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
 Share
filbertway

Coronavirus Thread

By filbertway, in General Chat

Recommended Posts

st albans fox

st albans fox

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, WigstonWanderer said:

I get the impression that the number of positive test results seems to no longer look like exponential growth. Perhaps the government measures are working to damp things down a bit?

I get the opposite impression - in some of the areas where tighter restrictions were brought in two weeks ago there is a drop off but in the places I’m looking at the graph is headed upwards ..... 

 

If we do get to a point where R becomes nearer to 1 but there are 50k infections per day then you can work out how long it will take for that number to drop to a workable figure ref the NHS - apparently there are 96 k per day now and R is 1.5 in the north and over 2.5 in London as cases begin to increase markedly down here. 
 

Be interesting to see if the govt testing pos case numbers can catch up with the university studies ..... doubtful 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dsr-burnley

dsr-burnley

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, st albans fox said:


iF your figures were correct (and I strongly doubt that they are) then that’s 245 families who will live the next ten years wondering which one of them killed grandma - and if it becomes obvious which one did then they are in for a rough time from their siblings - when a new grandkid is born and grandma isn’t around to see it 

 

fwiw, I would be looking at a relaxation of the rules whereby the six is relaxed to 12 people (over the age of 14) and only for Xmas day. Unfortunately, no one will be able to travel more than 30 miles for Xmas day. 

 

infact, if the govt are going to keep the rules tight for Xmas then I would suggest they simply go the whole way and have a firebreak for the two weeks when most offices and factories are shut anyway.  I doubt given the latest study that says 100k per day are being infected (Lots of people are Sorry sir Patrick)  that we get past November without a nationwide lockdown in any case and the justification that Xmas can see some relaxation will be used.

 

 


huge problem.  Sad that so many the general public simply don’t have the individual responsibility required to get us through this without so many dying.  Yes the govt are culpable with their abject attempt at test/trace but joe bloggs could have helped us all out much more than he was prepared to. 

That is the point.   What I'm saying is that if we let all the old folks have their Christmas party it will be the last Christmas for 300,245 of them.  If we don't let them have a party it will be the last Christmas for 300,000 of them.  What you are saying is that is an absolutely unacceptable risk; better that the 300,000's last Christmas is miserable than that the 245 should die.  What I am saying is that when you're old, and can't get about easily, and have various illnesses which are all going to get worse, and you know that dementia may be waiting round the corner, then perhaps you think a little less long term and live more in the present.  Things need to be judged in proportion.

 

Are you planning to extend this to other causes of death?  2,000 people die on the roads each year.  Would it be reasonable to ban private transport to save these lives? Or would it be disproportionate?  Does the sibling who taught a relative to drive get a rough time from the other siblings if said relative is killed?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dsr-burnley

dsr-burnley

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Nod.E said:

To be fair, older folk probably haven't been having family dinners so the 1 in 100 number won't wash.

 

I agree with you though. The sacrifice won't be worth the saved risk. Not even close.

 

Not to mention 50,000 of those will die of other usual causes again next year. So a 1.6% chance that by turning down this Christmas, they'd be turning down their last ever one.

 

While I don't think your 0.008% number will be quite right, even if you doubled it a few times is way less than the risk people are going to be turning down their last ever Christmas.

 

As I said, the small level of increased risk doesn't justify the precaution and sacrifice.

Actually the 50,000 is just between now and Christmas.  300,000 people aged over 80 die each year.  And I suspect the 0.008% chance of death from one Christmas dinner is an overestimate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ealingfox

ealingfox

Posted
Posted

What's clear is this in-between stuff is a load of old bollocks. The people who dont need protecting are miserable and the people who do need it are dying in big numbers anyway. Either enforce a proper lockdown or laissez-faire and be done with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Crinklyfox

Crinklyfox

Posted
Posted
17 hours ago, z-layrex said:

That article on the BBC was pretty ignorant to be honest. ICU populations are always less acute during the warmer months, the patients starting to come in now are as sick as before. All perfectly manageable in terms of beds at the moment, Wales and Manchester area getting hit pretty hard though.

 

We had a lot of sickness at work over those couple weeks in feb. I had been feeling off for a few days, was on a night shift and started feeling worse and worse, dry cough and fever. Went home and got in bed, my mrs was away working. I had hallucinations for about a day after that so must have had a stonking fever, constantly feeling ice cold and very nasty cough. Just thought it was the flu! After my fever came down my chest got worse, but I also remember being incredibly hungry. I ordered 2 dominoes and I usually hate shit pizza like that. Definitely the weirdest illness I ever had. What was weird was I always felt worse after taking ibuprofen.

 

 

Just a word on Ibuprofen.

 

I'm not a medical professional, I just try to read up on relevant matters.  It's my understanding that it's the body that raises temperature when a coronavirus is contracted, this results in a high temperature which makes the sufferer feel bad but is more efficient for combating the virus.  Taking Ibuprofen or similar reduces temperature but makes it harder for the body to combat the virus.  Of course when temperature gets very high it becomes dangerous so there's a time when taking Ibuprofen becomes necessary, but until that point is reached I tend to avoid it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kopfkino

Kopfkino

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, st albans fox said:

I get the opposite impression - in some of the areas where tighter restrictions were brought in two weeks ago there is a drop off but in the places I’m looking at the graph is headed upwards ..... 

 

If we do get to a point where R becomes nearer to 1 but there are 50k infections per day then you can work out how long it will take for that number to drop to a workable figure ref the NHS - apparently there are 96 k per day now and R is 1.5 in the north and over 2.5 in London as cases begin to increase markedly down here. 
 

Be interesting to see if the govt testing pos case numbers can catch up with the university studies ..... doubtful 

 

When I saw the 96000 figure I thought it must be too high, that's a significant fraction of what it was earlier in the year and 'optimism' bias kicked in. But based on Sage's 2.7% hospitalisation rate, that would mean in a week to 10 days, hospitalisations would be 2500. The last day we have full England hospitalisation data for is the 25th, 1186 and doubling roughly every two weeks which is to say it isn't far off on that quick fag-packet maths. 

 

But crucially, this is already far outstripping Sage's reasonable worst case scenario from July, we're probably about 6 weeks ahead of it. Sad that the government failed to act earlier because of the false dichotomy of public health and the economy. 

 

CASEDEMIC.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nalis

Nalis

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, Sampson said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54723962

 

Yeah rhe rate of increase does seems to be growing if anything.

 

There's the BBC article about estimates are now roughly 96,000 people catching it a day. With it doubling every 9 days (this was though to be every 13 days a couple of weeks ago).

Fair play for showing link with a comparision between the same studies.

 

Previously seen this thread quote one figure in past such as positive tests against current Imperial or ONS projections a month later by way of 'showing' a higher increase than reality  when its an apple and oranges comparison.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
yorkie1999

yorkie1999

Posted
Posted
38 minutes ago, Sampson said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54723962

 

Yeah rhe rate of increase does seems to be growing if anything.

 

There's the BBC article about estimates are now roughly 96,000 people catching it a day. With it doubling every 9 days (this was though to be every 13 days a couple of weeks ago).

45,600 deaths. 310 new deaths

942,275 total cases. 24701 new cases

160,784 hospital admissions. 1227 new admissions.

 

Where is the discharged from hospital and consequently recovered data. Why do the media sites fail to publish what could be considered the most important bit of data.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nalis

Nalis

Posted
Posted
44 minutes ago, Ollie93 said:

Heard a couple of rumours a national lockdown is pending w/c 9th November. Doesn't surprise me tbh

If it was for three weeks on the basis we went to Tier 1 nationally for the month of December then I'd be on board.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
shramik

shramik

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, Nalis said:

If it was for three weeks on the basis we went to Tier 1 nationally for the month of December then I'd be on board.

That depends really, if there's a plan and way to come out of it.. 

 

Come January if all the kids go back to school, and students go back to Uni how do we not be In the same position as we are in now.. ? 

Also it's more palatable if you live with family, friends or partners but Christmas and New Year for those who live on their own is pretty awful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nalis

Nalis

Posted
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, shramik said:

That depends really, if there's a plan and way to come out of it.. 

 

Come January if all the kids go back to school, and students go back to Uni how do we not be In the same position as we are in now.. ? 

Also it's more palatable if you live with family, friends or partners but Christmas and New Year for those who live on their own is pretty awful.

Think people would accept November and January was locked down if December was not.  Thats just my opinion though to be fair and I could be wrong.

Edited by Nalis
Link to comment
Share on other sites
st albans fox

st albans fox

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Ollie93 said:

Heard a couple of rumours a national lockdown is pending w/c 9th November. Doesn't surprise me tbh

Wouldn’t surprise me - but I would expect 4 weeks to end 7th Dec so cases aren’t too high again  when Xmas comes around 

 

3 hours ago, Nalis said:

If it was for three weeks on the basis we went to Tier 1 nationally for the month of December then I'd be on board.

my uninformed guess would be that all inside social gathering premises are closed. (Bars, restaurants, cinemas, gyms).  Shops stay open (although not many will go shopping), work stays open (although please WFH if you can) and outside sports for U16’s continues.

 

schools stay open 
 

unis become on line apart from practical sessions 
 

2 hours ago, shramik said:

That depends really, if there's a plan and way to come out of it.. 

 

Come January if all the kids go back to school, and students go back to Uni how do we not be In the same position as we are in now.. ? 

Also it's more palatable if you live with family, friends or partners but Christmas and New Year for those who live on their own is pretty awful.

a big rise in jan/feb will likely lead to another two/three week firebreak before the onset of spring reduces cases (and maybe a vaccine)

 

 

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...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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