Jump to content
Fuzzar

Corona Virus main thread

Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, Herman said:

There was a larger march in Berlin in August. It was reported on by the BBC. And it was about 970k short of a million people.😀

If these people stuck to the facts their argument may gain more traction. Start bull****ting people and you lose the audience.

Here’s both the links for you the recent demo and the August demo, looks like the numbers are decreasing, maybe they caught the virus in the August demo.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-53959552

https://www.dw.com/en/germany-thousands-protest-against-covid-19-rules-in-berlin/a-55392704

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You'll have to re edit your post back in unless he comes up with a report of a massive march that nobody has heard of. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Well b back said:

You may not know how much following I do of the vaccines, but it’s a lot lol 
It really was hopeful that it would be launched now ( Oxford and Pfizer ) not to everybody but to a certain group, then another group probably beginning December. But I really am hopeful it will be very soon. If for some reason the results are not as positive as expected for Oxford and Pfizer the U.K. is going to use what’s called human Challenge in January, which will get one of the others over the line, but they won’t be as advance with production as Oxford and Pfizer, so although we might know we will be waiting until summer for any sort of launch.

I realise there will be lots of questions ( don’t know if you saw the anti vaxer today on the main thread, his post was removed as would be on Facebook and Twitter ) but the first doses will be given to the most vulnerable, the NHS, Carers ect. That will be followed by the over 65’s then 60’s and so on. Certainly until you get below 55 I invisage people fighting to get the vaccination, I maybe wrong but I am 60 and a type 2 diabetic and a lot of my friends are of the same age are already in the theoretic quee. The difficult decisions won’t need to be taken until after that.

I keep telling myself not to get drawn into pointless discussions with those who can't see the wood for the trees.

Stick to the basic confirmed facts, ignore wishful or fanciful thinking and apply not so common sense. Sage, independent Sage all really agree on rhe way forward.

I have a huge belief in the ingenuity and competence of our global scientific community - they can and will defeat the virus. 

What I fear is the incompetence or political dallying of our politicians (and self publicists on social media) who seem peculiarly ill equipped by character & intellect to combat such a national challenge.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NHS not very happy with the article you posted up the other day @Well b back

https://www.england.nhs.uk/2020/10/nhs-and-other-professional-bodies-response-to-sunday-times/

Some very strong words from various clinicians re not running out of capacity during the main wave and not refusing treatment etc. 

Also plenty of interesting comments, in particular under the section headed “the facts” , to consider in the hospitals being overwhelmed conversation. Two of of them read:

“

  • NHS hospitals did not run out of intensive care beds, so there was never a need to refuse anyone treatment on the basis of NHS capacity.

“Throughout the Covid-19 pandemic there has in fact always been ICU capacity available. As the National Audit Office have confirmed, around the peak of Covid-19 hospital admissions on 14 April, NHS providers in England had 6,818 ventilator beds operational, of which: 2,849 (42%) were occupied by Covid-19 patients; 1,031 (15%) were occupied by other patients; and 2,938 (43%) were unoccupied.”

 

Edited by Aggy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Aggy said:

I think for your last question - if they’re vaccinated you wouldn’t need to be. In the same way I don’t get a flu jab but my partner does as she has conditions I haven’t got and is in a higher risk ‘category’ than I am. And to an extent, if you can vaccinate the vulnerable, it’s possibly even beneficial not to have everyone else vaccinated for reasons discussed by others.

If the vaccine is safe and there is enough to go around then loads of even young will get it. Loads of elderly and vulnerable people will get it - as long as it’s safe. Why wouldn’t you?

The interesting question would be if it is rushed through and there are question marks about safety -amongst the public (whether justified or not). If vulnerable people then did not take it up in enough numbers, would you force it on them?

I don’t think any government, even Trump, would be stupid enough to force people to have a vaccine the public didn’t trust. Not only because it would be political suicide, but if there was even the tiniest little question mark about safety and you forced people to have it and millions died, well, you don’t want that on your hands.

Indeed. Think of the lawsuits if a government forced people to take a vaccine that turned out to be unsafe. No government is going to risk that. Forcing is a non-starter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Herman said:

You'll have to re edit your post back in unless he comes up with a report of a massive march that nobody has heard of. 

I did lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Aggy said:

The NHS not very happy with the article you posted up the other day @Well b back

https://www.england.nhs.uk/2020/10/nhs-and-other-professional-bodies-response-to-sunday-times/

Some very strong words from various clinicians re not running out of capacity during the main wave and not refusing treatment etc. 

Also plenty of interesting comments, in particular under the section headed “the facts” , to consider in the hospitals being overwhelmed conversation. Two of of them read:

“

  • NHS hospitals did not run out of intensive care beds, so there was never a need to refuse anyone treatment on the basis of NHS capacity.

“Throughout the Covid-19 pandemic there has in fact always been ICU capacity available. As the National Audit Office have confirmed, around the peak of Covid-19 hospital admissions on 14 April, NHS providers in England had 6,818 ventilator beds operational, of which: 2,849 (42%) were occupied by Covid-19 patients; 1,031 (15%) were occupied by other patients; and 2,938 (43%) were unoccupied.”

 

Well found Aggy. So glad I started that and any other story from the papers with the magic words

If this is true no wonder the hospitals were never overwhelmed. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if this will prove to be the case. Don’t be alarmed by the initial headline it’s a circuit break not a March style lockdown. If it happens how on earth will this be presented to us. Is a circuit break inevitable ? I still think not.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/27/uk-coronavirus-death-toll-passes-60000-official-figures-show

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From that notorious left-wing propoganda machine The Telegraph:

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/coronavirus/exclusive-second-covid-wave-forecast-to-be-more-deadly-than-first/ar-BB1as1bc?ocid=msedgdhp

"Second Covid wave forecast to be more deadly than first"

 

"Downing Street is privately working on the assumption that the second wave of coronavirus will be more deadly than the first, with the death toll remaining high throughout the winter.

An internal analysis of the projected course of the second wave is understood to show deaths peaking at a lower level than in the spring but remaining at that level for weeks or even months.

It is understood that the projection – provided by the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) – has led to intense lobbying from Sir Patrick Vallance and other Government advisers for Boris Johnson to take more drastic action."

Now sit back and wait for Bagster to post more conspiritorial tosh from youtube.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Herman said:

They always seem to want to ignore this. High infection rate, high death rate and a heavy economic hit too. As you say, in a few years time they may show they got their approach right, but at the moment it isn't much better than most other places.

Sweden is being lauded by libertarians in what is often a fraudulent argument about freedom and by those who fear economic damage, which again is sometimes self-serving, albeit sometimes not. If it wasn't so serious it would be amusing to se a country usually derided by many of these people as socialism gone mad now being held up as the example to follow.

Edited by PurpleCanary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, horsefly said:

From that notorious left-wing propoganda machine The Telegraph:

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/coronavirus/exclusive-second-covid-wave-forecast-to-be-more-deadly-than-first/ar-BB1as1bc?ocid=msedgdhp

"Second Covid wave forecast to be more deadly than first"

 

"Downing Street is privately working on the assumption that the second wave of coronavirus will be more deadly than the first, with the death toll remaining high throughout the winter.

An internal analysis of the projected course of the second wave is understood to show deaths peaking at a lower level than in the spring but remaining at that level for weeks or even months.

It is understood that the projection – provided by the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) – has led to intense lobbying from Sir Patrick Vallance and other Government advisers for Boris Johnson to take more drastic action."

Now sit back and wait for Bagster to post more conspiritorial tosh from youtube.

So is it about protecting the nhs and stopping hospitals from being overwhelmed, or are we back to stopping anybody from ever dying of covid?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Aggy said:

So is it about protecting the nhs and stopping hospitals from being overwhelmed, or are we back to stopping anybody from ever dying of covid?

It's always been about protecting the NHS from being overwhelmed and thereby increasing the chance of minimising the number of deaths. It's the only rational plan that the Government could have. The real debate should be focused upon how that is achieved. I suspect many of us feel that the aim is right but the execution has all too often  been catastrophic. Bungled preparation for a pandemic (despite Cygnus), bungled late lockdown (despite seeing what was happening in Europe), bungled track and trace etc, etc.

But we are where we are, and we have to protect the NHS from collapse while we pursue an effective vaccine.

Edited by horsefly
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Well b back said:

Just like your news on the vaccine complete misinformation and fabrication.

Please will you provide the link that tells us that the government have changed policy and will vaccinate the under 18’s. 
may not be important to you but I would like to know if you have lied or if the government have changed their initial thoughts.

Ok stop with the under 18 nonsense , I never said under 18, my kids are 20 25 and 27. I still refer to them as kids.

Two , if you look at the covipass you will clearly see that if you can't prove  immunity ie you have not been vaccinated then foreign travel, sporting events etc will not be available to you.That is not much different to no jab no pay, government does not have to issue mandatory vaccinations for them to be basically be mandated by other means.

Third , the death rates can be found on the WHO 

0.23% overall

0.05% if your under 70

Incidentally , 2018 flu was .20 and we had 50 k excess deaths.

Fourthly PHE stated that from the 8th of October flu and covid will be counted as one.

But the overall point of my argument is 

THIS 70 and under death rate 0.05!!!!!!!

We are destroying our economy for this.

NOW YOU PROVE THOSE FIGURES WRONG

AND THEN TELL US WHY ARE WE DOING THIS.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, horsefly said:

It's always been about protecting the NHS from being overwhelmed and thereby increasing the chance of minimising the number of deaths. It's the only rational plan that the Government could have. The real debate should be focused upon how that is achieved. I suspect many of us feel that the aim is right but the execution has all too often  been catastrophic. Bungled preparation for a pandemic (despite Cygnus), bungled late lockdown (despite seeing what was happening in Europe), bungled track and trace etc, etc.

But we are where we are, and we have to protect the NHS from collapse while we pursue an effective virus.

How on earth are we protecting the NHS by devastating the economy?

12 billion on track and trace...how many hospitals could we build with that?

At no point were the hospitals overwhelmed in the first wave, nightingales were not really used at all.

The virus first showed up in sewage in November 2019, no social distancing, no extra washing of hands, no masks ect for months but apparently now the 2 Nd wave is going to be worse than the first.

Ok I look forward to seeing your proof

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, horsefly said:

It's always been about protecting the NHS from being overwhelmed and thereby increasing the chance of minimising the number of deaths. It's the only rational plan that the Government could have. The real debate should be focused upon how that is achieved. I suspect many of us feel that the aim is right but the execution has all too often  been catastrophic. Bungled preparation for a pandemic (despite Cygnus), bungled late lockdown (despite seeing what was happening in Europe), bungled track and trace etc, etc.

But we are where we are, and we have to protect the NHS from collapse while we pursue an effective virus.

Agreed. My problem with this article (and many similar, and the opinions that keep getting put forward by many) is that it tells us more people will die over a long period of time, it tells us how many will die, it tells us how many are dying in other countries, it tells us all about deaths and then at the very bottom it says “oh and by the way one hospital in a part of the country that’s hit really bad is getting a bit busy, but isn’t yet overwhelmed and we aren’t going to tell you whether it’s any more busy than any previous year”.

This isn’t just a case of policy / discussing lockdown vs no lockdown. It’s also about messaging to the public. Even many “sensible” (ie non conspiracy theory folk) will look at the comments on more deaths over a longer period, then look at average age of death from covid being 82, current average life expectancy being 81, and query why lockdown is needed - people dying at an age they are, statistically on average, expected to die isnt on its own going to convince people to get behind measures which increase their own risk of health problems, cause economic devastation and job losses etc.

If there is compelling evidence that hospitals will be overwhelmed, that needs to be front and foremost. That does affect everyone. The messaging needs to get back to protect the nhs. My guess is that at the moment it isn’t bad enough for that messaging to be effective and so has fallen off the radar a bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bagster said:

Ok stop with the under 18 nonsense , I never said under 18, my kids are 20 25 and 27. I still refer to them as kids.

Two , if you look at the covipass you will clearly see that if you can't prove  immunity ie you have not been vaccinated then foreign travel, sporting events etc will not be available to you.That is not much different to no jab no pay, government does not have to issue mandatory vaccinations for them to be basically be mandated by other means.

Third , the death rates can be found on the WHO 

0.23% overall

0.05% if your under 70

Incidentally , 2018 flu was .20 and we had 50 k excess deaths.

Fourthly PHE stated that from the 8th of October flu and covid will be counted as one.

But the overall point of my argument is 

THIS 70 and under death rate 0.05!!!!!!!

We are destroying our economy for this.

NOW YOU PROVE THOSE FIGURES WRONG

AND THEN TELL US WHY ARE WE DOING THIS.

 

I already did please see the link

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Aggy said:

Agreed. My problem with this article (and many similar, and the opinions that keep getting put forward by many) is that it tells us more people will die over a long period of time, it tells us how many will die, it tells us how many are dying in other countries, it tells us all about deaths and then at the very bottom it says “oh and by the way one hospital in a part of the country that’s hit really bad is getting a bit busy, but isn’t yet overwhelmed and we aren’t going to tell you whether it’s any more busy than any previous year”.

This isn’t just a case of policy / discussing lockdown vs no lockdown. It’s also about messaging to the public. Even many “sensible” (ie non conspiracy theory folk) will look at the comments on more deaths over a longer period, then look at average age of death from covid being 82, current average life expectancy being 81, and query why lockdown is needed - people dying at an age they are, statistically on average, expected to die isnt on its own going to convince people to get behind measures which increase their own risk of health problems, cause economic devastation and job losses etc.

If there is compelling evidence that hospitals will be overwhelmed, that needs to be front and foremost. That does affect everyone. The messaging needs to get back to protect the nhs. My guess is that at the moment it isn’t bad enough for that messaging to be effective and so has fallen off the radar a bit.

The more compelling figure was that the average of Covid patient on ICU was around 60 give or take a few years if I recall.

Yes 60 (similar I believe to other forms of viral pneumonia). Boris Johnson can obviously confirm that!

If there was no impact of Covid on the NHS etc until you were > average life expectancy then yes I wouldn't  be too concerned but 60 ?

The 82 figure is just to befuddle people as to the true issues. Its called grasping at straws.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bagster said:

Ok stop with the under 18 nonsense , I never said under 18, my kids are 20 25 and 27. I still refer to them as kids.

Two , if you look at the covipass you will clearly see that if you can't prove  immunity ie you have not been vaccinated then foreign travel, sporting events etc will not be available to you.That is not much different to no jab no pay, government does not have to issue mandatory vaccinations for them to be basically be mandated by other means.

Third , the death rates can be found on the WHO 

0.23% overall

0.05% if your under 70

Incidentally , 2018 flu was .20 and we had 50 k excess deaths.

Fourthly PHE stated that from the 8th of October flu and covid will be counted as one.

But the overall point of my argument is 

THIS 70 and under death rate 0.05!!!!!!!

We are destroying our economy for this.

NOW YOU PROVE THOSE FIGURES WRONG

AND THEN TELL US WHY ARE WE DOING THIS.

 

Although I’m with you in general Bags, you need to consider the impact on the hospitals, we could see more death without some control measures.

I do agree we need to be very careful not to ruin our economy which is going to be tested come our exit from the EU.

I think we’re in the final throws of this virus, three months time we’ll have a vaccination plan in place and spring will see some form of normality return.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Aggy said:

Agreed. My problem with this article (and many similar, and the opinions that keep getting put forward by many) is that it tells us more people will die over a long period of time, it tells us how many will die, it tells us how many are dying in other countries, it tells us all about deaths and then at the very bottom it says “oh and by the way one hospital in a part of the country that’s hit really bad is getting a bit busy, but isn’t yet overwhelmed and we aren’t going to tell you whether it’s any more busy than any previous year”.

This isn’t just a case of policy / discussing lockdown vs no lockdown. It’s also about messaging to the public. Even many “sensible” (ie non conspiracy theory folk) will look at the comments on more deaths over a longer period, then look at average age of death from covid being 82, current average life expectancy being 81, and query why lockdown is needed - people dying at an age they are, statistically on average, expected to die isnt on its own going to convince people to get behind measures which increase their own risk of health problems, cause economic devastation and job losses etc.

If there is compelling evidence that hospitals will be overwhelmed, that needs to be front and foremost. That does affect everyone. The messaging needs to get back to protect the nhs. My guess is that at the moment it isn’t bad enough for that messaging to be effective and so has fallen off the radar a bit.

I haven’t looked at the article but I can see from all your comments the rough angle of what it is saying.

If there are as many deaths this time around something has gone seriously wrong as although there are no absolute cures yet as I eluded to the other day and you kindly put up an nhs response to a different article we have learnt to find ways to keep the toll of deaths down. As well as this hospitals seem to have learnt ‘ how to keep open for business ‘ with icu wards divided and Covid secure areas, but mainly an almost instant test which means you can be isolated from people until they now you are Covid free. They are not even expecting monograms to be effected.
This has come at the expense this time of all non essential Procedures, if nothing else I hope everyone on here can agree these are not as serious as Covid, cancer, heart and at least equal to flu. To show how it has evolved if and when opened I understand the Nightingales will not be taking in patients when they are first admitted but will be more a recovery area, for those improving and at the end of their hospital journey.
The problem therefore to me therefore seems to be The West and the leadership many have been given. Due to our freedoms we ignored the rules and the numbers are clearly out of control. We had messages telling us to pack out the pubs, that was interpreted by the younger element it’s ok now it won’t kill us, wether your argument is for or against masks if you didn’t wear one where you should, you weren’t challenged and so the list goes on. To prove the case in reverse, care homes took drastic action and that seems to be working, hospitals also seem to have put measures in place that worked regards spread. In my opinion the likes of Trump and some of these articles we have seen as well have simply helped it get out of control.
Consequently again the lessons did not get learnt and we are making the same mistakes again and this time we won’t be halting it with a lockdown, or will we ? I don’t say that because I think there should or shouldn’t be I say it because in my opinion our leader has no idea what to do next to keep himself in power. 
In conclusion I am far more likely to catch it this time round, but far less likely to die ( I think ), so I am bloody glad I didn’t catch it in March.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Indy said:

Although I’m with you in general Bags, you need to consider the impact on the hospitals, we could see more death without some control measures.

I do agree we need to be very careful not to ruin our economy which is going to be tested come our exit from the EU.

I think we’re in the final throws of this virus, three months time we’ll have a vaccination plan in place and spring will see some form of normality return.

But therein lies the problem the likes of Bagster are advocating you don’t take the vaccine. Only guesswork but I think we will be lucky and the vast majority will ignore them, especially if their freedom of movement is effected.

As you may be aware I do a lot of work on the vaccine. Although I would hope the more vulnerable will be protected by Spring I think it will be the summer before things return to anything like they were, but that is purely guesswork as the further down the age groups we go the more resistance there will be, however when push comes to shove a huge % will have the vaccine but that is simply a guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Aggy said:

Agreed. My problem with this article (and many similar, and the opinions that keep getting put forward by many) is that it tells us more people will die over a long period of time, it tells us how many will die, it tells us how many are dying in other countries, it tells us all about deaths and then at the very bottom it says “oh and by the way one hospital in a part of the country that’s hit really bad is getting a bit busy, but isn’t yet overwhelmed and we aren’t going to tell you whether it’s any more busy than any previous year”.

This isn’t just a case of policy / discussing lockdown vs no lockdown. It’s also about messaging to the public. Even many “sensible” (ie non conspiracy theory folk) will look at the comments on more deaths over a longer period, then look at average age of death from covid being 82, current average life expectancy being 81, and query why lockdown is needed - people dying at an age they are, statistically on average, expected to die isnt on its own going to convince people to get behind measures which increase their own risk of health problems, cause economic devastation and job losses etc.

If there is compelling evidence that hospitals will be overwhelmed, that needs to be front and foremost. That does affect everyone. The messaging needs to get back to protect the nhs. My guess is that at the moment it isn’t bad enough for that messaging to be effective and so has fallen off the radar a bit.

Blimey! I think we agree almost entirely. Happy days!

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

I keep telling myself not to get drawn into pointless discussions with those who can't see the wood for the trees.

Stick to the basic confirmed facts, ignore wishful or fanciful thinking and apply not so common sense. Sage, independent Sage all really agree on rhe way forward.

I have a huge belief in the ingenuity and competence of our global scientific community - they can and will defeat the virus. 

What I fear is the incompetence or political dallying of our politicians (and self publicists on social media) who seem peculiarly ill equipped by character & intellect to combat such a national challenge.

Spot on.

To much listening to those that shout loudest and keeping them happy to keep power rather than taking difficult decisions at the right time. I agree that there are occasions where the scientists can be proved wrong, however taking in context they have been far more right than wrong.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Aggy said:

Agreed. My problem with this article (and many similar, and the opinions that keep getting put forward by many) is that it tells us more people will die over a long period of time, it tells us how many will die, it tells us how many are dying in other countries, it tells us all about deaths and then at the very bottom it says “oh and by the way one hospital in a part of the country that’s hit really bad is getting a bit busy, but isn’t yet overwhelmed and we aren’t going to tell you whether it’s any more busy than any previous year”.

This isn’t just a case of policy / discussing lockdown vs no lockdown. It’s also about messaging to the public. Even many “sensible” (ie non conspiracy theory folk) will look at the comments on more deaths over a longer period, then look at average age of death from covid being 82, current average life expectancy being 81, and query why lockdown is needed - people dying at an age they are, statistically on average, expected to die isnt on its own going to convince people to get behind measures which increase their own risk of health problems, cause economic devastation and job losses etc.

If there is compelling evidence that hospitals will be overwhelmed, that needs to be front and foremost. That does affect everyone. The messaging needs to get back to protect the nhs. My guess is that at the moment it isn’t bad enough for that messaging to be effective and so has fallen off the radar a bit.

By the way agreed. 
Are we all beginning to comprise and take the middle ground lol

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also agree with the hospital situation. Here in Leeds & Bradford Covid numbers are greater (at LGI and BRI) than last Spring but neither have stated they are overwhelmed. However they are very nervous (Both cities may be going into Tier 3 Friday).

I was reading the following article and I've shared it because I've read little about this angle (particular nutrients) but have read about vitamin D. As ever, I retain an open (or sceptical) view (naturopathy source).

https://www.primarydoctor.org/covid-19-is-a-lack-of-nutrients

She also has articles on masks and how they can be unhelpful / ill-advised (must be carefully looked after, washed every day). The link is in the article if interested.

 

Edited by sonyc
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bagster said:

How on earth are we protecting the NHS by devastating the economy?

12 billion on track and trace...how many hospitals could we build with that?

At no point were the hospitals overwhelmed in the first wave, nightingales were not really used at all.

The virus first showed up in sewage in November 2019, no social distancing, no extra washing of hands, no masks ect for months but apparently now the 2 Nd wave is going to be worse than the first.

Ok I look forward to seeing your proof

 

It is a fallacy to see protecting the NHS and protecting the economy as two separate things. If the NHS collapses and the virus runs rampant then the effects on the economy will be worse than they are now. Then you really would be talking about a long term lockdown.

Totally agree that 12 billion wasted on a useless track and trace is a scandal and I hope those responsible will be made accountble.

I think you need to talk to doctors and nurses if you don't think hospitals were pushed to the very limit. My partner is a front-line nurse so I at least have first hand knowledge on that issue. A number of hospitals declared emergencies as they had no more beds available. And the reason why Nightingale hospitals were hardly used is because there were not the trained staff available to run them. There was no gain in depleting hospital ward staff to send them to the Nightingales.

I don't understand what you are claiming is the significance of your point about the virus being detected in sewage in November 2019. Of course it starts with a few cases. The point is that infections have grown exponentially (close to a million in the UK). That's why it is worse now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, PurpleCanary said:

Sweden is being lauded by libertarians in what is often a fraudulent argument about freedom and by those who fear economic damage, which again is sometimes self-serving, albeit sometimes not. If it wasn't so serious it would be amusing to se a country usually derided by many of these people as socialism gone mad now being held up as the example to follow.

Just to add, I think there are four things one can say with certainty.

That no two pandemics are the same, so you cannot just rely on the playbook that worked, to a greater or lesser extent, last time. That no two countries are so alike that what works in one will work in another. That no definitive judgment on what was right and wrong can be made until the threat has been at least mainly eliminated. That no matter whatever policy is adopted, even if flawed, it will be no good unless applied competently. And the US and the UK are examples of where there has been lethal incompetence.

Edited by PurpleCanary
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is an interview by a  new Zealand GP with a German Doctor.

It's actually mind-blowing, if you don't watch then as far as I'm concerned you'll get what you deserve

Crimes against humanity have already started in Germany.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Well b back said:

As well as this hospitals seem to have learnt ‘ how to keep open for business ‘ with icu wards divided and Covid secure areas, but mainly an almost instant test which means you can be isolated from people until they now you are Covid free. They are not even expecting monograms to be effected.
This has come at the expense this time of all non essential Procedures, if nothing else I hope everyone on here can agree these are not as serious as Covid, cancer, heart and at least equal to flu. To show how it has evolved if and when opened I understand the Nightingales will not be taking in patients when they are first admitted but will be more a recovery area, for those improving and at the end of their hospital journey.
 

 

All sensible and largely agreed.

Another thing to consider, I think, is what we class as overwhelmed. Saying hospitals are 85 per cent or 97 per cent or 100 per cent full or whatever is only part of the story.  I posted links a while back so won’t repeat in full, but NW icus were no more overwhelmed in October 2020 than October 2019. Overall capacity in hospitals 2014-2016 was over the 85 per cent target every single quarter (likely much higher in winter months). 2013 - a third of hospitals at some point had to turn patients away because they were too full. 

On routine ops, the other point is that we have the longest waiting times ever already. You could be waiting 4-6 months for an operation and then still have it rearranged. We are pretty much always too overwhelmed to treat people quickly enough. You very rarely get diagnosed on Monday and have your op the following Wednesday - we’re too full to do that.

So we need to make sure we’re comparing figures to what they usually are. If we’re just as overwhelmed as every other year, then it doesn’t really justify lockdowns. If we’re going to be seriously overwhelmed, then perhaps it does. 

Your comments on the nightingales also sensible. I haven’t seen anything actually saying that will be the case, but did say myself some while ago that I’m hopeful we’ll be able (and it would be sensible) to use them less like Icus and more like “normal” wards to aid with capacity. This would also mean we’d need fewer staff to man them - you need more staff to be constantly putting out fires in icu than you do to monitor stable patients who you just don’t want to get any worse or who are already well on the road to recovery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, horsefly said:

It is a fallacy to see protecting the NHS and protecting the economy as two separate things. If the NHS collapses and the virus runs rampant then the effects on the economy will be worse than they are now. Then you really would be talking about a long term lockdown.

Totally agree that 12 billion wasted on a useless track and trace is a scandal and I hope those responsible will be made accountble.

"It is a fallacy to see protecting the NHS and protecting the economy as two separate things" - 100% correct, common sense tells you that, the economists are telling us that. They are two intertwined problems, and in the UK the major thing holding the the economic recovery back is not the current restrictions, though they clearly don't help, but the devasting impact on consumer confidence caused by the government's complete bungling of virtually all aspects of the crisis allied to its confusing, and often contradictory, messaging.

As for ÂŁ12billion on a dysfunctional track and trace - we definitely need a good track and trace system and we could have had one at a fraction of that cost but for the government's incompetence and their insistence on following their ideological obsessions rather use the professional expertise already in place.

Edited by Creative Midfielder
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Bagster said:

 

The virus first showed up in sewage in November 2019, no social distancing, no extra washing of hands, no masks ect for months but apparently now the 2 Nd wave is going to be worse than the first.

 

Is that in the UK? Be interested to see the article.

There was always a suggestion that London was hit earlier than imagined and that the lockdown came after the peak in a lot of its parts (hence why we are seeing the worst of it in the North now despite London not exactly being renowed as a healthy environment with healthy inhabitants).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...