Current Affairs Coronavirus Thread - Serious stuff !!!

[Kenshin]

What you say is true, but at what point does someone's remaining life, and quality of life become something that, in the grand scheme of things, isn't worth worrying about, which is basically what you're saying ?

I've seen, and sat with people dying of cancer or dementia, and keeping them alive can often be almost cruel, but equally, someone whose physical activity is curtailed by CVD can still get a lot of enjoyment out of the things they're able to do.

The role of family very much plays a part on factoring this.

How many dementia patients have close contact with family even beyond the point where they can recognise them? But at the same time there are many who are in care homes forgotten about as well.

When you talk about these types of patients then it's not them but family. You can't throw them all into one description because for every person who is visited each week by their family out of love, there is another who has no idea who they are anymore and never has a visitor.

But it's diverting the idea of who the patients are into some sort of value which is not really the same. There is no 'value' on anyone's life. Sometimes you have to remove sentiment from decision making or do so taking all of the sentiment into account.

Given 25% of deaths are dementia patients , is that a fair trade to someone's business / home / job? Not only theirs but their families as well.

That's the morality of it. At some point you have to take the first half of my post and the point above and put one aside , otherwise you can't win for either.

 

[Jebus_lives]

So dementia patients make full recoveries do they? Do heart failure patients at such a high age go back to living a full and normal life? You can't gloss over these issues for the use of a different generalised point.

The thing with average is that it tells you roughly what ball park the data is in. So the average age is absolutely important , especially when your own arguments include estimates from scientific bodies as fact. So you can't dismiss the average age yet hold ground on etimated data. Average age puts the mortality into a very specific age range , with the vast majority of that data coming 70 plus. The fact the average age of death is not 55 for example again tells us a hell of a lot.

If you just have that mind set that covid kills people that would not have otherwise have died at such a high age then you are removing the effects of literally every other way to die and focusing it onto one cause of death no matter what. You are removing any possible alternative to hospital patients and establishing that covid is always the cause of death.

Otherwise there is a very solid argument that dying patents are catching covid in hospital and ending up on the covid list despite the reason they are in the hospital to begin with.

According to the PHE surveillance report I shared yesterday, transmission in hospitals accounts for around 5% of cases

https://t.co/IGzfflBcQS?amp=1

PHE surveillance report regarding where infections are occuring. Mainly educational settings.

View attachment 104484View attachment 104485

Interesting from a report in March that states 'We predict that school and university closure will have an impact on the epidemic, under the
assumption that children do transmit as much as adults, even if they rarely experience severe
disease. We find that school and university closure is a more effective strategy to support epidemic suppression than mitigation' adding home isolation, quarantine and school closures would need to be the minimum requirement.

Sweden switched to remote learning very early in the pandemic course, which shows the timeliness of intervention in reducing spread.

The March report also states 'For suppression, early action is important, and interventions need to be in place well before healthcare capacity is overwhelmed' with school closure being the recommended action (albeit highlighting how damaging that could be on society).

So I'm sure how you can safely establish hospitals as the main reason for deaths reported among the elderly.

I suppose the question to ask is what was the underlying cause of death. Someone may be old, but have no likelihood of death prior to catching Covid-19, then catch it and die due to a list of factors arising from Covid-19. They would not otherwise have died were they not to have contracted Covid-19.

There is not an insignificant amount of information that is used to guide the determination https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...eting-a-medical-certificate-of-cause-of-death

Here's some more guidance https://www.themdu.com/guidance-and...ce/certifying-deaths-during-covid-19-outbreak

It's in the Government, a trust, CCGs, care homes interest to get this certification correct because it can have serious financial and legal implications if they don't.

The contention seems to be regarding comorbidities. I note you highlighted pneumonia recently. Influenza and pneumonia are common comorbidities. It's not surprising that people who die from COVID-19 have pneumonia. But, if you consider the underlying cause “that initiated the train of events directly leading to death” then pneumonia, caused by Covid-19 would be the certificate (Covid being the underlying cause of death).

If someone who gets COVID-19; which causes respiratory failure, and then dies of kidney failure due to being on a ventilator, they would have at least three things identified on their form: the immediate cause, kidney failure, the secondary cause, respiratory failure, and the underlying cause, COVID-19. Covid-19 has killed them, regardless of age.

I'm still not sure why you're arguing this, are you suggesting we just ignore these people? We don't include them in the stats? We stop treatment?

 

[Jebus_lives]

Haha

I think @bebo86 was trying to link this ?

An Open Letter from Pfizer Chairman and CEO Albert Bourla | Pfizer

As we get closer to an important data readout from our COVID-19 vaccine program, I wanted to speak directly to the billions of people, millions of businesses and hundreds of governments around the world that are investing their hopes in a safe and effective COVID-19 vaccine to overcome this...

www.pfizer.com

I know I've seen it. I'm sure he'll welcome your intervention, which was far more helpful than mine.

 

[Jebus_lives]

There is nothing logical in following the country that has managed to get rid of covid-19 and gone back to normal?

Think about it mate. Whilst you walk past the shut down pubs and other businesses , telling your friends and family see you next year hopefully.

Maybe write it on their Christmas card , there's no logic in ever copying the country who have managed to drop cases to practically nothing and went back to normal.

I didn't say there wasn't logic in copying China. There is lots of logic in copying China.

Perhaps as you write your Christmas cards, you can ponder upon what human rights and freedoms you'd like to give up to enable you to contain a virus to a city of 8m people and prevent it from taking hold again.

 

[Moomin]

According to the PHE surveillance report I shared yesterday, transmission in hospitals accounts for around 5% of cases

So I'm sure how you can safely establish hospitals as the main reason for deaths reported among the elderly.

I suppose the question to ask is what was the underlying cause of death. Someone may be old, but have no likelihood of death prior to catching Covid-19, then catch it and die due to a list of factors arising from Covid-19. They would not otherwise have died were they not to have contracted Covid-19.

There is not an insignificant amount of information that is used to guide the determination https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...eting-a-medical-certificate-of-cause-of-death

Here's some more guidance https://www.themdu.com/guidance-and...ce/certifying-deaths-during-covid-19-outbreak

It's in the Government, a trust, CCGs, care homes interest to get this certification correct because it can have serious financial and legal implications if they don't.

The contention seems to be regarding comorbidities. I note you highlighted pneumonia recently. Influenza and pneumonia are common comorbidities. It's not surprising that people who die from COVID-19 have pneumonia. But, if you consider the underlying cause “that initiated the train of events directly leading to death” then pneumonia, caused by Covid-19 would be the certificate (Covid being the underlying cause of death).

If someone who gets COVID-19; which causes respiratory failure, and then dies of kidney failure due to being on a ventilator, they would have at least three things identified on their form: the immediate cause, kidney failure, the secondary cause, respiratory failure, and the underlying cause, COVID-19. Covid-19 has killed them, regardless of age.

I'm still not sure why you're arguing this, are you suggesting we just ignore these people? We don't include them in the stats? We stop treatment?

When people with AIDS died, do we class it as AIDS or the common cold that killed them.

I'm just making a point that it would be a minor illness or infection that killed them in the end.

 

[Jebus_lives]

The role of family very much plays a part on factoring this.

How many dementia patients have close contact with family even beyond the point where they can recognise them? But at the same time there are many who are in care homes forgotten about as well.

When you talk about these types of patients then it's not them but family. You can't throw them all into one description because for every person who is visited each week by their family out of love, there is another who has no idea who they are anymore and never has a visitor.

But it's diverting the idea of who the patients are into some sort of value which is not really the same. There is no 'value' on anyone's life. Sometimes you have to remove sentiment from decision making or do so taking all of the sentiment into account.

Given 25% of deaths are dementia patients , is that a fair trade to someone's business / home / job? Not only theirs but their families as well.

That's the morality of it. At some point you have to take the first half of my post and the point above and put one aside , otherwise you can't win for either.

Can we really say that?

Lots of businesses close every year, how do we know that they didn't just close WITH COVID-19 rather than FROM it?

 

[JLW]

According to the PHE surveillance report I shared yesterday, transmission in hospitals accounts for around 5% of cases

So I'm sure how you can safely establish hospitals as the main reason for deaths reported among the elderly.

I suppose the question to ask is what was the underlying cause of death. Someone may be old, but have no likelihood of death prior to catching Covid-19, then catch it and die due to a list of factors arising from Covid-19. They would not otherwise have died were they not to have contracted Covid-19.

There is not an insignificant amount of information that is used to guide the determination https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...eting-a-medical-certificate-of-cause-of-death

Here's some more guidance https://www.themdu.com/guidance-and...ce/certifying-deaths-during-covid-19-outbreak

It's in the Government, a trust, CCGs, care homes interest to get this certification correct because it can have serious financial and legal implications if they don't.

The contention seems to be regarding comorbidities. I note you highlighted pneumonia recently. Influenza and pneumonia are common comorbidities. It's not surprising that people who die from COVID-19 have pneumonia. But, if you consider the underlying cause “that initiated the train of events directly leading to death” then pneumonia, caused by Covid-19 would be the certificate (Covid being the underlying cause of death).

If someone who gets COVID-19; which causes respiratory failure, and then dies of kidney failure due to being on a ventilator, they would have at least three things identified on their form: the immediate cause, kidney failure, the secondary cause, respiratory failure, and the underlying cause, COVID-19. Covid-19 has killed them, regardless of age.

I'm still not sure why you're arguing this, are you suggesting we just ignore these people? We don't include them in the stats? We stop treatment?

This is a really good point.
How many among the Covid stats fall under this category and the opposite of this?

I haven't seen these figures separating them, they all fall under 'the positive test within 28 day' data.

 

[Jebus_lives]

This is a really good point.
How many among the Covid stats fall under this category and the opposite of this?

I haven't seen these figures separating them, they all fall under 'the positive test within 28 day' data.

I'll do my best to answer later, remind me if I don't. I need to go out

 

[Kenshin]

According to the PHE surveillance report I shared yesterday, transmission in hospitals accounts for around 5% of cases

So I'm sure how you can safely establish hospitals as the main reason for deaths reported among the elderly.

I suppose the question to ask is what was the underlying cause of death. Someone may be old, but have no likelihood of death prior to catching Covid-19, then catch it and die due to a list of factors arising from Covid-19. They would not otherwise have died were they not to have contracted Covid-19.

There is not an insignificant amount of information that is used to guide the determination https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...eting-a-medical-certificate-of-cause-of-death

Here's some more guidance https://www.themdu.com/guidance-and...ce/certifying-deaths-during-covid-19-outbreak

It's in the Government, a trust, CCGs, care homes interest to get this certification correct because it can have serious financial and legal implications if they don't.

The contention seems to be regarding comorbidities. I note you highlighted pneumonia recently. Influenza and pneumonia are common comorbidities. It's not surprising that people who die from COVID-19 have pneumonia. But, if you consider the underlying cause “that initiated the train of events directly leading to death” then pneumonia, caused by Covid-19 would be the certificate (Covid being the underlying cause of death).

If someone who gets COVID-19; which causes respiratory failure, and then dies of kidney failure due to being on a ventilator, they would have at least three things identified on their form: the immediate cause, kidney failure, the secondary cause, respiratory failure, and the underlying cause, COVID-19. Covid-19 has killed them, regardless of age.

I'm still not sure why you're arguing this, are you suggesting we just ignore these people? We don't include them in the stats? We stop treatment?

All a lot of information there.

But I love this response , we ignore these people?

Why is that always the response ? At some point the government will ignore these people , because they will have to. The longer this goes on, the longer the country takes to recover from an economic viewpoint.

Like I have posted many times ,we should be protecting those most at risk and allowing those less at risk to continue on. Same as the ones in charge of the vaccine believe when they prioritise the same people. But what about long covid? Notice how there is always an answer to everything? Always a come back to any sort of solution formulated by a two Bob internet politician such as myself.

There has to be a change in approach. At some point the country will forget these people , it's inevitable. You can't stumble on for months and months and something has to give. The longer you keep shutting down, the more damage you do.

Because eventually all of this just doesn't matter if you have millions unemployed , thousands of business gone and thousands of people cut off from one another who go on to suffer mental health issues.

At some point , us crackpots will be less chatting wham and be predicting the future of the government plans.

 

[bullybeef]

This tier system is an absolute joke of a shambles which is no surprise given that it’s been developed by this utterly shambolic government.

Case in point... gyms closed in Liverpool but allowed to open in Lancashire.

Just shut the flippin gyms for all or don’t bloody bother closing any at all!

 

[Kenshin]

Can we really say that?

Lots of businesses close every year, how do we know that they didn't just close WITH COVID-19 rather than FROM it?

You are talking bullocks now trying to be funny again.

Try making that joke to a family who can't afford their mortgage because we shut down their business.

 

[Jebus_lives]

All a lot of information there.

But I love this response , we ignore these people?

Why is that always the response ? At some point the government will ignore these people , because they will have to. The longer this goes on, the longer the country takes to recover from an economic viewpoint.

Like I have posted many times ,we should be protecting those most at risk and allowing those less at risk to continue on. Same as the ones in charge of the vaccine believe when they prioritise the same people. But what about long covid? Notice how there is always an answer to everything? Always a come back to any sort of solution formulated by a two Bob internet politician such as myself.

There has to be a change in approach. At some point the country will forget these people , it's inevitable. You can't stumble on for months and months and something has to give. The longer you keep shutting down, the more damage you do.

Because eventually all of this just doesn't matter if you have millions unemployed , thousands of business gone and thousands of people cut off from one another who go on to suffer mental health issues.

At some point , us crackpots will be less chatting wham and be predicting the future of the government plans.

How?

If you are stating this, you need to describe how, otherwise you're pissing in the wind.

Your entire argument is based upon a failed strategy. All you are doing here is feeding failure demand. It's not a zero sum game, you can introduce measures which are effective and then implement strategy to contain. If it's done right, we don't have to go down your eugenics route.

 

[Jebus_lives]

You are talking bullocks now trying to be funny again.

Try making that joke to a family who can't afford their mortgage because we shut down their business.

The median length of time that businesses stay open is 2 years, most of the businesses that have closed in 2020 did so after 2 years so have we really lost anything?

Try telling a grandchild that Covid grandad is best left to die because he's only got an average of 2.5 years left.

 

[Woolverhampton_Blue]

I'm not sure a national lockdown's inevitable. But infections are rising all across the country, so, if that continues, it's pretty much inevitable that the majority of urban areas will end up in Tier 2 or above, with a similar effect to a watered down national lockdown.

My thinking on the inevitability was that the tier system will become unworkable due to resistance from the region’s themselves (eg Manchester) and inconsistency between areas under the same ‘tier’ (Liverpool vs Lancashire with the gym situation). There’s also no guarantee the system will work and with a national lockdown being proven to work (although at a high price) I just think we will end up there sooner or later.

 

[Old Blue 2]

I did. I still don't know what you're expecting.

If you can't understand that, then there's nothing more to say...