In the longer term though…
Yes; during the first wave Ocado cancelled all our regular orders for maybe 2 months ahead, and the other supermarkets were totally booked out. I think Ocado were “asked” to prioritise the 1.5M people who were “shielding” at home, but I suspect they soon realised these were not likely to become regular customers, so they got themselves organised and got back to normal after some weeks.
In the meantime Ocado busted up with Waitrose and Waitrose set up a home delivery fleet, which is working well. But I doubt all these can cover more than say 10% of the population. So, unfortunately, supermarkets cannot be avoided, for most of the population, no matter how hazardous it may be to shop there.
Ocado, and to a lesser extent Waitrose, are the butt of many jokes about “upper class shoppers”, but they do work, and if you want quality food, especially organic, it isn’t cheap anywhere.
That Ocado automated warehouse is amazing!
The thing that amazed me with Instacart is that when a customer produces and places an order for a particular store, somebody nearby will apparently accept it with a few minutes and its bought and delivered in a couple of hours max. Much like Uber in its infrastructure and volume.
Edit: The number of cases will not fall by much in the time span covered, but hospital admissions and deaths should fall quite significantly since the vaccines are targeting the most vulnerable people first.
Interesting. I assume the y-axis is percentage of present values?
The UK vaccinated significantly fewer people on Saturday than it did on Friday, although the Saturday figure is still (by 10k) above the run rate required for the 2m per week target.
I’d have thought that on a purely operational basis any reduction on the previous day, at any point, would be seen as totally unacceptable – so can only assume supply is becoming an issue. Second jabs have dried up to next to nothing (~2k) so this would seem to indicate the Pfizer supply issue is starting to bite.
1 in 8 recovered patients die within 140 days
Scary, although the data (no idea where to find the original paper) doesn’t tell you their ages etc. At age 90, life expectancy is about 2 years so you would expect roughly 20% of these to die within 140 days anyway, and you have to die of “something”.
But many more are readmitted for issues related to the original one.
Also some are getting a new diagnosis of Type 1 or Type 2 diabetes, which is more worrying.
If you have a bit of a think about that, its probably normal. 1 in 8 is what, 12% ?
Like many things that happen “normally”, I suspect most of the time no-one takes any notice of what happens to people after they exit hospital having been in an ICU having been admitted to hospital with breathing difficulties.
Regards, SD..
Peter wrote:
1 in 8 recovered patients die within 140 days
To be honest, “diabetes and chronic liver and kidney conditions” sounds awfully like the adverse effects of Remdeathivir, which has been associated with high blood glucose levels as well as liver and kidney toxicity. Is that administered frequently in the UK? The EMA has warned against its use some time ago, and emerging research is very troubling.
the drug permanently stops the activity of an enzyme called CES-2, which is found in the intestine, liver and kidney and is needed for the breakdown of many medications
Peter wrote:
1 in 8 recovered patients die within 140 daysScary, although the data (no idea where to find the original paper) doesn’t tell you their ages etc. At age 90, life expectancy is about 2 years so you would expect roughly 20% of these to die within 140 days anyway, and you have to die of “something”.
But many more are readmitted for issues related to the original one.
Also some are getting a new diagnosis of Type 1 or Type 2 diabetes, which is more worrying.
I don’t think that’s much cause for concern, unless the data had been carefully curated to ensure it wasn’t just showing us what we might expect to see anyway. What’s a ‘recovered patient’ in this context – someone who was hospitalised with Covid-19? Then almost by definition they are not that healthy anyway, and if they are hospitalised with a severe respiratory infection then is one eighth dying within five months after ‘recovering’ saying much? I doubt it. The age profile of the dataset, or the patients hospitalised, would give context. The average 90 year old might expect two more years, but if you’re 90 and have just been in hospital with a severe infection, on a ventilator, etc then you are not representative of the population as a whole and you don’t expect two more years. In essence the population for that dataset self-selects for poor health.
Lots of generally unhealthy people are undiagnosed with diabetes (and plenty of other things), only getting diagnosed when medics get a really good look at them over some other issue.
What I think Covid-19 exposes, more than anything, is how healthy or unhealthy various populations are. It stands to reason when you think about it – a reasonably aggressive respiratory infection that spreads like wildfire will do this.
I hypothesise that in the UK we will look back at this a decade from now and the real take-home message will be that Covid-19 exposed how unhealthy our population had become.
MedEwok wrote:
From a Guardian article on how the UK’s vaccination programme might impact the number of infections and hospital admissions.
The data in this chart doesn’t make sense:
- Hospital admission falls much more than can numbers → The would indicate that especially more serious cases are avoided
- ICU-Admissions, however, fall much less than hospitalization → That would indicate, that the Cases that actually make it in the hospital are more severe
- Deaths in hospital fall much fore than ICU cases and hospitalization → The would indicate that cases can be much better treated and are less sever.
So two data points indicate that cases are less severe and one that indicates cases are more severe. If you asked me, my bet would be that “hospital” and “ICU” lines are swapped – but it doesn’t make sense to try to find errors in quite obviously wrong data…
