Covid-19

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
rob63
Posts: 599
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2019 3:15 pm
Been Liked: 132 times
Has Liked: 396 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by rob63 » Fri Mar 06, 2020 11:48 pm

Bfcboyo wrote:
Fri Mar 06, 2020 3:36 pm
I spoke with an expert yesterday and apparently the liquids all the kids are smoking in the e cigs kills the virus.

Not sure if there is any truth in it.
You will get that in Wetherspoons at 9 in the morning :!:

Gordaleman
Posts: 1124
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:04 pm
Been Liked: 209 times
Has Liked: 223 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by Gordaleman » Fri Mar 06, 2020 11:48 pm

thatdberight wrote:
Fri Mar 06, 2020 11:37 pm
It must have been a very quick glance not to spot it.

Still, much better to rely on an old lady than the now multiple sources you've been given showing your numbers to be, yet again, way off.
Are you online 24 hours a day? Considering you once said you had similar views to me, you often come over as a right tw*t.

By the way, I inadvertently 'Liked' your post when I intented to quote it.

rob63
Posts: 599
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2019 3:15 pm
Been Liked: 132 times
Has Liked: 396 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by rob63 » Fri Mar 06, 2020 11:52 pm

FactualFrank wrote:
Fri Mar 06, 2020 4:06 pm
This thread has been 90% bickering.

Can't you just add each other to the ignore list, rather than make us all suffer having to read it.
The bickering on here has been rising exponentially quicker than the number of panic stories in the newspapers :D
These 2 users liked this post: FactualFrank tiger76

thatdberight
Posts: 3779
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2017 9:49 am
Been Liked: 924 times
Has Liked: 716 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by thatdberight » Fri Mar 06, 2020 11:53 pm

Gordaleman wrote:
Fri Mar 06, 2020 11:48 pm
Are you online 24 hours a day? Considering you once said you had similar views to me, you often come over as a right tw*t.

By the way, I inadvertently 'Liked' your post when I intented to quote it.
I'll take that as a compliment. We are multiple entities manning the post 24/7, by the way.

If you're still struggling to spot that;
Hereitis.jpg
Hereitis.jpg (38.15 KiB) Viewed 1053 times

Gordaleman
Posts: 1124
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:04 pm
Been Liked: 209 times
Has Liked: 223 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by Gordaleman » Fri Mar 06, 2020 11:58 pm

No, I'm not online 24 hours a day. I use this forum on a computer that is permanently switched on, that's all.

As to the figures you post, that's an entirely different set of figures to those posted earlier about the 1989 flu virus. Which set is right, I don't know.

Either way, I'm still not worried.

People are still quoting 80,000 cases in China, even though about 55,000 have fully recovered and are no longer infected. Why? At the moment WHO says there are 23,000 active cases in China.

fidelcastro
Posts: 3553
Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2016 8:45 pm
Been Liked: 1111 times
Has Liked: 1088 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by fidelcastro » Sat Mar 07, 2020 12:07 am

Gordaleman wrote:
Fri Mar 06, 2020 11:58 pm
At the moment WHO says there are 23,000 active cases in China.
Don't care what Pete Townshend thinks.

Bloody perv!
This user liked this post: deanothedino

thatdberight
Posts: 3779
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2017 9:49 am
Been Liked: 924 times
Has Liked: 716 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by thatdberight » Sat Mar 07, 2020 12:07 am

Gordaleman wrote:
Fri Mar 06, 2020 11:58 pm
No, I'm not online 24 hours a day. I use this forum on a computer that is permanently switched on, that's all.

As to the figures you post, that's an entirely different set of figures to those posted earlier about the 1989 flu virus. Which set is right, I don't know.

Either way, I'm still not worried.

People are still quoting 80,000 cases in China, even though about 55,000 have fully recovered and are no longer infected. Why? At the moment WHO says there are 23,000 active cases in China.
We are legion.

There were no other figures posted about the 1989 virus - or if they were they were just posted with no source.
You've been given three credible media sources and one primary scientific report and still you "don't know what to believe". Because you just like to believe whatever random nonsense comes into your head - or what an old lady told you.

I presume the 3,000 who've died in China still count or do they not count because they were in the past as well? That's pretty good news - that means that, as of now, nobody who's still alive has died.

ClaretAndJew
Posts: 6732
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:08 am
Been Liked: 2274 times
Has Liked: 462 times
Location: Earth

Re: Coronavirus

Post by ClaretAndJew » Sat Mar 07, 2020 12:10 am

Galaxy News Radio

Gordaleman
Posts: 1124
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:04 pm
Been Liked: 209 times
Has Liked: 223 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by Gordaleman » Sat Mar 07, 2020 12:11 am

thatdberight wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 12:07 am
We are legion.

There were no other figures posted about the 1989 virus - or if they were they were just posted with no source.
You've been given three credible media sources and one primary scientific report and still you "don't know what to believe". Because you just like to believe whatever random nonsense comes into your head - or what an old lady told you.

I presume the 3,000 who've died in China still count or do they not count because they were in the past as well? That's pretty good news - that means that, as of now, nobody who's still alive has died.
Oh, so if I had Flu 15 years ago I still count in this years Flu figures eh?

The figures being quoted are being quoted as active case, when they clearly are not.

Past my bedtime.

thatdberight
Posts: 3779
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2017 9:49 am
Been Liked: 924 times
Has Liked: 716 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by thatdberight » Sat Mar 07, 2020 12:13 am

Gordaleman wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 12:11 am
Oh, so if I had Flu 15 years ago I still count in this years Flu figures eh?

The figures being quoted are being quoted as active case, when they clearly are not.

Past my bedtime.
And so, yet again, you quietly move on from the erroneous information you were coming out with only a few minutes ago...

CrosspoolClarets
Posts: 2512
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:00 pm
Been Liked: 844 times
Has Liked: 223 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by CrosspoolClarets » Sat Mar 07, 2020 12:37 am

Covid-19 is not flu. Nor is the virus that it begins with, SARS-CoV-2.

For one, it is far more deadly. One reputable site says 3.4% of those infected die, so far (some other sites say 1%). Flu kills 0.1%. Even if Covid-19 rate comes down it will still be more.

For another, it may be more contagious. Flu has a R0 value of about 1.3 which means every 10 people with flu infect 13 people. SARS-CoV-2 infects over 20.

A third thing, it causes worse respiratory illness in most people, even if they end up recovering.

The good thing is that it may be more containable despite the infection rate. With sensible isolation of people once they have a sniffle, this thing, like its SARS predecessor, can be killed off.

We need to get real and start taking precautions, that way we win. Denying it, and claiming it is “just the flu” and many more will die.

deanothedino
Posts: 1279
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2017 10:34 am
Been Liked: 655 times
Has Liked: 236 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by deanothedino » Sat Mar 07, 2020 12:40 am

CrosspoolClarets wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 12:37 am
For one, it is far more deadly. One reputable site says 3.4% of those infected die, so far (some other sites say 1%). Flu kills 0.1%. Even if Covid-19 rate comes down it will still be more.
its hard to read much into the fatality rate at the moment. The number of cases is likely vastly underreported as most people will only suffer a mild illness.

thatdberight
Posts: 3779
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2017 9:49 am
Been Liked: 924 times
Has Liked: 716 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by thatdberight » Sat Mar 07, 2020 12:48 am

deanothedino wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 12:40 am
its hard to read much into the fatality rate at the moment. The number of cases is likely vastly underreported as most people will only suffer a mild illness.
There'll definitely be some of that but as the science continues to develop there seems less reliance on that. There are, of course, other views among credible scientists but the WHO report this week suggested not so much.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/03 ... -countries
"A critical unknown is how many mild or asymptomatic cases occur.

...the report notes that so-called fever clinics in Guangdong province screened approximately 320,000 people for COVID-19 and only found 0.14% of them to be positive. “That was really interesting, because we were hoping and maybe expecting to see a large burden of mild and asymptomatic cases,” says Caitlin Rivers, an epidemiologist at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security. “That piece of data suggests that’s not happening, which would imply that the case fatality risk might be more or less as we currently have.” But Guangdong province was not a heavily affected area, so it is not clear whether the same holds in Hubei province, which was the hardest hit, Rivers cautions."

Lowbankclaret
Posts: 3604
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
Been Liked: 619 times
Has Liked: 39 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by Lowbankclaret » Sat Mar 07, 2020 6:29 am

Greeny wrote:
Fri Mar 06, 2020 9:30 pm
The world has gone absolutely bonkers. It’s a newer version of flu for goodness sake. Coronavirus affects the same age group as ordinary flu. I have no idea why “Don’t Panic, Don’t Panic” Captain Mainwaring from Dad’s Army has been let loose to become editor of all the newspapers + hosting all tv + radio stations. Get a grip.
People can repeat and repeat its only like flu, however I suggest your ignoring the actual data that’s out there.
Just look at Italy’s figures, in a normal year of flu, I am sure there would be 8,000 in Burnley get flu, how many end up in hospital I wonder and how many in intensive care, probably single figures.

Just look at what’s happening in Italy!
97A30071-1EA0-48FC-AC8C-E9C0C514299E.png
97A30071-1EA0-48FC-AC8C-E9C0C514299E.png (381.61 KiB) Viewed 941 times

Lowbankclaret
Posts: 3604
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
Been Liked: 619 times
Has Liked: 39 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by Lowbankclaret » Sat Mar 07, 2020 6:32 am

deanothedino wrote:
Fri Mar 06, 2020 10:36 pm
What a load of b0llocks
Just read the figures from Italy and take them in,
455635FB-6CAE-4872-9756-75A72C72F2EA.png
455635FB-6CAE-4872-9756-75A72C72F2EA.png (381.61 KiB) Viewed 939 times

Lowbankclaret
Posts: 3604
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
Been Liked: 619 times
Has Liked: 39 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by Lowbankclaret » Sat Mar 07, 2020 7:07 am

thelaughingclaret wrote:
Fri Mar 06, 2020 11:26 pm
It’s a miracle we all survived swine flu. That was meant to kill most of us off wasn’t it?
This is flu, maybe it’s a bad flu but it’s still flu and a new flu no one on earth before a month or 2 ago had ever had and therefore no one is immune to it so of course it will have a higher infection and death rate. Human history has had influenza pandemics throughout history. The virus is out there now, it’s too late to stop it and make it go away. It’s in nearly every country on Earth now for crying out loud. It can not be stopped. We just have to carry on and hope you don’t get it, just the same as we have been doing our whole lives already in regards to normal flu and all other diseases you can get. What happened to put British way of getting in with life no matter what was thrown our way?
I agree it’s too late to stop it or make it go away.
However, if you just let this virus go on with out attempting to delay it you will overwhelm the NHS leading to an increased death rate.
The Gov is attempting to balance, deaths, economic impact , panic buying , plus more.

If you read Italy’s stats, currently 11% of people who have tested positive, let’s leave the debate about how many have it we don’t know about.
In the UK we have around 4100 intensive care beds. They are around 85% occupied according to sky news.

If we got to 40,000 cases, all your intensive care beds are occupied even if you have cancelled all operations. Your then in the realm of deciding who you just let pass away.

That’s why they are attempting to delay it, that’s why China built two 1000 bed hospitals in 8 days.

The number of people who will get it is unlikely to change, the number of people who need intensive care is unlikely change but by extending the infection rate, less people are likely to die.
Plus the economic impact will be less.

deanothedino
Posts: 1279
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2017 10:34 am
Been Liked: 655 times
Has Liked: 236 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by deanothedino » Sat Mar 07, 2020 7:19 am

Lowbankclaret wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 6:32 am
Just read the figures from Italy and take them in,

455635FB-6CAE-4872-9756-75A72C72F2EA.png
Quite small out of a population of 60m, no?

Grumps
Posts: 2101
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:15 am
Been Liked: 420 times
Has Liked: 181 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by Grumps » Sat Mar 07, 2020 7:41 am

mdd2 wrote:
Fri Mar 06, 2020 5:55 pm
Crickey Grumps you should be renamed Aesop given your prediction of the high risk of cancer from passive smoking compared with the risks from a virus that spreads easily and for which we have no immunity
The missing factor is what percentage of us do have some immunity to it
But pretty certain I would prefer exposure to passive smoke than this bugger over the next 6 months
I know you didn't mean to, but you're actually agreeing with me
I said you've got more chance of catching cancer from the smokers in the Bob lord bogs than you have of catching the virus there . Bearing in mind the chances of catching anything from the smokers is nil, if it was mathematically possible, catching the virus in there would be less.

Lowbankclaret
Posts: 3604
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
Been Liked: 619 times
Has Liked: 39 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by Lowbankclaret » Sat Mar 07, 2020 7:47 am

deanothedino wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 7:19 am
Quite small out of a population of 60m, no?
Yes I agree.
I have no idea how many people will get infected nor have I claimed anywhere that X amount of people will get it.

China appears to have stalled its infection by simply putting millions of people in isolation in their own houses.

2-3 weeks more of data from Italy and Iran will provide a clearer picture of what’s likely to happen here.
This user liked this post: paulatky

deanothedino
Posts: 1279
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2017 10:34 am
Been Liked: 655 times
Has Liked: 236 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by deanothedino » Sat Mar 07, 2020 7:51 am

Lowbankclaret wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 7:47 am
Yes I agree.
I have no idea how many people will get infected nor have I claimed anywhere that X amount of people will get it.

China appears to have stalled its infection by simply putting millions of people in isolation in their own houses.

2-3 weeks more of data from Italy and Iran will provide a clearer picture of what’s likely to happen here.
My issue is that we’re letting the fear of it get out of hand. At the moment, there’s no suggestion that it would affect everybody and there’s no suggestion that already healthy individuals are at risk of dying from it.

Rather than having everyone in a blind panic, buying all the pasta in the supermarket, we should encourage at risk categories to avoid travel, large gatherings etc. There’s no reason for someone fit and healthy in their 20s, 30s, 40s to significantly change their plans or behaviour at the moment.
These 2 users liked this post: Dark Cloud tiger76

Grumps
Posts: 2101
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:15 am
Been Liked: 420 times
Has Liked: 181 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by Grumps » Sat Mar 07, 2020 8:19 am

deanothedino wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 7:51 am
My issue is that we’re letting the fear of it get out of hand. At the moment, there’s no suggestion that it would affect everybody and there’s no suggestion that already healthy individuals are at risk of dying from it.

Rather than having everyone in a blind panic, buying all the pasta in the supermarket, we should encourage at risk categories to avoid travel, large gatherings etc. There’s no reason for someone fit and healthy in their 20s, 30s, 40s to significantly change their plans or behaviour at the moment.
What would you class as a large gathering? Turf moor on match day?
Let's use a pie in the sky example...say 100,000 people have the virus, what do you think the odds are of one of those being at today's game, and then the odds of being close enough to them to catch it off them? More chance of seeing Elvis doing the half time draw...
This user liked this post: Gordaleman

deanothedino
Posts: 1279
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2017 10:34 am
Been Liked: 655 times
Has Liked: 236 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by deanothedino » Sat Mar 07, 2020 9:03 am

Grumps wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 8:19 am
What would you class as a large gathering? Turf moor on match day?
Let's use a pie in the sky example...say 100,000 people have the virus, what do you think the odds are of one of those being at today's game, and then the odds of being close enough to them to catch it off them? More chance of seeing Elvis doing the half time draw...
I don't disagree but at the moment they're talking about having everyone avoid them...

Lowbankclaret
Posts: 3604
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
Been Liked: 619 times
Has Liked: 39 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by Lowbankclaret » Sat Mar 07, 2020 9:10 am

deanothedino wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 7:51 am
My issue is that we’re letting the fear of it get out of hand. At the moment, there’s no suggestion that it would affect everybody and there’s no suggestion that already healthy individuals are at risk of dying from it.

Rather than having everyone in a blind panic, buying all the pasta in the supermarket, we should encourage at risk categories to avoid travel, large gatherings etc. There’s no reason for someone fit and healthy in their 20s, 30s, 40s to significantly change their plans or behaviour at the moment.
I completely agree with you on that.

Gordaleman
Posts: 1124
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:04 pm
Been Liked: 209 times
Has Liked: 223 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by Gordaleman » Sat Mar 07, 2020 10:21 am

thatdberight wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 12:07 am
We are legion.

There were no other figures posted about the 1989 virus - or if they were they were just posted with no source.
You've been given three credible media sources and one primary scientific report and still you "don't know what to believe". Because you just like to believe whatever random nonsense comes into your head - or what an old lady told you.

I presume the 3,000 who've died in China still count or do they not count because they were in the past as well? That's pretty good news - that means that, as of now, nobody who's still alive has died.
Figures for the 1989 UK outbreak of Flu, were quoted on here, but of course could have now been edited out. However, I accept now that the figure of 100,000 deaths was wrong. According the the chart below, it was only 26,000. (Bad enough I think, and far worse than the number of Covid-19 deaths we are likely to get.)

https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... oss-the-uk

You are completely missing my point. The point is this. The media are still quoting 100,000 cases in China, as though there are STILL 100,000 people infected. This is simply not the case as there are only about 27,000 active cases in China now. (WHO figures.) This shows that the infection rate has peaked and is now on the decrease. The same is likely to happen here in the UK. It will peak quite quickly, then drop back but we are a few weeks behind China.

The strange annomoly in this outbreak is Italy. No one seems to know why they have so many infections, or why there appears to be a high death toll. Everyone is still learning about this disease but that doesn't mean it's worse than anything seen before. We simply know too little about it.
Last edited by Gordaleman on Sat Mar 07, 2020 10:57 am, edited 2 times in total.

Spijed
Posts: 11290
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 12:33 pm
Been Liked: 1987 times
Has Liked: 873 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by Spijed » Sat Mar 07, 2020 10:21 am

These 2 users liked this post: Gordaleman thatdberight

Gordaleman
Posts: 1124
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:04 pm
Been Liked: 209 times
Has Liked: 223 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by Gordaleman » Sat Mar 07, 2020 10:29 am

Spijed wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 10:21 am
Good article in the Guardian:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ ... -reassured
Yes, a sensible report from a sensible newspaper. It shows that the virus can be controlled with simple precations and it also shows just how badly people are over reacting.

FactualFrank
Posts: 19707
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
Been Liked: 5549 times
Has Liked: 9423 times
Location: Leeds

Re: Coronavirus

Post by FactualFrank » Sat Mar 07, 2020 10:46 am

Spijed wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 10:21 am
Good article in the Guardian:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ ... -reassured
I read that earlier, but didn't post it as I was expecting someone to start whinging about how they see it as inaccurate.

If it be your will
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
Been Liked: 500 times
Has Liked: 509 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by If it be your will » Sat Mar 07, 2020 11:07 am

thatdberight wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 12:48 am
There'll definitely be some of that but as the science continues to develop there seems less reliance on that. There are, of course, other views among credible scientists but the WHO report this week suggested not so much.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/03 ... -countries
"A critical unknown is how many mild or asymptomatic cases occur.

...the report notes that so-called fever clinics in Guangdong province screened approximately 320,000 people for COVID-19 and only found 0.14% of them to be positive. “That was really interesting, because we were hoping and maybe expecting to see a large burden of mild and asymptomatic cases,” says Caitlin Rivers, an epidemiologist at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security. “That piece of data suggests that’s not happening, which would imply that the case fatality risk might be more or less as we currently have.” But Guangdong province was not a heavily affected area, so it is not clear whether the same holds in Hubei province, which was the hardest hit, Rivers cautions."
I noticed WHO were starting to think there wasn't a large pool of asymptomatic/unrecorded cases. There has been a few anecdotal reports in the media of people, having recovered, saying things like "It wasn't so bad. Probably wouldn't normally have even gone to the doctors with it" so I was becoming increasingly convinced there must be such a pool. As such, the WHO saying there probably wasn't came as a bit of a jolt.

(Chloroquine update, by the way: The Chinese have included it in their standard management plan, and are claiming success, but are yet to release much in the way of actual figures. The S. Koreans are advising their doctors to consider either Chloroquine or Kalletra according to their own judgment, but caution there's no evidence for either. The Japanese don't seem to be using it at all, and there's no mention of its use in either Italy or Iran. Pending some real data, it doesn't, right now, look as if it is living up to the promise the in vitro studies and early Chinese trials suggested.)
This user liked this post: thatdberight

thatdberight
Posts: 3779
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2017 9:49 am
Been Liked: 924 times
Has Liked: 716 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by thatdberight » Sat Mar 07, 2020 11:07 am

Gordaleman wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 10:29 am
Yes, a sensible report from a sensible newspaper. It shows that the virus can be controlled with simple precations and it also shows just how badly people are over reacting.
"We know it can be contained (albeit at considerable cost). China’s draconian quarantine and containment measures appear to be working."

Like you say, simple precautions.

Gordaleman
Posts: 1124
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:04 pm
Been Liked: 209 times
Has Liked: 223 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by Gordaleman » Sat Mar 07, 2020 11:29 am

thatdberight wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 11:07 am
"We know it can be contained (albeit at considerable cost). China’s draconian quarantine and containment measures appear to be working."

Like you say, simple precautions.
With a death toll so far of less than 4,000 (WHO figuers) and cases falling fast in the worst affected country, (China) I just don't understand how for some reason, some people expect the death toll in this country alone, to be much higher than the existing world total of 4,000.

Which brings me back to my point about Flu. Flu kills an awful lot of people in this country and there are multiple types of Flu, yet I don't remember any panic over those earlier events.

In 1957 / 58 Asian Flu killed 33,000 in the UK. In 1968 / 69 Hong Kong Flu killed 80,000 people in the UK. In 2009/ 10 Swine Flu killed 457.

https://www.expressandstar.com/news/uk- ... ent-times/

Do we have any clear reason to suspect that Covid-19 will kill more people than any of the above? Yet no-one panics about Flu and there's no reason to panic about this virus. (Unless your family is unfortunate enough to lose someone.)

Lowbankclaret
Posts: 3604
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
Been Liked: 619 times
Has Liked: 39 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by Lowbankclaret » Sat Mar 07, 2020 11:31 am

thatdberight wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 11:07 am
"We know it can be contained (albeit at considerable cost). China’s draconian quarantine and containment measures appear to be working."

Like you say, simple precautions.
I am not sure if that’s an attempt at humour??

The Chinese have shut down completely in the area, one person is allowed out of the house every three days.

Several people on here are claiming we are overreacting, some people in China have not left the house in 5 weeks.
All factories shut, no travel allowed. You need a special licence to drive a car around.

As you say I t’s a very simple plan, not sure it’s going to go down well in the UK.

FactualFrank
Posts: 19707
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
Been Liked: 5549 times
Has Liked: 9423 times
Location: Leeds

Re: Coronavirus

Post by FactualFrank » Sat Mar 07, 2020 11:43 am

I've just gone on to the Tesco site to place an order and most of the hand wash is indeed unavailable.

Let's hope the 240 toilet rolls will last me.

thatdberight
Posts: 3779
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2017 9:49 am
Been Liked: 924 times
Has Liked: 716 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by thatdberight » Sat Mar 07, 2020 11:53 am

Gordaleman wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 11:29 am
With a death toll so far of less than 4,000 (WHO figuers) and cases falling fast in the worst affected country, (China) I just don't understand how for some reason, some people expect the death toll in this country alone, to be much higher than the existing world total of 4,000.

Which brings me back to my point about Flu. Flu kills an awful lot of people in this country and there are multiple types of Flu, yet I don't remember any panic over those earlier events.

In 1957 / 58 Asian Flu killed 33,000 in the UK. In 1968 / 69 Hong Kong Flu killed 80,000 people in the UK. In 2009/ 10 Swine Flu killed 457.

https://www.expressandstar.com/news/uk- ... ent-times/

Do we have any clear reason to suspect that Covid-19 will kill more people than any of the above? Yet no-one panics about Flu and there's no reason to panic about this virus. (Unless your family is unfortunate enough to lose someone.)
I don't have any expectation because it's all too novel. I do believe that a scenario which saw this spreading unchecked is worse than the flu. Your constant references to the flu are meaningless. You've just decided, contrary to the science, that it's no worse than the flu. Perhaps the scientist quoted at length by the "very sensible newspaper" (your view, not mine) is worth reading (Gabriel Leung, chair professor of public health medicine at the Faculty of Medicine at the University of Hong Kong and WHO Collaborating Centre for Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Control founding director);
https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/ ... df6d274472

I find this interesting, as I do the reactions of those who will not or cannot take in the latest views of those who are expert. It's neither nothing, nor apocalyptic as best as I, as a layman, can interpret what those experts are saying. Instead, it's serious. So, serious people are taking serious steps to mitigate. With a bit of luck and all the work being done a potentially serious situation will be minimised.

Gordaleman
Posts: 1124
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:04 pm
Been Liked: 209 times
Has Liked: 223 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by Gordaleman » Sat Mar 07, 2020 12:20 pm

thatdberight wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 11:53 am
I don't have any expectation because it's all too novel. I do believe that a scenario which saw this spreading unchecked is worse than the flu. Your constant references to the flu are meaningless. You've just decided, contrary to the science, that it's no worse than the flu. Perhaps the scientist quoted at length by the "very sensible newspaper" (your view, not mine) is worth reading (Gabriel Leung, chair professor of public health medicine at the Faculty of Medicine at the University of Hong Kong and WHO Collaborating Centre for Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Control founding director);
https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/ ... df6d274472

I find this interesting, as I do the reactions of those who will not or cannot take in the latest views of those who are expert. It's neither nothing, nor apocalyptic as best as I, as a layman, can interpret what those experts are saying. Instead, it's serious. So, serious people are taking serious steps to mitigate. With a bit of luck and all the work being done a potentially serious situation will be minimised.
Just what axe have you got to grind? I have given good accurate figures from respected people and in none of those scenarios does anything suggest that Covid-19 will kill more than a bad Flu epedemic.

I am NOT saying this is like a mild Flu, I know that it's nothing like Flu. What I am saying is that given existing figures world wide, it will kill a lot less than a bad Flu outbreak. Surely, the amount of deaths is the critical thing and thus far, there are less than 4,000 world wide? Yet no one panics about Flu which kills far more.

All I am saying is that if the media hype was not over the top, people would not be emptying shops of hand gel etc.. I think people should calm down, follow the guidlines but otherwise carry on as normal.

This virus is being overblown because it's a new pathogen and there is uncertainty about it. Scientists are naturally cautious, it's their job to be so. That doesn't mean that this Virus is worse than any other, it just means they haven't done enough work on it yet.

No doubt you will find something to disagree with in this post. (It appears as though that's YOUR job.) If you do, fine. Let's agree to disagree as there is no point playing tennis with posts.

paulatky
Posts: 1132
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2016 10:25 am
Been Liked: 183 times
Has Liked: 502 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by paulatky » Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:11 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 11:31 am
I am not sure if that’s an attempt at humour??

The Chinese have shut down completely in the area, one person is allowed out of the house every three days.

Several people on here are claiming we are overreacting, some people in China have not left the house in 5 weeks.
All factories shut, no travel allowed. You need a special licence to drive a car around.

As you say I t’s a very simple plan, not sure it’s going to go down well in the UK.
Would have a very serious effect on the economy which will take a long time to recover from.

The government will have to decide between personal health and economic health and unfortunately I think I know what they will choose
Last edited by paulatky on Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Lowbankclaret
Posts: 3604
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
Been Liked: 619 times
Has Liked: 39 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by Lowbankclaret » Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:14 pm

paulatky wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:11 pm
Would have a very serious effect in the economy which will take a long time ti recover from.

The government will have to decide between personal health and economic health and unfortunately I think I know what they will choose
I agree!!!

Spijed
Posts: 11290
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 12:33 pm
Been Liked: 1987 times
Has Liked: 873 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by Spijed » Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:25 pm

paulatky wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:11 pm
Would have a very serious effect on the economy which will take a long time to recover from.

The government will have to decide between personal health and economic health and unfortunately I think I know what they will choose
Should we shut everything thing down? If so, how do you feed people if no one is working in manufacturing and other industries?

Grumps
Posts: 2101
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:15 am
Been Liked: 420 times
Has Liked: 181 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by Grumps » Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:49 pm

Spijed wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:25 pm
Should we shut everything thing down? If so, how do you feed people if no one is working in manufacturing and other industries?
Don't expect him to have thought his argument through, just as long as he thinks he's scaring people, but it's not working, I guess 90 percent of this thread is in the keep calm camp.
This user liked this post: Gordaleman

Gordaleman
Posts: 1124
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:04 pm
Been Liked: 209 times
Has Liked: 223 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by Gordaleman » Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:53 pm

Grumps wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:49 pm
Don't expect him to have thought his argument through, just as long as he thinks he's scaring people, but it's not working, I guess 90 percent of this thread is in the keep calm camp.
Keeping calm is the only sensible option. When did panicking ever help anyone?

I'm going to watch the first half of Arsenal v West Ham. then I'm off to expose myself to 20,000 people on the Turf.

I'll wash my hands first though.

Claretmatt4
Posts: 3858
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:31 am
Been Liked: 1012 times
Has Liked: 692 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by Claretmatt4 » Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:55 pm

Gordaleman wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:53 pm
I'm going to watch the first half of Arsenal v West Ham. then I'm off to expose myself to 20,000 people on the Turf.
I hope bertie bee takes you out! 😁

Gordaleman
Posts: 1124
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:04 pm
Been Liked: 209 times
Has Liked: 223 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by Gordaleman » Sat Mar 07, 2020 3:00 pm

Claretmatt4 wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:55 pm
I hope bertie bee takes you out! 😁
Why, have you planned a 'Sting'?

Grumps
Posts: 2101
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:15 am
Been Liked: 420 times
Has Liked: 181 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by Grumps » Sat Mar 07, 2020 3:03 pm

Gordaleman wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:53 pm
Keeping calm is the only sensible option. When did panicking ever help anyone?

I'm going to watch the first half of Arsenal v West Ham. then I'm off to expose myself to 20,000 people on the Turf.

I'll wash my hands first though.
Just be careful of being hit by an asteroid, more chance of that than catching the virus at turf moor.
This user liked this post: Gordaleman

tiger76
Posts: 7051
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 9:43 pm
Been Liked: 1101 times
Has Liked: 2855 times
Location: Glasgow

Re: Coronavirus

Post by tiger76 » Sat Mar 07, 2020 3:13 pm

Latest UK figures

UK cases rise to 206

The UK government says the number of cases in the country is now 206, an increase of 43.

Two patients who tested positive for Covid-19 have so far died in the UK. Both were elderly and had underlying health conditions.

The Department of Health said that as of 07:00 on Saturday morning, more than 21,000 people had been tested for the virus.

Earlier, England's deputy chief medical officer Jennie Harries told the BBC that the UK remained in the "containment" phase of controlling the virus.

Yes the numbers are rising but not at an alarming rate,if those figures are anywhere near accurate,of the people tested less than 1% have tested positive,and the vast majority of those will likely have mild symptoms.

Grumps
Posts: 2101
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:15 am
Been Liked: 420 times
Has Liked: 181 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by Grumps » Sat Mar 07, 2020 3:19 pm

tiger76 wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 3:13 pm
Latest UK figures

UK cases rise to 206

The UK government says the number of cases in the country is now 206, an increase of 43.

Two patients who tested positive for Covid-19 have so far died in the UK. Both were elderly and had underlying health conditions.

The Department of Health said that as of 07:00 on Saturday morning, more than 21,000 people had been tested for the virus.

Earlier, England's deputy chief medical officer Jennie Harries told the BBC that the UK remained in the "containment" phase of controlling the virus.

Yes the numbers are rising but not at an alarming rate,if those figures are anywhere near accurate,of the people tested less than 1% have tested positive,and the vast majority of those will likely have mild symptoms.
Stop talking sense
These 4 users liked this post: Gordaleman CombatClaret Zlatan tiger76

tiger76
Posts: 7051
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 9:43 pm
Been Liked: 1101 times
Has Liked: 2855 times
Location: Glasgow

Re: Coronavirus

Post by tiger76 » Sat Mar 07, 2020 3:21 pm

Grumps wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 3:19 pm
Stop talking sense
:lol:

FactualFrank
Posts: 19707
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
Been Liked: 5549 times
Has Liked: 9423 times
Location: Leeds

Re: Coronavirus

Post by FactualFrank » Sat Mar 07, 2020 3:22 pm

tiger76 wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 3:13 pm
Latest UK figures

UK cases rise to 206

The UK government says the number of cases in the country is now 206, an increase of 43.

Two patients who tested positive for Covid-19 have so far died in the UK. Both were elderly and had underlying health conditions.

The Department of Health said that as of 07:00 on Saturday morning, more than 21,000 people had been tested for the virus.

Earlier, England's deputy chief medical officer Jennie Harries told the BBC that the UK remained in the "containment" phase of controlling the virus.

Yes the numbers are rising but not at an alarming rate,if those figures are anywhere near accurate,of the people tested less than 1% have tested positive,and the vast majority of those will likely have mild symptoms.
Now if only there was 0 bickering on here and more posts like the above.

tiger76
Posts: 7051
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 9:43 pm
Been Liked: 1101 times
Has Liked: 2855 times
Location: Glasgow

Re: Coronavirus

Post by tiger76 » Sat Mar 07, 2020 3:31 pm

FactualFrank wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 3:22 pm
Now if only there was 0 bickering on here and more posts like the above.
I'm merely reposting the info from the Beeb website,now i don't always agree with the BBC,but it's at times like this that their commonsense approach to just reporting the facts and simple medical advice is invaluable.

Compared to the nonsense headlines in the redtops,which have fuelled a lot of unnecessary anxiety amongst the general public,of course we should be concerned and take precautions,but there's no need for the mass panic buying and hysteria.
These 3 users liked this post: Gordaleman CombatClaret thatdberight

thatdberight
Posts: 3779
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2017 9:49 am
Been Liked: 924 times
Has Liked: 716 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by thatdberight » Sat Mar 07, 2020 4:20 pm

Grumps wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 3:03 pm
Just be careful of being hit by an asteroid, more chance of that than catching the virus at turf moor.
In a sea of bad information, thank goodness you're talking sense. I just checked. c.200 cases of this virus in the last few weeks but 1,873 Brits struck by asteroids and associated debris in the same period.

thatdberight
Posts: 3779
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2017 9:49 am
Been Liked: 924 times
Has Liked: 716 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by thatdberight » Sat Mar 07, 2020 5:18 pm

Jet fuel may not melt steel but this corona virus might...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-51784167

Gordaleman
Posts: 1124
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:04 pm
Been Liked: 209 times
Has Liked: 223 times

Re: Coronavirus

Post by Gordaleman » Sat Mar 07, 2020 9:22 pm

I'm not on Facebook, but a lady friend sent me this.

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_ ... cdDYU6UNqn

Pretty sound advice, I think.

Post Reply