Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
filbertway

Coronavirus Thread

Recommended Posts

The level of Government overreach is a little worrying in respect of the 10 year sentence nonsense. It will never happen, but the fact they even went ahead and publicly mentioned it is a concern. 

 

It also plays into the hands of COVID deniers and alike as it makes even rational people question just what on earth is going on. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mark 'expert' Lawrenson said:

 

Deaths from dementia are down 500% deaths from cancer, stroke and flu are also down.

 

 

Should 500% read 50% there? Either way, what is the source for that info?

 

A 500% fall would mean that vast numbers were rising from the dead, massively outnumbering those who had died, wouldn't it? I've yet to see evidence of this zombie army... :D

 

15 minutes ago, Robo61 said:

 

Please could you advise where you got the number dying from dementia from,  I can only find data on the internet that indicates the complete opposite. 

 

However Covid deaths are reported there are going to be built in innaccuaries,  there will also be people who have died of Covid-19,  but were never tested before their death and therefore they don't appear in the daily figures.  The three ways the Government is using to monitor the number of deaths caused by the Covid Virus are all tracking around the same ball park number,  so there is no reason to believe that any of them are widely inaccurate. 

 

The official data suggests a small but significant fall in dementia deaths in 2019 (i.e. before Covid):

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/dementiaandalzheimersdiseasedeathsincludingcomorbiditiesenglandandwales/2019registrations

DK why the figures fell in 2019 after rising continuously for decades - but nothing to do with Covid, obviously.

 

Another ONS page said that confirmed stats for most causes of death in 2020 won't be available until about June. 

But they did publish this, showing a 79% increase in dementia deaths at home between March and September 2020: https://www.alzheimersresearchuk.org/dementia-deaths-in-homes-soar/

That could be seen as evidence for the harm done by lockdowns (whether necessary, as I believe, or not) - or by lockdowns being longer than was inevitable, due to slow Govt response, fence-sitting, unclear messaging & loss of public trust.

A caveat, though: I presume that at least some of those 79% extra home deaths would have happened anyway in a normal year, just in hospital and not at home (due to hospitals swamped with Covid patients & people scared to get treatment).

 

It's entirely logical that there'll have been a big fall in flu deaths:

- Social distancing & masks will mean a lot fewer people have caught flu, so some people who would have died of flu/pneumonia in a normal year are still alive

- Some people who would have died of flu in the winter had already died of Covid earlier in the year

 

Again, a source for the claimed fall in cancer and stroke deaths would be good....

The expectation is that there'll be a rise in cancer deaths medium-term, due to treatment delayed by Covid-swamped hospitals & folk scared to seek help, when they might have survived/recovered otherwise

Again, in the short-term, there's a logic to there possibly being fewer cancer deaths as most who die of cancer are elderly & many will have died of Covid instead.

Stroke stats are harder to predict. Covid will have caused a fair few stroke deaths (Covid causes blood clots among other symptoms), so how are they recorded? Yet, you'd expect there to have been more stroke deaths at home for the same reasons as before (swamped hospitals, fear of seeking help).

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Sampson said:

It's funny how up until mid-December we'd heard nothing about variants and now they're everywhere.

 

Earlier in the pandemic it was said that the virus mutated way less than flu so the variations won't make much of a difference.

 

Now each one is a massive headline which will render the vaccine useless? Obviously it's important that Scientists study them and keep on top of them, but the way these variants feel a little sensationalist to me.

It is just relevance in my opinion. Variations didn't make much difference to the course of the pandemic when there was no vaccine - we were going to be in lockdown/control measures whatever was floating about. Now we have a possible route out of lockdowns with the vaccines, it is newsworthy that some variations may reduce the efficacy of vaccines. 

 

I guess the only sensationalist bit is that they don't report that once vaccine technology and manufacture is established, it should be relatively trivial to produce new vaccines to combat new variants. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sampson said:

It's funny how up until mid-December we'd heard nothing about variants and now they're everywhere.

 

Earlier in the pandemic it was said that the virus mutated way less than flu so the variations won't make much of a difference.

 

Now each one is a massive headline which will render the vaccine useless? Obviously it's important that Scientists study them and keep on top of them, but the way these variants feel a little sensationalist to me.

Exactly. It's PR. Government needs us to think the odds were stacked against us and that their leadership, or lack thereof, wouldn't have made much difference. Sad thing is, from conversations I've had (with family etc), I think it's working and the public will not hold this government responsible for the total lack of leadership, the preventable deaths, and the additional time required to lock down as a result.

 

Using a fact and disproportionately highlighting and pushing this fact and elevating it to unnecessary status is sensationalist. It's a good PR trick because factually they are not saying anything that is false, so it's difficult to challenge. But to make it headline news for moths is misleading and moves the conversation away from government shortcomings.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Super_horns said:

Stuff like this won’t help ease people’s doubts about the vaccine .

 

https://mobile.twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1359638587378180096

 

Not very helpful spreading “maybe” rumours

This is the sort of stuff than can be looked at with actual data.  This professor is concerned with the theoretical aspects of reinfection, specifically that the E484 variant (which is also in the Brazil variant) looks like it might reinfect people who have already had the old variant.  This is done by test tube experiments.

 

Why not use real world data?  There have been about 2 million people confirmed by covid test as being infected in Brazil since the start of this year.  There have been 10 million altogether, and about 5 million of those positive tests were before the end of September, before this strain arose.  So how many of the 2 million have been reinfected?  If half of this year's 2 million have the new strain, and 1.5% of the population has had a positive test before, you would expect 2 million x 50% x 1.5% of the new year positive tests to have a previous positive test - if the new variant completely negates the effect of the vaccine.

 

That is 15,000 people who would be expected to have a second test positive, if the new variant totally evades prior immunity.  If the new variant evades prior immunity by 50%, then there should be 7,500 repeat positive test.  If the new variant evades prior immunity by only 10%, there would still be 1,500 people testing positive for the second time.

 

I can find no evidence on google of any significant number of people getting two positive widely separated positive tests in Brazil.  Certainly no more than would be expected with any disease taking into account random failures of the immune system. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bovril said:

I'd like to know who the 13% are so I can keep away from them. 

I'd imagine they are the people who view the world from the worst case scenario. Putting myself in those types of shoes, I reckon I could probably justify a not harsh enough stance. 

 

Ten years sounds like a lot, but the reality is someone lying about their travel and not going into quarantine *could* be catastrophic. New incurable strain kills millions etc etc. Ten years in the slammer for that sounds measly eh. 

 

Personally think it's just about right. It's the part that isn't mentioned in that question that does my coconut in, the fine. We all know if the punishment is a fine and/or prison then the chances are the rich and fabulous won't give a damn, especially when the fine is capped. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mark 'expert' Lawrenson said:

This last 12 months have been truly terrible for all.

What I still fail to understand is why the government insist on counting all deaths with covid as a covid death.

Deaths from dementia are down 500% deaths from cancer, stroke and flu are also down.

Do other countries report COVID deaths the same way as us? 
It’s no wonder we have such a dreadful death rate with the way we report our deaths.

Apologies for my naivety as I just cannot understand why the government do this.

.

Also the  media  in their reports more often than not say there have been over 100,000 deaths “from” Covid not with.

 

It may be that the deaths are down for these conditions but in some of not a lot it is probably because Covid got there first. In some would it be months, of course, but in others it would have been years and therefore Covid is the true cause of death.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sampson said:

It's funny how up until mid-December we'd heard nothing about variants and now they're everywhere.

 

Earlier in the pandemic it was said that the virus mutated way less than flu so the variations won't make much of a difference.

 

Now each one is a massive headline which will render the vaccine useless? Obviously it's important that Scientists study them and keep on top of them, but the way these variants feel a little sensationalist to me.


My guesses would be a blend of: 

 

- Genetic sequencing being in full gear now, so it’s a lot easier to identify variations than earlier in the pandemic when everyone was scrambling 

 

- A full winter in the Northern Hemisphere pushing up cases - they’re high everywhere that hasn’t kept it out so there’s more chance of mutation with more people infected? 
 

- With the vaccine news largely positive, media are always going to be looking for the negative slant: fear sells. Variations making vaccines useless is the only real angle to get concerned viewers watching or reading, and it also helps the government to keep the public on its toes as to try and maintain a decent level of co-operation until they decide to lift lockdown. 
 

In short, nothing out the ordinary and nothing particularly malicious. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems to be some serious confusion as to whether asthmatics will fall under priority group 6 or not right now.

 

We've been trying to look into it for my nephew, but the government advise and the JCI priority list on the website seems to conflict itself. Even the Asthma UK website doesn't know and says they've been contacting the government for urgent clarity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

We should not have the option to book holidays in the current situation until the government given their approval for summer holidays. Simple as. Hurts businesses. Raises expectations. Will eventually hurt the consumer when sadly companies go bump through a lack of cash flow servicing refunds and cancelled holidays. 
 

Ive literally googled ‘Boris Summer Holiday 2021’ where two weeks ago he’s saying his confident of holidays and now he’s saying not to book. That indecision means business have to keep operating. Which is hurting their cash flow. If there is a clear defined decision. they can mothball properties saving money and overheads.

 

 

3 hours ago, dsr-burnley said:

The problem is that there are (oversimplification alert) two types of people - those getting by in the pandemic because even with the restrictions their life isn't so bad as all that, and those not getting by and having an awful time because their life is rotten.  This may be partly a state of mind rather than actual financial/social position, but that's not the issue.

 

Thepowers that be are far too concerned about reining in the optimists who think life isn't so bad.  They want to depress them. to rein them in, to make them believe the situation is worse.  But they can only do that by telling everyone that the situation is worse and it isn't getting better in any significant degree - and so obviously that's what they are telling the already depressed.  When you tell a young man with few cares to put on his big boy pants and face up to realities, you are saying the same thing to the pensioner with depression.

 

Covid is a problem for now.  But depression, dementia, loneliness are problems for now as well.  If government policy is that we should give up hope, then it will lead to problems, and I don't think those problems are being considered.

Will use oversimplification also, pick a number:-

 

1 - Advise the public that as of 8th March everything will reopen & will not close again regardless - Meaning take no action even if 1 of the mutations is proved to resist the current vaccines, risking 10s of 1000s of potential further deaths.

 

2 - Advise the public that we are in lockdown till every adult 16+ has been vaccinated with atleast a 1st shot, lets say 30th Nov 2021 - Meaning we stay in lockdown even if the science starts to show a decline in deaths & cases, risking public revolts, backlashes & god knows what else as the army are drafted in to suppress the rebel forces & regain law & order.

 

3 - Live day to day week to week month to month reacting to spikes & falls as the science & data fluctuates as & when this bloody virus decides too do what it wants.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Should 500% read 50% there? Either way, what is the source for that info?

 

A 500% fall would mean that vast numbers were rising from the dead, massively outnumbering those who had died, wouldn't it? I've yet to see evidence of this zombie army... :D

 

 

The official data suggests a small but significant fall in dementia deaths in 2019 (i.e. before Covid):

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/dementiaandalzheimersdiseasedeathsincludingcomorbiditiesenglandandwales/2019registrations

DK why the figures fell in 2019 after rising continuously for decades - but nothing to do with Covid, obviously.

 

Another ONS page said that confirmed stats for most causes of death in 2020 won't be available until about June. 

But they did publish this, showing a 79% increase in dementia deaths at home between March and September 2020: https://www.alzheimersresearchuk.org/dementia-deaths-in-homes-soar/

That could be seen as evidence for the harm done by lockdowns (whether necessary, as I believe, or not) - or by lockdowns being longer than was inevitable, due to slow Govt response, fence-sitting, unclear messaging & loss of public trust.

A caveat, though: I presume that at least some of those 79% extra home deaths would have happened anyway in a normal year, just in hospital and not at home (due to hospitals swamped with Covid patients & people scared to get treatment).

 

It's entirely logical that there'll have been a big fall in flu deaths:

- Social distancing & masks will mean a lot fewer people have caught flu, so some people who would have died of flu/pneumonia in a normal year are still alive

- Some people who would have died of flu in the winter had already died of Covid earlier in the year

 

Again, a source for the claimed fall in cancer and stroke deaths would be good....

The expectation is that there'll be a rise in cancer deaths medium-term, due to treatment delayed by Covid-swamped hospitals & folk scared to seek help, when they might have survived/recovered otherwise

Again, in the short-term, there's a logic to there possibly being fewer cancer deaths as most who die of cancer are elderly & many will have died of Covid instead.

Stroke stats are harder to predict. Covid will have caused a fair few stroke deaths (Covid causes blood clots among other symptoms), so how are they recorded? Yet, you'd expect there to have been more stroke deaths at home for the same reasons as before (swamped hospitals, fear of seeking help).

The 500% came from a doctor! Who also said the death toll due to lockdown will be 250,000 in the next 2 years alone due to missed cancer diagnosis and poverty related diseases.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Nod.E said:

Exactly. It's PR. Government needs us to think the odds were stacked against us and that their leadership, or lack thereof, wouldn't have made much difference. Sad thing is, from conversations I've had (with family etc), I think it's working and the public will not hold this government responsible for the total lack of leadership, the preventable deaths, and the additional time required to lock down as a result.

 

Using a fact and disproportionately highlighting and pushing this fact and elevating it to unnecessary status is sensationalist. It's a good PR trick because factually they are not saying anything that is false, so it's difficult to challenge. But to make it headline news for moths is misleading and moves the conversation away from government shortcomings.

Spot on.

 

There's hundreds of variants but they've only just become daily news in the past couple of months. We'll be led to believe that this Government are our saviours and they prevented hundreds of thousands of deaths by implementing some rules months after the pandemic started.

 

I'm not bothering with a summer holiday, don't think we'll be allowed to go, plus I've already got a stag booked in August abroad so don't fancy having even more money tied up.

 

Can't see any reason the kids shouldn't be back at school at the start of March, that's the most important thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, David Guiza said:

The level of Government overreach is a little worrying in respect of the 10 year sentence nonsense. It will never happen, but the fact they even went ahead and publicly mentioned it is a concern. 

 

It also plays into the hands of COVID deniers and alike as it makes even rational people question just what on earth is going on. 

Starmers already poo-pooed that sentence saying it wouldn’t stand up in court...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Mark 'expert' Lawrenson said:

The 500% came from a doctor! Who also said the death toll due to lockdown will be 250,000 in the next 2 years alone due to missed cancer diagnosis and poverty related diseases.

 

A doctor of what,  not maths i hope!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Mark 'expert' Lawrenson said:

The 500% came from a doctor! Who also said the death toll due to lockdown will be 250,000 in the next 2 years alone due to missed cancer diagnosis and poverty related diseases.

 

You can't have a 500% fall in deaths, though, surely? A 50% reduction would mean half the number of people died, 100% reduction would mean nobody died, so a 500% reduction in deaths means that 4 times as many people that previously would have died are being resurrected from the dead, doesn't it? :unsure: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, filbertway said:

Two masks better than one against Covid-19, US study says

Anybody else shocked by this revelation? :o

I can't wait to see the results of the three mask study

I believe that an enclosed diving suit with your own oxygen supply is better still.  Shopping can get a touch tricky, though.

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Kasey Keller said:

Starmers already poo-pooed that sentence saying it wouldn’t stand up in court...

With good reason. 

 

I can just picture Hancock, Johnson, Rees-Mogg and co sat around a room throwing ideas around and Hancock getting a pat on the back when he declares '10 year prison sentencing for COVID holiday liars' to a chorus of 'Yes and ho'.

 

Image result for thick of it thought camp gif

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mark 'expert' Lawrenson said:

The 500% came from a doctor! Who also said the death toll due to lockdown will be 250,000 in the next 2 years alone due to missed cancer diagnosis and poverty related diseases.

 

 

I wouldn't like to have that doctor calculating the dose of my meds! :D

 

It's clearly true that lockdown will cause a fair number of extra deaths, due to missed diagnoses, poverty, mental health issues etc.

But whatever the number, it will surely be a lot fewer than the number that would have been caused by not locking down and allowing Covid to spread much more widely?

Plus, without lockdown hospitals would be even more swamped - unless you left Covid patients to die at home - so it's not as if it would create the capacity for more cancer diagnoses.

It does need to be kept to a minimum, though - and hope on the horizon is very bloody necessary.

 

Just checked....cancer deaths 2016-2018 averaged a total of 166,000 per year: https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-statistics-for-the-uk#heading-One-

And most deaths from poverty-related diseases could be avoided with adequate govt/community support. So, that figure of an extra 250,000 deaths due to lockdown seems dubious. 

Are you quite sure this person was a doctor and not just some drunken bullshitter? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

 

A 500% fall would mean that vast numbers were rising from the dead, massively outnumbering those who had died, wouldn't it? I've yet to see evidence of this zombie army... :D

 

 

22 minutes ago, FoxesDeb said:

You can't have a 500% fall in deaths, though, surely? A 50% reduction would mean half the number of people died, 100% reduction would mean nobody died, so a 500% reduction in deaths means that 4 times as many people that previously would have died are being resurrected from the dead, doesn't it? :unsure: 

 

I've already explained this, Deb (see above). Please keep up. ;)

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BKLFox said:

 

Will use oversimplification also, pick a number:-

 

1 - Advise the public that as of 8th March everything will reopen & will not close again regardless - Meaning take no action even if 1 of the mutations is proved to resist the current vaccines, risking 10s of 1000s of potential further deaths.

 

2 - Advise the public that we are in lockdown till every adult 16+ has been vaccinated with atleast a 1st shot, lets say 30th Nov 2021 - Meaning we stay in lockdown even if the science starts to show a decline in deaths & cases, risking public revolts, backlashes & god knows what else as the army are drafted in to suppress the rebel forces & regain law & order.

 

3 - Live day to day week to week month to month reacting to spikes & falls as the science & data fluctuates as & when this bloody virus decides too do what it wants.

 

I will pick 1 please Sir. 

 

I will then continue to behave in the same way that I have all along, restricting my contact with people and minimising my outings until such time that I have been vaccinated. 

 

At least this way, the morons and anti-vaxxers won't be around to bother me when it's safe for me to resume normal life!

 

Link to comment
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...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...