G STAR RAM Posted February 16, 2021 Share Posted February 16, 2021 13 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said: The longer the period of time being measured, the less reliable the use of 'excess deaths' becomes. From the end of March 2020 to the end of January 2021, there were about 90k excess deaths compared with 105k Covid deaths. Given the usual variance between years, the fact normal flu deaths would have been reduced, and other variables, the 28 day Covid rule looks very reasonable to me. Agreed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIllyD Posted February 16, 2021 Share Posted February 16, 2021 38 minutes ago, sage said: Also there would be less flu deaths as old people are shielding and people are wearing masks. Unless you have a relentless agenda like some, then it's proof of the great conspiracy. Around 11k per year I think. One good outcome from this pandemic is this being so low this year, one expects that it to be a one off unfortunately, flu is often transmitted from overseas hence another reason for being low. Also lots of other things to take into consideration, road traffic etc....but as you say, some will believe falsifying a death certificate is the root cause ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted February 16, 2021 Share Posted February 16, 2021 1 hour ago, BIllyD said: Around 11k per year I think. One good outcome from this pandemic is this being so low this year, one expects that it to be a one off unfortunately, flu is often transmitted from overseas hence another reason for being low. Also lots of other things to take into consideration, road traffic etc....but as you say, some will believe falsifying a death certificate is the root cause ? I know there are some people that would argue that (I am not one of them by the way), I think there will be instances of deaths being recorded as Covid when they are not, but I think there will also be Covid deaths that go unrecorded. Can you not see that the argument used by the poster was fatally flawed though? The point I was making in my original post was that there is no obvious underreporting of Covid deaths as another poster keeps on claiming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIllyD Posted February 16, 2021 Share Posted February 16, 2021 8 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said: I know there are some people that would argue that (I am not one of them by the way), I think there will be instances of deaths being recorded as Covid when they are not, but I think there will also be Covid deaths that go unrecorded. Can you not see that the argument used by the poster was fatally flawed though? The point I was making in my original post was that there is no obvious underreporting of Covid deaths as another poster keeps on claiming. Apologies I misread your point. You mean the point made around masks and social distancing being the reason for flu deaths being so low ? If so, then my own personal opinion, not one I could back up with any stats is that they will have contributed to it based on flu being 3 times less contagious as COVID. However the main reason I believe is old generation staying in, less international travel and the highest uptake of jabs for years. I have read many articles and papers around things like this though and have to admit a lot go over my head. I can get a grasp and it's amazing the way these things mutate, some even making them selves less dangerous to survive and even others that if there was enough hosts without the jab compared to those with it could mutate so a vaccine would become ineffective. Not saying that there is any risk of it happening btw, just thought I'd share ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sith Happens Posted February 16, 2021 Share Posted February 16, 2021 41 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said: I know there are some people that would argue that (I am not one of them by the way), I think there will be instances of deaths being recorded as Covid when they are not, but I think there will also be Covid deaths that go unrecorded. Can you not see that the argument used by the poster was fatally flawed though? The point I was making in my original post was that there is no obvious underreporting of Covid deaths as another poster keeps on claiming. I dont know how accurate but this shows since march last year the excess deaths vs covid deaths https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/coronavirus-excess-deaths-tracker The main argument i have heard for figures being wrong is the 28 day rule. I think as you say there will be some covid deaths going down as something else, and non covid deaths going down as covid. As the excess deaths and covid deaths are similar i would suspect the figure is not too far wide of the mark. I guess if Kate Garraways husband dies that has to be covid related even though its over 28 days, but for everyone like that how many die if an unrelated heart attack etc 40 days after getting covid. I guess the only accurate way would be to have a postmortem for all deaths and determine the death that way, which is probably not practical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Posted February 16, 2021 Share Posted February 16, 2021 1 hour ago, G STAR RAM said: So shielding and wearing masks stops flu from spreading but it doesn't stop Covid from spreading? Covid is a damned sight more transmittable and a damned sight more dangerous. Is it really that hard for you to grasp? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted February 16, 2021 Share Posted February 16, 2021 1 hour ago, Eddie said: Covid is a damned sight more transmittable and a damned sight more dangerous. Is it really that hard for you to grasp? So it goes through masks easier and even spreads from people shielding in their own houses? No I wasnt aware of this! Dont worry, thats tongue in cheek. Yes I am aware of these facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIllyD Posted February 17, 2021 Share Posted February 17, 2021 According to Telegraph, lockdown not to be significantly eased until cases in the hundreds. “A senior Whitehall source said: "For any significant relaxation of lockdown, household mixing and reopening pubs, case numbers have to be in the hundreds, not thousands.” Telegraph is often used as a sounding board, so wouldn't surprise me if this was being considered. Currently this is predicted to be April IF cases continue falling at the current rate, but schools going back could push that into May or beyond. Not sure I agree on this myself, we have constantly been told it's based on deaths, vaccinations and NHS capacity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexxxxx Posted February 17, 2021 Share Posted February 17, 2021 13 minutes ago, BIllyD said: According to Telegraph, lockdown not to be significantly eased until cases in the hundreds. “A senior Whitehall source said: "For any significant relaxation of lockdown, household mixing and reopening pubs, case numbers have to be in the hundreds, not thousands.” Telegraph is often used as a sounding board, so wouldn't surprise me if this was being considered. Currently this is predicted to be April IF cases continue falling at the current rate, but schools going back could push that into May or beyond. Not sure I agree on this myself, we have constantly been told it's based on deaths, vaccinations and NHS capacity. I think it'll be based on how quickly they can get all the over 50s done and when cares are low. When schools go back there's a good chance cases will rise again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archied Posted February 17, 2021 Share Posted February 17, 2021 51 minutes ago, BIllyD said: According to Telegraph, lockdown not to be significantly eased until cases in the hundreds. “A senior Whitehall source said: "For any significant relaxation of lockdown, household mixing and reopening pubs, case numbers have to be in the hundreds, not thousands.” Telegraph is often used as a sounding board, so wouldn't surprise me if this was being considered. Currently this is predicted to be April IF cases continue falling at the current rate, but schools going back could push that into May or beyond. Not sure I agree on this myself, we have constantly been told it's based on deaths, vaccinations and NHS capacity. Yep , be interesting if EVERYONE in the country was on 70% of they’re income with the other 30% going back into the coffers to support everyone and the country , would we see a more balanced view on lockdown s and the lifting of them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archied Posted February 17, 2021 Share Posted February 17, 2021 18 minutes ago, Archied said: Yep , be interesting if EVERYONE in the country was on 70% of they’re income with the other 30% going back into the coffers to support everyone and the country , would we see a more balanced view on lockdown s and the lifting of them Ps , there’s a very large portion of the country who would kill to be on 70% of former earnings??♂️ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stive Pesley Posted February 17, 2021 Share Posted February 17, 2021 2 hours ago, BIllyD said: According to Telegraph, lockdown not to be significantly eased until cases in the hundreds. “A senior Whitehall source said: "For any significant relaxation of lockdown, household mixing and reopening pubs, case numbers have to be in the hundreds, not thousands.” Telegraph is often used as a sounding board, so wouldn't surprise me if this was being considered. Currently this is predicted to be April IF cases continue falling at the current rate, but schools going back could push that into May or beyond. Not sure I agree on this myself, we have constantly been told it's based on deaths, vaccinations and NHS capacity. This sounds like it's based on looking at the more successful strategies of other countries. The way to come out of lockdown and STAY out of lockdown is to have case numbers low enough that track and trace has a fighting chance of controlling outbreaks. What we've seen coming out of the last lockdown is that within 3 months we were back to the point of locking down again because there were simply too many outbreaks to control Given that the govt are pledging things like "this will be the final lockdown" and the plan to exit this lockdown will be "irreversible" - it certainly sounds like they don't want to repeat last year's mistake Whether pressure from the "covid research group" faction of Tory MPs and general public unrest will force the populist goon BJ to waver from that remains to be seen An open question to the floor - would you rather come out of this lockdown early but have another lockdown in 3 months, or would you rather extend this lockdown to guarantee no more lockdowns And yes I know it's a simplisitic view, and there are no guarantees either way - I just mean it as a philosophical question (so please no lengthy explanations as to why the question is wrong...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archied Posted February 17, 2021 Share Posted February 17, 2021 9 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said: This sounds like it's based on looking at the more successful strategies of other countries. The way to come out of lockdown and STAY out of lockdown is to have case numbers low enough that track and trace has a fighting chance of controlling outbreaks. What we've seen coming out of the last lockdown is that within 3 months we were back to the point of locking down again because there were simply too many outbreaks to control Given that the govt are pledging things like "this will be the final lockdown" and the plan to exit this lockdown will be "irreversible" - it certainly sounds like they don't want to repeat last year's mistake Whether pressure from the "covid research group" faction of Tory MPs and general public unrest will force the populist goon BJ to waver from that remains to be seen An open question to the floor - would you rather come out of this lockdown early but have another lockdown in 3 months, or would you rather extend this lockdown to guarantee no more lockdowns And yes I know it's a simplisitic view, and there are no guarantees either way - I just mean it as a philosophical question (so please no lengthy explanations as to why the question is wrong...) Then it’s not a question ??♂️??♂️??♂️ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stive Pesley Posted February 17, 2021 Share Posted February 17, 2021 8 minutes ago, Archied said: Then it’s not a question ??♂️??♂️??♂️ Yes it is would you A) rather come out of this lockdown early but have another lockdown in 3 months, or B) would you rather extend this lockdown to guarantee no more lockdowns You just have to say A or B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archied Posted February 17, 2021 Share Posted February 17, 2021 1 minute ago, Stive Pesley said: Yes it is would you A) rather come out of this lockdown early but have another lockdown in 3 months, or B) would you rather extend this lockdown to guarantee no more lockdowns You just have to say A or B No it’s not , it’s a made up scenario that you framed in a way to support your view ,,, non of those options are on offer , you just believe option 1 is in your opinion and personal circumstances the best option ??♂️ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archied Posted February 17, 2021 Share Posted February 17, 2021 Question to the floor the vaccine and treatments are doing they’re job now , 1 , do we open up now knowing there will be no more lockdown and there’s a chance millions will save they’re jobs , lives ,Heath ,education ,mental state ,homes 2, extend these lockdowns and restrictions as long as poss and escalate these measures at the drop of a hat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIllyD Posted February 17, 2021 Share Posted February 17, 2021 2 minutes ago, Archied said: Question to the floor the vaccine and treatments are doing they’re job now , 1 , do we open up now knowing there will be no more lockdown and there’s a chance millions will save they’re jobs , lives ,Heath ,education ,mental state ,homes 2, extend these lockdowns and restrictions as long as poss and escalate these measures at the drop of a hat What do you mean by the vaccines and treatments are doing their job ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIllyD Posted February 17, 2021 Share Posted February 17, 2021 17 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said: Yes it is would you A) rather come out of this lockdown early but have another lockdown in 3 months, or B) would you rather extend this lockdown to guarantee no more lockdowns You just have to say A or B Depends what you mean by early ? I understand to a certain point where you are coming from, however COVID is going to be around for the foreseeable future, so if your definition of early is based on number of infections that I'd have to say I'd need a bit more detail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archied Posted February 17, 2021 Share Posted February 17, 2021 1 minute ago, BIllyD said: What do you mean by the vaccines and treatments are doing their job ? I am told they are bringing down deaths and serious illness, don’t forget it’s a question just like stives I’m replying to Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stive Pesley Posted February 17, 2021 Share Posted February 17, 2021 35 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said: I just mean it as a philosophical question (so please no lengthy explanations as to why the question is wrong...) 11 minutes ago, Archied said: it’s a made up scenario that you framed in a way to support your view ,,, non of those options are on offer , you just believe option 1 is in your opinion and personal circumstances the best option Ok - so at least you kept it brief - but you're ruining the thread for people by being like this - it's just a genuine philosophical question. Nothing to do with my personal view or my personal circumstances. And of course it's a made-up scenario. That's how philosophical questions work I think it's clear that your answer is A - that's literally all you had to say - and it's absolutely fine to say A if that's your view. I'm not asking it so I can take people to task over their answers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.