Coronavirus Thread

[CosbehFox]

1 hour ago, Jon the Hat said:

My kids have been back at school for a week and both are off sick with colds.  Snot everywhere!  Presumably if we were all about to get Covid they would have that instead.

This level of panic is nuts it really is.  We will look back on this ****wittery with a wince at the vast economic cost, long term death rates from untreated illness including cancer, and loss of liberty.  Meanwhile Sweden is out the other side and motoring.

As an education system and the supporting government, you’d be asking Sweden how did you manage the schools being kept open? 
 

It’s been said elsewhere - we have to carry on to stop the economy flopping, steady rises of cases shouldn’t be a worry. It’s a worry when it jumps exceedingly high

[Kopfkino]

8 hours ago, Nod.E said:

Let's see. The total lack of entire neighborhoods dropping dead, despite the most invisible and infectious disease in recent times inevitably having spread, and continuing to spread. That enough?

 

The people panicking about cases increasing contradict themselves in their panic.

 

If you accept it's spreading like wild fire (It is, it's basically inevitable at this point, and you do accept this if you're panicked), you are also accepting that we're in a bad place case wise. If you accept this and realise how quickly it has come after schools went back, you must also accept the inevitability of it all. What's your solution? Stop everything for 2 or 3 years until there's a vaccine or it just all blows over? While we're at it let's make it illegal to leave the house without sun cream in summer due to the cancer this causes.

 

Either it's spreading like wildfire and we're not dying from it at a rate that should raise any more concern than the next cause of death, so it's not a concern.

 

OR

 

It isn't spreading that much because of the measures we have in place. So it isn't as much of a concern as it might be.

 

Clearly the second option isn't right as here we are in the midst of the inevitable panic off the back of schools returning. So clearly these half measures don't work.

 

Choose one. Either restrictions work or they don't. The only possible argument you have at this point is that we should batten down the hatches to save any unnecessary loss of human life, which, frankly, is not only ridiculous, but counterproductive due to the side effects of such an approach leading to, you guessed it, long term loss of human life.

 

Lockdown should be regarded an absolute last resort. Only when hospitals are at tipping point should it be considered an option. The damage caused from lockdown psychologically and economically are far too great to treat it as an 'ah well best to be on the safe side, eh' option.

 

It's the equivalent of breaking your left leg to stop the pain in your right. 

 

60 million people die every year for fvck sake. Covid has 'only' killed 1 million and that's a rate that will slow down as medicine is already catching up. And that's also with some very questionable attribution with Covid seemingly cropping up on death certificates and taking all the plaudits. Polio used to kill 500k every year before a vaccine! 

 

Sick to fvcking death of idealistic, head in the clouds thinking.

 

It really is as simple as people needing to chill the fvck out about this. Sorry if my perspective offends you, and apologies that I'm not sh*tting the bed over this. I'm aware that's the popular response.

 

Good of you to follow up your chat about humans not doing nuance very well with an example. 

[Jon the Hat]

15 minutes ago, fuchsntf said:

Shows you dont seem to know or Care what situation can arise in peoples lives...

I am 6.2..66 Yes old..ex-high performance athlete,until injuries in foot & legs Made their Impact for amy decent Level of Sport..

So I decided from 22-24, to be adventurous ,and to travel,trek,and work,around the World's far corners....After 28yrs , (50yrs old)I After so much Wear & tear found myself slowly becoming a Walking catastrophy..; Disabled...then I discovered I had diabetes,then  I got cancer,then Wheel..chair....

Many normal fit people,hit that wall....

Ist Not all about weakness or unwilling to Keep active...some People just cant..!!!

Oh I am well aware that many people's health deteriorates through no fault of their own, but there are plenty of people who don't look after themselves at all.  I would include myself in that to be honest.  I need to be a lot healthier.

[Col city fan]

12 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

Oh I am well aware that many people's health deteriorates through no fault of their own, but there are plenty of people who don't look after themselves at all.  I would include myself in that to be honest.  I need to be a lot healthier.

Fair play Jon. 

 

[RowlattsFox]

Worth remembering that not too long ago nearly 1000 people per day were dying. Whilst the new cases are worth keeping an eye on, the panic is over the top and not helping. Everyone is worried about their future as it is and constant mentions of local or lockdown measures are not going to help people's mental health..  Imagine how many cases there must've been when the daily deaths were as high as they were. 

 

Need to stop using the word "lockdown" too, because they're not. Restrictions at best. Looks like Lancashire is following the North East into more detailed restrictions, apart from the area around the illuminations supposedly  

[Nod.E]

28 minutes ago, Kopfkino said:

 

Good of you to follow up your chat about humans not doing nuance very well with an example. 

The requirement for a nuanced view diminishes the more you realise there isn't a big problem. At that point a 5,000 ft view is more appropriate.

[Nod.E]

8 hours ago, leicsmac said:

It's true, though.

 

Peoples responses to this crisis seem to be, by and large, focused on if they or people close to themselves are at risk from it and/or how the measures taken to combat it affect them personally. That's because, deep down, the idea of other people dying out of their line of sight is abstract to them.

 

It's not a new phenomenon, either - quite often the response to humanitarian adverts showing just how bad famines/war atrocities in various areas of the world is an "oh God, that's terrible"....and then keep eating dinner. This isn't sanctimonious, it's something that simply is a matter of record - and I include myself as guilty of that, too.

 

I guess my point is that I'd rather if people were going to advocate for a position where a massively above average loss of life and suffering (but not likely them personally) is possible (but not certain, obviously) that they'd have the basic honesty of purpose to admit that they're driven by self-interest while doing it.

Self interest dictates why I'm getting so irate, I'll admit that much.

 

But honestly I would tell my own octogenarian grandparents not to change their behaviour based on what I believe.

[Mark 'expert' Lawrenson]

12 minutes ago, Nod.E said:

Self interest dictates why I'm getting so irate, I'll admit that much.

 

But honestly I would tell my own octogenarian grandparents not to change their behaviour based on what I believe.

I’d imagine most people with a job, mortgage to pay etc would be worried about any potential further restrictions and god forbid a lockdown.

Id also expect retired people, and the elderly and vulnerable to be scared and support restrictions.

People will always put their own needs first.

 

Ive not stepped foot in my parents house since March (they’re both late 70’s) I sat in the garden with them and fully respect that they are vulnerable.

I also made the decision to carry on seeing my 2 daughters (both over 18) throughout the whole crisis, I live on my own couldn’t bare not seeing them.

Have I gone against government advice? Yes, is my mental health better for it? Yes again.

 

People should use common sense and respect others, sadly I don’t see enough of either.

Edited 18 September 2020 by Mark 'expert' Lawrenson

[leicsmac]

1 hour ago, Mark 'expert' Lawrenson said:

I think just reading the posts on here gives an idea of the ever increasing divide in people’s opinions on the covid crisis.

I enjoy reading all the differing opinions and it’s good to debate.

On a larger scale it may not be so good, the country will become divided, extremists views will get louder and whatever restrictions put in place by the government will be met with hostility by many.

This crisis will rumble on throughout the winter and I do wonder what things will be like when we get to springtime 

 

It is very good to see the debate, aye. It's also not good on a longer scale, as you say.

 

People are tired, and fairly so in a lot of cases. The problem is that a virus has an evolutionary advantage over us there - it doesn't get tired.

 

18 minutes ago, Nod.E said:

The requirement for a nuanced view diminishes the more you realise there isn't a big problem. At that point a 5,000 ft view is more appropriate.

There is no way that anyone can be certain of that. Or at least, no documented and peer reviewed way.

 

4 minutes ago, Nod.E said:

Self interest dictates why I'm getting so irate, I'll admit that much.

 

But honestly I would tell my own octogenarian grandparents not to change their behaviour based on what I believe.

Fair enough - it's part of what could be called the human condition in a lot of cases and it's reasonable behaviour.

 

The problem is that in a case like this, along with a few other global issues that are on the horizon (some approaching fast), such self interest can actually end up being counterproductive in the long run both for people out of the line of sight of the exhibitor and the exhibitor themselves.

[filbertway]

I can't believe this has been knocking around for 8/9 months now and we're still being led by people who have no long term plans and are making new rules up on a weekly, sometimes daily basis. Such weak weak leadership.

 

God I hope this vaccines passes trials soon and we can start injecting everyone.

 

This isn't going away, I don't know why some guidelines aren't based on age rather than throwing everyone into the same bracket.

 

If you're going out and about, don't go and visit elderly relatives in their homes. It's not ideal, but neither is deciding what everyone can or can't do on an ad-hoc basis. 

 

[Kopfkino]

11 hours ago, dsr-burnley said:

That Italian one is the only one I remember.  It seemed pretty unlikely, though, because what it was saying was that there was no difference between the life expectancy of the people who died with coronavirus from the general population (age adjusted) as a whole.  Which seems pretty unlikely bearing in mind that we know it disproportionately affects the already ill.

 

It also seems unlikely because about 40%, I think, of the deaths occurred in care homes.  The average life expectancy remaining to care home residents, as best I can find out, is about 2 years.  So if 40% of the deaths are people averaging 2 years to go, then the other 60% would have to average 17 years to go to get to 11 overall.  And bearing in mind that even people not in nursing homes, the average age of death is well into the seventies, it seems unlikely,  If you have any more studies, by all means link them.  I'd be interested.

No, they did account for what a LTC and their age would do to life expectancy. Age is a key one actually, people seem to assume an 80 year old is about to die but the average Italian man who is 80 years old could expect to live for another 10 years. Many long-term health conditions that put you at risk from Covid are managed perfectly fine in normal times, having a condition doesn't make you weak and on deaths door, nor does being old mean you haven't got long left either. But again the study doesn't use the severity of the condition so maybe it would be revised down, but it also only looks at deaths and not what happens to the survivors.

 

The study didn't account for care home deaths, it also excluded anyone under 50. Let's assume that the proportions stay constant over time (I'd say the proportion of deaths from care homes would fall over time just using your own logic). So the 11 years relates to 60% of those dying. Assume the 40% had 2 years left. That still leaves you with a YLL of ~7 years, a pretty significant proportion of time that doesn't suggest it's killing people that were about to die anyway. The 60% outside care homes are losing, on average, ~14% of the life expectancy of someone born today. 

 

See I have no problem with people arguing that lives and YLLs are worth sacrificing by putting a cost on them, be that the cost to the economy, the cost to young people's life chances, the social cost or whatever that cost is, even better if people think about quality of life not just quantity. That's what we do with our health system anyway, we put a price on life. What I'm not keen on is, instead of having that honest, frank and difficult discussion about that, people who are effectively doing that anyway take to the comfort blanket of the idea that the people who are dying would have died soon anyway. Many probably wouldn't and so let's not hide behind that.

[Kopfkino]

1 hour ago, Nod.E said:

The requirement for a nuanced view diminishes the more you realise there isn't a big problem. At that point a 5,000 ft view is more appropriate.

 

I admire the hubrism.

[Ollie93]

52 minutes ago, Mark 'expert' Lawrenson said:

I’d imagine most people with a job, mortgage to pay etc would be worried about any potential further restrictions and god forbid a lockdown.

Id also expect retired people, and the elderly and vulnerable to be scared and support restrictions.

People will always put their own needs first.

 

Ive not stepped foot in my parents house since March (they’re both late 70’s) I sat in the garden with them and fully respect that they are vulnerable.

I also made the decision to carry on seeing my 2 daughters (both over 18) throughout the whole crisis, I live on my own couldn’t bare not seeing them.

Have I gone against government advice? Yes, is my mental health better for it? Yes again.

 

People should use common sense and respect others, sadly I don’t see enough of either.

Done the same myself, its all just common sense.

[Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot]

So the whole of the Midlands is being hit with restrictions? 

[simFox]

I was listening to Carl Heneghan on you tube talking sense to the commons committee thingy last night, just hope the government will listen to him.

 

https://youtu.be/isWSEwpBgKY

[Col city fan]

49 minutes ago, filbertway said:

I can't believe this has been knocking around for 8/9 months now and we're still being led by people who have no long term plans and are making new rules up on a weekly, sometimes daily basis. Such weak weak leadership.

 

God I hope this vaccines passes trials soon and we can start injecting everyone.

 

This isn't going away, I don't know why some guidelines aren't based on age rather than throwing everyone into the same bracket.

 

If you're going out and about, don't go and visit elderly relatives in their homes. It's not ideal, but neither is deciding what everyone can or can't do on an ad-hoc basis. 

 

Great post

I don’t think enough people remember that whilst the virus might not affect THEM in terms of severity (often based on age, physical fitness, few underlying health conditions etc), if they have contracted Covid 19 and go on to transmit it to a person who CANT fight off the disease, then it’s a very real problem

This concept of course underpins government guidelines on shielding.

It is no coincidence that a large proportion of people who have died from Corona Virus have been men, typically older, more obese, more unfit  men and of course a racial element has been identified 

This matters. 

Edited 18 September 2020 by Col city fan

[filbertway]

Haha they're working from the north and placing the whole country into lockdown region by region

[Trumpet]

3 hours ago, Costock_Fox said:

For those with taste issues, would you say it’s literally a complete loss of taste?

 

Basically I feel like I’ve got a very mild cold but my taste and smell is a bit off. It’s not gone completely, I’ve tasted vinegar but it smells a bit strange.

 

No tests available which is ideal.

For me I could still just about taste things, but I completely lost my sense of smell. Even once recovered it took me around 2 weeks to get any sense of smell back and then around 4 weeks for it to be back to what it was pre-March.

[Leicester_Loyal]

'In Wolverhampton and Oadby & Wigston, residents will be banned from Tuesday from socialising with other people outside their own households or support bubbles in private homes and gardens.'

 

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-new-local-lockdown-measures-in-parts-of-north-west-midlands-and-west-yorkshire-12074816

[Rain King]

4 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

'In Wolverhampton and Oadby & Wigston, residents will be banned from Tuesday from socialising with other people outside their own households or support bubbles in private homes and gardens.'

 

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-new-local-lockdown-measures-in-parts-of-north-west-midlands-and-west-yorkshire-12074816

What is the rule for the rest of Leicestershire at the minute regarding going into other people's houses? I've lost track of where we are at the moment.

[Chrysalis]

Is wigston still out of national intervention? 2nd highest in the country, tory mp.

[Chrysalis]

On 17/09/2020 at 11:22, Nalis said:

A second lockdown wouldnt really be the same as the first though would it? For economic reasons anyway.

 

It would means only one household can socialise but everything else would stay open, including pubs and restaurants.

looks like hospitality is closing soon, the leak (before the action) has happened.

[Chrysalis]

On 17/09/2020 at 11:33, Leicester_Loyal said:

 

It was obvious they were going to rise, even if we shut the majority of stuff, purely having schools and unis open will mean this virus still spreads easily.

It interesting looking at the 7 day data for Leicester City.  The doubling of numbers is almost solely attributed to west end which is dominated by students.

 

https://www.leicester.gov.uk/your-council/coronavirus/coronavirus-in-leicester-latest-news/coronavirus-data-for-leicester/

[Chrysalis]

On 17/09/2020 at 11:51, joachim1965 said:

If you test the whole population with a pcr test the positive tests will be off the scale and the reaction of government would be horrendous, we would all be locked down indefinitely.

Probably yes LOL, they not normalising based on test count.

 

The count per 100k is very flawed.  It should probably be based on % of tests that are positive.  Even that is flawed as well, as obviously if you only testing those with symptoms you would then get a higher %, but I feel its less flawed than the current metric,

[Chrysalis]

4 hours ago, Costock_Fox said:

For those with taste issues, would you say it’s literally a complete loss of taste?

 

Basically I feel like I’ve got a very mild cold but my taste and smell is a bit off. It’s not gone completely, I’ve tasted vinegar but it smells a bit strange.

 

No tests available which is ideal.

When I had it, my taste seemed weakened but also changed, e.g. WKD taste went from something I loved to sicky, it went very bitter.

 

Bear in mind I was never a confirmed case, but the fact I went very ill with similar symptoms and then recovered points to covid.