Scrutable

MartinDurkin wrote: Tue Feb 25, 2020 10:57 am My wife has a somewhat compromised immune system after a bone marrow transplant in 2011 and has just about survived swine flu a couple of times in the past.

We have a holiday / visit to friends booked for the first week in April to the Como region. Should we be thinking about cancelling?

Herainestold wrote: Tue Feb 25, 2020 5:27 am

nefibach wrote: Mon Feb 24, 2020 8:47 pm

plodder wrote: Mon Feb 24, 2020 6:05 pm Apologies if we've already had this visualisation of the data, equally apologies if it's conspiratorial bollocks

https://mobile.twitter.com/NJ_Joel/stat ... 1241666562

This is very misleading. Epidemics don't take the same amount of time to play out, so stopping at a set number of days is ridiculous. Swine flu is thought to have killed 200k people overall. Seasonal flu kills 290 000 to 650 000 people annually. 2,626 deaths is f.ck all in comparison.

Swine flu killed 200 000 over what time period? How many of those flu deaths-or in this case coronavirus-just displace deaths from other causes?
They seem to disproportionally affect older people and people in already poor health. How many of the deaths are "excess" to what would hav e ocurred by other means, and how much is just hastening by a few months what would have happened anyway?

I'm not trying to make light of this situation, I realize it is very serious, it does kill younger healthier people, and we are ill prepared for it.

Iran's deputy health minister and an MP have both tested positive for the new coronavirus, as it struggles to contain an outbreak that has killed 15.

shpalman wrote: Tue Feb 25, 2020 11:36 am

MartinDurkin wrote: Tue Feb 25, 2020 10:57 am My wife has a somewhat compromised immune system after a bone marrow transplant in 2011 and has just about survived swine flu a couple of times in the past.

We have a holiday / visit to friends booked for the first week in April to the Como region. Should we be thinking about cancelling?

Well the number of new cases per day here is already decreasing and there are no reports of the virus in the wild in Como or even Milan. However, this might be because we're all asymptomatic carriers or that we just had a bit of a cold for a day or two (it feels like I've been catching and getting rid of colds since November).

The deaths here seem to have been people in their 70's and 80's who were mostly already in hospital for something serious.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_coro ... k_in_Italy

Boustrophedon wrote: Tue Feb 25, 2020 9:43 pm Oh great, local school has just welcomed it's returning Italy ski trip, back from Bormio.

http://www.de-aston.lincs.sch.uk/
http://www.de-aston.lincs.sch.uk/downlo ... pdate6.pdf

Doesn't look as if they have been through the affected areas.

Gfamily wrote: Tue Feb 25, 2020 9:51 pm
Wouldn't it help if they gave the symptoms to look out for? The Govt web page is pretty vague about them too.

OneOffDave wrote: Wed Feb 26, 2020 8:50 am

Gfamily wrote: Tue Feb 25, 2020 9:51 pm
Wouldn't it help if they gave the symptoms to look out for? The Govt web page is pretty vague about them too.

That's because the initial symptoms are very vague. They are literally a cough and/or fever developing shortness of breath and pneumonia.

That's part of the problem with travel screening. Most non-invasive testing picks up lots of other conditions at this time of year

nefibach wrote: Mon Feb 24, 2020 8:43 pm

Pucksoppet wrote: Mon Feb 24, 2020 3:11 pm Aren't masks mainly meant to be worn by people showing symptoms to limit the spread of infected secretions? Medical personnel treating patients need high quality (N95?) well fitting masks replaced regularly, but the general population don't need that - is that not correct?

If you want to limit how much you touch your own face, wearing sunglasses and a large bandanna worm over the nose and mouth Saturday-afternoon Western style, tucked into the collar of your shirt or blouse would probably work.

You are correct. Masks show some usefulness when worn buy people who are ill and symptomatic, with properly fitted respirators for medical personnel. The general population do not benefit from wearing masks when out and about.

If you want to limit your chances of getting sick then:

• Learn how to wash your hands effectively from this NHS guide. https://www.nhs.uk/live-well/healthy-bo ... our-hands/
• Wash your hands frequently, especially before eating and after touching door handles or other hard surfaces that may harbour the virus.
• Use hand sanitiser with at least 60% alcohol if handwashing facilities are unavailable.
• Cough or sneeze into a tissue and immediately throw it away.
• If you do not have a tissue, cough/sneeze into your elbow.
• Practice touching your face less.
• Do not shake hands or kiss cheeks when greeting others - use an elbow-bump or avoid contact completely.
• Push lift buttons with a knuckle instead of a fingertip.

Woodchopper wrote: Wed Feb 26, 2020 12:19 pm

What do people think about these suggestions for what an employer could do if the situation worsens:

- Encourage hand washing - eg distribute hand sanitizer, put up notices reminding people.
- Prioritize washing door handles, elevator buttons etc.
- Discourage handshaking - eg via notices and leadership taking the lead.
- Remove sources of infection - eg shared bowls of fruit, nuts, chocolate etc.
- Postpone or cancel seminars, conferences or other large gatherings of people. Would require informing clients etc about changes to planned activities.
- Postpone or cancel international travel, especially to affected areas.
- Allow lengthy periods of remote working (eg at a home office) so as to allow people to avoid crowded areas such as stations, trains or buses.
- Anticipate that to a greater extent than usual, employees may be on sick leave for long periods, or may need to spend lengthy periods caring for others (will affect planned completion of work for clients etc).

Any you'd add, remove or edit?

As mentioned, they'd be needed if things got worse, I'm not suggesting that all are done tomorrow.

El Pollo Diablo wrote: Wed Feb 26, 2020 11:37 am Dunno what everyone's worried about tbh. It'll be fine.

EllyCat wrote: Wed Feb 26, 2020 12:40 pm https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51641243

Hey, look, community testing to establish whether there’s transmission in the general public. This sounds sensible to me, so I’m a bit surprised that we’re actually doing it. I’ll be even more shocked if we use the results to inform our response strategy, but here’s hoping!

Boustrophedon wrote: Tue Feb 25, 2020 9:43 pm Oh great, local school has just welcomed it's returning Italy ski trip, back from Bormio.

http://www.de-aston.lincs.sch.uk/
http://www.de-aston.lincs.sch.uk/downlo ... pdate6.pdf

Doesn't look as if they have been through the affected areas.

OneOffDave wrote: Wed Feb 26, 2020 12:41 pm

Woodchopper wrote: Wed Feb 26, 2020 12:19 pm

What do people think about these suggestions for what an employer could do if the situation worsens:

- Encourage hand washing - eg distribute hand sanitizer, put up notices reminding people.
- Prioritize washing door handles, elevator buttons etc.
- Discourage handshaking - eg via notices and leadership taking the lead.
- Remove sources of infection - eg shared bowls of fruit, nuts, chocolate etc.
- Postpone or cancel seminars, conferences or other large gatherings of people. Would require informing clients etc about changes to planned activities.
- Postpone or cancel international travel, especially to affected areas.
- Allow lengthy periods of remote working (eg at a home office) so as to allow people to avoid crowded areas such as stations, trains or buses.
- Anticipate that to a greater extent than usual, employees may be on sick leave for long periods, or may need to spend lengthy periods caring for others (will affect planned completion of work for clients etc).

Any you'd add, remove or edit?

As mentioned, they'd be needed if things got worse, I'm not suggesting that all are done tomorrow.

A lot of these have been included in pandemic flu guidance for a while and were circulated during Swine Flu in 2009. The Pan flu reasonable worst case scenario had a figure of 50% of staff will need to take time off during the pandemic either due to illness or having to care for family members. Signage reminding staff of the main public health messaging and sources of accurate advice is also useful. Flexing sickness absence policies to prevent 'presenteeism' would also be useful

I'd also plan for issues with public transport as their staffing will be affected also

everyone should be required to play D&D or Warhammer or some other dice-rolling game at school, to get a visceral sense for how often "low probability" events come up. Rolling double ones is a <3% chance, but it happens ALL THE bl..dy TIME

lpm wrote: Wed Feb 26, 2020 3:55 pm e) people stupid enough to think they are going to win the lottery should be ten thousand times more certain they are going to die