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

[EddieSteadyGo]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I would think much of that increase in the number of tests is LFD tests in advance of schools restarting next week. My two children were tested today in advance of going back to school on Monday for example.

[scenario8]

Is it the pre-return-to-more-widespread-school-athon testing that is inflating the numbers?

I suppose a likely increase of daily reported “cases” when the schools go back is the optic the government (and other stakeholders) wish to see to dampen any pressure to release restrictions ahead of schedule.

[oyster]

Twinfan said:

oyster said:

It’s all a bit of a moot point anyway as no one can actually suggest HOW you can isolate the vulnerable? How do you feed them? Care for them? Treat them? Etc.

You isolate them by telling them to stay at home and get them to buy food online and have it delivered. If they get ill, you send a doctor round or you get them to hospital. Ensure anybody who enters the house is PPE'd.

Simple enough.

And if they’re not internet savvy?

[kiethton]

MaxFromage said:

Alucidnation said:

Looks like that police boss hasn’t got a clue either.



I’d love to know how travelling a fair distance for exercising is classed a reasonable excuse.

What a loon.

Do you genuinely not understand why you can go anywhere in England to exercise? And that it would be classed as a reasonable excuse?

Yep, I need some oysters so heading the 80 miles to Whitstable tomorrow, might as well take the Exige as it’s meant to be a nice day

[Graveworm]

isaldiri said:

Weather and climate 'will makes a huge difference' in your own words and likely have a lot higher transmission in winter..... but for you not enough to classify a virus as seasonal? Right..... I'm not sure what you're going to need to classify a virus as seasonal then.

I'd start with seasonal fluctuations, such that, it can't grow in summer and certainly where it doesn't grow in summer in some parts and fall in others, whilst doing the opposite during winter. It's odd that scientists have been looking at this for decades and when applying it to Covid are not sure but you can be.

Did you make the comparisons with South Africa, Morocco and Algeria? Or Brazil and Mexico? Same picture both falling and rising at the same time of the year whilst being in opposite seasons, like Chile, Europe & North America.

This paper pretty much covers it.
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpubh...

Weather and climate make a huge difference to many human to human transmitted viruses especially respiratory. That doesn't make all viruses seasonal, as I think you know.

Edited by Graveworm on Friday 5th March 21:19

[Zoobeef]

g4ry13 said:

Zoobeef said:

So,

My gran needs both cataract doing.
The doctor has just told her to pick which eye she wants, as because of covid and funding the NHS will now only pay for 1 eye per patient.

s.

Don't they usually do one eye at a time?

Yes, but that's not what I said.

[Graveworm]

oyster said:

And if they’re not internet savvy?

Or if they are the ones running the supermarkets, farms, transport companies or delivering the shopping? Obviously it would have to include everyone they live with and are cared for by or care for. Hopefully they are not important for things like paying wages, approving loans, running power stations, utilities, public transport, banks, fuel companies, pharmaceuticals, hospitals the government etc etc. Or any of the supply chain for them. Maybe even just key to any business really, as their employees might be upset. As a bigger percentage of the non isolated fall ill and go off sick, let's hope there still enough, when added to all those locked away to still keep things going. That all assumes the unions especially the nurses etc, will sit still for this which, judging by the teachers might well not be the case.

Edited by Graveworm on Friday 5th March 21:47

[Harrison Bergeron]

kiethton said:

Hang on, all over 60’s vaccinated (or called to be), 2 in hospital....what are they locking down and not just getting on with life?

How the fk can you not understand?
This is the most deadly virus on the planet that most people survive and a significant number don’t even realise they’ve got.

/s
Yeah I think they’re stupid too.

[Red Devil]

Elysium said:

Turns out you can travel anywhere in the country provided you have a reasonable excuse:

We have finally found a policeman who is willing to be honest about what the law actually says:

https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/news/local-news/yor...

Oh dear, not 'on message'. BJ and Mancock will be fuming. I wonder whether he will have the backing of Keith Hunter?

Elysium said:

Its taken us almost a year of nonsense to get here though:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-5...

JuanCarlosFandango said:

The BBC is incredible.

Not at all. See below.

JuanCarlosFandango said:

I wonder if he has any idea just how incensed some people are that a walk on the beach is now a police matter at all, or that the state broadcaster has become a cheerleader for authoritarianism.

The answer right there. It's no different from its propaganda role during WW2. Jibes perfectly with BJ's wannabe Churchill rhetoric.
It reminds me of the occasional similar flights of fancy by Jim Hacker, but without any of the comedy aspect.
And never forget that Johnson is the man who tried to unlawfully prorogue Parliament to suit his agenda.
Thereby putting the Queen in a totally invidious position. Utterly disgraceful. He has no shame.
Thankfully, the Supreme Court gave him a proper spanking. When was the last time, if ever, it delivered a unanimous 11-0 verdict?

danllama said:

JagLover said:

It is a public service broadcaster whipping up the mob rather than reporting the news calmly and without bias (which is its remit).

Hence the BBC losing fee payers in their droves, including our household over a year ago.

I haven't contributed to its income for over 40 years.
It sends me regular junk mail which goes straight into the paper recycling bin unread, along with the rest of it.
The licence fee is a tax, but an entirely voluntary one which I have no desire to pay (I'm happily LLF).

[isaldiri]

Graveworm said:

I'd start with seasonal fluctuations, such that, it can't grow in summer and certainly where it doesn't grow in summer in some parts and fall in others, whilst doing the opposite during winter. It's odd that scientists have been looking at this for decades and when applying it to Covid are not sure but you can be.

Weather and climate make a huge difference to many human to human transmitted viruses especially respiratory. That doesn't make all viruses seasonal, as I think you know.

You have an absurd bar for calling something seasonal then if it needs to not spread in summer. In prior years some of the hcovs have recorded spring peaks although mostly they are most prevalent in winter. I suppose that means they can't then be seasonal.......

'Seasonal' gets overstated at times but I think it is fairly obvious just like most other respiratory illnesses and existing hcovs in particular, the likelihood of spread of sars-cov2 is going to be much greater in winter for much the same reason that respiratory diseases spread. I fail to see how it doesn't make it seasonal as far as I am concerned ie it will most likely spread at a higher rate in winter. Even you seem to agree weather and climate will make a huge difference but seem to think the virus in the southern hemisphere will miraculously behave differently to europe.

[bodhi]

oyster said:

And if they’re not internet savvy?

How did people who weren't internet savvy but were also on the shielding list get their shopping last year?

Graveworm said:

Or if they are the ones running the supermarkets, farms, transport companies or delivering the shopping? Obviously it would have to include everyone they live with and are cared for by or care for. Hopefully they are not important for things like paying wages, approving loans, running power stations, utilities, public transport, banks, fuel companies, pharmaceuticals, hospitals the government etc etc. Or any of the supply chain for them. Maybe even just key to any business really, as their employees might be upset. As a bigger percentage of the non isolated fall ill and go off sick, let's hope there still enough, when added to all those locked away to still keep things going. That all assumes the unions especially the nurses etc, will sit still for this which, judging by the teachers might well not be the case.

Edited by Graveworm on Friday 5th March 21:47

Whereas with lockdown most of the people you mentioned would have been key workers and carried on working directly in harms way.

Slow golf claps all round really.

[Thin White Duke]

My younger sister and her boyfriend have said they're having the vaccine "so that they can go on holiday" without any fuss.

The fact it's come to this, people taking a jab that they don't need (they're both late 20's, fit and healthy with no issues), just so they can go on holiday is ridiculous. It's blatant coercion.

Now I know you could say they don't have to go abroad or that other countries can set whatever entry requirements they like, and I accept that. However I do not think a virus with a 99%+ survival rate and one in which the most vulnerable will be vaccinated against if they choose should warrant such a coercive push.

[Alucidnation]

Thin White Duke said:

My younger sister and her boyfriend have said they're having the vaccine "so that they can go on holiday" without any fuss.

Good for them.

And I am sure they will enjoy their holiday and not give the vaccine a second thought.

As per most people who want to do the same.

[pocty]

oyster said:

Twinfan said:

oyster said:

It’s all a bit of a moot point anyway as no one can actually suggest HOW you can isolate the vulnerable? How do you feed them? Care for them? Treat them? Etc.

You isolate them by telling them to stay at home and get them to buy food online and have it delivered. If they get ill, you send a doctor round or you get them to hospital. Ensure anybody who enters the house is PPE'd.

Simple enough.

And if they’re not internet savvy?

Then we invent a new gadget called "The pen and paper" Witchcraft I hear you say. But we could sell this to the HMRC for £50million i guess.

Pocty

[Sheepshanks]

Thin White Duke said:

My younger sister and her boyfriend have said they're having the vaccine "so that they can go on holiday" without any fuss.

The fact it's come to this, people taking a jab that they don't need (they're both late 20's, fit and healthy with no issues), just so they can go on holiday is ridiculous. It's blatant coercion.

Now I know you could say they don't have to go abroad or that other countries can set whatever entry requirements they like, and I accept that. However I do not think a virus with a 99%+ survival rate and one in which the most vulnerable will be vaccinated against if they choose should warrant such a coercive push.

Are your sister and her boyfriend marathon runners?

[Graveworm]

bodhi said:

oyster said:

And if they’re not internet savvy?

How did people who weren't internet savvy but were also on the shielding list get their shopping last year?

Graveworm said:

Or if they are the ones running the supermarkets, farms, transport companies or delivering the shopping? Obviously it would have to include everyone they live with and are cared for by or care for. Hopefully they are not important for things like paying wages, approving loans, running power stations, utilities, public transport, banks, fuel companies, pharmaceuticals, hospitals the government etc etc. Or any of the supply chain for them. Maybe even just key to any business really, as their employees might be upset. As a bigger percentage of the non isolated fall ill and go off sick, let's hope there still enough, when added to all those locked away to still keep things going. That all assumes the unions especially the nurses etc, will sit still for this which, judging by the teachers might well not be the case.

Edited by Graveworm on Friday 5th March 21:47

Whereas with lockdown most of the people you mentioned would have been key workers and carried on working directly in harms way.

Slow golf claps all round really.

That's kind of the catch 22. Lockdown as we have it impacts more people by limiting the non essential things they do and who they can meet but allows people who can't work from home to still go to work, shop etc etc.
If you want anything close to the same result but affecting fewer people the restrictions would need to be more draconian and those groups I mentioned would still need to be allowed to work so would just be exposed to the higher risk anyway.

[anonymous-user]

Sheepshanks said:

Are your sister and her boyfriend marathon runners?

Just avoid stairs. It's always stairs that cause the problem.

[isaldiri]

Graveworm said:

Or if they are the ones running the supermarkets, farms, transport companies or delivering the shopping?

I'm really quite curious. Given that started from a post wondering about helping the vulnerable groups to avoid infection better, exactly how many people do you reckon working in supermarkets/farms/transport companies or as delivery workers are over 70s....? I don't seem to see plenty of old folks pottering about doing that kind of work I have to admit. Perhaps you do though.....

[bodhi]

Graveworm said:

That's kind of the catch 22. Lockdown as we have it impacts more people by limiting the non essential things they do and who they can meet but allows people who can't work from home to still go to work, shop etc etc.
If you want anything close to the same result but affecting fewer people the restrictions would need to be more draconian and those groups I mentioned would still need to be allowed to work so would just be exposed to the higher risk anyway.

Or we could just pay them to isolate? We could make it worth their while and also save a fortune on the £400bn we've spunked up the wall on a failed science experiment.

[Biker 1]

bodhi said:

Or we could just pay them to isolate? We could make it worth their while and also save a fortune on the £400bn we've spunked up the wall on a failed science experiment.

My thoughts entirely. Even if live in careworkers were given 5 times their regular wage to isolate along with the oldies under their care, I would wager my house it wouldn't even have cost 10% of this debacle