Coronavirus Thread

[dsr-burnley]

14 minutes ago, theessexfox said:

Is there any reason to think anything other than that the vast majority of deaths within 28 days of a positive test are Covid-related deaths, or is this another red herring to play down the awful figures that we are seeing every day at the moment?

No.  Deaths as recorded on death certificates show a similar number of Covid deaths, which means that the number of people run over by a bus 27 days after a Covid test is negligible.

 

With flu and pneumonia, only about 1 in 6 deaths are because of flu and pneumonia - the others are basically old age and heart conditions where technically it was flu/pneumonia that killed them, but if it hadn't been that it would have been something else.  The suggestions are generally that Covid isn't like that - there was (mostly) no immediate reason why they would have died just then. 

 

On the other hand, I don't think it is published how many were under a terminal prognosis and died only a few weeks or months earlier as opposed to years.

[Buce]

9 hours ago, FoxesDeb said:

Well, no, not really. From what I remember you didn't post a 'well thought out argument', just a load of moaning points about what the Government have done wrong, in your opinion. Possibly not wrong, but hardly a well thought out argument 

 

This bloke literally expects us all to believe that his mother's brain has been mapped 

 

 

You asked him how Johnson had fared worse than his European counterparts and he replied, not with opinion, but with eleven valid examples, in what was probably one of the best posts in this entire thread.

 

We get that you're a Tory, but take off the blinkers for once.

Edited 20 November 2020 by Buce

[Buce]

 

And so it begins:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/nov/20/rishi-sunak-warned-not-to-freeze-public-sector-pay-in-mini-budget

 

Anyone who is in any doubt about who is going to pay for the economy tanking, let me give you a clue: it won't be the the rich.

 

With the Brexit shitshow still to come, a continuation of austerity is guaranteed.

[FoxesDeb]

10 hours ago, Finnaldo said:

You’re right to be fair, he didn’t write a well thought out argument, he literally described the events of the last 8 months, and it was a fairly objective account of what happened. Boris missed all six COBR meetings through February: fact. Boris kept on public events through to March and shook hands with active Covid patients: fact. Boris handed the contract to Track & Trace to an MP’s wife with no experience in the field and it’s underperforming massively: fact.
 

No one ever addresses these facts or even attempts to challenge them, they ignore it or act as if it’s a stupid question until the subject changes. Then we get vague comments about how it’s ‘moaning’ or ‘purposeful negativity’ from the usual suspects.

The Cobra meetings has already been addressed. Boris didn't miss them, he was never expected to attend them. The PM doesn't, the relevant secretary of state goes and then reports back to the PM, that's how it works. But although it's been said here many times, are we just ignoring that fact and continuing to be outraged by it? Of course we are, if it suits our narrative. 

 

The shaking hands has also been covered, again in this very thread. Again, people just ignore facts and continue to be outraged, after all, if some bloke posts it on a football forum it must be true hey? Who needs facts when there is so much outrage to be had?

 

The facts have been addressed many times, it just gets ignored because it doesn't fit with what people want to believe

[Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot]

What is the fact that justifies our prime minister shaking hands with people infected with a deadly disease? 

[FoxesDeb]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/nov/20/nhs-prepares-dozens-of-covid-mass-vaccination-centres-around-england

 

Anyone know if vaccinations need to be given by health staff, or if people can be trained to give them? This article suggests we need tens of thousands of staff to run these new centres

[FoxesDeb]

4 minutes ago, Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot said:

What is the fact that justifies our prime minister shaking hands with people infected with a deadly disease? 

I think at the time it was initially thought that colds/flu/covid couldn't be contracted by shaking hands, which to be fair it can't in itself, even though it's pretty obvious you can pick a virus up by touching and then pass it to your face.

 

The 'official' advice for us all to stop shaking hands came on the day, or the day after, I can't remember which, Boris was shown to be shaking hands with covid patients. 

 

As an aside to this, I wonder if we will ever go back to shaking hands all the time, or if this will permanently change the way we greet people?

[Finnaldo]

30 minutes ago, FoxesDeb said:

The Cobra meetings has already been addressed. Boris didn't miss them, he was never expected to attend them. The PM doesn't, the relevant secretary of state goes and then reports back to the PM, that's how it works. But although it's been said here many times, are we just ignoring that fact and continuing to be outraged by it? Of course we are, if it suits our narrative. 

They can be deputised to Ministers, although you’d think a deadly plague starting to rip through Europe would require the PM’s immediate attention. However you avoided the point he decided to give the green light to mass public events? Judging by that and the rest of the pre-lockdown response it wasn’t that high on priorities. 
 

35 minutes ago, FoxesDeb said:

The shaking hands has also been covered, again in this very thread. Again, people just ignore facts and continue to be outraged, after all, if some bloke posts it on a football forum it must be true hey? Who needs facts when there is so much outrage to be had?

 

The facts have been addressed many times, it just gets ignored because it doesn't fit with what people want to believe

 

Was it? I’ve gone back and I can’t find any explanation outside of this:

Is there something I missed? 
 

And you still haven’t covered the biggest one: why he thought his MP’s inexperienced wife should be in charge of the Track & Trace system which was our hinged as our biggest weapon to keep the virus at bay? 
 

I didn’t even go over the fact he quite literally changed the rules of lockdown to let off his chief advisor, skewering public trust in the meantime. 

[Finnaldo]

17 minutes ago, FoxesDeb said:

I think at the time it was initially thought that colds/flu/covid couldn't be contracted by shaking hands, which to be fair it can't in itself, even though it's pretty obvious you can pick a virus up by touching and then pass it to your face.

 

The 'official' advice for us all to stop shaking hands came on the day, or the day after, I can't remember which, Boris was shown to be shaking hands with covid patients. 

 

As an aside to this, I wonder if we will ever go back to shaking hands all the time, or if this will permanently change the way we greet people?

The SPI-B paper said: "There was agreement that government should advise against greetings such as shaking hands and hugging, given existing evidence about the importance of hand hygiene.

"A public message against shaking hands has additional value as a signal about the importance of hand hygiene.

"Promoting a replacement greeting or encouraging others to politely decline a proffered hand-shake may have benefit."

The same day, Mr Johnson told reporters at a Downing Street briefing: "I am shaking hands. I was at a hospital the other night where I think there were coronavirus patients and I was shaking hands with everybody, you will be pleased to know, and I continue to shake hands.
 

https://news.sky.com/story/amp/coronavirus-boris-johnson-was-shaking-hands-as-some-scientists-were-calling-for-it-to-stop-11983606

[Steven]

8 hours ago, UpTheLeagueFox said:

This thread.

Nobody has got a clue.

Just like politicians and scientists.

We're all pisssing in the wind, hoping for the best.

At least I know to piss downwind! 

[foxile5]

26 minutes ago, Finnaldo said:

They can be deputised to Ministers, although you’d think a deadly plague starting to rip through Europe would require the PM’s immediate attention. However you avoided the point he decided to give the green light to mass public events? Judging by that and the rest of the pre-lockdown response it wasn’t that high on priorities. 
 

 

Was it? I’ve gone back and I can’t find any explanation outside of this:

Is there something I missed? 
 

And you still haven’t covered the biggest one: why he thought his MP’s inexperienced wife should be in charge of the Track & Trace system which was our hinged as our biggest weapon to keep the virus at bay? 
 

I didn’t even go over the fact he quite literally changed the rules of lockdown to let off his chief advisor, skewering public trust in the meantime. 

You've missed the fact that, for some people, this isn't about arriving at a decision or judgement based on prevalent attitudes. This is about the 'my mate Boris' ethos and boot-licking. She won't admit wrong because to do so would be to break the cult of personality. 

 

It isn't politics, its a team sport of chosen blinkers.

[Babylon]

12 hours ago, Harrydc said:

 

I agree with the scaremongering. Literally says on BBC :

 

Deaths within 28 days of a positive test for ANY REASON.

 

No one knows the true figures for dying OF Covid, or if this winter the deaths are on similar levels to previous years, as hospitals are always overwhelmed every winter. 

Yes I'm sure the huge rise I excess deaths not long after a well publicised pandemic hit these shores is just a total coincidence.

 

[Heathrow fox]

49 minutes ago, FoxesDeb said:

I think at the time it was initially thought that colds/flu/covid couldn't be contracted by shaking hands, which to be fair it can't in itself, even though it's pretty obvious you can pick a virus up by touching and then pass it to your face.

 

The 'official' advice for us all to stop shaking hands came on the day, or the day after, I can't remember which, Boris was shown to be shaking hands with covid patients. 

 

As an aside to this, I wonder if we will ever go back to shaking hands all the time, or if this will permanently change the way we greet people?

Was just thinking this myself. I’m hoping we slowly return to the way things were regarding handshakes etc.

[dsr-burnley]

20 minutes ago, Heathrow fox said:

Was just thinking this myself. I’m hoping we slowly return to the way things were regarding handshakes etc.

Let's start with being able to shout at each other from opposite ends of a room.  Shaking hands is way down the line - won't be next year, if ever.  Other diseases can be transmitted by shaking hands.

[yorkie1999]

2 hours ago, FoxesDeb said:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/nov/20/nhs-prepares-dozens-of-covid-mass-vaccination-centres-around-england

 

Anyone know if vaccinations need to be given by health staff, or if people can be trained to give them? This article suggests we need tens of thousands of staff to run these new centres

Someone i knows son trains health staff in Bristol and back when the nightingale hospitals were first being built, he was helping to train a lot of army staff to help man the new hospitals so i would think they would be used for the vaccine centres. One things that i found a bit shocking when i asked why use the army was his reply of because they're expendable!

[ealingfox]

With vaccines the distinction is whether they come pre-packed and ready to inject, or whether the meds need to be mixed and drawn up into the syringe before being administered.

 

Everyone down to healthcare assistants can do pre-packed ones and it is quick and easy to train up people to do them. However with mixing and drawing there's a higher threshold - only doctors and nurses can do it and the doctor is supposed to be present if my understanding is correct.

 

As it stands the covid vaccine requires mixing and drawing but if they really need to accelerate roll-out then I'm sure they'll start pre-packing them or have a bit more leniency with who can administer them.

 

[Tommy G]

6 months we will be in a different world, once the older generation are vaccinated it will be all systems go. Should be by easter, I hope so from an Economic standpoint.

[StanSP]

@Finnaldo I believe you have posted good stuff but could be in the 'possibly not wrong category'

[Mickyblueeyes]

Surely no one is going to risk meeting up multiple homes for Christmas this year. The more I think about it the more I hope that the vast majority of people don’t choose to be that negligent. 
 

Whatever anyone may think about lockdowns and whether they’re needed or not, the reality is if infections go up, the world govts are choosing to lockdown. A 4/5 days break in restrictions and two or three houses meeting up risks the infection being spread again. The numbers go up and in the new year we get hit with a “third wave”. 
 

There has to be a common sense approach to the festivities this year. And I hope most choose to do the right think. One boring Christmas for a good year. 

[Costock_Fox]

4 hours ago, Steven said:

At least I know to piss downwind! 

Interesting story about pissing in the wind. Was on the Isle of Harris in Scotland, drove to a lighthouse that was literally in the arse end of nowhere and needed a piss.

 

Position myself in a little sheltered set of rocks.... or so I thought. Managed to fully piss over my entire body including face because the wind changed direction.

 

Glad to contribute to the thread.

Edited 20 November 2020 by Costock_Fox

[Costock_Fox]

31 minutes ago, Mickyblueeyes said:

Surely no one is going to risk meeting up multiple homes for Christmas this year. The more I think about it the more I hope that the vast majority of people don’t choose to be that negligent. 
 

Whatever anyone may think about lockdowns and whether they’re needed or not, the reality is if infections go up, the world govts are choosing to lockdown. A 4/5 days break in restrictions and two or three houses meeting up risks the infection being spread again. The numbers go up and in the new year we get hit with a “third wave”. 
 

There has to be a common sense approach to the festivities this year. And I hope most choose to do the right think. One boring Christmas for a good year. 

Now think for the older generation. That could be their last Christmas to see their grandkids.

 

Still think everyone should blankety do that?

[Mickyblueeyes]

2 minutes ago, Costock_Fox said:

Now think for the older generation. That could be their last Christmas to see their grandkids.

 

Still think everyone should blankety do that?

Yes, I do. I think there are ways to do it sensibly, taking a common sense approach. Meeting up, in houses, with multiple different families, like every other year risks health as well as the economy. People have got to approach it differently this year. And that’s even with consideration of the different vaccine announcements.

[Ollie93]

10 minutes ago, Costock_Fox said:

Now think for the older generation. That could be their last Christmas to see their grandkids.

 

Still think everyone should blankety do that?

My Christmas this year will involve sitting outside in the garden with my parents. I personally think thats the approach.

[dsr-burnley]

12 minutes ago, Ollie93 said:

My Christmas this year will involve sitting outside in the garden with my parents. I personally think thats the approach.

I suppose spending Christmas Day out of doors is one way to ensure pensioners die of something other than coronavirus.  

 

It's a problem.  On the one hand, we may have a parent who is getting pretty depressed about this way of living who would be done a lot of good to by seeing their grandchildren.  (Assuming, of course, that they aren't the one-in-three-thousand people who may catch coronavirus that day.)  On the other hand, we know that for the greater good it is better to watch our parents decline into despair because it reduces the spread of coronavirus, albeit (probably) only slightly and removes that one-in-three-thousand chance.

[Ollie93]

2 minutes ago, dsr-burnley said:

I suppose spending Christmas Day out of doors is one way to ensure pensioners die of something other than coronavirus.  

 

It's a problem.  On the one hand, we may have a parent who is getting pretty depressed about this way of living who would be done a lot of good to by seeing their grandchildren.  (Assuming, of course, that they aren't the one-in-three-thousand people who may catch coronavirus that day.)  On the other hand, we know that for the greater good it is better to watch our parents decline into despair because it reduces the spread of coronavirus, albeit (probably) only slightly and removes that one-in-three-thousand chance.

Of course, but everyone is depressed about something. I haven't seen my parents properly since March. I've sat in their garden a handful of times. My Mum gets the worst anxiety about this whole situation, made worse by the scaremongering of the government but thats another story. I'm sure there are people with a lot worse situations than me too, but tbh, I'd rather sit outside and enjoy the company over Christmas, than have to visit them, dying in a hospital bed, no matter how small the chance.