Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

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.

170 workers at a factory in Cornwall test positive for Covid. Most totally unaware and had no symptoms.

97 replies

Treesofwood · 30/09/2020 21:48

What is going on? Do these tests even work? How can that any people have a deadly disease that kills 1% of people it infects and not even know?

OP posts:
SheepandCow · 01/10/2020 17:06

@BrieAndChilli

It’s not just meat though is it, there were all those outbreaks in Leicester clothes sweat shops. Maybe we should just all go around naked and stop buying clothes going by some people’s reasoning!!

Also why are all these asymptomatic people being tested? Are the factories having private tests? I think we would all be very surprised if the whole population were tested, we would probably find a huge proportion of the country had covid with no symptoms!! It’s just that we aren’t supposed to get tested unless you do have symptoms

Maybe we should all just go around naked and stop buying clothes Or we could improve working conditions - including proper enforcement of any abuse or breach of employment laws.

How about we also ensure decent (non Dickensian) housing for the factory workers. At the very least their own private bedrooms.

movingonup20 · 01/10/2020 17:11

I had covid and the only initial symptom was feeling hot, I took ibroprofen and it went away never to go back up. If my dp has not already got a more persistent fever (2 days) I would have dismissed as a hot flush which I'm prone too. We both then lost our taste and smell but took 5 days from that initial temperature spike. We aren't even young, and we are overweight, so covid is weird, you can not realise easily. I'm a take two ibroprofen and go to work kind of person (obviously not this time) so I do understand that people dismiss mild symptoms

SheepandCow · 01/10/2020 17:16

The (UK) government is desperate to downplay Covid (long or short) but even they say it's 10% re Long Covid.
www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-long-term-health-effects/covid-19-long-term-health-effects

Many experts - scientists and doctors - have said it's around 10%. Cardiologists are alarmed by the number of previously healthy patients suffering heart damage.

Of courses it's still very early days with this novel coronavirus. We don't yet know how many will end up affected by Long Covid. At this stage we can't possibly say with confidence that it's no big deal.

www.itv.com/news/2020-09-29/long-covid-long-term-effects-of-coronavirus-include-damage-to-heart-liver-kidneys-oxford-study-reveals

movingonup20 · 01/10/2020 17:22

@Disconnect

The point is that just because it's a pub or restaurant doesn't mean it's potentially super spreading, if you stick with your own household seated the risk is low. We have to weigh up lots of factors including mental health, economic etc and whether this disease is that deadly (at a population level). It's not simple. Masks are a good example of a simple and cheap way to reduce super spreading

SheepandCow · 01/10/2020 17:37

Here's an open letter written by a group of doctors with Long Covid. They mention the high number of false negative Covid test results as being a potential issue.
www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3565?ijkey=fbd6427be638a2f124100cd84948e63587452705&keytype2=tf_ipsecsha

I was reading an article just the other day about a previously young fit and healthy doctor who's now been unable to work for six months. I feel for our healthcare workers. Put at higher risk from Covid AND the mental health affects of seeing so many Covid patients. The increase in PTSD amongst healthcare workers has been reported on.

hoodathunkit · 01/10/2020 17:58

The fact is that we still have a lot to learn about this virus and the disease it causes that can be lethal in some people.

We know that there are some things that make people more likely to get seriously ill than others.

It is highly likely that viral load plays a part. If this is true, and it almost certainly is, it may be that all the hand washing, mask wearing and social distancing mean that people who test positive are less likely to be severely affected than if they lived or worked in an environment with no preventative measures in place.

We know that people with underlying health conditions and obesity are more likely to become seriously ill, however most vulnerable people have been more careful than say, younger people who have been more likely to party and expose themelves to the virus.

There are many causal factors in terms of who gets very sick and who does not that we still don't understand.

This is a new virus and the reasons why some people get very sick and other don't are, at this point, a mystery..

We face a challenging, tough winter and, while we are still in the early days of the pandemic and with no vaccine in sight it just makes sense to be as careful as possible.

Disconnect · 01/10/2020 18:06

[quote movingonup20]@Disconnect

The point is that just because it's a pub or restaurant doesn't mean it's potentially super spreading, if you stick with your own household seated the risk is low. We have to weigh up lots of factors including mental health, economic etc and whether this disease is that deadly (at a population level). It's not simple. Masks are a good example of a simple and cheap way to reduce super spreading [/quote]
I agree about masks. Did you read the article - I think it is clear that indoor gatherings of many people over a prolonged period of time does mean it is potentially superspreading. I think sitting outside a pub or restaurant would not have this potential. Many are happy to sit outside with a heater (sorry environment) or a blanket (continental Europe style).
Yes, there is a balance to reach with the economy (constantly changing balance), but I thought the article was objective enough.

Disconnect · 01/10/2020 18:37

Ignore the blanket thing I said for pubs etc - clearly not Covid-safe (brain short-circuit).

Treesofwood · 01/10/2020 21:00

@amicissimma That's really interesting. Presumably this could be applied to other populations of similar make up.

Is there a break down by age etc?

OP posts:
amicissimma · 01/10/2020 22:26

@Treesofwood. It's been a while since I read the studies of the Diamond Princess. It may have been studied further or some of the other affected ships may have been looked at. I think there was a US naval ship that had an outbreak that was fairly well documented. The only thing I remember from reading about that was that mask-wearers suffered the least, but I don't know if there were other variables.

A good snoop around on Google might be rewarding, but bed beckons for me!

The Atlantic article re-iterates what I read a Japanese expert of some description saying: that the key was avoiding Crowds, Closed spaces and Closeness (to others). I would guess time would be a factor, too. You might get away with a few minutes in a closed, crowded room with a superspreader (or maybe you wouldn't!), but your risk would increase the longer you stayed.

amicissimma · 01/10/2020 22:32

Another thought has occurred to me.

From my experience of cruising, I would expect the passengers on the
Diamond Princess, which I think was quite a holiday-type itinerary, would be older and less fit, than those on the Greg Mortimor, which was an 'expedition' type cruise. The US ship, the Theodore Rooseveldt, I think, would have had a much younger, fitter population, but OTOH, probably a lot of cabin-sharing or dormitories, and very few, if any, balcony cabins.

Inkpaperstars · 01/10/2020 22:34

I read about a study in a prison population in the US...i wish I had bookmarked it but a huge percentage of those who tested positive were asymptomatic, over 70%. However, of those who were asymptomatic, the vast majority (again well over 70% I think) had actually sustained lung damage. Whether that will cause them problems in the future of their lung function is reduced by ageing or other illness I don't know.

A similar thing was reported by some NYC doctors during the peak of the pandemic...even those coming in for non covid related symptoms like a broken bone showed covid patterns of lung damage on x ray.

Zxyzoey31 · 01/10/2020 22:37

Sheepandcow you do pop up with the 10% long covid and links based on self reporting on lots of threads. To add another perspective, this week the Economist reported long term post viral symptoms affected about 1% of cases.

SheepandCow · 01/10/2020 22:41

@Zxyzoey31 Who would know more about a virus?
An economist or a doctor?

Lockdownproblems · 01/10/2020 22:43

I live nearby there and it's being said they are all Polish temp workers recently arrived.

Lindy2 · 01/10/2020 22:43

That's worrying about the lung damage. A very high proportion of prisoners (almost 100% in fact) tend to be smokers. I wonder if smoking damage leaves people more prone to Covid lung damage.

IloveJKRowling · 01/10/2020 22:46

It is highly likely that viral load plays a part. If this is true, and it almost certainly is, it may be that all the hand washing, mask wearing and social distancing mean that people who test positive are less likely to be severely affected than if they lived or worked in an environment with no preventative measures in place.

So those working in an environment with no preventative measures in place - like school classrooms - are likely to be worse affected.

Teachers are really being thrown under the bus.

BikeRunSki · 01/10/2020 22:49

@AfterSchoolWorry

To me the meat processing thing is weird. I don't understand why meat plants?
There are a few meat processing plants in the borough I live in that caused spikes earlier this year. I heard some esteemed science types talking about why meat processing plants were so vulnerable to covid outbreaks. They were saying that the constant jet washing they are required to do, creates aerosols which moves the virus around.
Treesofwood · 01/10/2020 22:52

Lindy2 Bizarrely smoking is thought to be protective. Not that that is shouted too loudly from the rooftops.

OP posts:
dementedpixie · 01/10/2020 22:52

Its not An economist its The Economist

Treesofwood · 01/10/2020 22:55

www.cebm.net/covid-19/nicotine-replacement-therapy/ a bit of an overview here

OP posts:
SheepandCow · 01/10/2020 23:04

I've been wondering about smoking.

Some early studies indicated smokers were nearly 25% less likely to be hospitalised with serious illness from Covid. Could just be coincidence, or perhaps an anti-inflammatory effect of the nicotine?

Re the Economist. I think when it comes to Covid I'll go more by medical journals than economic ones.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page