The big Coronavirus thread

tailwindhome

Generation X really are financially shafted.

I mean, I know millenials have their problems to face, but at least they have some time to recover.

focuszing723

The WHO's message is 'test test test' follow the infection so it's known where it is and stop it spreading. It makes sense, but bizarrely so does herd immunity to me too, build the percentage of people who have immunity.

I guess our method is good, but how long can the vunerable be kept isolated for until a vaccine or similar is ready?

bobmcstuff

focuszing723 said:

The WHO's message is 'test test test' follow the infection so it's known where it is and stop it spreading. It makes sense, but bizarrely so does herd immunity to me too, build the percentage of people who have immunity.

I guess our method is good, but how long can the vunerable be kept isolated for until a vaccine or similar is ready?

I understand the concept we're going for (although I think it will become politically impossible very soon/already), but I would have thought we should be doing more testing generally, so we have a better idea of how it's spreading.

Microsoft Teams fell down for several hours today as pretty much everyone who's able seems to have gone to home working... Apparently they've had over 500% increase in usage in the last month.

Supposed to be at a wedding in Scotland at the weekend. Not really sure about that.

surrey_commuter

focuszing723 said:

The WHO's message is 'test test test' follow the infection so it's known where it is and stop it spreading. It makes sense, but bizarrely so does herd immunity to me too, build the percentage of people who have immunity.

I guess our method is good, but how long can the vunerable be kept isolated for until a vaccine or similar is ready?

they are now saying that herd immunity is a byproduct rather than a strategy. The strategy is to let it run until the NHS reaches capacity and then to calm it down (but not switch it off) so that the NHS is full without being overwhelmed.

So it depends on whether you think their modelling based on inadequate testing is good enough and that their attempts at controlling it prove to be more effective than other countries who have thrown everything at it and are really struggling to dampen it down

rick_chasey

surrey_commuter said:

focuszing723 said:

The WHO's message is 'test test test' follow the infection so it's known where it is and stop it spreading. It makes sense, but bizarrely so does herd immunity to me too, build the percentage of people who have immunity.

I guess our method is good, but how long can the vunerable be kept isolated for until a vaccine or similar is ready?

they are now saying that herd immunity is a byproduct rather than a strategy. The strategy is to let it run until the NHS reaches capacity and then to calm it down (but not switch it off) so that the NHS is full without being overwhelmed.

So it depends on whether you think their modelling based on inadequate testing is good enough and that their attempts at controlling it prove to be more effective than other countries who have thrown everything at it and are really struggling to dampen it down

(This hours' opinion) I do think we are all expecting too much of the gov't in terms of controlling the spread.

surrey_commuter

rick_chasey said:

Pfft I'm clueless SC. Depends on what hour of the day it is on how i'm feeling about the whole thing.

RN I'm thinking the financial crash and subsequent recession will be worse, but an hour ago I thought the opposite.

I think the early months of this will be economically brutal.

mrfpb

There was talk of increasing testing to 10,000 per day last week, but our current total (44,000) only averages at 1,000 per day. Not great for containment.

TheBigBean

mrfpb said:

There was talk of increasing testing to 10,000 per day last week, but our current total (44,000) only averages at 1,000 per day. Not great for containment.

I don't think knowing precise numbers really helps. They just need to know approximately how many people have it. Then it is a simple matter - does the person have pneumonia or not.

focuszing723

Number10. Recommending isolation for two weeks now if symptoms are shown and for the whole household to do the same. Advice to avoid non essential contact especially the vunerable groups. Also mentioned closing down support for large events, that point didn't seem too clear to me. Still not closing down schools at this point.

surrey_commuter

TheBigBean said:

mrfpb said:

There was talk of increasing testing to 10,000 per day last week, but our current total (44,000) only averages at 1,000 per day. Not great for containment.

I don't think knowing precise numbers really helps. They just need to know approximately how many people have it. Then it is a simple matter - does the person have pneumonia or not.

would it not be useful to know if the number of cases is a few thousand or a few hundred thousand?

tailwindhome

surrey_commuter said:

TheBigBean said:

mrfpb said:

There was talk of increasing testing to 10,000 per day last week, but our current total (44,000) only averages at 1,000 per day. Not great for containment.

I don't think knowing precise numbers really helps. They just need to know approximately how many people have it. Then it is a simple matter - does the person have pneumonia or not.

would it not be useful to know if the number of cases is a few thousand or a few hundred thousand?

The key number is I suppose how many people are hospitalized

tailwindhome

rick_chasey said:

(This hours' opinion) I do think we are all expecting too much of the gov't in terms of controlling the spread.

Are the Govt expecting too little of the people?

coopster_the_1st

surrey_commuter said:

TheBigBean said:

mrfpb said:

There was talk of increasing testing to 10,000 per day last week, but our current total (44,000) only averages at 1,000 per day. Not great for containment.

I don't think knowing precise numbers really helps. They just need to know approximately how many people have it. Then it is a simple matter - does the person have pneumonia or not.

would it not be useful to know if the number of cases is a few thousand or a few hundred thousand?

You know this pretty accurately from deaths and hospitalised cases

coopster_the_1st

rick_chasey said:

(This hours' opinion) I do think we are all expecting too much of the gov't in terms of controlling the spread.

We are in agreement

TheBigBean

surrey_commuter said:

TheBigBean said:

mrfpb said:

There was talk of increasing testing to 10,000 per day last week, but our current total (44,000) only averages at 1,000 per day. Not great for containment.

I don't think knowing precise numbers really helps. They just need to know approximately how many people have it. Then it is a simple matter - does the person have pneumonia or not.

would it not be useful to know if the number of cases is a few thousand or a few hundred thousand?

Of course, so sampling is important. You don't need to do that many tests for that.

pblakeney

No more social events.
Apart from the lack of fun factor that is a lot of businesses going under.

kingstongraham

coopster_the_1st said:

kingstongraham said:

Will there ever be testing in this country of people who might or might not have had it? I've no idea if I have it very mildly or not at all - it would be useful in the future for people to know if they are no longer any risk.

That's not going to be the priority for a while, if ever. Why would you waste valuable testing resource on you when it is better to know the continued virus situation of medical staff?

Whitty: "what would be transformational would be the ability to test to see if people have had the disease." At the moment the test only identifies if they currently have it. But they are working on it as rapidly as possible.

surrey_commuter

tailwindhome said:

surrey_commuter said:

TheBigBean said:

mrfpb said:

There was talk of increasing testing to 10,000 per day last week, but our current total (44,000) only averages at 1,000 per day. Not great for containment.

I don't think knowing precise numbers really helps. They just need to know approximately how many people have it. Then it is a simple matter - does the person have pneumonia or not.

would it not be useful to know if the number of cases is a few thousand or a few hundred thousand?

The key number is I suppose how many people are hospitalized

what if a couple of hundred thousand have had a very mild dose and are now immune, surely that would be good to know

Pross

surrey_commuter said:

focuszing723 said:

The WHO's message is 'test test test' follow the infection so it's known where it is and stop it spreading. It makes sense, but bizarrely so does herd immunity to me too, build the percentage of people who have immunity.

I guess our method is good, but how long can the vunerable be kept isolated for until a vaccine or similar is ready?

they are now saying that herd immunity is a byproduct rather than a strategy. The strategy is to let it run until the NHS reaches capacity and then to calm it down (but not switch it off) so that the NHS is full without being overwhelmed.

So it depends on whether you think their modelling based on inadequate testing is good enough and that their attempts at controlling it prove to be more effective than other countries who have thrown everything at it and are really struggling to dampen it down

I'm still not sure what it is you think we should be doing. Italy and Spain have gone down the lockdown route and yet their hospitals are apparently overwhelmed so where is the advantage in that course of action?

surrey_commuter

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

focuszing723 said:

The WHO's message is 'test test test' follow the infection so it's known where it is and stop it spreading. It makes sense, but bizarrely so does herd immunity to me too, build the percentage of people who have immunity.

I guess our method is good, but how long can the vunerable be kept isolated for until a vaccine or similar is ready?

they are now saying that herd immunity is a byproduct rather than a strategy. The strategy is to let it run until the NHS reaches capacity and then to calm it down (but not switch it off) so that the NHS is full without being overwhelmed.

So it depends on whether you think their modelling based on inadequate testing is good enough and that their attempts at controlling it prove to be more effective than other countries who have thrown everything at it and are really struggling to dampen it down

(This hours' opinion) I do think we are all expecting too much of the gov't in terms of controlling the spread.

but their whole strategy is based around their ability to control the spread. If not they would have tried to minimise the spread from the start

coopster_the_1st

kingstongraham said:

coopster_the_1st said:

kingstongraham said:

Will there ever be testing in this country of people who might or might not have had it? I've no idea if I have it very mildly or not at all - it would be useful in the future for people to know if they are no longer any risk.

That's not going to be the priority for a while, if ever. Why would you waste valuable testing resource on you when it is better to know the continued virus situation of medical staff?

Whitty: "what would be transformational would be the ability to test to see if people have had the disease." At the moment the test only identifies if they currently have it. But they are working on it as rapidly as possible.

Let's hope they find this test ASAP as the country and the world needs to start returning to normality as quickly as possible

coopster_the_1st

Pross said:

surrey_commuter said:

focuszing723 said:

The WHO's message is 'test test test' follow the infection so it's known where it is and stop it spreading. It makes sense, but bizarrely so does herd immunity to me too, build the percentage of people who have immunity.

I guess our method is good, but how long can the vunerable be kept isolated for until a vaccine or similar is ready?

they are now saying that herd immunity is a byproduct rather than a strategy. The strategy is to let it run until the NHS reaches capacity and then to calm it down (but not switch it off) so that the NHS is full without being overwhelmed.

So it depends on whether you think their modelling based on inadequate testing is good enough and that their attempts at controlling it prove to be more effective than other countries who have thrown everything at it and are really struggling to dampen it down

I'm still not sure what it is you think we should be doing. Italy and Spain have gone down the lockdown route and yet their hospitals are apparently overwhelmed so where is the advantage in that course of action?

And they have cut their economy off at the knees.

My thoughts are this action could cause more deaths longer term than the virus

coopster_the_1st

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

focuszing723 said:

The WHO's message is 'test test test' follow the infection so it's known where it is and stop it spreading. It makes sense, but bizarrely so does herd immunity to me too, build the percentage of people who have immunity.

I guess our method is good, but how long can the vunerable be kept isolated for until a vaccine or similar is ready?

they are now saying that herd immunity is a byproduct rather than a strategy. The strategy is to let it run until the NHS reaches capacity and then to calm it down (but not switch it off) so that the NHS is full without being overwhelmed.

So it depends on whether you think their modelling based on inadequate testing is good enough and that their attempts at controlling it prove to be more effective than other countries who have thrown everything at it and are really struggling to dampen it down

(This hours' opinion) I do think we are all expecting too much of the gov't in terms of controlling the spread.

but their whole strategy is based around their ability to control the spread. If not they would have tried to minimise the spread from the start

You really are making yourself look more of a tw@t than normal here.

All the contact tracing and isolating they were doing over the past couple of months was trying to minimise the spread from the start

ddraver

focuszing723 said:

ddraver said:

focuszing723 said:

elbowloh said:

The banning of outdoor activities seems a bit bizarre, particularly if you are doing it on your own. The evidence points towards it being very unlikely to be contracted out in the open air if you keep your distance.

Exercise, fresh air and keeping your weight down helps peoples immune system too. I guess it depends where you live as well.

It's becasue there is no ambulance to come and rescue you when you Spoon it.

That's why

Yeah it makes sense, but going out for a walk I'm sure that will be encouraged in the right setting.

Well today was the first day I'm free of virus quarantine AND the physio said I could start doing longer walks and I...well...I managed to get phenomenally sunburnt today

focuszing723

ddraver said:

focuszing723 said:

ddraver said:

focuszing723 said:

elbowloh said:

The banning of outdoor activities seems a bit bizarre, particularly if you are doing it on your own. The evidence points towards it being very unlikely to be contracted out in the open air if you keep your distance.

Exercise, fresh air and keeping your weight down helps peoples immune system too. I guess it depends where you live as well.

It's becasue there is no ambulance to come and rescue you when you Spoon it.

That's why

Yeah it makes sense, but going out for a walk I'm sure that will be encouraged in the right setting.

Well today was the first day I'm free of virus quarantine AND the physio said I could start doing longer walks and I...well...I managed to get phenomenally sunburnt today

Great to hear Raver:) Ha, I bet you enjoyed a good walk. Getting out in the open always cheers me up.

orraloon

Bleepin' L. Brent oil futures sub $30.

diamonddog

No one is allowed to enter Spain as the borders close from midnight 16th unless Spanish, resident or citizen.

rick_chasey

So is BoJo mates with the insurers?

Only he’s not forcing any pubs clubs theatres etc to shut down only telling people not to go so they won’t trigger their insurance...

rick_chasey

Meanwhile this entire sh!tstorm is not making the funeral of a family member on Thursday very easy.

Lots of old people...people flying in from abroad.

Bloody nightmare.

tailwindhome