Jump to content
Fuzzar

Corona Virus main thread

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Indy said:

Of corse this is true but more people on average died from cancer today. Looks like we’re not too far away from treatments which might have a positive effect on the virus those infected and at more risk.

Get treatments in place which can prevent serious effects then it’s game on.....

.......................except if you are over 70, then it's game over

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Bill said:

.......................except if you are over 70, then it's game over

I’m not sure it will be for long Bill, it certainly looks like a number of treatments are looking like they might help in the fight against this virus. It’s been pretty vicious on the older population, but hopefully it’ll show that care homes need to be more prepared for thing type of event in the future.

I’m still at a loss to why any older vulnerable people weren’t moved to hospitals before they got too seriously ill, surely if they showed symptoms they should have been isolated in hospital? That’s just one area though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Bill said:

.......................except if you are over 70, then it's game over

How many people over 70 have had it and survived?

Edit: I’ve got no idea

Edited by Aggy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Indy said:

I’m still at a loss to why any older vulnerable people weren’t moved to hospitals before they got too seriously ill,

perhaps your earlier thought held sway

 

"time to know you can’t save everyone, the cost would have been and still are well over the top in my book, especially when you you consider you old boys have lived your life through probably the best of years."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Bill said:

.......................except if you are over 70, then it's game over

More nonsense.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Bill said:

perhaps your earlier thought held sway

 

"time to know you can’t save everyone, the cost would have been and still are well over the top in my book, especially when you you consider you old boys have lived your life through probably the best of years."

Sorry Bill, in context it was against the 88 billion cost in one month, I know you’re view is more focused on the lives lost, but the reality is that the average age which people are living has risen by nearly 10 years to 83....from where it was in the late 70’s.

I stand by the fact we now try to save everyone’s lives when the reality is they might only have a few months of very poor quality of life left. I have a different view that we live to have families, we want the best for our children and I’d certainly want to protect them, so you might see me as callous but for me I’d rather an 85 year old with serious health issues pass away than any youngster or parents in their 30’s.

As we know a good NHS needs to be funded well, the longer we borrow record amounts the weaker the NHS might become in the future.

I accept we see things differently I’ve worked in an industry where I’ve spent lots of time doing hazops, risk assessment and as aviation we had to put a price on a life, I suppose this with other things just make life less important to me.

That said I’ve been shopping and looking after a few of our local elderly residents in our road, it’s been a pleasure and a laugh to get to know them better. It’s always sad when someone passes but that’s the way of life.

Edited by Indy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Bill said:

Mengele

On a side note Bill, I can’t wait till it’s all over so that Boris gets his **** kicked, I absolutely loathe the guy, his only ever focus by hook or by crook was to be PM...he’s an absolute **** IMO.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, T said:

Cummings going?

Sounds if if he’s broken the rules, others have felt obliged to go, somehow sadly can’t see it in this case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Van wink said:

Sounds if if he’s broken the rules, others have felt obliged to go, somehow sadly can’t see it in this case.

Ferguson went for less.

He has to go else it will be an open goal for Starmer next PMQ and so far he doesn't miss. Home (Durham) run.🥵

Edited by Yellow Fever

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ricardo said:

Cor, 🍟🐟

Yes yummy.

Ok. Gupta actually said a lot of what I was saying a month or two ago .... didn't trust case numbers just deaths etc. However she clearly 'had' a preferred hypothesis which we now know the serological data doesn't easily support .. not without adding in ever more complex further reasons for immunity.

As to lockdown. Yes she is right an indefinite lockdown for years (30 ?) In isolation would leave us peculiarly open to new variants sweeping across but a year (ugh) is of no concern. That said a new swine flu could already be on it's way. It's a small world.

Overall an informative discussion albeit with a preferred hypothesis on the defensive which with today's data seems ever less likely.

We will slowly get more immunity, a vaccine and better treatments in the coming year and yes lockdown will be eased. However for those that wish for a quick free for all that's just fine but one of the casualties may well be you and or your family. Perhaps it's a price you are prepared to pay .....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, C Goodenough said:

Good scapegoat gotta go... Whatcha reckon. gotta go par for the course.... Hey. 

Whatcha your thoughts T. I reckon youve read it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, C Goodenough said:

Whatcha your thoughts T. I reckon youve read it. 

Do what I say not what I do ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does sound like mitigating circumstances but problem is when you have so many enemies then you are vulnerable. And his boss is also exposed so he no longer has a strong backer. Both will be gone at the first opportunity. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, ricardo said:

I predict there will be no Cummings and Goings😉

Agree. No way he will resign or he asked to. Boris Johnson needs him far too much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Suspect Cummings leaked by enemies. Boris getting skewered by SKS on a regular basis. The Sunday night Boris performance was a complete car crash so advisors failing their minder job and has to go at first opportunity Not a good look to get rid of Boris  now but he is a liability so his days are numbered. Question is who they have who won’t get ripped apart by SKS. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Barbe bleu said:

If you believe that this government would prefer to see thousands die than see press and TV reports of the NHS being overwhelmed and the loss of prestige that follows then that's your prerogative.

I took the protect the NHS line to mean that if it were overwhelmed we would not be able to treat everyone and that this lack of treatment would lead to avoidable deaths. If you believe something different that is fine.  Neither of us really know what Boris, his cabinet or advisors really think. 

 

 

Its not a matter of what I believe, it is what actually happened. Nor would I use the word 'prefer' -  it was exactly as stated, a case of what was the priority. Nor am suggesting that I know what the Cabinet were thinking but I repeat it is clear what they decided to prioritise, how they arrived at that conclusion is entirely a matter of speculation but the conclusion itself is clear.

The stated policy, and the actual implementation placed the focus entirely on protecting the NHS, i.e. avoiding the situation where there were more COVID patients than the NHS could treat. From the perspective of some Covid patients that is clearly a highly desirable outcome and in the early days it was also (as intended) the sole focus of the media, but it was never a holistic approach to minimising the death toll. There are many strands to this but let's just look at a few obvious ones:

In purely Covid terms the NHS wasn't overwhelmed but by any sane or objective definition our health system was completely overwhelmed because 'protecting the NHS' involved effectively shutting down treatment of all other seriously ill non-Corvid  patients many of whom could have been saved but weren't. The NHS has been quite open that many seriously ill but treatable patients, viz heart attacks, strokes, aggresive cancers amongst others have died as a result of this.

It was also not overwhelmed because admissions to hospital were filtered (as indeed was treatment to patients even once admitted) so instead of seeing swamped hospitals we had people dying quietly at home or in care homes - deaths which for far too long were totally ignored by the government and largely ignored by the most of the media.

This was in fact a double whammy as we now know that another facet of 'protecting the NHS' was freeing up beds by discharging many patients untested, a high proportion of which were vulnerable or elderly, from hospital into care homes and the community - it is very clear that there is a strong belief amongst many of the staff that some of these patients had become infected in hospital whilst being treated for other conditions and then became the conduits for the virus into the care homes. We don't know the exact extent of this but we do know that the Government has gone out of its way to lie about it so I think we can take that as confirmation that the staff know what they are talking about.

We could go on and on but its pretty pointless - there are two obvious objectives: protecting the NHS and minimising the death toll. Clearly there is a substantial overlap between the two, equally clearly they are not the same objective and in some areas the pursuit of either one is at the expense of the other. The government made a clear choice as to which they prioritised and I believe they made the wrong choice. You clearly believe they made the right one and you may have good reasons to believe that but if you do I'm baffled as to why, as usual, you simply misconstrue what I said originally and take a pop at that instead of articulating what your good reasons are. If I were a cynic then I might jump to the conclusion that you don't actually have any good reasons, just a blind faith in the government  🙄

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Yellow Fever said:

Ferguson went for less.

Visiting a Far Lefty activist married lover for a bit of nooky when one is supposed to be the top scientist that advises house arrest on the populace is hardly less a misdemeanour than driving a car up the country 😀

Let's have a butchers at Neil (pantsdown) Ferguson's track record:

 

His modelling of the China virus's transmission suggested 250,000 people could die in the UK without drastic action 🙃


In 2005, Ferguson said that up to 200 million people could be killed from bird flu. He told the Guardian that ‘around 40 million people died in 1918 Spanish flu outbreak… There are six times more people on the planet now so you could scale it up to around 200 million people probably.’ In the end, only 282 people died worldwide from the disease between 2003 and 2009.


In 2009, Ferguson and his Imperial team predicted that swine flu had a case fatality rate 0.3 per cent to 1.5 per cent. His most likely estimate was that the mortality rate was 0.4 per cent. A government estimate, based on Ferguson’s advice, said a ‘reasonable worst-case scenario’ was that the disease would lead to 65,000 UK deaths.


In the end swine flu killed 457 people in the UK and had a death rate of just 0.026 per cent in those infected.


In 2001 the Imperial team produced modelling on foot and mouth disease that suggested that animals in neighbouring farms should be culled, even if there was no evidence of infection. This influenced government policy and led to the total culling of more than six million cattle, sheep and pigs – with a cost to the UK economy estimated at £10 billion.


It has been claimed by experts such as Michael Thrusfield, professor of veterinary epidemiology at Edinburgh University, that Ferguson’s modelling on foot and mouth was ‘severely flawed’ and made a ‘serious error’ by ‘ignoring the species composition of farms,’ and the fact that the disease spread faster between different species.


In 2002, Ferguson predicted that between 50 and 50,000 people would likely die from exposure to BSE (mad cow disease) in beef. He also predicted that number could rise to 150,000 if there was a sheep epidemic as well. In the UK, there have only been 177 deaths from BSE.


On 22 March, Ferguson said that Imperial College London’s model of the Covid-19 disease is based on undocumented, 13-year-old computer code, that was intended to be used for a feared influenza pandemic, rather than a coronavirus 🤐

 

 

 

 

Edited by Jools

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, T said:

Suspect Cummings leaked by enemies. Boris getting skewered by SKS on a regular basis. The Sunday night Boris performance was a complete car crash so advisors failing their minder job and has to go at first opportunity Not a good look to get rid of Boris  now but he is a liability so his days are numbered. Question is who they have who won’t get ripped apart by SKS. 

I would venture Sunak seems to be the best of a bad bunch.

For those in the Tory party who want rid of the incompetent liar then they would do well to hold fire on getting rid of either...for the moment.

Let Johnson hang in there to allow as much of this failure to be tagged to him when he dies go. Clean break and all that. If he persists with Cummings all the better, and easier to dump him later.

However that assumes those who have put Johnson there don't still think he can carry out his task,

For political gain then having them both stay is a huge yes. For the interests of the country and the lives they have and still are, putting at risk the sooner the better

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unsurprisingly Fools doesn't tell you that his long post was lifted from here

https://www.spectator.co.uk/artic/six-questions-that-neil-ferguson-should-be-asked

and his desperate attempts to deflect from Cummings should be no surprise either

The only surprise is why he has Fools been used after such a long absence - maybe Len might be brought back at some point as well 😄

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Jools said:

 

His modelling of the China virus's transmission suggested 250,000 people could die in the UK without drastic action 🙃

 

 

 

 

I hate to break it to you but well over 36 thousand have died with action, belated or not. If we had carried on the way we were going then I don't think his figures would have been that far wrong. 

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, T said:

Boris getting skewered by SKS on a regular basis.

🙃😀

Boris ~ "Brilliant forensic mind that he has" 🤣

 

58161dd8-52e5-4194-8c0c-17b6a027c09b-d03😀

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Jools said:

Visiting a Far Lefty activist married lover for a bit of nooky when one is supposed to be the top scientist that advises house arrest on the populace is hardly less a misdemeanour than driving a car up the country 😀

Failed at the first hurdle Jools. He (the top scientist) went nowhere. 

Cummings is definitely toast. No way the Government can allow a very public expression of "those rules are for thee, not me" for anyone other than the Queen, the PM and his Cabinet Ministers. He deliberately broke rules he was fully aware of. He knew he'd tested positive, decided the rules don't apply to him and drove his family hundreds of miles to his parents. 

Edited by Surfer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Creative Midfielder said:

 as to why, as usual, you simply misconstrue what I said originally and take a pop at that instead of articulating what your good reasons are. If I were a cynic then I might jump to the conclusion that you don't actually have any good reasons, just a blind faith in the government  🙄

Misconstrue ?

it's only poor hand crank using one of his various logins - without the ability to mask is 'modus operandi

or are we to believe that a new poster pops up with the same style of post, and we are supposed to think it is someone entirely new to the forum ?

 

it rather reminds me of when there have been a spate of similar crimes in a short space of time in the same area and folk speculate as to how many criminals there are out there

whereas they are all being committed by the same person(s) ie in this case, van wink

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...