Coronavirus Super Thread ( merged )

[redjambo]

1 minute ago, main said:

 

Dont want to bring politics into it but throughout the whole coronavirus episode, I’ve found the guardian alongside the bbc/sky news to be unbearably negative and desperate to find a downside to everything. They’re not alone of course but they’re some of the main culprits. I started watching euronews out of curiosity and the difference is night and day. 

Anyways, regarding the deaths, as mentioned I think it’s highly likely the death figures have been skewered, not maliciously but still. In addition it’s also possible that the lockdown itself has had a disasterous effect on other people as I touched upon earlier and caused deaths which would not have occurred.

 

Ok, here's the Telegraph's article reporting the same thing: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/05/26/uks-covid-19-death-toll-rises-60000/

 

I'm not disputing that some deaths will have been by-products of the Covid-19 situation rather than directly caused by the virus, but I did want to show that Gards comment that "We've had 60,000 more deaths this year than the last 5 year average." was correct.

[main]

Just now, Gards said:

All the Guardian are doing are quoting data from the Office of National Statistics.  A government body.

 

Even if we take that as extreme.  We've got 34k deaths directly attributed to cvid.  We've got approx 60k excess deaths compared to previous 5 years (which includes thos 34k deaths)....so 26k excess deaths are unexplained.

 

I spoke about the ONS in my first post this evening. I believe their figures are wildly too high because it’s based on covid being on the death certificates. Don’t want to repeat myself but it is certain that everyone who has covid as a cause of death on their certificate did not die of covid.

[main]

3 minutes ago, redjambo said:

 

Ok, here's the Telegraph's article reporting the same thing: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/05/26/uks-covid-19-death-toll-rises-60000/

 

I'm not disputing that some deaths will have been by-products of the Covid-19 situation rather than directly caused by the virus, but I did want to show that Gards comment that "We've had 60,000 more deaths this year than the last 5 year average." was correct.

 

I think my response is valid for both articles. Also, I think as the article suggests it is feasible to attribute some of this years deaths towards November and December which would increase last years total and decrease this, hence making he figures less dramatic. I certainly think this thing arrived here late last year.

[Gards]

4 minutes ago, main said:

 

I spoke about the ONS in my first post this evening. I believe their figures are wildly too high because it’s based on covid being on the death certificates. Don’t want to repeat myself but it is certain that everyone who has covid as a cause of death on their certificate did not die of covid.

Isn't the 34k figure the ONS stat on confirmed cvid cases?  The 26k excess they don't attribute to anything?

[Don Dan]

Anyway we have lifted the lockdown a least 1-2 weeks to early. Well done Boris.

[main]

1 minute ago, Gards said:

Isn't the 34k figure the ONS stat on confirmed cvid cases?  The 26k excess they don't attribute to anything?

 

Very difficult to estimate the proper figures  now with the different methods of reporting. Even if I concede 34k covid deaths, which still could be too high, that’s a much less sensational than 60k+.

 

Looking forward however is much more grim. The constant ‘money v lives’ mantra being trotted out when people rightly look at the economic forecast is not helpful. The economy is not simply fat rich men sitting in raking the dough, it is people’s employment. A lot of people may find there is no job to go back to when this is over and history shows what follows. Less employment, in additon to more state support for the unemployed, results in less taxation and a much reduced GDP, 33% was the figure being bandied about. GDP is what pays for our NHS and public services, if our GDP shrinks by a third then believe me the excess deaths in the 2020s will be awful. Not bringing politics into it but people talk about 120,000 dead due to the tory’s Austerity in the Cameron years. That will be a drop in the ocean, that government saved £30bn in total. We have spent £2.4bn a day since lockdown started, so in less than two weeks that has been obliterated.

[vegas-voss]

England absolutely rammed at the tourist spots today.Folk will no doubt blame Cummings but im sorry thats just folk being dicks cause of a bit of sun.Same folk will no doubt be going daft about kids going back to school.

 

Cummings is a knob the rest of the country doesnt need to be.

[graygo]

15 minutes ago, Dannie Boy said:

Anyway we have lifted the lockdown a least 1-2 weeks to early. Well done Boris.

 

It's had the desired effect of deflecting attention away from Big Bad Dom. 

[Don Dan]

2 minutes ago, graygo said:

 

It's had the desired effect of deflecting attention away from Big Bad Dom. 

Indeed. 
This current excuse for a government have made a right pigs ear of handling this. It’s not easy but from day one you can see how they have made very very bad decisions. 
 

[Taffin]

43 minutes ago, redjambo said:

 

It appears that the part in bold is true.

 

Excess UK deaths in Covid-19 outbreak approach 60,000

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/26/uk-coronavirus-deaths-weekly-covid-19

 

 

Not sure if I'm looking at it wrong but I can't see where in that article it shows it. There was over half a million deaths in 2018 in England and Wales alone. We're up on deaths when you compare the first x number of weeks of the years, I still didn't think it was as much as 60k though. Quite shocking.

 

It wasn't that long ago we were actually down on deaths on direct comparison of the first few months of the year. Think it was week 15 (?) that was the case...around the time I stopped looking at it.

[Unknown user]

The numbers are artificially low because we're in lockdown, surely that's the most obvious thing in the world. Surely no one thinks you can compare lockdown covid figures to non lockdown flu figures and go "see, not so bad"

 

It's been not so bad because we've been in lockdown. That's not a good argument for ending lockdown, it's more of an argument for keeping it going.

[main]

17 minutes ago, Smithee said:

The numbers are artificially low because we're in lockdown, surely that's the most obvious thing in the world. Surely no one thinks you can compare lockdown covid figures to non lockdown flu figures and go "see, not so bad"

 

It's been not so bad because we've been in lockdown. That's not a good argument for ending lockdown, it's more of an argument for keeping it going.

Is the evidence certain about this? An interesting comparison is next door neighbours Belgium and Holland. Holland has imposed possibly the most relaxed lockdown in Europe apart from Sweden and Belarus. Belgium on the other hand has imposed one of the most stringent. Belgium has seen around 9,500 deaths with a population of 11 million. Holland has reported deaths of just under 6,000 with a larger population of 17 million. It would be better maybe to compare countries who locked down their care homes first and more securely.

[Unknown user]

Just now, main said:

Is the evidence certain about this? An interesting comparison is next door neighbours Belgium and Holland. Holland has imposed possibly the most relaxed lockdown in Europe apart from Sweden and Belarus. Belgium on the other hand has imposed one of the most stringent. Belgium has seen around 9,500 deaths with a population of 11 million. Holland has reported deaths of just under 6,000 with a larger population of 17 million. It would be better maybe to compare countries who locked down their care homes first and more securely.

Holland is very, very different to here, people are sensible as **** and have been voluntarily doing what we've been forced to do. Generally of course, but we're talking generalisations here.

It's very densely populated compared to here, they have to take these things seriously. 

I still have friends over there, it's only 2 years since we came back, their streets and roads have been as quiet as ours. 

 

Belgium I don't really know tbf.

[main]

5 minutes ago, Smithee said:

Holland is very, very different to here, people are sensible as **** and have been voluntarily doing what we've been forced to do. Generally of course, but we're talking generalisations here.

It's very densely populated compared to here, they have to take these things seriously. 

I still have friends over there, it's only 2 years since we came back, their streets and roads have been as quiet as ours. 

 

Belgium I don't really know tbf.

We won’t know for certain of course but it is my belief that it is the failure to immediately shut down care homes (no one gets in or out without a negative test and PPE) that has been the main factor in the increase of deaths as opposed to variances in lockdowns. If you remove the Care Home deaths which could have been prevented, the figures would be significantly lower. The ship has sailed however, it happened and care Home deaths/infections are declining.

[Unknown user]

1 minute ago, main said:

We won’t know for certain of course but it is my belief that it is the failure to immediately shut down care homes (no one gets in or out without a negative test and PPE) that has been the main factor in the increase of deaths as opposed to variances in lockdowns. If you remove the Care Home deaths which could have been prevented, the figures would be significantly lower. The ship has sailed however, it happened and care Home deaths/infections are declining.

 

You seemed to be questioning whether the figures would have been worse without lockdown, have I got that right? I just want to be clear what I'm dealing with here.

[main]

2 minutes ago, Smithee said:

 

You seemed to be questioning whether the figures would have been worse without lockdown, have I got that right? I just want to be clear what I'm dealing with here.

 

My main thought is whether the particular form of lockdown we have chosen was necessary and worth it considering the damage that has been done both short term and long term. It is important to remember that this entire policy was based on Neil Ferguson’s report, which made the government perform a complete U turn on their strategy, prediction 500,000 deaths in Britain.

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

As you can see, his record is pretty abysmal. All I’m suggesting is to question whether this policy was the correct and proportionate response to this virus.

[Unknown user]

4 minutes ago, main said:

 

My main thought is whether the particular form of lockdown we have chosen was necessary and worth it considering the damage that has been done both short term and long term. It is important to remember that this entire policy was based on Neil Ferguson’s report, which made the government perform a complete U turn on their strategy, prediction 500,000 deaths in Britain.

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

As you can see, his record is pretty abysmal. All I’m suggesting is to question whether this policy was the correct and proportionate response to this virus.

Do you think more people would have died with more relaxed measures?

[main]

1 minute ago, Smithee said:

Do you think more people would have died with more relaxed measures?

 

Do I believe that a looser lockdown would have cost countless lives? I’ll be honest, I don’t see evidence to support it. 

 

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/ten-reasons-to-end-the-lockdown-now

 

I think this is a great article that airs many of my views on the matter. It’s fairly long so I understand if you don’t have the inclination to read it.

[Unknown user]

1 minute ago, main said:

 

Do I believe that a looser lockdown would have cost countless lives? I’ll be honest, I don’t see evidence to support it. 

 

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/ten-reasons-to-end-the-lockdown-now

 

I think this is a great article that airs many of my views on the matter. It’s fairly long so I understand if you don’t have the inclination to read it.

I don't have the inclination to read it because its a tory rag with mrs Dom Cummings as commissioning editor. You cited its gossip column above ffs, the very epitome of tory propaganda. 

 

If you don't think more people would have died I have nothing else to discuss with you, you're buying into propaganda from people who want to make money again and don't care about anything else, they're mugging you off.

[Mikey1874]

13 minutes ago, main said:

 

My main thought is whether the particular form of lockdown we have chosen was necessary and worth it considering the damage that has been done both short term and long term. It is important to remember that this entire policy was based on Neil Ferguson’s report, which made the government perform a complete U turn on their strategy, prediction 500,000 deaths in Britain.

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

As you can see, his record is pretty abysmal. All I’m suggesting is to question whether this policy was the correct and proportionate response to this virus.

 

It's very difficult. 

 

The general, overall public non expert consensus is UK and US delayed lockdown by at least 2 or 3 weeks. Media all over the world reported dismay as UK didn't act with time to learn from likes of Italy. 

 

I can see comparing other countries is difficult. African countries for example acted with urgency and have low deaths. But their populations are much younger. 

 

And its not necessarily any ones fault testing wasn't done leading to being unable to trace and isolate or prevent care home deaths. 

 

But these are all reasonable questions to ask. 

[main]

1 minute ago, Smithee said:

I don't have the inclination to read it because its a tory rag with mrs Dom Cummings as commissioning editor. You cited its gossip column above ffs, the very epitome of tory propaganda. 

 

If you don't think more people would have died I have nothing else to discuss with you, you're buying into propaganda from people who want to make money again and don't care about anything else, they're mugging you off.

 

We’ll have to agree to disagree then. FWIW, I have never bought the spectator or been even a casual reader in my life, the article was sent to me. I don’t have any loyalty to any political party in this country so I couldn’t care less about Tory propaganda. What I will say is that Dr John Lee is a very intelligent man and his opinion is respected. Nice talking to you.

[Ray Gin]

Lake of Ozarks party goer tests positive, potentially infecting hundreds

https://abcnews.go.com/US/lake-ozarks-memorial-day-partygoer-tests-positive-covid/story?id=70968298

Edited May 30, 2020 by Ray Gin

[Unknown user]

1 minute ago, main said:

 

We’ll have to agree to disagree then. FWIW, I have never bought the spectator or been even a casual reader in my life, the article was sent to me. I don’t have any loyalty to any political party in this country so I couldn’t care less about Tory propaganda. What I will say is that Dr John Lee is a very intelligent man and his opinion is respected. Nice talking to you.

I didnt say you were loyal to them but you are buying their narrative. At the end of the day if you're telling me lockdown maybe didnt save any lives your credibility plummets to zero.

[Ray Gin]

12 minutes ago, main said:

 

Do I believe that a looser lockdown would have cost countless lives? I’ll be honest, I don’t see evidence to support it. 

 

No? Perhaps take a look at Sweden. 

 

For seven of the last 14 days, Sweden has had the highest number of deaths per capita in the world.

[main]

2 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

It's very difficult. 

 

The general, overall public non expert consensus is UK and US delayed lockdown by at least 2 or 3 weeks. Media all over the world reported dismay as UK didn't act with time to learn from likes of Italy. 

 

I can see comparing other countries is difficult. African countries for example acted with urgency and have low deaths. But their populations are much younger. 

 

And its not necessarily any ones fault testing wasn't done leading to being unable to trace and isolate or prevent care home deaths. 

 

But these are all reasonable questions to ask. 

 

An interesting factor in the severity of covid is the weather, with regions that have lousy weather being generally worse off than warmer countries. Obvious exceptions to this are Italy and Spain although there are reasons they were harder hit. The most prominent being the extended family I.e the culture of elderly people living with their families as opposed to being placed in care homes. Italy especially with its elderly population (old man of Europe), northern italy having the worst pollution in Europe and a large presence of workers from Wuhan was a prime target. The pollution is important as it is a respiratory illness after all that targets the lungs. This would help explain partially why London and NYC were such hotspots plus the density of the populations of those cities.

[main]

4 minutes ago, Smithee said:

I didnt say you were loyal to them but you are buying their narrative. At the end of the day if you're telling me lockdown maybe didnt save any lives your credibility plummets to zero.

 

That’s your view. I’m not interested in the narrative of the spectator. I was interested in the piece by John Lee, who has written and spoken elsewhere if it bothers you who prints his articles.

[main]

4 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

 

No? Perhaps take a look at Sweden. 

 

For seven of the last 14 days, Sweden has had the highest number of deaths per capita in the world.

 

I said before in another post, the failure to protect care homes was the main disaster. Sweden has large care homes, hence higher death rates.

[Unknown user]

1 minute ago, main said:

 

That’s your view. I’m not interested in the narrative of the spectator. I was interested in the piece by John Lee, who has written and spoken elsewhere if it bothers you who prints his articles.

 

No matter what your point of view is you'll find an expert, a very intelligent man, who agrees, but if you don't think a looser lockdown would have cost lives I'm not taking you seriously. 

[main]

1 minute ago, Smithee said:

 

No matter what your point of view is you'll find an expert, a very intelligent man, who agrees, but if you don't think a looser lockdown would have cost lives I'm not taking you seriously. 

 

So be it.

[Unknown user]

2 minutes ago, main said:

 

So be it.

[Armageddon]

Here's something that's strange about 2 of my mates (There's lots strange right enough!)

 

Mate number 1:  Goes to the 6 Nations France game with his dad, few days later feels utterly 5hite then he's in bed for 12 days solid with suspected COVID, his work react by sending all non-critical staff to work from home and this continues until the official government shut down - i spoke to him from a distance after dropping food off at his door as he has a wife and a 2 year old so helped them out - he looked and sounded sooooooo bad, everybody convinced he's been floored by it.

 

Mate number 2:  He's in Italy skiing at it's peak, comes home to his wife and 2 year old and a week later doesn't feel ideal, he works from home and isolates then we go into lock down, he when he was feeling unwell he still had to look after his daughter while his wife worked, so total contact with them both.

 

Mate number 1 has just been provided with 12 testing kits from his employer, the results of himself, his wife and his daughter test negative.

Mate number 2 was given 3 kits from mate number 1 - mate number 2 tests positive but his wife and daughter test negative even after being in lock down with him during his time of feeling unwell.

 

*If the test kits are even slightly reliable - how come somebody with COVID has isolated with his wife and child and he's not passed it on?  "I was blowing on her food most nights and kissed her at bedtime every night ..."

[John Gentleman]

5 hours ago, Taffin said:

 

Cheers, interesting, I don't think I'd ever fully appreciated the seriousness of the flu itself until all of this or the numbers it kills. Hopefully we can get CV19  under control in the same way. As I said (this isn't aimed at you), obviously this is worse for the very reasons you state...we have treatments and vaccines for the flu. I certainly know which I'd prefer to catch! I'm just not sure that fundamentally it's that out of the box to compare it with flu given the spread, the symptoms and those who are risk from it. It's a moot point really anyway as it doesn't matter which is more deadly. 

Of interest, perhaps, is that the number of flu' and common cold cases has collapsed in Australia (and NZ) as we enter winter. Experts are putting this down to a high level of social distancing compliance, large numbers of people working from home and a higher vaccination rate (1.4 million more than last year in a total population of 25.5M). The tables below provide the visuals.The number of cases as a % of the population are the lowest since records began. Clouds and silver linings etc.

 

[John Gentleman]

7 hours ago, Lone Striker said:

Interesting (and worrying) info, John.     

 

The simple point I was trying to make in my earlier  post which you replied to was that R is a complex estimate the medical experts  use through modelling to gauge how rapidly they think the  virus is spreading (or being suppressed) - it's not being sensibly represented or described by the media via their current reporting or fancy diagrams.    The expert modelling shows that the difference on the ground in terms of COVID cases (and subsequent deaths)  between 0.8 and 0.9 is starkly different - just 0.1 of a difference can account for several hundred extra cases.  Indeed, they generally only quote a range for what they think the R value is - most recently between 0.7 and 0.9 (UK wide).  So to answer your question, R only makes any sense to ordinary folk (like me) when you can compare what it's value was estimated to be last week to what it's value is estimated to be this week - is it getting "better" or "worse".  

......as I was saying about asymptomatic Shedders & Spreaders....

"Almost all evidence seems to point to a proportion of asymptomatic infections of around 40%, with a wide range,” says Houben. “The proportion is also highly variable with age. Nearly all infected children seem to remain asymptomatic, whereas the reverse seems to hold for the elderly."

40% is a scary number. Article here:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/30/could-nearly-half-of-those-with-covid-19-have-no-idea-they-are-infected

[ri Alban]

15 hours ago, Ray Gin said:

 

So Covid has managed 50% of the flu death rate in just 6 months despite lockdowns all over the world.

 

 

 

 

So 5 months is 6 months on the black cat calender. The UK government for example are listing 37,000 deaths whereas the Ons says 60,000. 23,000 in one country, a country who is supposed to be more honest than China who list 3000. And of course there's Brazil, India and the USA where its only just got started. 

 

Linked to flu, Linked to Covid19 etc... Well that puts respiratory death at 1m+ after 5 months and that's the fake low number every country can get away with. 

15 hours ago, Blackie the Cat said:

Here is another 100% fact  - Globally up to 650,000 die each year due to respiratory diseases linked to seasonal flu. At the moment there are just over 367,000 that have died from Covid-19.    

 

[OBE]

17 hours ago, Blackie the Cat said:

Here is another 100% fact  - Globally up to 650,000 die each year due to respiratory diseases linked to seasonal flu. At the moment there are just over 367,000 that have died from Covid-19.    

 

650,000 die with free movement. 367,000 have died in some form of lockdown. Cv-19 attacks more than just the lungs, it's been observed that it affects all major organs, including the brain. Also sticky blood, seasonal flu doesn't do that or infects so many in such a short time.

 

Medication doe's combat seasonal flu. Novel viruses? Professor, how can we treat this nasty wee thing? "I don't know, lets pick a card" 

[Ray Gin]

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=2992718297479254&id=506218122795963

 

Ffs. Check out these covidiots. 

 

 

[OBE]

10 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=2992718297479254&id=506218122795963

 

Ffs. Check out these covidiots. 

 

 

 

Pea brain Lemmings do the same.

[pablo]

9 hours ago, jonesy said:

I think you make a good point. It’s very easy to look at short term stats to judge whether or not governments have done this “right” or not. The reality is that most of them are making it up as they go along. 
 

There’s no question that isolating people in their homes will have negative consequences, while the job losses associated with this will hit hard very soon. There was no magic solution here, just a variety of coping mechanisms. I’m afraid that politicians, hiding behind the odd term “the science”, may have been trying to do what they feel will reflect best on them in the next election cycle. Sturgeon’s nanny state, finger wagging approach, or Johnson’s faux concern followed by ‘open it up’ akin to Trump, are both, I’d say, designed to appeal to their voters. 

 

Yes, this is exactly how I see it. 

[Beni]

52 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=2992718297479254&id=506218122795963

 

Ffs. Check out these covidiots. 

 

 

 

 

[Jambo-Jimbo]

Will not be surprised if infections begin to climb again in the next few weeks.

 

People around here have been really good during the lock-down, but yesterday it was as if the shackles had been taken off and it was just madness imo, lots of neighbours having BBQ's and parties, groups of friends going from one garden to the next before moving onto someone else for a few drinks, and there was little to no social distancing on display either once they had had a few drinks, just mental imo, it really was a case of yipee things are back to normal, or at least that's the impression I got. 

[Ray Gin]

1 minute ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

Will not be surprised if infections begin to climb again in the next few weeks.

 

People around here have been really good during the lock-down, but yesterday it was as if the shackles had been taken off and it was just madness imo, lots of neighbours having BBQ's and parties, groups of friends going from one garden to the next before moving onto someone else for a few drinks, and there was little to no social distancing on display either once they had had a few drinks, just mental imo, it really was a case of yipee things are back to normal, or at least that's the impression I got. 

 

Suspect we'll be back in full lockdown within a fortnight. 

[Jambo-Jimbo]

1 minute ago, Ray Gin said:

 

Suspect we'll be back in full lockdown within a fortnight. 

 

Wouldn't surprise me in the least, certainly expect to be back in lock-down at some point.

 

I'd bet that what happened around here was replicated up and down the country yesterday.

 

[The Real Maroonblood]

8 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

 

Suspect we'll be back in full lockdown within a fortnight. 

Got a decent amount of beer in the house.

Sorted.

[Francis Albert]

15 hours ago, main said:

 

For a country of nearly 67 million people, it is not unprecedented to have this number of deaths higher than the average. I don’t have the figures on me but I believe there are about 5 April’s that have had higher deaths in the uk in the last 20 years. I’m not a covid denier or conspiracy theorist by any means, this is clearly a very nasty bug that is potentially fatal to people who are vulnerable to a whole range of other ailments also, again mainly due to older age and poor immune systems. 

 

It is slightly too early to tell at this point, but I have a good hunch that this lockdown has in itself contributed to excess deaths that would not have happened. The people not turning up to our almost deserted hospitals (outside the covid wards of course) are indicative of people with other conditions such as cancer not turning up for treatment or to inspect symptoms is potentially fatal. In addition to mental health issues, I don’t know if there has been an increase in suicides, I really hope not. Although if someone was already close to the edge, being shut away or indeed having to work and maintain dull, bleak responsibilities with your only pleasures taken away, it could easily push the most vulnerable into a terrible decision.

 

Without wanting to present a maybe callous sounding ‘they would have died anyway’ thesis, it does have to be noted the average age plus the presence of one or more serious co morbidities of the fatalities. It is entirely feasible to assume that a lot of these deaths were in the ‘projected annual deaths’ and have simply sped up. In order for a proper analysis, it would be wiser to wait until the end of the year at least before making assumptions about the effects of covid and the lockdown on the number of deaths in this country and around the world. 

The last four words are for me the most significant. The impact of a major economic slump in developed countries as a result of lockdowns may well kill more people than Covid due to the impact on third world countries where millions already die each year as a result of poverty and simple things like lack of clean water. And thats just deaths. For many millions more life already pretty desperate will become more so. 

Let's come back in a year or two and make a preliminary assessment. In the meantime a little less certainty all round would be welcome.

Edited May 31, 2020 by Francis Albert

[Ray Gin]

11 minutes ago, jonesy said:

I don’t think the politicians would have the nerve to try it. 

 

Sturgeon has already said she'll have no hesitation if the R number shoots up above 1 again. 

[main]

10 hours ago, jonesy said:

I think you make a good point. It’s very easy to look at short term stats to judge whether or not governments have done this “right” or not. The reality is that most of them are making it up as they go along. 
 

There’s no question that isolating people in their homes will have negative consequences, while the job losses associated with this will hit hard very soon. There was no magic solution here, just a variety of coping mechanisms. I’m afraid that politicians, hiding behind the odd term “the science”, may have been trying to do what they feel will reflect best on them in the next election cycle. Sturgeon’s nanny state, finger wagging approach, or Johnson’s faux concern followed by ‘open it up’ akin to Trump, are both, I’d say, designed to appeal to their voters. 

 

I think you’re right.  Not to mention the ‘science’ is being used as a license for whatever policy is chosen. The ‘science’ can be anything.

[The Internet]

34 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

 

Suspect we'll be back in full lockdown within a fortnight. 

 

AlimOzturk outside holyrood when this happens

 

 

[Governor Tarkin]

1 hour ago, Francis Albert said:

The last four words are for me the most significant. The impact of a major economic slump in developed countries as a result of lockdowns may well kill more people than Covid due to the impact on third world countries where millions already die each year as a result of poverty and simple things like lack of clean water. And thats just deaths. For many millions more life already pretty desperate will become more so. 

Let's come back in a year or two and make a preliminary assessment. In the meantime a little less certainty all round would be welcome.

 

Good post, FA, and so was the one you quoted from @main.

 

The extended implications of this thing will be far-reaching.

 

I wouldn't be surprised to see China further extending its geopolitical range by taking full advantage of western economies and societies in disarray - both economically and militarily.

[Jambo-Jimbo]

Nicola Sturgeon tells Sky News that there is "A very significant risk that the virus could run out of control again"

 

Dominic Raab tells Sky News that we are at a "precarious" and "sensitive" situation with the virus.

 

And Professor Jonathan Van Tam said yesterday that Britain faces a "very dangerious moment" just now.

 

And we are still easing the lock-down, what possibly could go wrong............tits.............up...................and pear shaped spring to mind.

 

[Jambo-Jimbo]

8 minutes ago, Governor Tarkin said:

 

Good post, FA, and so was the one you quoted from @main.

 

The extended implications of this thing will be far-reaching.

 

I wouldn't be surprised to see China further extending its geopolitical range by taking full advantage of western economies and societies in disarray - both economically and militarily.

 

Already are, the investment arm of the Chinese State (can't recall it's name) have already been trying to buy up distressed companies in the UK, Italy, India, Indonesia, Australia & the US and that's just the countries I'm aware off.

 

I posted on here about it weeks ago with a link, I haven't got the time right now to find it all again, but the info is widely available on the internet.

I seem to recall in the UK it was some tech company, the Chinese were knocked back at the time, weeks ago.