• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Coronavirus

Grays_1890 said:
Subsequent spike in cases and panic then cycle will continue. Its a long wait till next March for vaccine
Click to expand...

Exactly. In the case of Wales if, as the Welsh leader stated, their ICU beds are already full, then it's hard to see any viable alternative solution now.
The only hope is that lockdown fatigue makes people more aware of their behaviour and they act responsibly during and after this series of lockdowns, to avoid more lockdowns further down the line. But I can't see that happening.
So we're going to be stuck in this cycle of lockdowns of varying degrees of severity.
 
Glenda's Legs said:
He said ICU units are already full and NHS won't be able to look after the increasing numbers falling seriously ill, even with the extra 5000 beds available for the winter.
Whether that's 5,000 Nightingale beds, or an extra 5,000 from existing hospital capacity set aside/reallocated for Covid wasn't clear.

He was very definite that it's a 2 week lockdown and won't be extended, and that the impact on the numbers won't be seen until a few weeks after they've come out of lockdown. Which begs the question what happens when they come out of this 'short, sharp' lockdown and everyone goes back to pre-lockdown behaviours.
Click to expand...

I stand corrected - but that does lead to more questions regarding paying for 5000 more beds Could that money be better spent elsewhere?

"Unless we act the NHS will not be able to look after the increasing number of people who will fall seriously ill in the coming weeks, even with the extra 5,000 beds we have available. And even more people will die.

The NHS is under pressure this time of year every year, all the stats need to be presented to show the differences - also it’s not helping a large number are actually catching it in hospitals.

Think Scotland will be a good marker- they are up on the 26th and nothing has changed in cases etc - let’s see if they extend
 
Grays_1890 said:
Subsequent spike in cases and panic then cycle will continue. Its a long wait till next March for vaccine
Click to expand...
It is
But it’s amazing how some people say places are full and others in those areas say it’s not
Can’t even get that bit right
 
Last edited:
Legohamster said:
I stand corrected - but that does lead to more questions regarding paying for 5000 more beds Could that money be better spent elsewhere?

"Unless we act the NHS will not be able to look after the increasing number of people who will fall seriously ill in the coming weeks, even with the extra 5,000 beds we have available. And even more people will die.

The NHS is under pressure this time of year every year, all the stats need to be presented to show the differences - also it’s not helping a large number are actually catching it in hospitals.

Think Scotland will be a good marker- they are up on the 26th and nothing has changed in cases etc - let’s see if they extend
Click to expand...

Extra beds are irrelevant really unless you have additional staff to look after them. Guess having a separate hospital does allow you to segregate patients a bit better.

Ireland are going into a 6 week lockdown.
 
He then proposes

They do though know who in the population is, if they catch the virus, most at risk of hospitalisation – older people and people with existing underlying conditions, diabetes, obesity, high-blood pressure, other respiratory illnesses. If this is the evidence, wouldn’t it be much better to have an effective shielding programme for those most at risk, rather than have a blanket business closure policy of dubious efficacy. Greater Manchester have estimated the cost of a shielding programme at around £14m a month, less than a fifth of the estimated cost of business closures

https://aboutmanchester.co.uk/manch...-month-shielding-programme-for-the-vinerable/
 
Grays_1890 said:
He then proposes

They do though know who in the population is, if they catch the virus, most at risk of hospitalisation – older people and people with existing underlying conditions, diabetes, obesity, high-blood pressure, other respiratory illnesses. If this is the evidence, wouldn’t it be much better to have an effective shielding programme for those most at risk, rather than have a blanket business closure policy of dubious efficacy. Greater Manchester have estimated the cost of a shielding programme at around £14m a month, less than a fifth of the estimated cost of business closures

https://aboutmanchester.co.uk/manch...-month-shielding-programme-for-the-vinerable/
Click to expand...

Still haven’t heard how it would work.
 
Grays_1890 said:
You don't believe it could there is a difference
Click to expand...

Explain to me (or link a creditable paper) as to how it would actually function. I’ve yet to see or hear anyone do that - beyond saying ‘Shield the vulnerable.’

The fact that not a single country on the planet has adopted the approach tells me everything I need to know.
 
Gilzeantoscore said:
How can we shield the elderly and the high risk? You would also need to shield the shielders, the nurses, therapists, porters, cooks and cleaners too. Some people have really got no fudging idea!
Click to expand...
We just have those support staff take extra care in terms of masks, gloves, etc.

Test them and isolate where required.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back