Coronavirus
New thread to continue the discussion on Covid-19 (Coronavirus).
|
Re: Coronavirus NEW
Although I'm in an at risk group, I'm moving towards the idea of letting the virus rip to achieve herd immunity. I can take measures to minimise my own risk (without giving up my trips to Waitrose, Wokingham). Why am I not yet fully convinced? There isn't enough evidence as to the longevity of antibodies, the number in the system, how many it needs to fight off the virus, etc. My fear is that it may take some time for these questions to be answered during which time the economy might tank beyond the point of no reasonable return. The government is obviously wrestling with this and may even think that the economy is more important than an on-balance calculation as regards CV. Very difficult for them. |
Re: Coronavirus NEW
Yup - misquoting the dear old beeb - the health department wants more controls/lockdowns to prevent disease spread and protect demand on NHS
Number 11 want to get the economy moving, get trading/spending back, get jobs/companies working. Number 10 has to balance it all. |
Re: Coronavirus NEW
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus NEW
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus NEW
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus NEW
Quote:
How are other parts of the world doing? Eg Wales, Scotland, France, Spain, and all the other countries on the "quarantine on return" list? The only countries that are doing "well" are ones that were never badly affected in the first place. The less people that are bringing it into the country, the less cases will happen in that country. |
Re: Coronavirus NEW
Nippy Sturgeon’s Covid-free strategy (loudly applauded over the summer, especially by Scottish nationalists and English people who know no better but assume she’s some sort of socialist goddess) is in tatters. There is mounting evidence that the R number here is now higher than anywhere else in the UK despite her supposedly more cautious approach to lifting restrictions.
I wonder whether we’ll ever get a satisfactory explanation as to why she threw Tory/Labour-voting Aberdeen into lockdown in the summer with an infection rate only a fraction of that now seen in nationalist Glasgow, which has been pretty much getting away with it until now. :scratch: |
Re: Coronavirus NEW
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus NEW
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus NEW
Quote:
More than 60% of the population lives in the central belt, where the present number of infections, while only around half of that in Liverpool or Manchester, is showing signs of very rapid increase. The additional measures coming into effect this weekend are meant to head off a possible doubling of cases by the end of the month. |
Re: Coronavirus NEW
Quote:
The R number from a low rate of infection only needs a couple of major outbreaks to rocket. If you're trundling along at thousands of cases per day consistently R is closer to 1. |
Re: Coronavirus NEW
I posted this in the recently closed thread.
I know its the Sun, but we could all do with something to give us some hope. https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/128728...jab-christmas/ |
Re: Coronavirus NEW
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus NEW
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus NEW
Quote:
Not a lot governments can do about this sort of thing. Link Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus NEW
BREAKING: Coronavirus: UK records 17,540 new cases - 3,000 more than yesterday
|
Re: Coronavirus NEW
Getting pretty quite escalations now..
|
Re: Coronavirus NEW
Quote:
This is down to more testing. |
Re: Coronavirus NEW
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus NEW
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus NEW
Quote:
My point being ( and yes I should have said):D I'm wondering how high the infection rates actually were back in March / April, when we didn't have testing. |
Re: Coronavirus NEW
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus NEW
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
BREAKING: Europe reported 96,996 new cases, the highest total for the region ever recorded by the World Health Organisation.
Global deaths rose by 5,514 to a total of 1.05 million. The previous WHO record for new cases was 330,340 on Oct. 2. The agency reported a record 12,393 deaths on April 17. As a region, Europe is now reporting more cases than India, Brazil or the United States. https://www.reuters.com/article/heal...source=twitter |
Re: Coronavirus
And the death rate remains the same.
Since the rise in infections started 3 weeks ago now, death rates still below 100. Since then the infection rate is now 4x that what it was three weeks ago and given that 10 days is the intervention threshold, really, if deaths, hospital admissions and ventilations have not increased dramatically by this time next week is anyone going to have a lightbulb moment? |
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
Link Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
As the reports keep telling you Quote:
Why on earth cant we simply count those actually killed by the virus. |
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
I've been saying this since it started, absolute disgrace. ---------- Post added at 14:53 ---------- Previous post was at 14:52 ---------- Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
The question of comorbidities makes it an academic question. If I'm running from a lion and having covid makes me unable to outrun the lion, is Covid responsible for my death or is the lion? Compare situations: Patient B has diabetes then catches covid and dies, they could have lived another 60 years so surely that can be blamed on covid Patient A has cancer then catches covid and dies, they were probably going to die in the next year or 2 anyway. So is it fair to count that as covid? Basically they would have to ask doctors to decide the reason of death and they would have to make some educated guess and this just side steps that whole thing. |
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
Link Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
The Great Barrington declaration has some famous signatories.
https://news.sky.com/story/coronvair...etter-12099947 Dr Harold Shipman is very apt. |
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
So they can make some educated decision. The public just see the number and go "AAAAH BIG DEATH NUMBER". |
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
|
Re: Coronavirus
Some pub owners are not too happy with the female version of Hitler.
https://twitter.com/capitalscotnews/...890952194?s=21 |
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
Seperately there’s a a few stories floating around about Sweden’s success story: Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
It cannot be denied that there have been many deaths of people who were not elderly, in care homes, or would've been expected to die from regular seasonal flu.
|
Re: Coronavirus
There’ll also be less deaths from other causes - road deaths, etc. So to equate the two years isn’t as straightforward as it seems. Obviously, it’ll suit the “it’s just a bad cold” narrative to pretend that 2020 was no different to 2019.
|
Re: Coronavirus
1 Attachment(s)
ONS are also giving 5 year averages on their stats.
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
If people want a lock-down, they just need to lock down. No need to rely on the government to tell them to do it. Leave the rest of us alone. The second wave is good evidence that lock-downs only slow the virus, they don’t eliminate it. How many more waves must we endure before people wake up to this reality? |
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
Is this the latest. Calling everyone scared? It’ll go away next summer, it just wasn’t warm enough this one. :D You’re free to put yourself at risk as often as you please. Get an all day ticket for public transport and let us know how you get on. The answer to your question at the end is as many lockdowns as it takes to get a vaccine. This was of course completely avoidable by going for the New Zealand or South Korean approaches. We are the fifth richest country in the world but “it’s too hard”. :rolleyes: |
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
Anyone who wants to contribute to herd immunity is more than free to go and hang around their nearest student halls. If you think 50-70% getting infected is a good thing, but want it to be other people and not you, then it’s more than a crass double standard.
Under the theory everyone who gets infected reduces opportunities for onward infection and the R number will decrease over time. It should be incentivised among those who believe it. |
Re: Coronavirus
From my layman's perspective, problem is that nobody is immune at the moment.
Those with antibodies can still be infected and be infectious. Their degree of resistance may only have a minor effect but unless everyone is tested once a fortnight or summat, we can't really bring this under control nor really know what's going on. |
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
Nottinghamshire is now going to suffer the latest parnoia rules just because Nottingham itself just got invaded by 50,000+ students last week [from all around the country] tons of who came back positive when tested, most had no clue until tested, they had zero symptoms. None are seriously ill, if ill at all. Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
That’s my point, Paul.
A lot of people keen to infect others, not so keen on it themselves. They’d no doubt voluntarily shield while it all plays out, while those in low paid and precarious work get to risk their health. It’s a laughable double standard. For an immunity unproven. To reach 50-70% it’s almost impossible for it not to reach high risk groups at some stage - so no reason for anyone, whatever their age, who believes in this policy to not do their bit. Even those at risk still stand a better chance than a coin toss. Rather die free than live a prisoner, as they say. |
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
Let’s get this over and done with. If you want a lockdown, be my guest. I won’t be joining you. ---------- Post added at 20:37 ---------- Previous post was at 20:35 ---------- Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
Nobody is advocating deliberate infection. Once again you are twisting what people say out of all recognition. You’re very good at that,I will admit. |
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
Quote:
---------- Post added at 21:01 ---------- Previous post was at 21:00 ---------- Quote:
---------- Post added at 21:02 ---------- Previous post was at 21:01 ---------- Quote:
---------- Post added at 21:08 ---------- Previous post was at 21:02 ---------- Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
Lets stop making personal jibes now, before I have to step in.
|
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
The key is to protect the vulnerable, particularly those in care homes. Most of the healthy population will scarcely get any symptoms at all. The medical experts are now coming around to this view themselves. ---------- Post added at 07:48 ---------- Previous post was at 07:42 ---------- Quote:
Scared? If I was scared I wouldn’t be doing the school runs and living my life as normally as possible. |
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
No. It’s entirely speculative. Sweden’s economy is tanking, they’re now also heading into a second wave like everyone else. I haven’t seen any scientist join the “herd immunity” camp. The Great Barrington declaration was funded by an economic think tank, signed by some physios and experts in “alternative medicine”. In addition to the evidence above can you find me scientists who were in favour of lockdown restrictions now saying to let it rip through society? Quote:
Fundamentally you don’t want to be in the 50-70%, but are happy for people in low paid, precarious work on public transport, retail, hospitality and even some NHS workers to put themselves at risk for a policy that is a) unproven in medical terms and b) doesn’t protect the economy because like you nobody wants to be in the 50-70%. Even just last week there was a case of a 74 year old, obese man with underlying health conditions staging a miraculous recovery with experimental treatments. Every day treatments are getting better and we get closer to a vaccine. If it’s really about the economy why aren’t you advocating funding an effective public health response and the tried and tested measures from South Korea, New Zealand and other south east Asian countries? If there’s one thing OB it’s that you’ve been ignoring the inevitable throughout this crisis and the longer significant numbers of people like you deny it the longer and more painful in health and economic terms this will be. |
Re: Coronavirus
Too many keyboard experts all over the internet.:(
|
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
I wonder how much other incidental data is being collected and shared around? |
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
A pub I went to on Friday had both the NHS QR code on the wall and their own registration site on the booking confirmation and menus. |
Re: Coronavirus
People do keep on about the success in New Zealand especially (the Asian countries are a bit different as the public behaviour to government is different). But geographically New Zealand is in a fortunate position. They don't have boat loads of people trying to get in across a small body of water any one of whom could bring in the virus past a border lockdown.
They also have a much smaller population (half population of Greater London - 2012) than us and is a bit bigger in land area. Makes it easier to lockdown hard for a short period and clear out the virus and keep it out. |
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
Public behaviour is often touted - people more likely to adhere to rules etc. Well if people open their eyes they should see that's a small price to pay for a semblance of normality. It'd also get the internal economy back on it's feet sooner. But no, it's too hard/too costly continues to be the mantra. I'm sure when we reflect on the costs in a few years it'd have been a relative bargain. |
Re: Coronavirus
But even if you segment up the UK how do you stop people moving between areas? Road blocks? How do you stop people walking cross country? What about people how live on the "border" that work in one area and live in another?
Population is important - NZ has a total population of say 5 million. The UK has 70 million in roughly the same land area. And population behaviour is important - the western mindset is more tuned to individuality than society. We say people should but they don't. And I do agree the costs will show to be bigger in the long run. New Zealand is "successful" because it can isolate itself. The Asian countries have some success because the populations do what they are told (or even suggested). We have neither advantage. |
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Do people really want another year of this? Because that's the alternative. |
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
No one's pretending these things are easy. |
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
Not good news given the tier lockdown level 3 which is going to be announced for many parts of the north later today by the government. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJwW...TheIndependent |
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/lond...-a4568481.html ---------- Post added at 12:35 ---------- Previous post was at 12:33 ---------- Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
We must be doing something right in Worthing as together with Cornwall and several other places we have a falling infection rate.
It could be having a large number of elderly living here that they're keeping their heads down. |
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
You need to join your own dots. |
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
Other countries have successfully plotted a different course and remained committed to it. They've been willing to invest in the public health infrastructure to test, trace and isolate. What is inevitable is without one we face further restrictions. I have harped on for months about these being inevitable - with many in denial - yet here we are. There is no viable alternative to lockdown that involves letting the virus go. You yourself don't want to catch the virus, but expect the rest of the population to do it for herd immunity at a cost of hundreds of thousands of deaths. The NHS will be the Coronavirus health service for this period - no cancer treatments, no screenings, nothing. For what? Half a percentage point on GDP? ---------- Post added at 15:13 ---------- Previous post was at 15:12 ---------- Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
Certainly, there should be no mandatory restrictions. The public should be advised on how to behave during the pandemic and to stay away from vulnerable friends and relatives, and vulnerable people should be advised to shield. Care homes in particular should be much better protected against people potentially bringing the virus into these establishments. This strategy, as I said, will achieve herd immunity with fewer deaths because it will tend to spread through the healthy population, the vast majority of whom won’t know they’ve had it. The fact that the vulnerable are protected in this way should ensure fewer deaths, despite the lack of a mandatory lockdown. Of course we should have the Nightingales. What I am pointing out is that we may not have enough NHS staff to man them. |
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
You keep incorrectly pointing out that I want to see more deaths, which shows how little of my argument you have grasped. Are you not aware of what the lockdown has done to people? It has meant that cancer monitoring has not taken place for those susceptible to it, operations have been cancelled, people have been left in agony because they couldn’t get dental treatment, it has been almost impossible to get GP appointments and mental illness has resulted from isolation and people losing their jobs and businesses. The lockdown itself has caused untold deaths and misery, which you appear to find acceptable. Your reference to the NHS is laughable. We’ve had next to no service from them for months (unless you have COVID symptoms, that is). ---------- Post added at 16:52 ---------- Previous post was at 16:48 ---------- Quote:
I suppose plunging everyone into poverty and collapsing the NHS and other services due to lack of money is a price worth paying in your book. We need to take a sensible approach, which is not something you have to offer. |
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
---------- Post added at 18:40 ---------- Previous post was at 18:38 ---------- Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
Quote:
The good news OB is I've seen nothing from Government to suggest your pipe dream fantasy of the old economy returning and sacrificing lives to expedite it is any closer to fruition. Back to the drawing board. Just a flu, go away in the summer, get out there and stop being scared. I look forward to your next piece of insight on this subject. |
Re: Coronavirus
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-54505193 @18:21
Quote:
Update - he did (it must be a typo on the BBC website). https://www.masslive.com/coronavirus...oblematic.html |
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
The stupidity of this approach is so obvious, it is clear you are taking the piss, so I will leave you to amuse yourself with these absurd ideas. I suppose you can always blame it on the ‘experts’ when you are eventually proved wrong, as you will be. Unless you are an expert yourself, jfman, in which case you have nowhere to run! :p: ---------- Post added at 19:14 ---------- Previous post was at 19:12 ---------- Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
I doubt it. Jobs and businesses need protected - that's where borrowing and taxation come in to plug the gap and an effective test, trace, isolate system are essential. The Swedish economy is in decline, so it's absolutely false to pretend that not controlling the virus is an economic solution. Isolating the vulnerable, and those who choose to be selective, reduces demand in the economy. Businesses are going to fail either way, you either support them financially or you don't. I fail to see how I will be proven wrong not a single country of any note is taking your approach seriously. |
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
Fantastic news for “I’ve had a good life” Vince Cable he can now volunteer to get infected by Coronavirus as part of clinical trials.
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/10/12/h...ntl/index.html This is a win-win for ‘herd immunity’ types they get to both progress herd immunity AND a vaccine trial. I look forward to fantastic demand to participate in the trial. |
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
How many weeks of additional thousands of Covid patients do you think the NHS is built to withstand?
|
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
How many NHS hospitals are there in the UK?
1,257 hospitals In addition to this, not all private hospitals are managed by NHS Trusts. The actual number, correct as at September 2019, is that there are 1,257 hospitals in the UK. This number includes the NHS Trust-managed hospitals and the additional private hospitals that are currently in use. 3665 patients into 1257 hospitals = how many to each hospital as an average. |
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:34. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.