COVID-19 — Coronavirus

[Blue Hefner]

The measures I’m for, that are more stricter, are for airlines, they need to be sacrificed this year unfortunately and we need to let them go if needs be.

We can’t afford to get our house in order for someone to fly in from elsewhere and start it all again.

Those that are essential to travel need quarantine and testing before they’re released.

And before anyone says, my mum and sister work at the airport, so could lose their jobs.

There will be some tough choices that need to be made, that is for sure. Business will change the way they work and those that aren't too keen on technology will have to embrace, invest and implement(correctly) as best they can from remote working

Maybe there will be stamps in passports issued to show someone is safe to travel, I don't know. All I do know is lives are changed for the foreseeable so nit sure why UEFA are getting their nickers in a twist because European football next season is very unlikely - I won't be flying to Italy to watch City and I doubt many would want to come here as things stand

A vaccine and more testing capabilities can't come soon enough

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

The effects of that last weekend of madness.

From 18 days ago? - hardly.

 

[kaz7]

On the face of it, 44k tests.

I can see cases for this for the following:
- initial investigations to see if false negatives were common
- frontline staff being tested every day (I'd be happy with this)

It still seems high for those two options, although obviously there may be others.

I agree with those they think have had a false negative as the test isn't 100%
I dont know how often front lines are tested,they are having difficulty getting once it seems,i wouldnt mind the figures to include which number are re-tests although that might open them up to questions about how effective the tests are that we are buying,seems a bit of creative accounting to me after being heavily critised for the slow testing

We can't test enough for me and we should have been testing early doors imo

 

[Nellies left peg]

From 18 days ago? - hardly.

4-5 days for symptoms to show and 2 weeks of illness doesn't seem unreasonable

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

4-5 days for symptoms to show and 2 weeks of illness doesn't seem unreasonable

Not two weeks to death though.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

According to that (dubious source) 744.

(dubious) source

 

[Nellies left peg]

Not two weeks to death though.

Boris has had illness for 10 days so far and hopefully will come through

 

[SWP's back]

Not two weeks to death though.

Yes, conceivably:

“With COVID-19 - the infection caused by the new coronavirus - the time between onset of disease and death is fairly significant, at around two to three weeks or more.”

https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-h...th-rates-are-not-what-they-seem-idUKKBN20Z281

 

[MillionMilesAway]

I agree with those they think have had a false negative as the test isn't 100%
I dont know how often front lines are tested,they are having difficulty getting once it seems,i wouldnt mind the figures to include which number are re-tests although that might open them up to questions about how effective the tests are that we are buying,seems a bit of creative accounting to me after being heavily critised for the slow testing

We can't test enough for me and we should have been testing early doors imo

Yes, I agree with that. I was just going off there being 44k more tests than individuals.

I would think that if tens of thousands were on NHS staff being re-tested, they would (a) tell everyone and (b) the 2000 tests quoted a few days back would probably be wrong (too low).

Maybe there's a description somewhere as to why they've changed.

 

[kaz7]

A small number being 44,000 tests, yes

It includes testing front line staff so some may be being tested weekly etc and it also says it will include antibody testing.

Antibody testing is a long time off,they dont even know how many they will need