Coronavirus outbreak

[slowmotion]

Thank you very much for that information @Pale Rider. I thought I might fall into the "12 week gated" group but I think I'm off the hook for now unless there is another category between "extremely vulnerable" and the general population.

 

[RecordAceFromNew]

even if the rates are down just for a day I will take it, it’s less pressure on vitals services and hopefully helps the morale of our frontline staff, these people should never have to buy a drink again.
It’s also less families in distress for a day

Unfortunately the fatality figures we have been given daily are literally unbelievable - but knowing all the missteps and mistakes the government has made so far, should we be surprised?

Not only do the figures exclude fatalities at home, a substantial number of those reported each day actually died many days ago. For example, over 30% of the 159 associated with England reported on Monday 30th died before 27th. One passed away 17 days ago!

What that inevitably means, is that numerous who died during recent days remain unreported.

Like the meaningless number of infected due to inadequate testing, we literally have no clue how bad it is. We just know it is dreadful.

 

[Pale Rider]

Thank you very much for that information @Pale Rider. I thought I might fall into the "12 week gated" group but I think I'm off the hook for now unless there is another category between "extremely vulnerable" and the general population.

I thought it might apply to me, even the docs and nurses in the specialist clinic I go to weren't sure, but it looks like my ailment is not on the list.

They had never heard of the document, and only came to their conclusion it doesn't apply to me after I showed it to them on my laptop.

 

[Edwardoka]

I for one do not mind the numbers being discussed. It informs me as to what's happening, and helps improve my own efforts to determine what the future might hold. This is not out of any voyeuristic desire, rather it is done to aid my decisions. For instance, it was watching the number of new infections and seeing community infections that made me urge my parents to limit going outside and isolate themselves as much as possible at the start of the month, long before any government pronouncement. They're both in their 80s with at risk medical conditions: I can hope that I was in time, and persuasive enough.

Personally I feel that any edict banning the discussion of the figures, no matter how well meaning, makes it much harder to counter the inevitable misconceptions and rumours. Being informed is an invaluable defence against this epidemic, and reducing the ability to do so is the wrong thing to do. I can't help those poor people in those statistics, but I can use the data to (hopefully) help those that I know.

Absolutely, it is crucial to be informed: the numbers allow for analysis about how the effort is going, as well as being an important tool to persuade the sceptical about the seriousness and the rate of escalation, as well as to counter dis/misinformation.

If someone comes along and says "it's not that serious, it's just like the flu" it is absolutely necessary to combat their assertion with "no, it isn't, and here's why", or my personal favourite from a vulnerable relative three weeks ago "there's no way we're going to catch it, there's only 200 cases in the entire country" with "yes, that's what people in Italy said two weeks ago"

I was never suggesting a blanket ban on mentioning the latest statistics or for it to be a moderation issue, nor was I suggesting that it was anyone's intention to be voyeuristic.
Rather, it was a request to let those who already have a good idea of how things are going and how much worse they are going to get before the peak be able to make the decision to look up the numbers themselves rather than have them foist upon them.

Furthermore, having a constant dripfeed of new case numbers that follow exponential growth allows us to become desensitised to the numbers and potentially lose sight of the fact that these are compounding (A 12% increase in new cases/new deaths every day will lead to a 10-fold increase in the totals over a week*)

* Yes I'm a hypocrite for modelling this

 

[Joey Shabadoo]

The online document is in this link.

Someone on here quoted a paper letter which was not identical, but used many of the same phrases.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...ng-extremely-vulnerable-persons-from-covid-19

My wife qualifies due to emphysema. The Scottish NHS document is similar and leads to a list of email addresses and contact numbers. Unfortunately for our area it states - "Phone number available shortly; please check back for updates." which has been there since last week and, as I said, the GP knows nothing about it.

 

[Johnno260]

My wife’s already being asked to do more shifts, issue is my work aren’t too warm about the whole working from home anyway and with kids as well won’t be a fun conversation, they would be at key worker school some of the time.

wife’s grandma has rallied it seems, her Herat rate is under control now, the C19 patient near her has been put into an isolation ward and grandma tested negative again, it’s just a race to get her back into the care home now.

she is a retired ENT doctor so knows the risks of being in hospitals at the moment.

 

[vickster]

Thank you very much for that information @Pale Rider. I thought I might fall into the "12 week gated" group but I think I'm off the hook for now unless there is another category between "extremely vulnerable" and the general population.

70+ have been asked to self isolate as much as possible to protect themselves but are still able to exercise and shop, the other group specifically addressed. If you feel your medical condition would put you at much higher risk if you were to catch CV19 then self isolation might be advisable even if it’s not on the official list

 

[BoldonLad]

Has anyone here received any official communication about shielding for the vulnerable? We thought my wife would have heard by now but she phoned her GP this morning and they knew nothing about it.

If you mean the “at risk” letter that was to be sent to approx 1.5-2million people, yes, I know two people who received one, one in England, the other in Scotland.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

70+ have been asked to self isolate as much as possible

I may be wrong but isn’t the current advice still
“We are advising those who are at increased risk of severe illness from coronavirus (COVID-19) to be particularly stringent in following social distancing measures.
This group includes those who are:

• aged 70 or older (regardless of medical conditions)” ?

https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...protecting-older-people-and-vulnerable-adults

I’m not trying to split hairs here, it’s just that I take a different meaning for self-isolation from social distancing.

My wife’s friend has been sent home from work on SSP even though she has no symptoms or other health problems, purely because she is over 70. The employer claims they are doing it “for her safety and in line with government advice for over 70s to self-isolate“.

 

[kingrollo]

Spoke to my GP yesterday - they are still in the process of identifying who is in the at risk group. So don't assume you aren't if you haven't had a letter just yet.

 

[vickster]

I may be wrong but isn’t the current advice still
“We are advising those who are at increased risk of severe illness from coronavirus (COVID-19) to be particularly stringent in following social distancing measures.
This group includes those who are:

• aged 70 or older (regardless of medical conditions)” ?

https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...protecting-older-people-and-vulnerable-adults

I’m not trying to split hairs here, it’s just that I take a different meaning for self-isolation from social distancing.

My wife’s friend has been sent home from work on SSP even though she has no symptoms or other health problems, purely because she is over 70. The employer claims they are doing it “for her safety and in line with government advice for over 70s to self-isolate“.

I don't personally see a lot of difference between self isolation and extra stringent social distancing but it doesn't really matter, it's about keeping yourself (and others) safe

 

[nickyboy]

Spoke to my GP yesterday - they are still in the process of identifying who is in the at risk group. So don't assume you aren't if you haven't had a letter just yet.

Son#1 has had one. The criteria seem a bit strange. He has mental disability which in itself I presume isn't a reason for the letter. When he was one year old he had a very serious issue with breathing and had to be ventilated. But he's twenty four now

In any case we keep him away from potential sources of infection such as supermarkets and he only goes out for his daily walk with us

 

[vickster]

Friend with lymphoma had the text a week ago, presumably via the hospital system not GP

 

[Johnno260]

Spoke to my GP yesterday - they are still in the process of identifying who is in the at risk group. So don't assume you aren't if you haven't had a letter just yet.

I would assume they contact the most at risk first, wife’s cousin donated a kidney to his wife and she was contacted very quickly as she is on immune suppression meds.

 

[Joey Shabadoo]

The wife read somewhere that they assess vulnerability combining condition with number of recent hospital visits. So although she has a fairly serious condition but avoids hospitals unless absolutely necessary, she doesn't score as highly as someone who runs back and forward to the hospital.

She's got emphysema and after two bouts of pneumonia, she has less than 33% lung function. She is unlikely to survive exposure to this virus.