So you could recover from the coronavirus

[JackSomething]

So from what I can see, the majority believe that the UK government performed poorly in relation to Covid-19. NZ's government performed significantly better and seem to be led by people who have some idea what they're doing.

Alongside that, we can't simplify things to the extent of saying 'we should have done what NZ did' because the countries are vastly different in many ways.

Is that about right? Can't see what there is to argue about that to be honest.

 

[Itchysphincter]

Our goverrnment was completely negligent, I can agree with you on that but comparing us to NZ is like comparing apples and oranges. They had far less to do and they still have huge problems. Battening down the hatches doesn't make the virus disappear.

It did for NZ until they allowed Brits to fly into the country

So you're agreeing with me then. Good.

 

[MajorR]

And get knocked down by a bus 3 months later and die, but the cause of death on the death certificate will say coronavirus :lol:

One big con.

By the same measure someone could spend 29 days in hospital after being tested before succumbing to the illness and not have their death recorded as Covid19 related. I bet there’s a lot more of those cases than there people being hit by a bus.

 

[LeonWasTheDog's]

And get knocked down by a bus 3 months later and die, but the cause of death on the death certificate will say coronavirus :lol:

One big con.

I'd be very surprised if that's happening. Evidence that it is?

 

[Dr. Winston]

Thought it was common knowledge that the official stats were counting deaths months after infection as Covid deaths? I know of at least three local deaths where Covid wasn't the cause yet they were counted in the figures. One example was a guy who had a mild case, recovered easily and then had a heart attack a couple of months later. Covid was included on his death cert and he went on the list. Extrapolate cases like that UK wide and you're looking at a pretty big discrepancy IMO.

It's one of the things the Government has failed so miserably on. After taking stick early on about not recording enough they went too far in the other direction. In the meantime how many thousands have died of other things that might have been avoided had we not shut everything down in a Covid panic? How many missed cancer diagnosis? How many suicides? (rates for that are right up too).

We simply can't say with any real certainty how many people have died as a direct result of Coronavirus and that's just not good enough.

 

[Professor]

Thought it was common knowledge that the official stats were counting deaths months after infection as Covid deaths? I know of at least three local deaths where Covid wasn't the cause yet they were counted in the figures. One example was a guy who had a mild case, recovered easily and then had a heart attack a couple of months later. Covid was included on his death cert and he went on the list. Extrapolate cases like that UK wide and you're looking at a pretty big discrepancy IMO.

It's one of the things the Government has failed so miserably on. After taking stick early on about not recording enough they went too far in the other direction. In the meantime how many thousands have died of other things that might have been avoided had we not shut everything down in a Covid panic? How many missed cancer diagnosis? How many suicides? (rates for that are right up too).

We simply can't say with any real certainty how many people have died as a direct result of Coronavirus and that's just not good enough.

It is difficult to get right, especially with a new infectious disease. Recording any death after infection is wrong, but 28 days is very arbitrary. The heart attack may very well be a consequence of the infection, long term effects and sequelae are still being discovered. There are examples where the actual infection is cleared, but greatly increases early mortality in the future. The obsession with death rates is masking lots of chronic disease problems. If 5% develop subsequent problems, it is still going to be a big long-term burden.

 

[Scotia]

I was talking to a GP friend last week who said his gut feeling was that we have over - recorded Covid deaths thus far, as he had some paitients who were incredibly ill / weak anyway and had died with Covid being recorded on their death certificate even if that may not have directly contributed to their death. He couldn't understand why we have been so keen to put Covid on death certificates.

He also mentioned that there are people who have been made incredibly ill because of covid but may not die (and hopefully they don't) for several years because of their illness. The example he used was Kate Garraway's husband, a healthy middle aged man, who is no longer infected with the virus but it has already done a huge amount of damage to his body, hopefully he and others like him recover but serious and permanent damage has been done.

 

[Professor]

I was talking to a GP friend last week who said his gut feeling was that we have over - recorded Covid deaths thus far, as he had some paitients who were incredibly ill / weak anyway and had died with Covid being recorded on their death certificate even if that may not have directly contributed to their death. He couldn't understand why we have been so keen to put Covid on death certificates.

He also mentioned that there are people who have been made incredibly ill because of covid but may not die (and hopefully they don't) for several years because of their illness. The example he used was Kate Garraway's husband, a healthy middle aged man, who is no longer infected with the virus but it has already done a huge amount of damage to his body, hopefully he and others like him recover but serious and permanent damage has been done.

This is why I get a bit annoyed about people saying mortality is low.
A significant number are having long-term effects which may well reduce life expectancy.
As you know I work on foodborne bacteria. Salmonella infections have a mortality well below 1%, but can lead to longer-term intestinal damage and in some cases arthritis. Nearly a thousand people get long term neurological problems after Campylobacter infection each year in the U.K. In Africa an invasive Salmonella infection doubles your chance of dying within two years. This is why I take this seriously- we don’t know long term problems.

 

[controversial_jack]

It can take 3 weeks, sometimes longer to die from this from detection to finality, sometimes longer. 28 days may not be enough.It's possible the deaths from this have been under reported

 

[Scotia]

It can take 3 weeks, sometimes longer to die from this from detection to finality, sometimes longer. 28 days may not be enough.It's possible the deaths from this have been under reported

That is assuming they aren't tested as the illness progresses. Most patients are tested several times, so it would be 28 days from their last positive test. It isn't perfect but probably isn't missing too many and is probably better than including anyone who ever tested positive.

 

[controversial_jack]

They aren't getting tested several times as the illness progresses, that's certainly not the norm.They get tested on admission in A&E and that's it.There's no point as the virus is deemed to no longer be infectious after a week to 14 days,although the patient may still be ill, hence the 14 day quarantine.

The test has zero value after a certain time span,It's why there's no value in testing patients on release as doctors would determine if that patient has recovered.

Some care homes ask for a negative test before re admitting the patient back to the home, but that's arse covering rather than any medical need.

 

[Scotia]

They aren't getting tested several times as the illness progresses, that's certainly not the norm.They get tested on admission in A&E and that's it.There's no point as the virus is deemed to no longer be infectious after a week to 14 days,although the patient may still be ill, hence the 14 day quarantine.

The test has zero value after a certain time span,It's why there's no value in testing patients on release as doctors would determine if that patient has recovered.

Some care homes ask for a negative test before re admitting the patient back to the home, but that's arse covering rather than any medical need.

They are. I've known several people who have been tested a few times during stays in hospital. Stats are being compiled on where the virus was contracted to establish if it were in hospital, If patients were only tested on admission that stat couldn't be compiled.

Similarly with Kate Garraway's husband he has tested negative apparently but the damage is done.

I don't think a test before readmission to a care home is arse covering - that is how it got in to many earlier this year.

 

[controversial_jack]

It got into care homes through temp staff moving from home to home, and also visitors before lock down.Docs wouldn't allow infectious ppl to be discharged. Patients are no longer infectious after 10 to 14 days as i posted earlier

 

[jack_lord]

And we don’t lockdown society for other serious infections. Lockdown was a huge mistake

Few are as transmissible. Lockdown was too late. Could have been shorter

My wife's friend had to go back to work in the DVLA this week and is still complaining.

 

[benny]

Russia vaccine triggers an immune response? What does the resident professor make of this? Still too small a group to be sure?

Coronavirus: Russian vaccine shows signs of immune response https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-54036221