Coronavirus

[maxjam]

5 minutes ago, Albert said:

So, why are there countries that have achieved it then?

Your argument is basically 'the UK is too incompetent for something like that'. 

Different economies, different climates, different societies.  Multiple factors.

Unless you want a financially crippling hard lockdown with sustained restrictions until (if ever) a vaccine becomes available the costs and benefits have to be weighed up against each other.

There are now multiple arguments to suggest that covid isn't as deadly as we first feared and the long term damage we are doing to our economies and future health of the nation will far outweigh the numbers we could save in the short term.

[Gone]

1 minute ago, Albert said:

It was not something that they claimed would happen

That’s a prediction, it has been dealt with you are wrong. 

[Albert]

1 minute ago, Eddie said:

But there is irrefutable evidence that the lockdown we had did work. We went from 4000 deaths a week at the start to double digits a week at the end. The lockdown served its purpose, which was purely and simply to prevent the NHS being completely overwhelmed. It bought time - unfortunately, that time has been utterly squandered for the most part because the message still hasn't got through to a large number of people that the easiest, best and cheapest way to reduce transmission of the disease is to reduce droplet transmission from person to person, and that if you have been unfortunate enough to come into close contact with somebody who has the disease, then it's better to know that information as quickly as possible so that you can take steps to break the chain.

 

I still don't get this 'buying time' idea. We know that pushing it to zero, or near zero, works. We know that it's the only way to be able to safely reopen anything, and keep them open longer term. We know it's the only way to restore consumer confidence, and help restart the economy. 

You're right, the time was squandered, but doing it all again, the move surely should be to emulate the successful countries, rather than just buying time to prepare for a third wave. 

[jimmyp]

2 minutes ago, TexasRam said:

That’s a prediction, it has been dealt with you are wrong. 

Forecast is scientific and free from intuition and personal bias, whereas prediction is subjective and fatalistic in nature. Forecasting is an extrapolation of past into the future while prediction is judgmental and takes into account changes taking place in the future

[Gone]

1 minute ago, jimmyp said:

Forecast is scientific and free from intuition and personal bias, whereas prediction is subjective and fatalistic in nature. Forecasting is an extrapolation of past into the future while prediction is judgmental and takes into account changes taking place in the future

It was a prediction, he clearly stated that. 

[maxjam]

1 minute ago, Eddie said:

But there is irrefutable evidence that the lockdown we had did work. We went from 4000 deaths a week at the start to double digits a week at the end.

I agree that lockdowns do work *but* they do indeed only buy you time.  You just push the problem further down the road.  As soon as you begin to open up again outbreaks will flair up. 

 

4 minutes ago, Eddie said:

The lockdown served its purpose, which was purely and simply to prevent the NHS being completely overwhelmed. It bought time - unfortunately, that time

The lockdown may have saved potential covid victims, but it has also sentenced many others to death due to turning away non-covid ailments.

 

6 minutes ago, Eddie said:

 the easiest, best and cheapest way to reduce transmission of the disease is to reduce droplet transmission from person to person, and that if you have been unfortunate enough to come into close contact with somebody who has the disease, then it's better to know that information as quickly as possible so that you can take steps to break the chain.

I'd agree that social distancing seems to be one of the best ways of tackling transmission.  However stats also seem to suggest that if you are under 60 and healthy the chances of fatality are minute.  I'm arguing that those that want to should be allowed to socialise and work whilst the vulnerable continue to take precautions and wait/hope for a vaccine. 

Keep the country and economy moving whilst protect those that need it.

[jimmyp]

1 minute ago, TexasRam said:

It was a prediction, he clearly stated that. 

No he clearly stated why it wasn’t a prediction by pointing out that the rule of 6 hadn’t yet had chance to have a full impact. It was a forecast of a possible scenario.

[Albert]

1 minute ago, maxjam said:

Different economies, different climates, different societies.  Multiple factors.

Unless you want a financially crippling hard lockdown with sustained restrictions until (if ever) a vaccine becomes available the costs and benefits have to be weighed up against each other.

There are now multiple arguments to suggest that covid isn't as deadly as we first feared and the long term damage we are doing to our economies and future health of the nation will far outweigh the numbers we could save in the short term.

All pretty weak excuses. Australia and New Zealand, culturally, aren't that different to the UK. New Zealand, in terms of climate, isn't that far off either. Economically speaking, all three are pretty similar in terms of fraction of GDP from tourism, with New Zealand out in front. 

The whole point I'm making is about costs and benefits. The lockdowns will roll on until the vaccine, without certainty, if you go down the UK's path. Going down the path Australia, New Zealand, as well as others like Taiwan, Vietnam, etc have done allows you to open up. You very much get the best of both Worlds, rather than the worst of both, which is what the UK has. 

As to the 'multiple arguments', not from scientists, just from wackos. The disease is actually more deadly in terms of infection fatality rate than we thought several months ago, it is proven that it can overwhelm healthcare systems, and there are emerging concerns of long term damage even to patients who were asymptomatic. We may well be dealing with the health fallout of decisions to let the fire burn even this much for decades to come. If places like the UK choose to keep going with half measures, rather than going the way places like Australia have, the economic costs could also be devastating. 

1 minute ago, TexasRam said:

That’s a prediction, it has been dealt with you are wrong. 

Wowzers. Well, you keep embarrassing yourself on this point if that's what you want to do. 

[Eddie]

2 minutes ago, Albert said:

I still don't get this 'buying time' idea. We know that pushing it to zero, or near zero, works. We know that it's the only way to be able to safely reopen anything, and keep them open longer term. We know it's the only way to restore consumer confidence, and help restart the economy. 

You're right, the time was squandered, but doing it all again, the move surely should be to emulate the successful countries, rather than just buying time to prepare for a third wave. 

The British government, and for that matter a sector of the British people (to be more specific, a sector of English people), have a mentality of 'assumed superiority'. There's not a cat in hell's chance that any one of them will ever admit that we should do what others are doing.

[Albert]

6 minutes ago, TexasRam said:

It was a prediction, he clearly stated that. 

Source that it was 'a prediction'? 

[Gone]

2 minutes ago, jimmyp said:

No he clearly stated why it wasn’t a prediction by pointing out that the rule of 6 hadn’t yet had chance to have a full impact. It was a forecast of a possible scenario.

Again we made new restrictions based on the outlandish prediction/forecast he quoted, including the rule of 6. Data shows nothing was needed, but that doesn’t matter let continue to kill the country socially and economically 

[Shuff264]

Its crazy how much cases are being driven in different regions

For me, the government needed to do much more at local level with short local lockdowns, similar to the national we had in April, to stop the spread impacting at a national level. 

The North West is seemingly out of control and has been for some time

[Gone]

5 minutes ago, Albert said:

Source that it was 'a prediction'? 

I heard it and watch it, go find it yourself 

[Albert]

6 minutes ago, maxjam said:

I agree that lockdowns do work *but* they do indeed only buy you time.  You just push the problem further down the road.  As soon as you begin to open up again outbreaks will flair up. 

 

The lockdown may have saved potential covid victims, but it has also sentenced many others to death due to turning away non-covid ailments.

 

I'd agree that social distancing seems to be one of the best ways of tackling transmission.  However stats also seem to suggest that if you are under 60 and healthy the chances of fatality are minute.  I'm arguing that those that want to should be allowed to socialise and work whilst the vulnerable continue to take precautions and wait/hope for a vaccine. 

Keep the country and economy moving whilst protect those that need it.

As noted, Australia, New Zealand, etc have opened up, and it is not flaring up. Here in Adelaide it's been over 50 days since the last 'flare up', which was less than half a dozen cases, and prior to that it was 100 days. 

As to the claim that the lockdown is costing lives, there is scant, if any evidence of such being the case to date. There's no doubt that there will be extra cases of cancers that aren't caught as quickly as they otherwise would have, etc, but the suggestion that this would represent as many lives lost as have been saved is fanciful. Again, the infection fatality rate of Covid is something like 0.5-1.0%, and many survivors get longer term complications, including damage to the liver, heart, lungs and brain. A year of delayed diagnoses is not doing that level of damage. That's not even considering the impacts of if the NHS were overwhelmed. 

[Albert]

2 minutes ago, TexasRam said:

I heard it and watch it, go find it yourself 

...find it mate... I'm not doing your legwork. 

[Gone]

7 minutes ago, Albert said:

Wowzers. Well, you keep embarrassing yourself on this point if that's what you want to do. 

So do you, I’m ok to keep going all day.  As stated I’m living from outcome of the prediction/forecast. Are you? 

[Albert]

Just now, TexasRam said:

So do you, I’m ok to keep going all day.  As stated I’m living from outcome of the prediction/forecast. Are you? 

Mate, you're a great laugh, I'll give you that. 

At least others can easily see through how weak a case you're putting. As noted though, restrictions came in, increase in the rate of new cases is slowly, which is good. Hopefully, it'll peak in the coming days, and the restrictions will have been successful. 

[Gone]

2 minutes ago, Albert said:

Mate, you're a great laugh, I'll give you that. 

At least others can easily see through how weak a case you're putting. As noted though, restrictions came in, increase in the rate of new cases is slowly, which is good. Hopefully, it'll peak in the coming days, and the restrictions will have been successful. 

I think trying to protect jobs, incomes, eduction, families, relationships, health outside of Covid etc etc etc by offering a different view to what we are being sold it’s not stupid but extremely important. 

[Albert]

4 minutes ago, TexasRam said:

I think trying to protect jobs, incomes, eduction, families, relationships, health outside of Covid etc etc etc by offering a different view to what we are being sold it’s not stupid but extremely important. 

That's exactly what my argument is for, protecting jobs, getting people back to face to face education, reuniting families, and allowing 'elective' and preventative treatments to return to normal. The thing is, my different view is based on something that exists in reality, and we have pre-existing examples of it being successful. 

Again, there exists countries that are opening up, virtually Covid free right now, because they did they lockdowns and protections correctly. There exists no country opening up 'while the fire burns' so to speak, because doing so would be completely and utterly insane. We've already seen some healthcare systems brought to their limits without even getting near that, it's absurd to suggest that it is, in any way, a decent plan. 

I think a special mention needs to go to health outside Covid though, as there exists no possible way that the UK can help health outside covid without locking down and forcing those numbers to zero. As long as beds are being taken by covid patients, and that's only getting worse without the numbers being driven down, then those beds aren't available for others. 

Sometimes, the medicine sucks, and so much that you stop the treatment early. That's what the UK did, and sadly it'll all need to start again now as a result of that. 

[Gone]

13 minutes ago, Albert said:

That's exactly what my argument is for, protecting jobs, getting people back to face to face education, reuniting families, and allowing 'elective' and preventative treatments to return to normal. The thing is, my different view is based on something that exists in reality, and we have pre-existing examples of it being successful. 

Again, there exists countries that are opening up, virtually Covid free right now, because they did they lockdowns and protections correctly. There exists no country opening up 'while the fire burns' so to speak, because doing so would be completely and utterly insane. We've already seen some healthcare systems brought to their limits without even getting near that, it's absurd to suggest that it is, in any way, a decent plan. 

I think a special mention needs to go to health outside Covid though, as there exists no possible way that the UK can help health outside covid without locking down and forcing those numbers to zero. As long as beds are being taken by covid patients, and that's only getting worse without the numbers being driven down, then those beds aren't available for others. 

Sometimes, the medicine sucks, and so much that you stop the treatment early. That's what the UK did, and sadly it'll all need to start again now as a result of that. 

I actually believe the cure is worse than the course, especially now in the perceived 2nd wave.