The coronabrexit thread. I mean, coronavirus thread

[alexxxxx]

10 hours ago, maxjam said:

I guess a new symptomless strain doesn't have the same appeal as the new uber mutant Botswana variant ? 

I mean why would it, frankly. This new variant has supposedly turned up over last couple of weeks and gone from 0% of the sequenced samples to nearly 100%. Cases are low, though. 

Let's see what happens in SA over the next couple of weeks - if the trajectory continues as it is we are screwed because it is probably already here. 

[GboroRam]

10 minutes ago, TexasRam said:

So how did people contract it when we still did those things? Am I still 100% wrong, I think not. Even with all of the above anybody can still catch it, which means EVERYBODY is susceptible to the virus and should be used in the calculation of impact.

You can’t argue of debate that because it’s fact. 

It goes up, it goes down. That's affected by coming out of lockdown, schools starting back up, Christmas lockdown, and everything else that happens. There were infections even at the low point, because people still had contact with others in one form or another. Your chance of infection has gone up or down depending on the measures in place at the time. The R rate is influenced by lots of things, and that impacts your chance of catching it. If you don't catch it, you can't die from it (or complications afterwards). If you catch it, your chances are far worse than your 0.06%. Drop all those measures and your chances are far worse than 0.06%.

Honestly the level of cognitive dissonance is staggering in here. 

OK, enough bad maths, refusal to accept simple reality and all the things in between. I'll let someone with more patience continue explaining to you.

[G STAR RAM]

9 hours ago, GboroRam said:

I've not had the disease because I've not caught it. I've not caught it because for a year and a half I've not been to the pub, cinema, restaurant, football, playzone with the kids, garden centre etc. I worked in a factory running with less people, all masked up and socially distanced. My children missed nearly a year of school so weren't bringing back any viruses. I washed my hands regularly and didn't hang about in Asda. I got shopping delivered way more than I would have. 

The reason I'm not in your 0.06% is because of the reaction we collectively made. And you're using it as a reason why we don't need that type of reaction because it only has a 0.06% chance of killing me. 

But if I caught it, my chances of dying rise up to nearly 2%. Maybe more as I have a few underlying health issues. 

Are you trying to say the virus isn't dangerous, or you don't have much chance of catching it? Because both aren't very accurate. 

Have you had an antibodies test then?

 

[GboroRam]

10 minutes ago, Archied said:

Then your assertion that the measures work to any degree over time is guesswork too but you want us to take it as a given and live as you choose??‍♂️,sorry but the way you describe living in your post is not living it’s existing in fear ,

how long do you feel your prepared to live that way , Christmas is comming and now bringing the new, worst ever super variant which just to ramp things up is believed to have come from an aids sufferer 

We literally can graph how those measures work. See above.

Go ahead and live your fearless life. I'd rather try to minimise my chances of falling ill. If I can avoid catching it I know I won't die from it. It seems like you are advocating forgetting about the chances of catching it and living a normal life, which is your prerogative. But don't believe for one second if you catch it you are 99.94% likely to not die, your odds are probably 2% or over (I'm guessing you're like me on the wrong side of 50).

[Gone]

3 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

It goes up, it goes down. That's affected by coming out of lockdown, schools starting back up, Christmas lockdown, and everything else that happens. There were infections even at the low point, because people still had contact with others in one form or another. Your chance of infection has gone up or down depending on the measures in place at the time. The R rate is influenced by lots of things, and that impacts your chance of catching it. If you don't catch it, you can't die from it (or complications afterwards). If you catch it, your chances are far worse than your 0.06%. Drop all those measures and your chances are far worse than 0.06%.

Honestly the level of cognitive dissonance is staggering in here. 

OK, enough bad maths, refusal to accept simple reality and all the things in between. I'll let someone with more patience continue explaining to you.

You can’t seem to grasp the point that anybody can catch it regardless of measures so are susceptible to it’s risks. Refusal to accept this simple reality and all things in between is staggering. I’ll let someone else with more patience continue explains to you. 

[G STAR RAM]

7 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

We literally can graph how those measures work. See above.

Go ahead and live your fearless life. I'd rather try to minimise my chances of falling ill. If I can avoid catching it I know I won't die from it. It seems like you are advocating forgetting about the chances of catching it and living a normal life, which is your prerogative. But don't believe for one second if you catch it you are 99.94% likely to not die, your odds are probably 2% or over (I'm guessing you're like me on the wrong side of 50).

Vaccine isnt very good then.

[Wolfie]

I swear sometimes this thread is like an out of body experience. 

[Archied]

16 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

It goes up, it goes down. That's affected by coming out of lockdown, schools starting back up, Christmas lockdown, and everything else that happens. There were infections even at the low point, because people still had contact with others in one form or another. Your chance of infection has gone up or down depending on the measures in place at the time. The R rate is influenced by lots of things, and that impacts your chance of catching it. If you don't catch it, you can't die from it (or complications afterwards). If you catch it, your chances are far worse than your 0.06%. Drop all those measures and your chances are far worse than 0.06%.

Honestly the level of cognitive dissonance is staggering in here. 

OK, enough bad maths, refusal to accept simple reality and all the things in between. I'll let someone with more patience continue explaining to you.

You go from death/ hospitalisation  rates being the only metric straight back to positive test numbers??‍♂️

[GboroRam]

3 minutes ago, Archied said:

You go from death/ hospitalisation  rates being the only metric straight back to positive test numbers??‍♂️

" But we can use it to gauge trends. Improve our response and we see the stats change, as fundamentally we aren't changing our testing methodology." 

[Archied]

31 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

We literally can graph how those measures work. See above.

Go ahead and live your fearless life. I'd rather try to minimise my chances of falling ill. If I can avoid catching it I know I won't die from it. It seems like you are advocating forgetting about the chances of catching it and living a normal life, which is your prerogative. But don't believe for one second if you catch it you are 99.94% likely to not die, your odds are probably 2% or over (I'm guessing you're like me on the wrong side of 50).

I’m 60 , I have looked at the numbers and believe I will catch it at some point if I haven’t already , I want to live life to the fullest I can every day I have left ,there are loads of things that I can die from that I’m probably at far more risk from than covid , jeez I’m up on roofs every day and have been for 30 odd years , ive rode motorbikes round tracks at 150 mph ,was hooked on cigarettes at a very early age along with drink and other stuff , cigarettes are the only vice left I haven’t kicked ,

I respect your choice re risks management of covid for you but given the numbers and vaccines I expect to be able to have my choices respected and not have measures imposed on me and that includes all those calling for measures to be imposed on those who don’t want to live like covid is the be all and end all

you once posted that sadly some of those who disagree with you on covid may just stop posting one day with the assumption covid got them , why? More likely to be cancer , heart attack ,stroke , accident and or a massive number of things that get us in the end ,

I would say for gods sake get on and enjoy your life but we both know there’s no point 

Edited November 26, 2021 by Archied

[Archied]

Getting people to fear covid to the level they do was genius, getting people to fear those that don’t feel that level of fear is a master stroke 

[ariotofmyown]

2 hours ago, TexasRam said:

You can’t seem to grasp the point that anybody can catch it regardless of measures so are susceptible to it’s risks.

I think that should be the final word on this thread. Debate is pointless.

[Gone]

4 minutes ago, ariotofmyown said:

I think that should be the final word on this thread. Debate is pointless.

Agree, I mean it’s just fact so no point arguing is there. 

[Archied]

9 minutes ago, ariotofmyown said:

I think that should be the final word on this thread. Debate is pointless.

Yep debate is pointless, even if I go with official figures I don’t believe they justify the policies?‍♂️
as we iradicate stuff that kills and debilitates us over the years new things come along , to justify the actions taken the death rate needs to be far far higher

Edited November 26, 2021 by Archied

[Bob The Badger]

1 hour ago, Archied said:

Yep debate is pointless, even if I go with official figures I don’t believe they justify the policies?‍♂️
as we iradicate stuff that kills and debilitates us over the years new things come along , to justify the actions taken the death rate needs to be far far higher

I think there's point in debating policy. I think your opinion on that is as valid as mine, or anybody else's in this group.

Well, I actually don't have a strong opinion on it because I've no idea what the best course is and I'd rather let smarter people than me decide.

I think we'll only know when we look back in 10 or 20 years time.

But that's another matter.

I think the areas not worth debating are when people like @TexasRamsay things like anybody can catch it regardless of measures so are susceptible to it’s risks which is kinda, almost, true..technically, but misses out the blindingly obvious and critical point that they are less likely to by far if they follow guidelines.

Has any scientist ever said it would be 100% effective? Even Fauci IIRC said they were aiming for 90% and they've beaten that.

It's like asking somebody to answer the question 'have you stopped molesting hamsters, yes or no?" It's just a gotcha question that has no value in a sensible debate. 

And then others like @G STAR RAM say (the) Vaccine isnt very good then because like every other vaccine in human history and every branch of medicine it isn't 100% effective.

I doubt there is any medical expert in this field that wouldn't agree the vaccine has saved countless lives, so ya know, not sure how you measure not very good.

If it was sarcasm, then it certainly wasn't very good sarcasm.

PS. I have stopped molesting hamsters.

For the time being.

 

[observer]

5 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

Vaccine isnt very good then.

3 people have had it in my house

only 1 has had 1 vaccine nobody had any issues other than the mental health aspect of being cooped up in a room for  1.5 weeks

 

[observer]

5 hours ago, Archied said:

Getting people to fear covid to the level they do was genius, getting people to fear those that don’t feel that level of fear is a master stroke 

Im still yet to see a fit and healthly person under the age of 60 thats died, sorry but its true.

 

Covid isnt anywhere close to as bad as the whole world would have you believe, and if its not as bad as they are making out you want to ask yourself who is winning in all of this misery!!

 

 

 

[observer]

1 minute ago, observer said:

Im still yet to see a fit and healthly person under the age of 60 thats died, sorry but its true.

 

Covid isnt anywhere close to as bad as the whole world would have you believe, and if its not as bad as they are making out you want to ask yourself who is winning in all of this misery!!

 

 

 

just to add we have had family members, friends and customers die because of 'covid' every single one had another reason to be in hospital and people died from them reasons long before covid

 

 

[Bris Vegas]

9 minutes ago, observer said:

Im still yet to see a fit and healthly person under the age of 60 thats died, sorry but its true.

 

Covid isnt anywhere close to as bad as the whole world would have you believe, and if its not as bad as they are making out you want to ask yourself who is winning in all of this misery!!

 

 

 

My friend’s boyfriend aged 36 died of COVID. Fit as a fiddle. 

Many people’s perspective of COVID varies from the experiences they have had.

[sage]

I don't post on here vert often for the same reason i don't do many visits to Millbrook Hospital.

I am however amused by the constant use of statistics kept low by lockdowns, travel restrictions, masks and vaccinations as a reason why lockdowns, travel restrictions, masks and vaccinations aren't needed. 

It's like saying why did we sign Jagielka when we have the 4th best defensive record in the division.