Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 01:09:25 pm

Login with username, password and session length

Links


FSA logo

Author Topic: Coronavirus  (Read 861026 times)

0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

i_ateallthepies

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 5003
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #360 on March 12, 2020, 06:59:08 pm by i_ateallthepies »
I’m not one to over react but I think our government is being blasé about this. Are other countries being over cautious.?

It’s my opinion but I don’t think the uk is doing anywhere near enough to contain the spread.

Check out the link Macho Madness posted in post 342 for confirmation that your opinion of the government's response is blasé.  The best evidence-based piece of analysis I think I have ever seen.



(want to hide these ads? Join the VSC today!)

Filo

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 29825
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #361 on March 12, 2020, 06:59:14 pm by Filo »
The management of public opinion was the theme for the media.

Very surprised to hear them claim we are 4 weeks behind Italy....when I last looked it was about 11 days!

Why have they not closed the stock market down for a month to damp down the financial panic?

The money men will make a lot of money out of this buying low and selling when the stock market recovers

rich1471

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 2637
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #362 on March 12, 2020, 07:14:23 pm by rich1471 »
Your right filo the company I work for the shares have gone from 1.26 on the 27 Feb to 55p today and will go lower

drfchound

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 29201
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #363 on March 12, 2020, 07:16:31 pm by drfchound »
Anyone can take advantage of buying shares at their low point and making some money.

River Don

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 8190
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #364 on March 12, 2020, 07:25:37 pm by River Don »
When news first started to break, apparently a group of students clubbed together to buy hand sanitiser in bulk. They then split the packets and sold individual bottles online at a huge mark up.

BillyStubbsTears

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 36605
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #365 on March 12, 2020, 07:28:14 pm by BillyStubbsTears »
The bbc column discusses why the uk isn’t doing as much as other countries.

Apparently it is “because we have a relatively low number of confirmed cases, so there is no need to take steps that will have profound social and economic consequences”

What about the unconfirmed cases and the spread they don’t know about.?

Am I missing something here.?

I think we are probably doing the right thing.

We aren't going to stop this now, so it's about spreading the duration. We need to turn the three week peak to a three month peak. So there WILL be a near closedown at the peak time. And it might well last three months. And it might still be 2-3 months away.

Being draconian now doesn't help. Slowing down the rate if spread when we only have a few hundred or thousand cases doesn't help. What you want to do is slow the rate of growth from half a million cases upwards. And if we shut down schools now, that's going to be an extra 2-3 months of parents having to be off work, for no benefit.

Save the big effort for when the tsunami breaks and it's really needed.

BillyStubbsTears

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 36605
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #366 on March 12, 2020, 07:30:03 pm by BillyStubbsTears »
London Evening Standard...Boris states between 5 and 10,000 infected in UK

I hope to God that is right.

If there's 10,000 cases and only 10 deaths, maybe the death rate might be a lot lower than we think. I'd take a 0.1% death rate now. It will still mean 30-40,000 dead but that's at the very best end of what we can hope for.

River Don

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 8190
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #367 on March 12, 2020, 07:35:22 pm by River Don »
The mortality rate in Italy is looking closer to 5%, I'd snap your hand off for 0.1%

The UK has quite a lot in common with Italy, a large elderly population, lots of people with underlying health conditions, obesity, diabetes and so on.

This is really going to test the NHS.

IDM

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 19615
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #368 on March 12, 2020, 07:59:40 pm by IDM »
The bbc column discusses why the uk isn’t doing as much as other countries.

Apparently it is “because we have a relatively low number of confirmed cases, so there is no need to take steps that will have profound social and economic consequences”

What about the unconfirmed cases and the spread they don’t know about.?

Am I missing something here.?

I think we are probably doing the right thing.

We aren't going to stop this now, so it's about spreading the duration. We need to turn the three week peak to a three month peak. So there WILL be a near closedown at the peak time. And it might well last three months. And it might still be 2-3 months away.

Being draconian now doesn't help. Slowing down the rate if spread when we only have a few hundred or thousand cases doesn't help. What you want to do is slow the rate of growth from half a million cases upwards. And if we shut down schools now, that's going to be an extra 2-3 months of parents having to be off work, for no benefit.

Save the big effort for when the tsunami breaks and it's really needed.

I understand what you mean and I agree to an extent.

Where I have difficulty is the quantity of cases.. these are confirmed tested cases, but what about the underlying thousands of untested mild sufferers or non infected carriers.?

I saw on my local news tonight (east mids) that testing would be prioritised on the most ill patients in hospital, and that those self isolating with mild symptoms wouldn’t get tested.

That was on the bbc - yes it may be local but it gave the impression that the count of those infected may end up being artificially small.

I get the argument to spread the load on the nhs but apart from hand washing and old folks not going on cruises, there seems to be little control over this thing spreading..

Are countries like the Netherlands, Denmark, Spain, Czech Republic and Ireland etc making OTT reactions.?

I’m not one for panic measures at all but I have to say I am not reassured by what our government is doing.

BillyStubbsTears

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 36605
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #369 on March 12, 2020, 08:02:45 pm by BillyStubbsTears »
The mortality rate in Italy is looking closer to 5%, I'd snap your hand off for 0.1%

The UK has quite a lot in common with Italy, a large elderly population, lots of people with underlying health conditions, obesity, diabetes and so on.

This is really going to test the NHS.

That's because they have tens of thousands undiagnosed.

Copps is Magic

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 8661
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #370 on March 12, 2020, 08:08:37 pm by Copps is Magic »
Another factor to consider: in some Italian regions the median age is 47-49. In the UK its 40, and 36.5 in places like London.

River Don

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 8190
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #371 on March 12, 2020, 08:09:35 pm by River Don »
The mortality rate in Italy is looking closer to 5%, I'd snap your hand off for 0.1%

The UK has quite a lot in common with Italy, a large elderly population, lots of people with underlying health conditions, obesity, diabetes and so on.

This is really going to test the NHS.

That's because they have tens of thousands undiagnosed.

True but there are other factors. The lag between infection and death/recovery for instance. Really they should compare the deaths with  diagnosed from at least seven days before.

The WHO estimate 3.4% which governments have been quick to dismiss. I would not be so sure, it isn't closer to the truth.

bpoolrover

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 5923
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #372 on March 12, 2020, 08:35:19 pm by bpoolrover »
The worry for Italy is they say it’s getting slightly better in some of the shut down areas and in 2 weeks hope to get them open a little, but surley it will just come back again the minute they do?

albie

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 3611
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #373 on March 12, 2020, 08:48:57 pm by albie »
The elephant in the room is the potential for infection to be transmitted before a host shows symptoms.

All well and good telling people to self-isolate with symptoms, but it may be locking the stable door after the horse has bolted.

You could be sat next to someone at football who is infected but does not yet know it. I can't see how stadium events will observe the "social distancing" requirements of a 2m air gap, let alone manage surface contamination.

As we have no present immunity, a precautionary approach has advantages.
I have little faith in the competence of our decision makers......Johnson and Hancock are not fit to be in charge of a shopping trolley IMO.

I hope for the best, but fear it will be worse than it could be.

Bristol Red Rover

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 9432
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #374 on March 12, 2020, 08:53:39 pm by Bristol Red Rover »
One small illustration of the chaos. I was due to be filming in London next week for 4 days. Around 600 people would be working there and that's just been cancelled. I know other big shoots have also been cancelled.

I'm doing one with around 100 tomorrow but guessing most filming with over 100 people will go the same way next week, and who knows after that. That's a lot of money just in the cancellations never mind the whole knock on effect in the industry as things can't be simply moved around as key people are booked way into the future.

I think schools will be closed within the week.

Sprotyrover

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 3990
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #375 on March 12, 2020, 09:00:22 pm by Sprotyrover »
London Evening Standard...Boris states between 5 and 10,000 infected in UK

I hope to God that is right.

If there's 10,000 cases and only 10 deaths, maybe the death rate might be a lot lower than we think. I'd take a 0.1% death rate now. It will still mean 30-40,000 dead but that's at the very best end of what we can hope for.
I found it a bit of a concern ,it means there are 5 to 10,000 folks out there who may still be in their work environment with a 'mild cold' merrily infecting all and sundry. And if there is a 5 day incubation period ?

wilts rover

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 10146
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #376 on March 12, 2020, 09:13:12 pm by wilts rover »
I was just about to post something similar sproty.

Boris said he isn't closing anything down (unlike many other countries) because he want's to control the outbreak and 'flatten the curve'. How on earth is allowing 10000 infected people to go about there daily business and potentially mingle with crowds large and small 'controlling the outbreak'?

It seems like the opposite to me - they want  these people to go out and spread the virus.

Somebody tell me I am missing something?

albie

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 3611
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #377 on March 12, 2020, 09:39:30 pm by albie »
I believe the relevant term is "culpable negligence", when you choose to avoid taking early actions to prevent later impacts.

Who knows if it applies here?
« Last Edit: March 12, 2020, 10:11:43 pm by albie »

BillyStubbsTears

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 36605
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #378 on March 12, 2020, 10:15:52 pm by BillyStubbsTears »
Trouble with closing down stuff now is the time that would go on for.

Let's assume there are 10,000 cases now and 50% of us will get it. We are told the crisis time is the peak 3 weeks of the epidemic, at the start of which, 25% of infections have happened and another 50% will happen over those three weeks. THAT is when the total shutdown comes. And at the start of that, we have about 9 million total cases. So we are going to need about a 1000 fold increase in cases from now until the peak three weeks starts. That's 10 doublings.

If the doubling rate is 5 days, which again is the usual rate in epidemic, so we are told, that's 50 days from now, or 7 weeks.

So if we start closing stuff down now, we've got to keep these closures for 2 months before the peak period even starts. Probably longer, because closing down would probably slow the doubling rate. Then you keep the shutdown over the peak period, which again you try to extend over longer than 3 weeks. Then you keep the shutdown on past the peak, because there are still a lot of new cases coming in.



Are we really going to shut down the country for 6 months? Keep kids off school? Keep people off work? Shut down the leisure industry? Shut down large gatherings? The economic and social effects would be horrific.

It's a fine balance and I'm leaving to thinking we are, on balance, probably doing it right.

IDM

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 19615
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #379 on March 12, 2020, 10:26:28 pm by IDM »
But isn’t that assuming 50% of us will get it, regardless of how or when it slows down.?

If we slow down now, wouldn’t far less people catch it in the long term.? 

Are you saying we shut down when this thing is at its peak, rather than to stop it ever reaching such levels.?
« Last Edit: March 12, 2020, 10:30:09 pm by IDM »

BillyStubbsTears

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 36605
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #380 on March 12, 2020, 10:33:09 pm by BillyStubbsTears »
No IDM.

That's what the Chief Medical Officer said today. We cannot significantly change the total who will get it. We CAN slow down the rate, but if we go all in now, can we keep that up for 6 months? Maybe it's better to allow it to grow in numbers now, while it is still infecting sufficiently few people for the country to cope, and THEN  go heavy in maybe a month, when the numbers are transitioning from hundreds of thousands to millions. If we have to have a Draconian shutdown for three months, maybe we can cope with that. Having a closedown for months BEFORE that is asking a lot.

Bristol Red Rover

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 9432
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #381 on March 12, 2020, 10:38:01 pm by Bristol Red Rover »
Trouble with closing down stuff now is the time that would go on for.


Exactly. Much as I'd like to dump a whole lot of anger at Johnson's door, I think the management so far is in the right ball park. Without everyone in quarantine for several months, there isn't another realistic option than to have gone about things as has been done so far. Even with that quarantine, it only takes one microscopic virus to land here and blow the whole plan apart, and that would happen.

wilts rover

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 10146
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #382 on March 12, 2020, 10:44:22 pm by wilts rover »
That all sounds fine Billy provided you have unlimited resources and control of time. We are 17000 NHS beds and 40000 nurses short and apparently stretched to capacity already.

This Italian doctor thinks we are doing it wrong and we are going to be overwhelmed quicker than we think. I do hope he is wrong and you and Johnson are right:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/coronavirus-uk-us-response-criticism-boris-trump-italy-a9398166.html

IDM

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 19615
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #383 on March 12, 2020, 10:46:01 pm by IDM »
No IDM.

That's what the Chief Medical Officer said today. We cannot significantly change the total who will get it. We CAN slow down the rate, but if we go all in now, can we keep that up for 6 months? Maybe it's better to allow it to grow in numbers now, while it is still infecting sufficiently few people for the country to cope, and THEN  go heavy in maybe a month, when the numbers are transitioning from hundreds of thousands to millions. If we have to have a Draconian shutdown for three months, maybe we can cope with that. Having a closedown for months BEFORE that is asking a lot.

I understand that, but I thought that a virus might ultimately spread less if restrained.

So regardless of how and when, the total spread would be the same anyway.?

The thought therefore is why are other countries not doing the same.? 


bpoolrover

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 5923
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #384 on March 12, 2020, 10:52:12 pm by bpoolrover »
While yes it comes down to boris he is going off what the medical and science people are telling him, what other option has he got but to follow there recommendations

IDM

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 19615
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #385 on March 12, 2020, 10:55:11 pm by IDM »
Why is the advice in other counties different, in places like Hungary where there are far fewer cases they have more restrictive measures.?

River Don

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 8190
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #386 on March 12, 2020, 10:57:54 pm by River Don »
It could just be panic, iDM.

It takes some doing, looking at computer models, weighing up the risks, accepting early setbacks with the hope of acting later... All when there is fear in the air and more could be done immediately.

It's a leap of faith but given where we are.. I think it's probably our best shot.

bpoolrover

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 5923
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #387 on March 12, 2020, 11:00:03 pm by bpoolrover »
Why is the advice in other counties different, in places like Hungary where there are far fewer cases they have more restrictive measures.?
less people could have gone to said countries and passed it on?

IDM

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 19615
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #388 on March 12, 2020, 11:25:46 pm by IDM »
How on earth are we going to slow down the extent of the spread if testing is only going to focus on patients in hospitals.?

So folks with mild symptoms or even none, ie just carriers, go untested and then uncounted.?  What’s to stop them infecting more vulnerable people.?

I’m a reasonably educated guy and try and see things from a common sense perspective but I find all this really confusing.

To me, it appears that the UK has decided that this virus is here and can’t be stopped, and are only trying to control it to manage it in a timely fashion.?

They seem to accept there will be more deaths as an inevitability whereas it looks like other countries are tying to prevent the fatalities.?

BillyStubbsTears

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 36605
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #389 on March 12, 2020, 11:26:41 pm by BillyStubbsTears »
That all sounds fine Billy provided you have unlimited resources and control of time. We are 17000 NHS beds and 40000 nurses short and apparently stretched to capacity already.

This Italian doctor thinks we are doing it wrong and we are going to be overwhelmed quicker than we think. I do hope he is wrong and you and Johnson are right:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/coronavirus-uk-us-response-criticism-boris-trump-italy-a9398166.html

Wilts.

Don't do that "you and Johnson" silliness. It's not the time for politicking. I'm listening to the CSA and the CMO, not to Johnson.

As I've said elsewhere, there are massive questions on how we have funded the NHS for a decade and whether we are as prepared as we could have been. The time for political arguments about that is 6 months down the line, not now. Now is the time for getting the response as right as we can.

 

TinyPortal © 2005-2012