Coronavirus Super Thread ( merged )

[doctor jambo]

1 hour ago, Ray Gin said:

 

 

How would the cases and deaths be kept under control with no lockdown? If that curve continued they'd very quickly have similar numbers to what we saw in March/April, and with nothing to control the virus in place that would keep rising. We had 1500 at our peak before lockdown brought it back under control. 

 

How many daily deaths are acceptable to you?

Last data suggested excess deaths from last austerity measures was in the region of 130,000

[Don Dan]

Took them long enough.

NHS UK release educational video on how to wear and wash your mask.

 

 

Coronavirus UK: 21 new fatalities and 816 infections 10/7/2020

[Nucky Thompson]

17 minutes ago, Boy Daniel said:

 

 

 

Coronavirus UK: 21 new fatalities and 816 infections 10/7/2020

I'm only seeing 8 UK deaths reported 

[Ray Gin]

40 minutes ago, doctor jambo said:

Last data suggested excess deaths from last austerity measures was in the region of 130,000

 

Yet you continue to vote Tory because Labour taxes would have cost you another £20 a month on your £85k+ salary.

 

[JudyJudyJudy]

17 minutes ago, Nucky Thompson said:

I'm only seeing 8 UK deaths reported 

Me too

[Cade]

24 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

Me too

 

It's monday.

Weekend lag.

Tomorrow will catch it all up.

It's been this way for the last 5 months.

[JudyJudyJudy]

10 minutes ago, Cade said:

 

It's monday.

Weekend lag.

Tomorrow will catch it all up.

It's been this way for the last 5 months.

 The stats reported today on Tabby tracker are always for the day before.  Yesterday in England it was 8 deaths. 

Edited August 10, 2020 by JamesM48

[graygo]

1 hour ago, Nucky Thompson said:

I'm only seeing 8 UK deaths reported 

 

He's quoted 10th July, not sure if he meant to or not.

 

Edit: No, his figures are correct just the date that's wrong.

 

 

 

Coronavirus (COVID-19) in the UK_ UK Summary

Edited August 10, 2020 by graygo

[milky_26]

8 minutes ago, graygo said:

 

He's quoted 10th July, not sure if he meant to or not.

 

Edit: No, his figures are correct just the date that's wrong.

 

 

 

Coronavirus (COVID-19) in the UK_ UK Summary 303.32 kB · 1 download

yep they have updated the numbers to 21 deaths and 819? new infections

[Governor Tarkin]

1 hour ago, Ray Gin said:

 

Yet you continue to vote Tory because Labour taxes would have cost you another £20 a month on your £85k+ salary.

 

 

You say that like it's a bad thing.

[Ray Gin]

12 minutes ago, Lord BJ said:

😂

 

Your user name is very apt. Having a dig at a NHS doctor earns during COVID crisis 🤮 Not that long ago you were, probably, applauding him like a trained seal. 
 

How much he earns, his profession of even your faux assumptions on his rational for voting wont change how many people will die of trashing our economy via lockdown. It’s just shite ad hominem nonsense. 
 

Austerity cost circa 100k last time. That will be dwarfed by the economic fallout out of this.
 

Do you not think that should maybe factor into decision making? It really should necessitate  finding a more balanced solution which will result in less deaths and negative consequences. 
 

The doctor gave some very sensible alternates that we’re at least worth discussing. You couldn’t even contemplate them 🤣 Probably why he’s a doctor and your just Ray Gin. 

 

 

 

I'm pointing out the hypocrisy of him suddenly caring about the impact of austerity when he couldn't give two hoots last year when voting in the general election. 

 

I've no issue with what doctors earn. Voting for the party that inflicted this austerity because it might save him £20 a month, I do have issue with. 

Edited August 10, 2020 by Ray Gin

[Ray Gin]

Just now, Lord BJ said:

 

Nah your not. Plus not sure it matters we can all be hypocritical🤷🏻‍♂️

You’re suggestIon he’s uncaring about the health of people, when he’s a doctor. The profession dedicated to people’s health a wellbeing 😂
 

I hazard a guess he does give two hoots about people but just had different political perspective. 👍

 

He basically just suggested that it's no big deal if thousands of over 80s die early and that we lock up anyone in the high risk group indefinitely.

[Jambo-Jimbo]

Doesn't appear that the virus is weakening, well not going by the situation in Vietnam.

Vietnam had went 99 days with no infections until a small cluster was found in Da Nang around about 3 to 4 weeks ago, since then it's spread to multiple towns & cities and after having no deaths since the outbreak in January, they now have had 15 deaths in the last week.

 

But the most worrying thing is the Vietnamese authorities haven't a clue where the cluster in Da Nang came from, it just seemed to appear from nowhere.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-53690711

 

[Ray Gin]

1 minute ago, jonesy said:

I think that’s an exaggeration! 
 

Cant say I often agree with the Doc’s posts but he’s hit the nail on the head. Destroying lives to save lives is illogical. 

 

Going into local lockdowns early is the best way to avoid destroying lives.  

[JudyJudyJudy]

9 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

 

He basically just suggested that it's no big deal if thousands of over 80s die early and that we lock up anyone in the high risk group indefinitely.

No he didn't. He made sensible and workable alternatives to a lockdown. He actually advocates  continued shielding for  the vulnerable and that includes elderly.

[Don Dan]

2 hours ago, Nucky Thompson said:

I'm only seeing 8 UK deaths reported 

 

1 hour ago, graygo said:

 

He's quoted 10th July, not sure if he meant to or not.

 

Edit: No, his figures are correct just the date that's wrong.

 

 

 

Coronavirus (COVID-19) in the UK_ UK Summary 303.32 kB · 4 downloads

figures from worldometer 

 

12

UK

311,641

+816

46,526

+21

 

[ri Alban]

10 hours ago, Governor Tarkin said:

 

 

"Mrs Robinson at number 6 is putting her bins out without wearing a mask. Hopefully she dies of covid" 

 

Not at all, if she stands beside me in a shoap. Well... 

 

No, just a wee reality check. No ***** wants anyone to die, even the likes of Donald Trump. But the like of Rolf Harris and Co, I wouldn't bat an eyelid. 

[Ray Gin]

16 minutes ago, jonesy said:

I disagree - it creates uncertainty and fear that the rug can be pulled from under you at any time, especially for folk working in retail, hospitality, education and a while range of other industries.
 

It also spreads fear and distrust of others when, in reality, numbers of infections are low (not that they’re ever going to be accurate). 

 

 

That's the whole point. To control it while numbers are still low to avoid it spiralling back out of control, thousands more deaths and another nationwide, full scale, lockdown. 

[JudyJudyJudy]

3 minutes ago, Boy Daniel said:

 

figures from worldometer 

 

12

UK

311,641

+816

46,526

+21

 

Yes just been watching Channel 4 news and they said it was 21 .  Quite confusing really. 

[Ray Gin]

22 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

No he didn't. He made sensible and workable alternatives to a lockdown. He actually advocates  continued shielding for  the vulnerable and that includes elderly.

 

continued shielding for  the vulnerable and that includes elderly = locking up the high risk group indefinitely

 

Just let the virus roam wild and free in society and they'll never be able to leave the house again.

 

[Don Dan]

1 minute ago, JamesM48 said:

Yes just been watching Channel 4 news and they said it was 21 .  Quite confusing really. 

I think the 8 may be NHS England deaths plus deaths in one of the other countries. You are right it is confusing. 

[JudyJudyJudy]

1 minute ago, Ray Gin said:

 

continued shielding for  the vulnerable and that includes elderly = locking up the high risk group indefinitely

 

Just let the virus roam wild and free in society and they'll never be able to leave the house again.

 

well your alternative seems to be an indefinite lockdown ?

[JudyJudyJudy]

1 minute ago, Boy Daniel said:

I think the 8 may be NHS England deaths plus deaths in one of the other countries. You are right it is confusing. 

Yeah . Still relatively how figures considering England has a population of over 60 million. 

[Governor Tarkin]

1 hour ago, Lord BJ said:

 

Probably why he’s a doctor and your just Ray Gin. 

 

 

 

Ray's a good guy but that was an excellent post culminating in a wonderfully executed put-down.

Honest, cutting, but good natured. 

9.5/10

 

Edited August 10, 2020 by Governor Tarkin

[Ray Gin]

Just now, JamesM48 said:

well your alternative seems to be an indefinite lockdown ?

 

I don't have an alternative, the official approach is fine for me. Local lockdowns when spikes occur and relative normality elsewhere. 

[JudyJudyJudy]

3 minutes ago, Lord BJ said:

Anyway economic and social consequences of lockdown. Discuss. 

Both of them are intertwined.  The main economic issue would be mass unemployment.  This then has the massive impact of individuals.  Being employed gives financial security, feelings of self worth and higher self esteem which in turn help with one's mental health and well being.

 

Being unemployed could mean loss of a house, certainly a big impact on mental health / self esteem and in turn can affect physical health.  All this in turn would be a burden on the NHS to help people with issues related to that.

 

If  a person is married then this can impact on their relationship and in turn the whole family causing family breakdowns, children being upset and their mental well being impacted too. 

 

Its a never ending spiral of consequences. 

 

 

[Ray Gin]

16 minutes ago, Lord BJ said:

😂

He really hasn’t, that you just making stuff up now. He suggested shielding that age group😂

 

Anyway economic and social consequences of lockdown. Discuss. 
 

 

 

 

How will that shielding ever end if the virus is just left to run rampant? It is effectively locking them up in their houses indefinitely. 

 

Small local lockdowns would be less devastating than hundreds of thousands all over the country being off sick for weeks and being left with lasting health problems. Do you really think that governments across the world haven't weighed up the pros and cons? Nobody has decided to screw their economy for a laugh. 

[JudyJudyJudy]

4 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

 

How will that shielding ever end if the virus is just left to run rampant? It is effectively locking them up in their houses indefinitely. 

 

Small local lockdowns would be less devastating than hundreds of thousands all over the country being off sick for weeks and being left with lasting health problems. Do you really think that governments across the world haven't weighed up the pros and cons? Nobody has decided to screw their economy for a laugh. 

Your arguments are truly bizarre.   So you think its ok to play havoc with people's lives by shutting down pubs etc when they depend on the financial aspects of working ?  Then re opening them again a few weeks later then closing them ?  Its almost abusive.  Those who are vulnerable tend not to be working due to age or disability therefore it is not a  great hardship for them to be quarantined.  

[Ray Gin]

10 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

Your arguments are truly bizarre.   So you think its ok to play havoc with people's lives by shutting down pubs etc when they depend on the financial aspects of working ?  Then re opening them again a few weeks later then closing them ?  Its almost abusive.  Those who are vulnerable tend not to be working due to age or disability therefore it is not a  great hardship for them to be quarantined.  

 

No great hardship to be stuck in your house indefinitely with no social contact you say?

 

[Taffin]

1 minute ago, Ray Gin said:

 

No great hardship to be stuck in your house indefinitely with no social contact you say?

 

 

They could go out and continue to socially distance and remain in a support bubble I guess. It's not great though, but neither is the current solution.

[JudyJudyJudy]

7 minutes ago, Taffin said:

 

They could go out and continue to socially distance and remain in a support bubble I guess. It's not great though, but neither is the current solution.

Exactly 

[graygo]

1 hour ago, JamesM48 said:

Yes just been watching Channel 4 news and they said it was 21 .  Quite confusing really. 

 

They said 8 earlier then suspended the deaths figure because of an anomaly with the count then updated it to 21.

 

Here's a screenshot from earlier.

 

 

Edited August 10, 2020 by graygo

[Taffin]

1 minute ago, JamesM48 said:

Exactly 

 

It feels like a weigh up between some people suffering really badly or everyone suffering a bit. I'd always be in favour of the latter, but, in this situation the worry is that the endgame of the latter ends up in everyone suffering really, really badly. Hopefully it doesn't come to that and the good figures continue.

[JudyJudyJudy]

1 minute ago, graygo said:

 

They said 8 earlier then suspended the deaths figure because of an anomaly with the count then updated it to 21.

Oh right that explains it 

[TheOak88]

3 hours ago, Ray Gin said:

 

Yet you continue to vote Tory because Labour taxes would have cost you another £20 a month on your £85k+ salary.

 

 

Bit below the belt this. 

 

The Tories did not run on a platform of austerity at last years election. 

 

Also having a go at NHS workers for their salaries been too high is about as Tory an opinion as you could get. 

[doctor jambo]

Just now, JamesM48 said:

Exactly 

Someone has to pay pensions / benefits and so on.

This economic cluster **** will need to be paid for by someone .

The only people not shafted so far ( the Uber Rich will never be caught!) are the workers.

The better off self employed just got shafted by not being eligible for furlough.

only so much you can milk from folk

[graygo]

2 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

Oh right that explains it 

 

[Ray Gin]

2 minutes ago, TheOak88 said:

 

Bit below the belt this. 

 

The Tories did not run on a platform of austerity at last years election. 

 

Also having a go at NHS workers for their salaries been too high is about as Tory an opinion as you could get. 

 

I don't think his salary is too high. I think begrudging £20 in taxes for public services when earning that amount is a bit off though. 

[Konrad von Carstein]

11 minutes ago, weehammy said:

Austerity that was inflicted due to the previous party of government bankrupting the country.

Global crash. Anyone? Anyone?

 

SNP voter BTW.

[CJGJ]

There does not seem to be any clear approach we should all follow

 

I am wary of the UK actions being the right way to go but we are on that path and too late to change

 

A short while ago people were deriding Sweden for their approach and yet recent information seems to show they are better off than many of the countries who are on the same path as us

 

Like it or not we cannot continue to simply follow a lockdown strategy with cases of mental health on the rise and will  continue to do so whilst we follow our current plans.... who do we help, those who have the virus or those who are suffering from our actions to control the virus ?

Other issues regarding being able to afford the current plans will also come to the fore and years of austerity will follow IF we get back to any kind of normality

[JudyJudyJudy]

1 minute ago, CJGJ said:

There does not seem to be any clear approach we should all follow

 

I am wary of the UK actions being the right way to go but we are on that path and too late to change

 

A short while ago people were deriding Sweden for their approach and yet recent information seems to show they are better off than many of the countries who are on the same path as us

 

Like it or not we cannot continue to simply follow a lockdown strategy with cases of mental health on the rise and will  continue to do so whilst we follow our current plans.... who do we help, those who have the virus or those who are suffering from our actions to control the virus ?

Other issues regarding being able to afford the current plans will also come to the fore and years of austerity will follow IF we get back to any kind of normality

👍👍👍

[Victorian]

Ray Gin is right.   There needs to be some kind of middle ground regime of virus suppression + great vigilance + allowing education to continue + allowing as much of the economy to operate without it causing an unmanageable rise in infections.

 

Just to rule out being able to have short term,  localised lockdowns really isn't going to achieve the right outcome.   Governments could abandon attempts to suppress infections,   but what happens if it all rises to similar levels at the peak?     

 

The economy has already taken a historic smashing.   There doesn't appear to be a zero jeopardy solution to prevent even more damage.   

[jake]

9 hours ago, Governor Tarkin said:

 

His mothers.

😂

Fekin hell mate.

😂

[Ray Gin]

22 minutes ago, Lord BJ said:

Ahh and discussion breaks out. 
 

Well it will end because we either discover effective treatment, vaccine, achieve herd immunity or it just burns itself out. Lockdown or shielding doesn’t really alter the speed of achieving these things 

 

Shielding is about protecting the most vulnerable from a disease which is most deadly to them. It’s just a scaled back version of lockdown but balancing the risk to general population who can largely go about life with some added protections, face masks etc the risks that general healthy population would have to risk of are commensurate with other risks we have to live with. 

 

 

None of those things are guaranteed to happen. They could be stuck indoors with no contact for years if waiting on any of those things. My mother is in the shielding group and it was certainly not a scaled back version of lockdown. It was full pelt, maximum lockdown. She couldn't see any of her family, wasn't allowed out to the shops, and pretty much had to stay in the house 24/7. She was only allowed to do any of these things once rules got relaxed due to dropping numbers via lockdown.

 

Inflicting that on people with no end in sight would be brutal.

[jake]

4 hours ago, doctor jambo said:

Depends what you regard as acceptable.

1- covid has shortened the life expectancy of a large number of people over 80 years old with pre-existing conditions- by how much we dont know and cannot tell.

Many in nursing homes

2 - lock down will cost thousands of lives to be shortended by decades via delayed cancer diagnosis and cancelled treatments.

3 the upcoming ultra recession will cost countless young lives ( how many did the last austerity cost? certainly tens of thousands and this one is going to make the last one look like a cake walk!)

 Keep nursing homes locked down and anyone over ?70 years old locked down + some shielding groups would be my guess, otherwise the consequences will be apocalyptic

Been saying or thinking the same for a while.

You have to ask if again we are sort of remortgaging again the future generations to accommodate the elderly.

That probably sounds very harsh so I apologise .

But the collateral damage especially to school kids will be one to watch.

 

I'm not suggesting a cull by default.

And I'm not looking to get involved in the political slant a few posters seem desperate too.

But if we are talking death then we should look at all death.

Anyway good post Doc and I've had a few run ins with you but good to hear about a medical problem from a medical pro .

 

[Ray Gin]

7 minutes ago, Lord BJ said:

Your correct none of these things will definitely 

happen but I can almost guarantee we will figure it out. 
 

No one is suggesting we just start shielding over 70s or whatever permanently. That’s just something, else, you made up. 🤷🏻‍♂️
 

It’s just a control measure you bring in as opposed to going straight down into full lock down of local lockdown. It’s really just a more nuanced method of lockdown precautions you would flex as appropriate. It’s does not prevent local or full lockdown if they were required. 

 

 

The doc literally said "Keep nursing homes locked down and anyone over 70 years old locked down + some shielding groups would be my guess".

 

How do you do propose that it would be done temporarily with the virus rampant in the rest of society?

Edited August 10, 2020 by Ray Gin

[jake]

1 minute ago, Ray Gin said:

 

How do you do propose that it would be done temporarily with the virus rampant in the rest of society? 

I have a child who was full pelt lockdown.

My parents are both over 70.

They all 3 will always be susceptible to various threats.

I'm as worried as you are.

But we cannot stop the world from turning.

My child also has breathing problems relating to her serious health conditions .

I'd like it if we stopped polluting the fek out the planet which is causing mass extinction.

I'm not having a go mate you are obviously worried .

I'm just asking if theres not part of you that thinks it's all a bit no right given cause v effect.

Please dont think I'm having a go.

[Ray Gin]

1 minute ago, jake said:

I have a child who was full pelt lockdown.

My parents are both over 70.

They all 3 will always be susceptible to various threats.

I'm as worried as you are.

But we cannot stop the world from turning.

My child also has breathing problems relating to her serious health conditions .

I'd like it if we stopped polluting the fek out the planet which is causing mass extinction.

I'm not having a go mate you are obviously worried .

I'm just asking if theres not part of you that thinks it's all a bit no right given cause v effect.

Please dont think I'm having a go.

 

We can all accept that we need to take a bit of a hit rather than deciding to instead completely **** 15-20% of the population though.

 

(over 70s = 15%, another 5% for risk groups a complete guess)

[jake]

2 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

 

We can all accept that we need to take a bit of a hit rather than deciding to instead completely **** 15-20% of the population though.

 

(over 70s = 15%, another 5% for risk groups a complete guess)

What per cent of over 70s infected died from it though?

And if the effect on the rest of the population is to increase deaths by for example cancer treatments etc the horrible reality is that we maybe have to choose .

To use a shite metaphor and I hope I dont offend .

If there was one seat left on a lifeboat who gets it?

I know shite but I hope you get where I'm coming from.

 

[Dawnrazor]

14 minutes ago, jake said:

I have a child who was full pelt lockdown.

My parents are both over 70.

They all 3 will always be susceptible to various threats.

I'm as worried as you are.

But we cannot stop the world from turning.

My child also has breathing problems relating to her serious health conditions .

I'd like it if we stopped polluting the fek out the planet which is causing mass extinction.

I'm not having a go mate you are obviously worried .

I'm just asking if theres not part of you that thinks it's all a bit no right given cause v effect.

Please dont think I'm having a go.

I hope your daughter is fine though all this Jake, your parents too, it's difficult times for millions for different reasons 🤞👍