Re: Coronavirus
 

Which figures though? Current flawed testing results due to false positves?

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/13...-tynside-corby

Re: Coronavirus
 

There’s no real evidence that false positives are a significant proportion of all results, or that false positives are doubling every 8 days (or even increasing) as a proportion of all positive tests.

One of the key assumptions behind the theoretical piece is that hospitalisation aren’t rising. They now are, and in France and Spain they are seeing increased deaths. Again I ask the question of what will make our experience different?

Re: Coronavirus
 

In terms of hospitalisations, it should also be noted that

Re: Coronavirus
 

Viral load can be very important as to whether our immune systems can fight and win. So I think they may have something with this idea that masks help.

---------- Post added at 17:54 ---------- Previous post was at 17:52 ----------

French radio just gave new information that over 50% of the population in Care Homes there died within the first few weeks of the first spike. Whereas the "normal" rate was under 15%.

Re: Coronavirus
 

WOW! 200 staff to look after to look after 51 patients again. (sorry, that was London). Birmingham never had one patient although the staff were there.

Re: Coronavirus
 

And it took a lockdown to prevent these being required.

Re: Coronavirus
 

So on that basis the alleged second wave will be larger than the first?

Re: Coronavirus
 

I don’t follow your logic. How bad the second wave is depends on the effectiveness of the response by Government and compliance from public in respect of distancing etc. This is not known at this stage.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

The logic is simple. During the onset of corona virus the Government set up 5 "Nightingale" units to look after the overflow from NHS hopitals during the epidemic, there were also 2 others set up slightly later.

The only unit to be used was the London one which had 200 full time staff for an eventual 51 patients during the time it was in operation. It then like the other 6 sites were mothballed but not decommissioned just in case.

So, following logic, if the Birmingham Nightingale unit is to be brought out of mothballing and staffed then it follows that it is considered the number of cases will be larger then when the covid epidemic began.

ERGO the alleged second wave will be larger than the first.

Re: Coronavirus
 

So no major rise In hospitalisations yet then

Re: Coronavirus
 

They can provide the best data available, despite it being healthy to be sceptical. You are falling into the trap of others by dealing with everything in black and white in a world of grey.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Don't you just love the "Higher alert" status. At present they are "mothballed" which means no staff, they are just there waiting for use. To use them there needs to be a supply of staff who were either laid off (agentcy) or sent back to normal working in the hospitals.

Selective media reporting methinks.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I don’t think all of those things necessarily flow from each other. The Birmingham unit being brought out of mothballing (and indeed any other) is risk management based on current data.

I’m not sure decisions can be compared with March.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Then please explain the flaw in my logic.