Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Just checked an email from Tesco and if we are self isolating then bags will be used


"Following the Government?s advice on preventing the spread of COVID-19, if you?re self-isolating, your driver won?t be able to come into your home. But to help make things easier, although we have a bagless policy, we?ll provide clean shopping bags which your driver will use to pack your shopping for you at your door."

dbboy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> If the expectation is that 300,000 will die from

> the virus from a population of some 66,000,000,

> then they are expecting a conservative mortality

> rate 0.5% of the population, I suppose that is

> "their" worst case scenario, if you then double

> that to get a more accurate figure, that makes

> this really scary.

>

> As Boris said, "many families will lose loved

> one's before their time". Well isn't that ironic

> with the health minister and probably other

> cabinet ministers being infected, including Boris,

> remind me who's next in the chain of command? Step

> up Larry "the" Cat


The last flu pandemic was estimated to have 13,000 deaths.

https://vk.ovg.ox.ac.uk/vk/influenza-flu


But looking at these numbers (tell me if I'm wrong) they have guesstimated that 5,000 to 10,000 people have contracted this virus - no idea how many are recovered or may fall further ill but lets take the most optimistic possibility of 10,000 recovered and 10 dead (0.1 mortality).


If 35 million contract the virus at the same rate then projected deaths == 35,000 (3x the last flu pandemic) so maybe they feel that's acceptable ?


Of course that's optimistic and we may run out of ventilators and beds and have to prioritise care and also their figured of 10,000 current cases may be completely wrong or some of those may die.

We really just don't know what a major outbreak would look like in terms of mortality. China is the only insight we have at present and they built two new hospitals in just 10 days to accommodate all the patients needing ICU care that would recover. Without those hospitals, the death rate would have been higher.


Italy is experiencing a mortality rate double that of China.


But whatever the final mortality rates will show themselves to be, a mass outbreak affecting 60% of the population is going to need millions of hospital beds. We don't have them.

If you want updated figures go to https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/


It updates each time a nation declares its figures.


Italy death rate, death vs recovered is over 40%. UK has had 20 people recovered and 11 deaths...


These percentages will go down as more people recover but still higher than 1% that has been floating around.

I'm just trying to work out what the government and it's scientists are thinking - and as they said 5-10K people have contracted (=recovered?) in the UK maybe it thinks the mortality is much much less (a dangerous assumption).


We may never know their thinking though - I hope they didn't just say "sod them"

That 10K figure for the UK is just guesswork. There is never any way of knowing who gets mild symptoms, recovers at home, and never presents themselves for testing. Mortality rates have always been measured from known cases and in the case of pandemics, are finally made at the end of the pandemic. There is little point in offering unknowns as mitigating factors on known figures. It just encourages complacency. All that we know for sure, is that people are getting ill, and significant numbers are needing ICU treatment, with others ending in death. The details are changing every day, as scientists race to understand the virus and its pathway better. But we are too early in the process to know enough to say with any certainty, what awaits us.

Psara thanks for sharing this link - if you sort by deaths gives a useful perspective.

The southern hemisphere is in the main quite un-affected, the virus does not warm to hot climates, the re-timing of the London Marathon to October is significant and positive.

I do hope other big events, festivals for example The Telegraph Hill Festival will also re-schedule.

Our summer should rapidly diminish the threat and hopefully we can all then move on to the next letter in the alphabet.


This is useful ref World Map:

www.thesun.co.uk/news/11036721/coronavirus-map-far-spread/


Previously shared here:

www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30566-3


metro.co.uk/2020/03/11/telegraph-journalist-says-coronavirus-cull-elderly-benefit-economy-12383907/


Psara Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> If you want updated figures go to

> https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

>

> It updates each time a nation declares its

> figures.

>

> Italy death rate, death vs recovered is over 40%.

> UK has had 20 people recovered and 11 deaths...

>

> These percentages will go down as more people

> recover but still higher than 1% that has been

> floating around.

WHO is questioning UK's plans now. It's the herd immunity thing that is the issue as there is no proper proof.


https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/coronavirus-uk-scientists-question-government-policy-on-herd-immunity/13/03/


I haven't yet read Prof Costello's twitter thread.

I find it very strange when artificial immunity has been used, as the only example

regarding herd immunity with infectious diseease, when natural immunity has been mentioned it is often tied with conspiracy.

Regardless of the flu vaccines, the deaths from flu, especially in vulnerable people, I welcome natural immunity.

"The Times reported the laws could also give police and immigration officers to detain people if they are suspected of being infected and the ability to direct schools to stay open. The newspaper said the laws could remain in place for two years."


Don't Cough.

Herd immunity is not a straightforward thing, especially when considering virus that regularly mutate, like influenza. Herd immunity also is more usually achieved when some kind of mass vaccine programme is in place. Nothing should be ruled out, and everything should be considered, at this stage.


As for southern hemisphere rates of infection and warm weather, we are not seeing that correlation in Latin America or the West coast of Africa (where infection rates are still two or three weeks behind us). Iran is also a case in point. This is not a flu virus. It is a respiratory virus. It is too early to say if warm weather will affect infection rates.


The whole idea behind pushing our exponential rates of infection out to the summer is purely to be hitting a peak at a time of year when the NHS is not dealing with the seasonal flu infections. We do not know yet if warm weather will impact this Coronavirus in itself.


There is some prior evidence of mild Coronavirus being suppressed by warm weather, but this could not be said of SARS CoV. In short, it is just too early to know or say, and we also have to be careful of not attributing decreasing rates of infection through public behaviour and government action to a coincidental change in season.


The optimistic thing to add though, is that if all the measures being taken by various governments work to lessen the impact of the virus, then we will be in a better place to act as soon as it reappears (as no doubt it will) over the next 18 months. This is not something that will be gone by the summer (as some are signalling). This is something we have to 'manage', until a working vaccine is doing that job for us, and the flattening of peak approach is the right one. Things are going to be tricky for some time yet.

The vulnerable must be feeling bad - we used to operate systems like the below but not make it so public (we probably still have to some extent). But not treating patients - we at least used to say we will turn them over to a specialist group to ease their suffering - the impression we are giving here is you're on the street. At least provide morphine or something.


https://metro.co.uk/2020/03/14/severely-coronavirus-patients-might-not-get-treated-nhs-goes-war-footing-12396604/


Apparently when this happened years ago patients and relatives just weren't told.

Does what this Dr say about vulnerable people cheer you up or worry you - not sure. Is he saying all the treatments we have won't be enough for you.


https://www.standard.co.uk/news/health/coronavirus-intensive-care-doctor-letter-matt-morgan-a4387326.html

JohnL Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Does what this Dr say about vulnerable people

> cheer you up or worry you - not sure. Is he

> saying all the treatments we have won't be enough

> for you.

>

> https://www.standard.co.uk/news/health/coronavirus

> -intensive-care-doctor-letter-matt-morgan-a4387326

> .html


I'd say that was pretty reassuring, on the whole.


He doesn't say what will happen when in theory they could treat you but in practice they can't because they don't have sufficient resources, though.

The first role of Government is to protect its citizens, from what has transpired it now appears that Boris is willing to allow between 300,000 - 500,000 citizens to die, before their natural time because the NHS clearly does not have the necessary resources to adequately cope with this virus. i.e anything to sustain breathing.
At the moment according to the (who) influenza kills between 290-000 and 650-000 globally each year. In the UK 12000 people have died from influenza from Oct 2019 up to 7th march 2020 these are mostly people with underlying health problems .which is mostly the elderly.plus 39 children.very very sad

teddyboy23 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> At the moment according to the (who) influenza

> kills between 290-000 and 650-000 globally each

> year. In the UK 12000 people have died from

> influenza from Oct 2019 up to 7th march 2020 these


Teddyboy23, could you please give a link to these stats,I can't find them.

I felt this winters flu was the worst i've ever encountered as in the amount of young people affected, the cough that went with it took weeks even months in some cases to go. When the coronavirus came to light many healthy people who had the flu thought thts what they must have had, as they had never felt so ill. I didn't think the figures had been given out yet.

> are mostly people with underlying health problems

> .which is mostly the elderly.plus 39 children.very

> very sad

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
  • Latest Discussions

    • Per Cllr McAsh, as quoted above: “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution. " Is anyone au fait with the Clean Air Act 1993, and  particularly with the state of 'Smoke Control' law and practice generally?  I've just been looking  through some of it for the first time and, afaics, the civil penalties mentioned  were introduced into the Clean Air Act, at Schedule 1A, in May 2022.  So it seems that, in this particular,  it's a matter of the enforcement policy trailing well behind the legislation.  I'm not criticising that at all, but am curious.  
    • Here's the part of march46's linked-to Southwark News article pertaining to Southwark Council. "Southwark Council were also contacted for a response. "Councillor James McAsh, Cabinet Member for Clean Air, Streets & Waste said: “One of Southwark’s key priorities is to create a healthy environment for our residents. “To achieve this we closely monitor legislation and measures that influence air pollution – our entire borough apart from inland waterways is designated as a Smoke Control Area, and we also offer substantial provision for electric vehicles to promote alternative fuel travel options and our Streets for People strategy. “We as a council support the work of Mums for Lungs and recognise the health and environmental impacts of domestic solid fuel burning, particularly from wood-burning appliances. “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.  “This work is being undertaken in collaboration with other London boroughs as part of the pan-London Wood Burning Project, which aims to harmonise enforcement approaches and share best practice across the capital.” ETA: And here's a post I made a few years ago, with tangential relevance.  https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/278140-early-morning-drone-flying/?do=findComment&comment=1493274  
    • The solicitor is also the Executor. Big mistake, but my Aunt was very old, and this was the Covid years and shortly after so impossible to intervene and get a couple of close relatives to do this.  She had no children so this is the nephews and nieces. He is a single practitioner, and most at his age would have long since retired - there is a question over his competence Two letters have already gone essentially complaining - batted off and 'amusingly' one put the blame on us. There are five on our side, all speaking to each other, and ideally would work as a single point of contact.  But he has said that this is not allowed - we've all given approval to act on each others behalf. There are five on her late husband's side, who have not engaged with us despite the suggestion to work as a team, There is one other, who get's the lion's share, the typicical 'friend', but we are long since challenging the will. I would like to put another complaint together that he has not used modern collective communication (I expect that he is incapable) which had seriously delayed the execution of the will.   I know many in their 80s very adept with smart phones so that is not an ageist comment. The house has deteriorated very badly, with cold, damp and a serious leak.  PM me if you want to see the dreadful condition that it is now in. I would also question why if the five of us are happy to work together why all of us need to confirm in writing.             The house was lived in until Feb 23, and has been allowed to get like this.
    • Isn’t a five yearly electricity safety certificate one of the things the landlord must give for a legal tenancy?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...