Latest Chinese export - coronavirus COVID-19

[T00ts]

Maybe we are looking at this thing from the wrong angle.



We keep hearing about how the hospitals are the best place for the coronavirus victims but is that so? After all, a lot of folk die in hospital. I should know, I was once a mortuary porter and despite all the Doctor Kildare stuff, we never ran out of work.



But go into your local betting office. It is always full of folk coughing and spluttering and farting and nipping outside for a quick fag because smoking is compulsory in such places. But somehow the patrons always come back.regardless of whatever bug is in fashion. So maybe the best idea might be to isolate coronavirus victims in the nearest branch of William Hill?

 :: Whatever floats your boat I guess!

[T00ts]

Hopefully there is a bunker because government will need to operate - as long as they are doing the best for 'the governed' I'm happy with them having a safe bunker - although that might not provide much protection when the 'enemy' could be your colleague sat next to you in the bunker with a bit of  a cough.



Political factionism shouldn't play any part in decision making - only their duty to save as many people as possible from an illness which is mild for most but serious or even deadly for significant proportion.

I do think it's fairly evident that there is unity across all political sides certainly for now. I guess depending on the outcome there might be some political mayhem at how it could be done better once it's all over.

[Borchester]

Maybe we are looking at this thing from the wrong angle.



We keep hearing about how the hospitals are the best place for the coronavirus victims but is that so? After all, a lot of folk die in hospital. I should know, I was once a mortuary porter and despite all the Doctor Kildare stuff, we never ran out of work.



But go into your local betting office. It is always full of folk coughing and spluttering and farting and nipping outside for a quick fag because smoking is compulsory in such places. But somehow the patrons always come back.regardless of whatever bug is in fashion. So maybe the best idea might be to isolate coronavirus victims in the nearest branch of William Hill?

[papasmurf]

Or maybe have the police do it? There is a marvellous scene in The War Game (1965 or 1966, Youtube and IMDB differ) where Plod is shown despatching the radiation victims with their Webley revolvers.

That would be to expensive, gas operated humane killers are very cheap to run.

[Borchester]

They could well issue triage nurses with gas operated captive bolt pistols, (humane killers.)

Or maybe have the police do it? There is a marvellous scene in The War Game (1965 or 1966, Youtube and IMDB differ) where Plod is shown despatching the radiation victims with their Webley revolvers.

[Hyperduck Quack Quack]

That was pretty much the question to the Leader of the House this morning. His reply was that it was felt that it would wrong for parliament to do anything other than what they were asking everyone else to do. So, self isolating if feeling unwell and getting tested at the appropriate time.



I personally have no doubt that should governance depend on it there will be a bunker somewhere where they will disappear to.

Hopefully there is a bunker because government will need to operate - as long as they are doing the best for 'the governed' I'm happy with them having a safe bunker - although that might not provide much protection when the 'enemy' could be your colleague sat next to you in the bunker with a bit of  a cough.



Political factionism shouldn't play any part in decision making - only their duty to save as many people as possible from an illness which is mild for most but serious or even deadly for significant proportion.

[T00ts]

As we're well aware, people in government are no less likely to catch coronavirus than anyone else, indeed they're probably more likely to do so because of the number and variety of people they come into contact with.



So there must be an element of self-preservation in their thinking as well as determining what's best for society as a whole.  



How this might affect decision-making I don't know.  Would a load of politicians who believe that they and their families have already been exposed to coronavirus still be in a frame of mind to care what happens to the rest of our population?



If the interests of those in power and society as the whole on this issue can be served by the same wise decisions, we're in safer hands than when those interests diverge.

That was pretty much the question to the Leader of the House this morning. His reply was that it was felt that it would wrong for parliament to do anything other than what they were asking everyone else to do. So, self isolating if feeling unwell and getting tested at the appropriate time.



I personally have no doubt that should governance depend on it there will be a bunker somewhere where they will disappear to.

[T00ts]

Denial of what? What we are short of is hard facts, but if we are to believe the figures we have ( about 125,000 confirmed cases, about 5000 deaths, vast majority will get only mild symptoms, many will not even know they have it), then the case for massive and over warranted panic is compelling.



5000 deaths is sadly tragic, but more people will die in road accidents today alone, and common flu kills more people every year. People will be making money out of this fearmongering, and that is tragic too.



The fact is, society HAS to keep functioning. It's wholly unrealistic and almost childish to think the whole population can simply "work from home". If we don't get on with real life and accept risk, and stores don't get food, homes get power and heating and hospitals get medicine and supplies, etc,etc,etc, then people WILL die. Sorry, we disagree, but I think over reaction and panic will solve nothing, and will make thingd a.lot worse than it needs to be. There are no silver bullets and magic wands. We do what we've always done, and that is get on with life. The modern sickness of hiding behind "risk aversion" is way worse than any virus.

I sincerely hope you are right. However it is not death numbers we are looking at. It is length of illness for the majority and degree of sickness. As said earlier it is all about slowing it down and the only way to do that is to stop folk interacting. So we all carry on as before. Before we know it the whole office is down, then the whole factory because the office girls wander home take to their beds and give it to the whole family. Then you get the lucky ones who don't know they've got it so infect the whole train on the way back from work. It's an epidemic that will stop too many working at all. They are trying to keep people working even if it's from home. The numbers we have are only the beginning.

Interesting times. I'll have that Henry when it's all over!  

[T00ts]

They could well issue triage nurses with gas operated captive bolt pistols, (humane killers.)

Possibly. There is more than one medical solution if it's considered in the patient's best interest. The fact that the patient will be in isolation makes family intervention less likely.



Another question I have is will we be able to bury the dead or will it be compulsory cremation? It could be that the snowflakes will have to grow some rather rapidly.

[DeppityDawg]

I have a feeling you have denial problems. As you say we will see but unless we manage it better than say Italy we may well be in their situation. I am not panicked but I am realistic. The NHS has been today put on a war footing. This allows them to relocate staff into areas they are unfamiliar with. They are already getting swamped. What we are not being told in the figures so carefully updated each day is how many are on oxygen/life support of those already infected. It's an interesting omission considering their careful transparency.

If this was a common cold/flu in the normal sense then I would agree but we have here a disease where they are trying to govern the numbers that are recovering to achieve herd immunity. This involves as many as possible surviving it to halt the virus's search for new hosts. It is a process that may take months depending on how successful they are in controlling the march of the virus through the population.

I actually feel it's a fairly false hope and decidedly experimental. Doctors will have to become selective if they are over-run. They can't admit that of course but that's where we are going.

Denial of what? What we are short of is hard facts, but if we are to believe the figures we have ( about 125,000 confirmed cases, about 5000 deaths, vast majority will get only mild symptoms, many will not even know they have it), then the case for massive and over warranted panic is compelling.



5000 deaths is sadly tragic, but more people will die in road accidents today alone, and common flu kills more people every year. People will be making money out of this fearmongering, and that is tragic too.



The fact is, society HAS to keep functioning. It's wholly unrealistic and almost childish to think the whole population can simply "work from home". If we don't get on with real life and accept risk, and stores don't get food, homes get power and heating and hospitals get medicine and supplies, etc,etc,etc, then people WILL die. Sorry, we disagree, but I think over reaction and panic will solve nothing, and will make thingd a.lot worse than it needs to be. There are no silver bullets and magic wands. We do what we've always done, and that is get on with life. The modern sickness of hiding behind "risk aversion" is way worse than any virus.

[Hyperduck Quack Quack]

As we're well aware, people in government are no less likely to catch coronavirus than anyone else, indeed they're probably more likely to do so because of the number and variety of people they come into contact with.



So there must be an element of self-preservation in their thinking as well as determining what's best for society as a whole.  



How this might affect decision-making I don't know.  Would a load of politicians who believe that they and their families have already been exposed to coronavirus still be in a frame of mind to care what happens to the rest of our population?



If the interests of those in power and society as the whole on this issue can be served by the same wise decisions, we're in safer hands than when those interests diverge.

[papasmurf]

 Doctors will have to become selective if they are over-run. They can't admit that of course but that's where we are going.

They could well issue triage nurses with gas operated captive bolt pistols, (humane killers.)

[T00ts]

I don't understand your post. My point was that in a few months time, this will all be over. We will see then if the dire predictions of "deaths in the millions" and "80% of the population sick" have come true or not. The world's economy meanwhile will have been pushed irreversibly into a recession for which we no longer have the tools to tackle, which will result in immeasurably more suffering (and deaths) across the globe than this "pandemic" has caused.



The only thing I'm sick of is the scaremongering and panic.

I have a feeling you have denial problems. As you say we will see but unless we manage it better than say Italy we may well be in their situation. I am not panicked but I am realistic. The NHS has been today put on a war footing. This allows them to relocate staff into areas they are unfamiliar with. They are already getting swamped. What we are not being told in the figures so carefully updated each day is how many are on oxygen/life support of those already infected. It's an interesting omission considering their careful transparency.

If this was a common cold/flu in the normal sense then I would agree but we have here a disease where they are trying to govern the numbers that are recovering to achieve herd immunity. This involves as many as possible surviving it to halt the virus's search for new hosts. It is a process that may take months depending on how successful they are in controlling the march of the virus through the population.

I actually feel it's a fairly false hope and decidedly experimental. Doctors will have to become selective if they are over-run. They can't admit that of course but that's where we are going.

[DeppityDawg]

My daughter just mentioned a British chap in Italian who was interviewed this morning. The comment that resonated with her was that if you are fit and healthy and get the right treatment you might recover.

So fit and healthy and presumably ventilation. So when thousands are ill and needing oxygen for day/weeks and they simply don't have it..........

When so many are diagnosed/isolated I should think making money for the national economy will be the last thing that's thought about or possible. The financial suicide is not by choice.

I don't understand your post. My point was that in a few months time, this will all be over. We will see then if the dire predictions of "deaths in the millions" and "80% of the population sick" have come true or not. The world's economy meanwhile will have been pushed irreversibly into a recession for which we no longer have the tools to tackle, which will result in immeasurably more suffering (and deaths) across the globe than this "pandemic" has caused.



The only thing I'm sick of is the scaremongering and panic.

[T00ts]

The problem at the moment is that while we're free to travel and mix in large groups, not to mention being required to turn up for work etc. there's strong social pressure for all of us to continue mixing freely, even if it's against out better judgement.  



That's why we need the government to bring in stringent restrictions, so that people no longer feel obliged to mix freely and risk spreading coronavirus.



Ireland has just brought in restrictions while Angela Merkel has warned that up to 70% of Germany's population could eventually get the virus.  Only a fraction of a percent of China's population caught the virus and the epidemic there is in sharp decline, her statement sounds incredibly defeatist given that the way to stop the spread is staring her in the face.  Germany's government seems to be as far behind the curve as the UK on this one.

There is evidence from Italy that it isn't only the elderly/infirm that are dying. The press is saying that BJ is trying to control the travel of the virus in an effort to get herd immunity. So hopefully enough people survive it in the community thus the virus runs out of new hosts and dies out. I hope he can get it right but our society does not do herd very well unless it's something to do with their freedoms.



I guess someone like me is likely to be housebound for the rest of this year.