spectateur
Player Valuation: £30m
Obviously because the measures taken against covid are equally effective against influenza.
After all they are both mainly spread by the same means.
Current Affairs Coronavirus Thread - Serious stuff !!!
- Thread starter bullybeef
- Start date
- Status
After all they are both mainly spread by the same means.
grandjoeblue
Player Valuation: £35m
I agree with this but I think its all down to the vaccine now. To get rid of COVID in the UK would probably take 4 or 5 months of full continuous lockdowns.
spectateur
Player Valuation: £30m
UK a nation of alcoholics.?
We can't get rid of COVID. That's literally impossible.
The point of a lockdown is to stop infections becoming exponential in growth, not to eradicate them.
That would be achieved by a six week lockdown - one akin to March, not the joke a few months back.
After that it'd take three months or so for exponential rise again and by that point a vaccine will be in place for the most vulnerableat the very least.
grandjoeblue
Player Valuation: £35m
I just don't think 6 weeks would be enough. It was longer than that first time round with better weather conditions.
Public support for a long lockdown is probably mixed as well, I doubt the overall compliance would be at the same levels as the first lockdown.
When you compare death figures, though, then it paints a different picture.
There's hardly any discrepancy between October-November 2019, and October-November this year.
But there was a 1500-2000 jump from Oct-Nov 2018 to Oct-Nov 2020.
This thing was here last year and the deaths were, I'm sure, being put down to flu (because we didn't know to test for COVID.
Note that when deaths are recorded now, it is said whether they are 'with covid' (that wasn't the case in March.
I'm not saying it's all a conspiracy. But this thing has been here well over a year and we were blindly ignorant, and nobody batted an eyelid at the deaths.
So it goes back to @Tubey's point. Either lockdown fully (which further tanks the economy and makes things worse for more people than the virus would impact directly, really) or get back up and running with guidance and let people live their lives rather than just complete control from idiots - and I mean this for every country. They've proven totally inept across the UK and Europe.
tsubaki
Player Valuation: £90m
Which would be (and I’m not having a go at you here) such an admission of failure by the Government.
All subsequent lockdowns after the first one would not have been necessary with an effective and rapid track, trace and isolate system, one that didn’t require you to have a car and sufficient savings (and an understanding boss) to do what society required.
That they’ve still not sorted that out is, to use @davek phrasing, criminal. It was bad enough in August but now it’s unforgivable.
D
Deleted member 48881
Guest
Full lockdown or Sweden approach IMO. Staying in between is criminal and idiotic.
TheBigIguana
Player Valuation: £100m
Pretty sure Sweden would recommend against their approach at this point.
D
Deleted member 48881
Guest
Yeah but they dont suffer economically instead, and suffer just as much as others health wise. So full lockdown (lock absolutely everything down) for a month, or let people decide what's best for themselves.
Billy Dean
Player Valuation: £70m
Pretty sure I read that Sweden have nor benefited economically from their approach in comparison to those that locked down.
D
Deleted member 48881
Guest
Well Swedes who own small shops are doing much better than their English, German, French and Spanish counterparts, it is obvious, we don't really need to read anything. Of course all economies suffered considerably, since it is a global pandemic.
Light lockdowns and no lockdowns result in the same. Just shut everything down or do not.
How are your country handling it?
Billy Dean
Player Valuation: £70m
Can’t help but feel an opportunity has been missed here
- Status