COVID-19 Pandemic

[Bristawl Si]

1 minute ago, BornFromTheVoid said:

My partner is a doctor, and worked in the local respiratory ward for much of the winter. And no, they would not have detected COVID-19 if it was present, nor would they have tested for it. Even now, COVID-19 tests are severely limited and only employed after certain criteria are met.  Regardless, the corona virus group is different to influenza. You can't detect COVID-19 by testing for the flu.

Still, I agree that COVID-19 was not prevalent before the new year. With how infectious it is, it would have quickly developed and spread, causing anomalous respiratory failures and other related issues.

Well, i know they do extra tests to try and find cause of pneumonia, so one would expect any unknown detected would've been investigated. My point is that pneumonia is investigated to find cause of pneumonia; so during heart of Winter if an 'unknown' had shown up further investigation may have detected COVID-19.

[alexisj9]

59 minutes ago, Bristle boy said:

My local Tesco express has been re-stocking paracetemol everyday since i first noticed early last week. There must've been 200 packets on shelf at 10 oclock this morn. Guess they're dripfeeding every day. With all this panic buying just wondering if some peeps are forgetting the smaller outlets and rushing to the large stores to have a panic?

Bought some today from local shop, more expensive but still there. 

[Allseasons-Si]

4 hours ago, Boro Snow said:

Sorry if this has been posted but a must watch he explains what it felt like to have covid 19

 

This to me was a great story in how to deal with the symptoms of COVID-19 and i would like to congratulate these two for sharing this video clip,i don't know the age of this couple but prob in there 60's and it was touch and go for him,what a great couple and are back in the UK

the message he sent across was adhering and people need to address this to other folk that are vulnerable and of an older age ,we know this now and how this virus works

so please people,adhere of the warnings/dangers to your elderly,i do not wish for the elderly to remain in isolation as this would lead to(i hope not)loneliness but if this saves lives then they must understand

42 minutes ago, Paul Faulkner said:

Great to see, Italian air-force trying to keep spirits up

just brilliant this and shows strength

we will all get through this

night.

[alexisj9]

1 hour ago, CatchMyDrift said:

There's also been an ongoing shortage of ibuprofen for many months, empty shelves have been common since October:

Tesco & Sainsburys have struggled for their own brand but the Co-op have always had their own brand in stock.

I also buy this from local shop, more expensive but so far still there. 

[BornFromTheVoid]

1 minute ago, Bristle boy said:

Well, i know they do extra tests to try and find cause of pneumonia, so one would expect any unknown detected would've been investigated. My point is that pneumonia is investigated to find cause of pneumonia; so during heart of Winter if an 'unknown' had shown up further investigation may have detected COVID-19.

Sure, they test for the typical causes, so they are extra tests. However, they wouldn't have even had COVID-19 on the radar then. In a health system with a huge budget, they might be able to go after every single possible known and unknown cause, but that isn't the case in a system that prides itself on efficiency (I'm not saying this is a bad thing, it's actually quite pragmatic). Why look for something that isn't even known about when there's many other common causes? That's a total waste of resources and time.
A blood test or swab doesn't detect every possible anomaly or unknown, they look for specific features. In fact, there have been cases where patients have tested positive for influenza, but later had different tests done that showed they also had coronavirus. Some people think that there are a significant number of cases where people developed pneumonia due to COVID-19 but were only tested for influenza, and so that was considered the cause of death.
Basically, it's a really messed up and complex situation. But there's very little to suggest widespread cases outside of China before the last 2 months, and much less that it could even have been detected.

[alexisj9]

58 minutes ago, emax said:

On this point though, are we sure they could of picked up COVID back in Dec/Jan/ early Feb? Why increase testing to hospitals patients now, if they routinely would of picked it up anyway?

My limited understanding (which may be wrong, so I'm happy to be corrected) is that dont they generally test for stuff they know about, but dont always pick up everything, particularly if its new? (ie blood tests for example are normally aimed at specific tests, rather than taking one sample and testing for every possible blood related problem etc)

 

Again, my stance on this is that its a minor minor chance, and just speculation, but I feel its something that cannot be completely ruled out.

Vwhen I ended up in hospital with the flu, they did a special culture blood test I'm not sure if that is standard or not, but if it is surely they would have seen, at the very least that the virus wasn't flu. Ie I think there is more than one type of culture test, as I'm sure they were discussing whether they should do a different one or not. Although I was out of it, so could have that wrong. 

[Azazel]

It was just all very weird and I can’t shake the feeling.

i was super super sick - the illest I’ve ever been to the point I was genuinely frightened. My partner’s glands in her neck swelled up around the same time but otherwise no symptoms. She had blood tests but they couldn’t find a cause - just said it was likely viral. My dad has some kind of cold a few weeks later and ended up in hospital with viral pneumonia - they couldn’t specify which virus. Thankfully he got over it after being in hospital for a week or so.

To add to this my mum also had a dry racking cough just before Christmas but seemed to escape fairly lightly.

I saw my dad around New Year’s Day when I was still a bit unwell but able to drive again - the only thing that makes me think he didn’t catch anything off me was that he ended up in hospital around 4 weeks later - however we know this thing has a protracted ‘shelf life’ so to speak so who knows!

Edited March 15, 2020 by Azazel

[emax]

50 minutes ago, BornFromTheVoid said:

 In fact, there have been cases where patients have tested positive for influenza, but later had different tests done that showed they also had coronavirus. Some people think that there are a significant number of cases where people developed pneumonia due to COVID-19 but were only tested for influenza, and so that was considered the cause of death.
Basically, it's a really messed up and complex situation. But there's very little to suggest widespread cases outside of China before the last 2 months, and much less that it could even have been detected.

Just been reading this, which backs up your comments. Its a long read, but basically an example of a patient in China who developed ARDS, but repeatedly tested negative for COVID. Apparently the doctor's persistence in testing due to the symptoms and travel history, lead to a final positive test of COVID. They suggest that (certainly in the early days at least) COVID is so similar to Influenza A that it could be mistaken for normal flu.

Early Release - Co-infection with SARS-CoV-2 and Influenza A Virus in Patient with Pneumonia, China - Volume 26, Number 6—June 2020 - Emerging Infectious Diseases journal - CDC

WWWNC.CDC.GOV

---

Detection of SARS-CoV-2 can be difficult and patients can be co-infected with influenza A virus and COVID-19.

 

Then when you look at PHE weekly statement (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/870504/PHE_Influenza_Surveillance_graphs_2019_2020_week_10.pdf) , there was definitely a spike before and around Christmas for Influenza, but of course, that is meaningless really, particularly compared to previous years. It does at least prove that there definitely was a spike over Christmas, but nothing to say its in any way related to COVID 19, unless you take into account different strains/minor mutations/or whatever. Again, still just total conjecture!

Edited March 15, 2020 by emax

[weirpig]

I must live in a different world    shops still full of stock    pubs still full of folk    and the wife in the spare bed  because of snoring      no change here 

[kold weather]

So I've just read what the more extreme plans are suggesting. I'm just stunned that we are actually going to have to go to this level, truly is like being at war with the enemy at your doorstep, something only a small minority of this country will be able to remember.

Especially the changing of manufacturing for ventilators. Without a doubt its going to be needed and sadly in huge quantities. 

[weirpig]

2 minutes ago, kold weather said:

So I've just read what the more extreme plans are suggesting. I'm just stunned that we are actually going to have to go to this level, truly is like being at war with the enemy at your doorstep, something only a small minority of this country will be able to remember.

Especially the changing of manufacturing for ventilators. Without a doubt its going to be needed and sadly in huge quantities. 

Really ? 

[weirpig]

I think all of us   are going way over the top with this    its obvious a nasty virus   which will kill alot of people   but I think perspective  is needed   alot of this thread  is domesday like predictions       chill 

 

 

[kold weather]

1 minute ago, weirpig said:

I think all of us   are going way over the top with this    its obvious a nasty virus   which will kill alot of people   but I think perspective  is needed   alot of this thread  is domesday like predictions       chill 

 

 

I think comparing it to the world wars is probably not overkill, it will probably kill well over a million plus world wide (and that is probably way too low at this point frankly) but its not just that, its the fact that come the end of it there is going to have to be a huge economic reorganization as so many countries will have to dig very very deep financially to manage. Then there is the fact that its going to fundamentally change how society works, at least for a 2-3 month period in a way that has not been seen since WW2.

In the UK, I think its probably fair to say many thousands are likely to die, its just a case whether its in the 10s or 100s of thousands IMO...I hope its on the lower end of that range!

[BornFromTheVoid]

20 minutes ago, kold weather said:

So I've just read what the more extreme plans are suggesting. I'm just stunned that we are actually going to have to go to this level, truly is like being at war with the enemy at your doorstep, something only a small minority of this country will be able to remember.

Especially the changing of manufacturing for ventilators. Without a doubt its going to be needed and sadly in huge quantities. 

The current situation in unprecedented and the general population really struggles to grasp it. We've spent so long watching disasters in other far flung parts of the world that many do not realise we are also susceptible. Our great living standards and (relative) wealth has left so many with an underlying feeling of invulnerability, that anything suggesting a catastrophe is simply hype - because that sort of thing doesn't happen to civilised countries nowadays.

But here we are. In a situation where the best case scenario to achieve herd immunity results in at least 100,000 deaths. Where people are stealing hand sanitisers from hospitals for profit. Where you can turn up to an A&E in Italy feeling dreadful and simply be turned away because they don't think your chances are good enough to waste resources on. It's horrifying and difficult to accept, but, it's reality.

Edited March 15, 2020 by BornFromTheVoid

[weirpig]

8 minutes ago, kold weather said:

I think comparing it to the world wars is probably not overkill, it will probably kill well over a million plus world wide (and that is probably way too low at this point frankly) but its not just that, its the fact that come the end of it there is going to have to be a huge economic reorganization as so many countries will have to dig very very deep financially to manage. Then there is the fact that its going to fundamentally change how society works, at least for a 2-3 month period in a way that has not been seen since WW2.

In the UK, I think its probably fair to say many thousands are likely to die, its just a case whether its in the 10s or 100s of thousands IMO...I hope its on the lower end of that range!

Come on  the more this goes on  the more I think this is media driven    if the media were to produce daily totals of other infections  diseases  we would never sleep  .  it's getting to a point when I'm wondering why  .   This in all intensive purposes is a mild disease    it affects s the elderly   and the infirm    I JUST DONT GET THE  PANIC 

Edited March 15, 2020 by weirpig

[Gael_Force]

17 minutes ago, kold weather said:

So I've just read what the more extreme plans are suggesting. I'm just stunned that we are actually going to have to go to this level, truly is like being at war with the enemy at your doorstep, something only a small minority of this country will be able to remember.

Especially the changing of manufacturing for ventilators. Without a doubt its going to be needed and sadly in huge quantities. 

It's all very well making hundreds of ventilators but according to a specialist on C4 news there's hardly enough specially trained staff to operate the ones we already have. 

I'm also confused as to who they are intended for ....

The young don't get sick enough to require: the middle aged ... might be a few serious cases that need ventilation... over 65 and your past the point at which resuscitation by ventilator is considered appropriate. 

[matty007]

I want to post some thoughts on Covid 19. I don't claim to be a infecious disease expert, but I do have a medical degree and have been following it very closely daily, and have read numerous doctors studies on it, at length. I think there is far too many inaccurate and fear mongering articles out there and people need real information. So here goes -

Initial reports of the mortality rate were around 3%. This was due to the virus only being apparent in those that were serious enough to require hospitalization. This obviously severely skews the figures. Over time, and looking at other countries, it is highly likely that the mortality rate is around 1%, with a fairly good probability of it being even lower, at around 0.5%, with good hospital procedures and care.

It is now inevitable that the virus will spread very widely. While it is not quite as contagious as some suggest, the R0 (reproductive number) of the virus, is around 2-2.2%. This suggests a doubling time of around 5-6 days. So if the UK currently has 1,000 cases, we can expect upwards of 2,000 later next week. That 2,000 will then become 4,000 after a further week, and so on and so on. We also have to bear in mind that the official figures are likely MUCH lower than the actual figures, due to only a small portion of those infected, actually being tested. A conservative estimate is that there are currently 10,000 cases in the UK, and likely more.

The virus appears to be very mild in younger people, with a mortality rate of around 0.1% in those under 50 years old (largely comparable to the flu). Children also seem to be largely unaffected with very few being infected, and those that are, being very mild cases.

Where the virus does seem to be more severe is in those over 60, and especially those with pre-existing health conditions such as heart issues, diabetes, and COPD. Of these cases, approximately 10% will require hospitalization, and 5% will be critical. People over 80 years old have a 15% probability of death.

I think what this shows more than anything is that the majority of the population should not fear to contract this virus. The overwhelming percentage of these will have a mild illness and fully recover. What however is important, is to practice good hygiene, not to protect ourselves, but to try and ensure that we don't pass on the virus to those who are more at risk.

Many people have ridiculed the government's thoughts on 'herd immunity' and branded it 'murder'. Actually, the government are correct. Aside from a vaccine, the only way to stop the spread of a virus is for the large percentage of a population to contract it. Once enough people have become infected, it will stop the virus's ability to spread.

Whilst major lockdowns seem a good idea, there are vast economic and social damages due to this. How are people supposed to make money if they are self-employed? How will businesses stay afloat? If schools are closed, who will take care of the children when they are not at school? This will place a burden on the parents, physically, and financially. Also, in light of the evidence that this virus largely seems to not affect children, what will we actually gain by doing this?

The genie is out the bottle so to speak. The phase where we are able to stop the virus through simple social distancing is long over. Some will self isolate yes, but there will always be a number who don't. If everyone goes into lockdown, we will see a reduction in cases, yes, but the virus will soon reappear once things go back to normal.

If you could find every single case of COVID 19 in the UK and isolate every single one, yes, this would stop the virus dead. However, this is impossible now due to the wide community spread. We don't have vaccines either so we cannot eliminate the virus through that means either.

This virus is not going anywhere and will likely infect millions in the UK before it fades out, or is vaccinated. But we have to remember that it is NOT a fatal virus in the overwhelming number of the population, and is highly recoverable. Panic buying will do nothing but raise fear and cause shortages. It will also cause an increase in prices of essential everyday products, placing those that actually really need them, and can't afford them, in great hardship. Lockdowns will do nothing but damage the economy, kill businesses, and still leave us exposed to the virus once we return to our normal lives. Square one.

We have to accept the virus is here and many of us will be infected by it. The only thing we can do is ensure good hygiene to mitigate spread to the elderly, and to others. Over time, enough people will acquire immunity to the virus, and it will have no way to continue spreading.

[emax]

9 minutes ago, BornFromTheVoid said:

 

But here we are. In a situation where the best case scenario to achieve herd immunity results in at least 100,000 deaths. 

I'm not downplaying, but over what time frame? Thats the key to all this

[kold weather]

4 minutes ago, weirpig said:

Come on  the more this goes on  the more I think this is media driven    if the media were to produce daily totals of other infections  diseases  we would never sleep  .  it's getting to a point when I'm wondering why  .   This in all intensive purposes is a mild disease    it affects s the elderly   and the infirm    I JUST DONT GET THE  PANIC 

Estimates of daily deaths are certainly findable for other diseases, though they are pretty rough estimate of course.

I think the reason its getting so much attention is because its going to kill 10000+ people in our country alone probably in the space of 2-4 months. It will also effectively destroy our NHS as it just won't cope with those numbers, and it will probably smash the economy as well to pieces, both locally and globally and many will be left without jobs and a deep recession seems increasingly likely.

If that is not worth the attention, then nothing ever will be. This will highly likely be one of the biggest stories globally this upcoming century along with climate change and possibly one or two unknowable events. Its not about panic, its just stating what is likely to happen here.

[weirpig]

9 minutes ago, kold weather said:

Estimates of daily deaths are certainly findable for other diseases, though they are pretty rough estimate of course.

I think the reason its getting so much attention is because its going to kill 10000+ people in our country alone probably in the space of 2-4 months. It will also effectively destroy our NHS as it just won't cope with those numbers, and it will probably smash the economy as well to pieces, both locally and globally and many will be left without jobs and a deep recession seems increasingly likely.

If that is not worth the attention, then nothing ever will be. This will highly likely be one of the biggest stories globally this upcoming century along with climate change and possibly one or two unknowable events. Its not about panic, its just stating what is likely to happen here.

I disagree  its mass hysteria   if nobody told  you a virus  would steady move  across the globe  with roughly a 2 percent mortality rate   mainly of the elderly and infirm  nobody would bat an eyelid    it happens every year   I honestly dont get the panic    we have a number  released by the government  of infected and every day it goes up   why do they give them out ?    Imo  carry on as normal

Edited March 15, 2020 by weirpig

[kold weather]

11 minutes ago, matty007 said:

 

Initial reports of the mortality rate were around 3%. This was due to the virus only being apparent in those that were serious enough to require hospitalization. This obviously severely skews the figures. Over time, and looking at other countries, it is highly likely that the mortality rate is around 1%, with a fairly good probability of it being even lower, at around 0.5%, with good hospital procedures and care.

 

Totally agree with your post matty, the only question I do have is this part.

The key with mortality is having good hospital procedures as noted, however once we are getting into the Italy situation and the capacity is maxed out, then surely the mortality rate is going to skyrocket as effectively you are having to choose who lives and dies based on best chances, and obviously those with bad chances are less likely to survive in the first place even without the removal of help. 

So whilst the normal mortality is 0.5%, you could easily shoot it back upto 3% average because the care quality degrades as the NHS crumbles under the strain of thousands needing extra care.

I know the idea is to not get to that point, but its kind of feeling inevitable at this point given what has been said this evening.

 

[matty007]

3 minutes ago, emax said:

I'm not downplaying, but over what time frame? Thats the key to all this

Difficult to say as so many factors determine how quickly the virus spreads.

To achieve herd immunity, we would need 70% or so of the population to be infected by it. That is roughly 46 million. The virus is doubling every 4-5 days, so let's say we have 20,000 in the UK with it now. Next week we would have 40,000, the following week, 80,000. In a month we would have 320,000. Another month, 4.8 million. A month after that.......72 million. Theriotcally, the entire population could be infected in just three months....yeah. Highly unlikely for a virus to maintain that sort of transmission for a solid three months, however. But if you use this formula, in principle, we would have herd immunity after about 2 and a half months.

However, given that more drastic measures and social distancing would likely be adopted long before this point, it is almost impossible for it to spread this rapidly.

As a realistic estimate, herd immunity should be easily achievable in six months.

 

[emax]

1 minute ago, kold weather said:

 

I think the reason its getting so much attention is because its going to kill 10000+ people in our country alone probably in the space of 2-4 months.

I personally think its the unknown thats the problem. No one can really say how this is going to pan out, and that fuels the panic as much as anything. If Northern Italy hadn't of happened, we'd still be in the "it'll probably be fine" stage.

As for the deaths, again, I'm not downplaying things whatsoever, as we just dont know how bad things could get, but, 10,000 deaths over 2-4 months equals 2,500-5,000 per month. Over 51,000 people die in the UK every month on average. Now again, I'm definitely not downplaying it, but suddenly it doesn't seem quite as scary. If we sustained 5,000 extra deaths per month, for many months, then obviously that would be a catastrophe, but thats just pure guessing. As I say, we literally just dont know how this is going to pan out (not on this forum anyway).

Since the first case in January, there's been 21 deaths up to this point. Since that time, an average of 60,000 people have died in the UK. Clearly deaths from this are going to still skyrocket, but it always appears worse when you see specific updates day by day.

[emax]

5 minutes ago, matty007 said:

Difficult to say as so many factors determine how quickly the virus spreads.

To achieve herd immunity, we would need 70% or so of the population to be infected by it. That is roughly 46 million. The virus is doubling every 4-5 days, so let's say we have 20,000 in the UK with it now. Next week we would have 40,000, the following week, 80,000. In a month we would have 320,000. Another month, 4.8 million. A month after that.......72 million. Theriotcally, the entire population could be infected in just three months....yeah. Highly unlikely for a virus to maintain that sort of transmission for a solid three months, however. But if you use this formula, in principle, we would have herd immunity after about 2 and a half months.

However, given that more drastic measures and social distancing would likely be adopted long before this point, it is almost impossible for it to spread this rapidly.

As a realistic estimate, herd immunity should be easily achievable in six months.

 

Thanks for the excellent explanation, and that is actually very interesting.

I did actually mean what time frame on the 100,000+ deaths. As in, if thats spread over a year, its still bad, but no where near as bad as a couple of months.

[kold weather]

2 minutes ago, weirpig said:

I disagree  its mass hysteria   if nobody told  you a virus  would steady move  across the globe  with roughly a 2 percent mortality rate   mainly of the elderly and infirm  nobody would bat an eyelid    it happens every year  

It certainly doesn't, 2% of global population mortality is 154 million deaths! I think you'd notice that given its more than WW1 and WW2 combined!

Not that I'm saying that will happen, but 2% mortality rates are ultra rare in terms of infectious diseases, to give you an example, the Spanish Flu pandemic had a mortality rate of 2% and thats widely regarded as one of the most dangerous pandemics ever along with the Black Death and possibly a few plagues that hit the Roman Empire.

Even 1% fatality rate at 20% of the population is over 15 million deaths worldwide, which would rank it 2nd highest killed world wide behind Cardiovascular disease over a year period.