Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Covid

Mumsnet doesn't verify the qualifications of users. If you have medical concerns, please consult a healthcare professional.

Remember November 2018?

88 replies

LilacTree1 · 09/05/2020 19:10

No, neither do I.

Well, I remember the story but I think I only heard it once because dad was still alive and working for the NHS.

www.independent.co.uk/news/health/flu-vaccine-deaths-nhs-ineffective-crisis-bad-weather-illness-2017-a8660496.html

OP posts:
Thread gallery
6
Devlesko · 11/05/2020 18:13

I remember this, but thought it was ineffective not late.

Derbygerbil · 11/05/2020 18:22

I wish it was possible to discuss these issues without it always having to be about an 'agenda' many of us are not black / white for /against anything but somewhere in the middle!

I agree. I get frustrated with those with an agenda too. That’s what I was reacting to... @Mumlove5
has a massive Covid-minimising agenda.

Orangeblossom78 · 11/05/2020 18:58

Ok, well I'm not sure about that but hoping it is sometimes possible to look at the whole situation overall rate than just focusing on extremes.

Obviously both covid and flu could flare up at the same time next winder which is a real concern to everyone as would mean hospitals could be overwhelmed- it has been shown both conditions have the risk of doing that alone! and maybe things can be learned from previous times to help the covid situation too.

Surely it's better to discuss that sort of thing rather than get hung up on lockdown 'extremes' there is far more to it than that

Mumlove5 · 11/05/2020 19:17

@Derbygerbil

I know you have it out for me ;)

I am not downplaying the severity of the disease, however I believe lockdowns are ineffective for various reasons and are causing way more harm than good. I do believe we will look back on this and come to the realization how grave these decisions were.

The cure is worse than the disease. You don't have to agree with me, of course. :)

www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31035-7/fulltext

Many countries (and members of their press media) have marvelled at Sweden's relaxed strategy in the face of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic: schools and most workplaces have remained open, and police officers were not checking one's errands in the street. Severe critics have described it as Sweden sacrificing its (elderly) citizens to quickly reach herd immunity.1 The death toll has surpassed our three closest neighbours, Denmark, Norway, and Finland, but the mortality remains lower than in the UK, Spain, and Belgium.2

It has become clear that a hard lockdown does not protect old and frail people living in care homes—a population the lockdown was designed to protect.3 Neither does it decrease mortality from COVID-19, which is evident when comparing the UK's experience with that of other European countries.

PCR testing and some straightforward assumptions indicate that, as of April 29, 2020, more than half a million people in Stockholm county, Sweden, which is about 20–25% of the population, have been infected (Hansson D, Swedish Public Health Agency, personal communication). 98–99% of these people are probably unaware or uncertain of having had the infection; they either had symptoms that were severe, but not severe enough for them to go to a hospital and get tested, or no symptoms at all. Serology testing is now supporting these assumptions.4

These facts have led me to the following conclusions. Everyone will be exposed to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, and most people will become infected. COVID-19 is spreading like wildfire in all countries, but we do not see it—it almost always spreads from younger people with no or weak symptoms to other people who will also have mild symptoms. This is the real pandemic, but it goes on beneath the surface, and is probably at its peak now in many European countries. There is very little we can do to prevent this spread: a lockdown might delay severe cases for a while, but once restrictions are eased, cases will reappear. I expect that when we count the number of deaths from COVID-19 in each country in 1 year from now, the figures will be similar, regardless of measures taken.

Measures to flatten the curve might have an effect, but a lockdown only pushes the severe cases into the future —it will not prevent them. Admittedly, countries have managed to slow down spread so as not to overburden health-care systems, and, yes, effective drugs that save lives might soon be developed, but this pandemic is swift, and those drugs have to be developed, tested, and marketed quickly. Much hope is put in vaccines, but they will take time, and with the unclear protective immunological response to infection, it is not certain that vaccines will be very effective.

In summary, COVID-19 is a disease that is highly infectious and spreads rapidly through society. It is often quite symptomless and might pass unnoticed, but it also causes severe disease, and even death, in a proportion of the population, and our most important task is not to stop spread, which is all but futile, but to concentrate on giving the unfortunate victims optimal care.

Orangeblossom78 · 11/05/2020 21:18

Yes, and of course in Sweden other measures are being used, people being educated about social distancing, hygiene, being self aware ( a bit like our 'alert' idea)

Orangeblossom78 · 11/05/2020 21:26

It's all a spectrum isn;t it of course we can't stay in lockdown forever and if these viruses are going to say around then Sweden's approach seems to be one we might be going towards for the future.

And of course hopefully a vaccine and treatment. Fingers crossed

BigChocFrenzy · 11/05/2020 21:28

Mumlove5 I am not "keen on Imperial's model*

I am keen on the fact that the Chief Medical officer Chris Whitty made a "reasonable worst case estimate" using simple multiplication and
assuming up to 80% infected of the UUK's 67 million, with a death rate of max 1%

Imperial gave him scenarios to play with, whether 50% of deaths occurred over 3 weeks etc

However, as CMO he had to warn the government of his assessment of reasonable worst case scenario

  • and no responsible government could just ignore that
Orangeblossom78 · 11/05/2020 21:30

with that last sentence

"our most important task is not to stop spread, which is all but futile, but to concentrate on giving the unfortunate victims optimal care."

I'm not sure on that as I think it is not either / or, can reduce spread rather than 'stop' it, as well as giving care...again it is quite extreme. Needs to be a balance.

BigChocFrenzy · 11/05/2020 21:39

However much the Social Darwinists want to let the elderly and the vulnerable die, so businesses can make money again,
the government fortunately is not this callous

... or more probably, Boris wouldn't risk his name going in the history books as the PM who let ½ million Brits die

Boris explained - yet again - that he imposed lockdown to avoid the worst case of up to ½ million British lives

There is no Tardis to go back and not have Lockdown,
so certain posters can post a million times how much they hate it, but they can change nothing

Lockdown happened.
Lockdown will continue until Boris / the government decide they have satisfied the 5 tests for removing lockdown

This means that new cases must fall to a level where track & trace is feasible
and
they must - finally ! - organise effective mass testing and mass contact tracing

BigChocFrenzy · 11/05/2020 21:49

The UK behaves epidemiologically like Italy, France & Spain, not like the Scandi / Nordic countries which all have low death rates

Sweden's death rate is about 10 x that of its neighbours - who chose lockdown - even after deaths are normalised wrt population

So Boris looked at Italy - and made the correct decision for the UK

"our most important task is not to stop spread, which is all but futile, but to concentrate on giving the unfortunate victims optimal care."

Not in Boris's character - he's not that passive
Reportedly, in that Times article (describing when the Cabinet changed from herd immunity / Sweden)
he and other key ministers regarded letting large numbers just die as defeatism

Once lockdown relaxes - probably 1 June, the UK must be constantly vigilant:

I live in Germany, which has relaxed lockdown - and cases have immediately risen in certain care homes and factories
France has also seen some increased cases locally

So there had to be local lockdowns

Looks like the UK will eventually be doing the same, with local lockdowns if cases rise too high anywhere

Remember November 2018?
BigChocFrenzy · 11/05/2020 21:51

(paywall) Inside No 10 How Boris Johnson changed his priorities: save lives first, and then salvage the economy_

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/coronavirus-ten-days-that-shook-britain-and-changed-the-nation-for-ever-spz6sc9vb

.....Dominic Cummings, the prime minister’s senior aide,
became convinced that Britain would be better able to resist a lethal second wave of the disease next winter
if Whitty’s prediction that 60% to 80% of the population became infected was right and the UK developed “herd immunity”.

At a private engagement at the end of February, Cummings outlined the government’s strategy.

Those present say it was “herd immunity, protect the economy and if that means some pensioners die, too bad”.

At the Sage meeting on March 12, a moment now dubbed the “Domoscene conversion”,

Cummings changed his mind.
In this “penny-drop moment”, he realised he had helped set a course for catastrophe.

Until this point, the rise in British infections had been below the European average.
Now they were above it and on course to emulate Italy, where the picture was bleak.

A minister said: “Seeing what was happening in Italy was the galvanising force across government.”

By Friday, March 13, Cummings had become the most outspoken advocate of a tough crackdown.

“Dominic himself had a conversion,”
a senior Tory said.

“He’s gone from ‘herd immunity and let the old people die’,
to
‘let’s shut down the country and the economy.’”

Cummings had a “meeting of minds” with Matt Hancock, the health secretary, who wanted stronger action to prevent NHS hospitals being swamped.

Department of Health officials had impressed on Hancock that the death rate in Wuhan province was 3.4% when the hospitals were overrun and 0.7% elsewhere in China.

Johnson had also been queasy about the previous original approach.

“Boris hated the language of ‘herd immunity’ because it implied that it was OK for people to die,”
a senior source said.
“Matt hated the language because it implied we had given up.
You’ve got to fight.”
.....
But when Johnson gathered his key advisers in the cabinet room at 9.15am last Saturday
there was unanimity.

Whitty and Vallance explained that Britain had been four weeks behind Italy “and now we are closer”.

The two experts, together with Hancock and Cummings, all delivered to Johnson one message:
“Now is the moment to act.”

The prime minister agreed:
“We must work around the clock and take all necessary measures.”

One of those present said:
“The mood in the room was astonishing.
You could tell that something very significant had shifted.”

Orangeblossom78 · 11/05/2020 21:56

Sweden has a lower population density and good healthcare. The main place this seems to be rampaging like wildfire is in parts of the USA and i can't imagine anyone thinks Trump's approach is great. Except him of course.

mac12 · 11/05/2020 22:16

Am I missing something? I have just read through the PHE influenza reports for 2017-18 and 2018-2019 and there is no mention of 50,000 deaths from flu. 2017-18 was rated moderate to high year and 2018-2019 was low to moderate year for influenza.
The ONS report on excess winter mortality for 2017-2018 attributes roughly a third (34.7%) of those 50,100 excess deaths to respiratory diseases.

Have I missed something - just wondering where the statistic of 50,000 influenza deaths in 2018 comes from?

New posts on this thread. Refresh page