Most at risk
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavir...rds-chefs-and-
taxi-drivers-among-those-most-likely-to-die-with-covid-19-says-ons- 11986382 -- Roland Perry |
Most at risk
"Roland Perry" wrote in message ... https://news.sky.com/story/coronavir...rds-chefs-and- taxi-drivers-among-those-most-likely-to-die-with-covid-19-says-ons- 11986382 and to solve anther conundrum it also says that medics have the same likelihood of the disease as normal people, even after taking account of age profiles But care workers are worse https://www.independent.co.uk/news/h...-a9508091.html tim |
Most at risk
In message , at 14:32:42 on Mon, 11 May
2020, tim... remarked: "Roland Perry" wrote in message ... https://news.sky.com/story/coronavir...rds-chefs-and- taxi-drivers-among-those-most-likely-to-die-with-covid-19-says-ons- 11986382 and to solve anther conundrum it also says that medics have the same likelihood of the disease as normal people, even after taking account of age profiles That statistic has been circulating for a couple of weeks now. Whatever the genetic reasons turn out to be (maybe they'll publish it one day), and every death is a tragedy, the early news did tend to concentrate on demised older BAME NHS workers. But care workers are worse https://www.independent.co.uk/news/h...ocial-care-dea th-rate-ons-covid-19-a9508091.html Maybe they are more likely to be encountering infected patients (although the NHS has scaled back a lot, they are still treating lots of younger people - for other ailments, and who have probably been self isolating themselves previously - and who aren't infected). -- Roland Perry |
Most at risk
Roland Perry wrote:
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavir...rds-chefs-and- taxi-drivers-among-those-most-likely-to-die-with-covid-19-says-ons- 11986382 I'm not surprised by the care workers, because they're less likely to have good PPE, more likely to be on zero hours contracts (and therefore less likely to be tested or hospitalised if they feel unwell) and, of course, much more likely to be in contact with virus-infected patients than most NHS staff. But I hadn't thought of security guards being in a high risk occupation. |
Most at risk
In message , at 15:25:12 on Mon, 11 May
2020, Recliner remarked: https://news.sky.com/story/coronavir...rds-chefs-and- taxi-drivers-among-those-most-likely-to-die-with-covid-19-says-ons- 11986382 I'm not surprised by the care workers, because they're less likely to have good PPE, more likely to be on zero hours contracts (and therefore less likely to be tested or hospitalised if they feel unwell) and, of course, much more likely to be in contact with virus-infected patients than most NHS staff. But I hadn't thought of security guards being in a high risk occupation. That's just because of being in contact with lots of different people I think. When I went shopping last week it occurred to me that the chap I most needed to avoid was the one at the door enforcing the "one out, one in" policy". He wasn't social distancing, and had said exchanged a few words with every entering and departing customer. -- Roland Perry |
Most at risk
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 15:25:12 on Mon, 11 May 2020, Recliner remarked: https://news.sky.com/story/coronavir...rds-chefs-and- taxi-drivers-among-those-most-likely-to-die-with-covid-19-says-ons- 11986382 I'm not surprised by the care workers, because they're less likely to have good PPE, more likely to be on zero hours contracts (and therefore less likely to be tested or hospitalised if they feel unwell) and, of course, much more likely to be in contact with virus-infected patients than most NHS staff. But I hadn't thought of security guards being in a high risk occupation. That's just because of being in contact with lots of different people I think. When I went shopping last week it occurred to me that the chap I most needed to avoid was the one at the door enforcing the "one out, one in" policy". He wasn't social distancing, and had said exchanged a few words with every entering and departing customer. Yes, that's probably it. At Waitrose, I've seen security staff wearing gloves, masks and face shields, which seems wise. Other supermarkets' staff seem to be less well protected. |
Most at risk
In message , at 16:04:20 on Mon, 11 May
2020, Recliner remarked: Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 15:25:12 on Mon, 11 May 2020, Recliner remarked: https://news.sky.com/story/coronavir...rds-chefs-and- taxi-drivers-among-those-most-likely-to-die-with-covid-19-says-ons- 11986382 I'm not surprised by the care workers, because they're less likely to have good PPE, more likely to be on zero hours contracts (and therefore less likely to be tested or hospitalised if they feel unwell) and, of course, much more likely to be in contact with virus-infected patients than most NHS staff. But I hadn't thought of security guards being in a high risk occupation. That's just because of being in contact with lots of different people I think. When I went shopping last week it occurred to me that the chap I most needed to avoid was the one at the door enforcing the "one out, one in" policy". He wasn't social distancing, and had said exchanged a few words with every entering and departing customer. Yes, that's probably it. At Waitrose, I've seen security staff wearing gloves, masks and face shields, which seems wise. Other supermarkets' staff seem to be less well protected. And yet Screwfix security staff on day 1 of the lockdown were keeping their distance from the (click and collect only) queue they were policing. -- Roland Perry |
Most at risk
On 11/05/2020 16:25, Recliner wrote:
Roland Perry wrote: https://news.sky.com/story/coronavir...rds-chefs-and- taxi-drivers-among-those-most-likely-to-die-with-covid-19-says-ons- 11986382 I'm not surprised by the care workers, because they're less likely to have good PPE, more likely to be on zero hours contracts (and therefore less likely to be tested or hospitalised if they feel unwell) and, of course, much more likely to be in contact with virus-infected patients than most NHS staff. But I hadn't thought of security guards being in a high risk occupation. I'd have thought the vast majority (maybe 90%) of NHS staff would not be working day in, day out with covid-19 patients (why? well, at the peak there were something like 20,000 in hospital at once - a 1:1 staff ratio giving 24/7 coverage would mean something like 100,000 staff on the basis of a 35 hour week. That wouldn't mean 1 person looking after 1 patient, more 0.5 nurses, 0.1 consultants, 0.1 porters and so on. The NHS has 1.3M employees or something). Therefore any variance of death rate could be lost in the statistical noise. If a care home has a covid-19 case, then there's every chance (care home residents tend to wander a lot more around the entire home, and most covid-19 patients in hospital tend to turn up once symptomatic vs care home residents who will be there when asymptomatic and therefore people don't know they need to take infection control precautions) a decent proportion of the staff could be exposed, and given 30% or something of care homes have cases then that's far more likely to lead to statistically relevant differences. |
Most at risk
Recliner wrote:
Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 15:25:12 on Mon, 11 May 2020, Recliner remarked: https://news.sky.com/story/coronavir...ards-chefs-and - taxi-drivers-among-those-most-likely-to-die-with-covid-19-says-ons- 11986382 I'm not surprised by the care workers, because they're less likely to have good PPE, more likely to be on zero hours contracts (and therefore less likely to be tested or hospitalised if they feel unwell) and, of course, much more likely to be in contact with virus-infected patients than most NHS staff. But I hadn't thought of security guards being in a high risk occupation. That's just because of being in contact with lots of different people I think. When I went shopping last week it occurred to me that the chap I most needed to avoid was the one at the door enforcing the "one out, one in" policy". He wasn't social distancing, and had said exchanged a few words with every entering and departing customer. Yes, that's probably it. At Waitrose, I've seen security staff wearing gloves, masks and face shields, which seems wise. Other supermarkets' staff seem to be less well protected. But certainly not every Waitrose ... no gloves, masks or face shields at Waitrose near me. |
Most at risk
"Roland Perry" wrote in message ... In message , at 14:32:42 on Mon, 11 May 2020, tim... remarked: "Roland Perry" wrote in message ... https://news.sky.com/story/coronavir...rds-chefs-and- taxi-drivers-among-those-most-likely-to-die-with-covid-19-says-ons- 11986382 and to solve anther conundrum it also says that medics have the same likelihood of the disease as normal people, even after taking account of age profiles That statistic has been circulating for a couple of weeks now. but without the age correlation Whatever the genetic reasons turn out to be (maybe they'll publish it one day), and every death is a tragedy, the early news did tend to concentrate on demised older BAME NHS workers. But care workers are worse https://www.independent.co.uk/news/h...ocial-care-dea th-rate-ons-covid-19-a9508091.html Maybe they are more likely to be encountering infected patients without sufficient PPE probably being the salient point tim |
Most at risk
Someone Somewhere wrote:
On 11/05/2020 16:25, Recliner wrote: Roland Perry wrote: https://news.sky.com/story/coronavir...rds-chefs-and- taxi-drivers-among-those-most-likely-to-die-with-covid-19-says-ons- 11986382 I'm not surprised by the care workers, because they're less likely to have good PPE, more likely to be on zero hours contracts (and therefore less likely to be tested or hospitalised if they feel unwell) and, of course, much more likely to be in contact with virus-infected patients than most NHS staff. But I hadn't thought of security guards being in a high risk occupation. I'd have thought the vast majority (maybe 90%) of NHS staff would not be working day in, day out with covid-19 patients (why? well, at the peak there were something like 20,000 in hospital at once - a 1:1 staff ratio giving 24/7 coverage would mean something like 100,000 staff on the basis of a 35 hour week. That wouldn't mean 1 person looking after 1 patient, more 0.5 nurses, 0.1 consultants, 0.1 porters and so on. The NHS has 1.3M employees or something). Therefore any variance of death rate could be lost in the statistical noise. Yes, that's a very good point, which helps explain the gap between the higher reported death rates of front-line NHS staff and the overall NHS staff death rate. If a care home has a covid-19 case, then there's every chance (care home residents tend to wander a lot more around the entire home, and most covid-19 patients in hospital tend to turn up once symptomatic vs care home residents who will be there when asymptomatic and therefore people don't know they need to take infection control precautions) a decent proportion of the staff could be exposed, and given 30% or something of care homes have cases then that's far more likely to lead to statistically relevant differences. Yes, and furthermore, care homes employ many agency staff, who routinely work in more than one home and therefore are at even more risk of ecposure. |
Most at risk
In message , at 20:57:50 on Mon, 11 May
2020, tim... remarked: https://news.sky.com/story/coronavir...rds-chefs-and- taxi-drivers-among-those-most-likely-to-die-with-covid-19-says-ons- 11986382 and to solve anther conundrum it also says that medics have the same likelihood of the disease as normal people, even after taking account of age profiles That statistic has been circulating for a couple of weeks now. but without the age correlation No, with the age correlation. -- Roland Perry |
Most at risk
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 20:57:50 on Mon, 11 May 2020, tim... remarked: https://news.sky.com/story/coronavir...rds-chefs-and- taxi-drivers-among-those-most-likely-to-die-with-covid-19-says-ons- 11986382 and to solve anther conundrum it also says that medics have the same likelihood of the disease as normal people, even after taking account of age profiles That statistic has been circulating for a couple of weeks now. but without the age correlation No, with the age correlation. Yes, indeed. Allowing for all the demographic adjustments, NHS staff as a whole are not succumbing at an unduly high rate, though care home staff are. What I've not seen analysed is how ICU and other front-line NHS staff in Covid-19 wards are faring. |
Most at risk
On Mon, 11 May 2020 19:05:21 +0000 (UTC), "David Jones"
wrote: Recliner wrote: Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 15:25:12 on Mon, 11 May 2020, Recliner remarked: https://news.sky.com/story/coronavir...ards-chefs-and - taxi-drivers-among-those-most-likely-to-die-with-covid-19-says-ons- 11986382 I'm not surprised by the care workers, because they're less likely to have good PPE, more likely to be on zero hours contracts (and therefore less likely to be tested or hospitalised if they feel unwell) and, of course, much more likely to be in contact with virus-infected patients than most NHS staff. But I hadn't thought of security guards being in a high risk occupation. That's just because of being in contact with lots of different people I think. When I went shopping last week it occurred to me that the chap I most needed to avoid was the one at the door enforcing the "one out, one in" policy". He wasn't social distancing, and had said exchanged a few words with every entering and departing customer. Yes, that's probably it. At Waitrose, I've seen security staff wearing gloves, masks and face shields, which seems wise. Other supermarkets' staff seem to be less well protected. But certainly not every Waitrose ... no gloves, masks or face shields at Waitrose near me. I think it's optional: some staff choose to wear it, some don't. But I'd expect all Waitrose branches to be supplied with them. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 09:20 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk