Mucker1884 Posted February 8, 2021 Share Posted February 8, 2021 Day 348 in The Big Bother Thread... Who stays (sane), and who goes (nuts). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted February 8, 2021 Share Posted February 8, 2021 4 minutes ago, Wolfie said: Not really. Thanks to the nightingale hospitals & freeing up beds in other ways, it's not a lack of beds but trained staff that has been the biggest issue. What are the resource demands (staff, equipment etc) for 1000 high dependancy ICU beds with ventilators, as opposed to 1000 general ward beds with people in for planned hip replacement or other standard treatment? Total bed occupancy could be 20% but cripple the NHS if they are all needing 1:1 care and ventillators. Aware of the staffing issues. Isn't this just a temporary issue or are staff off long term with Covid? Don't think there have ever been issues with ventilators has there? Think we got on top of that issue very early. Other than that I can't see that you're saying anything other than the NHS has adapted to cope with demand, which is what I agree they have done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted February 8, 2021 Share Posted February 8, 2021 5 minutes ago, WhiteHorseRam said: Do you think that the Covid-19 situation is just a 'bit of a bad patch' for the NHS, or an actual serious pandemic? What are you trying to prove? What's your objective on this forum? Think it is a serious pandemic, not sure what your point is? I don't have an objective, just discussing the biggest event of our lifetime on a forum. What is your objective? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteHorseRam Posted February 8, 2021 Share Posted February 8, 2021 Just now, G STAR RAM said: Think it is a serious pandemic Glad we have cleared that up then - my objective achieved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIllyD Posted February 8, 2021 Share Posted February 8, 2021 16 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said: Beds available for 2020/21 Q2 are 120,000 compared with 128,000 for the corresponding period in the previous year. There are waiting lists every year, should we add them back in too to previous years? I'm not saying the situation is great, I am just saying appropriate measures are taken to protect the NHS. In the context of if the NHS is close to collapse they are very meaningful aren't they? Ok so let's just break this down even using the limited figures you give: 120k beds @ 77% = 92.4K beds taken v 128k beds @ 88% = 112k. Would the figures you not show, confirm that if we had 30k COVID added onto the 112k from last year show we would be out of beds if we hadn't have taken action to address the situation ??? That's not even taking into account the tens of thousands that are off with the virus and that the facilities required to treat the virus are completely different to being a LFL comparison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted February 8, 2021 Share Posted February 8, 2021 1 minute ago, BIllyD said: Ok so let's just break this down even using the limited figures you give: 120k beds @ 77% = 92.4K beds taken v 128k beds @ 88% = 112k. Would the figures you not show, confirm that if we had 30k COVID added onto the 112k from last year show we would be out of beds if we hadn't have taken action to address the situation ??? That's not even taking into account the tens of thousands that are off with the virus and that the facilities required to treat the virus are completely different to being a LFL comparison. Yes all fair points. On the other side, what about the fact that flu has disappeared this year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIllyD Posted February 8, 2021 Share Posted February 8, 2021 8 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said: Yes all fair points. On the other side, what about the fact that flu has disappeared this year? I think but wouldn't bet on it based on my google skills, 500 per week is considered a high peak for flu. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted February 8, 2021 Share Posted February 8, 2021 11 minutes ago, BIllyD said: I think but wouldn't bet on it based on my google skills, 500 per week is considered a high peak for flu. From the Government website:- 'Flu hospitalisation and intensive care admission rates decreased from 1.39 per 100,000 to 1.05 per 100,000 and 0.13 per 100,000 to 0.10 per 100,000 respectively - suggesting flu is having a low impact on hospital admissions as well as intensive care unit and high dependency unit admissions.' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1of4 Posted February 8, 2021 Author Share Posted February 8, 2021 14 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said: Yes all fair points. On the other side, what about the fact that flu has disappeared this year? Good to know the number of flu cases are low this year, not seen any figures showing that its disappeared. But if you can provide the figures to prove that flu has disappeared, that will be great. Maybe when the country gets back to normality, we should think about having a lockdown ever winter like we've had this year, if as you say that the flu has disappeared this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfie Posted February 8, 2021 Share Posted February 8, 2021 43 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said: Aware of the staffing issues. Isn't this just a temporary issue or are staff off long term with Covid? Don't think there have ever been issues with ventilators has there? Think we got on top of that issue very early. Other than that I can't see that you're saying anything other than the NHS has adapted to cope with demand, which is what I agree they have done. So why post a load of occupancy figures like you're trying to make a point about it? Now it just looks like you're backtracking.. I give up. Again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIllyD Posted February 8, 2021 Share Posted February 8, 2021 12 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said: From the Government website:- 'Flu hospitalisation and intensive care admission rates decreased from 1.39 per 100,000 to 1.05 per 100,000 and 0.13 per 100,000 to 0.10 per 100,000 respectively - suggesting flu is having a low impact on hospital admissions as well as intensive care unit and high dependency unit admissions.' Probably me being a bit thick this morning, but what are you saying to say ? I'm guessing that Flu would normally account for XX, so that could be taken off the 30k ? I just took a rough figure based upon an article as below ? https://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/news/uncategorised/flu-hospital-admissions-in-england-rise-by-more-than-40-in-a-week/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gone Posted February 8, 2021 Share Posted February 8, 2021 17 minutes ago, 1of4 said: Maybe when the country gets back to normality, we should think about having a lockdown ever winter like we've had this year I think there’s a fair few on here who’d vote for that......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted February 8, 2021 Share Posted February 8, 2021 11 minutes ago, Wolfie said: So why post a load of occupancy figures like you're trying to make a point about it? Now it just looks like you're backtracking.. I give up. Again. I was asked to post stats to back up my assertion that I did not believe that the NHS was not close to collapsing, so I did. If they've proven to be wrong. If theyve just been met with comments about adding on numbers of people that are not in hospital then I'm not sure that makes my assertion wrong. Appears everyone has an opinion but mine is the only one open to challenge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted February 8, 2021 Share Posted February 8, 2021 7 minutes ago, TexasRam said: I think there’s a fair few on here who’d vote for that......... We could go even further and have a staged re-opening through the year! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GboroRam Posted February 8, 2021 Share Posted February 8, 2021 Surely opening up in a non-phased way will allow the R number to rise steeply and the number of infections to rise massively in no time? With the heavy use of lockdown in this country, we still saw the R number rise to probably above 3 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55105285). If we reopen restaurants and pubs, allow the hospitality industry to reopen fully, schools to go back to normal - what will the reproduction rate look like? We were seeing a doubling of cases around every 7 days at one point. Without the controls we're using now, I think it'll be much less than that, considering we've got a faster spreading strain in the wild now. Let's say it doubles every 3 days, and we start with 100 cases in the UK. Within 2 months, everyone in the country is infected. What percentage do we need to become ill for that to seriously impact the ability to treat people? Will having so many cases of the virus encourage more mutations, more strains that don't respond to the vaccine and potentially worse symptoms? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stive Pesley Posted February 8, 2021 Share Posted February 8, 2021 I think it will be interesting once the target of all over 50s vaccinated by May is hit - as the primary impact of that will be to vastly reduce deaths and hospitalisations. So there will be much less of an imperative to impose restrictions on society and we could quite easily begin to see some kind of normality return What it doesn't stop though is the virus continuing to circulate amongst the under 50s and those who have refused the vaccine. A lot of whom are the ones who have argued throughout for their right to personal freedom because it is unlikely to affect them. I hope for their sake that if and when they do catch it it proves to only be the "mild illness" they claimed it would be Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norman Posted February 8, 2021 Share Posted February 8, 2021 Coronavirus (COVID-19) death rate in Italy as of February 3, 2021, by age group 0-9 years 0% 10-19 years 0% 20-29 years 0% 30-39 years 0.1% 40-49 years 0.2% 50-59 years 0.6% 60-69 years 2.9% 70-79 years 9.9% 80-89 years 19.9% 90 years and older 25.8% I used Italy as the figures go right up to last week. The above numbers will fall dramatically when you take out underlying health conditions. After the over 50's are done, I would start opening up in a staggered manner. Once those under 50 who are considered 'shielders' are vaccinated, I would open up fully. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angieram Posted February 8, 2021 Share Posted February 8, 2021 52 minutes ago, Norman said: Coronavirus (COVID-19) death rate in Italy as of February 3, 2021, by age group 0-9 years 0% 10-19 years 0% 20-29 years 0% 30-39 years 0.1% 40-49 years 0.2% 50-59 years 0.6% 60-69 years 2.9% 70-79 years 9.9% 80-89 years 19.9% 90 years and older 25.8% I used Italy as the figures go right up to last week. The above numbers will fall dramatically when you take out underlying health conditions. After the over 50's are done, I would start opening up in a staggered manner. Once those under 50 who are considered 'shielders' are vaccinated, I would open up fully. The under 50s who are shielding will be vaccinated before the 50 - 65s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sith Happens Posted February 8, 2021 Share Posted February 8, 2021 11 minutes ago, angieram said: The under 50s who are shielding will be vaccinated before the 50 - 65s. by next week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norman Posted February 8, 2021 Share Posted February 8, 2021 Let's get pissed then *I'm only joking before someone posts a really long message about how we need to keep the r rate down etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.