Mutating Corona Virus

[cjcregg]

11 hours ago, hightail said:

Lockdown isn't sustainable.  It might have been effective if it had been imposed much sooner and much harder but I have doubts there.  

 

I think it's generally accepted that it has been effective.

 

11 hours ago, hightail said:

When lockdown was first imposed it was all about not overwhelming the NHS, ensuring there was capacity.  Well that's been achieved 

 

 

Yes it has been achieved but only so far.

 

11 hours ago, hightail said:

 

I'm reading in articles today that scientists are warning there will be 100k deaths very quickly if we lift restrictions too much or too soon.  It's the 'very quickly' in that comment I find interesting.  100k is still 100k if it happens quickly or more slowly.  The only difference is public opinion and political fallout.

 

If we get to a point of sustaining 100,000 deaths very quickly the NHS would be on it's knees and utterly paralysed, which would put everyone's health at risk. That's the difference.

[cjcregg]

27 minutes ago, honeybee13 said:

Part of the reason that the NHS wasn't on its knees is that many people were left to die in care homes or in their own homes.

 

When you say 'left to die', by whom?

 

[cjcregg]

17 minutes ago, brassnecked said:

I think  it might be the fact that Covid infected people were sent back to care homes and their own homes after acquiring it in the NHS general Hospital infections central Covid should be treated away from a General Hospital, allowing nrmal service and minimal risk.

 

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/newsliverpool/two-women-die-after-contracting-coronavirus-during-hospital-stay/ar-BB12Ydwy

 

I might be missing something but in both those cases the patients died in hospital. How does that chime with them being left to die in care homes or at home?

[cjcregg]

1 hour ago, brassnecked said:

The point is that they went in for something one would usually be admitted for, and acquired the infefction whilst IN hospital, whether they die there of it or are discharged and die elsewhere  is  then an issue.  Both these cases acquired the virus in one hospital, then were sent to another, where they died, therefore spreading the infection to the other non General Hospitals used for recovery.

 

https://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/man-dies-after-contracting-covid-18197454

 

https://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/north-wales-farmer-dies-after-18093887

 

It might be a 'point' but it's entirely irrelevant to the as yet unsubstantiated claim that ''people were left to die in care homes or in their own homes''. Clearly.

[cjcregg]

27 minutes ago, honeybee13 said:

If you go back to the excess mortality figures, all of those people died somewhere other than a hospital and having tested positive. AIUI anyone who wasn't tested isn't in the official figures. It isn't just me saying this, it's all over the media.

 

Before you continue making different points, who is it that you believe is leaving people to die in care homes or in their own homes? I'm just interested to know who you think it is, that's all.

Edited May 11, 2020 by cjcregg

[cjcregg]

1 hour ago, honeybee13 said:

I assume it's health professionals following the guidelines that they must have about who they admit to hospital/intensive care.

 

I'm not aware of any guidelines that allow the NHS the freedom to refuse patients who need hospital care. In fact I believe they have a legal obligation to provide it.

[cjcregg]

21 hours ago, unclebulgaria67 said:

I find some of the foreign newspapers much more interesting to read than UK newspapers.  They tend to have more of a focus on the actual subject matter and do not get distracted as much by Politics.  

 

 

 

Unlike most of the posts on this thread.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[cjcregg]

3 hours ago, London1971 said:

I defer to the experts on this Profs, Virologists, Epidemiologists, CMO's etc. Plenty of them with blue ticks on Twitter, all who say Temp testing is a waste of time. Sure it's great to give a bit of re assurance, which is why most public think it's a good idea.

 

 

That's why Heathrow are going to trial it, it's just a PR exercise that they believe will reassure enough dumb passengers to make it worth their while.

 

Heathrow will be using  the latest thermal scanner tech which by all accounts ''don't really work'' https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/05/11/thermal-scanners-are-latest-technology-being-deployed-detect-coronavirus-they-dont-really-work/

[cjcregg]

Footballers aren't getting tested because the government or NHS  thinks they're ''more important''. The premier league are paying for the tests privately (as indeed anyone could) as has been widely reported.

[cjcregg]

1 hour ago, citizenB said:

 

I imagine that many parents, even more so single parents  'Feared they may be incapacitated by the virus'  However, this statement is weird.. did they both have the virus or not.. or simply were afraid they 'might' get it ? 

 

At the point they left for Durham only she was showing symptoms. I think it's reasonable that as her husband he feared he may be incapacitated by the virus and indeed he was. I'm not defending him - far from it, just interested in establishing the facts.

 

 

1 hour ago, citizenB said:

 

Why also was DC's Father enquiring about security for his Son.. surely that is something that should have been done by government or DC himself ?

 

As I understand it, it's not certain what security issue Cummings senior approached the police about.

 

1 hour ago, citizenB said:

I rather suspect that any investigation will favour Demonic's version of events and let him off scott free. 

 

There won't be any investigation, he'll be gone before anyone gets the chance to start one. He's finished and good riddance to him.

[cjcregg]

/\

 

This is a bit obsessive isn't it? 

[cjcregg]

46 minutes ago, hightail said:

Mine too as long as that remains an option but I fear a situation where it becomes compulsory if you want to use public transport, enter shopping centres, even access medical care such as dentists, opticians etc.  

 

That's frightening. Not that it could become compulsory, but that you think it could.

[cjcregg]

4 hours ago, hightail said:

 If enough businesses and services decide they want to see that you have a phone with the app installed to let you in we’ll all have to give in eventually.

 

I don't get it. Why would any business insist on customers having the tracing app?

[cjcregg]

10 minutes ago, hightail said:

It's a condition I call 'competitive quarantining'.  Many businesses are making up their own rules above and beyond what's required so they can say they can make a big thing of saying they're taking staff and customer safety seriously. 

 

 

 

I see.

[cjcregg]

16 hours ago, honeybee13 said:

hightail isn't the only one to think that. From this article:

 

It is not yet known whether use of the app would be mandatory or voluntary. “A mandatory smartphone app would be a significant measure, both legally and culturally,” the lawyers said. “Our view is that there would need to be a clear and detailed legal basis for a mandatory system, set out in specific legislation.”

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/03/covid-19-tracking-app-must-satisfy-human-rights-and-data-laws

 

No it isn't and it's just scaremongering to suggest otherwise.

 

 

[cjcregg]

19 minutes ago, hightail said:

 So will temperature taking at a supermarket (or whatever) entrance if they so choose ........ and asking to see your status on the app on your phone.  They'll do it with pride and many will applaud them for it.  My point is they can impose any conditions they like and if they do there's nothing we can do about it if we wish to continue using any service.  

 

Anyone could do anything in theory but AFAIK there is no evidence whatsoever that supermarkets or retailers generally are even considering such measures so your fears are misplaced.

[cjcregg]

10 hours ago, 45002 said:

Sorry if this is in the wrong place

 

Has anyone ordered facemask on line and got a fast delivery ?

 

I'm looking for a good supplier anyone has used and no problems, any recommendations.

 

You can get them at Screwfix click & collect https://www.screwfix.com/p/type-1-single-use-3-ply-face-mask-10-pack/894kh

[cjcregg]

10 hours ago, honeybee13 said:

Hi 45002.

 

There's a non-discussion thread in the NHS forum, you could try posting there.

 

HB

 

What's inappropriate with posting it here ? 

[cjcregg]

As I understand it it's the R number that the UK is looking at. The reason that the Government has only recently put in the 2 week quarantine rule is that it wasn't worth doing when our R number was above 1. Now it's hovering below that the UK will consider airbridge deals with nations whose R number is lower, though I doubt other countries will want them if the UK's rate is higher. So I can't see too many airbridge agreements anytime soon.

[cjcregg]

Anyone with symptoms, including those in quarantine, can get a test. Just putting that here so people aren't misinformed.

[cjcregg]

24 minutes ago, honeybee13 said:

If you mean a posted home test, the results aren't always conclusive.

 

Maybe, maybe not but that's irrelevant to the consideration of when people can get tersted. I'm just correcting the misleading statement that ''Regarding the R number, when you look at what is being avoided JUST in 'untested 14 day lockdowns (who would largely only be tested if they end up ill enough to be rushed to hospital)'' which is factually incorrect.

 

Anyone with symptoms can get tested  https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-getting-tested

 

Is that clear enough for you?

[cjcregg]

10 hours ago, honeybee13 said:

 

Is this what happens when you come out of lockdown without a plan and without easily understood guidelines. 

 

Yeah I mean being told you can't meet in groups of over 6 and must remain 2 metres from others is awfully difficult to understand. As are the established criminal offences of illegal overnight camping, littering and fighting. I struggle to get my head around that myself.

 

It's quite clearly a government messaging issue and public are entirely blameless.  

[cjcregg]

If there's one thing that the pandemic (should have) taught us is the importance of collective responsibility. Blaming the absence of it on the Government is singularly pathetic.

[cjcregg]

44 minutes ago, honeybee13 said:

I think a lot of people saw Demonic Cummings and others blatently flout the rules and thought 'If they can do it so can I'.  Scientific types who did the wrong thing at least had the good grace to resign.

 

 

You had said that the guidelines were not easily understood. You're now saying that they did understand the rules but knowingly broke them because Cummings did.

 

Either way there is no acceptable reason to abdicate social responsibility during a pandemic. How can there be?

[cjcregg]

40 minutes ago, honeybee13 said:

I don't see how 'Stay Alert' is easily understood, maybe I'm missing something.

 

Yes you are missing something, in fact almost everything - the actual substance of the guidance https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/staying-alert-and-safe-social-distancing/staying-alert-and-safe-social-distancing