Coronavirus Thread

[Nalis]

36 minutes ago, Nod.E said:

Lockdown costs lives, too. 

Exactly, there will come a point when we cant just say '2020 death toll minus 2019 death toll = covid 19 death toll' when the social impact of lockdown comes into play.

 

Saying that, maybe that equation might work to see how we dealt with things as a whole in a couple of years?

[Chocolate Teapot]

45 minutes ago, Nod.E said:

Lockdown costs lives, too. 

Genuine question - and I'm not seeking to disagree with your point. Is there any factual evidence of this? It makes sense to me that of course it would be an issue in the long run, I'm just yet to see any hard evidence in the media.

[Jon the Hat]

18 minutes ago, Abrasive fox said:

Genuine question - and I'm not seeking to disagree with your point. Is there any factual evidence of this? It makes sense to me that of course it would be an issue in the long run, I'm just yet to see any hard evidence in the media.

It doesn't really fit the media narrative at the moment.  Or the Government one I guess.  The panicked approach to this has led to so far:

- Pushing elderly peope out of Hosptials and into Care homes without testing - to free up beds for the COVID response- we know this has caused a spike in Care home deaths, what we dont; know if how many are really COVID and how many related to worse care.  We also don;t know how many are just accelerated deaths which would have happened anyway this year.

- Delaying hundred of thousands of treatments for anything else, which will result in deaths and certainly pain and suffering.

- Seperating lonely people including the elderly from those they need and love - also results in death, pain and suffering.

 

The more I look at it, the more lockdown looks like a massive overeaction which we will be paying for for the rest of our lives.  I read yesterday an article which asked if this started in a country other than China which happily enforced a lock down then said it worked, would anyone have imposed a lockdown in the west;  Not one country had lockdown is its pandemic plan.  Not one!  China must be laughing at us.

 

[Chocolate Teapot]

1 hour ago, Jon the Hat said:

It doesn't really fit the media narrative at the moment.  Or the Government one I guess.  The panicked approach to this has led to so far:

- Pushing elderly peope out of Hosptials and into Care homes without testing - to free up beds for the COVID response- we know this has caused a spike in Care home deaths, what we dont; know if how many are really COVID and how many related to worse care.  We also don;t know how many are just accelerated deaths which would have happened anyway this year.

- Delaying hundred of thousands of treatments for anything else, which will result in deaths and certainly pain and suffering.

- Seperating lonely people including the elderly from those they need and love - also results in death, pain and suffering.

 

The more I look at it, the more lockdown looks like a massive overeaction which we will be paying for for the rest of our lives.  I read yesterday an article which asked if this started in a country other than China which happily enforced a lock down then said it worked, would anyone have imposed a lockdown in the west;  Not one country had lockdown is its pandemic plan.  Not one!  China must be laughing at us.

 

Interesting, I'm also wondering if the arguments that this started earlier are being subverted too. Who knows is the answer to the question really. Will be interesting to look back on this in a few years time.

[FoxesDeb]

1 hour ago, Jon the Hat said:

It doesn't really fit the media narrative at the moment.  Or the Government one I guess.  The panicked approach to this has led to so far:

- Pushing elderly peope out of Hosptials and into Care homes without testing - to free up beds for the COVID response- we know this has caused a spike in Care home deaths, what we dont; know if how many are really COVID and how many related to worse care.  We also don;t know how many are just accelerated deaths which would have happened anyway this year.

- Delaying hundred of thousands of treatments for anything else, which will result in deaths and certainly pain and suffering.

- Seperating lonely people including the elderly from those they need and love - also results in death, pain and suffering.

 

The more I look at it, the more lockdown looks like a massive overeaction which we will be paying for for the rest of our lives.  I read yesterday an article which asked if this started in a country other than China which happily enforced a lock down then said it worked, would anyone have imposed a lockdown in the west;  Not one country had lockdown is its pandemic plan.  Not one!  China must be laughing at us.

 

Do we know definitely yet how many people this has affected? My appointments and treatment have thankfully continued as normal, and so have many other people I know. I just wonder if I've been particularly lucky, or if hopefully the number of people affected have actually been quite few 

[Salisbury Fox]

36 minutes ago, FoxesDeb said:

Do we know definitely yet how many people this has affected? My appointments and treatment have thankfully continued as normal, and so have many other people I know. I just wonder if I've been particularly lucky, or if hopefully the number of people affected have actually been quite few 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52876999

 

This gives an indication for cancer.

[FoxesDeb]

28 minutes ago, Salisbury Fox said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52876999

 

This gives an indication for cancer.

That explains why my treatment hasn't changed,  it's the initial screening and subsequent referrals that have really been affected, some of those numbers are frightening 

[Kopic]

Probably been discussed before but I wonder how many deaths have been reported as coronavirus that aren't. They just noted my grandads cause of death as coronavirus; the hospital said yesterday we won't bother testing as there's no point and he probably has it, and put him on a corona ward. Turned out the ambulance crew tested him and its now come back negative. Also to note he didn't have any symptoms of it other than his lungs were ****ed but they have been for a long long time due to smoking for over 70 years.

 

Just a bit concerning how blasè they seemed to be.

[Guest Fktf]

5 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

The more I look at it, the more lockdown looks like a massive overeaction which we will be paying for for the rest of our lives.  I read yesterday an article which asked if this started in a country other than China which happily enforced a lock down then said it worked, would anyone have imposed a lockdown in the west;  Not one country had lockdown is its pandemic plan.  Not one!  China must be laughing at us.

 

The UK influenza response plan definitely does. It might not have the word lockdown in it, but it talks about social distancing measures, the need to not breach NHS capacity, possibility of school closures - most of the stuff we've been hearing about/doing. 

[Blue ROI]

Just an update on Southern Ireland.

 

The death rate is over 1600. For the population its something of a large amount but nowhere near as bad as some in Europe. Dublin aside (which has 50% of the cases). Thea deaths are high but its only slightly higher than the deaths we would normally have in the same timeframe the last few years.

 

We have had daily deaths of 10 or less for around the last 10 days or so now. A few of us got back to work with Phase 1 a fortnight ago.  Phase 2 begins next week.

 

The 10 days before lockdown was brutal due to the uncertainty of it all and the quiet on the roads was incredible. The last 10 days or so has seen the crowds slowly but surely gather once again. Outside a shopping centre I went to in Cork on Sunday was packed full of people sitting outside enjoying the sun. A lot more cars are on the roads and the garda stoppages on the road have dropped. Masks are a lot more common but people are not as cautious wrt getting close to others.

 

In general people have started to get out of the lockdown state of mind. There will be an inevitable increase in cases but that 2 1/2 months of "lockdown" is over for a lot of people.

[l444ry]

6 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

It doesn't really fit the media narrative at the moment.  Or the Government one I guess.  The panicked approach to this has led to so far:

- Pushing elderly peope out of Hosptials and into Care homes without testing - to free up beds for the COVID response- we know this has caused a spike in Care home deaths, what we dont; know if how many are really COVID and how many related to worse care.  We also don;t know how many are just accelerated deaths which would have happened anyway this year.

- Delaying hundred of thousands of treatments for anything else, which will result in deaths and certainly pain and suffering.

- Seperating lonely people including the elderly from those they need and love - also results in death, pain and suffering.

 

The more I look at it, the more lockdown looks like a massive overeaction which we will be paying for for the rest of our lives.  I read yesterday an article which asked if this started in a country other than China which happily enforced a lock down then said it worked, would anyone have imposed a lockdown in the west;  Not one country had lockdown is its pandemic plan.  Not one!  China must be laughing at us.

 

So you don't go along with the Imperial College Paper that suggested up to 500,000 deaths if we didn't lockdown?  

[Jon the Hat]

2 minutes ago, l444ry said:

So you don't go along with the Imperial College Paper that suggested up to 500,000 deaths if we didn't lockdown?  

No not in the slightest.  I think protecting those at risk is of course right, but closing schools and paying for millions of people to go home is over the top and will cost untold billions.

 

The Imperical College gourp have a history of wild predictions - millions dead from SARS / CJD etc.  They don't appear to take into account human reaction.

[Finnaldo]

We were pretty much the last European country that bothered to lock down, it seems like we’ll come out with significantly higher deaths that most, bar perhaps the Italians you got taken completely by surprise and were on having the healthcare system in some places collapse. 

What do people that oppose lockdown believe are an ‘acceptable’ total of Coronavirus deaths? 

Edited 2 June 2020 by Finnaldo

[worth_the_wait]

9 hours ago, String fellow said:

Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson has a history of risk-taking.

Winston Churchill was the biggest risk taker of them all.     Standing up to the Nazis in 1939.    Madness, I tell you!  

[worth_the_wait]

I just had a quick look through the 89 page Public Health England document: "Disparities in the risk and outcomes from COVID-194"

 

The section on Ethnicity states ...

 

People from Black ethnic groups were most likely to be diagnosed. Death rates from COVID-19 were highest among people of Black and Asian ethnic groups. This is the opposite of what is seen in previous years, when the mortality rates were lower in Asian and Black ethnic groups than White ethnic groups. Therefore, the disparity in COVID-19 mortality between ethnic groups is the opposite of that seen in previous years.

 

An analysis of survival among confirmed COVID-19 cases and using more detailed ethnic groups, shows that after accounting for the effect of sex, age, deprivation and region, people of Bangladeshi ethnicity had around twice the risk of death than people of White British ethnicity. People of Chinese, Indian, Pakistani, Other Asian, Caribbean and Other Black ethnicity had between 10 and 50% higher risk of death when compared to White British.

 

These analyses did not account for the effect of occupation, comorbidities or obesity. These are important factors because they are associated with the risk of acquiring COVID-19, the risk of dying, or both. Other evidence has shown that when comorbidities are included, the difference in risk of death among hospitalised patients is greatly reduced.

 

The 2nd paragraph gives you the headline stat "up to twice the risk", although further reading shows that for most ethnic groups it's somewhere in the 10-50% range,

 

But It's the last paragraph that contains information just as important, as the figures above don't take into account occupation, comorbidities (underlying health issues) and obesity.

 

The final sentence is the crucial bit:  "Other evidence has shown that when comorbidities are included, the difference in risk of death among hospitalised patients is greatly reduced."

 

So this is saying you can potentially greatly reduce the 10-50% figure, once you've taken all other factors into consideration.

 

Which I think is excellent news, as that should hopefully allay the fears of anyone in an ethnic minority group.

 

[Voll Blau]

22 minutes ago, worth_the_wait said:

Winston Churchill was the biggest risk taker of them all.     Standing up to the Nazis in 1939.    Madness, I tell you!   

Churchill wasn't PM in 1939.

Edited 2 June 2020 by Voll Blau

[CosbehFox]

5 minutes ago, Voll Blau said:

Churchill wasn't PM in 1939.

Given he was forewarning British govt about the Nazi’s in 1935/36 as well, I’d hardly count it as a risk either. To compare him to Johnson is a joke 

[Finnaldo]

11 minutes ago, Voll Blau said:

Churchill wasn't PM in 1939.

If there’s to be a Churchill comparison, I think First Lord of the Admiralty in 1915 is more fitting.

 

That said, he has spent some times in the trenches last couple of weeks...

Edited 2 June 2020 by Finnaldo

[The whole world smiles]

36 minutes ago, worth_the_wait said:

Winston Churchill was the biggest risk taker of them all.     Standing up to the Nazis in 1939.    Madness, I tell you!  

I puked in my mouth seeing that comparison!

 

Comparing De Pfeffel with Churchill is like comparing Elvis Hammond with Jamie Vardy.

[Dr The Singh]

3 hours ago, Kopic said:

Probably been discussed before but I wonder how many deaths have been reported as coronavirus that aren't. They just noted my grandads cause of death as coronavirus; the hospital said yesterday we won't bother testing as there's no point and he probably has it, and put him on a corona ward. Turned out the ambulance crew tested him and its now come back negative. Also to note he didn't have any symptoms of it other than his lungs were ****ed but they have been for a long long time due to smoking for over 70 years.

 

Just a bit concerning how blasè they seemed to be.

It's more common then you think

[String fellow]

BoJo does fancy himself as Churchill Mk2. Why else would he write a book entitled 'The Wit and Wisdom of Boris Johnson', when there was already a book out entitled 'The Wit and Wisdom of Winston Churchill'? Btw, did anyone spot the word 'recrudescence' being used today in the government's daily press conference? It's a flare up of symptoms after a period of quiescence (or remission) following an infection. As if we haven't already got enough to worry about!

[l444ry]

3 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

No not in the slightest.  I think protecting those at risk is of course right, but closing schools and paying for millions of people to go home is over the top and will cost untold billions.

 

The Imperical College gourp have a history of wild predictions - millions dead from SARS / CJD etc.  They don't appear to take into account human reaction.

Got any sources for these please? Would be interested to see them.

[StanSP]

1 hour ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

Given he was forewarning British govt about the Nazi’s in 1935/36 as well, I’d hardly count it as a risk either. To compare him to Johnson is a joke 

I think it's an insult to compare Johnson to Churchill!

[z-layrex]

Did you see all the rubbish left at Lulworth Cove? Piles of it. Why do we have so many scumbags on this island.

[Izzy]

3 minutes ago, z-layrex said:

Did you see all the rubbish left at Lulworth Cove? Piles of it. Why do we have so many scumbags on this island.

I saw this on BBC, not sure if same place?

 

Absolutely appalling.