Working From Home - Impacts of Coronavirus

[Zero999]

Here's a thing for our UK members and others. I learned today of a family friend who was hospitalised with Covid-like symptoms in mid-December last year. He lives and works in Liverpool, and recently tested positive for Corana virus antibodies. So did he have Covid19 before xmas 2019? No-one is willing to say because this would kind of blow a hole in the official timeline. Suffice to say, when he originally went to his doctor with breathing problems, he was given antibiotics (sic). A few days later he was in the ICU. He made a full recovery, but is rightly sceptical of his 'pneumonia' diagnosis.

Yes, there is plenty of evidence to suggest it arrived in the UK well before the official timeline state. It's true, the UK authoraties have made numerous blunders, but I wouldn't blame them for missing the early cases, as many of the symptoms are simular to other diseases, especially flu.

Pneumonia just means inflammation of the lungs. It can be caused by many things: bacteria, fungi, inhaling chemicals, as well as viruses such as flu and COVID-19.

[paulca]

Pneumonia just means inflammation of the lungs. It can be caused by many things: bacteria, fungi, inhaling chemicals, as well as viruses such as flu and COVID-19.

And one of the most common "death by natural causes" in care homes.  When old people get a bacterial or viral lung infection their immune system can't cope, antibiotics/virals might not work, at that stage they usually get the morphine syringe driver and the family summoned.

[coppice]

I think the policy is to maximise the economic damage with a lock down, and then maximise the number of elderly cleared out of care homes to reduce the bills and cover the cost of the economic damage.

Consider also that any younger person they manage to off is one less elderly person to care for in the future - bonus!   

Its no use losing them while you can still get some work and taxes out of them. You need to get rid of them as they turn from asset to burden.

[bd139]

Ah care homes. Like a cruise, as deadly as a cruise but crap scenery and the destination is a hole in the ground.

The whole concept is broken.

[coppice]

Ah care homes. Like a cruise, as deadly as a cruise but crap scenery and the destination is a hole in the ground.

The whole concept is broken.

The care homes I've been in feel like the zombie apocalypse is upon us.

[paulca]

The whole concept is broken.

[maginnovision]

It all made sense... Until Box. Funniest line in the whole movie. First time I saw it I laughed for at least 10 minutes.

[PlainName]

Ah care homes. Like a cruise, as deadly as a cruise but crap scenery and the destination is a hole in the ground.

The whole concept is broken.

What would be a better (workable) solution?

[Zero999]

What is troubling me right now is "They think it's all over".  The UK is dropping quarantine for travellers, relaxing lock down even more.  Northern Ireland had it under control, but they too are relaxing traveller quarantine.

However globally the virus is accelerating not dropping.  It will not end well.

We went into lock down when there was 20k new cases per day.  Now there are 200k and we open the borders and tell people to come on in and mix, go to the pub have parties.

I wouldn't say that most people here feel that it's all over.

On the surface, it may seem as though the UK is going back to normal, but look a little deeper and it's not the case. Pubs and restaurants are only allowed to open, if they meet strict criteria, quarantine is only relaxed for those travelling from countries with low COVID-19 figures and gatherings of more than 30 people are still against the law.

It can be argued that the drastic lockdowns seen in most of the world were overkill. Sweden came under a lot of criticism for not implementing a full lockdown, as most other countries did, but it's not true they did nothing. Secondary schools were closed, public gatherings limited to less than 50 and people were advised against non-essential travel. Although lots of the criticism aimed at Sweden was valid, mainly the lack of protection of the elderly, they did flatten the curve. Now it seems as though many other European countries, such as the UK have moved in a similar direction to Sweden by opening up most of the economy, whilst maintaining some social distancing.

Unfortunately it's too early to say who was right and who was wrong. We'll only know that at the end of the pandemic.

[PlainName]

Secondary schools were closed

Over-16s only, so basically those about to leave or heading into further education. Below 16 they were all open.

they did flatten the curve

Highest per capita death rate in Europe. Worse than ours, even!

Source

[Zero999]

Secondary schools were closed

Over-16s only, so basically those about to leave or heading into further education. Below 16 they were all open.

they did flatten the curve

Highest per capita death rate in Europe. Worse than ours, even!

Source

Yes, I've read that article before. Like in the UK, many of the deaths were in care homes and could have easily been prevented. The UK had many excess deaths due to cancelled appointments and people scared of going to hospital. I don't know if that was the case in Sweden.

My expectation is by the end of the summer, the UK's social distancing policies will be similar to Sweden's. Whether or not we should have just implemented the measures we currently have, from day one, rather than going for a full lockdown is an interesting question. One thing to note is we've not yet had a massive second wave, since the easing of the lockdown, so does this mean that it was unnecessary to begin with?

It's still too early to say, whether Sweden did right, or wrong. We're still nearer to the start, than the end of the pandemic. I remain open minded about whether the lockdowns were right or wrong: I don't have enough information to make an informed opinion.

[SilverSolder]

Secondary schools were closed

Over-16s only, so basically those about to leave or heading into further education. Below 16 they were all open.

they did flatten the curve

Highest per capita death rate in Europe. Worse than ours, even!

Source

Yes, I've read that article before. Like in the UK, many of the deaths were in care homes and could have easily been prevented. The UK had many excess deaths due to cancelled appointments and people scared of going to hospital. I don't know if that was the case in Sweden.

My expectation is by the end of the summer, the UK's social distancing policies will be similar to Sweden's. Whether or not we should have just implemented the measures we currently have, from day one, rather than going for a full lockdown is an interesting question. One thing to note is we've not yet had a massive second wave, since the easing of the lockdown, so does this mean that it was unnecessary to begin with?

It's still too early to say, whether Sweden did right, or wrong. We're still nearer to the start, than the end of the pandemic. I remain open minded about whether the lockdowns were right or wrong: I don't have enough information to make an informed opinion.

You'll never be a good populist, if you keep talking like that! 

[themadhippy]

it's too early to say who was right and who was wrong

Thats simple to answer,regardless of any outcome,boris/donald/insert leader of choice  was right everybody else was wrong

[PlainName]

Whether or not we should have just implemented the measures we currently have, from day one, rather than going for a full lockdown is an interesting question.

The technical answer would probably be 'no'. But we are dealing with actual people, many of whom are bloody-minded just for the sake of it, and some just plain bonkers. It would take something like a complete lockdown to impress on them that this isn't a game. So the practical answer would probably be 'yes'.

A more pertinent question might be what it would take to convince people to act reasonably in order that a full lockdown wasn't necessary. (Or, at least, most people - the ones that burn down 3G towers because covid is caused by 5G are beyond reason.)

[Zero999]

Secondary schools were closed

Over-16s only, so basically those about to leave or heading into further education. Below 16 they were all open.

they did flatten the curve

Highest per capita death rate in Europe. Worse than ours, even!

Source

Yes, I've read that article before. Like in the UK, many of the deaths were in care homes and could have easily been prevented. The UK had many excess deaths due to cancelled appointments and people scared of going to hospital. I don't know if that was the case in Sweden.

My expectation is by the end of the summer, the UK's social distancing policies will be similar to Sweden's. Whether or not we should have just implemented the measures we currently have, from day one, rather than going for a full lockdown is an interesting question. One thing to note is we've not yet had a massive second wave, since the easing of the lockdown, so does this mean that it was unnecessary to begin with?

It's still too early to say, whether Sweden did right, or wrong. We're still nearer to the start, than the end of the pandemic. I remain open minded about whether the lockdowns were right or wrong: I don't have enough information to make an informed opinion.

You'll never be a good populist, if you keep talking like that! 

That's good, because I don't want to be one.

I've looked at all of the extremist points on COVID-19: ranging from "Blah, it's just the flu, no excuse for the Marxists to copy China's lockdown!", to "Hell we all need to shelter in place, because the world could end!", but I listen to virologists, epidemiologists, doctors, nurses more.

Obviously the kind of lockdown we've had in many countries is unsustainable. It was an emergency measure to stop the hospitals becoming overwhelmed. Unfortunately it's taken it's toll on the economy and the mental health of many, such as myself. A couple of months ago, just after I went back to work, I went through a period of extreme emotional instability, even for me (I do have a bit of a reputation for being irritable and have suffered from anxiety before). I had blazing rows with a couple of my colleagues and once broke down in tears at my desk. Fortunately I got better, otherwise I would have been sent home sick. One of my colleagues who I reached out to, suggested I take some time off, but didn't want to, as I found being off work more depression.

Ultimately we need to adapt to this virus and live with it, without it getting out of control, or closing down half the economy. We need sustainable social distancing, contact tracing and the capacity to boost intensive care capacity, in case of any flare ups.

Whether or not we should have just implemented the measures we currently have, from day one, rather than going for a full lockdown is an interesting question.

The technical answer would probably be 'no'. But we are dealing with actual people, many of whom are bloody-minded just for the sake of it, and some just plain bonkers. It would take something like a complete lockdown to impress on them that this isn't a game. So the practical answer would probably be 'yes'.

A more pertinent question might be what it would take to convince people to act reasonably in order that a full lockdown wasn't necessary. (Or, at least, most people - the ones that burn down 3G towers because covid is caused by 5G are beyond reason.)

Perhaps, but again we don't know. Cultures vary from one country to another, but that doesn't seem to be the case in Sweden, where most people followed the advice.

[dietert1]

Sweden has one of the highest death rates per capita in Europe. I think it will take time until everybody knows somebody who died or remained with severe health problems after infection. That's one of the failures of the media: Counting the dead. Also in a war there are a hundred times more people who return with severe damages or psychological problems and who cannot continue their previous life.
Everybody somewhat awake will try to avoid infection until there will be vaccines. Hope that happens later this year.

Regards, Dieter

[Zero999]

Sweden has one of the highest death rates per capita in Europe. I think it will take time until everybody knows somebody who died or remained with severe health problems after infection. That's one of the failures of the media: Counting the dead. Also in a war there are a hundred times more people who return with severe damages or psychological problems and who cannot continue their previous life.
Everybody somewhat awake will try to avoid infection until there will be vaccines. Hope that happens later this year.

Regards, Dieter

Yes, that's true and is why excess deaths is probably a better measure, but you're right it doesn't account for long term health problems due to COVID-19.

Looking at the numbers of dead at this point in the pandemic is pretty meaningless. We don't know how many people will die in other countries in the near future due to COVID-19. Have the lockdown measures actually saved any lives, or just postponed deaths by a few months? The answer to this question will depend on whether a safe and effective vaccine is developed or not. If we never have a vaccine, then Sweden's approach might be more sensible, since herd immunity will gradually develop, even though that might not have been the goal. The countries who had big lockdowns will still have a large number of people who are not immune, so what will they do then? Impose lockdowns every time there's a flare up? That will prove unsustainable. The lockdown approach only works, if there's a hope of eradicating the virus, or a vaccine being developed.

[bd139]

Totally agree on the body count being irrelevant. It's simply about nations desperately trying to look less bad than other ones rather than any actual meaningful statistics.

I suspect the politicians are running scared and that's why we're hearing a lot about it.

[Zero999]

Totally agree on the body count being irrelevant. It's simply about nations desperately trying to look less bad than other ones rather than any actual meaningful statistics.

I suspect the politicians are running scared and that's why we're hearing a lot about it.

We'll only know when the pandemic is over, which will be when we either have herd immunity, be it naturally, or due to a vaccine, or a cheap marvellous new treatment which stops the virus doing any harm. Then, I think the best metric will be number of socioeconomic-disability adjusted, human life-years lost, rather than the number of lives, which will apply more weight to younger lives lost, not just to COVID, but because they didn't get treated for other illnesses, due to lockdowns, or care capacity being filled by COVID-19 patients.

At the moment we need to edge towards something resembling the Swedish model of sustainable social distancing and contact tracing, to keep the number of cases manageable levels. If we have good enough contact tracing and do enough testing, perhaps even mandate it for workplaces where there's a high risk of the virus spreading, such as care homes, hospitals and meat processing plants, then any quarantines can be very small and localised.

[bd139]

Indeed. Unfortunately I suspect that entire process will be immediately broken by the sheer number of stupids out there 

[PlainName]

when we either have herd immunity, be it naturally, or due to a vaccine

There is a suggestion neither will happen (at least, usefully):

immunity to covid 19 could be lost in months uk study suggests

But, so what - it'll be just like flu or a cold. Except that dying may not be the biggest problem:

as covid 19 persists around the world death is not the only outcome to fear

In a war, the most effective weapon is not the one that kills your opponents but the one that maims them and ties up your opponents resources.

[paulca]

The technical answer would probably be 'no'. But we are dealing with actual people, many of whom are bloody-minded just for the sake of it, and some just plain bonkers. It would take something like a complete lockdown to impress on them that this isn't a game. So the practical answer would probably be 'yes'.

Yea, the UK tied that.  People went, "Meh" and ignored it.  So they increased the restrictions like saying, "No we are serious!" and people went "Meh", and trotted off to the beach in their 1000s.  So the government went, right then, stay in you fucking homes and the police can enforce it!

Then people went.. "Why didn't you do this earlier?"

You can't fix stupid.

[paulca]

as covid 19 persists around the world death is not the only outcome to fear

It's a bit hand wavy, "We just don't know", but it could, or it might and people are saying and my brother's friends uncle said....

[Ed.Kloonk]

as covid 19 persists around the world death is not the only outcome to fear

It's a bit hand wavy, "We just don't know", but it could, or it might and people are saying and my brother's friends uncle said....

They say that you shouldn't leave the house if you wanna be safe. But statically, I am more likely to do myself a mischief at home. Especially when ladders are involved. And tree pruners.

[GeorgeOfTheJungle]

Yeah stay at home, very good, but most people don't get the pay if they stay at home. Private businesses go bankrupt without customers, so except for the usual public tit suckers that live in a parallel reality, that isn't a viable solution.