Jump to content

Recommended Posts

It is clear the demand has increased since the schools went back.  What should've happened is prioritising the children, teachers, families for tests. If they'd said back in mid-July, for example- "Right, schools are back on the 7th of September, school families take priority, even separate test centres where possible, we can aim to control the spread there". They'd have had seven/ eight weeks to prepare, the public know and can get used to it.

 

The two weeks, if it comes in, needs to be used to decide how they proceed, what the main issues are and how they can be managed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

'729 new ARI incidents have been reported in week 37 (Figure 19):
• 313 incidents were from care homes where 228 had at least one linked case that tested
positive for SARS-CoV-2
• 18 incidents were from hospitals where 13 had at least one linked case that tested positive for SARS-CoV-2
• 193 incidents were from educational settings where 110 had at least one linked case that
tested positive for SARS-CoV-2
• 4 incidents were from prisons where 3 had at least one linked case that tested positive for
SARS-CoV-2
• 110 incidents were from workplace settings where 92 had at least one linked case that
tested positive for SARS-CoV-2
• 34 incidents were from food outlet/restaurant settings where 25 had at least one linked
case that tested positive for SARS-CoV-2
• 57 incidents were from the other settings category where 39 had at least one linked case
that tested positive for SARS-CoV-2'

 

This look like it's hardly spreading in homes, more schools, workplaces and care homes.

 

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/919092/Weekly_COVID19_Surveillance_Report_week_38_FINAL.pdf

 

Add in the 30% where COVID wasn't the underlying cause of death.

 

https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/death-certificate-data-covid-19-as-the-underlying-cause-of-death/

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fully on board with blaming the public to an extent. The amount of people I see not wearing masks on public transport is shockingly large. I reckon there were more people not wearing masks than we wearing them on the train yesterday, and it was pretty busy. If people aren't adhering to that, they're probably not adhering to less visible measures either.

 

Of course, I don't think the government has helped with nonsense like telling people to go back to work, testing needs sorting, and the Cummings thing undermined everything but the public has got to take responsibility and, whilst there's an element of selection bias involved, from what I've seen too many aren't. If everyone does the simple things then we can avoid the worst of measures returning.

 

"It is our duty to look after ourselves and then also to help look after our neighbour and life is a reciprocal business and people have got the entitlements too much in mind without the obligations.”

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mark 'expert' Lawrenson said:

Yes smoke.

People’s lifestyle choices have not helped them at all.

But it’s not an infectious transmission. 
 

Just disagree with cancer being used as a comparison when it can be a sad case of luck or family history 

Edited by Cardiff_Fox
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Kopfkino said:

Fully on board with blaming the public to an extent. The amount of people I see not wearing masks on public transport is shockingly large. I reckon there were more people not wearing masks than we wearing them on the train yesterday, and it was pretty busy. If people aren't adhering to that, they're probably not adhering to less visible measures either.

 

Of course, I don't think the government has helped with nonsense like telling people to go back to work, testing needs sorting, and the Cummings thing undermined everything but the public has got to take responsibility and, whilst there's an element of selection bias involved, from what I've seen too many aren't. If everyone does the simple things then we can avoid the worst of measures returning.

 

"It is our duty to look after ourselves and then also to help look after our neighbour and life is a reciprocal business and people have got the entitlements too much in mind without the obligations.”

Of course the public are to blame- we're all part of it. But out of 60 million people, how many really have been blase, careless, stupid, senseless etc? I'd imagine that well over 75% have been responsible, compliant, sensible and frankly I resent being told that I'm part of the problem. The public are to blame for the rise in cases and also to blame for demand for tests? 

 

I will comply with whatever measures are in place because it's the right thing to do but I'm not accepting the public as one are to blame, politicians haven't been angels themselves either.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

But it’s not an infectious transmission. 
 

Just disagree with cancer being used as a comparison when it can be a sad case of luck or family history 

I obviously know it’s not infectious, smoking is a lifestyle choice which will more than likely end badly and an increased chance of illness.

I haven’t mentioned any other form of cancer and totally agree with your last sentence, but specifically cancer from cigarettes is different.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Corky said:

Of course the public are to blame- we're all part of it. But out of 60 million people, how many really have been blase, careless, stupid, senseless etc? I'd imagine that well over 75% have been responsible, compliant, sensible and frankly I resent being told that I'm part of the problem. The public are to blame for the rise in cases and also to blame for demand for tests? 

 

I will comply with whatever measures are in place because it's the right thing to do but I'm not accepting the public as one are to blame, politicians haven't been angels themselves either.

 

Well idk why you take 'the public' as an ad hominem attack on you or anyone else's actions as individuals. But you are part of a community that isn't being as vigilant as it could and should. Seems a bit strange to take it personally.

 

I mean you've just started with of course the public are to blame as we are all part of it and finished with offence that the public is being blamed. Make your mind up.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Kopfkino said:

 

Well idk why you take 'the public' as an ad hominem attack on you or anyone else's actions as individuals. But you are part of a community that isn't being as vigilant as it could and should. Seems a bit strange to take it personally.

 

I mean you've just started with of course the public are to blame as we are all part of it and finished with offence that the public is being blamed. Make your mind up.

Not everyone who gets this virus will have done so carelessly or recklessly, it could be lurking anywhere. I've no doubt plenty have been stupid but proportionately I'd say the public have been far more responsible for avoiding the spread, hospitalisations and deaths being astronomical.

 

Hancock and his tone are just getting on my nerves at the moment, I'm more annoyed at him really.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Before saying "coronavirus is spreading, we must have another lockdown", has it occurred to anyone ion government to enquire whether lockdown does any good?  Italy had a big lockdown.  So did Spain.  We had a lesser one.  Sweden had no lockdown at all.  Peru had a very strict lockdown.  Brazil had a President who refused to believe coronavirus existed.

 

And here are their death rates per million:

967, 642, 635, 626, 589, 574.

Pretty much of a muchness, apart from the highest death rate which is Peru.  (The lowest on that list, incidentally, is Sweden.)

 

The point being that the virus has run roughly the same course in all those countries, lockdown or not.  So before rushing to enforce another lockdown, and possibly several more ad infinitum, perhaps they could produce some statistical evidence to say how, why, and if it has made any difference?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, dsr-burnley said:

Before saying "coronavirus is spreading, we must have another lockdown", has it occurred to anyone ion government to enquire whether lockdown does any good?  Italy had a big lockdown.  So did Spain.  We had a lesser one.  Sweden had no lockdown at all.  Peru had a very strict lockdown.  Brazil had a President who refused to believe coronavirus existed.

 

And here are their death rates per million:

967, 642, 635, 626, 589, 574.

Pretty much of a muchness, apart from the highest death rate which is Peru.  (The lowest on that list, incidentally, is Sweden.)

 

The point being that the virus has run roughly the same course in all those countries, lockdown or not.  So before rushing to enforce another lockdown, and possibly several more ad infinitum, perhaps they could produce some statistical evidence to say how, why, and if it has made any difference?

 

You need to take into account how stretched those countries health systems became.Also how stretched they may become if we do get another wave.Our nhs frontline workers must be dreading this winter.

Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Heathrow fox said:

You need to take into account how stretched those countries health systems became.Also how stretched they may become if we do get another wave.Our nhs frontline workers must be dreading this winter.

Yes, that was the point of the initial lockdown.  The only time the government has said what they are trying toi achieve is when lockdown was first imposed, and they said that it was to avoid overwhelming the health service.  It was to last 3 weeks.

 

Have they noticed that the health service is not overwhelmed?  

 

And before they want to re-impose draconian laws that restrict everyone's freedom, wouldn't it be as well to have a bit more evidence beyond "I was scared"?  Let's see what the government hopes to achieve by another lockdown, and scientific evidence of why they think it will work.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

'729 new ARI incidents have been reported in week 37 (Figure 19):
• 313 incidents were from care homes where 228 had at least one linked case that tested
positive for SARS-CoV-2
• 18 incidents were from hospitals where 13 had at least one linked case that tested positive for SARS-CoV-2
• 193 incidents were from educational settings where 110 had at least one linked case that
tested positive for SARS-CoV-2
• 4 incidents were from prisons where 3 had at least one linked case that tested positive for
SARS-CoV-2
• 110 incidents were from workplace settings where 92 had at least one linked case that
tested positive for SARS-CoV-2
• 34 incidents were from food outlet/restaurant settings where 25 had at least one linked
case that tested positive for SARS-CoV-2
• 57 incidents were from the other settings category where 39 had at least one linked case
that tested positive for SARS-CoV-2'

 

This look like it's hardly spreading in homes, more schools, workplaces and care homes.

 

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/919092/Weekly_COVID19_Surveillance_Report_week_38_FINAL.pdf

 

Add in the 30% where COVID wasn't the underlying cause of death.

 

https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/death-certificate-data-covid-19-as-the-underlying-cause-of-death/

 

 

This data doesn't take homes into account as it's pretty much impossible to account for. However it is interesting how educational and workplace settings are high, and care homes are still high. Any sort of measures which exclude schools are not going to get a grip on an outbreak.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Nod.E said:

Exactly.

 

The people complaining are the first to talk up how infectious the disease is, but are happy to say it's the fault of 'selfish b*stards' that we're experiencing a second wave. 

 

Did people really just start being selfish b*stards all of a sudden or is it something bigger, like schools opening again? 

 

It's obviously going to spread, and all the signs are that it's much less deadly and the health service is much more prepared for it.

 

Our only concern should be any impending lockdown because the virus doesn't realistically cause us all that many issues at this point. 

we need to let it run its course and get on with life, it aint going away, even if we hide.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well here we go again...

 

Even if it takes a week or two the next lockdown is coming - looking at other countries and the mess they are heading in to combined with the the idea that the virus can survive on frozen or cold surfaces for significant periods, the government don’t really have a choice - no matter if they make it this week or in two weeks time.

 

It comes down to being able to Police the rules so the rules need to be very clear and enforceable. In my opinion what they’ll do will be to prevent any households at all mixing inside or outside in their respective homes. People up to groups of six I reckon will still be allowed to meet up in pubs (whilst they remain open) but until then it’ll be at some point soon household lockdown. They have to keep the economy going so the options left are to restrict liberties outside of work and schools.

 

Cant see another outcome at the moment.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, joachim1965 said:

we need to let it run its course and get on with life, it aint going away, even if we hide.

Covid: Is it time we learnt to live with the virus?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54228649

 

Prof Robert Dingwall, a sociologist and an adviser to the government, believes the public may well be now at the stage where it is "comfortable" with the idea that thousands will die from Covid just as they are that they die of flu.

 

He believes it is only a particular element of the public health and scientific leadership who worry about driving down the infection level and is critical of politicians for not being "brave enough" to be honest with the public that the virus will be around "forever and a day" even with a vaccine.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Izzy said:

Covid: Is it time we learnt to live with the virus?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54228649

 

Prof Robert Dingwall, a sociologist and an adviser to the government, believes the public may well be now at the stage where it is "comfortable" with the idea that thousands will die from Covid just as they are that they die of flu.

 

He believes it is only a particular element of the public health and scientific leadership who worry about driving down the infection level and is critical of politicians for not being "brave enough" to be honest with the public that the virus will be around "forever and a day" even with a vaccine.

Doubtless some people may be comfortable with letting thousands die every year from Covid-19, maybe tens of thousands, worst case hundreds of thousands with our hospitals overwhelmed and the care home sector devastated, so long as it's not them that's dying.

 

Covid-19 is different to flu right now - we have an annual flu vaccine that protects the vulnerable, we don't with Covid-19.  Once we do have an effective vaccine then we could potentially live with it, until then it's not an option that many would be willing to consider.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Crinklyfox said:

Doubtless some people may be comfortable with letting thousands die every year from Covid-19, maybe tens of thousands, worst case hundreds of thousands with our hospitals overwhelmed and the care home sector devastated, so long as it's not them that's dying.

 

Covid-19 is different to flu right now - we have an annual flu vaccine that protects the vulnerable, we don't with Covid-19.  Once we do have an effective vaccine then we could potentially live with it, until then it's not an option that many would be willing to consider.

It could be years before a safe and tested vaccine is available,  do you suggest we hide away until then? 

The mental health issues and suicide rates would be sky high.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I also think that 'comfortable' is a bad choice of words, nobody should ever be comfortable with thousands of people dying, unfortunately thousands upon thousands die of numerous causes on a daily basis, it is a sad fact of life that everyone has to accept.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, joachim1965 said:

It could be years before a safe and tested vaccine is available,  do you suggest we hide away until then? 

The mental health issues and suicide rates would be sky high.

I'm anticipating a vaccine in months, there are several promising vaccines in Stage 3 trials.

 

 

Link to post
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.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

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...
×
×
  • Create New...