Coronavirus (OLD)

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by nomadking

So again, which country WAS prepared?

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.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Mr K

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.

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.

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by Mr K

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.

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..

[mrmistoffelees]

Originally Posted by nomadking

So again, which country WAS prepared?

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.

[tweetiepooh]

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.

[downquark1]

Originally Posted by Mr K

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.

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.

[denphone]

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

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

The latest figure in the UK for the number of people that have died after testing positive for COVID-19 is 1,651.

The nations breakdown is as follows:

England: 1651 (a rise of 367)
Wales: 69 (a rise of seven)

Scotland: 60 (a rise of 13)

Northern Ireland: 28 (a rise of six)

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by nomadking

So this equipment was supposed to be stored away for 10 years or more, just in case it's needed? Never been needed on this scale before.

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

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

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

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

[jfman]

Originally Posted by nomadking

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

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?

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Mr K

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.

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

Originally Posted by nomadking

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

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

Not only are the states having to bid against each other, but they are also having to bid against FEMA , representing the federal government- and all the foreign governments still trying to cope with their own coronavirus crises.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Hugh

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

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

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by Mr K

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.

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

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

[denphone]

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

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