Coronavirus.

[ainsworth74]

The point I'm trying to make is that they've gotten back down to the point where they can consider relaxing some restrictions, because their current infection rate is manageable again.

And it'll be interesting to see what happens next. Does it come roaring back like I think many expect or not. Because then whilst having it manageable again is a massive step in the right direction it doesn't mean a return to normality either socially or economically for quite some time yet....

 

[trebor79]

Very short, a 12 week period given as a 'fact' with no scientific input from the experts alongside to back up the claim and during questions completely rowed back on what the 12 week claim actually meant.

The fact the experts stayed silent even when they could have clarified that might be a time period in which infection rates might start to fall was telling. I think there might have been an advisor at the back of the room shaking his head and mouthing "NO!" which prompted the back pedalling.

I don't think we can say that until we see what happens when their restrictions are relaxed. I think we might be entering a period of stop-go, when activity is restricted to bring the death rate back down, and then more is allowed until it starts rising again.

That is exactly what the Imperial College research which has informed the policy says will have to happen. Suggests for about 2 years, with restrictions in place for about 2 thirds of that period.
That's assuming there's an effective treatment or effective vaccine ready for mass deployment within 18 months...

 

[edwin_m]

And it'll be interesting to see what happens next. Does it come roaring back like I think many expect or not. Because then whilst having it manageable again is a massive step in the right direction it doesn't mean a return to normality either socially or economically for quite some time yet....

If it's knocked down on the scale that seems to have happened in China (questionable in the UK I think) then it will start growing again from a very low base. Hopefully more slowly because the authorities are ready with testing and tracing and there will still be some distancing in place. We may even get to a position where there's enough confidence to predict the periods of restriction and of relative normality a few weeks ahead.

However the cycles in different countries will be out of sync so international travel will still be difficult.

 

[AM9]

Correct - the key dependencies are availability and occupancy of critical care beds. We cant breach that number. That is what all of this is about. It is really simple: Want your Granny to live? Stop in and stop away. Simple.

It seems that there are few posters here who maybe undestand those dependencies, but have taken the view that their personal (self assessed) risk profile is such that they won't suffer as a result of the NHS resource limitations. Presumably any vulnerable relatives or friends that they have are seen as collateral and have had their wellbeing mentally traded in favour protecting a future capitalist economy.

 

[R G NOW.]

The virus cant be affecting many folks in Gloucester as two busses past my flat were full.

 

[Mag_seven]

Despite the government advice to avoid pubs, one of our most distinguished virologists, Tim Martin boss of pub chain Wetherspoons is going to keep the pubs in his chain open because "There's hardly been any transmission of the virus within pubs and I think it's over the top to shut them."

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-wetherspoons-boss-says-over-the-top-to-shut-pubs-11960778

Shutting pubs over the coronavirus outbreak is "over the top" and they should stay open "for the duration", Wetherspoon boss Tim Martin has told Sky News.

The chain's founder and chairman argued that supermarkets were far more crowded and claimed there had "hardly been any transmission" of infection in pubs.

Maybe Boris should sack Professor Chris Whitty and employ Martin as Chief Medical Officer instead.

 

[JonathanH]

Correct - the key dependencies are availability and occupancy of critical care beds. We cant breach that number. That is what all of this is about. It is really simple: Want your Granny to live? Stop in and stop away. Simple.

That is so much the problem. It isn't about Granny. It is about Healthcare Professionals, normal people, everyone.

The BBC news yesterday carried a report that
* Everyone on respirators in Italian hospitals at the centre of the virus is under 60 - there is no room for older people now, that age is going to keep coming down
* Many of those are doctors and healthcare professionals
* Healthcare professionals are dying

It is healthcare professionals we need to protect (as well as granny) and as well as ourselves. Stop in and stay away.

 

[Mathew S]

How patronising of you, Mathew S. How patronising to state facts and point people towards expert opinions.

Hehe

On which note, I would genuinely like to point people towards this page on gov.uk https://www.gov.uk/government/group...mergencies-sage-coronavirus-covid-19-response, which was published this morning. It includes most of the scientific evidence which has been informing the official response to this pandemic (not quite all, as some of the detail of the actual models used will be published elsewhere, as per standard practice).
It is detailed stuff, and requires some investment of time and energy to get your head around, but mostly it's written in simple language as advice from the expert groups to laypeople (the PM and others). I would especially point out the dates on the documents, which show how the scientific understanding of this virus has evolved over time, particularly late last week and over the weekend.

 

[DarloRich]

That is so much the problem. It isn't about Granny. It is about Healthcare Professionals, normal people, everyone.

Agreed - but making it personal hits home harder. A distant doctor isnt important to these individuals. I bet their mum or granny is.

 

[JonathanH]

Agreed - but making it personal hits home harder. A distant doctor isnt important to these individuals. I bet their mum or granny is.

'Granny' makes normal people think that so long as they lock their granny away somewhere, they can keep going about their normal life because it won't affect them.

No one yet knows what the characteristics are of those who will end up in hospital - we really do need to let this start to take out 'normal' people in the population to make people think, those who battle it for three weeks on life support, and by then it will be spread too far.

 

[cactustwirly]

Most businesses affected by COVID-19 have announced closures of 4-6 weeks. That alone will cause abject misery to tens or even hundreds of thousands who work in these firms who lose their livelihood.

Twelve weeks, let alone more, is likely tonrepresent a disaster of epic proportions. It could lead to social deprivation, untold misery for millions, civil unrest and a substantial increase in suicides.

A solution is needed inside a month. Burying the nation’s heads in the sand in our back gardens is not going to solve this. “The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few - or the one.”

What do you suggest? There is no cure for this, the only way to stop it spreading, is to go full lockdown.
Yes the economic costs will be huge, but that is the situation with a global pandemic.
If we do not act now, this will just go on for much longer, and many thousands of people will lose their lives.

 

[Bantamzen]

Just to give some insight here, lots of people are concerned about the elderly and vulnerable. However lots of people are also concerned about the mental health of the same, and the younger and healthy as well. Even more people are concerned about the effects of anything more than a couple of weeks of lock down.

Scientific advice may well be to stay like this for months, maybe years. And in an ideal world that is what would happen, but this isn't an Ideal world. People need money to survive, and to make money people have to work. Some of us are lucky, we can do that from home. Most people however cannot. So the longer this goes on, the more people are pushed to the edge. And when people are backed up against the wall, they will fight back.

We are still some weeks away from that, but the clock is ticking. If anyone thinks the current situation is bad, just wait until the unrest starts. And mark my word, it will.

 

[Mogster]

Hehe

On which note, I would genuinely like to point people towards this page on gov.uk https://www.gov.uk/government/group...mergencies-sage-coronavirus-covid-19-response, which was published this morning. It includes most of the scientific evidence which has been informing the official response to this pandemic (not quite all, as some of the detail of the actual models used will be published elsewhere, as per standard practice).
It is detailed stuff, and requires some investment of time and energy to get your head around, but mostly it's written in simple language as advice from the expert groups to laypeople (the PM and others). I would especially point out the dates on the documents, which show how the scientific understanding of this virus has evolved over time, particularly late last week and over the weekend.

Very useful. Thanks for the link.

 

[JonathanH]

Scientific advice may well be to stay like this for months, maybe years. And in an ideal world that is what would happen, but this isn't an Ideal world. People need money to survive, and to make money people have to work. Some of us are lucky, we can do that from home. Most people however cannot. So the longer this goes on, the more people are pushed to the edge. And when people are backed up against the wall, they will fight back.

We are still some weeks away from that, but the clock is ticking. If anyone thinks the current situation is bad, just wait until the unrest starts. And mark my word, it will.

There are going to be a lot of vacancies in the NHS. (There already are.) Incredibly risky work in the current situation. This is like a war - there will need to be conscription into hospital work.

Money to survive is going to have to come from the Government and higher taxes on those lucky people who can still earn.

 

[cactustwirly]

Just to give some insight here, lots of people are concerned about the elderly and vulnerable. However lots of people are also concerned about the mental health of the same, and the younger and healthy as well. Even more people are concerned about the effects of anything more than a couple of weeks of lock down.

Scientific advice may well be to stay like this for months, maybe years. And in an ideal world that is what would happen, but this isn't an Ideal world. People need money to survive, and to make money people have to work. Some of us are lucky, we can do that from home. Most people however cannot. So the longer this goes on, the more people are pushed to the edge. And when people are backed up against the wall, they will fight back.

We are still some weeks away from that, but the clock is ticking. If anyone thinks the current situation is bad, just wait until the unrest starts. And mark my word, it will.

That's why people should be paid sick leave throughout the lockdown.
This is a global pandemic, nothing is going to be easy, difficult choices have to be made.
The longer we dither, the worse it will be, and the longer the lockdown will be.

Look at Italy, 3,500 people are dead, and the health system is overwhelmed.
The UK is more densely populated, and its health service is under even more pressure.
Early indications are that, the death rate in the UK is higher than in Italy (comparing same infection points)

 

[Bantamzen]

There are going to be a lot of vacancies in the NHS. (There already are.) Incredibly risky work in the current situation.

Money to survive is going to have to come from the Government and higher taxes on those lucky people who can still earn.

That isn't going to happen. We need real world solutions, and we need them now. Scientific modelling, no matter how well informed doesn't feed people. Our very basic instinct is for self preservation, push the boundaries too far and humans will revert to that basic need.

 

[cactustwirly]

That isn't going to happen. We need real world solutions, and we need them now.

Such as?

 

[JonathanH]

Look at Italy, 35,000 people are dead, and the health system is overwhelmed.

3,500 actually (and even with those numbers the health service is overwhelmed)

 

[Bletchleyite]

The UK is more densely populated

In a practical sense it's not. Italy has more nothingness, but its cities are far denser than our sprawling suburbs and they are, in those cities, primarily flat dwellers which create far more opportunities for spread.

The only city we have that's European-dense is London, and that seems to be where most of it is presently going on.

Early indications are that, the death rate in the UK is higher than in Italy (comparing same infection points)

On what basis is that? If it's deaths/tests positive, that won't work as we are not testing minor suspected cases. Our death rate could end up well over 20% if that continues, but it won't be 20% of people who get it that die, just 20% of those who end up in hospital. (Random figure, don't read into it).

 

[Islineclear3_1]

If anyone thinks the current situation is bad, just wait until the unrest starts. And mark my word, it will.

And indeed it has. Near to one of the hospitals where I work, the police have been called numerous times to the local Aldi store and I have seen people stealing the sandwiches from the open shelves in Greggs

 

[Mathew S]

That isn't going to happen. We need real world solutions, and we need them now. Scientific modelling, no matter how well informed doesn't feed people. Our very basic instinct is for self preservation, push the boundaries too far and humans will revert to that basic need.

That is why the government is compromising and trying to be as pragmatic as possible based on the expert advice. They know there's no way they'd get away with the kind of things that have been done in certain countries, and they know that there's only so long people will tolerate the huge disruption for. But it's a balancing act between keeping people happy(ish) and cooperative(ish) on one hand, and saving lives on the other.

As for real world solutions - the only one that exists is a vaccine. And that's being worked on just as fast as is humanly possible. Until then, we're all just going to have to wind our necks in, do our bit, and make the best of a horrible situation.

 

[cactustwirly]

3,500 actually (and even with those numbers the health service is overwhelmed)

So it is, idk where I got that number from.

 

[cactustwirly]

In a practical sense it's not. Italy has more nothingness, but its cities are far denser than our sprawling suburbs and they are, in those cities, primarily flat dwellers which create far more opportunities for spread.

The only city we have that's European-dense is London, and that seems to be where most of it is presently going on.



On what basis is that? If it's deaths/tests positive, that won't work as we are not testing minor suspected cases. Our death rate could end up well over 20% if that continues, but it won't be 20% of people who get it that die, just 20% of those who end up in hospital. (Random figure, don't read into it).

Yes but the cities are much further apart, and the villages/towns are smaller than the UK, which means that the virus has the potential to spread much more quickly.

No of deaths vs days since 10th death, I can't find the graph rn, but it showed the UK had a steeper curve than Italy, although not as steep as Spain.

 

[Bantamzen]

That's why people should be paid sick leave throughout the lockdown.
This is a global pandemic, nothing is going to be easy, difficult choices have to be made.
The longer we dither, the worse it will be, and the longer the lockdown will be.

Look at Italy, 3,500 people are dead, and the health system is overwhelmed.
The UK is more densely populated, and its health service is under even more pressure.
Early indications are that, the death rate in the UK is higher than in Italy (comparing same infection points)

And the demographics of Italy are very different, plus remember in the UK we are not recording potential cases where people self-isolate & do not seek medical advice. So it is way too early to draw such conclusions.

Such as?

Frankly I don't know, but long term lock downs are not the answer unless you want to see serious civil unrest.

And indeed it has. Near to one of the hospitals where I work, the police have been called numerous times to the local Aldi store and I have seen people stealing the sandwiches from the open shelves in Greggs

Reading the BBC news, there's already been some looting in London supermarkets. And this will be only the tip of the iceberg.

That is why the government is compromising and trying to be as pragmatic as possible based on the expert advice. They know there's no way they'd get away with the kind of things that have been done in certain countries, and they know that there's only so long people will tolerate the huge disruption for. But it's a balancing act between keeping people happy(ish) and cooperative(ish) on one hand, and saving lives on the other.

I actually do respect Johnson's pragmatic approach, however the world is what it is. This country will probably tolerate a few more weeks of the restrictions before things start to go wrong. And I suspect the same is true of other countries, indeed in Brazil where restrictions have only just started social unrest is already bubbling to the surface.

As for real world solutions - the only one that exists is a vaccine. And that's being worked on just as fast as is humanly possible. Until then, we're all just going to have to wind our necks in, do our bit, and make the best of a horrible situation.

A vaccine that is available to a large percentage of the population is probably 12-18 months away. Yes some are in early testing, but these have to be certified before mass production can even be considered. And that takes time. In the meantime it is not a matter of winding necks in, people need to feed their families and those on low or no incomes can't wait that long.

Look, I understand where you are all coming from. But at the same time you all need to realise that we cannot bunker down for months and hope it goes away. Any kind of governmental assistance will only last so long before the budget runs dry. As I've mentioned previously, in the US the cost of covid-19 is estimated at £350Bn by the end of March. Now consider the global cost, especially if truncated out for months. It doesn't even bear thinking about. We absolutely must protect the vulnerable, but I do not believe we are going to achieve that by locking up large quantifies of the population for months at a time on ever diminishing incomes. That is the recipe for real disaster on a global scale that has not been seen for centuries.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes but the cities are much further apart, and the villages/towns are smaller than the UK, which means that the virus has the potential to spread much more quickly.

Makes little difference - almost nobody is travelling between cities now.

No of deaths vs days since 10th death, I can't find the graph rn, but it showed the UK had a steeper curve than Italy, although not as steep as Spain.

Mostly in London, which is European-style dense, and apparently secondarily in the West Midlands, which isn't far off.

 

[CaptainHaddock]

Despite the best efforts of some on here to convince us that Armageddon is upon us, it should be stressed that, so long as you're not showing any symptoms of the virus or are in a vulnerable group, it's perfectly safe to go out for a walk. Indeed the Chief Medical Officer himself has stated that "Being outside in the park is a very good thing to do.”

Here's an article explaining why you should.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/mar/20/coronavirus-anxiety-nature

 

[Skymonster]

Look, I understand where you are all coming from. But at the same time you all need to realise that we cannot bunker down for months and hope it goes away. Any kind of governmental assistance will only last so long before the budget runs dry. As I've mentioned previously, in the US the cost of covid-19 is estimated at £350Bn by the end of March. Now consider the global cost, especially if truncated out for months. It doesn't even bear thinking about. We absolutely must protect the vulnerable, but I do not believe we are going to achieve that by locking up large quantifies of the population for months at a time on ever diminishing incomes. That is the recipe for real disaster on a global scale that has not been seen for centuries.

Absolutely - spot on conclusion.

 

[Mojo]

Our son's nurseries e-mailed the list at about 1600 or so this afternoon.

Only qualify if *both* parents fall into above categories (not sure about where single parents stand)

I ought to add, that this list is incorrect and is based upon speculation in a number of media outlets after a letter sent out by a handful of education providers a few weeks ago. I hope you don't mind, for the benefit of people catching up on this thread (like myself) if I edit your post adding a warning, and directing people to post #1181 (https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/coronavirus.201152/page-40#post-4493703) which provides the actual list. The Government was also previously clear that this is voluntary; if you have other safe childcare arrangements then you are not mandated to send your children to school, also of note is that not all schools are offering this service, and if your regular school is not, then your local authority should be contacted, as they will be making arrangements.

 

[Siemens Staines]

On what basis is that? If it's deaths/tests positive, that won't work as we are not testing minor suspected cases. Our death rate could end up well over 20% if that continues, but it won't be 20% of people who get it that die, just 20% of those who end up in hospital. (Random figure, don't read into it).

The day on day increase in the number of deaths in the UK is worse than Italy was at the same stage. Only Spain has higher a rate. Last nights updated statistics from the FT

https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch?lang=en

 

[Bletchleyite]

The day on day increase in the number of deaths in the UK is worse than Italy was at the same stage. Only Spain has higher a rate. Last nights updated statistics from the FT

Before you panic remember that because people don't (generally) just drop dead from it the day they catch it, it'll take 2-3 weeks for the increased measures to take effect from introduction. The deaths today will be from spread during the time when there were no restrictions bar a bit of handwashing.

The number of cases would be interesting were we still testing but we're not.