COVID-19/Coronavirus Information and Support Thread (see OP for useful links)

[Biggles]

Canada is steadily moving down the Covid rankings .... & not because cases are dropping - they're actually rising fairly quickly - it's because Poland, the Czech Republic & Romanian - eastern European countries that had very few covid cases during the spring & early summer - are seeing an explosion of cases. Belgium, France, the Netherlands, Switzerland & Israel are also seeing a startling rise in cases. It looks like it's going to be a bad few months going forward.

 

[FuriousDemon]

With schools reopening and winter coming it was pretty much a given. Let’s see how high the numbers go.

We also have trick or treat aka superspreader event coming tomorrow. Stay safe.

 

[Imari]

It's interesting that even with modern healthcare, COVID is starting to work it's way up into the ranks of most deadly pandemics ever. And this in less than a year.

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/history-of-pandemics-deadliest/

I guess we had a couple of decades between the end of the cold war and this where death wasn't just around the corner. That was nice.

 

[RacingGrandpa]

We also have trick or treat aka superspreader event coming tomorrow. Stay safe.

Halloween 2020 tagline: Trick or Treatment

 

[Liquid]

Slovakia has begun testing its entire population as of today. There are 5.5 million people in Slovakia and the Prime Minister has bought 14 million testing kits off his mate in a total coincidence.

So trying to test 5 million people and what's the government advice?

Avoid big queues. Genius.

I tested negative for the third time in a row, by the way.

 

[Michael88]

Austria is doing a light lock down beginning next Monday. We've been having 4000-6000 new infections per day for the last two weeks, which is a lot for a country of this size, with a population of 8 million. Reactions are anger and frustration, nobody wants that lock down and blames the government for everything. I don't think people will obey the rules this time, they are simply tired and don't give an F anymore.
Hospitals report that their ICU's are maxed out already.

 

[Touring Mars]

England is set for a national lockdown from Monday - the rest of the UK will almost certainly, if reluctantly, follow suit, presumably in the hope of being able to ease restrictions over the Xmas break.

I think compliance, in Scotland anyway, will be high - in spite of the fact that people are tired of restrictions already. But I think most people readily acknowledge that by not complying with restrictions, the situation is only going to get worse.

I really feel for NHS staff and key workers right now, but I think that the impact of this wave is going to be more severe than the last one, and in ways that most people may not be expecting. Even key institutions (hospitals, utilities, public services etc.) and well as workplaces and schools that are allowed to remain open (including supermarkets and distribution chains) will face disruption to a lesser or greater extent depending on how well these new restrictions work... the more people who don't play the game, the more people will face days/weeks off work, and the more pressure will build on those charged with carrying out key work during this time.

A key question is how many healthcare workers can stay working at full tilt without either becoming ill themselves, or having to take time off through stress/exhaustion etc. The same applies across other key sectors as well. I really hope it doesn't come to this, but this is what will happen to some extent. We all need to individually act responsibly now in order to collectively avoid the higher end of that spectrum of negative impacts.

 

[UKMikey]

We all need to individually act responsibly now in order to collectively avoid the higher end of that spectrum of negative impacts.

I hate to say it but even if we had positive and forceful leadership I don't see much hope of this. I really feel for healthcare professionals and other key workers as well as nursing home staff right now.

 

[Touring Mars]

Yes, my too. I think the best case scenario still involves some major impacts on all sectors, but in healthcare in particular. The worst case scenario, however, doesn't bare thinking about.

-

Boris Johnson will give a statement at 5pm tonight.

Based on a number of independent projections, a new lockdown appears unavoidable.

All projections are significantly worse that the UK Government's previous 'worst case scenario', with deaths expected to reach anywhere between 2,000 and 4,000 per day... compared to the peak of the first wave at ca. 1,000 deaths per day, and the fact that the second wave could last for longer (up to six months from now), the expected death toll from the second wave could easily dwarf the first wave if no new restrictions are put in place now.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54762048

These projections are based on the assumption that the current level of restrictions are maintained, so hopefully a new lockdown for several weeks will significantly influence what actually happens, as was the case the first time around.

 

[Stotty]

More politically motivated decision making.

No rise in cases through the summer, when the beaches are packed, bars and restaurants are open, and the government are encouraging people to return to work and actively incentivising people to eat out.

Then as soon as the kids go back to school cases increase... which should never have been a surprise to anyone as, like clockwork, upper respiratory illnesses do this every year when the kids return to school.

The Government now feel they have to be seen to be doing something, despite knowing what they are going to do will have little impact as long as schools remain open... but they can’t close the schools because of the political fallout.

You either lockdown fully, or don’t bother. All this will do is push another couple of million on to the unemployment list and add another £100bn or so to the debt mountain this year, with billions more in years to come.

All in a vane attempt to save the lives of a few thousand people, the vast majority of whom are already over natural life expectancy and would likely die anyway in a bad flu season.

 

[novcze]

Austria is doing a light lock down beginning next Monday. We've been having 4000-6000 new infections per day for the last two weeks, which is a lot for a country of this size, with a population of 8 million. Reactions are anger and frustration, nobody wants that lock down and blames the government for everything. I don't think people will obey the rules this time, they are simply tired and don't give an F anymore.
Hospitals report that their ICU's are maxed out already.

That's strange, I would guess that ICU or generally hospital capacity could be a valid reason to follow the rules and keep numbers low. We already have some hospitals postponing all surgeries and this is affecting everybody.

 

[Touring Mars]

More politically motivated decision making.

No rise in cases through the summer, when the beaches are packed, bars and restaurants are open, and the government are encouraging people to return to work and actively incentivising people to eat out.

Then as soon as the kids go back to school cases increase... which should never have been a surprise to anyone as, like clockwork, upper respiratory illnesses do this every year when the kids return to school.

The Government now feel they have to be seen to be doing something, despite knowing what they are going to do will have little impact as long as schools remain open... but they can’t close the schools because of the political fallout.

You either lockdown fully, or don’t bother. All this will do is push another couple of million on to the unemployment list and add another £100bn or so to the debt mountain this year, with billions more in years to come.

All in a vane attempt to save the lives of a few thousand people, the vast majority of whom are already over natural life expectancy and would likely die anyway in a bad flu season.

This is a very simplistic way of looking at it.

Recent research suggests that 'Eat out to help out' and the reopening of hospitality did lead to an increase in cases, as did reopening universities, people returning to work and schools reopening. It is definitely not the case that schools are solely to blame for the second wave.

There would be a tremendous backlash if schools were to close again, and not without good reason. While I personally don't doubt that schools being open is leading to more infections, there is little evidence to suggest that schools are a significant driver of new infections.

The cost of closing schools is also immense, and would undoubtedly makes life harder for working parents... it is just not feasible to keep schools closed for any length of time, esp. when they have already had one spell of closure.

Keeping schools open and keeping the NHS working are two equally important yet opposing priorities - we need to have both, but the former makes the latter harder. This being the case, the government are in a very difficult position of having to try to limit the spread of the virus without closing schools again.

-

As for the bit about 'people are going to die anyway', while it is literally true to some extent, I find such comments hard to stomach. The fact is that COVID-19 is causing a very large number of excess deaths - that is, deaths beyond what would otherwise happen - so yes, there are people who would have died anyway, but that is missing the point by a very wide margin. It is also not true that the projected deaths from COVID-19 are akin to a 'bad flu season'... it is way, way beyond a 'bad flu season', and do wish people could get their heads around this basic point.

 

[FuriousDemon]

It’s not only about deaths. People get severe complications without dying. Wife and I had gotten infected in March and she is still dealing with aftermath although it’s a bit better than it was within the first 3-4 months. We really don’t even know the exact extent of the effect of it as the doctors are not willing to prescribe the tests to really tell what happened.

 

[Liquid]

So far Slovakia has tested 828,000 people today and found 8,000 positive cases.

 

[Outspacer]

Something is definitely not quite right. For example Nottinghamshire just moved into Tier 3, which already looked like being a huge over-reaction when looking at the data. Tier 2 restrictions were clearly sufficient, bringing case rates down dramatically in Nottingham itself, and falling or remaining low/medium in other districts:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-54717821

Yet these case rates were described as "remaining high" as the justification for Tier 3.

And what did this over-reaction cause? Well, what do you expect, all the youngsters had another big "last night out"...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-54740707

I agree with @Stotty in my suspicion that schools and colleges going back were a large part of this. However I think generally people relaxed too much - I doubt that people 'eating out to help out' themselves had a big effect, but the message it sent did.

Obviously the desire to be seen 'doing something' won out, but for it to be a 31 day lockdown without closing schools is IMO not a reasonable response. Should there be a need for a further lockdown it should be short and severe, and announced in advance - having it rumoured on Saturday and enforced come Monday gives people no chance to prepare, meaning for example massive waste of stock at cafes and restaurants who are already on the brink. By short and severe I mean akin to the isolation time, which was due to be reduced from 2 weeks, perhaps to 10 or 7 days, to include everything non-essential. Most importantly, it should NOT be subject to review. We know enough by now to know that we wouldn't know how well it worked until weeks afterwards, but we do know it would have significant effect.

That said, living in one of the many Tier 1 areas, I can't see any justification for a national lockdown. For the most part I think regional restrictions have been sufficient, with the main problem being the weeks of debate and hence delay in action. Switching to some data driven decision method would alleviate that.

 

[Biggles]

England is set for a national lockdown from Monday - the rest of the UK will almost certainly, if reluctantly, follow suit, presumably in the hope of being able to ease restrictions over the Xmas break.

I think compliance, in Scotland anyway, will be high - in spite of the fact that people are tired of restrictions already. But I think most people readily acknowledge that by not complying with restrictions, the situation is only going to get worse.

I really feel for NHS staff and key workers right now, but I think that the impact of this wave is going to be more severe than the last one, and in ways that most people may not be expecting. Even key institutions (hospitals, utilities, public services etc.) and well as workplaces and schools that are allowed to remain open (including supermarkets and distribution chains) will face disruption to a lesser or greater extent depending on how well these new restrictions work... the more people who don't play the game, the more people will face days/weeks off work, and the more pressure will build on those charged with carrying out key work during this time.

A key question is how many healthcare workers can stay working at full tilt without either becoming ill themselves, or having to take time off through stress/exhaustion etc. The same applies across other key sectors as well. I really hope it doesn't come to this, but this is what will happen to some extent. We all need to individually act responsibly now in order to collectively avoid the higher end of that spectrum of negative impacts.

"Feel for the NHS staff"? You mean they aren't making more money from treating Covid patients? Suckers!

 

[McLaren]

All in a vane attempt to save the lives of a few thousand people, the vast majority of whom are already over natural life expectancy and would likely die anyway in a bad flu season.

Today I learned 35,847 people are just a "few" thousand people of the 46,555 people that have died in the UK.


What an absolute Trump-level take of absurdity.

 

[Stotty]

Today I learned 35,847 people are just a "few" thousand people of the 46,555 people that have died in the UK.


What an absolute Trump-level take of absurdity.

The net effect of the lockdown will only save a few thousand. Covid will kill tens of thousands between now and next spring no matter what is done short of closing everything and confining people to their homes.

A lockdown now is Politically motivated... have to be seen to be doing something even if what we are doing will have little impact and will ultimately prove more damaging longer term.

Meanwhile we will under go further ruination of our economy and destruction of our civil liberties.

 

[Joey D]

All in a vane attempt to save the lives of a few thousand people, the vast majority of whom are already over natural life expectancy and would likely die anyway in a bad flu season.

What a monumentally ignorant statement.

When your healthcare systems reach capacity, and they will reach capacity if cases continue on their current trajectory in the UK, more than just a "few thousand" people who are "over natural life expectancy" will feel the effects. If your system is at its max people can't get treatment. This means if you're in a car accident, found to have cancer, need a life-saving surgery or any number of other things, you won't be able to, or you won't be able to in a time frame that allows your own best chance for survival.

But by all means, continue not to care and watch your fellow countrymen die needlessly.

 

[Stotty]

What a monumentally ignorant statement.

When your healthcare systems reach capacity, and they will reach capacity if cases continue on their current trajectory in the UK, more than just a "few thousand" people who are "over natural life expectancy" will feel the effects. If your system is at its max people can't get treatment. This means if you're in a car accident, found to have cancer, need a life-saving surgery or any number of other things, you won't be able to, or you won't be able to in a time frame that allows your own best chance for survival.

But by all means, continue not to care and watch your fellow countrymen die needlessly.

Except our healthcare system isn’t anywhere near capacity. Our hospitals are massively under capacity following the criminal decision to basically stop care for anything other than Covid across the last 6 months. Waiting list for a joint replacement is now 5 years. Cancer screenings are running at around 50% of historical levels.

The NHS has a one illness focus since March, which will lead to many more people dying prematurely over the coming years than will die from Covid.

And these premature deaths won’t have an average age of 84.

 

[novcze]

But by all means, continue not to care and watch your fellow countrymen die needlessly.

as someone who likes conservative/nationalist values I strongly dislike people who refuse to follow simple rules in times when the nation needs it.

 

[Joey D]

Except our healthcare system isn’t anywhere near capacity. Our hospitals are massively under capacity following the criminal decision to basically stop care for anything other than Covid across the last 6 months. Waiting list for a joint replacement is now 5 years. Cancer screenings are running at around 50% of historical levels.

The NHS has a one illness focus since March, which will lead to many more people dying prematurely over the coming years than will die from Covid.

And these premature deaths won’t have an average age of 84.

I didn't say you were currently at capacity. I said if the UK continues at its current trajectory, your healthcare system will hit capacity. Going back to the article that @UKMikey posted, it appears that the infection rate is worse than the "worst-case scenario". The UK probably isn't as screwed as the US is at this very moment, but it's on its way there.

It's also worth understanding that capacity isn't measured in terms of space, it's measured in terms of staffing. I'm sure the UK has more than enough beds available, most places have more than enough beds. The problem is that they don't have the specifically trained staff, especially when it comes to ICU care. You can't just throw any nurse in the ICU and expect them to provide a level of meaningful care. You can't just magically create medical staff either, almost all of it requires a significant amount of training, even down to the person who cleans the rooms.

I also agree that many people will die from not being able to get procedures that they need now due to restrictions put in place by the health system. But that's not the fault of the health system, it's the fault of people not taking COVID seriously and doing what they should be doing to reduce the infection rate. If COVID precautions were taken seriously and people got it out of their heads that it's no big deal, then there wouldn't be an issue.

 

[Outspacer]

What a monumentally ignorant statement.

Indeed it is. I'm not sure if it wasn't there when I read the post or if I somehow failed to notice it.

It is frustrating to have to combat such nonsense so firmly since it stifles otherwise reasonable discussion.

However there is, I think, good reason for scepticism of a further lockdown purely based on the data. Both as per my last post re. Notts and at an aggregated national level. The latest rolling 7-day average is worryingly high, but has reduced its upward charge noticably since more places were moved into higher Tiers. There is a very valid question as to what the trajectory actually is at the moment, and whether current restrictions have fully shown what effect they are having (especially considering that it was only this week that two large areas, Notts and West Yorkshire, were moved into tier 3).

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/cases , screenshot taken today, so note that 7-day only has data up to five days ago, some leveling off apparent...

Daily is up-to-date however most recent days may be subject to adjustments due to reporting delays. To my eye the data beyond the 7-day average does not deny a leveling off of cases...

Across the UK (and across England) the incidence of covid is extremely varied by region, with most of the south being in the lowest tier. These maps are taken from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/31/covid-cases-and-deaths-today-coronavirus-uk-map

The change in case numbers by area is much less scary, showing it falling or stable(-ish) across most of the nation (if these are based on the 7-day average, which I think they are, they are also 5 days behind, so represent the 23rd not the 28th):

Wales is coming up to the end of its 17-day lockdown, so one would hope that the largest dark red patch will have faded considerably once data is tallied in a week or so's time.

UPDATE: Lockdown 2 will begin on Thursday for England. No doubt in the following week we'll be told how it's working well, even though that would be the result of the current restrictions.

 

[Imari]

All in a vane attempt to save the lives of a few thousand people, the vast majority of whom are already over natural life expectancy and would likely die anyway in a bad flu season.

We're all going to die eventually. What stops you from getting it over with right now?

 

[Famine]

And these premature deaths won’t have an average age of 84.

This is a slightly misrepresented statistical quirk.

For most people, the word "average" means "total of things divided by number of items", which is the "mean". The mean age of people dying from COVID-19 in the UK is... actually pretty tough to find out, but it appears to be approximately 77. I'd want to spend more time on the numbers to be more accurate, but it's not important to the point right now.

The figure reported in several mainstream papers - including the Mail, the Sun, and the Times - of 82.4 years is the median (and they all mention that within the opening paragraph of their relevant stories). That's an alternate way of measuring an average in a set, and it means the point at which exactly half of all examples are above that number and exactly half of all examples are below that number. To put it another way, this number means that half of all COVID-19 deaths in the UK are in people aged 82.4 and above... but half are in people younger than that.

A third common definition of "average" is "mode", which is the most frequently occurring number in a set. I can't find that at all, but as most deaths occur in the 85+ age group and there's a rather limited range of numbers and individuals above that, I'd suspect the mode is 85.


So yes, the "average" is 82.4 as reported, but on the understanding that this is the median. By the definition of average that most people understand - the mean - the average is nearer 77.

 

[Biggles]

The Lancet follows the New England Journal of Medicine in condemning the US response to Covid:

“The fraying social safety net, continual erosion of trust in the public sector, the perceived diminished responsibility of the federal government, and political interference with crucial public health apparatus (most markedly the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) have culminated in the disastrous US response to the coronavirus pandemic,” the authors wrote. “But the crucial acknowledgment that should be made is the absence of comprehensive health infrastructure. Without it the USA is at great risk.”

 

[Stotty]

We're all going to die eventually. What stops you from getting it over with right now?

Given you posted the below earlier I'm surprised you're not hiding under the covers, shaking in your bed given death is clearly 'just around the corner'

Covid has an IFR of <0.1% for under 40's rising to c.5% for over 80's in 'poor' countries . It's hysterical bollocks like the quote below that perpetuates the myth that everyone's going to die from it... the reality is Covid (with a few exceptions) only kills old people with serious contributing health issues.

Get a grip and stop over dramatising. Death from Covid isn't 'just around the corner' unless you're old and you have serious contributing health issues... if you are old, and you do have serious contributing health issues, death is already 'just around the corner'.

I guess we had a couple of decades between the end of the cold war and this where death wasn't just around the corner. That was nice.

I didn't say you were currently at capacity. I said if the UK continues at its current trajectory, your healthcare system will hit capacity. Going back to the article that @UKMikey posted, it appears that the infection rate is worse than the "worst-case scenario". The UK probably isn't as screwed as the US is at this very moment, but it's on its way there.

It's also worth understanding that capacity isn't measured in terms of space, it's measured in terms of staffing. I'm sure the UK has more than enough beds available, most places have more than enough beds. The problem is that they don't have the specifically trained staff, especially when it comes to ICU care. You can't just throw any nurse in the ICU and expect them to provide a level of meaningful care. You can't just magically create medical staff either, almost all of it requires a significant amount of training, even down to the person who cleans the rooms.

I also agree that many people will die from not being able to get procedures that they need now due to restrictions put in place by the health system. But that's not the fault of the health system, it's the fault of people not taking COVID seriously and doing what they should be doing to reduce the infection rate. If COVID precautions were taken seriously and people got it out of their heads that it's no big deal, then there wouldn't be an issue.

More 'blame everything on the population'... you should work in government.

What's happening in the UK is entirely the fault of the government and healthcare management... they have allowed an illness, that present little danger to healthy people under the age of 70, to completely take over an entire healthcare system (from GP level to hospital). 6 months of complete inactivity... both in treating 'normal' health issues and preparing for the inevitable autumn/winter rise of a respiratory illness.

Both the government and healthcare management should have known what was coming - but no one can criticise the NHS, they are beyond reproach.

The NHS had 6 months to train thousands (if not tens of thousands) of nurses that don't normally work on respiratory illness to improve capacity... it's not like they were doing anything else at the time, and it's not like they are doing anything now. Yes, ICU beds will always be capacity limited, but we have the fabled nightingales, and we have army doctors and nurses as well, if needed.

This is a slightly misrepresented statistical quirk.

For most people, the word "average" means "total of things divided by number of items", which is the "mean". The mean age of people dying from COVID-19 in the UK is... actually pretty tough to find out, but it appears to be approximately 77. I'd want to spend more time on the numbers to be more accurate, but it's not important to the point right now.

The figure reported in several mainstream papers - including the Mail, the Sun, and the Times - of 82.4 years is the median (and they all mention that within the opening paragraph of their relevant stories). That's an alternate way of measuring an average in a set, and it means the point at which exactly half of all examples are above that number and exactly half of all examples are below that number. To put it another way, this number means that half of all COVID-19 deaths in the UK are in people aged 82.4 and above... but half are in people younger than that.

A third common definition of "average" is "mode", which is the most frequently occurring number in a set. I can't find that at all, but as most deaths occur in the 85+ age group and there's a rather limited range of numbers and individuals above that, I'd suspect the mode is 85.


So yes, the "average" is 82.4 as reported, but on the understanding that this is the median. By the definition of average that most people understand - the mean - the average is nearer 77.

Your point is of course, accurate, but even so, 77 is still pretty much average life expectancy in the UK.

 

[Danoff]

Given you posted the below earlier I'm surprised you're not hiding under the covers, shaking in your bed given death is clearly 'just around the corner'

Totally unhelpful, and absurd, and very much undermines everything you want to try to say. I'd say stop refraining from dehumanizing people who disagree with you, and stop making it about fear or bravery and just focus on what is reasonable and responsible.

Covid has an IFR of <0.1% for under 40's rising to c.5% for over 80's in 'poor' countries . It's hysterical bollocks like the quote below that perpetuates the myth that everyone's going to die from it... the reality is Covid (with a few exceptions) only kills old people with serious contributing health issues.

You're downplaying this very serious illness for some reason, and dehumanizing older people.

Get a grip and stop over dramatising.

Stop denying the severity of this illness, on everyone.

Death from Covid isn't 'just around the corner' unless you're old and you have serious contributing health issues... if you are old, and you do have serious contributing health issues, death is already 'just around the corner'.

Lots of people have something that can be considered a health issue contributing to the severity of this disease. It's almost impossible to make it to middle age before something in your body starts failing or giving you problems. And lots of them cause additional problems with this disease, which can place a great deal of stress on even a healthy person's body.

Anecdotally, I know a fit mountain climber in his 30s who runs marathons who describe COVID as the worst illness of his life, and said that it was like a gorilla was sitting on his chest. I'm not sure why anyone would be in a hurry to get this thing.

More 'blame everything on the population'... you should work in government.

If people would just wear a mask, something which is incredibly easy, especially when you consider the paper disposable masks that weigh nothing, there'd be no need for a herculean government effort like you describe below.

What's happening in the UK is entirely the fault of the government and healthcare management... they have allowed an illness, that present little danger to healthy people under the age of 70, to completely take over an entire healthcare system (from GP level to hospital). 6 months of complete inactivity... both in treating 'normal' health issues and preparing for the inevitable autumn/winter rise of a respiratory illness.

Both the government and healthcare management should have known what was coming - but no one can criticise the NHS, they are beyond reproach.

The NHS had 6 months to train thousands (if not tens of thousands) of nurses that don't normally work on respiratory illness to improve capacity... it's not like they were doing anything else at the time, and it's not like they are doing anything now. Yes, ICU beds will always be capacity limited, but we have the fabled nightingales, and we have army doctors and nurses as well, if needed.

Or maybe... people could lift the tiniest of fingers and wear a mask and avoid restaurants and gyms for a bit. It's really not that hard. I'm not going to defend the NHS, I'm not a big fan of government run healthcare. But you're turning a blind eye to how little is really required of the general public here.

 

[Stotty]

If people would just wear a mask, something which is incredibly easy, especially when you consider the paper disposable masks that weigh nothing, there'd be no need for a herculean government effort like you describe below.

Or maybe... people could lift the tiniest of fingers and wear a mask and avoid restaurants and gyms for a bit. It's really not that hard. I'm not going to defend the NHS, I'm not a big fan of government run healthcare. But you're turning a blind eye to how little is really required of the general public here.

I live in Spain. Masks have been compulsory here in public places since we exited lockdown in late May. When I'm out and about I see 100% compliance. I wear a mask whenever I'm outside my home or car, as does everyone I know here.

Covid cases continue to rise in Spain... despite masks, and despite increasing restriction on the population (curfew, movement, etc).

I was prevented from going to the gym when lockdown started in March. So I bought a Peloton in the UK and shipped it down here. No need for gym membership now.

As we saw through the summer, when there was no lockdown and restaurants were open (and the UK government was actively incentivising people to eat out)... Cases didn't rise. Infections didn't rise. Hospitalisations didn't rise. Deaths didn't rise. Restaurants are not a significant source of spread.

 

[Joey D]

Get a grip and stop over dramatising. Death from Covid isn't 'just around the corner' unless you're old and you have serious contributing health issues... if you are old, and you do have serious contributing health issues, death is already 'just around the corner'.

So you're just going to continue with this blatant misinformation? Yes, people who are older or with certain health conditions are more likely to die if they contact COVID. However, there are plenty of seemingly healthy people who've died. Death could be right around the corner for anyone who gets it. We don't know enough about COVID yet to say otherwise. We also have no idea what the long term effects of COVID are either. You could be a very healthy person and end up with lifelong respiratory or cardiovascular issues.

Both the government and healthcare management should have known what was coming - but no one can criticise the NHS, they are beyond reproach.

Almost every hospital knew what was coming, but if you think any health system is equipped to deal with a massive surge from anything in six months then you're sorely mistaken. Medical staff takes a long time to train and every single health system across the globe is competing with every other health system for resources. I'm sure the hospitals did as much as they possibly could in the given amount of time, but when cases are growing exponentially, there's only so much they can do.

The NHS had 6 months to train thousands (if not tens of thousands) of nurses that don't normally work on respiratory illness to improve capacity... it's not like they were doing anything else at the time, and it's not like they are doing anything now. Yes, ICU beds will always be capacity limited, but we have the fabled nightingales, and we have army doctors and nurses as well, if needed.

This is flat out wrong. Being an ICU nurse takes a long time and requires substantial training. Looking briefly at the requirements in the UK, it looks like it takes a minimum of 18 months of on the job education to be able to work in the ICU. In the US, it's two years, minimum. Respiratory therapists are similar in the US and I have to imagine they're similar in the UK as well.

As for staff, you can't just take an L&D nurse and have them care for a patient with an infectious disease. Just because they're a nurse doesn't mean they can magically take care of every ailment they come across. The same goes for doctors too, an orthopedic surgeon isn't going to have the training to deal with a critical care patient.

So yes, you probably do have an army of doctors and nurses, but it's pretty meaningless when they're unable to treat the patients effectively and could very well do more damage.