Corona Virus main thread

[Ian 1,129]

9 minutes ago, Bill said:

oh dear, it just gets worse ...............................however here is a clue

look at the two dates

if not, coming down to your level

14th July 1969 man has never landed on the moon

20th July 1969  man lands on the moon

can you grasp which one determines much of what follows , and that it is not 'revisionist' to use the latter date as the qualifying date/action when discussing whether man has landed on the moon, or not

 

 

 

I'm not sure if you are actually this logically challenged, but at the risk of engaging with the terminally dim, I will take your argument in good faith.

I have no doubt Chinese scientists and doctors were well aware of how contagious this virus is during early Jan/late December. It seems impossible for some not to have been aware given just how distinctive the symptoms are, and how highly contagious the virus clearly is.

I also have absolutely no doubt that good people in China tried to warn the world, and demonstrate that the virus should be taken very seriously. We seem to completely agree here.

However, this does not explain, or invalidate, why the WHO - presumably in conjunction with Chinese state scientists/doctors, officially reported no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission on Jan 14th. Indeed, it was not until several months later that they officially declared this a pandemic.

Given that this is a massively contagious virus, and that the WHO seem to be one of these supra-national funded organisations, full of doctors and scientists that we should absolutely trust, I think it is absolutely fair to suggest that the official "facts" coming out of China were not leaning towards the truth of this virus, or helping early preparations for other countries, including the UK, that would shortly be hit.

Therefore, I do not see the evidence to suggest that it was patently obvious that this novel virus was going to cause such hugely tragic events given "facts from China", and that it is pure negligence on the part of various European governments to not take it seriously.

I have no doubt there have been failings in the UK response to this pandemic, and without question people should be held to account when the full facts are made aware. However, this should absolutely not be mutually exclusive to also criticising the Chinese and WHO response during the absolutely critical initial stages either.

[Ian 1,129]

8 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

Can you find that email ? 

It doesn't say that. Taiwan was asking for information (they were aware of early cases in Wuhan). They did not report person to person transmission.

https://www.ft.com/content/2a70a02a-644a-11ea-a6cd-df28cc3c6a68

[Ian 1,129]

14 minutes ago, Bill said:

I should have lie down - you are now contradicting yourself

having previously talked about what the Chines were saying - you know they we should trust them

you are as bad as poor hand crank - he used to get himself tied into similar knots, before disappearing and coming back as another name

 

 

I'm guessing from the interesting nature of your grammar and spelling you've been on the sauce tonight Bill. However, if you look at the original response I made to Herman's post about us ignoring the "facts from China"; indeed, such facts that you gallantly rushed to defend. you will probably see that I've been pretty consistent.

Perhaps the obvious contradictions, and obsession with changing usernames, lie much closer to home?

Good night, hope the head isn't too sore in the morning!

[Indy 3,296]

54 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

Excess deaths to date. Compare us to say Germany. Yes there are many more months to run but so far our figures don't bear well with such comparisons.

This isn't a contentious point.

Yes a better benchmark if all deaths are recorded in that month, there are lots delays in numbers registered in a month.

Additionally it could be other factors such as the age range who caught the virus might be different in the countries or the population spread of elderly in care homes here in the uk, where more older relatives live with families in Germany, who knows, it’s very hard to assign a like for like to determine how bad we’ve done by benchmarking totally different culture.

Thats why I say to review the numbers to see excess death average to previous UK years! Then we can see the reality of excessive death rates and apportion correct blame.

[BigFish 1,986]

4 hours ago, Barbe bleu said:

I guess the real value in the statistics will come when we are the other side of a vaccine.   For all we know even germany might only be holding back aand delaying an inevitable tide.

The real value of the statistics is as part of a comprehensive strategy, of which any vacine would also form a part.

The problem is the government doesn't have a strategy.

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

1 hour ago, Ian said:

However, this does not explain, or invalidate, why the WHO - presumably in conjunction with Chinese state scientists/doctors, officially reported no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission on Jan 14th. Indeed, it was not until several months later that they officially declared this a pandemic.

I think its clear from this section of your post that you don't understand what the difference is between an epidemic and a pandemic.

An infectious disease or virus is not at 'pandemic' status until it has spread throughout the world and across continents, it wasn't a pandemic by definition on January 14th as it was limited to a couple of hotspots in a couple of countries. 

Furthermore, the WHO does not 'declare a pandemic' as that's not a disease classification, and it hasn't done so. The Director General of the WHO first used that word on 11th March, but the highest level of official disease classification was given to coronavirus on 30th January when it was declared a global health emergency.

That's the highest possible level of classification, and it was given the day before that the first people were diagnosed with Coronavirus in Italy.

Of course, I didn't know any of the above before this pandemic started... but it is easy to research and learn about, I do advise doing a little bit of your own research before attempting to sound authoritative on the subject as you are actually just spouting nonsense and spreading disinformation. 

Edited May 5, 2020 by TeemuVanBasten

[Terminally Yellow 2,448]

15 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

I do advise doing a little bit of your own research before attempting to sound authoritative on the subject as you are actually just spouting nonsense and spreading disinformation. 

Talk about pot, kettle, black!

[Barbe bleu 818]

1 hour ago, Yellow Fever said:

I will quickly answer as you've made the case for z values as the sd would be enormous and February in your example would not stand out !

Have a good night.  

You would make a terrible teacher.

I think have worked it out though.   

Tell me what you get for the z scores if I have 300 deaths and then 210 and in the preceding 3 years the numbers for each month were 100, 90 and 110 and then 10, 9 and 11

[wcorkcanary 4,334]

4 hours ago, keelansgrandad said:

Mind you, who would of thought you could get killed by a water buffalo in Wales?

There is a little Mozzarella  hotspot in Toonsbridge, Co Cork, why not Wales.

 

Can you make Mozzarella from Whales milk?

[wcorkcanary 4,334]

7 hours ago, The Real Buh said:

I literally don’t care mate

Dont believe  that either.

[Herman 9,746]

I see the main supporters of Boris Johnson are angry about the morals of some other idiot. I wonder what they are trying to distract attention away from?? 

 

[ricardo 7,380]

42 minutes ago, Herman said:

I see the main supporters of Boris Johnson are angry about the morals of some other idiot. I wonder what they are trying to distract attention away from?? 

 

Thats the problem with statisticians Herman. If there is a 50 / 50 chance of getting caught out then 9 times out of 10 they will🤣🤣🤣

Statisticians do it with standard deviations 😉

[Van wink 2,994]

 

7 hours ago, Barbe bleu said:

My position on this is largely unchanged we lost the battle before it started as we have under-invested in public health (as opposed to medical services though the same applies) for years if not decades and si.y could not contain it

 

Nail on head. Public health is an easy target when savings are being looked for, spending can be cut on public health with no immediate obvious adverse consequences, I know from experience.

Public health has been under funded for years, you only need to look around you at the general health of our population to see that, and be under no doubt if we do come out of this with the worst outcome in Europe it will be in part due to our under investment over decades in Public health. Unhealthy people are much more likely to find this infection fatal. 

[The Real Buh 3,432]

8 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

Can you find that email ? 

It doesn't say that. Taiwan was asking for information (they were aware of early cases in Wuhan). They did not report person to person transmission.

https://www.ft.com/content/2a70a02a-644a-11ea-a6cd-df28cc3c6a68

[T 190]

Look like it will be announced today that football will resume in Germany from either 15 or 21 subject to strict controls including a 2 week quarantine period before games. 
 

Generally gradual  lifting of restrictions subject to maintaining hygiene and distance measures. The exact measures and timing will be decided locally with the proviso that the number of new infections in the last seven days must be less than 50 per 100,000 of population which would require increased restrictions being imposed again. 
 

[T 190]

14 minutes ago, Van wink said:

 

Nail on head. Public health is an easy target when savings are being looked for, spending can be cut on public health with no immediate obvious adverse consequences, I know from experience.

Public health has been under funded for years, you only need to look around you at the general health of our population to see that, and be under no doubt if we do come out of this with the worst outcome in Europe it will be in part due to our under investment over decades in Public health. Unhealthy people are much more likely to find this infection fatal. 

Agree with both. There is little doubt that UK amongst others were poorly prepared for a pandemic and mistakes have been made. It is not helpful to deny that as many hung up on their values  are doing but accept that you can’t change the past and learn and take actions to change the future. That must come from society not just government. Obesity is clearly also an associated epidemic that needs to be addressed. This is not about socialism but addressing counter productive failures within capitalism. 

[The Real Buh 3,432]

2 minutes ago, T said:

Agree with both. There is little doubt that UK amongst others were poorly prepared for a pandemic and mistakes have been made. It is not helpful to deny that as many hung up on their values  are doing but accept that you can’t change the past and learn and take actions to change the future. That must come from society not just government. Obesity is clearly also an associated epidemic that needs to be addressed. This is not about socialism but addressing counter productive failures within capitalism. 

This is very true. We need something different. 

[T 190]

16 minutes ago, The Real Buh said:

“Ze rulez vill be followed!”

im not criticising Germany by any extent but they seem to have inadvertently the perfect national psyche to deal with a pandemic

It’s a massive generalisation but yes being risk adverse and being obsessed with planning and organisation and order are not always good characteristics but they are helpful characteristics for dealing with a pandemic. 

[Bill 1,788]

8 hours ago, Ian said:

I'm not sure if you are actually this logically challenged, but at the risk of engaging with the terminally dim, I will take your argument in good faith.

I have no doubt Chinese scientists and doctors were well aware of how contagious this virus is during early Jan/late December. It seems impossible for some not to have been aware given just how distinctive the symptoms are, and how highly contagious the virus clearly is.

I also have absolutely no doubt that good people in China tried to warn the world, and demonstrate that the virus should be taken very seriously. We seem to completely agree here.

However, this does not explain, or invalidate, why the WHO - presumably in conjunction with Chinese state scientists/doctors, officially reported no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission on Jan 14th. whereas

"also said that human-to-human transmission would not be surprising given our experience with SARS, MERS and other respiratory pathogens.  "

Indeed, it was not until several months later that they officially declared this a pandemic or in reality a pandemic requires certain conditions which were not reached - then it was declared a pandemic - and is less than two months really several months as others would presume ?

Given that this is a massively contagious virus, and that the WHO seem to be one of these supra-national funded organisations, full of doctors and scientists that we should absolutely trust, I think it is absolutely fair to suggest that the official "facts" coming out of China were not leaning towards the truth of this virus, or helping early preparations for other countries, including the UK, that would shortly be hit.

Another lie- check the WHO's official site (below)

Therefore, I do not see the evidence to suggest that it was patently obvious that this novel virus was going to cause such hugely tragic events given "facts from China", and that it is pure negligence on the part of various European governments to not take it seriously.

Another lie as you are trying to drag European countries into the UK's failure

I have no doubt there have been failings in the UK response to this pandemic, and without question people should be held to account when the full facts are made aware. However, this should absolutely not be mutually exclusive to also criticising the Chinese and WHO response during the absolutely critical initial stages either.

Another rag bag of misinformation and lies from hand crank - as shown

As a look at the WHO site will confirm

https://www.who.int/news-room/detail/27-04-2020-who-timeline---covid-19

you might also care to note what hand crank posted yesterday,

which was challenged "showed there was very low risk of human transmission"

has now been changed to "officially reported no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission on Jan 14th"

the man lies every time he posts, whatever name he uses - have a check on what the WHO did actually say be clicking on the above a link

 

Edited May 6, 2020 by Bill

[Van wink 2,994]

11 minutes ago, T said:

Agree with both. There is little doubt that UK amongst others were poorly prepared for a pandemic and mistakes have been made. It is not helpful to deny that as many hung up on their values  are doing but accept that you can’t change the past and learn and take actions to change the future. That must come from society not just government. Obesity is clearly also an associated epidemic that needs to be addressed. This is not about socialism but addressing counter productive failures within capitalism. 

It should not be about politics full stop, many will disagree but imo the provision of health services in their broadest sense should be the function of an executive governed by a cross party committee. There needs to be an agreed long term strategy, five maybe ten year depending on the condition, with guaranteed funding and proper independent review. Short term target driven provision needs to be scrapped so that a much broader strategy can be delivered which recognises the value of prevention as well as treatment. Short termism is one of the main reasons why we have never developed a proper strategy for social care. Using the NHS as a political football has wasted huge sums of money to satisfy the vanity of various politicians with constant restructuring and reorganisations wasting a fortune which could have been better spent on care.

[Ian 1,129]

7 hours ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

I think its clear from this section of your post that you don't understand what the difference is between an epidemic and a pandemic.

An infectious disease or virus is not at 'pandemic' status until it has spread throughout the world and across continents, it wasn't a pandemic by definition on January 14th as it was limited to a couple of hotspots in a couple of countries. 

Furthermore, the WHO does not 'declare a pandemic' as that's not a disease classification, and it hasn't done so. The Director General of the WHO first used that word on 11th March, but the highest level of official disease classification was given to coronavirus on 30th January when it was declared a global health emergency.

That's the highest possible level of classification, and it was given the day before that the first people were diagnosed with Coronavirus in Italy.

Of course, I didn't know any of the above before this pandemic started... but it is easy to research and learn about, I do advise doing a little bit of your own research before attempting to sound authoritative on the subject as you are actually just spouting nonsense and spreading disinformation. 

Thank you for the correction, happy to bow to your superior knowledge on this one. I took a lot of reports I read at the time at face value - indeed reputable newspaper articles talk about the WHO declaring a global pandemic, and it's more than fair to say that I probably should have researched more deeply. Would it be fairer to say that the WHO did not start using the term "pandemic" in official communications until that date?

That said, this wasn't really the point I was making. As you seem to have researched this in much more depth than me, I would be very interested if you think it's surprising the WHO/Chinese government found no evidence of human-to-human transmission on January 14th, and whether this had any sort of impact on global preparations at an absolutely crucial time?

[The Real Buh 3,432]

8 minutes ago, Ian said:

Thank you for the correction, happy to bow to your superior knowledge on this one. I took a lot of reports I read at the time at face value - indeed reputable newspaper articles talk about the WHO declaring a global pandemic, and it's more than fair to say that I probably should have researched more deeply. Would it be fairer to say that the WHO did not start using the term "pandemic" in official communications until that date?

That said, this wasn't really the point I was making. As you seem to have researched this in much more depth than me, I would be very interested if you think it's surprising the WHO/Chinese government found no evidence of human-to-human transmission on January 14th, and whether this had any sort of impact on global preparations at an absolutely crucial time?

Mate, mate, mate, mate. It’s best to walk away on this one. I slept on it and decided engaging with a lost, defeated labour supporter gearing up to fully support the Chinese government is not a smart thing to do. 

Edited May 6, 2020 by The Real Buh

[Ian 1,129]

1 minute ago, The Real Buh said:

Mate, mate, mate, mate. It’s best to walk away on this one. I slept in it and decided engaging with a lost, defeated labour supporter gearing up to fully support the Chinese government is not a smart thing to do. 

Having reflected on this, you are absolutely right. Must be some mental gymnastics required to continually blame one faction, whilst steadfastly defending every other, even when there is circumstantial evidence of extremely dubious behaviour. Not much point in engaging in good faith when views are so dogmatically entrenched.

Luckily I have a busy day ahead today so getting drawn in is less likely. Stay safe and have a good one!

[Yellow Fever 3,763]

46 minutes ago, The Real Buh said:

https://www.ft.com/content/2a70a02a-644a-11ea-a6cd-df28cc3c6a68

Really not interested in these false false spun politically motivated arguments. Facts be out.

Even the Taiwanese CDC is more honest. Look it up.

However - 

In Taipei on Saturday, Health Minister Chen Shih-chung quoted the text of the Dec. 31 email written in English that the government sent to the WHO.

“News resources today indicate that at least seven atypical pneumonia cases were reported in Wuhan, China,” Chen said, reading the email.

“Their health authorities replied to the media that the cases were believed not to be SARS, however the samples are still under examination, and cases have been isolated for treatment,” he continued.

 

“I would greatly appreciate if you have relevant information to share with us.”

In a statement sent to Reuters on Saturday, the WHO said, “We have asked how they communicated this to us, because we are only aware of that one email that makes no mention of human-to-human transmission, but they haven’t replied.”

Chen said any medical professional would know the circumstances requiring isolation, and added that the WHO was quibbling over the wording.

“If being treated in isolation is not a warning, then what is?” he asked.

 

Taiwan's first case I think was 21st January. Although there are close personal ties between Taiwan and China (many families are historically 'split')  they were in no position to 'Confirm' person to person transmission until then!

Of course we were all worried about such transmission as a possibility - WHO and everybody elses and indeed preventive precautionary measures were taken by many - Taiwan and China!

Anyway -  I don't usually paste large chuck into post but here is the Taiwanese Official response - 

Any way I have real job to do....

 

1. The Taiwan Centers for Disease Control (Taiwan CDC) learned from online sources that there had been at least seven cases of atypical pneumonia in Wuhan, China. In China, the term “atypical pneumonia” is commonly used to refer to SARS, a disease transmitted between humans caused by coronavirus.

2. Owing to its experience with the SARS epidemic in 2003, Taiwan vigilantly kept track of information about the new outbreak. On December 31, 2019, Taiwan sent an email to the International Health Regulations (IHR) focal point under the World Health Organization (WHO), informing WHO of its understanding of the disease and also requesting further information from WHO. Given the lack of clarity at the time, as well as the many rumors that were circulating, Taiwan’s aim was to ensure that all relevant parties remained alert, especially since the outbreak occurred just before the Lunar New Year holiday, which typically sees tremendous amounts of travel. To be prudent, in the email we took pains to refer to atypical pneumonia, and specifically noted that patients had been isolated for treatment. Public health professionals could discern from this wording that there was a real possibility of human-to-human transmission of the disease. However, because at the time there were as yet no cases of the disease in Taiwan, we could not state directly and conclusively that there had been human-to-human transmission.

3. The Taiwan CDC also contacted the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention in a bid to obtain more information. However, in response to our inquiries, the WHO IHR focal point only responded with a short message stating that Taiwan’s information had been forwarded to expert colleagues; China provided only a press release.

4. Even though Taiwan strongly suspected that human-to-human transmission of the disease was already occurring at the time, we were unable to gain confirmation through existing channels. Therefore, on the day the aforementioned email was sent to WHO, the Taiwan government activated enhanced border control and quarantine measures based on the assumption that human-to-human transmission was in fact occurring. These measures included screening passengers on flights from Wuhan prior to disembarkation.

5. In mid-January, the Taiwan CDC dispatched experts to Wuhan to gain a better understanding of the epidemic, the control measures taken there, and patients’ exposure history. Based on preliminary research, Taiwan determined that this form of pneumonia could indeed spread via human-to-human transmission.

 

[Jim Smith 2,317]

11 hours ago, The Real Buh said:

I never get ill but I had something in January that floored me. No energy, really unusual and it made its way round work. 
 

It probably wasn’t, but China knew about this for a long time and did nothing. 

I posted on this yesterday after the France story broke but it seemed to get lost amongst the excess deaths debate.

I had a horrible mystery virus in mid December. Absolutely knackered, fever for a couple of days, zero energy and a really dry cough that lasted on and off for about 4 weeks that made me dizzy and nearly pass out at times it was so bad. Went to the doctors and they just said seems like a virus, there have been a couple of nasty mystery viruses going about. Even after 2 or 3 weeks I still had days where I woke up and was exhausted all day. It was not like any normal chest infection or flu i've had. My dad caught it off me and was similarly ill himself for about 3 weeks. Its all anecdotal but there were a lot of people hit by something similar around the same time.

Its probably wishful thinking in my part that I actually have had it already but the news from France does make you wonder if there was a first and perhaps slightly less virulent wave of Covid 19 in this country at the end of last year and its somehow mutated into something a bit nastier ahead of a second wave. I will be very interested to take an antibody test when they are available/reliable.

[Bill 1,788]

23 minutes ago, Ian said:

That said, this wasn't really the point I was making. As you seem to have researched this in much more depth than me, I would be very interested if you think it's surprising the WHO/Chinese government found no evidence of human-to-human transmission on January 14th, and whether this had any sort of impact on global preparations at an absolutely crucial time?

still lying I see hand crank

so let's have a look at what WHO actually said

14 January 2020

'WHO's technical lead for the response noted in a press briefing there may have been limited human-to-human transmission of the coronavirus (in the 41 confirmed cases), mainly through family members, and that there was a risk of a possible wider outbreak. The lead also said that human-to-human transmission would not be surprising given our experience with SARS, MERS and other respiratory pathogens'

of course, you could prove me wrong by posting up evidence of your claim - but I expect as with Yellow Fever’s dismissal of Buh's lies yours is also nothing more than fabricated nonsense to distract from the governments failings

.  

 

 

"Raymond Getard

[Yellow Fever 3,763]

1 minute ago, Bill said:

still lying I see hand crank

so let's have a look at what WHO actually said

14 January 2020

'WHO's technical lead for the response noted in a press briefing there may have been limited human-to-human transmission of the coronavirus (in the 41 confirmed cases), mainly through family members, and that there was a risk of a possible wider outbreak. The lead also said that human-to-human transmission would not be surprising given our experience with SARS, MERS and other respiratory pathogens'

of course, you could prove me wrong by posting up evidence of your claim - but I expect as with Yellow Fever’s dismissal of Buh's lies yours is also nothing more than fabricated nonsense to distract from the governments failings

.  

 

 

"Raymond Getard

Lying is a bit strong Bill - 

It's more like only reading the attention grabbing 'selling'  headlines you want to read and ignoring the actual facts or small print & 'disclaimers'.

[The Real Buh 3,432]

3 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

Lying is a bit strong Bill - 

It's more like only reading the attention grabbing 'selling'  headlines you want to read and ignoring the actual facts or small print & 'disclaimers'.

I never lied, China lied and it cost lives.

[Jim Smith 2,317]

1 hour ago, T said:

Look like it will be announced today that football will resume in Germany from either 15 or 21 subject to strict controls including a 2 week quarantine period before games. 
 

Generally gradual  lifting of restrictions subject to maintaining hygiene and distance measures. The exact measures and timing will be decided locally with the proviso that the number of new infections in the last seven days must be less than 50 per 100,000 of population which would require increased restrictions being imposed again. 
 

is that a 2 week quarantine period before every game (i.e. teams will only play every 2 weeks at the end of which they will have to test clear?).

Interesting if so given that the premier league is planning to play 9 matches in 7 weeks.

[Bill 1,788]

8 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

Lying is a bit strong Bill - 

It's more like only reading the attention grabbing 'selling'  headlines you want to read and ignoring the actual facts or small print & 'disclaimers'.

afraid not

the intention was to misrepresent by lying - if I can find the evidence then so can he

especially after being shown it umpteen times

and this poster has a habit of this way way back long before he was posting as Joanna Grey was shown to be Raymond Getard - both described as quite unpleasant posters