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

Volumiza

The alright "V", B-Boy cypher cat
Joined
Jul 13, 2018
Messages
13,510
Location
Somewhere in the middle
It's a question that ends up getting a strange answer. We definitely saw less presentations of other medical problems. I recall seems much less heart attacks, strokes, surgical issues etc. We all found this quite bizarre because these medical/surgical emergencies are ticking time-bombs for everyone - they shouldn't have "paused" or had a low incidences of these. For that reason, the hospital didn't really have many non-COVID related issues. For example, my hospital would normally have 4 wards for General Surgical, Orthopaedic and Trauma and Gynaecological patients. During COVID, all patients managed to fit into 1 ward - which goes to show how little acute emergencies we saw in these specialities. Obviously, the lack of elective surgeries played a role, but the actual amount of surgical "emergencies' that presented via the Emergency Department definitely dropped.

Long winded answer to basically say - most of the hospital was COVID, COVID, COVID. My hospital didn't get particularly overwhelmed, because it practically turned into a COVID hospital without even meaning to. I can't say for sure what it was like in April because in all honesty, the last 7 months have genuinely blended into each other. Was it overwhelmed? Not in the sense as it was in Italy - but that was because we had the benefit of foresight and opened up more areas in the hospital that could become an intensive care area.

Another massive factoid in trying to avoid overwhelming the hospital was to change our threshold for admitting a patient into hospital. This felt incredibly uncomfortable at the start and we'd normally have to tell people who'd normally require further investigations or more intense treatment for non-COVID related issues to go home with advice on how to manage at home, (with a prescription of course). For example, we'd send people home with horrible cellulitis, that would typically need 48 hours or so of intravenous antibiotics, with oral antibiotics with advice to return if they basically develop sepsis. It was a dangerous time and ethically it felt very discomforting that people were not being treated properly - but at the end of the day, the hospital was a riskier place to be in than their home.

The days were 700+ would die daily - we're fortunate that those days haven't been seen for a while. But it's unfortunate in the sense that people have lost the fear-factor of it now.
There is so many selfish people in the world who now seem to think that we've got this all under control and that it isn't half as bad at what it's reported to be.
If people are more relaxed about it, more people will catch it - and when more people catch it, the difficult decisions on who deserves an ITU bed becomes an issue again.

I'll always remember a 50-odd year old gentleman who was probably one of the first few COVID patients that I had. He was able to tolerate just high-flow oxygen on the ward for a couple of days after coming in. But decisions had to be made early, no matter what state they were in, on what their ceiling of care would be. Do they go to ITU? If not, do we even try to resuscitate them if their heart stops? I had to write a "Do-not-resuscitate" form for this guy without even discussing it with him because we were told that we didn't have to have these discussions with patients at this stage of COVID if they were deemed not appropriate for ITU.

Slightly off tangent to what was asked, but these last months have been incredibly hard and I haven't really reflected on much of it until recently. I've had severe bouts of depression during the last few months and I've had to stomach it all up because I've felt as if i've had to. It's very easy to ignore how COVID indirectly affects people. As I said in my post from earlier, it's horrendous seeing how quickly people can deteriorate in front of your eyes - and sometimes, there is literally nothing that can be done apart from chuck the kitchen sink at them and hope that it works.
Stern reading, thanks for sharing and I hope you can get through the next few months in decent shape.
 

TheGame

Full Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2002
Messages
18,836
Location
In the Land of Saints and Sinners
Blood tests for covid antibodies show around 5-8% of a country like Spain UK having caught the virus, which is around 3 million+ people over a few months. Testing back then was heavy symptoms and hospital admissions largely for France UK and Spain so only a few hundred thousand were caught. Testing now is more community and vastly increased. We're seeing it spread now in real time through younger people. Back in Jan and Feb it was doing the same thing but to an unsuspecting public with no testing and then limited testing at hospital.

Deaths are increasing in Spain and France where cases have climbed to 10-13k but I doubt deaths will be as high as before although it could just take longer to reach old and vulnerable. Those people will be extra careful still and not in the dark like before but unfortunately the virus will reach some eventually. April was the big time bomb for UK with the virus working its way through the care homes and such in Feb/March. Thing is younger people look after the old.

The virus is still just as deadly

With current testing it could be the 5-6k per day of April would be the equivalent of 15-30k today as so many were missed back then.
Thanks. Having spoken to some people and looking at social media, the first thing people who don’t take it seriously throw around is the lack of deaths. I spoke to someone today who said ‘but there are hardly any deaths’. I don’t think people really understand how it works. Back in March, the death rate probably scared them but there are lots of people I see who just don’t see the virus as a threat anymore. Obviously the conflicting Government advice hasn’t helped.
 

Wibble

In Gadus Speramus
Staff
Joined
Jun 15, 2000
Messages
88,607
Location
Centreback
Am I right in thinking that the end result is that a sterilising vaccine kills the virus before it enters our cells and a non-sterilising vaccine attacks the virus once we are infected (possibly again) even if in some cases that is quick and very effective?
I think that sounds about right and B cells are involved as they potentially deal with the virus before it infects the cell.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutralizing_antibody
 

Pogue Mahone

The caf's Camus.
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
133,350
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
Just following on from my post yesterday about flu vaccine shortages, this is all over the news in Ireland today. A global shortage of supply means primary care here are due to get 2/3 as many doses as they did last winter. A month later than usual. Which is a disaster. The plan had always been to massively increase the vaccination program from previous flu seasons but looks like we’ll actually be vaccinating a hell of a lot less people than usual. FFS.

And this is after knowing for months and months that we needed to get more flu vaccines into people than ever before. Yet another example of these fragile global supply chains and the difficulty of meeting demand when the whole world is in the queue. A taste of things to come if/when we ever develop a vaccine for covid.
 

Pogue Mahone

The caf's Camus.
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
133,350
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
Good point. Or rather points.

Do you know what the features of/the difference between a non-sterilising and sterilising vaccine are? My limited reading seems to suggest that the strength of the immune response is important as is the mechanism (if that is the right term) that the vaccine uses to deal with the virus. Am I right in thinking that the end result is that a sterilising vaccine kills the virus before it enters our cells and a non-sterilising vaccine attacks the virus once we are infected (possibly again) even if in some cases that is quick and very effective?

Apologies for expecting you to have the answers.
The precise mode of action will vary from vaccine to vaccine. They are defined as sterilising vs non-sterilising based on whether they stop you catching the virus vs whether they just minimise the severity of the illness. If I was a betting man I would predict a non-sterilising vaccine will be the first to market.
 

Tony Babangida

Full Member
Joined
May 15, 2017
Messages
813
Just following on from my post yesterday about flu vaccine shortages, this is all over the news in Ireland today. A global shortage of supply means primary care here are due to get 2/3 as many doses as they did last winter. A month later than usual. Which is a disaster. The plan had always been to massively increase the vaccination program from previous flu seasons but looks like we’ll actually be vaccinating a hell of a lot less people than usual. FFS.

And this is after knowing for months and months that we needed to get more flu vaccines into people than ever before. Yet another example of these fragile global supply chains and the difficulty of meeting demand when the whole world is in the queue. A taste of things to come if/when we ever develop a vaccine for covid.
Yeah that is not good. Last thing hospitals need is a load of people sick with flu showing up. In Australia we basically didn’t have a flu season. Hopefully some of the social distancing/ mask measures do the same in the Northern Hemisphere.

I wonder if the pre-manufacture of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine candidates has anything to do with the lack of flu shots.
 

MikeUpNorth

Wobbles like a massive pair of tits
Joined
Apr 26, 2007
Messages
19,938
I’m generally not as negative about this pandemic as some others, and think the world isn’t doing quite as bad a job at tackling it as it might seem in all the chaos.

We are fortunate that the virus has emerged in this era, when the internet and modern technology makes home working possible for quite a lot of the population. If it had occurred in previous eras, even as recently as say 1995, social distancing just wouldn’t have been a viable option, and we would have had no choice but to be at work throughout the peak, making it exponentially worse.

In any previous era, I think we'd have seen a death rate much like Spanish Flu. Scaled up for the modern global population, that would be something like 250m deaths. We'll hopefully come in at less than 1% of that total when all is said and done.

Given how easily this virus spreads, with asymptotic transmission and the reality of highly interconnected global transport, as well as a significant fatality rate, getting through this with a couple of million dead out of a global population of 8 billion would probably be a pretty decent achievement.

All that said, I'm sure this winter is going to be brutal.
 
Last edited:

Penna

Kind Moderator (with a bit of a mean streak)
Staff
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
49,661
Location
Ubi caritas et amor, Deus ibi est.
I can't get over how many people are out and in the shops here. Everywhere is packed, we've been back in England for about a fortnight now and it's like the run-up to Christmas everywhere.

I'm not surprised the cases are rising so fast. For some reason I expected things to be quieter.
 

Fluctuation0161

Full Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2016
Messages
8,156
Location
Manchester
I do think a lot of people were just getting tests because they were available and they wanted reassurance to go about doing what they want, rather than due to symptoms, and I also think the problem has been grabbed by the media and turned into a much bigger monster.
Agree with you regarding the media. But reality is that the proportion of people doing this will be so low it is a negligible factor. The only people getting tests who dont have symptons is those who have been contacted by track and trace.

It is just another way to blame the public for the government's failure in sorting adequate tests. Unfortunately alot of people fall for that line.
 

Fluctuation0161

Full Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2016
Messages
8,156
Location
Manchester
Just like how if I knock on to my mate's terrace house and chat to him on the pavement outside, we're immune, but if we get out of people's way and go into the back yard, it's becomes dangerously infectious.
I think not being able to meet in gardens is ridiculous in lockdown areas. But in your example, wouldn't you need to walk through the house to get access?
 

Pogue Mahone

The caf's Camus.
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
133,350
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
I think not being able to meet in gardens is ridiculous in lockdown areas. But in your example, wouldn't you need to walk through the house to get access?
I think it’s also about hanging out in gardens. When at some point there’s a good chance they’ll need to use the toilet. The whole garden socialising thing inevitably ends up in back yard piss ups. Once again, it’s booze that fuels the pandemic.
 

Sparky_Hughes

I am Shitbeard.
Joined
Mar 26, 2008
Messages
17,537
I do think a lot of people were just getting tests because they were available and they wanted reassurance to go about doing what they want, rather than due to symptoms, and I also think the problem has been grabbed by the media and turned into a much bigger monster. I can get a test same day through work if I want. They have spare capacity at our work as well for schools, care workers, etc. I think they are just reluctant to use up that spare capacity so some idiot can get a test before flying off to Croatia and infecting themselves.

This is a developed country but it's full of idiots. There was no toilet role in the supermarket again today, and a queue to the tills that was literally backing down four isles and then almost back out of the store. I mean, not only is this stupid in itself, but we've literally already had a lockdown and realised once that panic buying toilet role is a completely pointless thing to do. I don't understand how anyone is this dumb but apparently enough people are just in my area to form a line of idiots as far as the eye can see.
Unfortunately a large percentage of the British population are as thick as pig shit.
It will reduce exposure time and thus the number of infection occurances. It also reduces risky behaviour that occurs more often later in the night no doubt. No panacea of course. Far from it.

In Australia you need to book to get in to a pub and register on entry and apply hand sanitiser. Some pubs also take your temperature before you are allowed in. Social distancing is enforced with tables closed/removed. You can only sit (no standing in groups), each pub must have a covid marshal to enforce the rules and regular inspections by the authorities are conducted. Non-complying venues are given huge fines and can be closed. Seems to be working well.
The differences are you (from my limited knowledge of Australia) appear to have a government who at least have some semblance of common sense and decency rather than tesco value trump, matt nocock, adolf patel and the right honourable minister for the 17th century and a population thats prepared to work together.
 

Jacko21

Full Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2016
Messages
4,567
Location
Manchester
I think it’s also about hanging out in gardens. When at some point there’s a good chance they’ll need to use the toilet. The whole garden socialising thing inevitably ends up in back yard piss ups. Once again, it’s booze that fuels the pandemic.
I think even the most conscious of people recognise that visiting someone in their garden is entirely fine and are therefore doing so - when appropriate measures are taken. Nobody should stop visiting their elderly grandparent(s) just because the government doesn't trust others to be sensible.

Don't go in the house, don't share mugs/cutlery, sit at a distance, sanitise when necessary and limit the numbers to a handful of individuals.
 

Wibble

In Gadus Speramus
Staff
Joined
Jun 15, 2000
Messages
88,607
Location
Centreback
Unfortunately a large percentage of the British population are as thick as pig shit.


The differences are you (from my limited knowledge of Australia) appear to have a government who at least have some semblance of common sense and decency rather than tesco value trump, matt nocock, adolf patel and the right honourable minister for the 17th century and a population thats prepared to work together.
Our federal government are an incompetent bunch of far right cockwombles who couldn't think their way out of a wet paper bag unless it was to put brown people in third world gulags, go on holiday to Hawaii when the country is burning down or halve unemployment pay during a pandemic to fund a tax cut for middle and upper income earners.

Luckily our State Premiers have largely been the adults in the room even those I generally don't like or agree with their politics. They have worked tirelessly to keep people safe with minimal interstate bickering.

The best thing you can say about the Federal Government is that they haven't been quite as evil or utterly incompetent as usual.
 
Last edited:

Stack

Leave Women's Football Alone!!!
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
13,288
Location
Auckland New Zealand
Just following on from my post yesterday about flu vaccine shortages, this is all over the news in Ireland today. A global shortage of supply means primary care here are due to get 2/3 as many doses as they did last winter. A month later than usual. Which is a disaster. The plan had always been to massively increase the vaccination program from previous flu seasons but looks like we’ll actually be vaccinating a hell of a lot less people than usual. FFS.

And this is after knowing for months and months that we needed to get more flu vaccines into people than ever before. Yet another example of these fragile global supply chains and the difficulty of meeting demand when the whole world is in the queue. A taste of things to come if/when we ever develop a vaccine for covid.
I now the situation is significantly different in the Northern Hemisphere but a possible bit of hope regarding the lack of flu vaccines. If there is a reasonable amount of social distancing and some uptake in mask use then hopefully you will experience what we did this winter just finished which was a significant drop in the number of flu cases. That doesnt change the frustration of the flu vaccine shortages but with some luck you will see what we saw. Fingers crossed.
 

Sparky_Hughes

I am Shitbeard.
Joined
Mar 26, 2008
Messages
17,537
Our federal government are an incompetent bunch of far right cockwombles who couldn't think their way out of a wet paper bag unless it was to put brown people in third world gulags, go on holiday to Hawaii when the country is burning down or halve unemployment pay during a pandemic to fund a tax cut for middle and upper income earners.

Luckily our State Premiers have largely been the adults in the room even those I generally don't like or agree with their politics. They have worked tirelessly to keep people safe with minimal interstate bickering.

The best thing you can say about the Federal Government is that they haven't been quite as evil or utterly incompetent as usual.
So you are still one up on us then :lol:
 

Pogue Mahone

The caf's Camus.
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
133,350
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons

@Wibble Reading stuff like this is why my money would be on non-sterilising vaccine (or vaccines) with varying take-up in different countries. Basically, the chance of eradicating this virus globally in the next 12 to 18 months is vanishingly small.

The most likely positive outcome re vaccines is that they help the vulnerable get less sick. Which will, in turn, allow us to ease off on the social distancing measures slightly. But the virus will remain in circulation everywhere, without any kind of sudden snap back to full normality.

The best way to sum this up was from a comment I read from a very experienced public health physician “pandemics don’t end with a bang, they end with a whimper”
 
Last edited:

Vidyoyo

The bad "V"
Joined
Jun 12, 2014
Messages
21,283
Location
Not into locations = will not dwell
I’m generally not as negative about this pandemic as some others, and think the world isn’t doing quite as bad a job at tackling it as it might seem in all the chaos.

We are fortunate that the virus has emerged in this era, when the internet and modern technology makes home working possible for quite a lot of the population. If it had occurred in previous eras, even as recently as say 1995, social distancing just wouldn’t have been a viable option, and we would have had no choice but to be at work throughout the peak, making it exponentially worse.

In any previous era, I think we'd have seen a death rate much like Spanish Flu. Scaled up for the modern global population, that would be something like 250m deaths. We'll hopefully come in at less than 1% of that total when all is said and done.

Given how easily this virus spreads, with asymptotic transmission and the reality of highly interconnected global transport, as well as a significant fatality rate, getting through this with a couple of million dead out of a global population of 8 billion would probably be a pretty decent achievement.

All that said, I'm sure this winter is going to be brutal.
I agree, however it seems there are flip sides when it comes to interconnectedness.

For a start, I'm not convinced people would feel as much need to be out and about as they would have in 1995. We live in a world dominated by marketing principles that implicitly dictate that if you aren't living life to the fullest then you aren't living life at all. This is the flip side - where social media is basically advertising at a massive level. It changes behavior and, at this time, seems to make people feel less easy about being at home despite there being many more ways to entertain one's self. Cue some serious mental health implications that we probably wouldn't have had before (at this point, does anybody deny the links?).

Young people exemplify this for a few reasons. I have strong doubts that university students would be having as many personal issues in 1995 where higher education wasn't as entwined with a particular lifestyle (well, ignoring Britpop and ecstacy, etc). If you hear them talk now, a lot are worrying that they won't be/aren't getting a real university experience, which seems to translate into them feeling they won't be able to make friends/have a good time. The strange thing is how the actual studying part comes after (was this always the case?). Apply this to to other young people in general and it becomes a bit more obvious why they're ignoring aspects of social distancing/mask wearing. Their priorities lie elsewhere.

Conversely, I think winter will change some of this. People usually feel a greater need to go out in Summer and less need in Winter.
 
Last edited:

Pogue Mahone

The caf's Camus.
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
133,350
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
I agree, however it seems there are flip sides when it comes to interconnectedness.

For a start, I'm not convinced people would feel as much need to be out and about as they would have in 1995. We live in a world dominated by marketing principles that implicitly dictate that if you aren't living life to the fullest then you aren't living life at all. This is the flip side - where social media is basically advertising at a massive level. It changes behavior and, at this time, seems to make people feel less easy about being at home despite there being many more ways to entertain one's self. Cue some serious mental health implications that we probably wouldn't have had before (at this point, does anybody deny the links?).

Young people exemplify this for a few reasons. I have strong doubts that university students would be having as many personal issues in 1995 where higher education wasn't as entwined with a particular lifestyle (well, ignoring Britpop and ecstacy, etc). If you hear them talk now, a lot are worrying that they won't be/aren't getting a real university experience, which seems to translate into them feeling they won't be able to make friends/have a good time. The strange thing is how the actual studying part comes after (was this always the case?). Apply this to to other young people in general and it becomes a bit more obvious why they're ignoring aspects of social distancing/mask wearing. Their priorities lie elsewhere.

Conversely, I think winter will change some of this. People usually feel a greater need to go out in Summer and less need in Winter.
I was a university student from 1990 to 1996 and can confirm that this was definitely the case! Even putting the whole ecstasy generation to one side, the social element of attending university was a huge priority for everyone (the vast majority anyway). Going to university has always been - and should always be - about so much more than lectures and exams. My heart bleeds for anyone in university right now. They’re getting a pale approximation of the experience they should be getting.
 

acnumber9

Full Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2006
Messages
22,253
I haven’t been digging through Uk data but don’t you have a summary of where all the clusters are happening?

In Ireland the health service releases weekly updates like this. 2000 out of our 3000 outbreaks have been in private homes.
I haven’t seen it if there is but would that not always have been the case anyway? Even during lockdown. People picking it up somewhere and spreading it at home to the people they live with? It would be interesting if they had those kind of statistics for the whole year.
 

Pogue Mahone

The caf's Camus.
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
133,350
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
I haven’t seen it if there is but would that not always have been the case anyway? Even during lockdown. People picking it up somewhere and spreading it at home to the people they live with? It would be interesting if they had those kind of statistics for the whole year.
They have the stats for the whole year. And private homes have always been the main location for people passing it to one another. The number of outbreaks when people eat/drink away from home have always been low. And I don’t think there’s a single case linked to a visit to a supermarket (so we can probably stop washing our groceries!) The restaurant/lobby are frothing at the mouth about this, after being shut down again on Friday. The response from the health service has been that the virus must be getting from one household to another somehow. And they refer to big outbreaks in bars/restaurants in other countries.
 

Ludens the Red

Full Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2009
Messages
17,430
Location
London
They’re saying that but have they provided any actual evidence of it?
There are better people than me in here at providing stats and actual evidence for this sort of stuff as Pogue just did but logic kinda dictates it would spread in the house more based on the factors I mentioned in my post.
 

Smores

Full Member
Joined
May 18, 2011
Messages
25,496
I agree, however it seems there are flip sides when it comes to interconnectedness.

For a start, I'm not convinced people would feel as much need to be out and about as they would have in 1995. We live in a world dominated by marketing principles that implicitly dictate that if you aren't living life to the fullest then you aren't living life at all. This is the flip side - where social media is basically advertising at a massive level. It changes behavior and, at this time, seems to make people feel less easy about being at home despite there being many more ways to entertain one's self. Cue some serious mental health implications that we probably wouldn't have had before (at this point, does anybody deny the links?).

Young people exemplify this for a few reasons. I have strong doubts that university students would be having as many personal issues in 1995 where higher education wasn't as entwined with a particular lifestyle (well, ignoring Britpop and ecstacy, etc). If you hear them talk now, a lot are worrying that they won't be/aren't getting a real university experience, which seems to translate into them feeling they won't be able to make friends/have a good time. The strange thing is how the actual studying part comes after (was this always the case?). Apply this to to other young people in general and it becomes a bit more obvious why they're ignoring aspects of social distancing/mask wearing. Their priorities lie elsewhere.

Conversely, I think winter will change some of this. People usually feel a greater need to go out in Summer and less need in Winter.
I think most people who have been at university across the last few decades would agree first year is mainly about socialising and enjoying independence. It's not until 2nd year where studying becomes too much to handle alongside partying all the time.

I've never been an extrovert but I'd fecking hate to be going to university this year. They've missed out on one of the most enjoyable years of their youth.

I've been guilty of judging young people but what someone said a few pages ago rang true, it's easy to judge when you're no longer young. Lockdown has been easy for me, it wouldn't have been at 19.
 

acnumber9

Full Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2006
Messages
22,253
There are better people than me in here at providing stats and actual evidence for this sort of stuff as Pogue just did but logic kinda dictates it would spread in the house more based on the factors I mentioned in my post.
But logic would always dictate that it will spread at home more simply because there are more homes and more people frequenting them even with restrictions surely? One figure doesn’t show the full story. It spreading more in homes doesn’t mean it hasn’t been picked up somewhere else. I’m not going to pretend to be an expert because I’m not so I’m happy for somebody to point out where I’m wrong.
 

balaks

Full Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2014
Messages
15,335
Location
Northern Ireland
Supports
Tottenham Hotspur
Unfortunately a large percentage of the British population are as thick as pig shit.


The differences are you (from my limited knowledge of Australia) appear to have a government who at least have some semblance of common sense and decency rather than tesco value trump, matt nocock, adolf patel and the right honourable minister for the 17th century and a population thats prepared to work together.
I wouldn't say they are thick - they are just entitled and feel that their own opinion is more important than others. It's the way society has moved towards the individual rather than the collective - this has accelerated in the last 15 years due to social media in my opinion. It literally encourages narcissism.
 

Classical Mechanic

Full Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2014
Messages
35,216
Location
xG Zombie Nation
The UK outbreaks since lockdown was lifted have largely been in Asian communities and because of spreading in overcrowded homes due to poverty and multi-generational living.
 

acnumber9

Full Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2006
Messages
22,253
They have the stats for the whole year. And private homes have always been the main location for people passing it to one another. The number of outbreaks when people eat/drink away from home have always been low. And I don’t think there’s a single case linked to a visit to a supermarket (so we can probably stop washing our groceries!) The restaurant/lobby are frothing at the mouth about this, after being shut down again on Friday. The response from the health service has been that the virus must be getting from one household to another somehow. And they refer to big outbreaks in bars/restaurants in other countries.
If homes have always been the primary location for picking it up, even during full lockdown, I fail to see how the current measures are going to be a big help when people can now go other places and bring it home anyway. Where were people picking it up and bringing it home?
 

RobinLFC

Cries when Liverpool doesn't get praised
Joined
May 20, 2014
Messages
20,808
Location
Belgium
Supports
Liverpool

College has started again... Same images and videos from multiple student cities. Can't even say I "blame" most of them, since it was technically legal. Closing it altogether would've just lead to illegal parties in private houses, so it's a case of damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Those hundreds of thousands college students return home every weekend though - for spare time activities, going out, markets, even visiting their grandparents... Worrisome to say the least.
 

Pogue Mahone

The caf's Camus.
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
133,350
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
If homes have always been the primary location for picking it up, even during full lockdown, I fail to see how the current measures are going to be a big help when people can now go other places and bring it home anyway. Where were people picking it up and bringing it home?
The initial wave was started by people returning from overseas travel. With the vast majority of outbreaks in people’s homes seeded in the week or two running up to lockdown, when life was basically continuing as normal (busy pubs, night clubs etc). After that it passed from person to person in households where it had already got a foot in the door, as well as workplaces/care homes etc


I’m not sure what specific current measures you mean? The general idea is to cut face to face contacts as much as possible. Or at the very least, shorten them. All the measures I can think of will help to do this.
 

Vidyoyo

The bad "V"
Joined
Jun 12, 2014
Messages
21,283
Location
Not into locations = will not dwell
I was a university student from 1990 to 1996 and can confirm that this was definitely the case! Even putting the whole ecstasy generation to one side, the social element of attending university was a huge priority for everyone (the vast majority anyway). Going to university has always been - and should always be - about so much more than lectures and exams. My heart bleeds for anyone in university right now. They’re getting a pale approximation of the experience they should be getting.
Fair. I don't deny that probably was the case, just meant that there's a bit more pressure on them these days to maximise it all.

I did my master's as recently as 2018 (original degree finished in 2012) and it felt like something had changed in those years insofar as students now lead with this idea of needing to maximise their experience. Back then, we kinda did but there was less pressure about it (having fun took priority).

I met quite a few undergrads who seemed to have this impression they needed to socialise, study and get proper work experience as best as they could. If that's a prevalent feeling, and I believe it probably is, I totally get why this seems like an awful time to go to university.

I think most people who have been at university across the last few decades would agree first year is mainly about socialising and enjoying independence. It's not until 2nd year where studying becomes too much to handle alongside partying all the time.

I've never been an extrovert but I'd fecking hate to be going to university this year. They've missed out on one of the most enjoyable years of their youth.

I've been guilty of judging young people but what someone said a few pages ago rang true, it's easy to judge when you're no longer young. Lockdown has been easy for me, it wouldn't have been at 19.
Agreed, see my reply to Pogue above. I didn't mean just the partying aspect; it's all those extra-curriculars too.

I don't blame those who are deferring entry this year
 

acnumber9

Full Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2006
Messages
22,253
The initial wave was started by people returning from overseas travel. With the vast majority of outbreaks in people’s homes seeded in the week or two running up to lockdown, when life was basically continuing as normal (busy pubs, night clubs etc). After that it passed from person to person in households where it had already got a foot in the door, as well as workplaces/care homes etc


I’m not sure what specific current measures you mean? The general idea is to cut face to face contacts as much as possible. Or at the very least, shorten them. All the measures I can think of will help to do this.
The rule of 6 for households. That’s looser than it was during lockdown and still households were the primary cases because of course they would be. Looking at the latest figures you provided there for Ireland there were 61 cases for private homes and 22 for workplaces. How many homes are there to workplaces? Considerably more than 3. And each case picked up at work has to be brought home.
 

jojojo

JoJoJoJoJoJoJo
Staff
Joined
Aug 18, 2007
Messages
38,145
Location
Welcome to Manchester reception committee
They have the stats for the whole year. And private homes have always been the main location for people passing it to one another. The number of outbreaks when people eat/drink away from home have always been low. And I don’t think there’s a single case linked to a visit to a supermarket (so we can probably stop washing our groceries!) The restaurant/lobby are frothing at the mouth about this, after being shut down again on Friday. The response from the health service has been that the virus must be getting from one household to another somehow. And they refer to big outbreaks in bars/restaurants in other countries.
Isn't the "private home" thing obvious though? It's almost inevitable that once it's in the household, most of those every day close contacts are getting it. The more surprising (and potentially educational) data would be on people who don't catch it in that situation. Do they actually differentiate between household cluster and multi-household cluster, where they got infected in the same home?

Again though, almost by definition the people in your house are the people who are closest to you. For some people they'll be the only people we spend ten minutes with in close proximity etc, and for most people they'll be the biggest proportion of daily face to face contacts. It's the cross generation issues that are probably the biggest factor in death rates and I would guess, hospital admissions as well. Things that zoom in on the practical issues of protecting people in front-line jobs (including taxi drivers etc) so they don't take it home, or (depending on their job) into other people's homes, and on how to handle informal care of the elderly/vulnerable are big deals, but don't seem to be in play when it comes to making rules or tailoring advice.