Coronavirus

[becchio bear]

Boris transferred into intensive care at 7 pm tonight

[becchio bear]

One of Mrs Bob's friends has an uncle die and aunt very sick who live very close to us. It's real and it's here!

Sorry to hear that Bob

[gessa]

One of Mrs Bob's friends has an uncle die and aunt very sick who live very close to us. It's real and it's here!

Condolences Bob.

[Mrs64]

Boris transferred into intensive care at 7 pm tonight

He doesn't look at all well yesterday

[becchio bear]

He doesn't look at all well yesterday

He didn't look well last Thursday when he was out on the steps of Downing Street clapping. This must be the second wave they talk about and no he didn't look well yesterday.

[John in Louisiana]

Wishing your PM a full and quick recovery.........

[Velotrax]

Maybe peeps will start to take this serious now, on the estate I live on there have been kids playing footy while their mum's sit in the bus shelter smoking weed, ffs they will be the first to complain if they get it !

[1964white]

Maybe peeps will start to take this serious now, on the estate I live on there have been kids playing footy while their mum's sit in the bus shelter smoking weed, ffs they will be the first to complain if they get it !

Obviously one of those parents incapable of looking after her kids Velo

[becchio bear]

I'm getting increasingly frustrated with my family!! I live in Leeds, my mum lives in Doncaster and so does my sister and her family. Sister working from home, brother in law still working, (decorator so not a key worker) teenage son at home. Eldest son is a teacher who works away. He came home briefly, had to go back to school and the house he lives in, as he's on a rota to keep the school open for kids of key workers and vulnerable kids.

As stated in a previous post I haven't seen my mum or 2 eldest sons since all this kicked off. I ring my mum daily as she says she's lonely. Anyway, during the conversation this evening she says my sister's eldest son has come back again and she's pleased as he will be able to do her shopping for her etc. So now we have 2 households merged and visiting my mum!! He's been in contact with goodness knows who whilst at school, shopping etc and now in contact with his dad who is out decorating a house and mixing with others etc ...... My mum is in her 80s and had a mini stroke the other year and is supposed to be self isolating. Am I wrong to be frustrated/annoyed/anxious/worried?

[1964white]

I'm getting increasingly frustrated with my family!! I live in Leeds, my mum lives in Doncaster and so does my sister and her family. Sister working from home, brother in law still working, (decorator so not a key worker) teenage son at home. Eldest son is a teacher who works away. He came home briefly, had to go back to school and the house he lives in, as he's on a rota to keep the school open for kids of key workers and vulnerable kids.

As stated in a previous post I haven't seen my mum or 2 eldest sons since all this kicked off. I ring my mum daily as she says she's lonely. Anyway, during the conversation this evening she says my sister's eldest son has come back again and she's pleased as he will be able to do her shopping for her etc. So now we have 2 households merged and visiting my mum!! He's been in contact with goodness knows who whilst at school, shopping etc and now in contact with his dad who is out decorating a house and mixing with others etc ...... My mum is in her 80s and had a mini stroke the other year and is supposed to be self isolating. Am I wrong to be frustrated/annoyed/anxious/worried?

Not at all young lady

[weasel]

I'm getting increasingly frustrated with my family!! I live in Leeds, my mum lives in Doncaster and so does my sister and her family. Sister working from home, brother in law still working, (decorator so not a key worker) teenage son at home. Eldest son is a teacher who works away. He came home briefly, had to go back to school and the house he lives in, as he's on a rota to keep the school open for kids of key workers and vulnerable kids.

As stated in a previous post I haven't seen my mum or 2 eldest sons since all this kicked off. I ring my mum daily as she says she's lonely. Anyway, during the conversation this evening she says my sister's eldest son has come back again and she's pleased as he will be able to do her shopping for her etc. So now we have 2 households merged and visiting my mum!! He's been in contact with goodness knows who whilst at school, shopping etc and now in contact with his dad who is out decorating a house and mixing with others etc ...... My mum is in her 80s and had a mini stroke the other year and is supposed to be self isolating. Am I wrong to be frustrated/annoyed/anxious/worried?

I dare say this sort of thing will be going on all over the country and to be honest it is likely what the govt actually wants as what it means is a slow trickle of infections which means the NHS can cope with it and the virus works its way through the population. If for example 500,000 people became infected per month and out of that 10% (50,000) got seriously ill of which half of those (25,000) people needed hospital treatment then the NHS would likely cope. What it can't cope with is millions getting infected all at the same time.

As the amount of equipment, medication and testing increases then I can see more people being allowed to mingle, especially when more and more people have had the virus and survived and are no longer contagious as if for example 5m people were mixing but 2m of those people had had the disease and weren't contagious then the amount of people able to get infected is far less.

The only way we get to the other side is by everyone actually getting infected, what we cannot have however is too many getting infected at the same time as the NHS wouldn't cope due to the amount of hospitals shut down in recent years and the amount of staff cuts.

[Richard]

I dare say this sort of thing will be going on all over the country and to be honest it is likely what the govt actually wants as what it means is a slow trickle of infections which means the NHS can cope with it and the virus works its way through the population. If for example 500,000 people became infected per month and out of that 10% (50,000) got seriously ill of which half of those (25,000) people needed hospital treatment then the NHS would likely cope. What it can't cope with is millions getting infected all at the same time.

As the amount of equipment, medication and testing increases then I can see more people being allowed to mingle, especially when more and more people have had the virus and survived and are no longer contagious as if for example 5m people were mixing but 2m of those people had had the disease and weren't contagious then the amount of people able to get infected is far less.

The only way we get to the other side is by everyone actually getting infected, what we cannot have however is too many getting infected at the same time as the NHS wouldn't cope due to the amount of hospitals shut down in recent years and the amount of staff cuts.

Agree with all this. Amazon delivering games and non essentials, B&Q, Screwfix and Wickes all open along with takeaways. A mate of mines been recruited by Wickes they can’t keep up with demand at the moment. He is delivering to residential customers, paint, doors, wood stain, nothing essential.

[Velotrax]

Maybe I've got this wrong, correct me if I do, it won't be the first time.....but the 'lock down' is to reduce the contact between each other, thus reducing the contamination of the virus, so we need to limit he contact with other peeps? we all need to eat, so we keeping our distance in the suppermarkets etc , but we also need keep ourselves busy, I have almost finished painting my flat! The point I'm trying to make, although not too well,is we will only beat this virus by cutting down the no of peeps we come into contact with, but we still need to interact, but the less we do the better....or am I wrong?

[1964white]

Maybe I've got this wrong, correct me if I do, it won't be the first time.....but the 'lock down' is to reduce the contact between each other, thus reducing the contamination of the virus, so we need to limit he contact with other peeps? we all need to eat, so we keeping our distance in the suppermarkets etc , but we also need keep ourselves busy, I have almost finished painting my flat! The point I'm trying to make, although not too well,is we will only beat this virus by cutting down the no of peeps we come into contact with, but we still need to interact, but the less we do the better....or am I wrong?

No you are not wrong, you are bang on right with your opinion

[Peter in Blackpool]

I dare say this sort of thing will be going on all over the country and to be honest it is likely what the govt actually wants as what it means is a slow trickle of infections which means the NHS can cope with it and the virus works its way through the population. If for example 500,000 people became infected per month and out of that 10% (50,000) got seriously ill of which half of those (25,000) people needed hospital treatment then the NHS would likely cope. What it can't cope with is millions getting infected all at the same time.

As the amount of equipment, medication and testing increases then I can see more people being allowed to mingle, especially when more and more people have had the virus and survived and are no longer contagious as if for example 5m people were mixing but 2m of those people had had the disease and weren't contagious then the amount of people able to get infected is far less.

The only way we get to the other side is by everyone actually getting infected, what we cannot have however is too many getting infected at the same time as the NHS wouldn't cope due to the amount of hospitals shut down in recent years and the amount of staff cuts.

I would object to your last statement, no health authority in the world would cope with a high peak of infections at once.

yes lockdown is not to stop the virus but to limit the number of infections to allow the nhs to cope. Preparations have been excellent what with this 4000 bed nightingale hospital and many more ventilators available.

Your solution is called herd immunity and would require 60% minimum with immunity to start being effective, the only other end game is of course vaccination.

which comes first herd immunity or vaccination?

either way, people will still get infected and die until one of those comes to pass

[Peter in Blackpool]

Maybe I've got this wrong, correct me if I do, it won't be the first time.....but the 'lock down' is to reduce the contact between each other, thus reducing the contamination of the virus, so we need to limit he contact with other peeps? we all need to eat, so we keeping our distance in the suppermarkets etc , but we also need keep ourselves busy, I have almost finished painting my flat! The point I'm trying to make, although not too well,is we will only beat this virus by cutting down the no of peeps we come into contact with, but we still need to interact, but the less we do the better....or am I wrong?

no, that is quite right. diy and gardening shops should be open. Its springtime and one has to do something for moral. Sitting at home day after day with nothing to do makes picnics and days out look very attractive.

Lockdown is to regulate the number of infections, if infections get too low then it will be relaxed to create more , too many infections and it will be tightened, the goal is to get to herd immunity (or vaccination) without overwhelming the health service

[WhiteRose]

At some point the call needs to be made on whether the financial impact of the lockdown will ultimately lead to more lives been lost than directly via the virus itself. Corbyn claimed 120000 died as a result of austerity - the effects of continued lockdown will by far more severe than a few years of austerity. I have asthma and so am in an at risk group, im also very pessimistic about my health and am convinced im a gonna if i catch it even though im 35 - so im not coming at this from a selfish point of view. the government cant pay peoples wages indefinitely and as this goes on more companies will switch to furlough further stretching the public finances. id say end of June is as long as this current situation can continue much further than that and there won't be much left to come back to.

Herd immunity isnt going to happen on lockdown and without mass anti body testing kits being provided how would anyone even know if they are immune anyway. Vaccine still a while away aswell so i think it's just a case that we are going to have to learn to live with this, those most vulnerable should be kept in and hopefully new treatments to help those badly affected by the virus will be developed to reduce the death rate. Also get the mass media to chill out on the coverage a bit to stop the panic they are stirring up daily.

[Velotrax]

No you are not wrong, you are bang on right with your opinion

I guess there's a first time for everything !!

I just don't get why peeps are still meeting up for bbq's etc, one of my neighbours had a b day party for her daughter, there were at least 20 kids present and probably 8-10 adults......what is wrong with them ? they must be ammuned as well as thick as shite

[weasel]

I guess there's a first time for everything !!

I just don't get why peeps are still meeting up for bbq's etc, one of my neighbours had a b day party for her daughter, there were at least 20 kids present and probably 8-10 adults......what is wrong with them ? they must be ammuned as well as thick as shite

Shame it isn't a virus that targets the thick instead of those that are already struggling.

Would probably be better just delivering bottles of poison to every household with a label saying do not drink.

[hector]

Just remove all safety labels (you know the common sense ones)
and shut off electricity for a month..

The herd will be suitably trimmed then....