Coronavirus

[Mudface]

 

4 minutes ago, Spy Bee said:

I'm not saying you cannot distinctly have Covid symptoms, or cold symptoms. I am saying that often it will be very difficult to tell. I should have just done the venn diagram in the first place shouldn't I?

 

Yes, you should...

[Guest Alex_K]

12 hours ago, Rico1304 said:

So your worry is people being turned out into the street and starving.  But at the same time acknowledging that the government has intervened perhaps more than any other. Which is it? 
 

Its not black and white.  What is your acceptable  % of deaths? 

Do you smoke? Do you drink? Do you drive? What of the c. 90,000 deaths a year in the UK is an acceptable number to allow citizenry the freedom to engage in those activities. There are boundless other activities which cause death & are freely accepted into society.

 

The government intervention was a needed shot-in-the-arm to prevent the emptying of supermarkets in March evolving to a full-on run on the banks. It was however illusory & has created in some (many?) a false idea of what lockdown-land entails. As for my view on "what is an acceptable % of deaths"? Put it this way, I think it is completely necessary for society to continue around a virus that has a sub-1% fatality rate for under 60s & a sub-3% rate (at the very worst calculations so far) for under 70s with protective measures for that at-risk group when there is no definable alternative. The benefit of a 4 month complete & unprecedented lockdown in halting infection rates is approaching negligible after single digit weeks! I expect a genuine 3 million (non-furloughed) unemployment line will shake some of the malaise.

[Bjornebye]

17 minutes ago, Spy Bee said:

it keeps me entertained while I have a quite week. I'm afraid this may be my last day of such significant contributions for a while. I'm sure you're all devastated by this news.

I am. Its good to debate and you make a better fist of it than some of your fellow "moon is made of cheese" chums. 

[Mudface]

3 minutes ago, Alex_K said:

The benefit of a 4 month complete & unprecedented lockdown in halting infection rates is approaching negligible after single digit weeks! 

True, but that's entirely due to the response of the government- it dithered and locked down way too late, hence had to lock down for far longer than if it had gone early, ruined the collective response with the Cummings debacle, and then opened things back up too early with still significant numbers of infections and track and trace nowhere near functional. If we'd done it properly, we could potentially be in a position where we're just suppressing localised outbreaks with much of the place back to relatively normal, instead of re-imposing restrictions on the whole country. As it is, we're between a rock and a hard place with all avenues leading to some degree of shite.

[Rico1304]

17 minutes ago, Alex_K said:

Do you smoke? Do you drink? Do you drive? What of the c. 90,000 deaths a year in the UK is an acceptable number to allow citizenry the freedom to engage in those activities. There are boundless other activities which cause death & are freely accepted into society.

 

The government intervention was a needed shot-in-the-arm to prevent the emptying of supermarkets in March evolving to a full-on run on the banks. It was however illusory & has created in some (many?) a false idea of what lockdown-land entails. As for my view on "what is an acceptable % of deaths"? Put it this way, I think it is completely necessary for society to continue around a virus that has a sub-1% fatality rate for under 60s & a sub-3% rate (at the very worst calculations so far) for under 70s with protective measures for that at-risk group when there is no definable alternative. The benefit of a 4 month complete & unprecedented lockdown in halting infection rates is approaching negligible after single digit weeks! I expect a genuine 3 million (non-furloughed) unemployment line will shake some of the malaise.

I don’t smoke, but do drink and drive (although not at the same time). But I can’t infect your nan with liver cancer.  On driving it must be one of the most heavily regulated areas of our lives.  We have to have a test, have insurance and drive a car that is fit for purpose.  There are fucking hundreds of laws related to driving and if you don’t obey you can go to prison for the rest of your life. Yet if one person goes against the grain, and say drives the wrong way up the motorway or stops on a foggy motorway they can kill loads of people in one incident. 
 

What is your acceptable %.  

[Duff Man]

Not really sure what the thinking was/is with universities. Can only conclude that they knew what would happen and just thought fuck it, why not

[Spy Bee]

3 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

I don’t smoke, but do drink and drive (although not at the same time).

Very wise. You don't want to spill booze.

[Duff Man]

There are also quite a few upsides to 'driving', like getting food and vital supplies to wherever they're needed in the country, all day every day. If Covid starts doing that then it might be a worthwhile comparison.

[3 Stacks]

22 minutes ago, Mudface said:

True, but that's entirely due to the response of the government- it dithered and locked down way too late, hence had to lock down for far longer than if it had gone early, ruined the collective response with the Cummings debacle, and then opened things back up too early with still significant numbers of infections and track and trace nowhere near functional. If we'd done it properly, we could potentially be in a position where we're just suppressing localised outbreaks with much of the place back to relatively normal, instead of re-imposing restrictions on the whole country. As it is, we're between a rock and a hard place with all avenues leading to some degree of shite.

I forget his name, but a German epidemiologist said the only reason Germany are doing better than places like the UK is because they did all the prevention earlier. They didn't do anything different or special, they did the exact same stuff, just acted sooner. 

[Duff Man]

Early intervention does seem to have been key. But on the flip-side, those horse racing events are pretty important, too

[Bjornebye]

10 minutes ago, Duff Man said:

There are also quite a few upsides to 'driving', like getting food and vital supplies to wherever they're needed in the country, all day every day. If Covid starts doing that then it might be a worthwhile comparison.

Wait Covid can drive?

 

I'm off me. 

[Mudface]

3 minutes ago, 3 Stacks said:

I forget his name, but a German epidemiologist said the only reason Germany are doing better than places like the UK is because they did all the prevention earlier. They didn't do anything different or special, they did the exact same stuff, just acted sooner. 

Aye, at the same time, we had Johnson dodging COBRA meetings, saying that us brave Brits could 'take it on the chin' and shaking hands with potential Covid patients.

 

16 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

I don’t smoke, but do drink and drive (although not at the same time). But I can’t infect your nan with liver cancer.  On driving it must be one of the most heavily regulated areas of our lives.  We have to have a test, have insurance and drive a car that is fit for purpose.  There are fucking hundreds of laws related to driving and if you don’t obey you can go to prison for the rest of your life. Yet if one person goes against the grain, and say drives the wrong way up the motorway or stops on a foggy motorway they can kill loads of people in one incident. 
 

What is your acceptable %.  

Smoking's a good example of how bought and paid for scientists- vociferous, but in a minority- can confuse the public over the safety of something with bullshit and allow a view opposing the general consensus to become normalised. See also climate change deniers and the likes of Sikora and Gupta now. These aren't trailblazing geniuses that have spotted something 99% of the scientific community missed, they're cunts.

[Barrington Womble]

40 minutes ago, Colonel Kurtz said:

I think its a myth that  we can stop vulnerable people getting this for the next six months. The Government are not being honest about the end plan for all of this. What is going to happen in six months time that will change anything ? There should be a lot more parliamentary scrutiny of the plan. 

Well I guess the plan for after 6 months is there'll be no need for a plan as we'll have a vaccine rolling out. Everything we're doing has always just to stop the NHS getting over run for long enough to get a vaccine. 

[Tony Moanero]

Cunts are panicking buying again.

[Duff Man]

Yeah bog roll shelves were empty in my local Sainsburys this morning

[Harry's Lad]

29 minutes ago, Colonel Kurtz said:

I think its a myth that  we can stop vulnerable people getting this for the next six months. The Government are not being honest about the end plan for all of this. What is going to happen in six months time that will change anything ? There should be a lot more parliamentary scrutiny of the plan. 

I'm classed as extremely vulnerable and was ok (apart from the isolation) during the first lockdown.

My Mrs was was off work with pay because of this, so there was much less of a chance of either of us picking anything up.

The next six months will be very different though because now she has to be in work, and as she works in a school, the risks of catching anything are much higher.

I don't believe the authorities when they say that children don't spread it.

If that was the case, why is it that when a child tests positive, the rest of the class including the teacher have to stay off and isolate for 14 days?.

I agree with you that it's a myth that you can stop vulnerable people getting it, but it's been made a lot more likely that they will.

[Sugar Ape]

 

[Duff Man]

Putting a fiver on a half term lockdown

[Spy Bee]

10 minutes ago, Sugar Ape said:

 

The rate slowed down significantly in the second week, which is good.

 

This is interesting. A history of vaccines:

 

 

[Numero Veinticinco]

22 hours ago, Anubis said:

 

 

I’m running it on an iPhone 6S from 5 years ago in 2015. So... not true. It’s probably a technical limitation from Apple, not the government. I mean, there’s only so much you can expect. 
 

Hancock is a dickhead though. 

[TheHowieLama]

3 day average for deaths in the UK is the highest it has been since the first week of July.

[Rico1304]

21 minutes ago, Duff Man said:

Putting a fiver on a half term lockdown

I would, I’m supposed to be in centre Parcs 

[TheHowieLama]

2 hours ago, Bjornebye said:

I reckon Spy Bee wakes up at 4:30am, drinks 6 raw eggs then goes for a run with before he logs on to this thread. 

 

 

[Barrington Womble]

52 minutes ago, Sugar Ape said:

 

I think that's better than it looks at 1st glance. While 3k have been added each week, as a percentage it's a massive decrease. Let's hope it's showing we don't have exponential growth. 

[Mudface]

1 minute ago, Barrington Womble said:

I think that's better than it looks at 1st glance. While 3k have been added each week, as a percentage it's a massive decrease. Let's hope it's showing we don't have exponential growth. 

Fingers crossed, at that rate it could peak in a few weeks and actually start to decline.