Coronavirus Super Thread ( merged )

[Tazio]

41 minutes ago, Robbofan99 said:

Furlough should not have been extended and neither should this scheme . It only legitimises a full lockdown yet again. . Like I said open up everything shield and support the vulnerable and let the rest of us be productive citizens for our own sanity mental health and social life 

Thanks for the empathy, glad to see you’re happy for people to get thrown on the scrap heap if they work on industries that haven’t opened up and won’t in the immediate future. 

[jack D and coke]

6 minutes ago, SE16 3LN said:

Unsurprisingly, Its not perfect 😀

No shock. I certainly couldn’t complain if it’s the same people getting help again. I didn’t hardly hear a word of it though but my ears pricked up at that bit  

[Jambo 4 Ever]

7 minutes ago, Samuel Camazzola said:

 

 

Um no I’m not 

and it has been backed up by others who say similar 

[Samuel Camazzola]

2 minutes ago, Jambo 4 Ever said:

Um no I’m not 

and it has been backed up by others who say similar 

You're a chancer. Get out your bunker, lighten up, stop greetin' and try and relax. 😎 

[doctor jambo]

2 hours ago, Jambo 4 Ever said:

Can you catch these from other people?

You cannot catch long Covid from other people.

Not everyone reacts to “bugs” in the same way.

Some people catch a cold and get the sniffles.

orhers catch it and are crippled with chronic fatigue.

Its hardly new.

 

[Jambo 4 Ever]

3 minutes ago, doctor jambo said:

You cannot catch long Covid from other people.

Not everyone reacts to “bugs” in the same way.

Some people catch a cold and get the sniffles.

orhers catch it and are crippled with chronic fatigue.

Its hardly new.

 

You can catch COVID from other people and no one knows Til you get it if it will be long COVID or not.

 

so you and everyone else MUST take it seriously and adhere to the rules and guidelines 

[Tazio]

**** me, he’s actually lecturing a doctor on health issues now. 

[Costanza]

18 minutes ago, Tazio said:

Thanks for the empathy, glad to see you’re happy for people to get thrown on the scrap heap if they work on industries that haven’t opened up and won’t in the immediate future. 

Yup, an incredibly selfish point of view.

I don't see anything in the measures today that help the live entertainment industry.

From my point of view, it's gutting that I can't go to gigs,  but that pales into comparison to the situation for bands, venues and their staff.

[doctor jambo]

Just now, Jambo 4 Ever said:

You can catch COVID from other people and no one knows Til you get it if it will be long COVID or not.

 

so you and everyone else MUST take it seriously and adhere to the rules and guidelines 

I am rule adherent .

Doesnt mean I don’t think the govt are incompetent twats.

There is of course the issue that by NOT facing the virus this time, that when it circulated back around the same happens.

A population gets stronger by exposure .

Maybe in 2 years we get a “super-strain” Covid with 30% mortality, that previous exposure to c-19 protects you from.

theres a cheery thought!

[doctor jambo]

1 minute ago, Costanza said:

Yup, an incredibly selfish point of view.

I don't see anything in the measures today that help the live entertainment industry.

From my point of view, it's gutting that I can't go to gigs,  but that pales into comparison to the situation for bands, venues and their staff.

Good to see also that if you earned £50k , then you can live on nothing for a year🤪

[Tazio]

Just now, Costanza said:

Yup, an incredibly selfish point of view.

I don't see anything in the measures today that help the live entertainment industry.

From my point of view, it's gutting that I can't go to gigs,  but that pales into comparison to the situation for bands, venues and their staff.

It’s massive numbers of people, the majority of who are freelance. It’s everyone from the musician, crew, front of house staff, caterers, producers, merchandise staff, businesses nearby that pick up trade from venues. 

[King prawn]

2 minutes ago, Tazio said:

**** me, he’s actually lecturing a doctor on health issues now. 

[Samuel Camazzola]

7 minutes ago, Tazio said:

**** me, he’s actually lecturing a doctor on health issues now. 

😂

[King prawn]

3 minutes ago, Tazio said:

It’s massive numbers of people, the majority of who are freelance. It’s everyone from the musician, crew, front of house staff, caterers, producers, merchandise staff, businesses nearby that pick up trade from venues. 

I think these roles are often forgotten. Same with any events staff whether it be for sport, conferences etc.

[Costanza]

5 minutes ago, Tazio said:

It’s massive numbers of people, the majority of who are freelance. It’s everyone from the musician, crew, front of house staff, caterers, producers, merchandise staff, businesses nearby that pick up trade from venues. 

Really good points. Without more targeted actions, hard to see how we mitigate the impacts.

[Robbofan99]

42 minutes ago, Tazio said:

Thanks for the empathy, glad to see you’re happy for people to get thrown on the scrap heap if they work on industries that haven’t opened up and won’t in the immediate future. 

You have. Misinterpreted my post . I am for ending lockdown so people can get back and a living , keep their business’s afloat etc without the pitiful support from Govt which has to be paid back but probably most people won’t be able pay it back anyway as they will be u employed or on the sick due to the pandemic . Open up everything protect the old and vulnerable but let them make their own risk assessment . 

[Enzo Chiefo]

23 minutes ago, Jambo 4 Ever said:

You can catch COVID from other people and no one knows Til you get it if it will be long COVID or not.

 

so you and everyone else MUST take it seriously and adhere to the rules and guidelines 

:Long Covid" is not a disease. It's a manufactured term designed to influence behavioural change. It's no different to any other virus pr disease that affects different people in different ways.

[Victorian]

14 minutes ago, Enzo Chiefo said:

:Long Covid" is not a disease. It's a manufactured term designed to influence behavioural change. It's no different to any other virus pr disease that affects different people in different ways.

 

Well naw.  Not yet.  The effects are not known yet and wont be known until the whole thing is studied and peoples' health conditions are monitored going forward.    Declaring long covid as not a thing is just as daft as declaring it a thing.

[Victorian]

Employer and gvt equally share two thirds of the balance between 100% hours and hours worked.

 

100-34=66.  66/3=22 (each).  Rounded.

[doctor jambo]

20 minutes ago, jonesy said:

The government are continuing to get this wrong, in my opinion. Since March, they’ve thrown money (actually, future money, because it’s all borrowed) at people who can and want to work. 
 

A mass shielding programme for the vulnerable and at risk groups would have probably cost less, and allowed folk who can and want to get on with their lives to do so.

Can we not just give “shielders” full pay to stay at home?

[Costanza]

16 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

Well naw.  Not yet.  The effects are not known yet and wont be known until the whole thing is studied and peoples' health conditions are monitored going forward.    Declaring long covid as not a thing is just as daft as declaring it a thing.

There are studies already and significant anecdotal evidence (I posted links earlier in the thread)

Saying that other respiratory diseases also can cause long term health issues is fine, drawing equivalence (as some appear to be doing on this thread) with Covid, which is a currently highly infectious disease in the UK with no vaccine, seems a reductive way of looking at things.

The British Medical Journal are referring to this as Long Covid so I'll happily defer to them on this.

 

https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3489/rr-2

[Francis Albert]

2 hours ago, The Mighty Thor said:

I see from Twitter that Anders Tegnell, the poster boy for the absolute bangers on here now says Sweden will face short term lockdowns. 

 

Well I never. 

 

Poster boy? 

As one I suspect of your alleged "absolute bangers" what I have consistently said is that Sweden has done as a favour by adopting a different approach because it may provide some evidence of the merits of different approaches.  And I have also said consistently that it will be a long time maybe years before we can judge whether Sweden's alternative approach will prove to have been a success compared to others.

Yet you leap in on the basis of what you have read on Twitter,   to proclaim with apparent glee and a bit of gloating to rubbish  the Swedish approach just because short term lockdowns may be part of their approach.

[Morgan]

16 hours ago, Jambo 4 Ever said:

Eh?

Thank you for proving my point.

 

[heartstastic]

How Jih hasn't posted this yet i do not know.

 

 

This is from your lovely caring goverment folks...no scare tactics here none at all. Takes a lovely 'balanced' approach to the situation.

[The Internet]

[Shanks]

10 minutes ago, heartstastic said:

How Jih hasn't posted this yet i do not know.

 

 

This is from your lovely caring goverment folks...no scare tactics here none at all. Takes a lovely 'balanced' approach to the situation.

 

****ing hell. Goebbels would be proud of that work. 

[Robbofan99]

48 minutes ago, Brian Dundas said:

So you are suggesting no restrictions except for 'vulnerable' people? Mass events allowed, 50/60K people with no social distancing?

 

Just to be sure that would mean that you still couldn't visit or have visit elderly grandparents but you could have house parties again?

 

How do you protect for example cancer patients from COVID when they need treatment? 

Clearly they would be in the vulnerable group . ( cancer patients etc ) yes gradual opening up of everything would be my favoured option 

[Robbofan99]

40 minutes ago, doctor jambo said:

Can we not just give “shielders” full pay to stay at home?

That’s too sensible an option 

[Governor Tarkin]

53 minutes ago, Brian Dundas said:

 

How do you protect for example cancer patients from COVID when they need treatment? 

 

The same way we protect cancer patients from all the other nasties in general circulation when they need treatment.

[manaliveits105]

Thank god I dont drink tea

[doctor jambo]

3 minutes ago, Governor Tarkin said:

 

The same way we protect cancer patients from all the other nasties in general circulation when they need treatment.

Quite, dealing with the immunocompromised is not a new concept either

[luckydug]

3 minutes ago, jonesy said:

 

 

Come on lads. No matter your views on this, don't lower yourself to the language used by JiH. Keep it civil - respond and don't react. Anything else cheapens the discussion.

You've clearly not read some of your own posts then. 

[doctor jambo]

9 minutes ago, Robbofan99 said:

That’s too sensible an option 

But seriously - you could pay them full wages, deliver shopping, give them free Netflix or whatever and still save a fortune.

because this debt is all rolling up and going nowhere.

there has to be a more focussed way than we are doing currently .

 

[doctor jambo]

1 minute ago, jonesy said:

 

You mean support the vulnerable and allow the rest of the population to contribute to the wellbeing of the economy, thereby allowing long-term sustainability of NHS funding, in turn providing better healthcare to those who need it most? Is that really what you're suggesting? How dare you suggest a solution which impacts a lower number of people for a shorter term.

Means I hate old people apparently 

[Enzo Chiefo]

1 hour ago, Victorian said:

 

Well naw.  Not yet.  The effects are not known yet and wont be known until the whole thing is studied and peoples' health conditions are monitored going forward.    Declaring long covid as not a thing is just as daft as declaring it a thing.

It's the terminology I'm referring to, not the effects themselves. I'm sure there are people who suffer effects for weeks/months afterwards but they are effecta of Covid. Long Covid is simply a slogan designed, again, to scare people

[doctor jambo]

1 minute ago, Brian Dundas said:

I'm sure its not but I'd bet vaccinations of staff are big part of the process

Where available.

I accept flu vaccine every year as part of my duty to society and patients- even though it has risks, it has benefits.

This is a massive case of there is a fire in the kitchen, so to contain it we’ve demolished the rest of the house.

[doctor jambo]

1 minute ago, Brian Dundas said:

You are asking them to go into full lockdown while everyone else goes back to normal, some of them might not like that

Sure, that’s true, but it’s about keeping THEM safe, that’s the only point of any restrictions at all, the virus is otherwise very benign.

 

[Costanza]

1 minute ago, Enzo Chiefo said:

It's the terminology I'm referring to, not the effects themselves. I'm sure there are people who suffer effects for weeks/months afterwards but they are effecta of Covid. Long Covid is simply a slogan designed, again, to scare people

Sorry but can't see the logic or evidence for this assertion.  It's a term actually used within the Medical world to describe the long term impacts of Covid.

Watch this video or even better do some research. It's not a term described to scare people and to say it is, is disingenuous at best.

 

https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3489/rr-2

[Don Dan]

A further 33 people have died in UK hospitals after testing positive for coronavirus, including an 18-year-old.

Thirty of the deaths were in hospitals in England. Two more people died in Scotland, one died in Wales and Northern Ireland recorded no further deaths.

The people who died in England were aged between 18 and 101. All had known underlying health conditions except two, aged 53 and 82.

The dates of the deaths were between September 17 and September 23. Seven other deaths were reported with no positive Covid-19 test result.

 

[Cade]

Supermarkets starting to ration certain items to prevent arseholes raiding the shelves.

[doctor jambo]

38 minutes ago, Brian Dundas said:

My parents have actually said they'd be happy to do that and let the rest get on with life, they feel for young people and families and the impact that its had, however loads will not feel the same way, I think it would be hard sell. Even if we knew it was the right thing to do

Yet hundreds of students are shut in their rooms to protect their elderly relatives. 
Tens of millions suffer so a small number can golf/ shop and so on

Not balanced IMHO

[Francis Albert]

53 minutes ago, Costanza said:

Sorry but can't see the logic or evidence for this assertion.  It's a term actually used within the Medical world to describe the long term impacts of Covid.

Watch this video or even better do some research. It's not a term described to scare people and to say it is, is disingenuous at best.

 

https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3489/rr-2

One thing we have learnt from this is that doctors and other experts are not averse to a bit of publicity. Long Covid is a catchy title for something not yet well understood or defined and a catchy term that the media was likely to catch on to. "Covid after effects" would not work as well in scary forecasts and headlines.

[i8hibsh]

If we were told that as from next week we must hop in the street going from A to B you would see some ***** in this country saying "What leg do you wish for us to hop on Nicola?"

 

 

[JudyJudyJudy]

25 minutes ago, Boy Daniel said:

A further 33 people have died in UK hospitals after testing positive for coronavirus, including an 18-year-old.

Thirty of the deaths were in hospitals in England. Two more people died in Scotland, one died in Wales and Northern Ireland recorded no further deaths.

The people who died in England were aged between 18 and 101. All had known underlying health conditions except two, aged 53 and 82.

The dates of the deaths were between September 17 and September 23. Seven other deaths were reported with no positive Covid-19 test result.

 

Good to see more in depth information behind the stats.  Somehow it feels less scary.  Wonder why its so hard to find this info? hmmmm ?

[Victorian]

You can't just expect the government to impose a decree of choice to shield or choice not to shield on the basis of the mythical strategy to lift all the restrictions.   You can't expect people to accept making that choice.    There are huge numbers of people of older or middle age and/or with CV vulnerable conditions who currently have a chance to continue working and going about their lives under the current strategy of suppression.    People who need to work to pay the bills and support families.    People existing in a balance between requiring to work and accepting a level of risk while the virus is suppressed.    Open everything up and the risk for these people increases.   A lot of them will get a severe covid illness.

 

The only moral way is to try to enable as many people as possible to work,  pay their bills,  support their families and try to suppress their exposure.   Telling the working old/ill that they need to face the risk of an unsuppressed virus or choose financial trauma instead is basically throwing them under the bus.    A arbitrary 'going over the top of the trenches' so that others don't have to live for a while under some moderate restrictions?    

 

Making it a mythical personal choice actually removes choice for others.   Or makes life harder for people.

 

Your mythical personal choice theory will always have bad consequences for some.

[Jambo no 1]

2 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

Good to see more in depth information behind the stats.  Somehow it feels less scary.  Wonder why its so hard to find this info? hmmmm ?

I found these stats in the Evening Standard in the News App on my phone. Same as Boy Daniel. These stats are available if we look. 

Edited September 24, 2020 by Jambo no 1

[Jambo 4 Ever]

Over hundred people test positive at Napier 

[Don Dan]

4 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

Good to see more in depth information behind the stats.  Somehow it feels less scary.  Wonder why its so hard to find this info? hmmmm ?

I’m always surprised these stats are not widely available or is it some MSM don’t like publishing them. 

[Irufushi]

1 hour ago, heartstastic said:

How Jih hasn't posted this yet i do not know.

 

 

This is from your lovely caring goverment folks...no scare tactics here none at all. Takes a lovely 'balanced' approach to the situation.

**** sake 🤣🤣🤣

[Costanza]

7 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

One thing we have learnt from this is that doctors and other experts are not averse to a bit of publicity. Long Covid is a catchy title for something not yet well understood or defined and a catchy term that the media was likely to catch on to. "Covid after effects" would not work as well in scary forecasts and headlines.

Oh seriously, now it is publicity hungry doctors.

Do you seriously think that webinar I linked to is for publicity?

Instead of the contrariness, analyse the issue and then we can have a meaningful discussion.

Long Covid has not been featured heavily in any Government briefing  (UK or Scottish) so this scaremongering angle isn't based on reality.