Jump to content

Coronavirus


faraway saint

Recommended Posts

All my thanks to McHargs the Bakers for being open all week. An absolute godsend. 

Also, found an open Chinese Takeaway last night. 

Had a wonderful supper. 

Thanks to Yulan House. 

So, getting a bit of work done and getting well fed. 

Nearly a normal week. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


2 hours ago, ALBIONSAINT said:

This was on the BBC website the other day, no matter how you cut it, it’s bad news all round 

What about the impact of the lockdown?

The lockdown, itself, however could cost lives.

Prof Robert Dinwall, from Nottingham Trent University, says "the collateral damage to society and the economy" could include:

  • mental health problems and suicides linked to self-isolation
  • heart problems from lack of activity
  • the impact on health from increased unemployment and reduced living standards

Others have also pointed to the health cost from steps such as delaying routine operations and cancer screening.

Meanwhile, University of Bristol researchers say the benefit of a long-term lockdown in reducing premature deaths could be outweighed by the lost life expectancy from a prolonged economic dip.

And the tipping point, they say, is a 6.4% decline in the size of the economy - on a par with what happened following the 2008 financial crash. 

It would see a loss of three months of life on average across the population because of factors from declining living standards to poorer health care.

The areas that I've highlighted are hugely salient points.

This lockdown is unprecedented, and, as such, there will have been no studies that can predict its effects on, say for example, cardiovascular health.

The potential for a significant increase in deaths due to cardiovascular health deterioration as a result of someone working from home sitting on their arse for three months, who is unable to be active at work or attend a gym regularly, is clear and present.

Of course people can go for a walk, as I try to do every day. That's not the same as being on your feet all day or attending a gym regularly. Others will have their exercise regime restricted by child care etc.

Six months down the line if someone dies of cardiovascular disease, where the lockdown has been a contributing factor, then would it even be possible to ascertain whether the lockdown was a contributing factor?

Similarly, the lockdown may be enough to cause further deterioration to the health of someone with specific mental health issues. Worst case scenario being an increase in suicides.

Deaths from cardiovascular disease and suicides largely go unreported, and are often accepted as run of the mill, possibly due to pre-conceived, stereotypical views on the type of individual assumed to be most likely to succumb to these illnesses. There's also the possibility that they will increase gradually, so the general public probably wouldn't be aware that anything different was happening.

For these reasons, I doubt we'll ever really be able to measure reliably the impact of the lockdown on overall health.

As much as I agree with the principles behind the lockdown, I really, really hope that we haven't overreacted, based on inaccurate recording of data, and that we haven't created a ticking time bomb in the future.

It's certainly food for thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, stlucifer said:

That percentage is probably much higher than reality as it is calculated on the number of KNOWN cases. As testing is still not taking place extensively it's highly likely there are far more who have, or have had, the virus.

Yeah very true, one of the main reasons for action is the unknown around this virus. More instances of people dying recently that have no known underlying conditions, more deaths, more bad news. 
 

It’s clear some on here are happy to gamble with human life. Fortunately the majority Seem to be in favour of the approach we’re seeing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

Yeah very true, one of the main reasons for action is the unknown around this virus. More instances of people dying recently that have no known underlying conditions, more deaths, more bad news. 
 

It’s clear some on here are happy to gamble with human life. Fortunately the majority Seem to be in favour of the approach we’re seeing. 

Has there been any reliable data released regarding the percentage of deaths from no known/as yet undiscovered underlying conditions?

A couple of articles I've read, indicate that as a result of the 2009 H1N1 pandemic, the death rate for the aforementioned group was around 10%.

Could help in working out just how virulent the current virus is.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

Yeah very true, one of the main reasons for action is the unknown around this virus. More instances of people dying recently that have no known underlying conditions, more deaths, more bad news. 
 

It’s clear some on here are happy to gamble with human life. Fortunately the majority Seem to be in favour of the approach we’re seeing. 

Everybody's immune system is different. Any virus could kill seemingly healthy people. The big thing about this virus appears to be that, if you put 10 people in a room with the flu virus, probably 8 will not get the flu. Put 10 people in with this virus it's likely 10 will succumb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, stlucifer said:

That percentage is probably much higher than reality as it is calculated on the number of KNOWN cases. As testing is still not taking place extensively it's highly likely there are far more who have, or have had, the virus.

https://www.livescience.com/is-coronavirus-deadly.html

Quote

Epidemiologists believe the total number of infections with SARS-CoV-2 is underestimated because people with few or mild symptoms may never see a doctor. As testing expands and scientists begin using retrospective methods to study who has antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 circulating in their bloodstreams, the total number of confirmed cases will go up and the ratio of deaths to infections will likely drop

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, FTOF said:

Has there been any reliable data released regarding the percentage of deaths from no known/as yet undiscovered underlying conditions?

A couple of articles I've read, indicate that as a result of the 2009 H1N1 pandemic, the death rate for the aforementioned group was around 10%.

Could help in working out just how virulent the current virus is.

 

Nothing I've seen yet man. Scary times ahead, hopefully all this data and study is to come. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest TPAFKATS
From the BBC:

"... in Paisley three men were fined for being in a van together on Saturday.

Police said they had no reasonable excuse to be together and they told officers they had no intention of complying with regulations."
Was it a Cooncil refuse van?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...