Alfa Romeo Forum banner

1761 - 1780 of 1828 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,220 Posts
Self administered. Like you, I gagged on the deep throat. But the nose......I have never had something so uncomfortable before in my life and that includes the 3 doctors that did a rectal examination before my appendix op.
You are a braver man than me Gungadin. I stopped pushing up the nostril once it became what I considered as uncomfortably resistant. Who knows if there is an "industry standard" for uncomfortableness.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,799 Posts
Discussion Starter #1,762
The number of UK new cases is very very slowly going down but still too high.. thankfully much fewer deaths.

On the downward path but still not out of the woods.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,220 Posts
I wonder if it's not time soon to wean us off of the daily stat updates as they exist today (deaths, new cases and - most irrelevant of all - pigging "R"!).

As the UK appears now to be back in the realms of 5-year average expected deaths, and infection rates measured in 10ths of a percentage or less of population - I would accept now that we need only be updated if we move out of those boundaries (i.e. excess deaths above expected range again, or infection rates rising back to levels we saw mid March).

I know that sounds a bit cavalier, and I'm not suggesting in any way that we are not in a dangerous period - but I do think that we should be focusing now more on the identification and tracking of new infection clusters by location and size.

I would much prefer now to see weekly updates that say:

  • Total deaths in the UK are within 5 year norms (or some acceptable measure)
  • Infection rates are not showing significant deviations (on a 7 day moving average basis)
  • This week there were 4,250 new cases identified as follows:
(a) 135 separate clusters of >5 new infections
(b) 89 were in hospitals
(c) 22 were in care homes
(d) 24 were in the community and accounted for 895 individual infections in the following Local Authorities
  • 3 clusters in Hackney
  • 4 clusters in Cumbria
  • 2 clusters in Peterborough
etc etc

That way we could all be weaned off the daily "OMG it's gone up again!" or "Yeah! it's gone down" (and vice versa the following day) and move towards a sense that actually, for 80-90% of local authority areas - you can go the pub/shop/gym/school and be highly unlikely (never risk free obvs) to bump into someone and catch it PROVIDED you wash your hands, and be sensible in crowded areas.

If the "new normal" is that we are a cleaner and less contaminating society (for all infections) then I am good with that. I am not prepared for a "new normal" where I am queueing to get into WH Smiths for ever more......
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,513 Posts

"Critics of the distancing advice, which states that people should keep at least 2 metres apart, believe it is too cautious. They seized on the research commissioned by the WHO, which suggested a reduction from 2 metres to 1 would raise infection risk only marginally, from 1.3% to 2.6%"

I'm no maths or statistics expert, but an increase from 1.3% to 2.6% seems to my simple mind to be a doubling or 100% increase in risk... someone please set me right and explain how this raises the risk "only marginally" .??
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,744 Posts

"Critics of the distancing advice, which states that people should keep at least 2 metres apart, believe it is too cautious. They seized on the research commissioned by the WHO, which suggested a reduction from 2 metres to 1 would raise infection risk only marginally, from 1.3% to 2.6%"

I'm no maths or statistics expert, but an increase from 1.3% to 2.6% seems to my simple mind to be a doubling or 100% increase in risk... someone please set me right and explain how this raises the risk "only marginally" .??
It may of doubled the percentage, but the risk of infection in this way is still a marginal risk as it’s only a 2.6% chance of contraction leaving 97.4% chance of not.
Health experts say you’d have to be talking face - to - face for more than 15 minutes without social distancing to run a risk of contraction.
The best advice is what’s been known for 150 years in medicine. Wash your hands


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
45,626 Posts
It may of doubled the percentage, but the risk of infection in this way is still a marginal risk as it’s only a 2.6% chance of contraction leaving 97.4% chance of not.
Health experts say you’d have to be talking face - to - face for more than 15 minutes without social distancing to run a risk of contraction.
Those two statements are incompatible with each other. The first says there's already a chance of contraction from just moving within 2 metres of each other.

I suspect you mean that "Health experts say you’d have to be talking face - to - face for more than 15 minutes without social distancing to run a significant risk of contraction."

But what is your, or their, definition of 'significant'?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,744 Posts
Those two statements are incompatible with each other. The first says there's already a chance of contraction from just moving within 2 metres of each other.

I suspect you mean that "Health experts say you’d have to be talking face - to - face for more than 15 minutes without social distancing to run a significant risk of contraction."

But what is your, or their, definition of 'significant'?
Experts from Public Health England say that people are at risk of the virus if they've had close contact with an infected person.

Dr Paul Cosford, medical director at PHE, told the BBC today: "The groups that we're interested in are people who've been in close face-to-face contact with somebody who's got the infection for at least 15 minutes.

"Or somebody who has been within two metres of that person for 15 minutes or longer.

"So that does suggest that it is actually very close contact that puts you at risk not just being somewhere within the same environment as somebody.

"It's close contact with somebody with the infection that puts you at risk - not just being in the same area, or the same room for a short period of time."

Giving someone their 2 meters outdoors is just being respectful not because you’ll catch it just by walking past them.

I saw an ambulance driver the other day driving with a face mask on her forehead.

And then you have the taxi drivers wearing them on the chin, people touch them with possibly contaminated hands to keep adjusting them to seat them more comfortable whilst covering the mouth & nose. Now that’s a risk of more than 2.6%.

It’s not science this 2 meters & mandatory face masks, it’s common sense, nothing actually proven in Scientific literature
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,499 Posts
Experts from Public Health England say that people are at risk of the virus if they've had close contact with an infected person.

Dr Paul Cosford, medical director at PHE, told the BBC today: "The groups that we're interested in are people who've been in close face-to-face contact with somebody who's got the infection for at least 15 minutes.

"Or somebody who has been within two metres of that person for 15 minutes or longer.

"So that does suggest that it is actually very close contact that puts you at risk not just being somewhere within the same environment as somebody.

"It's close contact with somebody with the infection that puts you at risk - not just being in the same area, or the same room for a short period of time."

Giving someone their 2 meters outdoors is just being respectful not because you’ll catch it just by walking past them.

I saw an ambulance driver the other day driving with a face mask on her forehead.

And then you have the taxi drivers wearing them on the chin, people touch them with possibly contaminated hands to keep adjusting them to seat them more comfortable whilst covering the mouth & nose. Now that’s a risk of more than 2.6%.

It’s not science this 2 meters & mandatory face masks, it’s common sense, nothing actually proven in Scientific literature
This advice is nonsensical when compared to what is being implemented.

If there is some 15 minute threshold (and I'd really like to understand the science behind that because it sounds like bullshit), then all of the social distancing in retail is irrelevant. The advice needs to be "go to Tescos, pile in, just make sure the queues for the checkout are less than 15 minutes".

What they're saying is "its fine to get in a lift with a really sick sneezing person because you won't be in there for 15 minutes". Really?

IMO what is happening is this:

  • People who know about viral transmission know that everyone is going to get this until we have a level of immunity
  • That message is somewhat unpalatable to many people.
  • Thus a charade over track and trace is being set up so the government is "doing something".
  • Note that according to my mate the GP, self administered tests are useless - the swab has to be so far up your nose and back down your throat it hurts. There is no way you'll do it properly yourself. They've had loads of false negatives. All of the tests at the testing centres - are self administered.
  • The plan is to keep the lid on the death rate so that it doesn't get everyone running around like their hair is on fire. Slow burn throughout the summer.
  • According to my mate the consultant, London has achieved herd immunity - the explanation was complex, but it involved something to do with T-cells.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,744 Posts
The whole aspect has been misinformation from the start. The WHO said it’s not contagious from person 2 person, then they back tracked.
Most “ experts “ said wearing masks makes no difference and then double back on that too.

All I know is less people seem to be worried and just want to get on with their life’s. They’re more worried about losing jobs, etc.

I’d say in the next 4 weeks we’ll see this social distancing dropped. Business can’t operate with the guidance given. Most are legally challenging the government and have asked for furlough or mortgage holiday extensions.

At the moment we’ve living in a technocracy, not a democracy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,220 Posts
Today's widespread stories on the success rates of the treatment with a cheap and widely available steroid looks like very good news. In the absence of a vaccine, or indeed any really reliable understanding of why for some people it is fatal while for others it's a sniffle - means that large improvements in treatment (at least to reduce the risk of dying) is our best hope in the short term to unlock the paralysis of fear.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,744 Posts
What amazed me about this is how countries rates of infection are so wide apart. Take Japan - 126.5 million people, less than 18,000 recorded cases, and less than 1,000 deaths.
Australia 24.5 million people, less than 7,500 infected, and 102 deaths
We know some countries have misleading data on deaths. Spain is one of them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,220 Posts
What amazed me about this is how countries rates of infection are so wide apart. Take Japan - 126.5 million people, less than 18,000 recorded cases, and less than 1,000 deaths.
Australia 24.5 million people, less than 7,500 infected, and 102 deaths
We know some countries have misleading data on deaths. Spain is one of them.
Much depends on how many infected individuals were in circulation per country I guess. Not all countries had an equivalent number of infected individuals wandering around in Jan/Feb spreading the virus. However - soooo many unknowns still on how it spread to where and how.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,798 Posts
New Zealand has two new cases, two women arrived from the U.K. They were allowed in on compassionate grounds. There will be a review regarding such concessions I should think.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,779 Posts
Without patronising that’s why we are following the science data, testing, launching the tracker app so they can track the virus and isolate whoever you’ve been in contact with. The point is to keep the infection rate down. This virus is A) either going to be around for ever. B) a vaccine that works can be distributed in order to attempt a faster rate of herd immunity ( as a virus isn’t a cure ) or C) if some how we are lucky it burns itself out because we was successful enough to track it down to the last person


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
C isn't going to happen, as we simply can't control the world, as the chinese/ New Zealanders found, the moment you open your borders the whole thing will flare up again. It's going to be a case of a/b ( just like the flu,)

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,779 Posts
Much depends on how many infected individuals were in circulation per country I guess. Not all countries had an equivalent number of infected individuals wandering around in Jan/Feb spreading the virus. However - soooo many unknowns still on how it spread to where and how.
Please ignore the 'number of infected', this is just a factor of the number of tests.


Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,220 Posts
Please ignore the 'number of infected', this is just a factor of the number of tests.


Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
I was responding to a question about why some countries got hit harder by the virus back in Feb/March, not how many they have infected/tested now.

It would be sensible to assume that during February/early March there were many more infected people wandering around in the UK, France, Spain and Italy than there were in NZ, Greece and Norway. The often heard assertion that countries like the latter have "managed it better" by "locking down earlier" is wishful thinking that they somehow controlled it.
 
1761 - 1780 of 1828 Posts
Top