Off Topic SARS-CoV-2 Covid-19

DMD · Mar 16, 2020

originallambrettaman said: ↑

At the current rate of sale, I've got enough stock to cover my online sales for roughly seventeen years, so it's not going to make much of a dent.
Click to expand...

I told you bulk buying the "Championship Winners 2020" Leeds merchandise was a mistake.

DMD · Mar 16, 2020

Amin Yapusi · Mar 16, 2020

We sell most our stuff to the NHS. Financial year end is approaching and any orders not received get cancelled. So I’ve got a big rush on with a big run of parts in my machines now to clear them but once that’s all done I’m hoping for a mass closure of everything and some nice weather.

My only quibble is my missus, although young, is in the high risk group as she had pneumonia as a tiddlywink and suffers a rare and severe form of asthma, so she’ll be taking a prolonged spell off work.

Which means I’ll take me tent and **** off on a grand adventure.

Wildie · Mar 16, 2020

I have my own business with a fellow director. Fortunately we are in a position whereby if we get no more orders, we have 10 months worth of overheads (wages, rent etc) covered in the bank. However, I appreciate not all small businesses can be in the position, if this had happened 2 years ago, then we would probably close within 2 months

AmalCarb · Mar 16, 2020

Policy of let it burn through the people now.

Many won’t understand..

Some won’t care.

“It’s just the flu”

End result is the same..and why it will be devastating here.

McCann OUT

originallambrettaman · Mar 16, 2020

The web is awash with misinformation on the Coronavirus. On this site, we present the facts as they become available, substantiated by academics, health organisations and governments...

https://www.covid-19facts.com/

DMD · Mar 16, 2020

https://www.facebook.com/groups/195462515082417/

please log in to view this image

balkan tiger · Mar 16, 2020

I hope you have stocked up.

"I had some time to kill in Swindon today and they have rationing in the supermarkets. You can only buy up to 4 of anything. I tried to buy a case of beer and they took 16 of the 20 out the box at checkout. There was loads of beer and I always buy it in cases. Was a right faff. I assumed the sign meant I couldn't by more than 4 cases. They are nutters down south"

GLP · Mar 16, 2020

Delayed TV Licence fees for the over 75s. Given they have advised 70 and over to stay in. Why not make this delay and apply free licence fees from the age of 70 onwards?

Steven Toast · Mar 16, 2020

GLP said: ↑

Delayed TV Licence fees for the over 75s. Given they have advised 70 and over to stay in. Why not make this delay and apply free licence fees from the age of 70 onwards?

Click to expand...

Ullofaman · Mar 16, 2020

SW3 Chelsea Tiger said: ↑

I’m not an expert in any of this.....just seen this & thought I’d share

“Bottom line up front: As an epidemiologist, I support the UK government's response to the coronavirus outbreak as proportionate, measured, targeted, nuanced, and sustainable. It is science-led, and I believe that the current choice of action is best for protecting the country.

---

Have read a lot of people writing – "I'm not an epidemiologist, but...". Well, I am an epidemiologist, so while infectious diseases aren't usually my thing, I do have a professional opinion on the current situation, and it is an informed one, so thought I'd share it.

An epidemic is like a forest fire. We are the trees, and the disease is the fire. The initial response is to find the trees on fire and try to isolate them – to create fire-breaks, and hope that the fire dies out. Despite the best efforts of the countries where the novel coronavirus infection (COVID-19) first broke out, this stage has past – there are far too many infections in the population to isolate the virus. We have to face the reality that a substantial portion of the UK population will encounter the virus.

We are now in the holding phase – there are small fires going on, and we are trying to manage them. With the 1918 Spanish flu, while the peak of the outbreak has long passed, the virus never fully went away – it is still burning to this day. Several strains of modern flu are descended from that century-old virus mutation. The ideal future situation is that this novel virus strain (COVID-19) becomes something that we treat similarly to other viruses that cause colds and flu – we take precautions against it, it makes us sick, and occasionally it is serious or even fatal, but it doesn’t drastically change how we live our lives. The end goal with the current outbreak is to get to that stage in a way that is slow, controlled, and not geographically isolated – so as not to put too much strain on the health service at any one time. The worst case scenario is what we see in Northen Italy – a fierce localized blazing fire. But having no burn at all means that the whole population is susceptible – the forest is a tinderbox waiting to ignite. We want a slow burn.

Here are four reasons for not taking more drastic action at the moment: waiting for the peak, ensuring the action is effective, avoiding unintended consequences, and the impact of action on society.

First, we are not close to the peak of the outbreak. Imagine that you are holding a "Close schools for a week" card, which reduces the infection rate by 20% for that week. If you play that card now for one week, you will delay the outbreak by a few days. But the peak of the outbreak will be unchanged – it'll be a few days later, but it'll be just as peaky. The correct time to play the card is a couple of weeks before the peak – not to stretch out the low-risk period, but to stretch out the critical period.

Secondly, if you play too many "Close schools for a week" cards, they will become less effective. It's reasonable to ask people to stay at home for a few days. It's not reasonable to ask people to stay at home indefinitely. If you close schools for several weeks, you won't get a sustained 20% reduction in infection rate – and so you won’t get as much of a reduction when you need it.

Thirdly, if you play the "Close schools for a week" card, what happens instead? Where do the children go? What consequences could result from such a decision? Again, it’s a reasonable request to ask parents to keep children isolated for a week or so. But if there is a long disruption, it could mean children end up spending more time with grandparents, who are more vulnerable to infection. It would likely result in the virus spreading more unpredictably and maybe even more quickly.

Fourthly, drastic action is disruptive. While "health takes priority over wealth" is a reasonable statement when the choice is whether to miss a week's wages versus exposing yourself to a high risk of serious illness (although for some people, even losing a week's wages would be a major set-back). But when the choice means that people go bankrupt and businesses fail, we have to think more carefully. Financial security has a major impact on personal well-being as well as on health itself. To say that the economy shouldn't be a factor in decision-making is naive and shortsighted.

By not taking drastic action at the moment, it means the government has some control over the speed of the fire. There will likely be a future day when schools will close, but we want that decision to be made when it would have the most impact in slowing the spread of the virus – too soon would mean that the action is less effective, and could lead to unintended consequences.

The situation is complicated, and it is constantly evolving. As the number of infections rises, we will need to slow the spread of the virus. But for now, keeping proper hygiene and isolating those who are infectious as well as those who are vulnerable means that the burn will mostly be in healthy individuals – this is the safest way to proceed for everyone. Personally, at the moment, I'm not travelling internationally, but I'm not socially isolating either – I am trying to avoid large crowds, but I am still attending work and social gatherings. The current government advice is reasonable and sustainable for the current situation – until this changes, this is what I am being guided by.”
Click to expand...

If I understand you correctly, are you suggesting that healthy individuals should go about their daily lives, inevitably slowly (slow burn as you put it) becoming infected and in the majority of cases then developing immunity? Vulnerable individuals should self-isolate? If yes, half-marathons in Bath etc can go ahead because these are healthy people although who knows the state of health of the roadside watchers?; ergo young people going to pubs and restaurants. Following that logic, football, and numerous other sporting codes played by healthy athletes should have continued perhaps behind closed doors to prevent unhealthy/vulnerable fans from being in attendance. Cheltenham also should have been run with no attendees. There seems to be no consistency here. Furthermore, Italy did not react initially to the problem with any great alarm (just as here today) , allowing people to intermingle, and look where they are now!!! Look at Iran, and how it is now unfolding in Spain. Italian Medics are saying to the rest of Europe that you need to completely shut down EVERYTHING, NOW with minimal contact with anyone. Maybe somewhere in between these opposing views lies the real truth. What is known about the "end game" for this virus?. Does it die out with those who die of it and those who have become immune to it? Can the least affected (children) continue to shed it for months and years thereafter? How should society interact (after the crisis) with those who were shielded during the crisis - elderly relatives, elderly neighbours, immunocompromised patients, asthmatics, cystic fibrosis sufferers etc. Your epidemiological background provides a theoretical sound logic but does it really apply in the real world - Britain (let it run around the place) versus the Rest (shut down) should make for interesting academic literature in years to come (providing there are plenty of us still here!!!!)

dennisboothstash · Mar 16, 2020

originallambrettaman said: ↑

At the current rate of sale, I've got enough stock to cover my online sales for roughly seventeen years, so it's not going to make much of a dent.
Click to expand...

Well whack your website link on here, and anyone else on here flogging stuff online should too.
I’ve had stuff of yours before (even bought in actual shops!) and no harm reminding people where to go

SW3 Chelsea Tiger · Mar 16, 2020

Ullofaman said: ↑

If I understand you correctly, are you suggesting that healthy individuals should go about their daily lives, inevitably slowly (slow burn as you put it) becoming infected and in the majority of cases then developing immunity? Vulnerable individuals should self-isolate? If yes, half-marathons in Bath etc can go ahead because these are healthy people although who knows the state of health of the roadside watchers?; ergo young people going to pubs and restaurants. Following that logic, football, and numerous other sporting codes played by healthy athletes should have continued perhaps behind closed doors to prevent unhealthy/vulnerable fans from being in attendance. Cheltenham also should have been run with no attendees. There seems to be no consistency here. Furthermore, Italy did not react initially to the problem with any great alarm (just as here today) , allowing people to intermingle, and look where they are now!!! Look at Iran, and how it is now unfolding in Spain. Italian Medics are saying to the rest of Europe that you need to completely shut down EVERYTHING, NOW with minimal contact with anyone. Maybe somewhere in between these opposing views lies the real truth. What is known about the "end game" for this virus?. Does it die out with those who die of it and those who have become immune to it? Can the least affected (children) continue to shed it for months and years thereafter? How should society interact (after the crisis) with those who were shielded during the crisis - elderly relatives, elderly neighbours, immunocompromised patients, asthmatics, cystic fibrosis sufferers etc. Your epidemiological background provides a theoretical sound logic but does it really apply in the real world - Britain (let it run around the place) versus the Rest (shut down) should make for interesting academic literature in years to come (providing there are plenty of us still here!!!!)
Click to expand...

Im not suggesting anything ....the quotes marks & the fact I said I was sharing it should have given you a teeny tiny clue

Leon T Trout AFC · Mar 16, 2020

SW3 Chelsea Tiger said: ↑

I’m not an expert in any of this.....just seen this & thought I’d share

“Bottom line up front: As an epidemiologist, I support the UK government's response to the coronavirus outbreak as proportionate, measured, targeted, nuanced, and sustainable. It is science-led, and I believe that the current choice of action is best for protecting the country.

---

Have read a lot of people writing – "I'm not an epidemiologist, but...". Well, I am an epidemiologist, so while infectious diseases aren't usually my thing, I do have a professional opinion on the current situation, and it is an informed one, so thought I'd share it.

An epidemic is like a forest fire. We are the trees, and the disease is the fire. The initial response is to find the trees on fire and try to isolate them – to create fire-breaks, and hope that the fire dies out. Despite the best efforts of the countries where the novel coronavirus infection (COVID-19) first broke out, this stage has past – there are far too many infections in the population to isolate the virus. We have to face the reality that a substantial portion of the UK population will encounter the virus.

We are now in the holding phase – there are small fires going on, and we are trying to manage them. With the 1918 Spanish flu, while the peak of the outbreak has long passed, the virus never fully went away – it is still burning to this day. Several strains of modern flu are descended from that century-old virus mutation. The ideal future situation is that this novel virus strain (COVID-19) becomes something that we treat similarly to other viruses that cause colds and flu – we take precautions against it, it makes us sick, and occasionally it is serious or even fatal, but it doesn’t drastically change how we live our lives. The end goal with the current outbreak is to get to that stage in a way that is slow, controlled, and not geographically isolated – so as not to put too much strain on the health service at any one time. The worst case scenario is what we see in Northen Italy – a fierce localized blazing fire. But having no burn at all means that the whole population is susceptible – the forest is a tinderbox waiting to ignite. We want a slow burn.

Here are four reasons for not taking more drastic action at the moment: waiting for the peak, ensuring the action is effective, avoiding unintended consequences, and the impact of action on society.

First, we are not close to the peak of the outbreak. Imagine that you are holding a "Close schools for a week" card, which reduces the infection rate by 20% for that week. If you play that card now for one week, you will delay the outbreak by a few days. But the peak of the outbreak will be unchanged – it'll be a few days later, but it'll be just as peaky. The correct time to play the card is a couple of weeks before the peak – not to stretch out the low-risk period, but to stretch out the critical period.

Secondly, if you play too many "Close schools for a week" cards, they will become less effective. It's reasonable to ask people to stay at home for a few days. It's not reasonable to ask people to stay at home indefinitely. If you close schools for several weeks, you won't get a sustained 20% reduction in infection rate – and so you won’t get as much of a reduction when you need it.

Thirdly, if you play the "Close schools for a week" card, what happens instead? Where do the children go? What consequences could result from such a decision? Again, it’s a reasonable request to ask parents to keep children isolated for a week or so. But if there is a long disruption, it could mean children end up spending more time with grandparents, who are more vulnerable to infection. It would likely result in the virus spreading more unpredictably and maybe even more quickly.

Fourthly, drastic action is disruptive. While "health takes priority over wealth" is a reasonable statement when the choice is whether to miss a week's wages versus exposing yourself to a high risk of serious illness (although for some people, even losing a week's wages would be a major set-back). But when the choice means that people go bankrupt and businesses fail, we have to think more carefully. Financial security has a major impact on personal well-being as well as on health itself. To say that the economy shouldn't be a factor in decision-making is naive and shortsighted.

By not taking drastic action at the moment, it means the government has some control over the speed of the fire. There will likely be a future day when schools will close, but we want that decision to be made when it would have the most impact in slowing the spread of the virus – too soon would mean that the action is less effective, and could lead to unintended consequences.

The situation is complicated, and it is constantly evolving. As the number of infections rises, we will need to slow the spread of the virus. But for now, keeping proper hygiene and isolating those who are infectious as well as those who are vulnerable means that the burn will mostly be in healthy individuals – this is the safest way to proceed for everyone. Personally, at the moment, I'm not travelling internationally, but I'm not socially isolating either – I am trying to avoid large crowds, but I am still attending work and social gatherings. The current government advice is reasonable and sustainable for the current situation – until this changes, this is what I am being guided by.”
Click to expand...

What's the source of this please? Ta

brownbagtiger · Mar 16, 2020

One of the arguments I’m seeing is that folk reckon they’ve already had it because there was a bug going round this winter with very similar symptoms to covid-19.

there are still lots of other illnesses out there doing the usual rounds. 40K+ folk have been tested in the UK to date - that must mean 40k+ folk with the right symptoms. So far about 1300 are positive, which means about 38k have a “normal” winter bug and could still get covid-19.

so odds are that no, you haven’t already had it. Wash your hands and stay away from my mam.

originallambrettaman · Mar 16, 2020

Leon T Trout AFC said: ↑

What's the source of this please? Ta
Click to expand...

An epidemiologist, named Stephen Burgess, posted it on Facebook (I believe he works at Cambridge University, but not 100%).

GLP · Mar 16, 2020

First death in Wales brings the total to 36 UK deaths.

cheshireles · Mar 16, 2020

GLP said: ↑

Delayed TV Licence fees for the over 75s. Given they have advised 70 and over to stay in. Why not make this delay and apply free licence fees from the age of 70 onwards?

Click to expand...

Surely 70 to 75 will still be lifting weights, doing yoga and running on a treadmill?

highpeak tiger · Mar 16, 2020

Interesting reading

https://www.statnews.com/2020/02/04/two-scenarios-if-new-coronavirus-isnt-contained/

The B&S Fanclub · Mar 16, 2020

I've been in Asda Kingswood, in the last hour. Bedwetters are stripping the shelves. Apparently, Aldi on Sutton Fields was rammed at 8:30. It will soon be time to get the army out to bang a few heads together.

Off Topic SARS-CoV-2 Covid-19

DMD Eh?
Forum Moderator

DMD Eh?
Forum Moderator

Amin Yapusi Well-Known Member

Wildie Well-Known Member

AmalCarb Well-Known Member

originallambrettaman Mod Moderator
Staff Member

DMD Eh?
Forum Moderator

balkan tiger Well-Known Member

GLP Well-Known Member

Steven Toast Well-Known Member

Ullofaman Well-Known Member

dennisboothstash Well-Known Member

SW3 Chelsea Tiger Well-Known Member

Leon T Trout AFC Well-Known Member

brownbagtiger Well-Known Member

originallambrettaman Mod Moderator
Staff Member

GLP Well-Known Member

cheshireles Well-Known Member

highpeak tiger Well-Known Member

The B&S Fanclub Well-Known Member

Share This Page

About Us

Quick Navigation

Like us on Facebook

Buy us a beer!

Useful Searches

Off Topic SARS-CoV-2 Covid-19

DMD Eh? Forum Moderator

DMD Eh? Forum Moderator

Amin Yapusi Well-Known Member

Wildie Well-Known Member

AmalCarb Well-Known Member

originallambrettaman Mod Moderator Staff Member

DMD Eh? Forum Moderator

balkan tiger Well-Known Member

GLP Well-Known Member

Steven Toast Well-Known Member

Ullofaman Well-Known Member

dennisboothstash Well-Known Member

SW3 Chelsea Tiger Well-Known Member

Leon T Trout AFC Well-Known Member

brownbagtiger Well-Known Member

originallambrettaman Mod Moderator Staff Member

GLP Well-Known Member

cheshireles Well-Known Member

highpeak tiger Well-Known Member

The B&S Fanclub Well-Known Member

Share This Page

DMD Eh?
Forum Moderator

DMD Eh?
Forum Moderator

originallambrettaman Mod Moderator
Staff Member

DMD Eh?
Forum Moderator

originallambrettaman Mod Moderator
Staff Member