Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

Coronavirus: The Thread

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

Coronavirus: The Thread

Old 13th May 2020, 12:17
  #6601 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 17,679
China to test all 11 million inhabitants of Wuhan to ensure the virus does not come back

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world...ck/ar-BB141Bs0
NutLoose is offline  
Old 13th May 2020, 12:33
  #6602 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 0
Originally Posted by highflyer40 View Post
And your point being? Itís their culture and they are allowed to have culture. I quite enjoy when I visit Asia (and there are wet markets in most of the Asian countries by the way) taking a stroll through the markets. Quite an experience.

The American culture of building guns and bombs has killed more people than Corona Virus has.
My point is borderline bleedin' obvious ! 'Their culture'? Oh yes. Probably responsible - according to various sources - for spreading an extremely virulent pathogen around the world. One, for which as yet, there is no complete answer and, if we are extremely lucky, responsible for the deaths of just a few hundred thousands worldwide.

American gun culture ? comparing like with like shows a distorted sense of comparative values.
Capt Kremmen is offline  
Old 13th May 2020, 13:00
  #6603 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Ilmington, Warwickshire
Posts: 138
Does anyone in the UK get the impression that the relaxing of the quarantine is deliberately rather nebulous? Almost like there is a policy of letting it unravel without a clear direction. You can now visit strangers homes to view a house, you can meet one relative in the open air, but does it have to be a relative or can it be a friend etc etc?

I'm just wondering if this might be a ‘strategy of deniability’ so if it all goes wrong, it’s the public’s fault because the boundaries were pushed too far?

Personally, I’m quite happy as we’re adults and need to take responsibility for our own health choices. I’m getting a bit bored with the grumblers who want to be locked down for longer. That’s totally their choice and if they feel safer that way, I have no issue. The same with vulnerable or shielded groups - that makes sense too. I fully expect another rise in cases because that’s the nature of the beast - it’s not going to go away do we need to find a way to work around it.
BehindBlueEyes is online now  
Old 13th May 2020, 13:01
  #6604 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Hampshire
Age: 73
Posts: 798
Despite the aphrodisiac effects attributed to the horn of that poor animal, it hasn’t yet appeared in the Wuhan market in the flesh.
You do realise how long it takes a rhino to walk from Nairobi to Wuhan, I suppose?
KelvinD is offline  
Old 13th May 2020, 13:10
  #6605 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Hampshire
Age: 73
Posts: 798
Originally Posted by BehindBlueEyes View Post
Does anyone in the UK get the impression that the relaxing of the quarantine is deliberately rather nebulous? Almost like there is a policy of letting it unravel without a clear direction. You can now visit strangers homes to view a house, you can meet one relative in the open air, but does it have to be a relative or can it be a friend etc etc?

I'm just wondering if this might be a Ďstrategy of deniabilityí so if it all goes wrong, itís the publicís fault because the boundaries were pushed too far?

Personally, Iím quite happy as weíre adults and need to take responsibility for our own health choices. Iím getting a bit bored with the grumblers who want to be locked down for longer. Thatís totally their choice and if they feel safer that way, I have no issue. The same with vulnerable or shielded groups - that makes sense too. I fully expect another rise in cases because thatís the nature of the beast - itís not going to go away do we need to find a way to work around it.
Spot on there!
Last week, it was a punishable offence to drive your car any distance. It didn't matter that you were the only occupant and you had no intention of getting out and meeting someone, it was the act of driving the car that was seen to be criminal. There was no logic in that at all.
This week, you can drive hundreds of miles if it pleases you but you are forbidden from staying the night in your holiday home/second home if you have one. So, driving long distances is now OK but staying the night, alone, in your own home is verboten!
Where's the logic in that. I know some believe there is a fear of regional health facilities being overwhelmed if millions of grockles descended on Devon/Cornwall or the Lake District but I wonder how many thousands of second homes there really are in those areas? Quite a lot, I know but enough to cause the populations of entire counties to have an attack of the vapours? I doubt it.
Ours is not to reason why...
KelvinD is offline  
Old 13th May 2020, 13:21
  #6606 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: 900m
Posts: 0
Originally Posted by KelvinD View Post
You do realise how long it takes a rhino to walk from Nairobi to Wuhan, I suppose?
Ah! But you calculate without the new Chinese Mombasa railway and also the new Silk Road...

Furthermore Sir, if I were a rhino about to be distilled into a virus, I might forego the walk altogether.
Twitter is offline  
Old 13th May 2020, 13:50
  #6607 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Wiltshire, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 390
Originally Posted by KelvinD View Post
Spot on there!
Last week, it was a punishable offence to drive your car any distance. It didn't matter that you were the only occupant and you had no intention of getting out and meeting someone, it was the act of driving the car that was seen to be criminal. There was no logic in that at all.
This week, you can drive hundreds of miles if it pleases you but you are forbidden from staying the night in your holiday home/second home if you have one. So, driving long distances is now OK but staying the night, alone, in your own home is verboten!
Where's the logic in that. I know some believe there is a fear of regional health facilities being overwhelmed if millions of grockles descended on Devon/Cornwall or the Lake District but I wonder how many thousands of second homes there really are in those areas? Quite a lot, I know but enough to cause the populations of entire counties to have an attack of the vapours? I doubt it.
Ours is not to reason why...
The problem is not that visitors will overload the health care in holiday areas at all, that's trivial, in the overall scheme of things, I think. The problem is that with the movement of people automatically comes the movement of infection. This means that areas that have a low incidence of Covid-19 (like South West England, for example) may well become disease hot spots as infection spreads around the local population as a consequence of being brought into the area from somewhere with a very much higher incidence of disease, like London.

If visitors didn't interact with locals, go to local shops, use local filling stations, etc then it's not really a problem, but sadly very many will. Sparsely populated areas, like the South West, are already stretched for health care. Ask anyone in West Cornwall, for example, what the standard of health care is like there - it's not good, even without having loads of Covid-19 cases to deal with. The Royal Cornwall Hospital Trust has been in "need of improvement" for pretty much as long as I can remember (pretty sure it was actually worse than this a few years ago).
VP959 is online now  
Old 13th May 2020, 13:51
  #6608 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Canberra
Posts: 160
Pandemics Depress the Economy, Public Health Interventions Do Not: Evidence from the 1918 Flu
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....act_id=3561560

A non-peer reviewed paper but part of their findings (from the paper itself):
"Our analysis yields two main insights. First, we find that areas that were more severely affected by the 1918 Flu Pandemic see a sharp and persistent decline in real economic activity. Second, we find that early and extensive NPIs have no adverse effect on local economic outcomes. On the contrary, cities that intervened earlier and more aggressively experience a relative increase in real economic activity after the pandemic. Altogether, our findings suggest that pandemics can have substantial economic costs, and NPIs cannot only be means to lower mortality but may also have economic merits by mitigating the adverse impact of the pandemic.
"
NPI - non-pharmaceutical intervention (e.g. mask wearing, social-distancing)

Cities with similar growth from 1909 to 1914 were included in the comparison with regard to how quickly, and intensively, they applied NPIs. Page 26 (5.3.1) they claim that this showed 4% and 5% higher employment post pandemic.

If comparisons can be drawn between COVID-19 and the "Spanish flu", NPIs reduce the death toll and increase post-pandemic economic activity (win-win). Conversely, leaving societies 'open', or opening up too soon, costs lives and slows the economic recovery.

Last edited by layman; 13th May 2020 at 13:52. Reason: typo ...
layman is offline  
Old 13th May 2020, 14:15
  #6609 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: 3NM from LROP, 80ft AGL
Posts: 16
Originally Posted by Mr Optimistic View Post
'Well, in that case, would it be OK to start euthanizing randomly some of the people that are "economically unproductive'
You might think that but I don't.
Actually I was thinking about Asimov's first law of robotics: "A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.". It implies that both injuring somebody directly and allowing somebody to be harmed should be seen as being equally bad. Unfortunately many people, and especially politicians, don't think this way. They tend to focus their decisions on how the blame might be assigned later, instead of the actual outcome of their actions.
MikeSnow is offline  
Old 13th May 2020, 14:17
  #6610 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Japan
Posts: 740
Originally Posted by KelvinD View Post
You do realise how long it takes a rhino to walk from Nairobi to Wuhan, I suppose?
From our friend Wiki: "Once the most widespread of Asian rhinoceroses, the Javan rhinoceros ranged from the islands of Java and Sumatra, throughout Southeast Asia, and into India and China."
jolihokistix is online now  
Old 13th May 2020, 14:32
  #6611 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: 900m
Posts: 0
Shobushi

This 28 year old Sumo Wrestler who had a four day delay getting a place in hospital has now died, following a month of treatment.
Other wrestlers and trainer of his ďstallĒ are also positive.
Twitter is offline  
Old 13th May 2020, 14:43
  #6612 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: apogee
Age: 65
Posts: 59
The earliest literary mention of hunting the rhinoceros occurs in the "Great Capture" chapter of the Lost Book of Zhou (Yizhoushu), where the results of a hunting trip on an enormous scale by the first king of the Zhou Dynasty, King Wu, are recounted:
King Wu hunted and netted 22 tigers, 2 panthers, 5,235 stags, 12 rhinoceri, 721 yaks, 151 bears, 118 yellow-bears, 353 boars, 18 badgers, 16 king-stags, 50 musk-deer, 30 tailed-deer, and 3,508 deer.
In the Manshu (Tang dynasty) it states that rhinoceroses were hunted by the Nanzhao (in modern Yunnan) using pit traps, and that it was believed that killing one would always bring a thunderstorm.

During the Song Dynasty (960-1279), it was revealed that the demand for rhino horn caused the extinction of rhinoceros in central to northern China. One of the last outposts of the native Chinese rhinoceros was Sichuan, where rhinoceroses were reported to be living up to the late 17th century. The last native population of rhinoceros only became extinct in Yunnan province in the 20th century.
wiki
--------------------
meadowrun is online now  
Old 13th May 2020, 14:45
  #6613 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 128
dead pan:
Despite the Govt's bluster I doubt whether we'll go into full lock-down again, given the huge additional economic damage this will inflict. The lock-down was very much a one-off.
If cases surge again and Boris is hesitant or nebulous in re-tightening lock-down*, I wonder if the public would voluntarily do it for him?

*I get the impression that Boris is trying to sound bullish whilst being cautious. Furthermore, phrases such as 'should be actively encouraged to return to work' don't exactly exude scientific clarity and come across as an effort to dodge his personal responsibilty as PM delivering them. The virus cares not for crafted messages and nudges. The fruits of our expanding scientific knowledge are our weapons against it.
John Marsh is offline  
Old 13th May 2020, 15:28
  #6614 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: apogee
Age: 65
Posts: 59
Forget about a vaccine for 18 months, maybe years, maybe never.
To get things working again, many changes in workplace design have to occur based on what we know is effective....
Distancing and masks.
Most everything involving people spaces will have to be re-worked from offices to factories, schools, prisons, entertainment venues (restaurants, bars, clubs, theatres),sports and transport. How many in a taxi?
6 feet of personal space on a 787 is an unsupportable economic nightmare. (I can trace most of my colds/flus over the last 20 years back to flights).
Expect prices and taxes to go up.

But, it has to be done.
To be done right, it will have to be like a "Creeping Barrage" where the barrage of safety measures closely proceed the public marching forward into a less friendly normal..
meadowrun is online now  
Old 13th May 2020, 15:36
  #6615 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 17,679
Last week, it was a punishable offence to drive your car any distance. It didn't matter that you were the only occupant and you had no intention of getting out and meeting someone, it was the act of driving the car that was seen to be criminal. There was no logic in that at all.
Agreed, police stopping people sitting in the park or sunbathing with their partner or alone, same for beaches, what was the point, they are self isolated, well, they were until a couple of stomping great coppers joined them.
NutLoose is offline  
Old 13th May 2020, 16:40
  #6616 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 1,913
Personally, I’m quite happy as we’re adults and need to take responsibility for our own health choices. I’m getting a bit bored with the grumblers who want to be locked down for longer. That’s totally their choice and if they feel safer that way, I have no issue. The same with vulnerable or shielded groups - that makes sense too. I fully expect another rise in cases because that’s the nature of the beast - it’s not going to go away do we need to find a way to work around it.
The narrative from government from the start is that Covid-19 will kill you - that is you, not someone else, and as a result people now feel very uneasy about going to work, sending their kids to school; even going to the doctors or being admitted to hospital. Even today Shapps was saying that using public of transport is "a matter of life and death". Of course, he's right, it is, but then again so is driving your car, crossing the road, and any number of sporting activities and as intelligent (?) members of the public we have to manage risk as we see fit. To do that we need to understand the level of risk to life, and if I take sensible precautions, like no snogging all and sundry, not playing contact sport (could be construed to be one and the same!), only cross roads when the pedestrian lights are on green, and drive defensively I can mitigate those various risks.

The flaw in the whole issue is intelligence, and many people simply don't appear to be capable understanding risk and reasonable steps to mitigate it. That's why, when the WHO says minimum social distancing is 1.0m, the UK government demands 2.0m, even when in most countries is 1.5m, (or if you're mentally challenged 1.8m - that is 6 feet to our American cousins). The British public has ultra cautiousness hot wired into their psyche, and is very risk averse. As an example, kids now can't just go and call on their friends to play, it's now some sort of diplomatic agreement between two sets of parents, that involves use of the family's 4x4s!
ATNotts is offline  
Old 13th May 2020, 17:08
  #6617 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: australia
Posts: 90
Originally Posted by ATNotts View Post
The narrative from government from the start is that Covid-19 will kill you - that is you, not someone else
I'm much more comfortable with covid killing my neighbour. I never liked them anyways. For the sake of the country, I'm even willing to throw my mother in law onto the fire.
golder is offline  
Old 13th May 2020, 17:32
  #6618 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 0
Originally Posted by golder View Post
I'm much more comfortable with covid killing my neighbour. I never liked them anyways. For the sake of the country, I'm even willing to throw my mother in law onto the fire.
Fire ? In Oz ? Spoilt for choice !
Capt Kremmen is offline  
Old 13th May 2020, 18:15
  #6619 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: scotland
Posts: 169
For anyone interested, the preliminary results of a population wide antibody test in Spain indicate that about 5% of the population show Coronavirus antibodies.

Last edited by occasional; 13th May 2020 at 18:30.
occasional is online now  
Old 13th May 2020, 18:24
  #6620 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Wiltshire, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 390
So about 3.35 million people infected so far. That's a bit less that I'd have guessed, I thought we might have topped 5 million cases by now.
VP959 is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.