Printable View
So have we in Derbyshire Dales.
I still don't know anyone who has tested positive for Covid 19!
From a selfish point of view I am not unhappy with being in Tier 3 because it will hopefully stop the hoards from Sheffield/Derby/Nottingham/Manchester visiting, especially the ones who cannot go anywhere without needing to go into a pub.
Those who like to aimlessly wander around Bakewell will probably still turn out though!
From my selfish point of view, it won't affect too much as i'm working from home permanently now anyway.
But it does mean i can't get to any fell races (such as they may occur) until we come out of tier 3... given that xmas for me revolves around racing, i hope that is rectified as a matter of government urgency...!!
If somebody has the typical symptoms and signs (hypoxia in particular), and the classic ground glass appearance on their CXR/CT scan, they are highly likely to have Covid, even if a test is negative.Quote:
Originally Posted by Witton Park
and if in a care home? That's where the doctor expressed concerns during the interview.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike T
If somebody dies suddenly in a care home, I can see there may be doubt about the diagnosis - each death would need to be considered on a case by case basis. Were there other cases in the home? What symptoms did they have? Did a doctor/nurse see them during their final illness? What did they find on examination? What were their O2 saturations? Lots to consider.Quote:
Originally Posted by Witton Park
I follow some Acute Medicine Consultants on social media - they report that between a third and two thirds of the acute admissions in their hospitals are Covid or probable Covid. Sharing with two other households over xmas? No thanks.
As Chris Whitty said: "Would I encourage someone to hug and kiss their elderly relatives? No I would not...If you want them to survive to be hugged again."
I would go further - don't even share space with them inside - spend time on zoom, or socially distance outside.
The Government must have worked out how many illnesses/admissions/deaths the three household/five day rule will cause - but they are not telling us.
And if we were able to know in advance not how many but who.... Would we consider it then. The only way we accept these kind of risks in normal life (driving, climbing, crossing the road etc) is because we don't know the identity of those who are going to die until they actually do. We can perhaps identify some people at greater risk of premature death in advance - smokers for example, or solo rock climbers. So we can choose to mitigate those risks by not smoking or not soloing. But these still aren't guarantees you won't have a heart attack or a belay won't fail on a trad climbing route. So I think that like everything else in life we take a level of risk we and those affected by our actions are reasonably prepared to accept. So mixing over Xmas? I'm not sure what I'm comfortable with but our two adult sons both live alone so we are more likely to see them than my 89 year old mother.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike T
Yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark G
Canada recently had Thanksgiving (it comes earlier than in the USA) and at some length Radio 4 PM interviewed a Canadian Professor of Epidemiology about what has happened since in terms of new cases. Her analysis was more detailed than "there have been more deaths" and I do not recall the detail - but yes there will be more deaths here after Christmas. And everyone hopes they will be in someone elses family.
I can foresee the Witton “but they would’ve died anyway” argument incoming
It is often said that forecasting the future is difficult, but I'm not sure...:)Quote:
Originally Posted by Fellbeast