Current Affairs Coronavirus Thread - Serious stuff !!!

[Jay]

So you reckon there are currently 170,000 people infected with the virus in the UK now.? That seems high to me.

How long does the virus remain active in the body mate?. I thought it was only about 7 days. There's probably about 25,000 that have tested positive in the UK in the last 7 days, from probably in the region of 600,000 tests. Given the testing capacity now most people with symptoms will be getting tested. So what you are saying is that there are nearly 150,000 people out there with the virus that are asymptomatic. Or am I over simplifying things?

Here is another issue with "testing", well over a month ago i came across an article saying some recovered patients in South Korea were reinfected or the virus reactivated since they tested positive again weeks after recovering, it was worrying piece of news, so i kept following the updates from S Korea about that issue, in the next few days more reports started coming out, they started calling those who recovered weeks ago and asking them to come and get tested again, the number reached 160 people and in the end the Korean CDC issued a statement saying that they will no longer test the remaining recovered since it turned out that they were not reinfections or reactivation, it was simply a case of "dead" virus particles appearing in the PCR tests.

Paulo Dybala kept testing positive for 50 days (he never had any symptoms).

Now lot of similar stories from around the World are being reported (testing positive again after recovering)

So the problem with mass/random testing is that you will find lot of new "cases" when in fact those are old cases, people who were infected and were either asymptomatic or mild cases who still have traces of the "dead" virus in their bodies, so the answer should be in the number of new hospitalizations, we simply don't know (since no country is doing any clear reporting) about the daily number of hospitalizations, are the people who are dying today lets say in UK are people who were hospitalized in March and been in ICUs since then? Or they were hospitalized 2 weeks ago?

 

[Catfish Blues]

How are there 2 or 3000 new cases everyday in hospitals when everyone has been more or less indoors for months?

There's something like 200 NHS trusts in the UK mate. So, on average, 10 to 15 a day per trust, and, because plenty of trusts run more than one hospital, less than that per hospital and also a, hopefully small % of people, will likely have caught the virus in hospitals. Also, the number of positive tests don't mean there's that many patients with positive tests, some will have had multiple tests

If it was 10 per trust and one in ten people infected end up in hospital you only need 100 infected people per day per catchment area. Catchment area populations vary, but are probably 200 or 300k on average. 700 a week out of, say, 250k is about 0.3%, so tiny in the grand scheme of things, but when you add them all up, you easily get to something in four figures.

 

[OGG]

Awaiting more data but intial signs a tad worrying

As someone whose son is due back at college in California in late August (assuming travel ban is relaxed) It is worrying!

 

[Barnfred 55]

Then, no offence, but you need to get out more.

I went shopping yesterday, I saw loads of them, hell im even 1 myself.

I think you think vulnerable people means 60+, but next time you go out, take notice of how many fatties you see.

Don't need to mate. I just look in the mirror

 

[Catfish Blues]

so the answer should be in the number of new hospitalizations, we simply don't know (since no country is doing any clear reporting) about the daily number of hospitalizations ...

Not sure where you live ( the States presumably ? ), but new COVID hospitalisation figures are in the graphs in the daily UK briefings and are running at something like 700 a day in England.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/886865/2020-05-21_COVID-19_Press_Conference_Slides_-_for_publication.pdf

 

[Dixieslaces]

My lads school have quashed the year 10 return to school on 1st June, in a scathing letter to parents, they say the Government have not yet issued any safety guidelines to the school and therefore they wont be able to comply with whatever IS decided in time for June 1st.

For context, my lads school are the top performing school in Northamptonshire and are desperate to get kids back to maintain their "status" but seem hampered by the lack of clarity from the Education Ministers.

I'm not "digging" at the Government but it does seem, they are way behind their "imaginary" schedule for reopening!

 

[LouReedwalkonthewildside]

My lads school have quashed the year 10 return to school on 1st June, in a scathing letter to parents, they say the Government have not yet issued any safety guidelines to the school and therefore they wont be able to comply with whatever IS decided in time for June 1st.

For context, my lads school are the top performing school in Northamptonshire and are desperate to get kids back to maintain their "status" but seem hampered by the lack of clarity from the Education Ministers.

I'm not "digging" at the Government but it does seem, they are way behind their "imaginary" schedule for reopening!

Supposedly the government are now mulling over their original June 1st date after receiving a barracking from all over the gaff.

 

[Toast]

My lads school have quashed the year 10 return to school on 1st June, in a scathing letter to parents, they say the Government have not yet issued any safety guidelines to the school and therefore they wont be able to comply with whatever IS decided in time for June 1st.

For context, my lads school are the top performing school in Northamptonshire and are desperate to get kids back to maintain their "status" but seem hampered by the lack of clarity from the Education Ministers.

I'm not "digging" at the Government but it does seem, they are way behind their "imaginary" schedule for reopening!

My lads school emailed out letters again today.
One was solely the risk assessment they did for re opening.
It's when you see it in black and white, how obvious it is that they just can't re open yet.

 

[PhilM]

My lads school emailed out letters again today.
One was solely the risk assessment they did for re opening.
It's when you see it in black and white, how obvious it is that they just can't re open yet.

My wife was saying that a standard classroom, able to fit thirty children (not sure what age that specifies), should be 55m2. Less than 50m2 is deemed bad!

They have two classrooms that are less than 50m2 (mid 40s she thinks), so the idea of the children having any form of distancing isn't going to happen.

Liverpool are planning on having two more weeks of vulnerable and key worker children but in their own school, and then a slow transition to more classes.

There's a pretty slim chance that all children will go back before September from what they're planning.

 

[LouReedwalkonthewildside]

Distancing advice in England could change to allow closer contact

Britain’s physical distancing advice to stay 2 metres from other people is a “precautionary approach” and could change to allow closer contact, top officials from Public Health England (PHE) have said.

The guidance is out of line with advice in most other countries and with recommendations from the World Health Organisation, which says people should stay just one metre apart.

“We have taken a precautionary approach to say 2 metres apart, full stop,” said Yvonne Doyle, medical director of PHE in evidence to a hearing of the science and technology committee of MPs. “We are still learning about the virus.”

But, she said, the safe distance is still, being discussed and evidence amassed as the end of lockdown restrictions approaches. Doyle said she was aware that a reduction to 1 metre or 1.5 metres could make the difference between businesses re-opening or not.

“It is an important decision. We are clearly aware of that. We are aware of the requirements of the economy and business. We are aware of the concerns and anxieties of the population. But the science should inform the measures as we go forward,” she said. PHE is contributing to discussions in Sage on the infectivity of the virus in different settings and its transmission on surfaces.

Greg Clark, chair of the committee, pointed out that the UK was going it alone by insisting on a 2 metre separation. “Other countries are recommending a shorter distance,” he said. The WHO, Hong Kong, Singapore, France and China all say 1m apart is enough. Australia, Germany and the Netherlands recommend 1.5m while South Korea opts for the equivalent of 1.4m.

“In international comparisons, we are an outlier at an extreme end of the distancing that is recommended,” he told her.

“We are aware of the international differences,” said Doyle. They would be looking at “whether 2m is actually necessary or could it be reduced further.”

There is already evidence that people are less likely to get infected out of doors, which had fed into the decision to tell the public that they could take more outdoor exercise, she said.

Catherine Noakes, professor of environmental engineering for buildings at the University of Leeds, told the committee that the virus dispersed quickly in the open air. “The chances of you being able to inhale enough in an outdoor environment is very, very small,” she said.

There is very little evidence of outdoor transmission, she said. One study in China showed transmission between two people outside, but they were having a prolonged conversation, which suggested they were not far apart.

People can sit closer if they are back to back or side by side, she said. “We believe at 1m to the side or back you really breathe the air in the room rather than the plume coming out of someone’s mouth,” she told the committee. Passing close by somebody in the street, she added, “the risks are very, very small”.

Professor Andrew Curran, chief scientific adviser at the Health and Safety Executive, said the public needed to be involved in decisions about how they stay safe when they go back to work. Nobody should underestimate the ability of the British public to work things out for themselves, if they are given open and transparent information.

“If you have to resort to PPE, you have essentially given up,” he said.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

404 - Not found | Error Pages | Imperial College London

www.imperial.ac.uk

 

[Minimeister]

I cant see that. The vulnerable people wont be the types going to work by and large.

Some of the most vulnerable working the most underpaid jobs and living in deprived areas ie cleaners, bus drivers etc

 

[Paris]

If the government is looking for volunteers to test pubs and bars to make sure that they're safe, then I'm willing to step up and do my duty for my country.

"England expects that every man will do his duty".

 

[Grinch]

If the government is looking for volunteers to test pubs and bars to make sure that they're safe, then I'm willing to step up and do my duty for my country.

"England expects that every man will do his duty".

And lord help me if they want to trail long hours 5+ hours in them. FOR THE HEALTH OF THE COUNTRY!!!

 

[tsubaki]

if this is true, then this is both worrying and not exactly unexpected:

A low-risk scenario where pupils in England would attend school on alternating weeks was presented to the government as the most likely way to gain popular support before ministers instead settled on their plan for a widespread reopening on 1 June, newly published papers have revealed.

The government’s plan for reopening schools to entire classes of reception, year 1 and year 6 pupils on 1 June was not among the nine scenarios modelled for Sage by the Department for Education. But one of the scientists’ preferred options of splitting classes and having pupils attend on alternate weeks, which they said had “particular potential merit”, was passed over.

The papers of scientific advice prepared for Sage and its subcommittees reveal high levels of uncertainty around different scenarios for school reopenings, and over the likelihood of transmission of the Covid-19 virus by children of different ages.

One of the most recent papers, discussing the effects of increasing school attendance on transmission, concludes: “There is substantial uncertainty, with the relative contribution of school openings being driven also by the relative susceptibility and infectivity of children of different ages compared to adults, as well as the extent to which social distancing is or is not sustained in the wider population.”

Ministers rejected school reopening plan recommended by Sage experts

Documents reveal that PM’s current plan was not among those modelled for scientists

www.theguardian.com