COVID-19 — Coronavirus

Status
Not open for further replies.
*ring ring ring ring*
”Ahoyhoy!”
“Hi, it’s Dan from BBC Breakfast.”
“Hello...”
“Yes, we believe your Dad croaked it from Hong Kong fluey?”
“Yeah”
“Well we were wondering if you’d like to come on the sofa tomorrow and tell us all about it?”
“Yeah I’ll pointlessly come on tele and make a tit of myself, crying in front of the nation, tell everyone what a great Dad and Grandad he was”
“Great, get down to Salford for 5:30 am tomorrow, bye!”
“Good bye!”

well they could perhaps try and interview many of the people who have had this disease so they can share how they felt when they first got the disease, their symptoms, how they got tested , what it was like at the worst point and how long it lasted. What they did in self isolation and how they feel now .
there are a great many people who have had it and recovered I have not seen a single interview on TV of a person who has had it and recovered.

you know may be for balance and learning.
 
Is this proposal to quarantine over 70s for months going to be legally enforced or is it just recommended?

How will it apply to those over 70 who are still working? My brother in law is 71, owns a shop. He employs a couple of people who do the donkey work but he still manages it. Pops in most days to check stock levels, decide on offers, pay wages etc. Will he have to close down?
 
Hoping for? You mean all that learned discussion in the media over the last week on the Govts ‘unique’ strategy to combat a potential second wave by building up ‘herd immunity’ was based on...hope?

No wonder the **** put it behind a fucking paywall.
Yes, hope that they could get it out there in large enough numbers to kill off a load of [in their eyes] elderly, weak and useless people in society that are a burden on the NHS and the bank balance of the country. Democide in action.
 
*ring ring ring ring*
”Ahoyhoy!”
“Hi, it’s Dan from BBC Breakfast.”
“Hello...”
“Yes, we believe your Dad croaked it from Hong Kong fluey?”
“Yeah”
“Well we were wondering if you’d like to come on the sofa tomorrow and tell us all about it?”
“Yeah I’ll pointlessly come on tele and make a tit of myself, crying in front of the nation, tell everyone what a great Dad and Grandad he was”
“Great, get down to Salford for 5:30 am tomorrow, bye!”
“Good bye!”

Ring ring hi it’s Louise sorry dan can’t make it he’s died of the virus I’ll be interviewing you instead:)
 
Is this proposal to quarantine over 70s for months going to be legally enforced or is it just recommended?

How will it apply to those over 70 who are still working? My brother in law is 71, owns a shop. He employs a couple of people who do the donkey work but he still manages it. Pops in most days to check stock levels, decide on offers, pay wages etc. Will he have to close down?

Crystal Palace will need a new manager
 
Increasing? You are ill-informed.

There are huge question marks over the UK strategy. It might work but if it doesn't the outcome will be tragic. Arguably the best strategy is to flatten the curve in order to learn as much about the virus as possible.

I read today that in France half of the infected people in a critical condition are under 50 y.o. The conjecture that only old or vulnerable people are at risk might be wrong.

It's very unfortunate for the UK and the USA that their leaders are loonies. This might cost them a lot.
The problem in life in general and in this case in particular, there is little correlation between genius and common sense. Some of the most brilliant people I have ever known, you would not trust to tie their own shoelaces.

Such it is with the recommendations given to our government and course of action followed thus far.

The theory might suggest that allowing people to get infected - which is what we have been doing - get them treated and back out into the community so as to start to build up herd immunity, might have some possible legs.

But common sense says it's far too risky and based upon many assumptions which may be invalid. If these assumptions are wrong, then the entire strategy is flawed and many, many people die needlessly. The principle dodgy assumptions are these;

1. That draconian measures later on, will be able to stop the NHS being swamped. Given that Italy has twice the ICU capacity we have, and it has been completely overwhelmed, this is surely questionable. The common sense way to minimise the risk of the NHS being overwhelmed, would have been to limit the numbers to the greatest extent possible *before* significant exponential rise. We have not done this. Some of our inactions - like allowing unchecked incoming flights from Italy and Spain for example, have been wreckkess to the point of negligence IMO. And now have tens of thousands of infected citizens, soon to be hundreds of thousands. Many of them are going to get sick. The Tsunami is coming now.

2. That people cannot catch it twice. Who knows?

3. That all other options are ineffective and that "we'll all be catching it anyway". China saw an immediate drop in new cases the moment they implemented the shut down. New cases have now stopped. Similar in northern Italy. People say it will start up again as they get back to normal. But will it?

4. That people will get tired of draconian measures and compliance will fall over time.. Seems to me compliance is worse than it could be because of the governments "relaxed" approach. Also seems to me that people will be pretty disciplined when they see large numbers dying.

If any of the above underpinning assumptions by the government advisers are wrong, then we've chosen the wrong path and will have caused many to die unnecessarily.
 
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-51892402


‘The group, specialising in a range of disciplines, ranging from mathematics to genetics, though no leading experts in the science’

Just a point worth mentioning from that article. Not that I’m saying to ignore them but thought it was worth highlighting.
“Science” is a broad term though isn’t it?

Epidemiologists aren’t “scientists” either.

Not sure how much use an astrophysicist would be although they’re bona fide scientists.
 
“Science” is a broad term though isn’t it?

Epidemiologists aren’t “scientists” either.

Not sure how much use an astrophysicist would be although they’re bona fide scientists.
Worth noting, "In a separate letter to the government, more than 200 behavioural scientists have questioned the government's argument that starting tougher measures too soon would lead to people not sticking to them just at the point that the epidemic is at its height."

Given that this assumption underpins our policy of not introducing stricter measures sooner, if this is wrong, we've fucked it up already.

Our numbers have been rocketng up - very dramatically indeed over the past 4 days - so we now have tens, soon to be hundreds of thousands infected. There would have been a fraction of these numbers had we acted sooner. And we didnt, simply because of assumptions that may very well be wrong.
 
And what of the opinions of the 200 or so British scientists who have written to the government saying the course of action we are taking is wrong? If you dismiss the judgement of the scientists from pretty much every other country on the basis that "we know best", on what basis do you dismiss the above? Are the leading epidemiologists only the ones who agree with you?
Yes, I prefer to believe our response is best for us. The professional standing of most of those signatories has already been convincingly criticized but in any case their judgement in associating themselves with a politically organised petition is highly questionable. Fortunately good science is not suspeptible to majority voting including what other countries decide to do (in often very different current circumstances.)
“Science” is a broad term though isn’t it?

Epidemiologists aren’t “scientists” either.

Not sure how much use an astrophysicist would be although they’re bona fide scientists.
Your idea of what constitutes science is hilarious.
 
Last edited:
Just watched Matt Hancock on Sophy Ridge, wouldn't deny the new measures coming in wil include powers of arrst to suspected covid19 sufferers, forcing schools to remain open, reviewing nursing home lockdowns and possibly lowering requirements to work in one so staffing levels can stay current.

Denied they are using herd immunity as a method.
 
Last edited:
Increasing? You are ill-informed. There are huge question marks over the UK strategy. It might work but if it doesn't the outcome will be tragic. Arguably the best strategy is to flatten the curve in order to learn as much about the virus as possible. I read today that in France half of the infected people in a critical condition are under 50 y.o. The conjecture that only old or vulnerable people are at risk might be wrong. It's very unfortunate for the UK and the USA that their leaders are loonies. This might cost them a lot.
Yes the other Scandinavian countries are following the UK and Sweden according to info posted earlier by @TCIB. I'm afraid the only huge question mark is over you if you think the UK is led by loonies or it is acceptable to recycle alarmist and discredited misinformation about the situation in France.
 
Yes, I prefer to believe our response is best for us. The professional standing of most of those signatories has already been convincingly criticized but in any case their judgement in associating themselves with a politically organised petition is highly questionable. Fortunately good science is not suspeptible to majority voting including what other countries decide to do (in often very different current circumstances.)

Your idea of what constitutes science is hilarious.
As a matter of interest, are you a scientist? It would appear not, else you would have realised that scientific understanding is subject to peer review. Unless of course peers disagree in which case we just have to accept in anyway?

Edit : And their standing has not been convincingly criticised, or even criticised for that matter.
 
As a matter of interest, are you a scientist? It would appear not, else you would have realised that scientific understanding is subject to peer review. Unless of course peers disagree in which case we just have to accept in anywsy?
Peer reviews don't produce what is being reviewed - they are an endorsement by the community of experts in the field.
51dvkSyXnAL._SX343_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg

I think you may benefit by investing in a good book on the subject
But you’d had said other countries were increasingly following our lead. So which is it?
along with @SWP's back - who also doesn't seem to get it's a good idea to follow sound scientific advice rather than the herd instinct.
 
Yes the other Scandinavian countries are following the UK and Sweden according to info posted earlier by @TCIB. I'm afraid the only huge question mark is over you if you think the UK is led by loonies or it is acceptable to recycle alarmist and discredited misinformation about the situation in France.
@TCIB, @SebastianBlue here's my take on it:

There have been 900 cases and 2 death in Sweden so far. The last five days have seen 100, 100, 200, 150, 150 new cases. So 700 of 900 in the last 5 days. The second death is worrying. I heard on the radio that even though the patient was 80+ there were no underlying problems.

I don't think Sweden have had the same "herd immunity" policy as the UK until now, though. They started tracing contacts with known cases but at the end of this last week decided that this was no longer practical as the virus had spread into the wider community, at least in Stockholm. Now the focus has changed to protecting the vunerable as the virus spreads. I wouldn't say that this was necessarily plan "A" like in the UK but it's the only viable option now. It waw half term in Stockholm a couple of weeks ago and too many people came home from Italy and Iran for them to keep a lid on it. Where I work there were 8 of 120 people who had to self-isolate for two weeks afterwards.

The planning seems to be beter in Sweden than the UK.

People who self-isolate get pay or sick pay. A lot of standard surgeries have been cancelled. gatherings of more than 500 people have been banned and most sporting events have been postponed. Prison visits have been cancelled and walk-in surgeries have stopped - you have to call for an appointment now. Schools are generally staying open mostly because closing them will take people out of the work force to look after healthy children. They close if there are suspected or confirmed cases. But children and teachers aren't generally in the high risk groups, either. Most of these rules have come in over the last few days. They aren't ruling out lock downs, either.

There is a principle in Sweden called the "responsibility principle" that says: if you are responsible for something under normal circumstances, then you are responsible for it during a crisis too. So a lot is happening at local and company level. A lot of companies are asking people to work from home, banning travel, on-site visitors etc. The Employers organisations and Unions have agreed a plan to reduce working hours from 1 May across the board if necessay upto a 20% reuction in working hours. The governmnet have allowed for a 40% reduction in hours but a maximum 20% reduction in pay. They have introduced a rule for companies so tax can be delayed for up to a year.

There seems to be more planning ahead in Sweden than the UK, even though the plan has changed in the last few days. And there seems to be more coherence between what the government is saying and what they are doing, than in the UK. And there is more information about what the next step in the process will be. Of course everyone is being told that their government has the best plan, nobody is saying "Oh, the Koreans have a better plan, but we're not doing that."

We should have gone skiing yesterday, but we decided not to go. Today the Foreign Office have advised against all foreign travel. Holiday companies have cancelled all flights out are saying they will send out empty planes to fly people home. I imagine they will be asked to self-isolate when they get home. I posted earlier that the thing that we can controll is the "actual" R0 - how much we spread the disease to others. Sweden seems to be implementing policies that will flatten the curve more than the UK is.
It seems that even though Sweden is now following a similar approach, they're doing it in a better organized way.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top