Re: Coronavirus
 

How so ?

The country is still going to be in virtual lockdown regardless of any test result people get.

Also, as already pointed out, a negative test today doesnt mean you wont catch it tomorrow.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

Additionally how would we verify who previously had it during lockdown? Give them a certificate to carry?

Being a home test how do we verify the person who claimed to take the test actually did, and isn't wanting to start working again (e.g. self employed) so got someone else to test who came back positive?

Re: Coronavirus
 

The "then" is just an example. It doesn't exclude the possibility of picking up the virus minutes, hours, or days later. :rolleyes:
Eg Prince Charles could've theoretically been tested daily, but the period of time between those tests and getting the results would allow the possibility of picking up the virus and transmitting it to others.

Re: Coronavirus
 

You are going round in circles here against scientific evidence that testing works at containing viruses, with multiple nudges from mods not to so I’m out.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Good to see our Chief Virologist, is still on the case. You have your research to back that up.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Where does the scientific evidence say a negative result is useful? Eg Would a negative STD test result prove people would be clear the next day?

In South Korea any positive results were used to do very thorough contact tracing and insist on self-isolation.
Link
Good luck with trying that in the UK.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Maybe its just me but l see no updated CV figures have been released thus so far today.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Today I was handed a note on headed paper stating that we are key employees, (which we are NOT), so if we get stopped I can show it.

The US DoD, USAF and RAF are our customers, the later saying we may be required to support the RAFs C-130s.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Are you saying that it’d be impossible? I suggest you back that up.

I was clearly dealing in hypotheticals.

---------- Post added at 19:49 ---------- Previous post was at 19:47 ----------

Once again you are going around in circles against the evidence. Multiple mods have already said we should stop sniping and I’ve already been removed from this thread once. Ironically for berating a Government policy that lasted less time than my expulsion.

All tests provide useful results.

Just because the UK is unable or unwilling to match South Korea doesn’t discredit the science. It’s maybe a behavioural thing, or a cultural thing. Like the idiots mugging NHS workers or slashing ambulance tyres.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Army despatched to Glasgow Airport's Holiday Inn hotel

Army personnel were stationed at roundabouts and under viaducts and said staff had been told it was a "precationary measure."

https://www.glasgowtimes.co.uk/news/...day-inn-hotel/

Re: Coronavirus
 

This all stemmed from insisting NHS workers with negative results should be allowed to work rather than self-isolate. If they are having to self-isolate without symptoms, then it would be because somebody else in their household did have symptoms. That was the starting point for all this. If they self-isolated elsewhere away from their potentially contaminated household environment then testing negative might be useful after a couple of days.


A negative test result only gives a result as of at the time of the test.

Re: Coronavirus
 

UK deaths rise to 463 after latest NHS England figures record 28 more deaths.

https://news.sky.com/story/live-bori...kdown-11963248

Re: Coronavirus
 

It's encouraging we don't seem to be following the Italian rate so far though.

Re: Coronavirus
 

l agree with your sentiments but yeah its far too early yet to indicate a trend downwards as the next few weeks will tell us a awful lot.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Well a lot of sensible Brits have been actively social distancing for years ;) We aren't a very touchy feely nation.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Speak for yourself Mr K as our family is a pretty demonstrative family.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Well you want to nip that in the bud Den.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I could be totally wrong here but surely anyone supporting the military be it overseas forces or our own ARE key workers?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Have they published the number of infections? Can't seem to find it anywhere.

Re: Coronavirus
 

No nothing announced as of yet.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Sky apparently reporting up 1,452 to 9,529 - largest increase to date.

Re: Coronavirus
 

It's an irrelevant number anyway given the randomness of testing. Unfortunately deaths is the only number we can rely on.

---------- Post added at 21:34 ---------- Previous post was at 21:33 ----------

Means they are testing more? Who can say.

Re: Coronavirus
 

You would expect each day to be higher but it's a stable escalation so far.

Re: Coronavirus
 

While nobody accepts it's an accurate figure (thanks to the decision not to test) there's still value in the data. Who has it and where will drive healthcare decision making in the coming weeks. It's better to know than to be oblivious to where the trouble spots will come.

Obviously, genuine success comes when in a like for like period with a similar number of tests and similar testing policy the number of new infections decreases. Something we will hopefully see in the next 14 to 21 days.

Re: Coronavirus
 

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavir...wales-11963431
Of the 43 deaths today, all but one had underlying medical issues.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I’ve made no claim to evidence. You however have, hypothetically.....if you say so, suggested that once you contract the virus and beat it, it can mutate and infect you again.

Which is scaremongering, unless you have the science to back it up. That you obviously don’t

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

Actually, it isnt.
Any death where the patient has tested positive is being counted, whether the virus was the actual cause or not.

As has been noted many times, most of them had other underlying conditions as well, which could also have been the cause of death.
Just like there is no way to tell how many untested people have the virus, there is no way to know how many deaths would have happened anyway due to other causes.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

I’m not scaremongering. In fact I explicitly stated the likelihood was statistically extremely unlikely.

You are simply trolling, and I’m unsure why because it’s of little value to the discussion to deliberately misinterpret my words.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Home tests are not going to be available just yet.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52035615

A few other interesting bits in the report as well.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Yeah, the headline number of the number of confirmed cases is kind of meaningless. There is an argument that you can extrapolate based on the demographics of those tested but that more drives health policy rather than immediate clinical need/treatment

Re: Coronavirus
 

No you didn't.

Re: Coronavirus
 

The problem is deaths will always remain low while demand for NHS treatment is within supply. Meanwhile the virus could be spreading further and we are only saving up our problems for later.

A lot can happen in as little as two and a half weeks:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...ponse-analysis

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

I see they now need family permission to announce a death, so 28 may not be the total who died in the 24 hours previously.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Transparency is the key l always find.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I doubt they need permission to announce the numbers.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Yeah, I can understand the thing about releasing names, but numbers of deaths are the bread & butter of the statisticians/scientists/media


not meaning to sound sarcastic, but by heck it's pointless watching any news programs unless you live in one of the big cities

Re: Coronavirus
 

Not on if correct:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...box=1585163756

Re: Coronavirus
 

Newsnights political editor said it:

https://twitter.com/siennamarla/stat...202818561?s=20

Hopefully we get clarification on this - it’d be a crass way to massage the figures for bureaucracy to lose a few permission slips along the way.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Can you explain? I don't live in a city but don't find the news irrelevant.

Re: Coronavirus
 

So let's see what's happening.

UK: Army brought in to deliver supplies of PPE etc and in process of.

EU. Joint European Procurement Initiative has been able to secure on the world market concrete offers of considerable scale on shortest notice.

Hmmmm.

---------- Post added at 14:22 ---------- Previous post was at 12:58 ----------

Care to provide a link to that if you can find one. Facebook doesn't count.

Re: Coronavirus
 

You can click the link above to see the the source. I would imagine the state broadcaster would have corroborated this in line with their editorial guidelines.

Re: Coronavirus
 

What’s not on is the Independent using this crisis to try to campaign on the future relationship, painting anything the EU does as somehow virtuous and heroic and every decision by HMG not to participate as self destructive and evil.

We have our own procurement plans, and anyone capable of reading past the spin the independent has put on this story will note that nowhere is there any suggestion that the UK’s approach will result in fewer items arriving more slowly. They have gone to some lengths to prompt careless readers from drawing that conclusion by basically welding two different stories together - but nonetheless they still don’t actually report that the UK government has actually disadvantaged itself. Because there’s no evidence that it has.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I thought that the USP of The Independent was that they were supposed to be politically neutral and this should really apply to Brexit/the pandemic and everything else.

Re: Coronavirus
 

So you're happy to simply accept what the EU allows our quota to be or should we sort out ourselves how much we actually need.

Re: Coronavirus
 

My comment was directed at The Independent not, apparently, being independent.

Re: Coronavirus
 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52048216

Re: Coronavirus
 

Well when you think things can't get any worse.

My mum has the Coronavirus.

Re: Coronavirus
 

l pray that your Mum will be okay Hom3r.

Re: Coronavirus
 

The Independent gave up being politically neutral years ago, when they realised that newspapers that lack a clear voice also lack a loyal readership.

It does not overtly associate itself with any particular political party, but its outlook is overwhelmingly socially liberal, economically internationalist soft-left and, on the European issue, it practically foams at the mouth for Remain.

The BBC is reporting the issue now, using its usual weasel words formula "The government is facing a backlash from MPs" as cover for trumping up the story. In fact, their report quotes two Liberal Democrats (Lib Dems still think we should be doing things jointly with the EU, shock horror) and the limp and ineffectual John Ashworth, who to be fair to him is Labour's heath spokesman for at least the next few weeks until his boss shuffles off to the allotment so we'll cut him some slack.

Again, the EU issue generates a lot of heat but very little light. There are still plenty of people who think anything done in concert with the EU must on a point of principle be better than anything we plan and execute for ourselves. They would have us believe that they are prepared to tolerate Brexit in normal times but they still think that in a crisis, our only hope is to go running back to Brussels.

HMG does not subscribe to that view and neither do I.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

There are those who think anything being done by the EU must be bad, and we must be able to do better ourselves.

I believe there is a major difference between "being offered help" and "running back to Brussels" - we should be doing what’s right for the NHS and those affected by the pandemic.

Re: Coronavirus
 

my sister went to see her and was told to go to the quiet room, oh bugger she thought, that's when she was told the news.

My sister was allowed to tell my mum the news. She has the virus but no symptoms.

So my sister is self isolating, I was at work and tried to call my HR manager but I had to leave him a voice message.

I manage to speak to him when I got in.

The fun part is that under normal circumstances I would get a full wage, but self isolation means £94 per week.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I agree Hugh and that's why I think a concrete order for 10,000 ventilators is better than concrete offers.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Surely both maximises the amount of ventilators?

Re: Coronavirus
 

it's a side issue, and not really relevant to to the current crisis

Re: Coronavirus
 

On the contrary. You have, incorrectly, viewed this as a zero sum game. It may interest you whether a ventilator came from a European project or not, but I doubt those that will need them in the coming weeks will care for your ideology on their death beds.

I’d, like a rational person, take every ventilator going. British, European or sourced from elsewhere. The only thing irrelevant is where it comes from.

The good news is the Goverment share my view and are now participating in the European project.

---------- Post added at 18:10 ---------- Previous post was at 18:08 ----------

Best wishes to your family Hom3r.

Re: Coronavirus
 

The Department of Health have announced that there are 115 more deaths in the UK, according to the latest figures , the total now is 578.

2129 new confirmed cases, total now 11,658.

https://twitter.com/DHSCgovuk/status...37209039396872

Re: Coronavirus
 

Nice phrase, do you know what it means? using it in this context would suggest you don't.

I don't have an ideology, I was merely suggesting that this was a side issue. The independent article was very short on any detail. i.e Amount of ventilators each state would get, when they would get them, cost etc, etc

A side issue that wasn't worth getting bogged down in.

I agree, I don't think anything said was contrary to that, apart from whether sourced via EU, via UK or via Both is a side issue.

like I said, side issue.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Does it? Doesn't the EU scheme effectively pool them across the EU. So a country that doesn't bother making them could've got them from the UK instead? Bit like fishing quotas.

Re: Coronavirus
 

No. Nothing prohibits the UK from buying or manufacturing more.

As I’ve also said - it’s UK Government policy to participate in the scheme, so presumably our esteemed experts have decided this method maximises ventilators.

If UK suppliers wish to sell to an EU scheme that’s capitalism whether we participate in the scheme or not.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Wouldn't we be buying and/or manufacturing them in order to be distributed at the whim of the EU? Otherwise we would just be "stealing" from other EU countries that can't produce any of their resources, IE we would have our own resources and some from the EU. Can't see that being the case. We will have already had plans underway.






Can't see why people can't treat it like very bad weather and only go out reluctantly. They wouldn't go out jogging with several inches of snow or chucking it down with rain.

Re: Coronavirus
 

No, it’s a procurement exercise and it’s not even clear who the suppliers will be. Nothing to stop the UK Government putting its own orders in now and join the exercise for more later.

Stealing is wholly the incorrect word here. Private companies can sell to whomever they wish - anywhere in the world. Our membership of any such scheme is irrelevant.

Re: Coronavirus
 

If you mean the Dyson ones, they haven’t been built or approved yet, so they’re "jam tomorrow".

Apparently, the EU offer "got lost in the post’.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52052694 Obviously, two different spokesmen...

Re: Coronavirus
 

Who? Arse and Elbow ? Do they know each other?

Re: Coronavirus
 

GTech will be making some too.

The real reason for the drop in the death rate and the sudden climb back up. Informing relatives only played a small part.

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...0&d=1585252912

Re: Coronavirus
 

WOW.

People outsite clapping and cheering, an amulance is driving around and giving a thank you blast from its siren.

#ThankYouNHS

Re: Coronavirus
 

It was very moving hearing people showing their support for NHS staff and carers.

Re: Coronavirus
 

There is indeed a great difference, however my argument is that the claim that we ought to be participating in the EU scheme for no better reasons than 1. It exists, and 2. It’s the EU, suggests to me that the claim - such as it is - is rooted in running, not choosing.

It appears HMG has now opted to join the joint purchasing program on this occasion. Fair enough. I am content with our ability to choose what works best for us, and I have no ideological need for us not to work with other European countries, with or without facilitation through the EU.

Re: Coronavirus
 

It cost my daughter her phone. :(
Somehow she managed to drop it out of the bedroom window while clapping. :dozey:

As well as clapping etc, we had some 8pm fireworks round here as well.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Of those NHS staff who have been tested, the majority were asymptomatic at the time. This is the problem with this particular virus, so many people have no symptoms at all, yet can infect many.

Re: Coronavirus
 

It’s all very well clapping but it’s now time to ensure they get a decent wage increase.

Re: Coronavirus
 

And also given the right tools to safely do their job...

Re: Coronavirus
 

Exactly. I don't think NHS staff feel under appreciated by the public. It's the politicians.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Agreed but the public are a bit fickle. Ask them to vote for tax increases to pay for it and they won't. They need to show their appreciation by paying more tax.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Boris has tested positive, and is experiencing mild symptoms, say No. 10.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-52060791

Re: Coronavirus
 

Shame, but is he in hospital? How did he meet the criteria to be tested?

Re: Coronavirus
 

It was all that handshaking at the hospital..;)

Re: Coronavirus
 

Yes, it's a real mystery.....:rolleyes:

Re: Coronavirus
 

This seems to hit a lot of famous folk considering we are a country where the vast majority of us are extremely ordinary.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Displaying mild symptoms and took the test at the advice of the chief medical officer.

I'm guessing that him being the leader of the country means he ģets tested and looked after asap.

He tweeted a video not long ago. Says has a temp and cough. But is now self isolating and is still working from home.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Because they are getting tested or can afford to pay for a private test I suspect.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Pretty sure being leader of a country bumps you up the priority list... :dozey:

---------- Post added at 12:16 ---------- Previous post was at 12:07 ----------

Since Dominic Raab* is the PM's "Designated Survivor", can we all pray for a speedy recovery? :D

*https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46142188

Re: Coronavirus
 

Yes, because the only notable thing about Boris Johnson is that he's famous. :rolleyes:

Get a grip.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Media driven obviously

Big news if someone 'important' tests positive, but not so much interest about Alice Bodworth (62) of 17 Bishops Lane, Harrogate

Re: Coronavirus
 

If by “important” you mean the person empowered to sign off on all the emergency planning necessary right now, then yes, it is bigger news than Mrs Bodworth, whose illness (regrettable though it is) does not carry the risk of further complicating our national situation.

Re: Coronavirus
 

He has deputy(ies), politicians aren't in short supply. Frontline NHS staff who still haven't been tested are in more short supply and more valuable atm. Some are more equal than others, twas ever the way in this country.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I'm not being specific about Boris Johnson - I'm including Idris Elba, Prince Charles etc.

It's a disproportionately high number I'm sure everyone would agree. Pointing to a far wider problem in the population at large.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Calm down, I was simply explaining (to the jfman post) why it 'seems' to be hitting important folk rather than us commoners ;)

Re: Coronavirus
 

If he was showing symptoms do you not think it a good idea to test him as seen as he could infect the entire government!

There really are some dweebs on this site, you know who you are.

Re: Coronavirus
 

An infected NHS worker could infect most of a hospital.

Re: Coronavirus
 

An infected factory worker could infect half a town

Re: Coronavirus
 

Health secretary tests positive.....

Re: Coronavirus
 

Or it is simply that they have more contacts, shake more hands, etc?

Re: Coronavirus
 

l have nothing against the PM being tested as he felt unwell but its a national scandal that the majority of the frontline NHS staff who are laying their lives on the line have still yet to be tested.

Re: Coronavirus
 

And some others who bring absolutely nothing useful to the table.

---------- Post added at 14:09 ---------- Previous post was at 14:07 ----------

They should follow the advice.

I think we all know that the headline Coronavirus figure is absolute crap, explaining the disparity. The probability is we are already staggering obliviously into an Italy type situation.

---------- Post added at 14:09 ---------- Previous post was at 14:09 ----------

There not important though

---------- Post added at 14:19 ---------- Previous post was at 14:09 ----------

I get that the media are why I hear about them and not poor Mrs Bodsworth just not why they're a disproportionate amount of the headline figure when 99.99999% of us are nobodies.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Latest update from the Department of Health.

https://twitter.com/DHSCgovuk/status...41321601748993