Corona Virus main thread

[Well b back 3,190]

4 minutes ago, Teemu’s right foot said:

I’ve no feelings either way about them. What I have strong feelings about is the damage that lockdown has done and the many unnecessary lives it has cost and will continue to take.  A recent government paper put the number at up to 200k because of locking down 

Do you have any links for these various bits of information ?
The other day you were telling us a vaccine that has been around for ten years was only developed in March and on another thread you are suggesting Manchester hospitals are full because they only have a few beds allocated for Covid. I am not disputing what you are saying but would love to see the evidence ?

As a side note regards other illnesses I don’t know what you do as if you have cancer and you catch Covid, that seems to be pretty much a death sentence. Birmingham Heartlands stroke wards have just had to empty and move all patients as there was a positive that ( alledgedly ) would have seen all those catching it also dead. So I have no idea what you do, what would be your proposal ? You are sheltered in Norfolk, here in The Midlands it’s everywhere.
The average age in ICU at the moment is 60. Because of this many will come out alive, however being denied those beds or for others early treatment would see a large proportion dead. We also as yet have no idea what will happen to anyone who has had Covid in the future. Read up on Long Covid.

Dont take this as me questioning what you are saying, I am genuinely interested to see these links. 

 

 

 

[Teemu’s right foot 53]

15 minutes ago, Well b back said:

Do you have any links for these various bits of information ?
The other day you were telling us a vaccine that has been around for ten years was only developed in March and on another thread you are suggesting Manchester hospitals are full because they only have a few beds allocated for Covid. I am not disputing what you are saying but would love to see the evidence ?

As a side note regards other illnesses I don’t know what you do as if you have cancer and you catch Covid, that seems to be pretty much a death sentence. Birmingham Heartlands stroke wards have just had to empty and move all patients as there was a positive that ( alledgedly ) would have seen all those catching it also dead. So I have no idea what you do, what would be your proposal ? You are sheltered in Norfolk, here in The Midlands it’s everywhere.
The average age in ICU at the moment is 60. Because of this many will come out alive, however being denied those beds or for others early treatment would see a large proportion dead. We also as yet have no idea what will happen to anyone who has had Covid in the future. Read up on Long Covid.

Dont take this as me questioning what you are saying, I am genuinely interested to see these links. 

 

 

 

Read the thread I posted earlier on twitter regarding hospital occupancy.

https://www.newschain.uk/news/cancer-research-uk-really-worried-about-impact-covid-19-patients-seeking-treatment-39370?amp=1

[ricardo 7,349]

51 minutes ago, Bagster said:

Have you met Ivor Cummins

Analysis for Ireland

https://youtu.be/PRu6Mgb49Uk

Yes, seen it.

Governments seem to be in panic mode.

[Yellow Fever 3,749]

14 minutes ago, Teemu’s right foot said:

Read the thread I posted earlier on twitter regarding hospital occupancy.

https://www.newschain.uk/news/cancer-research-uk-really-worried-about-impact-covid-19-patients-seeking-treatment-39370?amp=1

From your own link.

"A spokeswoman for the NHS in England said: “Cancer treatments are now back to usual levels and routine screening services have now safely resumed across the country.

“A recent study by ONS (Office for National Statistics) and others estimated that the brief pause in screening would in fact have a very modest impact on health.”

[Teemu’s right foot 53]

4 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

From your own link.

"A spokeswoman for the NHS in England said: “Cancer treatments are now back to usual levels and routine screening services have now safely resumed across the country.

“A recent study by ONS (Office for National Statistics) and others estimated that the brief pause in screening would in fact have a very modest impact on health.”

So you choose to ignore everything that cancer research U.K have said in that article and highlight the only part the spokeswoman for the N.H.S has said!?

ignored the estimated 3 million that have missed cancer screening since March?

the 350,000 plus missed referrals 

the 16,000 fewer lung cancer referrals since March 

Across the UK, around 31,000 fewer patients started treatment between April and July – a 26% reduction compared with the same timeframe in 2019.
 

CRUK said the biggest monthly fall in urgent referrals was in April – during the peak of the first wave of the pandemic.

While the numbers are steadily improving, they are still lower than before lockdown, it added.
 

you ignored all that and only highlighted what an Nhs spokeswoman said

 

[Well b back 3,190]

6 minutes ago, Teemu’s right foot said:

Read the thread I posted earlier on twitter regarding hospital occupancy.

https://www.newschain.uk/news/cancer-research-uk-really-worried-about-impact-covid-19-patients-seeking-treatment-39370?amp=1

That’s avoided the questions ? This has been known about for a long time but 200,000 deaths during lockdown though ?. I would love to see the Goverment link you have referred to as that’s scary. Like I say I appreciate that there maybe other consequences but my question is what do you do ? Do you deny Covid patients treatment ? As I understand it if you are on a cancer ward and Covid spreads to it ( Edinburgh is a good example ) you likely die, so I am saying I really don’t know what you do I was asking for your thoughts.

You also we’re telling people the other day the Oxford vaccine had been developed in a few months. I don’t think that’s correct so if you could provide a link that would be great as I understood it was a 10 year old vaccine that had been reprogrammed to attack the spike.

You have also said on another thread, Manchester hospitals are not really full of Covid patients as only a very few beds have been allocated for Covid. If this is true that is horrifying and questions our doctors and nurses that are on the brink of going under, so a link would be great and I will send that to my local MP. It is estimated that there were nearly a thousand admissions a day a few days ago, how are the hospitals empty ?

The guy you keep quoting this is a repeat of what he was saying 2 months ago. In reply to your thoughts my personal thoughts would be if nine doctors told me I had cancer and I needed X treatment and another came along and said I don’t think you have cancer but I can’t be sure so don’t do anything, I know who I would listen to, but that is just my personal opinion.

If you think Covid is just about the death figures read up on some of the reports regards long Covid, then tell me only those over 80 should worry about it.

 

[Well b back 3,190]

1 minute ago, Teemu’s right foot said:

So you choose to ignore everything that cancer research U.K have said in that article and highlight the only part the spokeswoman for the N.H.S has said!?

ignored the estimated 3 million that have missed cancer screening since March?

the 350,000 plus missed referrals 

the 16,000 fewer lung cancer referrals since March 

Across the UK, around 31,000 fewer patients started treatment between April and July – a 26% reduction compared with the same timeframe in 2019.
 

CRUK said the biggest monthly fall in urgent referrals was in April – during the peak of the first wave of the pandemic.

While the numbers are steadily improving, they are still lower than before lockdown, it added.
 

you ignored all that and only highlighted what an Nhs spokeswoman said

 

Have you not asked us to ignore 95% of the experts and believe a person out on a limb.

[Teemu’s right foot 53]

1 hour ago, Well b back said:

That’s avoided the questions ? This has been known about for a long time but 200,000 deaths during lockdown though ?. I would love to see the Goverment link you have referred to as that’s scary. Like I say I appreciate that there maybe other consequences but my question is what do you do ? Do you deny Covid patients treatment ? As I understand it if you are on a cancer ward and Covid spreads to it ( Edinburgh is a good example ) you likely die, so I am saying I really don’t know what you do I was asking for your thoughts.

You also we’re telling people the other day the Oxford vaccine had been developed in a few months. I don’t think that’s correct so if you could provide a link that would be great as I understood it was a 10 year old vaccine that had been reprogrammed to attack the spike.

You have also said on another thread, Manchester hospitals are not really full of Covid patients as only a very few beds have been allocated for Covid. If this is true that is horrifying and questions our doctors and nurses that are on the brink of going under, so a link would be great and I will send that to my local MP. It is estimated that there were nearly a thousand admissions a day a few days ago, how are the hospitals empty ?

The guy you keep quoting this is a repeat of what he was saying 2 months ago. In reply to your thoughts my personal thoughts would be if nine doctors told me I had cancer and I needed X treatment and another came along and said I don’t think you have cancer but I can’t be sure so don’t do anything, I know who I would listen to, but that is just my personal opinion.

If you think Covid is just about the death figures read up on some of the reports regards long Covid, then tell me only those over 80 should worry about it.

 

The government article on lockdown costing up to 200,000 lives is posted already on the telegraph link.

as for the Manchester hospital numbers there is differing opinions on that with little certainty on what’s happening 

it will be interesting in time to see how the average age of deaths caused because of lockdown compares to the average age of death because of covid if such figures are ever known or released. I’d wager the average age because of lockdown will be far, far lower than Covid

edit I never said 200k deaths during lockdown I said because of lockdown. You’ve added the during yourself

Edited October 20, 2020 by Teemu’s right foot

[Yellow Fever 3,749]

29 minutes ago, Teemu’s right foot said:

So you choose to ignore everything that cancer research U.K have said in that article and highlight the only part the spokeswoman for the N.H.S has said!?

ignored the estimated 3 million that have missed cancer screening since March?

the 350,000 plus missed referrals 

the 16,000 fewer lung cancer referrals since March 

Across the UK, around 31,000 fewer patients started treatment between April and July – a 26% reduction compared with the same timeframe in 2019.
 

CRUK said the biggest monthly fall in urgent referrals was in April – during the peak of the first wave of the pandemic.

While the numbers are steadily improving, they are still lower than before lockdown, it added.
 

you ignored all that and only highlighted what an Nhs spokeswoman said

 

I read the whole article. Its pretty reasonable but the main issue seems to be people being too scared to present or go to hospital.

The NHS / ONS comment was the last two paragraphs ... and a reasonable summary.

WBB answers the rest quite well. 

In truth the NHS has to prioritise those that present and need immediate help. Its for those reasons we need to keep Covid-19 rates very low.

[Well b back 3,190]

2 hours ago, Teemu’s right foot said:

The government article on lockdown costing up to 200,000 lives is posted already on the telegraph link.

as for the Manchester hospital numbers there is differing opinions on that with little certainty on what’s happening 

it will be interesting in time to see how the average age of deaths caused because of lockdown compares to the average age of death because of covid if such figures are ever known or released. I’d wager the average age because of lockdown will be far, far lower than Covid

edit I never said 200k deaths during lockdown I said because of lockdown. You’ve added the during yourself

Still not getting it.

You were advising that the vaccine has been developed in a few months where is that link please, I still believe it’s a 10 year old vaccine. ?

I am really concerned about your claim of very few Covid beds being allocated and if this really is true ( I think you quoted 9 beds allocated for Covid in one of Manchester’s main hospitals ). If this is correct we as a country need to be challenging the Goverment and I will be at the front of the quee if you give me the evidence.

As Yellow Fever says of course the more Covid positives the more people will die as if they were put near to any risk of Covid, their chances would not be very good. The hospitals haven’t closed these units, people don’t want to go. I maybe misunderstanding you but are you saying people with Covid just need to be left to die ? As that is what happens with no treatment. I am not asking if it is correct some people will die that wouldn’t have, but what is your solution ? How do we get people back to the hospitals.

If you check the come on Sarah thread you will see that guy 2 months ago saying the same things ‘ there will be no 2nd wave it is finished ‘. Looks like a second wave to me.
Like most I will hold my hands up and say I have no idea what the future holds. But without treatments I can’t see full stadiums or crowds for most of next year. Only history will tell and as I have mentioned before, come live in the Midlands, I garuntee you will see Covid in a different light.

[Van wink 2,994]

So NHS Professionals drop me a little line tonight-

“As you all know NHS Professionals are currently working hard to increase capacity in Level 2, but additional support is also required to meet the increasing demand.

 

From 21st October 2020 changes will be introduced across the worker community to provide the additional capacity to meet this surge in demand. A number of experienced agents from Serco and Sitel will assist with Index Case tracing from tomorrow, focusing primarily on gathering information required for Contact tracing. 

 

These agents will work closely with NHS Professional colleagues, including Team Leaders and Clinical Leads, who will be available to provide advice as required, exactly as they do currently for NHSP Clinical Caseworkers.”

 

So pleasing to see more work for Serco and Sitel, perish the thought of using local capacity!!!

I wonder who these “experienced”people are and where have they come from. Unbelievable.

[Well b back 3,190]

3 hours ago, Teemu’s right foot said:

The government article on lockdown costing up to 200,000 lives is posted already on the telegraph link.

as for the Manchester hospital numbers there is differing opinions on that with little certainty on what’s happening 

it will be interesting in time to see how the average age of deaths caused because of lockdown compares to the average age of death because of covid if such figures are ever known or released. I’d wager the average age because of lockdown will be far, far lower than Covid

edit I never said 200k deaths during lockdown I said because of lockdown. You’ve added the during yourself

I have the NHS spreadsheet and the following are daily Coronavirus cases admitted to hospital in the NW hospitals as declared by the NHS themselves. These figures are Covid only.

18/10 - 276

17/10 - 272

16/10 - 196

15/10 - 258

14/10 - 223

13/10 - 244

12/10 - 220

11/10 - 209

10/10 - 177

 

[Well b back 3,190]

Here is the U.K. spreadsheet. Not sure if it will come out as it is so big.

https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/10/COVID-19-daily-admissions-20201020.xlsx

[Aggy 752]

4 hours ago, Teemu’s right foot said:

 

 

Not quite the point you’re making, but similar...

There have been a large number of articles in the last few days, none of which, unsurprisingly, have been mentioned on here despite all being published or referred to in articles which were available on (or from links on) the bbc or national newspaper websites. 

All of the below deal with the position in which 16-24 year olds will find themselves in a matter of weeks. Various articles on unemployment in 16-24 year olds and the idea that related poverty will lead to health issues.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/17/coronavirus-1-million-young-britons-face-jobs-crisis-within-weeks Headline self explanatory.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8852491/Report-says-16-24-year-olds-struggle-work-furlough-scheme-ends-month.html headline self explanatory.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/oct/20/sage-experts-warn-of-impact-of-covid-policies-on-young-generation-z-harm-pandemic-coronavirus Sage wading in. Reports youth unemployment already on track to be highest since early 1980s (before we even consider any future lockdown or circuit breaker).

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54545158 Former homelessness advisor to the government war in families won’t be able “to put shoes on children”.

"I can't impress upon you enough that I think we are heading into an unprecedented period. We're already in it and it's going to get worse. And it needs a more cross-government and cross-society response." 
 

 

Prof Russell Viner, the president of the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, who is on Sage’s children’s task and finish working group, said: “This is a generation under threat. It will be catastrophically, disproportionately hit and harmed by the loss of economic and social opportunities as a direct result of the pandemic. We have taken money out of our children’s futures by racking up this huge national debt.

“We have to face up to the fact that we not only took away the protective net we throw around our children by closing schools and redeploying the children’s health workforce, but then we mortgaged off their futures for the current reality.”.

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn05871/  300,000 people aged 16-24 who were in employment in March are now unemployed (about a third). Expect many more when furlough ends this month. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-54543654 modelling suggesting two week circuit break could push economic recovery back by a whole year.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1342697/coronavirus-pandemic-unemployment-poverty-charities -

https://www.health.org.uk/news-and-comment/charts-and-infographics/unemployment - unemployment and poverty cuts years off life expectancy. Posters keep talking about your grandparents dying if we don’t stop the spread. Adds a slightly different light when you consider some forms of stopping the spread might knock 10 years off your grandkids’ life.

What were the buzz words on here? Sleepwalking into disaster, and heads in sand?

 

Edited October 20, 2020 by Aggy

[Teemu’s right foot 53]

7 hours ago, Well b back said:

Still not getting it.

You were advising that the vaccine has been developed in a few months where is that link please, I still believe it’s a 10 year old vaccine. ?

I am really concerned about your claim of very few Covid beds being allocated and if this really is true ( I think you quoted 9 beds allocated for Covid in one of Manchester’s main hospitals ). If this is correct we as a country need to be challenging the Goverment and I will be at the front of the quee if you give me the evidence.

As Yellow Fever says of course the more Covid positives the more people will die as if they were put near to any risk of Covid, their chances would not be very good. The hospitals haven’t closed these units, people don’t want to go. I maybe misunderstanding you but are you saying people with Covid just need to be left to die ? As that is what happens with no treatment. I am not asking if it is correct some people will die that wouldn’t have, but what is your solution ? How do we get people back to the hospitals.

If you check the come on Sarah thread you will see that guy 2 months ago saying the same things ‘ there will be no 2nd wave it is finished ‘. Looks like a second wave to me.
Like most I will hold my hands up and say I have no idea what the future holds. But without treatments I can’t see full stadiums or crowds for most of next year. Only history will tell and as I have mentioned before, come live in the Midlands, I garuntee you will see Covid in a different light.

Again you’re adding things that I haven’t said. I questioned if the Manchester situation is what has been claimed as the article shows. I didn’t say anything about the numbers of beds there, you’ve added that yourself. That was a different hospital that bbc news said was full in the week which was then said to have been that number. . As for a second wave, maybe it is, maybe it isn’t. With continued testing of over 300k tests per day and an incredibly high false positives rate the virus could never, ever go away as positive results are not necessarily positive cases

Edited October 21, 2020 by Teemu’s right foot

[Teemu’s right foot 53]

6 hours ago, Aggy said:

Not quite the point you’re making, but similar...

There have been a large number of articles in the last few days, none of which, unsurprisingly, have been mentioned on here despite all being published or referred to in articles which were available on (or from links on) the bbc or national newspaper websites. 

All of the below deal with the position in which 16-24 year olds will find themselves in a matter of weeks. Various articles on unemployment in 16-24 year olds and the idea that related poverty will lead to health issues.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/17/coronavirus-1-million-young-britons-face-jobs-crisis-within-weeks Headline self explanatory.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8852491/Report-says-16-24-year-olds-struggle-work-furlough-scheme-ends-month.html headline self explanatory.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/oct/20/sage-experts-warn-of-impact-of-covid-policies-on-young-generation-z-harm-pandemic-coronavirus Sage wading in. Reports youth unemployment already on track to be highest since early 1980s (before we even consider any future lockdown or circuit breaker).

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54545158 Former homelessness advisor to the government war in families won’t be able “to put shoes on children”.

"I can't impress upon you enough that I think we are heading into an unprecedented period. We're already in it and it's going to get worse. And it needs a more cross-government and cross-society response." 
 

 

Prof Russell Viner, the president of the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, who is on Sage’s children’s task and finish working group, said: “This is a generation under threat. It will be catastrophically, disproportionately hit and harmed by the loss of economic and social opportunities as a direct result of the pandemic. We have taken money out of our children’s futures by racking up this huge national debt.

“We have to face up to the fact that we not only took away the protective net we throw around our children by closing schools and redeploying the children’s health workforce, but then we mortgaged off their futures for the current reality.”.

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn05871/  300,000 people aged 16-24 who were in employment in March are now unemployed (about a third). Expect many more when furlough ends this month. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-54543654 modelling suggesting two week circuit break could push economic recovery back by a whole year.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1342697/coronavirus-pandemic-unemployment-poverty-charities -

https://www.health.org.uk/news-and-comment/charts-and-infographics/unemployment - unemployment and poverty cuts years off life expectancy. Posters keep talking about your grandparents dying if we don’t stop the spread. Adds a slightly different light when you consider some forms of stopping the spread might knock 10 years off your grandkids’ life.

What were the buzz words on here? Sleepwalking into disaster, and heads in sand?

 

Thank you. It’s seems reading through this thread that the majority on here have their heads buried in the sand over the repercussions of what we’ve done by shutting down the economy and practically closing the nhs for other problems. Again I’ll get asked and questioned over this but it’s been said that over 26 million gp appointments have been missed, just scale that down to what percentage will be serious and the repercussions of that. The economy will be absolutely tanked soon, again a serious disaster for us all. Covid is far from the only problem in town but on this thread it appears nothing else matters...

[Bagster 101]

12 hours ago, ricardo said:

Yes, seen it.

Governments seem to be in panic mode.

What our Doris panicking!!

Have you seen the flu and pneumonia death statistics?

England and Wales

14/15.  28330

15/16.  11 875

16/17.   18 009

17/18.    26 408

19/20.       394

Hooray Doris Marx Johnson and his chums have managed to cure the flu!

Genius 🤣

Pneumonia deaths England and Wales

14/15  30k plus

15/16. 30k plus

17/18 30 k plus

19/20 13619

Unbelievable Mr Handcock has only been health minister for 5 mins

Genius 🤣

Convid 19 84 rolls on and the masses lap it up, they have lost their minds!

If you are under 70, you have 0.05 chance of dying and people are screaming for mandatory vaccines.....

🤡🌍

[Bagster 101]

But don't worry the boys from Davos have got our backs

We can have Health passports now

Thanks to our elite friends from the World Economic Forum

Papers please

[Bagster 101]

Average lifespan in the UK is 81

Average age of death in the UK from covid 19 is 82!

This is what we are destroying our economy for!!

It's ****

Keep your eyes on the IMF and the central banks

 

[Yellow Fever 3,749]

Thought you all might like this if you want to talk about 'risk'. Note the paper is this September

https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3259

Basically it concludes roughly CV risk of dying is about the same per age as your annual 'normal ' no covid risk (So if you have a 1% chance of dying from something else you would also have an extra 1% chance of dying from Covid).

I've pulled out a little comment for the disbelievers. Good luck with an extra 600,000 deaths ! 

"This agreement between the estimated covid-19 risks and the average annual mortality rates suggests that, based on the figures provided by the Imperial College team in March 2020, being infected with SARS-CoV-2 contributes about a year’s worth of extra risk of dying for those aged over 20 and less than half this risk for those aged under 20. There is a simple reality check on this figure. Ferguson et al7 estimated that if the virus went completely unchallenged, around 80% of people would be infected and there would be around 510 000 deaths. So if everyone got infected we would presumably expect 510 000×100/80=637 500 deaths, which is fairly close to the “normal” annual total of around 616 000 deaths in the UK (2018)."

Sadly none of this answers the questions as to how to stop the NHS (and by extension society and the overall  economy) being overwhelmed much as per above if we try not to contain it. The most successful economies challenged by Covid have indeed fully suppressed the virus

Edited October 21, 2020 by Yellow Fever

[sonyc 5,492]

2 hours ago, Teemu’s right foot said:

Thank you. It’s seems reading through this thread that the majority on here have their heads buried in the sand over the repercussions of what we’ve done by shutting down the economy and practically closing the nhs for other problems. Again I’ll get asked and questioned over this but it’s been said that over 26 million gp appointments have been missed, just scale that down to what percentage will be serious and the repercussions of that. The economy will be absolutely tanked soon, again a serious disaster for us all. Covid is far from the only problem in town but on this thread it appears nothing else matters...

Your points made make a very valuable contribution TRF. The economic repurcussions are going to be severe. From my more mature age (...and I'm talking age here rather than what I've tried to gain in life experience and knowledge) point of view, I have two conflicting opinions:

Firstly, for my own children and their future (and therefore read into this every other younger economically active person), I want them to flourish and not be laid off / made redundant. This is the main worry for me. I've worked 40 plus years to help people realise their potential in a variety of ways, into jobs, through new education, through psychotherapy, through better housing / welfare. It's natural therefore I want the economy open.

Secondly, I enjoy life and have no wish for it to end (yet!) or for older grandparents either.

I think therefore some posters are worried quite naturally (on a number of fronts and possibly number more than my two main concerns) and views are simply reflections of their current experiences. No-one is sticking their head in the sand but simply responding to events, policy changes. Nor is it just the UK government (and I'm certainly not an apologist) but globally countries are trying to handle things.

So it's just debate. And keep posting evidence because it's interesting and it's more needed if you feel the majority on this thread want lockdowns (I don't believe at all that is the case though). Overall, we need to keep asking questions. When someone posts so authoritatively I'm someone who naturally tends to question things like that because I don't believe in fixed positions really. It's better to be open minded, questioning. Otherwise we simply head into civil war type territory like Brexit. Do keep posting links if you're minded.

[sonyc 5,492]

"Sadly none of this answers the questions as to how to stop the NHS (and by extension society and the overall  economy) being overwhelmed much as per above if we try not to contain it. The most successful economies challenged by Covid have indeed fully suppressed the virus"

 

And this makes the point rather well that you don't have an economy if you don't have health. Ergo, we have to control the pandemic so that we have a health service for all other health issues.

Edited October 21, 2020 by sonyc

[Yellow Fever 3,749]

2 minutes ago, sonyc said:

"Sadly none of this answers the questions as to how to stop the NHS (and by extension society and the overall  economy) being overwhelmed much as per above if we try not to contain it. The most successful economies challenged by Covid have indeed fully suppressed the virus"

 

And this makes the point rather well that you don't have an economy if you don't have health. Ergo, we have to control the pandemic even if nothing else, so that we have a health service for all other health issues.

Agreed SC. Nobody wants lockdowns or restrictions but we need practical alternatives (so far none) else there will be no health service for anybody unless you have significant private funds for anything! 

[Well b back 3,190]

Hi TRF

What I have said all along is there are 2 different arguments, the economy and health we each have the one that matters to us as our top priority. China for instance managed both, but in the West would we keep to a proper lockdown and then real social distancing and have our neighbour thrown in prison for breaking the rules for a good reason, probably not. Here we have argued over both and ( in my opinion ) not succeeded with either. Unfortunately by not dealing with either this is where mine and your problems are. I appreciate people will die from other things, but I don’t know the answer as if you have cancer for instance and catch Covid that it is not good, as now shown on many cancer wards. The economy will be in a total mess, but what do you do ? Let the people up North starve whilst telling them they can’t work to protect the Southern cities. The only answer I know is get the virus under control is the only way to stop people dieing, becoming unwell, shortening people’s lives ( nobody knows yet the after effects of having Covid ), and to start repairing the damage that has been done to the economy. 
Our views ( and both should be respected ) are totally different. Mine is we should have locked down a month earlier, we should have come out of lock down a month later, we should have had a circuit break 4 weeks ago and track and trace should have been up and running properly. My conclusion and method had we have suppressed the virus then our economy could have recovered. The other view of course is we should never have done that, we should have let the virus run through the population, kept everything open and the economy would not have suffered. Only my view but there would still have been the excess deaths amongst for instance cancer sufferers as if they caught Covid what would their chances be ?. The likelihood is the mental health of just as many would have suffered being terrified of the disease and would the economy really not have suffered, I don’t know. So for me I have no idea which way was best. Trump tested a Nation by using the let it run through the population theory, we will see how that went down with the people in 2 weeks. Brazil has done the opposite still I wonder what their results are on people being tested for cancer, or having it catching Covid and dieing. I suspect ( but I don’t know for certain ) they are worse than ours.

So my point is nobody knows which way is correct, that is something for history to tell us. I was asking your solutions as I was genuinely interested. To me my solution is getting the vaccine out there, but even then we are talking next summer before it takes enough effect to alter where we are, and ( again my opinion ) people giving false info on the vaccine will delay people having it. Those most at risk even after being vaccinated won’t be as protected as somebody young, so who knows until there are treatments that work where we will go. You may see an extreme where people not vaccinated are banned from certain countries, you may be told unless you have your green pass you cannot enter a football stadium or a pub, again only history will tell. Unlikely in this country but you may just be told you have to have the vaccine, you will certainly be told that in some countries such as Russia, China and North Korea.

What has worried me therefore is the information, which I may have misunderstood or maybe from somebody with a similar user name. Did I understand correctly from another thread regards only 8 beds being allocated for Covid in Manchester ? If so I would like to pass that to my MP as that means many English people will unnecessarily die from Covid. Again there was a comment on the come on Sarah that indicated the vaccine has only been in development for a few months, this as I understand it is not correct and some of the vaccines are not even a chemical ( if that’s the word ) they are an electric shock to stimulate certain parts of the body to fight Covid.

Your views are respected by me as I have learnt to live with the virus, but I probably contribute 1/2 of what I used to contribute to the economy and that will remain the same until I have my injection. I no longer visit pubs and restaurants, I no longer go into shops for a quick spur of the moment visit to blow a tenner. I don’t travel to different places in my free time, and I don’t even pay £12 for a haircut, my wife does it.

Unfortunately my view remains, that this Goverment has made poor decisions regards the suppression of the virus, and because of that the economy has gone t**s and many people with other diseases have died because the virus has not been suppressed. And before you think that’s political I have voted Tory all my life ( including last year ) but never again whilst Johnson is in charge.

Hope that clears the air.
 

[horsefly 4,287]

I really do recommend that everyone watches the Sky News documentary: "Hotspots: Global Pandemic". It collates contemporary news reports charting the development of the pandemic around the world. The overwhelming view I personally took from it was just how utterly irresponsible Johnson and his government were in delaying the lock-down. And this isn't a view gained in hindsight. One Italian mayor interviewed at a time when his country was being overwhelmed, but when we had only a handful of cases, is seen pleading with the UK government to act now or else face a crisis worse than the Italians. Hopefully, a genuine independent judicial inquiry will call many to account for this egregious dereliction of duty.

Sadly, whatever course of action we take now will amount to a constant gruelling process of fire-fighting the multitude outbreaks of economic and healthcare catastrophes until a vaccine becomes available. If only we had a government like that in New Zealand which reacted to the outbreak with immediate virus supressing actions. If only!

 

[Indy 3,286]

Interesting times, add our two trillion debts, inflation starting to rise, global warming challenges and leading governments lead by more nationalistic types, with the race issues, fundamentalist killers, countries pulling away from each other’s, less tolerance all indications pointing the inevitable war scenario often brought on after massive global austerity.
 

The reality of modern life is very distressing and the horizon for our youngsters doesn’t look like one I would want to live through.

I just hope the next generation can look to become more sensible than us, but having seen their response in general to Covid I have my doubts! It’s their world and the will be paying off this national debt for years to come, they will have to learn to live with global impacts of weather, rising temperatures, massive fires, over population and major changes to lifestyles.

[sonyc 5,492]

1 hour ago, Well b back said:

Unfortunately my view remains, that this Goverment has made poor decisions regards the suppression of the virus, and because of that the economy has gone t**s and many people with other diseases have died because the virus has not been suppressed. And before you think that’s political I have voted Tory all my life ( including last year ) but never again whilst Johnson is in charge.

Well, you may not have to wait too long Wbb if the reports I read prove correct. Johnson is rumoured to be stepping down in the first part of 2021. I suppose he can then tick off the 'prime minister' position off his list to be world king. I am quite sure he will go on to earn more like Cameron and Blair before in after dinner / corporate speeches and media opportunities. Maybe Sunak will be more your kind of Tory leader? He looks the most likely. Cannot see Gove, Hancock, Raab, Patel being acceptable (then, are they to anyone?). I think the PM role has not proved such a wheeze that Johnson expected. If he does decide to go he leaves behind him quite some legacy!

[ricardo 7,349]

1 hour ago, Indy said:

Interesting times, add our two trillion debts, inflation starting to rise, global warming challenges and leading governments lead by more nationalistic types, with the race issues, fundamentalist killers, countries pulling away from each other’s, less tolerance all indications pointing the inevitable war scenario often brought on after massive global austerity.
 

The reality of modern life is very distressing and the horizon for our youngsters doesn’t look like one I would want to live through.

I just hope the next generation can look to become more sensible than us, but having seen their response in general to Covid I have my doubts! It’s their world and the will be paying off this national debt for years to come, they will have to learn to live with global impacts of weather, rising temperatures, massive fires, over population and major changes to lifestyles.

I prefer to look on the bright side and nobody gets out of life alive.

Keep smiling, you're a long time dead.👍

[nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159]

keep smiling if you can, this virus will win if it keeps finding new ways to morph. Feast your eyes on this

https://nextstrain.org/ncov/global

[Aggy 752]

4 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

Thought you all might like this if you want to talk about 'risk'. Note the paper is this September

https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3259

Basically it concludes roughly CV risk of dying is about the same per age as your annual 'normal ' no covid risk (So if you have a 1% chance of dying from something else you would also have an extra 1% chance of dying from Covid).

I've pulled out a little comment for the disbelievers. Good luck with an extra 600,000 deaths ! 

"This agreement between the estimated covid-19 risks and the average annual mortality rates suggests that, based on the figures provided by the Imperial College team in March 2020, being infected with SARS-CoV-2 contributes about a year’s worth of extra risk of dying for those aged over 20 and less than half this risk for those aged under 20. There is a simple reality check on this figure. Ferguson et al7 estimated that if the virus went completely unchallenged, around 80% of people would be infected and there would be around 510 000 deaths. So if everyone got infected we would presumably expect 510 000×100/80=637 500 deaths, which is fairly close to the “normal” annual total of around 616 000 deaths in the UK (2018)."

Sadly none of this answers the questions as to how to stop the NHS (and by extension society and the overall  economy) being overwhelmed much as per above if we try not to contain it. The most successful economies challenged by Covid have indeed fully suppressed the virus

A few (lengthy) points on this.

1. On the article you’ve linked to:

“Basically it concludes roughly CV risk of dying is about the same per age as your annual 'normal ' no covid risk (So if you have a 1% chance of dying from something else you would also have an extra 1% chance of dying from Covid).”

The quote you’ve put in your post doesn’t say that.

It says “being infected with covid” raises the risk. If you’re not infected, your risk doesn’t increase by that amount.

The modelling further down your post is done on the basis the virus was left “completely unchallenged”, in which case it might (only might) infect 80 per cent of the population.

On the basis we aren’t leaving it “completely unchallenged” and haven’t done since March, you can instantly chop chunks off that 600,000.

The 200,000 deaths T referred to was based on the lockdowns we’ve had already. So further lockdowns = more deaths from collateral things as a result of lockdown.

And T’s 200,00 deaths didn’t even take long term deaths from increased poverty into account. So we can bump that 200,000 up even if there are no further lockdowns, and bump it up again if we have additional lockdowns.

The 600,000 vs 200,000 deaths argument suddenly not quite as convincing. Exactly why the other things need to start being taken more seriously.

 

Point 2.

When I referred to sleepwalking, this sort of response is basically what I meant. Not specifically aimed at you YF but generally the whole public.

T posted a post about 200,000 people potentially dying. It got around twelve responses and not one of them talked about ways we might avoid hundreds of thousands of deaths. 

Rather than discuss trying to avoid 200,000 deaths caused as a result of lockdown policies, or the dozens of thousands (perhaps more) of deaths in young people medium to long term which my links refer to, the response was to find some statistics to try and in effect downplay the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people or show that they were somehow less important/ less urgent than covid deaths.

T didn’t say we should let all old people die. He didn’t say we should scrap all restrictions. He said that people only seem focussed on covid deaths and not potentially hundreds of thousands of other deaths. And your responses rather support that opinion.

This isn’t specific to this messageboard. The whole nation has become so scared that anything discussing anything other than the number of covid deaths that occurred yesterday is simply dismissed.

How many times have we heard “follow the science”, but the people saying it don’t even bother to factor in “the science” relating to hundreds of thousands of deaths due to lockdown and the state of the economy for years to come? 

How many times did we hear the government failed to follow SAGE advice re lockdown? Then compare that to how many times people have mentioned other SAGE advisors warning about the long term health impacts that lockdown will have on the young.

Sonyc says it’s a discussion and people haven’t got their heads in the sand, but it’s not a discussion. Any discussion (not just on here but generally in the public sphere) about anything other than covid deaths gets ignored and downplayed because covid deaths are the only thing that matter too often.

As i said, extremely concerned that we are sleepwalking into a horrendous situation for millions of people, particularly young people, for years (possibly decades) to come.
 

Point 3. 

On the wider point of avoiding nhs being overwhelmed, Sir Richard Leese commented recently that he is pretty shocked we still haven’t got proper mandatory shielding in place. Before VW tells me my grandma’s about to die again, Leese didn’t say we should have no other restrictions.
 

He made the point that closing pubs and shops won’t alone stop the spread. Asking the most vulnerable to shield won’t alone stop the spread. They would however both help, but we’re currently only enforcing (or even asking people to follow) the one that will result in people losing jobs and health issues which arise from that. Yes, elderly and vulnerable will suffer from mental health issues as a result of shielding, but so will millions of others from losing jobs.

Leese also made the point that whilst other restrictions are still needed to help curb the spread, it is still the case that the extremely large majority of deaths are elderly people, and average age of icu patient is retirement age (hospitalisations lower at c.60). So yes we need other things to help stop the spread as well, but shielding would significantly help reduce the number of hospital admissions. I’m not sure why we haven’t reintroduced this. Even in tier three shielding isn’t mandatory.

Some will say it’s unfair to introduce shielding for, say, 85 year olds in areas with low rates of infection. But others will wonder which is more likely to lead to deaths - a 25 year old going to a covid secure place of work, or two 85 year olds meeting up indoors with their two school aged grandkids, son and daughter in law who have both been into work.

Doesn’t have to be one of shielding or jobs - why not both?