Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
StanSP

3 Players Show Signs/Symptoms of Coronavirus

Recommended Posts

On 15/03/2020 at 08:28, Foxxed said:

From my understanding, even if most of the UK does become immune, they’re still sacrificing the lives of the elderly and at risk.

 

There’s nothing in place to protect the vulnerable, both young and old. It’s mad.

What would you suggest they put in place?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

Increasingly easy to sweep over it like that. Reported this morning that one gentlemen went in hospital six weeks ago with a stroke. He got the virus whilst in hospital. Couldn't fight it as he was in recovery as opposed to an 'underlying issue'. Was only tested for coronavirus post death. 

But that's always s been the case.My dad went into his hospital for a minor operation 7 years ago but picked up a water infection that he couldn't fight as he was week after the OP and passed away 

  • Sad 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  

3 hours ago, Captain... said:

I'm no fan of this government but it is an impossible situation. It may seem callous putting economic activity ahead of the lives of the elderly and vulnerable, but how many lives will be lost/ruined in the event of a recession. Suicide rates increase dramatically in a recession as well as health issues arising from poverty.

 

There is no right answer and these decisions are not being taken lightly. The virus is only one aspect of it, the economic and societal impact of any measures need to be considered. What benefit are extreme measures if they deal with the virus but cripple the economy for years.

 

"The economic impact may be bad, and we don't want to deal with that - but we'll probably bail the banks out again and work with the world bank etc - so let's instead sacrifice some elderly and vulnerable young."

 

The government is deciding to let people die rather than dealing with a possible economic crisis, from what I can see. I suspect the government values a GDP figure untouched by state intervention more than the death rate.

 

I hear this morning the government are advising the elderly to isolate. This is good. But they're also following a policy that puts them - and anyone else with health issues - more at risk.

 

Edited by Foxxed
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Foxxed said:

  

"The economic impact may be bad, and we don't want to deal with that - but we'll probably bail the banks out again and work with the world bank etc - so let's instead sacrifice some elderly and vulnerable young."

 

The government is deciding to let people die rather than dealing with a possible economic crisis, from what I can see. I suspect the government values a GDP figure untouched by state intervention more than the death rate.

 

I hear this morning the government are advising the elderly to isolate. This is good. But they're also following a policy that puts them - and anyone else with health issues - more at risk.

 

Hey - it could always be worse: we could have Donald Trump as PM :P

Edited by PhillippaT
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 15/03/2020 at 09:28, Foxxed said:

From my understanding, even if most of the UK does become immune, they’re still sacrificing the lives of the elderly and at risk.

 

There’s nothing in place to protect the vulnerable, both young and old. It’s mad.

As long as we don't have a vaccine that works, the vulnerable will continue to die. But in essence, that's nothing different compared to seasonal flu. The vast majority of deaths due to coronavirus affect people over 60 with already existing medical conditions, so the ones with a weak(er) immune system to start with.

 

What we can do is slow down the virus' spread by reducing direct contact with one another, impose self-isolation wherever possible, by staying calm and by eating and drinking as healthily as possible.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Foxxed said:

  

"The economic impact may be bad, and we don't want to deal with that - but we'll probably bail the banks out again and work with the world bank etc - so let's instead sacrifice some elderly and vulnerable young."

 

The government is deciding to let people die rather than dealing with a possible economic crisis, from what I can see. I suspect the government values a GDP figure untouched by state intervention more than the death rate.

 

I hear this morning the government are advising the elderly to isolate. This is good. But they're also following a policy that puts them - and anyone else with health issues - more at risk.

 

Yes they will probably bail out the banks but those that suffer during an economic crisis are the poor. In recessions suicide rates increase and health issues related to diet, alcohol and smoking increase. An economic crisis is not without it's death toll and should be avoided if possible. Whether this path the government is on is the best one I don't know and we may never know, but the only way to go forwards is to trust the government that they are doing the right thing and follow their instructions. If enough people start thinking they know better and going against government advice then their approach will fail.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Markyblue
4 hours ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

Increasingly easy to sweep over it like that. Reported this morning that one gentlemen went in hospital six weeks ago with a stroke. He got the virus whilst in hospital. Couldn't fight it as he was in recovery as opposed to an 'underlying issue'. Was only tested for coronavirus post death. 

Sorry but people pick stuff up all the time in hospitals,  sad but true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Markyblue said:

Sorry but people pick stuff up all the time in hospitals,  sad but true.

Which is true. I objected to the use of 'underlying health issues' as though it makes the death all more palatable.

 

The bloke went for recovery on an event which is in some part luck, survived that but died. I feel for all folk going in for must have treatment for cancer - which again is a 'luck' disease - but are at major risk of infection. To write off their potential death as an 'underlying health issue' doesn't sit well with me. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 14/03/2020 at 18:35, blabyboy said:

Forced isolation also increases the chances of a stronger second or third wave, which in turn makes it harder to develop a vaccine.. which mutated strain are you going to try and stop/slowdown?? Also, when next winter comes around, those that survived the initial wave would have a greater chance of infection as there would be multiple strains and all without a viable vaccine.

 

 Allowing the spread gives a better chance of herd immunity and self inoculation not only against this strain but others that will develop in the coming years.

 

Herding also helps to flatten the peak so your resources (the NHS) have a better chance of handling those infected.

 

Italy tried the lock down without much success, it's population percentage of older people is greater than ours. China is an unknown at present, they've locked down, but have now started reopening again so a key test will be to see if they get a strong second wave.

Quote

 

Is what you've written based on fact, fiction or as a result of your own thought process? If that sounds like a criticism it's not meant to be because we all, including me are guilty of the same. We simply regurgitate the last bit of what we deem to be credible information that we heard.

 

My understanding is that the mutation of viruses is not quite as you put it, yes they do mutate continually but it doesn't necessarily mean that they can't be successfully vaccinated against. Proof in the pudding is the current vaccination for seasonal flue that is available. It covers 'many flus' not separately, but more by  addressing certain similar weaknesses or flaws in each flus genetic makeup.

 

It's a very complex area of research and academia far beyond me and the average FT contributor Iwould suggest, hence we have to try and put our trust in those people who do know and rely on them to get us through this. What may seem a logical and common sense approah to us, based on what we believe we know, even whilst looking at others countries management of their situation is inherently flawed. I don't believe a 'one size fits all' response is always going to be right as this things passes round the world for a variety of medical, social, cultural and management reasons. 

 

https://www.scidev.net/global/disease/news/coronavirus-mutations-no-cause-for-alarm.html?__cf_chl_jschl_tk__=c44c29c0f54ad407fe7b512749fe8b99155a4727-1584267414-0-ARSQGGJVfxO2aTrtoNkpf4HIptBl-qS7d0_gDN4NWwFxnON7SXgFdi8IMy3xlmSBvJUp5C3Hy3qdMea4FxAOqfgm0_QdsZuk_1wpyPtbIv7iGjoKbDzvltEoHiEN2adfKl0X0Fa1Lbi9cX4FelpfQ4vvNOh2sJZ2Us-paSEU2gQVuyrDvY8x6kKqWtN-LSKLfiAoYwis_1YxRkU1Juil6cA5nKfYfPb9A8iqXVWgoaw13Zb5-PzqkDWLxO4XI62k8ILwE_m3QAKBoNOt7-nne4kU9Zj0h-jESY52A-AQ1Jda-ow26I6Bl-VgyRH24qmizkZmhhlZnwQIVx2ibANskdyIbV_N1_5hBggUraHekSEr

 

 

Hi Volepeazzuro,

First off, my apologies in delaying a reply. Secondly, no offence taken, the maxim "Trust, but verify" is a great one for these times  :)

 

My points were based in fact. The 'Flu' jab that you, I or others might receive each season is a 'best guess' of the strain that will be the main version in that year's season. Scientists incubate the strains, then kill them and effectively inject the dead version into the patient to allow the body to recognise it as a virus and then build antibodies against it. It's a best guess, which is why in some seasons, we have a 'flare' because it's a different strain that dominates. It's a bit of a bugger's muddle. See here for a concise but informative way on how they choose (https://www.cdc.gov/flu/prevent/vaccine-selection.htm)

 

TLDR; It's regional, so a Flu jab in the US will be different to the one in the UK, to the one in Japan.. and so on. And they have to do it 6 months in advance!

 

To draw comparison with your link (very good btw), the virus has mutated 3 points from the origin - and that's just in that patient, so how many more times might it be mutated before we get to the point of being able to create a viable vaccine that as you say, covers many different mutations - the answer is I/we do not know. We need a lot more cases before we can be confident that that one vaccine will work against multiple strains.

 

[side note] Not sure if you caught it, but an important point in the UK PM's update today was that secondary testing (those that have caught and beaten the virus) is now key because it will tell us: the infection rate; the survival rate; the amount of ppl that needed treatment vs how many could self-isolate... and will provide many more samples for testing against mutated strains. South Korea and Hong Kong took a very different approach to minimise the spread at the beginning of when they thought an infection may be coming. Both _could_ be valid and viable ways to deal with this threat and will be picked over in the years to come.

 

With regards to the mutations, the problem we have is that pretty much all of the countries infected thus far have said that no vaccine is going to be available for at least a year - possibly 18 months depending upon how rigorous the testing is going to be. So, you are right that eventually ( I hope) there will be a vaccine, but not in the short to mid-term and that means mutations may have a significant part of play come this Autumn/Winter, especially to those that have self-isolated and managed to avoid the original strain. The one exception is the US who claim to be near to getting a vaccine (well Trump says so!), but I personally think this is more for political purposes than what will actually happen, especially given their previous mistakes in having a diagnostic test that failed miserably earlier this year.

 

With regards to China especially. It is now very clear that they did too little too late, China had reports in November `19 and sat on them thinking they could contain their first wave - information for any second wave will be vital, but I would venture that it is not looking too promising for the Chinese authorities to be forthcoming on that. For Italy, it is perhaps a case of being unprepared and then trying to minimise spread 'once the horse has bolted'. I very much agree with you that a one-size does not fit all in this case, which is why although Europe is closing it's borders, but the messages coming out from each country are slightly different - some are enforcing shut-downs, others are recommending (appearing to be less authoritarian). The makeup of the population is also very important and perhaps why Italy is seeing more deaths due it having a greater percentage of more mature people, hence a higher death rate that those countries around it. You could also argue that Italy has been the 'canary in the coal mine' for Europe and other countries are now more prepared. The facts on the population makeup are out there for all to see, the time between China's first initial reports and when Wuhan went into lock-down is established, as is there ability to silence discussion around it.

 

But don't take my word for it, use the most powerful tool that humans have created and find out for yourself instead of posting on FT  :)  

Cognoscere nisi habeat fiduciam

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, blabyboy said:
  On 14/03/2020 at 18:35, blabyboy said:

Forced isolation also increases the chances of a stronger second or third wave, which in turn makes it harder to develop a vaccine.. which mutated strain are you going to try and stop/slowdown?? Also, when next winter comes around, those that survived the initial wave would have a greater chance of infection as there would be multiple strains and all without a viable vaccine.

 

 Allowing the spread gives a better chance of herd immunity and self inoculation not only against this strain but others that will develop in the coming years.

 

Herding also helps to flatten the peak so your resources (the NHS) have a better chance of handling those infected.

 

Italy tried the lock down without much success, it's population percentage of older people is greater than ours. China is an unknown at present, they've locked down, but have now started reopening again so a key test will be to see if they get a strong second wave.

 

Hi Volepeazzuro,

First off, my apologies in delaying a reply. Secondly, no offence taken, the maxim "Trust, but verify" is a great one for these times  :)

 

My points were based in fact. The 'Flu' jab that you, I or others might receive each season is a 'best guess' of the strain that will be the main version in that year's season. Scientists incubate the strains, then kill them and effectively inject the dead version into the patient to allow the body to recognise it as a virus and then build antibodies against it. It's a best guess, which is why in some seasons, we have a 'flare' because it's a different strain that dominates. It's a bit of a bugger's muddle. See here for a concise but informative way on how they choose (https://www.cdc.gov/flu/prevent/vaccine-selection.htm)

 

TLDR; It's regional, so a Flu jab in the US will be different to the one in the UK, to the one in Japan.. and so on. And they have to do it 6 months in advance!

 

To draw comparison with your link (very good btw), the virus has mutated 3 points from the origin - and that's just in that patient, so how many more times might it be mutated before we get to the point of being able to create a viable vaccine that as you say, covers many different mutations - the answer is I/we do not know. We need a lot more cases before we can be confident that that one vaccine will work against multiple strains.

 

[side note] Not sure if you caught it, but an important point in the UK PM's update today was that secondary testing (those that have caught and beaten the virus) is now key because it will tell us: the infection rate; the survival rate; the amount of ppl that needed treatment vs how many could self-isolate... and will provide many more samples for testing against mutated strains. South Korea and Hong Kong took a very different approach to minimise the spread at the beginning of when they thought an infection may be coming. Both _could_ be valid and viable ways to deal with this threat and will be picked over in the years to come.

 

With regards to the mutations, the problem we have is that pretty much all of the countries infected thus far have said that no vaccine is going to be available for at least a year - possibly 18 months depending upon how rigorous the testing is going to be. So, you are right that eventually ( I hope) there will be a vaccine, but not in the short to mid-term and that means mutations may have a significant part of play come this Autumn/Winter, especially to those that have self-isolated and managed to avoid the original strain. The one exception is the US who claim to be near to getting a vaccine (well Trump says so!), but I personally think this is more for political purposes than what will actually happen, especially given their previous mistakes in having a diagnostic test that failed miserably earlier this year.

 

With regards to China especially. It is now very clear that they did too little too late, China had reports in November `19 and sat on them thinking they could contain their first wave - information for any second wave will be vital, but I would venture that it is not looking too promising for the Chinese authorities to be forthcoming on that. For Italy, it is perhaps a case of being unprepared and then trying to minimise spread 'once the horse has bolted'. I very much agree with you that a one-size does not fit all in this case, which is why although Europe is closing it's borders, but the messages coming out from each country are slightly different - some are enforcing shut-downs, others are recommending (appearing to be less authoritarian). The makeup of the population is also very important and perhaps why Italy is seeing more deaths due it having a greater percentage of more mature people, hence a higher death rate that those countries around it. You could also argue that Italy has been the 'canary in the coal mine' for Europe and other countries are now more prepared. The facts on the population makeup are out there for all to see, the time between China's first initial reports and when Wuhan went into lock-down is established, as is there ability to silence discussion around it.

 

But don't take my word for it, use the most powerful tool that humans have created and find out for yourself instead of posting on FT  :)  

Cognoscere nisi habeat fiduciam

 

Wow an informative, non hysterical post on the Corona virus on foxestalk. 

 

Good post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, wurmer said:

Don’t be ridiculous, he’s bad but Trump is much worse.

I dont care for trump... but his last couple of press conferences have been good.  The one wher he got all the companies *,( roche..labcorp, google, Walmart etc etc) on the podium to tap into us patriotism was great.. made me wish we were more patriotic... 

Then he just shuts the theatres and bars etc... where as boris just said better not to go to them.

The us has a big covid 19 problem and time will show which leaders do best... but I thought boris lacked leadership today.

I still don't Care for trump.... but I can't deny he did a good performance today and on Friday 

Edited by foxinsocks
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Facecloth said:

Scandinavia is actually Norway, Sweden and Denmark. Denmark is in lockdown.

 

oops thanks for the correction!

 

I kind of meant with regards to democratic socialism, not so much the virus pandemic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, st albans fox said:

They have smaller populations than us 

 

They’re testing far more people so looks like they have more cases per head which they don’t 

 

across the region, they have approx 6 deaths thus far.  

 

there are many reasons why the virus may spread more slowly in some countries 

 

we shall see over the next week or so how the number of fatalities increases in comparison to the rest of Europe - I expect would be slower 

 

you could well be right!

 

but I think people are misunderstanding my point, it was in reply to someone suggesting that democratic socialism never works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Collymore said:

So did we ever find out if the players had it or not?

We didn’t test our 3 players so will never find out.

 

On the same day Watford announced they also had 3 players with symptoms, those 3 were tested and came back negative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 16/03/2020 at 07:49, everton carr said:

Out of the 35 that have sadly died all had health issues 5 were over 90 12 over 80 Only 1 under 60 Nick Matthews who had been in and out of hospital his entire life and was over 22 stone.Lets keep calm guys

 

Careless post, I can understand trying to avoid panic, but this isnt the way to go about it.

 

The most common underlying illness by the way is high blood pressure, which is a very common condition that under normal circumstances is considered very manageable and not an extreme condition.  People have perhaps been assuming it means things like cancer or other terminal illnesses.

 

For reference I have the virus (probably).

 

My symptoms dont match the 111 page, but that page is useless.  For you to be told to isolate for 7 days you have to have a temperature around mid torso and/or aggressive cough.

 

My actual symptoms are, 2 days ago I got sudden on set of high temperature on my head, nausea and faintness.  It barely lasted an hour though.  Yesterday the nausea and faintness came back, much more potent and lasted half a day, I rang 111 as I felt I was close to blacking out, he asked if I had a temperature  I said not now but did yesterday, was told to isolate, I said what about feeling faint, was told to ignore it, ironically another page on the nhs website tells you to ring 999 if got reduced consciousness, as is a medical emergency.

 

The issue with the NHS is they clearly withholding information, there is no defined list of symptoms and which category of severeness they come under.  In my opinion I probably have the virus, as nothing else makes particular sense, if its the flu then I have never had the flu before.  Non nhs websites confirm nausea as a symptom.   It also feels like I need more effort to breathe, but I also acknowledge anxiety could be giving me that impression.

 

I didnt ring 999 as I had concern for the people who would be in contact with me, and I also decided I would rather black out, not wake up, instead of spending a few days with invasive treatment before dieing.  Very odd, as for the first time I was thinking about how I want to go out.  If I answered the 111 website questions honestly I wouldnt have even been told to self isolate, they made it way too vague.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Captain... said:

Yes they will probably bail out the banks but those that suffer during an economic crisis are the poor. In recessions suicide rates increase and health issues related to diet, alcohol and smoking increase. An economic crisis is not without it's death toll and should be avoided if possible. Whether this path the government is on is the best one I don't know and we may never know, but the only way to go forwards is to trust the government that they are doing the right thing and follow their instructions. If enough people start thinking they know better and going against government advice then their approach will fail.

Government was choosing to let us die rather than intervene in a recession to help.

 

The government did a complete volte face. They are saying good things about isolation. Although, not enough.

 

We had one poster here saying he wanted coronavirus, next to a poster said if he was infected he may die.

 

The government created that risk to life. Thank god all the herd immunity crap is dying down.

 

What it's done to the infection rate in the UK, and danger to elderly and vuln, is anyone's guess. But I'm happy they're back tracking somewhat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...