coronavirus

[JohnM 7,424]

1 hour ago, Saintslass said:

Oh look! The BBC made a mistake. How convenient.

Earlier on Friday we reported that a boss of an NHS trust had contacted the BBC with concerns about the provision of gowns for staff during the coronavirus crisis.

He had asked the BBC for the phone numbers of Burberry and Barbour - two companies which have become involved in making gowns - because he was concerned about supply shortages.

We should clarify that the person concerned is not the boss of an NHS trust but is part of a network of organisations helping to source personal protective equipment for some NHS trusts.

The mistake was caused by a misunderstanding of the person's role in the fight against the pandemic.

I expect GJ will be on here shortly correcting his earlier response to  my mention of this. 

[GUBRATS 4,835]

1 hour ago, BryanC said:

Nobody care to comment?

By the way. Same person takes the same three weeks off fer t'lambing for the last five or six years.

I repeat.

Care to comment?

Thought not.

Want to join in clapping on Thursday?

Jesus Christ, what's WRONG with you people???

One thing's for certain. When the smoke clears, the only people / jobs/ pensions will be unaffected are the public sector and the "holy of holies" NHS.

God help the rest of you and may the devil take the hindmost.

I wish you luck, but sadly feel that so many of you will need it.

Don't bother to reply / respond / slag me off again. I feel that I'm probably done on here for now.

I may revisit this forum when this nonsense has run it's course. 

Tinkety Tonk.

Bye , mind you don't trip up on your way out 

[JohnM 7,424]

2 hours ago, Bob8 said:

The areas that will have the most trouble are areas like London and New York, I would imagine. There is far more space in Copnehagen or Oslo than there is in London. On the other hand, UK and Russian death figures appear to be optimisitic.

It is always dangerous to compare directly.

Yes indeed. I'll say it again, the really meaningful comparisons are with the past present and future in one country, providing of course their is no change in the way things are measured. International comparisons are fraught with danger. A good example being the impression over the last few days that all lockdown are the same, when we know from reports on here from different  ountries that some countries lockdowns are more restrictive than others. 

[JohnM 7,424]

1 hour ago, BryanC said:

Nobody care to comment?

By the way. Same person takes the same three weeks off fer t'lambing for the last five or six years.

I repeat.

Care to comment?

Thought not.

Want to join in clapping on Thursday?

Jesus Christ, what's WRONG with you people???

One thing's for certain. When the smoke clears, the only people / jobs/ pensions will be unaffected are the public sector and the "holy of holies" NHS.

God help the rest of you and may the devil take the hindmost.

I wish you luck, but sadly feel that so many of you will need it.

Don't bother to reply / respond / slag me off again. I feel that I'm probably done on here for now.

I may revisit this forum when this nonsense has run it's course. 

Tinkety Tonk.

No, they are not all angels. In such a huge organisation, there are bound to be some with lower standards than everyone else. 

However, even the severest critic would acknowledge the anxiety and fear that many NHS personel must experience when there are so many conflicting and negative stories in the news. Some media outlets seem to delight in digging up doom mongering specialists, or painting things as dark as possible. Look at the delight at the BBC as it published the lie that an NHS director had rung the BBC to get the phone number of Barbour. 

Clap the NHS? It's not a legal requirement yet, is it? I don't join in, preferring instead to do my best to ensure that by my behaviour I do not add to the NHS workload. 

Yes at the end of this, unless anyone knows better, the majority of state sector employees will still be paid, still get their pensions etc,  and indeed I'm advising my youngest grand-children to make sure that they get state sector jobs when they grow up. I have no doubt though that many non-NHS bureaucrats are putting the hours to handle the current heavy workload. 

As one who has on a few occasions kept away from the forums, mainly the political ones, I'd advise you to stay and fight. This is a predominantly left of centre set of forums, with what seems to be a significant proportion of posters being in the state sector and posters  need to be challenged. 

There are, of course a number of left of centre posters who make valuable contributions to discussions.

The rest I have on ignore. 

Edited April 17, 2020 by JohnM

[SSoutherner 2,261]

37 minutes ago, JohnM said:

I expect GJ will be on here shortly correcting his earlier response to  my mention of this. 

I suspect from the message i got via an ex school facebook group desperately looking for people who could make facemasks this may be whichever trust is closest to Brighton

[Bedford Roughyed 8,067]

5 hours ago, fairfolly said:

Grandaughters husband gets 6 months full pay and 6 months half pay. Grandaughter gets 4 months full pay and four half pay.

It's not something you 'get' every year.  It's not part of your leave.  Having cancer or god knows what else isn't regarded as a fun activity.  

[Copa 4,651]

Canberra’s stats today. It’s looking very good but I don’t know what the end game will be. I mean, do we just wait until a vaccine? That could be forever. 

 

[Bob8 6,872]

3 hours ago, Copa said:

Canberra’s stats today. It’s looking very good but I don’t know what the end game will be. I mean, do we just wait until a vaccine? That could be forever. 

 

Yes, but that would, were it accurate, be a very alarming death rate. I suggest it is not accurate. But, still, it is looking far better.

My sister works in the ICU in Australia, has plenty of PPE and is not very busy. It is looking better.

[Wolford6 2,196]

9 hours ago, gingerjon said:

You probably shouldn’t have persuaded them to vote Tory then.

Just what they need, a trite shallow comment.

[Copa 4,651]

33 minutes ago, Bob8 said:

Yes, but that would, were it accurate, be a very alarming death rate. I suggest it is not accurate. But, still, it is looking far better.

My sister works in the ICU in Australia, has plenty of PPE and is not very busy. It is looking better.

Every case in Canberra except for one has been connected to an overseas traveler. Two of the deaths were from people who were ill while outside of Australia on the same cruise ship and then returned home.

Unnervingly, the other death was an elderly man who had not traveled and had no connection to anyone who had traveled. He was also in self isolation for quite some time out of fear of the virus and had only been out shopping twice. That tells me it’s out there undetected in the Canberra community, which is no surprise.

[gingerjon 15,663]

8 hours ago, JohnM said:

I expect GJ will be on here shortly correcting his earlier response to  my mention of this. 

This would appear to be a political point and it has been confirmed by the government that they can't guarantee supplies of gowns which have also been confirmed to be running low.

So, always happy to correct. But it doesn't make the issue go away.

[gingerjon 15,663]

50 minutes ago, Wolford6 said:

Just what they need, a trite shallow comment.

I never claim to be anything but shallow.

A week ago (roughly) you gave the lockdown two weeks.

Still think that?

[Damien 12,026]

Deeply worrying figures if anywhere hear accurate:

The number of care home residents who have died of suspected coronavirus may have reached 7,500, according to the latest estimate, The Telegraph has learned.

New data collated by Care England, the country's largest representative body for care homes, suggests the number of deaths from Covid-19 is far higher than its previous estimate of 1,400 from earlier this week.

The number is also far in advance of the official figure from the Office for National Statistics (ONS), which has recorded 217 care home deaths from the virus up to April 3 – the most recent date for which official data is available. 

However, as the Government published its daily update on coronavirus hospital deaths on Friday, which showed a rise to 14,576, it emerged that the death toll in UK care homes is suspected to be much bigger than previously feared. 

Professor Martin Green, the chief executive of Care England, told The Telegraph that around 7,500 people may have died in care homes as a result of the virus. 

"Without testing, it is very difficult to give an absolute figure," he said. "However, if we look at some of the death rates since April 1 and compare them with previous years' rates, we estimate a figure of about 7,500 people may have died as a result of Covid-19."

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/04/17/number-coronavirus-deaths-care-homes-could-high-7500-according/

[Pen-Y-Bont Crusader 866]

My nephew is telling me that cases in the SE London area seem to be slowing based on his last three shifts. Good news if that’s the full picture.

[Saintslass 3,823]

5 minutes ago, Pen-Y-Bont Crusader said:

My nephew is telling me that cases in the SE London area seem to be slowing based on his last three shifts. Good news if that’s the full picture.

That is good news.  It seems to be showing through on the charts at the press conferences where apparently cases have dropped 5% in London since the lockdown began.  Alas, in other parts of the country things are not quite as rosy.  Here in St Helens we had our highest number of recorded deaths yesterday and deaths in St Helens alone now stand at 85.  (By comparison in Warrington that number stands at 39)   

[gingerjon 15,663]

10 minutes ago, Pen-Y-Bont Crusader said:

My nephew is telling me that cases in the SE London area seem to be slowing based on his last three shifts. Good news if that’s the full picture.

Give it three weeks and all those who were infected by the Westminster Bridge clapalong (with full Met support) can turn up.

[Tyrone Shoelaces 970]

11 hours ago, Saintslass said:

Anyway, I had to post this because I just know how much it will be appreciated on here! 

 

That should have a government health warning. 

[gingerjon 15,663]

Anyway, I'll stick this here because it relates to the virus situation although, as with all these things, a political edge.

WHO point out that, firstly, there's no evidence that people who have recovered from the virus are immune to it, and, secondly, the bought and paid for UK tests are probably worthless: https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-no-evidence-that-covid-19-survivors-have-immunity-who-warns-11975011?dcmp=snt-sf-twitter

Today, we have always like the WHO.

But that thing about not guaranteeing immunity does now seem to becoming a persistent problem.

[Robin Evans 4,516]

I'm beginning to think lance Armstrong never did walk on the moon.....

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-52318539

[Damien 12,026]

2 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Anyway, I'll stick this here because it relates to the virus situation although, as with all these things, a political edge.

WHO point out that, firstly, there's no evidence that people who have recovered from the virus are immune to it, and, secondly, the bought and paid for UK tests are probably worthless: https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-no-evidence-that-covid-19-survivors-have-immunity-who-warns-11975011?dcmp=snt-sf-twitter

Today, we have always like the WHO.

But that thing about not guaranteeing immunity does now seem to becoming a persistent problem.

It is and its notable how it is being increasingly mentioned in an almost drip feed kind of way. We have seen what tend to follow when this happens. It does though go against conventional thinking and even if true may only apply to a small percentage etc.

[Bob8 6,872]

3 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Anyway, I'll stick this here because it relates to the virus situation although, as with all these things, a political edge.

WHO point out that, firstly, there's no evidence that people who have recovered from the virus are immune to it, and, secondly, the bought and paid for UK tests are probably worthless: https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-no-evidence-that-covid-19-survivors-have-immunity-who-warns-11975011?dcmp=snt-sf-twitter

Today, we have always like the WHO.

But that thing about not guaranteeing immunity does now seem to becoming a persistent problem.

As I read it, and only that, it makes most sense as a warning against certainty. Humans are very complex organisms, the virus is very simple. How people react will be different. A healthy individual with the anti-bodies (which will vary per person) will almost certainly be able to display an immune response, which should confer a good level of immunity.

Probably. I think.

[Northern Eel 1,655]

12 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Anyway, I'll stick this here because it relates to the virus situation although, as with all these things, a political edge.

WHO point out that, firstly, there's no evidence that people who have recovered from the virus are immune to it, and, secondly, the bought and paid for UK tests are probably worthless: https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-no-evidence-that-covid-19-survivors-have-immunity-who-warns-11975011?dcmp=snt-sf-twitter

Today, we have always like the WHO.

But that thing about not guaranteeing immunity does now seem to becoming a persistent problem.

There are numerous benefits to the antibody test, irrespective of the disappointing news above. This will be money well spent, I am certain.

[gingerjon 15,663]

Just now, Northern Eel said:

There are numerous benefits to the antibody test, irrespective of the disappointing news above. This will be money well spent, I am certain.

I certainly hope so. The worry, I guess, is that it confers false security.

[Bob8 6,872]

1 minute ago, gingerjon said:

I certainly hope so. The worry, I guess, is that it confers false security.

I suspect (guess) that it will be useful for population data in determining policy.

Individually, it would be the best data available.

Edited April 18, 2020 by Bob8

[Northern Eel 1,655]

10 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

I certainly hope so. The worry, I guess, is that it confers false security.

I'm thinking:

• Identification of past sufferers for the purpose of further research
• Identification of past sufferers in front-line services who have shown only mild symptoms and may be less prone to the virus should they return to work
• The ability to use such data to track spread and virulence in certain geographic areas
• Extend research around the effects of the virus on children, particularly those who have shown no, or very low level symptoms

There would have have be a clear caveat attached to some of the outcomes of this work though.

Edited April 18, 2020 by Northern Eel