- 17,254
- United Kingdom
Cases are spreading in Glasgow and no wonder... it's on sale!
Nine quid in my local Tesco, I've been drinking enough of the stuff to make me ill!
Cases are spreading in Glasgow and no wonder... it's on sale!
What I'm wondering is: how much worse will this get ... & how long until it gets better? Is it better to wait it out - in areas where the outbreak is currently not bad - or do what you have to do before it gets worse?
It entirely depends on how well countries can contain their various outbreaks, and in turn how countries can adapt to the fact that other countries may not be doing as well as others.
There will be a peak of infections, and things will start to get better beyond that... but it is likely to be some time off yet. My guess is that the global peak could be around May unless there is significant quarantining worldwide, but disruption could last for months beyond that unfortunately.
Cue Dad's Army map with the Nazi triangles replaced by biohazard warning signs.
Payments on mortgages are to be suspended in Italy due to the coronavirus outbreak, the country’s government has announced.
More than 9,000 people have been infected by Covid-19 in Italy, where the total number of reported deaths jumped to 463 on Monday – an increase of over 25 per cent compared to the day before.
When asked about the possibility of halting mortgage payments on Radio Anch’io, Laura Castelli, the deputy economy minister, said: ”Yes, that will be the case, for individuals and households.”
The Independent's choice of headline there is... concerning.CORONAVIRUS: PASSENGERS ENTERING UK FROM ITALY FACE ‘ZERO CHECKS’ AT AIRPORT
https://www.independent.co.uk/trave...w-airport-a9387072.html?utm_source=reddit.com
Seems clear, that there are no real steps being taken by the government to prevent the spread of the virus in this country.
I reckon less than 1% of people who are stockpiling toilet paper actually had any genuine concern that coronavirus was going to for whatever reason cause them to need a surplus of toilet paper, then everyone else just thought “all these idiots are going to take all the toilet paper, better stock up so i don't get caught without it”They'll also see people shopping for the immunocompromised and think "Hang on, they're getting loads of bog roll, perhaps we should too".
The Independent's choice of headline there is... concerning.
The bulk of the article is fine. It actually spoke to the airports and PHE to determine what checks there are for SARS-COV-2 (which are broadly summarised as "no specific checks, unless aircrew advise of a symptomatic passenger". This is stupid given the huge window of opportunity for asymptomatic people to be infectious, but then the virus is droplet transmission rather than fully airborne; the plane's interior surfaces are likely to be pretty infectious too), which is good journalism.
But that headline, seemingly based on that Tweet? Come on, we can't infer anything from that photo. The passenger is standing on the UK side of passport control, after he's passed through either an e-gate (pictured)* or a human border control agent. That's not zero checks, by definition.
The story is PHE's lack of additional measures for passengers and aircraft that have visited high risk zones, not "guy Tweets unverifiable junk". You'd expect it in a tabloid or on the BBC but not a newspaper with a reputation.
Bizarre that it treated a single social media source to a headline quote with that, but didn't go with 'Les Dennis "swore at my 2 year old son".' for a similar story. Different sub-editors, I guess.
I have never had a UK e-gate work for me. I have never had any trouble in any other country, but UK e-gates at three different UK airports have all refused entry and sent me to a human.
Come on, we can't infer anything from that photo. The passenger is standing on the UK side of passport control, after he's passed through either an e-gate (pictured)* or a human border control agent.
That's still a single, unverifiable source. There's no issue with it being part of the article, and it could be that it was the spark for the journalist to do some journalism, but it is very poor form (likely from a sub-editor) to have it being the basis of the headline. The story - and headline - is PHE's guidelines to the airports. It should be "Public Health England to Make No Additional Checks on Passengers Arriving from Italy".The bloke tweeting, isn't just a random person though (I think claims like this are also hard to verify, without them having reporters they can send to Italy and have them fly back so when someone like Fede is able to report on them first hand it's fair to take it as it is);
Federico Gatti
UK bureau chief correspondent @Mediaset
(Italian TV). Previously award winning investigative journalist at The Bureau of Investigative Journalism (@TBIJ)
It is. I'm not even sure it's allowed where he did it either (and he's caught other passengers' faces in the shot).Isn't photography forbidden in the passport checking area? Also, he probably left it until having passed through the entire area as that's when he would have realised there'd been no additional checks.
The bulk of the article is fine. It actually spoke to the airports and PHE to determine what checks there are for SARS-COV-2 (which are broadly summarised as "no specific checks, unless aircrew advise of a symptomatic passenger". This is stupid given the huge window of opportunity for asymptomatic people to be infectious, but then the virus is droplet transmission rather than fully airborne; the plane's interior surfaces are likely to be pretty infectious too), which is good journalism.
No doubt there is a lack of control but trying to contain it can save lives and minimise the amount of people effected before a cure, just letting it have free passage will likely lead to hospitals being over filled and killing off alot of elderly that wouldn't of died otherwise as a cure may be possible before it gets to that stage if it's trying to be contained.And I've heard from one symptomatic passenger who was pulled off of a plane (after having boarded) because she had symptoms not consistent with COVID-19. So leaving it up to the flight crew is not necessarily the best move, they seem to have not the greatest idea of what to look for (at least that one southwest crew in texas didn't).
China was looking for fever at every entry point. I feel like that's a fair compromise. I got checked for fever and questioned on my way from mainland China to Hong Kong. Seems like a reasonable precaution.
I'm not sure what could be done for an asymptomatic person short of doing a blood test on everyone. And like I said, terrorists would smuggle it in anyway, so the spread is going to happen whether we like it or not.
Why can people not accept that they do not have control here?
No doubt there is a lack of control but trying to contain it can save lives and minimise the amount of people effected before a cure, just letting it have free passage will likely lead to hospitals being over filled and killing off alot of elderly that wouldn't of died otherwise as a cure may be possible before it gets to that stage if it's trying to be contained.
China was looking for fever at every entry point. I feel like that's a fair compromise.
I really don't think the UK is ready in terms of ICU provision when it hits properly. Triaging like the Italians are having to do at the moment will soon be a reality I fear.
Sorry, my mistake, should have made clear - triaging for ICU beds (I heard from some callers from Italy in to LBC that some areas are setting a cutoff of 60 years old).There is no need to do what the Italians are doing. Sheltering the high risk groups (ie: primarily the elderly) is all that is needed. 20 year olds getting sick is not going to flood the ICU.
Sorry, my mistake, should have made clear - triaging for ICU beds (I heard from some callers from Italy in to LBC that some areas are setting a cutoff of 60 years old).
This doesn't fill me with much comfort either
So the 6th person to die in the UK was 60 and also had underlying health problems. No surprises there I guess, however the BBC reports that the underlying conditions were arthritis, heart problems, and cholesterol. I'd previously assumed that where people had talked about underlying conditions, they'd typical be immune system related or respiratory in nature, that would have caused complications.. but it doesn't seem so (at least, not to me - but then I'm not a Doctor).
From the (very) little I've read, organ failure can follow the initial infection and managing the blood pressure is a challenge. Normally (in a healthy individual) this is managed mainly by the heart so it makes sense that someone with "heart problems" has little reserve to maintain an adequate BPSo the 6th person to die in the UK was 60 and also had underlying health problems. No surprises there I guess, however the BBC reports that the underlying conditions were arthritis, heart problems, and cholesterol. I'd previously assumed that where people had talked about underlying conditions, they'd typical be immune system related or respiratory in nature, that would have caused complications.. but it doesn't seem so (at least, not to me - but then I'm not a Doctor).
It has a knock on effect.Yes, I'm making an educated guess that most of the people that would require hospitalization are from the high-risk group (primarily the elderly). So that high-risk group being sheltered, quarantined, or whatever is enough to take care of mortality as well as hospitalization concerns. 20 year olds are not the high-risk group for hospitalization or death.
They are, however, the high-risk group for losing their jobs and getting evicted.
Underlying conditions for COVID complications are anything heart or lung related. Plus the immunocompromised, as you say.So the 6th person to die in the UK was 60 and also had underlying health problems. No surprises there I guess, however the BBC reports that the underlying conditions were arthritis, heart problems, and cholesterol. I'd previously assumed that where people had talked about underlying conditions, they'd typical be immune system related or respiratory in nature, that would have caused complications.. but it doesn't seem so (at least, not to me - but then I'm not a Doctor).
So the 6th person to die in the UK was 60 and also had underlying health problems. No surprises there I guess, however the BBC reports that the underlying conditions were arthritis, heart problems, and cholesterol. I'd previously assumed that where people had talked about underlying conditions, they'd typical be immune system related or respiratory in nature, that would have caused complications.. but it doesn't seem so (at least, not to me - but then I'm not a Doctor).
Not so:I'd would hazard a guess that the cholesterol and heart problems are really the same thing (one leading to the other) - but from what i understand, my wife suffers from PoTS so has looked into it, corona virus shouldn't affect people with heart issues any more than it would regular healthy members of the public. But anyone with a reduced immune system is always going to be more susceptible to infection.
Not so:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/specific-groups/high-risk-complications.html
https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/925681
EDIT: Didn't mean to alarm you with those articles. From what I can see there would be no reason to consider POTS as a risk factor for complications from the virus - as always check with the GP/cardiologist.
it occurred to me that a terrorist would smuggle it in, in a package, in a person, somehow. There is no way to stop something like this from spreading.