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

People over 70 will be instructed by the government to stay in strict isolation at home or in care homes for four months, under a "wartime-style" mobilisation effort by the government likely to be enforced within the next 20 days.
It is part of a series of measures being prepared by the prime minister, health secretary, chief medical officer and chief scientific adviser to prevent the health service from "falling over" and to save lives as Covid-19 becomes an epidemic in the UK.
Other measures already being planned include:
  • the forced requisitioning of hotels and other buildings as temporary hospitals;
  • the requisitioning of private hospitals as emergency hospitals;
  • temporary closure of pubs, bars and restaurants - some time after next weekend's ban on mass gatherings;
  • emergency manufacture by several companies of respirators that would be necessary to keep alive those who become acutely ill;
  • the closure of schools for perhaps a few weeks, but with skeleton staff kept on to provide childcare for key workers in the NHS and police.
Click to expand...
https://www.itv.com/news/2020-03-14...ime-style-mobilisation-to-combat-coronavirus/
 
I’ve been following this since January and have spent a lot of time reading about it or listening to news podcasts/interviews about it.
I must say, it was always concerning, but with everything going exactly as the graphs had predicted, and with knowing that there’s not been any miraculous deus-ex-machina style stop for the virus spread, yesterday and today I’ve really started to be very worried.
 
Arruda said:
So you don't know. And, from your answer I guess no one knows too, right? (For anyone following, the question was "Poverty will kill millions more before their healthy life expectancy.")

Now think for a moment, you can't even give me a guess estimate on that number of deaths, let alone use them to make a comparison.

And yet you seem to admit as potentially viable, that a public health strategy on an international emmergency, can be based on that.

I can guarantee you that policy won't hold much longer anyway. One of three will happen quickly:
1- The government will backdown and do as everyone else, not explaining why.
2- Doctors and nurses will run to the press and social media exerct pressure, which will lead to government backing down reactively
3- As people start to die in numbers, the population itself will auto-enforce quarantine whether the government wants them to or not.

If I was from the UK I'd really want 1 or 2 to happen quickly. 3 causes much less damage if you plan ahead for it (essential logistics, social responses - sick leaves (how will they have to change to cope)) than if you don't.
Click to expand...
How did you get "so you don't know" from what I told you? Were you expecting a mathematical formula? Are you really trying to suggest that the burden of proof is on me for not taking the time to exhaustively demonstrate that "poverty will kill millions more before their healthy life expectancy"? You'd think we have progressed to the point where people can see the benefits that civilisation will bring. Forgive me for choosing not to spend the rest of my Saturday night writing a thesis on why water is wet.

What do you think health outcomes are like for homeless people vs those with a fixed address? Or for those living in a household for with secure full-time employment vs one where the main earner is doing cash-in-hand or part-time work? Or households that can afford to heat their home versus those who cannot?

If you cannot understand the topic from the King's Fund (simple) or the Marmot Review (advanced) then there's nothing more I can do. feck the economy, and you're fecking the health of your entire population long term and reducing people's healthy life expectancy by far more than the immediate effects of COVID-19. Even Italy is still trying to keep many businesses and workplaces open, despite the rest of their lockdown and are pumping billions in to try and save their economy.
 
17 Van der Gouw said:
Looks like the Herd Immunity plan is out of the window.

I trusted Prof. Vallance when I heard him speak on behalf of the government, but honestly, for my parent's sake, I'd much rather they were locked down and out of harm's way. Economy be damned.
Click to expand...
I don't know if we're necessarily abandoning the herd immunity theory or they just realised their current plans were going to cause things to happen more quickly than they thought. Given none of these measures are immediate I wouldn't be surprised if the plan remains to allow mass infection of the under 50's but at a decreased rate from what would happen without any extreme measures.

EDIT - It's good news though, in my view. I'm with you there.
 
17 Van der Gouw said:
Looks like the Herd Immunity plan is out of the window.

I trusted Prof. Vallance when I heard him speak on behalf of the government, but honestly, for my parent's sake, I'd much rather they were locked down and out of harm's way. Economy be damned.
Click to expand...
I think people are becoming overly fixated on the herd immunity bit. As a society we will gain some form of indirect protection against the coronavirus as individuals gain immunity, and it is an important part of the modelling and how the eventual spread of the coronavirus will slow, but make no mistake we will be wanting mass vaccinations as soon as we can.

I watched Vallance and Whitty in full live, and didn't really see that as the central part of what they were presenting their strategy as. It seems to have taken on a life of its own in the media since. More importantly, to me at least, was the frankness in pointing out that the UK is in a much longer struggle (or as they put, we are right at the beginning at the flat part of the curve, despite approx. 5k-10k cases) and that they are delaying lockdown measures for as long as possible for when they are most effective, as things are to get much worse.
 
TMDaines said:
How did you get "so you don't know" from what I told you? Were you expecting a mathematical formula? Are you really trying to suggest that the burden of proof is on me for not taking the time to exhaustively demonstrate that "poverty will kill millions more before their healthy life expectancy"? You'd think we have progressed to the point where people can see the benefits that civilisation will bring. Forgive me for choosing not to spend the rest of my Saturday night writing a thesis on why water is wet.

What do you think health outcomes are like for homeless people vs those with a fixed address? Or for those living in a household for with secure full-time employment vs one where the main earner is doing cash-in-hand or part-time work? Or households that can afford to heat their home versus those who cannot?

If you cannot understand the topic from the King's Fund (simple) or the Marmot Review (advanced) then there's nothing more I can do. feck the economy, and you're fecking the health of your entire population long term and reducing people's healthy life expectancy by far more than the immediate effects of COVID-19. Even Italy is still trying to keep many businesses and workplaces open, despite the rest of their lockdown and are pumping billions in to try and save their economy.
Click to expand...

Yes, the burden of proof is on you, you're the one:
1) Claiming poverty will kill millions more (than the virus?) before their healthy life expectancy. Obviously here I have to interpret "poverty" as extra poverty caused by more stringent public health measures. How can you claim that if you can't even guess a number that reflects this economic cost?
2) Implying that, even if the above claim could be proven true, there is actually a "choice" to be made between:
- More short-term deaths, delayed Economic downturn, which will lead to more saved lives in the future
- More lives saved in the short-term, but an anticipated (by weeks?) Economic downturn, which will lead to more long-term deaths

You seem to support the idea that the first choice might be better from an utilittarian point of view - This is a huge claim. And the burden of proof is on you.


What exactly is your role on WHO, if you don't mind sharing? I understand you work in Public Health, but are you a doctor, statistician, economist?


PS: I am a Doctor and I don't need links to websites talking about health determinants. That's what you learn on the first five minutes of Public Health on an average 3rd year medical curriculum
 
Last edited:
jojojo said:
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.
Click to expand...
Should be able to differentiate them if people just tell the truth if they have been tested or not I'm really interested in people's experiences even people who have just had the symptoms and the advice they got from phoning 111
 
17 Van der Gouw said:
Hello mate, whilst diabetics have an elevated relative risk, I think I remember reading that it's still low overall providing you're less than 60 years old and in otherwise fair health.

Don't quote me on that! I'll try to find the article. They key thing is - try not to panic, and do everything in your power not to catch this bastard disease. If somebody in your house gets it, isolate them and steer well clear!
Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply. Luckily I live alone so I'm well isolated but still have to get out and about to get shopping in and the like. Will need to top up on supplies next week.

It's been tough enough adjusting to type 1 diabetes without this threat also in the background. Its hard to see where/when this Covid-19 threat will end. Scary times and as I said before I'm worried about my elderly parents more than anything.
 
Whats frustrating on a personal note is.


I've felt a bit shit for days, but in all honesty, I don't think I've had it, so I still need to take as many precautions as I can to limit the chance of me getting it.
But what if I have actually got it, and about to pass it, I've got months ahead of not knowing, just like many others will have.

I know it's a small problem in the grand scale,
 
United58 said:
That's really interesting, thanks
Click to expand...

You're welcome.

zing said:
Thanks - how is this used in treatment? Is this injected or made into an oral drug?
Click to expand...

If you're wondering specifically how it'll work for covid19 or any potential resultant vaccine from the original post you quoted regarding the Dutch research team (if they - or anyone - even develop a vaccine, keep in mind) then that's unknown, but it's pretty likely it'll be injected. Oral vaccines are usually for intestinal disease (cholera, etc)

If you're asking in general how vaccines are delivered into the body, then there are a lot of ways, all with pros and cons and sometimes restrictions. But still, mainly injected.
 
Frank Grimes said:
Thanks for the reply. Luckily I live alone so I'm well isolated but still have to get out and about to get shopping in and the like. Will need to top up on supplies next week.

It's been tough enough adjusting to type 1 diabetes without this threat also in the background. Its hard to see where/when this Covid-19 threat will end. Scary times and as I said before I'm worried about my elderly parents more than anything.
Click to expand...
Yeah, the worst thought in the world is losing someone to this.
 
nickm said:
That’s right it makes perfect sense for the tories to kill off the section of society that most reliably votes Tory. FFS.
Click to expand...

Bojo didn't think that one through did he. Which isn't suprising of course.
 
I suspect this thread reads a whole lot like each year's RAWK EPL winners threads. The tone has really changed these last few days after the initial "its just a flu" posts. Next week will be Stevie G slipping as we start seeing loved ones being infected. Personally, I was worried at first, and now I'm terrified of what is about to happen.
 
Redlambs said:
This maybe a stupid question, but why not just limit the amount of items to 1 or 2 per customer? Enforce the rule.
Click to expand...
horsechoker said:
They're going to have to limit certain items per customer. Times like these make people selfish and tribalistic.
Click to expand...
They already have I believe. Online shopping on Tesco, you can only buy 2 of items when I checked a few hours ago.
 
Arruda said:
Yes, the burden of proof is on you
Click to expand...
I don't work for the WHO. I work for the NHS in Population Health commissioning. I'm going to bed now, but I'll say this:

Ultimately, our perspectives are going to differ based on whether you think the UK has any realistic prospect of greatly limiting the number of COVID-19 cases over the next year. In my opinion, we've got no chance, as this is completely national, likely north of 20,000 true cases at this stage. I don't think we have any hope of preventing it running into the many millions in the next weeks and months. Therefore the only thing you can possibly prioritise is trying to distribute the spread in such a way that the health services can help as many of those most vulnerable as possible when they need. Thousands of deaths will be inevitable. There is life beyond COVID-19 however. Taking measures that harm the economy, whilst only delaying the unpreventable in the spread of the coronavirus, would lead to greater costs and health detriments. The legacy of COVID-19 will have far greater negative effects long term for many, than the couple of weeks of mild-to-no illness that they experienced at the time.
 
TMDaines said:
Therefore the only thing you can possibly prioritise is trying to distribute the spread in such a way that the health services can help as many of those most vulnerable as possible when they need.
Click to expand...

Isn't that the point of all our discussion? What we all want?

Amazing how you see this and yet think the solution isn't to act immediately until we can at lesat guarantee that the health services will be able to cope with the initial wave. Other countries experiences suggest it can't, unless measures are taken before.
 
senorgregster said:
I suspect this thread reads a whole lot like each year's RAWK EPL winners threads. The tone has really changed these last few days after the initial "its just a flu" posts. Next week will be Stevie G slipping as we start seeing loved ones being infected. Personally, I was worried at first, and now I'm terrified of what is about to happen.
Click to expand...

So, you haven't read it yet you seem to want to gloat about being right?

Seems like you should just stick to the bitter football threads then.
 
DiseaseOfTheAge said:
That sucks. Sitting on an island in the middle of nowhere watching whales sounded like a dream escape from reality.
Click to expand...
Aye, I was double checking but just confirmed.

Diagnosed a 29 year old woman who passed through the previously diagnosed transmission area. Hard not to think it will explode now. Gotta get ready.
 
kouroux said:
Obviously not gonna generalize but feck me americans can be fecking crazy :wenger: People stocking up chips, ice creams, cookies, sugar beverages

Click to expand...

No, you can generalize. You are pretty spot on. That cart is a nutritional travesty.
 
Carolina Red said:
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!
Click to expand...
Jesus, what’s SC’s rationale for this? Surely there’s spring break coming up y’all can tack a week onto?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.