CV19 - Cure worse than the disease? (Vol 10)

[Pete102]

baptistsan said:

Now that's a bloody good idea!

Reduce my gym membership monthlies, I'm in

They could have subsidised outdoor 1-1 exercise, getting some PT's back to work and also getting people healthier. As we move into the summer they should be looking at how they can get people moving whilst reducing risk - outdoor classes anyone? Even if 2 or 3 out of a class of 10 keep it up, its still a decent reduction in burden.

[Thankyou4calling]

vonuber said:

So being a tub of lard is a big risk factor. So we closed gyms, sports activities, have the Stasi out harassing people having a walk, but ensure that takeaways and booze are easily available and pretty much the only source of pleasure.

Genius.

The reality is that fat people have never been frequent gym users so closing them hasn’t made a difference.

People can still go for a walk, run, bike ride etc and they have in huge numbers and are very very rarely hassled.

Food of every description has always been freely available. Fat people eat too much that’s the truth.

[baptistsan]

Pete102 said:

baptistsan said:

Now that's a bloody good idea!

Reduce my gym membership monthlies, I'm in

They could have subsidised outdoor 1-1 exercise, getting some PT's back to work and also getting people healthier. As we move into the summer they should be looking at how they can get people moving whilst reducing risk - outdoor classes anyone? Even if 2 or 3 out of a class of 10 keep it up, its still a decent reduction in burden.

Completely agree

[Scolmore]

Thankyou4calling said:

People can still go for a walk, run, bike ride etc and they have in huge numbers and are very very rarely hassled.

Not been hassled exercising throughout this ridiculousness. I did experience my first pavement jumper for many months on my run this morning - long jump worthy leap over a grass strip and a scamper to the middle of the road. The craziness is going to persist in many for a long time.

[Alucidnation]

What are you lot going to bh about when lockdown has been lifted and we start to return to some form of normality?

Sky not blue enough?

[Uggers]

Graveworm said:

I am definitely not in favour but this also applies to Chinese citizens and they have been doing it internally, (SWIDT) for some time.

Just a race to the bottom........

[CrutyRammers]

Graveworm said:

a) We have polls to show public opinion from several agencies, they all show very strong support for the restrictions at a level that is well outside their margin for error and would need them to be out by an order of magnitude more than they have ever been. None have shown lack of support, despite them also showing low satisfaction in the government themselves. Even within those who don't support the measures, a significant number said they do so because they believe they don't go far enough. So I can say broadly supported by the majority.
b) I agree and history shows us this but they haven't passed laws that change the basis of democracy. Democracy is government by elected representatives in free and fair elections. If they stop you voting them out or standing for parliament then that's undemocratic.
c) They may have but that is what governments do. I don't believe they have passed any laws to limit what the media can say.
d) Bad actions by wicked democratically governments are exactly that. Saying something is democratic doesn't get them a free pass and that's a straw man. They should be held to account, but it's not the same as saying it's undemocratic.

If you want to define "democracy" in some very narrow, pedantic way in order to try to win an argument, that's your perogative. If you really believe that what has happened over the last year is "the definition of democracy" then we have very different ideas about what the important features of a democratic system are.

[Blue62]

Pete102 said:

They could have subsidised outdoor 1-1 exercise, getting some PT's back to work and also getting people healthier. As we move into the summer they should be looking at how they can get people moving whilst reducing risk - outdoor classes anyone? Even if 2 or 3 out of a class of 10 keep it up, its still a decent reduction in burden.

Two weeks ago, Mark Woolhouse of Sage was calling for outdoor activities to resume immediately for kids and small groups of adults. The Observer actually led with the story but it’s received little to no publicity since, he also debunked the claims that crowded beaches caused infections, no evidence anywhere in the world.

[Uggers]

Blue62 said:

Two weeks ago, Mark Woolhouse of Sage was calling for outdoor activities to resume immediately for kids and small groups of adults. The Observer actually led with the story but it’s received little to no publicity since, he also debunked the claims that crowded beaches caused infections, no evidence anywhere in the world.

Good god man don't expect them to react to data and evidence.

[Pete102]

Blue62 said:

Two weeks ago, Mark Woolhouse of Sage was calling for outdoor activities to resume immediately for kids and small groups of adults. The Observer actually led with the story but it’s received little to no publicity since, he also debunked the claims that crowded beaches caused infections, no evidence anywhere in the world.

This appears to have been the approach in several European nations, outdoor gatherings allowed up to 10 or 15, exercise with social distancing (in groups) and childrens activities outdoors allowed.

[ant1973]

Graveworm said:

ant1973 said:

Not sure that is correct (c. £9k at the top v £4k) at the bottom.



https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunit...

There's no VAT on food, etc, which may explain the difference.

Property and inheritance tax massively hit the top percent almost exclusively. One mid seven figure house purchase is lifetime VAT for several average households. IHT on a 10 million estate is 24 households.

Correct. The whole discussion on tax and spending is completely warped.

[Elysium]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

We are only allowed to compare Sweden to Finland, Denmark and Norway.

If they have done better its because the had a lockdown anyway. They just didn't call it that, or actually make their people stay at home. Anyway, the main thing is that they did badly, even if they did well, and they are not comparable to the UK because of population density and oily fish.

[oyster]

johnboy1975 said:

I'm fully on board (just acknowledging the problems)

You could minimise the time to deal with the problematic bits by "letting it rip" (whilst attempting to shield the vunerable). I'm sure we could have gotten the 150k up to 1m a day in short order with a R0 of 3 and within a month it would have petered out naturally. So 2 months max (dealing with the tail etc). If I was vunerable, I'd take 2 months of isolation over 1 year plus

Not least because, even if 200,000 sadly lose their lives through covid, they would have "had a good innings" so to speak. I firmly believe at least half of the 123k were on borrowed time anyway (would we even of heard of Capt Tom if he had passed away peacefully at the age of 100 after a bout of flu?)

And I'm no fan of giving dementia sufferers another 18 months

Appreciate that doesn't cover all the deaths, and there will (obviously) be tragedies amongst those who died. But I think the collateral damage will be equal to, or greater than, what we've seen directly from covid.

The NHS would have collapsed. The death toll would be nearer 250k, mostly younger than those you propose isolating.

And PS - how the hell can you actually isolate people anyway?

[London424]

While bored today I was having a look across Europe and there really is a mixed picture. Portugal have really turned things around and are at tiny levels now, Italy looks like they’re about to ramp up again, Czech is a car crash right now, France is treading water but levels are pretty high. So many different pictures it’s really tough to figure out what is working or not working

[Twinfan]

oyster said:

The NHS would have collapsed. The death toll would be nearer 250k, mostly younger than those you propose isolating.

And PS - how the hell can you actually isolate people anyway?

If the vulnerable are isolated, how would the NHS collapse?

You isolate people by identifying the most vulnerable (top 4 groups of the vaccine list perhaps?) and tell them to shield if they want to/can. Provide furlough if they're working. If they then choose to shield, prioritise them for home food deliveries and ensure they have extra support to provide them with medications and any medical care they need. Once vaccinated with both doses, extra support is removed.

It's more difficult than telling everyone to stay at home, but it's not impossible and it would have had far less cost to the rest of the population.

[Ntv]

oyster said:

johnboy1975 said:

I'm fully on board (just acknowledging the problems)

You could minimise the time to deal with the problematic bits by "letting it rip" (whilst attempting to shield the vunerable). I'm sure we could have gotten the 150k up to 1m a day in short order with a R0 of 3 and within a month it would have petered out naturally. So 2 months max (dealing with the tail etc). If I was vunerable, I'd take 2 months of isolation over 1 year plus

Not least because, even if 200,000 sadly lose their lives through covid, they would have "had a good innings" so to speak. I firmly believe at least half of the 123k were on borrowed time anyway (would we even of heard of Capt Tom if he had passed away peacefully at the age of 100 after a bout of flu?)

And I'm no fan of giving dementia sufferers another 18 months

Appreciate that doesn't cover all the deaths, and there will (obviously) be tragedies amongst those who died. But I think the collateral damage will be equal to, or greater than, what we've seen directly from covid.

The NHS would have collapsed. The death toll would be nearer 250k, mostly younger than those you propose isolating.

And PS - how the hell can you actually isolate people anyway?

How does an organisation with 1.2m employees collapse?

Would all of them be treating COVID patients?

[Ntv]

Twinfan said:

oyster said:

The NHS would have collapsed. The death toll would be nearer 250k, mostly younger than those you propose isolating.

And PS - how the hell can you actually isolate people anyway?

If the vulnerable are isolated, how would the NHS collapse?

You isolate people by identifying the most vulnerable (top 4 groups of the vaccine list perhaps?) and tell them to shield if they want to/can. Provide furlough if they're working. If they then choose to shield, prioritise them for home food deliveries and ensure they have extra support to provide them with medications and any medical care they need. Once vaccinated with both doses, extra support is removed.

It's more difficult than telling everyone to stay at home, but it's not impossible and it would have had far less cost to the rest of the population.

Well put.

No sensible person pretends GB is easy or that it is obviously impossible. It's neither of those things.

Our strategy, whether you like it or not, has maxed out on the cost to society and damage to children.

[Ntv]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

And culturally high rates of compliance, ignoring the surprisingly high rates of compliance in the UK.

[Ntv]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

vonuber - well put.

Johnson is in a disgusting state.

When will politicians get the message that in all sorts of ways making the population more active, in effect forcing them to be more active through designing it in to the built environment, is what we need to invest in???

They idiotically seem to think exercise is just something you really should do a few times a week, but don't get round to.

[Blue62]

London424 said:

While bored today I was having a look across Europe and there really is a mixed picture. Portugal have really turned things around and are at tiny levels now, Italy looks like they’re about to ramp up again, Czech is a car crash right now, France is treading water but levels are pretty high. So many different pictures it’s really tough to figure out what is working or not working

Was discussing this last night, the US is seeing a big drop off in numbers but across the globe it’s a bit mixed. There doesn’t seem to be a clear reason, if it’s a seasonal thing how come S.Africa is seeing a fall in infections? If it’s herd the most optimistic estimates put the US at 30%, not enough to explain the fall and Italy now seeing a potential 4th wave challenges HI.

Maybe vaccine, distancing and suppression measures are the reason, but more likely a combination of things though there are aspects of covid 19 that don’t seem to conform to the usual pattern of coronavirus behaviour.