Coronavirus Thread

[dsr-burnley]

49 minutes ago, Sampson said:

Peru has now seen more than 0.1% of its population die from covid.

 

They're the country with the worst outbreak by population bar the micro-states.

 

Interesting to see when they approach herd immunity.

 

You would imagine at least 1/3rd of their population have had it now if the 0.3% death figure is accurate.

 

Will be interesting to follow their numbers going forward.

The problem with Peru is that their stats are three months behind everyone else's.  They had a really strict lockdown, among the strictest in the world, until June which kept the disease really under control.  Unfortunately they ran out of money to fund it and when they set the people free they found they had made it worse, not better - it ran absolutely rampant.

 

Brazil, next door, have a nutter for President who says that coronavirus doesn't really exist.  Their excess deaths are lower than Peru's and until June at least were only half the level of ours.  That may have changed now because their deaths curve did not come down anything like as fast as ours, so their death rate is still (relative to April) higher than ours.

[Guest Fktf]

Those suggesting delaying the circuit break don't really get the idea of it. It's only really beneficial do it when cases are low enough. It's why it was suggested weeks ago, and why if we're going to do it - we're fast running out of time to get the benefits from it.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54206582 (sorry for the explanation in a mainstream link )

[Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot]

I've thought for a while a good way to go would be open everything up for a few months then fully lock everything down for a few weeks and repeat when necessary, that way if people know they're only going to be locked down for a few weeks their mental health will cope better, a light at the end of a mini lockdown tunnel, and financially it must be beneficial for the government to have a near fully functioning economy for a period of time, then subsidise for a short period, rather than having to prop it up with all these different restrictions from one area to another, add to that businesses themselves would be more secure, stuff like hospitality, if this were to become a near normal thing you could have a near full pub/restaurant and with the modeling being done, know that in 10 days from now or with as much notice as possible, you'll be closed for a fortnight, there'd be little to no stock waste as you could plan accordingly, I know at my pub when the first lockdown happened we lost well over 9k in stock alone. To me, while obviously not ideal, it'll be of most benefit to all aspects, when compared to managing measures locally (which is clear from it being implemented so poorly, in terms of communication and logic, Liverpool being the only tier 3 when Nottingham has a vast number more cases) or just letting the thing run riot and thus over burdening the hospitals. It gets rid of a lot of uncertainty in many different aspects of this virus, economically, for peoples health both mentally and physically and for hospitals, also the shit show that is track and trace would be less burdened. Yes it's flawed but I don't see a better option. Mini lockdowns every few months with a clear start and finish until we've sorted a vaccine or herd immunity or whatever the hell is going to cause all this to finally be over. 

[simFox]

7 hours ago, Lionator said:

The problem is if hospitals become overwhelmed, that average age will plummet as those younger people who need the life saving treatments will be less likely to get them.

The young will always get preferential treatment over old people, that's just a fact. It's not a compassion thing, it's about preserving your tax paying workforce. 

 

We locked down initially to buy time and increase capacity, so we need to implement it, otherwise what was the point of the first lockdown. A second lockdown just means you failed, it's not a solution.

 

We should be sending people to specialist covid treatment centres and that should have been available from the very start, not capacity over spill. Hospitals should be available for all normal care, pre pandemic. The treatment centres should have been open from patient 1 and remain open until the last patient. 

 

Make the covid centres an elite corps of the NHS with "covid pay", commensurate with the increased hazards and arduous PPE conditions. What you don't do is expect the normal doctors and nurses to bear the brunt and certainly not at the expense of other treatment.

 

In my view we've made a terrible job of it so far.

Edited 14 October 2020 by simFox

[st albans fox]

I’m told that up to a third of cases past few weeks in Herts are students in other parts of the country (the positive case is registered at your GP address).  When this is sorted out, the north will look even worse compared to the south than it currently does 

 

however, anecdotally, I am becoming aware of so many people now testing positive that I have a two person separation from that it’s only a matter of time before the south catches up ....

[Stivo]

1 hour ago, st albans fox said:

I’m told that up to a third of cases past few weeks in Herts are students in other parts of the country (the positive case is registered at your GP address).  When this is sorted out, the north will look even worse compared to the south than it currently does 

 

however, anecdotally, I am becoming aware of so many people now testing positive that I have a two person separation from that it’s only a matter of time before the south catches up ....

Are we double counting then?  Looking at where cases are on the map and comparing university news reports with local cases it seems to me that they are being counted in the university postcode area.  Eg see Exeter university web site and compare with cases in Exeter.

 

i think at many universities students must register with a university nhs practice within a couple,of weeks of term.

edit

 

looking at e.g nottingham

https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/studentservices/services/health-service.aspx

and exeter

https://www.exeterstudenthealthcentre.co.uk/how-to-use-us/registration/

 

and bath

https://www.bath.ac.uk/campaigns/registering-with-the-medical-centre-and-dental-centre/

 

they vary in how strongly they insist.

 

it would seem a major blunder if we have millions of students being recorded in the wrong place.

 

 

 

Edited 14 October 2020 by Stivo

[UniFox21]

12 minutes ago, Stivo said:

Are we double counting then?  Looking at where cases are on the map and comparing university news reports with local cases it seems to me that they are being counted in the university postcode area.  Eg see Exeter university web site and compare with cases in Exeter.

 

i think at many universities students must register with a university nhs practice within a couple,of weeks of term.

Admittedly in the small examples I have of myself, family and friends, it was never a requirement and was always optional. It was recommended but that's it. 

[Nalis]

1 hour ago, st albans fox said:

I’m told that up to a third of cases past few weeks in Herts are students in other parts of the country (the positive case is registered at your GP address).  When this is sorted out, the north will look even worse compared to the south than it currently does 

 

however, anecdotally, I am becoming aware of so many people now testing positive that I have a two person separation from that it’s only a matter of time before the south catches up ....

To be fair the south spread it up north in the first place back in March.

[Stivo]

7 hours ago, Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot said:

I've thought for a while a good way to go would be open everything up for a few months then fully lock everything down for a few weeks and repeat when necessary, that way if people know they're only going to be locked down for a few weeks their mental health will cope better, a light at the end of a mini lockdown tunnel, and financially it must be beneficial for the government to have a near fully functioning economy for a period of time, then subsidise for a short period, rather than having to prop it up with all these different restrictions from one area to another, add to that businesses themselves would be more secure, stuff like hospitality, if this were to become a near normal thing you could have a near full pub/restaurant and with the modeling being done, know that in 10 days from now or with as much notice as possible, you'll be closed for a fortnight, there'd be little to no stock waste as you could plan accordingly, I know at my pub when the first lockdown happened we lost well over 9k in stock alone. To me, while obviously not ideal, it'll be of most benefit to all aspects, when compared to managing measures locally (which is clear from it being implemented so poorly, in terms of communication and logic, Liverpool being the only tier 3 when Nottingham has a vast number more cases) or just letting the thing run riot and thus over burdening the hospitals. It gets rid of a lot of uncertainty in many different aspects of this virus, economically, for peoples health both mentally and physically and for hospitals, also the shit show that is track and trace would be less burdened. Yes it's flawed but I don't see a better option. Mini lockdowns every few months with a clear start and finish until we've sorted a vaccine or herd immunity or whatever the hell is going to cause all this to finally be over. 

I think that’s a good idea, and if you planned to have these at half terms then the impact on kids could be minimised.

[Facecloth]

Had a notification from the app a few minutes ago, stating potential exposure. Clicked on it and nothing happened. Quick Google and it seems like its a glitch. What a pile of shit. Might as well delete it.

 

It confused me as I've not been anywhere other than work recently, and nobody else here has had a notification.

 

EDIT: There's an update i hadn't run, hopefully stops it.

Edited 14 October 2020 by Facecloth

[st albans fox]

17 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

Had a notification from the app a few minutes ago, stating potential exposure. Clicked on it and nothing happened. Quick Google and it seems like its a glitch. What a pile of shit. Might as well delete it.

 

It confused me as I've not been anywhere other than work recently, and nobody else here has had a notification.

 

EDIT: There's an update i hadn't run, hopefully stops it.

Mine auto updates and continues to glitch 

 

1 hour ago, Stivo said:

Are we double counting then?  Looking at where cases are on the map and comparing university news reports with local cases it seems to me that they are being counted in the university postcode area.  Eg see Exeter university web site and compare with cases in Exeter.

 

i think at many universities students must register with a university nhs practice within a couple,of weeks of term.

edit

 

looking at e.g nottingham

https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/studentservices/services/health-service.aspx

and exeter

https://www.exeterstudenthealthcentre.co.uk/how-to-use-us/registration/

 

and bath

https://www.bath.ac.uk/campaigns/registering-with-the-medical-centre-and-dental-centre/

 

they vary in how strongly they insist.

 

it would seem a major blunder if we have millions of students being recorded in the wrong place.

 

 

 

I was told that there definitely isn’t double counting  in these cases 

[Facecloth]

10 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Mine auto updates and continues to glitch 

That's reassuring!

Edited 14 October 2020 by Facecloth

[Sol thewall Bamba]

Was it fact checked that the average age of a "covid" death was 82, as opposed to the life expectancy which is just over 81? Incredible (if not really relevant) stat if true. 

[UniFox21]

30 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

Had a notification from the app a few minutes ago, stating potential exposure. Clicked on it and nothing happened. Quick Google and it seems like its a glitch. What a pile of shit. Might as well delete it.

 

It confused me as I've not been anywhere other than work recently, and nobody else here has had a notification.

 

EDIT: There's an update i hadn't run, hopefully stops it.

Mines updated and I still get them

[SpacedX]

Further, restrictions, disruption and the prospect of sporadic lockdowns are here to stay until a vaccine is approved.

 

A "deadly" virus doesn't tend to be a successful one. It is, after all. a parasite and a such, killing the host isn't a great career move. But then could the next pandemic be 50 times as bad as this one? Is the lethality of viruses a macabre lottery with simply good fortune all that is preventing something as lethal as Ebola engulfing the planet?

 

Viruses have a code of conduct that they need to adhere to to succeed. They need to be stealthy because pathogens are unable to thrive and reproduce alone - so they invade host cells relying on these to decode the genetic information in order to produce components for new virus particles - to assemble these and then release new viruses to infect more cells. It's a balance, because if this process results in tissue damage that culminates in organ failure, the virus will very probably perish with its host. This is why 'apocalyptic viruses' with 90% mortality aren't so successful. To survive, the virus needs to operate undercover in enemy territory to evade the host's immune response. At the start of this thread in January, I naively, nonchalantly and dismissively made the uninformed assumption that this outbreak would be contained and eradicated very quickly - like SARS-CoV which was transmitted through the sick, so by isolating those with symptoms, you could effectively prevent an onward spread. It became clear that SARS-CoV-2 however is efficiently spread before people get sick. This makes traditional symptomatic-based public health restrictions, which worked well for SARS, largely incapable of containing COVID-19. Although less severe than the latter, it is far more virulent and able to infect both the upper respiratory tract and the lung causing acute respiratory syndrome, which SRS-CoV could not do.

 

So any successful spy, must be a chameleon like master of disguise and so it is with viruses, changing their protein coat regularly. If the mutations are too subtle the viral coat will be easily identified by antibodies, to drastic a change might inactivate the virus. Successful mutations are the happy medium. These influenza viruses that cloak themselves in rapidly evolving RNA are expert shapeshifters. We know that influenza mutations can result in pandemics that can claim millions of lives so as flu evolves, virologists respond with a seasonal vaccine with remains effective for a time.

 

Corona viruses apparently have a proof reading mechanism that edits out mutations, I think I'm right in saying because the RNA genomes are very large meaning that they are more prone to error. That means they change less regularly than flu does, which is good news for vaccine developers - but there is still much more research to be done to determine just how long this may be effective for.  

 

I suspect that the spread of an infection will eventually become endemic, meaning that it will stabilise at a constant level so that it becomes present in communities at all times, possibly at a relatively low, often predictable rate. This is likely some way off happening. This is why maintaining a safe distance from each other and isolating patients is so useful in preventing new infections. Sars-Cov-2 also has a lipid-containing coat, so thorough handwashing with soap, which breaks down fats, can stop it in its tracks...and contrary to the bullshit on this forum, yes if properly used and fitted. masks are very effective in both the prevention and spread of the infection. 

 

If we want to get there sooner, then safeguarding ourselves and others by observing social distancing, face coverings and if necessary, provincial or national lockdown is essential. This isn't an infringement on your civil liberties, flagrantly flouting and failure to comply with consistent scientific guidelines is an infringement on the rights and well-being of others. The damaging rhetoric circulating on social media seems to be that mandatory masks violate a person's constitutional right to liberty and to make decisions about their own health and bodily integrity. HA! - It's precisely the latter that has contributed to this inevitable second wave and plunged us so deeply in the shit. 

 

The post-truth era favours opinions over fact, so refreshing to see them so well articulated and informed for a change...

 

https://www.city.ac.uk/news/2020/august/face-mask-rules-do-they-really-violate-personal-liberty

 

 

[Guest Fktf]

4 hours ago, simFox said:

The young will always get preferential treatment over old people, that's just a fact. It's not a compassion thing, it's about preserving your tax paying workforce. 

 

We locked down initially to buy time and increase capacity, so we need to implement it, otherwise what was the point of the first lockdown. A second lockdown just means you failed, it's not a solution.

 

We should be sending people to specialist covid treatment centres and that should have been available from the very start, not capacity over spill. Hospitals should be available for all normal care, pre pandemic. The treatment centres should have been open from patient 1 and remain open until the last patient. 

 

Make the covid centres an elite corps of the NHS with "covid pay", commensurate with the increased hazards and arduous PPE conditions. What you don't do is expect the normal doctors and nurses to bear the brunt and certainly not at the expense of other treatment.

 

In my view we've made a terrible job of it so far.

We're so far apart on how we think about this, but even we can find common ground. In an ideal world a lot of this would be implemented. 

[filbertway]

38 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

Was it fact checked that the average age of a "covid" death was 82, as opposed to the life expectancy which is just over 81? Incredible (if not really relevant) stat if true. 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/average-age-of-coronavirus-fatalities-is-82-pcwqrzdzz

 

Using ONS data so I would imagine so.

[joachim1965]

1 hour ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

Was it fact checked that the average age of a "covid" death was 82, as opposed to the life expectancy which is just over 81? Incredible (if not really relevant) stat if true. 

Of course it's relevant, it means that most people have very little to worry about.

[StanSP]

What do we make of the scenes in Liverpool then? Will there be a mass outbreak after their behaviour in the streets? 

[StanSP]

 

 

 

 

[Leicester_Loyal]

3 minutes ago, StanSP said:

What do we make of the scenes in Liverpool then? Will there be a mass outbreak after their behaviour in the streets? 

Nope, hasn't spread anywhere with outdoor events or protests in the past 7 months.

 

Stupid scenes though really, but no different than what was happening in London at the weekend at 10pm.

[Corky]

7 minutes ago, StanSP said:

What do we make of the scenes in Liverpool then? Will there be a mass outbreak after their behaviour in the streets? 

Probably. I'm not surprised- this is exactly the problem we face. The vast majority are being sensible and coping with the restrictions, understanding that we can't carry on as normal and are adapting.

 

So many people have sacrificed so much, been housebound shielding to protect themselves, and some carry on without care. You really are in a lottery situation where you hope you don't end up near them.

 

Can't stand the selfishness of them.

[MonmoreStef]

6 minutes ago, StanSP said:

What do we make of the scenes in Liverpool then? Will there be a mass outbreak after their behaviour in the streets? 

I’d guess the same scenes will re occur in various other locations where similar lockdowns are introduced.

[RowlattsFox]

18 minutes ago, StanSP said:

What do we make of the scenes in Liverpool then? Will there be a mass outbreak after their behaviour in the streets? 

Embarrassing but inevitable

 

Its one thing it being busy after the 10pm curfew and everyone just walking away, to transport or whatever but these pricks were actually actively making a scene in a **** you to the rules. You can disagree but these scenes just give excuses for the government to blame the public. 

[Nalis]

Starting to think the cycle will be:

 

- Further restrictions between now and early December across the UK resulting in a slight dip in cases

- December opening up a bit with  maybe a max of 3 households mixings. 

- Restrictions coming back in January until early spring when cases inevitably rise during tbe previous December/early 2021 period

 

Having major restrictions in December wouldnt go out well and people are more likely to ignore them particularly around Xmas. Maybe the public might buy into lockdowns a bit more if the carrot of the Christmas season opening up is dangled (they shouldnt need to but still)?

Edited 14 October 2020 by Nalis