Coronavirus

[kernelbogey]

Hi all, I'm new here.

I'm having great difficulty finding out any information about The Proms and whether or not it will be going ahead.

Do you people know anything?

With thanks

jarvis

Hi Jarvis: welcome!

There is a thread on this, although not much more information yet than on this one!

(Click on the red hyperlink and it will take you there. )

[burning dog]

The 2 metre rule should have been promoted from the start, along with the hand washing advice. People where I work discuss endlessly how long the virus survives on various surfaces and less about coughs, sneezes or just being "too close"

[jarvis]

Hi

Thank you to people for your replies to my question.

Jarvis

[Dave2002]

Andrew Bridgen MP. interviewed on Channel Four News tonight, who says he has had Covid-19, proposed the interesting idea that the virus has been around far longer than anyone has been recognising; he believes there are many who have had the resultant illness and may therefore now be immune. He is urging the application of the immunity test (i.e. test for antibodies) as he believes many people may be able safely to get out and go back to work. (I don't know the status of this test.)

That is really interesting, and something I have been wondering about. It's a hard one to put to the test at this time. If indeed Covid-19 is a new virus, and it really is deadly, then getting it wrong - certainly at an individual level - could have very unhappy outcomes. On the other hand, if it's a much older virus, by which I mean significantly older than the detection in China, then many people will already have some exposure to it, and possibly some resistance.

Putting it another way:

There's a virus detected in China - now called Covid-19. It appears to be pretty deadly, at least to some people.
Suppose it's not really new, but would have been classed as flu in previous years. We know that "regular" flu can kill people, or make them really ill, but it's something societies have lived with for years - accepting the difficulties and consequences.

If we treat Covid-19 (now we have identified it as a "new" illness) with the same relative disregard as regular flu, and carry on "as normal" there could be several measurable outcomes.

1. The rates of illness and death would be similar to "regular flu", not good, but deemed "acceptable".
2. The rate of illness and death would be far higher than "regular flu" - so the outcomes would not be acceptable.
3. Rates could be lower - but this seems unlikely - and not born out by observations to date.

I am not sure if anyone really knows about this yet. We do know that there have been very serious outbreaks of diseases in the past - the 1918 so-called Spanish flu incidents - show that - and more recent outbreaks of diseases now called Sars and Mers. Ignoring disease outbreaks does not seem sensible, but it is perhaps possible that some "new" diseases are in fact no worse than other diseases which society has accepted in some way as "tolerable".

So do we go with Trump's earlier comments that the illness and death rates are in fact not out of line with regular flu - which would imply we would just "get on with our lives", or is it really a very significant new threat, and possibly going to wipe a lot of us out? I just don't know.

I am not proposing that we should do nothing. The situation in Italy clearly has been very severe, which does indicate that we are looking at a big problem - which is real. (*1)

Is anyone looking into this? How do the rates of illness and fatalities for (now) known Covid-19 differ from supposed "regular flu" in typical years? Presumably the evidence from (*1) above is that it is significantly higher.

Here is a link to some worldwide statistics - though I can't verify their accuracy - https://www.statista.com/statistics/...de-by-country/ How would that compare with "regular flu" in a typical year? I am not disputing that Covid-19 is unpleasant for many people.

[ardcarp]

If any lesson is to be learned from all this, it is that the government (any government) needs to run our health service, and especially hospitals, with some spare capacity. In my area (a rural one) two quite large local hospitals have been shut down in very recent years meaning that everyone, including the sick and eldderly have to do a 60 mile return journey (a) to get treatment and (b) to visit relatives. It's potty. Also main hospitals should run at say 75% of capacity in 'normal' times so that there is space for surges in medical need. It would also mean that the ridiculous stress which many health workers suffer would be reduced. Paring everything to the bone, which is what has happened over the past 10 years and longer, is ridiculous. The French model, in my humble opinion, works very well. But if that is politically a hot potato, then those who can afford it need to pay more in tax to fund, what is after all, a vital service to everyone.

[MrGongGong]

This has been doing the rounds this morning

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/03/angela-merkel-nails-coronavirus-speech-unlike-trump.html?utm_source=fb&fbclid=IwAR1Hj-DaZzZg2XKD95Bic7x9mtWtMDmGAkuPjG93mJ-DyR35kK3j29HvDL8

[LMcD]

This has been doing the rounds this morning

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020...R35kK3j29HvDL8

I believe many Germans call her 'Mutti'. I just can't bring myself to call BJ 'Daddy' 'Pop' or 'Papa'.

[DracoM]

This has been doing the rounds this morning

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020...R35kK3j29HvDL8

Yes, a worth it after the huffing and puffing absolute pig's breakfast BJ and his 'team' are making of it all.

[cloughie]

I believe many Germans call her 'Mutti'. I just can't bring myself to call BJ 'Daddy' 'Pop' or 'Papa'.

Many other things but not any of those, but I believe there are a small number of people who can genuinely call him by one of those names!

[Dave2002]

Many other things but not any of those, but I believe there are a small number of people who can genuinely call him by one of those names!

Relatively speaking!

[Bryn]

That is really interesting, and something I have been wondering about. It's a hard one to put to the test at this time. If indeed Covid-19 is a new virus, and it really is deadly, then getting it wrong - certainly at an individual level - could have very unhappy outcomes. On the other hand, if it's a much older virus, by which I mean significantly older than the detection in China, then many people will already have some exposure to it, and possibly some resistance.

Putting it another way:

There's a virus detected in China - now called Covid-19. It appears to be pretty deadly, at least to some people.
Suppose it's not really new, but would have been classed as flu in previous years. We know that "regular" flu can kill people, or make them really ill, but it's something societies have lived with for years - accepting the difficulties and consequences.

If we treat Covid-19 (now we have identified it as a "new" illness) with the same relative disregard as regular flu, and carry on "as normal" there could be several measurable outcomes.

1. The rates of illness and death would be similar to "regular flu", not good, but deemed "acceptable".
2. The rate of illness and death would be far higher than "regular flu" - so the outcomes would not be acceptable.
3. Rates could be lower - but this seems unlikely - and not born out by observations to date.

I am not sure if anyone really knows about this yet. We do know that there have been very serious outbreaks of diseases in the past - the 1918 so-called Spanish flu incidents - show that - and more recent outbreaks of diseases now called Sars and Mers. Ignoring disease outbreaks does not seem sensible, but it is perhaps possible that some "new" diseases are in fact no worse than other diseases which society has accepted in some way as "tolerable".

So do we go with Trump's earlier comments that the illness and death rates are in fact not out of line with regular flu - which would imply we would just "get on with our lives", or is it really a very significant new threat, and possibly going to wipe a lot of us out? I just don't know.

I am not proposing that we should do nothing. The situation in Italy clearly has been very severe, which does indicate that we are looking at a big problem - which is real. (*1)

Is anyone looking into this? How do the rates of illness and fatalities for (now) known Covid-19 differ from supposed "regular flu" in typical years? Presumably the evidence from (*1) above is that it is significantly higher.

Here is a link to some worldwide statistics - though I can't verify their accuracy - https://www.statista.com/statistics/...de-by-country/ How would that compare with "regular flu" in a typical year? I am not disputing that Covid-19 is unpleasant for many people.

Firstly, we are dealing here with Andrew Bridgen, not the brightest of sparks and certainly not someone deeply versed in epidemiology or virology. Enough has been made, by those who are so versed, of the crucial differences between influenza and Corvid-19, including in regard to symptoms. Being a coronavirus it is closer in type to the common cold than to influenza. This gives some added information regarding the timeline and the Bridgens' dispute over how he got whatever he got:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/mar/13/mp-andrew-bridgen-enters-coronavirus-row-between-wife-and-nadine-dorries

Remember, we are talking about this guy:https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...peed-line.html . Sorry about linking to that gutter rag but they seem to have been the only national publication to deal with his exploitation of the system in this instance.

[LMcD]

At this difficult time, may I suggest that we spare a thought for all those company directors and executives whose bonuses are linked to the price of their company's shares.

[oddoneout]

At this difficult time, may I suggest that we spare a thought for all those company directors and executives whose bonuses are linked to the price of their company's shares.

Yup, going up nicely in the case of supermarkets...

[MrGongGong]

At this difficult time, may I suggest that we spare a thought for all those company directors and executives whose bonuses are linked to the price of their company's shares.

I had a thought.....

[LMcD]

Yup, going up nicely in the case of supermarkets...

Perhaps some of the distressed fat cats from the financial services sector might like to follow the example set by Derek Jacobi's character in Last Tango in Halifax and do a few shifts at the checkout at their local Asda or Morrisons (names of other possible employers can be found online).