O/T Coronavirus Thread (4)

[flourbasher]

Singapore has experience of MERS and SARS, which gave them a head start in terms of an understanding of the issue within the population.

Even if the system is largely successful, I would make the (weary) prediction that the media will pick up on any instance where it falls short.

So if other countries have had epidemics and managed them in the past then perhaps our Govt should have been aware of this and used the Singaporean experience as a blue print for the UK.

Why try to reinvent the wheel or was it just case of not being as prepared as we could have been.

[KerrAvon]

So if other countries have had epidemics and managed them in the past then perhaps our Govt should have been aware of this and used the Singaporean experience as a blue print for the UK.

Why try to reinvent the wheel or was it just case of not being as prepared as we could have been.

Our government was aware of it, had conducted planning exercises and was deemed to be one of the best prepared countries in the world.

None of the above helps with a population that has little or no experience of dealing with a stealthy, easily transmitted virus with a high mortality rate, however. Take a look through the posts on this board an you find posters who were comparing Covid19 to 'flu and moaning about restrictions placed upon them. A population that had experience of SARS and MERS would be far less likely to do that. Look at Japan, where the government had no power to impose a lockdown, but the population did it anyway.

[Exiletyke]

Our government was aware of it, had conducted planning exercises and was deemed to be one of the best prepared countries in the world.

None of the above helps with a population that has little or no experience of dealing with a stealthy, easily transmitted virus with a high mortality rate, however. Take a look through the posts on this board an you find posters who were comparing Covid19 to 'flu and moaning about restrictions placed upon them. A population that had experience of SARS and MERS would be far less likely to do that. Look at Japan, where the government had no power to impose a lockdown, but the population did it anyway.

But with the 2nd worst death rate in the WORLD
How on earth did that happen Mr Trump?

[CAMiller]

But with the 2nd worst death rate in the WORLD
How on earth did that happen Mr Trump?

Talking of Mr Trump, is this more BBC bias or simply fair reporting of the facts? I know which camp I'm in.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52775216

[great_fire]

But with the 2nd worst death rate in the WORLD
How on earth did that happen Mr Trump?

It's still not good but looks like 5th highest to me.

1. San Marino 1238
2. Belgium 810
3. Andorra 660
4. Spain 580
5. UK 558

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

[Exiletyke]

It's still not good but looks like 5th highest to me.

1. San Marino 1238
2. Belgium 810
3. Andorra 660
4. Spain 580
5. UK 558

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

Check again gf
I think you are quoting deaths per million population

[flourbasher]

Our government was aware of it, had conducted planning exercises and was deemed to be one of the best prepared countries in the world.

None of the above helps with a population that has little or no experience of dealing with a stealthy, easily transmitted virus with a high mortality rate, however. Take a look through the posts on this board an you find posters who were comparing Covid19 to 'flu and moaning about restrictions placed upon them. A population that had experience of SARS and MERS would be far less likely to do that. Look at Japan, where the government had no power to impose a lockdown, but the population did it anyway.

I think you're being too generous and conciliatory to the govt and UK health advisors.
A more aggressive approach would have reduced deaths and reduced the lockdown period. It would also have led to a reduced impact on the economy which we are yet to feel the full effects of.
I'm not sure how allowing Cheltenham and Anfield would be deemed best prepared.
It's not acceptable for our govt to say it's never happened here before so we did our best.

[KerrAvon]

I think you're being too generous and conciliatory to the govt and UK health advisors.
A more aggressive approach would have reduced deaths and reduced the lockdown period. It would also have led to a reduced impact on the economy which we are yet to feel the full effects of.
I'm not sure how allowing Cheltenham and Anfield would be deemed best prepared.
It's not acceptable for our govt to say it's never happened here before so we did our best.

Covid-19 is a completely new disease which was not reported to WHO until December 30th. With that being the case, I think it completely fair to cut the UK government some slack. The science of the illness and the dynamics of its spread are still being researched and debated - even the mortality rate is uncertain. Coupled with that, it is clear that the virus has mutated several times, including becoming better able to spread and to be more stealthy (with people becoming infectious before they become symptomatic), which means that the maths that sits under governmental responses has also changed over time.

I’m sure that the government’s actions will be scrutinised for years at the end of this (as they should be). When we know what their advisers were telling them and can see the details of the decision making, we will be able to assess their performance from an informed position. Trying to do it now helps nobody and risks making unfair judgements. If the eventual conclusion is that 'they did their best' then surely we could ask for no more?

[John2]

When we know what their advisers were telling them and can see the details of the decision making, we will be able to assess their performance from an informed position. Trying to do it now helps nobody and risks making unfair judgements. If the eventual conclusion is that 'they did their best' then surely we could ask for no more?

Would you agree that it is fair to say the UK government was one of the slowest countries in Europe to introduce lock down (relative to known cases/death rate) and seemed for a time to be operating on advice that was contradictory to the noises coming out of almost every other nation in Europe?

Also, if our panel of advisers got it wrong and every other European nation's did a better job, who should accountable for that?

[flourbasher]

Covid-19 is a completely new disease which was not reported to WHO until December 30th. With that being the case, I think it completely fair to cut the UK government some slack. The science of the illness and the dynamics of its spread are still being researched and debated - even the mortality rate is uncertain. Coupled with that, it is clear that the virus has mutated several times, including becoming better able to spread and to be more stealthy (with people becoming infectious before they become symptomatic), which means that the maths that sits under governmental responses has also changed over time.

I’m sure that the government’s actions will be scrutinised for years at the end of this (as they should be). When we know what their advisers were telling them and can see the details of the decision making, we will be able to assess their performance from an informed position. Trying to do it now helps nobody and risks making unfair judgements. If the eventual conclusion is that 'they did their best' then surely we could ask for no more?

Track and trace isn't a medical procedure though it's purely a management tool to monitor the movements of people and therefore any illness they might have. It's fairly simple to set up too in so much as all you need is some resource and a decent communication system. I t would have been within the capabilities of the uk to divert some of the vastly oversubscribed NHS responders to this task and asked the comms companies to react quickly.

Track and trace could be applied to a range of virus, diseases Etc as it,s merely a way of knowing where a medical issue is and where it's spreading so I don't think the govt could use the excuse that they didn't know what they were dealing with. It's a bit of a red herring.

With Singapore being a Commonwealth country it should have been a fairly easy to ask for advice on how they dealt with previous pandemics and they would have been more forthcoming than asking China. It's a simple management technique to follow best practice where others have already got some of the answers

I'm not Govt bashing here as they've done some faulous things such as setting up the temporary hospitals but I really think they missed a trick.