Coronavirus

[Sith Happens]

4 minutes ago, smiths_tavrn said:

Lol you really have bought this coronavirus propaganda.

So i guess if you develop a cough tomorrow you won't stay at home as instructed? 

[1967Ram]

17 minutes ago, Paul71 said:

Why is boris doing the heil hitler thing??

Comes naturally? ?

[GboroRam]

5 minutes ago, Paul71 said:

So i guess if you develop a cough tomorrow you won't stay at home as instructed? 

Pah. It's them bloomin experts again. 

[Mick Brolly]

This time next week their will be poo rolls galore because none of the selfish bankers will need anymore until Christmas. 

[ramit]

Have a bit of a dilemma.  We have tickets to fly to Alicante April 5.  Spain has today been listed as a high risk area by our government and anyone returning will have to go through 2 week quarantine.  We have renters who are about to return our house to us on the 5th.

We sort of have to go if flight isn't cancelled, but can't help having a few doubts..

 

 

[Leeds Ram]

Just now, smiths_tavrn said:

I'll make a bold statement here but I believe it's the correct one. Coronavirus is leading to people losing money, their livelihoods but more importantly probably loss of life. And the reason for loss of life? Too many resources are being allocated to coronavirus which IMO is relatively harmless and because resources are being stretched those with more critical medical issues will as a consequence not receive the same medical attention. Everything gets more thinly spread. Therefore the governments policy in all of this is to the detriment not the benefit of society as a whole. If you support the governments stance then you support detriment to society as a whole. You can't have it both ways. We can't magically expand the NHS overnight.

If the resources aren't dedicated to corona virus and the policy of herding and gradualisation of cases fails (which many think it might) then we're at risk of the healthcare system collapsing. It's not even the number of deaths but the amount of hospitalisations required, the last i read it's sitting at around 10% of cases require admission. If that figure sits correctly that's going to have a massive effect on the capacity of the healthcare system. By preparing the system for the shock it's possible to limit the effects. If it was just business as usual approach it'd be potentially catastrophic and cause mayhem which is exactly what the government is trying to prevent. Hopefully, the gradualisation approach works so there isn't a massive overload in the system as a best case scenario. 

Yes, for the under 50's with no underlying healthcare conditions then corona is basically a bad case of flu from the sounds of it. However, if you've got an underlying condition or are 60+ then it isn't necessarily harmless from what I've read. I'm not a doctor or an epidemiologist so i don't want to make definitive statements, however I've got quite severe asthma and when i have a cold that often mutates into a pretty nasty chest infection so I'm doing what i can to avoid this. 

I understand people trying to calm others down who are panicking but it'd be unwise to ignore the professionals who have said this is a serious problem and it requires drastic action to try and limit the effects of this. 

[Sith Happens]

19 minutes ago, smiths_tavrn said:

I'll make a bold statement here but I believe it's the correct one. Coronavirus is leading to people losing money, their livelihoods but more importantly probably loss of life. And the reason for loss of life? Too many resources are being allocated to coronavirus which IMO is relatively harmless and because resources are being stretched those with more critical medical issues will as a consequence not receive the same medical attention. Everything gets more thinly spread. Therefore the governments policy in all of this is to the detriment not the benefit of society as a whole. If you support the governments stance then you support detriment to society as a whole. You can't have it both ways. We can't magically expand the NHS overnight.

So is that a yes or no?

[Tamworthram]

25 minutes ago, smiths_tavrn said:

I'll make a bold statement here but I believe it's the correct one. Coronavirus is leading to people losing money, their livelihoods but more importantly probably loss of life. And the reason for loss of life? Too many resources are being allocated to coronavirus which IMO is relatively harmless and because resources are being stretched those with more critical medical issues will as a consequence not receive the same medical attention. Everything gets more thinly spread. Therefore the governments policy in all of this is to the detriment not the benefit of society as a whole. If you support the governments stance then you support detriment to society as a whole. You can't have it both ways. We can't magically expand the NHS overnight.

To call that a bold statement is a little bit of an understatement. It’s the sort of thing I’d expect to hear from Katie Hopkins.

Do you have any medical expertise to support your view, in particular that Coronavirus is relatively harmless, that seems to be at odds with pretty much the entire scientific community?

[Uptherams]

15 minutes ago, smiths_tavrn said:

I'll make a bold statement here but I believe it's the correct one. Coronavirus is leading to people losing money, their livelihoods but more importantly probably loss of life. And the reason for loss of life? Too many resources are being allocated to coronavirus which IMO is relatively harmless and because resources are being stretched those with more critical medical issues will as a consequence not receive the same medical attention. Everything gets more thinly spread. Therefore the governments policy in all of this is to the detriment not the benefit of society as a whole. If you support the governments stance then you support detriment to society as a whole. You can't have it both ways. We can't magically expand the NHS overnight.

Let me pose a question to you. There is a person who was born in an NHS hospital, they can't use their body and they can't communicate. They require constant care and attention, multiple operations and procedures a year to keep them alive. They live in the hospital and they have been there for 18 years like this. The parents have refused to allow their child to die. Someone close to you get's the Corona-virus and it's bad. If they are treated in the hospital, they could survive. However there are no beds left , ventilators and not enough doctors and nurses to treat this person. This other person, is using all the resources that the person close to you requires. Who should die? 

 

[Leeds Ram]

1 minute ago, smiths_tavrn said:

Witness accounts for one. The deaths of 10 people in the UK has been attributed to it. What evidence is there that it's down to coronaviris and not the underlying health issues? Someone dies of pneumonia or heart disease and they say they died of coronaviris. No they didn't, they died of pneumonia. or heart disease. Oh by the way you still haven't told me what I got wrong. You can have a little more time if you wish.

I mean almost your entire post on China was wrong 

[RoyMac5]

7 minutes ago, smiths_tavrn said:

Witness accounts for one. The deaths of 10 people in the UK has been attributed to it. What evidence is there that it's down to coronaviris and not the underlying health issues? Someone dies of pneumonia or heart disease and they say they died of coronaviris. No they didn't, they died of pneumonia. or heart disease.

Do you actually know how covid-19 affects the body? No I don't think you do. Your statement is wildly inaccurate. 

Read this: What coronavirus does to the body.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-51214864

Quote

"The virus is triggering an imbalance in the immune response, there's too much inflammation, how it is doing this we don't know," said Dr Nathalie MacDermott, from King's College London.

...

It is estimated around 6% of cases become critically ill.

By this point the body is starting to fail and there is a real chance of death.

The problem is the immune system is now spiralling out of control and causing damage throughout the body.

It can lead to septic shock when the blood pressure drops to dangerously low levels and organs stop working properly or fail completely.

Acute respiratory distress syndrome caused by widespread inflammation in the lungs stops the body getting enough oxygen it needs to survive. It can stop the kidneys from cleaning the blood and damage the lining of your intestines.

"The virus sets up such a huge degree of inflammation that you succumb... it becomes multi-organ failure," Dr Bharat Pankhania said.

And if the immune system cannot get on top of the virus, then it will eventually spread to every corner of the body where it can cause even more damage.

 

[RoyMac5]

Just now, smiths_tavrn said:

How many of the people in the UK who have died had underlying health issues? Yet every single time coronavirus is the culprit. 

Yes it is the culprit - read the article again. It may be that they aren't as 100% a fine physical specimen as you might be, but if it wasn't for coronavirus they'd still be alive NOW.

[Leeds Ram]

Just now, smiths_tavrn said:

Oh really. And what was wrong about it?

I mean there are so many protests that go on in China every day and the state doesn't flinch when it comes to exercising coercive measures when they feel they are necessary... just look at what they're doing in Xinjiang for example. The chinese don't care what they look like on the world stage you're assuming they're liberal internationalists who actively seek cooperation with other states like we do... they're not. They believe internal issues of policy are exactly that and while their manufacturing drives a large segment of the world economy states won't get tough on them anyway. If the Chinese wanted to cut off Wuhan they literally would have just done it. This is a state which tightly controls the internet and when they thought several years ago the name of a flower was a code word for protest they simply banned that word on the internet and had a massive police presence in big cities. 

Why would the communists be seriously worried about their grip on power? If anything being unable to handle an epidemic is one of the scariest prospects the Chinese state faces as it speaks directly to their ability to get the job done. The state is used to facing protests on a daily basis in micro forms it doesn't bother them. Essentially, the vast majority of your assumptions were wrong. The only thing you were correct about is the pollution which is an issue but is becoming less of an issue since the Chinese are trying to move to solar and other forms of energy quickly. 

[Sith Happens]

3 minutes ago, smiths_tavrn said:

How many of the people in the UK who have died had underlying health issues? Yet every single time coronavirus is the culprit. 

All of them probably.  

Does it mean less if people with underlying conditions die?

 

[Uptherams]

15 minutes ago, smiths_tavrn said:

You're making the assumption like so many others that coronavirus is a vicious virus and it's deadly. Is it?  Where's the proof?

I'd prefer you'd answer the question.

Up to 20% of people who are infected are requiring hospitalisation. 5% end up in a critical condition and 3.5% end up dead. Once a countries resources are stretched, those figures increase. 

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

 

[Tamworthram]

6 minutes ago, smiths_tavrn said:

OK its a bold statement. the gist of it is that the government's policy is leading to loss of lives not saving lives. perhaps like Wolfie you could explain what I got wrong?

Personally I think you have got it wrong on a number of counts.

Firstly, I believe the virus is far from harmless. It seems to be an extremely serious threat to any one with a number of pre-existing medical conditions or elderly. I accept these unfortunate people are at higher risk than the majority of the population but this virus seems to be significantly increasing the risk.

Secondly, correct me if I’m wrong but, I’ve not seen it suggested anywhere that the government is diverting NHS resources away from other essential treatments and operations as you seem to be suggesting. I myself am awaiting a hernia repair operation and this is exactly the sort of minor/routine operation that will almost certainly get delayed. I am fully supportive of such a delay.

Perhaps you can enlighten me as to what resources you think the government is diverting away from other critical cases? Quite the opposite. The NHS advice is to self isolate if you think you may have CV, not to go to your surgery, pharmacy or hospital or even ring 111 unless your condition gets worse or the symptoms do not get better after 7 day. In my opinion, that is pretty much saying, please don’t take up NHS resources just yet, you’ll probably be amongst the vast majority that will get over it. The exception being those at high risk (for example my 87 year old mum with a heart problem.

[Uptherams]

Just now, Paul71 said:

All of them probably.  

Does it mean less if people with underlying conditions die?

 

Unfortunately the term is open to interpretation and massive manipulation of statistics. Put it this way, someone who is obese has underlying health conditions. Obese is fast becoming average in a country like this. We all do it, picture that guy that weighs 30 stone as the poster child for obesity when the reality is different. Is the average obese person about to drop dead suddenly or die in the next 5 years....nope. This is what Germany have been doing, manipulating the statistics. 

[RoyMac5]

Just now, smiths_tavrn said:

Oh and I'm far from a fine physical specimen. Nice sneer though. 

Then you should be more worried than you seem to be now. You have read the article that describes what covid-19 does to the body and yet you still say that victims are dying from underlying causes that hasn't killed them until they became infected. Consider your logic and your knowledge is lacking. 

[DarkFruitsRam7]

14 minutes ago, smiths_tavrn said:

How many of the people in the UK who have died had underlying health issues? Yet every single time coronavirus is the culprit. 

Well that's just absolute baalocks, isn't it?

As of 8 hours ago, there have been 21 confirmed deaths caused by the virus: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51889957

If what you're saying is true, then only 21 people with underlying health conditions have died in the last few weeks. I'm pretty sure that thousands, if not tens of thousands, with underlying health conditions have died in that time. So tell me how the virus is being reported as the cause of death 'every single time'.

[Sith Happens]

1 minute ago, smiths_tavrn said:

Of course it doesn't mean less. 

You certainly give the impression that it does. This is a frightening time for some of us so forgive me if your attitude doesn't work me the duck up.