Spanish Posted October 9, 2020 Share Posted October 9, 2020 1 hour ago, TexasRam said: Not really, as I quoted I’ll post meaningful data when I get it. I do find it extremely worrying that yourself @GboroRam@Eddie are loving the fact numbers are going up, how very very odd. I can also counter argue and include data that backs up my original argument that we should lift restrictions ASAP before it’s too late for our Country to economically recover. Including the amount of positive cases that lead to absolutely nothing (not even a sniff) or the amount of cases coming from Universities where no one is sick. Again I’ll state that I think it’s incredibly selfish of the few potentially effected to destroy the futures and life’s of the mass population that aren’t. Do you think that sort of comment is actually fair? That these guys are reveling in bad news? Not what I have read from them. Everybody seems worried about the virus and they way in which it is dealt with. Some are more worried about the economy and some about lives. I think it is quite natural to quote figures that support your views. I guess you would be happy to quote bad economic data, it certainly wouldn't be because you enjoy it because reading your posts tells me quite the opposite Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxjam Posted October 9, 2020 Share Posted October 9, 2020 12 minutes ago, Andicis said: We're talking about different things. The cases in the University are not leading to ''surges'', if it gets out into the public, that's when it's a problem. But when it's one isolated Uni halls with 500 cases, it's not a huge problem is it? Shouldn't get community spread from that. The amount of students getting covid in universities is surging - there are a number mentioned in the following article all with 100s or a 1000 confirmed cases; https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-more-than-1-000-students-at-newcastle-university-have-tested-positive-over-the-past-week-12099193 Hopefully all have locked down and as students are unlikely to return home during term time it will pass through a section of the community that will overwhelmingly suffer mild to no complications. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Posted October 9, 2020 Share Posted October 9, 2020 1 minute ago, Andicis said: We're talking about different things. The cases in the University are not leading to ''surges'', if it gets out into the public, that's when it's a problem. But when it's one isolated Uni halls with 500 cases, it's not a huge problem is it? Shouldn't get community spread from that. All I'm pointing out is that whereas the increase in cases can be explained by the disease running wild on university campuses, the increase in deaths and hospitalisations cannot. Students don't all live in halls, but those who don't do so come into contact with those who do at lectures, refectories, around campuses etc. They then come into contact with the general population, and that starts the community spread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Clough Posted October 9, 2020 Share Posted October 9, 2020 11 minutes ago, Andicis said: We're talking about different things. The cases in the University are not leading to ''surges'', if it gets out into the public, that's when it's a problem. But when it's one isolated Uni halls with 500 cases, it's not a huge problem is it? Shouldn't get community spread from that. Students don't go out shopping for groceries or clothes anymore? They don't go to pubs/clubs where non-students also visit? Don't use public transport? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gone Posted October 9, 2020 Share Posted October 9, 2020 7 minutes ago, Spanish said: Do you think that sort of comment is actually fair? Good point and probably not fair, an over reaction by me and I apologise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Posted October 9, 2020 Share Posted October 9, 2020 34 minutes ago, TexasRam said: If you actually read anything, yes I think that my family, friends, colleagues future is more important to me than someone I don’t know , absolutely I do. I see the closest to me including elderly parents life’s being effected so badly by the restrictions in place with very little risk to them of effects of Covid. I see my children’s education effected, their futures effected and their social and mental well-being effected. So yes I deem that more important, I am not interested if you think that’s bad or immoral because those people I mention and thier well-being come 1st to me above anybody else. I’m guessing unless you truley are mother Teresa you think the same hence take the stance you take. Oh why am I engaging with you again ? This kind of selfishness is the kind of thought process that harms everyone, including yourself. As noted, the best outcome is where nobody is getting sick. Particularly from a selfish point of view, just for you, it's worth noting that it's likely that members of your immediate family do indeed have risk factors that they may not be aware of. Equally, as noted, there's nothing to say that damage to the economy is being avoided by any method except forcing the numbers to zero. That's a front that we'll have to see on though. 25 minutes ago, TexasRam said: This ones just for you @Albert You clearly don't understand what fringe science. Given that, starting with wikipedia's definition may help you start your journey to understanding the point: Quote Fringe science is an inquiry in an established field of study which departs significantly from mainstream theories in that field and is considered to be questionable by the mainstream. Prof Gupta et al's work is indeed questioned by the mainstream, which is why the great Barrington declaration exists in the first place. Fringe science is very different to pseudoscience, and such fringe beliefs do on occasion turn out to be more valid, and become the mainstream. A good example of such is plate tectonics, was indeed considered such at one point. 29 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said: What would hospital admissions normally be showing at this time of year as we head towards winter and the flu season? How are flu deaths looking in comparison to previous years? Should we not expect hospital admissions to be going up after they were pretty much closed to everything except Covid for 4 months? The graphs that people continue to present are completely meaningless without context and supporting background information. Ghost of Clough has already answered most of the points, but on flu deaths, the NHS releases figures on the flu each year. You can read those reports here. So, the benchmark from last year is 103 deaths. You can compare this to the weekly flu reports if you wish. These can be found here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stive Pesley Posted October 9, 2020 Share Posted October 9, 2020 11 minutes ago, Andicis said: The cases in the University are not leading to ''surges'', if it gets out into the public, that's when it's a problem. But when it's one isolated Uni halls with 500 cases, it's not a huge problem is it? Shouldn't get community spread from that. No such thing as isolated Uni halls though. I know 3 people with kids at Nottingham Trent Uni at the moment. All freshers, all in different halls, all have tested postive, and all their halls are rife with it. They don't know each other, but they have all been out in the various student nights at pubs, mingling with the student population. But these pubs aren't staffed by students - they are staffed by people from the community, the trams and buses and taxis are driven by people in the community, shops where they buy their stuff - staffed by the community. Cases in Nottingham have risen seven-fold in a matter of days. This is the exact exponential scenario that we warned about and a lot of people poo-pooed. OK, so no students have died yet, but they will. There will be students with pre-existing conditions who won't be so lucky as those who just feel a bit "under the weather" and don't take isolation seriously Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxjam Posted October 9, 2020 Share Posted October 9, 2020 16 minutes ago, ariotofmyown said: Agreed, although it doesn't feel that we have a plan though since the lockdown proper ended. I'm sure things would have worked much better with a functioning app, working trace and trace system, clear rules from the start (as opposed to guidelines), testing at airports and ports etc etc. We were told in May that the App was key to relaxing lockdown. But we opened up regardless and got the App in September. How different things might have been if the App had been released whilst we were all in lockdown, clapping together, everyone engaged and prepared to do what was necessary. Although sacking Cummings immediately might have helped with some social cohesion. Agreed that the plan, such as it is, has been average at best but I do believe that we have some challenges that other countries don't - some of which include; - being a heavily service driven economy meaning that we can't afford to keep locking down - having approx 1m people pass through the country every day - living in a densely packed country meaning that the local lockdowns haven't really worked - you can just go 5 minutes up the road and be in a different area under different restrictions. IMO its either lockdown nationally for a long time and live with the economic crisis, the misery and long term deaths or open up, take a short term hit and learn to adapt to living with the virus. These half measures are just prolonging the agony. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Posted October 9, 2020 Share Posted October 9, 2020 18 minutes ago, Andicis said: We're talking about different things. The cases in the University are not leading to ''surges'', if it gets out into the public, that's when it's a problem. But when it's one isolated Uni halls with 500 cases, it's not a huge problem is it? Shouldn't get community spread from that. The concern is that hospitalisations, etc are surging, suggesting that it is not limited to the universities. 15 minutes ago, TexasRam said: I will continue to post this point Says it all really. 12 minutes ago, ariotofmyown said: Agreed, although it doesn't feel that we have a plan though since the lockdown proper ended. I'm sure things would have worked much better with a functioning app, working trace and trace system, clear rules from the start (as opposed to guidelines), testing at airports and ports etc etc. We were told in May that the App was key to relaxing lockdown. But we opened up regardless and got the App in September. How different things might have been if the App had been released whilst we were all in lockdown, clapping together, everyone engaged and prepared to do what was necessary. Although sacking Cummings immediately might have helped with some social cohesion. This is the whole thing, the virus was close to under control, and they've just bumbled their way back to this second wave. Clear leadership at that key time, and there wouldn't be any of this discussion. Instead, this shambles is what we get. I would point out, however, that the app likely wouldn't have achieved anything. Even in Australia, where the leadership has, bizarrely, been more competent, and gotten the virus under control, the app achieved virtually nothing in this, and barely functions. Let's hope the UK's one works better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxjam Posted October 9, 2020 Share Posted October 9, 2020 5 minutes ago, Albert said: This is the whole thing, the virus was close to under control, and they've just bumbled their way back to this second wave. Clear leadership at that key time, and there wouldn't be any of this discussion. Instead, this shambles is what we get. It wasn't close to being under control though - we were just all hiding from it. If you want it to remain under control you continue to lockdown and watch as everything collapses, if you open back up covid has a resurgence. It is of no surprise to me at least that with our open borders and ease of movement large swathes of Europe are experiencing second waves, whilst other countries such as Australia and New Zealand are better able to keep a lid on things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Posted October 9, 2020 Share Posted October 9, 2020 2 minutes ago, maxjam said: Agreed that the plan, such as it is, has been average at best but I do believe that we have some challenges that other countries don't. Some of which being a heavily service driven economy meaning that we can't afford to keep locking down, approximately 1m people passing through the country every day and a densely packed country meaning that the local lockdowns haven't really worked - you can just go 5 minutes up the road and be in a different area under different restrictions. IMO its either lockdown nationally for a long time and live with the economic crisis, the misery and long term deaths or open up, take a short term hit and learn to adapt to living with the virus. These half measures are just prolonging the agony. This is a bit of a false dichotomy though. Opening up isn't going to be a 'short term hit'. The NHS was pushed to its limit already not under such conditions, the country doesn't have the capability of just letting it burn, even if we were willing to sacrifice all those lives to the economy. Equally, without knowing the full picture of the long term health consequences of the virus, even if such actually did work it's possible that it would lead to a massive long term productivity loss not just from loss of life, but reduced capability. Add this to the cost of healthcare for those people, and even a small fraction suffering long term complications becomes a significant burden. The other side of the coin is that if the UK really does give up attempting to control the disease, this risk alienating many of those people who would travel to and through the country, out of fear of catching the virus. This has the potential to do further, and longer term damage to the economy. The horse has well and truly bolted though, and as discussed previously, regardless of the path the nation chooses, there needs to be a more coherent plan. The half measures have failed, the UK has to make a choice about a national strategy to go forward with. It seems all choices are bad at this point. Again though, my preference is the New Zealand model, because if it is done well, and all goes wrong with the vaccine, the economy can at least stay open long term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Posted October 9, 2020 Share Posted October 9, 2020 1 minute ago, maxjam said: It wasn't close to being under control though - we were just all hiding from it. If you want it to remain under control you continue to lockdown and watch as everything collapses, if you open back up covid has a resurgence. It is of no surprise to me at least that with our open borders and ease of movement large swathes of Europe are experiencing second waves, whilst other countries such as Australia and New Zealand are better able to keep a lid on things. The numbers were low enough that a coherent plan, followed through, at that point would have been able to get the numbers to zero, as was done elsewhere. Countries that did so have managed to open back up with out such a resurgence. That said, if you're just going to blame the EU and open borders, maybe it's time to look more into those borders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Posted October 9, 2020 Share Posted October 9, 2020 56 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said: Not sure where you can find this data https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/deathsduetocoronaviruscovid19comparedwithdeathsfrominfluenzaandpneumoniaenglandandwales/deathsoccurringbetween1januaryand31august2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxjam Posted October 9, 2020 Share Posted October 9, 2020 6 minutes ago, Albert said: This is a bit of a false dichotomy though. Opening up isn't going to be a 'short term hit'. The NHS was pushed to its limit already not under such conditions, the country doesn't have the capability of just letting it burn, even if we were willing to sacrifice all those lives to the economy. I'm not saying let it burn through everything. I'm saying that we learn to live with the virus and not let it dominate everything. Employ social distancing etc, allow pubs, clubs, businesses etc to stay open and let people manage their own risk. There was also an argument that the winter covid outbreak had already peaked before we went into lockdown anyway; https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8391141/Did-UKs-coronavirus-crisis-peak-lockdown.html Continuing to lockdown just results in this which means eventually we'll have no NHS to save anybody anyway; Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxjam Posted October 9, 2020 Share Posted October 9, 2020 Ah, it warms my heart to see that we're all in this together... average working man/woman; https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/explainers-52135342 MPs; https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-business-minister-nadhim-zahawi-criticises-inappropriate-plans-to-give-mps-1633500-pay-rise-12099809 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Posted October 9, 2020 Share Posted October 9, 2020 2 minutes ago, maxjam said: I'm not saying let it burn through everything. I'm saying that we learn to live with the virus and not let it dominate everything. Employ social distancing etc, allow pubs, clubs, businesses etc to stay open and let people manage their own risk. Except we've learned this isn't enough to contain the virus. It certainly reduces the rate of spread, but to get it under control generally takes more than that. 2 minutes ago, maxjam said: There was also an argument that the winter covid outbreak had already peaked before we went into lockdown anyway; https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8391141/Did-UKs-coronavirus-crisis-peak-lockdown.html ...dailymail... 2 minutes ago, maxjam said: Continuing to lockdown just results in this which means eventually we'll have no NHS to save anybody anyway; Except that's clearly not the case, given that the first set of lockdowns did indeed work, and they have worked elsewhere in the World. 2 minutes ago, maxjam said: Again, the economic impacts are more than just 'from lockdowns'. If it were just from lockdowns, countries that did not use them would not have them. This is not the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 9, 2020 Share Posted October 9, 2020 1 hour ago, Ghost of Clough said: Relevance to being admitted to hospital due to covid? Not sure where you can find this data Relevance to being admitted to hospital due to covid? The graphs show in increase in cases, hospitalisations and deaths. I'm not sure how you can argue against that. Well if 1000 people are being admitted to hospital with Covid and 0 with flu, yet in normal years at this time 1000 were being admitted with flu, then you would have a better idea of the situation. Same for deaths. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxjam Posted October 9, 2020 Share Posted October 9, 2020 27 minutes ago, Albert said: Except we've learned this isn't enough to contain the virus. It certainly reduces the rate of spread, but to get it under control generally takes more than that. And we've also learned that its widespread and over 80% of carriers show no symptoms. 27 minutes ago, Albert said: ...dailymail... So? It was also reported elsewhere, this was just the top google search link. It was referring to a Bristol University study. 27 minutes ago, Albert said: Except that's clearly not the case, given that the first set of lockdowns did indeed work, and they have worked elsewhere in the World. Except that is clearly is the case as they equally haven't worked elsewhere in the world. 27 minutes ago, Albert said: Again, the economic impacts are more than just 'from lockdowns'. If it were just from lockdowns, countries that did not use them would not have them. This is not the case. Sigh. Not all economies are the same. Some countries are better able to cope with lockdowns than others. Regardless, all countries will have to pay a cost at some point in the future including Australia; https://www.lowyinstitute.org/publications/costs-covid-australia-economic-prospects-wounded-world We're clearly not on the same page when it comes to this discussion and as was noted by others yesterday this thread is becoming like the old politics thread that eventually got shut down. We're just going over old ground and repeating existing arguments so I'll leave it here ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfie Posted October 9, 2020 Share Posted October 9, 2020 2 hours ago, SchtivePesley said: Yeah - we should be honest and give them credit for the complexities of the challenge that they face. I dont envy them. However, It's not so much about knowing the right thing to do, and more about them making mistake after mistake in the responses they have chosen How do we know they are mistake responses, though?. Once a course of action is chosen, we can only speculate as to what other outcomes would have been. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Posted October 9, 2020 Share Posted October 9, 2020 3 minutes ago, maxjam said: And we've also learned that its widespread and over 80% of carriers show no symptoms. Source on how widespread you think it is? If it were already widespread enough for this point to be meaningful, the trends of infections, hospitalisations and deaths would not be on the way up. 3 minutes ago, maxjam said: So? It was also reported elsewhere, this was just the top google search link. It was referring to a Bristol University study. Then why not quote that study? The notion that the lockdown was required requires more than just curve fitting, particularly given this is quite out of date of this point. Would be interesting to see the original paper. Also, are you going to reference how they note the average time to death as 23 days, which challenges the current criteria of dying within 28 days of being a confirmed case? 3 minutes ago, maxjam said: Except that is clearly is the case as they equally haven't worked elsewhere in the world. ...they literally have. If there is one thing we know with upmost certainty at this point, it's that lockdowns are indeed effective. 3 minutes ago, maxjam said: Sigh. Not all economies are the same. Some countries are better able to cope with lockdowns than others. Regardless, all countries will have to pay a cost at some point in the future including Australia; https://www.lowyinstitute.org/publications/costs-covid-australia-economic-prospects-wounded-world You love your right wing think tanks don't you? For those curious, this lot aren't quite as out there as the IPA. They were founded by the founder of Westfield. The point with Australia is that the Covid-free states economies are recovering, as they're not in lockdown. I find it odd you've posted this link without highlighting exactly what you're expecting people to get from it. It's worth noting that nothing here broadly disagrees with anything I've discussed regarding Australia's position, nor economic forecast. If your point is that we were better insulated from the cost of lockdowns, the point is largely moot, as our lockdowns were shorter than the UK's, for the most point, because they were handled well. That is, in essence, my whole point. The UK never needed to have these exhausting long lockdowns. Denser places, with greater amounts of transit through them per capita, have done even better than Australia. Singapore and Hong Kong come to mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.