Coronavirus - Part Two.

[Becky B]

31 minutes ago, Anna B said:

I know intensive care, doctors and nurses are in short supply, but these elderly people are only in need mainly of rest and recuperation, which can be done by care staff in a Nightingale or hotel setting. Otherwise what use are they going to be?

 

The reason care homes are agreeing to take them is because they are being paid per covid patient they admit, (I believe it's around £1,000 each.) But care homes run on minimum wage, minimum staff anyway. This money could be used to pay care workers to staff them. 

Care homes are already staffed.

Nightingale hospitals are (or would be) staffed from staff seconded from NHS hospitals.  You can't rob Peter to pay Paul, when the  hospitals are full already.

These elderly people don't get escalated to intensive care, so numbers of staff on ICU aren't relevant to them. 

[Olive]

4 hours ago, RiffRaff said:

If that's the case, police time would be as well spent shutting said coffee shop - and non-essential businesses - down.

Schools are supposedly covid safe.  The school authorities claim it. Are they all kidding themselves? Fibbing then, perhaps.

We've had no visitors to our house since day one. Likewise, we've not entered anybody else's. In fact, I personally don't know of anybody who has, or admits to it.

On the latest figures showing that perhaps 1 in 50 are carriers, and from the daily rise in cases and admissions, your logic would lean towards literally thousands of households having visitors indoors?

 

 

 

 

The term 'Covid safe' is, and always has been, a nonsense. 

 

'Covid a bit safer' might be a better description.

 

Covid is a respiratory disease, spread primarily through the air in droplets and aerosols.

 

If you have a room, with people in it, who are breathing in and out, then you have transmission risk.  Proximity and time spent in the room effects risk.

 

You can mitigate to an extent with ventilation to get any virus filled air and replace it with fresh air. Wearing masks will have some limited effect.  

 

But really, pubs, schools, workplaces, anywhere people spend any kind of significant time indoors with other people, are always going to be a problem, no matter how many one way systems are put in place.

Edited January 13, 2021 by Olive

[Jim117]

My other half has just been given a letter by her employer stating that she’s a key worker in the event she is challenged by police. The letter ends by thanking her for continuing to come in to her Covid safe office. The office is an open plan call centre so no masks cos they wear headsets and are constantly on the phone. Windows are never allowed to be open for security reasons. Covid safe apparently means they’ve staggered the desks and instituted a one way system.

[RiffRaff]

3 hours ago, Olive said:

The term 'Covid safe' is, and always has been, a nonsense. 

 

'Covid a bit safer' might be a better description.

 

Covid is a respiratory disease, spread primarily through the air in droplets and aerosols.

 

If you have a room, with people in it, who are breathing in and out, then you have transmission risk.  Proximity and time spent in the room effects risk.

 

You can mitigate to an extent with ventilation to get any virus filled air and replace it with fresh air. Wearing masks will have some limited effect.  

 

But really, pubs, schools, workplaces, anywhere people spend any kind of significant time indoors with other people, are always going to be a problem, no matter how many one way systems are put in place.

In other words, from your description, we're stuck with it.

 

[The Joker]

Today we've had the terrible news that not only have we hit 100,000 Coronavirus deaths in the UK, but we've also had the highest one-day number of UK deaths too, at 1564.

 

You'd expect the press to hold BoJo to account for this, instead of whether he is allowed to cycle seven miles or not.

 

Still, that's what the UK voted for.

 

No wonder the UK's in such a mess, eh folks?

 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/13/uk-coronavirus-deaths-pass-100000

 

UK coronavirus deaths pass 100,000 after 1,564 reported in one day

More than 100,000 people have died from coronavirus in the UK since the disease first appeared in the country almost a year ago, in what public health experts said is a sign of “phenomenal failure of policy and practice”.

 

On Wednesday the daily figure for recorded deaths was 1,564 – a new record high bringing the total to 101,160, according to analysis of figures from government and statistical agencies. The toll far exceeds some of the worst-case scenario estimates made during the first wave of the pandemic.

 

 

[ECCOnoob]

"From" coronavirus is a strong choice of words by The Guardian there.

 

I'd like to see their detailed figures on that statement and find out exactly how those deaths are recorded. Even the daily briefings and the most anti-government television news sources are very careful with their wording of exactly how deaths have arisen and the range of nuiances of what exactly gets recorded.

 

There has already been plenty of criticism on the statistics bandied about and how easy it could be for someone to be knocked down by a bus who just coincidentally happens to have coronavirus to be included in the big scary death numbers.

 

Of course irrelevant to all that - to some people nothing will get to over the fact that "...everything's is all Boris' fault..." right?

[Delayed]

36 minutes ago, The Joker said:

Today we've had the terrible news that not only have we hit 100,000 Coronavirus deaths in the UK, but we've also had the highest one-day number of UK deaths too, at 1564.

 

You'd expect the press to hold BoJo to account for this, instead of whether he is allowed to cycle seven miles or not.

 

Still, that's what the UK voted for.

 

No wonder the UK's in such a mess, eh folks?

 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/13/uk-coronavirus-deaths-pass-100000

 

UK coronavirus deaths pass 100,000 after 1,564 reported in one day

More than 100,000 people have died from coronavirus in the UK since the disease first appeared in the country almost a year ago, in what public health experts said is a sign of “phenomenal failure of policy and practice”.

 

On Wednesday the daily figure for recorded deaths was 1,564 – a new record high bringing the total to 101,160, according to analysis of figures from government and statistical agencies. The toll far exceeds some of the worst-case scenario estimates made during the first wave of the pandemic.

 

 

Personally I thought you wouldn't be that upset about this news. 

 

You were the one hoping for the deaths of older Brexit voters back in 2017 (consequences of Brexit thread part 4) with your post correctly deleted my moderators. 

 

So you might've got your wish given the large numbers and the number of Brexit voters.

 

Still..all Boris's fault...eh?

[Olive]

51 minutes ago, RiffRaff said:

In other words, from your description, we're stuck with it.

 

Well, to some extent, until infection rates come down and the immunisation programme starts making an impact.

 

Until then we ought to be more aware of/realistic about where the real transmission risks are.

 

We've spent a long time obsessing about relatively inconsequential issues - how what counts as local exercise, whether or not you should be allowed to sit on a park bench.  Earlier on in the pandemic we put the majority of focus on handwashing and surface transmission.

Hopefully the message is finally getting through that the biggest risk is breathing the same air as an infected person, especially when you're in an enclosed, poorly ventilated space, even more so over a prolonged period.

[tinfoilhat]

4 minutes ago, Olive said:

Well, to some extent, until infection rates come down and the immunisation programme starts making an impact.

 

Until then we ought to be more aware of/realistic about where the real transmission risks are.

 

We've spent a long time obsessing about relatively inconsequential issues - how what counts as local exercise, whether or not you should be allowed to sit on a park bench.  Earlier on in the pandemic we put the majority of focus on handwashing and surface transmission.

Hopefully the message is finally getting through that the biggest risk is breathing the same air as an infected person, especially when you're in an enclosed, poorly ventilated space, even more so over a prolonged period.

You can only do what you can do. I did some work at my mum's house today. I wore a mask because the virus doesn't understand bubbles. I can't stop antimaskers doing what they do, I can't stop house parties, I can't hold the government to account for things I think they've failed on - not yet anyway. 

 

 

[Olive]

2 hours ago, Jim117 said:

My other half has just been given a letter by her employer stating that she’s a key worker in the event she is challenged by police. The letter ends by thanking her for continuing to come in to her Covid safe office. The office is an open plan call centre so no masks cos they wear headsets and are constantly on the phone. Windows are never allowed to be open for security reasons. Covid safe apparently means they’ve staggered the desks and instituted a one way system.

It's not very honest is it?  It's  clearly not possible to stop virus particles circulating in that situation, should someone be carrying the infection, and I'm sorry your partner and others have to deal with this situation day in, day out.

 

I don't know what the answer is, but I do think that claiming something is safe when it's simply impossible that it can be safe, is not getting us anywhere.

Edited January 13, 2021 by Olive