Jump to content

Coronavirus


1of4

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, rammieib said:

Instead of money for a life, if the science proves that more lives are being lost to other causes because of the actions were taking to suppress covid, what will the correct course of action be then?

Every scientists view im seeing is purely focused on covid and covid only.

I agree, it's a difficult one to quantify. I would also be interested in how many lives would be lost to Covid if the actions to suppress the virus weren't being taken, and how many additional lives would then be lost to other causes should the NHS be overwhelmed. That last point is what scares scientists and government alike, and perhaps explains why they seem single-minded to the point of being hyperfocused.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 19.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
45 minutes ago, Gritstone Ram said:

How do you know? 
Are you taking the belt and braces approach? What cost does that come at?

Because the govt scientists said it was their recommendation.

They asked for a 2 or 3 week lockdown which is cheaper than a 4 week lockdown. It would also have covered some of the time when regions were being put into tier 2 and 3 which also cost money.

A stitch in time saves nine. Or in this case hundreds or thousands of lives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Eddie said:

It's a difficult balancing-act - the question nobody seems prepared to answer, at least in public, is how much a life is worth. There was a debate on the subject a year or two back which came up with a figure of around $10,000,000 (£8m). How that was justified, and whether there was a weighting that made young people worth more than old (or even the other way around), I know not, and frankly, I have a 75 cl bottle of Gulden Draak in the fridge, so I'm not going to research it tonight, preferring instead to research hops, barley, yeast, water and candi sugar in a glass that resembles a dragon's egg.

 

£96,000. 

That's the value of the minerals the average person has in their body at any one time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gritstone Ram said:

You make a good point about how much is a life worth. How much are people prepared to pay. Will people give up their livelihood, house etc to save someone they don’t know?

It’s the middle people that lose out as always. The ones who have nothing don’t lose and the ones who have plenty will be ok. Us working class are shafted and will end up paying for it all too.

Those lucky beggars with nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, reverendo de duivel said:

£96,000. 

That's the value of the minerals the average person has in their body at any one time.

No, that's the resale value of your organs.

The actual value of the elements which comprise the average human body is about 75 pence.

@sage is worth about £2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Eddie said:

No, that's the resale value of your organs.

The actual value of the elements which comprise the average human body is about 75 pence.

@sage is worth about £2.

One kidney is worth about a million dollars. Ok, maybe not one of mine, too many miles on the clock.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 29/10/2020 at 10:29, Eddie said:

It's quite clear that @SouthStandDan plucked that little gem out of thin air. The ONS recently published a study of COVID-19 v influenza and pneumonia which concluded that already this year, the number of COVID-19 deaths exceeds every single year for influenza and pneumonia deaths over each of the last fifty years - and we haven't had a winter yet for comparison (COVID-19 deaths didn't really start to kick off until March).

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/deathsduetocoronaviruscovid19comparedwithdeathsfrominfluenzaandpneumoniaenglandandwales/deathsoccurringbetween1januaryand31august2020

There's loads of charts and tables in there - but I bet you @TexasRamdoesn't reproduce any of those.

The problem I have Eddie is I've listened to a Oxford University professor of evidence based medicine who is calling out the government saying the data isn't factually correct. It's difficult who to believe and until these clever folks and the government bash their heads together, get on the same page, I can't believe a word anyone is saying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, SouthStandDan said:

The problem I have Eddie is I've listened to a Oxford University professor of evidence based medicine who is calling out the government saying the data isn't factually correct. It's difficult who to believe and until these clever folks and the government bash their heads together, get on the same page, I can't believe a word anyone is saying.

There's always this fellow...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54777346

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, sage said:

Because the govt scientists said it was their recommendation.

They asked for a 2 or 3 week lockdown which is cheaper than a 4 week lockdown. It would also have covered some of the time when regions were being put into tier 2 and 3 which also cost money.

A stitch in time saves nine. Or in this case hundreds or thousands of lives.

I’m not so sure. The rate of infections across the country has varied, so a lot of areas stayed in tier 1 for a long time where as other areas have been in tier 3 for at least a month. The tier 3 areas have nearly been in a total lockdown for a month already. If your so called circuit breaker had come in 2 weeks ago would it have brought the R rate down enough in these high infection rate areas or has it been better to get those with high infection rates under control first and then introduce a national lockdown? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Eddie said:

It's a difficult balancing-act - the question nobody seems prepared to answer, at least in public, is how much a life is worth. There was a debate on the subject a year or two back which came up with a figure of around $10,000,000 (£8m). How that was justified, and whether there was a weighting that made young people worth more than old (or even the other way around), I know not, and frankly, I have a 75 cl bottle of Gulden Draak in the fridge, so I'm not going to research it tonight, preferring instead to research hops, barley, yeast, water and candi sugar in a glass that resembles a dragon's egg.

 

That figure seems way off, the value of a human monetarily should be calculated as the gross gdp they contribute - the cost of services they consume individually. If you are being really technical and precise you could calculate the total cost of local services that could potentially used by that person then find out the economic cost of that publically provided service for one person's usage and also take that into account. Technically even the cost of a park per person in a local district would be subtracted from the total value, because let's say 50% of all people died then there would be a reduction in the need for services provided. 

So for older people there would be an economic saving, unemployed on benefits the same and only younger people wirh good jobs or the potential to contribute alot to the economy would have relatively high economic value of maybe the 100s of grand sort of ball park millions for some select few but for most nowhere near. Its incredibly crude and tactless to talk about life in terms of marginal revenue vs cost but if you do in alot of cases people dying would save the state alot of money, I wouldn't make that sort of argument for letting people die but if you are looking in terms of pure numbers then most people wouldn't have that high value when you consider the services they receive and costs to the government. When you consider stuff like the multiplier effect for an individuals spending in a local area contributing to further rises in Gdp its unbelievabley difficult to calculate economic value, could do tax revenue - service cost including community services they may not used but hard to be precise. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Archied said:

Never thought I would see the day I would consider voting Nigel but there you go ,,, anybody who tries to put a stop to this money/ power grab farce gets my vote now

Do you actually think Farage cares? It's just yet another populist land-grab cause in his fake "man-of-the-people"

He's making the same mistake as last time though - his target audience are all dying out

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, SchtivePesley said:

Do you actually think Farage cares? It's just yet another populist land-grab cause in his fake "man-of-the-people"

He's making the same mistake as last time though - his target audience are all dying out

Don’t really care if farage cares or not ,as long as he can open a door for right thinking folk to push back against this facist madness it he will do for me ,,, All this for a virus that 99% of those who contract it survive very nicely without hospitalisation or often a symptom, 

people need to wake up and smell the coffee,,, even if the stupidity screwed figures are believable the best you can say is the theory of never let a good crisis go to waste is at work here ,,,,

lets send kids to school to mix and spread then send them home to their families in lock down with the central heating on full blast ?,

ooops , forgot children don’t spread it ( first thing in history kids don’t super spread?) ,,, you really couldn’t make this shat up ,,ooops turns out you can

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Archied said:

as long as he can open a door for right thinking folk to push back against this facist madness it he will do for me

Do you not spot an irony vortex there? "right-thinking folk" is a classic fascist trope - it's all double-think

Anyway - this looks promising, an AI app that can detect covid from coughing/breathing sounds

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-54780460

No doubt the conspiracy theorists will have a meltdown over this one too - as they all sit there with their smart phones learning everything about them anyway

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, SchtivePesley said:

Do you not spot an irony vortex there? "right-thinking folk" is a classic fascist trope - it's all double-think

Anyway - this looks promising, an AI app that can detect covid from coughing/breathing sounds

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-54780460

No doubt the conspiracy theorists will have a meltdown over this one too - as they all sit there with their smart phones learning everything about them anyway

Ok ,,, thinking folk , as opposed to Non thinking folk ,,,, you tell me on the figures out there what percentage of people survive corona ? 
then tell me how that equates to what we have seen the world turn into ,,, 

conspiracy my backside , the facts are there and getting harder to suppress by the day as are the extremely stupid contradictory arbitrary rules that are being imposed , don’t lets even get into following the money trail From the government since lockdown

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, SchtivePesley said:

Do you not spot an irony vortex there? "right-thinking folk" is a classic fascist trope - it's all double-think

Anyway - this looks promising, an AI app that can detect covid from coughing/breathing sounds

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-54780460

No doubt the conspiracy theorists will have a meltdown over this one too - as they all sit there with their smart phones learning everything about them anyway

A world beating app that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...