Coronavirus Pandemic

[KlaxonCow]

I'm genuinely scared now because of what I've read about it and the fact I live with parents in their late 60s.

I don't know if your work / life situation would permit it - whether you're capable of working from home in your job, for example - but the logical thing is that you might need to "self-isolate" the entire household, including yourself, even though you don't have it right now.

As the government says that it's going to advise the elderly and vulnerable to self-isolate to protect themselves soon - and, for once, maybe they're learning the lessons of mentioning these things ahead of time, so we can prepare for them like this - and we'll have the "if anyone in the household has it, then the whole household self-isolates" advice soon as well (though this seems common sense to do so anyway, but governments have to account for the idiots and specify it explicitly, I guess). So the logical combination of that is that if you're living with the vulnerable, the whole household should self-isolate together to protect them.

Try sorting things out with whoever you have to sort these things out with, and then commit to the fact that you might well have to self-isolate the entire household, for their benefit.

(Indeed, in the various government advice being given, there has so far been little consideration given to those who might have their elderly relatives living with them - perhaps, for example, in a somewhat caring capacity, as they can't really live on their own.)

[gilesgoat]

So if a company doesn't pay sick pay, why would people self isolate when they have bills to pay?

I know there is statutory sick pay, but probably not enough for some. Banks are going to 'help' by basically postponing payments on mortages and stuff, but people will have to pay eventually and be playing catchup?

I see a large portion of people not even considering any consequences (to the point of not taking much interest at all as it currently doesn't affect them) until it is too late and they are dropped right in it.

Isn't a case the government "say something" and "fix this kind of shit" given that it's not just "a walk in the park" but a worldwide medical emergency ?

.. they did have BILLIONS to spend on Brexit and Brexit coins and Brexit parties and maybe even ding the Big Ben ...

[gilesgoat]

I'm genuinely scared now because of what I've read about it and the fact I live with parents in their late 60s.

I don't know if your work / life situation would permit it - whether you're capable of working from home in your job, for example - but the logical thing is that you might need to "self-isolate" the entire household, including yourself, even though you don't have it right now.

As the government soon says that it's going to advise the elderly and vulnerable to self-isolate to protect themselves soon - and, for once, maybe they're learning the lessons of mentioning these things ahead of time, so we can prepare for them like this - and we'll have the "if anyone in the household has it, then the whole household self-isolates" advice soon as well. So the logical combination of that is that if you're living with the vulnerable, the whole household should self-isolate together to protect them.

Try sorting these out with whoever you have to sort these things out with, and then commit to the fact that you might well have to self-isolate the entire household, for their benefit.

(Indeed, in the various government advice being given, there has so far been little consideration given to those who might have their elderly relatives living with them - perhaps, for example, in a somewhat caring capacity, as they can't really live on their own.)

The problem is "self isolate the over 70" MAYBE as in "possibly they don't get sick and die" but the problem is all the others below 70 going around are still spreading the contagion increasing the numbers of infected people.

[Deckard]

it might just come to everyone being infected and anyone under 60 mostly not dying...

[tufty]

The only possible outcome is herd immunity. Slowing the spread, isolating hotspots, etc is all down to reducing the load on health services. It's pragmatic, aimed at reducing the unnecessary death toll. Herd immunity isn't going to kick in until 60% or more of the population have been infected.

China have *contained* the infection, but they haven't eliminated it. What happens when they finally open the gates on Wuhan...

We will lose a lot of people. Mostly the older generation. There's not much we can do about it.

[merman]

So presumably everyone parents here are over 70 so like mine in the next few weeks will be self isolating for weeks if not months - thank god for FaceTime and the web etc.....

Health Secretary Matt Hancock has told Sky News that over-70s will be asked to self-isolate "in the coming weeks" - and it could potentially last for months.

He told the Sophy Ridge on Sunday programme that the growing coronavirus outbreak meant "the elderly and vulnerable" would be asked to "shield themselves by self isolating".

Not so good if you live on your own in a flat with no tech knowhow.

You can read the Health Secretary's plans.
They are on The Telegraph website, hidden behind a paywall.

Richard Branson whining that his airline needs bailing out to the tune of billions.
How about we look after the poor and the sick first, then we can worry about billionaires who have already bilked the taxpayers out of billions in subsidies and don't pay tax here?

[merman]

Currently in Nottingham as my wife Alison recovers from major surgery.

The hospital is doing an amazing job, the staff are under so much pressure.

And then on Thursday came the first confirmed coronavirus case among the patients.

So sensibly they are restricting visiting hours and number of visitors.


You cannot have hundreds of thousands getting sick to promote so-called "herd immunity".
That only works when you have
a) a vaccine, or clear evidence that those exposed to the virus gain antibodies/immunity to re-infection
b) a health service that hasn't been brought to its knees by ten years of ideological and unnecessary cuts & privatisation


(Don't get me started on the private sector "renting" beds to the NHS, my blood pressure is high enough already...)

[gilesgoat]

The thing about this virus "herd immunity" we know nothing about to say it's going to even work.

Even the "die a fuckload of people, the remaining ones will be stronger" .. we don't know that for sure, until we know better it could be just "die and die and keep dying".

And then again "it's not automagically" that only those "over X" are going to die, it "keeps proving" in Italy that "everyone of any age can actually die" even if true there seems to be a higher % in elderly probably because overall they are weaker.

Thing is yeah "you can leave things go without doing much" LOT of people will die ... that maybe could have been avoided with more care ..

But yes "overall" "seeing how things are going in the world in general" I can see why some people may think they may be ok with that.

Except with "that logic" next time could be you and next time could be the next virus.

Fact is we are going from "people" to "numbers" and to "it's ok tot % goes without trying much of a shit because it's ok so".

The thing to think about "this time we may be form one side of this thing" .. but "the next time" the same people could be "on the other side of the thing".

So when you get over 70 and maybe you are unemployed or sick or something ... "get a gun and shoot yourself", actually no that's too expensive, the government will give you a set of pills to take because "who needs you any more".

Is that what you want ?

[zip accident]

It seems to me that when this thing actually arrives, it'll be the people who do go in to work despite having it mildly, who will be the heros, because if everyone has it, nobody else will be working.

It'll be the people who go in to work despite having it mildly who will be the cause of everyone getting it.

Or people who go to the shops to buy food, people who go to their doctor because they are sick, people who go to their bank to withdraw cash to buy food with etc.

I can't see powdered milk in the shops, and wet milk is expensive.

The only possible outcome is herd immunity. Slowing the spread, isolating hotspots, etc is all down to reducing the load on health services. It's pragmatic, aimed at reducing the unnecessary death toll. Herd immunity isn't going to kick in until 60% or more of the population have been infected.

China have *contained* the infection, but they haven't eliminated it. What happens when they finally open the gates on Wuhan...

We will lose a lot of people. Mostly the older generation. There's not much we can do about it.

I'm wondering whether the pension age will go down again, but even if most of the elderly die we'll probably have to wait for another government to see that.

[tufty]

Is that what you want ?

It's not a question of what I, or anybody else, want. It's a question of brutal reality.

We have a disease with a long period where those infected show no symptoms but are infectious. A disease which is highly infectious and has a relatively high mortality rate. A disease which is already out in the wild, globally. A disease which doesn't have a cure, or a vaccine. We don't even know if the antibodies developed once / if you get through an infection last very long; herd immunity might not even be a thing, and that's without taking into account the thought that it might mutate.

There's nothing good about this.

[zip accident]

Is that what you want ?

There's nothing good about this.

It's not ebola or anthrax. It thus could be much worse.

[PFVA]

245 cases as of this morning, 50 of which are doctors.
The region of Lisbon and the Tagus Valley is now ahead of the Northern region

It's now forbidden to drink in the streets, i imagine to stop the groups of people with the 1 liter bottles of beer.

The beaches aren't closed but beach sports, such as football, volley ball, etc, are. I don't know if surf is.

[phattslagg]

Is that what you want ?

There's nothing good about this.

It's not ebola or anthrax. It thus could be much worse.

There are vaccines for both of those, and covid19 is way more infectious than either.

[(o)(o)]

Is that what you want ?

There's nothing good about this.

It's not ebola or anthrax. It thus could be much worse.

There are vaccines for both of those, and covid19 is way more infectious than either.

Yep.. Ebola is substantially more lethal but was relatively easy to contain..

Meanwhile 8 MILLION people are expected to need hospitalisation, in the U.K., under Tory plans

What are the odds that the better off you are, the greater your probability of surviving this ...

[Harlequin]

The only possible outcome is herd immunity. Slowing the spread, isolating hotspots, etc is all down to reducing the load on health services. It's pragmatic, aimed at reducing the unnecessary death toll. Herd immunity isn't going to kick in until 60% or more of the population have been infected.

More like 70%, I think, but:

I’m an epidemiologist. When I heard about Britain’s ‘herd immunity’ coronavirus plan, I thought it was satire

Your house is on fire, and the people whom you have trusted with your care are not trying to put it out. Even though they knew it was coming, and could see what happened to the neighbours as they were overwhelmed with terrifying speed, the UK government has inexplicably chosen to encourage the flames, in the misguided notion that somehow they will be able to control them.
…