Corona Virus

[Kopfkino]

3 hours ago, MattP said:

Does the WHO need taking on after all this about why it was parroting Chinese lies in January? Absolutely. 

 

Is Trump the man to do it? Absolutely not given he took it as seriously as they did.

But he is one of few that would do so I can just about get on board. It'd be good if we did the same, no idea we're paying for China's rent boy

Edited 15 April 2020 by Kopfkino

[fox_up_north]

At the very least, however this ends, there will be a lot of finger pointing and new political/ country alliances made.

 

I also wouldn't put it past certain countries to try and take advantage of the situation.

[brucey]

8 hours ago, z-layrex said:

I'd just like to add that Nightingale is only treating so few patients because they can't staff it, like I said they wouldn't be able to a few weeks ago. The place is a bit of a PR stunt by Barts Trust and the government. They were never going to be able to staff it. Their capacity is not 4000, its not even 400.

The hospital where I work seems to have already seen its peak, with the number of positive inpatients plateauing for the past 2 weeks (new admissions = discharges + deaths) and now slowly decreasing for the last couple of days. This is outside London so obviously significantly different case loads, but I wonder if that's being mirrored in London? 

[leicsmac]

18 minutes ago, fox_up_north said:

At the very least, however this ends, there will be a lot of finger pointing and new political/ country alliances made.

 

I also wouldn't put it past certain countries to try and take advantage of the situation.

They already are.

[leicsmac]

With respect to the recent discussion, I'm curious about two things:

 

- what exactly the WHO were supposed to do in January if indeed they were given erroneous information about this virus.

 

- if one is interested in having an impartial international organisation to oversee these kind of things, exactly what good withdrawing funding from some areas will do when all that will mean is the areas that maintain funding will get a bigger say in how it operates (the opposite of what is needed).

[murphy]

19 minutes ago, brucey said:

The hospital where I work seems to have already seen its peak, with the number of positive inpatients plateauing for the past 2 weeks (new admissions = discharges + deaths) and now slowly decreasing for the last couple of days. This is outside London so obviously significantly different case loads, but I wonder if that's being mirrored in London? 

That's great news. I believe that London is ahead of the rest of the country so you would expect it there too depending on people's behaviours.

[Dahnsouff]

51 minutes ago, Kopfkino said:

But he is one of few that would do so I can just about get on board. It'd be good if we did the same, no idea we're paying for China's rent boy

Trump’s ire is disingenuous in the extreme, he is a hard line capitalist and would not have shut down the US if he could have avoided it. He may rail against the WHO, but only if it fits his aims and that is a poor reason to target the WHO. They need to be held accountable in review, just  like all parties after the crisis.

[davieG]

8 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

Trump’s ire is disingenuous in the extreme, he is a hard line capitalist and would not have shut down the US if he could have avoided it. He may rail against the WHO, but only if it fits his aims and that is a poor reason to target the WHO. They need to be held accountable in review, just  like all parties after the crisis.

Trump's already reviewed his approach and actions and he's concluded they were perfect and the best of all the world leaders. So he's allowed to criticise everyone else who's not as perfect as he is.

[Dahnsouff]

3 minutes ago, davieG said:

Trump's already reviewed his approach and actions and he's concluded they were perfect and the best of all the world leaders. So he's allowed to criticise everyone else who's not as perfect as he is.

This is a good point,I shall  proceed to flagellate myself before the Lincoln Memorial at once 

(Getting to the US may be a slight challenge though)

[BlueSi13]

8 hours ago, z-layrex said:

 

I'd just like to add that Nightingale is only treating so few patients because they can't staff it, like I said they wouldn't be able to a few weeks ago. The place is a bit of a PR stunt by Barts Trust and the government. They were never going to be able to staff it. Their capacity is not 4000, its not even 400.

Source?  Evidence?  

 

Or another crackpot conspiracy theory? 

[Finnaldo]

Just now, BlueSi13 said:

Source?  Evidence?  

 

Or another crackpot conspiracy theory? 

He’s an A&E nurse in London mate.

[rachhere]

1 hour ago, brucey said:

The hospital where I work seems to have already seen its peak, with the number of positive inpatients plateauing for the past 2 weeks (new admissions = discharges + deaths) and now slowly decreasing for the last couple of days. This is outside London so obviously significantly different case loads, but I wonder if that's being mirrored in London? 

I have a friend who works in ICU just outside of London and she has been saying the same - they finally feel like they can cope with the numbers needing to come into ICU, and last I heard no deaths over a 24 hour period. Her message (after a lot of despair over the past few weeks) was to keep doing what we are doing as they can see that it's working. 

[BlueSi13]

18 minutes ago, Finnaldo said:

He’s an A&E nurse in London mate.

I obviously don't know him so I'll assume that's true.  But I have seen nothing being reported to back his post up.

 

I personally think in the current climate of gotcha journalism I think we'd have heard a LOT more about it if that was the case.  Especially the part about it being some sort of Boris PR stunt.

 

Even the Guardian are reporting it might not be needed as urgently as expected:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/03/nightingale-emergency-coronavirus-hospital-london

 

Personally I prefer to stay positive at difficult times like this.  

[Lionator]

The World Health Organisation dropped a b*llock at the start but when they were saying test, test, test and contact trace in February and March, which countries weren't doing that? The US and UK? Who now has disproportionately large outbreaks compared to other countries, the US and the UK. All Trump is doing is making it look like the WHO are to blame, and absolving himself of any blame. Only his core base will buy it. Pretty much everyone messed up besides the countries which have actually controlled it by listening to WHO guidance (South Korea, Germany, Taiwan, Aus & NZ for example). 

[Finnaldo]

13 minutes ago, BlueSi13 said:

I obviously don't know him so I'll assume that's true.  But I have seen nothing being reported to back his post up.

 

I personally think in the current climate of gotcha journalism I think we'd have heard a LOT more about it if that was the case.  Especially the part about it being some sort of Boris PR stunt.

 

Even the Guardian are reporting it might not be needed as urgently as expected:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/03/nightingale-emergency-coronavirus-hospital-london

 

Personally I prefer to stay positive at difficult times like this.  

I’ve never met him, but he’s been on the board for years and mentioned he's a nurse in London long before this kicked off. I have no reason to think he’s been building up a fantasy life for years so I’d vouch for him.
 

There’s nothing wrong with staying positive but the input from frontline workers is pretty valuable considering they’re the ones with boots on the ground and the professional expertise to give us the best picture of how we’re actually coping in hospitals.

[Kopfkino]

1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

With respect to the recent discussion, I'm curious about two things:

 

- what exactly the WHO were supposed to do in January if indeed they were given erroneous information about this virus.

 

- if one is interested in having an impartial international organisation to oversee these kind of things, exactly what good withdrawing funding from some areas will do when all that will mean is the areas that maintain funding will get a bigger say in how it operates (the opposite of what is needed).

 

What is a the point in it being a PR organisation just parroting whatever information they are given. Comfortably the worst argument possible, 'why do you expect the WHO to do their job'. Jesus wept. 

 

Quite simple really, cutting its funding is part of binning it off and starting again. If it just exists to repeat erroneous information I think we'll cope just fine without it in its present form. 

[brucey]

3 minutes ago, Lionator said:

The World Health Organisation dropped a b*llock at the start but when they were saying test, test, test and contact trace in February and March, which countries weren't doing that? The US and UK? Who now has disproportionately large outbreaks compared to other countries, the US and the UK. All Trump is doing is making it look like the WHO are to blame, and absolving himself of any blame. Only his core base will buy it. Pretty much everyone messed up besides the countries which have actually controlled it by listening to WHO guidance (South Korea, Germany, Taiwan, Aus & NZ for example). 

Testing widely has definitely had a massive impact on the curve for the initial wave, but the reports about a second wave emerging in Singapore who has probably had the most extensive testing and tracing due to their small population are worrying.

[rachhere]

5 minutes ago, Lionator said:

The World Health Organisation dropped a b*llock at the start but when they were saying test, test, test and contact trace in February and March, which countries weren't doing that? The US and UK? Who now has disproportionately large outbreaks compared to other countries, the US and the UK. All Trump is doing is making it look like the WHO are to blame, and absolving himself of any blame. Only his core base will buy it. Pretty much everyone messed up besides the countries which have actually controlled it by listening to WHO guidance (South Korea, Germany, Taiwan, Aus & NZ for example). 

What's happening in the US is highlighting the inequality in health care. Which to the rich guys with full insurance doesn't matter normally, except this time there's no escaping. 

[Jon the Hat]

5 minutes ago, Finnaldo said:

There’s nothing wrong with staying positive but the input from frontline workers is pretty valuable considering they’re the ones with boots on the ground and the professional expertise to give us the best picture of how we’re actually coping in hospitals.

Valuable yes as it tells us about experience on the frontline; however I would counter that unless he actually works in the Nightingale or is part of the team staffing it then it is highly likely he is repeating what is essentially gossip.  It is easy to imagine people questioning how it could be staffed turns into rumours that it cannot be.

[Kopfkino]

1 hour ago, Dahnsouff said:

Trump’s ire is disingenuous in the extreme, he is a hard line capitalist and would not have shut down the US if he could have avoided it. He may rail against the WHO, but only if it fits his aims and that is a poor reason to target the WHO. They need to be held accountable in review, just  like all parties after the crisis.

 

But he's about the only hope to do it because everybody else is too besotted by the fuzzy ideals of international cooperation where intent is more important than outcomes so they'll just keep going with it cos that's easier than having to reimagine something. Of course, he's the worst person to do anything moving forward but if he's a catalyst for others to act that's good. 

[VLC86]

27 minutes ago, rachhere said:

I have a friend who works in ICU just outside of London and she has been saying the same - they finally feel like they can cope with the numbers needing to come into ICU, and last I heard no deaths over a 24 hour period. Her message (after a lot of despair over the past few weeks) was to keep doing what we are doing as they can see that it's working. 

Got a paramedic friend in Nottingham area who said it’s getting worse there. Obviously he isn’t in ICU so maybe some of them don’t even up there.

[yorkie1999]

12 minutes ago, Kopfkino said:

 

What is a the point in it being a PR organisation just parroting whatever information they are given. Comfortably the worst argument possible, 'why do you expect the WHO to do their job'. Jesus wept. 

 

Quite simple really, cutting its funding is part of binning it off and starting again. If it just exists to repeat erroneous information I think we'll cope just fine without it in its present form. 

could describe any government worldwide.

[Finnaldo]

1 minute ago, Jon the Hat said:

Valuable yes as it tells us about experience on the frontline; however I would counter that unless he actually works in the Nightingale or is part of the team staffing it then it is highly likely he is repeating what is essentially gossip.  It is easy to imagine people questioning how it could be staffed turns into rumours that it cannot be.

I can’t answer on his behalf, so I’ll leave that to @z-layrex to answer should he wish because neither of us know the extent of his knowledge so I can’t respond faithfully.

 

What I will say is he’s never appeared particularly partisan so I imagine he’s telling it as straight as he can, I recall him pointing out issues with it previously though.
 

 

[Lionator]

13 minutes ago, brucey said:

Testing widely has definitely had a massive impact on the curve for the initial wave, but the reports about a second wave emerging in Singapore who has probably had the most extensive testing and tracing due to their small population are worrying.

If you look at the graphs here (https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/singapore/) you'd suggest that Singapore aren't actually having a second wave, more they're having their first and through their testing they've managed to delay that wave dramatically. Unless there's a vaccine, cheap drug treatment or drastic social distancing then waves will occur regardless but quick and easy access to testing means you can quarantine yourself straight away, and family members can be tested before they're infectious so that they can quarantine. This ultimately will reduce the R0 number that everyone keeps talking about which will slow the spread so that hospitals don't become overwhelmed. 

[leicsmac]

13 minutes ago, Kopfkino said:

 

What is a the point in it being a PR organisation just parroting whatever information they are given. Comfortably the worst argument possible, 'why do you expect the WHO to do their job'. Jesus wept. 

 

Quite simple really, cutting its funding is part of binning it off and starting again. If it just exists to repeat erroneous information I think we'll cope just fine without it in its present form. 

If that's the case then bring the binning to the table explicitly, don't just half-arse things by cutting funding and letting it limp on when that would be the worst of both worlds.

 

I agree that the WHO and other organisations like it shouldn't just be PR organisations parroting - that's why they need more power to find things out and act on them, not less. Of course, the very attitude you describe below where contempt is shown for the "fuzzy ideals of international cooperation" means it will never happen. Cynical nation-centred realpolitik always seems to win.

 

4 minutes ago, Kopfkino said:

 

But he's about the only hope to do it because everybody else is too besotted by the fuzzy ideals of international cooperation where intent is more important than outcomes so they'll just keep going with it cos that's easier than having to reimagine something. Of course, he's the worst person to do anything moving forward but if he's a catalyst for others to act that's good. 

With respect, Kopf, do you really think that Trump, among other world leaders, want the WHO and other international organisations running in any way smoothly, whether with a fresh start or not? He and they just want them gone - they don't want any challenges to their own national authority, and they don't give two shites about actually cooperating internationally, even on matters like this one where it's so critically necessary.