Coronavirus

[peelyfeet]

37 minutes ago, ProfessorWoland said:

There's a lot of people living under dustbin diagnoses of IBS etc. Often taking PPI's for far too long whilst storing up trouble for themselves and eventually the NHS.

They can each be symptoms of an underlying condition, the latter particularly associated with auto immune conditions. They could in turn impair the bodies response or perhaps interfere with the regulation thereof?

There's an interesting study, tiny though, about how those presenting with digestive issues may be more likely to have an adverse outcome:

https://theconversation.com/worried-about-coronavirus-pay-attention-to-your-gut-137939

 

 

Maybe - what I think the general public want to know is,  "If I have condition X - how much does that increase my chance of dying from covid if I catch it"

There's been a lot noise suggesting that its only the old and/or those with other conditions that are likely to die, and the lockdown sceptics are using this to argue that restrictions are pointless if you're healthy.

If the other conditions that make you more likely to die include for example,  IBS, learning difficulties,  previous depression, obesity, asthma, heart disease, migranes, cancer, alcoholism, diabetes, reflux, high blood pressure,  dementia, arthritis etc etc - that's a massive chunk of the population, and therefore it might make some sit up and take notice a bit better, and stop the lockdown sceptics a bit.

The ICNARC reports suggest that only 8% have very serious comorbidity - the other 92% who've died appeared to be getting on just fine. This doesn't take into account the care home deaths though, so really it will probably be much higher than 8% but even so I think it would be useful to find out how many of those classed as "having an underlying condition" had something that we wouldn't normally consider as  high risk

 

Edited May 14, 2020 by peelyfeet

[ProfessorWoland]

3 minutes ago, peelyfeet said:

 

If the other conditions that make you more likely to die include for example,  IBS, learning difficulties,  previous depression, obesity, asthma, heart disease, migranes, cancer, alcoholism, diabetes, reflux, high blood pressure,  dementia, arthritis etc etc - that's a massive chunk of the population, and therefore it might make some sit up and take notice a bit better, and stop the lockdown sceptics a bit.

 

 

Good point.

Talking to my mum this morning, retired former NHS and still very interested in what's happening. She'd seen a lady interviewed about the co morbidity stats and said she mentioned almost every potential cause except obesity. This lady was herself rather large. 

Speaking to friends who are or have been on the Covid ward and the large amount of large people is a consistent theme. So why isn't it highlighted in these figures? 

[only1swanny]

40 minutes ago, ProfessorWoland said:

That looks like Salford joining Team Oxford in the more people have had it camp.

meanwhile the Pasteur institute, who are actually testing rather than modelling say it's average of 5% in France and Spain

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-france-immunity/only-44-of-french-population-infected-by-coronavirus-pasteur-institute-idUSKBN22Q0RS

i would rather have the testing than the modelling.

 

However the testing is well out as the Government would initially only test people who were in hospital. At the height of the outbreak, the line was, "self isolate". I've spoken to a lot of people who were ill but untested. 

[peelyfeet]

40 minutes ago, ProfessorWoland said:

That looks like Salford joining Team Oxford in the more people have had it camp.

meanwhile the Pasteur institute, who are actually testing rather than modelling say it's average of 5% in France and Spain

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-france-immunity/only-44-of-french-population-infected-by-coronavirus-pasteur-institute-idUSKBN22Q0RS

i would rather have the testing than the modelling.

Have you read the Salford paper - They've created their model to work out which GP practices will need more coronavirus resources than others,  based on the demographics of the patients they look after - it's nothing to do with predicting how many have been infected, that's just an extrapolated guess they made, using data from mid March. Blimey 

[peelyfeet]

10 minutes ago, only1swanny said:

 

However the testing is well out as the Government would initially only test people who were in hospital. At the height of the outbreak, the line was, "self isolate". I've spoken to a lot of people who were ill but untested. 

the testing is well out if you look at the total numbers, but they aren't doing that to try and work out how many have had it - theyre using evidence from clusters of infection - so for example testing everyone in a village, on a cruise ship, in a homeless shelter, in a meat packing factory,  in  an army barracks and  making assumptions from there. 

nobody knows - theyre just making a best guess

Edited May 14, 2020 by peelyfeet

[Zico]

1 hour ago, boltondiver said:

I see your viewpoint, but it will be extremely tested over the next few years.

And.....we didn’t really have austerity 

in the same way we didn't really have lockdown

[radcliffe white]

Haven’t listened to anything today on it 

this testing in a nutshell any timescales when average Joe public will have it done, I take it there’s a pecking order and a limited capacity to what they can do daily or weekly. 

[Lt. Aldo Raine]

28 minutes ago, only1swanny said:

 

However the testing is well out as the Government would initially only test people who were in hospital. At the height of the outbreak, the line was, "self isolate". I've spoken to a lot of people who were ill but untested. 

I think the Spanish study is based on antibody tests.

[Youri McAnespie]

22 minutes ago, ZicoKelly said:

in the same way we didn't really have lockdown

In the same way someone in a well-suspensioned Chelsea Tractor might not feel every single pothole on a badly surfaced road...

Whereas some poor c*nt being towed at the back - skiddling along with their arse on a fucking tea tray might have a different story.

Edited May 14, 2020 by Youri McAnespie

[desperado]

This Van-Tam fella doing the briefing today  answered a question about footballers returning. 
 

He talked about “small, tentative, carefully measured, slow,” steps to getting them back. I’ve also read about PPE, tests, and strict social distancing measures.

How does this measure up with the fact that in 2 weeks, Just short of 300 kids, 60 staff, none of whom will be wearing any PPE as advised by the government, and where social distancing will be near on impossible, will be coming back into a lot of larger 2 form entry schools.

 

Ok children aren’t going to die from this (we hope), but as news outlets have put out today, children are just as likely to catch the virus (and pass it on) as anyone else.

 

[Rudy]

9 minutes ago, desperado said:

This Van-Tam fella doing the briefing today  answered a question about footballers returning. 
 

He talked about “small, tentative, carefully measured, slow,” steps to getting them back. I’ve also read about PPE, tests, and strict social distancing measures.

How does this measure up with the fact that in 2 weeks, Just short of 300 kids, 60 staff, none of whom will be wearing any PPE as advised by the government, and where social distancing will be near on impossible, will be coming back into a lot of larger 2 form entry schools.

 

Ok children aren’t going to die from this (we hope), but as news outlets have put out today, children are just as likely to catch the virus (and pass it on) as anyone else.

 

Cash is king I’m afraid 

[miamiwhite]

6 hours ago, ZicoKelly said:

and then there's this:

https://labourlist.org/2020/05/tory-mps-share-doctored-video-of-starmer-promoted-by-far-right/

Conservative MPs have shared a video of Keir Starmer that was edited to be misleading and promoted by far-right accounts on social media to discredit the Labour leader.

Health minister Nadine Dorries, government whip Maria Caulfield and Lucy Allan this morning quote-tweeted a video post that claimed to show Starmer explaining his record as head of the Crown Prosecution Service.

It was claimed that Starmer was accounting for “why he didn’t prosecute grooming gangs”, when in fact he was explaining why he implemented reforms as the Director of Public Prosecutions.

Yes, Starmer actually ordered investigations into why the cases were stopped, he's done nothing wrong on the Savile case or grooming gangs scandal.

He even apologised for the CPS's actions in both cases and wanted the cases reviewing.

Still a tit for promoting Naz Shah but can't have everything 😉

[Tonge moor green jacket]

15 minutes ago, desperado said:

This Van-Tam fella doing the briefing today  answered a question about footballers returning. 
 

He talked about “small, tentative, carefully measured, slow,” steps to getting them back. I’ve also read about PPE, tests, and strict social distancing measures.

How does this measure up with the fact that in 2 weeks, Just short of 300 kids, 60 staff, none of whom will be wearing any PPE as advised by the government, and where social distancing will be near on impossible, will be coming back into a lot of larger 2 form entry schools.

 

Ok children aren’t going to die from this (we hope), but as news outlets have put out today, children are just as likely to catch the virus (and pass it on) as anyone else.

 

I'm not yet convinced the reopening of schools will happen on this date.

Wasn't a guaranteed date, and plenty of folk are saying they won't let kids go back.

Just been talking to a lass who has been emailing parents with details of what her school is proposing; she's had loads back saying their child won't be in attendance, intimating that it will be a pointless exercise.

[only1swanny]

It won't happen.

Boris ensured every "soundbite" made it clear it isn't set in stone, the death toll hasn't dropped sharply, and parents are not happy with it. 

[gonzo]

 

[peelyfeet]

30 minutes ago, desperado said:

This Van-Tam fella doing the briefing today  answered a question about footballers returning. 
 

He talked about “small, tentative, carefully measured, slow,” steps to getting them back. I’ve also read about PPE, tests, and strict social distancing measures.

How does this measure up with the fact that in 2 weeks, Just short of 300 kids, 60 staff, none of whom will be wearing any PPE as advised by the government, and where social distancing will be near on impossible, will be coming back into a lot of larger 2 form entry schools.

 

Ok children aren’t going to die from this (we hope), but as news outlets have put out today, children are just as likely to catch the virus (and pass it on) as anyone else.

 

The thinking is, they're just as likley to catch it, but because they're less likley to get ill, have less symptoms, potentially less likley to be infectious for a long period of time (not proven yet),  will be in close contact with a small number of people, traveling to and from school usually over a short distance without interaction with general public or transport hubs, they're relatively low risk reintroduction when you compare to secondary school pupils, workers travelling on public transport, etc etc.

Not saying its going to work - I think they should wait a bit longer or make the PPE better - or provide better home schooling for those who can still do it  - me and my mrs both work from home - we could quite easily keep our two kids at home for ever if the quality of schooling was just as good.  

Are schools using conferencing software for lessons? - my two kids aren't, but one is having private music lessons on zoom, and the other is having conference sessions with BWFC coaches on zoom, as part of the academy - why aren't the schools doing it (or are they in some?)

Edited May 14, 2020 by peelyfeet

[only1swanny]

1 minute ago, peelyfeet said:

The thinking is, they're just as likley to catch it, but because they're less likley to get ill, have less symptoms, potentially less likley to be infectious for a long period of time (not proven yet),  will be in close contact with a small number of people, traveling to and from school usually over a short distance without interaction with general public or transport hubs, they're relatively low risk reintroduction when you compare to secondary school pupils, workers travelling on public transport, etc etc.

Not saying its going to work - I think they should wait a bit longer or make the PPE better - or provide better home schooling for those who can still do it  - me and my mrs both work from home - we could quite easily keep our two kids at home for ever if the quality of schooling was just as good.  

Are schools using conferencing software for lessons? - my two kids aren't, but one is having private music lessons on zoom, and the other is having conference sessions with BWFC coaches on zoom, as part of the academy - whay aren't the schools doing it (or athey in some?)

Safeguarding issues...

[peelyfeet]

1 minute ago, only1swanny said:

Safeguarding issues...

realy, is that why? what's the safeguarding issue? 

[Spider]

3 minutes ago, peelyfeet said:

The thinking is, they're just as likley to catch it, but because they're less likley to get ill, have less symptoms, potentially less likley to be infectious for a long period of time (not proven yet),  will be in close contact with a small number of people, traveling to and from school usually over a short distance without interaction with general public or transport hubs, they're relatively low risk reintroduction when you compare to secondary school pupils, workers travelling on public transport, etc etc.

Not saying its going to work - I think they should wait a bit longer or make the PPE better - or provide better home schooling for those who can still do it  - me and my mrs both work from home - we could quite easily keep our two kids at home for ever if the quality of schooling was just as good.  

Are schools using conferencing software for lessons? - my two kids aren't, but one is having private music lessons on zoom, and the other is having conference sessions with BWFC coaches on zoom, as part of the academy - why aren't the schools doing it (or are they in some?)

What school your kids at Peely?

[Zico]

21 minutes ago, miamiwhite said:

Yes, Starmer actually ordered investigations into why the cases were stopped, he's done nothing wrong on the Savile case or grooming gangs scandal.

He even apologised for the CPS's actions in both cases and wanted the cases reviewing.

Still a tit for promoting Naz Shah but can't have everything 😉

You need to have a word with Lynda

[peelyfeet]

1 minute ago, Spider said:

What school your kids at Peely?

They go to a catholic one in Orrell, near Wigan, St Peters, its called -   we live in west lancashire, near parbold

[only1swanny]

1 minute ago, peelyfeet said:

realy, is that why? what's the safeguarding issue? 

It stems from the fact that you are on video to kids, often in their rooms etc...and able to record you and others via a screen recording app. There are often vulnerable children doing work and this in itself leads to the issues. 

Some teachers have had the videos recorded, edited and posted on social media, not particularly nice. 

There are other ways of teaching remotely

[peelyfeet]

1 minute ago, only1swanny said:

It stems from the fact that you are on video to kids, often in their rooms etc...and able to record you and others via a screen recording app. There are often vulnerable children doing work and this in itself leads to the issues. 

Some teachers have had the videos recorded, edited and posted on social media, not particularly nice. 

There are other ways of teaching remotely

The issue I'm having wth my kids is that because they're not in a classroom environment, theyre unable to ask questions as quickly as you could in class, they dont work as hard, concentrate etc - if they could have a conference lead class for a couple of hours a day it would make a big difference - wouldn't have to be with cameras on - just audio and a powerpoint would do  

[ProfessorWoland]

14 minutes ago, only1swanny said:

Safeguarding issues...

Think my niece's school are using Zoom but I'll ask her. 

 

  

1 hour ago, peelyfeet said:

Have you read the Salford paper - They've created their model to work out which GP practices will need more coronavirus resources than others,  based on the demographics of the patients they look after - it's nothing to do with predicting how many have been infected, that's just an extrapolated guess they made, using data from mid March. Blimey 

I'd not read it, just lazily scanned the headline and then saw they were making some extrapolations and downgraded it accordingly.

I've now found this from one of the researchers:

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ijcp.13528

Quote

This also suggests with current 105,000 reported
cases that 16.1 million (26.8% of the total population) have now been infected.
Applying the 150 difference between community infection and reported cases can also be
used to examine mortality. The ONS reported between 1 and 31 March 2020, there was
a total of 47,358 deaths. Of these, 3,912 deaths (8%) were reported to have involved the
coronavirus (COVID-19)). There were a total 12,288 reported cases of COVID-19 up to 5
days before the end of March; this, according to the above factor (150), is equivalent to a
community infection of around 2.0 million people. This reflects a mortality rate of 0.2% in
the total infected population. If this rate is applied to the total 60 million population then
up to 120,000 are at risk of dying

 

 

Edited May 14, 2020 by ProfessorWoland

[only1swanny]

You can do that for some lessons and i know the wifes school are doing it that way.. But a lot have towed the safeguarding line. It's hard with maths (my subject) as kids often learn at very different paces. I've been recording videos on a visualizer and uploading to youtube..Most seem happy with that. 

 

I seem to remember the actual line was that online lessons need at least 2 teachers/Ta's on

Edited May 14, 2020 by only1swanny