Coronavirus Thread

[Costock_Fox]

31 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

Rutland isn't Leicestershire?

Lies

[rachhere]

25 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

68% of the population will be living in Tier 3 once the new tiers come into place. 
 

Countless places have gone up into Tier 3, with many of them having lower numbers than areas which were placed into Tier 2 a few weeks ago. There’s no system, there’s no figure to aim for, purely because they’re making it up as they go along. 
 

They’ve sold the hospitality sector down the river, offering a grand to each pub as a bonus to help them out, nothing more than insulting. 
 

I for one will not be voting for these ***** again next GE, I’d rather curl out a turd on the ballot paper. 
 

Oh and an extra 11k positive tests have been found in Wales late last night, that ‘firebreak‘ did them the world of good! 

We are having to lockdown tighter now in anticipation of what will come as a result of the Christmas plans. The recent statement from the government and medical advisors show however that they are now concerned that this won't be enough and that we are in trouble heading into January. Was it on here that someone posted that they are considering delaying the start to the school term, presumably because of this. 

[SpacedX]

20 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

Oh and an extra 11k positive tests have been found in Wales late last night, that ‘firebreak‘ did them the world of good! 

It did what it was designed to do - a temporary reduction of the virus in the community,

 

The minute you leave a lockdown rates start to go up, because people come into contact with each other again and this increases the amount of virus in circulation. The rate of increase before the lockdown was quite similar to the rate of increase we're having now. The lockdown was projected to reset the level by about a month and it did that. But obviously if you change your measures at that point, the rate is going to go up. The Welsh lockdown was relaxed too prematurely, but the firebreak itself was successful in reducing cases. 

 

Wales is seeing more of an increase relative to England and other parts of the UK precisely because of this - restrictions have been eased for longer. Wales' lockdown ended on 9 November, which was only a few days after England's four-week circuit breaker began. The situation in England and Wales is exactly the same but we're offset by about two weeks. A lack of action in England now and this is indicative where England will be in two to three weeks' time,

 

You talk about "making it up as they go along" without seeming to appreciate that lockdown is a preventative measure. When this is relaxed it causes an explosion in cases and the seemingly knee-jerk reactive firefighting that you decry. As Danshouff explained - "a pandemic by its very nature is a dynamic, constantly evolving situation". 

[yorkie1999]

1 hour ago, AllGoneTitsSchlupp said:

why does everywhere in leicestershire stay in tier 3, except rutland ?

 

does a tory have a house there ?

cos no-one's got a clue. Hinckley and Bosworth 3 cases per 100000, which is 2 people.

[Leicester_Loyal]

I take the points offered by others on board, but I'm not gonna lie I can't be arsed to sit here arguing on Foxestalk about it all, but I have read and I do appreciate the points made. It just puts me in a mood for the rest of the day (more so than I'm already in).

 

I'm off to visit some family members and deliver some Christmas presents, have a good day all

[yorkie1999]

13 minutes ago, Line-X said:

It did what it was designed to do - a temporary reduction of the virus in the community,

 

The minute you leave a lockdown rates start to go up, because people come into contact with each other again and this increases the amount of virus in circulation. The rate of increase before the lockdown was quite similar to the rate of increase we're having now. The lockdown was projected to reset the level by about a month and it did that. But obviously if you change your measures at that point, the rate is going to go up. The Welsh lockdown was relaxed too prematurely, but the firebreak itself was successful in reducing cases. 

 

Wales is seeing more of an increase relative to England and other parts of the UK precisely because of this - restrictions have been eased for longer. Wales' lockdown ended on 9 November, which was only a few days after England's four-week circuit breaker began. The situation in England and Wales is exactly the same but we're offset by about two weeks. A lack of action in England now and this is indicative where England will be in two to three weeks' time,

 

You talk about "making it up as they go along" without seeming to appreciate that lockdown is a preventative measure. When this is relaxed it causes an explosion in cases and the seemingly knee-jerk reactive firefighting that you decry. As Danshouff explained - "a pandemic by its very nature is a dynamic, constantly evolving situation". 

But in that period of lock down, you would expect those that have it to either recover from it or die from it, which in either case, the virus would no longer be present unless, the virus is present in a person after they've recovered from it, which then means self isolation is pointless because, once the 2 week period is over, a person can still pass it on or, the virus is being transmitted through something other than from person to person and we're not being told about it. It's in the water system.

[SpacedX]

8 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

But in that period of lock down, you would expect those that have it to either recover from it or die from it, which in either case, the virus would no longer be present unless, the virus is present in a person after they've recovered from it, which then means self isolation is pointless because, once the 2 week period is over, a person can still pass it on or, the virus is being transmitted through something other than from person to person and we're not being told about it. It's in the water system.

a lockdown is a stop gap - simply to buy time. Infections start to increase once it is relaxed as people come into contract with each other again. Also, we know that not all members of the public are compliant or adhere to restrictions. 

[ealingfox]

Rutland isn't even a real place, it's just a theoretical construct and doesn't actually exist.

[leicesterlad1989]

51 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

68% of the population will be living in Tier 3 once the new tiers come into place. 
 

Countless places have gone up into Tier 3, with many of them having lower numbers than areas which were placed into Tier 2 a few weeks ago. There’s no system, there’s no figure to aim for, purely because they’re making it up as they go along. 
 

They’ve sold the hospitality sector down the river, offering a grand to each pub as a bonus to help them out, nothing more than insulting. 
 

I for one will not be voting for these ***** again next GE, I’d rather curl out a turd on the ballot paper. 
 

Oh and an extra 11k positive tests have been found in Wales late last night, that ‘firebreak‘ did them the world of good! 

It appears that although in a lot of places the numbers are dropping, hospital admissions are rising. I know that as a fact in Leicester. There have been a number of emergency meeting today at the Royal in Leicester, which has meant my wife now has to help out on the Covid wards. She isn't a doctor or a nurse. In a lot of cases doctors and nurses have been asked to cancel annual leave over Christmas. I assume that those in Leicestershire will still use the hospitals in the City? With those now at maximum capacity, it would be criminal to put areas close to the City into Tier 2. I'd image the same things have been taken into account in other City's too.

 

[Dahnsouff]

42 minutes ago, bmt said:

I think relatively speaking you could still say we are one of the worst. Not saying I agree with the above points but the apologism for the government action here because other countries are doing similar (but still better imo) makes little sense - not saying that is you but it's an argument I have seen banded around. 

 

 

We are one of the worst certainly, and I am sure better could have been done, but perhaps someone can enlighten me on factors involved in such variations? But possible not, as it may be done to death already. .

 

However, I certainly think no government should be immune from criticism of their actions during this pandemic (Ours especially as its ours after all) , how else do we get better prepared next time should it occur. 

 

Please do not think I am apologising for this government, I do not care who is government during this pandemic, and frankly no-one probably should put in front and centre.

[kenny]

20 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

cos no-one's got a clue. Hinckley and Bosworth 3 cases per 100000, which is 2 people.

I try to stay out of this thread for obvious reasons, but the Hinckley tier has been set as they use the hospitals in Leicester and Nuneaton which are in tier 3.

 

The issue as everything with the government is that there is logic applied but they do not explain themselves.

[Izzy]

We’re in Bucks and going into tier 3 from Saturday. But as someone who doesn’t go to the pub any more and rarely eats out, what’s the real difference between tier 2 and 3?

Cant see much changing for me tbh. 

[Strokes]

7 hours ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

Still it’s the household rule ain’t it? 

Maybe they are all members of the House of Commons  

[yorkie1999]

1 hour ago, Line-X said:

a lockdown is a stop gap - simply to buy time. Infections start to increase once it is relaxed as people come into contract with each other again. Also, we know that not all members of the public are compliant or adhere to restrictions. 

So, after that lockdown, either everyone who was in lockdown is still carrying the virus which means we can never get rid of it, or a lockdown isn't really a lockdown, it's the government forcing businesses to shut down where members of the public can go.  

[Ric Flair]

51 minutes ago, kenny said:

I try to stay out of this thread for obvious reasons, but the Hinckley tier has been set as they use the hospitals in Leicester and Nuneaton which are in tier 3.

 

The issue as everything with the government is that there is logic applied but they do not explain themselves.

Shame they can't use their own hospital instead

[Strokes]

34 minutes ago, Izzy said:

We’re in Bucks and going into tier 3 from Saturday. But as someone who doesn’t go to the pub any more and rarely eats out, what’s the real difference between tier 2 and 3?

Cant see much changing for me tbh. 

You can tell the mother in law to fùck off.

[Mark 'expert' Lawrenson]

I’m sure research has been done on why certain people don’t catch the virus, my daughters live with their mum and only the eldest daughter had coronavirus and she wasn’t careful in the time before she showed symptoms.

6 women I know went on holiday back in March, 3 caught it the others didn’t.

Do some people have a natural immunity to it? 
 

[yorkie1999]

5 minutes ago, Mark 'expert' Lawrenson said:

I’m sure research has been done on why certain people don’t catch the virus, my daughters live with their mum and only the eldest daughter had coronavirus and she wasn’t careful in the time before she showed symptoms.

6 women I know went on holiday back in March, 3 caught it the others didn’t.

Do some people have a natural immunity to it? 
 

My next door neighbours daughter caught it a fortnight ago, her mum caught it and had to have the ambulance out last week because she was struggling to breath and they gave her oxygen for a couple of hours, but she's on the mend now, but her dad and brother were both fine and returned negative tests twice. I think it comes down to a person's immune system, bit like the bloke who sits next to me at the football who always seems to have a cold.

[filbertway]

1 hour ago, Izzy said:

We’re in Bucks and going into tier 3 from Saturday. But as someone who doesn’t go to the pub any more and rarely eats out, what’s the real difference between tier 2 and 3?

Cant see much changing for me tbh. 

The big one is being able to go round mates or family in Tier 2, but you can't in Tier 3.

 

Now again, if you don't have any mates or family then you're not missing out on much. I think that's the crucial difference for me though.

[yorkie1999]

7 minutes ago, filbertway said:

The big one is being able to go round mates or family in Tier 2, but you can't in Tier 3.

 

Now again, if you don't have any mates or family then you're not missing out on much. I think that's the crucial difference for me though.

What, you're not going to be missing out on much.

[filbertway]

1 minute ago, yorkie1999 said:

What, you're not going to be missing out on much.

I can't tell if this is a joke at me having no mates or if you've not understood me

 

[Jon the Hat]

22 minutes ago, filbertway said:

The big one is being able to go round mates or family in Tier 2, but you can't in Tier 3.

 

Now again, if you don't have any mates or family then you're not missing out on much. I think that's the crucial difference for me though.

You can't meet others inside in Tier 2, only outside, and rule of 6 applies.

[filbertway]

2 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

You can't meet others inside in Tier 2, only outside, and rule of 6 applies.

Ahhhh sorry @yorkie1999

 

That update totally passed me by

 

[SpacedX]

1 hour ago, yorkie1999 said:

So, after that lockdown, either everyone who was in lockdown is still carrying the virus which means we can never get rid of it, or a lockdown isn't really a lockdown, it's the government forcing businesses to shut down where members of the public can go.  

No, as I explained, it reduces infection rates, relieves clinical stress and buys time. Serioously, how many times? As soon as people interact or measures are relaxed, cases increase again. Eventually, the vaccination programme will mitigate the above and we achieve herd immunity. Once a sufficient proportion of the population is no longer susceptible, any new outbreak peters out (you don’t need everyone in the population to be immune - you just need enough people to be immune). High levels of vaccination-induced immunity in the population benefits those who can’t receive or sufficiently respond to a vaccine, such as people with compromised immune systems. The formula for calculating the herd-immunity threshold is 1–1/R0, meaning that the more people who become infected by each individual who has the virus, the higher the proportion of the population that needs to be immune to reach herd immunity. Although it's largely expected that Sars-CoV-2, the virus responsible for Covid-19, will become endemic, there is hope that the impact of the disease will lessen as immunity within communities is slowly built up. In such a scenario, over time people will either be vaccinated or have exposure to Sars-CoV-2 as a child, offering them a degree of protection that would help to maintain the virus at a baseline level within the population - like chickenpox.

 

Natural protection against Covid-19 may wane. People are regularly reinfected with other coronaviruses responsible for the common cold, but the background immunity that is to be built will reduce the severity of any illness that develops.

 

It remains to be seen what research into this newest strain will divulge, but there are no major signs that coronavirus will mutate to become more deadly, The pathogen will eventually fade into the background - similar to other viruses that are in circulation throughout the global population. In the meantime this is why we must diligently maintain social distancing and adhere to measures to reduce the risk of transmission. The more that we do this, the sooner that some semblance of normality can be reached. I genuinely struggle to understand why some people on this thread are incapable of comprehending this. 

[Dunge]

Lockdowns work.

 

They may not solve the problem entirely or make the virus go away, and there’s no doubt they damage the economy, but they lower infection rates effectively, no matter what Professor O’Virus with the soothing Irish voice may say on YouTube.