Corona Virus

[Charl91]

4 minutes ago, Steve_Walsh5 said:

Why do a job if it makes you feel like that? 

 

Because I have a mortgage to pay, sadly.

[st albans fox]

20 minutes ago, StanSP said:

Apparently 1m+ people have been recorded to have recovered from the virus. Could be more though given some people could have had it and not realised. 

Given that the mortality rate is actually below 0.5%, might I suggest that at leat 40 million people have recovered .......

[Facecloth]

 

[BKLFox]

10 hours ago, leicsmac said:

I'm sorry, but this is not accurate. Korea has a total of eight international airports (though one is on an island) - Incheon, Gimpo, Busan, Daegu, Cheongju, Jeju, Yangyang and Muan, spread all over the country. Of course, if you're going to the other side of the world then you've got to go from Incheon or Gimpo but that's broadly the case with airports in England too (Gatwick or Heathrow, sometimes Stansted or Manchester).

 

It may not be identical but I stand by what I said in it being at least similar in terms of infrastructure - similar enough to be included in a point anyway.

 

Apologies for the pedantry, but last year Incheon had 68,350,784 passengers going through, and Heathrow had 80,844,310. That's a difference of passenger traffic (rather than capacity, actual people going through is more important than what on airport can hold in this case) of roughly 18%, rather than 33%.

 

No comparison is going to be perfect and I'll take your word on combination of airports in the UK being busier than in Korea but as above I'm sticking by what I said in that they are similar enough to warrant comparison in terms of how they have dealt with this.

 

I'll repeat myself for clarity here - the UK and Korea is not a perfect comparison in terms of statistics that might have an effect on this situation, but I believe it to be closer between the two than between the UK and practically any other country, so it stands to reason that is where the UK should be looking for comparisons in terms of logistics, if nothing else.

I want to let it lie i really do but bringing the other airports into play makes it even more of a ridiculous comparison as a whole & in order to make a comparison you have to look at the whole picture.
We have established Heathrow & Incheon pretty similar, although 10-15m is a large number which for an average is lets say 1m more visitors in January, but after that & just taking 8 airports each there is over 110m more foot traffic in the UK & to further expand on what @nnickn mentioned lets take Bristol as thats an obscure 1 to pick, Bristol has 2m more than 4 of the combined airports you mention & only 2m less than those 4 + the remaining 7 airports not mentioned within the country so 2m less than 11 airports combined, so NO foot traffic via airports can not be used in a comparison of the 2 Countries.

 

What were the other comparisons between the 2 countries after UK is larger & has a greater population & SKorea having better testing facilities?
I think maybe we should stick to the 3rd highlighted sentence & stop looking at apples & pears because as mentioned by @st albans fox "circumstances play a big part" & lets just say Well Done South Korea keep up what ever it is your doing.

[Leicester_Loyal]

Wow, 81k tests took place on Wednesday! We could actually hit 100k today, I didn't think it was possible. Hopefully we'll hear more later on today.

[murphy]

Just now, Leicester_Loyal said:

Wow, 81k tests took place on Wednesday! We could actually hit 100k today, I didn't think it was possible. Hopefully we'll hear more later on today.

 

There will be people here just desperate for the number to fall short.  

[BKLFox]

2 hours ago, Facecloth said:

 

I just had a vision of the world set like the 1976 classic Bugsy Malone with Jodie Foster & Scott Baio

[bovril]

8 minutes ago, murphy said:

 

There will be people here just desperate for the number to fall short.  

Ah, haven't heard the old 'some people will be desperate for us to fail" since the good old days of the Brexit debate. Didn't think it would get dragged out when there were lives on the line but there you go.

If you genuinely believe people want the government to fail over coronavirus I'd suggest you're way more biased than those you criticise. 

[Kopfkino]

8 minutes ago, bovril said:

Ah, haven't heard the old 'some people will be desperate for us to fail" since the good old days of the Brexit debate. Didn't think it would get dragged out when there were lives on the line but there you go.

If you genuinely believe people want the government to fail over coronavirus I'd suggest you're way more biased than those you criticise. 

 

Maybe not wanting them to fail but sharpening their knives and itching to pile in when it became official the target wasn't met. 

[Finnaldo]

21 minutes ago, murphy said:

There will be people here just desperate for the number to fall short.  

 
There’s no issue with thinking the government has done a good job if that’s your opinion. People like myself may disagree but I’m not going to insult you over it.

 

Making up situations in your head that the dastardly dissenters are hoping the government underperforms and more die so they’re right is a very strong accusation and more than a little bit weird. I can almost assure you that everyone you has criticised the government has praised at least some part of the government’s response so far, even if they feel it may have been slow to begin with or enough isn’t being done now. 
 

Pretending everyone is out to get the government isn’t healthy mate.  
 

7 minutes ago, Kopfkino said:

Maybe not wanting them to fail but sharpening their knives and itching to pile in when it became official the target wasn't met. 

Folks who are ideologically opposed are going to be more critical of government, that’s nothing new to be fair, the target seemed strangely high when we were struggling to hit 20k tests at the start of the month.
 

If I’d criticise anything, it would be that they probably should have set them more reasonably as to avoid this altogether than that they haven’t met it given where testing was at the end of March.

[Voll Blau]

19 minutes ago, Kopfkino said:

 

Maybe not wanting them to fail but sharpening their knives and itching to pile in when it became official the target wasn't met. 

If a government doesn't meet any target it sets itself, then it needs to be held to account for that. Likewise, they deserve praise for meeting it by the date they said they would.

 

I'm glad the press and public will be doing the latter. It's fvcking mental for people to assume that anyone other than the most extreme of partisan online weirdos would have wanted anything other than for the government to succeed in this venture.

[leicsmac]

5 hours ago, st albans fox said:

As I have said before, circumstances play a big part.  This virus began to explode in Hubei during middle January as the country approached their new year shutdown. I don’t know for sure but I suspect there is a drop off in tourism out of China in the middle part jan - and I also suspect that the virus wasn't circulating widely around the wealthy parts of Wuhan society given its likely origin in the wet market area. So perhaps Seoul got lucky that the worst time for Chinese tourists to be coming there co incides with the quietest period for Chinese tourism?? 
 

 mid Jan period is also not a period where the Chinese tend to travel around the country. how many of us go visiting distant family/friends in the first half December ?  We generally wait for the holiday period. And they managed to shut down the country approaching their new year break which stopped wide transmission. whilst we are pretty confident that their numbers are way under stated, an escape of the virus around the whole country (as would have happened if travel hadn’t been restricted) would have not been possible to publicly suppress.  
 

Europe has plenty of ‘hard luck’ stories (as well as poor planning and disease control) when it comes to how this thing got out of control across the continent- I would point to the e european countries with their low rates as an illustration that those parts with less movement of population in/out for business and tourism have done much better. Add to that their early shut downs - without a vaccine in the next six months, it could prove difficult for them to manage their situations.  We just don’t know. 

There are no easy answers here ........ we aren’t comparing apples and apples when we look around the world on this.

 

40 minutes ago, BKLFox said:

I want to let it lie i really do but bringing the other airports into play makes it even more of a ridiculous comparison as a whole & in order to make a comparison you have to look at the whole picture.
We have established Heathrow & Incheon pretty similar, although 10-15m is a large number which for an average is lets say 1m more visitors in January, but after that & just taking 8 airports each there is over 110m more foot traffic in the UK & to further expand on what @nnickn mentioned lets take Bristol as thats an obscure 1 to pick, Bristol has 2m more than 4 of the combined airports you mention & only 2m less than those 4 + the remaining 7 airports not mentioned within the country so 2m less than 11 airports combined, so NO foot traffic via airports can not be used in a comparison of the 2 Countries.

 

What were the other comparisons between the 2 countries after UK is larger & has a greater population & SKorea having better testing facilities?
I think maybe we should stick to the 3rd highlighted sentence & stop looking at apples & pears because as mentioned by @st albans fox "circumstances play a big part" & lets just say Well Done South Korea keep up what ever it is your doing.

...if we might rewind a bit, I made my OP because other people were making similar comparisons and I put forward Korea not as a perfect match for the UK (I emphasised that in the OP) but rather as the closest possible one in terms of certain statistics crucial to the spread of the virus. Even if the comparison in passenger numbers doesn't hold that much water, is there another country with a combination of a reasonably similar population number, land area and island border control characteristics (no land borders)? If there is, then fine, we can use that one instead.

 

If the argument is that any comparison argument in this way is going to be flawed as differences are too big for reasonable controlling in any case whatsoever, then fair enough and I can see that - however using certain numbers as a "control group" does, I think, allow you then to identify other factors that might have been in play - some of which have been talked about here, such as effectiveness of response and, yes, good fortune. I'm merely putting forward what I think to be the most fitting control group (again, if someone has another option I'd be happy to see it) so that when this is all done people might have a better idea about what factors were in play that made the difference in cases and deaths between Korea and the UK so stark. Because knowing that might be rather important going into the future.

[martyn]

If they hit 100k today, or even in the next day or 2 that's a decent effort from where we were.

 

Im very critical of the government in regards to the handling of this crisis, but i wouldn't be using this target not being met by a day or 3 as a stick to beat them with. 

[Kopfkino]

25 minutes ago, Finnaldo said:

Folks who are ideologically opposed are going to be more critical of government, that’s nothing new to be fair, the target seemed strangely high when we were struggling to hit 20k tests at the start of the month.
 

If I’d criticise anything, it would be that they probably should have set them more reasonably as to avoid this altogether than that they haven’t met it given where testing was at the end of March.

 

Yeah fine that doesn't bother me, it's more the trying to pretend that isn't the case. One poster says nothing of people wanting the government to fail but let's dress it up as that. People might not want to government to fail but it's pretty clear they get a semi when it gives them the chance to pile in or sit there criticising. It's why somebody claims on Twitter to have an email showing that the government stopped an order for PPE and that's automatically taken as a shambles by government, no enquiry as to why that was the case or what the actual details are. 

 

You acknowledge it and that's fine, it's innate in everybody to varying levels, it's just a version of tribalism. No problem with it, just cbf with the window dressing.

 

17 minutes ago, Voll Blau said:

If a government doesn't meet any target it sets itself, then it needs to be held to account for that. Likewise, they deserve praise for meeting it by the date they said they would.

 

No. An arbitrary target is irrelevant, the government set themselves up to be judged on it of course but effective accountability would still to review the whole testing regime rather than the number. I'd rather 80000 tests done as part of an effective testing strategy than 100000 tests done for the sake of testing some number. Suddenly in the last week we've had a flood of mail order tests, it's not clear if they really needed doing, how many of them actually needed doing but hey we've got to our arbitrary target.

Edited 1 May 2020 by Kopfkino

[Voll Blau]

11 minutes ago, Kopfkino said:

No. An arbitrary target is irrelevant, the government set themselves up to be judged on it of course but effective accountability would still to review the whole testing regime rather than the number. I'd rather 80000 tests done as part of an effective testing strategy than 100000 tests done for the sake of testing some number. Suddenly in the last week we've had a flood of mail order tests, it's not clear if they really needed doing, how many of them actually needed doing but hey we've got to our arbitrary target.

I'm not really sure it is an arbitrary target at this stage though when we're still working towards ensuring those genuinely most at risk are getting the tests rather than anyone sat at home reporting a slightly dicky tummy or whatever. I appreciate there are nuances to the overall testing strategy which call for more complex analysis than headline-grabbing numbers though.

[yorkie1999]

Just wondering, how long do the results of these tests take to come back

[davieG]

Found on Facebook

 

Perspective:

WE ARE NOT IN THE SAME BOAT ...
I heard that we are all in the same boat, but it's not like that. We are in the same storm, but not in the same boat. Your ship could be shipwrecked and mine might not be. Or vice versa.

For some, quarantine is optimal. A moment of reflection, of re-connection, easy in flip flops, with a cocktail or coffee. For others, this is a desperate financial & family crisis.

For some that live alone they're facing endless loneliness. While for others it is peace, rest & time with their mother, father, sons & daughters.

With the weekly increase in unemployment some are bringing in more money to their households than they were working. Others are working more hours for less money due to pay cuts or loss in sales.

For some not getting on with Family domestic abuse is rife...we never know whwt goes on behind closed doors.

Some were concerned about getting a certain candy for Easter while others were concerned if there would be enough bread, milk and eggs for the weekend.

Some want to go back to work because they don't qualify for unemployment and are running out of money. Others want to kill those who break the quarantine.

Some are home spending 2-3 hours/day helping their child with online schooling while others are spending 2-3 hours/day to educate their children on top of a 10-12 hour workday.

Some have experienced the near death of the virus, some have already lost someone from it and some are not sure if their loved ones are going to make it. Others don't believe this is a big deal.

Some have faith in God and expect miracles during this 2020. Others say the worst is yet to come.

So, friends, we are not in the same boat. We are going through a time when our perceptions and needs are completely different.

Each of us will emerge, in our own way, from this storm. It is very important to see beyond what is seen at first glance. Not just looking, actually seeing.

We are all on different ships during this storm experiencing a very different journey.

Realize that and be kind.

Unknown author

[Kopfkino]

7 minutes ago, Voll Blau said:

I'm not really sure it is an arbitrary target at this stage though when we're still working towards ensuring those genuinely most at risk are getting the tests rather than anyone sat at home reporting a slightly dicky tummy or whatever. I appreciate there are nuances to the overall testing strategy which call for more complex analysis than headline-grabbing numbers though.

I think it's arbitrary. It's the lowest big number they could come up with to be achieved on the day that's easiest to identify and communicate, there's no reason for it be 100000 other than optics. It might have focussed minds but it's not clear it's actually been achieved in a thorough, systematic way to optimise according to purpose.

[murphy]

1 hour ago, bovril said:

Ah, haven't heard the old 'some people will be desperate for us to fail" since the good old days of the Brexit debate. Didn't think it would get dragged out when there were lives on the line but there you go.

If you genuinely believe people want the government to fail over coronavirus I'd suggest you're way more biased than those you criticise. 

Now when did I say that?  I was talking about this specific target not being met and basing my assumption on the views that have been expressed here very recently, but you go on hearing what you want to hear.  I'll leave you to carry on the argument you imagine that you're having with yourself.

[Guest MattP]

Going to be some seriously salty tears if they hit the target, maybe next time we set 50,000 and everybody is happy.

 

I doubt many people really actually care, anecdotal but my fiance is on the front line and isn't remotely bothered about the test. She wants the antibody one of course, but other is almost pointless.

[Guest Fktf]

1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

 

...if we might rewind a bit, I made my OP because other people were making similar comparisons and I put forward Korea not as a perfect match for the UK (I emphasised that in the OP) but rather as the closest possible one in terms of certain statistics crucial to the spread of the virus. Even if the comparison in passenger numbers doesn't hold that much water, is there another country with a combination of a reasonably similar population number, land area and island border control characteristics (no land borders)? If there is, then fine, we can use that one instead.

 

If the argument is that any comparison argument in this way is going to be flawed as differences are too big for reasonable controlling in any case whatsoever, then fair enough and I can see that - however using certain numbers as a "control group" does, I think, allow you then to identify other factors that might have been in play - some of which have been talked about here, such as effectiveness of response and, yes, good fortune. I'm merely putting forward what I think to be the most fitting control group (again, if someone has another option I'd be happy to see it) so that when this is all done people might have a better idea about what factors were in play that made the difference in cases and deaths between Korea and the UK so stark. Because knowing that might be rather important going into the future.

I've been presented with this argument before on here - and I actually don't see all that much support for it. If we look at the countries that introduced a lockdown from the first few cases - they all have very similar epidemics. If we look at those countries that introduced a lockdown after many more cases - these also have very similar epidemics. Everything beyond the initial response doesn't seem to alter the broad pattern of the outbreak, which has been remarkably similar between countries that have taken similar measures. Sure, things like being landlocked or not, population number, density, will have some influence on total deaths at the end of this all - in the order of a few thousand - but any suggestions that we were always going to be much more severely impacted than S.Korea because of airports is utter cobblers. 

 

Given the similarity in epidemics between countries that have followed similar paths, we absolutely should be looking at the responses South Korea, Poland, Germany, Denmark, New Zealand, and any other countries that come out of this much better than us. Not as a 'what could have been', but so that next time something comes along we deal with it better.

Edited 1 May 2020 by Fktf

[StanSP]

6 minutes ago, MattP said:

I doubt many people really actually care,

I'd beg to differ seeing as one person came in here to try and claim some moral high ground about the testing figures and claiming people would potentially be happy if the target was missed 

[ketteringscott]

1 hour ago, yorkie1999 said:

Just wondering, how long do the results of these tests take to come back

My boss was tested Sunday and received the all clear to return to work on Tuesday afternoon

[Guest MattP]

11 minutes ago, StanSP said:

I'd beg to differ seeing as one person came in here to try and claim some moral high ground about the testing figures and claiming people would potentially be happy if the target was missed 

I meant in practical terms - theyll care if its missed as it's a stick to bash the Tories. If they get it they can move onto death count.

 

Not all people or posters btw - just the ones who've done nothing but bash Boris/Tories/Brexit since he took over.

[Nod.E]

2 hours ago, Kopfkino said:

 

Maybe not wanting them to fail but sharpening their knives and itching to pile in when it became official the target wasn't met. 

Well by pre empting that 'sharpening of knives', aren't you just as bad if not worse by preparing yourself to leap into defence of the government before knives have even been brandished? 

 

Whichever side of the fence you sit on everybody should be able to agree that this tribal politics we seem to be moving towards isn't healthy for anybody and both sides are guilty.

 

There shouldn't even be 'sides'. 

 

Yes I fall on one of those sides but I'm also capable of independent thinking. Sometimes my thoughts go against what my 'side' would say. 

 

I fear way too many people at this point just let others do their thinking for them and leap to defence or criticism whenever it suits. Sorry state of affairs.

 

I'm usually a labour voter but given that there are so many uncertainties, I am reserving judgement rather than using this situation to criticise the government to strengthen my argument concerning which political party is better.