Re: Coronavirus
 

Yes exactly that. You can't predict when a pandemic might happen but you should be prepared for it, stock refreshed when necessary. The Govts own test exercise showed we weren't prepared and they took no action/hid the results.

Swine flu and Bird flu should have been wake up calls. Luckily they didn't prove to be as transmissible in humans, but they easily could have been. However it was only a matter of time but something more transmissible came along.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Not a expert on anything but is it not best to be prepared rather then be unprepared whatever it is as the trouble is now the horse has already bolted and we are deeply ill prepared for it and are then trying to play catch up.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Agreed.

Re: Coronavirus
 

So again, which country WAS prepared?

Re: Coronavirus
 

No country can ever be prepared.

Take a look at the Yellowstone Super Volcano it is 40,000 years over due.

When it goes boom, it could spew ash for thousands of miles across the United States, damaging buildings, smothering crops, and shutting down power plants.

New York & Maimi would be effected.

Millions would die, in the US alone.

it would make the Eyjafjallajökull volcano seem insignificant.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Ironically the US was the best prepared but they've been hampered by a megalomaniac president who knows better than the healthcare experts/scientists. He'll be the first electoral victim from this.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Also, other countries being inadequately prepared doesn't mean we have to aim for the same low bar.

Given the cost to the economy, in the short and long term, adequate preparations would have been a worthwhile investment and given the public reassurance they need to prevent both the supply and demand side shocks.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Depends how many rabid supporters he has. I dare say that at least the most rabid of them will dismiss this whole thing as a product of the Democrats..

Re: Coronavirus
 

Surely the question should be. 'Why weren't countries prepared?'

1) 1st case in Wuhan November 2019
2) knowledge regarding spread and level of transmission known since mid January 2020
3) Warnings of potential mass influenza type pandemics since 2016 IIRC

Governments around the world treated this as the previous version of SARS or MERS and basically hoped it would go away until it was too late.

Re: Coronavirus
 

So once we pass the peak, to we just store up "spare" equipment or do we make available to other nations, especially those that may not be able to afford to buy or manufacture all the equipment they will need?

Will this equipment mothball well? Will it need maintenance and when brought out will it all be immediately viable or will we need to replace certain parts that may then be in short supply? Not much better having lots of unusable equipment to not having the equipment.

--
And the strategy here was never so much as stopping infection or preventing deaths as in spreading the load out over a longer period. This could end up with more deaths but less load on the health service. We'll see in the next week or so if rates keep climbing or level off.

Re: Coronavirus
 

How would they be best prepared?

Taiwan and some of the other Asian countries have done fairly well. They were closer to previous pandemics and generally don't trust China.

Re: Coronavirus
 

The Department of Health and Social Care has just released the latest updated figures.

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavir...id-19-11966273

Re: Coronavirus
 

Ditto much military equipment. We hope we'll never have to use it but we need it there, maintained and updated in case.

Re: Coronavirus
 

That's more to do with the fact that you can't be expected to rustle up a tank at short notice.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Or ventilators, evidently.

When was the last time we needed a tank that wasn't an illegal US led invasion of a country that posed no threat to us anyway?

Re: Coronavirus
 

So New York doesn't have shortages? The prime responsibility is at State level.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Unfortunately, the States can’t get the equipment because they Are having to bid against each other and the Federal Government...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-supplies.html

Re: Coronavirus
 

So none of them were prepared BEFORE.:rolleyes: That was the sub-issue under discussion. It also highlights the fact that the prime responsibility for preparedness was at State level.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Of course the US was best prepared...Not.

https://techcrunch.com/2020/03/26/pr...and-sanitizer/

Re: Coronavirus
 

Here is a very brave man who has at least beaten Coronavirus.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbi...box=1585674221

Re: Coronavirus
 

Interesting to see what's at the top of the National Risk Register since 2008 with a reasonably high chance of a occurrring and a high impact if it did. It's on page 5 - pandemic influenza.
https://assets.publishing.service.go...k_register.pdf

Re: Coronavirus
 

“Nobody could have predicted this”

Re: Coronavirus
 

Which is why there is a bunch of documents labelled "UK Influenza Pandemic Preparedness Strategy" started in 2011.
Link
By it's very definition a Pandemic is going to have a high and wide-spread impact.

Re: Coronavirus
 

BREAKING: Milton Keynes ice rink to be converted in to temporary mortuary.

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavir...tuary-11966525

Re: Coronavirus
 

Which was found to be totally inadequate in the 2016 pandemic simulation exercise.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...equipment.html

Re: Coronavirus
 

Sadly even very young healthy people are becoming victims of it.

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavir...ictim-11966526

Re: Coronavirus
 

Please be cautious. For a start the article does not say he was healthy. The family is quoted as saying to the best of their knowledge he had no underlying health issues. Maybe he did, maybe he didn't. The point is, there is quite enough stress caused over this pandemic already, without people rushing onto internet forums just so they can get a thrill out of being the first to share bad news. Let the science lead your understanding of this illness. Do not rush ahead of it. And certainly don't recklessly misrepresent the articles you're quoting.

Second, there is a useful piece about the significance of viral load that has been doing the rounds. I'm pretty sure I've seen it quoted in here and I have also seen it on Facebook. The initial dose of virus particles that you get, makes a difference as to the severity of the infection you develop. Covid-19 becomes lethal if a significant infection develops deep in the lungs. This happens when the body's immune system can't work fast enough to keep up with the rate of infection. A person weakened by another health condition or with a compromised immune system is vulnerable in this way. Someone who receives a heavy initial does of the virus is also more vulnerable.

So factors such as the boy's home environment, how prolonged was his exposure, and to what form of contamination, are all very relevant. It is quite possible that he has been coughed over by a dozen only mildly infectious people, if he lives in a large household or if his family has flouted hand hygiene or social distancing guidance.

The statistics, even from the early days in China, have shown that even young people *can* die from this infection. That is not news. And it should be stated again and again that the chances of someone younger than their 50s dying of it are very, very small.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Any simulation wouldn't be evidence to change the strategies outlined in those documents.

Re: Coronavirus
 

You do know the purpose of these simulations, right?

Re: Coronavirus
 

This is basically what my doctor told me, which is why I am now being 'shielded' from the virus. In a nutshell my health is so poor that it could kill me which, as well as having to put myself under house arrest, has affected my state of mental health. I imagine it's the same for many others too. Depression, anxiety etc will be going through the roof, so please everybody, try to be kind to one another.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Erm, you missed a bit out of your 2nd quote from the article...

Re: Coronavirus
 

You were implying that the simulation should've changed the strategies. The strategies were based upon worldwide actual experiences and don't seem to have any connection or relevance to any simulation. It was just a SINGLE scenario and not testing a range of scenarios. In order to for any simulation to be useful in deciding strategies, it would have to test various ones.

---------- Post added at 22:17 ---------- Previous post was at 22:01 ----------

And where does it say the WHO said otherwise?
November 2019.

Re: Coronavirus
 

No it wouldn’t. In your opinion you deem that to be the case, presumably solely for the purposes of being argumentative as it’s not based in reality.

Many, many simulations work on very narrow parameters due to the difficulty in applying a full scale simulation for something that in the real world would be massive. Something like a global pandemic for example.

They can, and do, build upon real world examples elsewhere - the test being on the differences such as the healthcare system.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I think it's fair to say that everyone's contingency plans will be re-written once the dust settles on this.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Exactly.

The more cases we have the higher the likelihood that low probability events will happen. Even at a 0.1% chance, when you have 1,000 cases you're going to get 1.

Re: Coronavirus
 

A simulation cannot be expected to change strategies unless the simulation is tested against various strategies. Otherwise there can be no right or wrong strategy. People are constantly whinging X should've been done on day Y, not day Z. Unless the simulation tested both those and other options, it is meaningless. To be 2nd in list of preparedness is not too shabby.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

Grim but convincing number-crunching from Sky
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavir...eaths-11966517

Re: Coronavirus
 

The other half is a therapist, they're doing skype and facetime sessions at her work, if anyone needs to call the number is

01268 293799

Re: Coronavirus
 

Seeing as this virus seems to adversely affect the elderly, one question popped up in my head - how does the mortality risk from a coronavirus infection compare to the mortality risk of simply being old? Or, put another way (and yes, this is dispassionate) is being old in itself and underlying health condition?

Well I finally found an article on this - https://medium.com/wintoncentre/how-...t-4539118e1196

It seems, on average, a coronavirus infection packs a year worth of risk of mortality in to around a week! There are some outliers for example, the very young (0-9 years old) having a relatively high mortality with little coronavirus risk and it seems like the 60-69 year age bracket run the most additional risk. Note that underlying health conditions apart from simply being old are not taken into account...

Re: Coronavirus
 

The term "underlying health conditions" should be qualified with the word "known", ie "known underlying health conditions".

If somebody is suffering from high blood pressure and are treated for it, doesn't that suggest they now don't have high blood pressure?:confused: So is the actual risk from untreated high BP, or treated high BP, or is it connected to the underlying reason for the high BP?

Too many suggestions(backed by evidence) of contradictory advice that might be helpful or might be harmful. Difficult to discuss those without the heavy risk of people following the wrong route or going to extremes. Eg In Iran the notion of alcohol fixing it, has led to hundreds of people being killed by methanol or ethanol poisoning.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I’d like to thank you for that cheery information.

I’d like to...;)

(j/k -all additional info welcomed)

Re: Coronavirus
 

Thank you, much appreciated :)


A doctor's surgery in Wales has sent out a letter to patients with cancer etc telling them that they would be unlikely to get hospital treatment if they caught the virus:

https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/w...ients-18012444

Re: Coronavirus
 

Another 563 people have died in the UK after testing positive for coronavirus - bringing the total number of deaths to 2,352.

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavir...2-352-11966771

https://twitter.com/DHSCgovuk/status...37119721230340

Re: Coronavirus
 

As always, beware of raw numbers, they are always careful to state people died & tested positive, not that they died because of the virus.

Its a small but important difference. :cool:

Re: Coronavirus
 

One of the slight disadvantages if the person you’re living with is on a video call at work, whilst at home....

Re: Coronavirus
 

:D:D:D

Re: Coronavirus
 

I've had to stop listening to the news, especially as my mum has the Coronavirus, and is currently in the local hospital Coronavirus ward, and noe one can visit her.

Not only that when she eventually get moved to another ward we still may not be able to see her as the hospital is not allowing any visitors.

What scares me more is the fact my mum had her spleen removed and has a low immune system and in a high risk group.

Re: Coronavirus
 

:clap:

Re: Coronavirus
 

Also a 2nd cousin on my dads side is burying her mum today, but sadly only a very limited number are allowed to attend.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Best post in this entire thread.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Agree. :tu: Chris.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Found a link that contains the letter. It's absolutely shocking, but I believe that they have now issued an apology.

https://welfareweekly.com/nhs-patien...navirus-panic/

Re: Coronavirus
 

+1

Especially this bit

Re: Coronavirus
 

They did. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-52117814

Re: Coronavirus
 

Are they apologising because it’s a bad idea of because it’s in the news?

I suppose at least they have given us insight into the crisis to come.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Richard, it was totally wrong what the surgery did, but a point of order - "patients with cancer" is not the same thing as patients with "serious health conditions such as incurable cancer, motor neurone disease, and untreatable heart and lung conditions’.

When I read your post, I assumed it was patients in early stage of cancer diagnosis/treatment - our local Health Trust is delaying treatment for those, because they believe compromising their immune system with cancer treatment, with the COVID-19 virus around, is a greater risk than delaying the treatment.

---------- Post added at 20:19 ---------- Previous post was at 20:18 ----------

Triage is a basic concept of Emergency Medicine - not nice, but a fact.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Even in normal times. wouldn't a possible DNR be raised? The difference is the possible speed of escalation of the situation.

Re: Coronavirus
 

The difference is the grossly insensitive way it was handled. Something of this magnitude just can't be done via a mail-merge standard letter. It might be sound crisis planning but the execution was beyond crass.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Small selected list.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Be interested to know the exact numbers and circumstances around each case to see how low the DNR bar is going to go.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Then they should have rung them...

Re: Coronavirus
 

https://www.theguardian.com/society/...-ones-bma-says

In the worst case scenario a patient with their situation improving could have a ventilator taken from them given to someone else.

Re: Coronavirus
 

What other (realistic, given where we are now) option would you suggest?

Re: Coronavirus
 

I’m not making a suggestion - as you said earlier re: triage it’s a grim part of emergency medicine. I’m just lamenting it’s got to this I suppose, and fearful for the future.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Just been on the local news that a woman from York was found wandering around the platforms of York railway station. She refused to give the police an explanation and has been fined £800.

It's the first time i've heard of any fines being imposed, hopefully because there aren't many people breaking the law. Has anyone else heard of any being levied?

I didn't realise that the fines would be so much, I could have sworn that it was going to be £60, reduced to £30 if paid within 28(?) days. I could have got this wrong though. Perhaps she also resisted arrest or something too?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Well I’ve been in contact with several people I know that have/had it, and as has been posted the severity of the illness is on an individual basis.

But the two elements that seem consistent ( and this is based on a handful of people I know that thankfully have not needed hospital care) is severe breathing problems, so bad that it’s hard to talk, apparently quite distressing at the time, lasting typically for around 3-4 days accompanied with severe Muscle pain in the chest, arms, neck and abdomen. Apparently words cannot get across how it hits you. This is from people my age. 45-55,

But, thankfully, they have got over it.

I’m hoping not to experience it, where I am, I’m semi-rural my the family are staying put and I’m only going out for the shop when required, so I am hopeful we can dodge it.

Re: Coronavirus
 

She was arrested, not given an on the spot fine.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-englan...shire-52121216

I dont quite get the victim surcharge bit, who was the victim here ?

Re: Coronavirus
 

The victims of violent crime, iirc this is how the criminal injuries compensation scheme gets it cash now...

Re: Coronavirus
 

It's victim support services that gets it. Compensation whether from the offender or Government is separate.
Link


---------- Post added at 08:02 ---------- Previous post was at 07:58 ----------

I should imagine they had to spend enough time identifying the people in the first place. The only real difference is the possible acceleration of reaching the point of needing a ventilator. Realistically they would've been refused one in normal times as there would have been little point with incurable lung cancer.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Even the Torygraph, the Boris appreciation fanzine, have turned against the Government; they're in big trouble when the fallout comes.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/202...ures-lockdown/

Re: Coronavirus
 

The testing machines still have to be used for everyday testing. That is why they exist. They weren't just sitting there doing nothing, just waiting for something like Covid-19 to come along.

Re: Coronavirus
 

To combat the virus Boris has rightly or wrongly introduced what is pretty much a temporary communist system. The type of conservative that reads the telegraph is not going to be happy either way.

I'd predict the final fallout will depend on how badly other nations manage and how quickly the measures are removed. Sweden will be interesting.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Quasi-socialist, surely?

If it was Communist, they would have "seized control of the means of production"*




*and stormed the Winter Palace... ;)

Re: Coronavirus
 

Per the link posted by Paul, she was actually at Newcastle station and lived 90 miles away in York with no explanation for her journey. She hadn't just wandered down to her local station to stretch her legs.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Perhaps she was going to deliver essential supplies to her father, and sing happy birthday to him? Or is that feeble and non-existent excuse reserved for Labour politicians?

Re: Coronavirus
 

I imagine the Telegraph is in tune with its demographic who feel under threat from a lack of testing. Boris's position is not under threat so it's safe to highlight such issues.

---------- Post added at 10:15 ---------- Previous post was at 10:13 ----------

If her father lived there, she'd done that, driven by car and provided that explanation to the police then I suspect she would have been ok too.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Even if she had been there long enough to put out chairs and take photos? His story was a complete fib from beginning to end.

Re: Coronavirus
 

In your opinion it’s a fib, however you cannot prove so. The legislation on what you are and are not permitted to do is clear, and if you have “reasonable excuse” to be out of your own home the the burden of proof is of course with the officer and any subsequent prosecution that you were acting illegally.

Re: Coronavirus
 

The mere fact that as I said, chairs were put out and photos taken. That was evidence of not being there just to deliver essential supplies, pictures of which were strangely missing. Was nobody else in the local Labour party prepared to do it?:confused:

Re: Coronavirus
 

The Kinnocks did have an explanation and did not use public transport. That was the difference.
.

Re: Coronavirus
 

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/...ulation/6/made

You will note that the legislation states:

By phrasing the legislation in this way the list is not exhaustive. Whether it is reasonable, or not, to engage in conversation with a vulnerable person from a safe distance in their garden is open to interpretation.

Whether a public figure, in the course of carrying out said activities safely, could reasonably publicise it for the purposes of encouraging best practice for the good of public health - again open to interpretation.

“Reasonable” has a definition in case law that is something like how a person of average intelligence would interpret events. E.g. in tax nobody can reasonably plead ignorance to the fact tax exists.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Anybody can have an explanation, it is another thing as to whether it stands up to proper scrutiny, or in the Kinnock case, any scrutiny at all. Without the presence of the chairs, their story might have been plausible. Their story went that they only remained long enough to sing "happy birthday", which apparently only takes 20 seconds. Either the chairs came from within the house, or they brought them with them.
LinkTravelled all the way from Wales to London. Everybody else is expected to make do with online interactions.

Re: Coronavirus
 

The chairs are an absolute irrelevance. See the law as implemented.

No they aren’t. If they have reasonable excuse in terms of caring for other people then they are entitled to travel. Nowhere does it say, again in the legislation, that there is a distance limit on how far you could travel “reasonably” for the purposes of carrying out an activity.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I live in cleethorpes. is there any member living near Great Yarmouth who needs essential supplies like a loaf of bread or a tin of beans ,i have my own accomodation in that area[boat] so just sing out,we are all in this together.;)

Re: Coronavirus
 

You forgot the toilet rolls.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I'll swing by Kinocks house and pick some up,he must have loads he's full of S...;)

Re: Coronavirus
 

If she was, she should have said she was. Then she'd probably just have been sent home and told not to do it again, like Kinnock was (and as the law allows).

Here are two more who got fined. Again both got arsey with the police:

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co...sures-18019240
https://talkradio.co.uk/news/man-fin...co-20033033144

Re: Coronavirus
 

Well I've been Furloughed until 1st July, this may be extended or reduced.

So a 90 day holiday.

Re: Coronavirus
 

So me out shopping for essentials happening to see friends also out shopping for essentials and greeting each other even when socially distancing is a criminal offence now? How about we get a grip? We are not a police state as far as I'm aware.

Re: Coronavirus
 

The lack of common sense in certain cases should be a criminal offence.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Fear is a bigger issue than the virus. It's fear that causes the problems and governments to take more control. People don't know real details and are being saturated with so much information it's hard to dig out the truth. And initial reports are often found to be less accurate later - healthy person dies -> didn't die from virus but from some other condition not know about at time.

And as always we want someone (else) to blame. If this really is a unique situation then responses will never be as good as maybe they should be. Even if it's not that unique getting large populations and organisations to change isn't trivial. But it's always someone fault. Even if we had a stock pile of ventilators it wouldn't be enough, someone somewhere would miss out. And I'd bet if we did have a stockpile they wouldn't have been maintained or they would be stored somewhere out of the way and can't transport them around fast enough. And why would we have stocked them up anyway? Can you imagine the headlines - NHS buys lots of ventilators just in case while patients are dying because they can't afford <insert drug/machine/treatment of choice here>!

Re: Coronavirus
 

They have just tested a percentage off the staff at the Great Ormond Street Hospital and 40% were found to have Coronavirus and l would imagine when the finally get around to test all the other NHS staff whenever that is the results might well be the same..

Re: Coronavirus
 

Just a general question for maybe some ideas.

Plant growers are going to the wall because while DIY stuff can stay open plant shops can't but unlike DIY stuff plants (and other grown products) need to be sold when ready. How can they make some money while keeping people safe?
Maybe put plants out in car park with honesty box/donations. They can take some money and people can get plants to use at home or maybe road side or some public spaces if done safely. Else plants are going to be dumped and grower gets nothing.

Local traders - can they sell vouchers to maintain income and honour later? The presumes they will remain in business later.

---------- Post added at 12:22 ---------- Previous post was at 12:18 ----------

Central London may be different to the rest of country. If staff are commuting in or living in dorms and eating in canteens it's very different to hospitals away from centre of town where staff are more spread out and don't squeeze into tube trains to travel in and out of work.

GOSH is also in an area with other hospitals all around it - National Hospital for Neurology, Homeopathic and Italian hospitals are all in same area.

Re: Coronavirus
 

B&Q for example are not open to walk around and browse (at least my local stores are not) you have to order on their website, pay online and then they will offer a click and collect service from their car park

---------- Post added at 12:40 ---------- Previous post was at 12:35 ----------


It's got nothing to do with being a police state, it's about minimising the spread of the virus.

If people want to chat to friends then use whatsapp or facetime etc.

if people are going out to shop for essentials thats what they're there to do. not stand around chatting to mates (even if it is at the 2m distance)

Unfortunately, life is not meant to be normal right now.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Our family uses Skype or the Facebook video messenger as we are going to use it again later today to speak to our parents.

Re: Coronavirus
 

When and if this breaks, the CMO & Boris et all are going to have some serious questions to answer.

1) Why propose the herd immunity theory when it was clearly out of step with the rest of the worlds attempts to mitigiate?
2) Why the delay in understanding that mass testing is the key to get us out of this, again out of step with China, South Korea & Singapore ?
3) Why are people still not being checked on flight arrivals?

Whilst i can appreciated these are difficult times it would appear that the government has chosen to be reactive rather than proactive. Because of this, a degree of the people who have died could possibly have been saved.

---------- Post added at 12:47 ---------- Previous post was at 12:46 ----------

Yup, our family do that too. quite suitable for communications.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I don't believe so. What makes you think otherwise?

If there are only the two of you, you don't even need to socially distance to stay within the law AIUI.

Re: Coronavirus
 

These are some of the questions they will have to answer once this is all over as the most important thing currently is to get over this whenever we eventually reach that stage.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Quite, hence my initial 'When and if this breaks'

---------- Post added at 12:53 ---------- Previous post was at 12:52 ----------

If you're not from the same physical household. Yes, you do !!!!