The virus. PPE. Part 1

Status
Not open for further replies.
dod said:
think it's reasonable as our head politico that he gets tested if he's showing symptoms. He might not meet the criteria as such but it's important for them to put in succession planning etc just in case.
Click to expand...

I think it would be reasonable if there were an abundance of tests.

Those NHS frontline staff who are either asymptomatic and spreading the infection, or on lockdown at home but may not have the virus and could be at work saving lives are surely higher priority?

With parliament on recess it should be easy for Boris to take it on the chin and self isolate
 
cambsno said:
But I dont see the valkue of the checks. Say I am driving to meet some friends, or go to a park. I get stopped so say to the police I am head to Tesco for food. They wont know if I am telling the truth so pointless?
Click to expand...
They can ask where you live, they'll know which direction you're heading in, and they'll know where Tesco is......they don't need to be detectives :LOL:
 
KitsuneAndy said:
So how come Boris gets tested ahead of frontline staff? Same BS excuse that he "meets the criteria?" if he's not in hospital with it, he doesn't.
Click to expand...

Because he is the leader of the country - seems obvious he would be at the front of the queue. Even more so when you think about the people he comes into contact with.
 
Reports coming in from Nancy, France (an area struggling to cope) that 37 doctors and around 25 nurses have all tested positive.....one assumes that they're all be a cautious as is possible with their regimes.

Separately, mobile phone data shows that 1.2 million Parisians fled the city ahead of the lockdown.
 
Last edited:
Fuji Dave said:
Just got back from my daily walk exercise, just walked and saw only one person on a bus so folk are taking this more serious now.
Click to expand...

You'd think so wouldn't you, but a neighbour of mine's girlfriend just drove to see him so they could go for a walk together locally :-/ Despite her turning up in a corsa she's not a young scally either, they're both "mature" and you'd think have more sense.

Nod said:
Just about time to start planting beans for picking in summer so going to be a bit of a wait for those home (as in UK) grown runners...
Click to expand...
Same for Lettuce which is just planted this week in most of the East of England. Ready in about 6 weeks.

cambsno said:
But I dont see the valkue of the checks. Say I am driving to meet some friends, or go to a park. I get stopped so say to the police I am head to Tesco for food. They wont know if I am telling the truth so pointless?
Click to expand...

I'd hope people are not so stupid, but there will inevitably be some. However, the purpose will be one of deterrence.

Nod said:
MIGHT make some people think twice about unnecessary trips if they get stopped and checked a few times.
Click to expand...

This.

cambsno said:
The cynic in me thinks this is a stunt so he can be a 'man of the people'
Click to expand...

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
 
I
KitsuneAndy said:
I think it would be reasonable if there were an abundance of tests.

Those NHS frontline staff who are either asymptomatic and spreading the infection, or on lockdown at home but may not have the virus and could be at work saving lives are surely higher priority?

With parliament on recess it should be easy for Boris to take it on the chin and self isolate
Click to expand...
I don't disagree with the sentiment but he is supposed to be the man coordinating policy and strategy. I don't think he did a great job initially but can't really argue against him being a priority for testing.

Ironic how his words are coming back to bite him though :rolleyes:
 
arclight said:
I have no medical/scientific qualifications therefore a little explanation would be greatly appreciated, Toni.
I think that the body produces red cell antibodies to fight infection and that donated blood with antibodies cannot be used for transfusion ........... is that correct ?
If 30% of dontated blood has antibodies then presumably a similar proportion of the general population is infected ......... is that correct ?

I can see how that will affect the number of people who die, but cannot grasp how that affects the death rate.
What am I failing to grasp, Toni.
Thanks for all your posts. Always welcome.
Click to expand...

Italy and China have about the same number of reported cases, but Italy has more than double the number of reported deaths. Does this mean that there is something special about the Italian epidemic (e.g. older people on average, or a collapse in the healthcare system that means many people are dying who could otherwise be saved), or could it be that the Italian epidemic is simply much larger than the epidemic in China, with many more unreported cases? A serological survey (testing blood for antibodies to the virus produced by white cells) gives us a handle on this. If this is a large, recent, representative sample of the Italian population and the results are correct, then it does imply that large numbers of Italians have been infected already, perhaps tens of millions rather than the tens of thousands we currently know about. This could explain why there are so many deaths, and in fact the proportion of deaths begins to look relatively low rather than relatively high.

The antibody test wouldn't tell us how many are currently infected, just that they've been exposed at some point, though because some types of antibody (IgM) are produced earlier than others (IgG), it may be possible to draw inferences about what stage an individual's antibody response is at if the test detects both. To detect a live infection you need to swab the respiratory system and do an RT-PCR test that picks up the genetic material of the virus (all the testing you've heard about up till now will have been done this way - it's the easiest test to develop rapidly). There'll be a period when a patient with an active infection is positive both by RT-PCR and by the antibody blood test, but as the infection is cleared they will only be antibody positive (hopefully for a long time). You could therefore use antibody testing to identify immune individuals who could (say) return to work safely.

Edit: Coronaviruses aren't thought to be bloodborne or to persist long-term, so it's not like being HIV antibody positive (which implies your body fluids are permanently infectious unless the virus is suppressed by medication). I believe viral RNA is, in a proportion of cases, detectable in the blood by RT-PCR, but I don't think anyone has found infectious virus, or reported infection by transfusion of this or any other coronavirus. There is some interest in using 'convalescent serum' from recovered patients, which will contain antibodies, to treat others.
 
Last edited:
Using hydroponics, yes but there are far better crops that could/should be grown using those "farms". The hydroponic and associated lighting systems are fairly energy intensive too.
 
Nod said:
Using hydroponics, yes but there are far better crops that could/should be grown using those "farms". The hydroponic and associated lighting systems are fairly energy intensive too.
Click to expand...
Not just hydroponics, there is winter lettuce as well which is grown in the UK during the autumn and winter.
Hydroponic farms use LED lights which aren't energy intensive.
 
Last edited:
My neighbours are starting to pee me off.

Just like every other day since the beginning of the year they have all their familial tradesmen round working on their house, even though since the lock down it is only minor decorating left to do so nothing that couldn't wait. And today they have spent most of the day in the garden with their parents, brothers and all their families, about 15 of them all together. All talking about how often they are washing their hands and what a good job of social distancing they are doing. My arse. People like these are going to cause this to drag out for ever. :mad:
 
bass_junkie83 said:
My neighbours are starting to pee me off.

Just like every other day since the beginning of the year they have all their familial tradesmen round working on their house, even though since the lock down it is only minor decorating left to do so nothing that couldn't wait. And today they have spent most of the day in the garden with their parents, brothers and all their families, about 15 of them all together. All talking about how often they are washing their hands and what a good job of social distancing they are doing. My arse. People like these are going to cause this to drag out for ever. :mad:
Click to expand...
Grass them up.
 
Fuji Dave said:
Just got back from my daily walk exercise, just walked and saw only one person on a bus so folk are taking this more serious now.
Click to expand...
I went for a cycle with my daughter.
Plenty of folks driving to the beach then walking along the seafront.
 
cambsno said:
Because he is the leader ruler of the country - seems obvious he would be at the front of the queue. Even more so when you think about the people he comes into contact with.
Click to expand...
FTFY, so annoys* me, he is the leader of the Conservative party :).

Edit: not getting at you, everyone does it, and you can see where it leads with Trump & Boris :(.
 
Last edited:
Retune said:
Italy and China have about the same number of reported cases, but Italy has more than double the number of reported deaths. Does this mean that there is something special about the Italian epidemic (e.g. older people on average, or a collapse in the healthcare system that means many people are dying who could otherwise be saved), or could it be that the Italian epidemic is simply much larger than the epidemic in China, with many more unreported cases? A serological survey (testing blood for antibodies to the virus produced by white cells) gives us a handle on this. If this is a large, recent, representative sample of the Italian population and the results are correct, then it does imply that large numbers of Italians have been infected already, perhaps tens of millions rather than the tens of thousands we currently know about. This could explain why there are so many deaths, and in fact the proportion of deaths begins to look relatively low rather than relatively high.

The antibody test wouldn't tell us how many are currently infected, just that they've been exposed at some point, though because some types of antibody (IgM) are produced earlier than others (IgG), it may be possible to draw inferences about what stage an individual's antibody response is at if the test detects both. To detect a live infection you need to swab the respiratory system and do an RT-PCR test that picks up the genetic material of the virus (all the testing you've heard about up till now will have been done this way - it's the easiest test to develop rapidly). There'll be a period when a patient with an active infection is positive both by RT-PCR and by the antibody blood test, but as the infection is cleared they will only be antibody positive (hopefully for a long time). You could therefore use antibody testing to identify immune individuals who could (say) return to work safely.

Edit: Coronaviruses aren't thought to be bloodborne or to persist long-term, so it's not like being HIV antibody positive (which implies your body fluids are permanently infectious unless the virus is suppressed by medication). I believe viral RNA is, in a proportion of cases, detectable in the blood by RT-PCR, but I don't think anyone has found infectious virus, or reported infection by transfusion of this or any other coronavirus.
Click to expand...

Excellent, thank you. (y)
You have previously flagged up the risk of drawing conclusions from the published statistics (which do not show the entire picture).
That was a valid warning. Having looked at the stats for testing there are a large number of countries with low test numbers. How can the scale of this disease be established without large scale testing.
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/...K+RUS+NOR+VNM+USA+GBR+KOR+JPN+ITA+IRN+ISL+CHE
 
Nod said:
MIGHT make some people think twice about unnecessary trips if they get stopped and checked a few times.
Click to expand...

How would you decide what is an unnecessary trip. People need excercise for physical and mental wellbeing (especially during lockdown).
Many folk live in areas where a walk would take them through areas where they would encounter many people.
People can drive to a place where they can walk without encountering people. It is very clear that those who drive to a quiet place to walk are posing no risk to themselves or others. Their journey to that walk is justified.
 
arclight said:
How would you decide what is an unnecessary trip. People need excercise for physical and mental wellbeing (especially during lockdown).
Many folk live in areas where a walk would take them through areas where they would encounter many people.
People can drive to a place where they can walk without encountering people. It is very clear that those who drive to a quiet place to walk are posing no risk to themselves or others. Their journey to that walk is justified.
Click to expand...

Indeed, I am tempted (to get away from monotony of things) to take a 10 min drive to a local woodland area. Often I can go there and never see anyone, around 50% of the time you may see one or two others there.
 
arclight said:
How would you decide what is an unnecessary trip. People need excercise for physical and mental wellbeing (especially during lockdown).
Many folk live in areas where a walk would take them through areas where they would encounter many people.
People can drive to a place where they can walk without encountering people. It is very clear that those who drive to a quiet place to walk are posing no risk to themselves or others. Their journey to that walk is justified.
Click to expand...
The problem is if everyone starts doing it. The fact they are driving may not put anyone at risk of coronavirus, but could put someone at risk if they have an accident, and they may then need medical treatment when the NHS are stretched.
I know the chances of that happening are maybe low, but it's not "no risk"
 
arclight said:
How would you decide what is an unnecessary trip. People need excercise for physical and mental wellbeing (especially during lockdown).
Many folk live in areas where a walk would take them through areas where they would encounter many people.
People can drive to a place where they can walk without encountering people. It is very clear that those who drive to a quiet place to walk are posing no risk to themselves or others. Their journey to that walk is justified.
Click to expand...
From what they were saying on TV, Exercise should be taken locally, there was even mention of a run being no more than 1km.
Journeys to take exercise isn't justifiable. An unnecessary journey in a car poses the risk of being involved in an accident and possibly getting hurt. The idea of the lockdown is to reduce the amount of traffic on the roads and reduce the possibility of accidents and unnecessary work for the NHS.
 
nilagin said:
From what they were saying on TV, Exercise should be taken locally, there was even mention of a run being no more than 1km.
Journeys to take exercise isn't justifiable. An unnecessary journey in a car poses the risk of being involved in an accident and possibly getting hurt. The idea of the lockdown is to reduce the amount of traffic on the roads and reduce the possibility of accidents and unnecessary work for the NHS.
Click to expand...
They need to make things clearer I think.
I've not seen anything that says how long a run should be, or how long you should walk or cycle.
I think I did hear Boris say that people shouldn't be driving to exercise or take their dogs out though.
 
nilagin said:
They have street cameras that they use for parking offences etc. They could easily track a car especially as the roads are now significantly quieter and there are fewer cars and people about. Especially if the same car is seen very often.
Click to expand...

And it will be there to stay long after virus is gone. People will better get bloody outraged over this and other authoritarian power grabs.

Honestly if you go out walking your dog or to supermarket you are now much better off leaving your phone at home and wearing a nice big hat. I've already adopted these measures a few days ago.
 
Bobsyeruncle said:
They need to make things clearer I think.
I've not seen anything that says how long a run should be, or how long you should walk or cycle.
I think I did hear Boris say that people shouldn't be driving to exercise or take their dogs out though.
Click to expand...

That's just it, I'd love to go for a "walk" but I'd need to get to a park where there's a decent footpath and that would mean taking the car.
 
LongLensPhotography said:
And it will be there to stay long after virus is gone. People will better get bloody outraged over this and other authoritarian power grabs.

Honestly if you go out walking your dog or to supermarket you are now much better off leaving your phone at home and wearing a nice big hat. I've already adopted these measures a few days ago.
Click to expand...
Is your hat made out of tinfoil? :LOL:
The cameras have been there for years.
What have you got to hide? :)
 
Last edited:
Bobsyeruncle said:
Is your hat made out of tinfoil? :LOL:
The cameras have been there for years.
What have you got to hide? :)
Click to expand...

Soon you will be getting fines through the post for stepping out of your local 1km perimeter, Italy style. The up the horror incrementally.

Any large hat will do, even tinfoil or KKK style. Burqa would be my favourite actually with face mask inbuilt.
 
LongLensPhotography said:
Soon you will be getting fines through the post for stepping out of your local 1km perimeter, Italy style. The up the horror incrementally.

Any large hat will do, even tinfoil or KKK style. Burqa would be my favourite actually with face mask inbuilt.
Click to expand...
Aren't you becoming a bit paranoid?
Or are you winding us up?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top