Corona Virus - Should we be worried?

[Earth_pig]

They didn't cancel the rugby they haven't cancelled the man United match I am watching and it looks pretty much full up.

If there are no concerns from the events going ahead why bother cancelling things.

[Supernintendo Chalmers]

I've purposely stayed out of this thread to protect my peace but I thought I'd share an observation after a weekend spent in London. I've used various forms of transport and moved freely across the breadth of the city and one thing that was noticeable is the lack of people wearing "protective" masks. I spotted maybe a dozen over the course of 48 hours. People seem to be just getting on with life regardless. They maybe taking a few more precautions but certainly nothing obvious.

I'm not trivialising a clearly very serious situation but some, if not most areas of the media would have us think we're on the brink of the collapse of civilisation as we know it. I'm not entirely sure what my point is but once this situation has resolved itself, the same organisations where the majority of the country sources it's "information" will probably be warning of a critical water shortage due to everyone needing to wash their hands for twenty seconds every time during the Coronavirus crisis. In times like this I'm quick to remind myself that fear, bad news, negativity and pessimism sells newspapers and fuels 24 hour news channel viewing figures. Just look at the political state of the world over the past decade to reinforce that point.

Right now, the festival is going ahead and although I've got zero scientific basis to back any hope up, I still firmly believe it will. Seems to me the only real threat to it is the fear being created by those with a certain agenda.

If anyone needs me, I'll be in the electronica thread planning which of the many micro venues I'll be in at 4am on the Saturday morning of the festival. 

[Brownie30]

4 minutes ago, Supernintendo Chalmers said:

I've purposely stayed out of this thread to protect my peace but I thought I'd share an observation after a weekend spent in London. I've used various forms of transport and moved freely across the breadth of the city and one thing that was noticeable is the lack of people wearing "protective" masks. I spotted maybe a dozen over the course of 48 hours. People seem to be just getting on with life regardless. They maybe taking a few more precautions but certainly nothing obvious.

As a daily London commuter I can give a big +1 to this - asides from the odd person looking up with a suspicious stare at each cough. 

As others have said, there's really little point cancelling events if we're leaving the tube running round with millions each day. I'm confident that the only thing that could risk a cancelled Glastonbury is logistical issues borne out of knock-on effects of Coronavirus, rather than being forced to do so over virus spread fears. Again though - it's the 8th March, if we're in a state at the end of June when Glastonbury is needing to be cancelled, then we'll have much more significant things to worry about than the festival itself. It's going to be fine!

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

The surgical masks you see people wearing in china etc are designed to stop the user spreading stuff and not the other way round. So part of me thinks hopefully we’re just a more sensible and pragmatic nation.... but then you see our supermarkets stripped bare of bog roll and you realise that can’t be the case.

[Crazyfool01]

4 minutes ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

The surgical masks you see people wearing in china etc are designed to stop the user spreading stuff and not the other way round. So part of me thinks hopefully we’re just a more sensible and pragmatic nation.... but then you see our supermarkets stripped bare of bog roll and you realise that can’t be the case.

But that is purely as a result of media / social media ... I suggested the other day that we filled the shelves with the next days delivery which had arrived and was due to be filled over night and people were thinking I was mad and saying it would have a knock on impact ... full shelves to me would have indicated that there was no problem and people could continue as usual ... rapidly emptying shelves /empty ones indicates an issue with supply . 

[Zoo Music Girl]

1 hour ago, plot2pot said:

Just back from Morrisons - they had shit loads of toilet paper (sorry about the pun!) Not a lot of pasta but lots of cream eggs. Didn't check the hand sanitiser (sorry!)

Not sure - maybe we can convince people it's spread by bad smells and they should buy air freshener?

 

This is actually what people used to think in the old days, that disease was spread by foul odours. Before they knew about germs etc. Sorry, I can't be more specific than old days.

Edited March 8, 2020 by Zoo Music Girl

[MrRadioactiveCake]

9 minutes ago, Brownie30 said:

As others have said, there's really little point cancelling events if we're leaving the tube running round with millions each day.

Events such as Glastonbury will have very little impact on the economy or lives of the public if cancelled whereas the tube, train/bus stations, schools etc would be far more disruptive if shut down. There’s a balance between slowing the infection down (to allow the healthcare system to cope) and allowing the economy to function as normally as possible. Mass events will be seen as a luxury and will be top of the list to restict as it’d have a far smaller social-economic impact than closing the tube for example.

[a6l6e6x]

35 minutes ago, Supernintendo Chalmers said:

I've purposely stayed out of this thread to protect my peace but I thought I'd share an observation after a weekend spent in London. I've used various forms of transport and moved freely across the breadth of the city and one thing that was noticeable is the lack of people wearing "protective" masks. I spotted maybe a dozen over the course of 48 hours. People seem to be just getting on with life regardless. They maybe taking a few more precautions but certainly nothing obvious.

I'm not trivialising a clearly very serious situation but some, if not most areas of the media would have us think we're on the brink of the collapse of civilisation as we know it. I'm not entirely sure what my point is but once this situation has resolved itself, the same organisations where the majority of the country sources it's "information" will probably be warning of a critical water shortage due to everyone needing to wash their hands for twenty seconds every time during the Coronavirus crisis. In times like this I'm quick to remind myself that fear, bad news, negativity and pessimism sells newspapers and fuels 24 hour news channel viewing figures. Just look at the political state of the world over the past decade to reinforce that point.

Right now, the festival is going ahead and although I've got zero scientific basis to back any hope up, I still firmly believe it will. Seems to me the only real threat to it is the fear being created by those with a certain agenda.

If anyone needs me, I'll be in the electronica thread planning which of the many micro venues I'll be in at 4am on the Saturday morning of the festival. 

One thing I enjoyed while walking through kings cross this weekend was the huge queue of people waiting for a photo at the platform 9 3/4 bit where they all wear the same scarf over their face

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

8 minutes ago, MrRadioactiveCake said:

Events such as Glastonbury will have very little impact on the economy or lives of the public if cancelled whereas the tube, train/bus stations, schools etc would be far more disruptive if shut down. There’s a balance between slowing the infection down (to allow the healthcare system to cope) and allowing the economy to function as normally as possible. Mass events will be seen as a luxury and will be top of the list to restict as it’d have a far smaller social-economic impact than closing the tube for example.

But multiple experts have said if you cancel big events people will just go to places like the pub instead, where they have a greater chance of infecting people anyway. So cancelling them will do very little, it will just be to show they are doing something rather than it actually helping in the grand scheme of things.

[Ozanne]

14 minutes ago, MrRadioactiveCake said:

Events such as Glastonbury will have very little impact on the economy or lives of the public if cancelled whereas the tube, train/bus stations, schools etc would be far more disruptive if shut down. There’s a balance between slowing the infection down (to allow the healthcare system to cope) and allowing the economy to function as normally as possible. Mass events will be seen as a luxury and will be top of the list to restict as it’d have a far smaller social-economic impact than closing the tube for example.

Yet several Medical experts have said open air gatherings pose a lower risk, especially as those people would go to pubs, clubs etc. The tube also poses a high risk due to the close confines.

[Brownie30]

1 minute ago, MrRadioactiveCake said:

Events such as Glastonbury will have very little impact on the economy or lives of the public if cancelled whereas the tube, train/bus stations, schools etc would be far more disruptive if shut down. There’s a balance between slowing the infection down (to allow the healthcare system to cope) and allowing the economy to function as normally as possible. Mass events will be seen as a luxury and will be top of the list to restict as it’d have a far smaller social-economic impact than closing the tube for example.

I hear you - and what a shame that it's such an acceptable viewpoint for there to be a genuine trade-off between economic performance vs personal health and welfare - money driven policymaking at its peak. Though, I don't necessarily agree that cancelling a 5 day festival would be particularly worthwhile in slowing the infection down, asides from making a point of the authorities being seen to be "doing something". 

Let's say I had an as-yet unsymptomatic and undetected case of Coronavirus, and Glastonbury had been cancelled. This might remove my chance of passing it on in a field, but I'd just cancel the holiday from work and be hopping on the tube the next morning - probably passing it on, but in a different spot. Is this really "halting the spread of the virus"? 

If by June we have 20,000 + serious cases and still spreading, then maybe. But frankly I don't buy this argument of mass events being "luxury items" that should be fair game to cancel when those that 'drive the economy' are free to crack on as normal. If we reach a point in June where Glastonbury and other such large-scale events (Wimbledon etc, I'm looking at you) are at risk of cancellation, then I'd be pretty disappointed in those decision-makers if public transport and schools etc weren't in the firing line too. Cancelling Glastonbury without doing these, for me, would be little more than a PR exercise for the government. Protecting the public in this exceptional scenario should be the prime goal, rather than considering what would be the least economically disruptive option. I'm aware this might be an unpopular opinion which has probably all been said before in the 152 pages here (and I have no intention of running the same debates that have left this page on Hot now for days), but it's just my own reading of the whole current situation. 

[Lycra]

Whilst the world slowly slips into a hysteria of panic over toilet rolls, hand sanitiser and pasta, we had a serenely calm day purchasing potting compost......Safe in the knowledge that the shops will open again tomorrow and, if we run out of toilet paper, there's always The Sun.....just as we did when we were little

[Crazyfool01]

3 minutes ago, Lycra said:

Whilst the world slowly slips into a hysteria of panic over toilet rolls, hand sanitiser and pasta, we had a serenely calm day purchasing potting compost......Safe in the knowledge that the shops will open again tomorrow and, if we run out of toilet paper, there's always The Sun.....just as we did when we were little

As long as you don’t purchase it  

[Matt42]

Was at Tesco earlier and everywhere had ran out of soap. The guy there said it was being restocked and people were queuing to get the restock.

Craziness. 

[efcfanwirral]

15 minutes ago, Brownie30 said:

I hear you - and what a shame that it's such an acceptable viewpoint for there to be a genuine trade-off between economic performance vs personal health and welfare - money driven policymaking at its peak. Though, I don't necessarily agree that cancelling a 5 day festival would be particularly worthwhile in slowing the infection down, asides from making a point of the authorities being seen to be "doing something". 

Let's say I had an as-yet unsymptomatic and undetected case of Coronavirus, and Glastonbury had been cancelled. This might remove my chance of passing it on in a field, but I'd just cancel the holiday from work and be hopping on the tube the next morning - probably passing it on, but in a different spot. Is this really "halting the spread of the virus"? 

If by June we have 20,000 + serious cases and still spreading, then maybe. But frankly I don't buy this argument of mass events being "luxury items" that should be fair game to cancel when those that 'drive the economy' are free to crack on as normal. If we reach a point in June where Glastonbury and other such large-scale events (Wimbledon etc, I'm looking at you) are at risk of cancellation, then I'd be pretty disappointed in those decision-makers if public transport and schools etc weren't in the firing line too. Cancelling Glastonbury without doing these, for me, would be little more than a PR exercise for the government. Protecting the public in this exceptional scenario should be the prime goal, rather than considering what would be the least economically disruptive option. I'm aware this might be an unpopular opinion which has probably all been said before in the 152 pages here (and I have no intention of running the same debates that have left this page on Hot now for days), but it's just my own reading of the whole current situation. 

Not just Glastonbury but all festivals - it'll be a blanket thing not just a Glastonbury PR stunt. Its not just when you're there, it's the travelling. More packed trains, buses, service stations. Add to that unsanitary conditions, and imagine if a wristbander, bar staff, food stall person has it at any of these festivals and has very little symptoms but enough to pass it on. It's such a potential way of spreading it, times however many events. 

The people who get it will likely be fine, but its who they then pass it on to who may not be as strong. And that then puts more pressure on the system, all for something that just isn't necessary.

The responsible thing to do during an outbreak like this is to only make necessary journeys, and a festival isn't one. Some work journeys are and schools could be but not sure either way on that one (older relatives looking after the kids could give a whole new set of issues), hopefully some will be working from home so people can keep distances on public transport (if someone gets on the metrolink in Manchester with it, they'll be pressed up against people so will pass it on for example). 

This isnt aimed at anyone in particular but I think there is very much an attitude around of "the government will tell me what to do and I'll carry on doing these things unless they explicitly tell me not to (then I'll moan about it)" instead of "what can I do to help this situation now". If people had some sort of social responsibility then maybe the quarantines wouldn't be necessary. But the people fleeing Milan last night and people buying trolleys full of toilet roll gives us more of an idea about what to expect from the wider public to be honest....

[Ayrshire Chris]

13 minutes ago, Lycra said:

Whilst the world slowly slips into a hysteria of panic over toilet rolls, hand sanitiser and pasta, we had a serenely calm day purchasing potting compost......Safe in the knowledge that the shops will open again tomorrow and, if we run out of toilet paper, there's always The Sun.....just as we did when we were little

The Sun. not at all informative but very absorbent . On the whole a nasty  vile newspaper, on the hole quite useful! 

[squirrelarmy]

1 minute ago, Ayrshire Chris said:

The Sun. not at all informative but very absorbent . On the whole a nasty  vile newspaper, on the hole quite useful! 

I’d feel dirtier after wiping. 

[DeadAmos]

12 minutes ago, efcfanwirral said:

Not just Glastonbury but all festivals - it'll be a blanket thing not just a Glastonbury PR stunt. Its not just when you're there, it's the travelling. More packed trains, buses, service stations. Add to that unsanitary conditions, and imagine if a wristbander, bar staff, food stall person has it at any of these festivals and has very little symptoms but enough to pass it on. It's such a potential way of spreading it, times however many events. 

The people who get it will likely be fine, but its who they then pass it on to who may not be as strong. And that then puts more pressure on the system, all for something that just isn't necessary.

The responsible thing to do during an outbreak like this is to only make necessary journeys, and a festival isn't one. Some work journeys are and schools could be but not sure either way on that one (older relatives looking after the kids could give a whole new set of issues), hopefully some will be working from home so people can keep distances on public transport (if someone gets on the metrolink in Manchester with it, they'll be pressed up against people so will pass it on for example). 

This isnt aimed at anyone in particular but I think there is very much an attitude around of "the government will tell me what to do and I'll carry on doing these things unless they explicitly tell me not to (then I'll moan about it)" instead of "what can I do to help this situation now". If people had some sort of social responsibility then maybe the quarantines wouldn't be necessary. But the people fleeing Milan last night and people buying trolleys full of toilet roll gives us more of an idea about what to expect from the wider public to be honest....

unsanitary conditions,

I keep seeing this phrase in this thread, yes we might not be able to wash as often as we would like , I'm sure there are millions of people worldwide who would love to live in a place where the toilets are emptied and they have access to fresh clean running water, if it was unsanitary I'm sure the council would of shut it down years ago

[Ozanne]

It isn’t ‘socially irresponsible’ to want Glastonbury to go ahead or attend even if it does. The more irresponsible elements of this are years and years of Austerity based cuts that have left our NHS on the brink of collapse in an emergency. As has been mentioned before if these types of events are cancelled people aren’t going to sit in at home, they’ll still travel around and socialise and spread around anyway.

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

Just now, DeadAmos said:

unsanitary conditions,

I keep seeing this phrase in this thread, yes we might not be able to wash as often as we would like , I'm sure there are millions of people worldwide who would love to live in a place where the toilets are emptied and they have access to fresh clean running water, if it was unsanitary I'm sure the council would of shut it down years ago

Thank you, I kept thinking the same thing. It’s not exactly the slums of India.

[Brownie30]

12 minutes ago, efcfanwirral said:

This isnt aimed at anyone in particular but I think there is very much an attitude around of "the government will tell me what to do and I'll carry on doing these things unless they explicitly tell me not to (then I'll moan about it)" instead of "what can I do to help this situation now". If people had some sort of social responsibility then maybe the quarantines wouldn't be necessary. But the people fleeing Milan last night and people buying trolleys full of toilet roll gives us more of an idea about what to expect from the wider public to be honest....

Whilst I agree with the final sentence of this, I'm not sure that being sceptical of the need to cancel festivals, while there are numerous other places and situations mentioned here where the virus can be passed on too, goes against being socially responsible. Being socially responsible in this case surely means maintaining high personal hygiene, self-isolating if diagnosed or showing symptoms, and following the advice of Public Health England - which so far seems to suggest that cancelling large events isn't necessary. If we reach a stage where it appears necessary to cancel such large-scale events, then I would suspect our confirmed "serious" cases should have to be in their multiple thousands, and I don't think it's unnecessary to assume this would also come alongside a massive curtailment of other forms of spreading, such as through the earlier example of public transport. Sure - festivals would be a large enabler of the virus, but as would hundreds of other activities too.

I'm not questioning the risk of Glastonbury being cancelled, and if it ends up being a necessity then I would make the assumption this has been made directly upon medical and scientific advice - I'm just questioning whether (barring a huge increase in serious cases) it actually would be as useful as numerous other measures too, even though these would be more "economically damaging". 

[Brownie30]

Just now, Ozanne said:

The more irresponsible elements of this are years and years of Austerity based cuts that have left our NHS on the brink of collapse in an emergency. 

^ Nail on the head. 

[lukethekid]

2 hours ago, MrHew said:

My local Waitrose was out of toilet paper and coffee machine filters on Thursday night. 

Waitrose is a proper Tory shop, who even goes to Waitrose apart from them 2 pisshead toffs off Gogglebox.

Edited March 8, 2020 by lukethekid

[stuartbert two hats]

11 minutes ago, Brownie30 said:

^ Nail on the head. 

Nail on a completely different head. "Austerity is/was bad" isn't an answer as to what we should do now.

[MrHew]

3 minutes ago, lukethekid said:

Waitrose is a proper Tory shop, who even goes to Waitrose apart from them 2 loss head toffs off Gogglebox.

Ha. 

Just happens to be the closest supermarket to work so I pop in if we need supplies.