Coronavirus Thread

[Dahnsouff]

25 minutes ago, Mark 'expert' Lawrenson said:

Boris just be honest for once and tell the public there will be a 3rd lockdown if they refuse to be sensible and ignorantly carry on as normal

That I could agree with 

[Kingleicester]

53 minutes ago, Mark 'expert' Lawrenson said:

Boris just be honest for once and tell the public there will be a 3rd lockdown.

 

Do you think so?? If so when do you think? I think he is being honest tbf, he does not want another lockdown, but maybe forced into one if cases do not drop! Can you please tell me what is not honest about that?

[Buce]

1 minute ago, Kingleicester said:

Do you think so?? If so when do you think? I think he is being honest tbf, he does not want another lockdown, but maybe forced into one if cases do not drop! Can you please tell me what is not honest about that?

 

Cases are rising nationwide and all the best medical advice says that a 5 day break at Xmas will lead to many more cases; Johnson just doesn't want to be seen as the Grinch who stole Xmas.

 

So, yes, he's being completely disingenuous.

[l444ry]

 

[urban.spaceman]

So, got out of 14 day self-isolation this week. I was still trying to work out where I could have come into contact with someone who'd tested positive as the app informed me - in the 48 hours before being told to isolate I had been to the shop for 5 minutes, socially distancing, masked up and hand sanitiser; then to the gym for a one-on-one session with my trainer where I scanned in the app. 

 

Coming back from the gym today I bumped into my neighbour (I live at the end of a cul-de-sac in a detached house and am never closer than a few feet to my neighbours). She told me that they'd been self isolating too because her son (14) had tested positive for COVID despite having very mild symptoms.

 

Is it possible that my bluetooth had connected with his and that's why the app flagged me as being in contact with someone with a positive test?

 

Someone please tell me that this app isn't THAT ****ing stupid.

[Buce]

1 minute ago, urban.spaceman said:

So, got out of 14 day self-isolation this week. I was still trying to work out where I could have come into contact with someone who'd tested positive as the app informed me - in the 48 hours before being told to isolate I had been to the shop for 5 minutes, socially distancing, masked up and hand sanitiser; then to the gym for a one-on-one session with my trainer where I scanned in the app. 

 

Coming back from the gym today I bumped into my neighbour (I live at the end of a cul-de-sac in a detached house and am never closer than a few feet to my neighbours). She told me that they'd been self isolating too because her son (14) had tested positive for COVID despite having very mild symptoms.

 

Is it possible that my bluetooth had connected with his and that's why the app flagged me as being in contact with someone with a positive test?

 

Someone please tell me that this app isn't THAT ****ing stupid.

 

Maybe it's spreading via Bluetooth...

 

#conspiracytheries

[Mark 'expert' Lawrenson]

16 minutes ago, Kingleicester said:

Do you think so?? If so when do you think? I think he is being honest tbf, he does not want another lockdown, but maybe forced into one if cases do not drop! Can you please tell me what is not honest about that?

Because he must already know they’ll have to be another lockdown, cases aren’t going to drop and he knows that, otherwise he’s a complete idiot.

Hospital beds always fill up in the winter anyway, do you think he doesn’t know that? 
 

[Mark 'expert' Lawrenson]

47 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

That I could agree with 

Lol that’s unfair 😡

 

[Kingleicester]

5 minutes ago, Mark 'expert' Lawrenson said:

Because he must already know they’ll have to be another lockdown, cases aren’t going to drop and he knows that, otherwise he’s a complete idiot.

Hospital beds always fill up in the winter anyway, do you think he doesn’t know that? 
 

Well it depends if mystic meg is on his team, if not, there is no chance borris knows if cases are going to go up or down in the nx week, obviously with all the mixing at Christmas they will go up then, but they might go down before that, 

[Costock_Fox]

32 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

So, got out of 14 day self-isolation this week. I was still trying to work out where I could have come into contact with someone who'd tested positive as the app informed me - in the 48 hours before being told to isolate I had been to the shop for 5 minutes, socially distancing, masked up and hand sanitiser; then to the gym for a one-on-one session with my trainer where I scanned in the app. 

 

Coming back from the gym today I bumped into my neighbour (I live at the end of a cul-de-sac in a detached house and am never closer than a few feet to my neighbours). She told me that they'd been self isolating too because her son (14) had tested positive for COVID despite having very mild symptoms.

 

Is it possible that my bluetooth had connected with his and that's why the app flagged me as being in contact with someone with a positive test?

 

Someone please tell me that this app isn't THAT ****ing stupid.

Sounds a round about way of saying you are sleeping with your neighbour, it’s alright we aren’t your wife/gf. This is your safe space.

[DennisNedry]

https://www.who.int/bulletin/online_first/BLT.20.265892.pdf

 

'Across 51 locations, the median COVID-19 infection fatality rate was 0.27% (corrected 0.23%): the rate was 0.09% in locations with COVID-19 population mortality rates less than the global average (< 118 deaths/million), 0.20% in locations with 118–500 COVID-19 deaths/million people and 0.57% in locations with > 500 COVID-19 deaths/million people. In people < 70 years, infection fatality rates ranged from 0.00% to 0.31% with crude and corrected medians of 0.05%'

 

As soon as the over 70s have been vaccinated, we can surely fully unlock the country?

[Costock_Fox]

1 minute ago, DennisNedry said:

https://www.who.int/bulletin/online_first/BLT.20.265892.pdf

 

'Across 51 locations, the median COVID-19 infection fatality rate was 0.27% (corrected 0.23%): the rate was 0.09% in locations with COVID-19 population mortality rates less than the global average (< 118 deaths/million), 0.20% in locations with 118–500 COVID-19 deaths/million people and 0.57% in locations with > 500 COVID-19 deaths/million people. In people < 70 years, infection fatality rates ranged from 0.00% to 0.31% with crude and corrected medians of 0.05%'

 

As soon as the over 70s have been vaccinated, we can surely fully unlock the country?

Don’t be daft mate, until our hamsters have a life expectancy of 9 normal life cannot continue. Don’t be so selfish.

[BKLFox]

1 hour ago, Buce said:

 

Cases are rising nationwide and all the best medical advice says that a 5 day break at Xmas will lead to many more cases; Johnson just doesn't want to be seen as the Grinch who stole Xmas.

 

So, yes, he's being completely disingenuous.

Reading that I trust you will be home alone this Christmas Buce 

[Buce]

7 minutes ago, BKLFox said:

Reading that I trust you will be home alone this Christmas Buce 

 

No, I'll be home with my wife and daughter, apart from when my Mrs is at work putting her life on the line caring for elderly people dying of Covid.

[Trumpet]

1 hour ago, urban.spaceman said:

So, got out of 14 day self-isolation this week. I was still trying to work out where I could have come into contact with someone who'd tested positive as the app informed me - in the 48 hours before being told to isolate I had been to the shop for 5 minutes, socially distancing, masked up and hand sanitiser; then to the gym for a one-on-one session with my trainer where I scanned in the app. 

 

Coming back from the gym today I bumped into my neighbour (I live at the end of a cul-de-sac in a detached house and am never closer than a few feet to my neighbours). She told me that they'd been self isolating too because her son (14) had tested positive for COVID despite having very mild symptoms.

 

Is it possible that my bluetooth had connected with his and that's why the app flagged me as being in contact with someone with a positive test?

 

Someone please tell me that this app isn't THAT ****ing stupid.

Well, the app isn’t going to know that you’re wearing a mask in a shop and you’ve applied anti bac to your hands. It really is just done on Bluetooth connections and location data isn’t it?

[Guest Fktf]

3 hours ago, DennisNedry said:

https://www.who.int/bulletin/online_first/BLT.20.265892.pdf

 

'Across 51 locations, the median COVID-19 infection fatality rate was 0.27% (corrected 0.23%): the rate was 0.09% in locations with COVID-19 population mortality rates less than the global average (< 118 deaths/million), 0.20% in locations with 118–500 COVID-19 deaths/million people and 0.57% in locations with > 500 COVID-19 deaths/million people. In people < 70 years, infection fatality rates ranged from 0.00% to 0.31% with crude and corrected medians of 0.05%'

 

As soon as the over 70s have been vaccinated, we can surely fully unlock the country?

Lockdowns have never been about death rates.

[dsr-burnley]

5 hours ago, Sampson said:

Of course there is - ring vaccination for people who can't have vaccines like pregnant women or people with allergies.

 

It makes no sense to lift restrictions until everyone who can be vaccinated has been.

Just out of interest, how many pregnant women have died of coronavirus so far?  It isn't so many.

 

It's a nice ideal that it's better for two million people to lose their jobs than that one person should die, but it isn't going to work out that way.  Politics doesn't.  People don't, for that matter.  You might be happy to lose your house and your job so that one unknown person the other end of the country can live, but most wouldn't - before you count the corollary effect of the deaths caused by lockdown.

 

Besides, if you're taking lockdown to the nth degree, no release until everyone is safe, what are you going to do about flu?  Between 10k and 17k annual premature deaths per year caused by flu.  Lockdown could save some of those.  It just isn't practical.

[Guest Fktf]

3 minutes ago, dsr-burnley said:

Just out of interest, how many pregnant women have died of coronavirus so far?  It isn't so many.

 

It's a nice ideal that it's better for two million people to lose their jobs than that one person should die, but it isn't going to work out that way.  Politics doesn't.  People don't, for that matter.  You might be happy to lose your house and your job so that one unknown person the other end of the country can live, but most wouldn't - before you count the corollary effect of the deaths caused by lockdown.

 

Besides, if you're taking lockdown to the nth degree, no release until everyone is safe, what are you going to do about flu?  Between 10k and 17k annual premature deaths per year caused by flu.  Lockdown could save some of those.  It just isn't practical.

But their babies to tend to be born prematurely, and require neonatal care.

 

Lockdown is not about death rates.

[dsr-burnley]

24 minutes ago, Fktf said:

Lockdown is not about death rates.

Then what is lockdown about?  

[Guest Fktf]

40 minutes ago, dsr-burnley said:

Then what is lockdown about?  

Keeping enough nhs beds free to treat people, mainly. Both for covid and non-covid patients.

 

But also protecting the vulnerable from bad (but unwanted) consequences (e.g. the pregnant women and their babies you mention).

[dsr-burnley]

7 minutes ago, Fktf said:

Keeping enough nhs beds free to treat people, mainly. Both for covid and non-covid patients.

 

But also protecting the vulnerable from bad (but unwanted) consequences (e.g. the pregnant women and their babies you mention).

Now that you mention it, your right - that's what they said it was all about. But in practice it wasn't - or at least, the two go hand in hand.  But in summer there were as many spare beds as there ever are and they didn't release all the controls.

 

(BTW, Sampson brought up the pregnant women.  It's old people that are my particular hobby-horse.  Which is why I think once they have been vaccinated, we the negative consequences of lockdown will outweigh the positive once the vulnerable have been jabbed.  We still have to remember that it isn't a choice of a number of pregnant women die or else everything is perfect; it's a choice between a number of pregnantwomen die or a number of other people die and other bad things happen too.)

Edited 19 December 2020 by dsr-burnley

[Guest Fktf]

11 minutes ago, dsr-burnley said:

That's what they said it was all about, but in practice it wasn't - or at least, the two go hand in hand.  But in summer there were as many spare beds as there ever are and they didn't release all the controls.

 

(BTW, Sampson brought up the pregnant women.  It's old people that are my particular hobby-horse.  Which is why I think once they have been vaccinated, we the negative consequences of lockdown will outweigh the positive once the vulnerable have been jabbed.  We still have to remember that it isn't a choice of a number of pregnant women die or else everything is perfect; it's a choice between a number of pregnantwomen die or a number of other people die and other bad things happen too.)

I don't agree the two go hand in hand. The data on mortality is clear, and cannot be used to justify lockdowns (or to end them). Where this and common flu differ isn't on death rate, but the number of people that need to go through hospital to recover.

 

Pregnant women is just one example of a group that won't die from it, but may have complications. But I take your point that there's a decision to be made once the group that mostly fill up the hospital beds have been vaccinated. 

Edited 19 December 2020 by Fktf

[Buce]

 

I don't know how representative this is, but my wife's workplace has all employees booked for CV vaccinations this weekend; out of circa 100 employees, 95 have declined to have it, citing a variety of conspiracy theory based reasons.

[Nalis]

7 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

I don't know how representative this is, but my wife's workplace has all employees booked for CV vaccinations this weekend; out of circa 100 employees, 95 have declined to have it, citing a variety of conspiracy theory based reasons.

That is insane

[yorkie1999]

12 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

I don't know how representative this is, but my wife's workplace has all employees booked for CV vaccinations this weekend; out of circa 100 employees, 95 have declined to have it, citing a variety of conspiracy theory based reasons.

One of the theories isn't by chance to do with the thalidomide drug is it?