Coronavirus

[Andy Kev.]

I think I'm saying that the advice doesn't add up in practice. For example, today more pictures were shown of a crowded underground and train stations. People going to work because they can't work from home but doing non-essential work (changing the colour of people's living rooms, for example) crowded into the same space as nhs workers who we need to stay healthy. Meanwhile, advice is to stay 2m apart.
I wrote elsewhere in the forum today about builders working across the road from me. They were building something in a neighbour's house, to-ing and fro-ing, working close together (no choice given what they were lifting) and so on through the day. meanwhile, after I've taken the dog for a walk, I'm grounded, sat looking at these fellas getting on with their non-essential work, driving back and forth with stuff and all that goes with it.
Are the decisions that permit this to proceed actually led by scientific advice? Because the reality seems to lead to flouting that advice.

I think you have to be nuts to be using the underground if you are worried about catching the virus yourself or worried about the possibility of you infecting others. But ... nobody would be forcing me to get on the underground trains.

I suppose the problem is that there is a view that a lot of people simply have to get into London to make it work and therefore the tube is available. I wouldn't but a lot of people are what looks to me like daft. I don't blame the government for their daftness.

There's a building site in full swing on the opposite side of the river from where I live. I can't see too much of a problem with that given that in the open air the workers can easily stay out of each other's way. And I presume that they are committed to limiting the possibilities of getting in close proximity to each other.

The other side of the coin is that in those shops which are open e.g. bakeries, people are being very sensible and keeping their distance from each other. The supermarket has even got tape on the floor to mark where people should stand while queuing for the checkout.

A sense of proportion can be maintained with just a little thought.

 

[MikeK]

The hardware store in my town is open, but access is restricted. I watched from the safety of my truck for a while while eating my takeaway lunch, and every customer is stopped at the front door and asked what they want. A store employee then disappears into the store and returns a few minutes later with what might be the item the customer wanted. Some customers provided lists, but I didn't see anyone, other than employees, enter the store. There is a chip and pin reader at the door, so all sales are card only.

 

[Rorschach]

That fits in more with my own opinion and that of other not in the main stream media. As I have said before though, we will never really know what the right to do is because you can only take one path and no amount of modelling or prediction will ever give you the real outcome.

Lets just hope for the best.

 

[Lons]

Aye, but protect us from plague, protect us from penury, or, as far as is humanly possible, protect us from the worse ravages of both?

It's great shame however that they and no one else can protect us from ourselves or at least from the selfish, ignorant pr*ts that many humans once again have proved themselves to be.

The only governments that have actually got a handle on this thing are the Chinese and the South Koreans and a couple of others who have taken reasonably prompt and fully enforced measures to control and contain it.

Different societies where absolute power largely enabled that action. Had that been done here a few weeks ago I strongly suspect we would have seen riots on the streets with resulting consequences. The Germans probably learned much more than we did.

Not sure that I believe current statistics from the Chinese government. However if they are correct it will be enlightening to see if their return to normality triggers another wave of infection.

Hear, hear !
I you looked at daily statistics China regularly provided no information on new cases and at the very beginning they hid the evidence and information from the rest of the world. It has been strongly argued that the Chinese could have in fact contained the infection at source but instead they chickened out of cancelling the Chinese New Year which drew millions into Wuhan and spread the virus far and wide.
There is a lot of suspicion over the information coming out of China, it's not that it's out of character is it.

Just as an aside to this, anyone trying to make political gain during a national and global crisis should be hung drawn and quartered imo. The time for criticism and analysis along with appropriate congratulations and castigation should be when the battle is over.

 

[Rorschach]

Lets just hope for the best.

No, I'd prefer to take the advice of people with a background in dealing with viruses and pandemics; rather than hoping for the best.

The scientists have one goal though, save lives at all costs, they think about nothing else. That isn't a realistic path forward though.

 

[Lons]

I'd prefer to take the advice of people with a background in dealing with viruses and pandemics; rather than hoping for the best.

Me too =D> =D>

 

[MikeG.]

.........The scientists have one goal though, save lives at all costs, they think about nothing else. That isn't a realistic path forward though.

I'm not sure this is their goal. It certainly isn't the stated aim of the path we are following. How do you know this is the scientists' position?

 

[sploo]

Lets just hope for the best.

No, I'd prefer to take the advice of people with a background in dealing with viruses and pandemics; rather than hoping for the best.

The scientists have one goal though, save lives at all costs, they think about nothing else. That isn't a realistic path forward though.

How do you know that?

My point is that you're assuming that those with an understanding of the issues are focused only on one thing and ignoring all other factors. I could just as well say that the politicians care only about damage to the economy and think of nothing else. I don't believe that's true for a minute, so why would you think "the scientists" are equally as blinkered?

 

[Cheshirechappie]

As I see it, the job of the scientists and medics is to advise government, who will also be seeking advice from economists in the Treasury and elsewhere, listening to Parliament and public opinion, observing actions and effects internationally, and then reaching a decision as to the best course of action.

 

[RogerS]

Lets just hope for the best.

No, I'd prefer to take the advice of people with a background in dealing with viruses and pandemics; rather than hoping for the best.

The scientists have one goal though, save lives at all costs, they think about nothing else. That isn't a realistic path forward though.

You seem to be advocating an equation where a human life has a monetary value and that if the monetary value is too high than that human life is allowed to take their (probably limited) chances.

 

[nev]

It is very difficult to discuss this without mentioning what The Government is doing about it.

It is very difficult to filter out political point scoring without upsetting somebody.

This thread is going the same way as the BBC/ Brexit thread.
I know I cant win with the moderating, some will agree and some will not.
With the simple fact that this is (primarily)a Woodworking forum as my guide I will be deleting anything I deem political, including I'm afraid, anything that gets caught up in it.
Arguing about who did or did not do what at what time is both pointless just a breeding ground for irate rants and name calling.

Apologies to those that unnecessarily get caught up in net.

 

[Selwyn]

Why have some of my posts been deleted?

I wrote that through it all the panic buying is worse as a media story than a real inability of people to get food and it was deleted. That is not fair to delete it. The mods are only encouraging group think and reaffirming one line of view by doing this. That guys mate was wrong to stockpile however don't get sucked into the idea that people could not buy food, because they could. They just didn't get everything they wanted at a certain time from certain shops.

Hysteria and collective thought is making a bad situation even worse

 

[Selwyn]

..

 

[Nigel Burden]

My wife has just been to the bank and building society, both closed, and only open for certain days with limited hours. This will cause increased customer numbers during those periods making social distancing more difficult. As my wife said, they send out enough emails about services that they offer, why not send out emails detailing opening hours.

Nigel.

 

[sploo]

As I see it, the job of the scientists and medics is to advise government, who will also be seeking advice from economists in the Treasury and elsewhere, listening to Parliament and public opinion, observing actions and effects internationally, and then reaching a decision as to the best course of action.

You seem to be advocating an equation where a human life has a monetary value and that if the monetary value is too high than that human life is allowed to take their (probably limited) chances.

Roger's reply above wasn't to CC, but I thought both were interesting in context. The thing is: I agree.

Nothing is black and white. We can't pump insane amounts of money into trying to save every last person - it just doesn't make sense.

I do agree with CC's assessment of how it should be happening, but obviously that requires good leaders (leaders who, whilst not having to be experts in every area, have the ability to process information and advice and make appropriate decisions). Politicians, by nature, have to factor in public image and impact on their ability to get re-elected; which can negatively colour their judgement. Fact of life - that's not a "for" or "against" any particular party comment.

 

[Rorschach]

You seem to be advocating an equation where a human life has a monetary value and that if the monetary value is too high than that human life is allowed to take their (probably limited) chances.

Do you not think that is reality?
Human life most definitely has a monetary value.
But actually that wasn't my point, my point was that by saving the lives of older people now we could inadvertently be killing more younger people in the near future.

 

[thetyreman]

I regret starting this thread now to be honest, it has been dumbed down from it's original title about how masks are inadequate, I tried changing the title and it kept changing back on it's own magically, doctors are now concerned about the masks they've been supplied with.

 

[MikeG.]

........ my point was that by saving the lives of older people now we could inadvertently be killing more younger people in the near future.

Which again misses the point. We aren't saving the lives of older people......we are reducing the immediate pressure on the NHS by spreading the impact of the disease over a longer period. This enables the NHS to better look after the young as well as the old. Roughly the same number of people will still die from Coronavirus.

 

[sploo]

I regret starting this thread now to be honest, it has been dumbed down from it's original title about how masks are inadequate, I tried changing the title and it kept changing back on it's own magically, doctors are now concerned about the masks they've been supplied with.

Don't worry: as I noted in an earlier post - the doctors (at my wife's hospital at least) aren't failing their mask fitting checks now. The hospital has fixed that problem by ceasing the mask fitting checks...

 

[sploo]

........ my point was that by saving the lives of older people now we could inadvertently be killing more younger people in the near future.

Which again misses the point. We aren't saving the lives of older people......we are reducing the immediate pressure on the NHS by spreading the impact of the disease over a longer period. This enables the NHS to better look after the young as well as the old. Roughly the same number of people will still die from Coronavirus.

Though a side effect of slowing down transmission is that a vaccine may become available (thus lowering deaths). Alternatively, it also gives time for research on better treatment - there are some (seemingly - to the non-virologist such as myself) unrelated drugs that are showing promise in aiding symptoms. Way out of my knowledge area, but a potential positive in slowing infections down.