I am very sorry to hear about their struggles, especially your father’s.Good point - the stats may very well be reported at the end of this nightmare. I have a mother-in-law and father-in-law both with end stage COPD, the latter having been given only days to live, a few weeks ago before he perked up a bit. When these two finally peg out, I very much doubt they will be put down as COVID-19 victims whether they had it or not. My father-in-law is in a care home and the decision was made already not to treat him further if he takes a turn for the worst, even before all this started.
We’re not all £20 million assets unfortunately, clubs are going to look after there’s employees mate, I’d assume all staff too, physio, trainers, coaches.They will obviously have either purchased in advance or have connections to purchase on demand.
The point the person on Twitter and I (and probably @BosnianBlue) were making is that this advantage is not and will likely not be extended to the vast majority outside of the privileged classes.
It’s of course like that with most crises like this one, but it doesn’t mean it *should* be the case and we should highlight it as a failing in the collective response.
They will test dead bodies though. The trick is understanding who died ‘with it’ and who died because of it. In the example you gave, why add that into the numbers today?Oh yeah testing people who are not going to hosp is the right thing,it does mean that the money can go into the vaccine instead
Have you been in a care home? By their nature they are very ill elderly people,a lot of them with respiratory problems and all kinds of bugs floating around,unless it is one of the more well ones suddenly struck down with the symptoms there is absolutely no testing going to be done,sorry to sound callous but a government is not going to spare them a single thought
Why would testing people not taken to hospital be a pointless exercise and serve no purpose?So, you think that someone dying in a care home, showing all the symptoms of Coronavirus, will not be tested? Presumably so the rest of the people in the care home can all die within a week or two? That’s nonsense. As for, they’re not testing anyone not taken to hospital, why should they? It’s a pointless exercise and serves no purpose. If people don’t feel well, STAY AT HOME. If you feel very ill, have been ill for a while and are having breathing difficulties, go to hospital. It’s really not complicated and sending medical staff to test people seems pointless. Not only that, the only test that’s any use, is a positive one.
Can’t disagree with that.We’re not all £20 million assets unfortunately, clubs are going to look after there’s employees mate, I’d assume all staff too, physio, trainers, coaches.
Fucking hell, this thread's going to rival the Isco one by the end of civilisation.
Thanks mate - kind words and much appreciated.I am very sorry to hear about their struggles, especially your father’s.
I hope, when it happens, that his passing is as peaceful as possible and he does not suffer from this horrible condition.
It’s all any of us can ask for, really.
They have made it clear the elderly and infirm are acceptable losses,there is no testing of them unless they are taken to hospital with serious new respiratory symptoms,what i will keep an eye out for is the winter death figures when they are released,if they are massively up but the coronavirus cause of death is still low then it would suggest that the recording of deaths from the virus is way offThey will test dead bodies though. The trick is understanding who died ‘with it’ and who died because of it. In the example you gave, why add that into the numbers today?
It might be better if they released the numbers like this. Since March 5th, 12000 people have died in the U.K, TEN of which have been due to Coronavirus.
We can only hope, mate, for all of our sakes!Fucking hell, this thread's going to rival the Isco one by the end of this crisis.
I get what your saying and, in time, testing the entire population would be enormously helpful for the reasons you state. At the minute though, only a positive test is any use. If we imagine that the U.K. doesn’t know about 95% of people with it, that means that there are maybe 100000 people who have it. That’s over 65 million who currently don’t have it.Why would testing people not taken to hospital be a pointless exercise and serve no purpose?
I can think of many valuable purposes.
Wouldn’t we want to have accurate numbers for infections?
Wouldn’t we want to know who has been infected and recovered so as to allot emegerency assistance to those with antibodies (to potentially relieve those who are sick or have no antibodies)?
Wouldn’t it be helpful for those that have been sick to know whether they have recovered from COVID-19?
You are arguing against a point I didn’t make, mate — though we seemingly agree on the larger point that comprehensive, continual testing does serve a valuable purpose.I get what your saying and, in time, testing the entire population would be enormously helpful for the reasons you state. At the minute though, only a positive test is any use. If we imagine that the U.K. doesn’t know about 95% of people with it, that means that there are maybe 100000 people who have it. That’s over 65 million who currently don’t have it.
Are we testing everyone, or everyone who feels unwell? The reason they’re testing hospital admissions is so they know what they’ve got and thus have a reasonable idea of how to treat them.
If you think the current priority is testing people randomly, on the off chance they’ve had it, it’s not. And rightly so.
My mums care home went into lock down today. No visitors allowed. Whilst it is the best way to protect the very elderly, she will not understand why she isn't getting her usual visitors. How are you K? hope feeling a little better.Oh yeah testing people who are not going to hosp is the right thing,it does mean that the money can go into the vaccine instead
Have you been in a care home? By their nature they are very ill elderly people,a lot of them with respiratory problems and all kinds of bugs floating around,unless it is one of the more well ones suddenly struck down with the symptoms there is absolutely no testing going to be done,sorry to sound callous but a government is not going to spare them a single thought
One on the bus this morning too, coughing like mad.I can tell you one thing this self isolation is totally bollox must be at least 4 people coughing in my office yet they are still in work! Wtf
I think according to the WHO, that is what China did. They traced down contacts of those testing positive very quickly and isolated them. This was one of the main recommendations coming from the WHO report.You are arguing against a point I didn’t make, mate — though we seemingly agree on the larger point that comprehensive, continual testing does serve a valuable purpose.
I was responding specifically to the assertion that “testing people not taken to hospital” would be “a pointless exercise and serve no purpose” in the context of those who are sick but not being treated (as you were discussing with @karen7).
I do not think randomised testing is practical nor particularly valuable to us right now (though, I am sure South Korean leadership would say otherwise). But selective testing of potentially impacted cohorts (any person sick with symptoms that *could* be COVID-19, being an example of one) would be incredibly valuable as the outbreak progresses for the reasons I stated earlier.
In the longer term, I’d agree. In the short term, not so much.You are arguing against a point I didn’t make, mate — though we seemingly agree on the larger point that comprehensive, continual testing does serve a valuable purpose.
I was responding specifically to assert that “testing people not taken to hospital” would be “a pointless exercise and serve no purpose” in the context of those who are sick but not being treated (as you were discussing with @karen7).
I do not think randomised testing is practical nor particularly valuable to us right now (though, I am sure South Korea would say otherwise). But selective testing of potentially impacted cohorts (any person sick with symptoms that *could* be COVID-19, being an example of one) would be incredibly valuable as the outbreak progresses for the reason I stated earlier.