The UK response to Covid-19 [MOD WARNING 1ST POST]

robinph

Donald Trump wrote: »

Quite possibly. Anyway, must have an amazing recovery for him to have been bad enough to be tested and then have recovered so quickly to get back to his salubrious lodgings.


https://twitter.com/OxfordDiplomat/status/1240776914693951496

What benefit would having a test do for someones treatment?

It is useful to know so that you isolate yourself and don't pass it on, it is useful to know for the PM as someone who is otherwise expected to be out and about "doing stuff" so that they then isolate, it would be useful to know for NHS staff so that when they recover then know they can get back to work...but other than that what does it do to benefit the patient.

If you have symptoms then assume that you have it and isolate yourself, exactly the same as you would do if you had a confirmed test result.

CelticRambler

meeeeh wrote: »

People in other countries saw what was going on and took things seriously. Living arrangements where families often live in the same house as grandparents don't help.

Unfortunately, that's not really true. Despite the examples of Italy and Iran, neither the governments of the (rest of the) EU/US nor their people really did take this seriously. And despite the rhetoric, governments now are not fighting Covid-19, they're fighting (albeit timidly) their own people, huge numbers of whom are still not taking this seriously, and will exploit any loophole for their own personal benefit at the first opportunity.

robinph wrote: »

The dispersal of cases around the country makes it far harder to try to stop before it gets out of hand, but it does relieve the pressure on one location and give a bit more time to get things in order.

The first part of this is correct, but the second part is not. The root of this pandemic (i.e. it's wildfire spread outside of China) has been a whole series of preventable super-spreading events - football matches in Italy, a happy-clappy religious congress in France, skiing holidays in Austria, political protests in Spain, high-society parties in Connecticut and Uraguay, Mardi-Gras in New Orleans ... and, of course Cheltenham in Ireland (yeah, I know Cheltenham's not in Ireland, but the cases will be.)

But in addition to that, there are way too many people deciding to isolate themselves - along with their incubating infections - in places that do not have the infrastructure to deal with this kind of infection. This is being seen in France, and it will become a problem in the UK, where people have holiday homes in rural areas that are almost completely devoid of medical services. What's there is geared up to cope with the odd aged permanent resident who gets sick in the winter, and the many summer holidaymakers who get drunk and/or sunburnt and/or nearly drowned and/or fall off balconies - not those who suffer from severe respiratory illness, who would ordinarily be transferred to a major city hospital for intensive care.

What did happen in Spain, what is happening in France and what will happen in the UK (possibly Ireland too, but it's probably too small a territory) is that the numbers of town->country migrants getting sick overwhelms the capacity of the local hospitals and the ambulance service; so those people will die in their rural retreat when they could have had treatment in the cities they left.

France has an advantage of sorts over the UK in that the primary outbreak in Mulhouse/Alsace was a near-ideal balance of high-quality facilities and a population that didn't know what was coming so couldn't escape; and they've been able to commandeer trains, planes and auto naval vessels to move patients out of the region.

Britain's people and government, on the other hand, had a heads-up. The people reacted, the government didn't so instead of locking down London and keeping the all the asymptomatic spreaders there, the Johnson-Cummings rumour machine leaked notions about locking down the capital without taking any action - ensuring that anyone with the means to escape to the underfunded regions could do so. The first remote clusters are showing up now; the avoidable deaths will be seen from next week onwards.

robinph

There is a lot of stuff over the last couple of days regarding people being sent back from wherever they were heading for "holidays" due to potential to overwhelm the rural health services. Those areas are shut down and people turned out of the area. It is a potential problem, but they seem to be limiting it as much as possible.

Did France/ Spain do anything in advance to stop people heading off to 2nd holiday homes?

PopePalpatine

Penn wrote: »

Now Boris has tested positive for Coronavirus

https://twitter.com/BorisJohnson/status/1243496858095411200?s=20

Get herd immunity done!

Jayzee.

Cummings will prob have it too

Half the cabinet as well

loveall

Wonder if Boris is working remotely on the Russians off the UK coast problem

Donald Trump

robinph wrote: »

What benefit would having a test do for someones treatment?

It is useful to know so that you isolate yourself and don't pass it on, it is useful to know for the PM as someone who is otherwise expected to be out and about "doing stuff" so that they then isolate, it would be useful to know for NHS staff so that when they recover then know they can get back to work...but other than that what does it do to benefit the patient.

If you have symptoms then assume that you have it and isolate yourself, exactly the same as you would do if you had a confirmed test result.

I think that you are being deliberately obtuse in your defence of the British upper class.

Johnson faffed about and delayed - resulting in days lost that could have slowed down the spread of this virus. Plenty of lick-arses on here lauded him for his decision, saying it was the decision of a genius.

The simple point made at the time was that it was easy for him to make that decision because neither he nor his family would ever be at the risk of suffering the same consequences. He wanted the great unwashed to go out and spread it among themselves and generate herd immunity so that his wealth and investments would not suffer. They could run the gauntlet of the public hospital and play Russian roulette with the doctors decision of which patient in the makeshift ward in the tent in the carpark get the ventilator.

MadYaker

Bojo's tested positive jaysus. I assume they've been doing social distancing for a week at least but he's probably still infected loads of people. I wonder did he have symptoms, id say world leaders are tested regularily.

robinph

Donald Trump wrote: »

I think that you are being deliberately obtuse in your defence of the British upper class.

Johnson faffed about and delayed - resulting in days lost that could have slowed down the spread of this virus. Plenty of lick-arses on here lauded him for his decision, saying it was the decision of a genius.

The simple point made at the time was that it was easy for him to make that decision because neither he nor his family would ever be at the risk of suffering the same consequences. He wanted the great unwashed to go out and spread it among themselves and generate herd immunity so that his wealth and investments would not suffer. They could run the gauntlet of the public hospital and play Russian roulette with the doctors decision of which patient in the makeshift ward in the tent in the carpark get the ventilator.

So what has any of that got to do with how having a test done on me or you would improve our treatment or change our actions?

Rants regarding the UK monarchy and class system belong elsewhere.

RobMc59

loveall wrote: »

Wonder if Boris is working remotely on the Russians off the UK coast problem

I understand that was a couple of weeks ago but has only just been reported.

Donald Trump

robinph wrote: »

So what has any of that got to do with how having a test done on me or you would improve our treatment or change our actions?

Rants regarding the UK monarchy and class system belong elsewhere.

The only ranting is done by Boris' defenders.

There were plenty on here defending Johnson's actions, even though it was clear that they would impact the common people, but would not affect him.

And so it has come to pass.


Here is the story of a lady in Italy who didn't have a test done. It might have helped her to have had a test and received some treatment. https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-gomorra-actor-and-family-trapped-at-home-with-infected-body-11955292

CelticRambler

robinph wrote: »

Did France/ Spain do anything in advance to stop people heading off to 2nd holiday homes?

Spain, definitely not; France, only half-heartedly at first, then three-quarter-heartedly, before finally introducing a ban.*

Once again, though, it was a clear as day to anyone with real epidemiological experience that this would happen in the UK too if matters weren't handled differently. Johnson, with his waffle about doing things "at the right time", opted for the "Italy minus" form of control, i.e. prompt everyone with the means to escape to run away before they were trapped. [I would include in this particular attribution of blame Patrick Valence, with his idiotic statement that this contagious respiratory virus wasn't going to spread widely in the context of public events. If that is a measure of the quality of the advice he was giving to Johnson, then it's not really a surprise that Johnson acted in such a negligent fashion.]

* Side note: there are currently five involuntary manslaughter lawsuits being brought against the French government for not imposing movement restrictions soon enough.

robinph

Donald Trump wrote: »

Here is the story of a lady in Italy who didn't have a test done. It might have helped her to have had a test and received some treatment. https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-gomorra-actor-and-family-trapped-at-home-with-infected-body-11955292

There is no treatment.

What would happen differently to your treatment if you had a positive test result?

cian68

robinph wrote: »

What benefit would having a test do for someones treatment?

It is useful to know so that you isolate yourself and don't pass it on, it is useful to know for the PM as someone who is otherwise expected to be out and about "doing stuff" so that they then isolate, it would be useful to know for NHS staff so that when they recover then know they can get back to work...but other than that what does it do to benefit the patient.

If you have symptoms then assume that you have it and isolate yourself, exactly the same as you would do if you had a confirmed test result.

Wouldn't fly with a lot of bosses who need you to come in. Positive test at least there'd be no way around it

Donald Trump

robinph wrote: »

There is no treatment.

What would happen differently to your treatment if you had a positive test result?

You know that there are people in hospitals around the world due to this virus? You might have heard that on the news. They are going in for treatment, not just for a comfy bed and a gander around the wards.


If you are tested and you are confirmed then your condition can be better monitored. Resources can be focused on the people who definitely have it rather than those that do not. But if you aren't testing anyone, then the people who do have it get lost in the noise of the people ringing up with a sniffle and a hangover who think they are dying from it.


Or maybe you are right and Michael Ryan from the WHO is talking through his arse when he says that every country needs to ramp up testing in order to try to combat the disease. But I'll go with his opinion over yours

Testing can also show that you don't have it, in case you are actually suffering from something else which might be able to be treated in a different manner.

robinph

cian68 wrote: »

Wouldn't fly with a lot of bosses who need you to come in. Positive test at least there'd be no way around it

That is actually a genuine reason for needing a test result, thank you.

But, there is a government requirement for anyone with symptoms to self isolate and the government will pay the statutory sick pay for the duration and no requirement for a letter from GP. Shouldn't be any reason for anyone to lose their jobs due to self isolation, and if there was it would already be all over social media... So for now we can assume it's not happening.

robinph

Donald Trump wrote: »

You know that there are people in hospitals around the world due to this virus? You might have heard that on the news. They are going in for treatment, not just for a comfy bed and a gander around the wards.


If you are tested and you are confirmed then your condition can be better monitored. Resources can be focused on the people who definitely have it rather than those that do not. But if you aren't testing anyone, then the people who do have it get lost in the noise of the people ringing up with a sniffle and a hangover who think they are dying from it.


Or maybe you are right and Michael Ryan from the WHO is talking through his arse when he says that every country needs to ramp up testing in order to try to combat the disease. But I'll go with his opinion over yours

Testing can also show that you don't have it, in case you are actually suffering from something else which might be able to be treated in a different manner.

If someone requires treatment to help them breath then how does a test result change that? They still need treatment to help them breathe. In those severe cases where a negative result can mean that they then treat for other known treatable conditions then it's useful to know one way or another. But if you don't require hospital treatment and can get better by staying at home then does it really matter what caused you to be ill, all that matters is that you don't pass whatever it was onto anyone else.

It will be useful to know at a later date who did have it, but for now, for people who are getting better on their own at home it's a waste of time trying to test everyone.

Kidchameleon

Absolutley shameful what I am reading here. So many posts virtue signalling and now the same people are relishing in the PM's diagnosis

threeball

Health minister down with it now as well

Harry Palmr

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Absolutley shameful what I am reading here. So many posts virtue signalling and now the same people are relishing in the PM's diagnosis

Please spare us your weird crap.

Donald Trump

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Absolutley shameful what I am reading here. So many posts virtue signalling and now the same people are relishing in the PM's diagnosis

Please spare us your weird crap.

Amazing how quickly one's tone can change!

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Fair play to Boris. Showing true leadership since the beginning of this crisis.

meeeeh

I don't wish Johnson or Hancock anything bad but it is funny.

Donald Trump

robinph wrote: »

If someone requires treatment to help them breath then how does a test result change that? They still need treatment to help them breathe. In those severe cases where a negative result can mean that they then treat for other known treatable conditions then it's useful to know one way or another. But if you don't require hospital treatment and can get better by staying at home then does it really matter what caused you to be ill, all that matters is that you don't pass whatever it was onto anyone else.

It will be useful to know at a later date who did have it, but for now, for people who are getting better on their own at home it's a waste of time trying to test everyone.

So nobody should be tested then right? We can beat the virus by everyone just staying at home if they have symptoms.

Get on the blower there to Michael Ryan and tell him your research findings there Einstein

:rolleyes:


(But of course, Charlie and Boris had to be tested. Even though there was no point testing them, it was worth testing them. I'm sure that Charlie had some urgent business to attend to. Perhaps he was driving the local bus for the rest of the week and didn't want to spread it. lol)

droidman123

Yes johnsonn is a buffoon,but for anyone(a poster a fee pages back) to wallow in the fact he caught covid19 and say its karma is disgusting.boards.ie reaches a new low,i hope the owners of this site are ashamed,doubt it though.

4068ac1elhodqr

Is there something they're not telling us, all the top blokes are catching the Verson 1 of the WuFlu,
Charlie, Hancock then Boris himself. (keep an eye on Donald someone).

Would it be safer to wait to see what a mutated v2.0 brings, with zero antibodies in store?
Assuming v1 antibodies would be still relevant to slight mutations circa November.

PommieBast

droidman123 wrote: »

Yes johnsonn is a buffoon,but for anyone(a poster a fee pages back) to wallow in the fact he caught covid19 and say its karma is disgusting.boards.ie reaches a new low,i hope the owners of this site are ashamed,doubt it though.

By the standards of UK politics it is barely batting an eye-lid.

Donald Trump

Catalina Inexpensive Piano wrote: »

Is there something they're not telling us, all the top blokes are catching the Verson 1 of the WuFlu,
Charlie, Hancock then Boris himself. (keep an eye on Donald someone).

Would it be safer to wait to see what a mutated v2.0 brings, with zero antibodies in store?
Assuming v1 antibodies would be still relevant to slight mutations circa November.

I'd say it's just that those people are getting tested. It wouldn't surprise me if Johnson and his buddies were having tests done every day "just in case" for the past month or more.

RobMc59

meeeeh wrote: »

I don't wish Johnson or Hancock anything bad but it is funny.

Would you think it funny if the Taoiseach got it?

droidman123

RobMc59 wrote: »

Would you think it funny if the Taoiseach got it?

Me and you dont agree much on things rob but i,m with you 100% on this.its disgusting

Itsalladdingup

meeeeh wrote: »

I don't wish Johnson or Hancock anything bad but it is funny.

Hope if you get it, no-one you know thinks its funny.....