COVID-19 — Coronavirus

Status
Not open for further replies.
I thought we were all annoyed Johnson wasn’t being honest?

I don't have a solid opinion either way, we will have to see how it pans out. Just pointing out how different the coverage is and the measures which are being taken - Although, I would suggest getting public-buy-in, with a view to imposing restrictions in an attempt to save lives is a better way to go than telling people your granny is for it so get to the football anyway
 
I have totally changed my opinion of Covid19 in the last 24 hours or so.

I was wondering why the UK was so laid back about this when a couple of nations have gone to war on it and seemingly won. I think the UK approach is that this is not going to be a blitzkrieg. It's going to be here for months and months and you have to sustain a response from the population. I believe the UK objective is about keeping it at low levels and building up immunity. They want to keep the old and vulnerable safe but they want the rest of us to get ill at a controlled rate not because they don't care but because that is the only protection. Enough of us have to get ill to stop this spreading.

The point that confuses me now is what happens to countries like China where they drive down the virus to very very low levels, and then return to BAU. Will it return? I think the jury is out on that. If China can keep their virus levels low, then that will be crucial. There is a possibility it will just bounce back. Ironically I think just about the safest place in the world right now is Wuhan because they have many recovered people.

Another thing I have learned is that all these vaccines can not just be rolled out to frontline staff. When you vaccinate people you can make it worse because these people can die through a massive immune response so it has to be developed properly and that's the time consuming part. I thought they could bypass that and just do it.
 
A question no-one is asking, and for which we have no answer is this: If someone gets really sick and needs intensive care, and they don't get intensive care, what are their chances?

It seems to me that this will be the situation for a lot of people who become critically ill. 5% of pretty much any conceivable projected number of cases is still way more than we have ICU facilities. Italy have double what we have, and are nowhere near their peak but are already overwhelmed.

This is what frightens me more than anything - that one of my loved ones may get seriously ill, and they may die because we have no capacity to treat them.

I think this is an important question too.

The government appear to have taken the approach that it's going to be spread whatever measures are taken; I'm not going into the rights or wrongs of that. However, there seems no detail about how things are at the moment and will be in the short term.
 
How difficult is it to get people tested? I understand it will be expensive and the tests have to be done somewhere but at the moment nobody knows if they have a cold, the flu or this bloody virus. Human nature will tell people it is one of the less serious and the pressure to earn a living means they will not isolate but carry on as normal. This will of course infect others and so on and so forth.

Anyone who has had a real bad dose of the flu knows you feel like you are dying at it's peak. So you feel like this now, what do you do? Nobody really knows, now people are being told don't even ring 111. It feels like the band playing on as the Titanic sank.

As I type I am listening to a Professor John Ashton speak on GMTV and he is aghast at how the government has and is dealing with this and called Boris a coward setting the two medical experts up as the fall guys. He said we lost six weeks due to inaction at the start and I agree there. More robust action should have been taken, especially with all these people coming back from infected areas, especially Italy.

I think all mass gatherings now have to be banned, better late than never. People should be told not to go out unless essential, as to go to work and buy food. People that can work at home should do so. Pubs and clubs, theatres, cinemas, restaurants SHOULD be closed but probably won't be. On the subject of food big stores should drop this minimum delivery order, which recently went up to having to spend £40 as opposed to £25. This means more people would use it.

We seem to have a head in the sand ostrich approach at the moment and it isn't good enough.
The supermarkets don’t have the capacity to significantly increase home deliveries.
 
A question no-one is asking, and for which we have no answer is this: If someone gets really sick and needs intensive care, and they don't get intensive care, what are their chances?

It seems to me that this will be the situation for a lot of people who become critically ill. 5% of pretty much any conceivable projected number of cases is still way more than we have ICU facilities. Italy have double what we have, and are nowhere near their peak but are already overwhelmed.

This is what frightens me more than anything - that one of my loved ones may get seriously ill, and they may die because we have no capacity to treat them.
If, and I say if, the situation there gets as serious as it is here (and at the moment it's nowhere near) there are gonna be many people, mostly elderly, dying suffocating alone in a hospital corridor while medics try at least to lessen their pain. No family allowed to visit them (obviously not allowed in the hospital and probably quarantined themselves) and no funeral function allowed afterwards.
 
ES-RSITWsAApOKf
Common sense tells you this is the most likely scenario. He mentioned on this morning taking it on the chin and the fact they aren’t closing schools and banning sporting events suggests they want the majority of the public to catch it now and be over it in a matter of weeks and back to work so the economy is less impacted than it being dragged out over 3/4 months. Unfortunately our elderly sick and weak will be collateral damage as he explained by saying he families will lose people before their time , that was pretty much a disclaimer .


It’s pretty fucking draconian
 
This absolutely nails it. China is for me an experiment. Let's hope that China works. If they survive and keep their numbers down then that is the way the whole world goes and it will be gone in a month of draconian isolation.

If it returns then the only thing to do is play the long game and build up immunity. There's also anti-virals. The trouble is when you get to a certain level, which Italy reached some days ago the virus starts to surge. Societies will get forced into the isolation method.

I believe that the UK's approach is actually the best. keep a slow burn for as long as possible to build up immunity, and postpone that peak until you are forced.
 
I have totally changed my opinion of Covid19 in the last 24 hours or so.

I was wondering why the UK was so laid back about this when a couple of nations have gone to war on it and seemingly won. I think the UK approach is that this is not going to be a blitzkrieg. It's going to be here for months and months and you have to sustain a response from the population. I believe the UK objective is about keeping it at low levels and building up immunity. They want to keep the old and vulnerable safe but they want the rest of us to get ill at a controlled rate not because they don't care but because that is the only protection. Enough of us have to get ill to stop this spreading.

The point that confuses me now is what happens to countries like China where they drive down the virus to very very low levels, and then return to BAU. Will it return? I think the jury is out on that. If China can keep their virus levels low, then that will be crucial. There is a possibility it will just bounce back. Ironically I think just about the safest place in the world right now is Wuhan because they have many recovered people.

Another thing I have learned is that all these vaccines can not just be rolled out to frontline staff. When you vaccinate people you can make it worse because these people can die through a massive immune response so it has to be developed properly and that's the time consuming part. I thought they could bypass that and just do it.

There isn't a vaccine at the moment, and making sure that the vaccine doesn't make it worse is the point of the longterm testing - it would be surprising if there is one available in 2020.

I don't understand the line "Enough of us have to get ill to stop this spreading". It appears they are trying to make it spread slowly, and not spike quickly.
 
That's my point exactly.and that's just in stadiums,fans come out and mingle in bars etc, its unbelievable what he says & what government saying.
Think it was France no bigger groups than 1,000,x that by potential is fking scary
And what happens when NHS staff starts showing symptoms.
Then we are fked big time,it will be the fittest survive sadly..

The number of serious cases is quite interesting and shows there must be multiple strains or something weird is going on in case reporting:

Italy - 1 in 15
China - 1 in 20
France - 1 in 25
UK - 1 in 30
South Korea - 1 in 100
USA - 1 in 120
Germany 1 in 300

I can understand the government objective in some ways. I think they want to build immunity because it is now inevitable that the vast majority of the population will be infected.

What they want is to spread the infections over a longer period otherwise there'll be hundreds of thousands in intensive care over a short period and the NHS cannot cope with that.

Lockdowns will eventually occur purely to slow the spread but to be honest for healthy young people it is probably ideal for them to get infected, get it out the way and build immunity so they might not get sick again in the future.

If we go into total lockdown then it will fade and come back in a loop like the flu.
 
I don't have a solid opinion either way, we will have to see how it pans out. Just pointing out how different the coverage is and the measures which are being taken - Although, I would suggest getting public-buy-in, with a view to imposing restrictions in an attempt to save lives is a better way to go than telling people your granny is for it so get to the football anyway

You won’t get the whole public buying in.

Johnson has hired the top scientists in the country to not only advise him but instruct the public as to why they’re taking these measures and certain agenda driven people have ignored the experts and attacked him.

The same people bemoaning Brexiteers for not believing the experts.
 
The number of serious cases is quite interesting and shows there must be multiple strains or something weird is going on in case reporting:

Italy - 1 in 15
China - 1 in 20
France - 1 in 25
UK - 1 in 30
South Korea - 1 in 100
USA - 1 in 120
Germany 1 in 300

I can understand the government objective in some ways. I think they want to build immunity because it is now inevitable that the vast majority of the population will be infected.

What they want is to spread the infections over a longer period otherwise there'll be hundreds of thousands in intensive care over a short period and the NHS cannot cope with that.

Lockdowns will eventually occur purely to slow the spread but to be honest for healthy young people it is probably ideal for them to get infected, get it out the way and build immunity so they might not get sick again in the future.

If we go into total lockdown then it will fade and come back in a loop like the flu.

It’s the reporting mate.

It’s nowhere near any of those figures.

There’s thousands in the UK with it who haven’t been tested.
 
it’s Russian roulette with an entire population. Are we being fucking irresponsible and can the rest of the world hold us accountable ?
If I were other countries I would ban every British citizen from crossing their borders as a response to our inaction

India, Israel, Uganda and Vietnam already have
 
A question no-one is asking, and for which we have no answer is this: If someone gets really sick and needs intensive care, and they don't get intensive care, what are their chances?

It seems to me that this will be the situation for a lot of people who become critically ill. 5% of pretty much any conceivable projected number of cases is still way more than we have ICU facilities. Italy have double what we have, and are nowhere near their peak but are already overwhelmed.

This is what frightens me more than anything - that one of my loved ones may get seriously ill, and they may die because we have no capacity to treat them.

They are fucked mate. They do like they do on a battlefield or a terrorist attack. They treat the ones they think they have more chance of saving and leave the others to die.

My dad is 88 and has to have a minimum five hour operation next week to remove cancerous growths from his bowel. This has come at the worst possible time for him and us. I desperately want to go and see him before the operation but I still have a cough from an horrendous bout of flu in January and I am terrified I will give him an infection. In contrast my stupid sister has decided to book a luxury caravan in Rhyl for a long weekend to cheer them up before the operation. So two people in the high risk age group, one with a serious operation looming are being taken out in public. I am fucking fuming.
 
I have totally changed my opinion of Covid19 in the last 24 hours or so.

I was wondering why the UK was so laid back about this when a couple of nations have gone to war on it and seemingly won. I think the UK approach is that this is not going to be a blitzkrieg. It's going to be here for months and months and you have to sustain a response from the population. I believe the UK objective is about keeping it at low levels and building up immunity. They want to keep the old and vulnerable safe but they want the rest of us to get ill at a controlled rate not because they don't care but because that is the only protection. Enough of us have to get ill to stop this spreading.

The point that confuses me now is what happens to countries like China where they drive down the virus to very very low levels, and then return to BAU. Will it return? I think the jury is out on that. If China can keep their virus levels low, then that will be crucial. There is a possibility it will just bounce back. Ironically I think just about the safest place in the world right now is Wuhan because they have many recovered people.

Another thing I have learned is that all these vaccines can not just be rolled out to frontline staff. When you vaccinate people you can make it worse because these people can die through a massive immune response so it has to be developed properly and that's the time consuming part. I thought they could bypass that and just do it.
The thing that worries me is this idea that we can allow the virus to build up in the wider community to gain herd immunity, while keeping the old and vulnerable isolated and safe. I just don’t see how that’s possible. My 80+ year old neighbour has a few health issues, including early-ish dementia. There’s a constant procession of people arriving at her door throughout the day. Her relatives, carers, nurses as well as the usual suspects who knock on our doors (I recently had to get very cross with someone from a market research company who seemed determined to get her to answer his survey). If we’re allowing the virus to circulate in the wider population, I just don’t see how she can avoid it.
 
Common sense tells you this is the most likely scenario. He mentioned on this morning taking it on the chin and the fact they aren’t closing schools and banning sporting events suggests they want the majority of the public to catch it now and be over it in a matter of weeks and back to work so the economy is less impacted than it being dragged out over 3/4 months. Unfortunately our elderly sick and weak will be collateral damage as he explained by saying he families will lose people before their time , that was pretty much a disclaimer .


It’s pretty fucking draconian

I may be interpreting that differently from intended, but I think the last thing they want is for widespread immediate contagion. The death rate will likely be much higher if that happens, as the NHS will be overwhelmed.
 
For those that think it’s a good idea for the population to get it, because it’s only mild. I posted a clip earlier today where an American professor expressed regret at using the term ‘mild’. This is because ‘mild’ now refers to small symptoms up to pneumonia without the need for oxygen in hospital - that doesn’t sound particularly mild to me
 
it’s Russian roulette with an entire population. Are we being fucking irresponsible and can the rest of the world hold us accountable ?
If I were other countries I would ban every British citizen from crossing their borders as a response to our inaction
I am one of the biggest cynics out there. I was very critical of our approach vs the Chinese and Koreans but I believe it is informed by a belief that we can not entirely eliminate the virus from the population, and the only way to do it is by building up immunity. Different countries are doing different things. If the Chinese model works, then the world should follow that. It's not clear yet.

I am of the opinion that it's all going to come to a head now anyway. The virus levels are building up to a level where we can no longer stretch this out much longer and it will double every 4 days.

2,4,8,16,32. Get to 500, where we are now and every nation is forced to do the same.

Just watch the China figures. If they stay low for another fortnight, then that's the way to go. Total isolation until the virus transmission collapses. If it bounces back then enough of us have to get ill to form a natural barrier to transmission.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top