Coronavirus Super Thread ( merged )

[redjambo]

Just now, Bongo 1874 said:

To an extent I agree but with this test coming back negative, who's to say it wasn't something else that was serious. 

 

You can't just assume someone has it. 

 

They had a day and an overnight to check his condition and his vitals, if the story is accurate. They made a clinical decision based on those observations. That's what hospitals do. If they kept everyone in just in case it was something else more serious, there would be beds lining the corridors.

[Bongo 1874]

2 minutes ago, redjambo said:

 

They had a day and an overnight to check his condition and his vitals, if the story is accurate. They made a clinical decision based on those observations. That's what hospitals do. If they kept everyone in just in case it was something else more serious, there would be beds lining the corridors.

A decision that could potentially, on the assumption that they think he has it, could hospitalise his wife and kids due to him returning home, and infecting them which puts more work on the NHS?. 

[Cade]

USA unemployment rises by 16 million in the last three weeks alone

 

Edited April 9, 2020 by Cade

[Jambo-Jimbo]

5 minutes ago, redjambo said:

 

Thanks J-J, I appreciate that.

 

Unfortunately, neither of the two folk quoted in the article provided a link to any research backing up their statement, at least in the article.

 

Here is an actual study showing the false negative rate for the PCR test at 3%. Now that is 3% too high in my opinion, but hopefully, during the period since the study was carried out, there has been a refinement in both the sample-taking procedure and the actual analysis that has reduced this figure even further.

 

https://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=228250

 

 

I did see an article quoting 3%.

 

But here is another one, this from America where they believe around about 33% of tests are wrong.

https://www.businessinsider.com/false-negative-coronavirus-test-accuracy-rates-worry-experts-report-2020-4?r=US&IR=T

 

The Wall Street Journal had a story (behind a paywall) but just below the main headline it said this.

Experts believe nearly one in three infected patients are nevertheless getting negative test results

 

It seems that there might be more than one test on the go, as the above article states, in America the FDA has approved as many as 20 different tests from presumably different providers.

You know as well as I do, that if there are different tests from different companies, then some will be better than others.

I don't know if similar is happening in the UK.

 

 

[Dawnrazor]

Two men arrested for licking thier hands and wiping them on fruit and veg, doors ect in a Sainsbury's in Morcambe wher my wife shops, and a family of 6 stopped on the M6 from Leigh in Manchester going for a "trip" ti the South Lakes and a couple stopped at a petrol station on the M6 going camping for the weekend to the Lakes.........wtf is wrong with some people?

[redjambo]

1 minute ago, Bongo 1874 said:

A decision that could potentially, on the assumption that they think he has it, could hospitalise his wife and kids due to him returning home, and infecting them which puts more work on the NHS?. 

 

They probably decided that if he did have it, then he would most likely have already infected the rest of his family already. So, given that he did not need ongoing hospital care, the best decision for the family was for them to isolate in the house for the required period(s).

 

Remember that a larger number of people will have gone through coronavirus at home rather than need to be hospitalised for it.

[Jambo-Jimbo]

1 minute ago, Dawnrazor said:

Two men arrested for licking thier hands and wiping them on fruit and veg, doors ect in a Sainsbury's in Morcambe wher my wife shops, and a family of 6 stopped on the M6 from Leigh in Manchester going for a "trip" ti the South Lakes and a couple stopped at a petrol station on the M6 going camping for the weekend to the Lakes.........wtf is wrong with some people?

 

Because they think that the rules don't apply to them.

 

Or they are of the opinion that it'll be alright we'll keep away from other people, and just miss the whole reason why we are in lock-down.

[redjambo]

2 minutes ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

I did see an article quoting 3%.

 

But here is another one, this from America where they believe around about 33% of tests are wrong.

https://www.businessinsider.com/false-negative-coronavirus-test-accuracy-rates-worry-experts-report-2020-4?r=US&IR=T

 

The Wall Street Journal had a story (behind a paywall) but just below the main headline it said this.

Experts believe nearly one in three infected patients are nevertheless getting negative test results

 

It seems that there might be more than one test on the go, as the above article states, in America the FDA has approved as many as 20 different tests from presumably different providers.

You know as well as I do, that if there are different tests from different companies, then some will be better than others.

I don't know if similar is happening in the UK.

 

Ok. As you say, quite a bit of disparity. You don't happen to know a friendly journalist who could ask the FM about the false negative rate of the PCR test that the UK is using?

 

I have to say that for a situation like this, I would far rather be looking at scientific studies than newspaper reports.

 

I've had a read of the Business Insider article you linked to. They're talking in general, I think, about newly-developed quick response tests, not the manually intensive PCR tests we've been using so far. I can't be sure though as the article is a bit hazy. If you're interested, I can PM you the text of the article.

[milky_26]

from the figures it looks like 891 is the latest number to have died in the uk giving a total of 7988 of deaths

 

scotland 81

NI 4

wales 41

england 765

Edited April 9, 2020 by milky_26

[vegas-voss]

5 minutes ago, milky_26 said:

from the figures it looks like 891 is the latest number to have died in the uk giving a total of 7988 of deaths

 

scotland 81

NI 4

wales 41

england 765

Northern Ireland always seems to have low figures.I know they are lower population but they do seem way lower all the time.

[Jambo-Jimbo]

8 minutes ago, redjambo said:

 

Ok. As you say, quite a bit of disparity. You don't happen to know a friendly journalist who could ask the FM about the false negative rate of the PCR test that the UK is using?

 

I have to say that for a situation like this, I would far rather be looking at scientific studies than newspaper reports.

 

I've had a read of the Business Insider article you linked to. They're talking in general, I think, about newly-developed quick response tests, not the manually intensive PCR tests we've been using so far. I can't be sure though as the article is a bit hazy. If you're interested, I can PM you the text of the article.

 

Do you think we'd get a straight answer...............do we ever get a straight answer from a politician.

 

Can't disagree with that.

 

You're alright mate I wouldn't understand it all anyway, over the top of my head, that sort of stuff, but thanks for the offer anyway. 👍

[GinRummy]

5 minutes ago, vegas-voss said:

Northern Ireland always seems to have low figures.I know they are lower population but they do seem way lower all the time.

It is to do with population. They’ve got 1.8 million which is 700k less than Strathclyde. 

[Jambo-Jimbo]

12 minutes ago, milky_26 said:

from the figures it looks like 891 is the latest number to have died in the uk giving a total of 7988 of deaths

 

scotland 81

NI 4

wales 41

england 765

 

Suppose there has to be some positives that the total is lower than yesterday's, still horrendus figures though.

[The Old Tolbooth]

Probably already been posted (and apologies if it has been), but the Swedish approach to this whole thing appears to be much more relaxed, much more measured, and with far fewer deaths and people in ICU, and the article makes perfect sense to me as well. 

 

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/04/coronavirus-response-sweden-avoids-isolation-economic-ruin/?fbclid=IwAR2es3jm9t3T2J4gTCYouqIPVvqKAoEe3zx3TxckIoXP4Qq1-nBj9AXrHG8

[Sharpie]

39 minutes ago, Cade said:

USA unemployment rises by 16 million in the last three weeks alone

 

 

Governor Cuomo just stated a few minutes ago that New York has hired 1000 personnel to handle unemployment cases, he states that used to be the figure of unemployment cases now they need an extra thousand to deal with them.

[Mikey1874]

Re Graph people in intensive care increasing a little though much less than deaths. 

 

More positive today re beginning to flatten.

 

Doubling numbers every 6 days - was every 3 days.

Edited April 9, 2020 by Mikey1874

[redjambo]

13 minutes ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

Do you think we'd get a straight answer...............do we ever get a straight answer from a politician.

 

Can't disagree with that.

 

You're alright mate I wouldn't understand it all anyway, over the top of my head, that sort of stuff, but thanks for the offer anyway. 👍

 

Aha, now that's a different question, altogether, JJ.

 

The article wasn't very scientific at all. Needless to say, it was heavy on "conclusions", less so on evidence.

 

Thanks for looking out those articles.

[The Mighty Thor]

Another wishy washy shitshow in the presser.

If you could all maybe, possibly stay in for a wee while, just until we fudge it for another week 'collating data' or as they really mean to say, hopefully in a week the 1000 a day will have plateaued. 

FFS tell everyone to ****ing stay at home or you're getting lifted. 

I thought Raab was trying to get a 5 year old to eat their greens.

Pathetic.

[OBE]

17 minutes ago, The Old Tolbooth said:

Probably already been posted (and apologies if it has been), but the Swedish approach to this whole thing appears to be much more relaxed, much more measured, and with far fewer deaths and people in ICU, and the article makes perfect sense to me as well. 

 

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/04/coronavirus-response-sweden-avoids-isolation-economic-ruin/?fbclid=IwAR2es3jm9t3T2J4gTCYouqIPVvqKAoEe3zx3TxckIoXP4Qq1-nBj9AXrHG8

 

Sweden 2.5 times the land mass of the UK with 1/6th of our population may also help.

Edited April 9, 2020 by Old Blue Eyes

[Victorian]

3 minutes ago, The Mighty Thor said:

Another wishy washy shitshow in the presser.

If you could all maybe, possibly stay in for a wee while, just until we fudge it for another week 'collating data' or as they really mean to say, hopefully in a week the 1000 a day will have plateaued. 

FFS tell everyone to ****ing stay at home or you're getting lifted. 

I thought Raab was trying to get a 5 year old to eat their greens.

Pathetic.

 

I think the first ground bait is being lobbed in to ease the lockdown as early as possible.   Maybe even in 2 or 3 weeks.     Quite possibly keeping the message softer as a pre-cursor to a gradual easing.    If the aim is to get businesses back asap then a hardline message now would contradict a sudden u-turn in a couple of weeks.

 

Direction of travel is an easing of lockdown before May.

[Cade]

Due to figure being counted in different ways by different sources and having delays on them, you can't say anything at all about curves flattening.

It's far, far too early to say.

Lockdown has been on for only two weeks.

 

[Victorian]

Just now, Cade said:

Due to figure being counted in different ways by different sources and having delays on them, you can't say anything at all about curves flattening.

It's far, far too early to say.

Lockdown has been on for only two weeks.

 

 

There's a fair bit of talking up of figures and trends though.    If you assume the agenda then it kind of fits in.     I'm quite wary of this.

[redjambo]

2 minutes ago, Old Blue Eyes said:

 

Sweden 2.5 times the land mass of the UK with 1/6th of our population may also help.

 

Indeed, but the more telling statistic is usually the percentage of a nation's people that live in an urban system. As an extreme example, you could have a country with loads of land mass but all their people crammed into a single city.

 

In this case, Sweden's urban population is 86%, the UK's is 83% (data from 2014).

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_countries_by_percentage_of_urban_population

 

[The Mighty Thor]

3 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

I think the first ground bait is being lobbed in to ease the lockdown as early as possible.   Maybe even in 2 or 3 weeks.     Quite possibly keeping the message softer as a pre-cursor to a gradual easing.    If the aim is to get businesses back asap then a hardline message now would contradict a sudden u-turn in a couple of weeks.

 

Direction of travel is an easing of lockdown before May.

They're winging it. 

I'm genuinely at a loss as to what the strategy is?

Actually I'm not. It's what it has always been. Herd immunity with anything under 6 figure death toll a brucie bonus. 

[Francis Albert]

5 minutes ago, Old Blue Eyes said:

 

Sweden 2.5 times the land mass of the UK with 1/6th of our population may also help.

But the Swedish population is not evenly distributed over its land mass. The Swedish example  is an interesting experiment in an alternative approach 

... at least if you are not in Sweden. Time will tell, a long time because the impact of Cranovirus and the reaction to it will extend for a very long time ... maybe a decade.

[Mikey1874]

6 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

I think the first ground bait is being lobbed in to ease the lockdown as early as possible.   Maybe even in 2 or 3 weeks.     Quite possibly keeping the message softer as a pre-cursor to a gradual easing.    If the aim is to get businesses back asap then a hardline message now would contradict a sudden u-turn in a couple of weeks.

 

Direction of travel is an easing of lockdown before May.

 

Yes

 

Whittey once more mentioned the negative health affects of economic lockdown. That is people will die of poverty. 

 

Suggesting it's a balance. 

[Jambof3tornado]

1 hour ago, Bongo 1874 said:

A decision that could potentially, on the assumption that they think he has it, could hospitalise his wife and kids due to him returning home, and infecting them which puts more work on the NHS?. 

Would they not be already infected potentially? At that they'd be told to self isolate and only attend hospital if it was really needed.

 

Most people who get this will suffer mild symptoms only. Very few will be hospitalised and even less will require icu intervention.

 

Many people are in for an overnight stay to run tests then sent home as there is no point in someone taking up a hospital bed unless they really need it.

[redjambo]

1 minute ago, The Mighty Thor said:

They're winging it. 

I'm genuinely at a loss as to what the strategy is?

Actually I'm not. It's what it has always been. Herd immunity with anything under 6 figure death toll a brucie bonus. 

 

They *are* winging it.

 

However, I think they gave up on herd immunity a while ago when they realised they wouldn't get away with it given that virtually none of the other countries had also decided to go down that route. It's always easier to be a ******* if those around you are being *******s as well.

[Victorian]

Just now, The Mighty Thor said:

They're winging it. 

I'm genuinely at a loss as to what the strategy is?

Actually I'm not. It's what it has always been. Herd immunity with anything under 6 figure death toll a brucie bonus. 

 

Yeah similar thoughts.   I think there's an acceptance that the country needs to face it.    Sensing an agenda to bring public opinion with them.     

 

If we ease soon,   the figures go back up.    If we ease after a more sensible pause,   the figures go back up.    But the sensible thing must be to face the next spike from a lower base demand on the NHS.    Not while they're still nearer capacity.

[Victorian]

4 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

Yes

 

Whittey once more mentioned the negative health affects of economic lockdown. That is people will die of poverty. 

 

Suggesting it's a balance. 

 

Yep.  He sold the pies there.    

[Boof]

5 hours ago, Homme said:

For those that wished my Mrs well last week, she had her appointment at the breast clinic this morning and the ultrasound showed that whatever she does have is non cancerous. 

 

Huge relief for us both. Thanks to you all for your concern and good wishes. 

 

Great news, Mr Homme.

[The Old Tolbooth]

15 minutes ago, Old Blue Eyes said:

 

Sweden 2.5 times the land mass of the UK with 1/6th of our population may also help.

 

A very fair point, but they also have cities too that are pretty crowded, and you'd think they would have a much higher rate than they have, nothing to the extent of London though. 

[Bongo 1874]

10 minutes ago, Jambof3tornado said:

Would they not be already infected potentially? At that they'd be told to self isolate and only attend hospital if it was really needed.

 

Most people who get this will suffer mild symptoms only. Very few will be hospitalised and even less will require icu intervention.

 

Many people are in for an overnight stay to run tests then sent home as there is no point in someone taking up a hospital bed unless they really need it.

I understand that, but the guy that has described it earlier in the thread he wasn't showing mild symptoms, more of the severe symptoms. 

[Jambof3tornado]

1 minute ago, Bongo 1874 said:

I understand that, but the guy that has described it earlier in the thread he wasn't showing mild symptoms, more of the severe symptoms. 

I'll read back more and review my post.

[OBE]

10 minutes ago, redjambo said:

 

Indeed, but the more telling statistic is usually the percentage of a nation's people that live in an urban system. As an extreme example, you could have a country with loads of land mass but all their people crammed into a single city.

 

In this case, Sweden's urban population is 86%, the UK's is 83% (data from 2014).

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_countries_by_percentage_of_urban_population

 

 

9 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

But the Swedish population is not evenly distributed over its land mass. The Swedish example  is an interesting experiment in an alternative approach 

... at least if you are not in Sweden. Time will tell, a long time because the impact of Cranovirus and the reaction to it will extend for a very long time ... maybe a decade.

 

Thanks guy's, I knew you'd enlighten me, fastest finger first. You win this time Rj, you're slipping FA.

 

Do the pair of you think Sweden having no teams in the last 16 of the Champ league and no team in the Rugby 6 nations screened them from the greater contagion we're witnessing on the continent?...3...2...1...Go!

[Jambof3tornado]

2 minutes ago, Bongo 1874 said:

I understand that, but the guy that has described it earlier in the thread he wasn't showing mild symptoms, more of the severe symptoms. 

If its the one hallucinating and in for a night and bad for 2 further days then its a mild symptom case. No need to be in hospital, we can tell at pickup which patients are genuinely life threatening, yes they can deteriorate quickly but the vast majority of admissions will be for an overnight stay with further tests done during the admission then discharge home.

[Francis Albert]

5 minutes ago, The Old Tolbooth said:

 

A very fair point, but they also have cities too that are pretty crowded, and you'd think they would have a much higher rate than they have, nothing to the extent of London though. 

Since 90% of the Swedish population live in urban areas it isn't really much of a point.

[Jambo-Jimbo]

30 minutes ago, redjambo said:

 

Aha, now that's a different question, altogether, JJ.

 

The article wasn't very scientific at all. Needless to say, it was heavy on "conclusions", less so on evidence.

 

Thanks for looking out those articles.

 

No worries, you know as well as I do, information is much more credible if there's a source attached.

 

[scott herbertson]

9 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

Since 90% of the Swedish population live in urban areas it isn't really much of a point.

 

 

They're also now beginning to catch up on other countries in  deaths per million population, so the jury's out on whether their strategy was right or not

 

One factor to consider would be the price of a pint. Seriously, they don't tend to congregate as frequently, or for as long,  or in such condensed spaces to drink as we do in my limited experience. I do think cultural/ behavioural factors must play a big part

Edited April 9, 2020 by scott herbertson

[Cade]

Child benefit: Up 35p a week to help with the lockdown 

 

MPs just gave themselves an extra £10,000 each to help with working from home

 

[Bongo 1874]

This virsus spreads faster than first thought, it is believed that 1 person can infect upto 5.7 people. 

 

So devasted man feel like just giving up, we aren't going to see football for atleast 1 year, unless they develop a vaccine in remarkable time. 

 

Even at that you can be sure we won't be getting it first. 

 

 

[scott herbertson]

3 minutes ago, Cade said:

Child benefit: Up 35p a week to help with the lockdown 

 

MPs just gave themselves an extra £10,000 each to help with working from home

 

 

 

Plenty of people (like my wife) getting nothing as they are caught between self employed and employed or are directors of small firms. While it may be they need extra it is so crass to do this. Why couldn't they have just pout any equipment required (dedicated internet connections etc) in free for the period of the crisis?

 

Edited April 9, 2020 by scott herbertson

[vegas-voss]

3 minutes ago, Cade said:

Child benefit: Up 35p a week to help with the lockdown 

 

MPs just gave themselves an extra £10,000 each to help with working from home

 

Is that for real **** me won't even buy a packet of smart price nugguts

[vegas-voss]

1 minute ago, scott herbertson said:

 

 

Plenty of people (like my wife) getting nothing as they are caught between self employed and employed or are directors of small firms

 

It's really is a cluster ****.It all sounded so good but the longer things have gone the more it's just not working out how it seemed.Great press headlines though.

[joondalupjambo]

6 minutes ago, Cade said:

Child benefit: Up 35p a week to help with the lockdown 

 

MPs just gave themselves an extra £10,000 each to help with working from home

 

The 35p is a ridiculous amount.  However the 10k is to purchase office equipment, it is not cash.

 

Not at all saying it is fair but do not think folk should think it is extra cash directly for them.

[gjcc]

“Front line workers to be formally recognised.”

Probably a clap at the next Westminster sitting, then forgotten about.  

[Bongo 1874]

A chilling chart has revealed the UK region at the centre of the coronavirus outbreak is not London but instead Scotland. 

[Cade]

5 minutes ago, gjcc said:

“Front line workers to be formally recognised.”

Probably a clap at the next Westminster sitting, then forgotten about.  

A commemorative 1p coin 

[GinRummy]

1 minute ago, Bongo 1874 said:

A chilling chart has revealed the UK region at the centre of the coronavirus outbreak is not London but instead Scotland. 

Surprised they were able to produce that chart as it’s just not true. 

[Bongo 1874]

2 minutes ago, GinRummy said:

Surprised they were able to produce that chart as it’s just not true. 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1267151/Coronavirus-chart-UK-death-rate-London-Scotland-lockdown-measures-latest/amp&ved=2ahUKEwi4n_257NvoAhUJesAKHSQoD84Q0PADMAt6BAgOEDA&usg=AOvVaw2wKtHlkbIgAX5NrWkccsRU