• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Coronavirus

Grays_1890 said:
Read a BBC article about the public and are we doing enough to protect the NHS and got me thinking, maybe a question for @Hootnow

My mum runs 3 practices and as much as the government plays a massive part in her frustrations with the NHS she believes the biggest drain on the system is the public, maybe more from a actual Drs Surgery than wider NHS but she believes those that use it when there is no need, the prolific appointment setters, the time wasters, the self diagnosing the drug dependent etc.

As much as we agree the government could have done more in this is there an argument to say the public could have and still could have done more to help the NHS and follow the guidelines? The longer this goes on from the lockdown and the cases still exist there are indicators to say people are still spreading the disease, some of them cases have to be due to flouting the rules.

Do you think the public could have done more?
Click to expand...

A great thread of discussion mate.
I think the modern era has seen a wave of "service mentality" moves which definitely mean the NHS is being used for the silliest of things.
 
scaramanga said:
I think you're making claims without nearly enough evidence.

163 people is a very small number - especially when there are no tests of any vaguely reasonable accuracy. There's no evidence they had it the first time or the second time.

If you're relying on a vaccine for immunity then immunity has to be possible. If immunity isn't possible then the options are lockdown forever or just deal with it being out there and get on with life.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it’s a small sample size, but it comes from the country which has been in front on this the whole way. It’s all we’ve got at present as they are that much further down the road.

There should be some interesting stuff coming out soon from German research and their widespread testing.

There aren’t many coronaviruses to which we are immune for life once contracted - I believe they reckon contracting SARS, for instance, provides immunity only for 3 - 4 years for most people if survived.

Let’s hope this one is different.
 
Mikey10 said:
Yeah, it’s a small sample size, but it comes from the country which has been in front on this the whole way. It’s all we’ve got at present as they are that much further down the road.

There should be some interesting stuff coming out soon from German research and their widespread testing.

There aren’t many coronaviruses to which we are immune for life once contracted - I believe they reckon contracting SARS, for instance, provides immunity only for 3 - 4 years for most people if survived.

Let’s hope this one is different.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure it makes much difference.

Vaccination only replicates contracting the virus in the body, so we need to be able to create natural immunity for the vaccine to work. If not, when we talk about vaccination, we're talking about vaccinating 60%+ of the planet on a regular basis. I don't think that's feasible.
 
Mikey10 said:
A lot of the emerging evidence from random testing seems to suggest only 1 -3% of populations have had it, although there are some studies which put it higher.

Herd immunity through infection doesn’t seem to work as a concept with this - it increasingly seems that people can be infected multiple times.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...ive-recovery-south-korea-latest-a9472091.html
Click to expand...

monkeybarry said:
The evidence is looking strong that contraction and recovery does not equal immunity.
So you talking full population.
Click to expand...

If this is true. Its extremely worrying, as my limited understanding of how vaccines work means that a vaccine won't be possible either then... unless I'm missing something.
 
DTA said:
If this is true. Its extremely worrying, as my limited understanding of how vaccines work means that a vaccine won't be possible either then... unless I'm missing something.
Click to expand...
That's precisely the problem. The only advantage a vaccine has in this scenario is that it can be administered without needing to contract the actual virus, but it means regular and continual vaccination. For everyone. Forever.
 
Glenda's Legs said:
Fair enough, I should know better than to assume. It doesn't surprise me but it seems like a glaring inefficiency (assuming any central function would be up to the task of course). Thinking about it more I can see that as Trusts are much like standalone companies, have their own management structures, budgets etc., that they might act independently. But you'd think it wouldn't be beyond the wit of those in authority to have certain shared services where costs can be saved, purchasing being one.

Edit : I don't know how the NHS and its Trusts is structured. If the Trusts are truly independent orgs then collaboration on purchasing may not be legally possible.
Click to expand...
I work in procurement and commercial management
I’m now a consultant working on some government defence work
It’s a mess but form what I’ve seen of the NHS procurement we look slick
The NHS structure is just wrong, wrong, wrong
It’s farcical how bad they are
But.... there are small shoots of outfits cropping up who do know their stuff and using basics economies of scale across multiple trusts. That can work but needs a lot of trust in that agency

if you was to google the disparity between NHS trusts over the costs of a pair of rubber gloves you would see how f€$%#d it all is
 
Mikey10 said:
A lot of the emerging evidence from random testing seems to suggest only 1 -3% of populations have had it, although there are some studies which put it higher.

Herd immunity through infection doesn’t seem to work as a concept with this - it increasingly seems that people can be infected multiple times.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...ive-recovery-south-korea-latest-a9472091.html
Click to expand...

There are serious doubts about whether the people that have been reinfected

This from the guy that discovered the original SARS

https://twitter.com/x/status/1249791222526468099
 
Things have seemed quite a bit busier around north east London the last two days. More cars, some businesses that were closed semi-open. It could just be the weather, but it feels like people are venturing out more, with the shock/fear of the virus easing. Probably not a good thing, but can't blame anyone.
 
SpurMeUp said:
Things have seemed quite a bit busier around north east London the last two days. More cars, some businesses that were closed semi-open. It could just be the weather, but it feels like people are venturing out more, with the shock/fear of the virus easing. Probably not a good thing, but can't blame anyone.
Click to expand...

Was thinking exactly the same round here, Worthing to Brighton. Think one thing the government got right is about how long people can cope with being locked up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back