Corona Virus

[Reamer]

The Government stopped testing after the first phase of its plan to fight the virus. Why ? The mayor of Bergamo , which is said to be two
weeks ahead of us, has said we should have been testing, The World Health Organisation is saying 'Test,Test,Test'.
Only now, after a week to ten days has the Government said it will 'ramp up' the frequency of testing to 10,000 and then 25,000 but this
week will only manage around 7,000.

[Reamer]

Those tests are per day but in UK you only get it if you are so sick that you have to go to hospital. Germany is testing those with symptoms who don't necessarily have to go to hospital.

[monkey hanger]

thought the test was for those who have had the virus to enable em to get back to work as the thought is if you have had it you will not get it again.

[Reamer]

Confusion abounds. There are two tests. One to determine if you have the virus presently, which is the one I was referring to above.
The other test is to see if you've already had the disease and (supposedly, not yet proven) therefore have the antibodies. The Government has 3.5 million of these with more to come but how they will disperse these among the population is anyone's guess.

[Margaret Pilkington]

Testing should have been the first priority.
The figures regarding this disease are so inaccurate as to be unreliable.
Even the quoted death figures are not to be relied on as many of those who have died have had other conditions which hastened their demise.
The only deaths that truly can be attributed to the virus are those who were young and had no underlying health issues.

Protecting people means knowing who has the virus and that cannot be known without testing.
If someone tests positive then they should be completely isolated....not this self isolation thing.
People do NOT know how to effectively self isolate.

[Reamer]

It matters little whether deaths can be 'truly' attributed to the virus. If your death is being hastened by the virus then there's no difference.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-51943612

[Margaret Pilkington]

But it matters in the reporting of the virus situation....why?

Well because it is part of the media whipping up fear and panic in the population.
We have to maintain some perspective on the situation and the media are particularly unhelpful in this.
They catastrophise everything, they use dramatic and sensationalist language in their reporting.
Panic is detrimental to a balanced approach. It is unhelpful because it has created a situation of panic in the general population....something which should have been avoided.

I am NOT saying that this is not a serious situation, but that it is something we need to take sensible precautions against.

Every year during the flu season I take the same precautions I am using now.
I avoid crowded places, I take good rest, I eat well,I take vitamins....none of this will guarantee that I will NOT get the flu.....but I owe it to myself to do these things.

Every year people die from the winter flu....last year 1300 people lost their lives from flu....did it make the news?
No....because it was not a worldwide event.

[Reamer]

Blimey, you don't half love a conspiracy theory, don't you, Margaret? I don't see the media whipping up fear in the population. Certainly not round here. Most people seem to be taking events in their stride and behaving well. Sure there are always a few people whose personality would scare Freddy Krueger (Trump for one) but most folk are giving, sharing, waving and so on.
The figures on the Public Health England website don't distinguish between young, old or the truly attributal. They're just there in black and white. That's not sensationalising. A news report adding that someone who's died had underlying health problems is not either. I saw something the other day that, of the deaths so far, 70% were men and 30% women. Nobody has jumped on that so far, let's see.

[Margaret Pilkington]

I was not talking about the way Public Health England report on anything and the only things that are black and white are the newspapers.
If you cannot see the sensationalising of this then all I can say is you aren't looking.

If you think that that is me loving a conspiracy theory, then you are reading it all wrong.

You say that most people are taking events in their stride and behaving...would these be the same people who have stripped the supermarket shelves of staple foods...or the ones who have abused ASDA and tesco staff for trying to ensure that there is stuff for everyone or maybe it was the woman coming out of HOME BARGAINS with 14 nine roll packs ot toilet rolls.
This is what you consider to be 'behaving well'
What do you think created the panic buying?
Might it have been the way the media were reporting the issues?
You surely cannot deny that there has been a wave of panic buying can you?

I have also seen those statistics about the difference between the genders, but I am not getting what the point is regarding this, that you are trying to make.


If you look at the language in how the media(and I include the BBC in this) the media are whipping up fear and panic. You cannot pick up a newspaper or turn on your TV without reading or seeing reports full of hyperbole regarding the virus.
But if you cannot see it then that is OK..it won't be worrying you will it?

[Margaret Pilkington]

Reamer, maybe you would enlighten me as to which bit of my post you considered to be a 'conspiracy theory'.

[Reamer]

Ok, I agree, maybe in the first weeks of March some people began to act a bit stupid. I did imply this
in my post by citing the Freddy Krueger lot, but the last couple of times I've been out either to shop or for exercise,
I haven't seen anyone stripping shelves, abusing staff or bulk buying. I can only relate what I see. You're describing those events as something ongoing as though its mass hysteria. I don't see it now.

'What do you think created the panic buying?' you ask. Well I think you answered your own question when you said this

'Every year people die from the winter flu....last year 1300 people lost their lives from flu....did it make the news?
No....because it was not a worldwide event.'

People accept the risk with flu because, as you say, its no longer a worldwide event. There's a vaccine and everybody takes it for granted that if you're reasonably fit as you get older, you'll make a do. This is different. It's a world health epidemic. A new disease with no known antidote and you ask why people panic. It's down to human nature and not specifically press coverage.

I haven't bought newspapers in many a year so the media is easy to deal with. Don't buy it or switch it off.
'You cannot pick up a newspaper or turn on your TV without reading or seeing reports full of hyperbole regarding the virus.' you say, so you must be reading and watching it all to know that. Finally no, I won't be worrying about what you've posted until it becomes fact.
Finally again, the Conspiracy theory comment was a lousy attempt to lighten the mood a little. Stay safe

[Margaret Pilkington]

Thank you for your response.
I do appreciate you taking time to do that.
As far as having answered the question....that was not the answer that I felt would be given.
Yes, it is human nature when they think they are in danger.
The population have been schooled to think they are in danger by the fear and panic created by the media.
That you do not buy papers, does not protect you from the media coverage....it seems current that ALL TV shows are making some comment on it and Professor Whitty pops up between programs....so unless you go and live in a cave hearing about is inevitable.
I do not watch much TV and cannot recall when I last watched a news broadcast.(my husband is so spooked by them that he turns out them off).

I am relating things I have seen.
I saw a woman abuse a till operator in ASDA, to,the point where security was called to deal with the issue ..and that was just last week.
The toilet roll thing too...that was a personal experience.

As you know, there is no cure for the common cold....and the flu vaccine depends on the virus that was prevalent more than a year ago and the last vaccine had an efficacy score of only 30%.

You are right about it being a new version of a disease, but you cannot spout statistics and expect them to be relevant if you really do not know the size of the problem.
We don't know the size of the problem because the population are not being tested.
There are probably very many more people who have had this virus and do not know they have had it because their symptoms have been mild enough to cause them no difficulty.

Again, this is NOT to say that we can be complacent, but there does need to be a sense of perspective.

If you are going to get this, you could stay in your home, not move out of your house and STILL get it...delivered on your gas bill envelope that someone with the disease has coughed on, breathed over or just touched.

Live cheerful, not fearful....and of course stay safe.

[Margaret Pilkington]

The very good news is that Front line NHS staff are going to be tested.
The other thing that really needs to be happening and the sooner the better.....is that NHS staff should be required to change out of their uniforms before they leave the hospital.
They should not be going home in their uniforms as these may be contaminated.
The hospital laundry should be laundering the clothes worn by frontline staff.

[cashman]

only this week there has been 1 scumbag in padiham, coughing and spitting at the police. so some people are still acting stupid. also i think this £60 fine is nowhere near enough to put scummies off, they will probably think i can live with that, in the unlikely event i am caught. the world is too ruddy soft these days,in my view.

[Margaret Pilkington]

So the media are not catastrophising the situation.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world...-cross-warning