Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

MERS Coronavirus warning

But it's probably far more than just cancer patients.

I can easily believe those numbers for cancer patients. We could also add all the category A vulnerable onto that list, eg transplant patients, immunosuppressed and so on. The immunosuppressed is a very wide range of people, many hopping about seeming perfectly healthy. If treated, immunosuppression could be removed, eg a successful heart transplant including after care.

The point I am repeatedly trying to make is that unless and until the virus is controlled, such patients cannot effectively be treated in hospital environments due to the danger of infection and thus death. Think care homes on a bigger scale. As a result, control of the virus becomes a priority to help all and specifically the most vulnerable. I hope you understand what I am saying.

When I say balance, I mean exactly what you said but with the addendum of ALL lives lost, given that control of the virus predicates outcomes for vulnerable patients in the same way as control of MRSA. We have protocols for the latter but not the former.

At present, the virus is partially controlled and the economy is opening up. It all depends on the willingness of people to comply. This is a problem. The balance is weighing the economy against death. At the moment, I think we have it about right.

The alternative is to fully open the economy and write off category A vulnerable , then cat B and C. Cat C would be people with a HbA1c over 76. Probably half of ARRSE. Thus lies the way to herd immunity.
 
The elderly and vulnerable die all the time due to a variety of illnesses and have done so for years. The only reason we are where we are today is because suddenly the population under 60 believe they may be affected.

Pretty damn selfish attitude if you ask me.

Can you go into more detail , please?
 
Rhinovirus (the common cold) can be a killer for immunocompromised children. Unlike this coronavirus which has killed less than 20 people under the age of 19 years old (16 I think is the exact number).

Unlike swineflu which killed 70 children.



so the lack of deaths from covid in immunocompromised young people was nothing to do with the strict shielding measures put in place to protect them?
 
Last edited:
Can you go into more detail , please?
Well why is it so many middle aged people suddenly want an enforced exclusion zone around them, dictate whether you should wear a mask or not, go on holiday, shop in a meaningful manner or even go out back at the height of the lock down.

They literally couldn't give a monkeys about spreading viruses last year because they were unlikely to die from them.

This is a selfish attitude.

I know this doesn't apply to everyone but a quick scan of your towns local FB page will reveal Karen's going into full meltdown because someone wandered around Sainsbury's mask less.

If you ask me this pandemic has exposed some severe mental health issues, a lack of fortitude and most importantly a lack of foresight among the populace.





Sent from my Pixel 4 using Tapatalk
 
@frenchie

I don't use facebook myself. Actually. I don't use any social media except ARRSE due to PERSEC reasons which are still sadly relevant to me. I am pretty sure I haven't missed anything.

However, I think that the restrictions and advice in the UK have come from top down. If you are implying that it is the 50 or 60 somethings in power that have decided to panic, then you are entitled to your opinion.

If people in general are worried that they might be ill or die, I would personally say that they are wise to take precautions.

As a general comment, the vast majority of people in the UK don't have a conception of epidemic disease. Whilst I still remember school with every class having a couple of kids in calipers like Forrest Gump due to polio, a few kids I know dying from Diptheria, I don't think this is the common experience in much of the population. People in general do not know why Covid19 is a problem or the reasons why they are, for example, asked to wear a mask. Overall. it is a lack of education coupled with fear in some instances ( often justifiable) and in others with a pig headed attitude of rights and not responsibilities.

If you ask me this pandemic has exposed some severe mental health issues, a lack of fortitude and most importantly a lack of foresight among the populace.

I am inclined to agree with you but would say that the pandemic has made worse existing issues as well. The lack of fortitude is our fault. For the last 30 years, we have been bringing up a generation of folks who expect but don't give and crisis finds them wanting in general resilience.* The foresight comment is at planning level and in terms of the pandemic, it has been known that one would occur but remediative measures have not been put in , mostly due to money in most nations. Maybe internationally, 10% compliance on planning. Luckily, this is not a "kill all" pandemic. As I have said a lot, we are lucky with this one.

I would go on to say that if this pandemic had occured 30 to 40 years ago and with the same pathogen, the response might have been very different but going down that road is futile because we are where we are.

I understand where you are coming from now. Thank you.

* Speaking generally. I know there are still many people tough as old boots but that is often in spite of what society demands.
 
The counting of cases and deaths seems to be a stick a finger in the bucket and see what comes out.
UK just "lost" 5,000 deaths by saying they'll only count those who died within 28 days of catching CV. One way to cut the numbers down, I suppose.

Cases rising significantly in Spain, but are they? Back to thousands each day but now the number of tests are approaching 50,000 a day it's no wonder. Still getting the mantra that 80% are "asymptomatic" and showing no signs so wouldn't even have been counted a few weeks ago. UK new cases over the past 14 days is under 20 per 100,000 whereas in Spain as a whole it is around 100 cases per 100,000 in the same period. On the other hand, in the same two week, the death rate in UK is 1.1 per 100,000 yet Spain is 0.3 per 100,000.
(It should be pointed out that over 80% of the new cases are in Catalonia, Aragon and Madrid in the north although cases are going up everywhere)

Spain counts 329,754 who have caught the CV19, a figure which is agreed by the WHO. However, Worldometer puts the number of cases at 376,864 which is almost 50,000 more yet deaths on all sources tally.

Latest wheeze (you'll see what I did there) is that regions are now banning smoking outdoors unless you can maintain an "effective" distance (not specified) and on bar terraces.

Went into town to get my haircut today. 5 restaurants next to each other (1 Brit, 1 Indian, 2 Spanish and 1 Thai). Normally, August, you'd be lucky to get a seat in any of them at lunchtime. Today, 1 couple in the Brit restaurant, none in the Indian, about 8 people in the Spanish restaurants and just 2 couples in the Thai restaurant.
Gonna be some hardships after this is all over.
Something to look at if you can find the numbers is the "positivity rate" for the Spanish testing data. This is the percentage of tests that come back positive. If the positivity rate is climbing, then infection is spreading. If the positivity rate is low or even falling, then finding more cases may be an artefact of doing more testing. A high rate means that there are probably a lot more people being infected that aren't showing up on tests.

A "low" rate would be 1% or less. A "high" rate would be 10% or higher.

When infections starting taking off in the US early this summer, the positivity rates in some states were as high as 20%. Those states with high positivity rates are the ones who are now in the middle of COVID-19 zombie apocalypse.
 
I can easily believe those numbers for cancer patients. We could also add all the category A vulnerable onto that list, eg transplant patients, immunosuppressed and so on. The immunosuppressed is a very wide range of people, many hopping about seeming perfectly healthy. If treated, immunosuppression could be removed, eg a successful heart transplant including after care.

The point I am repeatedly trying to make is that unless and until the virus is controlled, such patients cannot effectively be treated in hospital environments due to the danger of infection and thus death. Think care homes on a bigger scale. As a result, control of the virus becomes a priority to help all and specifically the most vulnerable. I hope you understand what I am saying.

When I say balance, I mean exactly what you said but with the addendum of ALL lives lost, given that control of the virus predicates outcomes for vulnerable patients in the same way as control of MRSA. We have protocols for the latter but not the former.

At present, the virus is partially controlled and the economy is opening up. It all depends on the willingness of people to comply. This is a problem. The balance is weighing the economy against death. At the moment, I think we have it about right.

The alternative is to fully open the economy and write off category A vulnerable , then cat B and C. Cat C would be people with a HbA1c over 76. Probably half of ARRSE. Thus lies the way to herd immunity.
MERS doesn't normally spread readily enough to cause a pandemic, but when it gets loose in hospitals it can cause absolute carnage. This happened in South Korea a couple of years ago, and the lessons learned from dealing with that is why the South Koreans were better prepared than most countries for COVID-19.

If COVID-19 is widespread there's no practical way of keeping it out of the hospitals. A large share of those who need to use the hospitals for other reasons are also exactly the sort of people who are most at risk from serious consequences from COVID-19.
 
I do. Bring back fever hospitals.
They did. It doesn't do anything to keep COVID-19 out of regular hospitals however, as patients can have multiple problems and hundreds of thousands of staff would be bringing it into the hospitals after picking it up in the subways and on the buses on their way to work.
 
Something to look at if you can find the numbers is the "positivity rate" for the Spanish testing data. This is the percentage of tests that come back positive. If the positivity rate is climbing, then infection is spreading. If the positivity rate is low or even falling, then finding more cases may be an artefact of doing more testing. A high rate means that there are probably a lot more people being infected that aren't showing up on tests.

A "low" rate would be 1% or less. A "high" rate would be 10% or higher.

When infections starting taking off in the US early this summer, the positivity rates in some states were as high as 20%. Those states with high positivity rates are the ones who are now in the middle of COVID-19 zombie apocalypse.

Positive Rate at the beginning of August (can't find anything more recent) was between 4 and 7%. The central Health Registry has the positive rate for all regions but, according to El Pais, has decided "not to release it to the press".
Saying that, the Min of Health mentioned a couple of regions in his Thursday press briefing. Basque Country between 1 and 2% but between 15 and 20% in Aragon and Catalonia (I think he was giving the lowest and the highest as examples).

He also mentioned the average age of those cases had dropped from 48 at the end of July to 42 now.
He didn't refer to the average age of those who had died.
 
Positive Rate at the beginning of August (can't find anything more recent) was between 4 and 7%. The central Health Registry has the positive rate for all regions but, according to El Pais, has decided "not to release it to the press".
Saying that, the Min of Health mentioned a couple of regions in his Thursday press briefing. Basque Country between 1 and 2% but between 15 and 20% in Aragon and Catalonia (I think he was giving the lowest and the highest as examples).

He also mentioned the average age of those cases had dropped from 48 at the end of July to 42 now.
He didn't refer to the average age of those who had died.
Going by what I recall public health experts saying about positivity rates a few months ago, a positivity rate of 15-20% in Aragon and Catalonia indicates a problem either with insufficient testing or with rapidly spreading infection. A rate of 4-7% is right in the middle of what is considered to be able to give a good idea of overall infection rate.
 
@Whey_Aye_Banzai Funny because I can actually see that happening on a wider scale as we get the next pandemic if it is worse and if the pharmaceutical companies don.t get their act together in terms of new antibiotics for bacteria (profits motive). Case of there being nothing new under the sun.

I think the last UK fever hospital was closed after Smallpox was eradicated. There are various isolation units, eg Guys but we may well end up turning the wheel again.

Overall, I am not too concerned about the extremely vulnerable because they will be protected and self isolated if we manage effective control As you said, I think, it is not going away. What I am concerned about is the people in category C who have received the vulnerable letter . They feel and appear healthy but are at high risk. Examples as stated would be marginally out of control type 2 diabetics and people with hereditary conditions, eg primary biliary cirrhosis etc. Even more so, the many who are in these categories who never go to the Doctor because they are healthy in their own minds so never get medical attention.
 
Going by what I recall public health experts saying about positivity rates a few months ago, a positivity rate of 15-20% in Aragon and Catalonia indicates a problem either with insufficient testing or with rapidly spreading infection. A rate of 4-7% is right in the middle of what is considered to be able to give a good idea of overall infection rate.

I think the testing in both Aragon and Catalonia are sufficient as they have been going all out in that branch.
The cases in those two regions is spreading rapidly. Aragon has the highest 14 day cumulative incidence of anywhere in Europe, let alone Spain. In 20 days it has risen 10 fold to 567 cases per 100,000 compared with Catalonia at 153 per 100,000.

Lumping them all together, Spain has 72 cases per 100,000 including the hardest hit regions. In all, even with the 26 reported deaths over the last 3 days (there was some problem yesterday with getting the data so they lumped 3 days together) remains at 0.3 per 100,000. With the huge increase in cases, especially in those two regions, I would think that will go up within the next 10 days or so.

The Zaragoza hospital (capital of Aragon) had 204 hospitalised 12 days ago, this has now risen to 491 of whom 42 are now in the ICU. Despite the repeated statements that the new cases age group is getting lower, those admitted to hospital has risen from the 60 to 65 age group in a week to the over 70s.

I think I'll stay down here on the coast and keep away from the North.
 

Latest Threads

Top