Talk

Advanced search

Worried About Coronavirus- thread 38

(992 Posts)
TheStarryNight Sat 18-Apr-20 13:57:41

New thread

OP’s posts: |
TheStarryNight Sat 18-Apr-20 13:58:43

Previous thread

OP’s posts: |
RigaBalsam Sat 18-Apr-20 14:08:05

As of 9am 18 April, 460,437 tests have concluded, with 21,389 tests on 17 April.

357,023 people have been tested of which 114,217 tested positive.

As of 5pm on 17 April, of those hospitalised in the UK who tested positive for coronavirus, 15,464 have sadly died.

Bercows Sat 18-Apr-20 14:13:11

Thanks for the new thread.

ClientQ Sat 18-Apr-20 14:17:21

My workplace have a tentative reopening date of around the 19th May. Seems v early to me...
I'm shielding so presume they may keep me furloughed

ToffeeYoghurt Sat 18-Apr-20 14:19:46

Those figures are awful. As is the care home situation. I read Spain has started a criminal investigation into their care home deaths. It really is criminal the way some of our most vulnerable are being (not) treated.

It's depressing isn't it @alloutoffucks but I take comfort that, although some don't care or think about others, many people do. I think a lot of people still don't think it will really happen to them or their families. Either that or they won't (can't?) face exactly how bad it might be. It's not a pleasant death. I think the most vulnerable of all, with an early end to lockdown, will be those who are vulnerable but not on the shielding list. That's millions of people in the UK. Perhaps the best solution is when lockdown is (slowly) lifted, the first group to go out should be those who volunteer to do so.

LilacTree1 Sat 18-Apr-20 14:27:07

Toffee “ Perhaps the best solution is when lockdown is (slowly) lifted, the first group to go out should be those who volunteer to do so.”

that’s the same as easing restrictions for everyone and letting everyone make a choice.

ToffeeYoghurt Sat 18-Apr-20 14:34:12

It's not the same for people who might be forced to go back to work despite being in a vulnerable (but not shielded) group. Or who might get fined if they don't send their kids to school. If it was purely voluntary it would be fairer.

Bercows Sat 18-Apr-20 14:38:05

I've just read a further 888 have died.

LilacTree1 Sat 18-Apr-20 14:39:00

Toffee I never thought people should be fined for taking kids out of school anyway. In terms of employers, which vulnerable groups do you think they should be obliged to protect?

Reastie Sat 18-Apr-20 14:41:55

Voluntary wouldn’t work though surely as people would have to go to work if they can’t work from home and their workplace reopens if it is currently closed. If I said, as a teacher, I didn’t want to risk going to school there may not be enough staff to look after the children that come to school, especially if there are staff absences with suspected or actual Covid 19 cases in the household. It’s a fair way to think it might happen but I think those most vulnerable on low incomes might feel forced into going back to work even if they don’t feel safe or want to in the present time. I’m not sure how they’ll do it because people can’t be jammed in tubes and trains again, and what they do I’m assuming will depend on how measures go in other countries as well. They keep talking about preventing a second peak but unless they keep most measures in place and very very slowly open things up with social distancing over many weeks and months I can’t see how there won’t be another peak.

ToffeeYoghurt Sat 18-Apr-20 14:43:42

I'm worried about anyone at increased risk from Covid-19. That's a lot of people if you include all the risk factors like sex, age (fr 40 or 50), being overweight, smoking history. The biggest worry is for people with hypertension, diabetes, or cardiac conditions. These three groups have some of the highest mortality rates with Covid. Higher, I believe, than some on the shielding list. It's unfair to place the burden to protect on employers, especially small businesses. It's the responsibility of the government. We need a longer lockdown really. Short-term pain to avoid worse damage longer term.

LilacTree1 Sat 18-Apr-20 14:44:31

We’re in redundancy territory now anyway so not sure how much difference it makes re voluntary returns.

LilacTree1 Sat 18-Apr-20 14:45:26

Toffee - it’s also unfair to millions who will lose work.

ToffeeYoghurt Sat 18-Apr-20 14:48:48

I agree Lilac That's why short-term disruption (longer initial lockdown) is preferable to a premature easing, which will cause worse longer-term damage to the economy and jobs.

LilacTree1 Sat 18-Apr-20 14:51:16

Toffee and if no cure is found and the death toll gets higher after longer lockdown?

LilacTree1 Sat 18-Apr-20 15:00:29

Interesting article re Nightingale

twitter.com/HSJEditor/status/1251449953421078528

ToffeeYoghurt Sat 18-Apr-20 15:01:13

The longer lockdown goes on (if done properly) the less chance of the virus spreading. It needs somewhere to go and if we're all locked down it has nowhere to go. Less chance of infection when lockdown ends - as long as it's easier very slowly. Of course we can only do so much but we should do what we can to mitigate things.

It's possible no cure or vaccine will be found but unlikely. All signs so far are very positive. The main issue is time. There aren't enough of these drugs at present. We need to buy time.

orangeblosssom Sat 18-Apr-20 15:03:20

Journalists seem to want lockdown to end ASAP. Daily mail is not making as much money as fewer people are buying papers.

ofwarren Sat 18-Apr-20 15:27:47

What was the original end date of the shielding?
A senior nurse from my son's transplant ward just said it's been extended for 3 weeks and that they have been told to expect it to be extended again.
I know it will be but I hadn't seen it written anywhere.

ClientQ Sat 18-Apr-20 15:58:25

@ofwarren I'm sure it was around the 15th June

ofwarren Sat 18-Apr-20 16:01:11

@ClientQ she sent a screen shot of the government guidance that says shield till the end of June. I'd always assumed it was the end of June anyway so never actually checked. We all know it's going to be much longer anyway.

MurrayTheMonk Sat 18-Apr-20 16:58:36

888 is a lot for a weekend day isn't it?
Plus once we know they ante taking into account care home and at home deaths...

I had a really low day yesterday. Had day off work and just sort of crashed. Think the adrenaline of the last few weeks is wearing off and it just left me a bit miserable. Had to turn the news off as I don't really believe a lot the government are saying now sad

TheCanterburyWhales Sat 18-Apr-20 17:09:09

Thanks for new thread.
Good to see you ofwarren, how are you doing?
flowers Murray.

mrshoho Sat 18-Apr-20 17:10:44

I watched the press conference today and feel uneasy about the 'good news' that the hospital beds figure is reducing. I think they said something along the lines of 'this tells us that the distancing measures are working'. But if as they have changed this from hospital admissions to hospital beds does this mean that they now deduct the deaths from this figure? So if 888 people have died that is deducted from the figure of people in hospital beds making this appear better than it actually is. Why don't they show hospital admissions anymore?

Join the discussion

Registering is free, quick, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Get started »