View Full Version : The Covid19 thread
svenrico
14-06-21, 08:57 PM
Yep. And we should have shut the borders long ago.
Sent from my F5321 using Tapatalk
Hear, hear.
Yep. And we should have shut the borders long ago.
Sent from my F5321 using Tapatalk
about 16 months ago . . . .
But unfortunately the Clowns in charge don't think this is appropriate. The same as addressing the HoP before Publicly announcing something, or consulting the House before Announcing something . . . . . you know, things they agreed to do months ago before implementing any changes.
They gave themselves emergency powers. Just keep an eye on how reluctant they are to give them up when the real emergency is over, and whether they start "mission creep", using the powers to do stuff it was never intended to cover. Having got used to the unchallenged ability to just do stuff they'll say they see no reason to revert to the democratic ways, just so much quicker and easier to do what they want. It's the thin end of the authoritarian or even totalitarian wedge. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Totalitarianism
Don't trust them an inch.
dizzyblonde
16-06-21, 10:04 PM
I could see it two months ago, that the future of June would be far from 'freedom'.
When the government gave dates for both
May and June as 'subject to review' was the great big obvious clue.
clear, concise description of the arrival of the "delta" variant by Ros Atkins (BBC):
https://twitter.com/i/status/1405615466844983298
so restrictions to be lifted on the 19th of this month. what the gov are really saying is that there is nothing more we can do and we are turning to herd immunity to cure the problem.
essentially, yes. A large proportion has now been vaccinated, and it's a Virus that will have to be lived with. The only way to do that is to see how society performs and how things go.
SV650rules
09-07-21, 11:15 AM
essentially, yes. A large proportion has now been vaccinated, and it's a Virus that will have to be lived with. The only way to do that is to see how society performs and how things go.
As Sajid Javid said ' we are going to have to learn to live with this virus'..
It will be treated like annual influenza where we will be offered a 'guess the variant' vaccine cocktail of 3 of 4 variants starting in Autumn, none of which are the right ones... In an average year 20 to 25,000 succumb to influenza despite the vaccinations, and as with covid they are the people who already have many underlying chronic health issues and those with dysfunctional immune systems. Maybe influenza deaths in next few years will be very low because covid has taken its place for last 18 months and reduced the pool of vulnerable people. Many vulnerable people also been saved in previous years by influenza vaccines, but they were helpless in the face of the new covid virus and succumbed quickly. We have to face the fact that some people are already in chronic ill health, kept alive by constant ministrations of NHS, but in the face of a virulent new virus could not really be protected fully.
Alternative is to cower in the cellar for years to come....
Biker Biggles
09-07-21, 12:19 PM
There is a pressure group known as "lockdown sceptics" who have been opposed to all restictions,mask wearing,school closures,social distancing and travel bans since it all began and they have been quite good at producing data to support their case. They have IMO also been wrong most of that time but,just like King Canute, their tide will eventually come in and they will be able to say,"Look we dont need any of this", and pretend they were right all along. My hope is that the vaccination program will be the factor that changes everything and that it will continue to work well including against current and future new variants. Given how well they are doing now,Im quite optimistic for the future.
Another 8 mins of Ros Atkins, this time about the issues with a July 19 covid rules relaxation:
https://twitter.com/i/status/1413219167130509314
SV650rules
09-07-21, 08:22 PM
Infection rates are high ( big clue, massive amounts of tests being carried of ) but are not resulting in hospitalization or death ( 24 deaths in last 24 hours ). All the people at high risk have had two doses of vaccine.
We are going to have to learn to live with this virus, come out of the cellar and carry on with life.... there have been many casualties covid, but not from the virus, from the cessation of normal life that was caused by lockdown. Sweden may have not done better this UK, but certainly no worse...
svenrico
10-07-21, 11:41 AM
Keep wearing a face mask, social distancing, using hand sanitiser or whatever , if you think it necessary and where you can. People don't have to abandon every precaution, there is still some choice.
Adam Ef
10-07-21, 12:01 PM
It's other peoples choices that will affect some of us. If you're working in retail / service then you can't avoid morons. We have so many people ducking under our barrier that says to stay at the door and coming into our workhop space (which they're not meant to anytime) saying "it's ok, I've been jabbed". Great for them, but not all our staff have yet.
NE Lincs is currently #2 in England for high virus rates and our local MP came on BBC's Look North to explain that, because there were only 6 people in our hospitals with covid, he was "content" that the relaxation plan was correct and should go ahead.
I emailed him (of course), explained he was guilty of a malapropism and the word he was looking for was "complacent".
I also emailed Look North and explained that since Martin Vickers MP always votes along party lines, his attitude was no surprise; he's just a yes man.
Well, this is working out well so far:
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/travel-testing-policy-chaos-cost-195135426.html
SV650rules
10-07-21, 02:46 PM
NE Lincs is currently #2 in England for high virus rates and our local MP came on BBC's Look North to explain that, because there were only 6 people in our hospitals with covid, he was "content" that the relaxation plan was correct and should go ahead.
I emailed him (of course), explained he was guilty of a malapropism and the word he was looking for was "complacent".
I also emailed Look North and explained that since Martin Vickers MP always votes along party lines, his attitude was no surprise; he's just a yes man.
You cannot stop the whole country for a few people in hospital, there have been no deaths in Shrophire for ages now, and very few in hospital - all the vulnerable have been vaccinated, the younger ones will get it, shake it off and have natural immunity, which is better than synthetic immunity. We need to stop cowing in the cellar and get on with things..
You cannot stop the whole country for a few people in hospital, there have been no deaths in Shrophire for ages now, and very few in hospital - all the vulnerable have been vaccinated, the younger ones will get it, shake it off and have natural immunity, which is better than synthetic immunity. We need to stop cowing in the cellar and get on with things..
I have no problem with relaxing the rules if done prudently but pretending that the exponential explosion of case rates in parts of the country does not exist is not being prudent.
To listen to the government, if we don't do it now we're all doomed and we'll live in masks and be socially isolated forever. If the vaccines are working so well, why not wait until most people are vaccinated? Since we were told that wearing masks protects other people and not necessarily yourself - allowing it to be voluntary means they will become worthless if a large number refuse to wear them.
Other countries are looking at us as a test case, a lab experiment to see what happens and the WHO has suggested a more cautious approach would be wise. This is a political decision rather than a scientific decision.
The government said that they expect people to use their common sense forgetting that it's the same people that voted them in - common sense is in short supply.
I have no problem with relaxing the rules if done prudently but pretending that the exponential explosion of case rates in parts of the country does not exist is not being prudent.
To listen to the government, if we don't do it now we're all doomed and we'll live in masks and be socially isolated forever. If the vaccines are working so well, why not wait until most people are vaccinated? Since we were told that wearing masks protects other people and not necessarily yourself - allowing it to be voluntary means they will become worthless if a large number refuse to wear them.
Other countries are looking at us as a test case, a lab experiment to see what happens and the WHO has suggested a more cautious approach would be wise. This is a political decision rather than a scientific decision.
The government said that they expect people to use their common sense forgetting that it's the same people that voted them in - common sense is in short supply.
How did spreads happen during lockdown & times of social distancing and household bubbles? People breaking the rules. There are people in society who will do what they want, regardless.
We 'survived' the first wave when very little was known about it, and what to do. And the subsequent waves after where we now have more information about it, better safety in place and a lot of vaccinated people too.
Not everyone is going to go out to a Nightclub and getting as close to everyone as possible, and the same for the Football.
This is our removing the sticking plaster moment to see what happens in society when a lot of Government guidance/mandated rules are removed.
I don't think anyone is under the illusion that this is the end and we made it.
There will still be restrictions of sorts in all places of society, and if the figures very quickly go the other way other will be bought back in too - including local & national lockdowns.
svenrico
10-07-21, 11:43 PM
It's other peoples choices that will affect some of us. If you're working in retail / service then you can't avoid morons. We have so many people ducking under our barrier that says to stay at the door and coming into our workhop space (which they're not meant to anytime) saying "it's ok, I've been jabbed". Great for them, but not all our staff have yet.
My son worked in retail and became exasperated because management would not enforce the rules.
according to some of the symptoms (cant taste or smell nowt with a bit of a cold and sore throat) i have had covid twice. once right at the begging of it all and again around January.
SV650rules
11-07-21, 10:39 AM
I have no problem with relaxing the rules if done prudently but pretending that the exponential explosion of case rates in parts of the country does not exist is not being prudent..
Read previous posts, plenty of 'cases' ( found due to massive testing, but no serious symptoms ) but very, very few hospitalisations or deaths. The link between an infection and serious illness is broken. Hopefully ( and it seems certain ) that cases of an already seriously chronically ill person over 80 getting a sniff of the virus and keeling over are long gone. younger people may get symptoms but 99.9% hardly get sick and certainly won't 'overwhelm the NHS' which appeared to be the governments main aim in previous lockdowns, and there was me thinking the NHS was there to protect us....:confused:
We are yet to find out how many 'lockdown casualties' will be appearing, a couple of older people I know who were out and about before lockdowns are in worse health now, one bloke aged 80 used to go out 2 or 3 times a week on the bus to see his mates for coffee in local town, he used to walk around to local mates for a chat, during lockdowns he was basically housebound and it has taken its toll, he is now in a care home, having lost a lot of use of his legs ( due to not getting out ) and I don't think he will get back to his previous mobility level. Factor in the fact that pretty much all diagnosis and treatments for diseases like cancer and daibetes ahve been closed, as well as GP's 'hiding' and unavailable and the fallout from lockdowns is gonna become clear in coming years, and arguably many more will die from lockdowns than from the virus itself.
We are yet to find out how many 'lockdown casualties' will be appearing, a couple of older people I know who were out and about before lockdowns are in worse health now, one bloke aged 80 used to go out 2 or 3 times a week on the bus to see his mates for coffee in local town, he used to walk around to local mates for a chat, during lockdowns he was basically housebound and it has taken its toll, he is now in a care home, having lost a lot of use of his legs ( due to not getting out ) and I don't think he will get back to his previous mobility level. Factor in the fact that pretty much all diagnosis and treatments for diseases like cancer and daibetes ahve been closed, as well as GP's 'hiding' and unavailable and the fallout from lockdowns is gonna become clear in coming years, and arguably many more will die from lockdowns than from the virus itself.
The fall out (subsequent Hospitalisations/deaths) from people not being able to get early diagnosis, Cancer treatments, or other medical appointments will dwarf the Covid numbers (the ones who were 'saved' and those who succumbed to it) in the coming few years.
My local GP surgery (bear in mind i have access to 3 of them, under the same group) are still not having any face to face appointments. Which is ludicrous for the large area they cover.
svenrico
12-07-21, 02:12 PM
The fall out (subsequent Hospitalisations/deaths) from people not being able to get early diagnosis, Cancer treatments, or other medical appointments will dwarf the Covid numbers (the ones who were 'saved' and those who succumbed to it) in the coming few years.
My local GP surgery (bear in mind i have access to 3 of them, under the same group) are still not having any face to face appointments. Which is ludicrous for the large area they cover.
I received a letter saying the doctors at my surgery would in future be able to discuss more than one medical condition of the patient at a review. I wonder what genius thought that that one up ! I still only saw a nurse at my annual review though, or maybe that's what's supposed to happen.
daktulos
12-07-21, 02:48 PM
I received a letter saying the doctors at my surgery would in future be able to discuss more than one medical condition of the patient at a review. I wonder what genius thought that that one up ! I still only saw a nurse at my annual review though, or maybe that's what's supposed to happen.
We've not been able to talk about two things in an appointment for as long as I can remember - I think it's just to try and keep to schedule.
While it's not all good news, my wife (who has put her back out) has had a result with our GP. Rather than calling up in the morning and trying to get an emergency appointment in the surgery, take time off work to go and sit in the waiting room surrounded by sick people, she put a request in through the website, was sent a 15 minute phone appointment slot and had her prescription sent straight to the pharmacy after it.
They've had the technology for years, why has it taken COVID to make such obvious improvements?
I think we've made it! NE Lincs virus cases now at 930 per 100k and I think that makes us #1 in England, 12 July 2021.
♪♪ NE Lincs is #1, NE Lincs is #1 ♪♪...oh wait :(
"Cleethorpes, plague capital of England"
svenrico
12-07-21, 10:23 PM
I think we've made it! NE Lincs virus cases now at 930 per 100k and I think that makes us #1 in England, 12 July 2021.
♪♪ NE Lincs is #1, NE Lincs is #1 ♪♪...oh wait :(
"Cleethorpes, plague capital of England"
Will I be ok for the sidecar meeting at Cadwell Park ?!
Will I be ok for the sidecar meeting at Cadwell Park ?!
Yes, they're in East Lindsey only 270 cases per 100k.
If you have to drive through NE Lincs keep your windows closed, "air" set to recycle. If you hear a bell and a plaintive "bring out yer dead" do not stop for a selfie ;) ... The plague carts are back in the depot by 8am. :)
Do not forget that my MP says he's content so you'll be safe. (well, possibly safe... I mean are any of us truly safe?).
If you're on a bike from the north you'd have to approach via North Lincs to West Lindsey for safety's sake.
update: NE Lincs is only #2 not #1 for virus cases, we were beaten by Sth Tyneside, we need to up our game - and I had all the posters printed too.
svenrico
14-07-21, 10:33 PM
Yes, they're in East Lindsey only 270 cases per 100k.
If you have to drive through NE Lincs keep your windows closed, "air" set to recycle. If you hear a bell and a plaintive "bring out yer dead" do not stop for a selfie ;) ... The plague carts are back in the depot by 8am. :)
Do not forget that my MP says he's content so you'll be safe. (well, possibly safe... I mean are any of us truly safe?).
If you're on a bike from the north you'd have to approach via North Lincs to West Lindsey for safety's sake.
update: NE Lincs is only #2 not #1 for virus cases, we were beaten by Sth Tyneside, we need to up our game - and I had all the posters printed too.
Should be ok then, I've never really noticed anywhere much to stop at between the Humber Bridge and Cadwell Park anyway ! There is a BP, I think it is ,service station near a roundabout ,but apart from that a straight run through . :)
I'm a cautious person; risk averse. So statements like this make me nervous:
"The UK's decision to end most Covid restrictions on 19 July poses "a danger to the world", an international group of scientists has warned.
The group, which includes official government advisers to countries including Italy and Australia, says the government is pursuing herd immunity by mass infection."
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/coronavirus-news-live-covid-vaccines-b1885144.html
Maybe the Independent is left of centre and thus not aligned with the Prime Moron's message? Let's see what the Daily Mail says:
"Britain WILL 'of course' face a new lockdown if Covid third wave hits 'unacceptable' levels of hospitalisation, minister warns as Whitty admits UK may have to consider new restrictions within weeks"
(The Daily Express headlines are about farming - they're still on about Brexit)
...Back with the Mail. Since virus cases are accelerating the Mail is concerned about the NHS (Serco's) app since it appears to be on track to ping everyone in the country:
"Will 'pingdemic' paralyse Britain? Bosses warn factories will shut, food could run out, hospitals cancel holidays and 1.6MILLION people in a week are told to isolate - but ministers still REFUSE to back down over app chaos"
As far as I can tell, they want the app to be desensitised which is akin (imho) to disabling the smoke detector in your house.
My old roommate in the US said that if something doesn't make sense, a piece of the puzzle is missing. So, if the medical professionals say that "Tory Death Cull Day" July 19th is a bad idea, scientists in the UK and abroad say it's a bad idea, why are we doing it? The number of second dose vaccinated people is about 65% - why not wait till that's 85%?
svenrico
16-07-21, 12:11 PM
I'm a cautious person; risk averse. So statements like this make me nervous:
"The UK's decision to end most Covid restrictions on 19 July poses "a danger to the world", an international group of scientists has warned.
The group, which includes official government advisers to countries including Italy and Australia, says the government is pursuing herd immunity by mass infection."
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/coronavirus-news-live-covid-vaccines-b1885144.html
Maybe the Independent is left of centre and thus not aligned with the Prime Moron's message? Let's see what the Daily Mail says:
"Britain WILL 'of course' face a new lockdown if Covid third wave hits 'unacceptable' levels of hospitalisation, minister warns as Whitty admits UK may have to consider new restrictions within weeks"
(The Daily Express headlines are about farming - they're still on about Brexit)
...Back with the Mail. Since virus cases are accelerating the Mail is concerned about the NHS (Serco's) app since it appears to be on track to ping everyone in the country:
"Will 'pingdemic' paralyse Britain? Bosses warn factories will shut, food could run out, hospitals cancel holidays and 1.6MILLION people in a week are told to isolate - but ministers still REFUSE to back down over app chaos"
As far as I can tell, they want the app to be desensitised which is akin (imho) to disabling the smoke detector in your house.
My old roommate in the US said that if something doesn't make sense, a piece of the puzzle is missing. So, if the medical professionals say that "Tory Death Cull Day" July 19th is a bad idea, scientists in the UK and abroad say it's a bad idea, why are we doing it? The number of second dose vaccinated people is about 65% - why not wait till that's 85%?
The usual c*ck ups. They didn't have to abandon all restrictions at once.
Not surprised some are still on about Brexit, it will be ongoing for years, nobody ever did really know what the consequences were going to be.
SV650rules
16-07-21, 12:43 PM
Well the usual bunch of tame scientists have been proved wrong ( wrong by several orders of magnitude ) with their forecasts since March 2020, Sweden which did not lock down had lower peaks than us in 'the waves' and is about the same as us now with hospitalisation and deaths... did the lockdowns do any good or merely prolong the length of the virus reign and allow more mutations ? We will never reach a stage of zero deaths ( or zero carbon either ) - both are targets that will not ( cnnot ) be met, so why not man up, come out of the cellar, take the tin hat off and carry on and see what happens rather than predicting all kinds of nightmares ( like Brexit project fear all over again ).
'Fear knocked on the door, courage opened the door - and there was nothing there'.... ( Martin Luther King ).
....'Fear knocked on the door, courage opened the door - and there was nothing there'.... ( Martin Luther King ).
..... and then someone shot him. :cry:
Craig380
16-07-21, 08:30 PM
I'll just leave this here: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jul/16/englands-covid-unlocking-a-threat-to-the-world-experts-say
garynortheast
16-07-21, 09:42 PM
I'll just leave this here: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jul/16/englands-covid-unlocking-a-threat-to-the-world-experts-say
I was reading that earlier today Craig. Very worrying.
( like Brexit project fear all over again ).
I don't think that helps your argument given many of the "fears" coming true. :(
Meanwhile, a new player is entering (re-entering?) the game: Beta variant. (aka Sth African variant).
https://www.yahoo.com/news/holidays-france-thrown-chaos-fully-181959015.html
and there's this: https://uk.news.yahoo.com/netherlands-unprecedented-surge-covid-cases-134633070.html
BoltonSte
17-07-21, 08:53 AM
Maybe the restrictions get lifted, everyone gets pinged by T&T and we have a 10 day lockdown without it actually being a lockdown?
Maybe the restrictions get lifted, everyone gets pinged by T&T and we have a 10 day lockdown without it actually being a lockdown?
... and when the economy collapses, the government can turn around and say that we didn't listen to their instructions.
It's brilliant, in a Machiavellian kind of way. ;)
svenrico
17-07-21, 12:40 PM
I don't think that helps your argument given many of the "fears" coming true. :
Exactly.
I don't understand:
Nightclubs - why do they become dangerous in September? Visiting one now is ok, but 2 jabs needed (with proof) in September. Is that when the new variant is scheduled for release? (trying my hand at conspiracy thinking).
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-57893788
garynortheast
20-07-21, 07:36 AM
Your mistake Seeker, I believe, is the expectation of logical, ordered, and science led thinking from the current Wastemonster administration.
I don't understand:
Nightclubs - why do they become dangerous in September? Visiting one now is ok, but 2 jabs needed (with proof) in September. Is that when the new variant is scheduled for release? (trying my hand at conspiracy thinking).
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-57893788
Correct. Same as all these countries which go on the Red list in a week, because what you want is a hoard of people coming back at the same time before the Virus realises what's going on . . . Of what i'm aware of Covid can't read or understand the spoken word - so we should be ok if no one tells it, :smt115
september is when all the students go back and its sexfest.. this is how the virus spread up here last year. it was almost at zero and along came the students.... St Andrews beach was like a can of sardines.
I don't understand:
Nightclubs - why do they become dangerous in September? Visiting one now is ok, but 2 jabs needed (with proof) in September. Is that when the new variant is scheduled for release? (trying my hand at conspiracy thinking).
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-57893788I think it's too force this age group to get vaccinated.
Sent from my SM-T510 using Tapatalk
I don't understand:
Nightclubs - why do they become dangerous in September? Visiting one now is ok, but 2 jabs needed (with proof) in September. Is that when the new variant is scheduled for release? (trying my hand at conspiracy thinking).
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-57893788
Ooo, don't get me started!
Too late ...
If there's going to be a condition, why not a negative test? As far as I know, being jabbed does not mean one cannot pass on the virus so there is still residual danger for every attendee. I think this is illogical, prejudicial and unnecessary - discrimination, even?
And as for the apparent ruling that the same won't apply for House of Commons - isn't that an indoor high-density occupied venue? It seems George Orwell was prophetic: "We are all equal, except that some are more equal than others".
The missing piece of the puzzle for me is that there is no official, approved process for permitting/demonstrating legitimate exemption from having the jab, i.e. no way of showing that you haven't been jabbed without being accused of being a crazy anti-vaxxer conspiracy-theorist and killer. Until that is put in place we will be left with polarised hoards each claiming the other is irresponsible.
Seriously, if anyone has any decent advice on how to get high quality medical opinion to help assess whether it's safe for specific individuals to take the jab, please let me know.
To give some context to my concern, both my wife and one of my sons have significant and serious allergy-related concerns to consider before submitting themselves for a jab. (My wife can't even take over-the-counter Ibuprofen without risking severe life-threatening reaction, my son reacts adversely to many foodstuffs.) Even talking to the GP, we cannot get beyond the sales-pitch "most people are fine" - yeah, same with eating peanut butter but that ain't great for everyone, so how do we assess for us specifically? Son is keen to go out again, possibly including clubbing, before he goes completely insane. But it now seems he has to risk killing himself by getting an immature substance injected. Epi-pens at the ready! Good job we don't generally discourage the taking of unfamiliar medicinal substances ... Ah!:rolleyes:
[Sorry, I needed to rant :smt076 I think this "removal of all legal restrictions" step (not!) is the straw that broke the camel's back for me on tolerance of the government leadership through this issue. As a step it needed to come but they've screwed it up because real-life is still badly distorted. IMHO, they have now completely abdicated their leadership responsibility. They've created a monster and now trying to just walk away from sorting it out.]
Another point I'm confused on: Has anyone any insight on if/when we might get to the point of being able to move away from widespread mask wearing and just go about our business without the insidious assumption that we're all breathing the kiss of death all the time?
Legal restrictions have gone (in England at least) yet many organisations and individuals seem unwlling to embrace the new found freedom. If we trusted the "powers that be" when they imposed restrictions, why do we not trust them now they have lifted the same?
Is it going to be left as a somewhat anarchic situation, inconsistent and randomly implemented all over the place? "Follow the science" seems to have got horribly messed up!
(Why am I frustrated by the mask situation? I've realised that, subconsciously, they are making me afraid - I think I may be losing any perspective I had on how serious Covid might be for me. Also, I simply don't like the fact that I can't see the people I'm interacting with smiling and laughing (or frowning/scowling!). The lack of that visual dynamic depresses me.)
1. collect peoples DNA via various means (its been going on for years) (if it were about crime then why has more people not been caught using DNA matching?)
2. infect the public with a tailor made virus.
3. instruct the public to line up for swab testing (funny how its pretty much identical to DNA testing)
4. compare notes to see which sector of the public is more susceptible.
5. introduce different variations of virus to keep the money flowing in but not kill certain groups of individuals.
6. give the public an untested vaccination.
6. give all results to the big corporates including life/health insurance (this is a massive revenue).
yes i have my tin hat on.
the world was pretty much at peace just before covid... hmmm..
we all die at some point but the fear of dying is the biggest "tool" that the power that be have.
i'll crawl back under my rock now.
1. collect peoples DNA via various means (its been going on for years) (if it were about crime then why has more people not been caught using DNA matching?)
2. infect the public with a tailor made virus.
3. instruct the public to line up for swab testing (funny how its pretty much identical to DNA testing)
4. compare notes to see which sector of the public is more susceptible.
5. introduce different variations of virus to keep the money flowing in but not kill certain groups of individuals.
6. give the public an untested vaccination.
6. give all results to the big corporates including life/health insurance (this is a massive revenue).
yes i have my tin hat on.
the world was pretty much at peace just before covid... hmmm..
we all die at some point but the fear of dying is the biggest "tool" that the power that be have.
i'll crawl back under my rock now.
:smt046That does seem quite extreme. Thankfully I'm not convinced they're actually that organised to be able to pull it off without being found out.
The point about manipulation through 'fear of dying' is a legitimate one though. One of my top takeaways from the Covid situation in that the general populus didn't comprehend the numbers for how many people die on a daily basis in the UK (i.e. c.1500/day, 0.5million/year) so perspective was distorted from day one and debate at a macro-level became impossible for lots because of hysteria about any death numbers.
But I'm probably a heartless sod affected by losing both parents at a relatively young age (me and them).
Legal restrictions have gone (in England at least) yet many organisations and individuals seem unwlling to embrace the new found freedom. If we trusted the "powers that be" when they imposed restrictions, why do we not trust them now they have lifted the same?
The main reason is that the relaxations are a gamble. The best way to create a new virus variant is to allow it to spread in a population. Even if it does not kill the host immediately, the act of viral replication allows the opportunity of a mutation. The WHO said this, 1200 virologists said it in a letter to The Lancet, many of own NHS staff have said this. Given enough replication time a covid version will emerge that will bypass the vaccines and we're back where we started.
The next reason is the mixed messaging. Initially it was said to be very important to wear a face covering, keep your distance and wash your hands. Suddenly, we are told it is no longer a legal requirement...ok, but then we're told we should do it anyway. Taking away the legal aspect makes it seem less important; it's a mixed, confusing message. Is it an attempt to transfer responsibility - I don't know, but I don't trust this government to act ethically.
SV650rules
20-07-21, 07:25 PM
Everyone focusing on cases, which are being found in people with no symptoms because of massive testing. Hospitalisation and deaths are not following cases....
Another point I'm confused on: Has anyone any insight on if/when we might get to the point of being able to move away from widespread mask wearing and just go about our business without the insidious assumption that we're all breathing the kiss of death all the time?
Legal restrictions have gone (in England at least) yet many organisations and individuals seem unwlling to embrace the new found freedom. If we trusted the "powers that be" when they imposed restrictions, why do we not trust them now they have lifted the same?
Is it going to be left as a somewhat anarchic situation, inconsistent and randomly implemented all over the place? "Follow the science" seems to have got horribly messed up!
(Why am I frustrated by the mask situation? I've realised that, subconsciously, they are making me afraid - I think I may be losing any perspective I had on how serious Covid might be for me. Also, I simply don't like the fact that I can't see the people I'm interacting with smiling and laughing (or frowning/scowling!). The lack of that visual dynamic depresses me.)
For me, it's thinking/knowing that i'm doing something beyond the basics to try and protect myself and others. I do not have an issue wearing a mask in an enclosed environment around other people (my office included).
A private area like an office is about protecting employees, and making people feel safe/comfortable as we all have different levels of anxiety and vulnerability (either directly, or people we see outside of work).
You're all able to decide what works for you, and what you're comfortable with as well as your family. Knowing my Mother works in retail and will have many customers in the store, i would like to think most people will continue to take extra steps to try and keep others safe. Which is why i do the same, as the people working in the shops are all Mothers/Fathers/Sons/Daughters/Brothers/Sisters etc to someone.
:smt046That does seem quite extreme. Thankfully I'm not convinced they're actually that organised to be able to pull it off without being found out.
The point about manipulation through 'fear of dying' is a legitimate one though. One of my top takeaways from the Covid situation in that the general populus didn't comprehend the numbers for how many people die on a daily basis in the UK (i.e. c.1500/day, 0.5million/year) so perspective was distorted from day one and debate at a macro-level became impossible for lots because of hysteria about any death numbers.
But I'm probably a heartless sod affected by losing both parents at a relatively young age (me and them).
I fully agree that people were unaware of how many people die every day as it is from various things. Which is why recording Covid deaths was a hard task. Trying to identify if Covid caused the death, or if it was simply there when they died.
I think the statistic was used as a scare tactic, to hit home to people the potential severe nature of what we were dealing with. Especially in the beginning when a lot was still unknown about it.
The vaccine drive in younger people will be the next hurdle to overcome, and then we'll see if they think a booster is needed this Winter . . . . . or if herd immunity has been achieved and things stabilise.
But i'd not write off another lockdown, either national or locals.
Everyone focusing on cases, which are being found in people with no symptoms because of massive testing. Hospitalisation and deaths are not following cases....
if you were to do the same with the "common" flu you would get the same results.
SV650rules
20-07-21, 08:58 PM
if you were to do the same with the "common" flu you would get the same results.
I agree, and in coming years probably going to be a lot fewer deaths from influenza as Covid has mopped up the vulnerable people. The flu virus does mutate a lot more than coronavirus, which is why they often do not get the correct flu virus even though they put 3 or 4 in the annual vaccine - it is a guessing game.
svenrico
21-07-21, 12:12 AM
This could go on for some time !
As if Brexit wasn't enough !
The main reason is that the relaxations are a gamble. The best way to create a new virus variant is to allow it to spread in a population. Even if it does not kill the host immediately, the act of viral replication allows the opportunity of a mutation. The WHO said this, 1200 virologists said it in a letter to The Lancet, many of own NHS staff have said this. Given enough replication time a covid version will emerge that will bypass the vaccines and we're back where we started.
The next reason is the mixed messaging. Initially it was said to be very important to wear a face covering, keep your distance and wash your hands. Suddenly, we are told it is no longer a legal requirement...ok, but then we're told we should do it anyway. Taking away the legal aspect makes it seem less important; it's a mixed, confusing message. Is it an attempt to transfer responsibility - I don't know, but I don't trust this government to act ethically.
What's the difference between a gamble and a professional judgement call? I absolutely get the mistrust of government but do we not believe in the ethics of their scientlific advisors any more?
The bit I can't square is that we're told vaccination doesn't prevent transmission. This virus is probably endemic so surely that means it will propagate anyway and the risk of a vaccine-tolerant mutation is just a matter of time?:confused: (I understand the other aspect of general virus mutation is that most mutations tend to result in less severe effects - a virus that gets too good at killing its host before it passes on will tend to self eradicate rather than self-perpetuate.)
I do agree about the mixed messaging. The law was to enable enforcement of the importance. If the importance is still there, why relax the law? If the importance is tolerably less, why the resistance to ditching the control measure? It's difficult for me to follow the logic of the thinking. It's been very badly explained. I think it's a macro vs. individual thing,driven by fear - i.e. it will happen to someone but not me please!
It leaves us with the residual 'when' question: If not now, then when? Hasn't 18 months+ been enough time to slow the really bad stuff down and create the enduring coping mechanisms?
For me, it's thinking/knowing that i'm doing something beyond the basics to try and protect myself and others. I do not have an issue wearing a mask in an enclosed environment around other people (my office included).
A private area like an office is about protecting employees, and making people feel safe/comfortable as we all have different levels of anxiety and vulnerability (either directly, or people we see outside of work).
You're all able to decide what works for you, and what you're comfortable with as well as your family. Knowing my Mother works in retail and will have many customers in the store, i would like to think most people will continue to take extra steps to try and keep others safe. Which is why i do the same, as the people working in the shops are all Mothers/Fathers/Sons/Daughters/Brothers/Sisters etc to someone.
All very reasonable and I don't want to be a danger either. But does that mean masks forever? How do we trade that off against other reasonable functional requirements of human existence that are better without masks, e.g. general social interaction, communication and relationship building, dealing with criminal activity by identifying perpetrators?
But i'd not write off another lockdown, either national or locals.
I think this virus is now endemc globally, elimination is not an option, so herd immunity is the only realistic stable state, be that via mass jabbing or natural transmission. Sadly that also means some people will die or have lives disrupted much earlier than they might have expected pre-Covid. That's a tough sell, to say the least, because although the principle existed before it was never consciously contemplated on a widespread basis. Now it's been unavoidably forced on us, front and centre. Suddenly we're all mortal and life-limited. Reluctantly, we have to accept that not all deaths are preventable and unexpected bad things happen to many all the time. Life is a series of risk-taking events but we don't get to choose or control the triggers a lot of the time. Sad but true?
I think there are some very difficult considerations to be faced before we're stable: What is the tolerable annual level of death due to this virus? How much investment in the NHS is required to cope with a higher baseload of treatment requirements for those seriously affected? What changes are acceptable in freedoms of movements for all? How do we make sure we don't unfairly discriminate?
Personally, I don't think lockdown is the right tool for the job any more.
SV650rules
21-07-21, 09:31 AM
Viruses normally do get less potent as they mutate- for the simple reason that virulent ones that kill their host do not normally get to spread very well / far where less potent ones that keep their host alive and moving around get more chance to spread their DNA. Sweden did not lock down, had lower peaks than us and in about the same place now. There is a court case going to Spanish high court saying that lockdowns are against their constitution...
I think there are some very difficult considerations to be faced before we're stable: What is the tolerable annual level of death due to this virus? How much investment in the NHS is required to cope with a higher baseload of treatment requirements for those seriously affected? What changes are acceptable in freedoms of movements for all? How do we make sure we don't unfairly discriminate?
Personally, I don't think lockdown is the right tool for the job any more.
+1
If people looking for zero deaths before easing restrictions then we will never get out of lockdown, C-19 needs to be added to the long list of things people need to be aware of in their daily life, which needs to get back to normal sooner rather than later..
.
It leaves us with the residual 'when' question: If not now, then when?
According to https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/ 88% of the population have had one jab and 68% have had both. When 88% have had both jabs then relax lockdown.
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/england-may-reimpose-covid-rules-083352028.html
_________
I may have discovered where the virus comes from. Here are the top virus rates...
Redcar and Cleveland: 1,421.8 infections per 100,000 people
Middlesbrough: 1,281
South Tyneside: 1,206.8
Sunderland: 1,100.4
Hartlepool: 1,081.5
Stockton-on-Tees: 1,073.2
North East Lincolnshire: 1,013
...it's the North Sea, that's where it's coming from. :)
Viruses normally do get less potent as they mutate- for the simple reason that virulent ones that kill their host do not normally get to spread very well / far where less potent ones that keep their host alive and moving around get more chance to spread their DNA.
Someone forgot to tell that to HIV.
SV650rules
21-07-21, 09:47 AM
Someone forgot to tell that to HIV.
HIV killed very, very slowly and allowed infectious people to carry on with what they were doing when they caught it in the first place ( often after they knew they were infected ) - Covid happens much quicker and the more virulent mutations take people out of general circulation pretty damned quick. The ones I really felt sorry for were the totally innocent people who got HIV from blood products that they needed regularly.
I think C-19 is spreading from Scotland - another dastardly plan by SNP to eventually reach Westminster.
All very reasonable and I don't want to be a danger either. But does that mean masks forever? How do we trade that off against other reasonable functional requirements of human existence that are better without masks, e.g. general social interaction, communication and relationship building, dealing with criminal activity by identifying perpetrators?
I think this virus is now endemc globally, elimination is not an option, so herd immunity is the only realistic stable state, be that via mass jabbing or natural transmission. Sadly that also means some people will die or have lives disrupted much earlier than they might have expected pre-Covid. That's a tough sell, to say the least, because although the principle existed before it was never consciously contemplated on a widespread basis. Now it's been unavoidably forced on us, front and centre. Suddenly we're all mortal and life-limited. Reluctantly, we have to accept that not all deaths are preventable and unexpected bad things happen to many all the time. Life is a series of risk-taking events but we don't get to choose or control the triggers a lot of the time. Sad but true?
I think there are some very difficult considerations to be faced before we're stable: What is the tolerable annual level of death due to this virus? How much investment in the NHS is required to cope with a higher baseload of treatment requirements for those seriously affected? What changes are acceptable in freedoms of movements for all? How do we make sure we don't unfairly discriminate?
Personally, I don't think lockdown is the right tool for the job any more.
I don't think it means masks forever, probably until C19 is less prevalent in everyday lives - such as less restrictions, less continuous focus on only C19. Hopefully that'll be when most people have been jabbed, herd immunity is higher/proven & it's been shown society can go on 'as normal' without anything going too crazy.
There absolutely needs to be an adoption of an expected fatality number to live with this Virus, much like we do with the Flu.
The freedom of movement within the UK is pretty much open, it's now more on an international level that things need to get sorted out.
you have to look at history to get your answers. Spanish flu killed around 50mil if i'm not mistaken but do we ever hear of it now.. no, not really. its going to be the same with covid. its a virus and there is absolutely nothing we can do to stop it. the only thing we can hope to achieve is slow it down so its just another flu. be thankful its not typhoid without a cure.
you have to look at history to get your answers. Spanish flu killed around 50mil if i'm not mistaken but do we ever hear of it now.. no, not really.
because they don't like upsetting countries by naming it after them anymore. It is the H1N1 virus which circulates regularly seasonally, swine flu in 2009 was H1N1. Most people now have at least partial immunity.
It takes 6 months to make a flu vaccine so they have to make an educated guess as to which flu variant (the H and N number) will be dominant.
Looks like there is already mumblings of having to roll back on some of the "freedoms" such as masks and distancing.
Lots of intriguing views and comments.
I still like to compare attitudes to Covid deaths and road deaths. Typically 5 people die on UK roads per day, and that's among the millions of everyday folk travelling out there. If the rate suddenly jumped to 50/day, who would say "Oh well, it's just something we'll have to learn to live with, we go out on the road and some people die even when they were doing nothing wrong."
I suspect not many proponents for the laissez faire approach, yet that's just what some are saying about Covid.
If there are reasonable measures which aren't really a hardship (distancing in shops, masks on transport etc) then why not do it, just like we wear seat belts and have speed limits. We still go about our daily business but take reasonable precautions.
There is also a conundrum in approach to treatment. If we say "Oh well, some folk will get Covid and die", then why bother to treat anyone who ends up in ICU? They are treated because we try to avoid people dying unnecessarily, and it's the decent thing to do. If we say it's worth trying to save someone's life in ICU, the why not say it's worth trying to avoid that person ending up in ICU in the first place? Prevention better than cure, and usually much cheaper.
I don't pretend to have answers. That doesn't mean I won't criticise what seem to be reckless or illogical steps, or more likely the inappropriate timing of actions.
Whatever we as a country (countries?) decide to do and act out, there is still the elephant in the room regarding how the rest of the planet will view us and want to interact (or not) with us. We could end up a 21st century "leper colony".
SV650rules
21-07-21, 04:38 PM
A sudden spike in road deaths would not trash the economy. There is a cost / benefit ratio for everything even health, decided every minute of every day by hospital ethics panels, and the older you get the less likely the 'benefit' will be worth the 'cost'. 75%+ of 'covid' deaths so far have been people over 80, with most of the rest people over 65. The country has been virtually locked down for over 16 months, pretty much everyone over 60 has been vaccinated, and anyone over 30 who wanted the jab could get it. We just have to move on... there have been many, many casualties from lockdown itself, two of our older neighbours who used to get out and about regularly were housebound by lockdown, unable to get out or even visitors, one aged 85 is now in a home having lost mobility due to lockdown ( and may not ever get back home ) the other one in hospital undergoing physio treatment to try to restore use of legs. Lockdown has not been a casualty free exercise, imagine the scenario in just our little street repeated throughout UK. We also need to consider the huge chunk taken out of education and jobs - I have an idea many of the people on furlough will not have a job to go back to as the high street and many small companies collapse. This is more complicated now than just protecting the vulnerable elderly, we at least need to trust the vaccines and try something rather than just endless lockdown cycles.
A sudden spike in road deaths would not trash the economy. There is a cost / benefit ratio for everything even health, decided every minute of every day by hospital ethics panels, and the older you get the less likely the 'benefit' will be worth the 'cost'. 75%+ of 'covid' deaths so far have been people over 80, with most of the rest people over 65. The country has been virtually locked down for over 16 months, pretty much everyone over 60 has been vaccinated, and anyone over 30 who wanted the jab could get it. We just have to move on... there have been many, many casualties from lockdown itself, two of our older neighbours who used to get out and about regularly were housebound by lockdown, unable to get out or even visitors, one aged 85 is now in a home having lost mobility due to lockdown ( and may not ever get back home ) the other one in hospital undergoing physio treatment to try to restore use of legs. Lockdown has not been a casualty free exercise, imagine the scenario in just our little street repeated throughout UK. We also need to consider the huge chunk taken out of education and jobs - I have an idea many of the people on furlough will not have a job to go back to as the high street and many small companies collapse. This is more complicated now than just protecting the vulnerable elderly, we at least need to trust the vaccines and try something rather than just endless lockdown cycles.
completely agree. This year should represent a step forward in the way this is managed, and by September the majority of Adults will be vaccinated. A lock down should not be needed, given what we know about the current effect the vaccine has had on breaking the link between infection/hospitalisation & death.
redtrummy
21-07-21, 09:44 PM
Its not out of the realm of possibility that we can eradicate Covid. We have managed to get rid of Sars and Polio.
This article is worth a read, but to be frank its far too complicated for me to really understand.
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200918-why-some-deadly-viruses-vanish-and-go-extinct.
Its up to everyone to draw their own demarcation lines. Personally I still ere on the side of caution but I know many that just want to return to previous normality (or have).
svenrico
21-07-21, 09:54 PM
I wouldn't rule anything out.
Its not out of the realm of possibility that we can eradicate Covid. We have managed to get rid of Sars and Polio.
This article is worth a read, but to be frank its far too complicated for me to really understand.
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200918-why-some-deadly-viruses-vanish-and-go-extinct.
Its up to everyone to draw their own demarcation lines. Personally I still ere on the side of caution but I know many that just want to return to previous normality (or have).
Well that's an intriguing article, although it probably raises more questions than it answers: Allegedly the H1N1 that caused 1918 "Spanish" Flu pandemic is effectively extinct. It states there is a school of thought that we should be trying to accelerate mutations - that's contrary to many current mask promoters' arguments! Yes, it says SARS has disappeared, yet official name for Covid-19 is SARS-CoV-2.
Just goes to show that "follow the science" isn't as straightforward or definitive as some would like to have you believe (especially with a developing situation)! I stick to my core tenet that it's all about making trade-offs but I wonder if anyone really knows what the right balance is. Can't deny that experimentation is part of scientific process. Oo, my brain hurts:smt017:confused:
I wouldn't rule anything out.
I think there's probably substantial wisdom in that statement. Believe it or not, I'm trying to keep an open mind too.
I suppose what I was trying to investigate was the tolerance level for deaths (for want of another simple measure).
Cases are increasing at around 2.5 times in 3 weeks, and so are deaths, following about 3 weeks after the cases. Today's ship has sailed, so in 3 weeks time I predict 120 deaths/day (7 day average) based on https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/uk/
I know some will dispute that source, but in the absence of anything better I'll refer to that.
If we do absolutely nothing to affect the curve for cases in the next 3 weeks, take no additional precautions and just let it go, then by 6 weeks time deaths will be near 300/day, and 3 weeks later near 750/day (I stand to be shot down in flames for getting this wildy wrong, but hey ho).
Whatever the actual numbers, the question is at what level does the govt decide to intervene? There must be some level, they couldn't let it just keep on rising (could they??). What would the public tolerate? Or would everyone just shrug their shoulders and say we'll just let it run regardless. A moral dilemma to be sure.
Of course it might just top out at say 100/day and then start coming down, in which case the strategy will (arguably) have been proven right.
I still like to compare attitudes to Covid deaths and road deaths. Typically 5 people die on UK roads per day, and that's among the millions of everyday folk travelling out there. If the rate suddenly jumped to 50/day, who would say "Oh well, it's just something we'll have to learn to live with, we go out on the road and some people die even when they were doing nothing wrong."
I suspect not many proponents for the laissez faire approach, yet that's just what some are saying about Covid.
If there are reasonable measures which aren't really a hardship (distancing in shops, masks on transport etc) then why not do it, just like we wear seat belts and have speed limits. We still go about our daily business but take reasonable precautions.
There is also a conundrum in approach to treatment. If we say "Oh well, some folk will get Covid and die", then why bother to treat anyone who ends up in ICU? They are treated because we try to avoid people dying unnecessarily, and it's the decent thing to do. If we say it's worth trying to save someone's life in ICU, the why not say it's worth trying to avoid that person ending up in ICU in the first place? Prevention better than cure, and usually much cheaper.
Cogent arguments here.
Did you pick your 50/day challenge point deliberately? As it happens that's about the daily average for 'regular' flu, which may (or may not) be a better comparator for Covid. I agree that setting the threshold of acceptability is a tough challenge. I think the only thing firm about my own considered current position is that we have to accept it can't be zero.
The point about moral philosphy for treatment is well made. You're right, it's a conundrum, made even more puzzling when we compare to other things where the causation is much clearer, e.g. smoking -> lung cancer, drinking -> liver disease, obesity -> heart disease.
Personally, I'm surprised there hasn't been more pickup on the dominant "Protect the NHS" mantra that's been ever-present. Why do we seem to have no overt intention to increase the systemic support for our health service now that we have a new demand to cater for? When should we shift to "Invest in the NHS", so that we expand its capacity to be able to "save lives" that are put under new threat because of this virus? Isn't the health service to support the population (as they go about their desired lives), not the other way around? Shouldn't we first decide the pattern of life we want, then define the service infrastructure to support it? You're right, prevention is better than cure but maybe the 'cure' environment (i.e. doctors, nurses, hospitals) is just easier to control, so more feasible to concentrate management effort there? Prevention challenge: How do you persuade a whole globe of nations & individuals to behave in the same way?
(And yes I know that sounds a bit utopian and conveniently ignores very real funding/economic issues, thus taking us right back to 'where's the limit'?)
I suppose what I was trying to investigate was the tolerance level for deaths (for want of another simple measure).
Cases are increasing at around 2.5 times in 3 weeks, and so are deaths, following about 3 weeks after the cases. Today's ship has sailed, so in 3 weeks time I predict 120 deaths/day (7 day average) based on https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/uk/
I know some will dispute that source, but in the absence of anything better I'll refer to that.
If we do absolutely nothing to affect the curve for cases in the next 3 weeks, take no additional precautions and just let it go, then by 6 weeks time deaths will be near 300/day, and 3 weeks later near 750/day (I stand to be shot down in flames for getting this wildy wrong, but hey ho).
Whatever the actual numbers, the question is at what level does the govt decide to intervene? There must be some level, they couldn't let it just keep on rising (could they??). What would the public tolerate? Or would everyone just shrug their shoulders and say we'll just let it run regardless. A moral dilemma to be sure.
Of course it might just top out at say 100/day and then start coming down, in which case the strategy will (arguably) have been proven right.
Yes, I agree, it's a heck of a dilemma. Gazing into the crystal ball is imprecise, the future is uncertain. But it's good to try to put some numbers to it to help the debate along, as you have done.
And, as you say, if it happens to turn out how they wanted, were they clever and wise or just plain lucky? (Of course they'll claim the former but will anyone ever be able to prove one way or the other for definite?)
SV650rules
22-07-21, 06:02 AM
I have read many articles that firmly blamed aspirin for a great many of the Spanish flu deaths - a lot of the symptoms reported were of aspirin overdose. Aspirin was being pushed by companies and doctors as the new silver bullet, but the toxicity of aspirin and the fact that it suppresses the immune system were known about but ignored. Some of the therapies used lately maybe did more harm than good ( respirators came with a whole new set of problems ).
https://www.bmj.com/rapid-response/2011/11/02/aspirin-may-be-enhancer-virulence-1918-pandemic
I really do not like the way that UK counted covid-19 ( or SARS-Cov-2 ) deaths, I think that the total was inflated compared to other countries by the methods used here. I think deaths amongst the over 60's will be lower in coming years because Covid had quite frankly affected the people who would succumb to annual flu and their own multiple chronic health problems within a few years anyway ( pretty much all victims have been over 60 with 2 or more pre-existing serious medical conditions, most of the younger victims were obese ). We need to take our tin hats off and come out of the cellar, but still be wary of large crowds in confined spaces, especially tube trains and buses.
Government relaxes mask rules
Government "expects" everyone to continue to wear masks inside
Conservative MPs reaction to "expectation":
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/jacob-rees-mogg-face-mask-150404680.html
..Did you pick your 50/day challenge point deliberately?
Just to roughly match the 7 day average for reported Covid deaths at 21st July, and it just happened to be a convenient 10x the actual road death rate. Arbitrary choice.
The question was simply (essentially rhetorical) what would govt/public reaction be to a 10x increase in road deaths? We put huge resource and effort into reducing road deaths by 1 or 2 per week average, yet don't apparently seem to be too concerned by 50 or 100/day for something else, really on the basis that it's less than it might be, could be worse.
they know exactly how many people die each year in the UK at any given Time Of Year. what they are not telling the public is how many over and above the TOY avg have/are dying due to covid.
they fell off a ladder and killed themselves but tested poz for covid so cause of death on certificate was covid. even though the person never had or got any symptoms like 99% of the population.
i would hazard a guess that pretty much everyone has had covid by now. its just that the vast majority of people dont get any symptoms or if they do its minor and just shrug it off just like the flu/cold and other bugs that we live with every single day.
if you go out in public you come in contact with every known common bug, you can't avoid it as they are on everything.
i have just had a bout of the trots for 3 days solid so was it covid? i had the no taste or smell symptoms twice so was that covid?
svenrico
22-07-21, 08:59 PM
they know exactly how many people die each year in the UK at any given Time Of Year. what they are not telling the public is how many over and above the TOY avg have/are dying due to covid.
they fell off a ladder and killed themselves but tested poz for covid so cause of death on certificate was covid. don't think they would go that far even though the person never had or got any symptoms like 99% of the population.
i would hazard a guess that pretty much everyone has had covid by now. my wife thinks everybody will get it eventually its just that the vast majority of people dont get any symptoms or if they do its minor and just shrug it off just like the flu/cold and other bugs that we live with every single day.
if you go out in public you come in contact with every known common bug, you can't avoid it as they are on everything.
i have just had a bout of the trots for 3 days solid so was it covid? i had the no taste or smell symptoms twice so was that covid? possibly,yes comments above in bold
Just to roughly match the 7 day average for reported Covid deaths at 21st July, and it just happened to be a convenient 10x the actual road death rate. Arbitrary choice.
The question was simply (essentially rhetorical) what would govt/public reaction be to a 10x increase in road deaths? We put huge resource and effort into reducing road deaths by 1 or 2 per week average, yet don't apparently seem to be too concerned by 50 or 100/day for something else, really on the basis that it's less than it might be, could be worse.
Thanks. I suspected it wasn't total coincidence that it matched the covid levels.
You're right about the wide-ranging difference in base thresholds for different things. It's not always obvous why 'acceptability' thresholds are set where they are. Presumably it's due to statistical jiggery-pokery, a byproduct of normalising to the likely exposed population, so that overall 'risk' numbers are similar? E.g. absolute road death numbers are lower beacuse not everyone is a road user, whereas level for diseases is higher because everyone breathes, but proportionately they're about the same? (I haven't checked, this is just a hypothesis.)
You're also right that sudden changes tend to cause the reactions, rather than overall numbers. I guess the new impact of covid is one example, perhaps the recent 'uproar' regarding smart motorways might be another (picking up your road deaths comparison)?
i would hazard a guess that pretty much everyone has had covid by now. its just that the vast majority of people dont get any symptoms or if they do its minor and just shrug it off just like the flu/cold and other bugs that we live with every single day.
Could very well be close to the truth. I wonder what effect that would have on the risk figures (if we assumed, say, 80% of the population were +ve cases rather than just the confirmed ones)? I suspect it would re-frame the debate quite a bit.
Tbh, I do struggle a bit with the "1 in 3 could be asymptomatic carriers" claim - it seems a very high proportion to me if the virus is truly so nasty. It's likely to kill you or it's likely not to have any noticeable effect at all - that's a very weird distribution for range of symptoms. No denying it could be very nasty for some but is there still a whiff of convenient excuse?
if you go out in public you come in contact with every known common bug, you can't avoid it as they are on everything.
I have heard of reports that some younger children have been coming down with other bugs at unusually high rates. This has been explained by lockdown having prevented them from much of the general activity that would alow them to generate natural immunity through day-to-day exposure to the minor stuff etc. - their immune systems haven't developed as fast as previous 'normal'. (I cant find a source so there's a chance this is an urban myth but IMHO it's not as wild as some covid/lockdown hypotheses.)
Adam Ef
22-07-21, 11:06 PM
Our local Lidl has a number plate recognition camara for it's car park on the way in and out. You have to scan your receipt under a touch screen and then input your number plate to not be fined for parking without shopping there. They stopped the system a while back due to it being touch screen for obvious reasons. As of this Monday they've reintroduced it due to lockdon rules ending. I imagine it's going to be a great hub for spreading Covid. All so they can catch a few people and a private company can fine people. I won't be shopping there using any transport with a number plate again any time soon.
if they tried that up here the screen would get smashed in about half a day.
I bet my MP that new covid restrictions would be imposed within 3 weeks from Freedom Day (Tory Death Cull Day, July 19th). Had he taken me up, I suspect I would win:
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/ministers-plan-restrictions-within-weeks-230109907.html
SV650rules
23-07-21, 10:44 AM
Wish people would stop panicking about infection rates and look at hospital admissions, serious illness and deaths as the benchmark.... infections in younger people give natural immunity, which is much better than immunity from a dubious cocktail of virus mRNA and chemicals.
Craig380
23-07-21, 11:35 AM
The number of cases is still useful data for monitoring infection rates, but it certainly doesn't need to be shouted by the news every day. Given the percentage of population vaccinated in the UK, the truly meaningful stats are hospital admissions and deaths where Covid is the direct cause.
SV650rules
26-07-21, 05:03 PM
Here is an article from Spectator about the real cost of 'zero covid' policy, Australia did the opposite of Sweden. ( I could have posted a link, but Spectator is behind a paywall )
Matthew Lynn
(https://www.spectator.co.uk/writer/matthew-lynn)Australia proves the cost of zero Covid
26 July 2021, 1:55pm
The UK is growing at the fastest pace in 80 years. The United States, fuelled by President Biden’s stimulus programme, is expanding at a breath-taking pace, while Sweden is growing at a rapid rate. Most of the global economy is bouncing back from the Covid recession at remarkable speed. There is, however, one exception. Australia. What has long been one of the most successful economies in the world is heading back not just into lockdown but into recession as well — and giving the world a sharp lesson in the cost of ‘zero Covid’.
Over the last year, Australia, along with New Zealand, has been heaped with praise for the way it has managed to keep Covid-19 under control. There is, of course, plenty of justification for that. Infection and death rates are dramatically lower than they are in most other countries. And yet, there is a price attached. Many local economists are now forecasting (https://www.skynews.com.au/business/economy-could-already-be-in-recession-over-lockdowns/video/86306cdc62c83d172ebf949b552e3ccd) that a recession (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-07-25/recession-possible-as-covid-lockdowns-ravage-australian-economy/100319202) is almost certain in the latest quarter.
There is no great surprise about that. With rising local infections, and New South Wales and Victoria under lockdown, two states that account for more than half the country’s GDP output is being hammered. No one can produce very much when they can’t go out.
That, of course, is happening in one of the richest and most successful economies of recent times. Only a couple of years ago Australia was being celebrated for completing almost three decades without a recession, the longest run of uninterrupted growth since accurate GDP records started to be collected in the 1930s. Now it is slumping just as the rest of the world is recovering. In fact, it is about to show the economic cost of a zero Covid strategy. The country has imposed the tightest lockdowns and border closures in the world. Sure, that has worked in the sense that it has a far lower death rate than any other major counrtry. The trouble is, it also has a chaotic vaccination programme, and keeps going back into lockdown.
In truth, the big problem with zero Covid is that there is no exit strategy. The virus isn’t eliminated, it just keeps on circulating at low levels. While that is true, the borders have to remain closed and there are repeated lockdowns to stop infections running out of control.
Lots of ‘experts’ have been lecturing us for the last 16 months that there was no trade-off between health and the economy, and that zero Covid would be better for output in the medium term. Australia is about to show that isn’t really the case. Zero Covid will take a huge economic toll and may last for years. It is perfectly respectable to argue for it if that's what you want — but there is no point in pretending that there won’t be a heavy price in lost output and jobs. And over time that will take a toll on society as well.
http://forums.sv650.org/data:image/svg+xml,<svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg"/>
(https://www.spectator.co.uk/writer/matthew-lynn)Written byMatthew Lynn (https://www.spectator.co.uk/writer/matthew-lynn)Matthew Lynn is a financial columnist and author of ‘Bust: Greece, The Euro and The Sovereign Debt Crisis’ and ‘The Long Depression: The Slump of 2008 to 2031’
Essentially that is a logical answer to shutting everything down; reduced economic activity and the subsequent cuts/fails of Business and jobs.
Perhaps Australia & New Zealand will review their policy given it hasn't worked for a continuous extended period of time and will have to adopt the 'living with' approach and the Vaccine route.
The article on Australia mentions its "chaotic vaccination program" in passing, as of 2 days ago they had only fully vaccinated 13% of the population. The Liberal Party (a centre-right group) have mis-handled that.
It neglects to mention the trade spat with China - ever since Australia asked for an independent inquiry to find covid's origin China has been adding tariffs (200% on wine, 80% on barley), blocking various shipments and buying US coal instead of Oz coal.
https://www.scmp.com/economy/global-economy/article/3128507/china-turns-us-coal-fill-void-created-australia-import-ban
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-12-17/australian-trade-tension-sanctions-china-growing-commodities/12984218
So suggesting that the differing approaches to lockdown is the sole reason for growth rates is not valid. China is/was Australia's biggest trading partner and they are playing hardball to punish Australia.
svenrico
26-07-21, 10:12 PM
What is the situation with an independent inquiry to find covid's origin , is there a 'lack of cooperation' from
China ?!
Statistics, a tricky fellow indeed. Growth depends where you measure it from .................
Australia GDP is above where it was in Dec19 (pre-pandemic), the drop in Q2-2020 (full hit from pandemic) was from about $500bn to $460bn ( -8%), which has recovered to just over $500bn again.
https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/economy/national-accounts/australian-national-accounts-national-income-expenditure-and-product/latest-release
The UK is now about 10% lower than it was in Q4-2019. We saw a much bigger drop to Q2-2020 hence the recovery looks bigger, but we're still behind.
£545bn drop to £426bn (-22%) then recovered to £500bn, give or take a touch. In fact we've dropped again very slightly, but things are a bit turbulent so take with a pinch of salt.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp/timeseries/abmi/ukea
What is the situation with an independent inquiry to find covid's origin , is there a 'lack of cooperation' from
China ?!
China now follows a "wolf warrior" doctrine which involves rebuffing any criticism of the country, its leaders, its policies for any reason.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolf_warrior_diplomacy
It sees the demand for a free and unbiased investigation into the source of the virus as an attack by the west to demonise the country. Australia was one of the first countries to demand an investigation.
The "independent" investigation that finished a few months ago was strictly controlled by China and the only data released was what China deemed relevant. China did not allow any interviews with their scientists without a CCP "minder" being present.
China's current position is that the virus started in several countries simultaneously.
SV650rules
27-07-21, 08:06 AM
What is the situation with an independent inquiry to find covid's origin , is there a 'lack of cooperation' from
China ?!
There is a lack of cooperation from China on pretty much everything, the west has built up China with its insatiable demand for cheap widgets but China acts as though it no longer needs the west, but the west is the biggest market for Chinese goods by a massive margin. Now Sleepy Biden ( that well known Sinophile ) is in charge of USA then China will relax a bit about USA sanctions and become even more belligerent. Trouble with one party countries like China ( same as Russia ) they need to be belligerent to make them appear strong.
Indeed, the UK appears to be in the process of increasing imports from China while reducing imports from the EU. Some might question the moral justifications.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/may/25/uk-trade-with-eu-falls-by-23-in-first-quarter-as-brexit-and-covid-hit
when was the last time you bought something made in Australia or New Zealand or for that matter anywhere apart from the "East"? China and its neighbouring countries has the rest of the world over a barrel so can do what it likes until the "West" start producing its own consumer shizz.
when was the last time you bought something made in Australia or New Zealand or for that matter anywhere apart from the "East"? China and its neighbouring countries has the rest of the world over a barrel so can do what it likes until the "West" start producing its own consumer shizz.
I agree. This isn't so much a political issue as a corporation and investor issue. Investors demand ever increasing profits and the easiest way to satisfy this is to shift production to where labour is cheaper. If the consumer stopped buying ebay knock-offs it would help.
I've recently bought 2 UK made plain T shirts (@ £30 each!), I could buy 15 for that from Matalan.
oh, and my Blundstone boots were made in Tasmania.
A good summary of UK's handling of pandemic:
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/british-government-covid-strategy-never-120632416.html
SV650rules
27-07-21, 05:25 PM
Zero covid is not a good strategy ( neither is zero carbon, but leave that for another day ). Nothing wrong with government lifting restrictions, too many bedwetting scientists have been forecasting millions of deaths for far too long now ( it actually reminds me of project fear before and during Brexit ). We need to treat this like flu, and UK has never worn masks during flu season ( well up to now anyway ) and has relied on vaccine to protect the vulnerable, they certainly never shut the country down for flu. Pretty much the same people are prey to flu every year, the old and infirm with multiple existing health conditions, old and young obese people and people with diabetes ( which is what the government should really be worrying about, it is a ticking time bomb in UK). Scientists seem to work on the premise that it is better to be massively gloomy than optimistic.
svenrico
27-07-21, 06:46 PM
China's current position is that the virus started in several countries simultaneously.
As Mandy Rice Davies once said - They would say that wouldn't they !
it actually reminds me of project fear before and during Brexit
you mentioned this once before, do you consider Brexit to be a success? It seems to me that all the pessimistic predictions are coming true.
too many bedwetting scientists have been forecasting millions of deaths for far too long now
are these the same scientists that are predicting:
...and people with diabetes ( which is what the government should really be worrying about, it is a ticking time bomb in UK)
Which particular gloomy outlook are you choosing to believe from the (bedwetting) scientists, covid deaths (currently 4.16 million worldwide] or UK diabetes (in UK about 4 million)?
It seems to me that many people have diabetes through lifestyle choices, not sure the same applies to covid patients (unless they have refused the vaccine).
Irrespective of how you feel about lockdown (and we know your views), my issue is how the government have handled the pandemic. On current information they cherry picked the scientific data to allow party donors to financially benefit.
just as well BJ predicted he would save us this amount.
https://static.dw.com/image/48958481_401.jpg
:^o
vBulletin® , Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.