Coronavirus outbreak

[Ming the Merciless]

But the possibility(threat) that you might lose your job, because you've to go into short term isolation, having caught something may be causing people to work with it. Which is why jobs at the lower end of the scale were chosen for the question.

Pregnancy isn't something that can be caught or transmitted at work.

Believe me plenty of conceptions happen at work

 

[vickster]

Pregnancy isn't something that can be caught or transmitted at work.

Well not without a bit of effort and not if social distancing is enforced

 

[Adam4868]

How many employers forced their staff to work.Maybe it would of been better to pay the individual rather than the firm/company.Its easier to blame the workers though,sounds better than the company commiting fraud.

 

[silva]

I can't celebrate the persistence of a nasty disease in the middle of the summer holidays with loads of restrictions still in place. It's likely to be a lull - look at the rest of Europe for what could we'll start happening here in September when schools return and offices start reopening, and it becomes too wet and cold to queue outside shops.

Apparently that last is being taken into account in recent week.
Last monday in an Aldi supermarket, technicians were installing a kinda panels at the side of the entrance.
I asked if those were sensors and if the system could count customers. Answer was yes.
Today I visited another Aldi supermarket (closed but accessible entrance), I saw the same sensor panels there, and they weren't there friday so they must have been installed inbetween.
Also, a new information billboard there, and a red and green light, red = no entrance due to government forced customer / m2 limit. Another note on the information billboard: it's recommended to use shopping carts. And that last is new, until now it was mandatory - you had to take one in order to get in.
So it all looks like september will be the end (at least for Aldi, don't know about others) of the mandatory shopping carts. A big plus for me since the hassle they cause doubled to tripled my average time there.

 

[deptfordmarmoset]

Apparently that last is being taken into account in recent week.
Last monday in an Aldi supermarket, technicians were installing a kinda panels at the side of the entrance.
I asked if those were sensors and if the system could count customers. Answer was yes.
Today I visited another Aldi supermarket (closed but accessible entrance), I saw the same sensor panels there, and they weren't there friday so they must have been installed inbetween.
Also, a new information billboard there, and a red and green light, red = no entrance due to government forced customer / m2 limit. Another note on the information billboard: it's recommended to use shopping carts. And that last is new, until now it was mandatory - you had to take one in order to get in.
So it all looks like september will be the end (at least for Aldi, don't know about others) of the mandatory shopping carts. A big plus for me since the hassle they cause doubled to tripled my average time there.

Mandatory shopping carts have never been in operation here (South London).

Meanwhile, I got phoned up by the ONS about their big infection survey this afternoon. Swabs appointment on Wednesday.

 

[silva]

This is an incredibly naive and dangerous set of views to be propounding. Your arguments are pretty incoherent, but insofar as I can make sense of them you seem to be saying that because scientists are concerned about both flu and coronavirus spreading (separately - your point (2) is a complete nonsense) the protection against coronavirus is a waste of time.

Johnson is encouraging children back to school, and office workers back to work. Sunak is withdrawing all the financial support for workers and firms, which will mean a load more people being forced together by economic necessity. And idiots are encouraging a slackening of protection against the transmission of a vicious and highly infectious disease. If we don't end up with a flu outbreak hitting large numbers of already vulnerable people we'll be lucky.

Do you agree that governments force a variety of "measures" to block spreading of corona?
If you don't, then I recommend to read news from the last X months, and/or to take a look inside cities.

If yes, do you further agree then if those measures succeed in blocking spreading of corona, shouldn't they also succeed in blocking spreading of influenza? And do that even better, due to influenza being called less dangerous and not been "lockdowned" like corona now, difference being caused by influenza immunity bigger than corona immunity, so IF there would be an influenza epidemy, then that would imply that the measures so called against corona didn't work against influenza, let alone against corona, in other words: unneeded/useless.

And third: that "protection" you talk about, has its own cost, an element that you seem to ignore.
To illustrate its major importance: imagine giving blocking corona top priority over everything.
Fine, everybody, to the last man and woman in the world, in quarantine, all companies cease production, economy basically looking like after a neutron bomb has been dropped, then corona virus spreading will surely be stopped.
The gain: nobody will die from corona.
The cost: everybody died from starvation.
Get it?

 

[classic33]

Do you agree that governments force a variety of "measures" to block spreading of corona?
If you don't, then I recommend to read news from the last X months, and/or to take a look inside cities.

If yes, do you further agree then if those measures succeed in blocking spreading of corona, shouldn't they also succeed in blocking spreading of influenza? And do that even better, due to influenza being called less dangerous and not been "lockdowned" like corona now, difference being caused by influenza immunity bigger than corona immunity, so IF there would be an influenza epidemy, then that would imply that the measures so called against corona didn't work against influenza, let alone against corona, in other words: unneeded/useless.

And third: that "protection" you talk about, has its own cost, an element that you seem to ignore.
To illustrate its major importance: imagine giving blocking corona top priority over everything.
Fine, everybody, to the last man and woman in the world, in quarantine, all companies cease production, economy basically looking like after a neutron bomb has been dropped, then corona virus spreading will surely be stopped.
The gain: nobody will die from corona.
The cost: everybody died from starvation.
Get it?

Last part first, I don't want it!!
That includes flu, by whatever prefix you use.

2001, I'm in an area where the only means of transport in the area was in a motor vehicle. Short distances on foot allowed, but I'd to stick to the highway. Lockdown at times that make this time seem like nothing. Large areas that couldn't be used. They came down heavy on you if you broke the rules, unlike now. Last confirmed death from foot and mouth, in the UK, was in 1966.

With flu, there's already a yearly injection/jab. This time, C-19/CV-19/Coronavirus, there isn't. It's an unknown, just like 100 years ago, only science has moved on. Not all for the better in my own opinion, but they can give you treatment that would have saved many 100 years ago. We, as individuals, however have become complacent over the years. Simple hygiene measures not followed. "It'll never happen to me" is commonplace.

If folk are made to remain apart, social distancing, to try and avoid the spread of one, would you not expect to see a drop in the other, similar virus related illness.

From advice on dealing with flu
"Cover your nose and mouth with your arm (not hands) while coughing or sneezing; wash your hands frequently to avoid the spread of germs.

Use paper tissues that you can toss after use instead of cloth handkerchiefs to avoid giving the virus to others."

Seems like good advice to me, and I've never had flu. Bad colds, but never flu.

It was expected to be over and done with in no time. This being the 21st century and all that, but the human body, for all its strengths has many weaknesses. Had the long term view been taken at the start, and implemented, then you may well have seen more people planning ahead. We live in a "Me Society" which doesn't allow too much of thinking about others. Maybe now we're paying the price for that, we can't adapt to meet the current situation.

Maybe it's time to stop thinking of this situation only affecting others, who are preventing you from doing what you want.

 

[MntnMan62]

I'm not convinced there's much probability of a return to high mortality rates, in the developed world at least. The true rate of UK infection must have been dozens of times higher than the official figures by the time the lockdown started. which means that millions had already contracted the virus by that stage. Because awareness of the virus was lower, even high risk individuals may not have taken much in the way of precautions to avoid it. Now, those who know the virus could hit them hard, are tending to be more cautious about mingling with everyone else. The rest of us, are mostly fed up with the lockdown and being told to limit social contact, so it has really gone out of the window for the majority of the population. I socialise several times a week in close proximity to other people, and I work in close proximity to others (albeit usually the same group), and apart from observing the normal polite behaviours like not sneezing and coughing over others it's back to normal as far as I'm concerned, virus or no virus. No-one I associate with has gone down with a nasty dose of anything recently, if they have caught it the symptoms must have been non-existent, because no-one has been knocked out and been unable to go to work or carry out their normal routine.

You keep talking about how people die every day. And while that may be true, the only two other things that kill more people on an annualized basis in the US are heart disease and cancer. 730,000 a year die from heart disease and 580,000 die of cancer. The rate of deaths from covid-19 in the US is running at about 400,000 per year, making it the third largest killer in the country. We put tons of money towards trying to prevent heart disease and find a cure for cancer. But when you talk about lots of people dying and that we should just get used to it, that just ignores the fact that we live in a modern advanced society with arguably the wealthiest economy on the planet. So, it would appear you are trivializing the deaths of 400,000 per year from covid. And by trivializing the covid deaths you are also trivializing those who die from cancer or heart disease. In addition, you are ignoring the number of people who end up with permanent and significant issues such as respiratory problems, heart problems, neurological problems. Those numbers haven't been quantified but they should because I'd bet they dward the death rate. Sorry, but I'll never agree that money comes before the lives of that many people. You are obviously ok with putting money before people's lives. You've made that clear because you've been saying it for quite some time now. But it doesn't make it right.

 

[DaveReading]

The rate of deaths from covid-19 in the US is running at about 400,000 per year, making it the third largest killer in the country.

Yes, most of us can do maths/math.

But prorating deaths over the 5 months or so that the pandemic has been raging in the US, in order to produce an annual figure, is meaningless at this point in time.

 

[Illaveago]

How many employers forced their staff to work.Maybe it would of been better to pay the individual rather than the firm/company.Its easier to blame the workers though,sounds better than the company commiting fraud.

I have heard of a company which forced it's workers to continue working whilst claiming the benefits.

 

[vickster]

I have heard of a company which forced it's workers to continue working whilst claiming the benefits.

And I hope they have been shopped to HMRC
https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/hm-revenue-customs/contact/report-fraud-to-hmrc

 

[Illaveago]

And I hope they have been shopped to HMRC
https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/hm-revenue-customs/contact/report-fraud-to-hmrc

Yes . I would hope so . But unless the Inland Revenue operate a witness protection scheme whereby the whistleblower is protected from any reprisals in the form of job ,home loss , being black listed by other employers who is going to risk it ? Especially when the punishment would be a tap on the wrist !
The punishment should be that if the whistleblower was threatened in any way that they be supported for the rest of their lives by the criminal .
I don't know the name of the company , I've been kept in the dark otherwise I would have shopped them .

 

[vickster]

Yes . I would hope so . But unless the Inland Revenue operate a witness protection scheme whereby the whistleblower is protected from any reprisals in the form of job ,home loss , being black listed by other employers who is going to risk it ? Especially when the punishment would be a tap on the wrist !
The punishment should be that if the whistleblower was threatened in any way that they be supported for the rest of their lives by the criminal .
I don't know the name of the company , I've been kept in the dark otherwise I would have shopped them .

The link states...
You do not have to give your personal details, and any information will be treated as confidential.
HMRC would presumably interview all employees

 

[MntnMan62]

Yes, most of us can do maths/math.

But prorating deaths over the 5 months or so that the pandemic has been raging in the US, in order to produce an annual figure, is meaningless at this point in time.

Why is it meaningless? On August 13, the US saw it's largest single day death toll at 1,499 with a 17 day running average per day of 1,000. I realize that the number of deaths will fluctuate for various reasons. And I'm glad you can do the simple math. There are many who can't. And I have no problem doing it for them.

 

[kingrollo]

I have heard of a company which forced it's workers to continue working whilst claiming the benefits.

I know a fair few "white van men" who have claimed furlough but taken jobs on the side.
I would imagine it's pretty widespread. I've had a few jobs done around the house - not one tradesman has replied saying "sorry on furlough until September"