12 hours ago, Alan_A said:

What is this "work" of which you speak?  Strange word, though there's something dimly familiar about it... 😎

BTW, @MartinRex007 is an epidemiologist, so that could be his lens.

I do agree that it's best to avoid politics.  We should limit ourselves to topics such as science and its impact on decision-making, things of that nature.

Yes, we should, especially in this time, where it is most inappropriate to go down that path.

We are all hoping that this is over by Easter (absolutely nothing wrong with saying that), but, we're all also mindful that it likely will not be, as has been said.  Even epidemiologists can agree with that.

1 hour ago, Murmur said:

Think I've already said this, but it's funny how people that wish for a restriction of voting rights, always put themselves in the subset of those that should continue enjoying those voting rights.

In her case, I'm pretty sure we'd all vote for her to not have a vote. Not that I suspect she'd be bothered, I can't imagine she's well up on politics, although judging from her appearance, she may pay it lip service. 

Edited March 29, 20206 yr by Chock

2 hours ago, Mace said:

We are all hoping that this is over by Easter (absolutely nothing wrong with saying that)

Nothing wrong with you or me saying it except that we'd be saying it based on no evidence, and in contradiction to a large body of evidence.  But there's a limit to the harm either of us could do by saying that, because our influence isn't great.

Hypothetically, there would be something wrong with a person charged with public safety - no one political, of course, but say, for example, a hospital official - to the extent that such an expression of hope influenced people to relax their caution and adopt behaviors that might in the long run prove dangerous.

Professional best practices would suggest that the hospital official ought to err on the conservative side - again keeping in mind that official's potential to influence behavior.

All in keeping with established public health standards - again, hope for the best, plan for (and communicate about) the worst.

4 hours ago, Mace said:

Yes, we should, especially in this time, where it is most inappropriate to go down that path.

We are all hoping that this is over by Easter (absolutely nothing wrong with saying that), but, we're all also mindful that it likely will not be, as has been said.  Even epidemiologists can agree with that.

 

"Easter"!!! You'll be lucky. Here in the UK they are saying at least a few months, and some restrictions could still apply up to six months. 

On ‎3‎/‎28‎/‎2020 at 8:00 PM, n4gix said:

Would that still have been true had a young teen sought help at a for-profit clinic or doctor's office?

Just to add to the response already given by Reader, everyone in the UK is also registered with a General Practitioner with whom consultations are also free.

Cheers,

Bill

Aparently in Derbyshire there was a gathering of 25 people. All having a great time partying. Singing dancing, barbecue.

The police had to break the nut jobs up.

More Darwin Award candidates. The world is full of them

Now we have a retired UK Supreme Court judge being given air time on the BBC to claim that the risk is grossly exagerated, and in his opinion the restrictions are totally excessive and a repression of human rights. He stated that as It's only a small proportion of older people who die, we should not be restricting others. He also criticised the police for clearing the silly i***ts  gathering in large groups last week. If this wasn't enough, there were many tweets supporting his views.

Many people here think judges are out of touch with real life.  I think this one, and his supporters, should be made to visit an intensive care unit to see the reality. They would not be at any risk, would they?

 

6 hours ago, scianoir said:

Just to add to the response already given by Reader, everyone in the UK is also registered with a General Practitioner with whom consultations are also free.

Cheers,

Bill

Thanks to both Read and you Bill. I had suspected this was the case, but really appreciate the confirmation from real people whom I can trust to be fully transparent.

I sometimes feel a bit guilty since I am being fully supported in my health needs through the Veterans Administration for everything except dental. I get an eye exam every year and a free set of glasses as my eyes continue to age. I get a free set of orthopedic shoes each year as needed because of my diabetes. Despite sometimes having to wait up to a month for a non-critical appointment, I've only had one cancellation of a pending appointment, and that was last week for a follow-up podiatry visit. That was due to the Covid-19 pandemic of course.

In other words, I'm receiving roughly the equivalent of your coverage through NHS, whereas my non-veteran fellow citizens get stuck with the rest of the nation's absurd patchwork of insurance scams (er, I mean insurance plans), rising hospital charges, or even more poorly managed Medicare/Medicaid programs that often fail to provide comprehensible plans!

1 hour ago, Biggles2010 said:

Now we have a retired UK Supreme Court judge being given air time on the BBC to claim that the risk is grossly exagerated, and in his opinion the restrictions are totally excessive and a repression of human rights. He stated that as It's only a small proportion of older people who die, we should not be restricting others. He also criticised the police for clearing the silly i***ts  gathering in large groups last week. If this wasn't enough, there were many tweets supporting his views.

It's been the same here.  I'm willing to bet your judge isn't just speaking for himself - he's likely to be part of a campaign organized by those that want to push in that direction.  The U.S. edition has been timed and sequenced exactly the way I'd do it if I was organizing a campaign - which is something I've done, so I know what it looks like.  Thankfully it hasn't gotten any traction here and the advocates seem to have backed off.  Hope the same happens over there.

I think that you are very likely to be entirely correct. I would hope that my thinking fellow countrymen will have seen what is happening elsewhere, in southern Europe, not to mention China and be able to work out for themselves what really needs to be done and what motivates those in many different "civilised" countries to attempt to belittle the importance of what is being done.

 

1 hour ago, Biggles2010 said:

Now we have a retired UK Supreme Court judge being given air time on the BBC to claim that the risk is grossly exagerated, and in his opinion the restrictions are totally excessive and a repression of human rights. He stated that as It's only a small proportion of older people who die, we should not be restricting others. He also criticised the police for clearing the silly i***ts  gathering in large groups last week. If this wasn't enough, there were many tweets supporting his views.

Many people here think judges are out of touch with real life.  I think this one, and his supporters, should be made to visit an intensive care unit to see the reality. They would not be at any risk, would they?

 

I don't generally ask my local car mechanic about astrophysics, nor would I be phoning up Professor Brian Cox if I wanted a bit of info on adjusting the steering rods on my car. Getting some old f*rt who used to be a judge to opine about the Covid 19 virus is akin to doing that.

He might be interested to know about some of the preparations I've learned of for the expected increase in UK deaths in the next two weeks from someone who is actually involved in it if he thinks it isn't serious. It was pretty scary stuff and they don't organise that kind of thing for fun.

Update from Italy: cases have been reducing since the 20th of March but we are still not at the peak, however today we had half the increment in new cases compared to yesterday. This however is given by a "good" component and a bad one. The good one is, today we have the record of healed cases. The bad, over 900 people died.

On this chart you can find how the certified deaths are splitted between the age of the patients:

https://www.datawrapper.de/_/Hm8rK/

10 minutes ago, Pastaiolo said:

Update from Italy: cases have been reducing since the 20th of March but we are still not at the peak

Good news, or at least as much as we can hope for right now - signs that the growth rate is slowing.  Thanks for sharing.

There are private hospitals in the UK and you can get private medical insurance. Whilst the NHS is comprehensive in its free coverage there are waiting lists for things like hip replacements, eye cataract operations etc.   The private sector therefore exists to allow you to avoid those queues for such scheduled surgery but it doesn't deal with emergencies.   Only a small proportion of the population have such add on private cover so its fairly niche.  The UK government have currently block purchased the facilities of the private sector to assist in dealing with COVID-19.