Coronavirus

[ik9000]

@TeePee and CTF

So the numbers are being over estimated some areas and under estimated in other areas to varying degrees.. hopefully the former but I feel pessimistic under the circumstances. I can imagine heart attacks, strokes and blood clots rising as people as don't get as much exercise.. yes.



My immuno-comprised brother (Crohn's disease - he's 39) recently recovered from Covid-19, so if he can survive it your uncle can too. I hope he recovers fully. My brothers house mates are primary school teachers who most likely caught it from the children at school, so the decision to keep schools open/herd immunity approach, probably nearly took my brother out of the picture.

that there summarises my view of how this whole thing has been managed (or not) so far.

[g8ina]

We are also on 100% lockdown as Sally is now also symptomatic with CV, stay safe you lot, or else you'l have me to deal with, but not for 2 weeks minimum

[TeePee]

So please explain your intent. I presumed you wanted to get back to working (near) normally, leaving a minority of other people to carry the burdens of the infection.

Please also explain how you see self selected isolation working. A virus does not respect individual choice. People merely provide a virus with the means and opportunity to reproduce. Any passing human will do. Locking down a whole population ensures those with the potential to spread the virus widest, furthest and to the most people, are much less likely to.

I find your assertion problematic on many levels. The nature of the economy goes some way to determine the quality of the lives being lived and saved. The post war British economy rewarded production with social security. The post 1980 consumerist economy breeds social insecurity by rewarding consumption at the cost of production. It's loony.

Valeant Pharmaceuticals for instance. Executives and stock holders made vast sums of money buying up smaller, innovative companies for their IP, stripping the expensive R&D departments and inflating the prices of the existing treatments. Rinse and repeat. Within the Valeant microcosm sharp practice in the board room was rewarded with vast sums of cash. Meanwhile the academics and scientists with the skills to do the actual life saving work were made redundant. Taken to the logical long term conclusion, those clever enough to do the life saving are clever enough to choose a more secure/rewarding career path altogether.


"We have to accept that some people will die. [Just as long as it is not me or mine.]"
Is probably closer to the truth.

Until the scientists know more about the virus the restrictions we are living under are the mitigation. The restrictions are going to be eased at some point. Possibly when the infection can be managed. Possibly when the death-toll created by the lock down needs to be managed. Possibly when the population at large stops consenting to be policed.

Economies do not stop functioning - which is sorta the problem. The virus has revealed how dysfunctional western economies have become. The lack of test kits, the lack of PPE, the lack of nurses, social care and so on are a feature of that economy and the behaviours it rewards. The things that could provide mitigation are not available because the economy (as it is) rewards not having them.

My intent is for people to survive and thrive. The economic damage is more deadly than the disease. A virus certainly does respect individual choice, in that those who choose not to be in contact with other people are less likely to be infected with it.

I would suggest that, since you appear to prefer a Chinese style economy, and a Chinese style response to the virus, you look further at the quality of life, health care and life expectancy there. For all the flaws our Western Economy has, I don't think your alternative is as good as you think.

[TeePee]

WRT to the US:
https://www.businessinsider.com/new-...20-4?r=US&IR=T



Makes you wonder what "aggressive social distancing policy" means especially if it lasts until August?

Apparently 133 million Americans suffer from chronic healthcare problems:
https://nationalhealthcouncil.org/wp...nicDisease.pdf



About 49 million people as of 2016 are over 65:
https://acl.gov/sites/default/files/...ansProfile.pdf

64 million Americans live in multi-generational households:
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...al-households/

It looks like quite a few people will in some kind of lockdown for the immediate future. So probably around 50~100 million people,covering over 65s,younger people with conditions and households which they live in. If you don't live in a household with either of the previous two groups,you are probably lucky TBF!

(yes I know its relative luck).

'Aggressive social distancing' in the US means, we're supposed to stay home, but are allowed out for essential tasks or for work. Restaurants and bars are takeaway only. Most States have no form of enforcement. In Washington I would say about 80% of businesses are still open, although with fewer staff on site, and roads are as busy as usual. State Parks are closed, city parks are open and people are using them. I'm seeing more people out and about on foot. I'm at work, as normal, although I refuse to go to China.

[TeePee]

It isn't. They have had to make significant revisions to their US model, but haven't changed the UK model yet. They were over estimating hospitalizations by over four times. In the UK, they estimated 1600 deaths yesterday, compared to 880 actual.

And more good news. They have updated the model since I posted, and now estimating a total of 37K deaths. The peak is supposed to be on the 17th, with 1674 deaths. While this is good news, I'm still hoping this is an overestimate. The first projection with the new model was for 1300 today, and we're significantly lower at 980. I really hope that continues to be the case.

[ik9000]

I have said from day 1 that what is needed is a clear understanding of what is actually happening with solid stats and figures. The only way to get that is testing and methodical reporting. It's not cheap but essential and then you can take appropriate action as best you can to respond to the facts. What we have is a farcical response where noone really had a good grasp (in the UK at least) of what is happening and in the mean time we are (understandably) being locked down but without knowing how best to target that, go on for, wh ether it was the optimal time to do so, for how long it should last, how best to reverse it, and what the outcome will be. Testing testing testing. Why is the government not pushing that?

[j1979]

We are also on 100% lockdown as Sally is now also symptomatic with CV, stay safe you lot, or else you'l have me to deal with, but not for 2 weeks minimum

Wishing you all a speedy recovery.

[j1979]

I have said from day 1 that what is needed is a clear understanding of what is actually happening with solid stats and figures. The only way to get that is testing and methodical reporting. It's not cheap but essential and then you can take appropriate action as best you can to respond to the facts. What we have is a farcical response where noone really had a good grasp (in the UK at least) of what is happening and in the mean time we are (understandably) being locked down but without knowing how best to target that, go on for, wh ether it was the optimal time to do so, for how long it should last, how best to reverse it, and what the outcome will be. Testing testing testing. Why is the government not pushing that?

I also thought we should lock down from day 1, and fully contain like south korea.

From what i understood, Jan and Feb were completly waisted and ZERO plans were made, top govenment, and advisors didn't take it seriously. SARS-CoV-2 the clue is in the name really. By 20th Jan if they hadn't already realised this was serious, they should at least start working now, but they did nothing again.

So we were at square 1 from the end of Feb. No test kits, PPE that they did have was past expiry and they were behind the curve of buying it. Roll on a week or so and they realised China now has a back log of orders, and ventilators will be needed too, lots of ventilators, and minimal test kits so it's now impossible to contain. so they release the Contain, Delay Mitigate response (on the 3rd march) after advice that the herd immunity approch was our only realistic hope. China had brought us 1-2 months and we did nothing.

Then the bombshell drops that the current herd immunity approch will cost between 250k-500k lives in the UK and basically MADMAX style scenes, everytime you pop to the supermarket. So they introduce lockdown after pressure from Macron saying the boarder will close if the UK doesn't lockdown it's citizens. Emmanuel Macron might have saved upwards of 250k UK lives by doing that.

What should have happened was, on Jan 2nd when the Scentific world was back at work after new year and was made aware of the new virus, work should have been done on mass testing kits. we should have had them at airports by Late Jan and at GP surgeries / hospiatls by mid Feb. Anyone from China, later singapore, Japan, S.Korea should have been tested at airports.

But we have a PM that likes to wing it and it could have cost hundreds of thousands of lives including his own. We now have x3 the number of dead of China, with a 2 month head start, and 4.5% of their population, and at least a week off the peak.

A global post pandemic inquiry will look at if our leaders should face criminal charges. They also knew from day 1 that masks protect from respiratory viruses, a 3 year old child can figure out the logic behind that. So not only did they do the wrong thing, they purposely and knowingly told us false informaion and people lost there lives as a result, if thats not criminal I don't know what is.

[MrJim]

As someone who happens to be severely physically disabled, and who requires the support of carers to live in my own home, this article is utterly horrific. Is my life worth less than that of an able-bodied person?

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...e_iOSApp_Other

[Jonj1611]

I can't comment on the story and I have read it but I can say with certainty your life is not worth less than anyone else's.

[Spreadie]

As someone who happens to be severely physically disabled, and who requires the support of carers to live in my own home, this article is utterly horrific. Is my life worth less than that of an able-bodied person?

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...e_iOSApp_Other

My cousin died two days ago and his brother is showing symptoms - both are physically and mentally disabled - a DNR was issued in his case. Whether that his disability was a relevant factor, I don't know - my sister works for the NHS and says DNRs are widespread in general for CV.

We are also on 100% lockdown as Sally is now also symptomatic with CV, stay safe you lot, or else you'l have me to deal with, but not for 2 weeks minimum

Hope you both make a full and speedy recovery, David.

[ik9000]

it's easy to be utilitarian and dispassionate until it is someone you know/love/care about. Then suddenly the moral question takes a very different slant doesn't it?!* Everyone's life is equally important, precious even. Where a department is swamped I can see they might have to make difficult choices, but if they could save someone, have the time and resources to do so, and choose not to simply because someone is disabled/old/obese/whatever that is morally repugnant - and I trust would not be the aim or desire of any medic. I know many, and none, not one, would countenance not doing whatever they could to preserve life. Their medical ethics courses drum that into them from the very start.

Gina, I hope Sally recovers quickly.
Spreadie I am sorry for your loss.

* not aimed at anyone - fully rhetorical, to myself included.

[Jonj1611]

Sorry to hear of your loss Spreadie

[[GSV]Trig]

Read that 91 people in South Korea have tested positive after already having The Rona, and recovering...
Do we think that this herd immunity thing might not be as simple as first thought?

[spacein_vader]

The Trust I work at is busy writing guidelines for doctors in the event we reach capacity (we're not even close to it yet,) and there are more people who need a given treatment such as ventilators than there are treatments available. Doctors, nurses, Caldicott guardians and other groups throughout the Trust are involved but in the end its likely to boil down to "In the lead doctors opinion, who has the best chance of survival if given the treatment?" This is unlikely to come out favourably for the infirm or immunocompromised I'd imagine. Just drafting this is causing a lot of pain and anguish among medical staff for whom being unable to offer the most effective treatment is alien to them.

For clarity:

I haven't seen the final guidance (if it has yet been finalised.)

Nobody wants anyone to have to use it.

We're not at that point yet.

[g8ina]

Spreadie, really sorry to hear that sir, they have now lost four at Sally's workplace, but they were all very vulnerable with COPD, cancer etc.

Sally is in good spirits and appears to have only a mild form.

Stay safe all.