why do our schools eschew Democracy as an organisational methodology that students, staff and parents engage in?

Why do we permit the Secretary of Education the powers over all students, in relative terms, of a King?

How can 12 years of habituation to hierarchy and authority prepare our youth for active engagement as democratically active citizens?

What would a democratic school look like?

"Imagine a school where children and teenagers are accorded all the rights and responsibilities of democratic citizenship; where students truly practice, rather than just read about, the principles of free speech, free association, and freedom to choose their own activities; where students vote on the rules that affect them, and serve on juries to try those accused of violating those rules. What better training than this to prepare students for democratic citizenship?"

Take these thoughts home with you, and muse upon the difference this approach might make to our current situation.


Kindest regards

Corneilius

"Do what you love, it is your gift to universe."

This blog, like all my other content creation work is not monetised via advertising. If you like what I present, consider sharing my content. If you can afford the price of a cup of coffee or a pint of beer/ale/cider for a few months, please donate via my Patreon account.

Thank you for reading this blog.

https://patreon.com/corneilius - donations gratefully received



Stop the Spread Explained: Healthy people are the main spreaders, vulnerable people suffer the most.



Stop the Spread Explained - as best as I can manage as a lay person.

My attempt to explain in laymans terms what Stopping the Spread of an infectious disease is all about, when we have no vaccine and no preventative treatment - and yes, healthy fit people are the primary spreaders of the infection because they move about a lot more than chronically ill people do, and they do not present with as much symptoms, so they can spread and not be aware of it. Wearing masks takes this into account, It is a precautionary measure. . No blame here, this is just how this SARSCOV2 virus functions. And people with chronic disease and immune system compromised status are the ones who suffer the worst effects. That's a lot of people - in the UK it is 15 million people, in the USA it is 83 million people. A family, society or culture is very much defined by how it relates to and treats the most vulnerable within it.

Stop the spread, eliminate the virus from a population, be it a village, a town, a city, a region or a country is a whole raft of measures that are designed to stop the spread of infection when there is no vaccine - that means to get to a point where there is no more active virus in the population within the given zone or territory. It is not a pick n mix list, any country dedicated to eliminating the virus from the population must do all of it. The weakest link must be strengthened to ensure the whole program works most efficiently.

If the virus cannot find new human hosts, it cannot replicate.

Transmission of infection across the community ceases. It stops finding new human hosts.

Then the vulnerable are much better protected.

That is what we ought to be aiming for.

* Important repetitive note : this virus is primarily spread by healthy people who show no symptom and the people it harms the most are those who have chronic disease conditions that compromise their immune response. Other super spreaders are people with symptoms left to self treat at home, in shared living spaces, apartment complexes.

Tourists, Immigrants and Business people travelling on air travel, in cruise ships, on holidays and so on, were the primary vectors of this infectious viral disease.

In the UK the population with chronic conditions and immune compromised status numbers some 15 million people, and it is not just the elderly, over 70s or people in care homes (441,000). In the US that population is 83 million.

Across all developed states, the numbers of potentially vulnerable people are significant.

The vulnerable are much  larger part of our population than anyone has really acknowledged.

It is worth noting that a small percentage of healthy people with no known or unknown underlying conditions also suffer some of the worst effects. So there is a risk, a gamble so to speak, even if it is very tiny, for healthy people who are exposed to the virus.

But for the vulnerable that risk is much, much greater. It is not a gamble they need imposed upon them.

The task before us, therefore, is to protect the vulnerable population by stopping the virus in it's tracks.

It doesn't necessitate heavy lock down, even though some states have used that.

Usually the reason for heavy shut down is that the virus has been allowed to go further than it ought to have been allowed. Shut down is a response to uncontrolled transmission.

Learning from experience?

UK Government Economic and Political policy was to not panic, in order to 'protect the economy'. In essence to deliberately allow the viral infection to run through the population, which was touted as 'herd immunity' - an a-scientific 'theory'. That was the original position,

While that aspect of the policy was 'dropped' (they stopped mentioning it) , and then denied, (they claimed it was never part of their considerations - an outright lie)  the policy of allowing a slow spread has been  maintained, and as such it has amounted to a continuation of the same policy - let the people take it on the chin, the healthy will gain immunity, shut the vulnerable away for 12 weeks.

There is no scientific basis for this policy, and certainly no public health basis whatsoever.

Vietnam and New Zealand acted early, and assertively, they acted as soon as any cases emerged.

First known case in UK was confirmed on 31st January, a Chinese couple returning from China to Newcastle, it was announced January 31st.  They had been in country for at least a week before that confirmation. The Wuhan epidemic was in full flow, and the UK was still receiving travellers from China, with no health checks at an UK travel entry points.

At that stage Italy was also seeing confirmed cases, and the beginnings of an epidemic, with thousands of ski holiday travellers from UK returning from Italy over February, without adequate checking or quarantine at entry to the UK, there was more infection being imported into the UK.

The time to act assertively is always as soon as the first cases emerge that are confirmed. A point worth repeating. It is also true that assertive action to quell community transmission must be taken at all times. You cannot allow even a slow spread of an infectious disease when you have neither vaccine nor treatment.

That said even if the infection has hit 10, or 15 or 20 percent of a population, when there is no vaccine, the stop the spread or suppression of virus protocols still apply and can still be implemented, and if done well, the policy will work.

The basic suppression of virus infection protocol is this :

A. From the very first cases, Government must give the citizens accurate clear direct information on the virus, how it is transmitted, and be transparent and honest in all communications - the first suggestion is that all mass events, public transport etc be curtailed - these are super spreader events. The UK government failed on that policy as Cheltenham Racing weekend was allowed to happen and a number of Football matches were allowed to go ahead.

People are asked to stay home for 8-12 weeks.

The State must support the citizens income for that period, and it must be fairly distributed, so that they can bear the burden.

All that money will be channelled into the local economies, which eases the stress on the economy at the local level. It is not wasted money. It is an investment in the health and welfare of the people.

B. Social distancing principles are put in place, to slow the spread, to give time for contact tracing etc, to work.

The Government must always be ensuring that people are very well informed as to why - you do not want to order people, you want to give them exact, detailed evidence based information. so that they are engaged in the process.

C. It is obvious that all social care and medical facilities must be fully equipped with PPE and other technical and logistical support for dealing with infectious disease, and have the ability to maintain standard services for the people who need their attention and care.

In China and Vietnam they created isolation treatment hospitals fever hospitals,  for treatment of people at the earliest possible stage of symptoms, to keep those ill people who were shedding viral away from the community. This stopped the spread and reduced cases escalating to severe or critical.

This must be enabled in both public and private care and health care settings. This means that they must be set up away from main hospitals. There can be no cutting corners in either environment.

D. The same applies to all institutional residential settings. If prisoners become infected,they must be removed from general population and treated in isolation.

E. We do not need health care 'heroes' - we need health care properly supported, well trained, not over stretched or over worked. UK has failed on all these areas.

(East Asian states had SARS and MERS in recent memory so their populations were alert to the methods having gone through them previously. )

Here is the basic process:

1. A case turns up at hospital or GP surgery, saying "I have fever, cough etc since yesterday." The earlier they report better. This is not a 'flu to be treated at home.

2. That person is tested (not just for SARSVOC2 Virus, but also for Flu and other Fever inducing diseases) and if found positive, with any infectious disease, is placed into treatment away from main hospital services in a Fever Hospital.

Government covers their income for the duration of their stay, average 2 weeks.

The Chinese and others have learned that Fever Hospitals are an effective way to treat cases of a specific virus or pathogen away from existing services so that escalation of cases are reduced, and so that cases can get the earliest and best possible treatment available. This reduces case fatality rates and protects main hospital ICU units. Those main hospital units can be expanded, and staff trained, more readily than entirely new ICU Hospitals can be built and staffed.

3. The person is questioned on his or her movements going back a week (standard incubation time, during which he or she might have been shedding viral particles that could infect other people) to draw a list of potential infectees - the list will be every person that the case spent more than 15 minutes with, in close contact, with attention paid to any public transport or crowded areas.

4. Contact tracing teams go out and visit each of those contacts, to check for symptoms, give advice and inform them of a 2 week quarantine - if they have symptoms, they go to Fever Hospital, with a contact trace carried out of their case. If no symptoms they are advised to stay on quarantine, and get in touch if any symptoms emerge - Government covers their weekly income for the 2 weeks of quarantine.

5. Repeat this for all cases and what you are doing is slowly but surely isolating all active infections, keeping an eye on potential new cases and finding out where people who have had the virus and had no symptoms are. And yes, teams of well trained people, who are good communicators must be assembled for this task to cover a large outbreak. I repeat that if Government is doing it's job, the communications of what is needed will be clear to all citizens, and they will have confidence in the teams of contact tracers, and will engage.

6. This is essential on closing down on the active virus. Chase every case, all contacts until no new cases emerge.

It is labour intensive, and smart phone tech can help make it a bit easier, but it cannot replace the human contact point - for example if an outbreak of cases occurs in your town, or neighbourhood, everyone is notified, by text or map, and people go into extra tight shut down, with hyper awareness of what to do if they get symptoms, vulnerable people get isolation treatment to protect them from being infected, people can provide help in shopping etc..

7. This helps being more precise in action, it can work without a major shut down if people wear masks, follow the protocols and are well disciplined - in the UK people are well disciplined, but the media have hyped the few who were not..

Contact tracing and mass testing makes the virus visible. 

That's the point. If we know where it is, then we can close it down
.
Obviously quarantine is essential at the borders of any territory, for all incoming travel, to maintain a virus free zone.

At their own expense, if foreign travellers or business, and if nationals returning, then the state funds it - use hotels close to entry points. This must be mandatory as the risk in not doing it is to great.

It is a process that has been tried and tested, it was developed during 1917-18 Flu Pandemic (even though they had no testing, or phones they applied the other human labour aspects and it worked well in limiting spread where it wass applied) and then refined during SARS in 2002-3, and MERS in 2012, Ebola  in 2013 -16.

It is an essential process for when an infectious pathogen is active and there is no vaccine or preventative treatment, and it has lethal outcomes for a significant part of a population.

In the case of this virus, it is spread rapidly by health fit people who show no obvious signs and for this reason shut downs are designed to slow the spread - and then you need the protocol above to STOP the spread. If you shut down, and do not follow the other protocols, there will be a drop off of infection rate, and as soon as you open up again, it will take off.

If we do not stop the spread, and eradicate the virus within a population it will continue to be passed around and that will expose those who are vulnerable because it's movement is invisible.

I wrote this song as an upbeat political protest song comparing New Zealand and others with USA and UK. There is room for more than hope in this crisis because we see proof positive of the stop the spread protocols.




this track is available as a free download as a .wav file (High res) on Soundcloud (above)

 or on Reverbnation as an ,mp3 file.


----

Useful links

Short paper: Did we Eradicate SARS? Lessons Learned and the Way Forward

https://biomedgrid.com/pdf/AJBSR.MS.ID.001017.pdf

Guardian Article: "I’m an epidemiologist. When I heard about Britain’s ‘herd immunity’ coronavirus plan, I thought it was satire"

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/mar/15/epidemiologist-britain-herd-immunity-coronavirus-covid-19

Lancet paper on: Can we contain the COVID-19 outbreak with the same measures as for SARS?

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(20)30129-8/fulltext

Wiki Page : Eradication of Infectious Diseases

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eradication_of_infectious_diseases

NHS England : Corona Virus - Expert Interview - What is contact tracing?

https://publichealthmatters.blog.gov.uk/2020/02/13/expert-interview-what-is-contact-tracing

Time Article : What We Can Learn From Singapore, Taiwan and Hong Kong About Handling Coronavirus

https://www.time.com/5802293/coronavirus-covid19-singapore-hong-kong-taiwan/

PR news article : Korean Government Communications during Corona Virus Epidemic

https://www.prnewsonline.com/South+Korea-coronavirus-communication

Vietnam's story - How Vietnam is winning its 'war' on coronavirus

https://www.dw.com/en/how-vietnam-is-winning-its-war-on-coronavirus/a-52929967

New Zealand:  New Zealand has ‘effectively eliminated’ coronavirus. Here’s what they did right

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/travel/2020/04/what-new-zealand-did-right-in-battling-coronavirus/


Fever Hospitals in Wuhan

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30744-3/fulltext

Fever Hospitals

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/3078397/china-style-makeshift-hospitals-could-help-coronavirus-hit


Kindest regards

Corneilius

"Do what you love, it is your gift to universe."

This blog, like all my other content creation work is not monetised via advertising. If you like what I present, consider sharing my content. If you can afford the price of a cup of coffee or a pint of beer/ale/cider for a few months, please donate via my Patreon account.

Thank you for reading this blog.

https://patreon.com/corneilius - donations gratefully received



The Fit, The Chronically ill, Poverty and the Economy - between a rock and a hard place. Stop the Spread.

The thing that strike me most about this virus SARSCOV2 is that it is a highly infectious viral infection, in that it transmits from human to human with relative ease.

There is a period where the infected person shows no symptoms,  the person feeling no symptoms is wholly unaware of it and is therefore spreading the virus to other human beings without knowing that he or she is a vector of the viral spread.

Therefore  the virus can run through any culture where there are many large group phenomena such as international travel on planes, boats, trains, shared public transport, pubs, clubs, football matches, prisons, care homes, parliaments, apartment blocks, temples of all kinds and large family homes and much else besides.

There is a blind spot among some fit healthy people that I have been feeling into and I will explore what this is in this article. "It can't be all that bad."



The dynamics of close urban living organisation and a silent virus.



In effect an invisible spread before any signs of it happening ever emerge.

Many people will become infected and they will show no symptoms at all. Their immune systems get on top of the virus before it causes any problems. Nobody is any the wiser. Nobody is at fault. We do not know why this is the case. All we have to go on is the experience. What happens.

Fit, healthy people can pretty much shake it off.  There are exceptions, of course, and whilst media tend to hype those or minimise them, we are still learning about the disease state as we go and fear is not really useful, whereas caution is.

Stay calm, act responsibly for the whole community.

For the people with strong immune systems the viral infection appears to them to be a not so serious problem. For some it's not. There is no way to predict in advance if one is one of the unlucky few. It is a gamble, a risk.

For people whose immune system is compromised, the issue becomes the disease, COVID19.

The disease is what happens when the virus begins to replicate faster than the body's immune system can cope with, and starts to impact on the body. When the body's immune system response is not robust enough to stall the viral replication which destroys body tissue.

That is what the disease is - the destruction of tissues within the body as the virus takes over cells and then destroys the cell once it has replicated many more copies within the cell, releasing the replicates which seek out new cells and these repeat the cycle, thus destroying enough cells to cause a variety of breakdowns depending upon which tissue is affected, that can then lead towards death : liver, kidney, gut, lungs and heart can all be impacted.

The disease COVID19 is really, really dangerous to a significant percentage of those who have chronic immune compromising health issues, or co-morbidity's.

That is why the Government and NHS has issued instructions to people at risk to shield themselves.

If you can imagine what it is like to live in what is called shielded status, where you cannot be touched by anyone in your immediate family, for months on end, for a year, for a year and a half. A situation where everything that comes to you has to be washed and cleaned, a situation where all your facilities such bath, toilet, clothes washing and handling and all your cooking, if they are shared,  must be policed with constant attention to detail every time anyone in your household uses those shared facilities. Imagine being confined to one room.  Imagine have to think about every move you might make outside that one room.

Add to that the conflicting narratives that percolate across news media and social media, spreading confusion and uncertainty, and then we can see that there is an extra avoidable element of situational  stress loaded onto people who are already dealing with significant stresses not of their own making.

Can you imagine living as an elder in care home that is shielded? The complexity and pressures that are added to those that already exist? What must it be like to be a carer at home?

What must it be like for carers working in large care homes?

In the UK population of people with multiple conditions is about 15 million people.  Not all are shielded of course. There are degrees of vulnerability.

In the USA it is about 83 million people.

The existing data from around the world suggests that about 20% of that cohort will, if exposed to the virus, experience severe and critical symptoms of the disease, and about half of those will potentially become fatal. Breakdown of the bodies systems and organs. This is a horrific way to die. 

How do we protect those people?

To protect the 10%  most at risk we must protect all of those people who could be vulnerable.

Co-morbidity, Disability and Vulnerability within a stressed culture.

The impact of multiple stressors on the human body and psyche that arise from living within a culture where chronic stress and inter-generational trauma patterns remain largely unresolved is well understood in the medical world and not widely understood across the grass roots.

Observe  how even media will publish articles that castigate people suffering from obesity: fat shaming is one aspect. Blaming smokers, suggesting they are doing it to themselves and should pay for their treatment, whilst protecting the Tobacco makers, even though we know that smoking involves addiction, The NHS offers treatment for that and other addictions.

There is the all too common negative attitude towards disabled people.

This makes gathering the intention of the population to focus on the needs of the vulnerable more difficult than in ought to be. Nonetheless the majority of people are decent, and will take into consideration the vulnerabilities of their fellow citizens.

To protect the vulnerable, those people with multiple combined health issues, the only proven strategy is to stop them from getting the infection in the first place.

They must not meet the virus.

We do not have a vaccine. There are no medicines that can reliably prevent escalation of the disease or can be used as treatments of the disease. There is evidence that vitamin D and C have offer some degree of immune system boost. There is evidence reducing stress reduces immune system effectiveness, so it stands to reason that reducing stress improves immune response.

SARS was a corona virus pandemic that happened in 2003.  It was less infectious than SARSCOV2  but more more lethal, with a case fatality rate of 60%, and because it generated symptoms rapidly it was much easier to trace and close down.

We still have no vaccine for that particular virus. The Governments in countries affected by SARS working with the WHO,  informed populations of the threat and what needed to be done, contact tracing, quarantine, treatment in isolation, limiting movement for a period, and they stopped the spread, and in time eradicated the virus from the population. The same procedure was applied in 197-18 epidemic. The process has been learned over a 100 year term, with new learnings since SARS in 2003. In clearest terms we know that suppression of transmission can lead to elimination of transmission, and that cause eradication of a virus that cannot live outside a human body.

We hear talk of a vaccine.

However vaccines are very difficult to make, and even more difficult to test to the degree that they can safely be used across entire populations. Such is the risk that Governments indemnify vaccine makers from litigation and financial compensation that arise when a few cases of vaccination cause severe and lethal reactions.

There are only two strategies that can protect vulnerable people in this situation.

One strategy is to isolate all vulnerable people from the general population, to isolate them from any possible community infection vector.  To enclose them behind a virus proof barrier.

That is really, really really difficult, and made much more difficult if you allow the rest of the population to slowly become infected while you wait for a vaccine. Waiting for a vaccine is not a health and safety protocol. Slow spread is not a health and safety protocol.

Those who service the vulnerable must  also be isolated from the general population.

If they become exposed,  then they must be set away from the vulnerable until they become provably immune, and can then re-introduced to continue their caring work - but they will still have to adopt clean site protocols upon entry into each caring facility as they could still carry the virus in by fomite transmission. Or they must live and work within the isolate environment of the point of care situation.

You have to somehow generate a population of immune people to service the vulnerable to maintain that separation from the virus, and you have to maintain that population in constant state of vigilant surveillance for viral particle presence.

The other way to protect the vulnerable is to stop the spread across the entire population.

That is to say to eliminate the transmission of the virus from within a given population, which leads to eradication of the virus. Stop the spread, spread the love.

This is also difficult, but it is proven. We know it works.

It was proven in SARS and MERS, and in other outbreaks of infectious disease where human to human transmission was the vector of spread. Suppression of the spread of infection, leading to elimination of community transmission and eventual eradication when the virus can find no new human hosts, and it dies out.

The process is complex, yes. It requires a lot of human resources, and a lot of co-ordinated action willingly undertaken by citizens, businesses and state officials. What makes it complicated are political and economic agendas intruding on the Health and Safety requirements.

New Zealand, Vietnam and others are showing that stopping the spread is a viable policy choice, across very different populations and economies.

Economics and Health and Safety.

Governments that have chosen the slow spread approach have all done so for economic and political reasons, not for health and safety or public health reasons.

And there is another dynamic that clouds the judgement of many people in this matter, going back to the start of this article.

Fit, healthy people are to a large degree thinking of and quite rightly concerned with how any of the protocols to stop the spread, social distancing, contact tracing and quarantine of workers, and a general shut down impacts them, their jobs and livelihoods. Because of the media narrative that the disease does not affect fit, healthy people, that many if not most will have no symptoms or will experience very mild symptoms,they are not so much worried about getting the infection and suffering severe symptoms.

Many believe that getting the infection will grant them immunity, and that as such getting the infection is desirable, to get it out of the way. This is understandable.  They have not been given the full accurate picture. 

Support - in economic terms - to take on the task of stopping the spread in the UK is minimal, and conditional and not well organised, as it was offered in an off the cuff move. This makes it less likely that working folk in the UK will readily consider what it might take to stop the spread - if your livelihood is under threat that is a reasonable feeling to have. They solution is to provide adequate and timely support. That is the job of the State in this kind of situation.

Austerity.

In the UK there is a further complication, that being cuts to public services  and the decades long policy of restricting support to disabled and chronically ill people who require state benefit support, as pursued under the policy banner of Austerity.

That the general population has been unwilling  or disinterested in confronting this over the past ten or twenty years or so in any meaningful manner is largely a matter of how media refuses to cover the dynamic honestly, how ineffective Parliament has been as a body with oversight that reins in harmful policies, and how the media and right wing politicians have been pursuing narratives that undermine empathy for people who need and deserve support - the attack on the welfare state as a thing that undermines the economy.

The UN report into the mistreatment of low income, unemployed, chronically ill and disabled people in the UK, by Government policy, was barely noticed by the population, and almost totally ignored by the largely right wing media, and robustly denied by Government, without any firm rebuttal - because there was and is no defence of those policies given the harm they have caused.

With regards to SARSCOV2 and COVID19 the Government attitude and it's stance is clearly focused on the economy, rather than on the welfare of the whole population, fit and vulnerable alike. The poverty of 14 million people in the UK is real. The feeling of deprivation amidst a growing population of billionaires whose wealth gains are in inverse proportion to the wealth losses from the low income groups is real.

Ironically, many of the fit and healthy feel as if they are being oppressed by the situation of the shut down. That said most people are adhering to the social distancing measures, and are diligent in their compliance and that is a really wonderful phenomenon - I know that most people are decent people, caring people. That decency is not reflected in the corridors of power, as the PPE scandal and others reveals.

And there is a large degree of confusion and resentment across the divided UK electorate  which is largely a consequence of Brexit and the deliberate bipolar adversarial dynamic deployed by it's proponents. So we can see that there's a lot going on here.

Protect the Economy, allow slow spread of the infection.

The confusion of political and economic and ideological perspectives in News media and across social media that filter perceptions of the nature of the threat and we have a perfect storm that creates confusion when what is need is clarity so that the population as a whole understands what is happening and what needs to be done.

Stop The Spread is the only viable policy facing this infectious disease.

Slow the Spread renders the whole population vulnerable. Loss of income is a serious leverage in deflecting attention from the realities of the Governments chosen stance. But we must transcend that and integrate it to resolve this situation.

What we are looking at is a factor that will determine the lethality of this viral infection will be socio-economic - low income population are much more at risk in any situation where an epidemic occurs.

This is born out by the most recent statistics produced by the Office of National Statistics.

Socio-Economic Status

Low income is a factor, as much as health and fitness, or lack of it in outcomes during an epidemic.

Universal Basic Income for the duration of a stop the spread policy duration could resolve that issue, and it would put cash flow into the local economies. 

Global international general trade must take second place for the duration. Internationally, resources movement must take precedence over personal travel so that areas that are less developed are more effectively supported in stop the spread policy implementation. We need every state to follow the stop the spread protocols. We have to help each other through this.

Tourism and Air travel are luxuries that must wait. Both were major vectors of the global spread of the infection. Nobody is talking of blaming either of these, and nobody should. That said, caution must be the stance, a until we are in control of the pandemic.

The dynamics of power as a factor in the exploitation of the situation.

Bullies will always, always seek to exploit any emerging vulnerability in a family, village, town, organisation, institute or population where they hold degrees of power over others. This is a behavioural dynamic, almost an un-thought about reaction other than they will think about how to maximise the opportunity - they will not have to think about choosing to exploit the vulnerability, that will feel natural, second nature to the bully.

Trump, Johnson et al are clearly part of a bullying dynamic, as are their hard core supporters. Their behaviour reveals this. The hatred poured out at those who are their political opponents, the bile and the misleading narratives with which they project and scapegoat others is well documented.

I think that British Government and their sponsors have made a  huge strategic error in allowing and endorsing a slow spread in order to protect the economy. That choice means that the hit to the economy will be much, much worse than if they had chosen the stop the spread policy, because it will mean extended periods of economic disruption as successive waves of opening up and closing down inevitably flow from the slow spread policy towards the fiction of 'herd immunity'.

The hubris and the arrogance of that decision stops them from admitting it, and now they are just bluffing through, which is why the media denial is so intense.

There is still time to stop the spread, but it means we must remove those in Government who refuse to take on that policy, because they have ideological and economic attachments to the slow spread policy and they cannot be trusted to carry through a stop the spread policy. Because they have already caused so much avoidable harm, they must be prevented from causing any more. They must be held accountable, and they must prevented from causing any more harm. The prevention of more harm has to be the primary concern right now.

We must address the issue of acknowledging that the often unspoken origin of distress, disease and ill health across entire populations lies in how power is mediated,  and where that observation is avoided, ignored, muted and suppressed - we must confront the deliberate gaslighting focus on what is 'wrong' within the individual, that avoids addressing what is harmful about the culture itself.

That is a serious problem - the resolution of which must come from a widespread, accurate and wholly evidenced understanding of the situation and fuller engagement across the population based on that understanding. Honesty and transparency matter profoundly. Spin causes harm. Lies are wholly unacceptable.






Kindest regards

Corneilius

"Do what you love, it's Your Gift to Universe"

Thank you for reading this blog. All we need to do is be really honest, responsive to the evidence we find,and ready to reassess when new evidence emerges. The rest is easy.