Coronavirus

[C8RKH]

20 minutes ago, Barrykearley said:

Yes but that’s a worldwide figure out of a huge number of people. Still dwarfed by malaria and other such diseases 

Around 3000 people are killed by guns in the US every month, so in a similar period as 3k die from Coronovirus globally, you can expect 9k deaths in the US . Cannot understand given such an epidemic 'Muricans are not panic buying toilet roll constantly.

Globally, on average there are more than 3000 deaths PER DAY from road traffic accidents, so 1m a year!  Better not go for a drive in your Lotus you'd be safer in an infectious ward!

1 in 4 deaths every year, around 650k people per year, so 54k every month, die from a heart attack in America.

 

Coronoavirus is BAD ASS, but it ain't the baddest of asses YET in terms of deaths per day, per week, per month, per year.  But hey everyone, PANIC! Society stops. People's savings get wiped out. People lose their jobs etc. Just keeping a perspective. No doubting it is bad, really bad, but it's not the end of the world. Just yet anyway.

[Barrykearley]

@C8RKH scientific fact 100% of people die

[The Pits]

Situation in Italy is horrendous, I really hope they get it under control soon as China appears to have done. Figures today are over 4200 new cases and 475 new deaths. Contrasting with China reporting just 13 new cases and 11 new deaths. Remarkable when China had over twice the number of cases if all the numbers are correct. Accepting that could be a sizeable 'if'.

Death rate in Germany seems astonishingly low at 28 deaths from 12,327 cases, compared to the UK's 104 deaths from 2,626 cases, I'd be interested to know how they have achieved this.

We really will see what the scientific communities are made of, the race for a vaccine and effective treatment is unprecedented. Given the importance, the financial backing and potential rewards I think we will see some incredible progress being made. One company has gone straight to human trials already. A breakthrough with treatment or available vaccine will change everything very rapidly, starting with calming people down. The world will bounce back quickly from there. Won't be the same as it was for a very long time and big changes to our lifestyles will be needed anyway from here on, but we may well advance medicine and microbiology rapidly in terms of dealing with viruses as a result of this. When all the world's brightest scientists are given all the world's money you are going to see some extraordinary results, just as we saw immense technological leaps taking place throughout WW2.

[C8RKH]

Just now, Barrykearley said:

@C8RKH scientific fact 100% of people die

Shit. Really. Argh. I need some toilet roll. Off to Tesco...

1 minute ago, The Pits said:

We really will see what the scientific communities are made of

As I posted earlier one Japanese company is reusing an earlier drug to good effect/reports from China.

[LotusLeftLotusRight]

There’s a bar chart on the BBC website which has the Italian deaths split into age groups. Up to 29 years it’s essentially zero, 30 - 39 maybe a small handful, 40 - 49 a few more, 50 - 59 a few more again, 60 - 69 is concerning, but 70+ is basically the vast majority. This might sound inhuman, but should the school and working age population of the developed  world stop everything to save some of our pension age population from dying prematurely? I am all for them self-isolating for the duration to survive and would do what I could to help, but is it really worth global economy meltdown based on this fatality data. I just don’t know.

[Barrykearley]

You won’t win the Princess Diana award for compassion ..... 🤭

[KAS-118]

37 minutes ago, Barrykearley said:

Yes but that’s a worldwide figure out of a huge number of people. Still dwarfed by malaria and other such diseases 

Well firstly I don't quite get the argument that X will kill a load of people but because Y kills more then there's no need to worry. 

However, that aside, there were 403,000 deaths world wide in 2018, 94% of those being from 1 defined area. So yes, that is awful but is not a pandemic and it has been isolated.

When the UK Government changed its strategy on 17 March 2020 - the Press Reports where that that was done on the basis that 225,000 people would die in the UK alone from Coronavirus. That policy was more akin to the 'carry on as normal' philosophy. 

So if you compare 225k deaths in the UK alone, against 403K world wide for malaria - then you can see it really is a significant factor. (By the way - deaths in the UK from Malaria was 6 in total in 2018 - so CV has well and truly beaten that one),

I appreciate that maybe there are bigger killers - but that doesn't mean that Coronavirus should not be taken seriously and that people should not take reasonable precautions against it.

Hopefully, the change in Policy will now significantly reduce those estimated deaths - but that's only going to happen if people act in a responsible way. 

[eeyoreish]

Isn't the drastic down turn in China numbers only because they have locked everyone down completely. The risk being that when they unlock there will be a huge spike in cases? This being why the UK didn't want to go into lockdown too early as they need a controlled flow of cases to build some 'herd immunity' over time.

[Barrykearley]

[andydclements]

5 minutes ago, eeyoreish said:

Isn't the drastic down turn in China numbers only because they have locked everyone down completely. The risk being that when they unlock there will be a huge spike in cases? This being why the UK didn't want to go into lockdown too early as they need a controlled flow of cases to build some 'herd immunity' over time.

That is pretty much the discussion I was having with my brother earlier today,  he was supporting the idea of closing schools and everything else so that people don't transmit the disease to others, he seemed to miss the point that when lock-down ceases either it;s not a problem because an effective treatment/cure/immunisation  has been proven and produced in sufficient quantities, or, the infection rate spikes as does death rate.

What does seem positive is the  early signs of positive results with existing drugs (the 'flu stuff but also HIV and malaria meds), because new drugs could be ages away, but existing drugs for a new disease may need less testing.  Do I believe that those will be available in 6 weeks- no way, so lock-down is as the UK government said (and I hate myself for supporting this) it needs to be delayed for as long as believed possible whilst not overwhelming the health service. If we don't delay it then the whole country comes to a grinding halt (take scenario, I need parts for my car, it's not food or medical therefore it's been forced to close, how can I go to shops /chemist etc?, same for plumbing, electrical etc ). 

[Barrykearley]

The one thing we are being lied to about is the government are saying no one will lose out for doing the right thing.

bollox

take a mortgage holiday. All it does it tab an extra 3 months on the end of the term - while it rolls 90 days worth of compounding interest forwards onto the remaining term.

for some that will equate to hundreds if not thousands of pounds

[tom kilner]

I'm sure they will have modelled the effects of lockdown-  induced economic meltdown and decided it was less bad than the quarter million deaths of unchecked disease.

Fingers crossed

[C8RKH]

I'm slowly getting the hang of this self isolation malarky.

[tom kilner]

So that's where all the lager went from the supermarket!

[andydclements]

Well, @Kimbers did post earlier photos of being in the supermarket, so I guess it's t be expected that he'd post that one from a few hours later.   

[oilmagnet477]

9 minutes ago, Barrykearley said:

The one thing we are being lied to about is the government are saying no one will lose out for doing the right thing.

bollox

take a mortgage holiday. All it does it tab an extra 3 months on the end of the term - while it rolls 90 days worth of compounding interest forwards onto the remaining term.

for some that will equate to hundreds if not thousands of pounds

Exactly my thoughts Barry. We went out tonight as a family (Me, Wife and kids 16/18) to our local restaurant. Was this risky/irresponsible? Well, I suppose, yes it has increased risk slightly (We do live in Norfolk!) but I'd far rather take that risk and show support for local business (who have become great friends over the last 15 yrs). If we don't support them, when all this is over, will they still be in business?

Why not give every business a chunk of real cash with the proviso that it is there to provide salaries to existing staff - keeping them in jobs and able to pay their mortgage/rent/food bills whatever and to cover other overhead if there is no cash flow. However the Govt deal with this it is going to cost an enormous amount of money - I appreciate there are no easy or straightforward answers but what use is just giving everyone further indebtedness through no fault of their own.

The tax payers bailed out the banks at ENORMOUS cost in 2008 - as they say in the Movies - payback's a bitch aint it

[USAndretti42]

On 09/03/2020 at 22:39, C8RKH said:

25000 tested in UK.

400 confirmed case - less than 2%

4 dead - 1% of the 2%.

So if you get it (a 98% chance you won't), you have a what, a 99,95% chance of surviving. As a result people are stripping the Supermarkets bare.

I'm sorry, but fook me, if the apocalypse really comes I want to die first....

I'm really not trying to trvialise it, just trying to bring some sanity to the insanity.

Your maths are wrong.  If you get it, you are one of the 400 of which 4 die, so 99% chance of surviving, 1% chance of dying.  As yet, we don't seem to know the chance of getting it.  It's as easy to catch as the flu is but has 10 times the mortatlity rate

I agree that the panic buying is stupid, thouogh.  I don't blame the media.  I blame the people who read to listen to only the headlines and do not look at the meat of the article.

[ChrisJ]

2 hours ago, Barrykearley said:

Had this outbreak occurred before the internet and information generation it’s pretty unlikely it would have made the news until it was over.

The Asian Flu in 1956-8 (no prizes for guessing which country that started in) killed 14000 people in the UK (1-4 million worldwide). Don't think there was any panic or global shutdown back then.

[march]

 

[Barrykearley]

30 minutes ago, oilmagnet477 said:

However the Govt deal with this it is going to cost an enormous amount of money - I appreciate there are no easy or straightforward answers but what use is just giving everyone further indebtedness through no fault of their own.

It really helps for the government to keep the people in line.

folks in debt and scared don’t protest after such events

12 minutes ago, ChrisJ said:

The Asian Flu in 1956-8 (no prizes for guessing which country that started in) killed 14000 people in the UK (1-4 million worldwide). Don't think there was any panic or global shutdown back then.

Exactly. 

[Chillidoggy]

7 hours ago, ChrisJ said:

The Asian Flu in 1956-8 (no prizes for guessing which country that started in) killed 14000 people in the UK (1-4 million worldwide). Don't think there was any panic or global shutdown back then.

Yes, but we didn’t have the Internet back then!

[tom kilner]

We've been shut in on doctors orders, and I can tell you 14 days food for a family of four is quite a lot. I'm not sure I could tell the difference between panic buying and trying to stock up for 4 people for 14 days.

Luckily the children don't drink.

Yet.

Now, where's the loo roll?😉🚽

[C8RKH]

8 hours ago, ChrisJ said:

The Asian Flu in 1956-8 (no prizes for guessing which country that started in) killed 14000 people in the UK (1-4 million worldwide). Don't think there was any panic or global shutdown back then.

In fairness both population density and international travel was much, much less. But I agree. Our parents and grand parents did not go into meltdown the way our current generation of selfish snowflakes has.

31 minutes ago, Chillidoggy said:

Yes, but we didn’t have the Internet back then!

Oh shit. You can get it from the internet!  😂😂😂😂😂

[mayevora]

I don’t even find it boring to stay inside all day ...but I don’t understand why in one box of rice krispies there are 2453 pieces, and in the other one 2467!

[C8RKH]

It's a shame you don't get the little toys in the box anymore. That would kill another hour ...