Coronavirus (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Saddlebrains
- Start date
Gazolba
Well-Known Member
In Intensive Care.
Looks very bad.
Hope he will pull through but what happens if he dies?
Does he have a deputy to take over or does there have to be an election?
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Hopefully this won't be an issue but if it is Raab is designated survivor so assume he would take temporary charge until a leadership contest could be held.
They don't have to call an election and its hard to see the government losing any vote of no confidence with the majority they have.
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
Johnson isn't president. The Conservative party were elected at the election and he happened to be leader of that party. No election when Brown followed Blair or when May followed Cameron or indeed when Johnson succeeded May. His deputy will step up initially (Raab I think at the moment) and later on there would be a new leadership election for the Tories.
But hopefully Johnson will pull through and I wish him all the best for a speedy recovery.
lifeskyblue
Well-Known Member
Initially Raab as stand in (is not PM) but if Boris dies the cabinet need to elect immediate leader (as temporary PM) and get assent from the Queen. Only after that would the Tory party hold its leadership election.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
clint van damme
Well-Known Member
Raab in charge is a frightening prospect. Not only a horrible fucker but a cretin as well. Dangerous combination.
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
I always get the impression that he could kick off at a journalist any second.
clint van damme
Well-Known Member
He already looks under pressure so watch this space.
A man with utter contempt for the NHS been put in charge of the country showing deep love for the NHS - What could go wrong?
Otis
Well-Known Member
Been thinking about this whole Coronavirus situation.
Correct me if I am wrong, but.....
Aren't we just putting off the inevitable? The virus is still going to be there when we get out and go back to work and places all open up again for business.
I know it has already been said in terms of protecting the NHS so it doesn't get completely overwhelmed. I get all that, but isn't the 'stay safe' just a 'stay safe for now?'
Seems to me is a vaccine or bust and the vaccine is some way off yet.
It's all well and good talking about peaks, but isn't it all just going to spike again when the country gets back to 'normal.'
Could it be we are indeed going to get herd immunity, but just not by design. Just by the simple fact the country will grind completely to a halt if we are to just stay indoors endlessly.
A vaccine is the only hope isn't it? The virus isn't just going to go away and die if we stay indoors and practice social distancing for a fee weeks or months.
Correct me if I am wrong, but.....
Aren't we just putting off the inevitable? The virus is still going to be there when we get out and go back to work and places all open up again for business.
I know it has already been said in terms of protecting the NHS so it doesn't get completely overwhelmed. I get all that, but isn't the 'stay safe' just a 'stay safe for now?'
Seems to me is a vaccine or bust and the vaccine is some way off yet.
It's all well and good talking about peaks, but isn't it all just going to spike again when the country gets back to 'normal.'
Could it be we are indeed going to get herd immunity, but just not by design. Just by the simple fact the country will grind completely to a halt if we are to just stay indoors endlessly.
A vaccine is the only hope isn't it? The virus isn't just going to go away and die if we stay indoors and practice social distancing for a fee weeks or months.
OffenhamSkyBlue
Well-Known Member
Absolutely spot-on, Otis! SBT post of the year so far.
Herd immunity relies on the herd being allowed to catch (or at least be exposed to) the little bastard at some point. it MAY be that all of us who have had any sort of symptoms in the past 6 weeks or so and who are now compliantly staying locked-down are immune, but i'm not convinced.
You're right that all of us staying isolated is simply delaying the inevitable.
There are three things we need at least one of to get back to anything like normality:-
1. An effective vaccine (probably 6 months to a year away)
2. An effective anti-viral treatment (probably about the same timescale)
3. A mass population antibody test (could be rather closer than the other two)
And we also need people on the frontline to get over the notion that, because they have had a virus test and are negative today, they are somehow protected from getting infected tomorrow.
OffenhamSkyBlue
Well-Known Member
It would appear from what is known about acquired immunity to other types of coronavirus (four of them cause about 15% of common colds between them) that the immunity is often short-lived (6 to 12 months as a best guess), whereas chickenpox for the vast majority of people confers life-long immunity (though the same virus lies dormant in nerve endings, and can become reactivated to cause repeated bouts of shingles, particularly in later life) - my ex-wife was one of the exceptions, who had multiple chickenpox infections into adulthood.
I'm not sure why the immune system behaves differently towards something like Coronaviruses than it does to the pox viruses - it MAY be that the coronavirus family mutate at a higher rate than other pathogens in a way that evades the immune response, and that may be why it is so good at crossing the species divide.
But MrsOSB and i were saying weeks ago that we should treat it like people do with chickenpox and have a huge gathering so everyone who is at low risk of complications gets it, gets immune, gets over it, gets on with life. I think that is maybe what they were originally suggesting with the herd immunity theory, but it seems now as though more people might be more at risk than they originally thought.
I would love to have a crystal ball and be able to look back from 12 months hence, when we have data on how many people had the virus in any form, and how many people dies, as that is the ONLY accurate way to identify the case fatality rate. It only looks high at the moment because we are only counting deaths not population cases.
Ian1779
Well-Known Member
It is a virus though... and it can’t live indefinitely without a host. So surely any approach has to be try and track the virus, how it is moving between people (which would involve mass testing) and that might give more time for the antibody test to be developed.
You may ultimately be right, but we never really got a grip of where, when and how it got here. There needs to be some effort to get a picture of where it is and how it is moving.
ajsccfc
Well-Known Member
I think because we have no idea exactly how many people are infectious at the moment the current steps are to prevent the worst case scenario of everyone getting sick at the same time. Assuming people do build up some kind of immunity to it for however long as seems to be the case, that susceptibility slowly goes down over time and the point where we can move about unrestricted will still see people getting sick with it and worse, but in the kind of numbers that don't require conference centres to become field hospitals. I think anyone expecting this to be within weeks is in dreamland, but time and testing is key. Once a vaccine is established it can hopefully relegate it to the level of a virus that won't go away but is preventable.
Sbarcher
Well-Known Member
Vaccines for flu viruses seldom work. Even with normal flu, by the time the immunologists come up with a vaccine, it's already mutated and the jab does very little to prevent catching the new strain. Seems that these strains are getting more virulent and this could become a regular thing for the world to face up to.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
We won’t know if Covid falls into that category for a few years but not every virus mutates year on year. Anti viral drugs are becoming increasingly effective and I would imagine we are closer to getting one of those than a vaccine in this case.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
They are about 40% effective I read which is clearly more than seldom and nevertheless even if they don't stop people getting the flu, they reduce the severity of the illness.
Otis
Well-Known Member
Won't there always be a host though? We are never, ever going to get all countries, all on 100% lockdown.
There will always be someone carrying the virus, sadly.
Sky_Blue_Daz
Well-Known Member
I see they’ve blocked off the entrances to coundon park , noticed it on the way to work earlier. Big containers across the car parks ,hopefully it will be some deterrent
rob9872
Well-Known Member
The only way I see this ending soon is if we go into full lockdown and people are made to stay at home with military and police patrolling the streets with the power they need using any force necessary. If that happens and we refuse all flights in and out of the country until the world has killed it too with no known cases (even if that means 12 months - we're an island we should take advantage of that) then we can all be kept safe.
A good training exercise too, that as soon as any known future case, complete lockdown implemented immediately.
I realise impractical probably, but would end it imo.
A good training exercise too, that as soon as any known future case, complete lockdown implemented immediately.
I realise impractical probably, but would end it imo.
Sky_Blue_Daz
Well-Known Member
Enforce curfews all shops and petrol stations shut at 7 everyone indoors at 8 unless you are going to or from work
Sky_Blue_Daz
Well-Known Member
It might sound selfish but I would mind it raining for the next week or so to stop these cockwombles going to and congregating in parks
clint van damme
Well-Known Member
It would really annoy me to lose my hours excersise because a few idiots can't abide by the guidelines.
duffer
Well-Known Member
Letting this rip through the population by having Coronavirus parties is, politely, a really, really bad idea. Even Trump can see that.
It’s about numbers and the fact that the virus kills healthy young people as well the old.
Let’s say you want to get herd immunity by exposing 50% of 50 million people (those numbers are on the low side of how this works, btw).
Even if only one tenth of one percent of those people died, that would be 25,000 dead. For the period over which those people and the far greater number of survivors who need urgent, intensive medical care are treated, the entire health system grinds to a halt.
Heart attack, stroke, cancer, car accident, baby or child with severe breathing difficulties at birth or later? Unlucky, they die too during this period, because there are considerably more than 25000 people trying to get into 5000 ICU beds and the whole focus is now on them.
That’s why it’s a disastrous idea and why no one is doing it.
Herd immunity can work for diseases that don’t kill people, or better, where there’s a vaccine, but for this it would be absolute, unbelievable carnage.
Look at what’s happening right now in our hospitals, and look again at Italy, Spain and New York. Scale that up by an order of magnitude and you can get the idea of where we would be in a few weeks without a lockdown.
When the health service has a chance of coping, and when you’ve got the testing resources in place to track, trace and isolate outbreaks is when you can ease up on this, but the real solution isn’t going to Coronavirus parties, I suspect.
OffenhamSkyBlue
Well-Known Member
Thanks for the rant, but can i refer you to the last line of my post, which said "I think that is maybe what they were originally suggesting with the herd immunity theory, but it seems now as though more people might be more at risk than they originally thought."Letting this rip through the population by having Coronavirus parties is, politely, a really, really bad idea. Even Trump can see that.
It’s about numbers and the fact that the virus kills healthy young people as well the old.
Let’s say you want to get herd immunity by exposing 50% of 50 million people (those numbers are on the low side of how this works, btw).
Even if only one tenth of one percent of those people died, that would be 25,000 dead. For the period over which those people and the far greater number of survivors who need urgent, intensive medical care are treated, the entire health system grinds to a halt.
Heart attack, stroke, cancer, car accident, baby or child with severe breathing difficulties at birth or later? Unlucky, they die too during this period, because there are considerably more than 25000 people trying to get into 5000 ICU beds and the whole focus is now on them.
That’s why it’s a disastrous idea and why no one is doing it.
Herd immunity can work for diseases that don’t kill people, or better, where there’s a vaccine, but for this it would be absolute, unbelievable carnage.
Look at what’s happening right now in our hospitals, and look again at Italy, Spain and New York. Scale that up by an order of magnitude and you can get the idea of where we would be in a few weeks without a lockdown.
When the health service has a chance of coping, and when you’ve got the testing resources in place to track, trace and isolate outbreaks is when you can ease up on this, but the real solution isn’t going to Coronavirus parties, I suspect.
Implication being that it wouldn't work. Sorry if you thought i was suggesting otherwise.
duffer
Well-Known Member
If you think that was a rant, then you want to get your skin checked - it’s looking a little thin.
It was an explanation of why a Coronavirus party was a pretty bad idea. I put numbers in and everything to help, because not everybody gets it.
It’s important that people do get it though, otherwise people can get daft ideas about potential solutions, that even dafter people might do. Or they trivialise the impact of the disease itself, which is equally dangerous, imho.
You seem to be implying that because we don’t know the death rate that it might be much lower than initially thought. That’s possible, but even with a very low rate, say 0.1%, a disease this rapidly transmissible with no immunity leads to obviously hideous outcomes. Again, numbers. Sorry if you didn’t get that.
Sky_Blue_Daz
Well-Known Member
Yes I completely agree, it would annoy me too as I enjoy walking my dog for an hour . And it is a case of minority ruining it for the majority ,but with a lovely bank holiday on the way will these numbskulls adhere to government guidelines
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Think my dog is getting annoyed on having to do so much walking!
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
Yep my dog was knackered last night after it’s 8 and a half hour 17 mile hike walk
David O'Day
Well-Known Member
Not going to happen anytime soon, it would have see parliament recalled to change the emergency powers act and they have already rowed back on that.
Nudge theory shows instead of threatening g people with sanction you are much more successful if you can bring them along with you.
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
Of course the virus won't have magically disappeared and restrictions can be lifted and we carry on as normal. Restrictions will be partially lifted or eased for a bit, then re-tightened if and when necessary to make the number of cases a steady stream (hopefully over time reducing to a trickle) to give the health services a chance to cope and not endanger anyone else in need of urgent medical treatment at the same time.
I'm sure the hope is to have a vaccine, but it may also be hoped that those steady stream of people who recover growing in numbers provide a bit of herd immunity. But that would be 'if all else fails' as at the moment no-one can be sure about how it may mutate (although the antibodies against Covid19 may at least provide a starting point for the body to fight any mutation) but it would allow some lifting of restrictions and why anti-body tests will become increasingly important.
There would also be a fear that those who have had a severe case of the virus will have damage to their lungs or possibly other organs making them more likely to contract and die from other infections in the future. So we may well see an increased death rate for a few years as some people who had the virus succumb to something else they pick up later. Worst case would be another respiratory illness.
Otis
Well-Known Member
Scary isn't it.