Cable Forum - Coronavirus (OLD)

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)

- Current Affairs (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=20)

- - Coronavirus (OLD) (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33708712)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36032582)

Not in this case, Ben. It could have been written by any witty UK observer who understands the left wing bias of the notes institutions.

And of course, the Mail, Express, and the Telegraph are the epitome of unbiased journalism... :D

---------- Post added at 12:58 ---------- Previous post was at 12:57 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36032582)

Not in this case, Ben. It could have been written by any witty UK observer who understands the left wing bias of the notes institutions.

You're half right... ;)

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julian (Post 36032584)

So what?

It's completely on point.

You probably need to look up "confirmation bias"... ;)

---------- Post added at 13:01 ---------- Previous post was at 12:58 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36032588)

Lefties, usually.

I think it's entirely right that the Guvmin should take a stab at testing the vaccines on offer. Clearly the scientific advisors have endorsed this and we mustn't miss a trick here.

Also this latest press persecution of Cummings and his sitting in on Sage meetings is a disgrace. If he was interfering, there would have been public resignations from this echelon group.

You do realise the info was probably leaked by senior Government sources, so I'm not sure how this is persecution by the "left wing" press - the story is also in the Express, Telegraph, Sun, and Mail; are they persecuting Cummings as well?

btw, I don't have an issue with him attending SAGE meetings, as long as he is there to listen, not direct or influence.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36032582)

Not in this case, Ben. It could have been written by any witty UK observer who understands the left wing bias of the notes institutions.

Could also have been written by an unwitty one too. ;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 36032558)

As usual you are totally wrong again. I have no afilliation to this or any other Government over the last 40 yrs or so.

The only reason I voted this time was that a party existed that would do what I voted for last time i.e. pull us out of the (then EEC) EU. I have not voted nor supported any party between those 2 votes.

So NO! I don't give a shit about any Government nor what they do. In the last 40 odd years there has never once been a political party that would change anything for me.

Enough of politics, I'm not interested. Broken records though normally get thrown out eventually.

<removed>

You only just got back into this topic after a weeks rest for constantly picking fights with everyone - and already you are at it again - are you after a permanant ban from this topic ?

An example of where the scientists and experts missed an important aspect, is over mass event gatherings. Not all of them are created equal. Eg A football match is relatively regimented in the movement of people, Cheltenham Races was completely different. At the races, people were milling about everywhere for hours and for more than one day. A football match may have been considered low risk, but the situation at Cheltenham was different.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36032592)

You probably need to look up "confirmation bias"... ;)

Nah I'm fine thanks. :)

Apparently:

'Ministers were warned last year the UK must have a robust plan to deal with a pandemic virus and its potentially catastrophic social and economic consequences in a confidential Cabinet Office briefing leaked to the Guardian.'

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...virus-pandemic

Quote:

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36032606)

But a year is not a long time when dealing with recommendations for future-proofing, particularly when taking account of the fact that we are only just emerging from a period of austerity, with all those pent up demands for increased expenditure.

Nobody expected Cobid-19 to arrive right now. It's easy to be wise after the event.

---------- Post added at 17:37 ---------- Previous post was at 17:28 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36032545)

Ah, an opinion piece, in the Telegraph, I feel much more educated now, Old Boy.

The Government never had any nerve, which is why it’s didn’t take the necessary decisions early enough or hard enough. The economy will lose more in the long term as we face years of social distancing and restrictions.

Not so. The government is already planning to ease restrictions, according to the press today. I don't see how social distancing can be a viable strategy when everyone is back to work. Just reminding ourselves of how crowded trains and buses are during rush hour puts the futility of such an arrangement into sharp focus. Flexible start and finish times have been mooted, as has working from home where possible, but I doubt that this will be very effective.

Fortunately, it seems that the virus may have a limited lifespan and could well disappear without trace before long, rendering the need for social distancing as irrelevant.

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36032607)

Fortunately, it seems that the virus may have a limited lifespan and could well disappear without trace before long, rendering the need for social distancing as irrelevant.

l suggest you read up on Covid 19 OB as you seem incredibly ignorant in your knowledge of it.

---------- Post added at 17:43 ---------- Previous post was at 17:42 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36032607)

Fortunately, it seems that the virus may have a limited lifespan and could well disappear without trace before long, rendering the need for social distancing as irrelevant.

Hmmm social distancing will be with us in some form until a vaccine is found.

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36032607)

Not so. The government is already planning to ease restrictions, according to the press today.

Planning and being able to do so effectively without the NHS collapsing are two different things.

Indeed, the difficulty around 100,000 tests a day demonstrates the difference between blue sky thinking and reality.

Quote:

I don't see how social distancing can be a viable strategy when everyone is back to work.

Correct. That's why not everyone will go back to work.

Quote:

Just reminding ourselves of how crowded trains and buses are during rush hour puts the futility of such an arrangement into sharp focus. Flexible start and finish times have been mooted, as has working from home where possible, but I doubt that this will be very effective.

Fortunately, it seems that the virus may have a limited lifespan and could well disappear without trace before long, rendering the need for social distancing as irrelevant.

Source? You are the one telling us about a second wave striking other countries that have more effectively managed it then us, and the WHO are sceptical about any meaningful immunity at all.

Quote:

Originally Posted by denphone (Post 36032611)

l suggest you read up on Covid 19 OB as you seem incredibly ignorant in your knowledge of it.

I have done so, Den, and the likelihood of Covid-19 having a limited life span is a scientific opinion. As you know, SARS and MERS died out naturally after their devastating impact.

---------- Post added at 18:16 ---------- Previous post was at 18:15 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by denphone (Post 36032611)

Hmmm social distancing will be with us in some form until a vaccine is found.

I've already pointed out that this will not be a viable proposition.

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36032618)

I have done so, Den, and the likelihood of Covid-19 having a limited life span is a scientific opinion. As you know, SARS and MERS died out naturally after their devastating impact.

These events didn't happen of their own accord, they were supported by strict adherence to WHO protocols on dealing with pandemics.

Quote:

I've already pointed out that this will not be a viable proposition.

Neither is hundreds of thousands of deaths which is quite the political dilemma.

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36032618)

I've already pointed out that this will not be a viable proposition.

It has to be as according to Professor Chris Whitty social distancing is likely to be needed until a vaccine is available for Covid-19 unless you think you know more then him.

Quote:

Originally Posted by denphone (Post 36032622)

It has to be as according to Professor Chris Whitty social distancing is likely to be needed until a vaccine is available for Covid-19 unless you think you know more then him.

I quite understand the medical advice on social distancing, Den!

I'm not questioning the sense of social distancing, I am simply stating the obvious - that it is not a practical proposition when everyone is back at work. The number of people crowded together on public transport will undo any good of social distancing at the workplace.

That's quite apart from those working in close proximity to their customers such as dentists, hairdressers, etc.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36032606)

Apparently? According to who? It's just a repeat of MANY previous ones going on for MANY years.
National Risk Register report for 2008.

Quote:

Up to one half of the UK population may become
infected and between 50,000 and 750,000
additional deaths (that is deaths that would not
have happened over the same period of time had
a pandemic not taken place) may have occurred
by the end of a pandemic in the UK.
• Normal life is likely to face wider social and
economic disruption, significant threats to the
continuity of essential services, lower production
levels, shortages and distribution difficulties.

Quote:

The Government assesses risks that could cause a national-scale emergency
in the UK (Box 1) via the National Risk Assessment.13 This is led by
the Civil Contingencies Secretariat (CCS) of the Cabinet Office and has
been published biannually as a classified document since 2008. It is
internationally acknowledged as one of the most sophisticated national-level
risk assessments.1
...
Planning for reasonable worst-case scenarios can present challenges in
communicating risk, as they are not necessarily the most informative
scenarios for businesses and the public. In some cases they have been
counterproductive. For example, during the 2009 pandemic influenza
outbreak, communication of the reasonable worst-case scenario (that
65,000 people in the UK could die) led to inaccurate press coverage.2
In addition, using extreme, but unlikely, scenarios and inadequately
communicating more likely scenarios can be detrimental to trust in the
risk assessment procedure.36 Previous reports have suggested that the
Government should communicate ‘most probable’ scenarios to better inform
the public about the likely risks. However, despite the NRR being intended
for a public audience rather than Category 1 and 2 responders with a
statutory responsibility for emergency planning (Box 2), the risk information
is based directly on the worst-case scenarios in the NRA.2

2016 report

Quote:

The resilience of contingency
arrangements for the NHS supply chain for medical devices, consumables and pharmaceuticals
was subject to independent review in 2013. The sheer size of the pharmaceutical pipeline means
that the NHS does not normally need to stockpile medicines. However, successive National Risk
Assessments have pointed to the exceptional need to expand the stockpile that has existed
since the 1970s in the case of two contingencies: an influenza pandemic or a bioterrorist attack.
...
The current main stockpile includes some twenty-plus products. It is based primarily on the
assessed risk of an infectious-disease pandemic and of a bioterrorist attack (in the NRA), and
on whether the supplies are generally available in the NHS. Only those which are not usually
available are stockpiled. The total replacement value is over £100 million, so there is quite a
considerable stockpile available for use in the UK.

Although not sure what those 20-plus products are.

Essex County Fire & Rescue report from a year ago.

Quote:

8.6.4 National planning assumptions are:
 Up to 50% of the population could experience symptoms of pandemic influenza during one or more waves lasting 15 weeks (though more would be expected to be infected);
62 The Service Infectious Disease Business Continuity Plan supports business critical functions in order to prioritise against reducing human resources.
 A case fatality ratio of up to 2.5% is expected in the reasonable worst case scenario, meaning up to 2.5% of those with symptoms could die as a result of the pandemic;
 Up to 4% of symptomatic patients could require hospital care if the virus results in severe illness, 25% of whom are expected to require level 3 critical care;
 Peak illness rates of around 10-12% (measured in new clinical cases per week as a proportion of the population) are expected in each of the weeks in the peak fortnight; and
 Absence rates for illness will be reaching 15-20% in the peak weeks.
8.6.5 Normal life is likely to face wide social and economic disruption; significant threats to the continuity of essential services, lower production levels, shortages, and distribution difficulties. The potential effects are likely to be profound. The impact of an influenza pandemic is unlikely to be confined to a building, or a highly defined geographical area. Consequently, the potential for a considerable to severe disruption to our Service, as well as to Society, is plain in a worst-case scenario.

All publicly accessible documents. Being prepared for a pandemic has been on the UKs radar since at least 2007ie probably before). Nothing new in any of the figures used, as there is little else to base any on.

Pandemic preparedness report from 2015 on face masks.

Quote:

Our ‘bottom line’ assessment of the available information for both healthcare and community settings is essentially unchanged from the previous HPA review and is similar to that of the recent review on face masks indicated above.
Conclusion
In conclusion there is limited data to support the use of face masks and/or respirators in healthcare and community settings. The effectiveness of masks and respirators is linked to consistent and correct usage; however, this remains a major challenge – both in the context of a formal study and in everyday practice.

UK Influenza Pandemic Preparedness Strategy
Guidance on preparing for and responding to an influenza pandemic.
Published 22 March 2011
Last updated 5 June 2014
Link to several documents.
That is the source for all the reasoning on recent UK government decision-making. Nothing secret, all referenced to source studies and reports.

As I said earlier, just more garbage and nonsense from the media.:mad:

If I can so easily find out all this and more, why can't or is it won't, the media do likewise? Then perhaps they might properly represent the truth and a true perspective on matters.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36032617)

Source? You are the one telling us about a second wave striking other countries that have more effectively managed it then us, and the WHO are sceptical about any meaningful immunity at all.

I read it in the Daily Telegraph, but as it's behind a paywall, I did a quick Google and found this. You could have done it yourself, jfman.

https://www.accuweather.com/en/healt...-months/679415