Coronavirus (OLD)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-53443724

Health Secretary Matt Hancock has called for an urgent review into how coronavirus deaths have been recorded in England.

It follows confirmation from Public Health England that reported deaths may have included people who tested positive months before they died.

Other UK nations only include those who die within 28 days of a positive test.

Officials say the publication of daily death figures will be paused while the issue was "resolved".

A note on the government's website read: "Currently the daily deaths measure counts all people who have tested positive for coronavirus and since died, with no cut-off between time of testing and date of death.

"There have been claims that the lack of cut-off may distort the current daily deaths number."

[Hom3r]

I want to know when:

A) I can hug my mum in a nursing home (if she isn't home by then)?


B) I can hug my sister, nephew and niece, we need it badly?

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

1. No, it's not hard to make an interim assessment, but plainly, that would be wildly inaccurate. Lockdowns slow the virus, but don't eliminate it. Further waves will push the numbers up throughout the world, and that's one of the reasons why it is too early to make proper judgements on which countries have got it right. I would also remind you that it is ridiculous to compare our numbers with other countries, since each of them set such different criteria as to what constitutes a covid death. The fact that other countries only count hospital deaths (not deaths in the community or in care homes) is all the evidence you need that comparisons at this stage are pretty pointless.

And once again I'd say they are not pointless - we can already make excess deaths comparisons as well as the official total. Again, I remind you, that you are simply trying to avoid an uncomfortable reality. However, I'm happy to revisit this in a couple of years time when I'm certain I'll be proven correct and those who claimed 'mild flu', 'it'll go away itself and the summer' and now 'it's too early to tell' will be proven wrong.

I'm uncertain why you persist in being proven wrong, when in actual fact the economy benefits from everyone accepting the reality than trying to hide from it.

2. I agree that some countries are having some initial success. This time next year, I very much suspect the situation will look a lot different. I don't care where you got the dreamy idea from, but it's wrong. There are disagreements within Sage as to how to best deal with this.

If I am certain of anything it's that your suspicions about coronavirus are politically fuelled.

3. Allowing the virus to run through the healthy population is exactly what needs to happen. It is the only practical way, and it is nature's way. But by protecting 'at risk' groups, we keep deaths to the minimum.

Needs to happen for what/who?

4. What I said was you cannot pin all your hopes on a vaccine. You have no plan B, so if you were in charge, you would be locking everyone up forever - until the riots started, that is.

Plan A should have been aiming to eradicate the virus. Plan B a vaccine.

At no stage have I ever suggested locking everyone up forever. As ever, Old Boy, you present the straw man argument.

You continue to be under the flawed logic that no lockdown = economy working as normal. 100% wrong. While I advocated a longer, stronger lockdown, protecting incomes and businesses along the way to get everyone out the other side in much the same position as before.

You however present the incoherent economics of austerity to save us. People lost their jobs. People spend less. More people lose their jobs. More people spend less. Cycle continues. For years.

It's not my fault your ideology makes you incapable of bold thinking, of 'entrepreneurial spirit' I think you call it.

When all is said and done a coherent strategy of eradicating the virus through isolating everyone as much as possible, for as long as possible, while protecting incomes will be proven to be better for public health and the economy.

[heero_yuy]

Quote from The Sun:

Face masks could be used by terrorists to hide their identity in order to launch attacks on cabinet ministers or high profile targets, an SAS-trained security expert has warned.

CCTV and facial recognition cameras will not be able to identify criminals and terrorists because they can blend into the crowd and hide their faces with a mask, the government was told today.

A phrase involving a fictional detective comes to mind.

A few weeks ago I saw a hoodie with long black hair, in black with a black mask on in Lidl and all you could see was the eyes. Might as well have been a burka.

The perfect disguise and all legal.

[Carth]

How ironic can it get?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotla...-west-53465160

Coronavirus: Potential Covid-19 cluster in Lanarkshire

A potential cluster of Covid-19 cases is being investigated in North Lanarkshire, health officials have confirmed.

BBC Scotland understands the outbreak involves a call centre which carries out coronavirus contact tracing for the NHS.

One employee said they believed at least seven colleagues had tested positive.

Well, you would think they shouldnt have too much trouble tracing themselves.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Paul

Well, you would think they shouldnt have too much trouble tracing themselves.

You over estimate the capability of the private sector, I suspect.

Small-scale medical trial suggests directly inhaling a version of the MS drug beta-interferon via a nebuliser dramatically reduces the severity of Covid-19 symptoms, possibly reducing the chances of needing a ventilator by almost 80%.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-53467022

[tweetiepooh]

There is more to all of this that government response.

Geography - how easy is it to close borders and restrict movement - New Zealand easy; Europe far less so.
Population - how well will the population obey suggestions/rules - Japan easy; UK not so much

It's a novel situation and no matter what any government does it will not be right to some observers who will often not offer viable alternatives.

---
Read a Tweet at weekend suggest that the papers read by older people are more optimistic than those read by the younger.
That said those older people papers tend to be more right so are more likely supportive than the younger set papers but thought it interesting anyway. Seems to echo a more general attitude that many older people just want to get on with things and it's the younger who are more keen on a cautious approach. It's not carelessness by the older though, they do have concerns and are not reckless but many want to hug families and be social again.

[Pierre]

People will do what they want eventually.

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavir...spike-12032433

There hasn't been a spike since lockdown was eased and all the BLM gatherings.

I think steady as we go.

Grassroots football and Karate starts again next week - woohoo

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

And once again I'd say they are not pointless - we can already make excess deaths comparisons as well as the official total. Again, I remind you, that you are simply trying to avoid an uncomfortable reality. However, I'm happy to revisit this in a couple of years time when I'm certain I'll be proven correct and those who claimed 'mild flu', 'it'll go away itself and the summer' and now 'it's too early to tell' will be proven wrong.

I'm uncertain why you persist in being proven wrong, when in actual fact the economy benefits from everyone accepting the reality than trying to hide from it.




Plan A should have been aiming to eradicate the virus. Plan B a vaccine.

At no stage have I ever suggested locking everyone up forever. As ever, Old Boy, you present the straw man argument.

You continue to be under the flawed logic that no lockdown = economy working as normal. 100% wrong. While I advocated a longer, stronger lockdown, protecting incomes and businesses along the way to get everyone out the other side in much the same position as before.

You however present the incoherent economics of austerity to save us. People lost their jobs. People spend less. More people lose their jobs. More people spend less. Cycle continues. For years.

It's not my fault your ideology makes you incapable of bold thinking, of 'entrepreneurial spirit' I think you call it.

When all is said and done a coherent strategy of eradicating the virus through isolating everyone as much as possible, for as long as possible, while protecting incomes will be proven to be better for public health and the economy.

Excess deaths is a blunt instrument at best. You forget that people are also dying owing to the fact that they could not get their illnesses diagnosed and treated during the lockdown.

The 'mild flu' jibe - you must be getting desperate now. For most people, they either do not know they've had it or only experience mild symptoms. For those 'at risk' groups and others with an underlying health condition it can, of course, be deadly, and there is a likelihood that continual exposure to infected people can make it worse. I accept that the virus does not seem to go away during the summertime as was first speculated, although as people spend less time confined indoors in crowded areas during the summer, the number of infections may well decline for that reason.

I'm glad that we agree the objective of Plan 'A'. Of course you do realise that the only plan to eradicate the virus in the absence of a vaccine is herd immunity. It seems that the government is going for the half-way house solution at the moment with track and trace and local lockdowns. I suppose that is worth a try, but this will send us all on a merry old dance for years to come.

As far as your comments about a longer, stronger lockdown, do come off it - do you think the public would tolerate that? They were already pretty fed up with it when the government started to ease restrictions. I did not present your favourite 'straw man' argument. I have surely already made clear that however long and strong the lockdown, the virus will just attack us again on the eventual release. It only took one super-spreader to set this all off in the UK, remember that?

Austerity, jfman, is what would happen if we were all in the 'longer, stronger' lockdown you advocate. I'd stop arguing if I were you, your plan is falling apart before your eyes. If you're looking, that is.

---------- Post added at 14:35 ---------- Previous post was at 14:31 ----------

Originally Posted by Pierre

People will do what they want eventually.

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavir...spike-12032433

There hasn't been a spike since lockdown was eased and all the BLM gatherings.

I think steady as we go.

Grassroots football and Karate starts again next week - woohoo

I am not really that surprised. The virus is not readily passed on between people outside. It is crowded indoor spaces which are the real worry, hence why the health specialists are concerned about the autumn/winter months.

[OLD BOY]

To those who say the government did not lockdown early enough, or failed to follow scientific advice, this might be an interesting read. This is how I remember it, too, particularly the 'herd immunity' bit.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-534338...5Bpost+type%5D

So there you have it. I particularly liked:

Prof Whitty argued that beginning social distancing measures "too early" would risk people becoming tired of them and public compliance waning.

And Sir Patrick began to talk about the concept of herd immunity. Speaking about the coronavirus he said: "It's not possible to stop everybody getting it and it's also actually not desirable because you want some immunity in the population. We need immunity to protect ourselves from this in the future."

Which, of course, is was I've been saying all along.

[Mr K]

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a9630556.html

Coronavirus could be ‘here forever’ with constant need for vaccinations, top scientist warns MPs
Virus pathogen may never be eliminated, says Professor Sir John Bell

One of the world’s leading immunologists has warned MPs that Covid-19 could be “here forever”.

Sir John Bell, a distinguished scientist and regius professor of medicine at Oxford University, said that the pathogen underpinning the novel virus may never be eliminated.

Giving evidence at a session of the Commons Health and Social Care Committee, Sir John, 68, added that any potential coronavirus vaccine “is unlikely to have a durable effect that’ll last for a very long time”.
"So we’re going to have to have a continual cycle of vaccinations and then more disease, and more vaccinations and more disease.” Sir John told the Committee, chaired by former health secretary and Tory MP Jeremy Hunt.

Sir John, knighted for his services to medicine in 2008, used polio as an example of how difficult it can be to completely suppress a disease.

Look at how much trouble they’ve had in eliminating, for example, polio, that eradication programme has been going on for 15 years and they’re still not there,” he said.

“So this [Covid-19] is going to come and go, and we’re going to get winters where we get a lot of this virus back in action.”

Bit sobering to those pinning their hours on a cure all vaccine or that life will ever get back to 'normal' again.

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by Mr K

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a9630556.html


Bit sobering to those pinning their hours on a cure all vaccine or that life will ever get back to 'normal' again.

Merely an opinion using an example where the reason for the noneradication is well known. There's also the smallpox vaccine to consider.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Mr K

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a9630556.html


Bit sobering to those pinning their hours on a cure all vaccine or that life will ever get back to 'normal' again.

we'll learn to live with it, like all the other Coronaviruses