Coronavirus Thread

[Nod.E]

37 minutes ago, Col city fan said:

I know what point you’re making and I disagree with you

You’ve said it above: ‘it’s much less tragic than people dying in the war’

Why? It’s lives lost when those lives were not at risk. Just because it’s predominantly older people, it’s still lives lost due to an unexpected virus.

You could argue completely the opposite. The lives we lost in WW2 were due to people fighting for a cause. To rid Europe of an Evil Dictator

Lives lost due to covid are for nothing. Zero cause. Just as tragic and possibly more so.

 

You're not reading my posts so there's no point me bothering to reply. Good day, sir.

[Guest Col city fan]

2 minutes ago, Nod.E said:

You're not reading my posts so there's no point me bothering to reply. Good day, sir.

I was making a near direct quotation. If that’s ‘not reading’ I don’t know what is 

👍

[Sol thewall Bamba]

3.2 million first doses given.

[Guest Col city fan]

6 minutes ago, Nod.E said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-b6360f40-84f9-469b-b6a3-a4568e161c4f

 

"This is why scientists are pointing out that until we have enough vaccine to go beyond vaccinating at risk groups against Covid-19 and reach a large proportion of the population, we won't see an end to social distancing.

 

"If you just protect the vulnerable, you will stop deaths that are happening in the vulnerable and you will reduce the burden of hospital cases, but it won't stop transmission," says Prof Salisbury.

 

Transmission will continue between people who haven't been vaccinated, who can then spread it to unvaccinated vulnerable people and vulnerable people who have been vaccinated but have not made a protective immune response, he says."

 

I cannot understand this thinking. If we stop deaths in the vulnerable and we remove the burden on the NHS, then what is the problem? 

 

I really couldn't give a flying toss if it's still in transmission if people aren't dying and only small numbers need ICUs.

 

The moment it becomes just another normal level disease is the moment it should leave the headlines and life should return to normal. I won't hold my breath, we've become obsessed.

You really are something else

Another 1200 plus deaths in 24 hours 

And we’ve ‘become obsessed’

Thank God we don’t all think like you do.

[Leicester_Loyal]

6 minutes ago, Nod.E said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-b6360f40-84f9-469b-b6a3-a4568e161c4f

 

"This is why scientists are pointing out that until we have enough vaccine to go beyond vaccinating at risk groups against Covid-19 and reach a large proportion of the population, we won't see an end to social distancing.

 

"If you just protect the vulnerable, you will stop deaths that are happening in the vulnerable and you will reduce the burden of hospital cases, but it won't stop transmission," says Prof Salisbury.

 

Transmission will continue between people who haven't been vaccinated, who can then spread it to unvaccinated vulnerable people and vulnerable people who have been vaccinated but have not made a protective immune response, he says."

 

I cannot understand this thinking. If we stop deaths in the vulnerable and we remove the burden on the NHS, then what is the problem? 

 

I really couldn't give a flying toss if it's still in transmission if people aren't dying and only small numbers need ICUs.

 

The moment it becomes just another normal level disease is the moment it should leave the headlines and life should return to normal. I won't hold my breath, we've become obsessed.

This is what I fear. It was all about protecting the NHS, but if we keep measures like this in place it becomes much more than that. I bet millions of the population will still continue to social distance regardless, like you say, people are obsessed, we've completely forgotten about people dying of other causes.

[Leicester_Loyal]

2 minutes ago, Col city fan said:

You really are something else

Another 1200 plus deaths in 24 hours 

And we’ve ‘become obsessed’

Thank God we don’t all think like you do.

Do you think we should continue to social distance forever? Even after we've all been vaccinated?

[martyn]

4 minutes ago, Nod.E said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-b6360f40-84f9-469b-b6a3-a4568e161c4f

 

"This is why scientists are pointing out that until we have enough vaccine to go beyond vaccinating at risk groups against Covid-19 and reach a large proportion of the population, we won't see an end to social distancing.

 

"If you just protect the vulnerable, you will stop deaths that are happening in the vulnerable and you will reduce the burden of hospital cases, but it won't stop transmission," says Prof Salisbury.

 

Transmission will continue between people who haven't been vaccinated, who can then spread it to unvaccinated vulnerable people and vulnerable people who have been vaccinated but have not made a protective immune response, he says."

 

I cannot understand this thinking. If we stop deaths in the vulnerable and we remove the burden on the NHS, then what is the problem? 

 

I really couldn't give a flying toss if it's still in transmission if people aren't dying and only small numbers need ICUs.

 

The moment it becomes just another normal level disease is the moment it should leave the headlines and life should return to normal. I won't hold my breath, we've become obsessed.

It doesn't say "remove" the hospital burden - it says "reduce". And the burden on hospitals right now is huge.

 

I saw a statistic today that only 25% of intensive care covid cases are in the 70+ age bracket. That may suggest that we need to get a larger group vaccinated first before opening up completely (we may still be able to ease restrictions somewhat), if the primary goal is to stop hospitals getting overwhelmed. 

 

 

[Guest Harrydc]

13 minutes ago, Nod.E said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-b6360f40-84f9-469b-b6a3-a4568e161c4f

 

"This is why scientists are pointing out that until we have enough vaccine to go beyond vaccinating at risk groups against Covid-19 and reach a large proportion of the population, we won't see an end to social distancing.

 

"If you just protect the vulnerable, you will stop deaths that are happening in the vulnerable and you will reduce the burden of hospital cases, but it won't stop transmission," says Prof Salisbury.

 

Transmission will continue between people who haven't been vaccinated, who can then spread it to unvaccinated vulnerable people and vulnerable people who have been vaccinated but have not made a protective immune response, he says."

 

I cannot understand this thinking. If we stop deaths in the vulnerable and we remove the burden on the NHS, then what is the problem? 

 

I really couldn't give a flying toss if it's still in transmission if people aren't dying and only small numbers need ICUs.

 

The moment it becomes just another normal level disease is the moment it should leave the headlines and life should return to normal. I won't hold my breath, we've become obsessed.

Absolutely. No excuse to not let us live normally once the elderly and vulnerable are vaccinated. 

[StanSP]

All travel corridors shut from 4am on Monday. 

[Leicester_Loyal]

2 minutes ago, martyn said:

It doesn't say "remove" the hospital burden - it says "reduce". And the burden on hospitals right now is huge.

 

I saw a statistic today that only 25% of intensive care covid cases are in the 70+ age bracket. That may suggest that we need to get a larger group vaccinated first before opening up completely (we may still be able to ease restrictions somewhat), if the primary goal is to stop hospitals getting overwhelmed. 

 

 

I posted the stats a while back but I've lost them now, from what I remember it was 85% of intensive care patients over the age of 60 or 65. Once we've vaccinated everyone who's over the age of 60 we should be absolutely fine.

[hackneyfox]

35 minutes ago, Harrydc said:

I'm now in the mindset of saying okay, I'm happy to have restrictions until the end of March IF that's then it. No more tiers, no more bubbles, no more anti-social distancing, no more mandatory masks and no more 24/7 news coverage of COVID. As a country we NEED the promise that things will get back to the old normal. And soon. 

Plenty of people under 50 going down with it. It'll be Autumn at the earliest imo before we're even getting close to 'normal'. 

So what will you do if it isn't all sorted by end of March? Refuse to wear a mask?

You could just not watch the news.

[yorkie1999]

12 minutes ago, Nod.E said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-b6360f40-84f9-469b-b6a3-a4568e161c4f

 

"This is why scientists are pointing out that until we have enough vaccine to go beyond vaccinating at risk groups against Covid-19 and reach a large proportion of the population, we won't see an end to social distancing.

 

"If you just protect the vulnerable, you will stop deaths that are happening in the vulnerable and you will reduce the burden of hospital cases, but it won't stop transmission," says Prof Salisbury.

 

Transmission will continue between people who haven't been vaccinated, who can then spread it to unvaccinated vulnerable people and vulnerable people who have been vaccinated but have not made a protective immune response, he says."

 

I cannot understand this thinking. If we stop deaths in the vulnerable and we remove the burden on the NHS, then what is the problem? 

 

I really couldn't give a flying toss if it's still in transmission if people aren't dying and only small numbers need ICUs.

 

The moment it becomes just another normal level disease is the moment it should leave the headlines and life should return to normal. I won't hold my breath, we've become obsessed.

We're going to get a lot more from the scientists, it's the final push for the 15 minutes of fame before they all have to retreat into the dark corridors of obscurity. (until the next big problem comes and out from the woodwork they'll all appear, i'm guessing rising sea waters and the only solution will be for us all to dig a giant hole off skeggy so the water will drain away)

[martyn]

12 minutes ago, Harrydc said:

Absolutely. No excuse to not let us live normally once the elderly and vulnerable are vaccinated. 

Hypothetical, but what would you say if opening up completely once all elderly and vulnerable are vaccinated resulted in a huge surge in cases, which overwhelmed hospitals, because as it turned out, a large enough percentage of non vulnerable and non elderly people needed hospital treatment?

 

If it transpired that the data indicated that vaccinating everyone over the age of 40 would completely nullify that risk, and we'd need a extra month of restrictions to facilitate that, what would you say?

 

Point is - throwaway comments like the above mean absolutely nothing, unless backed by data. There are plenty of excuses to keep restrictions in place, depending on what data tells us. 

Edited 15 January 2021 by martyn

[Leicester_Loyal]

7 minutes ago, hackneyfox said:

Plenty of people under 50 going down with it. It'll be Autumn at the earliest imo before we're even getting close to 'normal'. 

So what will you do if it isn't all sorted by end of March? Refuse to wear a mask?

You could just not watch the news.

There had been 825 Coronavirus deaths for people aged 44 years and under up until 1st January 2021.

 

[Nod.E]

18 minutes ago, Col city fan said:

You really are something else

Another 1200 plus deaths in 24 hours 

And we’ve ‘become obsessed’

Thank God we don’t all think like you do.

Case in point, you're trying to find outrage in my comments.

 

I'm not talking about now, am I? I'm looking to the future. It was all over the news in summer when we had single figure deaths.

 

 

 

[Leicester_Loyal]

48 minutes ago, Harrydc said:

I'm now in the mindset of saying okay, I'm happy to have restrictions until the end of March IF that's then it. No more tiers, no more bubbles, no more anti-social distancing, no more mandatory masks and no more 24/7 news coverage of COVID. As a country we NEED the promise that things will get back to the old normal. And soon. 

No chance of that happening mate. I reckon at some point in May, as we should have vaccinated about half the population by then.

[hackneyfox]

1 minute ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

There had been 825 Coronavirus deaths for people aged 44 years and under up until 1st January 2021.

 

Hospitals are saying that they are treating many more under 50s and under 40s than before.

These people are still taking up hospital beds which is leading to increased waiting times for other treatments. Have yet to hear the NHS saying it'll be fine when the over 65s have been vaccinated. There's a long way to go yet.

[hackneyfox]

2 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

No chance of that happening mate. I reckon at some point in May, as we should have vaccinated about half the population by then.

They will only even get close to that by only giving the first vaccination and waiting another 12 weeks for the second. Nobody even knows if you can leave it as long as 12 weeks without cover from the first injection being compromised.

[Legend_in_blue]

27 minutes ago, Col city fan said:

You really are something else

Another 1200 plus deaths in 24 hours 

And we’ve ‘become obsessed’

Thank God we don’t all think like you do.

 

There is data to show that the number of currently recorded cases of flu is barely noticeable, if at all, current virus being the dominant virus.  I would post it, but I can't be bothered because someone on here will find fault with it.  The current season is no worse than the 2018 season numbers wise but the media weren't obsessed back then.  I'll stop there because someone will find fault with that sentence also, but it is true.

Edited 15 January 2021 by Legend_in_blue

[Leicester_Loyal]

3 minutes ago, hackneyfox said:

Hospitals are saying that they are treating many more under 50s and under 40s than before.

These people are still taking up hospital beds which is leading to increased waiting times for other treatments. Have yet to hear the NHS saying it'll be fine when the over 65s have been vaccinated. There's a long way to go yet.

Average age of patients in ICUs in higher now than it was during the first lockdown last year.

 

1 minute ago, hackneyfox said:

They will only even get close to that by only giving the first vaccination and waiting another 12 weeks for the second. Nobody even knows if you can leave it as long as 12 weeks without cover from the first injection being compromised.

I honestly think we'll be doing a silly number of vaccinations by March, like 750k a day or so if needed, hopefully anyway.

[Nod.E]

7 minutes ago, Legend_in_blue said:

 

There is data to show that the number of currently recorded cases of flu is barely noticeable, if at all, current virus being the dominant virus.  I would post it, but I can't be bothered because someone on here will find fault with it.  The current season is no worse than the 2018 season numbers wise but the media weren't obsessed back then.  I'll stop there because someone will find fault with that sentence also, but it is true.

There is a rise in excess deaths, I don't think that can be argued. And NHS is clearly at breaking point, though had we have funded the NHS effectively it wouldn't be crumbling quite to this extent.

 

The media is definitely obsessed, though. And will be until the next major news series breaks. We need another Brexit! Never thought I'd say that.

Edited 15 January 2021 by Nod.E

[RowlattsFox]

Large crowds will be a way away, certainly full crowds. But hopefully by April/May we will be able to do most of the things we were able to do during the past summer. Social distancing doesn't bother me too much, neither does mask wearing within reason, expanding rule of 6 to maybe 10, most things open and a bit of outside freedom. Then hopefully by next winter vast majority have been vaccinated and there is no real impact.

 

Eventually they will stop testing in the community and we'll only go off hospital admissions.

 

 

[Matt]

Whitty "I'm afraid in the next week we do anticipate the number of people in the NHS and the number of deaths will continue to rise as the effects of what everyone has done take a while to feed through".

 

  I'm sorry?

 

 

Edited 15 January 2021 by Matt

[StanSP]

Hope they continue to hit numbers like this 

 

 

[StanSP]

Just now, Matt said:

Whitty "I'm afraid in the next week we do anticipate the number of people in the NHS and the number of deaths will continue to rise as the effects of what everyone has done take a while to feed through".

 

I'm sorry?

 

 

You especially. Not treating this like a lockdown. You're to blame.