SARS CoV-2 coronavirus / Covid-19 (No tin foil hat silliness please)

Well, I guess the reason people say it is because it only cuts cases temporarily then when you open up after a couple of months you back to square 1.

So you're saying the country can just borrow and borrow, let business close for an extended period, furlough millions of people and pay 80% of their wages, without real long term effect or consequence for people or the country?

What you define as "working" is different from the people who designed the approach, and the people who implemented the approach, so surely that would suggest what you define as "working" is not appropriate?

Lockdowns were supposed to suppress the virus for a limited period of time to prevent an uncontrollable rise. Going in and out of lockdowns is still entirely consistent with that approach, if it keeps things under control.

The question to ask is not whether it works - we have evidence from dozens of countries now that it does. And framing it that way is only designed to misinform. The reason you're saying it that way is because the people who planted that original idea and spread it through the media have succeeded. If nothing else you should be asking why they planted that idea in the first place.

Ultimately the question is not whether it succeeds in its goal but whether that goal was appropriate to begin with. That's a hard question to answer that required thoughtful discussion with an open acknowledgement of the things that remain unknowable at this stage, and thus the inherent uncertainty in the efficacy an alternative approach. My personal view is that's a big part of the reason why the question is framed in that misleading context.
 
303 dead yesterday here, cases on steep rise too. Read a story about a lady whose husband died at 30 last week, he suffocated at home but wouldn't allow to get himself tested as he did not believe covid-19 existed and didn't want hospital to get extra money for covid diagnosis (tons of money of course), his wife shared those beliefs. She's now suing hospital for putting covid in his death certificate (she doesn't have any proof the did that but she thinks they did it to boost their numbers and get more money). We are doomed. This all feels surreal.
 
303 dead yesterday here, cases on steep rise too. Read a story about a lady whose husband died at 30 last week, he suffocated at home but wouldn't allow to get himself tested as he did not believe covid-19 existed and didn't want hospital to get extra money for covid diagnosis (tons of money of course), his wife shared those beliefs. She's now suing hospital for putting covid in his death certificate (she doesn't have any proof the did that but she thinks they did it to boost their numbers and get more money). We are doomed. This all feels surreal.

Ignoring the general corona denialism and conspiracy theories for a second, where does the idea come from that hospitals are just making stacks of cash for treating corona patients? Usually there's a grain if truth that people then spin into a grand yarn of a conspiracy but that seems an odd one. I thought most people trusted healthcare professionals anyway?
 
Ignoring the general corona denialism and conspiracy theories for a second, where does the idea come from that hospitals are just making stacks of cash for treating corona patients? Usually there's a grain if truth that people then spin into a grand yarn of a conspiracy but that seems an odd one. I thought most people trusted healthcare professionals anyway?
This is idiotic. Economy is down the drain, people have no income which means less taxes, consumption is at an all time low but yeah, government makes a ton of money from the pandemic. Read a theory that government makes all that money on VAT from sales of sanitary products, this is how idiotic all those theories are.

Nobody trust healthcare professionals here anymore, people think they are all corrupt and only want to make money from covid. Recent poll suggested that more people trust their friends and family about covid-19 than healthcare professionals.

A guy I know recently told me that hospitals are doing great now because they get twice as much money as before while not doing anything as they are all completely empty except for actors pretending to be sick from covid.
 
It's not a household budget, you can keep 'borrowing' or printing until it severely impacts the credit rating and currency. Neither are anywhere close to likely because of another lockdown more so Brexit. Rates are low and it's just another war time event where we'll pay it back over the next century along with inflation eroding it.

Further some of the cost of the increased borrowing would be needed regardless of lockdown. The furlough scheme would still be needed as would the PHE budget.

Also I can't believe we still have people saying lockdowns don't work. They cut the infection rate so yes they do work, they stop hospitals becoming overcrowded and stop the societal and economic impact of this sweeping through a country. The economic rebound we had during the summer was a result of lockdown.
True, we have to invest, it is unfortunate that then UK credit rating has recently been downgraded twice due to Brexit. But we can still invest in minimising impact of the virus.

It is a shame we have not been investing in assets as a country over the last 10 years, say social housing for example which would have massively increased in value and reduced outgoings on housing benefit when unemployment peaks due to the killer punch of covid and brexit in the coming years.
 
This is idiotic. Economy is down the drain, people have no income which means less taxes, consumption is at an all time low but yeah, government makes a ton of money from the pandemic. Read a theory that government makes all that money on VAT from sales of sanitary products, this is how idiotic all those theories are.

Nobody trust healthcare professionals here anymore, people think they are all corrupt and only want to make money from covid. Recent poll suggested that more people trust their friends and family about covid-19 than healthcare professionals.

A guy I know recently told me that hospitals are doing great now because they get twice as much money as before while not doing anything as they are all completely empty except for actors pretending to be sick from covid.

Some pretty wild theories alright! That's a shame. You do kind of intuitively assume that when confronted with the reality of a situation, people are able to peek behind the curtain of a conspiracy theory, but invariably a lot of people just decide to double down :(
 
Some pretty wild theories alright! That's a shame. You do kind of intuitively assume that when confronted with the reality of a situation, people are able to peek behind the curtain of a conspiracy theory, but invariably a lot of people just decide to double down :(

No, it's getting worse as situation progresses. The sad reality is we will have thousands of people dying from it with a lot of others denying that it even exists and laughing at all the reports. This pandemic has opened my eyes to how susceptible people are to conspiracy theories (as long as it makes them look 'enlightened') and how little analytical skills an average person here has.
 
Good article here about the significant improvement in treatment and recovery rates from hospitalised cases, while still stressing the seriousness of it all.

The coronavirus struck the United States earlier this year with devastating force. In April, it killed more than 10,000 people in New York City. By early May, nearly 50,000 nursing home residents and their caregivers across the country had died.

But as the virus continued its rampage over the summer and fall, infecting nearly 8.5 million Americans, survival rates, even of seriously ill patients, appeared to be improving. At one New York hospital system where 30 percent of coronavirus patients died in March, the death rate had dropped to 3 percent by the end of June.

Doctors in England observed a similar trend. “In late March, four in 10 people in intensive care were dying. By the end of June, survival was over 80 percent,” said John M. Dennis, a University of Exeter Medical School researcher who is first author of a paper about improved survival rates in Britain, accepted for publication in the journal Critical Care Medicine. “It was really quite dramatic.”

Though the virus has been changing slowly as it spreads, and some have speculated that it has become more easily transmissible, most scientists say there is no solid evidence that it has become either less virulent, or more virulent. As elderly people sheltered inside and took precautions to avoid infection, however, more of the hospitalized patients were younger adults, who were generally healthier and more resilient. By the end of August, the average patient was under 40.

Were the lower death rates simply a function of the demographic changes, or a reflection of real progress and medical advances in treatment that blunted the impact of the new pathogen?

Researchers at NYU Langone Health who zeroed in on this question, analyzing the outcomes of more than 5,000 patients hospitalized at the system's three hospitals from March through August, concluded the improvement was real, not just a function of changing demographics. Even when they controlled for differences in the patients’ age, sex, race, underlying health problems and severity of Covid symptoms — like blood oxygen levels at admission — they found that death rates had dropped significantly, to 7.6 percent in August, down from 25.6 percent in March.

“This is still a high death rate, much higher than we see for flu or other respiratory diseases,” said Dr. Leora Horwitz, director of NYU Langone’s Center for Healthcare Innovation & Delivery Science and senior author of the paper in Journal of Hospital Medicine. “I don’t want to pretend this is benign. But it definitely is something that has given me hope.”

Other doctors agreed. “The mortality rates are way lower now,” said Dr. Robert A. Phillips, author of a research letter in JAMA that compared the first and second surges of Covid-19 patients in Houston. But he emphasized that the disease remains “not only deadly — 10 times more deadly probably than a bad influenza — but it also has long-term complications. You don’t have that from the flu.”

While the studies evaluated the death rate, they did not assess the burden of what Dr. Phillips called “post-Covid syndrome,” which leaves many patients with lasting respiratory and neurologic problems, cardiac complications, and other lingering issues.

“It’s relatively easy to measure death, but that doesn’t capture all the other health issues,” said Dr. Preeti Malani, an infectious disease expert at the University of Michigan. Many hospital patients face grueling and protracted recoveries and may require long-term care, while even those who had mild bouts of disease are often left with continuing health problems, like headaches, chronic fatigue or cognitive problems. “It will take a long time to understand the full clinical spectrum of this disease.”

The study from England analyzed the outcomes of 14,958 critical care and intensive care patients hospitalized throughout England from March 1 to May 30. Even after adjusting for differences in age, sex, ethnicity and underlying health conditions, the authors concluded survival improved by about 10 percent each week after the end of March for patients in critical care and high intensity care units (the English study did not adjust for severity of Covid-19 illness at admission).

A combination of factors contributed to the improved outcomes of hospital patients, the authors of the two studies and other experts said. As clinicians learned how to treat the disease, incorporating the use of steroid drugs and non-drug interventions, they were better able to manage it.

The researchers also credited heightened community awareness, and patients seeking care earlier in the course of their illness. Outcomes may also have improved as the load on hospitals lightened and there was less pressure on the medical staff, both of which had been overwhelmed by a surge of patients in the spring.

“We don’t have a magic bullet cure, but we have a lot, a lot of little things, that add up,” Dr. Horwitz said. “We understand better when people need to be on ventilators and when they don’t, and what complications to watch for, like blood clots and kidney failure. We understand how to watch for oxygen levels even before patients are in the hospital, so we can bring them in earlier. And of course, we understand that steroids are helpful, and possibly some other medications.”

For clinicians combating the disease, caused by a new pathogen that was unknown before it emerged in Wuhan, China, late last year, the learning curve has been steep. Doctors shared information and gleaned insights from a barrage of studies shared with unprecedented speed, but there were also missteps. At first, the focus was on the illness’ effects on the lungs; understanding the deleterious impact on other organs came later.

Early on, physicians were placing patients on mechanical ventilators to assist with their breathing; over time they learned to position patients on their stomachs and provide them with supplemental oxygen through less invasive means, and postpone ventilation or avoid it altogether if possible.

By mid-June, clinical trials in England had proven that treatment with a cheap steroid drug, dexamethasone, reduced deaths of patients on ventilators by one-third, and death in patients getting supplemental oxygen by one-fifth. But the early recommendations from China and Italy were “to absolutely not use steroids, even though a lot of us thought it made sense to use them,” said Dr. Gita Lisker, a critical care physician at Northwell Health. “I think it’s making a big difference. But when we started with this in March, the data and recommendations from China and Italy were saying, ‘Do not use them, steroids are bad.’”

Doctors also weren’t aware at first that the Covid-19 illness caused by the new virus caused life-threatening blood clots. Now patients are put on blood thinners early on in treatment when necessary.

But the other problem in the spring was that hospitals in hard-hit areas like New York City were overwhelmed. Doctors who hadn’t worked in critical care for many years were being drafted to care for seriously ill patients, nurses were short-staffed, and equipment was in short supply. “There was a sheer overwhelming tidal wave that overtook the health care system,” Dr. Lisker said. “You had critical care units run by doctors who hadn’t done critical care in 10 years, or even ever.”

She added, “There is no question that whether you lived or died in April, some of it had to do with what unit you landed in.”

Indeed, she said, “The whole idea of flattening the curve was to avoid overwhelming the health care system.”

Medical experts are worrying that the surges in cases around the country could reverse or roll back those gains. The number of hospitalized Covid patients has increased by 40 percent over the last month, and more than 41,000 patients are now hospitalized in the United States. Hospital administrators in Idaho, Utah and Kansas City, Mo., have warned they are already close to capacity. Some have turned ambulances away, and others are drawing up plans to ration care if they run out of beds and have said they may be forced to transfer patients to facilities in other states.

“If you compare the number of people who are dying from every 100 cases diagnosed in the U.S., it’s obviously substantially lower than it was in the summertime, and a lot lower than it was in the springtime,” said Tom Inglesby, the director of the Center for Health Security at Johns Hopkins University.

But, he added that the lessening death rate was not assured to remain steady, given the resurgence in higher caseloads. “If hospitals that aren’t prepared for large numbers of people have to deal with a large influx of Covid patients, or small hospitals get pulled into it, we should expect that mortality could change unfortunately,” he said. “That’s a warning.”

Though some have speculated that the virus is less virulent than it once was, experts say there is no evidence that is the case. The improvements in survival are “a testament to modern medical care,” said Dr. Howard Markel, a physician and medical historian at the University of Michigan.

“The virus is still just as stealthy and dangerous as it was,” Dr. Markel said. “We’re just getting better at managing it.”
 
I just don't get where the money comes from to pay for it? The countries borrowing is already basically the highest in history, add another lockdown to that and how do we pay for things like the NHS going forward?
Plus lockdowns have been shown to only be a temporary fix soon as you start to open up again it just goes to pot again.
So what do we do just keep having a lockdown every few months until we are utterly bankrupt?
 
The stats are definatley being 'massaged' lets say.
If you die from any regular death but you have had Covid at some point in the last 28 days - then you are logged as being killed as a Covid death, which is ridiculous.
Lockdowns inevitably take the pressure away from the NHS but having spoke to an ICU nurse, its not even 10% as busy as it was a few months back - despite what stats are being thrown out there.

We are all now well aware of the risks, along with the precautions to take to minimise your own personal risk - I think now is the time for the government to say - ''over to you guys, do as you please'' except those at risk of dying from it, diabetics and so on.... they must be told to shield. Might not seem fair, but the chances of your average Joe needing a ventilator is incredibly slim. He will just be a tad poorly for a week or 2 and in many cases, will be well enough to work from home, whereas an asthmatic will almost certainly need the care.
 
https://www.businessinsider.com/cov...tourists-holiday-scientists-2020-10?r=US&IR=T

"The majority of new COVID-19 cases in Europe stem from a mutated strain of the coronavirus that has been traced back to Spain and was spread across the continent over the summer by tourists, scientists said in a report Thursday.

The variant most likely originated in farm workers in northeastern Spain, where it was first recorded in June, they said.

The team of scientists from the University of Basel, ETH Zürich in Basel, and SeqCOVID in Spain said a suspected "superspreader" event accounted for early proliferation of the virus, which was then spread abroad by tourists and other travelers."

By mutated strain it just means a slight variant they've traced, it's still the same virus and just as deadly. They change slightly all the time but it's still largely the same. Think of it as an id tag.
 
We are all now well aware of the risks, along with the precautions to take to minimise your own personal risk - I think now is the time for the government to say - ''over to you guys, do as you please''
I think that's a great idea, can't think of any recent scenarios where it's gone horribly wrong for Britain to do that.

EDIT: oops, sorry, I meant.. GREAT Britain.
 
The stats are definatley being 'massaged' lets say.
If you die from any regular death but you have had Covid at some point in the last 28 days - then you are logged as being killed as a Covid death, which is ridiculous.
Lockdowns inevitably take the pressure away from the NHS but having spoke to an ICU nurse, its not even 10% as busy as it was a few months back - despite what stats are being thrown out there.

We are all now well aware of the risks, along with the precautions to take to minimise your own personal risk - I think now is the time for the government to say - ''over to you guys, do as you please'' except those at risk of dying from it, diabetics and so on.... they must be told to shield. Might not seem fair, but the chances of your average Joe needing a ventilator is incredibly slim. He will just be a tad poorly for a week or 2 and in many cases, will be well enough to work from home, whereas an asthmatic will almost certainly need the care.

Is that really true?
 
So I was confirmed today.
When it comes to work and wages etc, whats the deal.
Am I to furlough? I assume I don't take it off as sick

In UK? Statuary sick pay unless your company is specifically doing anything different or are still able to work from home. £95/week.

The furlough scheme was to protect against people being made unemployed, not for people falling sick.
 
https://www.businessinsider.com/cov...tourists-holiday-scientists-2020-10?r=US&IR=T

"The majority of new COVID-19 cases in Europe stem from a mutated strain of the coronavirus that has been traced back to Spain and was spread across the continent over the summer by tourists, scientists said in a report Thursday.

The variant most likely originated in farm workers in northeastern Spain, where it was first recorded in June, they said.

The team of scientists from the University of Basel, ETH Zürich in Basel, and SeqCOVID in Spain said a suspected "superspreader" event accounted for early proliferation of the virus, which was then spread abroad by tourists and other travelers."

By mutated strain it just means a slight variant they've traced, it's still the same virus and just as deadly. They change slightly all the time but it's still largely the same. Think of it as an id tag.

Interesting stuff. Makes me feel even more pissed off at the selfish tossers who couldn’t do without their annual pilgrimage to the Costa Del Sol.
 
The stats are definatley being 'massaged' lets say.
If you die from any regular death but you have had Covid at some point in the last 28 days - then you are logged as being killed as a Covid death, which is ridiculous.
Lockdowns inevitably take the pressure away from the NHS but having spoke to an ICU nurse, its not even 10% as busy as it was a few months back - despite what stats are being thrown out there.

We are all now well aware of the risks, along with the precautions to take to minimise your own personal risk - I think now is the time for the government to say - ''over to you guys, do as you please'' except those at risk of dying from it, diabetics and so on.... they must be told to shield. Might not seem fair, but the chances of your average Joe needing a ventilator is incredibly slim. He will just be a tad poorly for a week or 2 and in many cases, will be well enough to work from home, whereas an asthmatic will almost certainly need the care.

You need to talk to more than just one ICU nurse, evidently.

On ward 26 - one of three dedicated Covid recovery units - nurse Mairead Meenan also expressed concerns.
The 51 year old from Creggan in Derry worked her way through the first wave of the pandemic but said it is now "completely different".
"We are on our knees at work," she said.
"People are coming in and they are so, so sick - it's completely different from the last time, it's scary watching them."
 
So regarding this article:
https://english.elpais.com/society/...he-coronavirus-is-spread-through-the-air.html

I had a look at that...

These are respiratory droplets that are less than 100 micrometers in diameter that can remain suspended in the air for hours

In a quiescent environment, those large droplets will still settle fairly quickly due to gravity. The droplets which remain suspended for hours are of the order of about 1 micrometer in size and this is largely because of the fact they have a very small terminal velocity and are susceptible to Brownian motion. You can see sources for that here:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Bubbles-Drops-Particles-Mechanical-Engineering/dp/0486445801
https://journals.ametsoc.org/jas/article/6/4/243/37442

What may happen is that the liquid content in the droplets evaporates more quickly than the droplet settles, leaving behind a solid particulate which is smaller and of perhaps of the order of 1 micron. This depends on the initial conditions of the droplets.

Droplets
These are particles that are larger than 300 micrometers and, due to air currents, fall to the ground in seconds

This is just factually incorrect. First of all, a droplet is just any small quantity of liquid. There is no obvious reason to make an arbitrary cut-off at 300um. A 1micrometer sized quantity of liquid is just as much a droplet as a 500micrometer one for example. Secondly, droplets of that size in quiescent air would settle quickly due to gravity. If you had air "currents", they may or may not settle quickly, depending on the strength of the air "currents". It is non-trivial as well. There is not an obvious linear relationship. It is actually non-linear. There is a lot of physics involved here and the answer is not so clear without additional information about the air flow. Some of the major work on studying settling velocity of particles/droplets is here:
https://www.cambridge.org/core/jour...c-turbulence/E1D4020806EB90D78A0073359D234728
https://www.cambridge.org/core/jour...-simulations/377D142DD7EA77E4F59AAEB107E0A659

These aerosols, if not diffused through ventilation, become increasingly concentrated, which increases the risk of infection.

Diffusion is a molecular transport process. What they mean is advection or they can say convection as well. Better to actually just say "dispersed" because you don't normally use those previous words when describing this type of physics.

Methodology: we calculated the risk of infection from Covid-19 using a tool developed by José Luis Jiménez, an atmospheric chemist at the University of Colorado and an expert in the chemistry and dynamics of air particles. Scientists around the world have reviewed this Estimator, which is based on published methods and data to estimate the importance of different measurable factors involved in an infection scenario. However, the Estimator’s accuracy is limited as it relies on numbers that are still uncertain – numbers that describe, for example, how many infectious viruses are emitted by one infected person. The Estimator assumes that people practice the two-meter social distancing rule and that no one is immune. Our calculation is based on a default value for the general population, which includes a wide range of masks (surgical and cloth), and a loud voice, which increases the amount of aerosols expelled.

Why have they used an arbitrary tool rather than established CFD practices which have been used for decades?
 
The stats are definatley being 'massaged' lets say.
If you die from any regular death but you have had Covid at some point in the last 28 days - then you are logged as being killed as a Covid death, which is ridiculous.
Lockdowns inevitably take the pressure away from the NHS but having spoke to an ICU nurse, its not even 10% as busy as it was a few months back - despite what stats are being thrown out there.

We are all now well aware of the risks, along with the precautions to take to minimise your own personal risk - I think now is the time for the government to say - ''over to you guys, do as you please'' except those at risk of dying from it, diabetics and so on.... they must be told to shield. Might not seem fair, but the chances of your average Joe needing a ventilator is incredibly slim. He will just be a tad poorly for a week or 2 and in many cases, will be well enough to work from home, whereas an asthmatic will almost certainly need the care.

Why are you so desperate for there to be more to this than there actually seems?

It’s a pandemic of a virus that spreads rapidly and kills a percentage of those it infects. Letting people assess their own chances and just get on with it if they please would have a devastating effect. It’s exponential growth, we were up to 1.5k deaths a day in the first spike and a lock down got it under control. If we did as you say, that figure could be 10k deaths a day, it could be 50k.

These measures exist for a reason, the government clearly detest them so why do you think they persist?
 
Is that really true?
I'm guessing it wont include people dying of obvious other causes..
Deaths lag infection by several weeks .. 2-8 weeks is what I remember reading.. There was someone here who posted data from the recent cases in Italy and it said the average gap between infection and death was about 38 days.

I am not sure how the UK is counting it.. but if they arent counting any deaths after 28 days of infection as Covid deaths, then they are almost certainly missing a few..

And you can always look at the excess death data.. There is no reason to believe the death figure is being inflated. Unless you have a large collection of tinfoil hats.
 
So regarding this article:
https://english.elpais.com/society/...he-coronavirus-is-spread-through-the-air.html

I had a look at that...



In a quiescent environment, those large droplets will still settle fairly quickly due to gravity. The droplets which remain suspended for hours are of the order of about 1 micrometer in size and this is largely because of the fact they have a very small terminal velocity and are susceptible to Brownian motion. You can see sources for that here:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Bubbles-Drops-Particles-Mechanical-Engineering/dp/0486445801
https://journals.ametsoc.org/jas/article/6/4/243/37442

What may happen is that the liquid content in the droplets evaporates more quickly than the droplet settles, leaving behind a solid particulate which is smaller and of perhaps of the order of 1 micron. This depends on the initial conditions of the droplets.



This is just factually incorrect. First of all, a droplet is just any small quantity of liquid. There is no obvious reason to make an arbitrary cut-off at 300um. A 1micrometer sized quantity of liquid is just as much a droplet as a 500micrometer one for example. Secondly, droplets of that size in quiescent air would settle quickly due to gravity. If you had air "currents", they may or may not settle quickly, depending on the strength of the air "currents". It is non-trivial as well. There is not an obvious linear relationship. It is actually non-linear. There is a lot of physics involved here and the answer is not so clear without additional information about the air flow. Some of the major work on studying settling velocity of particles/droplets is here:
https://www.cambridge.org/core/jour...c-turbulence/E1D4020806EB90D78A0073359D234728
https://www.cambridge.org/core/jour...-simulations/377D142DD7EA77E4F59AAEB107E0A659



Diffusion is a molecular transport process. What they mean is advection or they can say convection as well. Better to actually just say "dispersed" because you don't normally use those previous words when describing this type of physics.



Why have they used an arbitrary tool rather than established CFD practices which have been used for decades?

Errors in the phraseology in the article aside (which you might expect in a lay publication covering science) do you see any obvious problems with their main findings?
 
Why are you so desperate for there to be more to this than there actually seems?

It’s a pandemic of a virus that spreads rapidly and kills a percentage of those it infects. Letting people assess their own chances and just get on with it if they please would have a devastating effect. It’s exponential growth, we were up to 1.5k deaths a day in the first spike and a lock down got it under control. If we did as you say, that figure could be 10k deaths a day, it could be 50k.

These measures exist for a reason, the government clearly detest them so why do you think they persist?
I'm definitely not desperate for there to more to it. Quite the opposite. I just feel we are doing more harm than good in the long run by locking people away, limiting freedoms, crippling the economy.
I was worried what type of world my children were growing into before this pandemic but they will be the ones paying for this, and their children too. A snowball effect. Its going to be a miserable world long after this virus has gone because of the damage we are causing to our finances.... Maybe it wont be as bad as i think as all countries will be on their knees, and wealth is all relative but that is the fear i have. Im ok - ive had my younger years and will die one day knowing that the last half of my innings were a bit of a mess but atleast it was good before the pandemic - My kids wont have that, or might not have that and i feel bad about that!
 
Errors in the phraseology in the article aside (which you might expect in a lay publication covering science) do you see any obvious problems with their main findings?

I can't speak about the absolute numbers, but yes, over some period of time, the suspended particles will cover the entire room. But it is already a well known fact and not something mysterious or ground breaking in itself. See the spoiler below for example.

EDIT: The parts about ventilation, whilst probably not documented, are obvious and not surprising.

Chapter 1 of "A first counrse in turbulence" collaborates this as well (page 9):
https://www.google.co.uk/search?tbm=bks&hl=en&q=A+First+Course+in+Turbulence+

According to Lumley, without any bulk air motion, it takes of the order of 100 hours for heat to diffuse by molecular processes alone from a radiator in a 5x5x5m room. With turbulence, this can take minutes. In reality, there will always be some weak bulk air motion, you just don't feel it, so a few hours sounds reasonable.

The motion of particles of the order of 1 micron is analogous in some respects to the way the heat disperses and such particles are called tracers. You do need to be careful and some people have characterised which particles can behave as tracers and under which fluids conditions:
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0957-0233/8/12/005/meta

What probably makes this article noteworthy is they give precise numbers about how many people become infected, but I can't comment about the validity of those numbers, nor how they are obtained. The convention in the past for engineering problems is to use well established CFD methods, which have pros and cons, but to varying degrees of success, they simulate the flow of air and sometimes the inertial particles/droplets. My guess is that this article uses a mathematical model of some sorts and not a simulation as such.
 
I'm guessing it wont include people dying of obvious other causes..
Deaths lag infection by several weeks .. 2-8 weeks is what I remember reading.. There was someone here who posted data from the recent cases in Italy and it said the average gap between infection and death was about 38 days.

I am not sure how the UK is counting it.. but if they arent counting any deaths after 28 days of infection as Covid deaths, then they are almost certainly missing a few..

And you can always look at the excess death data.. There is no reason to believe the death figure is being inflated. Unless you have a large collection of tinfoil hats.

Or if you read the Daily Mail. Shameless bastards, but very effective communicators.

There's nothing inflated about the UK's numbers. The government have been very open about it for months. It was discussed openly in the media when they changed from 60 days to 28 days, with arguments against the change for the same reasons as you: it'll miss a few. But the PHE did some sound analysis on why the current method is the best balance. They still count 60 days on top.

The reality is @SiRed, we know the figures aren't inflated because of the excess death figures. Have a look at them. During the period where we had a legitimately huge number of covid deaths, so big it led you to say this yourself...
Wow - this is a statistic that i have never seen and shows the lockdowns etc as being a necessity at minimum.
...the excess deaths figures peaked right along with it. These people dying from covid were not being misreported, we had thousands of people dying every week that wouldn't have died otherwise, regardless of what they've put on the death certificate.

Now, there are fewer deaths. That's true of excess mortality, and that's true of deaths reported by covid from PHE. There's no misreporting there, no inflating of the numbers, most people that die of covid within 28 days of contracting it would not have died in the short-term if they hadn't contracted it.

But the papers are drawing your attention to the wrong figures - it's not about how many people are dying now, which is already much worse than they're portraying, it's how many will be dying if the cases continue to spread at this rate. That number could double in a fortnight, and double again in another fortnight, so by the end of November we're within the realms of 1,000 covid deaths a day, worse than the first peak, if not for restrictions. If a national lockdown is not a plausible option this time, then it's not inconceivable more people could die than last time.

And you said yourself just this week that if that many people are dying, of course we need to lockdown! Now you're saying it's no big deal, not only do we not need a lockdown, but let's open everything up?! The virus is spreading more quickly than we can manage even when we've put the worst-hit places under conditions very similar to the first lockdown. You don't need to do complicated maths to see that if we hadn't applied any restrictions since August, more people would be dying now than they were then, and many more would be infected.

A virus that spreads this quickly can't travel freely in an open society without killing hundreds of thousands of people. More than you would have in any given year from all risk factors combined. It just isn't true to say we're inflating the figures, it's not that big a deal, let's open her back up and work through the worst of it. The worst of it is worse than anything you've experienced in your lifetime. What you're hearing is that in some regions, at some point in time, things aren't so bad now while they were terrible in the first wave. But in other regions things are terrible now, and weren't so bad in the first wave. What you need is to look at the wider picture, and for that you can look beyond the UK to see where we might be heading:

In Belgium, all nonessential hospital work has been postponed to deal with an influx of new Covid-19 patients, whose numbers have nearly doubled in the past week, matching levels seen in the first wave of the pandemic in the spring.

Croatia has asked former doctors to come out of retirement to help in hospitals, while National Guard troops have flown from the United States to the Czech Republic to assist overwhelmed health care professionals there.

In the Netherlands, new coronavirus patients have had to be transferred by helicopter to Germany to relieve Dutch intensive-care units.

Across Europe, hospitals are filling up at an alarming pace that harks back to the darkest hours of the first wave of the pandemic in the spring. The authorities are scrambling to slow the spread of a virus that threatens to bring ailing health care systems to the brink of collapse.

Nearly all countries in Western Europe have reported spikes in new cases — and for several of them, including Britain, France, Italy and Spain, their highest death tolls in months.

In announcing a new nationwide lockdown in France on Wednesday, President Emmanuel Macron predicted that the second wave of the virus would be more deadly than the first.

In France, one million people are currently estimated to be infected with the coronavirus, and 2,000 new patients are hospitalized every day, according to government data, the highest numbers in the country since mid-April. Doctors have warned that hospitals won’t hold in the winter if the virus can’t be stemmed, and Mr. Macron bluntly said on Wednesday that if France couldn’t put the brakes on the pandemic, doctors would soon have to choose which Covid-19 patients to save.

In Germany, as hospitalizations have doubled in the past 10 days and nearly 1,500 patients are in intensive care, Chancellor Angela Merkel announced new lockdown measures on Wednesday as she vowed to avoid “situations that are extremely difficult.”

Exhausted health care workers and other epidemics, like the flu, that arrive in winter have led authorities to warn that the worst is yet to come. While in Western Europe, the fear of overwhelmed hospitals brought a feeling of déjà-vu from the first wave in the spring, countries in Central and Eastern Europe, which escaped the first wave relatively unscathed, have faced a frighteningly new situation.

Countries like the Czech Republic and Poland imposed tough restrictions in the spring and saw lower infections rates, but soaring cases this fall have laid bare a critical shortage of nurses, doctors, and intensive care beds. In Bulgaria, scores of health care professionals are falling ill with the virus, and an acclaimed doctor became the 19th medical professional there to die of the virus earlier this month. In the Czech Republic, where cases are rising at one of the fastest paces in Europe, Prime Minister Andrej Babis has warned that the country’s health care system could collapse before mid-November.

It is an undeniable fact that if we let this thing spread uncontrollably, the best health systems in the world would collapse. And we don't have the best health system in the world. Most average health systems are struggling to keep things together even with these absolutely absurd restrictions on normal life.
 
I can't speak about the absolute numbers, but yes, over some period of time, the suspended particles will cover the entire room. But it is already a well known fact and not something mysterious or ground breaking in itself. See the spoiler below for example.

EDIT: The parts about ventilation, whilst probably not documented, are obvious and not surprising.

Chapter 1 of "A first counrse in turbulence" collaborates this as well (page 9):
https://www.google.co.uk/search?tbm=bks&hl=en&q=A+First+Course+in+Turbulence+

According to Lumley, without any bulk air motion, it takes of the order of 100 hours for heat to diffuse by molecular processes alone from a radiator in a 5x5x5m room. With turbulence, this can take minutes. In reality, there will always be some weak bulk air motion, you just don't feel it, so a few hours sounds reasonable.

The motion of particles of the order of 1 micron is analogous in some respects to the way the heat disperses and such particles are called tracers. You do need to be careful and some people have characterised which particles can behave as tracers and under which fluids conditions:
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0957-0233/8/12/005/meta

What probably makes this article noteworthy is they give precise numbers about how many people become infected, but I can't comment about the validity of those numbers, nor how they are obtained. The convention in the past for engineering problems is to use well established CFD methods, which have pros and cons, but to varying degrees of success, they simulate the flow of air and sometimes the inertial particles/droplets. My guess is that this article uses a mathematical model of some sorts and not a simulation as such.

Ok, cool. It definitely feels very speculative, even to someone like me with very little clue about the science behind it. I do think the message is useful and it’s well presented. So overall probably a good piece of journalism?
 
Today's UK numbers:

Positive Cases: 23,065
Deaths: 280
Patients in hospital: 10,308
Patients on ventilator beds: 957
Patients admitted in last 24hrs: 1404
 
These measures exist for a reason, the government clearly detest them so why do you think they persist?
I was in an argument about that the other day as well. Literally no one who's democratically elected and who wants to be so again wants any of these restrictions. They only do it because there aren't any better options.