Number numb
Wednesday 29th April, 2020 – 10am
Today, the number of dead in America from coronavirus passed the number the US lost in the whole Vietnam war.
Three weeks ago, I reluctantly came to the conclusion (shared in this blog on Sunday, 5th April) that there would be over 20,000 dead from coronavirus in the UK and probably more like 40,000 or 60,000 by the time it's all over. [There was a higher prediction too taking us into the future, but it's almost too horrible to contemplate, so let's play along and ignore it for now. After all, it may never happen.] Nobody likes a smart arse, but today, we are already over the 20,000 mark and we are going to get a sudden jump in our numbers of dead which we have happily been thinking (well, happily is stretching it a bit) are at least not as bad as the French, or the Spanish and, heavens forefend, certainly not as bad as the Italians. No way. Our figures are now set fair to outstrip everyone else's in Europe.
The sudden jump in our numbers will be provided by the addition of all those who have not died in hospital (which were the only ones we were counting) but elsewhere: care homes, for example, hospices, or in their own homes. We have been told, in a somewhat unclear and underhand fashion, that this will add a third to the numbers. I'm going to call that a half, because I don't think they will have the new system sorted out yet (or that is what they will say – it's all so dreadfully new after all), which means the increase in numbers can handily be spread over some weeks, thus softening the impact on us, and on them politically. And this change has been flagged so there is no shocking political comeback. It's the sort of thing we do so well in this country. Keeping everyone's emotions under control. Minimising outrage. Managing us. In this, as in so much, we are the envy of the world. And we love it too. We completely accept that we should be managed in this way. We do not object. FFS.
In fact, I think the numbers will double. Which brings us swiflty up to 40,000. Of course this sudden addition to our numbers will not prevent anyone from pointing out the sudden hike in China's numbers a week or so ago. It was immediately decalared how deeply suspicious that was. Ours, of course, is nothing to do whatsoever with manipulating the figures, or managing the reaction. Oh no.
But the numbers end up as a muddle in our heads anyway. Overexposure renders them meaningless if we are not careful. So just to help retain how fucking awful all this is, please remember that America's Vietnam landmark was 58,000 (the number of US soldiers who died in the entire Vietnam war). Ours might reasonably be 40,000 – the number of civilians who died in the seven-month period of the Blitz. If we breach that figure (and I am afraid we will) 70,000 is the number of British civilians killed during the whole length of the Second World War.
Today, the number of dead in America from coronavirus passed the number the US lost in the whole Vietnam war.
Three weeks ago, I reluctantly came to the conclusion (shared in this blog on Sunday, 5th April) that there would be over 20,000 dead from coronavirus in the UK and probably more like 40,000 or 60,000 by the time it's all over. [There was a higher prediction too taking us into the future, but it's almost too horrible to contemplate, so let's play along and ignore it for now. After all, it may never happen.] Nobody likes a smart arse, but today, we are already over the 20,000 mark and we are going to get a sudden jump in our numbers of dead which we have happily been thinking (well, happily is stretching it a bit) are at least not as bad as the French, or the Spanish and, heavens forefend, certainly not as bad as the Italians. No way. Our figures are now set fair to outstrip everyone else's in Europe.
The sudden jump in our numbers will be provided by the addition of all those who have not died in hospital (which were the only ones we were counting) but elsewhere: care homes, for example, hospices, or in their own homes. We have been told, in a somewhat unclear and underhand fashion, that this will add a third to the numbers. I'm going to call that a half, because I don't think they will have the new system sorted out yet (or that is what they will say – it's all so dreadfully new after all), which means the increase in numbers can handily be spread over some weeks, thus softening the impact on us, and on them politically. And this change has been flagged so there is no shocking political comeback. It's the sort of thing we do so well in this country. Keeping everyone's emotions under control. Minimising outrage. Managing us. In this, as in so much, we are the envy of the world. And we love it too. We completely accept that we should be managed in this way. We do not object. FFS.
In fact, I think the numbers will double. Which brings us swiflty up to 40,000. Of course this sudden addition to our numbers will not prevent anyone from pointing out the sudden hike in China's numbers a week or so ago. It was immediately decalared how deeply suspicious that was. Ours, of course, is nothing to do whatsoever with manipulating the figures, or managing the reaction. Oh no.
But the numbers end up as a muddle in our heads anyway. Overexposure renders them meaningless if we are not careful. So just to help retain how fucking awful all this is, please remember that America's Vietnam landmark was 58,000 (the number of US soldiers who died in the entire Vietnam war). Ours might reasonably be 40,000 – the number of civilians who died in the seven-month period of the Blitz. If we breach that figure (and I am afraid we will) 70,000 is the number of British civilians killed during the whole length of the Second World War.
Comments
Post a Comment