Jump to content

Generic Virus Thread


villakram

Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, Awol said:

Happy to disagree but instead of snide pot shots, why not explain what the alternative to herd immunity is? You clearly think there is one so why not share? 

Ok, this is definitely a snide potshot, but you have to admit, you know you're in trouble when the Daily Mail is asking serious questions yet you yourself are not. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

Therapeutics seem to be being underplayed as a solution. There are diseases for which we have neither herd immunity nor a vaccine (HIV is an obvious example) but which can be effectively suppressed by pharmacological intervention. Obviously they're far from a perfect solution - we don't even know what, if anything, works yet! - but they could theoretically be available before a vaccine is.

That’s definitely going to help if it comes through (and hopefully some of these anti-malarial drugs will work), but if we could catch HIV by breathing it in we’d still need a vaccine! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

There is a point between globalisation and isolationism.

Absolutely. It's about a mix.

There is a whole spectrum of points, not just one, in between and there will be different points for different groups of people (however large - Worcestershire, England, UK, Europe, &c.) depending on circumstances, need and levels of comparative advantage, resources available, &c.

The thing is to provide some sort of baseline at a local level (again 'local' can be defined by much more than merely the modern nation state) and proper cooperation beyond that especially for when markets (and trade) break down as they tend to do in situations such as this (or many others).

Obviously, cooperation is not the easiest thing to spirit up - it requires work, time, effort and planning. Most of all, though, it requires desire. If we're all retreating to our own arbitrary groups then the desire of all parties wanes very quickly.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Awol said:

That’s definitely going to help if it comes through (and hopefully some of these anti-malarial drugs will work), but if we could catch HIV by breathing it in we’d still need a vaccine! 

Obviously the rate of infection is massively higher, so the challenge would be to produce massively more of the drugs. There could be all sorts of problems, from cost to difficulties in manufacturing and distribution, so I'm not suggesting this is easy or without many, many hurdles, but when you're in a crisis, you have to explore each of the possible solutions, even if they're hard.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m a long time watcher of late night CNN for my news I find it way more adult and interesting than the pap we get served up here.

In particular Anderson Cooper, Chris Cuomo, and Don Lemon.

Chris Cuomo (brother is New York’s Governor) was tested positive a couple of days ago.

He continues to do his show from his basement. It is gripping, informative, amusing, and sobering.

I recommend watching it to anyone who wants to get a better human picture of what’s what.

( also watch his daily chats with his brother which are heartwarming).

The key message ?
 

As has been said often on here ..

We must all hammer home to each other and our friends and family.....

Its not the Flu. It’s not the death rates that are the biggest concern, it’s tens of thousands of very sick people all needing healthcare at the same time.

And you can get it or give it through the air or from a surface without even knowing it.

 

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, sidcow said:

Because tens of thousands of people with unknown health conditions would die unnecessarily along with hundreds of other otherwise healthy people who would also die because it will kill even some young and healthy people too. 

And Hospitals would be utterly overwhelmed by hundreds of thousands of people needing treatment. 

People need to get away from this attitude that unless you have a health condition you just drop a couple of paracetamol and get on with it. 

Even young healthy people will become gravely ill. 

Quite an assumption to make. Suppose you could be right mind. But I'm yet to see any numbers indicating those who don't have underlying health conditions get adverse effects (if that's the right lingo). The relatively few that are younger who has gotten very sick, has from what I've seen, almost always had underlying cases. And the few that didn't, probably did without anyone knowing it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ve completed my last site visit today. No more planned, no more will be accepted.

This was a one off, on the condition I worked alone. A small specialist contractor had completed a piece of work last week and needed my signature to release the payment. If it had been a big construction firm they could wait 3 months. This was one man and his brother, so I felt more inclined to co-operate.

Car journey on my own, mask and gloves on arrival, brief chat with security and then the building to myself for an hour. Straight back home done and dusted.

Less interaction than a trip to Tesco. But weirdly tense now thinking to myself I’ve got a week to find out if I cocked up in some way and licked something I shouldn’t have. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, KenjiOgiwara said:

 Are Sweden isolating all risk groups? 

Per recommendation, yes, not enforcing everything though but it looks like people are following sensible requests. That seams to be the main difference. We are more or less in a state of lockdown with everybody working from home, just not enforced. Right or wrong move? Who the f knows.

The businesses hurt badly by this is the normal retailers, restaurants and everything involving travel.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, KenjiOgiwara said:

Quite an assumption to make. Suppose you could be right mind. But I'm yet to see any numbers indicating those who don't have underlying health conditions get adverse effects (if that's the right lingo). The relatively few that are younger who has gotten very sick, has from what I've seen, almost always had underlying cases. And the few that didn't, probably did without anyone knowing it. 

Well you are not looking very hard then. 😒

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So because of the lack of testing for NHS staff, the trust my wife works for is down to 40% staff and expected to drop to 20% next week. 

The fact this government couldn't sort out testing for NHS staff and protective equipment is the kind of disaster that should never be forgotten. 

But it will

Edited by DCJonah
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Tegis said:

Per recommendation, yes, not enforcing everything though but it looks like people are following sensible requests. That seams to be the main difference. We are more or less in a state of lockdown with everybody working from home, just not enforced. Right or wrong move? Who the f knows.

The businesses hurt badly by this is the normal retailers, restaurants and everything involving travel.

This is not true. Many are still at work in offices all around. I know for a fact that many municipalities are at business as usual. Schools are open and so on. It will not end well for us this experiment.

Edited by NoelVilla
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, NoelVilla said:

This is not true. Many are still at work in offices all around. I know for a fact that many municipalities are at business as usual. Schools are open and so on. It will not end well for us this experiment.

I think we have to be careful of talking in absolutes. "More or less" is not everybody. And "many are" are not all.

It is an experiment, everywhere. And as we don't know the outcome I would be foolish to presume on way is better than the other. And different approaches probably work in different ways depending of social stucture, economy, geography and probably a ton more variables.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Tegis said:

I think we have to be careful of talking in absolutes. "More or less" is not everybody. And "many are" are not all.

It is an experiment, everywhere. And as we don't know the outcome I would be foolish to presume on way is better than the other. And different approaches probably work in different ways depending of social stucture, economy, geography and probably a ton more variables.

We are not even close to a lockdown in my opinion so it's wrong to call what we are doing a lockdown. A friend of mine works at a school with 700 pupils plus staff. His wife works at the hospital with patients who has lung diseases. Not Covid-19 but if they get it, it is game over. She works without protective gear because the patients don't have Covid-19. Together they have contact with approximately 1 000 people who can infect her and she then her patients.

Worst more or less lockdown ever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, NoelVilla said:

Worst more or less lockdown ever.

You are talking about the 2 of the 3 exceptions (to my knowledge) we have. Healthcare and Primary school. (geriatric care being the third). As I said previously, talking in absolutes distorts it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â