Jump to content
Fuzzar

Corona Virus main thread

Recommended Posts

At least Swindon, for all his faults did not offer a bet the weasel out

ps why can't you explain why you were the only one in June working for the NHS of t/t,

the evidence is there for all to see

t/t was being run by private companies - so why are you still lying ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because you’re wrong Billy. You know so little about this but persist with the Billy Big ****, like you do on every other subject. Sad old chap.

For the sake of seeing you make a donation to charity I will post up the shift availability for tomorrow, it will cost you £200 to the pups though Billy. 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

don't bother

https://www.nhsprofessionals.nhs.uk/Trusts/London-and-Herts/Norfolk-and-Suffolk

and anyone checking will see that the jobs listed are for recognised health professionals, not t/t

 

now rather than trying to spin it as some failing of mine.... Bill stole money fro, a charity etc

explain why you alone were working for the NHS in June on t/t when everyone on this thread knows that it was run by the private sector

since I exposed your lying you have not been able to provide one piece of evidence to back your claim - bar a cut and paste job from an online form that is seven years old

post up whatever distractions you wish,

but it is the lack of evidence to back your claim, and the explanation over why you were the only person working for the NHS in June that damns you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

more relevant, no defence of your lies

merely you trying to distract, because there is no explanation for you claim to have been working for the NHS in t/t in June

that can be seen by all-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

All mouth and no trousers Billy, you really are pathetic.

Edited by Van wink

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but not a sick liar trying to ride of the backs of genuine health and care workers

you have been found out yet again, and no lies about me supposedly stealing will distract from your shameful behaviour on here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Ok Billy, how about my NHS professionals payslip for June, but that will cost you £400 to charity. 

Edited by Van wink

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m off now Billy, surprised at your lack of balls, and you seemed so sure I was lying 😂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

oh dear hand crank - this is not a game of poker

you lied and got caught out, now do us all a favour and run along

as you clearly have no evidence, or explanation

that is obvious to all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you grown a pair this morning Billy? 
You have been calling me a liar, If you think I am bluffing call my bluff and take the bet,  either that or STFU. 
I will post up my NHS professionals online Payslip for June if I dont I will pay £400 to the PUP’s if I do you pay £400 and make a public apology. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

£400 is a lot of money and I don't think it is right to set the bar so high. Why not set it at £10, no one should be put off at that rate.  You can still pay £400 if caught out. 

Hopefully you two can sort this nonsense out and the discussion can be put back on the rails.

Throughout Europe we are seeing nations out of lockdown and with growing case numbers.  In some cases this second wave is worse than pre lockdown. 

This should be cause for huge concern.....but only in  a few places are we seeing this translate to deaths.   What is going on and what does this mean for our policies?  

Are we in europe just really good at protecting the vulnerable now?  Does summer make us more resilient ? Is the hoped for weakening real? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s fascinating that we are not seeing the number of hospitalisations previously associated with infections. Younger healthier people infected, more testing or weakening of virus? I suspect it’s down to a more healthy infected population in the current wave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This isn't a second wave. It's a continuation of the initial infection due to an easing of lockdown.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ricardo said:

This isn't a second wave. It's a continuation of the initial infection due to an easing of lockdown.

 

Yes agreed. Poor terminology.

Share this post


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

This isn't a second wave. It's a continuation of the initial infection due to an easing of lockdown.

 

Plot it on a bar chart and it certainly looks like a second wave!

In march we faced a growing caseload but (relative with what was to come) low deaths.  There was much criticism of lockdown timing.

Question is do we have a preemptive second go around?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, ricardo said:

This isn't a second wave. It's a continuation of the initial infection due to an easing of lockdown.

 

Undoubtedly true -  it's more 'controlled' (but growing still) at present simply due to the weak but existing restrictions. I sadly see currently no reason not to expect us to follow France and Spain and it to explode once more especially once it breaks back into more susceptible populations. No wishful thinking.

NZ has it right - lockdown fast and hard and not weak and wobbly as we have. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

Undoubtedly true -  it's more 'controlled' (but growing still) at present simply due to the weak but existing restrictions. I sadly see currently no reason not to expect us to follow France and Spain and it to explode once more especially once it breaks back into more susceptible populations. No wishful thinking.

NZ has it right - lockdown fast and hard and not weak and wobbly as we have. 

Sounds like you are advocating a second general lockdown?

Share this post


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

Sounds like you are advocating a second general lockdown?

I think yes. If you want the kids back at school in a couple of weeks or so then the numbers need to be at the very least already falling  now not rising! That means shutting pubs and restaurants I guess at the very least now. If we don't and it explodes in September again I wonder who will be blamed 'Blue' ?

Uncomfortable but simply true. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd be interested to hear from aggy and ricardo on this.

We should be seeing the effect of Scottish schools opening soon i guess which could inform English policy but with proposed re openings happening soon we might not have too much to go on before decisions need to be taken.

My view is that if there is a trade off it must be in favour of schools and that we might not have the data to make an informed decision by the time one is due which means an instinctual approach is required.

That being said surely we know what level of spread is caused by school children by now!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you only have to look at Sweden, who didn't have a lockdown and didn't close schools. Their epidemic curve had a slightly longer peak and a slower decline but infections still went down to a low level. Initially there were forecasts that Sweden's approach would result in 100k deaths but this hasn't happened and seems very unlikely to happen now.

I think we should be looking at the epidemic  graphs of countries who made different decisions and compare the actual data with the forecasts.

 

Share this post


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

I think you only have to look at Sweden, who didn't have a lockdown and didn't close schools. Their epidemic curve had a slightly longer peak and a slower decline but infections still went down to a low level. Initially there were forecasts that Sweden's approach would result in 100k deaths but this hasn't happened and seems very unlikely to happen now.

I think we should be looking at the epidemic  graphs of countries who made different decisions and compare the actual data with the forecasts.

or better, gaze at a few tea leaves

there are so many variables that the above is pretty much meaning less

simply looking at Norfolk infections and deaths without taking into account the huge number of 2nd homers etc who travelled up to Norfolk would not give a fair indication

Did Sweden halve an event like the Cheltenham festival where so many from so many different areas of the UK were in proximity for such a sustained period of time ?

look at Cholera in the 19th century - it would be lunacy to total up the number of deaths then try to extrapolate from there, they were almost all 'isolated cases' and the numbers affected were often determined by the population density as the susceptibility

looking at pretty meaningless numbers no doubt satisfies some need for those who will slaver and drool over the numbers put up on www.saddo.com - but here they are of far greater hindrance than help

Share this post


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

 

look at Cholera in the 19th century - it would be lunacy to total up the number of deaths then try to extrapolate from there, they were almost all 'isolated cases' and the numbers affected were often determined by the population density as the susceptibility

 

Nonsense from Billy, look up the work of  John Snow who using epidemiological data stopped the 1854 Cholera outbreak,  sadly the importance of his work wasn't recognised at the time, too many old fools believing in the miasma theory, a bit like you! 

https://www.pastmedicalhistory.co.uk/john-snow-and-the-1854-cholera-outbreak/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh dear, poor hand crank

as clueless as ever

the link actually backs up exactly my point ie the problem lies with outbreaks and their specific causes, not as the nonsense abour rze numbers etc

 

ps any evidence of my betting with, you, my supposed stealing of money or your moving from the private sector to the NHS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

This bloody bet thing.  Just both of you accept and lets get it done.  Bill, how about you pay £1 if caught out and VW you pay £400?

Interesting that Ricardo is leaning towards staying open as he was first into lockdown in March.   Got to say that  YF and Ricardo both make good cases. The swedish experience does give a lot of hope but the figures are not so different to those we saw in early to mid march. So which experience do you learn from?

 

 

 

Edited by Barbe bleu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Barbe bleu said:

This bloody bet thing.  Just both of you accept and lets get it done.  Bill, how about you pay £1 if caught out and VW you pay £400?

Interesting that Ricardo is leaning towards staying open as he was first into lockdown in March.   Got to say that  YF and Ricardo both make good cases. The swedish experience does give a lot of hope but the figures are not so different to those we saw in early to mid march. So which experience do you learn from?

 

 

 

I think we have to learn from the actual data not anecdotal nonsense about what may or may not have transpired from the Cheltenham Festival, football matches, demonstrations etc.

A quick lockdown undoubtedly saves lives early on but the virus cannot be eliminated and will always retain a residual pool to reinfect the susceptible.  This is what we now see in the data from countries like Australia etc that had a modicum of success early on.

 The reality is that without an effective vaccine the virus will eventually run through sufficient victims until herd immunity is established. In my opinion another total lockdown is unviable economically so I don't  expect to see one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ricardo said:

I think we have to learn from the actual data not anecdotal nonsense about what may or may not have transpired from the Cheltenham Festival, football matches, demonstrations etc.

A quick lockdown undoubtedly saves lives early on but the virus cannot be eliminated and will always retain a residual pool to reinfect the susceptible.  This is what we now see in the data from countries like Australia etc that had a modicum of success early on.

 The reality is that without an effective vaccine the virus will eventually run through sufficient victims until herd immunity is established. In my opinion another total lockdown is unviable economically so I don't  expect to see one.

We won't see a general lockdown again, not unless we have widespread community spread, localised action will be the norm.

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...