Covid-19 Discussion

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Well the Media are finally in a position they love, just like Brexit, putting the pro-lockdownerz against the anti-lockdowners.
I‘ve a great deal of sympathy for the people who have to make these decisions as either way lives will be lost and they’ll never come out of it with any credit.
In which scenario more lives will be saved or lost we’ll never know
 
We’ve been told that these measures were introduced to “protect the vulnerable & elderly” which any sane person would agree with the sentiment.

The problem comes from the law of unintended consequences; suicides, cancer and other illness deaths are going to go through the roof and probably exceed the deaths related to Covid.

I know three men (one 30, one 64 and the other 78) who have committed suicide due to the mental toll taken by the lockdown yet I only know one person so far that’s actually contracted the virus (he was asymptomatic) so while I fully accept that there’s been thousands of Covid deaths, what I can’t accept is the “well, just suck it up, buttercup and do as you’re told” narrative pushed by so many.
I'd be interested to know where you get your statistics about "suicides, cancer and other illness deaths going through the roof". I've looked for this information online but been unable to find it. I did find that suicide rates had been increasing in the UK since 2007 after steadily falling over the previous 20 years, so I wouldn't be surprised to see a further increase this year. (Incidentally SPX, I'm sad to say that the greatest rate is in Yorkshire & Humberside.) Equally concerning is that the number of deaths from cancer in the UK have been increasing steadily each year of this millennium, so agin it's expected that there will be a further rise this year. The leading cause of death in the UK in 2018 was dementia including Alzheimer disease, which has been rapidly increasing over the last ten years - an increase that looks likely to continue for now. So yes, we will most likely see increases in those deaths during Covid-19 lockdowns and the rate of increase may be higher this year. By what factor the increase may be and how much can be attributed to the unintended consequences of lockdown we're unlikely to ever know. We can only hope that those deaths don't "go through the roof", we surely can't state with certainty that they will. At the same time, neither should we dismiss the possibility. Instead the authorities should remain aware of the dangers, as I'm sure they are as part of the impossible balancing act.
 
REMOVED
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Quote
The problem with people building a conspiracy is that they need to over-play on the familiar to keep the intertia- with only a sprinkling of the unfamiliar - and THAT - is the give away.

Abit like a Lie then? thats good because the Government are doing very well on that front.

You're trying to create an equivalence - another problem with the conspiracy cult - you create the general acceptance the the government must be up to something. So that provides the perpetual backstop that even if the headline conspiracy isn't right - there's still other conspiracies - and you can always loop back to say one way or another that you were right all along.
 
Seeing the Main issue is with how Governments around the world have tackled this cv19 issue since we have established where this "Virus" came from and i'm not talking about BJ's Dads Novel which was written in 1982.

I'm going to have to leave this thread. As tobe quite honest it's blatantly clear whats going on and we have been asked not to discuss it.

"Understandably" as this is not my forum so will abide by the rules.

Stay safe and i truly mean that to everyone. :thumb:
 
Seeing the Main issue is with how Governments around the world have tackled this cv19 issue since we have established where this "Virus" came from and i'm not talking about BJ's Dads Novel which was written in 1982.

I'm going to have to leave this thread. As tobe quite honest it's blatantly clear whats going on and we have been asked not to discuss it.

"Understandably" as this is not my forum so will abide by the rules.

Stay safe and i truly mean that to everyone. :thumb:

I think what we were told is that some things can be discussed on this thread, while other things will need to be discussed in the 'UK Politics & Brexit' thread. But nothing was barred, unless I misunderstood the situation.

Either way, all the best and stay well.
 
Good news :thumb:
I wonder if there is a CFR threshold at which the powers will be will twig that cases are not translating into deaths so something else is going on here. That something could include mutation to a milder/ different form of coronavirus or community transmission leading to a degree of herd immunity within the population. Maybe then they will start a programme of mass antibody blood testing in the UK.
 
I wonder if there is a CFR threshold at which the powers will be will twig that cases are not translating into deaths so something else is going on here. That something could include mutation to a milder/ different form of coronavirus or community transmission leading to a degree of herd immunity within the population. Maybe then they will start a programme of mass antibody blood testing in the UK.

Difficult to say.


Firstly, I think the answer to that will depend on the variance rather than the average.

In other words, if the CFR is high for certain groups (age, BAME, obese, etc) and low for other (children etc) then they might take the view that we still need to do more to protect those at high risk of dying form COVID-19.


Then, this will also depend on data becoming available over time regarding 'long COVID'.

It might be the case that the focus will shift from CFR to other parameters, e.g. if a significant people become chronically ill and unable to work, or suffer from other long-term disabilities, etc.

But we'll only know this over time - COVID-19 is still a new disease.
 
I don’t think anyone (here at least) believes the Barrington declaration is a hoax. Doubts have been expressed about the validity of some of its proposals, and its support has been significantly discredited by the numbers of dubious signatories.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
and its support has been significantly discredited by the numbers of dubious signatories
I'm no supporter (nor proponent) of conspiracy theories, but one really has to question why there was such an orchestrated campaign to discredit a proposal for an alternative strategy that was made in good faith by subject-matter qualified people, and that the subsequent media focus has been on the "fake signatures" rather than proposals made. As Dr. Gupta says:
Since the declaration last week, the Great Barrington Declaration has come under attack across the media, online (including Wikipedia and Google) from fellow academics as being part of a Libertarian conspiracy (my politics are not remotely libertarian) or being based in “pseudoscience”; others attempting to be less defamatory say that our views are “fringe”. The large number of serious scientists from top institutions taking part suggest otherwise. There are genuine good faith disagreements that must be aired and discussed — the impact on the world is too significant for us to fail to have this discussion in a serious way.
 
The Great Barrington Declaration now has more than 450,000 signatures, despite the slur campaign.

One question for all those who are putting their faith in the current suppression (delay transmission of virus) until vaccination policy. What if the chosen vaccine when it arrives is ineffective in creating immunity?

CDC seasonal flu vaccine effectiveness 2009-2019. These figures explain how despite a flu vaccine so many still die every year.

 
In 10 minutes' time Monsieur Le Président will tell France what is going to happen here with regard to restriction tightening.

I'll report back later.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom