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

  • Thread starter baldgye
  • 13,285 comments
  • 644,751 views
After ten weeks of lockdown, my Dad and my Auntie have both visited my Mum for the first time this week. Dad came over briefly on Sunday night for a beer in the garden, and my Auntie is here now for a coffee.

Unfortunately, the good old Scottish weather is typically unobliging. May has seen record-breaking sunshine in the UK, but today it is starting to rain... and, as such, my Mum and my Auntie have abandoned their socially-distanced garden chairs and have moved into the conservatory :ouch: I just had to remind my Mum not to pass each other their mobile phones, which apparently they have already done a few times :rolleyes: Given how much I have spoken to my Mum about adopting some simple precautions, it is a bit disappointing (but entirely predictable!) to see how little effect my advice has had. I can only assume that this scenario is playing out across the country...

-

In all seriousness, it goes to show how awkward it is for people (esp. in the UK) to request that people observe hygiene measures. AFAIK, neither my Auntie or my Dad washed their hands or used sanitizer prior to meeting my Mum (who is immune-suppressed), but my Mum also didn't ask them or advise them to do that - not only would it probably not have occurred to her, she would likely consider it rude even if it had occurred to her to ask... and yet these are the exact precautions that people like my Mum should be taking care with.
 
Last edited:
If she's been in isolation for 10 weeks and never showed signs of anything wouldn't it stand to reason that she's most likely not infected and is safe in her own home with your aunt? I understand the concern though.
 
DesertPenguin
If she's been in isolation for 10 weeks and never showed signs of anything wouldn't it stand to reason that she's most likely not infected and is safe in her own home with your aunt? I understand the concern though.
Click to expand...
The same aunt could have touched the virus on the way to the house, no? On a door handle or such like. Then touched her phone, then passed her phone to a vulnerable person.
 
All of us have been in lockdown, but my Mum (who I am living with at the moment) has been shielding (as far as possible anyway).

I have no doubt that my Auntie is not going to spread the virus to my Mum - she has been very careful too, and so yeh, the risk is absolutely minimal.

The trouble is though that my Mum needs to take special care (and has been), and even though they are going to great lengths to be careful, I reckon they could be going a bit further - but either through politeness or lack of realisation, they aren't being as careful as I had recommended. (My Mum said "Oh, I didn't think about our phones..." :rolleyes: ...while sitting 2m apart from each other outside in the garden...)

My concern is what happens when/if the risk 'out there' starts getting to higher levels again. Unfortunately, this will probably mean a return to no visits at all, so the problem is kind of self-resolving, but it's this interim period where there is still virus knocking around and people are becoming more and more relaxed about socialising again where it becomes more and more important to get the simple things right.

-

Funnily enough, I had just finished explaining to my Mum why my Auntie visiting her is not the same in terms of risk as my Mum visiting my Auntie. Because my Mum is shielding and my Auntie is not, then my Mum is at higher risk if something happened on the way to my Auntie's house e.g. if her car broke down.

And as if to illustrate the point, my Auntie's car broke down on the way over to my Mum's...
 
Last edited:
My grandparents are on the other end of the spectrum. My grandmother suffers from an acute case of COPD and my grandfather just recently was finally cleared of blood cancer. Needless to say they have been very diligent, and only recently have had any of the family over to spend time out on the deck.
The neighborhood they live in has a huge fireworks display on the third of July. They invited us all over for the show. No one is tonarrive before 930 pm and every family has their own area's where they are to sit. Anyone leaving their area for whatever reason is required to use hand sanitizer and put on their mask before doing so. Its going to be the weirdest family gathering ever.
 
Last edited:
Touring Mars
After ten weeks of lockdown, my Dad and my Auntie have both visited my Mum for the first time this week. Dad came over briefly on Sunday night for a beer in the garden, and my Auntie is here now for a coffee.

Unfortunately, the good old Scottish weather is typically unobliging. May has seen record-breaking sunshine in the UK, but today it is starting to rain... and, as such, my Mum and my Auntie have abandoned their socially-distanced garden chairs and have moved into the conservatory :ouch: I just had to remind my Mum not to pass each other their mobile phones, which apparently they have already done a few times :rolleyes: Given how much I have spoken to my Mum about adopting some simple precautions, it is a bit disappointing (but entirely predictable!) to see how little effect my advice has had. I can only assume that this scenario is playing out across the country...

-

In all seriousness, it goes to show how awkward it is for people (esp. in the UK) to request that people observe hygiene measures. AFAIK, neither my Auntie or my Dad washed their hands or used sanitizer prior to meeting my Mum (who is immune-suppressed), but my Mum also didn't ask them or advise them to do that - not only would it probably not have occurred to her, she would likely consider it rude even if it had occurred to her to ask... and yet these are the exact precautions that people like my Mum should be taking care with.
Click to expand...

It is strange how much reluctance and machismo (in people of apparently any gender association) is going around. On the one hand, you run into people that don't seem to value avoiding the pandemic over being rude. On the other hand, you have people who seem to think it makes them weak to take basic precautions.

While we're sharing stories, my wife's parents (low 70s) are going to come visit us. They just sent us an email with COVID "facts" aimed at making it seem benign. It's the most skewed set of statistics I have seen in a while. I honestly feel that their visit will put us at greater risk, when shouldn't it be the other way around? 2 of my kids are in daycare, and the 3rd is headed to summer school shortly. And my wife's elderly parents are the most dangerous for us to be around? I think it might be the case. They intend to hit hotels/etc. on the road trip to visit.
 
Dennisch
Amsterdam ****ing up 3 months of smart lockdown in one single day, because this cause was more important than national health.



dumb ****s.
Click to expand...

Even Helsinki, Finland is going to have one of these. :banghead:

The still ongoing corona restrictions and lack of police brutality in here be damned, I guess.
 
Joey D
Stupidity is not exclusive to America it seems:

Unmasked Coronavirus Deniers Crowd Italian Piazza to Protest Health Measures Amid Pandemic They Claim 'Never Existed'
Click to expand...
Antonio Pappalardo added that he refuses to wear a mask himself and said: ‘’These lungs mine. I will take care of my lungs. Breathing is sacred.’’
Click to expand...
Coronavirus:
1hfmx7.jpg
 
Joey D
Stupidity is not exclusive to America it seems:

Unmasked Coronavirus Deniers Crowd Italian Piazza to Protest Health Measures Amid Pandemic They Claim 'Never Existed'
Click to expand...

The good news is that the majority of the italian population isn't buying that crap, because Mr. Antonio is such a meme that it's quite ridicolous; he's currently pursued by the italian law for "publicly insulting" our president after he tried to formally "arrest" him with a false arrest warrant (basically he tried to do a formal and half-assed coup d'etat).
Why? Because he did not agree with this law: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_electoral_law_of_2005 which it's fine if you want to protest about it (since it was already a controversial law for some political parties) but wow if it was a stupid move.

And with the exception of that, the covid situation here is pretty good; infections here are at a steady decrease, and a good number of people are acting responsibly about it, thankfully
 
Last edited:
Report of Chinese doctor who died after 5 months battling coronavirus. His skin changed color.
This story is sort of interesting for several reasons, not least in that it suggests the virus attacks many organs of the body, persons testing negative are getting symptoms and treatment, and the BBC actually links to the "anti-establishment" Epoch Times as integral part of its story.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-52897017
 
PzR Slim
The epidemiologist who conceived Sweden's Covid-19 response plan has admitted with hindsight that they got it wrong.
Click to expand...


Did you read the article? He says he'd do it differently knowing what he knows today. Who wouldn't? What he did not say is that he thinks the rest of the world got it right. The article actually says this:

“If we were to run into the same disease, knowing exactly what we know about it today, I think we would end up doing something in between what Sweden did and what the rest of the world has done,” he said.
Click to expand...
 
Danoff
Did you read the article? He says he'd do it differently knowing what he knows today. Who wouldn't? What he did not say is that he thinks the rest of the world got it right. The article actually says this:
Click to expand...
Hence why I used the word 'hindsight' and why I only mentioned Sweden.
 
PzR Slim
Hence why I used the word 'hindsight' and why I only mentioned Sweden.
Click to expand...

It's the "got it wrong" part I don't agree with. I think that's a mischaracterization of the article. "Would do differently" is not "got it wrong". To be fair, that's not just your characterization of it but also the captioner's.
 
Danoff
It's the "got it wrong" part I don't agree with. I think that's a mischaracterization of the article. "Would do differently" is not "got it wrong". To be fair, that's not just your characterization of it but also the captioner's.
Click to expand...
Why would you do it differently if you got it right the first time?
 
PzR Slim
Why would you do it differently if you got it right the first time?
Click to expand...

You might, because you'd have to assume you had the same information available when making the decision. You can make the right decision given the information available and then decide that a better decision would have been possible if the circumstances (information) had been different.

But this is not the point. The point is that your characterization of the sentiment in the interview (and Jamie McGeever's) is misleading. I think it is misleading because of personal bias.
 
Danoff
You might, because you'd have to assume you had the same information available when making the decision. You can make the right decision given the information available and then decide that a better decision would have been possible if the circumstances (information) had been different.

But this is not the point. The point is that your characterization of the sentiment in the interview (and Jamie McGeever's) is misleading. I think it is misleading because of personal bias.
Click to expand...
This is what the Swedish Prime Minister is quoted as having said.
"At the same time, we have to admit that when it comes to elderly care and the spread of infection, that has not worked. That is obvious,” he said. “Too many old people have died here."
Click to expand...

If that is not an admission of getting it wrong then I don't know what is.
 
PzR Slim
This is what the Swedish Prime Minister is quoted as having said.


If that is not an admission of getting it wrong then I don't know what is.
Click to expand...

You're not addressing the point. You're doubling down to defend your language. The article was updated 11 minutes ago to remove one of the more interesting paragraphs it held, which I was about to quote you. The paragraph was near the end and described how they were looking at countries that were reopening to see what measures they might have done short of lockdown to improve their numbers. I remember the word lockdown in that paragraph, and I remember where it was. It was deleted.

The point is simple. Your characterization (and McGeever's) is to suggest that Sweden wishes they had done what so many other nations did. And it is not the case. They're looking to improve their models for next time. Admitting that you can improve is not a sign of weakness, it is not a sign of regret, and it does not automatically validate critics.
 
Danoff
You're not addressing the point. You're doubling down to defend your language. The article was updated 11 minutes ago to remove one of the more interesting paragraphs it held, which I was about to quote you. The paragraph was near the end and described how they were looking at countries that were reopening to see what measures they might have done short of lockdown to improve their numbers. I remember the word lockdown in that paragraph, and I remember where it was. It was deleted.

The point is simple. Your characterization (and McGeever's) is to suggest that Sweden wishes they had done what so many other nations did. And it is not the case. They're looking to improve their models for next time. Admitting that you can improve is not a sign of weakness, it is not a sign of regret, and it does not automatically validate critics.
Click to expand...
I didn't mention any other countries. Is it not possible that more than one country if not the majority did the wrong thing? You seem to think that because I summarised their response as having been wrong that I think everyone else got it right. That is lies and I'd kindly as you not to put words in my mouth.
 
Danoff
It's the "got it wrong" part I don't agree with. I think that's a mischaracterization of the article. "Would do differently" is not "got it wrong". To be fair, that's not just your characterization of it but also the captioner's.
Click to expand...
PzR Slim
Why would you do it differently if you got it right the first time?
Click to expand...
If someone mixed paint blindfolded to get turquoise and they got teal instead, would you say they got it wrong? This isn't a binary situation.

Saying that - knowing what they know now - more could have been done and some things could have been done differently to achieve a better outcome is not saying they got it wrong. It's more like they thought they were as right as they could be, but new information says they were not, and they could have been more right with better information.


Oddly, I don't remember Sweden's policy being "hailed by many on the right" as it says in that Tweet. I remember a lot of people pointing at the comparatively huge death toll per capita three or four weeks back, which was highly at odds with the country's population density - an otherwise reliable indicator of death rates.
Danoff
The article was updated 11 minutes ago to remove one of the more interesting paragraphs it held, which I was about to quote you. The paragraph was near the end and described how they were looking at countries that were reopening to see what measures they might have done short of lockdown to improve their numbers. I remember the word lockdown in that paragraph, and I remember where it was. It was deleted.
Click to expand...
This is the cached version:
“CATASTROPHIC”
Recent antibody-tests have also indicated the number of infected people in Sweden is fewer than in the Public Health Agency’s models and that so-called herd immunity could be further off than predicted.

Tegnell said it was hard to know which measures taken elsewhere might have been the most effective in Sweden.

“Maybe we will find this out now that people have started removing measures, one at a time,” he said. “And then maybe we will get some kind of information on what, in addition to what we did, we could do without adopting a total lockdown.

The government has received criticism for failing to reach the target of 100,000 tests per week, hitting only a third of that last week.

Bjorn Olsen, Professor of Infectious Medicine at Uppsala University, said Sweden’s strategy had been catastrophic.

“This is one of Sweden’s biggest embarrassments and most tragic events, (in) all categories,” he said, calling for a change of course to start testing and do more contact tracing. “As long as people are dying, we must try to change.”
Click to expand...
This is the current version:
CRITICISM OVER TESTING
Most of Europe shut schools, shops and businesses. Sweden closed care homes to visitors in late March, but around half its coronavirus-related deaths have been among elderly people living in care facilities.

Recent antibody-tests have also indicated the number of infected people is fewer than in the Public Health Agency’s models and that so-called herd immunity could be further off than predicted.

The government has also received criticism for failing to reach its target of 100,000 tests per week.

Tegnell said it was hard to know what other measures Sweden should have taken but it might become clearer as countries ease restrictions.

Bjorn Olsen, Professor of Infectious Medicine at Uppsala University, said Sweden’s strategy had been catastrophic, “one of Sweden’s biggest embarrassments and most tragic events”.

Calling for more contact tracing and coronavirus test, he said: “As long as people are dying, we must try to change.”
Click to expand...
Deletions flagged in red. There's been some other light edits too.
 
Famine
Saying that - knowing what they know now - more could have been done and some things could have been done differently to achieve a better outcome is not saying they got it wrong. It's more like they didn't get it as right as they could have done, had they had better information

If someone mixed paint blindfolded to get turquoise and they got teal instead, would you say they got it wrong?


Oddly, I don't remember Sweden's policy being "hailed by many on the right" as it says in that Tweet. I remember a lot of people pointing at the comparatively huge death toll per capita three or four weeks back, which was highly at odds with the country's population density - an otherwise reliable indicator of death rates.

This is the cached version:

This is the current version:

Deletions flagged in red. There's been some other light edits too.
Click to expand...
Yes, I'd say they got it wrong. What is the problem with getting it wrong? There is no shame in getting something wrong, it's the way human knowledge has progressed since humans stood up and walked on two legs. I think you both need to chill out a bit and stop being so accusatory, it's not a good look.
 
PzR Slim
Yes, I'd say they got it wrong. What is the problem with getting it wrong?
Click to expand...
It's not a binary situation. It's not right or wrong. Saying that the whole thing is wrong, based on information they didn't have at the time is unhelpful.
PzR Slim
There is no shame in getting something wrong, it's the way human knowledge has progressed since humans stood up and walked on two legs.
Click to expand...
No, knowing what you don't know - and adapting new information to refine knowledge, rather than binning it wholesale - is how human knowledge has progressed.
PzR Slim
I think you both need to chill out a bit and stop being so accusatory, it's not a good look.
Click to expand...
Where on Earth have I accused anyone of anything?
 
Famine
It's not a binary situation. It's not right or wrong. Saying that the whole thing is wrong, based on information they didn't have at the time is unhelpful.

No, knowing what you don't know - and adapting new information to refine knowledge, rather than binning it wholesale - is how human knowledge has progressed.

Where on Earth have I accused anyone of anything?
Click to expand...
Hence why I used the word hindsight, 'with hindsight they got it wrong.' Seriously chill out, sit back, relax.
 
PzR Slim
Hence why I used the word hindsight, 'with hindsight they got it wrong.'
Click to expand...
Again, not a binary situation.
PzR Slim
Seriously chill out, sit back, relax.
Click to expand...
I always am, though I'm not sure what that has to do with anything. Heart rate's a solid 56, BP is 115/75, big-ass comfy chair is comfy.

You seem to have missed my question.
Famine
Where on Earth have I accused anyone of anything?
Click to expand...
Back it up, or back it up.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Famine
  • Locked
PSN outage/restoration - latest news from PS Blog
Replies
0
Views
10K
Famine
Famine
amar212
Pre-release GT5:Prologue Thread Firmware 2.17 mandatory for GT5:P? (and Pictures)
106 107 108
Replies
3K
Views
386K
Beerz
Beerz
Sauc3
The reasons why Bush's government is corrupt
2
Replies
38
Views
2K
Solid Fro
Solid Fro

Latest Posts

Back