CV19 - Cure worse than the disease? (Vol 5)
Discussion
Alucidnation said:
rich888 said:
stitched said:
Elysium said:
RonaldMcDonaldAteMyCat said:
lu has all but disappeared and excess deaths are currently within the normal, expected boundaries.
We have totally lost the plot on this virus. It will take a very small slice of the vulnerable population (who are typically vulnerable to or suffer from other series illnesses) and then meander relatively harmlessly through society (much like flu).
Yes, for those it's going to kill it's very effective, in that it is very infectious, so finds them quickly, and kills relatively soon after infection. Hence high peak hospital demand.
The thing is, pressure will subside quickly, because the stock of vulnerable people is used up far faster than it can be replenished.
Our constant meddling is saving nobody in the medium term, because it'll run through them eventually anyway. All we are doing is elongating the time it takes to reach the inevitable conclusion.
I have to agree. We have totally lost the plot on this virus. It will take a very small slice of the vulnerable population (who are typically vulnerable to or suffer from other series illnesses) and then meander relatively harmlessly through society (much like flu).
Yes, for those it's going to kill it's very effective, in that it is very infectious, so finds them quickly, and kills relatively soon after infection. Hence high peak hospital demand.
The thing is, pressure will subside quickly, because the stock of vulnerable people is used up far faster than it can be replenished.
Our constant meddling is saving nobody in the medium term, because it'll run through them eventually anyway. All we are doing is elongating the time it takes to reach the inevitable conclusion.
This entire situation is driven by hubris. An idea that, having done f
k all to deal with similar threats in the past, the new idea of restricting freedoms of the population can magically fix this one. It’s superstition not science. It infuriates me when I hear politicians and the experts say that we need to follow the rules more closely to bring this under control. They have not a shred of evidence to justify the effectiveness of their rules and they have purposely offered no hypothesis of the effect that things like the curfew, tiers and rule of six are expected to achieve.
It’s beyond stupid.
I wrote to my MP, a child with little or no life experience suggesting she check the qualifications of the signatories on GBD against those of SAGE.
I got an utterly patronising response telling me , basically, that I was too stupid to understand.
What the hell is wrong with our politicians, this is like mass hysteria on a global scale with no end insight for the pure insanity!
Elysium said:
RonaldMcDonaldAteMyCat said:
lu has all but disappeared and excess deaths are currently within the normal, expected boundaries.
We have totally lost the plot on this virus. It will take a very small slice of the vulnerable population (who are typically vulnerable to or suffer from other series illnesses) and then meander relatively harmlessly through society (much like flu).
Yes, for those it's going to kill it's very effective, in that it is very infectious, so finds them quickly, and kills relatively soon after infection. Hence high peak hospital demand.
The thing is, pressure will subside quickly, because the stock of vulnerable people is used up far faster than it can be replenished.
Our constant meddling is saving nobody in the medium term, because it'll run through them eventually anyway. All we are doing is elongating the time it takes to reach the inevitable conclusion.
I have to agree. We have totally lost the plot on this virus. It will take a very small slice of the vulnerable population (who are typically vulnerable to or suffer from other series illnesses) and then meander relatively harmlessly through society (much like flu).
Yes, for those it's going to kill it's very effective, in that it is very infectious, so finds them quickly, and kills relatively soon after infection. Hence high peak hospital demand.
The thing is, pressure will subside quickly, because the stock of vulnerable people is used up far faster than it can be replenished.
Our constant meddling is saving nobody in the medium term, because it'll run through them eventually anyway. All we are doing is elongating the time it takes to reach the inevitable conclusion.
This entire situation is driven by hubris. An idea that, having done f
k all to deal with similar threats in the past, the new idea of restricting freedoms of the population can magically fix this one. It’s superstition not science. It infuriates me when I hear politicians and the experts say that we need to follow the rules more closely to bring this under control. They have not a shred of evidence to justify the effectiveness of their rules and they have purposely offered no hypothesis of the effect that things like the curfew, tiers and rule of six are expected to achieve.
It’s beyond stupid.
"you need to follow the rules to control the virus"
"the virus is still spreading?"
"oh, well, thats because not everyone followed the rules precisely - and heres a picture of some people outside a bar at 10:05 to prove it. Therefore we need stricter rules because you didnt follow the previous ones - this is YOUR fault, not ours."
TheJimi said:
Pupbelly said:
Stay in Bed Instead said:
Pupbelly said:
Can someone ask the government a direct question - at what point does this all stop? What is the indicator that 'they' say "ok back to normal"?
This faff will potentially go on for years as goalposts keep getting moved, figures massaged, the media stirring up more bullst.
What is the feckin' end game?? Straight answer please Mr Government!!
There is currently no plan to stop until we have a vaccine.This faff will potentially go on for years as goalposts keep getting moved, figures massaged, the media stirring up more bulls
t.What is the feckin' end game?? Straight answer please Mr Government!!
For perspective, this shows 2020 vs max, min and average deaths for the previous 5 years. When we talk about excess deaths we are comparing with the 5 year average.
What is immediately clear is that this years deaths have been within the normal range since wk 24 (ends June 14th) and wk 41 (ends 11th Oct):
The first part of the 'second wave' is entirely unremarkable.
What is immediately clear is that this years deaths have been within the normal range since wk 24 (ends June 14th) and wk 41 (ends 11th Oct):
The first part of the 'second wave' is entirely unremarkable.
Elysium said:
For perspective, this shows 2020 vs max, min and average deaths for the previous 5 years. When we talk about excess deaths we are comparing with the 5 year average.
What is immediately clear is that this years deaths have been within the normal range since wk 24 (ends June 14th) and wk 41 (ends 11th Oct):
The first part of the 'second wave' is entirely unremarkable.
One would expect fewer deaths than normal, however, given how many died early this year. There’s no doubt this is a bad year. What is immediately clear is that this years deaths have been within the normal range since wk 24 (ends June 14th) and wk 41 (ends 11th Oct):
The first part of the 'second wave' is entirely unremarkable.
But I agree that it’s not out of proportion with any other bad year. The response is absurdly OTT.
ORD said:
It’s the lack of proportionality that blows my mind. We are ruining millions of long, otherwise healthy lives to add a few months to a few very old persons’ lives.
If I think back to when my grandparents died (all in their 70s or 80s, so not extremely old), death came as a blessing. They were tired. They weren’t enjoying life anymore. Have any of these Covid bed wetters even been to a care home? Very many of the residents are suffering enormously. Having watched someone die of dementia (it went down as Covid, of course), I won’t ever let that happen to me. My wife feels the same.
The idea that it’s the most ethical thing in the world to protect 90-year-olds from a virus is bizarre. It’s virtue signalling without any arguable virtue. It’s pure ‘look at what a good person I am!’ nonsense.
The idea that prolonging the lives of a few thousand 85 year olds is worth trillions of pounds stolen from our children and the poorest people in the world is ethically indefensible.
Totally agree with this and also with 2gins views! Didn’t Johnson and Vallance initially go with the immunity idea and Cummings comments, badly phrased, of “ if a few pensioners die, so be it,”. That made sense to me then and still does.If I think back to when my grandparents died (all in their 70s or 80s, so not extremely old), death came as a blessing. They were tired. They weren’t enjoying life anymore. Have any of these Covid bed wetters even been to a care home? Very many of the residents are suffering enormously. Having watched someone die of dementia (it went down as Covid, of course), I won’t ever let that happen to me. My wife feels the same.
The idea that it’s the most ethical thing in the world to protect 90-year-olds from a virus is bizarre. It’s virtue signalling without any arguable virtue. It’s pure ‘look at what a good person I am!’ nonsense.
The idea that prolonging the lives of a few thousand 85 year olds is worth trillions of pounds stolen from our children and the poorest people in the world is ethically indefensible.
What has changed is the MSM and the intellectually challenged going along with the we need to save granny narrative. I wish they could understand that none of us are immortal and old people die.
I have seen my parents die far too young, my oldest friends son died at age 30, my wife had a friend die at 40. It sadly happens all the time.
And yet, we must save granny, who will die anyway fairly soon. I suspect that when this ends, we will see a lot more deaths of younger people who have not had cancer treatments. Or as all the lefties keep saying, austerity kills but can’t see that we will have to repay our massive debt somehow.
Jasandjules said:
In other words covid has become part of the winter seasons mix of respiratory viruses.djohnson said:
df76 said:
irc said:
df76 said:
""At the moment we think the epidemic is doubling roughly every seven days.
"If, and that's quite a big if, but if that continues unabated, and this grows, doubling every seven days... if that continued you would end up with something like 50,000 cases in the middle of October per day."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54234084
Boringvolvodriver said:
And yet, we must save granny, who will die anyway fairly soon. I suspect that when this ends, we will see a lot more deaths of younger people who have not had cancer treatments. Or as all the lefties keep saying, austerity kills but can’t see that we will have to repay our massive debt somehow.
The lives of old people are not worthless. My parents are 70 and 68 so I would hardly think otherwise. There seems to me though a failure to recognise that what matters most is not length of life but quality of life.
Medical advancements and better living standards has meant that whereas you would once get your three score and ten if you were lucky now, once you have reached middle age, you can usually expect four score years instead. That is great and to be celebrated and many people have active lives in their seventies. There comes a point though when quality of life rapidly deteriorates, cognitive decline sets in and simple physical tasks become a struggle. If Coronavirus carries you off when you reach that point then it is a natural end to a life hopefully well lived, not something to be feared or avoided.
ORD said:
Elysium said:
For perspective, this shows 2020 vs max, min and average deaths for the previous 5 years. When we talk about excess deaths we are comparing with the 5 year average.
What is immediately clear is that this years deaths have been within the normal range since wk 24 (ends June 14th) and wk 41 (ends 11th Oct):
The first part of the 'second wave' is entirely unremarkable.
One would expect fewer deaths than normal, however, given how many died early this year. There’s no doubt this is a bad year. What is immediately clear is that this years deaths have been within the normal range since wk 24 (ends June 14th) and wk 41 (ends 11th Oct):
The first part of the 'second wave' is entirely unremarkable.
But I agree that it’s not out of proportion with any other bad year. The response is absurdly OTT.
I posted earlier, this year is the 8th worse for excess deaths in the last 27 years. EIGHTH. But im struggling to find a concise link to back that up
JagLover said:
Boringvolvodriver said:
And yet, we must save granny, who will die anyway fairly soon. I suspect that when this ends, we will see a lot more deaths of younger people who have not had cancer treatments. Or as all the lefties keep saying, austerity kills but can’t see that we will have to repay our massive debt somehow.
The lives of old people are not worthless. My parents are 70 and 68 so I would hardly think otherwise. There seems to me though a failure to recognise that what matters most is not length of life but quality of life.
Medical advancements and better living standards has meant that whereas you would once get your three score and ten if you were lucky now, once you have reached middle age, you can usually expect four score years instead. That is great and to be celebrated and many people have active lives in their seventies. There comes a point though when quality of life rapidly deteriorates, cognitive decline sets in and simple physical tasks become a struggle. If Coronavirus carries you off when you reach that point then it is a natural end to a life hopefully well lived, not something to be feared or avoided.
Well said. (And it would be nice to get a decent send off )
ORD said:
It’s the lack of proportionality that blows my mind. We are ruining millions of long, otherwise healthy lives to add a few months to a few very old persons’ lives.
If I think back to when my grandparents died (all in their 70s or 80s, so not extremely old), death came as a blessing. They were tired. They weren’t enjoying life anymore. Have any of these Covid bed wetters even been to a care home? Very many of the residents are suffering enormously. Having watched someone die of dementia (it went down as Covid, of course), I won’t ever let that happen to me. My wife feels the same.
The idea that it’s the most ethical thing in the world to protect 90-year-olds from a virus is bizarre. It’s virtue signalling without any arguable virtue. It’s pure ‘look at what a good person I am!’ nonsense.
The idea that prolonging the lives of a few thousand 85 year olds is worth trillions of pounds stolen from our children and the poorest people in the world is ethically indefensible.
Very much thisIf I think back to when my grandparents died (all in their 70s or 80s, so not extremely old), death came as a blessing. They were tired. They weren’t enjoying life anymore. Have any of these Covid bed wetters even been to a care home? Very many of the residents are suffering enormously. Having watched someone die of dementia (it went down as Covid, of course), I won’t ever let that happen to me. My wife feels the same.
The idea that it’s the most ethical thing in the world to protect 90-year-olds from a virus is bizarre. It’s virtue signalling without any arguable virtue. It’s pure ‘look at what a good person I am!’ nonsense.
The idea that prolonging the lives of a few thousand 85 year olds is worth trillions of pounds stolen from our children and the poorest people in the world is ethically indefensible.
We have as a society become completely detached from the concept of death
As our society has evolved we have become more insular and less aware of what is happening around us
We routinely pack the old folk off to homes where they are invisible and their passing is not noticeable or noted
The feeling is that life is guaranteed to be long and death will come in sleep at a great age after a life well lived and in good health is the expectation
Unfortunately it is not like that, and never has been
Having spent over 30 years on the frontline in the emergency services I have seen far far too much random senseless traumatic unexpected death
It can come to any of us at any time, sometimes in the most horrific and traumatic manner
I struggle with the idea that life is sacrosanct and every life must be saved .. at whatever cost
I’ve been in the position where I’ve had to make a conscious decision, when faced with a choice, of which life to save at the scene of a RTA
It’s not pleasant but it’s sometimes necessary .. it still haunts me
My life experience makes me feel that we are messing with the natural way of things
There has to be a balance, I don’t think there is at the moment
As our society has evolved we have become more insular and less aware of what is happening around us
We routinely pack the old folk off to homes where they are invisible and their passing is not noticeable or noted
The feeling is that life is guaranteed to be long and death will come in sleep at a great age after a life well lived and in good health is the expectation
Unfortunately it is not like that, and never has been
Having spent over 30 years on the frontline in the emergency services I have seen far far too much random senseless traumatic unexpected death
It can come to any of us at any time, sometimes in the most horrific and traumatic manner
I struggle with the idea that life is sacrosanct and every life must be saved .. at whatever cost
I’ve been in the position where I’ve had to make a conscious decision, when faced with a choice, of which life to save at the scene of a RTA
It’s not pleasant but it’s sometimes necessary .. it still haunts me
My life experience makes me feel that we are messing with the natural way of things
There has to be a balance, I don’t think there is at the moment
fido said:
Jasandjules said:
In other words covid has become part of the winter seasons mix of respiratory viruses.
)The real insanity is the confirmation bias loop the lockdowns promote.
We know the increasing infection rates lag the increase in testing. We know hospital admissions lag the increases in infection. We know increases in death lag the hospital admissions.
If you wait until the hospital admissions and deaths are rising, you are already well behind the curve.
As it happens, take Manchester, the infection rates are already dropping. This means the hospitalisation peak has more or less been fixed already, and the deaths with it.
Assuming the hospitals can cope with the peak that we already know has been set, there is literally no need or point in locking down those areas now. If the point was to protect hospitals, the time to do it was when the infections first showed signs of acceleration. If you wait for admissions, you're too late.
What happens now, is that the infections will continue to drop, as they would have done anyway, perhaps accelerated by the T3 lockdown. Hospital admissions will peak 2 or 3 weeks after peak infection rate and deaths within a month of that. It was all going to happen anyway.
However, it will be presented to us that the lockdown 'saved' the area from drowning. It will be given undue credit. People will believe it because they want to believe it and for many, they don't expect to have to deploy their own critical reasoning to the figures; they trust their government to look after them. It wont be questioned, except for a handful of opinion pieces in the broadsheets.
Meanwhile we continue to delay and delay the inevitable whilst Rome burns. And we will have learned nothing.
We know the increasing infection rates lag the increase in testing. We know hospital admissions lag the increases in infection. We know increases in death lag the hospital admissions.
If you wait until the hospital admissions and deaths are rising, you are already well behind the curve.
As it happens, take Manchester, the infection rates are already dropping. This means the hospitalisation peak has more or less been fixed already, and the deaths with it.
Assuming the hospitals can cope with the peak that we already know has been set, there is literally no need or point in locking down those areas now. If the point was to protect hospitals, the time to do it was when the infections first showed signs of acceleration. If you wait for admissions, you're too late.
What happens now, is that the infections will continue to drop, as they would have done anyway, perhaps accelerated by the T3 lockdown. Hospital admissions will peak 2 or 3 weeks after peak infection rate and deaths within a month of that. It was all going to happen anyway.
However, it will be presented to us that the lockdown 'saved' the area from drowning. It will be given undue credit. People will believe it because they want to believe it and for many, they don't expect to have to deploy their own critical reasoning to the figures; they trust their government to look after them. It wont be questioned, except for a handful of opinion pieces in the broadsheets.
Meanwhile we continue to delay and delay the inevitable whilst Rome burns. And we will have learned nothing.
Too many people focus on the what and where. It is the why!!
Why?
Focus on the money. Always focus on the money. Focus on governments spending billions and billions on PPE, testing and services (like the £7k/day COVID consultants)
Then focus on the who! For example; who is getting all the lucrative £68m PROFIT contracts that DO NOT go to tender!!!!!!! 1 of 100's of examples:
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/18780543.gover...
Once you focus on the money, the WHY makes perfect sense.
ETA...I'm not saying COVID-19 is not real, but the money got involved, contracts and Cronyism...rest as they say, is history...
Why?
Focus on the money. Always focus on the money. Focus on governments spending billions and billions on PPE, testing and services (like the £7k/day COVID consultants)
Then focus on the who! For example; who is getting all the lucrative £68m PROFIT contracts that DO NOT go to tender!!!!!!! 1 of 100's of examples:
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/18780543.gover...
Once you focus on the money, the WHY makes perfect sense.
ETA...I'm not saying COVID-19 is not real, but the money got involved, contracts and Cronyism...rest as they say, is history...
Edited by Turfy on Wednesday 21st October 10:13
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff