☣ Coronavirus ☣
- Thread starter ibiza77
- Start date
- Status
2H76
Well-Known Member
I'm off to Gibraltar as soon as I can, as a "working" place it doesn't really shut down for tourists so it doesn't matter what time of year you go. If the Skull Bar isn't open, I'll sit outside with a four-pack until they do.
FlatErik
Well-Known Member
Thing is...that's not true. Hospitals are not full. Not even close.
But there is no medical personnel cause when there's one of one department coughing or sneezing they all have to get tested (still PCR) and sometimes a whole team is quarantined for 10-14 days. So there is no medical personnel because of our own rules. We have room and beds but no nurses and doctors.
4tothefloor
Active Member
That is interesting. The reports I read suggested that this happened in wave 1 too. I guess if they dont have the staff, the capacity reduces. To be fair, in the UK the hospitals were never full to capacity, but the big issue here was the refusal to admit the elderly despite this. Re personnel, in the UK the hospital personnel are asked to turn off the track and trace app before work! But as @Hally said, we aren’t seeing personnel being stood down on a large scale due to infection. The PPE must be working here.
Buckley
Well-Known Member
So, considering whether to take the family to Tenerife for Xmas, if the 'non-essential travel' advice is lifted and normal travel insurance is therefore available. Can anyone who has spent more time looking at this comment on their much lower cases per million people? Less testing, more testing? Is the relevant metric actually active cases as a % of the population?
FlatErik
Well-Known Member
I think it's a catch 22 situation.
Hospital staff gets tested because of whatever reason (family member with a cold or whatever), PCR test is positive (still not sure if the person has Covid then) but everyone in his/her team gets send off and has to quarantine for 10 days. Even if it's not ICU personnel, it puts pressure on the entire hospital staff and beds.
This is not just the virus at work, this is the result of our own rules. PCR test positive = quarantine for you and people you worked with.
In March / April, this. was not the case here since we weren't testing...we expanded to 1400 ICU beds for COVID patients. Now they are panicking and looking at Germany for help because we are over 400 ICU cases. Thats 1000 less than in march/april!!
And yeah @stivi I still hold the same view as a few weeks ago. I understand the concerns, but we cannot shut down the entire nation AGAIN for a small bump of new cases. We will keep getting this problem locking down on and off. We haven't even tried really protecting the elderly and vulnerable group and keeping the economy going...we are just trying the same NOT WORKING solution again.
Last edited:
tclubber
Active Member
I trust the numbers, Canary Islands simply have less virus cases. They also have way less Covid deaths per million people than Spain overall (120 vs. 735). And deaths cannot be easily hidden by doing less testing.
I wouldn't be too much concerned about the covid incidence rate as a tourist anyway, because the virus mostly spreads among the local population. And let's face it, as a tourist, you have very little interaction with the locals. You don't go to indoor parties/family meets with the locals, your kids don't go to school with them, you don't go to work with them. Just avoid being indoors with many other people (not difficult in the Canaries even in winter), I think you should be fine then.
2H76
Well-Known Member
Wouldn't countries sharing borders with others in the EU normally transfer patients across borders when they find it convenient? Example, if you were a heart or cancer (or whatever) patient in Heerlen in the NL, and the nearest specialist unit was in Aachen (D) just across the border, it would defy logic to send them further in an emergency just to be in the same country.
So what is the solution then? Ignore the test or don't do it all, and simply hope that the medical staff don't have the virus??
I think in doing so, you would turn hospital wards into mortuaries. These other diseases, conditions and ailments that you are concerned about, they're not going to end well with Covid on top
FlatErik
Well-Known Member
I don't have the solution. Just saying it's a catch 22. We need better trustworthy tests instead of the PCR that shows a major false positive percentage, that's the only solution I can think of right now. If we had a better trustworthy test we would have enough staff and no semi-lockdown and moving patients around.
I am not sure what you claim it is that I keep talking about. I am talking about healthcare in a broader perspective, not just the tunnel vision on covid i.e. positive PCR tests.
So it would be fair to say, that at the moment, the best solution would be not to further risk the health of vulnerable hospital admissions and err on the side of caution
Whether it's a lack of trained staff or a lack of beds, a lack of capacity amounts to the same thing
Whether it's a lack of trained staff or a lack of beds, a lack of capacity amounts to the same thing
FlatErik
Well-Known Member
The difference with march/april is...we had a whole freaking summer to prepare in terms of staff, emergency hospitals etc.
We did nothing. Not national, not in EU cooperation.
Now the same sectors must suffer again with the same solution that didn't work. Lockdowns is just stalling and postponing death rates.
I think it's crazy that most people here don't agree with this logic:
You have a risk group (let's say 80+ or people with underlying conditions) and you have a non-risk group.
If you keep mixing those groups up in between lockdowns...wouldn't you agree it's just postponing the inevitable?
Really dividing those groups until there's a vaccin for that risk group (1% of society) is way more logical and less damaging for the far larger non-risk group (99%).
And how do you care for people who are 80+ or have serious illness? Or do you mean just put them all together with no care and let them die?
I think I saw something that reckoned you would need about 4M-5M people to isolate to ‘protect the vulnerable’ in terms of the actual vulnerable and the carers Supporting them.
I think I saw something that reckoned you would need about 4M-5M people to isolate to ‘protect the vulnerable’ in terms of the actual vulnerable and the carers Supporting them.
In the UK our health service is criminally underfunded and overstretched at the best of times. Of course that stinks.
I agree with the logic, if it was a simple of case of theoretically saving people.
My issue with it, is that from my own experience in caring for my relatively independent, lucid and mobile 83 yo grandfather, it won't work. Additionally I don't think it's humane to lock these citizens up any further than they already have been. My grandfather hasn't left his house since March. Fortunately he is happy enough, though he does get lonely. Many others will not be faring so well
And then we come to the issue that the virus is still going to penetrate - as has been shown, despite the best efforts of care homes.
Every person who needs care relies on multiple people, each of whom will have their own families, with their own interactions at school and work. Tell me how this would work in practice
I agree with the logic, if it was a simple of case of theoretically saving people.
My issue with it, is that from my own experience in caring for my relatively independent, lucid and mobile 83 yo grandfather, it won't work. Additionally I don't think it's humane to lock these citizens up any further than they already have been. My grandfather hasn't left his house since March. Fortunately he is happy enough, though he does get lonely. Many others will not be faring so well
And then we come to the issue that the virus is still going to penetrate - as has been shown, despite the best efforts of care homes.
Every person who needs care relies on multiple people, each of whom will have their own families, with their own interactions at school and work. Tell me how this would work in practice
FlatErik
Well-Known Member
I care for people who are 80+ but if you're saying you want to save all of them from dying.....we and them should stay inside forever.
Do you know what the average life expectancy in the world is? https://ourworldindata.org/life-expectancy
So you don’t really believe in protect the vulnerable then? You ignored my post asking how exactly you would do that
FlatErik
Well-Known Member
I do. By seperating them until there's a vaccin.
They need care so we need solid testing for care staff.
Make everyone a 'volunteer' to do shopping for the elderly.
Keep them seperated from the non-risk group as much and long as possible. Let them take the vaccin and let the young build up herd immunity.
MrHullMysterious
Well-Known Member
??
Buying people shopping isn’t ‘care’ - what about those with disabilities, those that cannot dress, shower, bath etc. You need carers to then also fully isolate with them to be able to care otherwise you risk infection when they are not working
- Status