Coronavirus outbreak

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
I want it now, not a year from now
 

Unkraut

Master of the Inane Comment
Location
Germany
Due to covid or with covid?
My understanding is that very few die of covid. The dosage needs to be very high. The majority die with covid as an addition to existing medical conditions. This is all the more true the older the patient is.

It is also probably true that many of the fatalities are already near the age of normal life expectancy, and many might have died anyway in the fairly near future. In that regard, over a longer period of time it might be there will not be a huge increase in the average death rate over the course of the pandemic.

I've certainly seen this argued, especially by those trying to reduce the seriousness of the pandemic and/or the drastic measures being taken to curtail its spread. Those claiming 'it's like flu'.

I think there are two objections to this.

The first is that curtailing the spread is primarily to prevent healthcare being overwhelmed. If 5% of the UK population need admitting to hospital if infected over say the next year, this would mean over 3 million additional patients to the normal load. Even if you halve the percentage and extend the time as more younger and fitter people are infected who are less likely to need treatment, this is still far too many. The death rate will increase from treatable diseases where operations were postponed.

The second is that just because many of the fatalities are already old and frail this doesn't mean it doesn't matter if they die from it. They are still fully human and deserving of respect, and their deaths will still leave grieving families.

This may or may not be what your question was aiming at, but I have recently seen too many people playing down the seriousness of the situation either in comments sections or in their irresponsible actions using precisely this reasoning.
 

deptfordmarmoset

Full time tea drinker
Location
Armonmy Way
This morning I find myself trying to get a good grasp of the idea of setting up mass vaccination centres for the over-80s. Are we asking the elderly to break from shielding and massively increase their risk of infection while travelling? As far as I understand it, any immunity won't kick in until a fair while after getting the jab.

Can someone better qualified explain how the pitfalls can be avoided?
 
My understanding is that very few die of covid. The dosage needs to be very high. The majority die with covid as an addition to existing medical conditions. This is all the more true the older the patient is.

It is also probably true that many of the fatalities are already near the age of normal life expectancy, and many might have died anyway in the fairly near future. In that regard, over a longer period of time it might be there will not be a huge increase in the average death rate over the course of the pandemic.

I've certainly seen this argued, especially by those trying to reduce the seriousness of the pandemic and/or the drastic measures being taken to curtail its spread. Those claiming 'it's like flu'.

I think there are two objections to this.

The first is that curtailing the spread is primarily to prevent healthcare being overwhelmed. If 5% of the UK population need admitting to hospital if infected over say the next year, this would mean over 3 million additional patients to the normal load. Even if you halve the percentage and extend the time as more younger and fitter people are infected who are less likely to need treatment, this is still far too many. The death rate will increase from treatable diseases where operations were postponed.

The second is that just because many of the fatalities are already old and frail this doesn't mean it doesn't matter if they die from it. They are still fully human and deserving of respect, and their deaths will still leave grieving families.

This may or may not be what your question was aiming at, but I have recently seen too many people playing down the seriousness of the situation either in comments sections or in their irresponsible actions using precisely this reasoning.

And long Covid - which appears not to discriminate on age.
 
This morning I find myself trying to get a good grasp of the idea of setting up mass vaccination centres for the over-80s. Are we asking the elderly to break from shielding and massively increase their risk of infection while travelling? As far as I understand it, any immunity won't kick in until a fair while after getting the jab.

Can someone better qualified explain how the pitfalls can be avoided?

The mass testing centres are an option - if they can't get to such centres, they will be offered a jab from the GP or something more local due course.
 

deptfordmarmoset

Full time tea drinker
Location
Armonmy Way
The mass testing centres are an option - if they can't get to such centres, they will be offered a jab from the GP or something more local due course.
Thanks for the answer. It will remain to be seen how much longer people will have to wait because they're keeping themselves safe.
 

mjr

Comfy armchair to one person & a plank to the next
This morning I find myself trying to get a good grasp of the idea of setting up mass vaccination centres for the over-80s. Are we asking the elderly to break from shielding and massively increase their risk of infection while travelling? As far as I understand it, any immunity won't kick in until a fair while after getting the jab.

Can someone better qualified explain how the pitfalls can be avoided?
No.

Is the idea is to restore the priority treatment of cities, with a distracting sop to Stevenage to maybe line them up for an early derestriction trial to silence their anti-lockdown MP?
 

fossyant

Ride It Like You Stole It!
Location
South Manchester
Our GP practice was running drive in vaccinations for the elderly this weekend. Still no vaccination for the local care homes, where the risk is highest.

Oh and my brother is fuming. His business partner is off sick with Covid. He half owns a dental practice, and they have now lost half the appointments whilst his partner recovers. Said partner's brother fled London just before Christmas to spend it with his sister :wacko:, the whole family caught it. 'Oh it wasn't from my brother she said'. My brother hasn't been squeaky clean over Christmas either, as he spend Christmas day with the in-laws and his missus 3 sister's families (five in total). :wacko:
 

tom73

Guru
Location
Yorkshire
This morning I find myself trying to get a good grasp of the idea of setting up mass vaccination centres for the over-80s. Are we asking the elderly to break from shielding and massively increase their risk of infection while travelling? As far as I understand it, any immunity won't kick in until a fair while after getting the jab.

Can someone better qualified explain how the pitfalls can be avoided?

The main problem is the vaccine program is very top down and not bottom up and has stared to get split into bits.
Up to now the primary care networks with help form Hospitals have been going them. In the same way as every other vaccine program. They know who to invite and when. The letters that have started to go out on mass that's getting all the news coverage inviting you to a mass vaccination centre. Are not from your GP but centrally from NHS England who centrally will be running them.

So the letter are not very clear on what happens if you can't go to a centre. If you can't get to one no-one need panic they don't get knocked off the list. But your GP will contact you in the same way as they do with flu jab. If you really need to stay home then once you are contacted by your GP that's the time to see what can be done. The Oxford vaccine is much user friendly and more practical to be taken place to place. So the home visit option is now much more possible how quick it can be gone is a different matter and will be down to having the staff to do them.

As for the vaccine the phone in today on radio five live this morning covered it in a very clear way. Even after one dose a vaccine will give a level of protection the time for it to reach maxium protection of this one looks to be around 2/3 weeks. If you are thinking of do you need both for it work? Then no you don't basally vaccines don't work like that you build antibodies once you get the first dose. The other dose gives an extra boost. First dose as once explained to me at uni is like protection from all but the worse weather , second one makes it stand up to extreme weather. If your thinking of minimising risk traveling then that's a different issue.

Simple advice is if you are offered one and can attend go and have it and please if you book for one and turn out you can't go. Let them know and then it can be given to someones else. If not it will be wasted and even once more supply comes it will still be very much in short supply.
 

Johnno260

Veteran
Location
East Sussex
I have a funny feeling outside exercise will be restricted.

After witnessing the supermarket last week when the online delivery failed to deliver 50% of the food they need to control those better, there is zero distancing, and if someone is challenged over not wearing a mask or distancing then tempers flare.

This whole situation has made me face palm daily about how entitled some people are, I thought kids where bad but these supposed adults have a loose wire.

Social media has a lot to answer for, free speech sure but fanning some of these tin foil conspiracies isn’t acceptable.

People like Katie Hopkins have a lot to answer as well.

Like I have said before, ants have a better social morale compass then some people.
 
Top Bottom