Coronavirus - how is it/has it affected you?

[Ethan]

Or perhaps your last sentence could read ....where the greatest risk of,population infection lies.
You haven mentioned the factor that if the old get infected they likely die.
If the working age population get it , they generally don't.
We know that is true, in that AFAIK, there have been a number of us forummers, who have had it and recovered. And there are a number of us who know of old folk who are very sick or die, and know of a number of working age who have had it and recovered.
It is valid to vaccinate those first who may overwhelm the hospitals, as you say, but I think the latter part of that last sentence is not true.

No, I said what I meant. It is not only the harm to the individual, but also the risk of spread and the harm to others. Many of the older care home residents are relatively static and it is more possible to protect them by testing staff and restricting visitors. They likely don't die, they have a greater risk of death, for sure, but they tend not to transmit much either. Younger people working in the NHS or schools may not suffer the same risk of death, but they can be responsible for major outbreaks.

 

[DanFST]

No, I said what I meant. It is not only the harm to the individual, but also the risk of spread and the harm to others. Many of the older care home residents are relatively static and it is more possible to protect them by testing staff and restricting visitors. They likely don't die, they have a greater risk of death, for sure, but they tend not to transmit much either. Younger people working in the NHS or schools may not suffer the same risk of death, but they can be responsible for major outbreaks.

It would be interesting to run the numbers and someone perform some predictions on the effect of immunisation of younger people, you'd need virologists, epidemiologists, behavioural psychologists, and analysts to look at historical movement patterns.

In my area (Tower Hamlets) just over 5% of the population is 65+, compare that to somewhere on the coast and the numbers would be very different. If you added Gva of those age groups in that area, you could have some really interesting results.

 

[SocketRocket]

It would be interesting to run the numbers and someone perform some predictions on the effect of immunisation of younger people, you'd need virologists, epidemiologists, behavioural psychologists, and analysts to look at historical movement patterns.

In my area (Tower Hamlets) just over 5% of the population is 65+, compare that to somewhere on the coast and the numbers would be very different. If you added Gva of those age groups in that area, you could have some really interesting results.

But it's not only care homes, there are a great deal of over sixties who are in great danger of dying if they contract the virus, should they be forced to isolate themselves from the rest of society for an unspecified period of time so that the younger populace can get vaccinated and get back to the pub.

If this is the way our society wish to control Covid then I would be absolutely ashamed of what we had become. To even consider such a policy makes me feel physically sick.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

So the numbers of positive cases continued to level out , they believe the restrictions are now starting to take affect. I think it’s better to look at the more positive side

Not in my trust. One bed left including all the escalated areas we moved into. Six new admissions from 6.30 until midday into ICU today

 

[DanFST]

But it's not only care homes, there are a great deal of over sixties who are in great danger of dieing if they contract the virus, should they be forced to isolate themselves from the rest of society for an unspecified period of time so that the younger populace can get vaccinated and get back to the pub.

If this is the way our society wish to control Covid then I would be absolutely ashamed of what we had become. To even consider such a policy makes me feel physically sick.

The whole populace has been isolating from society for months and are currently for an unspecified period of time.....

 

[Ethan]

It would be interesting to run the numbers and someone perform some predictions on the effect of immunisation of younger people, you'd need virologists, epidemiologists, behavioural psychologists, and analysts to look at historical movement patterns.

In my area (Tower Hamlets) just over 5% of the population is 65+, compare that to somewhere on the coast and the numbers would be very different. If you added Gva of those age groups in that area, you could have some really interesting results.

The NHS, through NICE, routinely reviews new medicines using Quality Adjusted Life Years. In brief, this combines the effect on quality of life with the years of live saved by treatment. So, as an aside, the NHS is institutionally ageist, because treatments offered to older people save fewer years than those offered to younger people, and hence are less good value in the older people. Anyway, applying the same equation to Covid, an argument could emerge that the value of vaccines ra optimised when used in people at the older ages of working life, and who still have dependents, because the effect of illness or death costs a lot more years of life, affects family members and the economy. There was a report in the media about an old dear with advanced dementia getting her vaccine. Now, I may be demented one day, possibly have started already, but the quality of life benefits in vaccinating people with dementia are next to zilch. Sounds harsh, but that is how rationing in the NHS already works.

I haven't run the numbers, but offer this just to challenge the rather one dimensional idea that people at the highest risk of death is the best way to prioritise. As a separate aside, if that formula was really true, men would get vacc'd before women 5 years younger, and BAME would get vacc'd a similar period before white prople. And BAME men would get vacc'd 10 years younger than white women. So discrimination by age is OK, but not by gender or ethnicity.

 

[GB72]

But it's not only care homes, there are a great deal of over sixties who are in great danger of dieing if they contract the virus, should they be forced to isolate themselves from the rest of society for an unspecified period of time so that the younger populace can get vaccinated and get back to the pub.

If this is the way our society wish to control Covid then I would be absolutely ashamed of what we had become. To even consider such a policy makes me feel physically sick.

I look at it slightly differently but it is wholly dependent on a vaccine stopping you spreading it as well as catching it (which seems to be at the root of the Indonesian approach). It may be possible to protect those at risk by vaccinating those that may spread the infection to them rather than vaccinating the individual. As I said though, it would be fully dependent on the vaccine stopping you passing in covid as well as stopping you getting I'll with it.

 

[DanFST]

The NHS, through NICE, routinely reviews new medicines using Quality Adjusted Life Years. In brief, this combines the effect on quality of life with the years of live saved by treatment. So, as an aside, the NHS is institutionally ageist, because treatments offered to older people save fewer years than those offered to younger people, and hence are less good value in the older people. Anyway, applying the same equation to Covid, an argument could emerge that the value of vaccines ra optimised when used in people at the older ages of working life, and who still have dependents, because the effect of illness or death costs a lot more years of life, affects family members and the economy. There was a report in the media about an old dear with advanced dementia getting her vaccine. Now, I may be demented one day, possibly have started already, but the quality of life benefits in vaccinating people with dementia are next to zilch. Sounds harsh, but that is how rationing in the NHS already works.

I haven't run the numbers, but offer this just to challenge the rather one dimensional idea that people at the highest risk of death is the best way to prioritise. As a separate aside, if that formula was really true, men would get vacc'd before women 5 years younger, and BAME would get vacc'd a similar period before white prople. And BAME men would get vacc'd 10 years younger than white women. So discrimination by age is OK, but not by gender or ethnicity.

It would be really interesting to see. I know what you mean about sounding harsh, but it's just another way to investigate data and work out the best approach for the population as a whole. It would be interesting to see what percentage of those in group 1+2 (minus healthcare workers) are still around to receive the vaccine next year, (should it be needed).

 

[SocketRocket]

The whole populace has been isolating from society for months and are currently for an unspecified period of time.....

The whole populace is society. What's important in a civilised society is allowing every person the chance of living the best life possible for them. Stopping the NHS being overwhelmed is just one of the ways of doing that.

 

[clubchamp98]

But it's not only care homes, there are a great deal of over sixties who are in great danger of dying if they contract the virus, should they be forced to isolate themselves from the rest of society for an unspecified period of time so that the younger populace can get vaccinated and get back to the pub.

If this is the way our society wish to control Covid then I would be absolutely ashamed of what we had become. To even consider such a policy makes me feel physically sick.

On the news ( if I heard it right ) Cressida Dick said “ her and her managers had been offered the vaccine but she would prefer the guys and gals on the beat to get it first”
Who made that decision???

 

[SocketRocket]

It would be really interesting to see. I know what you mean about sounding harsh, but it's just another way to investigate data and work out the best approach for the population as a whole. It would be interesting to see what percentage of those in group 1+2 (minus healthcare workers) are still around to receive the vaccine next year, (should it be needed).

Should they not have the same opportunity of living out every hour of their lives, are their hours less worthy due to their age.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

On the news ( if I heard it right ) Cressida Dick said “ her and her managers had been offered the vaccine but she would prefer the guys and gals on the beat to get it first”
Who made that decision???

I believe the police etc currently are being offered vaccines left over on the day or when people don’t turn up or refuse them etc

That does include all the managers etc

 

[drdel]

The NHS, through NICE, routinely reviews new medicines using Quality Adjusted Life Years. In brief, this combines the effect on quality of life with the years of live saved by treatment. So, as an aside, the NHS is institutionally ageist, because treatments offered to older people save fewer years than those offered to younger people, and hence are less good value in the older people. Anyway, applying the same equation to Covid, an argument could emerge that the value of vaccines ra optimised when used in people at the older ages of working life, and who still have dependents, because the effect of illness or death costs a lot more years of life, affects family members and the economy. There was a report in the media about an old dear with advanced dementia getting her vaccine. Now, I may be demented one day, possibly have started already, but the quality of life benefits in vaccinating people with dementia are next to zilch. Sounds harsh, but that is how rationing in the NHS already works.

I haven't run the numbers, but offer this just to challenge the rather one dimensional idea that people at the highest risk of death is the best way to prioritise. As a separate aside, if that formula was really true, men would get vacc'd before women 5 years younger, and BAME would get vacc'd a similar period before white prople. And BAME men would get vacc'd 10 years younger than white women. So discrimination by age is OK, but not by gender or ethnicity.

The classical economics dilemma, morality v money: logic v emotion

 

[DanFST]

Should they not have the same opportunity of living out every hour of their lives, are their hours less worthy due to their age.

Yes. however callous it sounds their hours are less valuable than a young person.

Hypothetically: If there is a a 30 year old and an 80 year old involved in a car crash both needing identical life saving surgery. Priority will 99% of the time be given to the 30 year old.

 

[clubchamp98]

I believe the police etc currently are being offered vaccines left over on the day or when people don’t turn up or refuse them etc

That does include all the managers etc

Right I only just caught what she said.
That would make sense.

 

[PJ87]

On the 4 out of 5 - I only have that from what I heard this morning on Nick Ferrari LBC (I'll see if I can find a link or other source)

I am not disagreeing with you. As far as the rules are concerned. Hands/Face/Space absolutely tells us of the simple behaviours we should adopt to minimise our risk of picking up and transmitting the virus.

But H/F/S is not a guideline/law of the sort defining what is allowed, that 4 out of 5 claim they don't understand.

I know what I am required to do. As you say - it isn't complex or difficult to understand.

1) Stay at home other than when a need to leave home is unavoidable as there is no viable alternative to going out
2) If I must go out for whatever unavoidable reason -I only do so for as short a time as possible - limited to short exercise or essential shop - and Hands/Face/Space

And that's it.

Do I 100% understand what I am allowed to do - no I do not. But I know where to look to find out if needs must.

You really need to turn off talk radio

 

[PJ87]

Right I only just caught what she said.
That would make sense.

The daily racist is moaning that homeless people in Oldham think it was are getting the vaccine before the over 70s

Such an outrage that the poorest should get help above their readers

Plus it will be left overs no doubt!!

 

[triple_bogey]

I could care less what the US are doing, I mentioned the UK and China in my post.

No one has been allowed in to investigate the strongly suspected origin for over a year.

- There is proof that China silenced researchers and journalists when covid was in the wild.
- There is proof that China chooses its case numbers seemingly at random.

If I was the Chinese foreign minister, I’d probably be working on international relations behind closed doors, rather than having a pop at another countries leader for saying the virus “may” have originated there.

You can call it sinophobia or whatever you like, I have nothing against the Chinese people. The Chinese government however are disgusting in my opinion. I’m glad I don’t have to ever go back.

[twitter]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1242436522487492610

[/twitter]

What happened? Deflection on how both the US/UK massively screwed up maybe?


You obviously didn't realise but news of the new Covid_19 actually made the news on their national TV coverage (CCTV-13) on the 31st Dec. A few hours after Dr Wenliang discussed it on his WeChat group (Dec 30th). If it was a massive coverup, they didn't really do a great job.
Now any intelligence agencies around the world, worth their salt WOULD/SHOULD had picked this up and put a strategy in place. Isn't that what governments are suppose to do, protect its citizens?

If your going to investigate the origins, all countries need to co-operate. As much as you couldn't care less, that's how it works. Not finger pointing to one country.

Where did you visit/work in China? You must had done something really bad for the government to step in and mistreat you. Otherwise it would be the local governing bodies that would had dealt with you. And if that single group of people did do something so drastic for you to despise the country, then higher up officials would step in and arrest them.

The two members here I remember that have family over in China, why have they not left and come back to the UK? If it really is as bad as the media makes out, makes no sense at all in staying. AKAIK, you can still leave the country but cannot get back in.

 

[AliMc]

They have just said that over 80% of the over 80's have had the jab in Scotland.
So perhaps our surgery just started/finished well, they are a very organised practice.

Sorry don't think that's right is it, they hope to have all over 80's done by 1st week of February, I thought they said only 2% had been done so far but maybe i misheard

 

[SocketRocket]

Yes. however callous it sounds their hours are less valuable than a young person.

Hypothetically: If there is a a 30 year old and an 80 year old involved in a car crash both needing identical life saving surgery. Priority will 99% of the time be given to the 30 year old.

But that's a different scenario and only an issue if there are inadequate resources available, this would be the case in an overwhelmed NHS.

We are talking of incarcerating a section of society who are not I'll and in many cases against their will to protect less vunrable younger people. As there is no evidence that vaccinated people cannot pass on the virus the only reason would be to make life easier for the young. How about we don't bother with the homeless or disabled.

IMO totally inhumane and horribly divisive.