Current Affairs Coronavirus Thread - Serious stuff !!!

[tsubaki]

This should of been done in January, early Feb.

and March

 

[DrEFC]

We're now trailing a 20 min test to see if you have it.
Interesting development.

Patients for theatre in my hospital are having rapid tests in the morning same day as surgery!

 

[DrEFC]

Thanks for that, been looking for one that I can order for my uncle. Just go on the lloyds pharmacy website?

Near impossible- sold out I think. There are plenty of online ones.

 

[Jebus_lives]

You do understand that early lock down, fewer cases and less spread of the virus means the country opens up again sooner? Plenty of epidemiologists and virologists were looking in horror at China, then at Italy and witnessed the successes of other countries.
Ample time, an Island with easily controllable borders, and witnessed it travelling from East to West.... is the penny dropping yet?

I think the £ dropping interests Pete more than a penny dropping about excess deaths

 

[Barnfred 55]

It helps when you have been in lockdown.... lol

Careful you don't talk some sense into yourself mate

 

[Jebus_lives]

This should of been done in January, early Feb.

It was being asked for in January and February.

 

[Barnfred 55]

Patients for theatre in my hospital are having rapid tests in the morning same day as surgery!

My brother was in for chemo last week and he said his test was back the next day. Maybe he had one of those 20 minute ones too without realising

 

[davek]

Soz Dave you‘re wrong on this. Gloves are mostly pointless outside the medical setting.

Glove use is to prevent infection via blood or body fluids. Respiratory droplets don’t fall in this category

If they settle on a hand, and that hand can be covered by a glove, then that's potentially stopping someone being infected by transference. In a supermarket the option would be there for hand hygiene to avoid the need for that, outside that - say on public transport - that option wont always be there between major stations.

I grant you, it's a pretty niche circumstance, but the issue here in today's schooling of Brennan has all been about belt and braces...if one poster feels he's contributing in some way to stop the transmission of the virus, why discourage it? Why discourage that cautious mind set? In my experience, the same people who'd denounce glove wearing are the same people who wouldn't countenance wearing a face mask. These people are arguing from a selfish 'civil liberty' perspective in many cases.

 

[DrEFC]

Impossible to argue with that. History will show that we were complacent in believing that the virus will pass us by like previous ones.

Having said that do you really believe a Labour government would have acted differently? I don't recall anybody calling the government out over it that early on. Nor anybody in here for that matter.

And just say the government did all that and spent billions on it, and the virus didn't become a pandemic, then they would have been absolutely slaughtered for wasting money. Some numpties have already criticised them over the Nightingale hospitals.

But yes. You are correct that a good government would have anticipated all this.

But the good news is that this is now all in place, or will be in time to deal with a second outbreak, which was the question that I originally responded to.

The only person on here who frequently warned of this was Adam, our TV guy, and he was ridiculed so much I don't think he's been on here for ages. The same people ridiculing him are now calling for government heads to roll. Hindsight hey!!

I don't think I'm a Johnny come lately to this subject, certainly not in criticism of the government's approach and management.

 

[DrEFC]

My brother was in for chemo last week and he said his test was back the next day. Maybe he had one of those 20 minute ones too without realising

The others currently take 72hrs. False negative rates are pretty appalling for a screening test.

 

[davek]

The prosecution rests.

Here’s a picture from your friends at the China loving WHO:

View attachment 87709

Honestly, you’re making yourself look a right nob every time you talk about Coronavirus. This isn’t your game.

"Offers more protection", not offers no protection.

You cant even interpret your own links.

Lol.

WHO are also saying face masks are not required...and they're wrong on that too.

 

[Brennan]

"Offers more protection", not offers no protection.

You cant even interpret your own links.

Lol.

WHO are also saying face masks are not required...and they're wrong on that too.

I said it was unnecessary to wear gloves.

So yeah, wearing gloves offers no more protection.

So that makes it unnecessary.

Any more ?

 

[Blues Harp]

I don't think I'm a Johnny come lately to this subject, certainly not in criticism of the government's approach and management.

Well said...".but...but...we shouldnt be political about this and all stick together" lol lol

 

[davek]

@Nymzee @davek @Brennan There isn't a great deal of advice to say you shouldn't wear gloves, but there is advice to recommend that you don't, but rather maintain good hand hygiene.

Gloves, while they provide a barrier, are still a surface where you can become infected or transmit from - particularly to your face or mouth. So regular hand washing is preferred to prevent that. People wrongly assume that a glove provides greater protection when largely it doesn't.

The glove itself is only as good as not touching your face with the glove. If you don't follow good hygiene practice while disposing of them and after using them, then it's a bit pointless.

Over and above a Dr on Tik Tok here's some more advice:

You can say that hands are only as good as the amount of times you wash them - it's essentially the same point as saying that gloves are not a failsafe.

Where we came in: one poster told another to leave their hands exposed in a supermarket. Period. The exchange pretty much took on an ugly tone from that bald, unqualified declaration.

 

[LinekersLegs]

Impossible to argue with that. History will show that we were complacent in believing that the virus will pass us by like previous ones.

Having said that do you really believe a Labour government would have acted differently? I don't recall anybody calling the government out over it that early on. Nor anybody in here for that matter.

And just say the government did all that and spent billions on it, and the virus didn't become a pandemic, then they would have been absolutely slaughtered for wasting money. Some numpties have already criticised them over the Nightingale hospitals.

But yes. You are correct that a good government would have anticipated all this.

But the good news is that this is now all in place, or will be in time to deal with a second outbreak, which was the question that I originally responded to.

The only person on here who frequently warned of this was Adam, our TV guy, and he was ridiculed so much I don't think he's been on here for ages. The same people ridiculing him are now calling for government heads to roll. Hindsight hey!!

Presume that depends on who their advisors were. Is Whitty etc a political appointee?

Tbh think personality could make just as much difference as party affiliation - for instance I think any other Republican president would have handled things differently than Trump has.