Corona Virus

[Parafox]

3 hours ago, worthosoriginals said:

I take it from that post you are age about 12

I'm 63 and totally at risk because of my job and my age, I'm willing to put myself out there and take that risk for those in need but I have a realistic logical balanced view of the whole thing. Do you? I genuinely can't believe your ignorance.

Edited 15 March 2020 by Parafox

[Parafox]

50 minutes ago, PAULCFC said:

Biggest concern for us at the moment is child care.We have 2 boys,Mrs works for the NHS and i work full time....and we have no one to look after them if the school closes.....guess i might have to go on nights,which i hate!

This is a genuine concern. If they shut schools, colleges, childcare facilities, what the fuk are working parents going to do?

[Soar Fox]

1 hour ago, lgfualol said:

One bloke at my nearest aldi had a trolley full of eggs, flatbread packets (probs at least 50 individual flatbreads) and still water bottles. 

My partner is a self employed cake maker. I went Aldi today to get her weekly ingredients and they restricted me to only 4 boxes of icing sugar instead of the 30 she normally buys. 
 

God knows why they would think I would want to bulk buy icing sugar  

[ithuriel]

Found this 

 

[Strokes]

56 minutes ago, Matt_Lcfc said:

These really are strange times - went to take the dog out for a walk and I saw about one person. 
As I’ve said earlier on in the thread, I’m in my final year off doing a-levels and the college are already preparing an “online portal” where all our work could go on there if we are to go into lockdown.

These times are unprecedented, im not worried about being dying, however, I’m worried about what it might mean in the next few years.

This town is coming like a ghost town
All the clubs have been closed down
This place is coming like a ghost town
Bands won't play no more
Too much fighting on the dance floor

Do you remember the good old days before the ghost town?
We danced and sang, and the music played in a de boomtown

 

 

Yes like it was fùcking yesterday.

[Guest Fktf]

2 minutes ago, Kopfkino said:

They've given plenty of forward guidance for anyone that's paid attention. The media has been utterly hopeless because of Political correspondents looking for political drama. For example, banning large gatherings was spoken about on Thursday and it was said that they'd decide shortly, then it comes out last night and is described as a u turn when it just wasn't. Again tonight we see complete media failure with The BBC  reporting the letter claiming to be from scientists as "More than 200 scientists have written to the government urging them to introduce tougher measures to tackle the spread of Covid-19." But they're almost all mathematicians and over half of them are PhD students so have very little authority on virology and epidemiology. The Guardian has chosen to make them relevant and the BBC has run with it x10. The first reference on the letter is a Medium link ffs. 

 

Its partly a comms problem because the government hasn't been fully transparent and the comms has been muddled at times (they really should take control and go to daily press conferences) but most of its been out there. The fact that a twitter thread from someone in the group advising the government did a better job of explaining that herd immunity isn't the strategy that the goverment is pursuing probably demonstrates that

My opinion is that we shouldn't be taking a decision shortly. We should have already made the decision, and implemtned social distancing. There's a lot unknown about the virus (it is new, after all). Scientists are trained that practice should be evidence based, and in the lack of any evidence, the default should be as conservative as possible. For instance, we don't know whether we can build useful herd immunity for the virus. It could turn out to be like common flu, and come in many different strains. If this is the case, eventually we'll repeat vaccinate for it (like we do with the flu). But in the short term it means we're accepting a lot of deaths on the hope it doesn't come come in different strains. It's a gamble we're taking, be in no doubt about that. 

 

The models the scientists advising the govt will be put together by mathematicians and experts in viruses, so it is unwise to discount opinions because they're from mathematicians. In fact, many mathematicians are hired by universities exactly because they can model things disease spread, so if anyone can question the modelling were working on, it is the mathematicians. 

 

I don't buy the strategy isn't herd immunity. If it wasn't, we'd have done what every other country has done and tried more extreme measures to stop the spread. The govt is hardly going to admit this, though, is it? We're keeping schools and universities open because people there are unlikely to die if they catch the virus, so infecting all of them is a great step towards meeting the 60% infection rate we need. Sure, some kids and students might infect elderly relatives, but it is for the common good'.

 

Instead, we see hints at this outcome 'families are going to lose their loved ones before their time', without actually hearing the rationale as to why this will be the case. 

 

 

[Lionator]

28 minutes ago, ithuriel said:

Found this 

 

Not representitive of what everyone will experience. 

Edited 15 March 2020 by Lionator

[ithuriel]

1 minute ago, Lionator said:

Not representitive of what everyone will experience. 

Obviously, no one said it was, even in the video they mention this.

[urban.spaceman]

[Dario_Rodriguez_]

6 hours ago, Parafox said:

 

Seasonal flu killed circa 2,000 people in the UK last year, most of whom were elderly and/or had underlying health issues. That fact is nothing new. Do we get all panicky and stockpile bog rolls every November-March? No we don't. This is a strain of flu that nobody has immunity to so far and, unfortunately some will die that otherwise may have not. It's a fact of life at the moment. The vast majority of those that get infected will have minor to moderate symptoms akin to seasonal flu and lasting between 4-7 days before a rapid recovery. In severe cases some will develop pneumonia, in particular those with pre-existing respiratory illnesses and that may prove fatal if they are already severely weakened and that's sad but it's going to happen. Yes, there are reports from around the world that previously fit, young people have developed pneumonia and are on ICU's on ventilators but they are expected to recover quickly within days.

The whole panic thing baffles me. I'm no medical expert, but it seems to me as a layman that the world's reaction to this thing has fuelled mass anxiety. I agree that steps need to be taken but surely things like banning international flights is closing the door after the horse has bolted. Every country is infected. They won't get any less infected by keeping foreigners out. Containment was never going to be achievable and now we are in the "slow it down" phase. Some will get it, some won't, some will die, the vast majority won't.

I also don't get the mad buying of pasta?

Seasonal Flu kills a couple of thousand a year in the UK.

 

Covid-19 is on course to do that in less than two weeks in Italy.

 

Ur heads in the sand son.

[nnfox]

6 hours ago, Kopfkino said:

They've given plenty of forward guidance for anyone that's paid attention. The media has been utterly hopeless because of Political correspondents looking for political drama. For example, banning large gatherings was spoken about on Thursday and it was said that they'd decide shortly, then it comes out last night and is described as a u turn when it just wasn't. Again tonight we see complete media failure with The BBC  reporting the letter claiming to be from scientists as "More than 200 scientists have written to the government urging them to introduce tougher measures to tackle the spread of Covid-19." But they're almost all mathematicians and over half of them are PhD students so have very little authority on virology and epidemiology. The Guardian has chosen to make them relevant and the BBC has run with it x10. The first reference on the letter is a Medium link ffs. 

 

Its partly a comms problem because the government hasn't been fully transparent and the comms has been muddled at times (they really should take control and go to daily press conferences) but most of its been out there. The fact that a twitter thread from someone in the group advising the government did a better job of explaining that herd immunity isn't the strategy that the goverment is pursuing probably demonstrates that

The media have been dreadful.  They should stick to reporting the facts and reiterating the government advice.  

 

Why have headlines like "Government continues to act on their plan" (They have a plan and are sticking to it) when you can stir up a frenzy with "Government in U Turn over mass gatherings" (They don't know what they're doing)

 

Sensationalism sells though, so instead they actively seek out authority figures who disagree with the government advice, they constantly question the strategy, they show too many pictures of empty supermarket shelves which fuels more panic buying.  They highlight the number of deaths and give little mention of the number of recoveries and so it goes on and on and on.

 

Johnson can't win.  If he goes off on one and locks down the country from day 1 then the media wheel out a bunch of scientists that inform us why that's a bad idea and he should be making science backed decisions.  Do as he's done with scientists flanking him then he is questioned why he isn't shutting the country down immediately.

 

Nobody knows everything about this virus, the correct way, or at least the best way of dealing with this won't be known by anyone on the planet until it's all over and mortality rates can be compared.  What I am sure of though, is those scientists working closest with the government know a hell of a lot more than me about the spread of viruses and my guess would be that they know a hell of a lot more than 99.9% of those chipping in with their opinion on social media or even the mainstream news channels.  They'll also have access to way, way, way more data than practically everyone else to inform their decisions.

 

I agree there should be daily press conferences.  That would calm a lot of people down.

[reynard]

6 hours ago, Kopfkino said:

They've given plenty of forward guidance for anyone that's paid attention. The media has been utterly hopeless because of Political correspondents looking for political drama. For example, banning large gatherings was spoken about on Thursday and it was said that they'd decide shortly, then it comes out last night and is described as a u turn when it just wasn't. Again tonight we see complete media failure with The BBC  reporting the letter claiming to be from scientists as "More than 200 scientists have written to the government urging them to introduce tougher measures to tackle the spread of Covid-19." But they're almost all mathematicians and over half of them are PhD students so have very little authority on virology and epidemiology. The Guardian has chosen to make them relevant and the BBC has run with it x10. The first reference on the letter is a Medium link ffs. 

 

Its partly a comms problem because the government hasn't been fully transparent and the comms has been muddled at times (they really should take control and go to daily press conferences) but most of its been out there. The fact that a twitter thread from someone in the group advising the government did a better job of explaining that herd immunity isn't the strategy that the goverment is pursuing probably demonstrates that

This is the issue though isn't it? We are told everything is science based yet it hasn't been made clear what that science is that resutls in us apprently on a very different trajectory of planning to other countries. ie what is the difference in the science between us and pretty much the rest of the world?

Any government when faced with such a crisis as this must take its people with it. I'm not sure ours is and will be able to in the coming months. I also think there are certain aspects of the current plan either missing or not explained.

For eg why has no detail been given about care in the community and why no specific help targetted towards those who work in it, many on zero hours contracts, who will receive no financial help should they have to self isolate? I guess most will try to continue to work because they can't afford not to. We're talking about people who care for the most vulnerable in society whether they be disabled or elderly or both, all of whom need this care or would otherwise have to be in hospitals. Surely all those who work in the care industry should be monitored and tested regularly to see if they carry the virus.

I also have not seen any details about how the government intends to help financially in real terms. Yes the budget mentioned some help but we are on the verge of potential economic collapse and I'm not especially reassured they have a plan. As well as the inevitable sad prospect of thousands dying we are potentially looking at millions being made redundant if the whole economy has to lockdown for several months which looks quite likely.

Edited 15 March 2020 by reynard

[leicsmac]

15 minutes ago, reynard said:

This is the issue though isn't it? We are told everything is science based yet it hasn't been made clear what that science is that resutls in us apprently on a very different trajectory of planning to other countries. ie what is the difference in the science between us and pretty much the rest of the world?

Any government when faced with such a crisis as this must take its people with it. I'm not sure ours is and will be able to in the coming months. I also think there are certain aspects of the current plan either missing or not explained.

For eg why has no detail been given about care in the community and why no specific help targetted towards those who work in it, many on zero hours contracts, who will receive no financial help should they have to self isolate? I guess most will try to continue to work because they can't afford not to. We're talking about people who care for the most vulnerable in society whether they be disabled or elderly or both, all of whom need this care or would otherwise have to be in hospitals. Surely all those who work in the care industry should be monitored and tested regularly to see if they carry the virus.

I also have not seen any details about how the government intends to help financially in real terms. Yes the budget mentioned some help but we are on the verge of potential economic collapse and I'm not especially reassured they have a plan. As well as the inevitable sad prospect of thousands dying we are potentially looking at millions being made redundant if the whole economy has to lockdown for several months which looks quite likely.

Yes, and you're right, in that order.

 

There urgently needs to be a better standard of communication with the entire UK populace about what courses of action are being taken and why. As above, it would very much help with the panic, as uncertainty leading to panic is as much a danger as the virus itself can be.

 

Something that has been done elsewhere is text alerts sent to all available phones in a local area detailing any new cases in that area and their movements over the time they were likely infectious (when they are known) - something to possibly consider. And, there needs to be better, faster testing infrastructure. The UK is going at about 1000-2000 tests processed per day - the target should be 10 times that, and soon.

Edited 15 March 2020 by leicsmac

[nnfox]

10 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Yes, and you're right, in that order.

 

There urgently needs to be a better standard of communication with the entire UK populace about what courses of action are being taken and why. As above, it would very much help with the panic, as uncertainty leading to panic is as much a danger as the virus itself can be.

 

Something that has been done elsewhere is text alerts sent to all available phones in a local area detailing any new cases in that area and their movements over the time they were likely infectious (when they are known) - something to possibly consider. And, there needs to be better, faster testing infrastructure. The UK is going at about 1000-2000 tests processed per day - the target should be 10 times that, and soon.

I understood that they were, if anything, going to scale back field testing and only test hospitalised cases.  There's an acceptance that there is just no way on earth it would be possible to test everyone who may have it.

 

We've already seen that 98% tests come back as negative.  

 

I'm not sure how increased testing will massively help the situation. The advice seems to be, if you think you have it, self-isolate for a week.  Let the healthcare professionals deal with those that really need the care instead of testing someone who is normally fit and healthy who doesn't feel quite right.  I'm not sure that testing them, even if positive, for them to feel better the next day without any other NHS intervention is necessarily the most efficient use of precious resources.

[leicsmac]

9 minutes ago, nnfox said:

I understood that they were, if anything, going to scale back field testing and only test hospitalised cases.  There's an acceptance that there is just no way on earth it would be possible to test everyone who may have it.

 

We've already seen that 98% tests come back as negative.  

 

I'm not sure how increased testing will massively help the situation. The advice seems to be, if you think you have it, self-isolate for a week.  Let the healthcare professionals deal with those that really need the care instead of testing someone who is normally fit and healthy who doesn't feel quite right.  I'm not sure that testing them, even if positive, for them to feel better the next day without any other NHS intervention is necessarily the most efficient use of precious resources.

...why not? They have managed that elsewhere.

 

Way I see it, boosting testing would establish a clear delineation between those who have to self-isolate or not and also field testing followed by isolation for positives would help contain outbreaks that happen as they occur. At the very least it would give more real-time information, which in a situation like this is extremely important. The only salient argument against it I can see is that of resources, yes...but I do believe that if a sitting government really wanted to find the resources for such an infrastructure, they would find a way regardless.

[Footballwipe]

7 hours ago, Parafox said:

This is a genuine concern. If they shut schools, colleges, childcare facilities, what the fuk are working parents going to do?

I dunno, and this isn't personal towards you, but schools are there to educate kids safely, not look after them like a crèche till they're 16.

 

If the call is made to close schools for safety reasons then parents will have to make arrangements. I'm sorry, having children is not mandatory. You chose to have kids. I detest the "who's going to look after my children?" attitude of some people. You. You look after your children. They are your children.

Edited 15 March 2020 by Footballwipe

[nnfox]

5 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

...why not? They have managed that elsewhere.

 

Way I see it, boosting testing would establish a clear delineation between those who have to self-isolate or not and also field testing followed by isolation for positives would help contain outbreaks that happen as they occur. At the very least it would give more real-time information, which in a situation like this is extremely important. The only salient argument against it I can see is that of resources, yes...but I do believe that if a sitting government really wanted to find the resources for such an infrastructure, they would find a way regardless.

No they haven't. It's impossible. 

 

It seems there are people who carry the virus and are infectious but display no symptoms. When do you test them? What about people who just feel a little unwell for a couple of days  and put it down to stress/mild flu/a cold/something else? 

 

Unless you test your entire population.  That means EVERYONE, every three days then there is no way you can test for all cases.

 

Stats are nice, and if there was a way to do it, then we should do it.  But as there isn't a way to do it then any stats we have are merely a guide and take us away from actually dealing with the problem.

 

At the end of this, there is only one stat that matters which is how many people died.  That is the metric by which relevant success will be measured.

[nnfox]

14 minutes ago, Footballwipe said:

I dunno, and this isn't personal towards you, but schools are there to educate kids safely, not look after them like a crèche till they're 16.

 

If the call is made to close schools for safety reasons then parents will have to make arrangements. I'm sorry, having children is not mandatory. You chose to have kids. I detest the "who's going to look after my children?" attitude of some people. You. You look after your children. They are your children.

Possibly one of the most ridiculous things I've read on FoxesTalk.

 

That's fine.  All the doctors and nurses with children who didn't think about the consequences of a global pandemic - don't come to work for the next four months.  Stay home and look after your fit and healthy children whilst the elderly drop dead in the streets.

[J.Lisemore]

16 minutes ago, Footballwipe said:

I dunno, and this isn't personal towards you, but schools are there to educate kids safely, not look after them like a crèche till they're 16.

 

If the call is made to close schools for safety reasons then parents will have to make arrangements. I'm sorry, having children is not mandatory. You chose to have kids. I detest the "who's going to look after my children?" attitude of some people. You. You look after your children. They are your children.

Arrangments with who? Grandparents? Undermining the situation is silly, this is a serious issue. 

[Bellend Sebastian]

At last hope of a breakthrough

[stripeyfox]

More bad news

 

Donald Trump tests negative for Coronavirus

 

[Trumpet]

27 minutes ago, Bellend Sebastian said:

At last hope of a breakthrough

If you close your eyes it’s Nigel Pearson.

 

Could’ve swore I was quoting a video of that chap talking about his symptoms 😂

Edited 15 March 2020 by Wet Trump

[Mark 'expert' Lawrenson]

Afternoon drinking in town yesterday and it was surprisingly busy in the pubs, not rammed by any means but plenty of drinkers still out socialising. 

[stripeyfox]

51 minutes ago, Footballwipe said:

I dunno, and this isn't personal towards you, but schools are there to educate kids safely, not look after them like a crèche till they're 16.

 

If the call is made to close schools for safety reasons then parents will have to make arrangements. I'm sorry, having children is not mandatory. You chose to have kids. I detest the "whose going to look after my children?" attitude of some people. You. You look after your children. They are your children.

You're massively over simplifying and generalising. Very few parents are demanding "who will look after my children". The vast majority of parents will to their utmost to balance childcare and work

[Benguin]

Am I wrong to think the whole world has gone mad and this isn't a big deal? Can someone who does not have extreme political views explain why I'm currently having to resort to using kitchen roll to wipe my arse?