Coronavirus (OLD)

[1andrew1]

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

[jfman]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

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

“Nobody could have predicted this”

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

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

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.

2.29 Experts agree that there is a high probability of
another influenza pandemic occurring, but it is
impossible to forecast its exact timing or the precise
nature of its impact. Based on historical information,
scientific evidence and modelling, the following
impacts are predicted:

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

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

rink in Milton Keynes will be turned into an emergency mortuary "in a matter of days", in order to cope with a rise in coronavirus-related deaths, the local authority has said.

Planet Ice in South Row will become a temporary facility in the event funeral directors are unable to hold bodies, according to Milton Keynes Council.

In a statement released on Tuesday, a spokesperson said: "We're working with the owners of Planet Ice to ready the rink as a precaution should it be needed to support local operations.

"Ice rinks elsewhere in the UK have previously been used as temporary mortuary facilities, as their existing infrastructure can typically be adapted faster and more effectively than other buildings."

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by nomadking

Which is why there is a bunch of documents labelled "UK Influenza Pandemic Preparedness Strategy" started in 2011.
Link

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

[denphone]

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

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

Originally Posted by denphone

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

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

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.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Mr K

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

Instead of bulk-buying critical care beds and ventilators, which some feared may have gone out of date, the Government focused instead on bolstering their supply chains, reports the Telegraph.

...

'The coronavirus outbreak calls for decisive action, at home and abroad, and the World Health Organisation recognises that the UK is one of the most prepared countries in the world for pandemic flu.

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

[jfman]

Originally Posted by nomadking

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

You do know the purpose of these simulations, right?

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by Chris

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.

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.

Originally Posted by nomadking

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

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

A Department for Health and Social Care spokesman told MailOnline: 'The coronavirus outbreak calls for decisive action, at home and abroad, and the World Health Organisation recognises that the UK is one of the most prepared countries in the world for pandemic flu.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by jfman

You do know the purpose of these simulations, right?

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 ----------

Originally Posted by Hugh

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

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

Last week, the Global Health Security Index was released and it examined whether countries across the world are prepared to deal with epidemic or pandemic. The topic was thrust into the spotlight in 2014 when an Ebola outbreak devastated parts of West Africa, killing more than 10,000 people. That prompted many other countries to boost their levels of preparation.
...
The index analyzes those preparation levels by focusing on whether countries have the proper tools in place to deal with large scale outbreaks of disease. Measured on a scale of 0 to 100 where 100 is the highest level of preparedness, the United States came first, followed by the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. Unsurprisingly, higher income countries tended to record better scores in the index.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by nomadking

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.

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.

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

Originally Posted by Chris

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.

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.