Care homes are staffed by people who are mostly on the lowest bit of the socio economic ladder and who struggle to live on the minimal wage while doing a (often literally) sh1tty job. They thus tend to live in dense households and tend to have multiple jobs (often doing multiple care homes and more normal jobs afterwards) – these factors mean they will be above average virus spreaders. Given that most residents may die of the virus if they get it, and the average stay (in the UK) is 2.5 years, the only solution is for the staff to wear “bio warfare” suits 
because even a single mishap is likely to kill somebody.
As the population ages, there is no simple way to deal with this because the State cannot pay much more money. Already, the assets of the resident are stripped until they are down to some low level.
Unless the staff live in the care homes for the duration of the pandemic I think it’s going to be very hard to keep it out of most of them. I’m sure they will do what they can to prevent infections from spreading but realistically speaking there are limits to what they can do. What is achievable is that the staff should be given proper gowns, masks and gloves just like anybody doing a similar job in the public sector.
On a more aviation-minded note, this has come out recently regarding long-term lung damage after ‘mild’ cases of COVID:
http://divemagazine.co.uk/skills/8907-serious-problems-diving-after-covid19
I wonder whether there will have to be mass screening of pilots following the pandemic before we are allowed to fly again, or whether some more pragmatic ‘test your sats’ advice might suffice?
This is very interesting!
I spoke to a cardiologist who said that provided you pass your medical or, if you need an ECG treadmill for your medical, provided you can pass that, the aviation medical authorities are happy. He said all respiratory diseases do some level of detectable and permanent lung damage.
Of course he cannot predict some reaction we may get from the Part-MED establishment or whatever.
“Mild” in this case means the patient was hospitalised.
There probably are a few steps between “mild illness” and “dead”…
Based on my experience, both FAA Class 2 and EASA Class 1, after ‘normal’ (bacterial, without hospitalisation) pneumonia this was purely a paperwork exercise with the medical notes confirming recovery. No extra tests were required.
For divers it’s similar after any pneumonia because the scar tissue in lungs can be a shunt between venous and arterial circulation, allowing dissolved nitrogen/helium to bypass lungs-filer and to reach brain, expand to bubbles and cause stroke.
1997 posts, including this one. What shall we do to the poster who makes post #2000?
EuroGA t-shirt, mandatory to wear at all fly-ins?
EuroGA face mask? There’s an idea!
My understanding was that the 6 divers had been seen in hospital but not admitted, and that their CT scans were done as favours rather than out of clinical need. But perhaps some of the German speakers here can clarify.
The news from the original article about the divers (at wetnotes.eu) is that these people seemed and felt totally healthy but yet the CT scans showed severe damage. They at least seemed to have had Covid-19 symptoms and hence got tested in the hospital. They did a CT scan because it’s quicker than a PCR test.
For number 2000? Let him or her fix the forum software:
kwlf wrote:
My understanding was that the 6 divers had been seen in hospital but not admitted, and that their CT scans were done as favours rather than out of clinical need. But perhaps some of the German speakers here can clarify.
As far as I understand, CT scans were done to confirm/deny the existence of permanent (or long term) lung injuries. Pulmonary shunts together with PFO are one of the most common causes for DCS type 2 in divers.
