Coronavirus (OLD)

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

We will not avoid deaths by the measures being taken. We can only delay them.

If you think the economy isn't important in determining when the restrictions are relaxed, I don't think the majority would agree with you.

Citation, please?

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Citation, please?

How will these measures help to slow the spread of the infection?

By limiting the amount of contact people have with each other, we can slow down the spread of the infection and try to delay widespread transmission to the summer when there is less pressure on the NHS.

https://publichealthmatters.blog.gov...al-distancing/

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

We will not avoid deaths by the measures being taken. We can only delay them.

If you think the economy isn't important in determining when the restrictions are relaxed, I don't think the majority would agree with you.

Of course we will avoid deaths. Antibody tests, vaccines and a range of control measures, ensuring medical need doesn’t exceed supply.

The economy is important but can be underwritten by Government and the Central Bank. It’s literally their main function at this time. Money, as you consider it like a household budget, simply doesn’t exist at a macroeconomic level in the same way.

[Hom3r]

I just found out that mum will never walk again as the coronavirus attacked her nervous system.

She had it before I took her in, but she had no symptons. I live at home and don't know it I've had it either?

Tomorrow she moves to a nursing home, this is possibly a pemanent placing.

The home is 30 minutes away.

We may be able to visit and take clothing for her. This should help her start to eat as she is very low at not seeing any one.

Originally Posted by pip08456

https://publichealthmatters.blog.gov...al-distancing/

That doesn’t answer my question, which was asking for evidence that the deaths weren’t being avoided, only delayed...

[richard s]

So sorry to hear about your mother hom3r... I am a maintenance person at a care home and it is a very worrying time. We do not accept any visitors into the home only medical personnel, this has been like this for the past three weeks. You will find this will be the case throughout the UK. Wishing you all well.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Citation, please?

It's the government position, Hugh. I thought you were good at Googling.

---------- Post added at 20:22 ---------- Previous post was at 20:13 ----------

Originally Posted by jfman

Of course we will avoid deaths. Antibody tests, vaccines and a range of control measures, ensuring medical need doesn’t exceed supply.

The economy is important but can be underwritten by Government and the Central Bank. It’s literally their main function at this time. Money, as you consider it like a household budget, simply doesn’t exist at a macroeconomic level in the same way.

Oh, it's news to me that you can have a test and you can avoid coronavirus! Has anyone told the virus that or is this just your command?

I'm sorry, mate, but we cannot avoid this as there is no way available yet that can stop the virus from spreading. Despite every effort of the care homes, the virus is still getting in and the death toll is dreadful.

As far as the economy is concerned, we cannot sustain the lockdown measures for long. Fortunately, we don't have an unsustainable deficit anymore, and interest rates are at their lowest in living memory. However, there is a limit to how much debt is manageable, and we cannot let too many businesses collapse - that would be truly disastrous.

Other EU countries are already starting to relax the lockdown, and I dare say we will learn a lot from that.z

---------- Post added at 20:24 ---------- Previous post was at 20:22 ----------

Originally Posted by Hugh

That doesn’t answer my question, which was asking for evidence that the deaths weren’t being avoided, only delayed...

It's the medical evidence that the government has used to drive the policy.

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by Hugh

That doesn’t answer my question, which was asking for evidence that the deaths weren’t being avoided, only delayed...

Then you have to ask why slowing down the spread and delaying widespread infection until summer is magically going to stop or reduce deaths.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Oh, it's news to me that you can have a test and you can avoid coronavirus! Has anyone told the virus that or is this just your command?

Here's your straw man you are looking for Old Boy.

I'm sorry, mate, but we cannot avoid this as there is no way available yet that can stop the virus from spreading. Despite every effort of the care homes, the virus is still getting in and the death toll is dreadful.

There is - keep everyone apart as much as possible. Combined with mass testing and contact tracing (see South Korea) and it is possible. What countries need to wake up to is ceasing non-essential international travel completely.

As far as the economy is concerned, we cannot sustain the lockdown measures for long. Fortunately, we don't have an unsustainable deficit anymore, and interest rates are at their lowest in living memory. However, there is a limit to how much debt is manageable, and we cannot let too many businesses collapse - that would be truly disastrous.

Again applying household budgeting principles to the global economy is a flawed outlook. If the whole world is borrowing money to sustain their economies in a global pandemic the obvious question is who are we borrowing from and who do we owe it to? Who are they borrowing it from?

This is where the fact money is a human construct - it's not backed by anything like gold any more - is key. During an economic recession printing money is a perfectly reasonable way to increase money supply and stimulate growth. The risk - hyperinflation - is extremely low and the lever to control inflation (interest rates) has plenty of scope to rise to bring this under control.

The currency markets will be minimally affected as other currencies like the Euro and US dollar will experience the same.

Other EU countries are already starting to relax the lockdown, and I dare say we will learn a lot from that.z

We know what we need to do. Test and contact trace. It really isn't rocket science and has been the internationally recognised way to deal with pandemics for decades now.

[denphone]

A paper, published in the journal Science says physical distancing measures may need to be in place intermittently until 2022.

https://science.sciencemag.org/conte...cience.abb5793

Originally Posted by Hom3r

I just found out that mum will never walk again as the coronavirus attacked her nervous system.

She had it before I took her in, but she had no symptons. I live at home and don't know it I've had it either?

Tomorrow she moves to a nursing home, this is possibly a pemanent placing.

The home is 30 minutes away.

We may be able to visit and take clothing for her. This should help her start to eat as she is very low at not seeing any one.

Sorry Homer.

How long ago did you take her in?

---------- Post added at 21:45 ---------- Previous post was at 21:36 ----------

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

We will not avoid deaths by the measures being taken. We can only delay them.

If you think the economy isn't important in determining when the restrictions are relaxed, I don't think the majority would agree with you.

Originally Posted by Hugh

That doesn’t answer my question, which was asking for evidence that the deaths weren’t being avoided, only delayed...

Leaving aside the fact that all we're ever doing is delaying deaths.....

The Government's approach now is to avoid deaths by controlling the rate of infection so that hospital capacity isn't overwhelmed. It's not true to say the current measures will only delay (for now) people's deaths. If we didn't have these measures then hospital capacity was projected to have been overrun resulting in a higher number of deaths.

What OLD BOY might be confusing that with is that long term one of the assumptions is that we cannot stop the virus and therefore there will be a given number of deaths and those deaths are being delayed and not avoided.

I.E The very fact we're delaying deaths itself lowers the overall death count.

Another thing is that by delaying the deaths we buy time for more effective treatments to be found which could save lives.

We might also - although I am skeptical of this - be able to open up against with aggressive contact tracing, social distancing and other measures to slow the infection rate so drastically that we reach a vaccine before the virus has infected everyone it theoretically could.

Originally Posted by Hom3r

I just found out that mum will never walk again as the coronavirus attacked her nervous system.

She had it before I took her in, but she had no symptons. I live at home and don't know it I've had it either?

Tomorrow she moves to a nursing home, this is possibly a pemanent placing.

The home is 30 minutes away.

We may be able to visit and take clothing for her. This should help her start to eat as she is very low at not seeing any one.

This is dreadful news, I’m very sorry to hear it.

You’re going to have a difficult few months but you can both come through it. And she doesn’t have to stay in a home half an hour away forever. Your local authority should provide you a list of approved homes that charge local authority rate. You will be able to find one that suits her and is a little closer to you.

Take your time, make use of your local CAB for advice and assistance and don’t let the authorities push you around.

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by Hugh

No, it doesn’t mean that.

It’s aimed at people who insist on attributing blame/fault before enough information is available, and those who ask why, in hindsight, why something wasn’t done that is only obvious after the fact.

I was always taught that ‘drains up" reviews must be de-personalised and not pre-judged, and ask "what went wrong", not "who did that wrong thing" - learn from mistakes, and if people did make wrong decisions, understand the reasoning behind those decisions, because as jonbxx said above, it’s rare that people actively do things wrong, it’s often unforeseen or changing circumstances.

You assume that no information was available and that the UK did not know what was coming. We had the luxury of a number of weeks before we became Italy. We literally could see into the future.

The advisors who came up with the initial Herd Immunity idea that delayed action for at least a week. Who are they and are they still advising the Government? The people that deliberately ignored the opportunity to get onboard the EU-wide procurement scheme for Ventilators and PPE, why did they make this decision and they still making similar decisions? They got it wrong then and they could get it wrong again.

When the WHO said the only way to combat this virus is to test, test and test again. Why did the UK choose to ignore this advice? What was the reasoning behind this.

Without challenge, the same mistakes can and probably will be made. You need to learn from your mistakes quickly and that process is to question, analyse, conclude and then act.

[jfman]

Sorry Hom3r, I want to echo what Chris has said.

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by jfman

Sorry Hom3r, I want to echo what Chris has said.

I think all of us echo what Chris has said.