Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Virus |
| Jump to newest |  |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"First take in the paper that was written back in 2018 and published March 2019 and digest and alert everybody with public information films. The MOD to find as much details from China back in November, poss Sept 2019. Worn all holiday operators to stop taking bookings for abroad, shut airports and ports CH tunnel by Christmas 2019 at the latest. " I agree with the shutting of ports and airports.. the latter should have been grounded at least 2 months ago | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"First I think the government is doing a pretty good job but I think all overseas travel should have been stopped sooner and people brought home and forced into isolation as the Wuan people where" As my last reply I agree with the travel aspect.. but disagree with the government is doing a good job. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Multiple testing for everyone. Know what you're dealing with." Germany is testing half a million a week. Makes us look like a third world country. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Probably exactly the same. Taking advice from the people who are educated and payed to understand this. I do hope that this results in all governments worldwide having a more comprehensive and cohesive strategy to deal with a situation like this should it happen again and have emergency resources in place. It's hard to plan for but makes me wonder what would happen in the event of a worldwide catastrophic event such as meteor strike or a huge volcanic eruption or a virus of ebloa or Zika level of seriousness. Not that c19 isnt serious. " Advice from our prime minister, health minister or chief science officer? No thanks as they cant look after themselves ffs. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Ordering appropriate equipment for the health service over 2 months ago, including testing kits, protective clothing and other essentials. Planning for measures, such as isolation of the population, should have also been done at a similar time, so that they could be implemented without need for delay. Social isolation measures should have been implemented around a month earlier at least, based on the Italy and China experiences. " This I agree with | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Ban people coming in from China when outbreak started Screen people coming in from infected areas Make sure NHS were prepared sooner Not advocated shaking hands Not advocated big crowds Lock down earlier? Tell people to wear face masks " FIFY Agreed | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Be more proactive Take up EU offer on ventilators" And W.H.Os offer of testing kits | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Be more proactive Take up EU offer on ventilators And W.H.Os offer of testing kits" Yes | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"An alternative strategy would have been to... Inform the public of the risk earlier on and then let them make their own arrangements to isolate based on their own perception of personal risk. Reassure the public that more than 99 of every 100 people will be absolutely fine. The less than one that won’t be will be very likely to be extremely old or extremely frail anyway, so they have the opportunity to make their own decisions early about how they would want (or not want) to be treated if they were to deteriorate. Weigh up the balance between the long term financial implications of shutting the country down for 3 months and restricting the liberty of 60 million, against losing a few thousand people nearing the end of their life anyway. It’s an alternative, but one I don’t think society would be willing to accept somehow, even with 3 months notice." Well it is an alternative strategy but your numbers are way off. 1% fatality rate in a population of 65 million is not a few 1000 it's a quite a few 100s of 1000. In fact 650,000. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"An alternative strategy would have been to... Inform the public of the risk earlier on and then let them make their own arrangements to isolate based on their own perception of personal risk. Reassure the public that more than 99 of every 100 people will be absolutely fine. The less than one that won’t be will be very likely to be extremely old or extremely frail anyway, so they have the opportunity to make their own decisions early about how they would want (or not want) to be treated if they were to deteriorate. Weigh up the balance between the long term financial implications of shutting the country down for 3 months and restricting the liberty of 60 million, against losing a few thousand people nearing the end of their life anyway. It’s an alternative, but one I don’t think society would be willing to accept somehow, even with 3 months notice. Well it is an alternative strategy but your numbers are way off. 1% fatality rate in a population of 65 million is not a few 1000 it's a quite a few 100s of 1000. In fact 650,000. " And it's 650,000 that at natural end of life would be evenly scattered throughout the year. But with covid-19 would all be dying within a two week period. Overwhelming hospitals, mortuaries, crematoriums. Also another couple of million seriously ill with covid at the same time, who could recover with hospital treatment but would die without because of hospital beds being fifty times outnumbered by patients. Also the background of every person with other serious but treatable conditions who would die because of being unable to get treatment. Which is exactly what italy and spain are seeing now. Break your arm - tough, it won't get fixed, you'll either be permanently crippled or die from an infection. Accident with that sharp knife - tough, you're going to bleed to death because there's no-one to sew it up. Early stages of cancer - tough you're going to die because the surgery/radiotherapy/chemo that could have given you ten years longer isn't going to happen until the cancer has spread too far. Your child falls, or gets something stuck in their throat, or gets some minor infection that could be treated with an antibiotic - they are going to die. This is the current reality for italy and spain. And very shortly the USA. And probably the UK. HERD IMMUNITY PLAN = MASS DEATH. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"An alternative strategy would have been to... Inform the public of the risk earlier on and then let them make their own arrangements to isolate based on their own perception of personal risk. Reassure the public that more than 99 of every 100 people will be absolutely fine. The less than one that won’t be will be very likely to be extremely old or extremely frail anyway, so they have the opportunity to make their own decisions early about how they would want (or not want) to be treated if they were to deteriorate. Weigh up the balance between the long term financial implications of shutting the country down for 3 months and restricting the liberty of 60 million, against losing a few thousand people nearing the end of their life anyway. It’s an alternative, but one I don’t think society would be willing to accept somehow, even with 3 months notice. Well it is an alternative strategy but your numbers are way off. 1% fatality rate in a population of 65 million is not a few 1000 it's a quite a few 100s of 1000. In fact 650,000. And it's 650,000 that at natural end of life would be evenly scattered throughout the year. But with covid-19 would all be dying within a two week period. Overwhelming hospitals, mortuaries, crematoriums. Also another couple of million seriously ill with covid at the same time, who could recover with hospital treatment but would die without because of hospital beds being fifty times outnumbered by patients. Also the background of every person with other serious but treatable conditions who would die because of being unable to get treatment. Which is exactly what italy and spain are seeing now. Break your arm - tough, it won't get fixed, you'll either be permanently crippled or die from an infection. Accident with that sharp knife - tough, you're going to bleed to death because there's no-one to sew it up. Early stages of cancer - tough you're going to die because the surgery/radiotherapy/chemo that could have given you ten years longer isn't going to happen until the cancer has spread too far. Your child falls, or gets something stuck in their throat, or gets some minor infection that could be treated with an antibiotic - they are going to die. This is the current reality for italy and spain. And very shortly the USA. And probably the UK. HERD IMMUNITY PLAN = MASS DEATH." Herd immunity in one hard hit is mass death but herd immunity, or to give it it's proper name - population immunity, is eventually the only solution and is the aim of all the possible strategies, but hopefully with the use of a vaccine. Until then it's all about different ways of spreading the peak so as not to overwhelm health systems. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I wouldn't have locked down sooner as there is no evidence that locking down sooner would have helped. I also wouldn't have introduced a ban on traveling from any foreign country, including China as there is no evidence that that works either. In fact Italy and the US that have tried this strategy are amongst the worst affected countries. What I would have done is test all arrivals and track then isolated any positives. I would have also mass tested around any area where there was an untracked case and isolated where necessary. This method of dealing with this virus is what has actually worked in South Korea and Taiwan without any need for travel bans or lockdowns. " I read today the lockdown is expected to save 140,000 lives.Dont know how true that is? How can restricting the number of people coming in from a badly hot area exacerbate the situation?genuine question. We havent had mass testing over here have we?On newsnight the gmnt estimated they will carry out 30,000 tests a day.I think right now we are doing about 7000?Are we testing new arrivals now.? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"An alternative strategy would have been to... Inform the public of the risk earlier on and then let them make their own arrangements to isolate based on their own perception of personal risk. Reassure the public that more than 99 of every 100 people will be absolutely fine. The less than one that won’t be will be very likely to be extremely old or extremely frail anyway, so they have the opportunity to make their own decisions early about how they would want (or not want) to be treated if they were to deteriorate. Weigh up the balance between the long term financial implications of shutting the country down for 3 months and restricting the liberty of 60 million, against losing a few thousand people nearing the end of their life anyway. It’s an alternative, but one I don’t think society would be willing to accept somehow, even with 3 months notice. Well it is an alternative strategy but your numbers are way off. 1% fatality rate in a population of 65 million is not a few 1000 it's a quite a few 100s of 1000. In fact 650,000. And it's 650,000 that at natural end of life would be evenly scattered throughout the year. But with covid-19 would all be dying within a two week period. Overwhelming hospitals, mortuaries, crematoriums. Also another couple of million seriously ill with covid at the same time, who could recover with hospital treatment but would die without because of hospital beds being fifty times outnumbered by patients. Also the background of every person with other serious but treatable conditions who would die because of being unable to get treatment. Which is exactly what italy and spain are seeing now. Break your arm - tough, it won't get fixed, you'll either be permanently crippled or die from an infection. Accident with that sharp knife - tough, you're going to bleed to death because there's no-one to sew it up. Early stages of cancer - tough you're going to die because the surgery/radiotherapy/chemo that could have given you ten years longer isn't going to happen until the cancer has spread too far. Your child falls, or gets something stuck in their throat, or gets some minor infection that could be treated with an antibiotic - they are going to die. This is the current reality for italy and spain. And very shortly the USA. And probably the UK. HERD IMMUNITY PLAN = MASS DEATH. Herd immunity in one hard hit is mass death but herd immunity, or to give it it's proper name - population immunity, is eventually the only solution and is the aim of all the possible strategies, but hopefully with the use of a vaccine. Until then it's all about different ways of spreading the peak so as not to overwhelm health systems." Can I ask a question? Much as I dislike piers Morgan he interviewed matt Hancock the other day and asked why he had abandoned herd immunity. He denied adopting this approach despite being contradicted by a scientist. Numerous searches also confirm the gmnt has changed its approach. It's quite confusing. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"First I think the government is doing a pretty good job but I think all overseas travel should have been stopped sooner and people brought home and forced into isolation as the Wuan people where As my last reply I agree with the travel aspect.. but disagree with the government is doing a good job. " Whoever was in power would have listened to the same “experts” So doubtful anything would have been done different Apart from Corbyn standing there with open arms welcoming it | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I wouldn't have locked down sooner as there is no evidence that locking down sooner would have helped. I also wouldn't have introduced a ban on traveling from any foreign country, including China as there is no evidence that that works either. In fact Italy and the US that have tried this strategy are amongst the worst affected countries. What I would have done is test all arrivals and track then isolated any positives. I would have also mass tested around any area where there was an untracked case and isolated where necessary. This method of dealing with this virus is what has actually worked in South Korea and Taiwan without any need for travel bans or lockdowns. " Did you see the BBC piece on exactly how Taiwan are tracking arrivals and isolations ? Explains exactly why they have been able to keep it under control | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"An alternative strategy would have been to... Inform the public of the risk earlier on and then let them make their own arrangements to isolate based on their own perception of personal risk. Reassure the public that more than 99 of every 100 people will be absolutely fine. The less than one that won’t be will be very likely to be extremely old or extremely frail anyway, so they have the opportunity to make their own decisions early about how they would want (or not want) to be treated if they were to deteriorate. Weigh up the balance between the long term financial implications of shutting the country down for 3 months and restricting the liberty of 60 million, against losing a few thousand people nearing the end of their life anyway. It’s an alternative, but one I don’t think society would be willing to accept somehow, even with 3 months notice. Well it is an alternative strategy but your numbers are way off. 1% fatality rate in a population of 65 million is not a few 1000 it's a quite a few 100s of 1000. In fact 650,000. And it's 650,000 that at natural end of life would be evenly scattered throughout the year. But with covid-19 would all be dying within a two week period. Overwhelming hospitals, mortuaries, crematoriums. Also another couple of million seriously ill with covid at the same time, who could recover with hospital treatment but would die without because of hospital beds being fifty times outnumbered by patients. Also the background of every person with other serious but treatable conditions who would die because of being unable to get treatment. Which is exactly what italy and spain are seeing now. Break your arm - tough, it won't get fixed, you'll either be permanently crippled or die from an infection. Accident with that sharp knife - tough, you're going to bleed to death because there's no-one to sew it up. Early stages of cancer - tough you're going to die because the surgery/radiotherapy/chemo that could have given you ten years longer isn't going to happen until the cancer has spread too far. Your child falls, or gets something stuck in their throat, or gets some minor infection that could be treated with an antibiotic - they are going to die. This is the current reality for italy and spain. And very shortly the USA. And probably the UK. HERD IMMUNITY PLAN = MASS DEATH. Herd immunity in one hard hit is mass death but herd immunity, or to give it it's proper name - population immunity, is eventually the only solution and is the aim of all the possible strategies, but hopefully with the use of a vaccine. Until then it's all about different ways of spreading the peak so as not to overwhelm health systems." There are 2 needs - to reduce the onwards infection rate R, of everyone infected, to as far below 1 as possible. And secondly to prevent the infections from overwhelming the NHS, such that treatment levels for this and other conditions remain optimal. As R gets closer to 0, the disease is on its last legs and will die out here. This does not require herd immunity, which to attain we'd likely overwhelm the NHS and harm health care for other conditions, especially those needing Intensive Care facilities. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I would like to think I would of shut everything down sooner but it takes alot of preparation to shut a country, way above my head. I think they are doing what they think is best for the majority. As long as their hearts are in the right place and they are doing their best in a bad situation, I can't ask anymore than that. We all make mistakes, nobody has a book telling them what to do, you just got to do the best you can. Can you imagine the stress and worry Boris Johnson is going through right now, trying to make the right choices at the right time? He's not been the pm long and Brexit was a big challenge for anyone without this happening. " But BREXIT was and still is a choice. If I have one big criticism of the government's handling of this it's not postponing BREXIT for at least as long as the lockdown last. That's not just because I don't like BREXIT but that I actually feel that anyone, either in the UK or EU, who is putting there mind to BREXIT now in the middle of this international crisis is simply not doing there job, which should be concentrating on Corona-SAR-2. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I would like to think I would of shut everything down sooner but it takes alot of preparation to shut a country, way above my head. I think they are doing what they think is best for the majority. As long as their hearts are in the right place and they are doing their best in a bad situation, I can't ask anymore than that. We all make mistakes, nobody has a book telling them what to do, you just got to do the best you can. Can you imagine the stress and worry Boris Johnson is going through right now, trying to make the right choices at the right time? He's not been the pm long and Brexit was a big challenge for anyone without this happening. But BREXIT was and still is a choice. If I have one big criticism of the government's handling of this it's not postponing BREXIT for at least as long as the lockdown last. That's not just because I don't like BREXIT but that I actually feel that anyone, either in the UK or EU, who is putting there mind to BREXIT now in the middle of this international crisis is simply not doing there job, which should be concentrating on Corona-SAR-2. " Brexit is no longer a choice, we aren't in the EU anymore. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I would like to think I would of shut everything down sooner but it takes alot of preparation to shut a country, way above my head. I think they are doing what they think is best for the majority. As long as their hearts are in the right place and they are doing their best in a bad situation, I can't ask anymore than that. We all make mistakes, nobody has a book telling them what to do, you just got to do the best you can. Can you imagine the stress and worry Boris Johnson is going through right now, trying to make the right choices at the right time? He's not been the pm long and Brexit was a big challenge for anyone without this happening. " Having a book telling them what to do is exactly the governments job. There have been epidemic crises before. They had months of warning of this one. They have experts to draw upon. They had ample time to dust off the plans from swine flu, or sars, or whichever other previous epidemic. There is an entire government research facilty - porton down - which has been doing this stuff for 40 years. They have the World Health Organisation to draw upon. They have all the data from China to draw upon. Government is supposed to plan. It's no good saying that nobody could foresee this - any halfway intelligent high school mathematics student could plot the graph a month ago showing the position that we are now in. It is absolutely certain that somewhere in Whitehall there are documents resulting from detailed studies of exactly this sort of threat to the population, simulated responses, estimates of casualties, economic impact, everything. It is the job of government to do this. Or do we think that the country is currently run by a bunch of incompetents who have been sitting on their jacksies for years, taking the money, doing fuck all to plan any level of civil defence, willfully ignoring advice from the experts that do exist, making it up as they go along, doing the bidding of billionaire businessmen, putting the interests of the country and its people in last place instead of first place? If government does not think that this is their very job to manage, to look after the people who ARE the country, then why are they even there? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I would like to think I would of shut everything down sooner but it takes alot of preparation to shut a country, way above my head. I think they are doing what they think is best for the majority. As long as their hearts are in the right place and they are doing their best in a bad situation, I can't ask anymore than that. We all make mistakes, nobody has a book telling them what to do, you just got to do the best you can. Can you imagine the stress and worry Boris Johnson is going through right now, trying to make the right choices at the right time? He's not been the pm long and Brexit was a big challenge for anyone without this happening. Having a book telling them what to do is exactly the governments job. There have been epidemic crises before. They had months of warning of this one. They have experts to draw upon. They had ample time to dust off the plans from swine flu, or sars, or whichever other previous epidemic. There is an entire government research facilty - porton down - which has been doing this stuff for 40 years. They have the World Health Organisation to draw upon. They have all the data from China to draw upon. Government is supposed to plan. It's no good saying that nobody could foresee this - any halfway intelligent high school mathematics student could plot the graph a month ago showing the position that we are now in. It is absolutely certain that somewhere in Whitehall there are documents resulting from detailed studies of exactly this sort of threat to the population, simulated responses, estimates of casualties, economic impact, everything. It is the job of government to do this. Or do we think that the country is currently run by a bunch of incompetents who have been sitting on their jacksies for years, taking the money, doing fuck all to plan any level of civil defence, willfully ignoring advice from the experts that do exist, making it up as they go along, doing the bidding of billionaire businessmen, putting the interests of the country and its people in last place instead of first place? If government does not think that this is their very job to manage, to look after the people who ARE the country, then why are they even there?"  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Advice from our prime minister, health minister or chief science officer? No thanks as they cant look after themselves ffs." Tbf if they had isolated and locked themselves away and not had contact with any other person, you would probably complain about that as well | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Pandemic strategy ‘not properly implemented’ Damian Carrington Damian Carrington The UK’s biological security strategy, published in 2018 to address the threat of pandemics, was not properly implemented, according to a former government chief scientific adviser. Prof Sir Ian Boyd, who advised the environment department for seven years until last August and was involved in writing the strategy, told the Guardian that a lack of resources was to blame. Other experts said there was a gap between pandemic planning and action, and that the strategy had stalled. The UK has been rated as one of the most prepared nations in the world, and some experts have said the coronavirus outbreak would have overwhelmed any government. However, a 2019 parliamentary inquiry into biological security was postponed and then cancelled because MPs were focused on Brexit and then the December general election." | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
