Page 311 of 841

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 12:38 pm
by ManInTheBar
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Saint wrote:
Mahoney wrote:As Edward VIII / the Duke of Windsor had no children, she's also genuinely his heir.
Yeah - If Eddie had had kids that could have thrown up some potential issues that conspiracy theorists would have no doubt enjoyed, but as things panned out, she just became Queen a couple of decades earlier than she would have done anyway
You do realise they did have a child who married the direct descendant of Jesus in the south of France and the progeny of that match is heir to Rome and the Realm and Church of England?

Nope, it WAS a laundry list, really it was.

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 12:38 pm
by DragsterDriver
Ireland’s strategy seems to be herd immunity for low risk groups and confinement for the at risk?

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 12:45 pm
by OptimisticJock
BM, if you're still interested in volunteering apparently NHS Scotland is catching up and trying to get something in place.

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 12:46 pm
by Sandstorm
Where's the posts from Aus and NZ calling on all the Royals to be exposed to Corona and then prevented from access to a ventilator?

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 12:47 pm
by backrow
DragsterDriver wrote:
Homer wrote:I work in product development for a large auto manufacturer. What has been going on (mostly in the background) from so many companies and individuals is really encouraging. We have been utilising our leverage and expertise in purchasing, logistics, rapid manufacture and mass production to support existing medical equipment manufacturers of masks, screen, respirators and ventilators. Hopefully it will give the frontline workers the tools they really need to do their jobs in the coming months.

Additionally, donating PPE (that is not currently required in our plants due to shudowns) and loaning vehicles to the Red Cross etc. are simple, but great ways to help out.

I don't believe people should go looking for praise for doing the right thing, but think hopefully we will be able to look back and take some satisfaction in knowing we have done a bit to help....
:thumbup:
:thumbup:

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 12:47 pm
by eldanielfire
redderneck wrote:Far be it for me to defend them, but that's a price list. It doesn't indicate old pricing nor does it make clear there is any price increase involved. Mentions a price change. Without a comparator, it's proof of nothing...???
Read the news stories connected with it and on TV Multiple sources confirmed the repricing and raising of prices.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... es-50.html

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 12:50 pm
by backrow
eldanielfire wrote:
redderneck wrote:Far be it for me to defend them, but that's a price list. It doesn't indicate old pricing nor does it make clear there is any price increase involved. Mentions a price change. Without a comparator, it's proof of nothing...???
Read the news stories connected with it and on TV Multiple sources confirmed the repricing and raising of prices.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... es-50.html
Ah now puttingnprices up 50% is a cnunts trick and I hope he goes bust
If it was w standard price increase then could have been already planned. Sadly I don’t think his clientele will vote with their feet once normality resumes

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 12:57 pm
by message #2527204
Saint wrote:
message #2527204 wrote:
Saint wrote:
Akkerman wrote:I assume William is being hurried to a safe location far from him as we speak.
You would think.

Mildly amusing thought - if Liz, Charlie, and Wills were all to pop their clogs, Harry becomes Prince Regent and would have to move back to the UK
He's not a royal any more. Andrew as Prince regent.
Harry actually is still HRH - but has been told not to use it. He's still in the line of succession and can't easily be removed
Didn't know that :thumbup:

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 1:00 pm
by DragsterDriver
Seneca of the Night wrote:
OptimisticJock wrote:BM, if you're still interested in volunteering apparently NHS Scotland is catching up and trying to get something in place.
Is Jerpy going to be standing outside a hospital waving people in with a big foam hand?
He’ll still be at a lock in celebrating with Salmond.

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 1:06 pm
by RodneyRegis
Wow. Some pretty hefty incentives for self-employed to under-declare income.

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 1:08 pm
by Plato'sCave
Well I’m pretty sure I’ve got it.

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 1:10 pm
by RodneyRegis
Raggs wrote:
Margin_Walker wrote:
Double wrote:I reckon in 3 weeks time we're going to start getting the antibody tests back in the UK and realise that everyone here got coronavirus back in late December/early January, that the disease is 10 times more virulent and 10 times less deadly than we expected, and that this lockdown was a giant waste of everyone's time.
That was basically what the FT article I posted a few pages back was suggesting. Not convinced, but would be great if it were true

https://www.ft.com/content/5ff6469a-6dd ... bea055720b

The new coronavirus may already have infected far more people in the UK than scientists had previously estimated — perhaps as much as half the population — according to modelling by researchers at the University of Oxford.

If the results are confirmed, they imply that fewer than one in a thousand of those infected with Covid-19 become ill enough to need hospital treatment, said Sunetra Gupta, professor of theoretical epidemiology, who led the study. The vast majority develop very mild symptoms or none at all.

“We need immediately to begin large-scale serological surveys — antibody testing — to assess what stage of the epidemic we are in now,” she said.

The modelling by Oxford’s Evolutionary Ecology of Infectious Disease group indicates that Covid-19 reached the UK by mid-January at the latest. Like many emerging infections, it spread invisibly for more than a month before the first transmissions within the UK were officially recorded at the end of February.
It would be great, but it still doesn't change the necessity for a lockdown (as I said, if anything, it increases it), it just means it'll be shorter.
It doesn't really make a lot of sense.

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 1:11 pm
by CM11
DragsterDriver wrote:Ireland’s strategy seems to be herd immunity for low risk groups and confinement for the at risk?
It is? Link?

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 1:12 pm
by happyhooker
RodneyRegis wrote:Wow. Some pretty hefty incentives for self-employed to under-declare income.
Where? What?

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 1:13 pm
by message #2527204
Just heard of a local company that has applied for the job retention scheme but is forcing their workers to work 4 days a week to get their 80%

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 1:14 pm
by happyhooker
message #2527204 wrote:Just heard of a local company that has applied for the job retention scheme but is forcing their workers to work 4 days a week to get their 80%
How are they applying for this?

The guys I spoke to last night were tearing their hair out trying to find out how this worked.

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 1:17 pm
by message #2527204
happyhooker wrote:
message #2527204 wrote:Just heard of a local company that has applied for the job retention scheme but is forcing their workers to work 4 days a week to get their 80%
How are they applying for this?

The guys I spoke to last night were tearing their hair out trying to find out how this worked.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... ion-scheme

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 1:21 pm
by Edinburgh01
New guy wrote:I'd imagine Charles will be fine, he'll have the kind of health care normal people can only dream of.

Doubt they'd have made this announcement if it wasn't serious though.
Perhaps it is a 'Look we are all in this together' type announcement rather than he is very ill.

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 1:23 pm
by Double
CM11 wrote:Not sure why people are trying to convince themselves that everyone has had it already and it's just that we didn't notice. ICU's are being overrun with healthy people. They won't show up in the death statistics for the most part but I think we'd have noticed a need for a lot more ICU beds around the world over the last few months if it was already prevalent everywhere?
But according to the Italian Minister for Health, only 12% actually died as a direct cause of coronavirus. And even that 12% haven't been entirely healthy people. So a large proportion of these people would have been in the ICU anyway - why does Italy seem to be overwhelmed?

It seems possible that it takes a lot more work to deal with someone confirmed to have Covid than someone who is equally ill, but isn't presumed to have an ultra-infectious 1% mortality disease. As soon as you're separating those people, as hospitals are doing, everything becomes much more stressed, and a problem suddenly exists that actually wouldn't if you didn't know that these people had this disease.

Look, we don't know either way, and I'm not saying that the precautions we're taking now aren't merited or whatever. I'm just trying to put reason to that paper from Oxford and propose how, in the slightly bizarre world of statistics, what they've modelled might not be inconsistent with what we're seeing now.

The only way we'll find out is widespread antibody testing, so I can see why the UK government is so keen to get those kits.

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 1:24 pm
by happyhooker
message #2527204 wrote:
happyhooker wrote:
message #2527204 wrote:Just heard of a local company that has applied for the job retention scheme but is forcing their workers to work 4 days a week to get their 80%
How are they applying for this?

The guys I spoke to last night were tearing their hair out trying to find out how this worked.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... ion-scheme
Ah, thanks. Don't think that page was fully operational when I spoke to them

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 1:26 pm
by DragsterDriver
happyhooker wrote:
message #2527204 wrote:
happyhooker wrote:
message #2527204 wrote:Just heard of a local company that has applied for the job retention scheme but is forcing their workers to work 4 days a week to get their 80%
How are they applying for this?

The guys I spoke to last night were tearing their hair out trying to find out how this worked.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... ion-scheme
Ah, thanks. Don't think that page was fully operational when I spoke to them
It’s not open yet.

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 1:27 pm
by DragsterDriver
https://dgiluz-wordpress-com.cdn.amppro ... rking/amp/

Decathlon scuba masks, genius stuff :thumbup:

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 1:32 pm
by Gospel
As an aside who has been responsible for developing the antibody test? Was it the work being done by Southampton Uni?

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 1:32 pm
by message #2527204
DragsterDriver wrote:
happyhooker wrote:
message #2527204 wrote:
happyhooker wrote:
message #2527204 wrote:Just heard of a local company that has applied for the job retention scheme but is forcing their workers to work 4 days a week to get their 80%
How are they applying for this?

The guys I spoke to last night were tearing their hair out trying to find out how this worked.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... ion-scheme
Ah, thanks. Don't think that page was fully operational when I spoke to them
It’s not open yet.
No, but better to identify and notify employees now and get your shit together for the end of the month.
The government have guaranteed that this will be available to all uk businesses.

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 1:36 pm
by message #2527204
Double wrote:
CM11 wrote:Not sure why people are trying to convince themselves that everyone has had it already and it's just that we didn't notice. ICU's are being overrun with healthy people. They won't show up in the death statistics for the most part but I think we'd have noticed a need for a lot more ICU beds around the world over the last few months if it was already prevalent everywhere?
But according to the Italian Minister for Health, only 12% actually died as a direct cause of coronavirus. And even that 12% haven't been entirely healthy people. So a large proportion of these people would have been in the ICU anyway - why does Italy seem to be overwhelmed?

It seems possible that it takes a lot more work to deal with someone confirmed to have Covid than someone who is equally ill, but isn't presumed to have an ultra-infectious 1% mortality disease. As soon as you're separating those people, as hospitals are doing, everything becomes much more stressed, and a problem suddenly exists that actually wouldn't if you didn't know that these people had this disease.

Look, we don't know either way, and I'm not saying that the precautions we're taking now aren't merited or whatever. I'm just trying to put reason to that paper from Oxford and propose how, in the slightly bizarre world of statistics, what they've modelled might not be inconsistent with what we're seeing now.

The only way we'll find out is widespread antibody testing, so I can see why the UK government is so keen to get those kits.
As I said earlier, there may be reasons not to have country-wide testing, at least not in the public domain. What will those without immunity do? Stay at home? Panic? Try and get infected?

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 1:37 pm
by CM11
Double wrote:
CM11 wrote:Not sure why people are trying to convince themselves that everyone has had it already and it's just that we didn't notice. ICU's are being overrun with healthy people. They won't show up in the death statistics for the most part but I think we'd have noticed a need for a lot more ICU beds around the world over the last few months if it was already prevalent everywhere?
But according to the Italian Minister for Health, only 12% actually died as a direct cause of coronavirus. And even that 12% haven't been entirely healthy people. So a large proportion of these people would have been in the ICU anyway - why does Italy seem to be overwhelmed?

It seems possible that it takes a lot more work to deal with someone confirmed to have Covid than someone who is equally ill, but isn't presumed to have an ultra-infectious 1% mortality disease. As soon as you're separating those people, as hospitals are doing, everything becomes much more stressed, and a problem suddenly exists that actually wouldn't if you didn't know that these people had this disease.

Look, we don't know either way, and I'm not saying that the precautions we're taking now aren't merited or whatever. I'm just trying to put reason to that paper from Oxford and propose how, in the slightly bizarre world of statistics, what they've modelled might not be inconsistent with what we're seeing now.

The only way we'll find out is widespread antibody testing, so I can see why the UK government is so keen to get those kits.
It's the healthy people who will survive that are in ICU.

The unhealthy people who have only a small chance of being saved aren't being admitted to ICU and are just being left to die.

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 1:40 pm
by Boobs not Moobs
A 21-year-old woman with no pre-existing medical conditions has died from the coronavirus, her family has said. Chloe Middleton (left and right) is thought to be the youngest victim in the UK to have no underlying medical conditions.

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 1:43 pm
by Double
message #2527204 wrote:
Double wrote:
CM11 wrote:Not sure why people are trying to convince themselves that everyone has had it already and it's just that we didn't notice. ICU's are being overrun with healthy people. They won't show up in the death statistics for the most part but I think we'd have noticed a need for a lot more ICU beds around the world over the last few months if it was already prevalent everywhere?
But according to the Italian Minister for Health, only 12% actually died as a direct cause of coronavirus. And even that 12% haven't been entirely healthy people. So a large proportion of these people would have been in the ICU anyway - why does Italy seem to be overwhelmed?

It seems possible that it takes a lot more work to deal with someone confirmed to have Covid than someone who is equally ill, but isn't presumed to have an ultra-infectious 1% mortality disease. As soon as you're separating those people, as hospitals are doing, everything becomes much more stressed, and a problem suddenly exists that actually wouldn't if you didn't know that these people had this disease.

Look, we don't know either way, and I'm not saying that the precautions we're taking now aren't merited or whatever. I'm just trying to put reason to that paper from Oxford and propose how, in the slightly bizarre world of statistics, what they've modelled might not be inconsistent with what we're seeing now.

The only way we'll find out is widespread antibody testing, so I can see why the UK government is so keen to get those kits.
As I said earlier, there may be reasons not to have country-wide testing, at least not in the public domain. What will those without immunity do? Stay at home? Panic? Try and get infected?
You can do widespread testing without giving people individual results. Then governments would have an idea of the spread of the disease and could adjust their plans accordingly.

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 1:45 pm
by OptimisticJock
We can't even do widespread testing in the NHS.

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 1:46 pm
by slick
We've just had our first family acquaintance die from the virus. Pretty old and a few health complications.

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 1:50 pm
by message #2527204
OptimisticJock wrote:We can't even do widespread testing in the NHS.
Not yet.

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 1:51 pm
by Double
OptimisticJock wrote:We can't even do widespread testing in the NHS.
Yeah, really seems like the government is struggling to get the kits it needs.

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 1:54 pm
by message #2527204
Anyone in the know...what happens if your kids get it bad? Are you allowed to accompany them to hospital? I guess you should be in self isolation, but I can't imagine leaving mine there alone for 14 days.

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 2:08 pm
by C69
CM11 wrote:
Double wrote:
CM11 wrote:Not sure why people are trying to convince themselves that everyone has had it already and it's just that we didn't notice. ICU's are being overrun with healthy people. They won't show up in the death statistics for the most part but I think we'd have noticed a need for a lot more ICU beds around the world over the last few months if it was already prevalent everywhere?
But according to the Italian Minister for Health, only 12% actually died as a direct cause of coronavirus. And even that 12% haven't been entirely healthy people. So a large proportion of these people would have been in the ICU anyway - why does Italy seem to be overwhelmed?

It seems possible that it takes a lot more work to deal with someone confirmed to have Covid than someone who is equally ill, but isn't presumed to have an ultra-infectious 1% mortality disease. As soon as you're separating those people, as hospitals are doing, everything becomes much more stressed, and a problem suddenly exists that actually wouldn't if you didn't know that these people had this disease.

Look, we don't know either way, and I'm not saying that the precautions we're taking now aren't merited or whatever. I'm just trying to put reason to that paper from Oxford and propose how, in the slightly bizarre world of statistics, what they've modelled might not be inconsistent with what we're seeing now.

The only way we'll find out is widespread antibody testing, so I can see why the UK government is so keen to get those kits.
It's the healthy people who will survive that are in ICU.

The unhealthy people who have only a small chance of being saved aren't being admitted to ICU and are just being left to die.
Treatment escalation is based upon frailty guidelines.
The NICE clinical fraily score will be a determinor of ICU admission.

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 2:11 pm
by OptimisticJock
slick wrote:We've just had our first family acquaintance die from the virus. Pretty old and a few health complications.
Condolences slick

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 2:12 pm
by OptimisticJock
message #2527204 wrote:Anyone in the know...what happens if your kids get it bad? Are you allowed to accompany them to hospital? I guess you should be in self isolation, but I can't imagine leaving mine there alone for 14 days.
We're allowing one parent to accompany them in ambulance.

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 2:16 pm
by DragsterDriver
OptimisticJock wrote:
message #2527204 wrote:Anyone in the know...what happens if your kids get it bad? Are you allowed to accompany them to hospital? I guess you should be in self isolation, but I can't imagine leaving mine there alone for 14 days.
We're allowing one parent to accompany them in ambulance.
Addenbrookes hospital has banned visitors, even to ‘end of life’ patients.




In other news the missus bought a world map.... gave me a dart and said "throw this and wherever it lands I'm taking you for a holiday when this pandemic is over". Turns out we're spending two weeks behind the fridge.

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 2:19 pm
by bimboman
DragsterDriver wrote:
OptimisticJock wrote:
message #2527204 wrote:Anyone in the know...what happens if your kids get it bad? Are you allowed to accompany them to hospital? I guess you should be in self isolation, but I can't imagine leaving mine there alone for 14 days.
We're allowing one parent to accompany them in ambulance.
Addenbrookes hospital has banned visitors, even to ‘end of life’ patients.




In other news the missus bought a world map.... gave me a dart and said "throw this and wherever it lands I'm taking you for a holiday when this pandemic is over". Turns out we're spending two weeks behind the fridge.

A dirty weekend will be great.

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 2:19 pm
by OptimisticJock
DragsterDriver wrote:
OptimisticJock wrote:
message #2527204 wrote:Anyone in the know...what happens if your kids get it bad? Are you allowed to accompany them to hospital? I guess you should be in self isolation, but I can't imagine leaving mine there alone for 14 days.
We're allowing one parent to accompany them in ambulance.
Addenbrookes hospital has banned visitors, even to ‘end of life’ patients.




In other news the missus bought a world map.... gave me a dart and said "throw this and wherever it lands I'm taking you for a holiday when this pandemic is over". Turns out we're spending two weeks behind the fridge.
:lol:

Not sure about ICU but the respiratory ward in Ninewells is allowing one parent. Not sure about visitors for adults though.

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2020 2:22 pm
by C69
All visitors are being stopped locally by cop today