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

UnrelatedPsuedo said:
It’s also too big.
it’s also unnecessary to apply blanket rules there

Imagine if every European Country had to apply the same rules at the same time.

Trump is a weapon. But America should be perfectly capable of handling this.

States should flatten curves as best they can, apply restrictions at the right times, the federal government should be able to move equipment around to meet peak needs.

The whole country does not need to be on identical lockdown. That results in what we’re seeing. Measures too severe, too early, that aren’t tolerated.
Click to expand...


Common sense, good stuff mate.

We'll all be watching how this unfolds, but I don't think its gonna be disastrous personally. The problem with this pandemic and how the media is covering it, is that the majority are going down the 'worst case scenario' route simply to drum home to everyone just how serious the virus is - there is nothing wrong with that. But people also need to keep a level head and recognise that they ARE being fed the worst case scenario. The UK death toll was originally supposed to be 200,000 - within a couple of weeks, the same bloke had dropped his estimate to around 20,000 or so.

You need to scare people into acting, I get that. If everyone is wandering around thinking 'its just the flu', we're fecked. But some critical thinking is required on the public's part or else everyone is going to end up in a padded cell.
 
golden_blunder said:
Why don’t they repurpose some knicker or shirt factories to make their own??
I mean it’s not like they won’t need a huge ongoing supply
Click to expand...
Probably all gone bust.

I used to audit a factory in Leigh that supplied all M&S’ swimming costumes. It closed down as soon as M&S stopped sourcing from the UK.
 
Alabaster Codify7 said:
Common sense, good stuff mate.

We'll all be watching how this unfolds, but I don't think its gonna be disastrous personally. The problem with this pandemic and how the media is covering it, is that the majority are going down the 'worst case scenario' route simply to drum home to everyone just how serious the virus is - there is nothing wrong with that. But people also need to keep a level head and recognise that they ARE being fed the worst case scenario. The UK death toll was originally supposed to be 200,000 - within a couple of weeks, the same bloke had dropped his estimate to around 20,000 or so.

You need to scare people into acting, I get that. If everyone is wandering around thinking 'its just the flu', we're fecked. But some critical thinking is required on the public's part or else everyone is going to end up in a padded cell.
Click to expand...

The flipside to that argument is that the reason the deaths are so much lower than first predicted is because people have been scared the right amount. Project fear has saved lives!
 
Alabaster Codify7 said:
Common sense, good stuff mate.

We'll all be watching how this unfolds, but I don't think its gonna be disastrous personally. The problem with this pandemic and how the media is covering it, is that the majority are going down the 'worst case scenario' route simply to drum home to everyone just how serious the virus is - there is nothing wrong with that. But people also need to keep a level head and recognise that they ARE being fed the worst case scenario. The UK death toll was originally supposed to be 200,000 - within a couple of weeks, the same bloke had dropped his estimate to around 20,000 or so.

You need to scare people into acting, I get that. If everyone is wandering around thinking 'its just the flu', we're fecked. But some critical thinking is required on the public's part or else everyone is going to end up in a padded cell.
Click to expand...
What I found pretty striking is that the Nightingale hospital is almost empty and there's next to no coverage of it.

If it was the other way round you could be sure as hell they would be sticking a reminder into every advert break.
 
Alabaster Codify7 said:
Common sense, good stuff mate.

We'll all be watching how this unfolds, but I don't think its gonna be disastrous personally. The problem with this pandemic and how the media is covering it, is that the majority are going down the 'worst case scenario' route simply to drum home to everyone just how serious the virus is - there is nothing wrong with that. But people also need to keep a level head and recognise that they ARE being fed the worst case scenario. The UK death toll was originally supposed to be 200,000 - within a couple of weeks, the same bloke had dropped his estimate to around 20,000 or so.

You need to scare people into acting, I get that. If everyone is wandering around thinking 'its just the flu', we're fecked. But some critical thinking is required on the public's part or else everyone is going to end up in a padded cell.
Click to expand...

Well we are going to be over 20,000 now and only just coming out of a very slowly dwindling peak. I think the 'panic' was exactly right.
 
I think with the progress being made on antibody studies we are now thankfully looking at a disease that is much less deadly than first thought. It won't be far off a severe flu season if I was to speculate. Still...would you want to risk catching it?! I'm social distancing until I either know I've had it, or there is a vaccine.
 
fergieisold said:
I think with the progress being made on antibody studies we are now thankfully looking at a disease that is much less deadly than first thought. It won't be far off a severe flu season if I was to speculate. Still...would you want to risk catching it?! I'm social distancing until I either know I've had it, or there is a vaccine.
Click to expand...

https://www.theguardian.com/society...-people-dying-from-flu-in-uk-than-last-winter

In this article here they talk about a particularly deadly flu season in Britain.

35 people died in a week.
 
golden_blunder said:
Why don’t they repurpose some knicker or shirt factories to make their own??
I mean it’s not like they won’t need a huge ongoing supply
Click to expand...
Hundreds of companies have tried to contact the government to offer help and they have been ignored. Just look at your local MP's twitter feed and you will see companies and groups offering assistance via their MP. The MP's are tearing their hair out as the government is failing to respond.

It's ironic that Boris is such a fan of Churchill and yet he failed to learn the lessons Churchill did at Dunkirk. This was a "little ships" moment where hundreds of small labs offered support with testing. Textile firms have offered help with gowns and masks, Engineering companies have offered to manufacture proven ventilator technology.

They have all largely been ignored by Government cronies who have googled it and think they have a better / cheaper solution. It's only later they realise they are having to wait for it to be shipped from overseas! I wouldn't trust them to run an ebay shop!

IF we had engaged with these firms earlier, you would see a health and social care system that was adequately protected and not acting as a vector of disease. Some people in government have a lot of deaths on their hands that should have been avoided. Spain and Italy were caught by surprise but look at how other European countries have responded who had the same amount of warning.

They have messed up a shopping and procurement exercise. Good luck with this team delivering anything else!
 
Dancfc said:
What I found pretty striking is that the Nightingale hospital is almost empty and there's next to no coverage of it.

If it was the other way round you could be sure as hell they would be sticking a reminder into every advert break.
Click to expand...
@Dancfc i must admit i find it amazing that its not made more headlines . Do you know what the total take up rate of each of the new hospitals is . Its amazing how quickly we managed to get them up and running . I wonder if they are being staffed at part capacity and the doctors etc being used in other hospitals if they are not needed ?
 
worldgonemad said:
@Dancfc i must admit i find it amazing that its not made more headlines . Do you know what the total take up rate of each of the new hospitals is . Its amazing how quickly we managed to get them up and running . I wonder if they are being staffed at part capacity and the doctors etc being used in other hospitals if they are not needed ?
Click to expand...
I read a few days ago at that point there has only been 19 admissions there.

I can't re find that exact article but I've found one that confirms the Excel centre has been pretty much desolate.

https://www.hsj.co.uk/coronavirus/t...gale-is-essential-to-recovery/7027435.article
 
Dancfc said:
What I found pretty striking is that the Nightingale hospital is almost empty and there's next to no coverage of it.

If it was the other way round you could be sure as hell they would be sticking a reminder into every advert break.
Click to expand...
The thought is that the nightingale hospitals are there to deal with a second wave that is likely to happen when restrictions are lifted. Their role is to deal with the large numbers who may need additional oxygen support to prevent them deteriorating and needing ICU support. These "empty" hospitals are essentially in a shakedown phase getting ready to deal with it.

The initial plan was that, if necessary, these would be staffed with Squaddies manually bagging people to give them some additional air. Thankfully common sense has prevailed and they have sourced the cpap connectors to do that job for them.
 
Dancfc said:
What I found pretty striking is that the Nightingale hospital is almost empty and there's next to no coverage of it.

If it was the other way round you could be sure as hell they would be sticking a reminder into every advert break.
Click to expand...

Some NHS bloke the other day was saying they might not even use the North East one at all.
 
So the ONS have released a graph suggesting that the amount dying at the moment is more significant than normal.

But some of these aren’t related to Corona virus.
What is more likely? That these deaths are corona related but not counted or that other people aren’t getting checked for things they need? Maybe the NHS can’t handle the extra strain?
 
Wumminator said:
https://www.theguardian.com/society...-people-dying-from-flu-in-uk-than-last-winter

In this article here they talk about a particularly deadly flu season in Britain.

35 people died in a week.
Click to expand...

Public Health England estimates that on average 17,000 people have died from the flu in England annually between 2014/15 and 2018/19. However, the yearly deaths vary widely from a high of 28,330 in 2014/15 to a low of 1,692 in 2018/19. Public Health England does not publish a mortality rate for the flu.

Source: https://fullfact.org/health/coronavirus-compare-influenza/

There's a big range, but COVID-19 has only just reached an average flu. Still a fair bit to go before it kills as many as a bad flu season. Death rate of around 0.1% for COVID seems like a possibility for COVID-19, but we'll have to wait to see what comes out in the fullness of time.
 
fergieisold said:
Public Health England estimates that on average 17,000 people have died from the flu in England annually between 2014/15 and 2018/19. However, the yearly deaths vary widely from a high of 28,330 in 2014/15 to a low of 1,692 in 2018/19. Public Health England does not publish a mortality rate for the flu.

Source: https://fullfact.org/health/coronavirus-compare-influenza/

There's a big range, but COVID-19 has only just reached an average flu. Still a fair bit to go before it kills as many as a bad flu season. Death rate of around 0.1% for COVID seems like a possibility for COVID-19, but we'll have to wait to see what comes out in the fullness of time.
Click to expand...

Thank you for that, it's interesting.

However, (I'm working on the assumption that COVID has killed around 20,000 people so far) doesn't that show that in roughly a month this disease has killed over the normal average for flu deaths despite the whole country being locked down and off work whereever possible? With odds that this will beat the flu 'high' just in this first wave?
 
Wumminator said:
Thank you for that, it's interesting.

However, (I'm working on the assumption that COVID has killed around 20,000 people so far) doesn't that show that in roughly a month this disease has killed over the normal average for flu deaths despite the whole country being locked down and off work whereever possible? With odds that this will beat the flu 'high' just in this first wave?
Click to expand...

Yeh, I think it's probably very likely to be more deadly than the flu. My point was that the death rate is likely to be closer to a severe flu than what we first thought. Initially figures of a few % were suggested as the death rate. Thank god that doesn't seem likely now!

Also I think the time period for deaths might be because of the 'R0' value which is quite high, meaning lots of people get infected really quickly. You end up with a tsunami of very sick patients. Flu has a much lower R0.
 
Regulus Arcturus Black said:
Well no, that's not the case either @Wibble as Belgium locked down rather early (even before Aus did) and have almost 6000 deaths now. And then you have the case of Gothenburg and Malmö, 2 big Swedish cities that have just 126 deaths between them.

I think Stockholm (944 deaths) and most of Belgium, having half term in week 9 (Italy horror week) royally fecked them, lock down or no lock down, that half term brought back so much of the virus to these places and they were fecked regardless of measures put in place in mid-March.

All of Poland, Oslo, Copenhagen, Gothenburg (Sweden) and Malmö (Sweden) all had half term in week 7 or 8, it seems to have made all the difference.

And, you gotta come out of lockdown Wibble, as many countries now are, they will all come out before long and long before any vaccine is in place; people will continue to catch this and die, whether now or in 3-5 months. Beaches opened up in Aus I saw, before long more and more will soon open up.
The idea that lockdown has "saved lives" is such a short term one, and when you see the likes of France and Belgium, is it really even a scientific fact? Belgium have still been seeing over 1000 cases per day one full month after lockdown. It appears to take at least one month before it even starts to help the stats drop, something that we're seeing in Sweden now even without lockdown after 6 weeks of social distancing measures, as the graph of daily deaths below shows:

66303406e82fa12ae2de505a9ce3dfa6cbc4443d55d4e002e7a3efa156d7cb210992b2be.jpg


Sweden above, no lockdown. Social distancing started mid-March, took some weeks to have effect, peaked around 8th April, now on downward trend.

Belgium below, 18th March lockdown, took some weeks to have effect, peaked around 11th April, now on downward trend.

58043409c2f4deca88632cdacb6340ac763f72686f67cbf9d9f4d811022e9dafd590affd.jpg


That'll be my last post on it for the week, unless any new data or study comes to light.
Click to expand...
Are you looking at deaths total or relative to country population? Context is critical.
 
It might not end up having a much higher mortality rate than a really bad flu season, but thats not really whats important imo, for two reasons.

One, because of no immunity or vaccine, it spreads so much faster and more than the flu. Many many more people will get this in one wave so many more people will die.

Two, even with a low mortality rate it still seems that many more gets a much more severe illness from this even if they survive. So the strain on hospitals will be much bigger.
 
sammsky1 said:
UK Government has replied with an official 2,500 word rebuttal to the Sunday Times article

Response to Sunday Times Insight article
Posted by: dhscpressoffice, Posted on: 19 April 2020 - Categories: Coronavirus (COVID-19)
A Government spokesman said: ‘This article contains a series of falsehoods and errors and actively misrepresents the enormous amount of work which was going on in government at the earliest stages of the Coronavirus outbreak.’
‘This is an unprecedented global pandemic and we have taken the right steps at the right time to combat it, guided at all times by the best scientific advice.
‘The Government has been working day and night to battle against coronavirus, delivering a strategy designed at all times to protect our NHS and save lives.
'Our response has ensured that the NHS has been given all the support it needs to ensure everyone requiring treatment has received it, as well as providing protection to businesses and reassurance to workers.
‘The Prime Minister has been at the helm of the response to this, providing leadership during this hugely challenging period for the whole nation.’
On the Sunday Times claims:
Claim – On the third Friday in January Coronavirus was already spreading around the world but the government ‘brushed aside’ the threat in an hour-long COBR meeting and said the risk to the UK public was ‘low’.
Response – At a very basic level, this is wrong. The meeting was on the fourth Friday in January. The article also misrepresents the Government’s awareness of Covid 19, and the action we took before this point. Health Secretary Matt Hancock was first alerted to Covid 19 on 3 January and spoke to Departmental officials on 6th Jan before receiving written advice from the UK Health Security Team.
He brought the issue to the attention of the Prime Minister and they discussed Covid 19 on 7 January. The government’s scientific advisory groups started to meet in mid-January and Mr Hancock instituted daily coronavirus meetings. He updated Parliament as soon as possible, on January 23rd.
The risk level was set to “Low” because at the time our scientific advice was that the risk level to the UK public at that point was low. The first UK case was not until 31 January. The specific meaning of “public health risk” refers to the risk there is to the public at precisely that point. The risk was also higher than it had been before - two days earlier it had been increased “Very Low” to “Low” in line with clinical guidance from the Chief Medical Officer.
The WHO did not formally declare that coronavirus was a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) until 30 January, and only characterised it as a global pandemic more than a month later, on 11 March. The UK was taking action and working to improve its preparedness from early January.
Claim - ‘This was despite the publication that day of an alarming study by Chinese doctors in the medical journal The Lancet. It assessed the lethal potential of the virus, for the first time suggesting it was comparable to the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic, which killed up to 50 million people.'
Response - The editor of the Lancet, on exactly the same day – 23 January - called for “caution” and accused the media of ‘escalating anxiety by talking of a ‘killer virus’ and ‘growing fears’. He wrote: ‘In truth, from what we currently know, 2019-nCoV has moderate transmissibility and relatively low pathogenicity. There is no reason to foster panic with exaggerated language.’ The Sunday Times is suggesting that there was a scientific consensus around the fact that this was going to be a pandemic – that is plainly untrue.

Claim - It was unusual for the Prime Minister to be absent from COBR and is normally chaired by the Prime Minister.
Response - This is wrong. It is entirely normal and proper for COBR to be chaired by the relevant Secretary of State. Then Health Secretary Alan Johnson chaired COBR in 2009 during H1N1. Michael Gove chaired COBR as part of No Deal planning. Transport Secretary Grant Shapps chaired COBR during the collapse of Thomas Cook. Mr Hancock was in constant communication with the PM throughout this period.
At this point the World Health Organisation had not declared COVID19 a ‘Public Health Emergency of International Concern’, and only did so only 30 January. Indeed, they chose not to declare a PHEIC the day after the COBR meeting.
Examples of scientific commentary from the time:
Prof Martin Hibberd, Professor of Emerging Infectious Disease, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, said:
“This announcement is not surprising as more evidence may be needed to make the case of announcing a PHEIC. WHO were criticised after announcing the pandemic strain of novel H1N1_2009, when the virus was eventually realised to have similar characteristics to seasonal influenza and is perhaps trying to avoid making the same mistake here with this novel coronavirus. To estimate the true severity of this new disease requires identifying mild or asymptomatic cases, if there are any, while determining the human to human transmission rate might require more evidence.”
Dr Adam Kamradt-Scott, Senior Lecturer in International Security Studies, University of Sydney, said: “Based on the information we have to date, the WHO Director-General’s decision to not declare a Public Health Emergency of International Concern is not especially surprising. While we have seen international spread of the virus, which is one of the criteria for declaring a PHEIC, the cases in those countries do not appear to have seeded further local outbreaks. If that was to start to occur, it would constitute a greater concern but at the moment the outbreak is largely contained within China.”
Claim - 'Imperial’s Ferguson was already working on his own estimate — putting infectivity at 2.6 and possibly as high as 3.5 — which he sent to ministers and officials in a report on the day of the Cobra meeting on January 24. The Spanish flu had an estimated infectivity rate of between 2.0 and 3.0, so Ferguson’s finding was shocking.’
Response - Infectivity on its own simply reveals how quickly a disease spreads, and not its health impact. For that, it is necessary to know about data such as associated mortality/morbidity. It is sloppy and unscientific to use this number alone to compare to Spanish flu.
Claim - No10 ‘played down the looming threat’ from Coronavirus and displayed an ‘almost nonchalant attitude…for more than a month.’
Response - The suggestion that the government’s attitude was nonchalant is wrong. Extensive and detailed work was going on in government because of Coronavirus, as shown above.
Claim - By the time the Prime Minister chaired a COBR meeting on March 2 ‘the virus had sneaked into our airports, our trains, our workplaces and our homes. Britain was on course for one of the worst infections of the most insidious virus to have hit the world in a century.'
Response - This virus has hit countries across the world. It is ridiculous to suggest that coronavirus only reached the UK because the Health Secretary and not the PM chaired a COBR meeting.
Claim - 'Failure of leadership' by anonymous senior advisor to Downing Street.
Response - The Prime Minister has been at the helm of the Government response to Covid 19, providing the leadership to steer his Ministerial team through a hugely challenging period for the whole nation. This anonymous source is variously described as a ‘senior adviser to Downing Street’ and a ‘senior Downing Street adviser’. The two things are not the same. One suggests an adviser employed by the government in No10. The other someone who provides ad hoc advice. Which is it?
Claim - The government sent 279,000 items of its depleted stockpile of protective equipment to China during this period in response to a request for help from the authorities there.
Response - The equipment was not from the pandemic stockpile. We provided this equipment to China at the height of their need and China has since reciprocated our donation many times over. Between April 2-April 15 we have received over 12 million pieces of PPE in the UK from China.
Claim - Little was done to equip the National Health Service for the coming crisis in this period.
Response - This is wrong. The NHS has responded well to Coronavirus, and has provided treatment to everyone in critical need. We have constructed the new Nightingale hospitals and extended intensive care capacity in other hospitals.
Claim - Among the key points likely to be explored are why it took so long to recognise an urgent need for a massive boost in supplies of personal protective equipment (PPE) for health workers; ventilators to treat acute respiratory symptoms; and tests to detect the infection.
Response - The Department for Health began work on boosting PPE stocks in January, before the first confirmed UK case.
  • Discussions on PPE supply for COVID-19 began w/c 27 January (as part of Medical Devices and Clinical Consumables), with the first supply chain kick-off meeting on 31 January. The first additional orders of PPE was placed on 30 January via NHS Supply Chain’s ‘just-in-time contracts’. BAU orders of PPE were ramped up around the same date.
  • Friday, 7 February, the department held a webinar for suppliers trading from or via China and the European Union. Over 700 delegates joined and heard the Department’s requests to carry out full supply chain risk assessments and hold onto EU exit stockpiles where they had been retained.
  • Monday, 10 February, the department spoke with the major patient groups and charities to update them on the situation regarding the outbreak and to update them on the steps it was taking to protect supplies.
  • Tuesday, 11 February, the department wrote to all suppliers in scope of the Covid 19 supply response work – those trading from or via China or the EU – repeating the messages from the webinar and updating suppliers on the current situation relating to novel coronavirus.
  • The NHS has spare ventilator capacity and we are investing in further capacity.
Claim - Suggestion that ‘lack of grip’ had the knock-on effect of the national lockdown being introduced days or even weeks too late, causing many thousands more unnecessary deaths.
Response - The government started to act as soon as it was alerted to a potential outbreak. Mr Hancock was first alerted to Covid 19 on 3 January and spoke to Departmental officials on 6th Jan before receiving written advice from the UK Health Security Team. He brought the issue to the attention of the Prime Minister and they discussed Covid 19 on 7 January.
The government’s scientific advisory groups started to meet in mid-January and Hancock instituted daily meetings to grip the emerging threat. We have taken the right steps at the right time guided by the scientific evidence.
Claim - Scientists said the threat from the coming storm was clear and one of the government’s key advisory committees was given a dire warning a month earlier than has previously been admitted about the prospect of having to deal with mass casualties.
Response - The government followed scientific advice at all times. The WHO only determined that COVID 19 would be a global pandemic on 11 March. Claiming that there was scientific consensus on this is just wrong. Sage met on January 22 but the first NERVTAG meeting was held on 13 January (NERVTAG is the New and Emerging Respiratory Virus Threats Advisory Group – see here https://www.gov.uk/government/groups/new-and-emerging-respiratory-virus-threats-advisory-group ).
Claim - The last rehearsal for a pandemic was a 2016 exercise codenamed Cygnus, which predicted the health service would collapse and highlighted a long list of shortcomings — including, presciently, a lack of PPE and intensive care ventilators.
Response - The Government has been extremely proactive in implementing lessons learnt around pandemic preparedness, including from Exercise Cygnus. This includes being ready with legislative proposals that could rapidly be tailored to what became the Coronavirus Act, plans to strengthen excess death planning, planning for recruitment and deployment of retired staff and volunteers, and guidance for stakeholders and sectors across government.
Claim - By February 21 the virus had already infected 76,000 people, had caused 2,300 deaths in China and was taking a foothold in Europe, with Italy recording 51 cases and two deaths the following day. Nonetheless NERVTAG, one of the key government advisory committees, decided to keep the threat level at “moderate”.
Response - This is a misrepresentation of what the threat level is. This is about the current public health danger – and on February 21, when the UK had about a dozen confirmed cases, out of a population of over 66 million, the actual threat to individuals was moderate. In terms of the potential threat, the government was clear – on 10 February the Secretary of State declared that “the incidence or transmission of novel Coronavirus constituted a serious and imminent threat to public health”.


Click to expand...

Tory PR getting more aggressive in an attempt to hide their massive failings. Nothing new there.
 
Wumminator said:
So the ONS have released a graph suggesting that the amount dying at the moment is more significant than normal.

But some of these aren’t related to Corona virus.
What is more likely? That these deaths are corona related but not counted or that other people aren’t getting checked for things they need? Maybe the NHS can’t handle the extra strain?
Click to expand...


Isn't it something like 1,600 people per day die in the UK on average every day? Before the pandemic.
I'm not sure where I read that figure so it's quite likely to be wrong. Has anyone seen average figures of how many people are currently dying every day in the UK for all reasons not just covid19? I'd be interested to see how much of a leap it has been seen as though the vast majority of covid19 deaths are stated to be "people with underlying health problems".

Disclaimer - yes, even 10-20 additional deaths is horrible, I know. Also, I doubt this is really considered important info for the government to be relaying at a time like this, best to focus on the matter at hand.
 
fergieisold said:
Also I think the time period for deaths might be because of the 'R0' value which is quite high, meaning lots of people get infected really quickly. You end up with a tsunami of very sick patients. Flu has a much lower R0.
Click to expand...

That shows the importance of us getting a vaccine added to a percentage of the population hopefully gaining a natural immunity. The R0 in 1918 of H1N1 was up to 2.8, with the strain in 2009 being about 1.6. The difference is thought to be due to vaccinations and antivirals.
 
BootsyCollins said:
It might not end up having a much higher mortality rate than a really bad flu season, but thats not really whats important imo, for two reasons.

One, because of no immunity or vaccine, it spreads so much faster and more than the flu. Many many more people will get this in one wave so many more people will die.

Two, even with a low mortality rate it still seems that many more gets a much more severe illness from this even if they survive. So the strain on hospitals will be much bigger.
Click to expand...

This is something harder to get information on. How many people get really sick compared to a severe flu for example. The death rate could be low but doesn't mean it won't put you in hospital.
 
Revaulx said:
Probably all gone bust.

I used to audit a factory in Leigh that supplied all M&S’ swimming costumes. It closed down as soon as M&S stopped sourcing from the UK.
Click to expand...

M&S and many others stopped sourcing the 'rag trade' as it was known in Britain, many moons ago. Specialist clothes manufacturers still exits in the UK, making uniforms, overalls, tabards, aprons etc. but would guess these are flat out now making PPE and/or body bags!
The problems with the offer from small companies is that the volume they can produce is low and to improve their capacity would take a lot of investment, not only in equipment but in skilled sewing machinists, piece work specialists, over-lockers etc. there just isn't the time right now. Also some companies are saying to the Government basically give me a free loan to update all my equipment and I'll turn out your PPE... eventually!

On the PPE and on the TESTING front we are suffering from the conversion over the last 30 or so years of our economy to 80% services and 20% manufacture/construction (almost inverse Pareto) balance. This pandemic and of course... sssh don't mention it.. Brexit, will make us review this 'balance' in the future.
 
fergieisold said:
Public Health England estimates that on average 17,000 people have died from the flu in England annually between 2014/15 and 2018/19. However, the yearly deaths vary widely from a high of 28,330 in 2014/15 to a low of 1,692 in 2018/19. Public Health England does not publish a mortality rate for the flu.

Source: https://fullfact.org/health/coronavirus-compare-influenza/

There's a big range, but COVID-19 has only just reached an average flu. Still a fair bit to go before it kills as many as a bad flu season. Death rate of around 0.1% for COVID seems like a possibility for COVID-19, but we'll have to wait to see what comes out in the fullness of time.
Click to expand...

The annual death rates from flu are calculated at the end of the epidemic. The most optimistic possible take on where the uk is now would be half way through. So you can double the current total - at the very least - if you want an idea of total deaths by the end of it.

Which means the UK is already on target for more deaths due to covid than the worst annual flu epidemic ever. And that’s despite this lockdown. Doesn’t bear thinking about the death toll if life had continued as normal (which is what happens during flu epidemics)
 
Alabaster Codify7 said:
Isn't it something like 1,600 people per day die in the UK on average every day? Before the pandemic.
I'm not sure where I read that figure so it's quite likely to be wrong. Has anyone seen average figures of how many people are currently dying every day in the UK for all reasons not just covid19? I'd be interested to see how much of a leap it has been seen as though the vast majority of covid19 deaths are stated to be "people with underlying health problems".

Disclaimer - yes, even 10-20 additional deaths is horrible, I know. Also, I doubt this is really considered important info for the government to be relaying at a time like this, best to focus on the matter at hand.
Click to expand...
756.jpg
 
Alabaster Codify7 said:
Isn't it something like 1,600 people per day die in the UK on average every day? Before the pandemic.
I'm not sure where I read that figure so it's quite likely to be wrong. Has anyone seen average figures of how many people are currently dying every day in the UK for all reasons not just covid19? I'd be interested to see how much of a leap it has been seen as though the vast majority of covid19 deaths are stated to be "people with underlying health problems".

Disclaimer - yes, even 10-20 additional deaths is horrible, I know. Also, I doubt this is really considered important info for the government to be relaying at a time like this, best to focus on the matter at hand.
Click to expand...

There is on a weekly basis - here: ONS weekly deaths (up to 10th April)

Basically the average of the last 5 years for the week ending 3rd April was 10,305. For the week ending 10th of April it was 10,520. This year the corresponding figures are 16,350 and 18, 516.

Of those 6k and 8k increases only 3,475 (April 3rd) and 6,213 (April 10th) were attributed to Covid19.

Edit: (This is only for England and Wales).
 
Wumminator said:
So the ONS have released a graph suggesting that the amount dying at the moment is more significant than normal.

But some of these aren’t related to Corona virus.
What is more likely? That these deaths are corona related but not counted or that other people aren’t getting checked for things they need? Maybe the NHS can’t handle the extra strain?
Click to expand...

Relevant, perhaps:



 
170 Covid-19 deaths in Belgium today, 89 of them confirmed cases in the hospital, others in nursing homes. So the 50% stat seems still correct.

5998 people have died in Belgium because of Covid19, only 48% of them are confirmed patients and died in a hospital, others have died in a nursing home.
 
sullydnl said:
Relevant, perhaps:



Click to expand...


An Irish journo did something similar by totting up death notices on rip.ie and identified a huge spike in all cause mortality compared to this time last year, over and above known covid mortality.

It looks as though many thousands of deaths due to covid are getting missed all over the world.

Which either means the virus is a lot more deadly than we thought (if you’re a pessimist like me) or the prevalence is many times higher than we thought (if you’re an optimist like @Regulus Arcturus Black). Most likely the truth is in the middle. It’s more deadly and more prevalent than current estimates predict.
 
Ekkie Thump said:
There is on a weekly basis - here: ONS weekly deaths (up to 10th April)

Basically the average of the last 5 years for the week ending 3rd April was 10,305. For the week ending 10th of April it was 10,520. This year the corresponding figures are 16,350 and 18, 516.

Of those 6k and 8k increases only 3,475 (April 3rd) and 6,213 (April 10th) were attributed to Covid19.

Edit: (This is only for England and Wales).
Click to expand...


Cheers man, very helpful!
 
Austria is reopening schools and restaurants (until 11 pm) on 15 May. All shops and services that are still closed will be allowed to open from 1 May.
 
buchansleftleg said:
The thought is that the nightingale hospitals are there to deal with a second wave that is likely to happen when restrictions are lifted. Their role is to deal with the large numbers who may need additional oxygen support to prevent them deteriorating and needing ICU support. These "empty" hospitals are essentially in a shakedown phase getting ready to deal with it.

The initial plan was that, if necessary, these would be staffed with Squaddies manually bagging people to give them some additional air. Thankfully common sense has prevailed and they have sourced the cpap connectors to do that job for them.
Click to expand...
I thought the government plan was to keep the lockdown in place until a second peak was no longer a possibility. So if we're near or even past the peak now then surely all these extra hospital beds are unnecessary.
 
King Eric 7 said:
I thought the government plan was to keep the lockdown in place until a second peak was no longer a possibility. So if we're near or even past the peak now then surely all these extra hospital beds are unnecessary.
Click to expand...

A second (and possibly, third, fourth, fifth) peak is inevitable. Only herd immunity (vaccine or 60% population immune after infection) will prevent another peak. Which won’t happen for at least another year. So more peaks are bound to happen. All our efforts now will be on keeping those peaks as small as possible (testing, tracing, social distancing and repeated lockdowns whenever necessary)

The second wave of Spanish flu killed many more people than the first.
 
King Eric 7 said:
I thought the government plan was to keep the lockdown in place until a second peak was no longer a possibility. So if we're near or even past the peak now then surely all these extra hospital beds are unnecessary.
Click to expand...

Capacity is key and other peaks are going to happen. There is no such thing as an unnecessary hospital bed as it stands currently.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.