Coronavirus

[Andrew3000]

I'd reccomend viewing this for a holistic view of covid-19, viruses in general and human health.  Its very technical in places but this is the kind of wider perspective we all need. I hope that our governments can stop pinning hopes on a vaccine and get to grips with how the virus itself is not the issue- it's how it interacts with environmental conditions such as air pollution that make it such a threat to us. Sadly, we can't rely on our governments to act wisely and we need to push for change.

 

[Sith Happens]

11 minutes ago, Gee SCREAMER !! said:

If we'd had millions I think we'd have had a lot more use for the Nightingale units. Your probably looking at no higher than 1.5 at the outside.

1 and half people have had Coronavirus?

All seems an overreaction then...i wonder who the 1 and a half are? My bet is the Krankies.

[Sith Happens]

2 minutes ago, Andrew3000 said:

I'd reccomend viewing this for a holistic view of covid-19, viruses in general and human health.  Its very technical in places but this is the kind of wider perspective we all need. I hope that our governments can stop pinning hopes on a vaccine and get to grips with how the virus itself is not the issue- it's how it interacts with environmental conditions such as air pollution that make it such a threat too us.

 

I was going to watch it, but then noticed Gareth Gates was one of those shown as presenting so decided to give it a miss.

[Andrew3000]

3 minutes ago, Paul71 said:

I was going to watch it, but then noticed Gareth Gates was one of those shown as presenting so decided to give it a miss.

Tee Hee! Never noticed the likeness before. I think you'll find Zach a little more qualified and articulate on the matter.

[rammieib]

22 minutes ago, Gee SCREAMER !! said:

If we'd had millions I think we'd have had a lot more use for the Nightingale units. Your probably looking at no higher than 1.5 at the outside.

They’ve already done multiple research studies showing 7% have antibodies. That’s 4-5 million right there in England. (Same numbers in Spain)

Then On top of this, the sub 30/40 age group don’t even need antibodies. The T Cells fight it off.

Most people will never have known they had it.

The risk is those very very small numbers of higher risk people who didn’t get it and then never left they’re home. 
 

However, you don’t shut a country/economy down for the 1% when the 99% are fine.

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

6 minutes ago, rammieib said:

They’ve already done multiple research studies showing 7% have antibodies. That’s 4-5 million right there in England. (Same numbers in Spain)

Then On top of this, the sub 30/40 age group don’t even need antibodies. The T Cells fight it off.

Most people will never have known they had it.

The risk is those very very small numbers of higher risk people who didn’t get it and then never left they’re home. 
 

However, you don’t shut a country/economy down for the 1% when the 99% are fine.

I think that's a lot of bold statements, not really backed up with data .  Once everybody who lives in the UK has had a test i'll believe that . Until then 

[rammieib]

3 minutes ago, Gee SCREAMER !! said:

I think that's a lot of bold statements, not really backed up with data .  Once everybody who lives in the UK has had a test i'll believe that . Until then 

A test for what though? Just look how many tests for antibodies on confirmed cases have come back negative - all on the younger generation.

[ariotofmyown]

21 minutes ago, rammieib said:

They’ve already done multiple research studies showing 7% have antibodies. That’s 4-5 million right there in England. (Same numbers in Spain)

Then On top of this, the sub 30/40 age group don’t even need antibodies. The T Cells fight it off.

Most people will never have known they had it.

The risk is those very very small numbers of higher risk people who didn’t get it and then never left they’re home. 
 

However, you don’t shut a country/economy down for the 1% when the 99% are fine.

Just checking, you do except we had around 50k excess deaths during March to June time? And that most of these were due to Covid?

[Gone]

2 minutes ago, ariotofmyown said:

Just checking, you do except we had around 50k excess deaths during March to June time? And that most of these were due to Covid?

With Covid not due to Covid 

[rammieib]

7 minutes ago, ariotofmyown said:

Just checking, you do except we had around 50k excess deaths during March to June time? And that most of these were due to Covid?

Yes.

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

13 minutes ago, rammieib said:

A test for what though? Just look how many tests for antibodies on confirmed cases have come back negative - all on the younger generation.

A blood test has an accuracy of level 93% if done correctly, not at home by finger rick.  

[ariotofmyown]

2 hours ago, TexasRam said:

With Covid not due to Covid 

Can't see the difference between those 2 descriptions really. 

[G STAR RAM]

5 minutes ago, ariotofmyown said:

Can't see the difference between those 2 descriptions really. 

Really?

If someone died with a cold, you would you class that as dying from a cold?

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

3 hours ago, Paul71 said:

1 and half people have had Coronavirus?

All seems an overreaction then...i wonder who the 1 and a half are? My bet is the Krankies.

Crouch and Holmes

[ariotofmyown]

16 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Really?

If someone died with a cold, you would you class that as dying from a cold?

Ah I see, I get what @TexasRam means now.  It seems to make little difference to me if all those excess deaths with 'of' Covid, or 'with' Covid. It seems to be a key point to people who seem to think that lockdown wasn't/isn't really necessary.

I haven't really got any underlying health issues but I'd rather not get it after speaking to people who a) had it or b) know relatively healthy people who died of/with it.

[Gone]

34 minutes ago, ariotofmyown said:

Ah I see, I get what @TexasRam means now.  It seems to make little difference to me if all those excess deaths with 'of' Covid, or 'with' Covid. It seems to be a key point to people who seem to think that lockdown wasn't/isn't really necessary.

I haven't really got any underlying health issues but I'd rather not get it after speaking to people who a) had it or b) know relatively healthy people who died of/with it.

Fair enough, but to me it’s a big difference because dying of it is extremely different to dying having it. You could have it, feel perfectly well but die of a heart attack because of your poor diet etc (probably not a good example). I’ve read and heard anecdotal evidence that the latter would be recorded in the Covid death data. 

Maybe my view is also tainted as I don’t know of anyone who’s actually had it (luckily I guess)  

[angieram]

9 hours ago, rammieib said:

They’ve already done multiple research studies showing 7% have antibodies. That’s 4-5 million right there in England. (Same numbers in Spain)

Then On top of this, the sub 30/40 age group don’t even need antibodies. The T Cells fight it off.

Most people will never have known they had it.

The risk is those very very small numbers of higher risk people who didn’t get it and then never left they’re home. 
 

However, you don’t shut a country/economy down for the 1% when the 99% are fine.

So that 1% is 660,000 people. Are they just to stay at home for the rest of their lives? 

[Gone]

1 hour ago, angieram said:

So that 1% is 660,000 people. Are they just to stay at home for the rest of their lives? 

No but to let the other 66Million people lead a normal life there should be some realistic balance of normality. Unless we want to be a communist state ..............Maybe??‍♂️

[rammieib]

3 hours ago, angieram said:

So that 1% is 660,000 people. Are they just to stay at home for the rest of their lives? 

No they are already leaving the house aren't they as the numbers are right down. However, surely you agree we can't screw the economy up for 1%?

Put yourself in the shoes of one of the nearly one million people who have lost their job now and tell me what the answer should be?

[Sith Happens]

7 hours ago, rammieib said:

No they are already leaving the house aren't they as the numbers are right down. However, surely you agree we can't screw the economy up for 1%?

Put yourself in the shoes of one of the nearly one million people who have lost their job now and tell me what the answer should be?

The 1% can only go out because the restrictions are being eased not removed. If we had not had lockdown I wonder if the numbers that were being talked about of 500k dead would have come true?

Surely its not 1% anyway. 2 million were asked to shield, and not all of those were old people. We have over 3 million over 80 in the UK who would also be more at risk, although I accept that some of those 2 million will be within those 3 million, but we are still feasibly looking at 4 or 5 million people just by my rubbish fag packet maths that would be in an enforced self isolation if lock down hadnt happened, or we lifted restrictions faster than we are.

I agree the economy is vital though and you cant just go in indefinetly.

Maybe its a good job that us mere mortals can just offer an opinion on whats happening, i cant imagine being in a position of having to make a decision, asking the question...So what it is it? 1 million unemployed of half a million dead?

Hopefully most of those 1 million will find their way back into work as the economy recovers.....thats an easier task than bringing half a million people back to life.