Coronavirus

[ariotofmyown]

23 minutes ago, Marriott Ram99 said:

Mainly lock downs of any forms, closing schools, closing down businesses and making it harder for people to stay in contact with friends and family and stay active. 

Only things I agree with are mask wearing on public transport and in shops, not letting people go to countries with high rates of corona, and encouraging people to wash their hands and keep good hygiene. Should be more up to individuals to manage risks imo, cover peoples wages who can't work because they have a high vulnerability. Everyone else should work as normal but try and do minor things to slightly reduce the speed of spread. 

Schools are still open though and few businesses have been shut down or are unable to open. Lack if demand is clearly a factor, as people don't want to mix and risk their health.

Things like table service in pubs is common sense and should have always been there.

Making it difficult to meet up with friends and family is a pain, but they clearly think large social gatherings with limited distancing are a super way of spreading. Family groups are also when multi-generations get together and risk the health of older people.

Whilst the rules on lockdown were originally effective, if too late, the easing of restrictions has been dire. Schools not prioritised, app and track & trace farces, confusing and contradictory rules and advice. 

I think we started to ease lockdown too late, then rushed it all. Opening pubs almost first was a joke, just to try and do something that looked good. Trouble with populists is that they make popular decisions instead of correct ones. 

[maxjam]

2 minutes ago, Van Gritters said:

Do you think if you were 48 then you are quite close to the 45 with no pre existing conditions then you’ll have a good chance of survival. May be a bit over weight but fairly fit. 
I’m just asking for a friend.

 

[ariotofmyown]

10 minutes ago, Norman said:

To quote myself. Less than 600 died under the age of 45 from Covid up until 11th of September.  With 4 of those being under the age of 14.

How many of those had preexisting conditions, how many died of other things? 

What scale do you use to determine who is expendable?

[Mafiabob]

Today is the day that Boris lost the dressing room. The party will remove him within 24 months, as he won’t be seen as an election winner next time around against a more competent opposition. 

[ariotofmyown]

Just now, maxjam said:

 

Just checking, can a young person infect an older person? 

[ariotofmyown]

1 minute ago, Mafiabob said:

Today is the day that Boris lost the dressing room. The party will remove him within 24 months, as he won’t be seen as an election winner next time around against a more competent opposition. 

24 days please

[Marriot Ram99]

18 minutes ago, TuffLuff said:

The problem with what you are saying it’s largely down to interpretation of figures or looking at future unknowns and thinking it’s a fact. I think some of the points you raise are the unfortunate knock on effects of a pandemic rather than the mishandling of it. 

It’s very difficult as we all read up on info that suits our certain arguments and it’s easy to get bogged down in it. To be honest I thought the biggest thing to come out of today was the idea of people working from home and the wash hands and wear a mask stuff. I don’t think much has changed past that really, essentially have a higher aware level that we are in a pandemic. 

In my opinion non of the knock on effects are just unfortunate, they all come as a result of government action and when the huge costs and indirect deaths  are wayed up against short-term lives saved it doesn't add up at all. The indirect deaths and costs  are hard to predict, but the longer it goes on the more the costs outweigh the benefits and if it goes on for another year or more much more people will be negatively impacted than the amount of peoples lives saved. Vulnerable people should be able to make their own decisions, some people may end up wasting their last years of life instead of enjoying themselves or living normally. This is likely to go on for another year so it will amount to 18 months which is far from a short term sacrifice. Potentially it could last another 2 years, the government will  be forced to open up the economy rendering any sacrifices made by the public pointless as the death toll will be similar to the no intervention amount as people will  die when the government stop with the interventions as they become impossible. 

[Norman]

2 minutes ago, ariotofmyown said:

What scale do you use to determine who is expendable?

I use the chart from the Official National Statistics website. 

Sorry if facts hurt your feelings. 

If I posted a chart that showed suicide is a far greater threat to under 45s, would that make you determine who is expendable? 

[Marriot Ram99]

Yes schools are open but that's pointless when they are forced to send year groups home after 1 case and with no proper testing its all a load of guess work amongst chaos. My sister just started back and is now off for 2 weeks, she will go back and then be off for another 2 weeks within a week it's just pointless trying to open up but do it in such a pathetic way. 

For me big compromise  is the route to failure.  If cases were really low and hardly anyone died I would accept the restrictions to an extent, but the fact that things are out of control yet at the same time there is massive impacts on the economy and peoples lives makes me think it is a double failure not achieveing much. 

The government acted so late they were doomed to failure no matter what, early strict lock down for just 3 weeks and a fast transition out of it with no back tracking would have been a hell of alot better.  Letting people come from all over the world with no tests while it spreaded was pure lunancy. 

[maxjam]

10 minutes ago, ariotofmyown said:

Just checking, can a young person infect an older person? 

Yep, older/vulnerable people should continue to take precautions and self isolate and maybe the rest of us can try to prevent generations of economic misery.

[ariotofmyown]

6 minutes ago, Norman said:

I use the chart from the Official National Statistics website. 

Sorry if facts hurt your feelings. 

If I posted a chart that showed suicide is a far greater threat to under 45s, would that make you determine who is expendable? 

I've read on the dark web that there could be a link between larger numbers of younger people been infected with a virus and vulnerable people getting infected from them. I know, crazy talk.

[ariotofmyown]

3 minutes ago, maxjam said:

Yep, older/vulnerable people should continue to take precautions and self isolate and maybe the rest of us can try to prevent generations of economic misery.

Which restrictions would you like to see removed to enable this?

[ariotofmyown]

6 minutes ago, Marriott Ram99 said:

Yes schools are open but that's pointless when they are forced to send year groups home after 1 case and with no proper testing its all a load of guess work amongst chaos. My sister just started back and is now off for 2 weeks, she will go back and then be off for another 2 weeks within a week it's just pointless trying to open up but do it in such a pathetic way. 

For me big compromise  is the route to failure.  If cases were really low and hardly anyone died I would accept the restrictions to an extent, but the fact that things are out of control yet at the same time there is massive impacts on the economy and peoples lives makes me think it is a double failure not achieveing much. 

The government acted so late they were doomed to failure no matter what, early strict lock down and a fast transition out of it with no back tracking would have been a hell of alot better. 

You are right that lots of the restrictions now are due to incompetent government all along. If proper testing and tracking had been in place, like they told us it had to be before we opened up, then we would be in a much better place. We are led by fools.

[Norman]

2 minutes ago, ariotofmyown said:

I've read on the dark web that there could be a link between larger numbers of younger people been infected with a virus and vulnerable people getting infected from them. I know, crazy talk.

Don't try and make out I am a conspiracy theorist. Your arguments follow the same dreary tone. 

If the kid goes home to its guardian, and that guardian is under 45, there doesn't seem to be a great risk. 

You visit the grandparents, you socially distance, use good hygiene methods, and take every precaution. 

Stops infections to the vulnerable you see. 

Found that in the Guardian next to an article about defunding the police. Crazy, eh? 

[maxjam]

7 minutes ago, ariotofmyown said:

Which restrictions would you like to see removed to enable this?

Can't be bothered with the whataboutery that goes on in this thread to get drawn into a discussion tbh.

How many of the 72 EFL clubs will still be around this time next season if they continue to be forced to play behind closed doors? 

Thousands of businesses and millions of people are facing severe economic hardship the longer these restrictions carry on - the human cost of which won't be tracked on a daily meter.

 

[sonofmidnight]

I'd just like to point out that many people who have covid19 are now suffering a syndrome called long covid which can have long term effects on the lungs and heart and young people are not exempt from these effects. If the cases of covid19 continue to increase at the current rate we could well have a substantial percentage of people with long lasting health problems as a result. People who have had Covid19 are also experiencing a number of other long term effects and we are still learning about the consequences of this virus.  Two members of my extended family are GPs and they are very concerned.

[GboroRam]

3 minutes ago, Dappled Ram said:

I'd just like to point out that many people who have covid19 are now suffering a syndrome called long covid which can have long term effects on the lungs and heart and young people are not exempt from these effects. If the cases of covid19 continue to increase at the current rate we could well have a substantial percentage of people with long lasting health problems as a result. People who have had Covid19 are also experiencing a number of other long term effects and we are still learning about the consequences of this virus.  Two members of my extended family are GPs and they are very concerned.

Pah, doctors. What do they know? 

A bloke on the Internet told me it's all a hoax, sheeple. 

[ariotofmyown]

23 minutes ago, maxjam said:

Can't be bothered with the whataboutery that goes on in this thread to get drawn into a discussion tbh.

How many of the 72 EFL clubs will still be around this time next season if they continue to be forced to play behind closed doors? 

Thousands of businesses and millions of people are facing severe economic hardship the longer these restrictions carry on - the human cost of which won't be tracked on a daily meter.

 

Nice answer.  Maybe the economy is having problems because people are unwilling to do things they used to do because 50k ish people died of Covid, and they are protecting themselves or vulnerable loved ones. And businesses are advising people to work at home as they don't want their staff all getting ill at the same time. Pubs shutting at 10pm seems like a small sacrifice.

[ariotofmyown]

33 minutes ago, Norman said:

Don't try and make out I am a conspiracy theorist. Your arguments follow the same dreary tone. 

If the kid goes home to its guardian, and that guardian is under 45, there doesn't seem to be a great risk. 

You visit the grandparents, you socially distance, use good hygiene methods, and take every precaution. 

Stops infections to the vulnerable you see. 

Found that in the Guardian next to an article about defunding the police. Crazy, eh? 

I remember a long time ago you wouldn't give me any links to evil things you claimed Hillary Clinton had done. Then I read about QAnon and the penny dropped.

[Norman]

Just now, ariotofmyown said:

Nice answer.  Maybe the economy is having problems because people are unwilling to do things they used to do because 50k ish people died of Covid, and they are protecting themselves or vulnerable loved ones. And businesses are advising people to work at home as they don't want their staff all getting ill at the same time. Pubs shutting at 10pm seems like a small sacrifice.

 

4 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

Pah, doctors. What do they know? 

A bloke on the Internet told me it's all a hoax, sheeple. 

He says quoting a bloke on the Internet with no stats to back up what he's saying.