Covid-19

[skyhuck]

People who argue against the lockdown and point out the very OBVIOUS very, very negative health affects of lockdown still haven't given a satisfactory alternative, IMO. The NHS would simply have been overrun, leading to possibly worse and long-lasting negative health outcomes. Plus we would have lost the hearts and minds of the NHS staff. They would have felt utterly abandoned and taken for granted.

 

 They will no doubt come back with the old "Oh you just protect the vulnerable" well firstly that's simply not possible. Our society is simply not built that way, it's like asking someone to remove the mortar from a wall, but leave the wall standing.

 

Plus the reason the less vulnerable survive it due to the excellent medical treatment they receive. The current average age of people in ICU is 65 and the very old and vulnerable don't ever go into ICU.

[skyhuck]

5 minutes ago, trigger_andy said:

As someone who has a such a self-professed grasp of the very basics of viral spread can you please explain why? 

If after the best part of a year of this you can't work it out, I ain't gonna waste my time trying.

[trigger_andy]

Just now, skyhuck said:

If after the best part of a year of this you can't work it out, I ain't gonna waste my time trying.

Ditto. 

[sime42]

I find your inability to grasp the very basics of viral spread, after nearly a year of this is utterly staggering.

Nah, I believe he probably has a very good grasp of the basics of virology. As good as the rest of us non-scientists at least. He's obviously an intelligent chap. It appears more like he just doesn't care, which is far worse IMO.

Anyway, I find the inability to answer simple, direct questions utterly staggering!

[trigger_andy]

Just now, skyhuck said:

People who argue against the lockdown and point out the very OBVIOUS very, very negative health affects of lockdown still haven't given a satisfactory alternative, IMO. The NHS would simply have been overrun, leading to possibly worse and long-lasting negative health outcomes. Plus we would have lost the hearts and minds of the NHS staff. They would have felt utterly abandoned and taken for granted.

Numerous people have given alternatives, alternatives that are im places like (shock) Norway but you clearly have no answer to that and refuse to explain why. Thats cool beans, but dont pretend that this pandemic could not be held in check with less stringent measures because (shock) its working here in Norway. 

 

1 minute ago, skyhuck said:

They will no doubt come back with the old "Oh you just protect the vulnerable" well firstly that's simply not possible. Our society is simply not built that way, it's like asking someone to remove the mortar from a wall, but leave the wall standing.

Again (shock) it works here in Noreay and they are even looking at relaxing some measures in a country where the measures are already more relaxed than the UK. We're talking large towns and cities here, not the vest wastelands. 

 

3 minutes ago, skyhuck said:

Plus the reason the less vulnerable survive it due to the excellent medical treatment they receive. The current average age of people in ICU is 65 and the very old and vulnerable don't ever go into ICU.

You mean the very, very limited number of those who are under the average age of dying from Covid which is 82 and have existing medical conditions are now surviving due to the medical treatment they receive?

 

There is a vast difference in false and personal narrative you're trying to push here and the truth. The irrefutable truth is that 99.991% of the English population under the age of 60 survive covid and the vast majority of them do not even know they have it. 

 

[Johnsond]

1 hour ago, sime42 said:

I can't acknowledge that those stats are correct, not having access to the source data or skills to analyse it, but they don't look too far off current estimates. On the other hand given that the source was Nigel Farage they ought to be very stringently fact checked!

However, the average ages of Covid victims is academic really, it's seriously missing the point. The problem is that those thousands of patients are taking a massive amount of resource to care for and treat. Regardless of age. If anything older patients need more resources. The consequence is that the lucky majority of the population that aren't adversely effected by Covid conversely suffer because they can't get the services that they require. How do you two in your wisdom suggest that we resolve this problem?

I've done the courteous thing and answered the question asked of me. Perhaps one of you could return the favour now.
 

Christ how many times do you need an explanation of the alternative approaches to this ??? 
I’m sure it’s been put up numerous times, you try to keep putting myself and Andy in the same opinion group but I think you will find it’s a good few more on here whom disagree with Lockdown as the only tool in the box. 

[sime42]

Christ how many times do you need an explanation of the alternative approaches to this ??? 
I’m sure it’s been put up numerous times, you try to keep putting myself and Andy in the same opinion group but I think you will find it’s a good few more on here whom disagree with Lockdown as the only tool in the box. 

Safety in numbers?

[sime42]

Christ how many times do you need an explanation of the alternative approaches to this ??? 
I’m sure it’s been put up numerous times, you try to keep putting myself and Andy in the same opinion group but I think you will find it’s a good few more on here whom disagree with Lockdown as the only tool in the box. 

I've never said Lockdown was the only weapon. It is the worst and as such the last resort.
Sadly all the other, better, more nuanced weapons have now been wasted or fxcked up for us in this country.

[Big J]

3 hours ago, skyhuck said:

They will no doubt come back with the old "Oh you just protect the vulnerable" well firstly that's simply not possible. Our society is simply not built that way, it's like asking someone to remove the mortar from a wall, but leave the wall standing.

 

I'd make the argument that society as we knew it has been largely destroyed anyway. 

 

We've killed off physical shops, the hospitality sector, our children's social lives and by extension, their development. We've entrenched an attitude of government dependency, ruined what little work ethic we had before and left ourselves and our children indebted for decades to come. 

 

I really do think that our public health outcome would not have been any worse had we simply isolated and shielded our old and vulnerable. Yes it would have been crap for them, and it would have seemed unfair, but apart from the fact that others in society would have freedoms that they didn't have, how would a targeted lockdown be any different for them to what they have now? Lumping everyone in the same risk group doesn't make sense from a public health perspective, and from an economic standpoint, it's a disaster.

 

I agree that the cost of covid is tragic (in terms of lives lost) but you have to ask the question - how many of those that died were already in declining health? How much longer would they have lived? I'm really trying not to appear callous about it, but I do fully expect to see a lower than average death rate for the next few years as the (slightly) premature deaths from covid balance out against the long term death rate. 

 

The ever spiralling limits on our personal liberties and the continued insistence from the government of using executive decree (rather than laws scrutinised by parliament) is deeply concerning. Once we're all vaccinated, we really do need to get back to some sort of normal.  

Edited February 12, 2021 by Big J

[Mesterh]

20 hours ago, Richard 1234 said:

How about distancing when needed masks when needed not meeting vulnerable people and then getting on with life using some common sense. Best of both worlds maybe?

I don't really understand as that's what's more or less going on now to a degree and there are plenty of people out there with no common sense at all. If you mean open up all business's but try to distance and expect people to use common sense then that's not really going to work either, it was tried and the rates went up hence this current lockdown.