CV19 - Cure worse than the disease? (Vol 10)
Discussion
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Vast swathes of the general public are lazy slobs who won't help themselves no matter what you put in front of them. Couple that with long hours or a stressful job then the last thing a lot of people want to do is exercise, it's much easier and instantly gratifying to stick a pizza in the oven, put your feet up and crack open a bottle of something to escape for a few hours. I don't think any amount of education on the subject will do much to change this.steveT350C said:
There is no resistance because there in no strength in conviction of individual thought.
Education has been dumbed down since Blair ‘took power’. Conspiracy is just a word, like racist.
Tough times (WW1&2) make strong men.
Strong men make good times.
Good times make weak men.
The men now aged between 25 and 45 in this country think strength is the ability to grow a beard.
I’m out.
Good luck
Education has been dumbed down since Blair ‘took power’. Conspiracy is just a word, like racist.
Tough times (WW1&2) make strong men.
Strong men make good times.
Good times make weak men.
The men now aged between 25 and 45 in this country think strength is the ability to grow a beard.
I’m out.
Good luck
Ntv said:
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?And PS - how the hell can you actually isolate people anyway?
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.
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.
As for the NHS, it goes to collapse every bloody winter. Somebody should have taken this by the scruff of the neck and sorted it years ago. But oh no, the NHS is a sacred cow
anonymous said:
[redacted]
I don't think that is only applicable to the fat and lazy to be fair. I know plenty of people who are fit and healthy, look after themselves, gym rats, cyclists, etc (myself included) who do exactly what you describe once a week or perhaps more. So yeah, I suppose I am actually agreeing with you! I don't think education is the answer, but getting rid of a lot of the body positivity BS would help.
Graveworm said:
But we cannot compare them to the 2 hundred countries that did better than them or the 100 with less than 10 percent of their death rate. Only the 20 odd who did worse.
Now, your first error there was stating that there are more than two hundred countries in the world...CrutyRammers said:
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.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.
R-t6t6s said:
CrutyRammers said:
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.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.
Snippet from Telegraph article:
'Four in 10 people aged over 80 have broken lockdown restrictions to meet up with people indoors since being vaccinated in the past three weeks, ONS figures have revealed.
Behavioural scientists have previously warned that compliance to measures was likely to fall once the vaccination programme was in full swing, but this is the first evidence it is actually happening.
According to latest ONS data, around two out of five (43 per cent) over-80s reported they had met someone other than a household member, care worker or member of their support bubble, indoors since the jab'
43% admit breaking lockdown rules: I would hazard a guess that the number is considerably higher as many will be petrified of getting arrested etc. So why the f
k continue with lockdown??
'Four in 10 people aged over 80 have broken lockdown restrictions to meet up with people indoors since being vaccinated in the past three weeks, ONS figures have revealed.
Behavioural scientists have previously warned that compliance to measures was likely to fall once the vaccination programme was in full swing, but this is the first evidence it is actually happening.
According to latest ONS data, around two out of five (43 per cent) over-80s reported they had met someone other than a household member, care worker or member of their support bubble, indoors since the jab'
43% admit breaking lockdown rules: I would hazard a guess that the number is considerably higher as many will be petrified of getting arrested etc. So why the f
k continue with lockdown??Ahonen said:
Graveworm said:
But we cannot compare them to the 2 hundred countries that did better than them or the 100 with less than 10 percent of their death rate. Only the 20 odd who did worse.
Now, your first error there was stating that there are more than two hundred countries in the world...Most countries are warmer and less impacted (probably) by seasonal resp. viruses
Most countries are less obese!
And most countries don't have the blessed NHS (though they all wish they did - but it's our IP, and they just can't replicate it!)
"Test and Trace barely used check-in data from pubs and restaurants - with thousands not warned of infection risk"
https://news.sky.com/story/test-and-trace-barely-u...
But we are just following the data....
https://news.sky.com/story/test-and-trace-barely-u...
But we are just following the data....
Jordan210 said:
"Test and Trace barely used check-in data from pubs and restaurants - with thousands not warned of infection risk"
https://news.sky.com/story/test-and-trace-barely-u...
But we are just following the data....
I think I only registered myself twice. The rest of the time I just waved my phone in the general direction of the sign and went about my business https://news.sky.com/story/test-and-trace-barely-u...
But we are just following the data....
Smollet said:
I think I only registered myself twice. The rest of the time I just waved my phone in the general direction of the sign and went about my business
I still haven't downloaded the app to be honest, we just signed in manually whenever we went anywhere, or if we booked in advance didn't even do that. Spent 3 or 4 nights a week in the pub or eating out over summer, not a peep from TnT. Biker 1 said:
Snippet from Telegraph article:
'Four in 10 people aged over 80 have broken lockdown restrictions to meet up with people indoors since being vaccinated in the past three weeks, ONS figures have revealed.
Behavioural scientists have previously warned that compliance to measures was likely to fall once the vaccination programme was in full swing, but this is the first evidence it is actually happening.
According to latest ONS data, around two out of five (43 per cent) over-80s reported they had met someone other than a household member, care worker or member of their support bubble, indoors since the jab'
43% admit breaking lockdown rules: I would hazard a guess that the number is considerably higher as many will be petrified of getting arrested etc. So why the fk continue with lockdown??
It would be interesting to know how many of them had broken the rules before being vaccinated. 'Four in 10 people aged over 80 have broken lockdown restrictions to meet up with people indoors since being vaccinated in the past three weeks, ONS figures have revealed.
Behavioural scientists have previously warned that compliance to measures was likely to fall once the vaccination programme was in full swing, but this is the first evidence it is actually happening.
According to latest ONS data, around two out of five (43 per cent) over-80s reported they had met someone other than a household member, care worker or member of their support bubble, indoors since the jab'
43% admit breaking lockdown rules: I would hazard a guess that the number is considerably higher as many will be petrified of getting arrested etc. So why the f
k continue with lockdown??Either way, good on them. The idea that you legislate as to whether people can meet in private is bonkers.
Ntv said:
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.
The Sage report from early last summer posted on here before, weighing up the Qualys of intervention v no intervention said that one of the biggest post pandemic/lockdown increases in demand for services for the nhs would be physiotherapy and muscular skeletal referrals/issues caused by reduced exercise/activity during restrictions. Seems about right to me.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.
bodhi said:
I still haven't downloaded the app to be honest, we just signed in manually whenever we went anywhere, or if we booked in advance didn't even do that. Spent 3 or 4 nights a week in the pub or eating out over summer, not a peep from TnT.
Staff were disinterested in doing it properly (who can blame them?) on at least three separate occasions I overheard them casually joking with customers about false details, "you're all one household, RIGHT? hehe" That one poor bod who was tasked with standing on the door for long periods regurgitating the same scripted nonsense over and over again. Nobody gave a toss. We were told to check in to every single building at university, without fail, they even stood checking we had done on one single occasion then it was forgotten about completely after a fortnight. Looking back it was just so bizarre. What a complete shambles.
soofsayer said:
Ntv said:
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.
The Sage report from early last summer posted on here before, weighing up the Qualys of intervention v no intervention said that one of the biggest post pandemic/lockdown increases in demand for services for the nhs would be physiotherapy and muscular skeletal referrals/issues caused by reduced exercise/activity during restrictions. Seems about right to me.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.
I don't find the arguments put forward that it's impossible to re-locate sufficient ICU capacity for 18 months for the biggest emergency the NHS has ever faced, with all the risks to non-COVID patients involved. I hope for this kind of decision to be picked apart by an inquiry. Need Sumption to chair it.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff