Current Affairs Coronavirus Thread - Serious stuff !!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
They don't mention co-morbidity's that's the issue, how many have died from just covid and how many had underlying conditions.
 
Vaccines dried up or Bank Holiday dead cat bounce?
One of my mates belled me on Thursday that his local health centre were appealing to anyone in the area who could get to the centre to go down for a jab as they had an absolute abundance that were at the end of their shelf life that day. Apparently they ended up chucking a load out, not sure if it's because people didn't turn up or what.
 
When they use the conditional tense, it does. The word 'could' imports with it in any sentence only the likelihood of something happening at sometime in the future. It implies a possibility, solely. In other words, they are guessing that (in this case) something MIGHT happen again. They are covering their backs in case it does. It's a standard thing to do by the Government, or any of its associated agents. Always has been...
It's a standard thing to do where you cannot give certainty, but that doesn't mean that it's a guess.

If there is a 1% chance of an outcome, you you add conditional tense, but that's far from suggesting 'its complete guesswork'.
 
There's nothing in that post that undermines the view that Johnson was getting good advice weeks before locking down to actually do that AND LOCK DOWN (and I state again that he was a negligent disgrace in swerving COBRA meetings in that period...something you didn't take up, I notice).

He was being told about herd immunity AND he was being told about suppression as the way forward...but the herd immunity advice fell away weeks before he actually locked down in late March. He was not 'doing what he was advised' he was doing what he wanted: keeping the economy open for the corporates who fund his party and who they exist for. THAT is why we saw tardiness over locking down. THAT is why we saw excessive death tolls in this country in the first wave...the type of idelogical idiocy that was then practiced in the autumn when again we suffered mega death because of his reluctance to go against vested economic interests.

You've either been hoodwinked or you really are handing support to this disgrace of a government.
You never mentioned COBRA before Dave. For the record I believe he was wrong to not attend the COBRA meetings he missed in January and possibly early Feb too. He probably had other things he considered more important like Brexit, but anything important enough to command a COBRA meeting should automatically demand the presence of the Prime Minister. Does that satisfy you?

As regards the highlighted bit Dave, that's pure bollox. As I've already said to you, you need to go and read all the SAGE minutes throughout Feb and March to see that Johnson followed the science on everything, and I mean everything. And I'd also urge anybody who believes this crap that Dave is spewing out to do the same.
 
They don't say people have died from covid tho do they, they say people have died within 28/60 days of a positive test.

So stick the magic bullet up your anus mate.

I know what they say. The point is, we do not know/we are not told what they died of. Having a trace of one thing in one's system is not an indicator that they died from that one thing. There are no doubt (sometimes multiple) other things that actually cause death. If you cannot see that, then I simply shake my head in disbelief at you...
 
I'm not in la-la land. You are. Because you refuse to accept what I said about the word 'could'. It is conditional tense. In the sentence that was quoted, it is no more than a guess at what MIGHT happen. If you wish to set great store by such pronouncements, fine. But don't try to convince me and others that what is predicted is 100% correct, because that is all it is - a prediction, nothing else...

And furthermore, you appear to take great joy in stating the latest death toll. The figures you quote are those where the Government says a positive test showed within the 28 days prior to death. What the Government does NOT tell us, is what they died of. They never have. Some of those deaths were likely to be from health issues without covid playing any part - issues where the individual would have died anyway (i.e. terminal cancer, heart attack, pneumonia). So to glibly quote such figures all the time without any in-depth details of the actual deaths simply shows the shallowness of your observation.
This is great. You first scold me for pushing guestimates on likely infection and fatality rates to come if restrictions are fully lifted, then you advance your belief that it's "likely" that some Covid19 deaths are being erroneously attributed to non-Covid19 deaths.
 
No contradiction in that. The link is established; we dont know why it's happening, but it is.

It's like saying a car starts making a noise when travelling over 50 MPH on a regular baisis, but I cant say yet what it is because we haven't made a lot of checks on similar vehicles having the same problem to come up with a conclusive declaration.


An established link but they just don't know what it is as yet.

Proper established that.
 
If you read the information leaflet on any medication it can be quite scary the side effects listed but it's very rare, I don't think we will ever get a 100% safe anything medical wise.
These are being given to, for the most part, a healthy younger age group who would never get cerebral embolisms on such an unusually large basis. That's the difference.
 
I know what they say. The point is, we do not know/we are not told what they died of. Having a trace of one thing in one's system is not an indicator that they died from that one thing. There are no doubt (sometimes multiple) other things that actually cause death. If you cannot see that, then I simply shake my head in disbelief at you...
People die.

But to say people with cancer would have died anyway is just a pathetic way to treat people.

They are a LOT of very sick people whose bodies cant fight a virus like Corona, do they not matter? Should we not care cos they were sick anyway?

The tories might be in power, but it doesn't mean we should think like them.
 
You never mentioned COBRA before Dave. For the record I believe he was wrong to not attend the COBRA meetings he missed in January and possibly early Feb too. He probably had other things he considered more important like Brexit, but anything important enough to command a COBRA meeting should automatically demand the presence of the Prime Minister. Does that satisfy you?

As regards the highlighted bit Dave, that's pure bollox. As I've already said to you, you need to go and read all the SAGE minutes throughout Feb and March to see that Johnson followed the science on everything, and I mean everything. And I'd also urge anybody who believes this crap that Dave is spewing out to do the same.
No, I never mentioned COBRA before...


:coffee:
 
These are being given to, for the most part, a healthy younger age group who would never get cerebral embolisms on such an unusually large basis. That's the difference.
Not really mate, one thing we all accept about medicine is it isn't perfect for everyone and unfortunately we are in a situation where we all need to take this medicine. It will never be perfect and casualties will happen, even if the vaccine had taken 10 years, casualties and bad side effects will still be present for a select few.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top