Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
simFox

Corona Virus

By simFox, in General Chat

Mark
Message added by Mark

No political discussion in this topic. That is complaining about a country, a politician, a party and/or its voters, etc

Recommended Posts

StanSP

StanSP

Posted
Posted

Good thread to read mentioning what actually happens when you have it (if indeed this person's wife does have it).

 

- worrying if she shows signs of it but hasn't been officially tested (way of keeping case numbers down?!)

- regardless, it's good to know the symptoms of such a virus and how it can weigh someone down

- There doesn't seem to have been much talk about what happens when someone has it, just how to stop getting it and the shitstorm we've seen in supermarkets.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AS78UK

AS78UK

Posted
Posted

I might be over simplifying this in my head.  But why doesnt the world go into lockdown for 2 months and kill the virus by stopping it spreading.  I fully appreciate economically this ain't great but who cares if we safe millions of people lifes globally.  

 

I fear an independent staggered approach across the globe makes this exponentially more dangerous then it could be.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
danny.

danny.

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, AS78UK said:

I might be over simplifying this in my head.  But why doesnt the world go into lockdown for 2 months and kill the virus by stopping it spreading.  I fully appreciate economically this ain't great but who cares if we safe millions of people lifes globally.  

 

I fear an independent staggered approach across the globe makes this exponentially more dangerous then it could be.  

Money. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sampson

Sampson

Posted
Posted (edited)

Nothing to do with money. It's to do with fatigue and population exhaustion. Not to mention, work gives people someone to hope for and concentrate on.

 

I hope I'm wrong but I'll make a prediction now- next winter is gonna be the killer, not now. 

 

We'll get over this. They'll be mass (premature) relief and celebration once we get through this in July time. People will go back to work and start overseas travel again and will start getting back to normality. But it will come back in October/November and as it's here and will have the whole of winter to spread (not just start spreading in March when we're basically in Spring) and everyone will be physically and mentality exhausted by it all by then and the lockdowns. November-Ferbruary 2020/2021 is when I think we're gonna see the majority of deaths of this during its "second wave".

 

I sincerely hope I'm wrong of course.

Edited by Sampson
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Strokes

Strokes

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Sampson said:

Nothing to do with money. It's to do with fatigue and population exhaustion. Not to mention, work gives people someone to hope for and concentrate on.

 

I hope I'm wrong but I'll make a prediction now- next winter is gonna be the killer, not now. 

 

We'll get over this. They'll be mass (premature) relief and celebration once we get through this in July time. People will go back to work and start overseas travel again and will start getting back to normality. But it will come back in October/November and as it's here and will have the whole of winter til spread (not just start spreading in March when we're basically in Spring) and everyone will be physically and mentality exhausted by it all by then and the lockdowns. November-Ferbruary 2020/2021 is when I think we're gonna see the majority of deaths of this during its "second wave".

 

I sincerely hope I'm wrong of course.

I’ll buy my pasta in july then.

Edited by Strokes
Link to comment
Share on other sites
inckley fox

inckley fox

Posted
Posted

From what the doctors I know are saying, the big question hanging over Johnson's approach is this: We're the best part of a year off a vaccine, so if we strive for herd immunity then that's with the next 1-10 months in mind, rather than longer term; and if herd immunity requires 60-80% of the country being infected, then can we deal with 10% of those people being hospitalised in the meantime? Do we have the beds, the ventilators (we have less than half the ventilators the Italians have, and if you're hospitalised then that's often for the purposes of a ventilator) to cope? 

 

Now the people I know are saying we'd be floored by 1% of 45,000,000 being hospitalised over such a short window of time. Ten or more times that amount would be an outright catastrophe. Especially when we're not sure of either seasonality or immunity-acquisition.

 

Maybe that's wrong, I don't know, but either way it's a question of numbers - and based on the approach we've taken, that question could easily be put to a government minister: Do we have the beds and equipment to achieve herd immunity in such a time that it's useful before the attainment of a vaccine?

 

Needless to say, there are two huge potential game-changers in this. One is that the numbers infected are vastly greater - perhaps 100 times greater than we currently believe - in which case we'd know that the mortality rate is very low, but wouldn't wish to scare the public by telling them that they probably had, in huge swathes, a deadly virus. The other is the prospect of a therapy like remdesivir, plasma treatment or keletra, one of which will probably be in play within eight weeks, and which could hugely reduce the amount of time patients need in intensive care.

 

But we have no reason to believe that the government's policy is based on knowledge of a vastly greater level of contagion, or a pending therapy. As such, we have to ask whether we have the beds and the equipment to deal with between 450,000 and 8,000,000 people being hospitalised in the coming months - and the truth is that even the lower end of that would be a huge problem. So this policy, purely on the basis of viability, needs further explanation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Harrydc

Guest Harrydc

Posted
Posted

What I worry about, is people with other potential issues. For example, if someone has sepsis, and they are simply told to self isolate with the medical professionals telling them to self isolate then they could possibly die. 

 

Or if the coronavirus gets to a stage where it is hospitilazing 1000s of people, where will they find the space for other people with other health issues that need sorting. Some real tough times ahead, and I pray everyone reading this is going to be okay. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WigstonWanderer

WigstonWanderer

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, inckley fox said:

From what the doctors I know are saying, the big question hanging over Johnson's approach is this: We're the best part of a year off a vaccine, so if we strive for herd immunity then that's with the next 1-10 months in mind, rather than longer term; and if herd immunity requires 60-80% of the country being infected, then can we deal with 10% of those people being hospitalised in the meantime? Do we have the beds, the ventilators (we have less than half the ventilators the Italians have, and if you're hospitalised then that's often for the purposes of a ventilator) to cope? 

 

Now the people I know are saying we'd be floored by 1% of 45,000,000 being hospitalised over such a short window of time. Ten or more times that amount would be an outright catastrophe. Especially when we're not sure of either seasonality or immunity-acquisition.

 

Maybe that's wrong, I don't know, but either way it's a question of numbers - and based on the approach we've taken, that question could easily be put to a government minister: Do we have the beds and equipment to achieve herd immunity in such a time that it's useful before the attainment of a vaccine?

 

Needless to say, there are two huge potential game-changers in this. One is that the numbers infected are vastly greater - perhaps 100 times greater than we currently believe - in which case we'd know that the mortality rate is very low, but wouldn't wish to scare the public by telling them that they probably had, in huge swathes, a deadly virus. The other is the prospect of a therapy like remdesivir, plasma treatment or keletra, one of which will probably be in play within eight weeks, and which could hugely reduce the amount of time patients need in intensive care.

 

But we have no reason to believe that the government's policy is based on knowledge of a vastly greater level of contagion, or a pending therapy. As such, we have to ask whether we have the beds and the equipment to deal with between 450,000 and 8,000,000 people being hospitalised in the coming months - and the truth is that even the lower end of that would be a huge problem. So this policy, purely on the basis of viability, needs further explanation.

I think the Chief Scientific Officer did mention a figure for estimates of actual number of infections in the UK as being up to 100 times the headline rate iirc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WigstonWanderer

WigstonWanderer

Posted
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, BKLFox said:

That’s it there is a plan and just because we are not following suit doesn’t mean we are wrong, to couple that thread and by no means trying to dumb it down this video explains quite well the UKs approach I 🤔 

 

This is a very good illustration of what appears to be the government’s strategy. What worries me is that there seems to be so much that is unknown about this virus that could undermine it.

 

Keeping the jug half full in the illustration is a very difficult balancing act. In the absence of good data regarding the actual current number of infections, it’s transmissibility, the proportion of infections that become serious, and the degree to which infection confers immunity, it could easily go wrong, i.e. the jug overflows.

 

They have a tiger by the tail, and most of the world seems to think it is better to take the more cautious approach of simply keeping numbers as low as possible at all times. Time will tell.

Edited by WigstonWanderer
Link to comment
Share on other sites
inckley fox

inckley fox

Posted
Posted
22 minutes ago, WigstonWanderer said:

I think the Chief Scientific Officer did mention a figure for estimates of actual number of infections in the UK as being up to 100 times the headline rate iirc.

I could be wrong, but I thought he said 10 times higher, i.e. 10,000 cases.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
brucey

brucey

Posted
Posted (edited)
29 minutes ago, WigstonWanderer said:

This is a very good illustration of what appears to be the government’s strategy. What worries me is that there seems to be so much that is unknown about this virus that could undermine it.

 

Keeping the jug half full in the illustration is a very difficult balancing act. In the absence of good data regarding the actual current number of infections, it’s transmissibility, the proportion of infections that become serious, and the degree to which infection confers immunity, it could easily go wrong, i.e. the jug overflows.

 

They have a tiger by the tail, and most of the world seems to think it is better to take the more cautious approach of simply keeping numbers as low as possible at all times. Time will tell.

Part of the problem is that the jug was already 80% full before all this started, and we’re now trying to maintain it at a constant level of 99% full, while controlling the pouring speed via a video feed on a 1 week delay. It isn’t possible.

 

If we mess up in our calculations and spill the whole bucket on the ground we won’t know about it for a week.
 

Whereas if we start off with pouring as slowly as possible (strong restrictions) we can then gradually start pouring more (relaxing those restrictions) after we get an idea of how much the jug can actually hold (NHS ability to cope).

 

We’re doing it backwards.

 

 

 

Edited by brucey
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
inckley fox

inckley fox

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, foxfanazer said:

Really praying my young daughter doesn't get it. It's all seeming rather inevitable though. Are they still saying children are pretty safe? 

She should be fine either way. Part of the problem is that kids shrug it off. If you work with them then you know how many have coughs and colds go round this time of year. So unless we randomly test in schools (and our testing is far less rigorous than what's happening in Spain, which is in turn getting slated for being nowhere near as rigorous as what's happening in other places) there's no knowing the extent to which they're harbouring the illness. 

 

But if you're under 45 and in decent health it's (apparently) not too awful, it's more a case of protecting our vulnerable (...famous last words, perhaps, spoken by a 40 year old).

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jattdogg

Jattdogg

Posted
Posted

March break over here in Ontario so kids are off for a week (as is the wife as she's a teacher). The government has also  announced school closures for 2 weeks after march break as well.

 

My work has gone full WFH starting this Monday and will reassess on a weekly or biweekly basis. Wish i was off for the full week. I am off this thursday and friday so a short week.

 

Stay safe everyone, dont panic!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lambert09

Lambert09

Posted
Posted
27 minutes ago, Jattdogg said:

March break over here in Ontario so kids are off for a week (as is the wife as she's a teacher). The government has also  announced school closures for 2 weeks after march break as well.

 

My work has gone full WFH starting this Monday and will reassess on a weekly or biweekly basis. Wish i was off for the full week. I am off this thursday and friday so a short week.

 

Stay safe everyone, dont panic!

Hey, im also out here in Ontario. This is actually a great bit of common sense from the government, as people are still going to be going on holiday unfortunately. 

 

However, my worry is that instead of using the 2 weeks for quarantining, those parents may just take their kids into their workplaces. 

 

Which has been happening a lot where I work during the teacher strikes. Hope common sense prevails from all, but im doubtful 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jattdogg

Jattdogg

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Lambert09 said:

Hey, im also out here in Ontario. This is actually a great bit of common sense from the government, as people are still going to be going on holiday unfortunately. 

 

However, my worry is that instead of using the 2 weeks for quarantining, those parents may just take their kids into their workplaces. 

 

Which has been happening a lot where I work during the teacher strikes. Hope common sense prevails from all, but im doubtful 

I think where possible people will wfh and companies will fall in line. With school closures, daycare closures parents have 0 choice but to either take leave, vacation or wfh. Most workplaces (office settings) wouldnt allow children there. Mine won't. 

 

My colleague was scheduled to leave for Montego Bay tomorrow but has since cancelled. She doesnt want to get stuck abroad in a place like Jamaica with a not so great healthcare system compared to here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
simFox

simFox

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I don't know why people think this is all Boris's plan. It wouldn't matter which government is in place, they'd all follow the advise from the same experts advising them. That's why they are in those positions.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...