# Facemasks



## Terry - Somerset (30 Jan 2020)

This is not strictly off topic, although the reasons for asking are.

We are probably all fairly familiar with the regular threads about dust protection and what the best masks are in terms of cost, comfort, effectiveness in a dusty woodworking environment. We are also very aware that the larger particles may be a major immediate irritant, but the very small particles are the ones that cause the most damaging long term health problems.

So with the benefit of all this knowledge, could the forum advise me what the best protection would be should the Corona virus reach and start spreading in the UK. 

I am assuming that (a) the risk of infection may be fairly small at present, and (b) obvious risk mitigation strategies are adopted - eg: avoid crowded places.


----------



## Trevanion (30 Jan 2020)

I read somewhere that there's a massive shortage of medical masks because of the scare of the Coronavirus.

I'd assume something like an Elipse P3 or a 3M 7500 with carbon filters fitted would be just about as good as you'll get without a full hazmat suit.


----------



## Trainee neophyte (30 Jan 2020)

It depends on your age and physical condition, more than anything. From what I can see, the vast majority of deaths have been in either the very elderly, or the very, very young. If you fit into one of those groups, then you ought to consider taking precautions, otherwise, it is just a (not so) common cold. It seems to be affecting the lungs particularly, so if you have already spent years abusing them with sawdust...now might be a really good time to start wearing protection.

I would worry more about influenza than this scaremongering excuse for a world recession. (In three weeks time I could be proven monumentally wrong, but for now I see no reason to panic).


----------



## Blackswanwood (30 Jan 2020)

There was an article on the BBC website that surprised me as it pointed out that surgical facemasks are pretty ineffective against airborne viruses as they leave the eyes exposed. They do however reduce hand to mouth infection. 

As I am due to fly to the Philippines via Hong Kong a week on Monday I am reading anything I see on the topic and apart from the view that it’s scaremongering agree with the earlier post that it seems to be more dangerous for people with existing health conditions ... but it’s a bit of a fact free zone at the moment!


----------



## MikeG. (30 Jan 2020)

Trainee neophyte":3dwue92e said:


> .....I would worry more about influenza than this......



Yep, absolutely.



Blackswanwood":3dwue92e said:


> .........surgical facemasks are pretty ineffective against airborne viruses as they leave the eyes exposed. They do however reduce hand to mouth infection........



I suspect the point of surgical masks is not to protect the wearer but to protect those people they might sneeze over.


----------



## Trevanion (30 Jan 2020)

Thing is, the media *love* a pandemic and will blow it way out of proportion. I have strong doubts that it will have an actual impact in Britain if any, but nothing is impossible. The "Preppers" in America seemed to have started panicking about it from what I can see and have bought all the medical masks on Amazon, and have stockpiled more petrol, diesel, food, and water... In preparation for something that _probably_ won't affect them.


----------



## Sideways (30 Jan 2020)

Listening to Radio 4 science program, it's described as a lower respiratory tract issue - very small, aerosol droplets from breathing can infect at upto 200 feet. Oh, and it settles and can be picked up from contact with keyboards, etc etc.
From some of the stories my wife tells me about the hygiene issues with shared laptops in schools, I'd say the school age population of the entire country should be exposed within a matter of days....
Tongue severely in cheek - the world has an overpopulation problem and we need something to thin us all out !


----------



## treeturner123 (31 Jan 2020)

I agree with Trevanion

A real panic has set in which is fed by the media. I remember when there was a previous 'Panic' and I was working for a well known charity looking after disabled people. Each home was required to buy in huge stocks causing financial problems AND problems of storage. Two years after the panic was over, I was still finding store cupboards full of masks, anti-septic solutions etc.

Have a few central stores where items can be obtained from IF needed.

BTW, what is the death rate from flue? I bet it is grater than this epidemic

Phil.


----------



## ScaredyCat (31 Jan 2020)

Imperial Collage are saying that an infected person will, on average, infect 2.6 others making it as virulent as influenza. 

Useful info
Transmissability of the virus

About the virus
.


----------



## Just4Fun (31 Jan 2020)

ScaredyCat":10epll6i said:


> Imperial Collage are saying that an infected person will, on average, infect 2.6 others


OK.



> making it as virulent as influenza.


Do they really say that? I thought the equivalent figure for seasonal strains of influenza averages about 1.28, with the figure for swine flu being in the range 1.4 to 1.6, making novel corona virus much more virulent than influenza.

To see what this means, if 100 people have influenza with an R0 value of 1.28 this means after 1 infection cycle they will have infected 128 others. At the end of the next infection cycle those 128 will have infected 164 people. Continue this for 10 infection cycles and there will be 1,181 people infected.

Do the same calculations for 100 people infected with the novel corona virus with an R0 value of 2.6. After 1 infection cycle they will have infected 260 others. After another infection cycle that 260 will have infected 676 others. After 10 infection cycles there will be 1,411,671 people infected. Rather more serious than for influenza.

Now I don't have any knowledge or expertise in this area, I just know how to operate a calculator. If I have got this wrong then please feel free to point out my error. If not, it is not surprising that some people are taking this seriously.


----------



## Droogs (31 Jan 2020)

The Chinese have already stated to WHO that they expect 100K deaths per 5m infections


----------



## Trainee neophyte (31 Jan 2020)

From Wikipedia, so it must be true: (tabular information has lost its formatting - 3 columns. Hope it's not too awful)


> Disease	Transmission	R0
> Measles	Airborne	12–18
> Diphtheria	Saliva	6-7
> Smallpox	Airborne droplet	5–7
> ...


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_r ... ion_number

As long as you are not very young, or very old, or have breathing issues there is not too much to worry about.


----------



## Just4Fun (31 Jan 2020)

Trainee neophyte":2nztn4tm said:


> From Wikipedia, so it must be true:
> 
> 
> > Influenza
> > (1918 pandemic strain)	Airborne droplet	2–3[5]


The problem with the Wikipedia figures is it gives the R0 for the 1918 pandemic strain of influenza but most of us think of the regular seasonal strains. So perhaps you have drawn the wrong conclusion. Perhaps it would be more accurate to say the novel corona virus has an R0 similar to the 1918 version of influenza, which Wikipedia tells us 


> infected 500 million people around the world, including people on remote Pacific islands and in the Arctic. The death toll is estimated to have been 50 million, and possibly as high as 100 million (three to five percent of Earth's population at the time)


I don't usually take much notice of these scares, but if the figures are correct this one could be more serious. Of course the R0 value reflects the infection rate but tells us nothing about how serious it is if you do get infected. I haven't seen much data about that.


----------



## Trevanion (31 Jan 2020)

What does concern me slightly is the possibility of the spread of the infection amongst densely populated nations with little or no healthcare systems in place such as many South Asian and African nations, in which there are a lot of Chinese infrastructure projects underway. Then it could potentially be very lethal if that were to happen.


----------



## ColeyS1 (31 Jan 2020)

Obviously it's truly awful that lives are being lost. In the back of my mind I wonder if its natures way of trying to reduce the population and save the planet. All the problems we face with over population, global warming NHS being stretched to the limit etc are all down to the world having too many people. Perhaps if rapists and paedophiles got steralised and capital punishment was brought back it would help with the excess ? I know it sounds proper harsh. I watched a Tom Hanks film the other day where some nut job was releasing a virus to cull the population. It does make you think though...

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## SammyQ (1 Feb 2020)

> I suspect the point of surgical masks is not to protect the wearer but to protect those people they might sneeze over



As a regular visitor (4-6 hour stays) to a ward full of immunologically compromised patients, I can confirm this is correct. 

Sam


----------



## Just4Fun (26 Feb 2020)

Trainee neophyte":16y16yef said:


> I would worry more about influenza than this scaremongering excuse for a world recession. (In three weeks time I could be proven monumentally wrong, but for now I see no reason to panic).


Now we are more than 3 weeks down the road so can I ask if your view has changed?

Certainly the media coverage is considerable and spread does seem to be rapid. The death rate still seems open to some debate but a figure of 20 to 25 times higher than for the flu has been quoted. Is it time to worry? Is anyone taking any action, and if so, what are you doing?

I do not normally pay much attention to these scares but I have been following this quite closely. I have been trying to work out why that is and come up against a chicken & egg situation. Am I paying more attention to this one because it is more serious or does it seem more serious because I have been following it more closely? Or is it just that modern online media makes information more, and more quickly, accessible?


----------



## Trevanion (26 Feb 2020)

Until we start seeing cases in say London I’m not going to worry about it at all. As I said earlier, the media love blowing things *way* out of proportion and the tinfoil hat brigade get all worked up about it thinking it’s going to kill everyone.

If you weren’t actively looking at the stories you also wouldn’t be worrying about it. Deaths are unfortunate but the numbers are still very low in reality, the media loves to make a mountain out of a molehill so to speak, it gets more clicks than “Everything is OK”.


----------



## John Brown (26 Feb 2020)

ColeyS1":36xu6w09 said:


> Obviously it's truly awful that lives are being lost. In the back of my mind I wonder if its natures way of trying to reduce the population and save the planet. All the problems we face with over population, global warming NHS being stretched to the limit etc are all down to the world having too many people. Perhaps if rapists and paedophiles got steralised and capital punishment was brought back it would help with the excess ? I know it sounds proper harsh. I watched a Tom Hanks film the other day where some nut job was releasing a virus to cull the population. It does make you think though...
> 
> Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


"Nature's way"?
Things don't work like that. Nature has no goal or target, anymore than evolution does.
If all rapists etc. were sterilised it would make approximately zero difference to anything.


----------



## Just4Fun (26 Feb 2020)

Trevanion":n20dhi7y said:


> Until we start seeing cases in say London I’m not going to worry about it at all.


Probably wise but since I posted about this earlier today the local news has reported 2 possible cases that are close to home for me. They are 2 people who have just returned from Tenerife. One of the suspect cases is in the town (population 140 000) where my wife's office is located and the other is in the town (population 50 000) where my son is studying. I will visit both towns this weekend. I assume there is little to no risk at the moment but I will monitor what happens. It is certainly a tad more real for me today than yesterday.


----------



## whiskywill (26 Feb 2020)

So you wear a mask and come into contact with somebody infected with the Corona virus. That person breathes/coughs/sneezes on you. The mask protects your nose and mouth but what about your hair, face, neck, hand, clothes and, of course, the outside surface of the face mask. The virus is able to survive on various surfaces.


----------



## Trevanion (26 Feb 2020)

Just4Fun":2sgkey7i said:


> Probably wise but since I posted about this earlier today the local news has reported 2 possible cases that are close to home for me. They are 2 people who have just returned from Tenerife. One of the suspect cases is in the town (population 140 000) where my wife's office is located and the other is in the town (population 50 000) where my son is studying. I will visit both towns this weekend. I assume there is little to no risk at the moment but I will monitor what happens. It is certainly a tad more real for me today than yesterday.



I can understand the concern, but realistically that's two people out of 190,000 total between the two towns you mentioned, the confirmed current active cases across the whole world is 80,000 with most in far more densely populated countries with little or no real medical care comparatively. You also mention they're "possible cases" which means they aren't even confirmed, not every pipper coming back from Tenerife is going to have Coronavirus but even the local media will make a big fuss about it because, again, it generates clicks. If there is a confirmed case in either said town I suspect the individual and anyone who may have made contact would be very quickly quarantined much like the rest that have been discovered.

If things get dire, you could always get one of these bad boys and wash it down with Dettol loaded into a pressure washer after being out and about to the shops.


----------



## Just4Fun (26 Feb 2020)

Trevanion":10h4oudd said:


> I can understand the concern, but realistically that's two people out of 190,000 total between the two towns you mentioned


Agreed. As I said, I assume little to no current risk but ... the evening news reported a 3rd case in the country and this one is confirmed, not suspect. Again, just one case and this one is not local to me but it does make you think.


> If things get dire, you could always get one of these bad boys ...


I am notoriously sartorially incompetent but even I draw the line at that!


----------



## SammyQ (26 Feb 2020)

> "The virus is able to survive on various asurfaces."



Whiskeywill, that is a VERY sweeping statement, not true of viruses in general. 
As regards Corovid 19, I would like to see specific medical or scientific reference to which surfaces and in what circumstances it can survive.
So far, the biomedical information suggests 'sustained close proximity (under 2m) to an infected person for 15 minutes' is needed for transmission. 
This facilitates droplet infection, not aerosol; ergo, you have to be coughed on, by someone practically inside your personal space, for infection, not by handling the same doorknob or toilet flush handle. 

Sam


----------



## lurker (26 Feb 2020)

Just to get this into proportion, 300 deaths per year due to influenza in the uk, would be a very conservative estimate.
And, I imagine this new bug is by no means as infectious.


----------



## Trainee neophyte (26 Feb 2020)

Just4Fun":1myftm51 said:



> Trainee neophyte":1myftm51 said:
> 
> 
> > I would worry more about influenza than this scaremongering excuse for a world recession. (In three weeks time I could be proven monumentally wrong, but for now I see no reason to panic).
> ...



A good question. I have been following several "alternative" news sites, because I don't trust the mainstream media. If you want to frighten the willies out of yourself, and anyone who knows you, have a look at Zerohedge who are convinced the human race will be extinct next week. MoonofAlabama are noting that the China numbers are coming under control, and it will be iradicated fairly soon (a matter of a few months).

I have a few thoughts - firstly, the disease is mostly harmless. Secondly, it is a Corona virus i.e. the common cold: everyone gets it. It seems to be randomly fatal for smokers, old/immunocompromised people, but not for everyone else. On that basis, I don't worry for myself, or my immediate family - the 'flu kills thousands every year, but we mostly don't lose sleep over it.

However, there will be economic fallout that may well be worse than if no one took any protective measures - I don't think many cruises will be booked in the next few months. Anyone enthusiastic to get on an aeroplane? I earn the majority of my income from tourism - that may not happen this year. This could all be a cunning ruse to precipitate the economic reset that has been so obviously necessary since 2009 (warning: paranoid conspiracy theorist at work).

More fun conspiracy theorising: both China and now Iran seem to be hard hit - could it have been a weaponised biowarfare attack? (Answer:almost certainly not, but it is entertaining to consider the possibility). Also, given that pensioners are the most likely victims, any government with a pension system has an interest in not controling the outbreak. Fewer pensioners makes for a better balance sheet.

In conclusion, I'm not worried about catching the virus, but I expect to be significantly poorer by the end of this year, because of government measures and public panic. We'll have to see how it all pans out.


----------



## sunnybob (27 Feb 2020)

I flew back from the UK to Cyprus yesterday after 10 days in the west country :shock: 

On the way there, one girl was wearing a mask all the way through the journey and both airports, but she did look of asian origin, so maybe she is more used to that than most westerners.

On the way back there were no masked marauders.
Strangely, I heard a lot less random coughing than usual in a public place, I think people are now scared to in case they start a panic :roll: 

But Having sat in the front seat (No, not THAT front seat) and seen just how many people use the toilet that I HAD to use in a 5 hour flight, I made sure to shower and wash all my clothes as soon as I got home.

(at least 180 on the plane, only three toilets, I saw one woman go into that toilet at least 6 times. But on the other hand, the man sitting next to us didnt even get out of his seat the whole journey. I estimate 70 people as a minimum used the one nearest to me)

Thankfully, thats my last flight this year 8) 8)


----------



## Trainee neophyte (27 Feb 2020)

sunnybob":1doo5pxp said:


> I flew back from the UK to Cyprus yesterday after 10 days in the west country :shock:
> 
> On the way there, one girl was wearing a mask all the way through the journey and both airports, but she did look of asian origin, so maybe she is more used to that than most westerners.
> 
> ...



Well done for making it back to civilization. Your next mission, should you chose to accept it, is to survive the next 14 days unscathed 

The real issue with being in a crowd of people is that you will be liberally plastered with virus and bacteria particles - nothing you can do about it. You just need to try not to get them inside your body. The face mask does very little (although it helps to not give your diseases to other people), but it does stop you putting your fingers in your mouth, which is probably the number one means of disease transmission.

Oh, and do you wash your vegetables? All those people prodding and poking the tomatoes, and sneezing and coughing and nose-picking just before they dive in to find the best produce...and don't forget that the hermetically sealed, plastic wrapped half-cucmber was cut in half by an east-european wage-slave with questionable hygiene.

Not that anyone should panic, or anything...but best to never leave the house again, just in case (/sarc off?)


----------



## Tris (27 Feb 2020)

Don't forget that by now we were all meant to have been wiped out by H5N1, SARS, ebola, and yet here we are.


----------



## sunnybob (27 Feb 2020)

I think if I had done that journey in a months time, I would have been arrested. :? :shock: 
Due to a very old nasal injury my nose is sometimes blocked for days, and then runs like a tap for a while to catch up. That actually happened 6 hours after I got home, and I have to admit I had a doubt for a couple of hours. :roll: :roll: :roll: 
But I'm back to normal today, basking in the 18c sunshine, after a week in the wet and cold. =D> =D> =D> =D> 8) 

Did you see the clip of the Iranian health minister? proclaiming there wasnt a problem while frantically wiping his face like he had just come out of a shower, and 5 hours later admitting he had self quarantined.
Oh how much we trust all politicians.........


----------



## John15 (27 Feb 2020)

Probably unnecessary but until the Coronavirus scare has passed I'm having my Sainsburys groceries delivered rather than mixing with people coughing and spluttering in the store. Also avoiding the busy times at the pub. I know I'm daft so no need to tell me so!!

John


----------



## sunnybob (27 Feb 2020)

I notice youre not having the booze delivered... just avoiding busy times.
But what happens if the barman has just contracted it, and then (I REALLY, REALLY hate this!) puts his fingers INSIDE your glass to pull it from the shelf?


----------



## John15 (27 Feb 2020)

sunnybob":3rznmzoj said:


> I notice youre not having the booze delivered... just avoiding busy times.
> But what happens if the barman has just contracted it, and then (I REALLY, REALLY hate this!) puts his fingers INSIDE your glass to pull it from the shelf?



I haven't noticed dirty fingers in the glasses. What a horrible thought - I wondered why my Guinness sometimes looses it's head rather quickly. At least I avoid contaminated cash by running a tab.

John


----------



## sunnybob (27 Feb 2020)

Now that I've mentioned it, you will see how often that happens.
I dont do much pub drinking anymore, thats one of the reasons.


----------



## RogerS (27 Feb 2020)

Those naysayers are missing one very important point. One I've mentioned elsewhere - namely that the bad thing about Covid-19 is that its morbidity is worryingly high at 20%. Translated in to English, that means that if you catch the disease and hospitalised that the severer symptoms tie up an awful lot of healthcare professionals. It won't take many cases to overwhelm the NHS.

Information from a qualified source - not a tinhat Facebook thread.


----------



## Nigel Burden (27 Feb 2020)

There's little point in worrying too much about it as there's no vaccine at present. Influenza is a bigger risk from what I've heard. Take sensible precautions by all means if you go to an area where the virus is known, but otherwise why worry too much, you'll only increase your stress levels. 

Nigel.


----------



## Tris (27 Feb 2020)

Roger- what is the source? A study published by the Lancet using data from January gives 8% morbidity, just wondering if it has become more virulent.


----------



## RogerS (27 Feb 2020)

Tris":25qnh8ae said:


> Roger- what is the source? A study published by the Lancet using data from January gives 8% morbidity, just wondering if it has become more virulent.



A medic at the coalface.


----------



## Trainee neophyte (27 Feb 2020)

Greece has its third case today, shipped in from Italy. To show that they care, the government has cancelled all the carnivals due to happen this week and next. The really big one is in Patras, which can attract 35-40,000 people taking part in the parade (according to the rather gushing wikipedia article, that is). Allegedly millions watch. Probably best to cancel it then. Our rather more modest village carnival has also been cancelled, just in case. There's always next year, I suppose.

We are going shopping this afternoon, to stock up on essentials such as bread flour, antibiotics and cold relief medicines. This is not because I am panicking, but because I know that everyone else will be panicking, and he who panics first, panics best (works in the stock market, too). Bear in mind that come mid-March, the lack of production in China is going to start to feed into the system - Amazon is going to be out of stock quite a bit, I believe. Apparently China also manufactures the vast majority of prescription drugs (certainly the case for America, I don't know if this is also the case for Europe), so lack of production could have some interesting knock-on effects.

We are certainly living in interesting times.


----------



## RogerS (27 Feb 2020)

Trainee neophyte":21iu98pb said:


> Greece has its third case today, shipped in from Italy. To show that they care, the government has cancelled all the carnivals due to happen this week and next. ....



We should be cancelling little Greta's eco-gathering in Bristol later on. But they won't. Our police are now spineless and the judiciary have seen to that by the ruling re those Excretion Revulsion twits. So any Tom, Dick or Harry can go and dig up a lawn anywhere, get the police to close the streets and inconvenience you and I plus delay ambulances etc because they are too scared to do diddly-squat.

Must confess that when I was at the doctor's surgery this morning I waited in the car until the last possible moment and any whisper of a cough from anyone then I was out of there. I do have an appointment at the local hospital. It's not urgent and I'm tempted to postpone.


----------



## Nigel Burden (27 Feb 2020)

Trainee neophyte":rg407rz6 said:


> Greece has its third case today, shipped in from Italy. To show that they care, the government has cancelled all the carnivals due to happen this week and next. The really big one is in Patras, which can attract 35-40,000 people taking part in the parade (according to the rather gushing wikipedia article, that is). Allegedly millions watch. Probably best to cancel it then. Our rather more modest village carnival has also been cancelled, just in case. There's always next year, I suppose.
> 
> We are going shopping this afternoon, to stock up on essentials such as bread flour, antibiotics and cold relief medicines. This is not because I am panicking, but because I know that everyone else will be panicking, and he who panics first, panics best (works in the stock market, too). Bear in mind that come mid-March, the lack of production in China is going to start to feed into the system - Amazon is going to be out of stock quite a bit, I believe. Apparently China also manufactures the vast majority of prescription drugs (certainly the case for America, I don't know if this is also the case for Europe), so lack of production could have some interesting knock-on effects.
> 
> We are certainly living in interesting times.



What good would an antibiotic be against a virus?

Nigel.


----------



## SammyQ (27 Feb 2020)

Roger, where is your medic getting 20% from please? The WHO were quoting 2% not long ago; has your medic indicated an increased mutation rate in the virus, leading to its greater potency?

Sam


----------



## SammyQ (27 Feb 2020)

EDIT. "Morbidity" is disease occurence, "mortality" is deaths.
20% of people will get symptoms, 2% of people will...

Sorry, Roger, skim reading and not thinking...

Sam


----------



## RogerS (27 Feb 2020)

SammyQ":1u3fj2mz said:


> EDIT. "Morbidity" is disease occurence, "mortality" is deaths.
> 20% of people will get symptoms, 2% of people will...
> 
> Sorry, Roger, skim reading and not thinking...
> ...



No worries, Sam...I can understand your concern and hope the coffee didn't soak too much into your keyboard when you read it !


----------



## AES (27 Feb 2020)

First off, Trainee neophyte wrote, QUTE: Apparently China also manufactures the vast majority of prescription drugs (certainly the case for America, I don't know if this is also the case for Europe), so lack of production could have some interesting knock-on effects. UNQUOTE:

I have a number of medicines (tablets) on a daily basis. Most of these are "Generica" (I forget the English word, but where some other company makes them when the originators' patent has run out). The reason for using them is that they're cheaper than the original label versions, so if they work (which they mostly do) then I'm all for saving a bit of money for my health care premiums. 

Anyway, I've just re-ordered my regular pain killers but they're not available for at least a week because they're made in China. My wife who worked in pharma before she retired (though not on the technical side) confirmed that many of the Generica medicines are indeed made in China. Who knew? Not me.

Next, I always take what I read in the papers/hear/see of the news with several LARGE shovelfuls of salt, and normally pay zero attention to all the stories of doom and gloom.

BUT:

Switzerland shares a border with Italy, which now has a number of confirmed cases. The nearest part of Switzerland to Italy (Kanton Tessin) has now cancelled this weekend's forthcoming carnival (normally it's HUGE down there).

But at the same time, while "grenzgangers" (people who live in Italy but work in Switzerland) are crossing the border twice a day, MUST wear masks during their travel (and that new reg comes from the Italian NOT the Swiss authorities)! Meantime there is (always has been) Customs and Immigration blokes manning the various Swiss/Italian border road crossing points who carry out regular random checks. The people on the Italian side are wearing face masks but the people on the Swiss side are NOT wearing any protection at all - AND you can get on a train in any big town in Switzerland and take a train direct through to Milan or Rome without any precautions being taken at all - and it seems, vice-versa too. The Swiss Minister of Health says he's "watching the situation very carefully but no action is being taken at present because he doesn't want to start an unnecessary panic!

Meantime, there's been 1 confirmed case in Basel, 20 mins drive up the road from us, and another 2 cases confirmed in a small town about 30 mins drive in the other direction.

In short, all the available information is not only conflicting (with adjoining country's officials taking completely different approaches) but is absolutely BOUND to be (IMO) highly exaggerated if journalists are involved in telling the "story".

As above, normally I would completely ignore the whole babble, just like the millennium bug (remember that one?) or Ebola for example.

BUT I have another BUT!

One thing the whole hubbub does seem to agree on is that it's mainly old people who are at risk, especially if they already have a medical problem.

OK, so my wife is 78, has COPD, and has both heart/circulation and iron deficiency problems. So I should I worry on her behalf? 

(For myself I really couldn't give a tinker's, having survived completely unscathed from far more "dangerous" things in various parts of the world)!

And more to the point, IF I should be worried about her (she actually does mean an awful lot to me  ), what should/can I do to mitigate that worry? 

The above last Questions are written in all seriousness.

"Confused, no longer of Tonbridge Wells"


----------



## sunnybob (27 Feb 2020)

dont go out unless it is essential. wear a face mask and gloves if you do, wash hands very often if you have to go out.Try not to handle ANYTHING unless absolutely essential.
Definitely stock up on regular medicines.
Regardless of conflicting "numbers" it will get worse before it gets better.


----------



## SammyQ (27 Feb 2020)

At the risk of being re-christened "Canute"...I can see NO point in wearing a facemask...unless...you actually HAVE Covid-19. That way, your droplets are (partially?) contained(?). Facemasks - as worn by 
Joe Public - will NOT act as a prophylactic, despite the 9999999 million people thinking it will. 

Sam


----------



## sunnybob (27 Feb 2020)

If someone who HAS the virus, sneezes directly at you or even in very close proximity, the face mask will stop you swallowing the water droplets.
Its a lot better than nothing. 
Of course, if you are sneezed on by an infected person, you would then need to be run through a full disinfecting station before you could remove the mask and wash your clothes and body.


----------



## AES (27 Feb 2020)

OK gents, thanks for the inputs.

If the various "powers that be" don't seem able to sing from the same song sheet I didn't really expect anything else except conflicting views from "unqualified" people (all due respect, really) but there's some pretty sensible people on here, so anyone else with a view to chip in is welcome.

In the meantime we have an appointment to see the GP next Monday. See what the expert has to say. At present my good lady is not experiencing any out of the ordinary symptoms (and BTW, I'm very proud of her, she gave up smoking last November, "just like that").

(NO, I will NOT be joining her) :?


----------



## Trainee neophyte (27 Feb 2020)

Nigel Burden":lctnilg5 said:


> What good would an antibiotic be against a virus?
> 
> Nigel.



Glad you brought that up: the answer is nothing, zilch, didlysquat etc. We never take antibiotics, but one day, just when you need some...

Greece already has issues with sourcing drugs, and having a course of antibiotics in the cupboard, "just in case", is three euros well spent. It is more about disrupted supply chains because of China than diseases, per se. I would expect large nations with big bank rolls to be higher up the list, should there be distribution issues. 

Completely precautionary, and almost certainly unnecessary. A step too far, probably. Frankly, I wouldn't have bothered, but the Chief Disaster Relief Operations Manager told me were were getting some, so there you go.


----------



## lurker (27 Feb 2020)

Seeing as the subject has changed a bit.
Antibiotics (types) are specific to particular bacteria.
So one might work and another not.
Which is why they are restricted to prescription in the uk.
The layman man having guess is the cause of the loss of efficiency due to immunity.


----------



## Trainee neophyte (27 Feb 2020)

lurker":2m7bwso5 said:


> Seeing as the subject has changed a bit.
> Antibiotics (types) are specific to particular bacteria.
> So one might work and another not.
> Which is why they are restricted to prescription in the uk.
> The layman man having guess is the cause of the loss of efficiency due to immunity.



Yup. DIY diagnoses are a mugs game. Being able to buy antibiotics over the counter is counter-productive, and may mean the end of antibiotics in not too many years. However, if it's what you've got, then go with it. Come the fall of civilization we could probably trade a packet for a chicken. More likely to cure your ailment than the pills.


----------



## RogerS (27 Feb 2020)

Trainee neophyte":3ph1pv4t said:


> ... However, if it's what you've got, then go with it. Come the fall of civilization we could probably trade a packet for a chicken. More likely to cure your ailment than the pills.



Not if they're feral like the ones in Jersey.


----------



## Just4Fun (27 Feb 2020)

AES":2quoj0bq said:


> In short, all the available information ... is absolutely BOUND to be (IMO) highly exaggerated if journalists are involved in telling the "story".


I can agree with that. Any event where I know what really happened has been rather different when described in the press, whether that be local rags or supposedly reputable national publications.



> OK, so my wife is 78, has COPD, and has both heart/circulation and iron deficiency problems. So I should I worry on her behalf?


Absolutely. Better to worry and be proven wrong rather than not worry and be proven wrong.



> IF I should be worried about her (she actually does mean an awful lot to me  ), what should/can I do to mitigate that worry?


Ah, now that is the 64,000 dollar question. The only advice I have seen online is to maintain high hygiene standards, take care over your diet and sleep patterns (to help your immune system) and minimise contact with other people. Beyond that, who knows?


----------



## Trainee neophyte (27 Feb 2020)

RogerS":3uncjeop said:


> Not if they're feral like the ones in Jersey.



I knew about feral chickens in Hawaii, but not in Jersey. Chicken dinner, anyone?


----------



## selectortone (27 Feb 2020)

I had the flu just after Christmas. It was unpleasant and kept me bed-ridden for the best part of a week. I'm 69, I live alone and I survived with little external intervention (my daughter brought me some Lem-sips). By all accounts the symptoms of Coronavirus are not as bad as influenza so I'm not the least bit worried for my personal health.

I appreciate that it may be fatal to those in bad health already, as is influenza, which kills tens of thousands every year*, and I understand the need for precautions but Jeez people, get a grip. It seems like we are descending into panic.

_*14,000 people have died and 250,000 people have been hospitalized during the 2019-2020 flu season, according to preliminary estimates from the CDC._


----------



## Trainee neophyte (27 Feb 2020)

Some facts for you: http://weekly.chinacdc.cn/en/article/id ... a8db1a8f51

An easier read which references this: https://www.moonofalabama.org/2020/02/c ... bally.html

The important bit:


----------



## Trevanion (27 Feb 2020)

*BREAKING NEWS*

The pope wiped his nose and coughed a bit... CORONAVIRUS?!


----------



## AES (27 Feb 2020)

Thanks Just4Fun. Yeah, from my own experience of things I've KNOWN about in full detail (e.g. couple of air crashes) I KNOW for a fact that journalists just cannot be trusted to present even 5% of the real facts without adding their own "slant". (95% are ignorant idiots IMO, not worth the oxygen they consume - excepting Laura Kuensberg that is)

And thanks for the advice too mate - pretty much what I've already concluded - basically stay in (weather's turned carp anyway) and wait until we see the GP on Monday.

Thanks for the figures Trainee neophyte. Yup, they line up pretty much with numbers I've got from other sources.

But what's REALLY gripping my dung with this one is all the conflicting advice from those who "should know". E.G. Our National Govt health minister was on TV again tonight saying in effect "don't panic, we're watching it carefully, but do nothing for now, no need for alarm, we don't want to scare the ("horses" - i.e. read) tourists". While the same day, the health minister for one of the Kantons (don't forget we're "federal" here) has already banned a huge (1,000s of participants) ski marathon planned for next weekend "as a precaution", and another Kanton has already banned the forthcoming Carnival processions, with, looking like, other Kantons to follow soon. And the Swiss do NOT give up their Carnival lightly, I tell you.

AND ALL the surrounding country's health ministries (Italy, Germany, France, Austria,) are ALL doing and saying something different - in some cases not just slightly different but RADICALLY different.

Pah!!!!!!! HUMBUG!

Bet it all turns out to be another SARS or millennium bug scare though (he says hopefully)  

Oh, P.S: @Trevanion, I forgot, sorry - the Pope, lovely one mate! (But you should have seen some official gink (Italian I think) on our TV tonight "putting on" his face mask - got the 2 strings in a twist, ended up with almost pulling his glasses off and with the "paper flat" covering his eyes but leaving his mouth uncovered). Best laugh I've had for ages, Peter Sellars couldn't have done it any better if he tried.


----------



## Trevanion (27 Feb 2020)

AES":z5i2b5g1 said:


> Oh, P.S: @Trevanion, I forgot, sorry - the Pope, lovely one mate! (But you should have seen some official gink (Italian I think) on our TV tonight "putting on" his face mask - got the 2 strings in a twist, ended up with almost pulling his glasses off and with the "paper flat" covering his eyes but leaving his mouth uncovered). Best laugh I've had for ages, Peter Sellars couldn't have done it any better if he tried.



That reminds me of a time in work once where me and a work colleague were carrying an especially heavy door and he had a habit of leaving his dust mask just above his forehead when it wasn't over his mouth and on this occasion he was walking backward and the mask suddenly slipped down from his forehead straight over his eyes, he couldn't take his hand off the 100KG door to move the mask and he couldn't see a bloody thing so I had to guide him backward with directions "Left a bit... No, my left!" 

I think that was the funniest thing I've seen happen in work, I'm grinning like an silly person now just thinking about it :lol:


----------



## whiskywill (28 Feb 2020)

SammyQ":xj1bh8ew said:


> > "The virus is able to survive on various asurfaces."
> 
> 
> 
> Whiskeywill, that is a VERY sweeping statement, not true of viruses in general.



So why are there examples of "deep cleaning" where victims of the virus have been?

Found on a random website. "But how long can the new coronavirus linger on surfaces, anyway? The short answer is, we don't know. But if this new coronavirus resembles other human coronaviruses, such as its "cousins" that cause SARS and MERS, it can stay on surfaces — such as metal, glass or plastic — for as long as nine days, according to a new study. (In comparison, flu viruses can last on surfaces for only about 48 hours.)

In the new study, researchers analyzed several dozen previously published papers on human coronaviruses (other than the new coronavirus) to get a better idea of how long they can survive outside of the body. The authors found that these coronaviruses can linger on surfaces for over a week but that some of them don't remain active for as long at temperatures higher than 86 degrees Fahrenheit (30 degrees Celsius). The authors also found that these coronaviruses can be effectively wiped away by household disinfectants.


----------



## SammyQ (28 Feb 2020)

Thank you whiskywill; interesting reading. I retract my comment in the light of your supplied information.
Broadly speaking, viruses can be very fragile and some will 'live' (remain potent or viable) less than a minute outside a host. Obviously, with Covid19, given what you quoted, there is a potential risk of sustained viral presence - given the 'familial' characteristics. What IS unknown though, is the exact degree of Covid19's durability. This could indeed be similar to SARS et al, or it could be much less. At the risk of stating the obvious, "why take risks?" - your earlier point stands.

Sam


----------



## Blackswanwood (29 Feb 2020)

The BBC have an article which sums up the known information on the numbers (How deadly is the Coronavirus) pretty well in my opinion.

I was due to go to the Philippines with work hubbing through Hong Kong (ninety minutes on the ground) but decided to defer due to the uncertainty of the situation. It is now rearranged for in a couple of weeks time flying via Dubai but cases are emerging in the Gulf states now, flights being reduced and the prospect of the Philippines saying (as they are with Hong Kong) that they will not accept arrivals from there. My expectation is increasingly that I will have to defer again.

My employer use an excellent firm of risk managers to keep us safe when we travel on business abroad ... they pretty much summed it up for me - no one really knows but a small increase in the rate of infection means many more fatalities (the line increases exponentially) so erring on the side of caution is absolutely the right thing to do.


----------



## Trainee neophyte (29 Feb 2020)

I was rather embarrassed to admit to "panic buying" the other day, but as I mentioned, he who panics first, panics best. Turns out I was right: https://greece.greekreporter.com/2020/0 ... harmacies/
https://www.keeptalkinggreece.com/2020/ ... kets-raid/


> Hardly has the first confirmed case of coronavirus case in Thessaloniki has been announced and the residents of the second biggest city of Greece quickly found their way to to the supermarkets.
> 
> They load their carts with staples like pasta, rice, milk, baby and powder milk, toilet paper and detergents. There is high demand also for oil, flour and sugar, while antiseptics have disappeared from the shelves



Whilst it is nonsense, it is human nature. Have you done your panic buying yet? That set of chisels, the extra hardwood order, that complicated UKJ jig that you might have a need for, at some point...oh, and some pasta and rice, obviously.


----------



## RogerS (29 Feb 2020)

Blackswanwood":13utqzlm said:


> The BBC have an article which sums up the known information on the numbers (How deadly is the Coronavirus) pretty well in my opinion.
> 
> I was due to go to the Philippines with work hubbing through Hong Kong (ninety minutes on the ground) but decided to defer due to the uncertainty of the situation. It is now rearranged for in a couple of weeks time flying via Dubai but cases are emerging in the Gulf states now, flights being reduced and the prospect of the Philippines saying (as they are with Hong Kong) that they will not accept arrivals from there. My expectation is increasingly that I will have to defer again.
> 
> My employer use an excellent firm of risk managers to keep us safe when we travel on business abroad ... they pretty much summed it up for me - no one really knows but a small increase in the rate of infection means many more fatalities (the line increases exponentially) so erring on the side of caution is absolutely the right thing to do.



Can I have your airmiles, please ?  

Was trying to get SWMBO to come away for a city break in Seville but she's not having it  God knows, we need some sun.

Meanwhile, back on topic, I don't know if the rules have changed or indeed whether there is a lack of funding by country govts but under WHO rules (as I understand it) if the declare a pandemic then funding comes from some central fund ....World Bank or somesuch. On the ground, not sure if that will make any difference.


----------



## RogerS (29 Feb 2020)

Trainee neophyte":30rrespm said:


> I was rather embarrassed to admit to "panic buying" the other day, but as I mentioned, he who panics first, panics best. Turns out I was right: https://greece.greekreporter.com/2020/0 ... harmacies/
> https://www.keeptalkinggreece.com/2020/ ... kets-raid/
> 
> 
> ...



SWMBO was prescient. Thessaloniki was city choice No 2 !

Anyone played Plague on their phone or tablet. It's remarkably realistic especially in light of current events.


----------



## SammyQ (29 Feb 2020)

> "but a small increase in the rate of infection means many more fatalities (the line increases exponentially) "


...really?







THIS is a random exponential graph, taken from somewhere on t'internet. If fatalities rise "exponentially", they will peak at infinity, i.e. every living being on the planet...the reality is 2% mortality - but also, only in those who contract the disease. 

Sam


----------



## Trainee neophyte (29 Feb 2020)

RogerS":2vovpmz7 said:


> Meanwhile, back on topic, I don't know if the rules have changed or indeed whether there is a lack of funding by country govts but under WHO rules (as I understand it) if the declare a pandemic then funding comes from some central fund ....World Bank or somesuch. On the ground, not sure if that will make any difference.



I had a brief look at this the other day: nobody wants to declare a pandemic, despite all the conditions for "pandemic" applying, because they have sold some "Pandemic Bonds", which are very cunning financial instruments. The deal is that you buy the bonds, and if there is no pandemic by the maturity date, you get your money back, plus some interest. However, to make them more exciting they have attached some derivative product to it, so Wall St and friends stand to make / lose significantly more than they invested, should a pandemic occur or not. 

https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press ... g-facility
https://www.investmentwatchblog.com/hal ... rivatives/
https://www.mintpressnews.com/wall-stre ... ds/265264/


----------



## Blackswanwood (29 Feb 2020)

SammyQ":pxj1vf1k said:


> > "but a small increase in the rate of infection means many more fatalities (the line increases exponentially) "
> 
> 
> ...really?
> ...



As a I understand it an exponential curve is one where the rate of change recorded by the graph On the y access increases as you move along the x axis. If I’m mathematically wrong I apologise! 

The graph I was shown highlighted that if the number of people getting infected increased it was not a directly proportionate number that then died ... the proportion who died increased at a faster rate. Clearly it’s an opinion but it’s a professional one.

The graph did not show the end of the human race but it convinced me that this is a bit more than man flu!


----------



## SammyQ (29 Feb 2020)

> The graph I was shown highlighted that if the number of people getting infected increased it was not a directly proportionate number that then died ... the proportion who died increased at a faster rate. Clearly it’s an opinion but it’s a professional one.



Ummm..."if the number of people getting infected increased it was not a directly proportionate number that then died ... the proportion who died increased at a faster rate. "...so, you're saying that: *if the morbidity rate (infections) increased, the mortality (death rate) increased at a rate faster than the morbidity? *. I am struggling to see how or why. Cruise ship, close-quarter, dubious hygiene, possibly, but not 'normal' dispersed, separate homes populations. Blocks of flats might approximate, but semi's, bungalows etc no. Educate me?

Sam


----------



## Blackswanwood (29 Feb 2020)

It's the cumulative effect of more people being infected and in turn infecting more people (the population infect increases faster) and the strain this places on the healthcare resources available.

Clearly we all have to make our own minds up on whether we believe it - personally I do.

Cheers.


----------



## Trainee neophyte (29 Feb 2020)

SammyQ":1zj4wnac said:


> > The graph I was shown highlighted that if the number of people getting infected increased it was not a directly proportionate number that then died ... the proportion who died increased at a faster rate. Clearly it’s an opinion but it’s a professional one.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I think he is saying that there will be more deaths in total, not that the death rate as a percentage will increase. I.e. 2% of 100 million is a bigger number than 2% of 100, but it is still 2%. 

In terms of the graph, I would expect a nice S-curve:




The infection rate will ramp up hugely in the initial stages, exactly as we are seeing, going from single cases to tens to hundreds to thousands etc, but eventually everyone who is going to get it will have already had it, and have recovered or died. About 80% of all of humanity seems to be a reasonable estimate, as I understand it, because after that the virus is going to struggle to find anyone who doesn't already have antibodies. 2% of 80% of 7 billion, anyone?


----------



## Trevanion (29 Feb 2020)

Not sure if any of you guys have seen these videos but this guy seems to know what he's talking about, he is a doctor after all!

[youtube]5rOTz9duXwo[/youtube]

I'm still a bit skeptical about how much on an impact it's actually going to have in the UK as the numbers, in reality, are still tiny. But I guess nothing is out of the realm of possibility.


----------



## Blackswanwood (29 Feb 2020)

Trainee neophyte":1we663e6 said:


> I think he is saying that there will be more deaths in total, not that the death rate as a percentage will increase. I.e. 2% of 100 million is a bigger number than 2% of 100, but it is still 2%.



No, that is not what I am saying TN.

The point I am trying to make (and seems to be given some merit in the video posted by Trevanion) is that if more people get infected each day the number of deaths is likely to go up at a rate faster than than the number of people infected.

Cheers

Ps and just to reiterate I don’t think this means domesday but it has the potential to be significant.


----------



## RogerS (29 Feb 2020)

Blackswanwood":21v0lpuo said:


> ..... is that if more people get infected each day the number of deaths is likely to go up at a rate faster than than the number of people infected.
> ...



That doesn't make any sense to me at all if I read you correctly. What I think you are suggesting is that if the death rate is 2% then if 100 people are infected that 2 people will die. But if 200 people are infected then more than 4 will die. Did I get that right ?

The rate of numbers infected can increase exponentially but not the death rate. The number of deaths will increase but the percentage remains the same.


----------



## Trainee neophyte (29 Feb 2020)

Blackswanwood":2x56ctub said:


> Trainee neophyte":2x56ctub said:
> 
> 
> > I think he is saying that there will be more deaths in total, not that the death rate as a percentage will increase. I.e. 2% of 100 million is a bigger number than 2% of 100, but it is still 2%.
> ...



Thanks for the clarification: can you tell us why? It doesn't seem to make sense, assuming all other things remain the same. What is changing as the number of infections increases?


----------



## Blackswanwood (29 Feb 2020)

It’s the capacity of health services around the world to cope with what could be a significant increase in demand. My guess is the UK would fare relatively better than many other countries but could still be stretched.


----------



## RogerS (1 Mar 2020)

Blackswanwood":2ei6iybt said:


> It’s the capacity of health services around the world to cope with what could be a significant increase in demand. My guess is the UK would fare relatively better than many other countries but could still be stretched.



Ah, I should have got that sooner as it was I who mentioned the high morbidity of Covid-19.


----------



## SammyQ (1 Mar 2020)

TN? Thst is a sigmoid curve, not an exponential one. QUITE different implications!!  

Blackswanwood, I am still struggling to see how this would work, but what I think you are getting at, rightly, is that for many, symptoms will be so mild as to not be noticeable? So, their viral load will go untested - and uncounted ? Wheras, deaths are (sorry) anything but, and therefore, the 'apparent' death rate will exceed the 'percieved' ( but under -counted) infection rate? 

Sam


----------



## RogerS (1 Mar 2020)

SammyQ":2rk4mo49 said:


> TN? Thst is a sigmoid curve, not an exponential one. QUITE different implications!!
> 
> Blackswanwood, I am still struggling to see how this would work, but what I think you are getting at, rightly, is that for many, symptoms will be so mild as to not be noticeable? So, their viral load will go untested - and uncounted ? Wheras, deaths are (sorry) anything but, and therefore, the 'apparent' death rate will exceed the 'percieved' ( but under -counted) infection rate?
> 
> Sam



No, that's not what he's saying. Because Covid-19 has higher morbidity, it follows that the demands placed on the NHS per infected patient are also higher. As more and more people get infected then these demands will increase. The NHS has a finite resource. There will come a time when the NHS resources will be overwhelmed. Which means that some patients will not, and not for want of trying, get the care that they need in a timely fashion and so will die.


----------



## SammyQ (1 Mar 2020)

Ahhhh! Thank you Roger. There are times I'm slow on the uptake.  

Gotcha now Blackswanwood; agreed.

Sam


----------



## Blackswanwood (1 Mar 2020)

No worries Sam

I'm off now to do some book matched veneering as I think more beautiful jewellery boxes are required to cheer the world up once Covid-19 has passed!

Cheers


----------



## Just4Fun (1 Mar 2020)

AES":2pyaz8yf said:


> Bet it all turns out to be another SARS or millennium bug scare though (he says hopefully)


Things are moving very fast and this youtube video is a couple of weeks old but it makes an interesting graphical comparison to Ebola, SARS, MERS and Swine flu. If it is accurate (and no, I haven't checked any of the data) it is daunting.


----------



## Jake (1 Mar 2020)

Trainee neophyte":2811nqwl said:


> I had a brief look at this the other day: nobody wants to declare a pandemic, despite all the conditions for "pandemic" applying, because they have sold some "Pandemic Bonds", which are very cunning financial instruments. The deal is that you buy the bonds, and if there is no pandemic by the maturity date, you get your money back, plus some interest. However, to make them more exciting they have attached some derivative product to it, so Wall St and friends stand to make / lose significantly more than they invested, should a pandemic occur or not.
> 
> https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press ... g-facility
> https://www.investmentwatchblog.com/hal ... rivatives/
> https://www.mintpressnews.com/wall-stre ... ds/265264/



You really do need to improve your information sources and your ability to discern which are reliable and which are not. One of those links is sensible, the other two are full of false info and conspiracy junk.


----------



## RogerS (1 Mar 2020)

Just4Fun":1a5knef4 said:


> AES":1a5knef4 said:
> 
> 
> > Bet it all turns out to be another SARS or millennium bug scare though (he says hopefully)
> ...



It certainly is. Just don't catch it if you are in the USA

https://www.businessinsider.com/how-muc ... ?r=US&IR=T


----------



## Trainee neophyte (1 Mar 2020)

Jake":2zfpvw9s said:


> Trainee neophyte":2zfpvw9s said:
> 
> 
> > I had a brief look at this the other day: nobody wants to declare a pandemic, despite all the conditions for "pandemic" applying, because they have sold some "Pandemic Bonds", which are very cunning financial instruments. The deal is that you buy the bonds, and if there is no pandemic by the maturity date, you get your money back, plus some interest. However, to make them more exciting they have attached some derivative product to it, so Wall St and friends stand to make / lose significantly more than they invested, should a pandemic occur or not.
> ...





I will accept that investmentwatchblog can be a bit iffy, and the World Bank are just an insane propaganda outlet, but MintPressNews aren't too bad at all. Less leftist than the Guardian, which is held up as the premier truth around these parts.

I presented a perfectly sensible conspiracy theory, and you are upset that I provided links to sites that have, from time to time, presented conspiracy theories? Where else would you go to get a good conspiracy theory? 

Or should I stick with the BBC and their guaranteed bias?

Note: I don't take myself very seriously, so don't feel that you have to, either ;-)


----------



## Flynnwood (1 Mar 2020)

Is she lying? (assuming translation is correct)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DU5Vu7X ... e=youtu.be

Note also: It could be false/setup? I don't know.


----------



## Trainee neophyte (1 Mar 2020)

Flynnwood":sfbycxy1 said:


> Is she lying? (assuming translation is correct)
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DU5Vu7X ... e=youtu.be
> 
> Note also: It could be false/setup? I don't know.



I don't often do this, mainly because I like to walk on the wild side, but


> NTD TV is founded by a group of Chinese-American Falun Gong


(https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/ntd-tv-new-tang-dynasty/)

Firstly there is a concerted anti-China propaganda movement from the western propaganda mill - any chance to belittle and put down the Chinese Communist party will be taken. Secondly, there is a Falun Gong movement, which is semi-political, semi-religious, semi-spiritual, which is banned in China, and completely antithetical to the government. Another similar outlet is Epoch Times. The USA seems to be very happy to have them stiring up trouble. They are fine for news as long as you don't believe a word of what they say about China.

Finally, I have no evidence to confirm or deny any of this - entirely plausible that someone was being overly efficient with the cremation service - just keeping things moving along, as it were. Coming to an emergency military crematorium near you...

[youtube]Jdf5EXo6I68[/youtube]


----------



## SammyQ (1 Mar 2020)

Talk about a topic diversion...


----------



## Flynnwood (1 Mar 2020)

Bill Gates on TED 2015
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Af6b_wyiwI

And VOX 2015
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9AEMKudv5p0


----------



## Jake (1 Mar 2020)

Trainee neophyte":2drbl4yr said:


> I presented a perfectly sensible conspiracy theory, and you are upset that



I'm not upset, I'm just a bit sorry for you.


----------



## Trainee neophyte (2 Mar 2020)

Jake":24znikh6 said:


> Trainee neophyte":24znikh6 said:
> 
> 
> > I presented a perfectly sensible conspiracy theory, and you are upset that
> ...



Everything so serious :-( Try having some fun.

Whilst we are about it, can you confirm that a) these pandemic bonds actually exist, and b) there will therefore be a financial incentive to not declare a pandemic? Something like half a billion dollars is at stake here, allegedly. Or is it just a conspiracy theory and none of this is true?


----------



## RogerS (2 Mar 2020)

Listening to various reports on the news, if they are accurate, then it would seem that our Powers-that-be seem to have lost the plot regarding managing this situation.. No checks of any description on passengers arriving from infected areas, for example. And suggestions of 'sealing a city'...beggars belief.


----------



## jeremyduncombe (2 Mar 2020)

Trainee neophyte":1maf7cmh said:


> Jake":1maf7cmh said:
> 
> 
> > Trainee neophyte":1maf7cmh said:
> ...



Yes, they really exist, and they aren’t a scam. An investor buys a pandemic bond from the World Bank - effectively this means they are lending their money to the bank for a set period. The bank pays them a very generous return on their investment. If there is no pandemic, they get all their money back in due course. If a pandemic is declared, they lose the lot. The World Bank then uses the funds to assist poorer countries to fight the pandemic.
There is no financial incentive for the World Bank not to declare a pandemic. They are simply taking the investors’ money and giving it to someone else. The investment returns on these bonds are so ridiculously generous that the bank might actually prefer to declare a pandemic so that they do not have to keep making annual payments to the investors.
The problem with these bonds is that they do not trigger the pandemic clause until 12 weeks after an outbreak of disease starts. That means that very poor countries will already be in the middle of fighting the outbreak, and the money will come too late. With Coronavirus, the bonds can not legally pay out until 23 March.

So as usual, no conspiracy, just an embarrassing mess. The bonds were badly designed because they are far too generous to the investors, and they pay out too late to help the countries most in need.

Now I have done the serious bit, I am with you on conspiracy theories. A good conspiracy brightens up a dull day .... so long as not too many people believe it.


----------



## jeremyduncombe (2 Mar 2020)

If you want a really bonkers coronavirus fact, sales of Corona beer have apparently slumped because people are frightened it will give them the disease. If you like Corona ( more of a real ale man myself ), now is the time to stock up on cheap beer.


----------



## Jake (2 Mar 2020)

The central flaw in this garbage attempt to delegitimise the World Bank is that the payment trigger is not whether a pandemic is declared. It is a number of deaths in a primary centre, and another number of deaths in a secondary centre. China hit the first, but the second had not yet been hit last time I looked but Iran must be a strong possibiity. 

The World Bank has every interest in those triggers being met (its interest and the reason for issuing them being to provide funding to help with a pandemic), but it does not control whether they are met. 

That is done by a calculation agent, AIR Worldwide (which does this for all sorts of catastrophe bonds, which are more commonly issued by insurers, so its business is sitting in the middle between financial institutions with interests on one side of a call and financial institutions with interests on the other). 

The markets think they will be triggered, as they are trading way down from par.


----------



## Blackswanwood (2 Mar 2020)

It's worth adding that these bonds have been around for a few years and were not created as a specific response to Coronavirus. I agree with Jake that there is a design flaw but they are a legitimate means of ensuring support is available to poorer companies.


----------



## Jake (2 Mar 2020)

I didn't say there is a design flaw.


----------



## Trainee neophyte (2 Mar 2020)

Jake":37721m1o said:


> The central flaw in this garbage attempt to delegitimise the World Bank is that the payment trigger is not whether a pandemic is declared. It is a number of deaths in a primary centre, and another number of deaths in a secondary centre. China hit the first, but the second had not yet been hit last time I looked but Iran must be a strong possibiity.
> 
> The World Bank has every interest in those triggers being met (its interest and the reason for issuing them being to provide funding to help with a pandemic), but it does not control whether they are met.
> 
> ...



And that is the very sensible, important piece of the puzzle that I wasn't aware of - I had assumed (hadn't even thought about it, to be honest) that someone like the WHO would be the party responsible for declaring what and when and how, and that it would be as political as it would be rational. Of course, people who buy bonds like to have numbers to work out the risk, so the fact that this will be based on actual numbers of actual cases, as it were, means there is nowhere to hide. 

I'm not sure it matters to us as woodworkers, but the terms apparently are:


> The two tranches of pandemic bonds represent different risks of contagion. The World Bank offered $225 million worth of Class A debt, which pay out 6.9% annually. The bonds default if pandemic-related deaths reach 2,500 in a single nation with an additional 20 or more deaths confirmed in an overseas country, according to the bank's prospectus.
> The Class B bonds have a lower bar for the debt to trigger and accordingly boast a higher interest rate, since holders are assuming more risk. The bonds pay 11.5% annually, but reach default after 250 deaths. The bonds' payout rate scales with the number of additional countries that experience than 20 confirmed deaths. The World Bank issued $95 million worth of the Class B assets.
> 
> The coronavirus outbreak has so far killed more than 1,370 people and infected more than 60,000, surpassing SARS in lethality earlier this month. Still, Singapore, Thailand, Japan, and Korea are the only nations currently hosting more than 20 infected individuals


I tried to get this info from the World Bank, but their web page certificate is invalid, so I used this instead: https://markets.businessinsider.com/new ... 06657?op=1


----------



## Blackswanwood (2 Mar 2020)

Jake":2h3cgppg said:


> I didn't say there is a design flaw.



Apologies Jake, I was reading and replying whilst on the move which is a bad habit. I was agreeing with Jeremy on the point of when the default takes effect as the practical action to check the spread is needed earlier. I guess coming up with a clear cut parameter that kicks in earlier however is difficult so this in effect catastrophe cover for the World Bank who will have already started providing financial assistance.

I am pretty sure Swiss Re were at the heart of the design when they first issued them.


----------



## lurker (2 Mar 2020)

jeremyduncombe":3kcvooi3 said:


> If you want a really bonkers coronavirus fact, sales of Corona beer have apparently slumped because people are frightened it will give them the disease. If you like Corona ( more of a real ale man myself ), now is the time to stock up on cheap beer.



This started as a perfectly reasonable joke, but there are either an awful lot of thick as sh... folks out there, or we have a serious proportion of autistic members of the general population.


----------



## Trainee neophyte (2 Mar 2020)

lurker":3hb7yzd4 said:


> jeremyduncombe":3hb7yzd4 said:
> 
> 
> > If you want a really bonkers coronavirus fact, sales of Corona beer have apparently slumped because people are frightened it will give them the disease. If you like Corona ( more of a real ale man myself ), now is the time to stock up on cheap beer.
> ...



I'm really disappointed to learn that it <may> be something made up by the internet: https://www.barrons.com/articles/corona ... 1583165067

Of course it could just be damage control by the PR department...


----------



## lurker (2 Mar 2020)

In the past month I think I have tried to explain to half a dozen folks with degrees ( all under 40) the difference between a virus and a bacteria. Mainly why antibiotics don’t work with all illnesses. I doubt most of them took a blind bit of notice!


----------



## jeremyduncombe (2 Mar 2020)

lurker":2o6swv92 said:


> jeremyduncombe":2o6swv92 said:
> 
> 
> > If you want a really bonkers coronavirus fact, sales of Corona beer have apparently slumped because people are frightened it will give them the disease. If you like Corona ( more of a real ale man myself ), now is the time to stock up on cheap beer.
> ...



Dammit, I have fallen for an internet joke. Guess I am just as thick as .... whatever. Shame, I would have liked it to be true.


----------



## lurker (2 Mar 2020)

Like you I would never drink the stuff, so maybe we will not get the dreaded lurgy :wink:


----------



## lurker (2 Mar 2020)

I meant folks didn’t realise it was a joke and took it as a statement of fact.


----------



## Trainee neophyte (3 Mar 2020)

lurker":ktmqmk81 said:


> I meant folks didn’t realise it was a joke and took it as a statement of fact.



Seeing as we are talking about the USA, I thought this might be appropriate:


> Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.



I was rummaging for the quote here and got completely sidetracked by his astonishing wisdom. Well worth a read, if you like cynical.


----------



## John Brown (3 Mar 2020)

Mencken is one of my favourites. 
You might enjoy Ambrose Bierce, also on that site, if you're not already familiar with his cynical definitions.


----------



## Chris152 (3 Mar 2020)

Can anyone help me understand this?

This morning, Matt Hancock on Radio 4 (at about 8.12 am) said that there was _no_ clinical benefit in closing schools now, and that it would be highly disruptive in other respects (presumably parents unable to work). Indeed, apparently there's a plan to allow class sizes to increase above the current legal limit in case teachers become ill and can't work (creating, I'd have thought, a perfect environment for transmitting the virus), so the economic factor (keeping parents working) seems most important to the government.

Since it's apparent the virus is now on the move within communities in the UK, how is it possibly true that closing schools - making it no longer necessary for kids to be in close contact with large numbers of others in confined spaces, sharing keyboards, door handles etc) - would be of _no_ clinical value (ie helping stop spread the virus). This seems patently untrue to me and, as a result, I find it very hard to believe anything the govt says to reassure us about how it's going to handle the outbreak.


----------



## John Brown (3 Mar 2020)

I think the answer's fairly simple. The government don't know what they're doing.
For political balance, I'm not suggesting the other shower would be any better...


----------



## Chris152 (3 Mar 2020)

My concern is that, while they don't really know what to do, they know that for them the economy trumps everything else, and in the worst case a thinning of the population - particularly those who are the greatest drain on the country's resources - would not be an entirely bad thing. Which is not to say that's a defined goal by any means, but I've not yet got my head around how the ruling 'elites' regard the rest of us. And it's certainly not a party political point.


----------



## AES (3 Mar 2020)

Chris 152: You wrote, QUOTE: ..... but I've not yet got my head around how the ruling 'elites' regard the rest of us. And it's certainly not a party political point. UNQUOTE:

If it's any consolation at all (I'm sure it's not!) there's no real difference here (Switzerland). And Corona virus is only the latest example! About the only thing I take issue with in your point above is the word "yet". Personally, I'm pretty sure I'm NEVER gonna get my head around these "idiots" (virtually all of 'em), unless it could possibly just be self-serving interest!


----------



## lurker (3 Mar 2020)

Chris152":34ef1tob said:


> Can anyone help me understand this?
> 
> This morning, Matt Hancock on Radio 4 (at about 8.12 am) said that there was _no_ clinical benefit in closing schools now, and that it would be highly disruptive in other respects (presumably parents unable to work). Indeed, apparently there's a plan to allow class sizes to increase above the current legal limit in case teachers become ill and can't work (creating, I'd have thought, a perfect environment for transmitting the virus), so the economic factor (keeping parents working) seems most important to the government.
> 
> Since it's apparent the virus is now on the move within communities in the UK, how is it possibly true that closing schools - making it no longer necessary for kids to be in close contact with large numbers of others in confined spaces, sharing keyboards, door handles etc) - would be of _no_ clinical value (ie helping stop spread the virus). This seems patently untrue to me and, as a result, I find it very hard to believe anything the govt says to reassure us about how it's going to handle the outbreak.



This is only true if you know for a fact that the politicians are ignoring advice from epidemiologists and virologists.


----------



## Chris152 (3 Mar 2020)

lurker":154y0dsd said:


> Chris152":154y0dsd said:
> 
> 
> > Can anyone help me understand this?
> ...



I don't doubt that they are taking that advice into account, but my concern is how heavily it weighs in relation to other priorities that politicians have.


----------



## lurker (3 Mar 2020)

I share your distrust of politicians, but have faith that the experts are sufficiently independent speak out.


----------



## Chris152 (3 Mar 2020)

lurker":2wkuk9x8 said:


> I share your distrust of politicians, but have faith that the experts are sufficiently independent speak out.



I'm not saying we forget all other matters and focus singly on stopping the virus - too many other essential things would stop and we could end up in a worse situation. Which is presumably in the mind of health experts who know they know little or nothing about managing a nation in the midst of a potential viral epidemic. 

Being told to keep calm and carry on while washing your hands and singing happy birthday doesn't really sound right to me. At the moment, it seems we're waiting for things to get worse before more strict measures are taken, rather than taking pre-emptive action to try to halt its progress. 

Clearly I'm just a punter wondering, and really don't know what I'm talking about. But when I hear what sounds very much like incoherent advice on schools, I start to doubt whose interests are at the forefront.


----------



## Trainee neophyte (3 Mar 2020)

Chris152":6nji527v said:


> lurker":6nji527v said:
> 
> 
> > I share your distrust of politicians, but have faith that the experts are sufficiently independent speak out.
> ...



I keep reminding myself of two points: firstly, this is the "common cold", which is common for a reason - it's really easy to catch. Secondly, there is no cure for the common cold. I said a couple of weeks ago that you were better served worrying about the 'flu than about this new virus, and as of today this still stands - you are much, much more likely to catch 'flu in the next week than you are to catch the coronanvirus. I'm not sure if I will be able to say that in a fortnight, however. 

The good news is sunshine and warmer weather are its major enemy. Well, good news for me, anyway. 

The brutal question to ask is whether the economic fallout of 2% of the population dying is worse than the fallout of stopping the world economy, all trade and travel, and keeping every human being isolated until the virus dies out through lack of fresh victims. In financial terms, what is 2% of the population worth?

There are people who get paid the big bucks to make the big decisions - it's not me, thank God.


----------



## Chris152 (3 Mar 2020)

Trainee neophyte":3quz3gq9 said:


> There are people who get paid the big bucks to make the big decisions - it's not me, thank God.


Agree completely, tho on the upside for them, presumably those big bucks allow them to put up effective barriers to protect themselves from the great unwashed (hands).


----------



## Terry - Somerset (3 Mar 2020)

Listening to the news conference from No 10 it seems that there is a plan which as a worst case ultimately assumes 80% of the UK is affected. This is just a guess but a good place to contingency plan. 

Corona is still being dealt with as a containment exercise - self isolation, testing, hospitalisation of the small numbers infected. This works with a very small number of cases but there clearly comes a point where the number of cases and geographic spread make this implausible. I think we are at that point now - or will be in a few days.

The next stage is to accept that it is in the wider community and realistically containment is no longer a workable strategy. The strategy then changes to extending the outbreak to reduce the peak load on the NHS. 

I assume hospitalisations would likely occur against some sort of skewed normal distribution curve - building up fairly rapidly (over, say, 3-8 weeks) to a peak which may last 4-8 weeks and then decline as new infections decline. Some of the remedies open to more authoritarian states (eg: quarantine of whole cities) would be difficult to implement in the UK. 

So how does this relate to schools noting that chidren are least likely to have complications (apparently). Children at home will need family carers and it is unclear how long the schools would remain shut. So many parents (some of whom work for the NHS) could be off work for several months until the virus is "spent". 

Strategically it may be better if those with children are infected at an early stage as they and their parents will normally be in lower risk groups and make more limited demands on the NHS. Schools and parents can then return to normal activities before the outbreak affects higher risk groups.


----------



## AES (3 Mar 2020)

Despite my general pessimism/cynicsm, matters DO seem to be coming together a bit better here now.

Last weekend was "Fassnacht" (Carnival) here in several towns & cities (actual dates vary according to Kanton) and it was cancelled or postponed in our area (NW of the country), and some others too.

As Carnival involves long processions with bands and people on floats chucking out hands full of sweets and fruit to the spectators, that sounds quite sensible to me. As said in an earlier post, it takes a LOT for the average Swiss to give up Carnival, they spend AGES rehearsing, and building all sorts of highly artistic Carnival floats, masks, etc.

All schools are already closed and will remain so for the next 10 days or so, but that's "standard", they always have about 2 weeks school hols for Carnival.

And when I went to my local hospital for my regular Physio this morning there were temporary barriers manned by Security people asking everyone if they have a sore throat or temperature. If yes "Only through that door there please" (where presumably medical staff would perform tests). If no, "OK, enter as normal here, but be sure to use the hand disinfectant just inside the door. It's obligatory".

Over reaction? Dunno, but looks/sounds quite sensible to me


----------



## lurker (3 Mar 2020)

To suggest that epidemiologists and virologists know little does them a gross disservice .
Only difference is scientists see no failing in declaring they don’t know something as they deal in hard facts. Whereas a politician will happily state his opinion as a hard fact.

Any disease follows a rise and then a fall.
There will be a humped graph of time vs deaths.
All that is unknown is the length and height of the hump.

There are known unknowns and that’s the only reason they appear to be unsure.


----------



## Chris152 (3 Mar 2020)

lurker":3tak7nf6 said:


> To suggest that epidemiologists and virologists know little does them a gross disservice .


My guess is they know lots about epidemiology and virology, and possibly about how to contain or control a virus, but I wouldn't expect them to know how to run a country - which was my point. Recognising they don't know that would mean they're disinclined to override or contradict govt's advice (tho one did contradict Johnson's thoughts on hand-shaking at lunchtime)? Maybe some do know how to run the country - I don't know, I don't think I've met one.


----------



## lurker (3 Mar 2020)

If you have studied for a proper degree that requires some hard work rather than someone with a natural ability with languages and a degree in classics , then I would bet they would make a better job of running the country than Boris  

The problem with most politicians is they all have some noddy degree but they don’t know what they don’t know ( which is basically everything worth bothering about) but they think they do.
They do at least have the self awareness to know that they are too thick to amount to anything and so enter politics.


----------



## Fitzroy (3 Mar 2020)

I’ve long thought the desire to enter politics should automatically disqualify one from entering politics. 

F.


----------



## AES (3 Mar 2020)

Agree with that 110% Fitzroy.


----------



## RogerS (3 Mar 2020)

Chris152":2dcerekc said:


> My concern is that, while they don't really know what to do.....



To be fair, not all the medical fraternity, scientists etc are in accord with each other as to how things are going to pan out, what's best etc.


----------



## Chris152 (3 Mar 2020)

RogerS":jkunwieo said:


> Chris152":jkunwieo said:
> 
> 
> > My concern is that, while they don't really know what to do.....
> ...


I'm sure that's true - new ground for everyone.

Just listened to the summaries of today's plans. Given that everyone seems to agree it's highly likely that numbers of people testing positive will increase significantly, how come there's no advice _at this stage_ to avoid situations where they could be exposed to the virus unless absolutely necessary? Seems obvious, but how come govt isn't advising that? 
Taking the bus to the cinema? Go for a walk in the fresh air instead. Or isolate yourself in the workshop and practice your dovetails.


----------



## John Brown (3 Mar 2020)

AES":2c4ap32p said:


> Agree with that 110% Fitzroy.


Which is something an epidemiologist should never say...


----------



## AES (3 Mar 2020)

Just as well I'm not one then


----------



## MIGNAL (3 Mar 2020)

There's not been many cases in Africa. That could be down to low levels of testing or perhaps the climate is having an effect. July can't come quick enough in the UK.! Even then the highest UV index is a relatively low 8.


----------



## Trainee neophyte (4 Mar 2020)

Well, this concentrates the thinking: it would appear that all schools in my area will be closed until next Monday (I assume that this will extended, as the closure decision is happening now, at 10:30 pm local time). Someone knows something about someone...

We have cruise ships that visit, and before they arrive here, they will have stopped off in Italy. What could possibly go wrong? Cancelled the carnival, but not football matches. Ferry port connections to Italy open and busy. Cruise ships from Italy full of stout krauts and seppos all plundering the souvenir shops in Ancient Olympia. Central planning at its best. Just heard that the local farmer's markets will also be closed, but not the supermarkets, I assume...

Good job I did my panicking a couple of days ago, before all of this.

Edit: now I hear the same for all of UK! Enforced holidays. More woodworking time!


----------



## RogerS (4 Mar 2020)

So Italy is closing the schools. Now how does this fit with their society ? Family first. So all these children - who may or may not be infected (and as it happens generally shrug Covid-19 off easily)- are looked after by...who ? Why their grandparents....and what age group does Covid-19 affect most regardless of any pre-conditions ? Yup..

Me ? I'm in that category so I'm thinking...go and get infected...beat the rush.


----------



## Trevanion (4 Mar 2020)

I might buy a knapsack sprayer and a few gallons of Dettol. Start cleansing the local area before it has a chance to strike!


----------



## Trainee neophyte (5 Mar 2020)

Panic! Cash may spread the coronanvirus!
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/0 ... ld-health/

Ok, I've done some research, and I've found the tried and tested, traditional solution to this problem: 




It's local for PhilP, and I seem to remember we have a fully trained stone mason who could turn these out repeatedly - although they may look a bit like rabbits, but it is nearly Easter, so why not?


Just remember to keep your plague stone in your wallet when you go to Tesco's, and all is good.


----------



## Richard_C (5 Mar 2020)

I found this interesting, MIT so it's 'proper'.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wnafrAtfMzE

The bit about ventilation systems is worrying. Hard to avoid.

I can see the value of masks to protect other people rather than the wearer.


----------



## selectortone (5 Mar 2020)

In the supermarket this lunch time a woman on another checkout was buying, amid a groaning XXL trolley of other multiple buys (complete trays of tinned beans, tomatoes, soup...), a case (16 x 2ltrs) of UHT milk. FFS! ... I pity her poor children eating foul tasting cereal for the next few weeks. Or perhaps she'll just throw it all away after the scare dies down. 

Me? a loaf of bread and 1/2 doz eggs.


----------



## Chris152 (5 Mar 2020)

As we start to move into a new phase this morning...

Mr Johnson: "One of the theories is perhaps you could take it on the chin, take it all in one go and allow the disease to move through the population without really taking as many draconian measures. I think we need to strike a balance."

Prof Whitty (chief medical adviser): "[The] benefits of the delay phase include:
Pushing the peak of cases "further away from the winter pressures on the NHS" so that there was "more capacity to respond"
Buying time to allow the UK to improve its response or develop counter measures such as drugs, vaccines and diagnostics
There may be a seasonal element of the virus - so if the peak was delayed to spring or summer, the "natural rate" of transmission could be lower."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51749352

I'm with Professor Whitty - the theory offered by Johnson seems deeply silly to me.


----------



## lurker (5 Mar 2020)

“Johnson’s theory “ is actually standard epidemiology, no doubt this had been explained to him by the CMA.
Say we were in autumn at this time In the epidemic , then it would make better sense than Prof Whittys, but for the same reason (winter is a bad time for illness).
Clearly coming out of the winter, the latter is the way to go.
But Johnson and his experts are right to consider all options.


----------



## Chris152 (5 Mar 2020)

Strikes me as incredibly poor leadership - at a time we're all supposed (according to the govt's own plan) to be protecting ourselves and others from the spread of the virus, he goes on national TV and offers up a case for not bothering (whatever he says about 'balance'). Presumably he sees it as preparing the way for less extreme measures that could harm other interests.


----------



## RogerS (5 Mar 2020)

Chris152":16ka2aya said:


> Strikes me as incredibly poor leadership - at a time we're all supposed (according to the govt's own plan) to be protecting ourselves and others from the spread of the virus, he goes on national TV and offers up a case for not bothering (whatever he says about 'balance'). Presumably he sees it as preparing the way for less extreme measures that could harm other interests.



I think you're being unfair and applying cognitive dissonance to what BoJo said. I'm no fan of his but if you read his words without prejudice then they do make sense.


----------



## Chris152 (5 Mar 2020)

I don't know what cognitive dissonance is - and it makes sense on its own terms, but looks like an extremely bad idea in the present context - compare to Whitty's comments.


----------



## Woody2Shoes (5 Mar 2020)

Chris152":3kiv2uyb said:


> I don't know what cognitive dissonance is



Attempting to believe more than six impossible things before breakfast... 8-[ :-k


----------

