Topic: COVID-19:VERIFIED news sources, 0 politishit, 0 CONSPIRACY SHITE

[killer-heels]

I mean one is a scientist and one sells travel deals...

Indeed but the Beeb gave him a platform as an expert answering questions on their debate show, alongside the scientist. I thought Calder’s advice was laughable.

[Elmo!]

It may be 'negligible' when looking at the overall figure, but what's the fatality rate for the over 65's?

I'm guessing you're not over this age so not arsed, but I'd imagine near 12m people in the UK aged over 65, and their loved ones, probably think it's quite serious.

And those of us with conditions that make us vulnerable. Screw us though, right?

[killer-heels]

These comments annoy me (sorry dude)

A virus that kills you quickly or at all isn't a good virus (although this will kill elderly and vulnerable people and btw 2% for a healthy individual is not a percentage I'd be happy with if I caught it), for it to spread the host generally has to be alive to pass it onto the next person and the next and so on.

Coronavirus issue isn't so much death, it's the fact it will FUCK YOU UP for the rest of your life, it cause massive problems in your respiratory system and seriously comprises it and your immune system, making you very prone to pneumonia amongst other respiratory diseases which can kill you.

So simply saying "but people, it's not that fatal, why the fuss?" is a seriously simplistic take on it - if you want thousands more people in hospital every year because of respiratory diseases and infections instead of just the oldies, then fine, I guess that's ok for you but for health professionals and the services which need to support those with poor health, it's not a good outcome, at all.

At the same time, the Beeb’s medical expert is saying for most this will just be a mild illness.

[PhilV]

It may be 'negligible' when looking at the overall figure, but what's the fatality rate for the over 65's?

I'm guessing you're not over this age so not arsed, but I'd imagine near 12m people in the UK aged over 65, and their loved ones, probably think it's quite serious.

In 1998, around one in six people were 65 years and over (15.9%), this increased to one in every five people in 2018 (18.3%) and is projected to reach around one in every four people (24.2%) by 2038.

From https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/articles/overviewoftheukpopulation/august2019

Quite a lot of people would be in a serious pickle if it got over here, nearly a quarter of the population - that's also not including children and people who are vulnerable due to disability, other health complications, etc.

At the same time, the Beeb’s medical expert is saying for most this will just be a mild illness.

Probs went to the same medical school as the Italian Doctor who went to Tenerife.

[killer-heels]

From https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/articles/overviewoftheukpopulation/august2019

Quite a lot of people would be in a serious pickle if it got over here, nearly a quarter of the population - that's also not including children and people who are vulnerable due to disability, other health complications, etc.

Probs went to the same medical school as the Italian Doctor who went to Tenerife.

There is loads of conflicting information and very confusing.

[Red Beret]

Remember that China has lots of isolated, rural communities. Under reporting is likely inevitable, even if unintentional.

The isolation might help protect a lot of people, but if the virus got loose in such places it could be very dangerous to the local population.

[PhilV]

There is loads of conflicting information and very confusing.

Probably because as per your post above, certain media and other platforms are giving a voice to wholly unqualified people to preach the wrong message to the masses - the Beeb letting a travel expert peddle deals vs a Scientist arguing fact based research and observation shows the level of "News" quality we get these days.

One is a man advocating something incredibly simple, be careful, look after your health and seeing as things are rather uncertain at the moment, maybe avoid travel unless absolutely necessary.

The other knows nothing of healthcare or contagion ans is peddling cheap travel - why do we as the masses give equal merit to both opinions seeing as one is super qualified to say something on the subject and the other is not - that's why there's mixed info, anyone worth their salt would advice caution in the face of uncertainty, as the saying goes, better safe than sorry.

[Roger Federer]

Yeah, but look at China. Now I'm very skeptical of any bit of information that comes out of there, but officially there have been 77,000+ cases. It may sound like a lot on face value, but their population is about 1.4 billion. Think of all the travel and commerce that goes on. And the outbreak there began in some time in December. And if they hadn't lied and bundled their way through it during the very beginning, the cases might even be fewer. And it's not as if they've experienced a boom in new cases over the last few weeks either. It's been other places. I'd trust the UK, Europe and the US to do a much better job of containing it should things start to get very serious. We'll just have to see what Italy does over the next few days.

Yes maybe, but since China started being (a bit more) honest about the outbreak, travel, manufacturing, and commerce are way down. Also, they managed to more or less contain the whole city of Wuhan (11 million people live there, 2 million more than London), banning people form going out a few weeks ago, have enough resources to treat most people with the virus, and contain the worst cases. In this particular situation, their totalitarian system could possibly be an advantage? If not in the beggining, then now when it has spread? It think it's unlikely that other countires are able to shut down so completely, and if you go outside the US or Europe, the healthcare is way, way, worse.   

[Red Beret]

Probably because as per your post above, certain media and other platforms are giving a voice to wholly unqualified people to preach the wrong message to the masses - the Beeb letting a travel expert peddle deals vs a Scientist arguing fact based research and observation shows the level of "News" quality we get these days.

One is a man advocating something incredibly simple, be careful, look after your health and seeing as things are rather uncertain at the moment, maybe avoid travel unless absolutely necessary.

The other knows nothing of healthcare or contagion ans is peddling cheap travel - why do we as the masses give equal merit to both opinions seeing as one is super qualified to say something on the subject and the other is not - that's why there's mixed info, anyone worth their salt would advice caution in the face of uncertainty, as the saying goes, better safe than sorry.

It's Brexit again, only with a virus.

[Hendollama]

These comments annoy me (sorry dude)

A virus that kills you quickly or at all isn't a good virus (although this will kill elderly and vulnerable people and btw 2% for a healthy individual is not a percentage I'd be happy with if I caught it), for it to spread the host generally has to be alive to pass it onto the next person and the next and so on.

Coronavirus issue isn't so much death, it's the fact it will FUCK YOU UP for the rest of your life, it cause massive problems in your respiratory system and seriously comprises it and your immune system, making you very prone to pneumonia amongst other respiratory diseases which can kill you.

So simply saying "but people, it's not that fatal, why the fuss?" is a seriously simplistic take on it - if you want thousands more people in hospital every year because of respiratory diseases and infections instead of just the oldies, then fine, I guess that's ok for you but for health professionals and the services which need to support those with poor health, it's not a good outcome, at all.

May I ask where you are getting this info from? I haven't seen anything regarding the long term effects on the respiratory system yet.

[PhilV]

May I ask where you are getting this info from? I haven't seen anything regarding the long term effects on the respiratory system yet.

Of Course:


https://pubs.rsna.org/doi/10.1148/radiol.2020200463

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2020/02/here-is-what-coronavirus-does-to-the-body/

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/heres-what-happens-to-the-body-after-contracting-the-coronavirus#COVID-19-affects-lungs

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-02-17/lung-biopsy-of-deceased-china-patient-shows-sars-like-damage

And also from scientist who have testified on the above on TV and so on.

Simply put, remember coronavirus is just a branch name, SARS is also coronavirus, these, like Pneumonia wreck havoc on the lungs and as most know, once your lungs are damaged by pneumonia you are at high risk of getting it again, if you do you're then at higher risk and so on until possibly death.

[...]

I haven't thought of this as serious for me until now. I live in London and my thoughts are that it would spread rather quickly here and it's not something I'd want to catch.

[Jiminy Cricket]

Probably because as per your post above, certain media and other platforms are giving a voice to wholly unqualified people to preach the wrong message to the masses - the Beeb letting a travel expert peddle deals vs a Scientist arguing fact based research and observation shows the level of "News" quality we get these days.

One is a man advocating something incredibly simple, be careful, look after your health and seeing as things are rather uncertain at the moment, maybe avoid travel unless absolutely necessary.

The other knows nothing of healthcare or contagion ans is peddling cheap travel - why do we as the masses give equal merit to both opinions seeing as one is super qualified to say something on the subject and the other is not - that's why there's mixed info, anyone worth their salt would advice caution in the face of uncertainty, as the saying goes, better safe than sorry.

Possibly even worse, Hilary Jones is just a GP, not an epidemiologist. Jones also softened/equivocated on his message towards the end of the interview. The reality is that Coronavirus is shaping up to be a big problem, and absolutely people should not travel unless absolutely necessary. I am not sure if it will make a great deal of difference to the total number infected in the end, but anything which helps spread-out infections over time the numbers infected is a good thing, as medical services are likely to be stretched beyond breaking point. It seems quite clear (to me) that there just aren't enough respirators to go around for those who will need them.

The interview with Calder and Jones:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_PQQUri3k8

[Hendollama]

Of Course:


https://pubs.rsna.org/doi/10.1148/radiol.2020200463

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2020/02/here-is-what-coronavirus-does-to-the-body/

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/heres-what-happens-to-the-body-after-contracting-the-coronavirus#COVID-19-affects-lungs

And also from scientist who have testified on the above on TV and so on.

Simply put, remember coronavirus is just a branch name, SARS is also coronavirus, these, like Pneumonia wreck havoc on the lungs and as most know, once your lungs are damaged by pneumonia you are at high risk of getting it again, if you do you're then at higher risk and so on until possibly death.

Thank you for the Links.

I know that I had pneumonia when I was very young. So that means I am at a high risk of death in case I happen to contract this virus, right? This is not very comforting.

[Dubred]

The problem the UK has is that despite being one of the richest Nations on Earth, the criminal underfunding of the NHS for the last ten years has left the NHS on its knees.

Once cases start to come in, the common, routine sight of people on beds just sitting in wards will continue - it won't take many instances where a packed-out A&E or a packed out corridoor leads to hundreds of infections in any UK hospital.

If the funding of the NHS had continued from when Labour were last in power then I'd say that the UK would be reasonably placed to handle it. As it stands? You just need to speak to any NHS professional to know the trouble it's in without a pandemic to deal with as well.

The UK government has shown itself to be not fit for purpose - even having to deal with the UK Citizens on the cruise-ship - they blathered and delayed and did nothing. Do you expect any better from them once the shit hits the fan?

Have to say this worries me big time.  If the trajectory continues and this does indeed become a pandemic, although we're a 'first' world country - we just don't have the capacity to deal with such an outbreak with our health system in its current state.

[Branno]

The fact this kicked off just as the Chinese Luna New Year season celebrations started so the largest human migration in the world  was under way (famili
es travelling all over the place) has made it the perfect storm.

[bornandbRED]

These comments annoy me (sorry dude)

A virus that kills you quickly or at all isn't a good virus (although this will kill elderly and vulnerable people and btw 2% for a healthy individual is not a percentage I'd be happy with if I caught it), for it to spread the host generally has to be alive to pass it onto the next person and the next and so on.

Coronavirus issue isn't so much death, it's the fact it will FUCK YOU UP for the rest of your life, it cause massive problems in your respiratory system and seriously comprises it and your immune system, making you very prone to pneumonia amongst other respiratory diseases which can kill you.

So simply saying "but people, it's not that fatal, why the fuss?" is a seriously simplistic take on it - if you want thousands more people in hospital every year because of respiratory diseases and infections instead of just the oldies, then fine, I guess that's ok for you but for health professionals and the services which need to support those with poor health, it's not a good outcome, at all.

That obviously wasn't an attempt to deny that this is a bad thing. Probably should have phrased it better.

I'm interested in the particular acuteness of the response even in contrast to recent pandemics. We have towns and cities being shut down in one. Existence of a bio weapons lab in Wuhan; still no clearly defined symptoms or origins; a long incubation period. Is there something the authorities aren't letting us know? Without necessarily whipping out the tinfoil hat, it's almost being treated like a bio weapon.

It may be 'negligible' when looking at the overall figure, but what's the fatality rate for the over 65's?

I'm guessing you're not over this age so not arsed, but I'd imagine near 12m people in the UK aged over 65, and their loved ones, probably think it's quite serious.

See above.

[classycarra]

That obviously wasn't an attempt to deny that this is a bad thing. Probably should have phrased it better.

I'm interested in the particular acuteness of the response even in contrast to recent pandemics. We have towns and cities being shut down in one. Existence of a bio weapons lab in Wuhan; still no clearly defined symptoms or origins; a long incubation period. Is there something the authorities aren't letting us know? Without necessarily whipping out the tinfoil hat, it's almost being treated like a bio weapon.

When you mentioned conspiracy theorists having a field day on this, were you talking about you?

[CraigDS]

When you mentioned conspiracy theorists having a field day on this, were you talking about you?

 

[McrRed]

When you mentioned conspiracy theorists having a field day on this, were you talking about you?

Probably me [emoji20]

[Red-Soldier]

When you mentioned conspiracy theorists having a field day on this, were you talking about you?

It very much seems that way.

[Caligula?]

More extreme measures are going to have to be taken. The UK and other countries should invoke a mandatory quarantine period for people arriving from places with a high number of cases. Italy included. There should be some kind of threshold. And if you're thinking of traveling to somewhere from one of those places, just don't unless you absolutely have to.

[KillieRed]

More extreme measures are going to have to be taken. The UK and other countries should invoke a mandatory quarantine period for people arriving from places with a high number of cases. Italy included. There should be some kind of threshold. And if you're thinking of traveling to somewhere from one of those places, just don't unless you absolutely have to.

You just know how that would be implemented in the UK; private jet/private school? You`ll be fine, off you pop.

[bornandbRED]

When you mentioned conspiracy theorists having a field day on this, were you talking about you?

Could you point out which bits of what I've mentioned are conspiracy and not fact?

The circumstances surrounding this outbreak are unique. There's no doubt about that.

[Dench57]

More extreme measures are going to have to be taken. The UK and other countries should invoke a mandatory quarantine period

Agreed. 14 days isolation for everyone in the UK. Paid leave.

[bornandbRED]

Could we end up lifting the title in an empty ground?

[UntouchableLuis]

Could we end up lifting the title in an empty ground?

The Etihad? We can win it there but no lift the trophy.

[classycarra]

The circumstances surrounding this outbreak are unique.

Mate the virus is called SARS 2

But seriously, that's sort of how outbreaks work. They take place in different places and times and involve different infectious diseases. They tend to vary.. What's conspiratorial about that?

Are you saying you wouldn't be indulging in conspiracies if this new coronavirus was actually exactly the same as SARS and infected the exact same number of people, over the exact same time period, with the same number of fatalities? Somehow I doubt it.

Could you point out which bits of what I've mentioned are conspiracy and not fact?

Yeah.

You said this is being treated like a bioweapon. It's not. Incidentally what experience do you have of bioweapon responses?

You said there are no clearly defined symptoms. This is also untrue.

You said there's nothing clear about origins. While it's true patient zero and the initial zoonotic transmission hasn't been found, there is plenty of research on the origins that eliminates a lot of the fake theories circulating online.

You said there's a long incubation period. I didn't really understand why you think that makes it more likely to be a biological weapon. Incidentally, virologists have observed nothing in the make up of the virus to suggest it's in any way synthetic.

There's more detail debunking the conspiracy theory this came from a weapons lab here https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-bioweapon-tom-cotton-conspiracy-theory-china-warfare-leak-2020-2?r=US&IR=T
Also shares some details on the consequences of spreading misinformation

[Barneylfc∗]

Apparently two people that recently came home from Venice have been sent home for two weeks from my mates office in Belfast.

[conman]

Probably me [emoji20]

I guess this 1981 Dean Koontz sci-fi book doesn't help

[Welshred]

Chevron's UK office I'm Canary Wharf has been closed and everyone sent home after 2 people displayed symptoms of the virus

[Alan_X]

What miffs me slightly is the huge reaction to something that ultimately has a negligible fatality rate, even compared to the common flu.

Conspiracy theorists would be wanking over less

2% means that on a full Airbus flight, if everyone caught the disease 17 people would die. 1,080 people would die from a typical Anfield crowd all catching the disease. 

[bornandbRED]

Mate the virus is called SARS 2

But seriously, that's sort of how outbreaks work. They take place in different places and times and involve different infectious diseases. They tend to vary.. What's conspiratorial about that?

Are you saying you wouldn't be indulging in conspiracies if this new coronavirus was actually exactly the same as SARS and infected the exact same number of people, over the exact same time period, with the same number of fatalities? Somehow I doubt it.

It's a legitimate discussion to have that the virus is borne out of a city where exists the highest grade weapons lab in the country, in a country where there have been previous instances of leaked viruses; where lab workers have been put in prison after making millions of pounds illegally selling wild animals that were involved in lab testing. Indeed, where a communication was transmitted soon after the discovery of the virus for more stringent bio hazard control in Wuhan laboratories.

[CraigDS]

It's a legitimate discussion to have that the virus is borne out of a city where exists the highest grade weapons lab in the country, in a country where there have been previous instances of leaked viruses; where lab workers have been put in prison after making millions of pounds illegally selling wild animals that were involved in lab testing. Indeed, where a communication was transmitted soon after the discovery of the virus for more stringent bio hazard control in Wuhan laboratories.

You still got that tinfoil hat off?

[FlashGordon]

It's a legitimate discussion to have that the virus is borne out of a city where exists the highest grade weapons lab in the country, in a country where there have been previous instances of leaked viruses; where lab workers have been put in prison after making millions of pounds illegally selling wild animals that were involved in lab testing. Indeed, where a communication was transmitted soon after the discovery of the virus for more stringent bio hazard control in Wuhan laboratories.

So you were talking about yourself? 

[Fiasco]

2% means that on a full Airbus flight, if everyone caught the disease 17 people would die. 1,080 people would die from a typical Anfield crowd all catching the disease.

If everyone on that flight was under say, 40 years of age, wouldn't the mortality rate be lower? Most deaths seem to be elderly people or those who have pre-existing conditions.

It doesn't make it any less worrying or serious, and of course a 25 year old could catch it and die and a 80 year old could survive, but nailing down figures and prognoses is a varied and difficult task.

[classycarra]

I guess this 1981 Dean Koontz sci-fi book doesn't help

Looks like a few cities got namechecked depending on where it was published

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/dean-koontz-predicted-coronavirus/

[conman]

Looks like a few cities got namechecked depending on where it was published

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/dean-koontz-predicted-coronavirus/

Name check all the bio weapon cities, eventually you'll get one right

[killer-heels]

If everyone on that flight was under say, 40 years of age, wouldn't the mortality rate be lower? Most deaths seem to be elderly people or those who have pre-existing conditions.

It doesn't make it any less worrying or serious, and of course a 25 year old could catch it and die and a 80 year old could survive, but nailing down figures and prognoses is a varied and difficult task.

The problem about the severity of the illness debate is that its used as a justification for people to carry on doing what they are doing. "Its not a big deal" has been expressed a lot and it doesn't help that there are GP's and Doctors on TV and Radio parroting this line. This despite China locking down a city of 11 million people and Italy locking down several small villages and towns.

The messaging has been conflicted. Common sense would say that whilst you shouldn't be shooting anyone who does walk on your drive way and panic buying, clearly when major powers are taking such extreme steps, that clearly its serious enough.

[Caligula?]

You just know how that would be implemented in the UK; private jet/private school? You`ll be fine, off you pop.

 

Most likely. But if they really want to get serious about it, it must be done. If say you're flying to the UK or to the US or wherever from a country that's had only a few cases, then mandatory quarantine probably shouldn't be necessary. But if you're arriving from China, South Korea, Italy, etc then it should be mandatory. And again, if you're thinking of traveling from one of those places then don't unless you absolutely have to.