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

Hugh Jass said:
The bad news i heard from an interview with an infectious disease expert is that he expects it to return to China once the Lockdown is lifted.

This thing is fecking scary.
Click to expand...

I don't think Wuhan will go out of lockdown until the number of confirmed cases fall in the 100s. Then they'll treat it like Shanghai (where they had 300 cases at one point IIRC) but have managed to maintain (restricted) daily life. Their biggest problem is going to soon be infections coming into China from the US/Europe/Middle East but the Chinese will have no qualms about eventually restricting flights from those places (unlike what we did in January).
 
Dante said:
The point is that 60% will get the disease no matter what you do. There's no positive outcome to this.

The scientific modelling is more about the correct timing for school closures and lockdown in order to get the most public compliance and minimise the unwitting spread between people in close quarters.
Click to expand...
If most people are going to get it at some point, aren't we better off getting out and trying to get it now before the NHS is overwhelmed in the peak?
 
Redlambs said:
You have more faith in the government than I do.
Click to expand...
I have zero faith in the government but soon they won’t have a choice when literally every other competently run country does similar. Trump is a complete idiot and they’ve been quite proactive in the last few days.
 
Redlambs said:
But that needs the government to do that and guarantee that we will all at least be able to feed our families. I completely agree with and see the sense in what you are saying, 100% It's fecking obvious to me that their plan is trash. But whilst they sit on the fence and won't guarantee a damn thing, what are people expected to do?

So until they do that, what is the alternative? In a perfect world I'd do the right thing and isolate myself and my family, but since I got a nice tax bill through this morning I don't trust anything right now.
Click to expand...
Exactly.

The economic pressures on people will mean that a lockdown would do more harm than good. It's timing needs to be pushed back as far as possible, and we need to ensure not to go too early such that a second lockdown becomes necessary in 6 months.
 
Dante said:
But 3 hours ago, he supported the UK idea of not banning mass gatherings.

Click to expand...


Not really. If you read to the end you'd realise that he actually advocates imposing methods capable of reducing R0 below 1 "as quickly as possible." He continues by saying that "These changes will have to be much more profound than stopping going to football matches." He's not exactly going out of his way to bang the gong for herd immunity is he?

edit: Also in what world does the phrase "My current instinct is that it [banning mass gatherings] is a sensible thing to do" translate into supporting the UK idea of not banning mass gatherings?
 
C'est Moi Cantona said:
I know, this is what seems to be missing in any explanation of how just 'sitting at home for as long as it takes' is viable, I'd lose my house and not be able to feed my kids pretty quickly.
Click to expand...
Yep. I'd be curious to know the circumstances of the posters on here calling for an indefinite lockdown. Something tells me they'd be relatively unaffected.
 
Sparky Rhiwabon said:
If most people are going to get it at some point, aren't we better off getting out and trying to get it now before the NHS is overwhelmed in the peak?
Click to expand...
Selfishly, probably 'yes'.

But on the other hand, the NHS will have a better idea about effective treatment in a few month's time.

As I keep saying, there's no good answer to this. Only varying degrees of shitty ones.
 
Sparky Rhiwabon said:
If most people are going to get it at some point, aren't we better off getting out and trying to get it now before the NHS is overwhelmed in the peak?
Click to expand...
Dangerous game to play. Look at how quickly it happened in Italy. You might think there's room to get it now but if it takes a week before you show symptoms you might be one out of many new cases at that point.
 
Redlambs said:
But that needs the government to do that and guarantee that we will all at least be able to feed our families. I completely agree with and see the sense in what you are saying, 100% It's fecking obvious to me that their plan is trash. But whilst they sit on the fence and won't guarantee a damn thing, what are people expected to do?

So until they do that, what is the alternative? In a perfect world I'd do the right thing and isolate myself and my family, but since I got a nice tax bill through this morning I don't trust anything right now.
Click to expand...

I'm not an economist nor do I have a background in finance, I've worked in retail banking before as a bank teller but that's it so my knowledge is very limited but couldn't the government, say something along the lines which Justin Trudeau said in his address to the nation? That there will be relief, that the people in need will receive help. I mean could mortgages not be deferred in such circumstances? Surely something like that can be worked out?
 
Redlambs said:
Is it now.

Because at this moment it's not and there's absolutely no word from the government.

So I'll be heading to work next week. If I could stay at home I would, but I can't so I'm not. That's the reality and people who act like it's going to be that easy are delusional to just how different life is for others.
Click to expand...

It will once they realise the implication of enough of working age people dying, and the life insurance companies start defaulting as they can't back all the mortgages that they've currently committed to paying out on.
 
MaxiPaxi said:


Right, we're royally fecked.
Click to expand...

I'm going to guess that just because of the sheer weight of cases, they're now only actually counting the ones who need hospital or equivalent treatment, and it's talking about ICU needs as a percentage of those hospitalised/treated.

At least I hope that what they're talking about otherwise it's a really nasty turn of events.
 
C'est Moi Cantona said:
I know, this is what seems to be missing in any explanation of how just 'sitting at home for as long as it takes' is viable, I'd lose my house and not be able to feed my kids pretty quickly.
Click to expand...

Perhaps but you never know, there might be a smidgeon of humanity in the government. Think of it this way, is it good business to have millions of people defaulting on their mortgages and house prices slumping? So even the lizard people who run our country will probably want to find a way to avoid that.
 
Ekkie Thump said:
Not really. If you read to the end you'd realise that he actually advocates imposing methods capable of reducing R0 below 1 "as quickly as possible." He continues: "These changes will have to be much more profound than stopping going to football matches." He's not exactly going out of his way to bang the gong for herd immunity is he?
Click to expand...
Herd immunity isn't being discussed here.

Gowers said: "What really matters is to introduce, as quickly as possible, changes to our ways of interacting that will reduce the average number of people each infected person infects to well below 1".

What do you think those "ways of interacting" are?
 
jymufc20 said:
How many on here have the virus ? Could we not get a separate thread maybe with a poll @Damien ? People could tell us their experiences and prepare us.

Edit, get well soon@Solius.
Click to expand...
We won't know if they've got the virus unless they get it so bad they're in hospital. We might get a lot of false reports, that really are just describing colds/flu etc rather than this.
 
Dante said:
But 3 hours ago, he supported the UK idea of not banning mass gatherings.

Click to expand...


I wish people would look to other countries that are ahead in the timeline.

Banning mass gatherings and closing schools is a waste of time. Italy did all those things on 22nd and 23rd February, 3 weeks ago now. It didn't work. The kids still hung out outside school and large events are not a huge transmission source anyway.

Close everything and get people to stay indoors. It is the only way. But, you need it to get bad enough that people will actually accept that happening. The UK is some way off that i feel.
 
11101 said:
I wish people would look to other countries that are ahead in the timeline.

Banning mass gatherings and closing schools is a waste of time. Italy did all those things on 22nd and 23rd February, 3 weeks ago now. It didn't work. The kids still hung out outside school and large events are not a huge transmission source anyway.

Close everything and get people to stay indoors. It is the only way. But, you need it to get bad enough that people will actually accept that happening. The UK is some way off that i feel.
Click to expand...
Exactly.

Proof from the front line.

Stay safe, mate.
 
11101 said:
I wish people would look to other countries that are ahead in the timeline.

Banning mass gatherings and closing schools is a waste of time. Italy did all those things on 22nd and 23rd February, 3 weeks ago now. It didn't work. The kids still hung out outside school and large events are not a huge transmission source anyway.

Close everything and get people to stay indoors. It is the only way. But, you need it to get bad enough that people will actually accept that happening. The UK is some way off that i feel.
Click to expand...
We wont know if the bannings have worked in Italy for another week or 2. Their numbers are still catching up
 
Dante said:
The point is that 60% will get the disease no matter what you do. There's no positive outcome to this.

The scientific modelling is more about the correct timing for school closures and lockdown in order to get the most public compliance and minimise the unwitting spread between people in close quarters.
Click to expand...

You have to bottleneck that number though. If we just surrender to the disease the NHS or any other health care system will be overwhelmed. Italy has twice as many ICU beds and they're nearly done so how do you think we'll cope?
Drastic measures have to be taken to slow the spread. Look at data inside Hubei and all other Chinese provinces -- they didn't even have a peak.
 
Last edited:
Dante said:
But 3 hours ago, he supported the UK idea of not banning mass gatherings.

Click to expand...


He is not saying so though. He is saying what is the rationale of stopping mass gatherings, if you allow small gatherings or kids going to school.

While he has not said that only a total lockdown works, he has several times hinted it on his threads. And he has essentially said that achieving herd immunity without crashing the medical system is impossible.
 
Mogget said:
Yep. I'd be curious to know the circumstances of the posters on here calling for an indefinite lockdown. Something tells me they'd be relatively unaffected.
Click to expand...

I don't mean this to be rude, but a lot clearly don't get it.

It amazes me the contempt for the Tories and how they feck over the working people, yet can't see how badly this is going to feck over people like me who live off a tiny business on self employed and have never fiddled a tax bill in my life. It's all rosy for some, but I'm done if I don't work and I have two kids and a home I rent.

For some to try to lecture on people dying and about how we should all stay in and quit our jobs and jolly it up, or somehow I should have saved for a fecking pandemic, without the same real world lives and pressures is just false to me.
 
My thoughts here probably have a billion flaws, but

We're an island. If we cut off all all travel by air and sea, apart from deliveries for stuff like medications, foods etc with strict checks.
Freeze everything. No mortgages, food bills etc
Have nobody on the streets. Army are used to patrol and make sure everything runs.
Volunteers to do certain things, so for example, bag up food supplies and drop off at houses.
NHS staff obviously have to work, as do certain people, for water, electricity etc. The things we'd really need
Also gain enough test kits, so that in 2months, maybe 3 months, they sweep streets one by one, test each person before they're allowed back into a normal life as such.

Wouldn't that effectively kill the virus off... In Britain at the very least, all while a vaccine is being created.
As I said, I know their are flaws but surely things could be ironed out to almost work.
Money is just a currency that we use.
But if a landlord for example doesn't have to pay his mortgage, his food bill, his business rates, is he any worse off?

Wishful thinking I know
 
MaxiPaxi said:
You have to bottleneck that number thougha. If just surrender to the disease the NHS or any other health care system will be overwhelmed. Italy has twice as many ICU beds and they're nearly done so how do you think we'll cope?
Drastic measures have to be taken to slow the spread. Look at data inside Hubei and all other Chinese provinces -- they didn't even have a peak.
Click to expand...
The idea is that the only way to bottleneck is through quarantine and lockdown.

But the British people are too stubborn to accept that more than once, or for more than a few weeks at most.

So the bottleneck has to be introduced judiciously. The modelling tells us that it's not the right time now, because only 1,100 are (officially) infected.
 
Last edited:
Igor Drefljak said:
My thoughts here probably have a billion flaws, but

We're an island. If we cut off all all travel by air and sea, apart from deliveries for stuff like medications, foods etc with strict checks.
Freeze everything. No mortgages, food bills etc
Have nobody on the streets. Army are used to patrol and make sure everything runs.
Volunteers to do certain things, so for example, bag up food supplies and drop off at houses.
NHS staff obviously have to work, as do certain people, for water, electricity etc. The things we'd really need
Also gain enough test kits, so that in 2months, maybe 3 months, they sweep streets one by one, test each person before they're allowed back into a normal life as such.

Wouldn't that effectively kill the virus off... In Britain at the very least, all while a vaccine is being created.
As I said, I know their are flaws but surely things could be ironed out to almost work.
Money is just a currency that we use.
But if a landlord for example doesn't have to pay his mortgage, his food bill, his business rates, is he any worse off?

Wishful thinking I know
Click to expand...
How would people have money to do anything then? Where would money be generated for the country to run?
 
Apparently half of people who have needed ICU in the Netherlands are under 50. Wow.
 
North Carolina: all schools are shut down for the next 2 weeks

Georgia: all schools are shut down for the next 2 weeks

South Carolina: see y’all on Monday!
 
Can someone answer me this - whilst many of us are expecting to get this virus? Won’t many of us get it and be over it in a couple of weeks? See worrying estimates of maybe 20m people in the Uk having it by June, but won’t many of the younger / healthier people have recovered within a couple of weeks?
 
cyberman said:
We wont know if the bannings have worked in Italy for another week or 2. Their numbers are still catching up
Click to expand...

We won't know if a total lockdown worked until then, but we do know just banning large gatherings of people and closing schools didn't work. That was implemented 3 weeks ago.
 
Redlambs said:
But that needs the government to do that and guarantee that we will all at least be able to feed our families. I completely agree with and see the sense in what you are saying, 100% It's fecking obvious to me that their plan is trash. But whilst they sit on the fence and won't guarantee a damn thing, what are people expected to do?

So until they do that, what is the alternative? In a perfect world I'd do the right thing and isolate myself and my family, but since I got a nice tax bill through this morning I don't trust anything right now.
Click to expand...
I get what you are saying. In your scenario, I would have done the same. It is nuts that the governments all over the world are not also introducing financial reliefs. The mortgage payments should stop until the crisis is over, for a start. Governments should ensure food for their citizens. And so on.

All I can say is, good luck, be careful and try to avoid contact with people (especially elderly and those with chronic diseases). At the end of the day, some degree of social distancing will help. The growth might still be exponential (in which case the number of victims would be approximately the same), but maybe not. South Korea and Singapore are containing it without going in full lockdown. Heck, even China is containing it without full lockdown (outside of Wuhan).

Anyway, I digressed but my point is that a full lockdown followed by a gradual relaxing of measures, but still mandatory social distancing when possible, might decrease the number of victims 10 fold or more. It might not, but what do we have to lose by trying?
 
Igor Drefljak said:
My thoughts here probably have a billion flaws, but

We're an island. If we cut off all all travel by air and sea, apart from deliveries for stuff like medications, foods etc with strict checks.
Freeze everything. No mortgages, food bills etc
Have nobody on the streets. Army are used to patrol and make sure everything runs.
Volunteers to do certain things, so for example, bag up food supplies and drop off at houses.
NHS staff obviously have to work, as do certain people, for water, electricity etc. The things we'd really need
Also gain enough test kits, so that in 2months, maybe 3 months, they sweep streets one by one, test each person before they're allowed back into a normal life as such.

Wouldn't that effectively kill the virus off... In Britain at the very least, all while a vaccine is being created.
As I said, I know their are flaws but surely things could be ironed out to almost work.
Money is just a currency that we use.
But if a landlord for example doesn't have to pay his mortgage, his food bill, his business rates, is he any worse off?

Wishful thinking I know
Click to expand...

It's pretty much what china did. They've had only 10 new cases today I think. After all this is over would anyone complain that the government overreacted?
 
Revan said:
He is not saying so though. He is saying what is the rationale of stopping mass gatherings, if you allow small gatherings or kids going to school.

While he has not said that only a total lockdown works, he has several times hinted it on his threads. And he has essentially said that achieving herd immunity without crashing the medical system is impossible.
Click to expand...
I'm not advocating for herd immunity. I'm saying that a high infection rate is going to be inevitable (unless you lockdown indefinitely, which is unworkable anyway).

I'm also saying that a crash of the medical system is going to be inevitable. The NHS is simply not built for these kinds of numbers. And since the banning of mass gatherings serves no purpose, we should remain economically active as long as possible as that's the best way to mitigate the coming medical system crash.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.