Jump to content

COVID-19 UK & Beyond


Rog
 Share

Recommended Posts

"We" are doomed.

The government has washed their hands of all responsibility for a second wave by relaxing lock down conditions and failing to deal with the Cummings debacle.

Durdle Door (Dorset) first full weekend after relaxing began, thousands drove from all over the country to visit the beauty spot.

Three were injured "tomb stoning" off the Door, requiring two helicopters to land on the beach.

Less than 24 hours later, more idiots were spotted jumping off the door, and the roads leading upto the Door were rammed with cars parked on the sides of the road (after the car park and overflow car park were closed).

 

This, this is what happens when you a) basically tell the public that the rules don't matter (Cummings) and b) leave something as important as collective public health up to "common sense" and the public.

 

82240931_10158447993005948_7591747491914055680_n.jpg

101909920_10158447992995948_7820211534126120960_n.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/3/2020 at 4:43 PM, woolley said:

What do you expect them to do? It's a viral infection that will run its course as they always do. It'll kill a tiny percentage, mainly the already ill and old. But that happens every winter anyhow. Panic is futile.

Nearly 3 months on, 372,000 dead world wide, care to update us on your feelings on the matter Woolster?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, RIchard Britten said:

Nearly 3 months on, 372,000 dead world wide, care to update us on your feelings on the matter Woolster?

Stop trolling And provoking. Back 24 hours. Is your return going to be less than 24 hours? Are you trying for a record.

If you can’t behave go post somewhere else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, RIchard Britten said:

Nearly 3 months on, 372,000 dead world wide, care to update us on your feelings on the matter Woolster?

in 2018 there was just over 7.5 billion people on the planet. so the death ratio is a tiny percentage. 

 

The other thing to factor in is Nicola Sturgeon admitted that in Scotland deaths were being recorded if the person died of a stroke but they had been diagnosed with Covid then it was being recorded as a covid related death. How many other countries have recorded in the same way?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/3/2020 at 4:43 PM, woolley said:

What do you expect them to do? It's a viral infection that will run its course as they always do. It'll kill a tiny percentage, mainly the already ill and old. But that happens every winter anyhow. Panic is futile.

 

2 hours ago, RIchard Britten said:

I'm not trolling, I am asking the poster if he still feels the same as he did 3 months ago.

I don't mind. It's a valid question.

Yes I do, very much so. It's a pandemic, and they happen from time to time. Perhaps more could have been done to mitigate around the world, particularly in the early stages, but what I said in that post remains valid and has been borne out by events. It HAS killed a tiny percentage and no matter how many more it kills in subsequent waves, it will remain a tiny percentage. It IS mainly the old and the ill who are the worst affected, so many of them already on the verge of death from other causes and to some a blessed release from suffering on indefinitely. Finally, panic IS futile and we have seen far too much of that. The societal damage caused by the extent of the measures is out of all proportion to the disease. A better way would have been to shield those who are genuinely vulnerable and allow the other 90%+ of the population, for whom it would entail a minor illness if that, to get on with life and in the meantime build up antibodies to shield the entire community.

I cite Wrighty's post from yesterday. This is not the end of the world.

On 5/31/2020 at 3:30 PM, wrighty said:

There are different figures on Worldometers.info. Cancer for example has killed 3.4 million apparently. 24 million deaths altogether so far this year, so covid most definitely has not killed more than any other cause. Even in the UK there’s been about 250,000 deaths this year so far - covid is about 40000 of them. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, P.K. said:

Please explain what you mean by "societal damage" which somehow makes "never events" worthwhile?

Thanks.

This is based on a false premise. A pandemic is not a "never event". They happen. The societal damage is the sum total of all of the social and financial upheaval being wrought around the world in the massive overreaction by governments and media to the virus. The better way would be to shield the genuinely vulnerable - say those over 60 and those with underlying health conditions - and let the rest of society continue as normal with some minor precautions against transmission to flatten the curve. The vast majority have little or nothing to fear from catching it. They have far more to fear from unemployment, loss of income, loss of businesses, property repossession, bankruptcy, neglect of care for every other illness, relationship breakdown and the consequent psychological ramifications. All of these major self-inflicted wounds will take many years to heal.

I would ask you to explain what you suggest happens in a second wave of infection. The same nonsense all over again at the same colossal cost?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, woolley said:

...neglect of care for every other illness...

About 2.5million patients not had cancer treatment, investigation or screening in the UK due to covid. And it’s not like the NHS can play catch-up afterwards - getting things up and running is far harder than just stopping them, and productivity post-covid is going to be about 50% what it was. 
 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52876999

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, woolley said:

This is based on a false premise. A pandemic is not a "never event". They happen. The societal damage is the sum total of all of the social and financial upheaval being wrought around the world in the massive overreaction by governments and media to the virus. The better way would be to shield the genuinely vulnerable - say those over 60 and those with underlying health conditions - and let the rest of society continue as normal with some minor precautions against transmission to flatten the curve. The vast majority have little or nothing to fear from catching it. They have far more to fear from unemployment, loss of income, loss of businesses, property repossession, bankruptcy, neglect of care for every other illness, relationship breakdown and the consequent psychological ramifications. All of these major self-inflicted wounds will take many years to heal.

I would ask you to explain what you suggest happens in a second wave of infection. The same nonsense all over again at the same colossal cost?

I disagree with this bit, strongly. The evidence is clearly there that a short early strict lockdown was entirely the right thing to do. The UK were two weeks late with theirs and it is going to take a long time and a lot of effort to get out of it as a result. The shielding the vulnerable sounds like a good idea but it is really hard to do and doesn't work if it is rampant in the general population. It will work if you've got that transmission right down.

Also, on the effects of the disease itself, while it obviously kills the old and vulnerable in pretty hefty numbers when it gets the chance it also makes quite a lot of less old and less vulnerable ill. And not just a cold or whatever, there are a lot of people in hospital, I'm not sure what the UK numbers are now, but yesterday in France where the worst has passed there were still more than 14000 covid patients in hospital. 3+ months in, when things have got better. 

I do agree with the potentially huge negative effects of the lockdown, its got doctors pretty worried for sure. The economy will bounce back though, somehow. It always will, there is money to be made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, TheTeapot said:

I disagree with this bit, strongly. The evidence is clearly there that a short early strict lockdown was entirely the right thing to do. The UK were two weeks late with theirs and it is going to take a long time and a lot of effort to get out of it as a result. The shielding the vulnerable sounds like a good idea but it is really hard to do and doesn't work if it is rampant in the general population. It will work if you've got that transmission right down.

Also, on the effects of the disease itself, while it obviously kills the old and vulnerable in pretty hefty numbers when it gets the chance it also makes quite a lot of less old and less vulnerable ill. And not just a cold or whatever, there are a lot of people in hospital, I'm not sure what the UK numbers are now, but yesterday in France where the worst has passed there were still more than 14000 covid patients in hospital. 3+ months in, when things have got better. 

I do agree with the potentially huge negative effects of the lockdown, its got doctors pretty worried for sure. The economy will bounce back though, somehow. It always will, there is money to be made.

Just a few points, Teapot, without wishing to start an old style argument. Sharp lockdowns, yes. But only among those over 60 and the already ill, and those cohabiting with them. Go hard on shielding and isolating care homes. It can be done. Most UK homes including many in covid hotspots don't have a single case. The point remains that the vast majority are paying a huge cost for this strategy which has no guarantee of working. The damage is currently incalculable. What would you suggest in the event of a second wave? The same again? I think that to have maintained normality at least for everyone under 50 in good health with some minimal anti-infection measures would have been a pragmatic response that would have seen us through in better order, with a functioning economy and more community immunity to combat future waves. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...