Cable Forum
Page 40 of 64 « First 3036373839 40 4142434450 Last »
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

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)

Paul 09-06-2020 20:59
Re: Coronavirus
 
I think they got this one wrong.
They should have gone with the Apple/Google solution.
I still think they will end up having to switch from one to the other.

---------- Post added at 20:59 ---------- Previous post was at 20:58 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36039143)
This will be a challenge for non-essential retail, hospitality and other small businesses going forward. Even if a small minority of customers - 5 or 10% - aren't confident enough to go out and purchase then that's profit margins significantly reduced.
Indeed, which is great for the less paranoid.
Hopefully I'll have less of an issue getting to the pub for a meal. :)

jfman 09-06-2020 21:17
Re: Coronavirus
 
It gets better than just getting a table :) - a slump in demand of that order would see plenty of good opportunities for those individuals more confident in their position (either through age, health, income). Hotels and flights cut prices to fill rooms/seats and even further a cooling of the house price market and slashed interest rates means there's never been a better time to get a mortgage for those who can.

I was scoping out flights in January to get away into the sun and there's plenty of bargain offers around.

Damien 09-06-2020 22:39
Re: Coronavirus
 
The possible NHS app limitations have been known about for months, if it is that causing delays then there is no excuse.

1andrew1 09-06-2020 23:16
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36039175)
The possible NHS app limitations have been known about for months, if it is that causing delays then there is no excuse.
They have been and the thinking was that we could strike a deal with Apple and Google to alter their Bluetooth security protocols.

tweetiepooh 10-06-2020 10:27
Re: Coronavirus
 
In passing saw an article suggesting that asymptomatic "suffers" and not likely to pass on infection. This does not include those who are presymptomatic who can be infectious.

What would be ideal is to have a very fast (minutes) are you infectious test. This would need to have a 100% accurate NO (false positives are less issue)! If that could be done at ingress points to facilities then maybe you can remove some of the other restrictions within that facility. Ah well I can dream!

1andrew1 10-06-2020 18:13
Re: Coronavirus
 
A real shame Boris Johnson got sidetracked by herd immunity.
Quote:
Professor Neil Ferguson estimates 25,000 lives could have been saved by going into lockdown a week earlier....
He told the House of Commons science committee of MPs: "The epidemic was doubling every three to four days before lockdown interventions were introduced.
"So, had we introduced lockdown measures a week earlier, we would have reduced the final toll by at least a half."
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavir...rlier-12004222

nomadking 10-06-2020 18:28
Re: Coronavirus
 
Now do people believe me, when I kept saying that the UK's problems were comparatively worse, because more people brought it into the country.
Link

Quote:
They found the UK's coronavirus epidemic did not have one origin - but at least 1,356 origins. On each of those occasions somebody brought the infection into the UK from abroad and the virus began to spread as a result. "The surprising and exciting conclusion is that we found the UK epidemic has resulted from a very large number of separate importations," said Prof Nick Loman, from Cog-UK and the University of Birmingham.
"It wasn't a patient zero," he added.
The study showed that less than 0.1% of those imported cases came directly from China. Instead the UK's coronavirus epidemic was largely initiated by travel from Italy in late February, Spain in early-to-mid-March and then France in mid-to-late-March.


---------- Post added at 18:28 ---------- Previous post was at 18:23 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36039263)
A real shame Boris Johnson got sidetracked by herd immunity.

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavir...rlier-12004222
Nonsense, it was already here long before then. As the Blood Transfusion Service study found, 1.5% of Londoners were carrying the virus by 1st week of March.
Quote:
Instead the UK's coronavirus epidemic was largely initiated by travel from Italy in late February, Spain in early-to-mid-March and then France in mid-to-late-March.

jfman 10-06-2020 18:34
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36039267)
Now do people believe me, when I kept saying that the UK's problems were comparatively worse, because more people brought it into the country.
Link
No, because there's no evidence that similar figures didn't enter other European countries. Neither does the evidence suggest they entered simultaneously as you frequently portrayed they describe a window across two months.

What that shows is that if we had implemented airport screening we could have caught 700 of them (give or take). Had we implemented a lockdown sooner, or cancelled major sporting events like Liverpool v Athletico Madrid before thousands came over the impact of the virus would have been reduced.

Surely you must believe these were now errors in retrospect?

Sephiroth 10-06-2020 19:13
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36039269)
No, because there's no evidence that similar figures didn't enter other European countries. Neither does the evidence suggest they entered simultaneously as you frequently portrayed they describe a window across two months.

What that shows is that if we had implemented airport screening we could have caught 700 of them (give or take). Had we implemented a lockdown sooner, or cancelled major sporting events like Liverpool v Athletico Madrid before thousands came over the impact of the virus would have been reduced.

Surely you must believe these were now errors in retrospect?
Yes - but only in retrospect aka hindsight.

Pierre 10-06-2020 19:25
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36039267)
Nonsense, it was already here long before then. As the Blood Transfusion Service study found, 1.5% of Londoners were carrying the virus by 1st week of March.
it may of been here long long before then.

Quote:
Said to have originated from Wuhan, China, in December, a recent study by researchers at University College London and the University of Reunion Island, found COVID-19 may have made the jump from its initial host to humans at some point between October 6 and December 11.

Looking at the Office of National Statistics (ONS) official death figures, Express.co.uk identified what experts have now determined to be a "spike" in fatalities in England and Wales between adults 45-85+ starting on week 45 of 2019 – November 8 – with the same figures being almost 1,000 deaths higher than the previous year and around 200-300 higher than the five-year average.

The ONS confirmed to Express.co.uk that there were 129,821 deaths registered in England between October and December 2019, 6,752 more deaths than the five-year average (2014 to 2018) for this quarter and that age-specific mortality rates significantly increased between this same timeframe for all age groups aged 75 years and over, in comparison to the year before.

Dr Jason Oke of the University of Oxford says these deaths need to be studied further to understand their implications.

He told Express.co.uk: “I’m interested in looking at this excess in deaths, but it depends on what you compare to, if you look back at other data, the expectation of what happens is quite variable year-on-year.

“Life expectancy has plateaued now, but it’s been going up for a while, so you would expect, perhaps, fewer deaths in later years.

“I think these comparisons are tricky – it’s very easy to see the effects of COVID, because the jump is so large – there’s no mistaking those because the magnitude is so big.

“But, smaller deviations are a bit more difficult to determine what’s going on, or whether that’s just an artefact.”

Dr Oke said there were no doubts over a significant rise in deaths among the elderly before Christmas, but said it was hard to put a finger on whether they could be attributed to coronavirus without further investigation.
People may of have been dying from it before it was even named. who knows.

I can't wait until anti-body tests are freely available, as I suspect Mrs Pierre had it in December.

Sephiroth 10-06-2020 19:34
Re: Coronavirus
 
If they really want to understand the scale of herd immunity, or rather - herd antibodies, they should offer free tests and provide a means of results sharing with the Guvmin (with a presumption, but an option) of anonymity. Ethicity and age etc would need to be part of the feedback.

nomadking 10-06-2020 19:42
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36039269)
No, because there's no evidence that similar figures didn't enter other European countries. Neither does the evidence suggest they entered simultaneously as you frequently portrayed they describe a window across two months.

What that shows is that if we had implemented airport screening we could have caught 700 of them (give or take). Had we implemented a lockdown sooner, or cancelled major sporting events like Liverpool v Athletico Madrid before thousands came over the impact of the virus would have been reduced.

Surely you must believe these were now errors in retrospect?
Quote:
The study also says the controversial football match between Liverpool and Atletico Madrid, on 11 March, probably had very little impact on bringing the virus into the country.
An estimated 3,000 fans flew in from Spain to watch the game, but there were 20,000 people flying in from Spain every single day in mid-March.
"[It] shows that individual events such as football matches likely made a negligible contribution to the number of imports at that time," the study says.
So how many cases did South Korea detect at their airports?
Chances are that it was a lot less than 1,500 people.
26th March, South Korea, so relatively late on and after UK lockdown.

Quote:
Korea reported 104 new cases Thursday, bringing total infections to 9,241, according to the Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Of the new cases, 39 cases -- 34 citizens and five foreign nationals -- involved travelers arriving in Korea from abroad. Of these imported cases, 25 were from Europe, 11 from America and three from Asia. Some 30 were detected during airport quarantine screening.
That's around a quarter missed via screening.
March 16.

Quote:
South Korea, which has the highest number of cases in Asia after China, now has a total to 8,162 confirmed infections and 75 deaths, the Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said (KCDC).
Most of that 8,162 was down to just ONE infected person that was missed using screening.

---------- Post added at 19:42 ---------- Previous post was at 19:37 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36039276)
it may of been here long long before then.



People may of have been dying from it before it was even named. who knows.

I can't wait until anti-body tests are freely available, as I suspect Mrs Pierre had it in December.
There were other related bugs also going around at that time.
Link

Quote:
But others are more sceptical. David Brown, a retired molecular virologist worked on coronaviruses for 20 years.
His wife got pneumonia over Christmas, with an appalling cough and loss of taste and smell.
He thinks she and many others probably had another coronavirus, OC43, which can also cause respiratory illnesses.
"OC43 can be really severe. It can cause recurring infections in your lifetime like other coronaviruses. There's no surveillance of it, and it's impossible to go back and check," he says.
...
But we've got to be really careful that we don't retrofit general winter respiratory symptoms to match Covid-19.
Researchers at the University of Nottingham have begun analysing samples from patients with lung problems going back to January.
Jonathan Ball, professor of molecular virology says: "The earliest point we can detect the virus is about the third week of February.
"One thing that I constantly get told is: 'I must have had Covid in November, December, or January, because my symptoms fit the description.' But that doesn't fit what we've found in samples."

jfman 10-06-2020 19:57
Re: Coronavirus
 
Again Nomadking you are putting forth the straw man that because screening isn’t 100% effective it isn’t a worthwhile tool at all. This leads to the preposterous conclusion that you genuinely believe that having 1400 people enter with the virus is of equal consequence to 700.

This is obviously not true.

---------- Post added at 19:57 ---------- Previous post was at 19:53 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36039274)
Yes - but only in retrospect aka hindsight.
It’s only truly hindsight if there was no alternative opinions available at the time. Something/someone (or multiple people) contributed to our decision making processes at many points against alternative scientific opinion - I’m curious as to the evidence base.

If we are listening to crap scientists then I hope we aren’t listening to them now. If it’s crap politicians the same.

downquark1 10-06-2020 19:59
Re: Coronavirus
 
It's amazing how many people tell me they think they had the virus even though their symptoms don't match at all.

1andrew1 10-06-2020 20:11
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36039281)
It’s only truly hindsight if there was no alternative opinions available at the time. Something/someone (or multiple people) contributed to our decision making processes at many points against alternative scientific opinion - I’m curious as to the evidence base.

If we are listening to crap scientists then I hope we aren’t listening to them now. If it’s crap politicians the same.
This is pertinent and interesting, from Hayley Barlow, Channel 4's Director of Communications
Quote:
EXCL: Channel 4 News has seen a leaked paper prepared for one of the scientific committees advising the government - which called in the starkest possible way for a lockdown - a full two weeks before the official announcement was made.
https://twitter.com/Hayley_Barlow/st...78122040942597

pip08456 10-06-2020 21:23
Re: Coronavirus
 
Interesting it may be but where is the evidence that the report was included in any advice SAGE gave to the Government?

jfman 10-06-2020 21:44
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 36039287)
Interesting it may be but where is the evidence that the report was included in any advice SAGE gave to the Government?
Indeed and if not, why not? Who justified it's exclusion and on what basis? Who set the remit of any reporting?

Pierre 10-06-2020 23:48
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by downquark1 (Post 36039283)
It's amazing how many people tell me they think they had the virus even though their symptoms don't match at all.
Mrs Pierre, started with a cough in Dec 2019, which ran until April 2020, it was a productive cough, ( without being too graphic) but she was coughing up white phlegm for four months. It was very bad at some points with her having trouble breathing. She had a lung cancer scan in March, she was told it might be Cop-d ( which could be anything. The scan said there was no cancer but signs of scarring due to infection. Since the scans we’ve heard sweet FA from the GP.

She is, getting better, gradually. She’s not on medication now.

Who knows what it was, but an anti-body test might help, that is what we need now.

pip08456 11-06-2020 00:46
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36039288)
Indeed and if not, why not? Who justified it's exclusion and on what basis? Who set the remit of any reporting?
One would assume it was either the modelling group it was submitted to or SAGE and any decision to exclude would have been by peer review.

jfman 11-06-2020 06:46
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 36039298)
One would assume it was either the modelling group it was submitted to or SAGE and any decision to exclude would have been by peer review.
One would assume... yes.

Would be interesting to see that confirmed. Also what were the specialist areas of the respective people on opposing positions. Who was setting agendas for any meeting and was there an overarching “steer”. One only has to set a series of working assumptions to change the outputs significantly.

One would hope not. As I say, it’d be interesting. If the process has failed then perhaps it needs redesigned for future emergencies.

pip08456 11-06-2020 09:25
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36039309)
One would assume... yes.

Would be interesting to see that confirmed. Also what were the specialist areas of the respective people on opposing positions. Who was setting agendas for any meeting and was there an overarching “steer”. One only has to set a series of working assumptions to change the outputs significantly.

One would hope not. As I say, it’d be interesting. If the process has failed then perhaps it needs redesigned for future emergencies.
I agree but the time for that is when the inevitable inquiry happens. Meanwhile the media are doing the usual and jumping to conclusions.

jfman 11-06-2020 09:57
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 36039323)
I agree but the time for that is when the inevitable inquiry happens. Meanwhile the media are doing the usual and jumping to conclusions.
I'm no fan of the media during the response (see earlier post re: stupid questions and trying to get the Government to commit to arbitrary timings. Doing things in the right order, at the right time, is bett)er than throwing kids back into school for summer because 4 weeks ago we thought it might be possible and the media reframed it.

But it's important that we learn from the first wave as we gradually, and slowly, ease restrictions. I think the time for behavioural scientists has been and gone.

tweetiepooh 11-06-2020 10:54
Re: Coronavirus
 
Again problems will arise between the government's national view and regional/local/personal views.

Some individuals/businesses/localities/regions will want to see restrictions eased in different ways if at all. Your view will be coloured by your experiences and expertise.

Carth 11-06-2020 11:22
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tweetiepooh (Post 36039351)
Again problems will arise between the government's national view and regional/local/personal views.

Some individuals/businesses/localities/regions will want to see restrictions eased in different ways if at all. Your view will be coloured by your experiences and expertise.

Quite true, London, Manchester, Leeds etc are in a whole different game than Tidworth, Holbeach, Ilkley, and Lanchester . . . I'd be surprised if the latter four even had a case of the virus

Damien 11-06-2020 17:06
Re: Coronavirus
 
The next round of testing for the NHS app has been postponed as the Government considers switching to the Apple/Google solution: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-52995881

Mick 11-06-2020 19:38
Re: Coronavirus
 
I’m currently in hospital and have been since Monday, following a serious complication, thats needed urgent surgical care. And a patient sharing the same bay as us tested positive for Covid-19. I now have to self isolate for 14 days from today’s date.

1andrew1 11-06-2020 19:45
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36039450)
I’m currently in hospital and have been since Monday, following a serious complication, thats needed urgent surgical care. And a patient sharing the same bay as us tested positive for Covid-19. I now have to self isolate for 14 days from today’s date.
Very sorry to hear that, Mick. I wish you a speedy recovery.

pip08456 11-06-2020 20:12
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36039451)
Very sorry to hear that, Mick. I wish you a speedy recovery.
+1

Hugh 11-06-2020 20:16
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36039450)
I’m currently in hospital and have been since Monday, following a serious complication, thats needed urgent surgical care. And a patient sharing the same bay as us tested positive for Covid-19. I now have to self isolate for 14 days from today’s date.
Sorry to hear this awful news, Mick - hope you keep safe, and get well soon.

Take care.

newapollo 11-06-2020 20:18
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36039450)
I’m currently in hospital and have been since Monday, following a serious complication, thats needed urgent surgical care. And a patient sharing the same bay as us tested positive for Covid-19. I now have to self isolate for 14 days from today’s date.
Get well soon Mick

joglynne 11-06-2020 20:19
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36039450)
I’m currently in hospital and have been since Monday, following a serious complication, thats needed urgent surgical care. And a patient sharing the same bay as us tested positive for Covid-19. I now have to self isolate for 14 days from today’s date.
Sorry to hear your news Mick, I hope you come through the self isolation without developing CV-19. <<hugs>>

jfman 11-06-2020 20:23
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36039450)
I’m currently in hospital and have been since Monday, following a serious complication, thats needed urgent surgical care. And a patient sharing the same bay as us tested positive for Covid-19. I now have to self isolate for 14 days from today’s date.
Sorry to hear, Mick. Best wishes.

Damien 11-06-2020 20:29
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36039450)
I’m currently in hospital and have been since Monday, following a serious complication, thats needed urgent surgical care. And a patient sharing the same bay as us tested positive for Covid-19. I now have to self isolate for 14 days from today’s date.
Ditto everyone else in saying, get well soon.

Mr K 11-06-2020 20:40
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36039450)
I’m currently in hospital and have been since Monday, following a serious complication, thats needed urgent surgical care. And a patient sharing the same bay as us tested positive for Covid-19. I now have to self isolate for 14 days from today’s date.
Take care and get well soon Mick.

Mick 11-06-2020 21:45
Re: Coronavirus
 
Thanks All for your kind words. :)

Carth 11-06-2020 22:00
Re: Coronavirus
 
Get well soon Mick :wavey:

oh, and be careful with the nurses ;)

Kursk 11-06-2020 23:23
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36039450)
I’m currently in hospital and have been since Monday, following a serious complication, thats needed urgent surgical care. And a patient sharing the same bay as us tested positive for Covid-19. I now have to self isolate for 14 days from today’s date.
Get well soon Mick. We need you back here to keep things in order. Rest up and stay strong mate.

heero_yuy 12-06-2020 08:02
Re: Coronavirus
 
Echoing others: Get well soon Mick. :tu:

ianch99 12-06-2020 08:23
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36039450)
I’m currently in hospital and have been since Monday, following a serious complication, thats needed urgent surgical care. And a patient sharing the same bay as us tested positive for Covid-19. I now have to self isolate for 14 days from today’s date.
Take care ..

Maggy 12-06-2020 08:36
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36039450)
I’m currently in hospital and have been since Monday, following a serious complication, thats needed urgent surgical care. And a patient sharing the same bay as us tested positive for Covid-19. I now have to self isolate for 14 days from today’s date.
Sending you positive vibes and wishing you to stay well.

Sephiroth 12-06-2020 09:09
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36039482)
Thanks All for your kind words. :)
To which I add mine. Cheers

mrmistoffelees 12-06-2020 09:09
Re: Coronavirus
 
Belatedly, best wishes. Here's hoping your self isolation period passes quickly and without further incident.

jonbxx 12-06-2020 09:20
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36039482)
Thanks All for your kind words. :)
Bit late to the party but I hope all goes well

Taf 12-06-2020 10:33
Re: Coronavirus
 
Scientists have found 1,356 different strains of the Coronavirus in the UK.

34% traced back to Spain.
29% traced back to France.
14% traced back to Italy.

Carth 12-06-2020 11:52
Re: Coronavirus
 
oh great, just when it looks like we may be getting over it, the mad scientists go looking for some more :D

Sephiroth 12-06-2020 11:55
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taf (Post 36039542)
Scientists have found 1,356 different strains of the Coronavirus in the UK.

34% traced back to Spain.
29% traced back to France.
14% traced back to Italy.
Bloody EU!

jfman 12-06-2020 12:34
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36039552)
Bloody EU!
:D

The EU seriously needs to look at how slow it was to close it's internal borders and further at giving Member States the autonomy to do this going forward to prevent or control further outbreaks.

This should equally break it down to regions within states to allow them to quickly implement regional lockdowns if required.

Once there's uncontrolled spread in one region and uncontrolled travel there's a sense of inevitability where it leads - back to national lockdowns that nobody wants to see again.

jonbxx 12-06-2020 13:06
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36039560)
:D

The EU seriously needs to look at how slow it was to close it's internal borders and further at giving Member States the autonomy to do this going forward to prevent or control further outbreaks.

This should equally break it down to regions within states to allow them to quickly implement regional lockdowns if required.

Once there's uncontrolled spread in one region and uncontrolled travel there's a sense of inevitability where it leads - back to national lockdowns that nobody wants to see again.
Closing the Schengen borders is a local decision, not an EU one;

Quote:
The reintroduction of border control is a prerogative of the Member States. The Commission may issue an opinion with regard to the necessity of the measure and its proportionality but cannot veto such a decision if it is taken by a Member State.
From here - https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/wh...der-control_en

joglynne 12-06-2020 15:45
Re: Coronavirus
 
Not sure if this article has been linked to but I found it interesting.
https://www.politico.eu/article/coro...vid-19-deaths/

Quote:
snippet... How to measure the real toll of the novel coronavirus has been a persistent question since the outbreak began.

There are a number of difficulties. Some countries test more per capita while others test less. And governments collect their statistics differently, making any cross-border comparisons — be it infections, recoveries, or deaths — inexact.

Researchers are narrowing in on a figure called "excess deaths" as a more reliable measure that can give insight into the true scale of the pandemic. The idea is to take the previous year's deaths as a baseline and use the difference in deaths this year over the last as a more accurate metric of the virus' impact. This way, researchers can capture fatalities that slipped through the cracks.

downquark1 12-06-2020 16:06
Re: Coronavirus
 
Yes this is what I was thinking was the most realistic measure. But then I realised there would be additional deaths that may occur due to cancelled medical appointments which would appear as a "CoVid" death.

1andrew1 13-06-2020 10:19
Re: Coronavirus
 
Perhaps one reason why we were under-prepared. It looks like the distraction of Brexit was key in this decision.
Quote:
  • The PM abolished the Threats, Hazards, Resilience and Contingency Committee
  • MPs such as Michael Gove and Matt Hancock were part of the pandemic team
  • The group was scrapped by Mr Johnson just days after he entered No10 last July
...The group, officially known as the Threats, Hazards, Resilience and Contingency Committee (THRCC), was supposed to ensure the UK was ready to cope with a pandemic.

...But it was mothballed by former prime minister Theresa May on the advice of Cabinet Secretary Sir Mark Sedwill so ministers and officials could focus on Brexit...

...Last night, a former Cabinet minister who was a member of THRCC until it was axed said it could have ensured the Government reacted more quickly to coronavirus, adding: ‘Once the pandemic took hold in Italy... alarm bells would have been ringing.

A former minister said fears that the UK was heading for a no-deal Brexit led to THRCC being wound-down in late 2018 by Sir Mark, adding "We were having to spend more time on EU exit strategy and less time on everything else."
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...tter_share-top

papa smurf 13-06-2020 10:29
Re: Coronavirus
 
Is there anything that can't be blamed on brexit :rolleyes:

jfman 13-06-2020 10:37
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36039631)
Is there anything that can't be blamed on brexit :rolleyes:
It’s not blamed on Brexit as such - it’s certainly bad timing. However the plan to hold a referendum and have no follow up plan (Cameron), followed by the rush to trigger A50 left Government racing against the clock. The lack of a definitive GE result in 2017 didn’t help followed by opposition squabbling - who upon reflection should have put up or shut up. Similarly the new extension deadline has us rushing to work to arbitrary deadlines.

Nobody is blaming the decision to leave the EU in and of itself - there’s a mandate for it after all, but it’s evidently not something easily unpicked in a couple of years. Taking back control didn’t mean fighting against the clock.

Maggy 13-06-2020 11:44
Re: Coronavirus
 
Let's not turn this into a Brexit discussion.

OLD BOY 13-06-2020 12:09
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36039630)
Perhaps one reason why we were under-prepared. It looks like the distraction of Brexit was key in this decision.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...tter_share-top
I don't think that's right at all. The government was following SAGE guidance throughout. The existence of the pandemic team would not have made any difference as they would still have followed the guidance of the scientists.

jfman 13-06-2020 12:16
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36039636)
I don't think that's right at all. The government was following SAGE guidance throughout. The existence of the pandemic team would not have made any difference as they would still have followed the guidance of the scientists.
Not necessarily - scientists don’t get a blank cheque to create policy. A specialist group on pandemic preparedness could, theoretically based on their experience, have further interrogated scientific outputs and the evidence base. Perhaps leading to different outcomes based on their internal knowledge of Government preparedness.

There’s no blanket and uniform “the science”.

OLD BOY 13-06-2020 12:16
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36039450)
I’m currently in hospital and have been since Monday, following a serious complication, thats needed urgent surgical care. And a patient sharing the same bay as us tested positive for Covid-19. I now have to self isolate for 14 days from today’s date.
We're all thinking of you, Mick.

Hugh 13-06-2020 13:14
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36039636)
I don't think that's right at all. The government was following SAGE guidance throughout. The existence of the pandemic team would not have made any difference as they would still have followed the guidance of the scientists.
They used SAGE guidance to inform policy - not the same thing.

1andrew1 13-06-2020 13:27
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36039636)
I don't think that's right at all. The government was following SAGE guidance throughout. The existence of the pandemic team would not have made any difference as they would still have followed the guidance of the scientists.
The article goes on to explain the difference that the team would have made.
Quote:
Last night, a former Cabinet minister who was a member of THRCC until it was axed said it could have ensured the Government reacted more quickly to coronavirus, adding: ‘Once the pandemic took hold in Italy... alarm bells would have been ringing.
‘We would have stress-tested the Government’s contingency plans for dealing with a pandemic.’

Carth 13-06-2020 13:44
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
a former Cabinet minister who was a member of THRCC until it was axed
dunno, looks a little like axe grinding to me ;)

Maggy 13-06-2020 16:39
Re: Coronavirus
 
Well I'm thinking there's going to be a spike in the figures if these protests and riots keep going for any length of time.

Carth 13-06-2020 16:42
Re: Coronavirus
 
oooops :shocked:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-53034924

Quote:
An area of the Chinese capital Beijing has been put under strict lockdown measures after the city's first coronavirus cases in more than 50 days.

pip08456 13-06-2020 19:16
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36039639)
They used SAGE guidance to inform policy - not the same thing.
Yes, and SAGE did not advocate lockdown, that was a political decision.

1andrew1 13-06-2020 21:25
Re: Coronavirus
 
Interesting insights from Bloomberg. I think Johnson needs to appoint a deputy PM to re-energise things.
Quote:
Boris Johnson’s Team Is Broken by the Virus and Losing Faith
The British handling of the pandemic is raising critical questions within the governing Conservative Party.
Inside Boris Johnson’s government, senior officials are exhausted, demoralized and starting to despair.
Their dreams of reshaping Britain for a bright post-Brexit world have been blown off course by coronavirus. With more than 41,000 Covid-19 deaths in the U.K., Johnson has presided over the worst record in the world after the U.S.

Now Britain faces among the heaviest financial tolls from the pandemic of any major economy, and the deepest recession in 300 years. In the background is the specter of compounding the pain by failing to reach a trade deal with the European Union, with Johnson next week set to try to rescue talks that are going nowhere.

As the Conservatives suffer a slump in the polls just six months after an emphatic election win, critically some within the party are also losing faith.
“I don’t know why we are doing what we are doing any more,” one Tory confided. Johnson’s team inside Downing Street are “running on empty,” said another. “There is a lot of unhappiness in the party,” said a third. “People are less and less impressed with Number 10.”
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...d-losing-faith

Paul 13-06-2020 23:47
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36039642)
The article goes on to explain the difference that the team would have made.
Quote:
We would have stress-tested the Government’s contingency plans for dealing with a pandemic.
I'm sure that sounds good, but is pretty meaningless, how do you 'stress-test' a plan exactly ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36039705)
Interesting insights from Bloomberg. I think Johnson needs to appoint a deputy PM to re-energise things.
Quote:
Johnson has presided over the worst record in the world after the U.S.
[Second] Worst record of what exactly ?
As far as CV19 is concerned, we are not second at either deaths or cases.

jfman 14-06-2020 09:40
Re: Coronavirus
 
Deaths per capita probably.

Hugh 14-06-2020 10:54
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul (Post 36039714)
I'm sure that sounds good, but is pretty meaningless, how do you 'stress-test' a plan exactly ?



[Second] Worst record of what exactly ?
As far as CV19 is concerned, we are not second at either deaths or cases.
We used the Gartner approach as a starting point for stress testing our Business Continuity Plans - running simulations (including desk top run throughs) would highlight gaps in our planning and if the initial assumptions we had based our plans on were still valid; we found out we had a lot of "single points of failure" (people, equipment, and process) and dependencies on suppliers’ responses that were not backed up by contractual agreements.

Paul 14-06-2020 16:53
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36039733)
Deaths per capita probably.
So just keep going through stats until you find one that fits .... :sleep:

Damien 14-06-2020 22:00
Re: Coronavirus
 
We're third for deaths: https://www.worldometers.info/corona...20%22countries

Mr K 14-06-2020 22:01
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul (Post 36039765)
So just keep going through stats until you find one that fits .... :sleep:
41,698 dead (probably a lot more) isn't a great stat, the worst in Europe. Most of those deaths could have been avoided if our Govt had acted as quickly and competently as other Governments.

Julian 14-06-2020 22:21
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36039796)
41,698 dead (probably a lot more) isn't a great stat, the worst in Europe. Most of those deaths could have been avoided if our Govt had acted as quickly and competently as other Governments.
Two words making the post pointless.

Paul 14-06-2020 22:24
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36039796)
41,698 dead (probably a lot more) isn't a great stat,
No one said it was, but thats not the point being questioned .... and "probably" isnt a fact. There are "probably" more in every country.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36039796)
Most of those deaths could have been avoided if our Govt had acted as quickly and competently as other Governments.
Most ? Wishful thinking. Its likely there would have been less, thats all you can say.

jfman 14-06-2020 23:07
Re: Coronavirus
 
We can’t turn the clock back but I just hope someone somewhere is crunching all the data. Who is at risk, where, when, why etc. and learning the lessons for if there is a resurgence of the virus.

Who should shield, for how long, what areas should lock down, regional travel restrictions should all be on the table going forward if the situation deteriorates (with better data available than in March). This could allow some of the country to operate normally, but would require people to be compliant to nuanced instructions.

It’s taken a monumental effort, and great cost, to get here and in the worse case scenario it could all be for nothing.

nomadking 14-06-2020 23:13
Re: Coronavirus
 
The snag is that if the government goes all out heavy with the next one, and there will be a next one, if it's turns out to be a bit of damp squid of a virus.

jfman 15-06-2020 07:10
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36039803)
The snag is that if the government goes all out heavy with the next one, and there will be a next one, if it's turns out to be a bit of damp squid of a virus.
That’s not really a snag compared to doing nothing and tens of thousands dying. The health and economic impact would be much worse longer term if it’s not controlled.

To go “all out heavy” and nothing come of it you can quickly open everything back up and minimise impact. Underplay it and it could take months to get back under control.

Sephiroth 15-06-2020 08:29
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36039809)
That’s not really a snag compared to doing nothing and tens of thousands dying. The health and economic impact would be much worse longer term if it’s not controlled.

To go “all out heavy” and nothing come of it you can quickly open everything back up and minimise impact. Underplay it and it could take months to get back under control.
Yep.

nomadking 15-06-2020 08:33
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36039809)
That’s not really a snag compared to doing nothing and tens of thousands dying. The health and economic impact would be much worse longer term if it’s not controlled.

To go “all out heavy” and nothing come of it you can quickly open everything back up and minimise impact. Underplay it and it could take months to get back under control.
If you clamp down too quickly, too many people haven't acquired any immunity, and so when you ease off, further outbreaks occur. As is shown in China and in South Korea. It only takes one or two people to create hundreds or even thousands of cases before anybody notices.

jfman 15-06-2020 08:44
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36039815)
If you clamp down too quickly, too many people haven't acquired any immunity, and so when you ease off, further outbreaks occur. As is shown in China and in South Korea. It only takes one or two people to create hundreds or even thousands of cases before anybody notices.
Manufacturing herd immunity by controlling the virus isn’t a viable option. Estimates put antibodies in anything between 4 and 14% of populations across the world - even heavily hit areas of Spain/Germany, at a cost of 50,000 lives (those we count) for us with no consideration of longer term health implications for those infected. And taken five months.

To get to 80% infected puts you in the region of two years of disruption and various stages of restrictions. Plus 200,000+ deaths. This without any evidence of long term immunity at all.

Economically that’s madness to drag it out for so long.

Sephiroth 15-06-2020 08:52
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36039817)
Manufacturing herd immunity by controlling the virus isn’t a viable option. Estimates put antibodies in anything between 4 and 14% of populations across the world - even heavily hit areas of Spain/Germany, at a cost of 50,000 lives (those we count) for us with no consideration of longer term health implications for those infected. And taken five months.

To get to 80% infected puts you in the region of two years of disruption and various stages of restrictions. Plus 200,000+ deaths. This without any evidence of long term immunity at all.

Economically that’s madness to drag it out for so long.
An interesting fork point. Opening up (not criticising it) in an unknown carrier situation (which is where we are), introduces a natural herd immunity path.

The buggeration factor might be that if this is an artificially manufactured virus, designed to defeat immunity, then we're all doomed-ish.

Logically, though, if we're doomed anyway we might as well open up save to the extent that the biologists cabn determine the true nature of the virus.

Complicated.

jfman 15-06-2020 09:06
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36039818)
An interesting fork point. Opening up (not criticising it) in an unknown carrier situation (which is where we are), introduces a natural herd immunity path.

The buggeration factor might be that if this is an artificially manufactured virus, designed to defeat immunity, then we're all doomed-ish.

Logically, though, if we're doomed anyway we might as well open up save to the extent that the biologists cabn determine the true nature of the virus.

Complicated.
The only problem is the restrictions are just one part of the economic downturn. The other part being consumer confidence during a deadly pandemic. Shares around the world are down this morning due to tensions over the virus despite restrictions easing in Europe. Tensions that will remain for some time to come if there’s uncontrolled/little controlled spread and no guarantee of long term immunity.

If in two years people start getting it all over again as immunity doesn’t last the economic impact would be even worse. We’d almost never get back to what we consider ‘normal’.

But yes I agree it’s extremely complicated - with decisions potentially impacting the next decade if we (the world as a whole) get them wrong.

I know that’s a lot of doom for a Monday morning I’m away to cheer myself up with coffee.

Damien 15-06-2020 09:16
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36039818)
An interesting fork point. Opening up (not criticising it) in an unknown carrier situation (which is where we are), introduces a natural herd immunity path.

The buggeration factor might be that if this is an artificially manufactured virus, designed to defeat immunity, then we're all doomed-ish.

Logically, though, if we're doomed anyway we might as well open up save to the extent that the biologists cabn determine the true nature of the virus.

Complicated.
I think it was designed to defeat immunity we would have seen evidence of that by now. It seems we do develop an immune response thankfully.

Sephiroth 15-06-2020 10:39
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36039822)
I think it was designed to defeat immunity we would have seen evidence of that by now. It seems we do develop an immune response thankfully.
That would be excellent news but I haven't seen definitive proof that we have immunity after infection or vaccine but see below.

Some useful news is given in a paper at https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipelin...he-coronavirus

Mixed into that useful news is an explanation of why older folk are at greater risk of having a really difficult time (cytokine storm).

It's the first article I've seen that gets down to to the cellular type level and its effect on CV.

Key concluding paragraph quoted below:

Quote:
So overall, this paper makes the prospects for a vaccine look good: there is indeed a robust response by the adaptive immune system, to several coronavirus proteins. And vaccine developers will want to think about adding in some of the other antigens mentioned in this paper, in addition to the Spike antigens that have been the focus thus far. It seems fair to say, though, that the first wave of vaccines will likely be Spike-o-centric, and later vaccines might have these other antigens included in the mix. But it also seems that Spike-protein-targeted vaccines should be pretty effective, so that’s good. The other good news is that this team looked for the signs of an antibody-dependent-enhancement response, which would be bad news, and did not find evidence of it in the recovering patients (I didn’t go into these details, but wanted to mention that finding, which is quite reassuring). And it also looks like the prospects for (reasonably) lasting immunity after infection (or after vaccination) are good. This, from what I can see, is just the sort of response that you’d want to see for that to be the case. Clinical data will be the real decider on that, but there’s no reason so far to think that a person won’t have such immunity if they fit this profile.

figgyburn 15-06-2020 11:07
Re: Coronavirus
 
Never mind all that pandemic stuff, Primark is open again and the world is fine.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-h...aths-lockdown/

Unbelievable.............

Maggy 15-06-2020 11:10
Re: Coronavirus
 
I'm now the only person wearing a mask when shopping at the supermarket/food shops..

jfman 15-06-2020 11:22
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by figgyburn (Post 36039841)
Never mind all that pandemic stuff, Primark is open again and the world is fine.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-h...aths-lockdown/

Unbelievable.............
Does it really sell anything you couldn't get on Amazon in the last 13 weeks ffs.

Carth 15-06-2020 12:41
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36039845)
Does it really sell anything you couldn't get on Amazon in the last 13 weeks ffs.
It's like a drug to them mate, they haven't had a wander around the store for their fix of 'cheap ill fitting throw away' crap for months ;)


Facebook will be full of 'me in Primark' selfies :)

mrmistoffelees 15-06-2020 12:55
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36039845)
Does it really sell anything you couldn't get on Amazon in the last 13 weeks ffs.
For some reason in Middlesbrough they started queuing from 5am to get into Primark with the queue up to 1/4 mile long at some point. God knows why.

Sports Direct had massive queues as well but a large propensity was apparently NHS staff tempted by the 50% off everything.

Having ventured out to the supermarket for the first time in 13 or 14 weeks I'm surprised I'm not on an assault charge. Peoples behaviour is ridiculous and it doesn't feel safe. I lost count of the amount of times I told people to move away from me.

cimt 15-06-2020 13:01
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 36039857)
For some reason in Middlesbrough they started queuing from 5am to get into Primark with the queue up to 1/4 mile long at some point. God knows why.

Sports Direct had massive queues as well but a large propensity was apparently NHS staff tempted by the 50% off everything.

Having ventured out to the supermarket for the first time in 13 or 14 weeks I'm surprised I'm not on an assault charge. Peoples behaviour is ridiculous and it doesn't feel safe. I lost count of the amount of times I told people to move away from me.
How far did the queue go for Primark? I saw on Twitter that it went right round to where the Princess Alice used to be.

In Leeds it has been the same. Do people really need new clothes that bad?

Damien 15-06-2020 13:02
Re: Coronavirus
 
Don't underestimate the appeal of normality. Same with those queues for McDonald's, the sheer relief of doing something conventional, something normal, something you used to do before the lockdown is a powerful draw. It's not so much they need some cheap jeans or a BigMac but that feeling that life can and will be normal again.

denphone 15-06-2020 13:11
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cimt (Post 36039858)
How far did the queue go for Primark? I saw on Twitter that it went right round to where the Princess Alice used to be.

In Leeds it has been the same. Do people really need new clothes that bad?
l have enough clothes for the next 5 years due to the many T Shirts , shorts , etc etc bought for me from my kind family.

l have not ventured out for 12 weeks and l have no intention of venturing out for a fair while yet.

Maggy 15-06-2020 15:35
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36039859)
Don't underestimate the appeal of normality. Same with those queues for McDonald's, the sheer relief of doing something conventional, something normal, something you used to do before the lockdown is a powerful draw. It's not so much they need some cheap jeans or a BigMac but that feeling that life can and will be normal again.
Normality is queuing? I hope not.

Chris 15-06-2020 15:39
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by denphone (Post 36039861)
l have enough clothes for the next 5 years due to the many T Shirts , shorts , etc etc bought for me from my kind family.

l have not ventured out for 12 weeks and l have no intention of venturing out for a fair while yet.
I only wear new stuff when it’s forced on me. Left to myself I could make my present wardrobe last a decade. :D

jfman 15-06-2020 15:42
Re: Coronavirus
 
I've resurrected a stag do t-shirt from 2017 in the current climate.

Sephiroth 15-06-2020 15:44
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36039874)
I've resurrected a stag do t-shirt from 2017 in the current climate.
I've resurrected my 1952 Ever Ready London Underground 00 train set (6V batteries).

papa smurf 15-06-2020 15:53
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris (Post 36039872)
I only wear new stuff when it’s forced on me. Left to myself I could make my present wardrobe last a decade. :D
The way my hair's growing i'm looking for some flares and an afghan coat;)

denphone 15-06-2020 16:01
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36039877)
The way my hair's growing i'm looking for some flares and an afghan coat;)
A trilby might be useful for hiding your hair.;)

ianch99 15-06-2020 17:09
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36039875)
I've resurrected my 1952 Ever Ready London Underground 00 train set (6V batteries).
Those batteries have lasted well! :)

Sephiroth 15-06-2020 17:11
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 36039884)
Those batteries have lasted well! :)
Halfords, mate!

Maggy 15-06-2020 17:46
Re: Coronavirus
 
Listening to the calls to reduce the distancing rules just made me shrug my shoulders mainly because for many it's already happening because the public at large have become very blase about distancing, judging by the way they charge around the supermarket.

denphone 15-06-2020 17:50
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maggy (Post 36039889)
Listening to the calls to reduce the distancing rules just made me shrug my shoulders mainly because for many it's already happening because the public at large have become very blase about distancing, judging by the way they charge around the supermarket.
Looking at some of the pictures today there are more people without face masks then there is with those who are wearing face masks.

Social distancing was very patchy as well and in some cases completely non existent.


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 13:22.
Page 40 of 64 « First 3036373839 40 4142434450 Last »
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
All Posts and Content are © Cable Forum