SARS CoV-2 coronavirus / Covid-19 (No tin foil hat silliness please)

11101 said:
Depends what the government is trying to do. Nobody believes they can totally eradicate this virus and everybody started from a different stage. Australia is not comparable with the UK. Only similar countries like France, Germany, and Spain are, with similar populations, profiles and advance warning, and we won't know who performed best for a few years yet.

I think the UK is focusing on keeping the virus beneath the capacity of the NHS, nothing else. I don't think they want to admit it but they're trying to keep the balance between that and keeping the economy moving as much as possible. In that sense they have succeeded so far.
Click to expand...

If the UK is focusing on keeping infections below the capacity of the NHS to cope they are still doing it all wrong.

Most of Europe hasn't done a great job but the UK has done a truly terrible job. The economy is going to get smashed every time there is a new wave of infection.
 
lynchie said:
What's your view on what countries like Australia and New Zealand do in the the hypothetical scenario that it begins to look like there's never going to be a vaccine? They've been very successful in avoiding this first wave, but if all our vaccine trials fail, and the virus keeps gradually spreading throughout the world, those countries that locked down successfully start to look very vulnerable if and when they start letting the outside world in, while the UK, which has massively messed up this first stage, is potentially well on the way to some level of herd immunity - if our IFR is similar to elsewhere in the world, we've got maybe 5-10% of the population exposed already.

I guess over time, we should at least find some decent therapeutic drugs, to manage the symptoms and reduce the mortality rate, but it would be a brave leader who makes the call that you need to let the virus back in if you're not going to be forever cut off from outside.
Click to expand...

If there is never a vaccine NZ and AU have made the wrong choice. But a vaccine is more likely a question of when rather than if.
 
Massive Spanner said:
Our ICU capacity is pretty good right now though with the merging of the private hospitals, isn't it? Certainly better than other countries who haven't got the same restritions as us. Personally I think Holohan is getting far too much unchallenged weight. Naturally from his perspective he wants to stop spread above all else but there surely has to be a point where we look at our crumbling economy, our jobless numbers, the fact that cancer screenings have been put on hold, the sheer amount of empty hospital beds that could be used for other aspects, and overall, that we are being so ridiculously slow compared to just about everyone else.

The media and government have basically taken his word for gospel so far and no doubt he did do a good job initially but our roadmap, for me, is a total joke. I think general consensus from the public is starting to echo that, too.
Click to expand...

I assume it's not actually just Holohan who calls the shots though, is it?

Every time they talk about recommendations being made it's NPHET that are making the recommendations, which means all these guys too:

Prof Colm Bergin, infectious diseases consultant at St James’s Hospital and Professor of Medicine at Trinity College Dublin.

Paul Bolger, director of Department of Health resources division.

Dr Eibhlin Connolly, deputy chief medical officer at the Department of Health.

Tracey Conroy, assistant secretary in the acute hospitals division of the Department of Health.

Dr John Cuddihy, interim director of the Health Protection Surveillance Centre (HPSC).

Dr Cillian de Gascun, director of the National Virus Reference Laboratory in UCD.

Colm Desmond, assistant secretary for corporate legislation, mental health, drugs policy and food safety division in the Department of Health.

Dr Lorraine Doherty, national clinical director for health protection in the HPSC.

Dr Mary Favier, president of the Irish College of General Practitioners.

Dr Ronan Glynn, deputy chief medical officer in the Department of Health.

Fergal Goodman, assistant secretary in the primary care division in the Department of Health.

Dr Colm Henry, HSE chief clinical officer.

Dr Kevin Kelleher, HSE assistant national director of public health.

Marita Kinsella, director of the national patient safety office in the Department of Health.

David Leach, HSE deputy national director of communications.

Dr Kathleen Mac Lellan, assistant secretary in Department of Health social care division.

Dr Jeanette McCallion, Health Products Regulatory Authority (HPRA) medical assessor.

Tom McGuinness, assistant national director at HSE office of emergency planning.

Dr Siobhán Ní Bhrian, HSE lead for integrated care.

Prof Philip Nolan, chair of Irish Epidemiological Modelling Advisory Group and president of Maynooth University.

Kate O’Flaherty, head of health and wellbeing at Department of Health.

Dr Darina O’Flanagan, special adviser to NPHET at Department of Health.

Dr Siobhán O’Sullivan, chief bioethics officer at Department of Health.

Dr Michael Power, national clinical lead of HSE critical care programme and consultant in intensive care medicine at Beaumont Hospital.

Phelim Quinn, chief executive of Health Information and Quality Authority (Hiqa).

Dr Máirín Ryan, deputy chief executive and director of health technology assessment at Hiqa.

Dr Alan Smith, Department of Health deputy chief medical officer.

Dr Breda Smyth, HSE director of health and public health medicine.

David Walsh, HSE national director of community operations.

Deirdre Watters, head of communications at Department of Health.

Liam Woods, HSE national director of acute operations.

Lorraine Doherty, HPSC clinical director for health protection.

You'd hope that with all those voices present there's reasonably thorough scrutiny and an awareness of how these policies impact other areas of the health service. As opposed to any one person having their word treated as gospel and a blinkered focus on the virus alone.
 
lynchie said:
What's your view on what countries like Australia and New Zealand do in the the hypothetical scenario that it begins to look like there's never going to be a vaccine? They've been very successful in avoiding this first wave, but if all our vaccine trials fail, and the virus keeps gradually spreading throughout the world, those countries that locked down successfully start to look very vulnerable if and when they start letting the outside world in, while the UK, which has massively messed up this first stage, is potentially well on the way to some level of herd immunity - if our IFR is similar to elsewhere in the world, we've got maybe 5-10% of the population exposed already.

I guess over time, we should at least find some decent therapeutic drugs, to manage the symptoms and reduce the mortality rate, but it would be a brave leader who makes the call that you need to let the virus back in if you're not going to be forever cut off from outside.
Click to expand...

If there is never a vaccine then the best informed decisions at the time will have just offset the pain.

I really doubt that we won't develop a vaccine though.
 
Sarni said:
I got appointment with my barbershop on Saturday to cut my hair after 4 months, I look ridiculous now. They pissed me off though, I was supporting them for 4 months paying for visit that obviously didn’t happen, full price, so I thought they would have at least allowed me to make reservation before they opened to public. The least they could do is to let me know booking is open. By the time I realized they reopened for booking they already sold out for the week. Ungrateful cnuts.
Click to expand...

Bastards :lol:

I gave 50€ to my favourite pub/restaurant as part of a crowdfunding campaign for local bars and restaurants. That would have entitled me to five beers "for free" as soon as they reopen. So we went there last Friday and I ended up having seven, but forgot about the voucher. Well, at least a reason to go back.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
FAO Irish

This is a really good interview with Cillian De Gascun about all things virus. He was a couple of years below me in med school and has a brain the size of a planet. He also toured New Zealand playing rugby for the Irish schoolboys team. Bastard. Probably has a small mickey though.

https://podcasts.apple.com/ie/podcast/the-coronavirus-ireland-podcast/id1503255048?i=1000475102407

@sullydnl
@golden_blunder
@lynchie
@Massive Spanner
@Brophs

Apologies to anyone I forgot.
Click to expand...
So he’s an expert in virology and putting his wanger in his mates’ pints. Sounds like the man for the job, alright.
 
Pexbo said:
My point was that if it is not possible to develop a vaccine for it, then it’s also likely that natural immunity is also unlikely to last for the same reason. Speculation on my part and I understand that there is other reasons why vaccination might not be viable but surely antibodies not persisting has got to be most likely?
Click to expand...

Oh right, yeah. With herd immunity (and, usually, vaccines) the goal is to stop people becoming infected. Even if repeat infections can’t be prevented, though, the second and subsequent infections with any virus are almost always much less severe. That’s why the swine flu pandemic didn’t kill as many elderly as first feared. Most people born before the 1950s had already been exposed to a version of H1N1 flu virus, so got quite a mild illness. Catching COVID-19 may not give you permanent (or even long term) immunity but it will almost certainly give you some protection.
 
Last edited:
Pagh Wraith said:
Bastards :lol:

I gave 50€ to my favourite pub/restaurant as part of a crowdfunding campaign for local bars and restaurants. That would have entitled me to five beers "for free" as soon as they reopen. So we went there last Friday and I ended up having seven, but forgot about the voucher. Well, at least a reason to go back.
Click to expand...

I’ve given them about 500 PLN total, so that’s about £100. I don’t get a discount, free visit or even any pre-booking rights.
 
Wibble said:
If the UK is focusing on keeping infections below the capacity of the NHS to cope they are still doing it all wrong.

Most of Europe hasn't done a great job but the UK has done a truly terrible job. The economy is going to get smashed every time there is a new wave of infection.
Click to expand...

It's just not possible to say this yet. The UK's Q1 growth figures were better than the Eurozone and the other main EU economies, but we will have to wait for Q2 to see the true effects.

If the UK can keep growth above it's neighbours and the number of Covid patients under the NHS capacity, that would mean they have achieved their goals. I would prefer they prioritised minimising deaths over all else, but a lot of people in the country don't see it that way.
 
Wibble said:
Governments want schools open so that parents can get back to work or become more productive to reduce the economic damage. However, when you are in a country where the the virus is still almost totally out of control then opening schools is a terrible idea. Just because kids don't get affected as much (or possibly infected as much) ignores the fact that teaching is an aging profession and teachers and pupils alike have elderly relatives. Not to mention all the ancillary staff you endanger. When you factor in the lack of PPE and that social distancing is virtually impossible in schools it is a terrible idea. We only had 9 new infections yesterday in the whole country and we are only just beginning to contemplate a return to F2F school for the majority. Even then there is a great deal of trepidation. If I were a teacher in the UK I wouldn't go back to work if I had a choice and I'd be hoping the union would call a national strike if the government insists.

And lockdowns aren't just to avoid the NHS becoming overwhelmed. It was also to try to minimise deaths and not throw the elderly to the wolves or to take one for the team.
Click to expand...

This is all based on the premise the virus is still completely out of control though, which isn't really the case. The key factors they need is numbers to be down enough to test anyone with symptoms immediately, to be flexible in that individual schools can close again if there is a concern with cases of people attending, and to have necessary measures in place within the schools to control and monitor things correctly.

We are talking about a week and a half from now and realistically we are going to be at the first of those points by then, and the main thing obstructing the other two is less the virus and more people being obstructive to it. Over 3 weeks is enough time to put measures in place considering it should have been being discussed the whole time.

On your second point. Again, I keep saying this, but if that was the aim, we should have gone into lockdown MUCH sooner, and been fully monitering the case numbers MUCH MUCH sooner. We did neither of these things. I agree we should have done, obviously, but we didn't, and there isn't really much point plugging a leak in a boat after it's sitting at the bottom of the lake. You'll just drown yourself trying. There is an epidemic in care homes. The number of "elderly" or vulnerable who have died is already around 60,000...I know people don't want to accept it but the final number at this point isn't going to be far off the number if we'd done nothing at all. The main factor in saving lives at this point is and was making sure the NHS isn't overwhelmed.

Basically we waited until our last line of defence was in danger of getting breached before accepting we needed to do anything. It's not much use at this point trying to pretend we can still hide behind the other lines that aren't there anymore. How you monitor casse numbers and make sure they drop at this point changes little whether you start doing it now or in a month's time.

THis is also completely ignoring again the fact that we have a quite unique problem in this country with the sheer number of families who will struggle to survive due to the "economic impact". The number outweighs the likely death toll from the virus if 100% of the population got it. It's not a minor factor you just glance at and chuck to one side. At this point it's an absolutely massive concern that will threaten to overshadow the virus itself if it's not taken as seriously. THere are entire communities where i am who will be under threat. The same people who have used this as a stick to beat the tories with for years are the ones who are determined to ignore it just because it's no longer a weapon they can use, which makes me think that really they've never really had to experience or fully appreciate the scale of the problem. It's just ceased to be important because doing something to help suddenly isn't as simple as ranting from behind a computer or phone screen.

I don't think our government has done a good job at all, but at this point politics are nothing to do with it. I would put money on the fact the people advising the government at this stage are taking all these factors into consideration and coming up with a calculated plan that tries to balance them against each other. It is literally their job and what they spend all day doing, while clearly a vast majority of the people moaning about it have not done this. The biggest problem in all this is it took the government FAR too long to start listening to them.
 
Last edited:
noodlehair said:
This is all based on the premise the virus is still completely out of control though, which isn't really the case. The key factors they need is numbers to be down enough to test anyone with symptoms immediately, to be flexible in that individual schools can close again if there is a concern with cases of people attending, and to have necessary measures in place within the schools to control and monitor things correctly.

We are talking about a week and a half from now and realistically we are going to be at the first of those points by then, and the main thing obstructing the other two is less the virus and more people being obstructive to it. Over 3 weeks is enough time to put measures in place considering it should have been being discussed the whole time.

On your second point. Again, I keep saying this, but if that was the aim, we should have gone into lockdown MUCH sooner, and been fully monitering the case numbers MUCH MUCH sooner. We did neither of these things. I agree we should have done, obviously, but we didn't, and there isn't really much point plugging a leak in a boat after it's sitting at the bottom of the lake. You'll just drown yourself trying. There is an epidemic in care homes. The number of "elderly" or vulnerable who have died is already around 60,000...I know people don't want to accept it but the final number at this point isn't going to be far off the number if we'd done nothing at all. The main factor in saving lives at this point is and was making sure the NHS isn't overwhelmed.

Basically we waited until our last line of defence was in danger of getting breached before accepting we needed to do anything. It's not much use at this point trying to pretend we can still hide behind the other lines that aren't there anymore. How you monitor casse numbers and make sure they drop at this point changes little whether you start doing it now or in a month's time.

THis is also completely ignoring again the fact that we have a quite unique problem in this country with the sheer number of families who will struggle to survive due to the "economic impact". The number outweighs the likely death toll from the virus if 100% of the population got it. It's not a minor factor you just glance at and chuck to one side. At this point it's an absolutely massive concern that will threaten to overshadow the virus itself if it's not taken as seriously. The same people who have used this as a stick to beat the tories with for years are the ones who are determined to ignore it just because it's no longer a weapon they can use.
Click to expand...

Of course the UK should have locked down earlier. That isn't a good reason to reduce the half arsed lockdown that did occur far too early just because not quite so many people are dying every day.

Cost benefit analysis shows it is 5 times cheaper to save a life vs unlocking too early. More so in the US where the value of life is calculated at a far higher rate. But Bojo and Trump.either don't know what they are doing or don't give a shit.
 
sullydnl said:
I assume it's not actually just Holohan who calls the shots though, is it?

Every time they talk about recommendations being made it's NPHET that are making the recommendations, which means all these guys too:

Prof Colm Bergin, infectious diseases consultant at St James’s Hospital and Professor of Medicine at Trinity College Dublin.

Paul Bolger, director of Department of Health resources division.

Dr Eibhlin Connolly, deputy chief medical officer at the Department of Health.

Tracey Conroy, assistant secretary in the acute hospitals division of the Department of Health.

Dr John Cuddihy, interim director of the Health Protection Surveillance Centre (HPSC).

Dr Cillian de Gascun, director of the National Virus Reference Laboratory in UCD.

Colm Desmond, assistant secretary for corporate legislation, mental health, drugs policy and food safety division in the Department of Health.

Dr Lorraine Doherty, national clinical director for health protection in the HPSC.

Dr Mary Favier, president of the Irish College of General Practitioners.

Dr Ronan Glynn, deputy chief medical officer in the Department of Health.

Fergal Goodman, assistant secretary in the primary care division in the Department of Health.

Dr Colm Henry, HSE chief clinical officer.

Dr Kevin Kelleher, HSE assistant national director of public health.

Marita Kinsella, director of the national patient safety office in the Department of Health.

David Leach, HSE deputy national director of communications.

Dr Kathleen Mac Lellan, assistant secretary in Department of Health social care division.

Dr Jeanette McCallion, Health Products Regulatory Authority (HPRA) medical assessor.

Tom McGuinness, assistant national director at HSE office of emergency planning.

Dr Siobhán Ní Bhrian, HSE lead for integrated care.

Prof Philip Nolan, chair of Irish Epidemiological Modelling Advisory Group and president of Maynooth University.

Kate O’Flaherty, head of health and wellbeing at Department of Health.

Dr Darina O’Flanagan, special adviser to NPHET at Department of Health.

Dr Siobhán O’Sullivan, chief bioethics officer at Department of Health.

Dr Michael Power, national clinical lead of HSE critical care programme and consultant in intensive care medicine at Beaumont Hospital.

Phelim Quinn, chief executive of Health Information and Quality Authority (Hiqa).

Dr Máirín Ryan, deputy chief executive and director of health technology assessment at Hiqa.

Dr Alan Smith, Department of Health deputy chief medical officer.

Dr Breda Smyth, HSE director of health and public health medicine.

David Walsh, HSE national director of community operations.

Deirdre Watters, head of communications at Department of Health.

Liam Woods, HSE national director of acute operations.

Lorraine Doherty, HPSC clinical director for health protection.

You'd hope that with all those voices present there's reasonably thorough scrutiny and an awareness of how these policies impact other areas of the health service. As opposed to any one person having their word treated as gospel and a blinkered focus on the virus alone.
Click to expand...
You'd hope so, but we still haven't heard a reasonable explanation from anyone as to why we have the most stringent roadmap in Europe.
 
noodlehair said:
THis is also completely ignoring again the fact that we have a quite unique problem in this country with the sheer number of families who will struggle to survive due to the "economic impact". The number outweighs the likely death toll from the virus if 100% of the population got it. It's not a minor factor you just glance at and chuck to one side. At this point it's an absolutely massive concern that will threaten to overshadow the virus itself if it's not taken as seriously. THere are entire communities where i am who will be under threat. The same people who have used this as a stick to beat the tories with for years are the ones who are determined to ignore it just because it's no longer a weapon they can use, which makes me think that really they've never really had to experience or fully appreciate the scale of the problem. It's just ceased to be important because doing something to help suddenly isn't as simple as ranting from behind a computer or phone screen.
Click to expand...

Come on noodles, you can’t keep asking other people to provide data to back up their claims then base almost your whole argument around an absolutely mental claim you’ve basically pulled out your arse!

If 100% of the British public caught COVID-19 (in a magical world with infinite hospitals/ITU beds and every one of them got the best possible care) you’d have deaths directly due to the virus in the region of 250,000 to 1 million (conservative estimate) Obviously, in the real world - when we run out of respirators, beds and even oxygen - this would be many multiples higher. And that’s not counting all the other excess deaths from other causes, due to hospitals collapsing under the pressure.

If we look at the effect of a recession on mortality, the most extreme case we can study was the Great Depression, in which overall mortality actually decreased!

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2765209/

You seem to be coming at this whole discussion with a fundamental misunderstanding of the idea that life being a bit shit for loads of people is not the same thing as loads of people ending up dead. And life being a bit shit is usually a price worth paying to avoid ending up dead.
 
Last edited:
Pogue Mahone said:
FAO Irish

This is a really good interview with Cillian De Gascun about all things virus. He was a couple of years below me in med school and has a brain the size of a planet. He also toured New Zealand playing rugby for the Irish schoolboys team. Bastard. Probably has a small mickey though.

https://podcasts.apple.com/ie/podcast/the-coronavirus-ireland-podcast/id1503255048?i=1000475102407

@sullydnl
@golden_blunder
@lynchie
@Massive Spanner
@Brophs

Apologies to anyone I forgot.
Click to expand...

Interesting listen, thanks.
 
Does the recent reporting of such high percentages of deaths occurring in nursing homes or care or elderly care facilities, ease any of your fears?

I found these numbers to be staggering. Canada 81%, USA 41%, France 50%, Belgium 51% and Spain 66%. Why do you think England is at 27%?
What can we do to protect these people and do these numbers advocate for the rest of the general public to begin easing of restrictions?
 
Drifter said:
Govt chose to focus on NHS over care homes early in outbreak - minister
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavi...rly-stages-of-outbreak-minister-says-11991378
Click to expand...
As this is a virus which is increasingly lethal the older you are, they should have been prioritised or at least classed as being of equal importance. However, most of them in the UK are privately-owned, which complicates matters. People who manage to get social services funding to go into residential care (care homes without any qualified nurses) are generally at the threshold where they'd have been in a nursing home 20 years ago - they have multiple chronic health conditions as well as simply needing help with daily living. Staff are often inadequately trained, over-worked and underpaid. They come and go all the time in some homes, which adds to the problem when you're trying to contain a highly-infectious disease.

I have a fair amount of experience of both in working in care homes and in monitoring them, and the quality is so variable it's a bit if a lottery if you go into one, really. I've seen some great care homes with wonderful owners, and some that are completely inadequate. Too many owners see it as a way to get rich and some of them are very rich - the last one I worked at had an owner who drove a new Bentley Continental whilst refusing to buy Kellogg's breakfast cereal for the residents.
 
We suffer in yhr
Penna said:
As this is a virus which is increasingly lethal the older you are, they should have been prioritised or at least classed as being of equal importance. However, most of them in the UK are privately-owned, which complicates matters. People who manage to get social services funding to go into residential care (care homes without any qualified nurses) are generally at the threshold where they'd have been in a nursing home 20 years ago - they have multiple chronic health conditions as well as simply needing help with daily living. Staff are often inadequately trained, over-worked and underpaid. They come and go all the time in some homes, which adds to the problem when you're trying to contain a highly-infectious disease.

I have a fair amount of experience of both in working in care homes and in monitoring them, and the quality is so variable it's a bit if a lottery if you go into one, really. I've seen some great care homes with wonderful owners, and some that are completely inadequate. Too many owners see it as a way to get rich and some of them are very rich - the last one I worked at had an owner who drove a new Bentley Continental whilst refusing to buy Kellogg's breakfast cereal for the residents.
Click to expand...

I am a bit confused about care homes. Have care homes always been separated from the NHS and therefore run privately or did this separation happen later? Are there any care homes run by the NHS and why are they so limited?
 
Wibble said:
Of course the UK should have locked down earlier. That isn't a good reason to reduce the half arsed lockdown that did occur far too early just because not quite so many people are dying every day.

Cost benefit analysis shows it is 5 times cheaper to save a life vs unlocking too early. More so in the US where the value of life is calculated at a far higher rate. But Bojo and Trump.either don't know what they are doing or don't give a shit.
Click to expand...

Where did that analysis come from? If we are focusing on utilitarianism rather than morality, then, in the context of this disease and the profile of victims, I find it hard to believe that keeping people in their 20s and 30s economically inactive is more expensive (let alone 5 times more) than the cost of retired people dying earlier than anticipated.
 
The new case data in London is interesting because 9 days on from Boris's stay alert speech that saw public transport fill up again you'd be expecting cases to increase by now?
 
0le said:
We suffer in yhr


I am a bit confused about care homes. Have care homes always been separated from the NHS and therefore run privately or did this separation happen later? Are there any care homes run by the NHS and why are they so limited?
Click to expand...

Can't talk about England but here in NI all care homes are privately run - we have health and social care integrated so all within our NHS but we have zero Trust care homes.
 
FrankDrebin said:
Click to expand...

Tbh, the problem there isn't the people. They all seem to be following advice and guidelines and to my knowledge aren't breaking any laws or rules?

It's down to the local council (and government) to enforce restrictions here, they're not breaking any laws and following the scientific advice.

Of course it looks ridiculous, and is ridiculous but at the same time if no rules are being broken then it's the rules that need to change.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.