Latest Chinese export - coronavirus COVID-19

[Hyperduck Quack Quack]

I'm not so sure that would work. China hasn't yet released everyone so what if there is still someone infectious when they do? The whole thing would kick off again. China has a different society to us and we have open borders with Europe. What might work in one country isn't necessarily the answer for us.

 

We should work to BJ's plan as laid out. Only by giving them results based on that plan can we facilitate any change if it proves not to be working. Everyone doing their own thing based on limited knowledge and personal feelings will result in us all running about like headless chickens to the detriment of all.

BJ has clearly stated that timing is all important and let's be honest he is only the mouthpiece for the science and medical experts. We either trust someone or we fall between the stools.

It really annoys me that other 'experts' are so sure of themselves when they haven't got the responsibility or the buck stopping with them.

It could all go wrong again in China and the approach there has been draconian.  Even if lockdown is less severe here, surely it's better than nothing.  

Re. experts - what's really worrying is when they're going against common sense, as though they're involved in an experiment to find the outcome, or even to produce an outcome that's worse than an alternative procedure would produce. The fact that I, as a non-expert, along with others on here who are not experts either, are so convinced that the government's policy is wrong.

[DeppityDawg]

On a lighter note, I've just seen a van parked opposite the office. In the grime on the back, some wag has written...



"no bog roll kept in this van overnight"  ::  ::  ::  ::  ::  ::



I'll have to come back to this later as it's taken me 20 minutes to stop laughing  :mrgreen:

[Borchester]

To that in bold how do you know that is the case?

Because I am telling you. I have been through every fashionable pandemic from the the Asian Flu of 1957 (which killed 33,000 in the UK) to this current nonsense. And the country survived. In another month or so this bug will have burned itself out and we will be frantically searching for something else to panic over.

[cromwell]

I think you are both misconstruing my point. Cromwell, yes governments (less so our own) are over reacting to public pressure because everyone is terrified of being seen not to be "caring". At least our government seems to be emphasising the science behind their decisions where they can.

So you think China over reacted,they don't give a rats arse about public opinion so I'm afraid your argument doesn't hold up there.

it's not about whether it's "helpful" or not to focus on the economy, it's about the scale of the problems this will cause down the line, and the likely effects to vast numbers people, way beyond the mild symptoms that the vast majority will suffer from this virus. By that I mean potentially bankrupt economies, spiralling debt, wholesale job losses, home repossessions and the rupture of public services that will heap far more misery on far more people than a fecking runny nose and a cough. It's about measured and proportional responses, not panic and govern by popularity contests. What we have is closer to pandering to public opinion rather than what little facts we do know. If you don't want to acknowledge that, that's fine, but please don't make me out to be more interested in "economics" than people's health, because you are going to have far more problems with people's health if we cannot fund a bus service never mind a health service. Because that's where we are headed if we allow the global economy to crash again. There aren't the tools available to fix it this time. That's my point. Whilst I have every sympathy for those who are at risk and those who will lose loved ones, we have to keep a sense of perspective. It's risking the whole ship to take Draconian measures against something that the vast majority of those who get it will experienice only mild symptoms.

To that in bold how do you know that is the case?

[T00ts]

I think you are both misconstruing my point. Cromwell, yes governments (less so our own) are over reacting to public pressure because everyone is terrified of being seen not to be "caring". At least our government seems to be emphasising the science behind their decisions where they can.



Toots it's not about whether it's "helpful" or not to focus on the economy, it's about the scale of the problems this will cause down the line, and the likely effects to vast numbers people, way beyond the mild symptoms that the vast majority will suffer from this virus. By that I mean potentially bankrupt economies, spiralling debt, wholesale job losses, home repossessions and the rupture of public services that will heap far more misery on far more people than a fecking runny nose and a cough. It's about measured and proportional responses, not panic and govern by popularity contests. What we have is closer to pandering to public opinion rather than what little facts we do know. If you don't want to acknowledge that, that's fine, but please don't make me out to be more interested in "economics" than people's health, because you are going to have far more problems with people's health if we cannot fund a bus service never mind a health service. Because that's where we are headed if we allow the global economy to crash again. There aren't the tools available to fix it this time. That's my point. Whilst I have every sympathy for those who are at risk and those who will lose loved ones, we have to keep a sense of perspective. It's risking the whole ship to take Draconian measures against something that the vast majority of those who get it will experienice only mild symptoms.

I don't think you don't care at all. I believe you are just as human as all of us. So what do you actually want our government or other governments to do? How are they supposed to keep the markets up? We are already borrowing heavily as I understand it in order to give businesses breaks, maintain/increase sick pay, mortgages 3 months breaks, NHS as much as needed. All this to give confidence and keep the economy here going as much as possible. Bof E dropped rates nearly to the bottom. EU Central Bank already in negative hasn't done much apparently. Trump threw cash at it. China will keep their prisoners working sick or not.

Is it not people playing the markets as much to blame as anyone? What is the answer?

[DeppityDawg]

I think you are both misconstruing my point. Cromwell, yes governments (less so our own) are over reacting to public pressure because everyone is terrified of being seen not to be "caring". At least our government seems to be emphasising the science behind their decisions where they can.



Toots it's not about whether it's "helpful" or not to focus on the economy, it's about the scale of the problems this will cause down the line, and the likely effects to vast numbers people, way beyond the mild symptoms that the vast majority will suffer from this virus. By that I mean potentially bankrupt economies, spiralling debt, wholesale job losses, home repossessions and the rupture of public services that will heap far more misery on far more people than a fecking runny nose and a cough. It's about measured and proportional responses, not panic and govern by popularity contests. What we have is closer to pandering to public opinion rather than what little facts we do know. If you don't want to acknowledge that, that's fine, but please don't make me out to be more interested in "economics" than people's health, because you are going to have far more problems with people's health if we cannot fund a bus service never mind a health service. Because that's where we are headed if we allow the global economy to crash again. There aren't the tools available to fix it this time. That's my point. Whilst I have every sympathy for those who are at risk and those who will lose loved ones, we have to keep a sense of perspective. It's risking the whole ship to take Draconian measures against something that the vast majority of those who get it will experienice only mild symptoms.

[T00ts]

Chief scientific advisor Sir Patrick Vallance says 60% of UK population needs to get covid-19 in order to produce 'herd immunity'



Am I the only one to think "ah, no, no, stop, this is wrong, so wrong"?  



https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-millions-of-britons-will-need-to-contract-covid-19-for-herd-immunity-11956793">https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus- ... y-11956793">https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-millions-of-britons-will-need-to-contract-covid-19-for-herd-immunity-11956793



If we introduce stringent restrictions amounting to lockdown or even near lockdown, that would drastically reduce the opportunities that covid-19 has to pass from individual to individual. In China today there are only 21 new cases and only 8 deaths and this has been the trend for some days now. It can't be a case of the virus simply dying out naturally, otherwise we wouldn't have the growing pandemic elsewhere.



While it might be true about the 60% and herd immunity, if we were to take take drastic measures now, we wouldn't need herd immunity.

  If 60% of people become infected and the death rate is 3%, that's 1.2 million deaths.

Is he really saying we should sacrifice 1.2 million citizens in order to guard against a disease could probably be eradicated and might never occur again?  Another coronavirus outbreak might be a different virus and herd immunity to covid-19 would be useless.



Perhaps Vallance is pointing out the bare facts about what would happen if the main goal was to create herd immunity.  Anyway I feel in my bones that using the population of this country as guinea pigs to find out how bad the epidemic could get here, rather than doing what's best to prevent it spreading, is plain wrong.



I have a worrying feeling that our PM is driven by the sentiment that "We're British, we do things differently and we're not going to copy what all those foreigners do."  The fact that he and his colleagues must be worried for themselves and their families makes the government's feeble response to covid-19 all the more baffling.

I'm not so sure that would work. China hasn't yet released everyone so what if there is still someone infectious when they do? The whole thing would kick off again. China has a different society to us and we have open borders with Europe. What might work in one country isn't necessarily the answer for us.

 

We should work to BJ's plan as laid out. Only by giving them results based on that plan can we facilitate any change if it proves not to be working. Everyone doing their own thing based on limited knowledge and personal feelings will result in us all running about like headless chickens to the detriment of all.

BJ has clearly stated that timing is all important and let's be honest he is only the mouthpiece for the science and medical experts. We either trust someone or we fall between the stools.

It really annoys me that other 'experts' are so sure of themselves when they haven't got the responsibility or the buck stopping with them.

[Borchester]

Great I've always thought them a rip off

That is true. I don't suppose there is much I can do about dying but I am buggered if I am going to spend zillions on a funeral. I rather fancy a sky burial where the corpse is placed on a platform and left for the birds and foxes to eat it. The buggers have broken my heart in the way they have eaten all the fruit from my bushes, so they might as well have the rest of me and save the family a few bob.

[Hyperduck Quack Quack]

Chief scientific advisor Sir Patrick Vallance says 60% of UK population needs to get covid-19 in order to produce 'herd immunity'



Am I the only one to think "ah, no, no, stop, this is wrong, so wrong"?  



https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-millions-of-britons-will-need-to-contract-covid-19-for-herd-immunity-11956793">https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus- ... y-11956793">https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-millions-of-britons-will-need-to-contract-covid-19-for-herd-immunity-11956793



If we introduce stringent restrictions amounting to lockdown or even near lockdown, that would drastically reduce the opportunities that covid-19 has to pass from individual to individual. In China today there are only 21 new cases and only 8 deaths and this has been the trend for some days now. It can't be a case of the virus simply dying out naturally, otherwise we wouldn't have the growing pandemic elsewhere.



While it might be true about the 60% and herd immunity, if we were to take take drastic measures now, we wouldn't need herd immunity.

  If 60% of people become infected and the death rate is 3%, that's 1.2 million deaths.

Is he really saying we should sacrifice 1.2 million citizens in order to guard against a disease could probably be eradicated and might never occur again?  Another coronavirus outbreak might be a different virus and herd immunity to covid-19 would be useless.



Perhaps Vallance is pointing out the bare facts about what would happen if the main goal was to create herd immunity.  Anyway I feel in my bones that using the population of this country as guinea pigs to find out how bad the epidemic could get here, rather than doing what's best to prevent it spreading, is plain wrong.



I have a worrying feeling that our PM is driven by the sentiment that "We're British, we do things differently and we're not going to copy what all those foreigners do."  The fact that he and his colleagues must be worried for themselves and their families makes the government's feeble response to covid-19 all the more baffling.

[T00ts]

Great I've always thought them a rip off

You can opt out of having a funeral you know.

[cromwell]

I feel fairly certain that that will indeed happen. There are going to be many who will refuse hospital and choose to die at home or if living alone unable to command attention. I just hope someone finds them before too long. The elderly in homes will be palmed off to the hospitals asap if past experience is anything to go on. I can't see care home having the capacity/expertise to quarantine anyone. Those poor souls will be the first for palliative care and not much else.



I see too reports (Independent) which have answered one question I had - virus victims = burial/cremation without funerals. Inevitable I guess.

Great I've always thought them a rip off

[T00ts]

Good point on the kids Toots. I don't know about the Chinese Flu , but so far no one has found a cure for old age. So we should stick to the old rule of women and children first and leave the grand dads to sit in the corner and drink themselves to death.



Boris wrote a biography of Churchill and the Blond Moppet's speech did seem to have been influenced by the great man, but was none the worse for that.

I feel fairly certain that that will indeed happen. There are going to be many who will refuse hospital and choose to die at home or if living alone unable to command attention. I just hope someone finds them before too long. The elderly in homes will be palmed off to the hospitals asap if past experience is anything to go on. I can't see care home having the capacity/expertise to quarantine anyone. Those poor souls will be the first for palliative care and not much else.



I see too reports (Independent) which have answered one question I had - virus victims = burial/cremation without funerals. Inevitable I guess.

[T00ts]

I am beginning to feel a bit lonely on here this morning but still = I am watching Sky news and as expected there seems to be more and more contradiction to the Government handling of the virus. Jeremy Hunt was possibly first for his 5 minutes of fame and now we have Rory Stewart spouts that we should close everything down now. There are others all questioning the methods.

For goodness sake how is anyone supposed to have a united response in the population if these people can't even give the Government 24 hours to consolidate the information?

[Borchester]

I agree someone had to say it. There is no other way. We need as many as possible to catch it and survive. They don't want people clogging up the medics and dying, that's not useful. They want as many kids to have their mild symptoms so that the next generation will be covered. Hopefully that will give them enough time to find a vaccine.

I can imagine Hunt who is currently advocating shutting everything being the wimp he appeared to be when he stood for the leadership. He can't negotiate with the virus any more than he could have done with the EU.

If we all escape it this week it will only hit us next week or month. We need the whole world to act in a similar way.

BJ has already aged, I bet he is not sleeping at night very much. He'll face it head on and good luck to him he deserves respect.

Good point on the kids Toots. I don't know about the Chinese Flu , but so far no one has found a cure for old age. So we should stick to the old rule of women and children first and leave the grand dads to sit in the corner and drink themselves to death.



Boris wrote a biography of Churchill and the Blond Moppet's speech did seem to have been influenced by the great man, but was none the worse for that.

[T00ts]

Well you can't legislate for such things as this virus,nobody seems to have a clear idea of the consequences or they are keeping it under wraps.

I get the feeling you think govts are over reacting,why would they though?

I can't see really what any Governments can do about the markets. Surely all the people involved in them - and yes I understand pension companies are a major part of the concern - are running around like headless chickens trying not to lose/make money. They are the problem.



It may well be that down the line global action will have to be taken but in the interim our Government seems as if they are doing everything they can to support businesses and employees during this time. I don't think it's helpful to anyone to focus on the economy while the world is trying to cope with a pandemic. Until we build some immunity in every country around the world and give ourselves time for a cure/vaccine we are in hock to the virus.