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 16th Jun 2021, 20:47
  #15881 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 12,530
Cancer, heart disease and strokes kill far more people than Covid and don’t stop affecting them because of a pandemic.
ONS figures for April.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulat...ales/april2021

In April 2021, there were 38,899 deaths registered in England, 2,523 deaths (6.1%) fewer than the April five-year average (2015 to 2019); this was the first month that deaths were below the five-year average in England since August 2020….

Coronavirus (COVID-19) was the 9th leading cause of death in April 2021 in England (accounting for 2.4% of all deaths registered in April)….

The leading cause of death in April 2021 in England was ischaemic heart diseases (accounting for 10.7% of all deaths), changing from dementia and Alzheimer's disease in March 2021….

In England, the April 2021 mortality rate (851.2 deaths per 100,000 people) was the lowest mortality rate for the month of April since our data time series began in 2001.…..

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulat...nding4june2021

Figures for week ending. 4th June….


The number of deaths registered in England in the week ending 4 June 2021 (Week 22) was 7,302; this was 1,704 fewer deaths than the previous week (Week 21) and 4.0% below the five-year average (305 fewer deaths)…..

Of the deaths registered in Week 22 in England and Wales, 98 mentioned “novel coronavirus (COVID-19)”, accounting for 1.3% of all deaths….

The number of deaths registered in the UK in the week ending 4 June 2021 was 9,111, which was 348 fewer than the five-year average…..


ORAC is offline  
Old 16th Jun 2021, 20:51
  #15882 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Glorious Devon
Posts: 504
Originally Posted by BWSBoy6 View Post
As you are well aware, every year it hangs by a thread. Stories of queuing ambulances, patients being treated in corridors etc etc. Much of this is a result of poor management and the fact it’s also a massive behemoth. The government could see that Covid would be the straw that would finally break the camels back. Overnight, the NHS became the National Covid Service and most other illnesses were effectively swept out of the way, with the consequence of many delayed and missed diagnoses. That should never have happened. Cancer, heart disease and strokes kill far more people than Covid and don’t stop affecting them because of a pandemic.

Clearly, the government decided that Covid trumps every other illness and that it’s far more politically expedient to be seen to be pro actively ‘fighting’ the virus whilst shelving urgent operations and suchlike. As I said before, if the money that has been peed up the wall on furlough had been judiciously spent appropriately on the NHS, we could have continued as near normal without sacrificing jobs and the economy.
People got sick from Covid and without treatment they were at risk of dying in the short term This treatment was provided at the expense of other services, both by diversion of resources and to reduce the risk of infection. Unless I misunderstand one of your earlier posts, you also do not seem to be in favour of lockdown. I am not clear what your solution would have been had you been running affairs.
Ninthace is offline  
Old 16th Jun 2021, 21:19
  #15883 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Beyond the Blue Horizon
Age: 61
Posts: 905
Originally Posted by Grayfly View Post
Agreed, if you are trying to reduce NHS costs due to Covid 19, seasonal flue etc it doesn't need to be manditory, it should just be bleeding obvious. I will probably continue wearing a mask is shops and public transport during the flue season and other nasy 'bugs', not just to reduce my risk but to reduce the risk of spreading to others. Why would anyone think that this minor adjustment, readily accepted in other cultures and countries is a threat to them? We're British and should be able to do this even better than them, if that helps you.

The beneficiaries? All of us...manufacturers and vendors creat jobs and much needed revenue to the treasury. It doesn't always have to be off shored, I thought we took back control to ensure we prosper.
Grayfly
This is obviously your first experience of this,I did China / HK in the SARS epidemic and said last year on here “think 18 months towards any thought of normality” from my own living there and experience of doing it. It is one of the reasons you see many Far East students still wearing masks in the UK as a result. UK is now bored of this and just wants it over now. Incidentally of to Majorca this weekend from Munich for a break. Mrs Mac is coming via Munich but will have to isolate on return in UK. I have a trip to Dubai up on return and will then go back to UK for yet another quarantine. I think the UK is some what behind the curve now in Europe despite the much lauded vaccine role out. Win war and lose peace maybe.

Cheers
Mr Mac
Mr Mac is online now  
Old 16th Jun 2021, 21:50
  #15884 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Bolton ENGLAND
Age: 76
Posts: 965
Mr Mac........ Ain't that the truth?!!!
Planemike is offline  
Old 16th Jun 2021, 22:17
  #15885 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Under a gooseberry bush
Posts: 65
Originally Posted by Ninthace View Post
People got sick from Covid and without treatment they were at risk of dying in the short term This treatment was provided at the expense of other services, both by diversion of resources and to reduce the risk of infection. Unless I misunderstand one of your earlier posts, you also do not seem to be in favour of lockdown. I am not clear what your solution would have been had you been running affairs.
I would have favoured a focusing on shielding the vulnerable/elderly. I believe we could have provided much better care and saved more lives by targeting those that really needed protection rather than a general blanket lockdown. The ‘at risk’ cohort not in care homes - those with underlying health conditions - could have self isolated and legislation passed to ensure that those of a working age received protection from employers who might insist on their attendance. Furlough could be justified in those cases.

Instead, the whole working economy has been squeezed dry.

The initial ‘clearing the decks’ in hospitals and sending potentially infected people into the care system was the initial disaster - but easy to be wise after the event on that one. Although, it later emerged that many of those infected, contracted Covid within a clinical setting.
BWSBoy6 is offline  
Old 16th Jun 2021, 22:40
  #15886 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Bolton ENGLAND
Age: 76
Posts: 965
Hmmmmm.... Some sense at last....!!!
Planemike is offline  
Old 16th Jun 2021, 22:47
  #15887 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Bolton ENGLAND
Age: 76
Posts: 965
Originally Posted by TURIN View Post
I am often reminded that PPRuNe is primarily a pilot's forum. Certainly aviation professionals tend to make up the vast majority of posters here. Which makes your remarks completely at odds with the hugely regulated industry in which we work. You don't decide which precautions you take when flying an aeroplane, you don't decide which precautions you take when carrying out major structural repairs or replacing vital components in a multi million pound airliner. You don't have that choice. The professional people who build, operate and regulate those machines do so from a position of knowledge, experience and skill.
Why is it so difficult to accept that wearing a mask, taking a vaccine, social distancing and washing your hands is based on professional advice from people who understand viruses and how they spread?
Choice is not what you think it is.
Totally unconnected issues..... Just because the advice is "professional" does not mean it is any good and to be relied upon....
Planemike is offline  
Old 17th Jun 2021, 02:10
  #15888 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Edinburgh
Age: 37
Posts: 624
With regards to vaccinations and the order we did them in. While you can't argue it's gone well around the UK and we have now made it down the list we created in good Time, would not have been better to vaccinate a. It differently?

For example, was there any reason why we chose to go and protect those who were already ring fenced inside care homes or shielding at home? Why not target those who could not work from home first? That would have stopped spread among those who had no choice but to be out and about, facing the public for work. While everyone else was limiting thier trips to Tesco and zoom calling thier friends in the next town, there were still millions of workers out and about potentially spreading Covid around themselves, families and the public.

Maybe I'm not seeing something here but surely making sure those people were vaccinated, thus cutting lines of transmission as much as possible, would have led to a shorter lockdown as once front line staff (not just healthcare and not based on age or medical status) were done, then move on to the care homes, shielders, high risk and so on in that order?

edi_local is offline  
Old 17th Jun 2021, 06:55
  #15889 (permalink)  
Thought police antagonist
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Where I always have been...firmly in the real world
Posts: 1,143
One day, hopefully, in an A & E Dept.

"Don't worry sir, the life changing and threatening injuries that brought you here today are entirely fake "

Covid-19: Four get hospital ban over hoax-claim broadcasts - BBC News
Krystal n chips is offline  
Old 17th Jun 2021, 07:54
  #15890 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 2,308
Originally Posted by BWSBoy6 View Post
I would have favoured a focusing on shielding the vulnerable/elderly. I believe we could have provided much better care and saved more lives by targeting those that really needed protection rather than a general blanket lockdown. The ‘at risk’ cohort not in care homes - those with underlying health conditions - could have self isolated and legislation passed to ensure that those of a working age received protection from employers who might insist on their attendance. Furlough could be justified in those cases.

Instead, the whole working economy has been squeezed dry.

The initial ‘clearing the decks’ in hospitals and sending potentially infected people into the care system was the initial disaster - but easy to be wise after the event on that one. Although, it later emerged that many of those infected, contracted Covid within a clinical setting.
As someone, whom, I imagine is neither elderly nor vulnerable it is very easy to say that. I also fall into neither category, however I can assure you that effective "house arrest" or "imprisonment" has done no good for elderly people, and probably has harmed them even if they avoided Covid-19 as a result. On a personal note my mother has been essentially imprisoned in her care home for most of the last 15 months, we have until the last 6 weeks or so been barred for face to face visits, having instead to visit in a secure pod, talking through an intercom, even though she was protected with double vaccination. For people in the last few years of life, and anyone over 90 is in that situation, incarceration in this way is inhuman. I can cope with it, my Mum, as she doesn't have any dementia could also, though it has been hard. For those with dementia or Alzheimer's that is not the case.
ATNotts is offline  
Old 17th Jun 2021, 07:56
  #15891 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: There and here
Posts: 2,369
Not that I want to defend people's right to express their opinion about covid and it being a hoax, but to deny these people possible treatment is getting into dangerous territory from a civil liberty perspective. We give treatment to killers, criminals, wastrels, cheats, illegal immigrants and so on, so why would these citizens be treated differently ? The NHS is there to provide a safety net for the country's population, not to be political or woke, or discriminatory. Sadly, it would seem that over the last handfull of years it has become similar to many of the other public services, who have become an entity unto themselves, forgetting what their purpose is and how they're funded.
SpringHeeledJack is offline  
Old 17th Jun 2021, 08:17
  #15892 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Glorious Devon
Posts: 504
Originally Posted by BWSBoy6 View Post
I would have favoured a focusing on shielding the vulnerable/elderly. I believe we could have provided much better care and saved more lives by targeting those that really needed protection rather than a general blanket lockdown. The ‘at risk’ cohort not in care homes - those with underlying health conditions - could have self isolated and legislation passed to ensure that those of a working age received protection from employers who might insist on their attendance. Furlough could be justified in those cases.

Instead, the whole working economy has been squeezed dry.

The initial ‘clearing the decks’ in hospitals and sending potentially infected people into the care system was the initial disaster - but easy to be wise after the event on that one. Although, it later emerged that many of those infected, contracted Covid within a clinical setting.
The elderly and the vulnerable were shielded. Many started a form of self imposed lockdown even before Boris got round to announcing the first lockdown. I am not sure what more could have been achieved. I agree clearing the decks and sending patients to care homes without a proper test was reprehensible. There seems to be a misconception that the world can be divided into those that are vulnerable and those that are not. Had advocates of this fallacy won the day, we would have ended up with many more casualties. The knock on effect of this on supply chains and production means the impact on the economy may well have been as bad as lockdown has been.
Ninthace is offline  
Old 17th Jun 2021, 08:21
  #15893 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Glorious Devon
Posts: 504
Originally Posted by Planemike View Post
Totally unconnected issues..... Just because the advice is "professional" does not mean it is any good and to be relied upon....
With that attitude, I am glad you are not an aviator. I mean, why should a person who has devoted their career to a subject know more about it than you?
Also, do not confuse advice and opinion.
Ninthace is offline  
Old 17th Jun 2021, 08:49
  #15894 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 12,530
Reads as if it has been rendered obsolete by new variants before it even gets to market…..

They are working on a updated version effective against new variants - for which the UK has an order of 50M doses.

https://www.politico.eu/article/cure...venting-covid/


CureVac’s vaccine only 47 percent effective at preventing COVID

German company CureVac's coronavirus vaccine is far less effective than other jabs already in use, the firm said Wednesday.

The company announced a 47 percent efficacy rate against all COVID-19 cases and said it "did not meet prespecified statistical success criteria" based on the second analysis of a large-scale efficacy trial.

The study involved 40,000 people in 10 countries in Europe and Latin America with at least 13 coronavirus variants circulating, the company said. The "original strain" was "almost completely absent" from the trial……

The vaccine's disappointing results will be a blow to the EU's vaccine portfolio, as the bloc secured most of the initial supply of the German mRNA vaccine — up to 405 million doses — and it was the first vaccine to receive the backing of the European Commission.

However, the EU has large quantities of another mRNA vaccine, from BioNTech/Pfizer, and is using three other vaccines: Moderna, Oxford/AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson.


https://www.curevac.com/en/2021/02/0...ov-2-variants/
ORAC is offline  
Old 17th Jun 2021, 09:25
  #15895 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Enjoy the experimental gene therapy! Cya!
Posts: 0
Originally Posted by Planemike View Post
I have succumbed to the relentless barrage of "get vaccinated" propaganda. I really do have my doubts as to whether
I really needed to be vaccinated. Anyway 'tis done now, twice, even....!!
keeprighton1974 is offline  
Old 17th Jun 2021, 09:27
  #15896 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 12,530
REACT study update in Politico.

DELTA DATA

New data out this morning shows that coronavirus cases in England are on the rise largely due to increasing prevalence among unvaccinated younger people and those yet to have their second jab.

The data from Imperial College’s REACT study shows that between May 20 and June 7 there was exponential growth fueled by the Delta variant, with a doubling time of 11 days and an “R” reproduction number of 1.44.

But there is some very good news out today as well: There are signs in the data that the growth in cases could be slowing, there are increasing signs that a double dose offers strong protection against serious illness, and estimates for the number of deaths likely this year have fallen.

All in all, the data so far puts England on course to lift more restrictions on July 19.

The REACT data shows that case rises are largely happening among younger people. Prevalence was highest in the 5 to 12 and 18 to 24-year-old age groups. Prevalence in those aged 5-49 was 2.5 times higher than those aged 50 and above…..

What ministers are looking at

The daily case data, while still on the rise, could be starting to trail off, some in government are hoping. If you look at the government’s COVID dashboard, rather than case numbers continuing to exponentially rise, there is some suggestion in the graph that they might be plateauing……
ORAC is offline  
Old 17th Jun 2021, 09:45
  #15897 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: There and here
Posts: 2,369
New data out this morning shows that coronavirus cases in England are on the rise largely due to increasing prevalence among unvaccinated younger people and those yet to have their second jab
From my own experiences in the last few weeks I'd have to agree. Almost no-one under say 25 wearing a mask and getting on various modes of transport in groups maskless. I can't stand wearing masks for longer periods, but where I'm obliged to I do, and where not I don't. It's pretty simple.

Summer is here and the young are doing what all young people do, getting out there and mingling, but the special urge to do so seems to have won over any semblance of common sense and/or self-preservation. If our wonderful government decide that we need another lockdown, the younger members of society will be more affected in terms of their freedoms. Oh well, there's always the Playstation or Xbox....
SpringHeeledJack is offline  
Old 17th Jun 2021, 10:01
  #15898 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Under a gooseberry bush
Posts: 65
Originally Posted by ATNotts View Post
As someone, whom, I imagine is neither elderly nor vulnerable it is very easy to say that. I also fall into neither category, however I can assure you that effective "house arrest" or "imprisonment" has done no good for elderly people, and probably has harmed them even if they avoided Covid-19 as a result. On a personal note my mother has been essentially imprisoned in her care home for most of the last 15 months, we have until the last 6 weeks or so been barred for face to face visits, having instead to visit in a secure pod, talking through an intercom, even though she was protected with double vaccination. For people in the last few years of life, and anyone over 90 is in that situation, incarceration in this way is inhuman. I can cope with it, my Mum, as she doesn't have any dementia could also, though it has been hard. For those with dementia or Alzheimer's that is not the case.
I quite agree, but I think there was possibly no choice if we were to protect the elderly/vulnerable. However, you raise a point that over the last year, I have often thought about.

Both my wife and I lost our elderly mothers last year at the height of the first wave - not Covid related - one had mild dementia and multiple myeloma and one was was very frail and eventually died with a lower respiratory infection. We were very restricted from visiting - even when they were both dying. This angered us both as they were both so poorly, had we even been infected with Covid, the outcome would have been exactly the same.

My concern at the time - and still is - shielding/protecting should be with the consent of any individual - whatever age. Many elderly people didn’t want to be ‘protected’, they knew they had limited time and were prepared to take the risk. Whatever happened to the Mental Capacity Act, which states:
  • assume a person has the capacity to make a decision themselves, unless it's proved otherwise
  • wherever possible, help people to make their own decisions
  • do not treat a person as lacking the capacity to make a decision just because they make an unwise decision
  • if you make a decision for someone who does not have capacity, it must be in their best interests
  • treatment and care provided to someone who lacks capacity should be the least restrictive of their basic rights and freedoms
“The Mental Capacity Act (MCA) is designed to protect and empower people who may lack the mental capacity to make their own decisions about their care and treatment. It applies to people aged 16 and over”

Had our mothers actually been consulted, I know they both would have chosen time with their families rather than be sealed away in a sterile room.


BWSBoy6 is offline  
Old 17th Jun 2021, 10:21
  #15899 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Wilts
Posts: 137
Originally Posted by SpringHeeledJack View Post
Not that I want to defend people's right to express their opinion about covid and it being a hoax, but to deny these people possible treatment is getting into dangerous territory from a civil liberty perspective. We give treatment to killers, criminals, wastrels, cheats, illegal immigrants and so on, so why would these citizens be treated differently ? The NHS is there to provide a safety net for the country's population, not to be political or woke, or discriminatory. Sadly, it would seem that over the last handfull of years it has become similar to many of the other public services, who have become an entity unto themselves, forgetting what their purpose is and how they're funded.
This is typical of the reporting nowadays. The banning order prevents them from attending hospitals EXCEPT for medical reasons.

Make a headline that attracts attention even it is only partly true.😖
DON T is offline  
Old 17th Jun 2021, 10:36
  #15900 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: No longer in Jurassic Park eating Toblerone....
Posts: 2,678
KnC post 15881;at least read the clip you are posting.....
West Mercia Police said the men, whom it is not naming, would now only be able to attend hospitals for a medical reason, under the terms of their community protection notices.
LowNSlow 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 © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.