What are the consequences if old people break a curfew? My mum isn't going to stay home for four months.
SARS CoV-2 coronavirus / Covid-19 (No tin foil hat silliness please)
- Thread starter Don't Kill Bill
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
So on the one hand their plan is based on the premise that people can only reasonably sustain harder measures for a limited period of time, on the other it also depends on old people isolating themselves for four whole months while the rest of the country is becoming infected? Hmmm.
They might die?
The chances that people in the risk-group will stick to isolation are incredibly higher than those at low risk. You've got about 4 weeks at best for low risk.
Well yeah, because if you're at a much higher risk of dying, that's a much higher chance you isolate.
Common sense tells you that.
They've backtracked on that one now. Apparently it's not part of their plan (which is nice considering there's no proof anyone stays immune over the long term), it's just something that may be vaguely helpful later if things aren't going well. Or something.
My mother is pretty blase about this whole thing. She doesn't really seem to care if she succumbs.
This looks to be complete and utter bullshit. No way you can control the virus like that bottle of water once you allow to let the virus spread like UK are now. Pretty much every expert apart from those in the UK and Sweden it seems recommends drastic measures as early as possible. Especially now that influenca is still heavily around and hospitals are overwhelmed already it makes sense to fight it as soon as possible.
Looking at China and South Korea which are the only two countries that seem to have it under control this seems the right approach. There is no evidence at all that UK's approach will lead to anything meaningful
Fashionable to slag off the UK response now is it?
They clearly have a plan and are clearly following the advice of their experts.
But yeah, TwoSheds and a bunch of blokes from the caf know better. The models they are basing this strategy on are assuming that the rate of infection is incredibly higher than the reported cases so far. They aren't making political decisions here.
They clearly have a plan and are clearly following the advice of their experts.
But yeah, TwoSheds and a bunch of blokes from the caf know better. The models they are basing this strategy on are assuming that the rate of infection is incredibly higher than the reported cases so far. They aren't making political decisions here.
It seems it's only the UK and you that seem to know it better than every other country in Europe and the world
Which is fine. But it's common sense that as the deaths increase in people 70+, if you take:
100,0000 people aged 70
and
100,0000 people aged 20-40
That a much higher majority of the first group will adhere.
For four entire months while others have far more freedom? You think old people will really stick that? You think their families will stick to that? Bearing in mind the UK's premise that people won't stick to measures for long generally even when they're applied to everyone equally.
And what complications come from these elderly people (who are vulnerable to other health problems and may need emergency or continuous care anyway) being isolated for a third of the year?
Think it rather glosses over just how difficult that measure will be to manage.
I'm in Sweden @Godfather, and we're following similar advice. In fact, our experts here slated Denmark last night, and the Danish experts later came out and agreed, admitting the decisions made were purely political.
Yup the number of deaths has gone up to 21 from 10 while the number of cases is up to 1140 from about 500 a couple of days back
I'm reading conflicting advice on whether to treat fever with paracetamol or not. The NHS website recommendations it as a treatment method. However that Dr. John Campbell dude said in one of his videos that he doesn't recommend it as it works against the body's natural defense mechanism to raise the temperature and kill the virus (or something along those lines). I'm not currently sick, just trying to be prepared for when the time comes.
What are your thoughts @Arruda @Pogue Mahone if you don't mind me asking?
You don't need Paracetamol anyways. Just take it on the chin.
I don't see why old people can't go out and socialise by keeping distance. Go for walks for instance, sit in the park.
Well I already said that we would need to pander to their every need did I not?
Agreed.
Those were the Friday numbers.
Edit, I'm wrong. I could've sworn I saw that 21 deaths number on Friday.
Short term memory loss/being an idiot isn't a symptom hopefully.
Last edited:
Depends on how thorough you wish to be. Could range from things like simply trying to maintain distance and eating separately to actual physical isolation and aggressive periodic disinfection of potentially shared surfaces.
As I say, common sense tells you that.
If the number of deaths in 70+ keeps increasing, and it will, and the number of infections keeps increasing, absolutely people in the risk groups will be more inclined to take drastic measures.
Right. Which will also be extremely difficult to sustain for four months.
So you have a government whose basic premise is that tough measures won't last long in the UK now depending on an extremely tough measure lasting for four months. Thus, hmmmm.
I have no idea how this plan should work. It makes no sense to me. Not doubting that there are expert behind the plan, experts that know much more about the virus than we do but it just sounds very unrealistic to think that you can let the virus spread to a certain point and then make it stop all of a sudden when hospitals are full.
The way most countries go about it is try and fight it as early as possible.
You can hmmmmmmm all you like.
Tough measures have a much higher chance in lasting in the risk-population. That's not even debatable so there's no "hmmmmmm" about it.
Exactly. Me neither.
But I'm pleased the UK and Sweden are following expert advice. People like the Prof Whitty and Sir Patrick Vallance, rather than making political decisions.
The UK aren't waiting for hospitals to be full by the way, the numbers @Godfather are based on a MUCH higher number of infected than currently reported, it's all modelled. Once the model (not current numbers) starts hitting those critical numbers, then you go full lockdown.
Oh the policy was buckets all along. I'm convinced.
This documentary from 2018 is on iplayer, very relevant. Lots of interesting stuff and also highlights the value of the BBC with them doing a pioneering study for pandemic planning.
Has it got buckets though?
They sure are. Just like pretty much every other country that decided to do it differently.
The result will pretty much be the same anyway. The moment UK has infection rates like Spain they will shut everything down. It's just a matter of days.
I would imagine catching the virus will be the biggest consequence for them, I'm sure it can only be advice to stay at home, rather than a legal order.
Yes, and that's the point, they aren't denying that. But the government ARE being slated in here, for following the advice of their experts.
Do you realise how fecking stupid that is? People on redcafe, slating politicians, for following expert advice?
Yes I get all that. I've been socially distant for about a week now. There were 4 appointments I couldn't cancel but other than that I've done all of the above voluntarily. I also understand that it's a lot more of a sacrifice for some than for others (depending on life, family situation. I have it easy in that respect).
But in the end any measure taken now will be almost infinitely more productive than the same measure in some days down the line. It's in the nature of exponential growth. The minute you get any sort of reduction in exponential growth you also get exponential reduction.
Well I agree and it looks we are on the same page. It just seemed you thought every other country bar Sweden and UK followed expert advice.
No, but France, USA and Denmark are also making political decisions that are AGAINST the advice of their experts. That's the difference.
Bang on pal. Opinions from internet keyboard warriors, including us, mean feck all. Do as you’re fecking told for once and stop moaning that the other countries are telling their citizens what to do when you’re doing the exact opposite.
It's not that stupid when other countries, experts, modelling and the WHO are following an approach that suggests that the UK's experts are wrong. Assuming that your country's experts are right just because they happen to be from your country would hardly be evidence of robust thinking.
Well I'm sure there are a lot of experts in the UK that would recommend a different strategy. It's just a matter what you believe. I for one haven't heard a single expert in Austria recommend letting the virus spread but anyhow. As we've mentioned. The difference result wise won't be much. A shutdown will come it's just a matter of days.
A shutdown has always been part of the plan in the UK, the only debate is as to when.
Waiting patiently for @Dante to come and explain that Brexit-loving Grannies won't do what they're told.
It's just a basic explanation for those who don't understand what's going, I'm sure the government didn't commission it.