Coronavirus.

[Siemens Staines]

Exactly why the number of reported cases is almost meaningless because it doesn't tell you the true number of cases. The mortality rate is less open to ambiguity (so long as countries are honest) but it does lag infection rate by around three weeks as you say. This lengthy but interesting article from Tomas Pueyo goes in to some detail about working out the true picture of the number of infections. Worth a read if you have half an hour to spare

https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-act-today-or-people-will-die-f4d3d9cd99ca

 

[Mathew S]

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.



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



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



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.



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.

I think, in reality, we agree. In all that I've posted, I've tried to concentrate on the bit I know and understand, at least a little bit, which is the science. I completely agree that the economic and societal cost of the whole thing is insane. My point, though, is that until we can start vaccinating (or, actually, to go back to something mentioned earlier in the thread, the serology test is made to work and comes on line, which is sounding like it may only be weeks away), everything that we do to help the economy costs lives, like some horrific see-saw. Right now, the priority, imho, has to be saving lives and - in the short to medium term - just deal with the economic impact as best as possible. Longer term, you're right, pragmatism is going to be the name of the game, but we're not there yet.

 

[stevetay3]

I am finding all this very difficult to grasp.If this is going to be such a mild illness and some won’t even know thay have got it, according to the governments chief health advisers.Why then is the whole world going into meltdown

 

[BlueFox]

I am finding all this very difficult to grasp.If this is going to be such a mild illness and some won’t even know thay have got it, according to the governments chief health advisers.Why then is the whole world going into meltdown

If we do nothing, half a million people in this country could die. Do you think that's acceptable?

If we slow down the spread enough, most of those people would survive, because they'll get proper medical care. Do nothing, and the hospitals won't be able to cope.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

I am finding all this very difficult to grasp.If this is going to be such a mild illness and some won’t even know thay have got it, according to the governments chief health advisers.Why then is the whole world going into meltdown

It is not a mild illness if people are dying

 

[Peter Kelford]

I am finding all this very difficult to grasp.If this is going to be such a mild illness and some won’t even know thay have got it, according to the governments chief health advisers.Why then is the whole world going into meltdown

Some comparisons with the relatively benign influenza:

Is medication available:
Flu: Y
Coronavirus: N

Mortality Rate:
Flu: <0.1%
Coronavirus: 3.5%+

Incubation Period:
Flu: 1 to 4 days
Coronavirus: 4 to 14 days

Hospitalisation Rate:
Flu: 1.4%
Coronavirus: 15%

Infection Rate:
Flu: 1.4
Coronavirus: 2.25

Infection Window:
Flu: From one day prior to symptoms until recovery
Coronavirus: Unknown

 

[JonathanH]

I am finding all this very difficult to grasp.If this is going to be such a mild illness and some won’t even know thay have got it, according to the governments chief health advisers.Why then is the whole world going into meltdown

No one has had this illness before so there is no immunity in the population and there is no research available about who it affects - you could get it and not know or you could end up in hospital fighting for life. The health service simply can't cope with everyone in the country getting a disease at once.

The government has got to protect the health service. That is why the whole world is going into meltdown.

We are only in early days and some hospitals are already full. We all have to try and keep the numbers down to meet the capacity of hospitals.

https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/present...tor-nhs-cant-cope-with-coronavirus-stay-home/

 

[stevetay3]

It is not a mild illness if people are dying

It definitely is not a mild illness so why are these top advisers saying otherwise

 

[CaptainHaddock]

If we do nothing, half a million people in this country could die. Do you think that's acceptable?

If we slow down the spread enough, most of those people would survive, because they'll get proper medical care. Do nothing, and the hospitals won't be able to cope.

"Could die", not "will die" and I have no idea where you get your half a million figure from.

No one knows what's going to happen in the future. The figure I've seen is that as many as 20,000 people in the UK "could" die of the coronavirus, which sounds like a lot until you realise that 1,500 people in the UK die each day anyway. At times like this it's not helpful to be scaremongering.

 

[JonathanH]

It definitely is not a mild illness so why are these top advisers saying otherwise

They are trying not to cause mass panic - it is not the black death.

 

[JonathanH]

"Could die", not "will die" and I have no idea where you get your half a million figure from.

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/im...-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf

Worth a read if you don't believe that 500,000 will die.

 

[stevetay3]

They are trying not to cause mass panic - it is not the black death.

It’s working well on me

 

[Bletchleyite]

It definitely is not a mild illness so why are these top advisers saying otherwise

It can be a mild illness. The problem is for those for whom it isn't.

 

[Bletchleyite]

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/im...-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf

Worth a read if you don't believe that 500,000 will die.

Now read it again, properly this time.

 

[BlueFox]

"Could die", not "will die" and I have no idea where you get your half a million figure from.

If we do nothing, half a million is a conservative estimate. The experts have predicted that up to 80% of the population couild get it. More than 1% who get it die, and it will be higher once the hospitals are overwhelmed. It could be a lot more than half a million.

No one knows what's going to happen in the future. The figure I've seen is that as many as 20,000 people in the UK "could" die of the coronavirus, which sounds like a lot until you realise that 1,500 people in the UK die each day anyway. At times like this it's not helpful to be scaremongering.

Did you read the post I was replying to?
I wasn't saying I think half a million will die. That was an estimate on the number if we don't do anything to slow down the spread. Did you read the post I was replying to?

 

[JonathanH]

Now read it again, properly this time.

Yes, I agree that it is the 'do nothing' scenario - sorry I should have written 'could' rather than 'will'. However, 500,000 (or more) will needlessly die if the measures aren't heeded.

 

[JonathanH]

No one knows what's going to happen in the future. The figure I've seen is that as many as 20,000 people in the UK "could" die of the coronavirus, which sounds like a lot until you realise that 1,500 people in the UK die each day anyway. At times like this it's not helpful to be scaremongering.

The problem with saying that 1,500 die every day is that in the course of those people dying, they don't each cause another five to ten people to die with them and they don't tend to kill health service professionals. Death of natural causes tends not to be contagious.

If all of the people who die from Coronavirus were to do so in isolation and we didn't try to save them by killing healthy people in that process, maybe it would be reasonable to take the attitude that 1,500 people die anyway.

 

[87electric]

Experts, advisors, experts, advisors......
CaptainHaddock......I’m with you for once. Too much scaremongering.

 

[AM9]

Standby for the rants from those who can't (or can't be bothered to) give up their visits to the pub.

 

[nlogax]

Standby for the rants from those who can't (or can't be bothered to) give up their visits to the pub.

Standing by.

I think this is a great decision, and certainly overdue. Certainly for those of us in the M25 who've seen and stand to suffer by widespread ignorance of distancing advice.

 

[CaptainHaddock]

The problem with saying that 1,500 die every day is that in the course of those people dying, they don't each cause another five to ten people to die with them and they don't tend to kill health service professionals. Death of natural causes tends not to be contagious.

If all of the people who die from Coronavirus were to do so in isolation and we didn't try to save them by killing healthy people in that process, maybe it would be reasonable to take the attitude that 1,500 people die anyway.

That may be true but AFAIK no one has died solely from coronavirus, every victim had underlying heath conditions. So there's no logical reason to think that each coronovirus death would cause any health service professional to die as a consequence of coming into contact with them.

 

[JonathanH]

That may be true but AFAIK no one has died solely from coronavirus, every victim had underlying heath conditions. So there's no logical reason to think that each coronovirus death would cause any health service professional to die as a consequence of coming into contact with them.

This is a new disease. The first people to die are, of course, those with underlying health conditions. They have absolutely no chance against this virus. We can't save those people.

There are, however, people in intensive care who did not have underlying health conditions. The fact that they are healthy means that they are battling the virus, needing health service care. They are occupying a precious bed and in due course, some of them will lose that battle.

We are about at the point where the news is going to stop reporting whether deaths are of people with or without underlying health conditions.

We are about at the point where people with underlying health conditions aren't even going to receive hospital treatment.

There is every reason to think that health service professionals are going to start to fall and that is not what they signed up for.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Standing by.

I think this is a great decision, and certainly overdue. Certainly for those of us in the M25 who've seen and stand to suffer by widespread ignorance of distancing advice.

Agreed. People were royally taking the mick, and Tim Martin's actions were beyond reprehensible and a major cause of the need to do it.

He (not Bojo) should resign.

 

[BlueFox]

That may be true but AFAIK no one has died solely from coronavirus, every victim had underlying heath conditions. So there's no logical reason to think that each coronovirus death would cause any health service professional to die as a consequence of coming into contact with them.

There have been people hospitalised in the UK without any underlying conditions. But they've recovered because the hospitals have been able to cope, so far.

Underlying conditions doesn't mean someone's at death's door. Underlying conditions can include things like diabetes, asthma etc, where people can live normal lives.

Some of the high risk factors are things that often go undiagnosed for years, like diabetes and hypertension, so a lot of people are at a higher risk than they think.

 

[Skymonster]

If we do nothing, half a million people in this country could die. Do you think that's acceptable?.

Half a million is less than 1% of the country’s population. The average death rate is already around 1% so if we assume that some of those who would die of Coronavirus would have died anyway (especially as Coronavirus will affect those with existing conditions more than others) then the overall death rate this year would still likely be less than 2%.

So to answer the question: yes, I contend it is something that while devastating should be accepted in order to assure the property of the country which in the light of the latest government action has been wrecked - which in turn will cause untold misery for millions, social deprivation and early deaths.

 

[trainophile]

Agreed. People were royally taking the mick, and Tim Martin's actions were beyond reprehensible and a major cause of the need to do it.

He (not Bojo) should resign.

You don't resign if you own the business. I agree though that Tim Martin has been very crass in his attitude to this.

 

[dtaylor84]

should be accepted in order to assure the property of the country which in the light of the latest government action has been wrecked - which in turn will cause untold misery for millions, social deprivation and early deaths.

I was going to respond to this but writing a response is making me too angry.

 

[DarloRich]

A better performance by Johnson. Less bluff and bluster, more maturity and more sober. Reverted to type in the q&a session mind. Needs to sort out his hands and stop the bloody knocking on the lectern! He still needs to be firmer on people not staying at home. They are morally deficient and will kill people.

The employment support package is incredible and must be a complete anathema to the Tories.

Experts, advisors, experts, advisors......
CaptainHaddock......I’m with you for once. Too much scaremongering.

You and others here need to open your eyes and ears.

 

[DarloRich]

That may be true but AFAIK no one has died solely from coronavirus, every victim had underlying heath conditions. So there's no logical reason to think that each coronovirus death would cause any health service professional to die as a consequence of coming into contact with them.

So far. This wont hold for much longer. Soon healthy people will die. Then what? If we all stop at home we might help get this under control. If you don't want to do that then so be it. My views on such selfishness aren't for a family audience.

Half a million is less than 1% of the country’s population. The average death rate is already around 1% so if we assume that some of those who would die of Coronavirus would have died anyway (especially as Coronavirus will affect those with existing conditions more than others) then the overall death rate this year would still likely be less than 2%.

So to answer the question: yes, I contend it is something that while devastating should be accepted in order to assure the property of the country which in the light of the latest government action has been wrecked - which in turn will cause untold misery for millions, social deprivation and early deaths.

this is a preposterous post.

 

[ainsworth74]

A better performance by Johnson.

I thought the Chancellor looked for statesmanlike personally. Made me kinda wish he was standing one podium over almost...