Corona-virus - Impact of the Health Situation worldwide

[Nearholmer]

Robert

 

Apologies for being rather brutal with the delivery of figures.

 

I’m not inventing numbers; I’m trying to be sensibly conservative.

 

bear in mind that those are numbers without any of the measures that have been introduced, which is why they’ve been introduced, and why people b well ought to obey them. 
 

The other discomforting fact is that for, as an example, a man 75<84yo the annual risk of death is c7% anyway, without Covid19.

 

Can you think of ways of getting people to follow social-distancing rules without scaring the bejasus out of them?

 

Kevin

 

 

Edited March 22, 2020 by Nearholmer

[Pacific231G]

14 hours ago, Downendian said:

Here's the French study referred to earlier if anyone is interested.

the topic Mr Trump and Tony Fauci were debating,

neil 

Hydroxychloroquine_final_DOI_IJAA.pdf 312.88 kB · 14 downloads

Thanks for posting this.

I've just read the study (It is in English). I appreciate that it's a relatively small study and it's all too easy to seize on anything that looks like a magic bullet but these results do look dramatically positive and it was a controlled trial. The controls may not have been perfect because a degree of self selection was involved but it looks far more than anecdotal as Tony Fauco was suggesting.

I don't know how serious the side effects of Hydroxychloroquine are, possibly too serious to use it as a prophylactic, but if these results bear out, they could provide a very immediate way of tackling or at least minimising the effect of the pandemic while we wait for a vaccine. I hope it's not ignored as "not invented here" and wonder whether, perhaps unusually, it wasn't Trump who was guilty of "not an American study so worthless". 

 

Edited March 22, 2020 by Pacific231G

[jjb1970]

31 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

jjb

 

it has struck me that it might be more impactful to talk about raw numbers, because of the way the population age bell-curve works:

 

- c18% of the population is >64yo, so at 8% mortality that would be 0.18x67Mx0.08= c960 000

 

- c66% of the poplulation 64<15yo, so at 0.5% mortality that would be 0.66x67Mx0.005 = c220 000

 

So, saying that about a fifth of those who might die are ‘young’ has a harder-hitting feel.

 

 

 

I don't think that would work, the Imperial College paper provided estimated mortality rates by age and for young people it really does not seem to be a particularly serious illness. That may offend some but it would also seem to be true. I am approaching 50 and of an age where mortality is going up but even at my age the odds actually seem very favourable by age. What might change things is to show risk by health condition as an awful lot of people do suffer underlying health conditions. 

[gordon s]

47 minutes ago, AY Mod said:

 

It's unfortunate that the weather has been more pleasant this weekend hence the hordes gravitating towards the more attractive places around; where's a miserable windy and wet weekend when it would be most useful?

 

Problem may now be solved....

 

[Oldddudders]

30 minutes ago, robert17649 said:

do they qualify for Darwin awards?

Undoubtedly. But unlike classic award-winners, they risk infecting others who may not be as stupid. 

[Reorte]

8 minutes ago, Oldddudders said:

Undoubtedly. But unlike classic award-winners, they risk infecting others who may not be as stupid. 

 

Why are they stupid though? Nice day, been asked to keep away from people, so go for a walk in a place where you'll normally not be near people, just the occasional passing for a second, relieves stress at a stressful time. The ones who are also stripping bare the local shops on the other hand...

[Pacific231G]

13 minutes ago, Oldddudders said:

Undoubtedly. But unlike classic award-winners, they risk infecting others who may not be as stupid. 

This is a difficult one. I do try to get in a daily walk of two or three miles and, though I live in London, am surrounded by enough mainly empty green space to do so without being closer than two metres to other people and that only ocassionally.  I could stay in the house and increase my risk of obesity, diabetes, poor immune system etc. or I could go out but do so with an informed awareness of risk. The answer is probably to look for  quieter places to walk than the usual beauty spots.

Edited March 22, 2020 by Pacific231G

[jjb1970]

11 minutes ago, Reorte said:

 

Why are they stupid though? Nice day, been asked to keep away from people, so go for a walk in a place where you'll normally not be near people, just the occasional passing for a second, relieves stress at a stressful time. The ones who are also stripping bare the local shops on the other hand...

 

We live in a world where it is now normal to dismiss anyone with a differing opinion or lifestyle choice as being stupid.

[PenrithBeacon]

I received this yesterday, I don't know about it's provenance

Cheers

Edited March 22, 2020 by PenrithBeacon

[Reorte]

2 minutes ago, PenrithBeacon said:

 

 

^ Useful post, for those of us not vulnerable as well - we need to know when not to turn up.

[jjb1970]

39 minutes ago, Pacific231G said:

Thanks for posting this.

I've just read the study (It is in English). I appreciate that it's a relatively small study and it's all too easy to seize on anything that looks like a magic bullet but these results do look dramatically positive and it was a controlled trial. The controls may not have been perfect because a degree of self selection was involved but it looks far more than anecdotal as Tony Fauco was suggesting.

I don't know how serious the side effects of Hydroxychloroquine are, possibly too serious to use it as a prophylactic, but if these results bear out, they could provide a very immediate way of tackling or at least minimising the effect of the pandemic while we wait for a vaccine. I hope it's not ignored as "not invented here" and wonder whether, perhaps unusually, it wasn't Trump who was guilty of "not an American study so worthless". 

 

 

I think the side effects would have to be properly analysed before using anti-malarial drugs widely. There are good reasons why doctors are careful in the advice provided to people visiting malarial zones. I made a decision not to take them and play the odds and made that decision in full awareness of the risks of malaria.  A disease that kills huge numbers. 

[boxbrownie]

9 minutes ago, Reorte said:

 

^ Useful post, for those of us not vulnerable as well - we need to know when not to turn up.

We live in hope......

[jcredfer]

23 minutes ago, Reorte said:

 

Why are they stupid though? Nice day, been asked to keep away from people, so go for a walk in a place where you'll normally not be near people, just the occasional passing for a second, relieves stress at a stressful time. The ones who are also stripping bare the local shops on the other hand...

 

Whilst in full agreement with the idea of a quiet walk... the places which were pictured and listed Top of Snowdon, the surrounding roads, Malam Tarn, Hove Promenade, West Wittering Beach, National Trust Properties etc...  hardly qualify as the sort of places where "go for a walk where you'll normally not be near people" would apply.

 

Julian

 

[robert17649]

8 minutes ago, jjb1970 said:

 

I think the side effects would have to be properly analysed before using anti-malarial drugs widely. There are good reasons why doctors are careful in the advice provided to people visiting malarial zones. I made a decision not to take them and play the odds and made that decision in full awareness of the risks of malaria.  A disease that kills huge numbers. 

Some anti malarials are horrid, liver damage in most cases and other effects.

 

If malaria was an urban western disease there would have been a better answer by now. chloroquine is less frequently used now because of its s/e profile , but if you die if you dont take it?

 

 

[AY Mod]

49 minutes ago, gordon s said:

 

Problem may now be solved....

 

 

 

That appears to be local pressure points in the Lake District (possibly posted by a resident) and I hope people will pay heed.

 

The full (current) position from the NT is shown on their site.

 

Quote

UPDATED - 9.30pm on Saturday 21 March 2020

 

National Trust closes parks and gardens, asking people to avoid travel and comply with government social distancing guidance. 

From midnight on 21 March the National Trust will close all of its gated gardens and parks to help restrict the spread of the coronavirus.

 

The move follows the closure of pubs, restaurants, cafes, gyms and leisure centres announced by the government on Friday, and tightening travel restrictions and public health advice.

 

At the start of this week the conservation charity announced that despite closing its houses, shops and cafes, it would work to keep gardens and parks open so people could access open space. However, the Trust warned that a fair weather forecast and Mothering Sunday could tempt people onto the roads over the weekend and National Trust sites would close if high demand meant social distancing could not be enforced. 

 

Director-General Hilary McGrady said:

 

'Despite our desire to keep our outdoor spaces open, the health and wellbeing of our staff, volunteers and visitors has to be our top priority. Having observed the numbers visiting our properties today and I am no longer convinced we can maintain social distancing over Mother’s Day when numbers are likely to grow, and beyond.

 

'We have now sadly taken the decision to close all of our parks and gardens, in addition to our houses, shops and cafes, to avoid crowding that puts social distancing at risk.

'We know that people are likely to need space and fresh air in the coming weeks and months and we will do all we can to provide access wherever possible.

'Our countryside and coastal locations remain open with parking charges waived, but we encourage people to stay local and observe social distancing measures.

'Over the coming weeks our digital platforms - our website, social media feeds, podcasts and video - will become even more important, ensuring the places of nature, beauty and history that we care for on behalf of the nation can remain open for business virtually while we are temporarily closed.

'We will also be ramping up our efforts to help people connect with nature wherever they are and to find moments of joy in the world around them. We will be providing rich content and staying in touch with our members and followers throughout this time.'

 

Information on which National Trust outdoor places are open can be found at www.nationaltrust.org.uk 

 

From https://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/press-release/the-national-trusts-latest-statement-on-coronavirus-covid-19

[Paul.Uni]

Words fail me.

 

[jjb1970]

12 minutes ago, robert17649 said:

Some anti malarials are horrid, liver damage in most cases and other effects.

 

If malaria was an urban western disease there would have been a better answer by now. chloroquine is less frequently used now because of its s/e profile , but if you die if you dont take it?

 

 

 

Malaria is one of many diseases and maladies that continues to kill huge numbers year on year and which are largely accepted because most of the people who die are from LDCs.

[tractionman]

29 minutes ago, AY Mod said:

 

That appears to be local pressure points in the Lake District (possibly posted by a resident) and I hope people will pay heed.

 

The full (current) position from the NT is shown on their site.

 

 

From https://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/press-release/the-national-trusts-latest-statement-on-coronavirus-covid-19

 

There are 1000s of miles of footpaths in England and Wales and Right to Roam/Open Access in Scotland so no need for an overcrowding of the usual haunts and 'honey pots' in our countryside and landscapes--useful current advice on safe walking in the country provided by The Ramblers: 

 

https://www.ramblers.org.uk/volunteer-zone/coronavirus.aspx

 

The drive to be outdoors -- which is a good thing -- could all help this long-established organisation achieve its ambition to 'Join the search' to help find public footpaths and bridleways at risk of being lost, in the Ramblers' "Don't Lose Your Way" initiative:

 

https://dontloseyourway.ramblers.org.uk/

 

This involves searching for, and locating, lost and threatened public rights of way using historic and modern OS maps, so it's possible to do a virtual walk as well as well as a real one using this app! Lots of us love our OS maps, so this is a great way to pass a bit of time and for a good cause.

 

Alas no public rights of way exist here in the part of the UK I am in, so cycling the now quietened lanes and roads will be my salvation outdoors, and modelling indoors...

 

all the best,

 

Keith

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[JeremyC]

42 minutes ago, Paul.Uni said:

Words fail me.

 

If you read the comments on the above there are a huge number saying this is a typical anti English SNP rant or it's my right to go where I want etc. Are people absolutely stupid, can they not understand the seriousness of the situation? Wales and Scotland and rural areas whether in England, Scotland or Wales do not have the resources to cope with a huge influx of extra people especially if this leads to a massive demand for medical services. People have now shown they cannot behave responsibly, it's time to make them do so, if that means restricting their rights so be it.

Edited March 22, 2020 by JeremyC

[John Tomlinson]

1 hour ago, Nearholmer said:

Robert

 

Apologies for being rather brutal with the delivery of figures.

 

I’m not inventing numbers; I’m trying to be sensibly conservative.

 

bear in mind that those are numbers without any of the measures that have been introduced, which is why they’ve been introduced, and why people b well ought to obey them. 
 

The other discomforting fact is that for, as an example, a man 75<84yo the annual risk of death is c7% anyway, without Covid19.

 

Can you think of ways of getting people to follow social-distancing rules without scaring the bejasus out of them?

 

Kevin

 

 

Your last sentence explains precisely the Governments's dilemma, or perhaps "tightrope it has to walk" is another expression.

 

In order to maintain confidence and prevent panic, they need to convey that the issue is under control and there is a plan, however in doing so some will read this as "well, there's not a big problem really, so all this guidance stuff is optional". Only by being near threatenening, as in this morning's "we're a couple of weeks from the NHS being overwhelmed", are people going to really knuckle down and act sensibly. But then you risk triggering panic in some.

 

I suspect most of the people on here are pretty rational and thoughtful, judging from the quality of the discourse, but elements of our population, or indeed elsewhere, may not be.

 

John.

Edited March 22, 2020 by John Tomlinson
clarity

[boxbrownie]

Just now, JeremyC said:

If you read the comments on the above there are a huge number saying this is a typical anti English SNP rant or it's my right to go where I want etc. Are people absolutely stupid, can they not understand the seriousness of the situation? Rural areas whether in England, Scotland or Wales do not have the resources to cope with a huge influx of extra people especially if this leads to a massive demand for medical services. People have now shown they cannot behave responsibly, it's time to make them do so, if that means restricting their rights so be it.

On our local FB pages there are quite a lot of holiday makers who are insisting they are still coming for the holiday they booked even though the venues have quite clearly said they are shut, when the venues answer their queries and explain why they have closed they are getting, shall we say not the nicest of comments in return, what is it with people, I expect they would bring plenty of toilet rolls though 

[Baby Deltic]

[jcredfer]

23 minutes ago, boxbrownie said:

On our local FB pages there are quite a lot of holiday makers who are insisting they are still coming for the holiday they booked even though the venues have quite clearly said they are shut, when the venues answer their queries and explain why they have closed they are getting, shall we say not the nicest of comments in return, what is it with people, I expect they would bring plenty of toilet rolls though 

 

You've done it - got the panic buying reason cracked!!  Woopee!!  Hit the nail on the head.  That's why they have been buying toilet rolls - just so they don't have to buy any in Cornwall, when the Grockles all dash down there.  Their cars will be laden with all that other stashed loot from the Supermarket shelves.  It's going to be bad for the Cornish economy again, just like it was back 88/99, just before the financial crash hit the rest of the country.  

 

Seriously, again, I really hope they do see the light of day and stay away.  I know my next door neighbour has had to cancel his long planned holiday and he, along with his friends have simply accepted their offer of a booking for next year, at no additional cost.

 

Julian

 

[robert17649]

SWMBO is a special needs teacher, and in her view just saying something might happen means it very probably will. If you shout don't run to some children they will run. If you say  we are not considering food rationing yet then this will be a self fulfilling prophecy some people(possibly lots) will interpret that as were are considering food rationing. If you ask people not to crowd together they will and worse if you tell everyone that young people are not so badly affected the young people will carry on as normal.

In much the same way when a junior doctor in paediatrics yonks ago my boss said if you ask yourself if you should do a lumbar puncture you should be looking at the result.

So I suppose if the government let it be known that they are considering something that something shoud perhaps have been done.

I note by the way that the Caravanning nd Camping club have shut down all their sites as of now. So even when they arrive in Cornwall there will be nowhere to stay.

[Ron Ron Ron]

It’s a lovely sunny day here on the English south coast.

With no plans to leave home over the weekend, or the next few days, like yesterday I’ve been out in the garden busying myself with jobs.

I could hear the occasional sound of similar gardening and DIY activity from of my nearby neighbour’s gardens, otherwise it has been quite tranquil.

When I sat down on a wall for a break and cuppa, late morning, I noticed the sound of cars passing by on the nearby lane and the distant sound of traffic, up on the main road, a quarter of a mile away.

It did seem to me that there were a lot of cars out and about, considering we have all been advised to minimise our excursions beyond the garden gate, or front door.

Where were all these people going, considering shop closures and the suspension of sporting activities and suchlike ?

No doubt a fair proportion of those cars are carrying people who are completely ignoring the advice to suspend social contact and are visiting family and friends, or heading for popular parks, beaches and beauty spots.

 

Do these people not realise that in Spain and Italy, you currently need to provide proof and documentation to go outside of your property, for anything other than a trip to the supermarket or chemist?

Do they not know that Germany and France are heading towards a similar tightening of there already more strict advice and restrictions.

Do they not know, that if it all goes t*ts up here, there will have to be similar restrictions imposed here and to them?

 

The penny simple isn’t dropping, or dropping far enough.

 

 

.