Mutating Corona Virus

[tobyjugg2]

3 hours ago, honeybee13 said:

Michael Veale from UCL has analysed the NHSX app. It seems to have a lot of problems.

 

https://osf.io/preprints/lawarxiv/6fvgh

 

yes, Ive been looking at it via github

 

Taken In parts, the app 'sellers can argue that each bit doesn't specifically upload blah blah blah

 

 

 

But as the key is generated centrally, and BT unique identifiers are used, the centrally stored whole  is (as stated if you look deeper) a fully identifiable social graphing application

 

eg It looks, tracks and logs who meets who, for how long, and where.

 

... With not even a hint of ACTUAL testing for Covid-19 so far. Although they will probably drop a nominal 'appropriate testing' somewhere in it.

 

 

 

 

Also interesting that the Tory message seems to be dropping the 'Protect our NHS' soundbite .....

 

 

Edited May 10, 2020 by tobyjugg2

[brassnecked]

Yes HB that app is on dodgy ground for sure, its insecure requires access to phone services that make it a malware  and hacking risk. It certainly breaches GDPR, of course the cretinous Hancock might say if challenged on it National Security and Covid Control is a lawful mitigation from GDPR, big fail there .  No way is it going anywhere near my phone.

 

On another note here is an interesting link from Dr North's blog today regasrding ope air treatment.  Implications of sealed wards and aircon are part of the problem of infection spread

 

https://medium.com/@ra.hobday/coronavirus-and-the-sun-a-lesson-from-the-1918-influenza-pandemic-509151dc8065

 

Link to today's blog from DR North, government and control by slogan is the theme with some interesting points like the one above.

http://www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=87603#disqus_thread

 

[honeybee13]

Now the testing and tracing set-up is coming under fire for using call centre operatives instead of environmental health people or teams they've trained. Plus over-centralisation of the system.

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/coronavirus-test-and-trace-programme-cases-deaths-uk-a9503651.html

[brassnecked]

Its designed full of holes by the cretinous Hancock and his "Experts"  HB, Serco and G4S are given the contracts almost on a nod, neither of those two are noted for being effective with UK Gov Contracts.  Its another Data Disaster in the making.

[honeybee13]

I know.

[unclebulgaria67]

Heard about a case, where a lady went to work feeling unwell and collapsed in the office.  A security/reception officer who was first aid trained, went to offer their assistance.  This happened in the London area.

 

A few weeks later, both the lady and the security officer died in Hospital from Covid-19.

 

If you are not feeling well, do not put others people at risk. Stay at home and follow the NHS guidance.

 

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/what-to-do-if-you-or-someone-you-live-with-has-coronavirus-symptoms/

 

If people are sensible enough, then the country can relax the lockdown measures.  But if people go to work or to the shops while feeling unwell, they risk causing an outbreak and this crisis will just keep running with hundreds dying on a daily basis.

 

In the past, I have worked while I had a cough/cold and generally feeling unwell.  I  won't be doing this again, until this virus is behind us, which will presumably be once a vaccine programme has been delivered.

[hightail]

10 hours ago, unclebulgaria67 said:

I just wonder how long any partial lockdown is sustainable for.  The economic impact could be worse than having let a herd immunity policy run. I am not saying that I think that a herd immunity policy should have been implemented with few restrictions introduced, as the numbers of deaths may have been much greater.

Lockdown isn't sustainable.  It might have been effective if it had been imposed much sooner and much harder but I have doubts there.  As it is we have the worst of all worlds, economic consequences which are leading and will lead to much more misery and many more non C-19 related deaths now and in the future combined with the highest death rate in Europe (as currently calculated).

 

When lockdown was first imposed it was all about not overwhelming the NHS, ensuring there was capacity.  Well that's been achieved but it was never suggested it would do anything but slow the rate of infection, not stop it.  Somehow expectations have changed, either that or they were unrealistic to start with.

 

I'm reading in articles today that scientists are warning there will be 100k deaths very quickly if we lift restrictions too much or too soon.  It's the 'very quickly' in that comment I find interesting.  100k is still 100k if it happens quickly or more slowly.  The only difference is public opinion and political fallout.

[London1971]

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/02/fearful-britons-oppose-lifting-lockdown-schools-pubs-restaurants-opinium-poll

public opinion is strongly behind lockdown. That has to be worth something. 

[brassnecked]

Not to Boris I fear.

[hightail]

43 minutes ago, brassnecked said:

Not to Boris I fear.

He can’t make individuals who are shielding go out if they don’t want to.  Surely their only worry is beng forced back to work if they can’t work from home.  I can’t see any employer taking the risk of requiring someone in the high risk group to return to the workplace.

[snowdragon]

Do not  see how  they going to let   children back    to school, specially  the  younger ones  as   they do not understand   social  distancing, all they   be  wanting to do is hug  their  friends  who they have not seen for  along time!

How  are  teachers   going to  keep  their distance   from  each other,   the parents  at  the  schools gates  etc  etc!

Some of his speech  was   alright but most  I doubt  many will take notice  as  a lots of people are  already going out  several times a day!

 

Also,   what most  don't get is  you are  allowed out  to go places now but not see  your  family?   bit   double dutch!

 

Think    they all need  go back to the  drawing board  and  start  again, seems  everyone got it in for  Boris!  I am not a  fan, have no idea  who could do a better job  but  not the Labour party  and NO I do not  support the Tories!

 

 

 

[cjcregg]

11 hours ago, hightail said:

Lockdown isn't sustainable.  It might have been effective if it had been imposed much sooner and much harder but I have doubts there.  

 

I think it's generally accepted that it has been effective.

 

11 hours ago, hightail said:

When lockdown was first imposed it was all about not overwhelming the NHS, ensuring there was capacity.  Well that's been achieved 

 

 

Yes it has been achieved but only so far.

 

11 hours ago, hightail said:

 

I'm reading in articles today that scientists are warning there will be 100k deaths very quickly if we lift restrictions too much or too soon.  It's the 'very quickly' in that comment I find interesting.  100k is still 100k if it happens quickly or more slowly.  The only difference is public opinion and political fallout.

 

If we get to a point of sustaining 100,000 deaths very quickly the NHS would be on it's knees and utterly paralysed, which would put everyone's health at risk. That's the difference.

[honeybee13]

Part of the reason that the NHS wasn't on its knees is that many people were left to die in care homes or in their own homes.

[tobyjugg2]

8 hours ago, snowdragon said:

Do not  see how  they going to let   children back    to school, specially  the  younger ones  as   they do not understand   social  distancing, all they   be  wanting to do is hug  their  friends  who they have not seen for  along time!

How  are  teachers   going to  keep  their distance   from  each other,   the parents  at  the  schools gates  etc  etc!

 

 

Too true - especially as even our local Morrisons staff can't.

Every time I go to Morrisons there is a cluster of staff in very close proximity to each other who you have to try and edge round to get 2 meters away

 

 

8 hours ago, snowdragon said:

 

Also,   what most  don't get is  you are  allowed out  to go places now but not see  your  family?   bit   double dutch!

 

The only rule i can understand is stay 6 feet away or be fines 100 quid

(that bluetooth social monitoring app is going to generate a fortune)

 

 

8 hours ago, snowdragon said:

Think    they all need  go back to the  drawing board  and  start  again

 

 

Wish they could.

[cjcregg]

27 minutes ago, honeybee13 said:

Part of the reason that the NHS wasn't on its knees is that many people were left to die in care homes or in their own homes.

 

When you say 'left to die', by whom?

 

[brassnecked]

I think  it might be the fact that Covid infected people were sent back to care homes and their own homes after acquiring it in the NHS general Hospital infections central Covid should be treated away from a General Hospital, allowing nrmal service and minimal risk.

 

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/newsliverpool/two-women-die-after-contracting-coronavirus-during-hospital-stay/ar-BB12Ydwy

[tobyjugg2]

37 minutes ago, cjcregg said:

 

When you say 'left to die', by whom?

 

 

I would say whoever set the policies and practices that caused them to die away from intensive care, if intensive care would have prevented any of the cases (most likely).

 

Although there could be a number of more 'immediate' reasons and causes, if its just one person you are looking for, then obviously thats the PM - the person 'in charge'

 

I remember seeing a son on the news, talking about his father dying in bed at home unable to breath, while repeated calls to 111 over a number of days resulted in 'self isolate at home' responses.

Heartbreaking.

 

 

 

 

[cjcregg]

17 minutes ago, brassnecked said:

I think  it might be the fact that Covid infected people were sent back to care homes and their own homes after acquiring it in the NHS general Hospital infections central Covid should be treated away from a General Hospital, allowing nrmal service and minimal risk.

 

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/newsliverpool/two-women-die-after-contracting-coronavirus-during-hospital-stay/ar-BB12Ydwy

 

I might be missing something but in both those cases the patients died in hospital. How does that chime with them being left to die in care homes or at home?

[brassnecked]

The point is that they went in for something one would usually be admitted for, and acquired the infefction whilst IN hospital, whether they die there of it or are discharged and die elsewhere  is  then an issue.  Both these cases acquired the virus in one hospital, then were sent to another, where they died, therefore spreading the infection to the other non General Hospitals used for recovery.

 

https://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/man-dies-after-contracting-covid-18197454

 

https://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/north-wales-farmer-dies-after-18093887

[unclebulgaria67]

Nice to have a coordinated plan emerging from Government with all important questions answered !

 

I have been working in an office throughout this crisis and from about the middle of March, staff that needed to be working from home for health reasons, have been home and will remain there for at least 3 months.   Before the end of March they were provided with laptops or mini pc's and they have been working normally since. Yes there have been connectivity problems and working from home, particularly those with Children to be kept occupied must be very difficult. 

 

And there are plans for more staff to be provided with mini pc's so they can also work from home, as I think the same as many  office based employers, they are thinking that same, that this crisis provides a brilliant opportunity to fully test working from home.  They can then look to close offices or reduce the size of offices, which will significantly reduce costs.  

 

I am lucky that my office is serviced by a company that has cleaners going around constantly throughout the day and the whole building is organised around social distancing. We have adapted the way we work, trying to keep as safe as possible. 

 

The concern must be that people are encouraged to return to work in some companies, where they cannot properly  organise around social distancing ( due to office/factory issues) and also are not willing to pay for the extra cleaning that will be required.   And also is the local transport infrastructure with social distancing enforcement able to provide efficient and safe services ?

 

 

 

[cjcregg]

1 hour ago, brassnecked said:

The point is that they went in for something one would usually be admitted for, and acquired the infefction whilst IN hospital, whether they die there of it or are discharged and die elsewhere  is  then an issue.  Both these cases acquired the virus in one hospital, then were sent to another, where they died, therefore spreading the infection to the other non General Hospitals used for recovery.

 

https://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/man-dies-after-contracting-covid-18197454

 

https://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/north-wales-farmer-dies-after-18093887

 

It might be a 'point' but it's entirely irrelevant to the as yet unsubstantiated claim that ''people were left to die in care homes or in their own homes''. Clearly.

[honeybee13]

If you go back to the excess mortality figures, all of those people died somewhere other than a hospital and having tested positive. AIUI anyone who wasn't tested isn't in the official figures. It isn't just me saying this, it's all over the media.

[cjcregg]

27 minutes ago, honeybee13 said:

If you go back to the excess mortality figures, all of those people died somewhere other than a hospital and having tested positive. AIUI anyone who wasn't tested isn't in the official figures. It isn't just me saying this, it's all over the media.

 

Before you continue making different points, who is it that you believe is leaving people to die in care homes or in their own homes? I'm just interested to know who you think it is, that's all.

Edited May 11, 2020 by cjcregg

[honeybee13]

I assume it's health professionals following the guidelines that they must have about who they admit to hospital/intensive care.

[unclebulgaria67]

Is this an issue of language used ?  "Leaving people to die", may be the wording of dispute.

 

There was a TV News item the other day, where it was claimed that very elderly people in Hospital who had Covid-19 were being allowed to return to care homes.  The viewers were clearly left with the idea, that basically the Hospital was unable to offer treatment or was prioritising who they treated and the care home was the best place to be. I took it that this meant that the care home staff would be managing end of life care.

 

So there is no leaving people to die as such,  but care home staff providing appropriate end of life care.  

 

This is why the statistics are showing many deaths in care homes.  Either they are not admitted to hospitals or they are released back to care homes.