Current Affairs Coronavirus Thread - Serious stuff !!!

[Brennan]

None of us on here really have a clue what we're talking about, so why would any of our predictions be given any weight?

You mean you’re not an epidemiologist too ?

 

[Brennan]

Straight from the get go, I described this pretty much as a world changing event way back in January 2020. I've certainly got a better record than Captain 'the vaccines are only 10% effective'.

Ps, I said case numbers aren't important because the vaccines will help to negate an exponential rise in serious, life threatening cases, which they are. There'll be some falling through the cracks unfortunately but that's not a reason to keep restrictions in place, to stop the majority of this nation's people from doing what they like to do, i.e. Weddings being a big do, having fun at night clubs and enjoying live music or attending the football.

So urm, sniff it?

Spoken like a true man child. Bravo.

 

[Mrk]

Signed off by Sage and Cobra. So another who needs to actually listen to Hancocks response to questions from select committee.

Didn't say it wasn't, and I have. Doesn't really answer my point...

 

[NilSatisOptimum]

This didn't really age well. Up there with his post that the vaccine was only 10% effective lol

As the sun rises, wait till it mutates, then it's isolation.

Indeed we all get things wrong it's about learning from mistakes and only 2 days later this post was an outlayer, so I'm half better at prevention than entire Government, not bad for someone who is neither politician or expert in virology, like to think it's my lefty woke principles that allows me to adapt, with good dose of personal stoicism.

As for the 10% I stand by that vaccines we have are not 100% effective.

Anyway, enough about me one will develop an internet ego none of us want to be that, but I have to ask, are you one of the many Grant Shapps internet personalities?

 

[Tubey]

"Follow the science" has its' limits. Nutters like this need to be disregarded.

FWIW, she's also a literal Communist. Unsurprisingly.

 

[tsubaki]

View attachment 130253

"Follow the science" has its' limits. Nutters like this need to be disregarded.

FWIW, she's also a literal Communist. Unsurprisingly.

Yes, let’s go back to sacrificing several thousand people a year to easily preventable illness, and losing hundreds of thousands of days due to preventable sickness. What madness it would be to slightly change how we live based on what we’ve all learned from the disaster we are living through. Fkin communists.

 

[Deckard2049]

NHS told to identify patients actually sick from Covid-19 separately to those testing positive

Exclusive: Changes to the way hospitals collect data will make the impact of the virus on the NHS look better

www.independent.co.uk

Some of the methods we’ve been using to collect certain data throughout the pandemic have been weird. I honestly had no idea that if you go into hospital for a broken leg and test positive Covid you are then part of the hospitalisation figures.

I mean, I understand that technically if you’re in hospital and you have Covid then you’re going to be part of the “people in hospital with Covid” data. But surely we should be focusing on people who are a) seriously ill with Covid and b) requiring hospitalisation due primarily to Covid.

It’s a tough one I guess though- eternal doomers will accuse the government of manipulating and massaging the figures whereas people who think it’s a hoax will say that it’s been hyped up all along to justify lockdowns/restrictions etc. Changing the way this data is collected and presented seems sensible though.

 

[Tubey]

Yes, let’s go back to sacrificing several thousand people a year to easily preventable illness, and losing hundreds of thousands of days due to preventable sickness. What madness it would be to slightly change how we live based on what we’ve all learned from the disaster we are living through. Fkin communists.

No, I was saying all science isn't equal science, and they have agendas like everyone else.

There's an awful lot of arse covering going on right now in terms of the upcoming inquiry etc. and there will be a lot of scientists who won't sign off on lifting restrictions until no COVID exists, which is impossible.

So nutters like the scientist quoted above should be disregarded. Their opinion isn't worthy of respect.

 

[Tubey]

NHS told to identify patients actually sick from Covid-19 separately to those testing positive

Exclusive: Changes to the way hospitals collect data will make the impact of the virus on the NHS look better

www.independent.co.uk

Some of the methods we’ve been using to collect certain data throughout the pandemic have been weird. I honestly had no idea that if you go into hospital for a broken leg and test positive Covid you are then part of the hospitalisation figures.

I mean, I understand that technically if you’re in hospital and you have Covid then you’re going to be part of the “people in hospital with Covid” data. But surely we should be focusing on people who are a) seriously ill with Covid and b) requiring hospitalisation due primarily to Covid.

It’s a tough one I guess though- eternal doomers will accuse the government of manipulating and massaging the figures whereas people who think it’s a hoax will say that it’s been hyped up all along to justify lockdowns/restrictions etc. Changing the way this data is collected and presented seems sensible though.

Very hard to do, because then you have to redraw the line from "positive COVID test" to "seriously ill", and what constitutes "seriously" is very debatable. Do you go for just people on respirators, or people requiring oxygen?

Don't know, but can understand the difficulties.

Personally, I just think what should dictate the response to COVID should be number of people on respirators and deaths. "Cases" are too nebulous, because there's a hell of a difference between 1,000 80 year olds with COVID and 1,000 20 year olds.

 

[tsubaki]

No, I was saying all science isn't equal science, and they have agendas like everyone else.

There's an awful lot of arse covering going on right now in terms of the upcoming inquiry etc. and there will be a lot of scientists who won't sign off on lifting restrictions until no COVID exists, which is impossible.

So nutters like the scientist quoted above should be disregarded. Their opinion isn't worthy of respect.

Why is she a nutter though? She has clearly said we should learn from this and change behaviours, which I’d have thought would be eminently sensible given the death toll, financial impact etc etc.

 

[Tubey]

Why is she a nutter though? She has clearly said we should learn from this and change behaviours, which I’d have thought would be eminently sensible given the death toll, financial impact etc etc.

Due to the imposition of it in terms of measures.

She supports official measures for it "forever". That's a hard no as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Tramps_mate]

View attachment 130253

"Follow the science" has its' limits. Nutters like this need to be disregarded.

FWIW, she's also a literal Communist. Unsurprisingly.

I think quite a few people will continue wearing masks indefinitely...

It will certainly be strange going shopping and not wearing one.

 

[Tramps_mate]

NHS told to identify patients actually sick from Covid-19 separately to those testing positive

Exclusive: Changes to the way hospitals collect data will make the impact of the virus on the NHS look better

www.independent.co.uk

Some of the methods we’ve been using to collect certain data throughout the pandemic have been weird. I honestly had no idea that if you go into hospital for a broken leg and test positive Covid you are then part of the hospitalisation figures.

I mean, I understand that technically if you’re in hospital and you have Covid then you’re going to be part of the “people in hospital with Covid” data. But surely we should be focusing on people who are a) seriously ill with Covid and b) requiring hospitalisation due primarily to Covid.

It’s a tough one I guess though- eternal doomers will accuse the government of manipulating and massaging the figures whereas people who think it’s a hoax will say that it’s been hyped up all along to justify lockdowns/restrictions etc. Changing the way this data is collected and presented seems sensible though.

Absolutely. Even last week the ONS admitted 1/3 of the recent Covid deaths have nothing to do with Covid. Its been like this since the start.

Elderly people dying in care homes with no autopsy were automatically down as covid, even if they died from a heart attack.

 

[tsubaki]

Due to the imposition of it in terms of measures.

She supports official measures for it "forever". That's a hard no as far as I'm concerned.

Those are very simple measures though, that would work. Making sure communal tables are kept clean is not communism.

 

[Tubey]

I think quite a few people will continue wearing masks indefinitely...

It will certainly be strange going shopping and not wearing one.

Optionally, that's fine.

By government order, no, that's not fine.