I can't find anything about the likelihood of long term effects in younger patients in this article?
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.
I can't find anything about the likelihood of long term effects in younger patients in this article?
Does anyone know your lungs ever fully recover from smoking?
I was on again off again smoker (20 a day when I was on it) for around 15 years. I gave up for a year or two at a time 2 or 3 times. Then I smoked when I was drinking for maybe another 4 and vaped for about a year somewhere in there too before giving up completely 5 years ago.
Hypertension a bit surprising, compared to what has been reported before.
The only studies I've seen on this suggest that on average approx. a decade of life is lost.
I'm not sure if they were taking the generally undercounted nursing home deaths into account, where you would expect people to die at a quicker rate anyway, though I'm also not sure how well those are taken into account in official figures either.
I'm not surprised people think less time is lost though, as one of the UK government's advisers previously said up to 2/3rds of those who died would have died soon anyway. Make of that what you will.
In the example I gave they were working longer hours to get in front of their workload, so that they would be less stressed in the coming weeks and could tackle things more effectively.
Note being "logged in" doesn't mean you're working.
In this specific instance they took around 3 hours of breaks over the period. It wasn't a "one off" in the sense that a 55-60 hour working week is something that is likely to happen several times a year. However if you assumed a 70+ hour week would be even an occasional occurance then you'd be wrong and I was unclear.
In terms of pay the specific member of staff received a £15k bonus in recognition of his work, but no he didn't receive "overtime" specifically.
Again they are not flogging themselves and I didn't say some are working most of their waking hours whilst others are 10% productive. Each member of staff has an individual load so one person falling behind only effects their outcomes and future workload. I said that some staff work more productively from home, but most do not. A minority of staff use the quieter environment and lack of commute a great opportunity to get in front of their workload. Their 90+ minute daily commute is used instead to work and the flexibility allows them to work in "batches" that they find works for them, rather than a "normal" solid 9-10 hours when the office is open. Most staff however are less productive.
This is getting extremely off topic either way. It was merely a comment as to why I don't believe we'll see a widespread change in WFH post Covid.
The UK hasn't had a quarantine for incoming travel? That was the first thing Norway did, before any sort of shut down was implemented. We've actually recently decreased the quarantine from 14 days to 10 days.
Incidentally, health authorities in Norway are now saying that the shut down was too strict and lasted too long, and probably did not have a significant effect. Indications are that the rate of infection was already falling drastically from social distancing measures before the shut down. It's unclear whether that includes the quarantine, though.
We've had the 14 day quarantine here in Azores. It's a lot more effective in smaller insular regions, I guess. But, as any quarantine, it requires people to be tested before it's lifted, otherwise 14 days aren't nearly enough, let alone 10.
Well I know my workplace is certainly planning for a large shift to WFH anyway, with a current target of 40% continuing to WFH post-crisis. Which is a lot given how many roles there are that currently can't be done from home. We were already likely to move in that direction over the next 10-20 years because that's the way the world is going but this crisis has massively expedited that process. The other larger financial service companies I'm in contact with are also signalling to their employees that they're planning to permanently shift in that direction.
The extent to which a shift to WFH can happen is very industry-specific but I suspect that not making that shift where you can will soon be a dated structure in a lot of sectors.
The extent to which a shift to WFH can happen is very industry-specific but I suspect that not making that shift where you can will soon be a dated structure in a lot of sectors.
I don't think any of that is off topic at all.
It's relevant as it informs your point of view. Working that many hours in the short-term on condition you will be rewarded with a decent bonus is a different thing altogether to what I assumed was going on.
However, I would fundamentally disagree with counting the hours previously used for commuting as business hours.
However, the way you've described how your business runs isn't the norm in my experience. We are being strongly urged to only work our regular hours and to take our breaks as we would have taken them in the office.
In my line of work, we will most definitely keep up the working from home aspect where it suits both the employee and the business and productivity is a factor in that decision-making process.
Most likely it would be some kind of hybrid as I feel some things can only be done face-to-face especially when setting up projects with new or existing clients where a knowledge transfer is needed.
Personally I'd need at least one day in the office a week.
Last edited:
Because he’s an attention-seeking numpty. The thread would be more intelligent for his removal.
You know what, I could easily stay inside for 21 days. No problem whatsoever. The reason I'm able to do that is because I don't have an essential role in society, and the role I do have can easily be done from home. That's why ive not been furloughed. I've also been lucky enough to be able to get a good supply of food in the house, so if there were suddenly an enforced 21 day lock down, I'd be fine, I'd maybe have to eat smaller portions.
The obvious trouble is that my situation is not applicable to everyone. It's not applicable to nurses, doctors, people in hospitals and care homes, farmers, people who make and deliver essentials like food, the police officers and emergency workers who need to enforce these rules etc. Also, the people who don't have money in the bank, who aren't able to stock up 3 weeks worth of food - during a panic buying spree we've never seen the likes of, no less. Those people would be forced to face the choice of almost certain starvation or take their chances with the virus and the law and go looting and stealing to put food on the table.
If you've spent more than a minute playing out this scenario in your head but not thought of any of these things, then you're clearly living in another uninverse.
Your smoking history is, give or take a year, exactly the same as mine. I don’t think either of us are out of the woods yet, unfortunately. But this was good to read, earlier in the year.
Scroll a few tweets down that thread...
The key point is it hasn’t been round long enough for us to understand long term effects. But there’s plenty of reasons to think that they will be an issue for many people.
Incredibly, the 'Most Read' story for the week on my area's newspaper website is 'Piers Morgan misses ITV's Good Morning Britain - here's why and when he could return'. This, in a place where hundreds of people have died.
The first part is quite scary but feeling much better by the end.
Thanks for the info!
I think that data shows exactly that. 24 people under 45 with no pre existing conditions out of nearly 7,000 died from that New York study. Death rate from the China study show a 0.4% death ratio in the same age group (and that’s likely overestimated). I guess it depends what you think is “Young”? I’d say someone in their 50’s and 60’s is old. They may not be THAT old in 2020 when life expectancy has gone up but they certainly aren’t “young”, which again I would consider under 40.
Can Young people die from it? Yes. Is it unlikely? Also yes. Is any death of Covid at any age a tragedy? Also yes.
Sol Campbell is a deluded hateful Tory cnut.
'Sol Campbell' is a man-made concept and 'deliberately targets the oxygen of publicity'.
I'm not sure if they'll be more detail to follow but the briefing on this so far appears to be no more than a restating of current policy dressed up as a control?
We're going to ask people to quarantine but this will be completely voluntary and in their own homes and no provisions to support it. So they'll still travel however they want and still most likely go out and do a food shop first?
In fact most likely we won't bother to track them or deport them so most will just do what they like.
That’s going to pretty much kill off the UK airline industry isn’t it??
Yeah, it's gonna gut the industry. I was hoping they would be trying to go for something like a pre-flight test at this stage. I don't know if it is possible to develop a quick response test though.
I fully understand that you two saw my posts of last night and didn't follow it to the point where I saw my folly. I'm now even more put in my place than before. Thanks!
No, I didn't, sorry.
Don't worry we've built up a surplus of claps
Parks are full in Dublin too. But I’m ok with that. This is tough as hell for everybody. There’s a growing body of evidence that outdoor transmission is more or less completely insignificant. So if it helps keep people sane to catch some rays in a park, then so be it.
People having house parties later on this evening can eat a bag of dicks, obviously.
Saw the same in my local park. Friends getting together, clearly not from the same household. Even some mini 5 a side going on, jumpers for goal posts. Don't think Boris needs to make his announcement tomorrow, the decision for easing lockdown has been made.
Surely though if people are seeing this and the people in the parks are getting away with doing that it makes people believe that they are fine with having house parties etc. It most certainly is difficult but doing that just promotes 'bad behaviour'. I'd struggle to believe that it is a necessity for most of those people to be at the park, sitting and chatting with no social distancing taking place. If you relax the rules in one area then it makes people feel comfortable and relax in other areas too.
Fair point.
How many dicks is that exactly?
Not as many as you used to get.Just like Creme Eggs and Mars, the bags are definitely getting smaller for the same price.
Absolutely crazy NOT to have stopped incoming passengers eight or nine weeks ago.
I don't usually trash the UK Government, but on this I''d trash them even more than most of you do on here every day.
Unlike in the other examples I’m happy to have to eat a reduced amount of dicks
Brazil over 10k dead now
Last edited:
Is this guy high? All countries that are using masks are doing particularly good