Worried about coronavirus thread 22

[ofwarren]

@usernameishistory is busy and asked me to start a new thread.

Please see post 21 for more information about coronavirus.

[Edited by MNHQ at OP's request]

@alloutoffucks this is literally what you said. So I'm not lying. I'll even bold the bit where you state 50% just so you definitely don't miss it.:

Other countries are trying to contain the virus. We don't know yet if this will be successful or not. Our Government is not even trying.
The aim is for the virus to spread in the UK, those who will die from it tough. But the economy saved. So mortality rate anywhere from 50% to doubled in 2020. Because that is what it will mean. And that is using the conservative Government estimates of mortality rate than WHO's. If you take WHO's, mortality rate in UK will be much higher.

Presumably it takes 7-14 days for the effect of any lockdown to be reflected in the new diagnosis numbers.

Of course the numbers are still increasing in Italy. This virus has an up to 2 week incubation period. We won't see any impact from a lock down until 2 weeks after the lock down starts.

Yes, Irene, and once we are on the steep bit of the exponential curve, cases tend to double daily. So one day of extra isolation at this stage can save hundreds of lives.

@alloutoffucks That does appear to be seen as an acceptable price to pay.

How can you say that? We aren't far enough along the line to know if the action or non action will result any differently than other countries, do we? You have a fear of the unknown I suppose. Fair enough.

And I'm not blindly trusting them but I trust them a damn site more than I trust some people on here and how they'd want to proceed!

How long did it take for China to peak?

So mortality rate anywhere from 50% to doubled in 2020. Because that is what it will mean.

Yes, I get it. The pp is looking at all deaths in the UK for all causes and how it will increase with an epidemic of coronavirus to reach 80% of the population.

ppl are fuckwits, unless there is enforcement hone isolation will be ignored repeatedly. People cannot bear the thought of even minor discomfort or inconvenience for the greater good

Also this ^ Until we are at a point where people WILL self quarantine due to anxiety, then it surely isn't the right time for the stronger measures to be brought in. They need to be implemented once and they need to work. Doing it too early means people won't stick to it. Hopefully Trump's action will penetrate a few thick skulls (even though it's a deeply weird action to not ban the UK from the US too).

Ok. So we shut the UK down. Wenslowndown the spread of the virus. Fine.

What happens in April, May? Or later on in the year?

They have said this is a marathon, not a sprint. And that most of us will get it.

I 100% agree that we need to do something to delay the spread and hopefully we will soon get measures to enable that.

I just cannot be convinced that we need to destroy the economy in doing so.

I don't like this government and I don't think BJ is fit to be PM but I don't think he is trying to kill lots of us. He has difficult decisions to make and helpfully he is been led by experts.

@Horehound Yes the currently mortality rate is about 500,000 from all causes. Obviously that does vary year by year. But 500,000 is on the low side of average.
If an additional 500,000 die from this virus, that will double the mortality rate from 500,000 to 1 million. Now I know some of the people who die of the virus may have died anyway. So lets say up to half may have died anyway. That would mean the mortality rate overall would either be 50% higher than normal or double the normal mortality rate. Basically somewhere within that range.

That is not half the population dying. That is not what I said. I was talking about the amount of people dying in relation to the existing mortality rate. And that is using the Governments figures which are lower than WHOs.

For context, a million deaths is approximately the number of British military people who died in the first and second world wars put together.

Right, I get you @alloutoffucks!

In China, even with lockdown, we went from about 20k cases in early Feb to 80k by 26 Feb. Lockdown started around 25th January with closures in my city and then the extension of the national holiday.
I live in Jiangsu.

They have said this is a marathon, not a sprint. And that most of us will get it.

Yes the policy is for most to get it in the UK. In that scenario the Government's actions make sense.
Other Governments are trying to prevent its transmission and eradicate it. That is WHO's advice.

About a week ago I though some estimates of mortality in the UK were very exaggerated. With proper containment far less people will die. But that is not the UK strategy. The UK strategy is for most people to get it, and we see who is alive at the end. So the annual mortality rate in the UK could double. WHO have explicitly said this strategy is immoral.

"The best NHS care available" is a moveable feast and not reassuring unless you're a shallow non-delver of wordclouds. If there's a huge peak of infected patients and the hospitals become even more overwhelmed than they already are, the "best care available" won't be the same as the "best care available" if there had been a lower longer peak and the hospitals weren't quite so overwhelmed. But in either scenario we can continue to say, weaselly-like, that patients received the "best care available."

Yes best care available may be waiting in a trolley in a corridor for an over worked Dr to have a look at you and say sorry there are no beds available.

alloutoffucks

Your post so eloquently sums up the situation.

What fucking government in the world could propose such a fucking callous approach.

Definitely a marathon: no new cases in my city in China (for over 14 days) but schools are still closed.

@TheElementsOfMedical very well put and thr reality of it!

Perfectly said TheElements, especially the weaselly bit at the end.

The best care available may be dying as your desperate relative is on hold for an ambulance

*Ok. So we shut the UK down. Wenslowndown the spread of the virus. Fine.

What happens in April, May? Or later on in the year?*

Dh was discussing the graph that shows the flattening curve; he says we need to get to a certain level of cases for then the flattening effect to maintain a certain level that is manageable longer term without the major measures.

If any of that makes sense.

I think I get what he means, the timing is crucial. Too early would cause further peaks when measures stop. Too late obviously causes Italy, which he said happened as they missed early cases.

(He is in no way associated with any profession that would have an expert view, but is good at maths and understanding stock markets etc!)

Very good points Random 18
This is above party politics the PM has at the moment the backing of opposition parties Surely if they thought he was so wrong they would be shouting about it

With proper containment far less people will die

Genuinely NOT wishing to be contrary but it occurs to me that this is where the differences between countries could have an impact. With containment, fewer people may well die of coronavirus, that's fair enough and it would be foolish to not defer to the WHOs opinion on that.

BUT what about the deaths that result from the societal and economic effects of that containment? That will vary between countries depending what their baseline level of poverty/standard of living is. The wealthier the nation's poorest, the bigger financial buffer they will have, the more food in storage as they could stockpile some etc. If the poor in the UK can't do that, but quarantine is enforced, there could be lots of deaths via malnutrition affecting other conditions, making jt harder to fight off coronavirus itself, people choosing suicide if their business goes under etc.

What I am (really badly) saying, is that perhaps the mortality rate would be as high or even higher in the UK if we did shut down for 3 weeks to let the virus burn out. And the economy is then wrecked too?

They know that the for a short period the NHS will struggle quite significantly. This has been very clearly acknowledged by the CMO.