Coronavirus Super Thread ( merged )

[Walter Bishop]

 

Why would governments, particularly the UK and US, falsify deaths and cases upwards? 🤔

 

 

 

 

[kila]

6 minutes ago, Walter Bishop said:

Its not 65,000.

 

There is no doubt this virus accelerated the deaths of thousands of elderly people and those with underlying conditions. No doubt at all.

 

Thousands will also have died due lack of proper treatment, lack of proper care, fear of going to hospital, Inability to seek the correct advice and many other things due to the attention given to a disease that in the long run will prove to have been a massive, very costly mistake. 

 

We had no choice but to give it attention though 🤷‍♂️

 

A new coronavirus out on the loose that had already caused China and other parts of Asia to close down. Then parts of Europe started getting hit really badly and hospitals were struggling. It would have been reckless if the government hadn't locked down to slow the spread so hospitals can cope.

 

OK I agree had care homes been better prepared maybe the number of CV19 patients in hospital wouldn't have been so bad. But key hospital operations would still have been disrupted while the world tried to get a better understanding on this new virus and the risks.

 

No doubt the world has changed from this and the foundations of capitalism been shaken. It's made countries look at where they get all their stuff from and that maybe relying on China to manufacture most of our shit isn't a good idea despite the cheap cost.

 

Hopefully there is more investment in producing things in our own country and that big desire earlier in the year to help build more ventilators and mass produce PPE is something that stays.

 

[MoncurMacdonaldMercer]

11 minutes ago, kila said:

 

We had no choice but to give it attention though 🤷‍♂️

 

A new coronavirus out on the loose that had already caused China and other parts of Asia to close down. Then parts of Europe started getting hit really badly and hospitals were struggling. It would have been reckless if the government hadn't locked down to slow the spread so hospitals can cope.

 

OK I agree had care homes been better prepared maybe the number of CV19 patients in hospital wouldn't have been so bad. But key hospital operations would still have been disrupted while the world tried to get a better understanding on this new virus and the risks.

 

No doubt the world has changed from this and the foundations of capitalism been shaken. It's made countries look at where they get all their stuff from and that maybe relying on China to manufacture most of our shit isn't a good idea despite the cheap cost.

 

Hopefully there is more investment in producing things in our own country and that big desire earlier in the year to help build more ventilators and mass produce PPE is something that stays.

 

 

do people still think the key purpose of lockdown was to stop the nhs from being overwhelmed?

 

the nhs does not have unlimited funding and has been overwhelmed/overstretched for decades and decades with people dying in numbers every single day because they get the best care available rather than the best care - all of which could be significantly improved for an absolute fraction of the cost of lockdown - it just doesn’t add up

 

was it to protect the elderly and vulnerable - well given tons of them were emptied back into care homes without tests - that doesn’t add-up either

 

most of these decisions were pretty impossible but all the reasons given for lockdown can be easily contradicted by the actions taken - it’s like none of these reasons while important were the actual reasons to lockdown

 

death numbers being high (or artificially higher) helps to justify lockdown and the fallout from it

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Herbert.]

6 hours ago, vegas-voss said:

Wives cousin is a hairdresser and she said it was costing quite a bit to kit out her salon to how the guidelines say it should be.

 

 

I've just opened a barbers and its cost 50quid for 5l if hand sanitizer a few masks, gloves and a visor, I've seen places go from 10 to 13 for a haircut using covid as a excuse,Its a money grab pure and simple. 

[Jambo-Jimbo]

FLU VACCINE

 

Giving that there is every chance that during the coming winter we will see both the flu & covid-19 around at the same time and that the Government says it is going to be running the largest flu vaccine programme ever this winter, so here's my question, which is aimed at all the folks who don't normally get a flu jab through the NHS or work.

 

Will you be getting the flu jab this year?

 

[tcjambo]

6 hours ago, Dannie Boy said:

If PHE have been stupid when collating the death as a result of Covid in  England then it has caused immense damage to the UK economy. Those responsible need brought to book over this. If this is the case it cost us billions. 

100%. The governments in all countries have spooked everybody by not constantly examining the emerging evidence and instead listening to non-experts in the field and the media . Meantime some people may have lost their chance of surviving cancer and other chronic illnesses and loads of businesses have gone bust with people to lose their jobs.

[Walter Bishop]

7 minutes ago, MoncurMacdonaldMercer said:

 

do people still think the key purpose of lockdown was to stop the nhs from being overwhelmed?

 

the nhs does not have unlimited funding and has been overwhelmed/overstretched for decades and decades with people dying in numbers every single day because they get the best care available rather than the best care - all of which could be significantly improved for an absolute fraction of the cost of lockdown - it just doesn’t add up

 

was it to protect the elderly and vulnerable - well given tons of them were emptied back into care homes without tests - that doesn’t add-up either

 

most of these decisions were pretty impossible but all the reasons given for lockdown can be easily contradicted by the actions taken - it’s like none of these reasons while important were the actual reasons to lockdown

 

death numbers being high (or artificially higher) helps to justify lockdown and the fallout from it

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As someone who was a wreck at the start of this to now being a bit more open minded and seeing past the sensationalism and negative headlines i agree with what you say here. What was the reason, Panic? I am not a conspiracy theorist and dont believe in all the new world order, 5g, need to shut down for the Climate shit so in my opinion It has to be down to mass panic, the world over. 

 

Fear has been the aim from day 1, it worked but now it is backfiring as we have a nation of people scared to leave their houses meaning the financial implications will be far worse than expected/assumed. 

 

 

[Walter Bishop]

4 minutes ago, tcjambo said:

100%. The governments in all countries have spooked everybody by not constantly examining the emerging evidence and instead listening to non-experts in the field and the media . Meantime some people may have lost their chance of surviving cancer and other chronic illnesses and loads of businesses have gone bust with people to lose their jobs.

This is in a nutshell. Fear is the virus and has been along. 

[GinRummy]

10 minutes ago, Walter Bishop said:

Fear is the virus and has been along. 

Quite a profound and thought provoking statement. I do wonder if the damage caused by the response to the virus, financial and mental and physical health, will be worse than the virus itself. An impossible situation for any government to deal with. 

[vegas-voss]

26 minutes ago, Herbert said:

 

 

I've just opened a barbers and its cost 50quid for 5l if hand sanitizer a few masks, gloves and a visor, I've seen places go from 10 to 13 for a haircut using covid as a excuse,Its a money grab pure and simple. 

I really have no idea just passing on what she told the wife

[Unknown user]

28 minutes ago, Walter Bishop said:

This is in a nutshell. Fear is the virus and has been along. 

Nope. 

 

Death rates are remarkably steady as a rule. The Office for National Statistics figures for overall deaths in England and Wales shows the following week 17 figures over the last 4 years;

 

Week 17, 2017 - 10,908

 

Week 17, 2018 - 10,306

 

Week 17, 2019 - 10,059

 

Week 17, 2020 - 21,997

 

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/weeklyprovisionalfiguresondeathsregisteredinenglandandwales

 

 

You can argue about different aspects and what you think they mean all you like, but these numbers say everything about why lockdown was the right thing to do.

[Walter Bishop]

3 minutes ago, Smithee said:

Nope. 

 

Death rates are remarkably steady as a rule. The Office for National Statistics figures for overall deaths in England and Wales shows the following week 17 figures over the last 4 years;

 

Week 17, 2017 - 10,908

 

Week 17, 2018 - 10,306

 

Week 17, 2019 - 10,059

 

Week 17, 2020 - 21,997

 

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/weeklyprovisionalfiguresondeathsregisteredinenglandandwales

 

 

You can argue about different aspects and what you think they mean all you like, but these numbers say everything about why lockdown was the right thing to do.

There is no doubt this virus accelerated the deaths of thousands of elderly people and those with underlying conditions, but how many were sent to premature deaths? Out of 45,000 more than half were in care homes and hospitals, then you have those who died in the home due to all care and attention being on hospitals. Not to mention those who received no treatment at all or were scared to attend hospital.

 

I understand this was new and we were entering the unknown but would our death toll have been even 10,000 had we not sent ill elderly folk back to care homes or had nurses, doctors and carers been assigned to specific wards/single care homes the whole time instead of being passed from pillar to post? 

 

 

[Unknown user]

Just now, Walter Bishop said:

There is no doubt this virus accelerated the deaths of thousands of elderly people and those with underlying conditions, but how many were sent to premature deaths? Out of 45,000 more than half were in care homes and hospitals, then you have those who died in the home due to all care and attention being on hospitals. Not to mention those who received no treatment at all or were scared to attend hospital.

 

I understand this was new and we were entering the unknown but would our death toll have been even 10,000 had we not sent ill elderly folk back to care homes or had nurses, doctors and carers been assigned to specific wards/single care homes the whole time instead of being passed from pillar to post? 

 

 

 

Covid-19 is the virus, not fear - 4 weeks into lockdown and our death rate was double what it would normally be. It would have been much, much worse without lockdown.

[Walter Bishop]

2 minutes ago, Smithee said:

 

Covid-19 is the virus, not fear - 4 weeks into lockdown and our death rate was double what it would normally be. It would have been much, much worse without lockdown.

Fair enough, you have your opinion and i have mine. 

 

 

[The Real Maroonblood]

6 minutes ago, Smithee said:

 

Covid-19 is the virus, not fear - 4 weeks into lockdown and our death rate was double what it would normally be. It would have been much, much worse without lockdown.

That appears to be the case.

[Unknown user]

1 minute ago, Walter Bishop said:

Fair enough, you have your opinion and i have mine. 

 

 

Fair enough, but I'd say the stats make mine much more compelling.

 

10,000 extra deaths in a single week, a month into lockdown. That's a LOT, half of tynecastle.

[MoncurMacdonaldMercer]

1 hour ago, Walter Bishop said:

 

As someone who was a wreck at the start of this to now being a bit more open minded and seeing past the sensationalism and negative headlines i agree with what you say here. What was the reason, Panic? I am not a conspiracy theorist and dont believe in all the new world order, 5g, need to shut down for the Climate shit so in my opinion It has to be down to mass panic, the world over. 

 

Fear has been the aim from day 1, it worked but now it is backfiring as we have a nation of people scared to leave their houses meaning the financial implications will be far worse than expected/assumed. 

 

 

 

nope there was a very good reason for some of the lockdowns (subsequent ones became political as couldn’t be seen to be doing much worse than others)

 

with hindsight it will no doubt be criticised but you just need to find a reason that was big enough to trash the world economy and be worth the potential devastating results of doing so

 

and disclosure of that reason would have been met with utter outrage - twitter nuclear explosion

Edited July 17, 2020 by MoncurMacdonaldMercer

[vegas-voss]

Quite sad how we just talk about peoples deaths now as numbers and stats.Old guy i used to work on the roofs with just died after seeminly beating Covid 2 months ago.You aint going to tell me having this virus didnt have an effect on his decline.

[Weakened Offender]

2 hours ago, Walter Bishop said:

Its not 65,000.

 

There is no doubt this virus accelerated the deaths of thousands of elderly people and those with underlying conditions. No doubt at all.

 

Thousands will also have died due lack of proper treatment, lack of proper care, fear of going to hospital, Inability to seek the correct advice and many other things due to the attention given to a disease that in the long run will prove to have been a massive, very costly mistake. 

 

 

Magic. That's all that Coronavirus deaths stuff sorted then 😁

[Walter Bishop]

9 minutes ago, Smithee said:

Fair enough, but I'd say the stats make mine much more compelling.

 

10,000 extra deaths in a single week, a month into lockdown. That's a LOT, half of tynecastle.

Dont think there was ever 10,000 extra deaths in any 1 week due to covid, but fair enough if it suits your opinion. 

Edited July 17, 2020 by Walter Bishop

[Governor Tarkin]

 

8 hours ago, Weakened Offender said:

Nurse! 

 

You ok?

[Unknown user]

1 minute ago, Walter Bishop said:

Dont think there was ever 10,000 extra deaths in any 1 week due to covid, but fair enough if it suits your opinion. 

Death rates doubled when a global pandemic was on the go.

 

We knew practically nothing about it, we still don't even know for sure if we can accurately test for it and whatever it's associated conditions might be, let alone cure the bloody thing!

 

Honestly, I think you're ****ing mental if you don't think it was the right thing to do.

[Walter Bishop]

6 minutes ago, Smithee said:

Death rates doubled when a global pandemic was on the go.

 

We knew practically nothing about it, we still don't even know for sure if we can accurately test for it and whatever it's associated conditions might be, let alone cure the bloody thing!

 

Honestly, I think you're ****ing mental if you don't think it was the right thing to do.

1.Death rates never doubled.

2.Yeah, we knew nothing about, and clearly testing is a major issue, Cure it? Will never happen, we cant cure colds, Influenza etc so not sure why you think we will cure this. We will have to live with this, probably with a vaccine. And in time, imo, we will find out we have caused most of the problems ourselves. 

 

Thanks though, I respect your opinion and certainly dont think you are "f****** mental" for having one. 

[Unknown user]

1 minute ago, Walter Bishop said:

1.Death rates never doubled.

2.Yeah, we knew nothing about, and clearly testing is a major issue, Cure it? Will never happen, we cant cure colds, Influenza etc so not sure why you think we will cure this. We will have to live with this, probably with a vaccine. And in time, imo, we will find out we have caused most of the problems ourselves. 

 

Thanks though, I respect your opinion and certainly dont think you are "f****** mental" for having one. 

 

Death rates doubled, I gave you the link, look for yourself.

Lock down was the right thing to do.

[graygo]

A wee bit of perspective about Covid-19.

 

700 are thought to have it in Scotland, 316 of them are in hospital and 90 are in a care home. That means that out of 5 million there's only 294 people infected that might be out there. That's about 0.006% of the "walking" population infected or to put it another way 99.994% are not infected.

 

I fancy my chances.

[Dawnrazor]

2 minutes ago, graygo said:

A wee bit of perspective about Covid-19.

 

700 are thought to have it in Scotland, 316 of them are in hospital and 90 are in a care home. That means that out of 5 million there's only 294 people infected that might be out there. That's about 0.006% of the "walking" population infected or to put it another way 99.994% are not infected.

 

I fancy my chances.

What was the percentage of people who had covid at the very start of the infections in the UK?

Couldn't have been much more.

[graygo]

6 minutes ago, Dawnrazor said:

What was the percentage of people who had covid at the very start of the infections in the UK?

Couldn't have been much more.

 

At the very start?  0% I would think. 😋

[Dawnrazor]

Just now, graygo said:

 

At the very start?  0% I would think. 😋

Obviously not!!!!

[graygo]

3 minutes ago, Dawnrazor said:

Obviously not!!!!

 

Ok, 0.00002% when the first person got it. 👍 (Scotland not the UK)

 

Seriously though, it's time they got things opened up again, if infection rates soar then deal with it on a local level.

Edited July 17, 2020 by graygo

[Dawnrazor]

2 minutes ago, graygo said:

 

Ok, 0.00002% when the first person got it. 👍 (Scotland not the UK)

 

Seriously though, it's time they got things opened up again, if infection rates soar then deal with it on a local level.

Do you think the public would put up with a second lock down?

No chance!!! 

[graygo]

46 minutes ago, Dawnrazor said:

Do you think the public would put up with a second lock down?

No chance!!! 

 

No, that's why I said local. National lockdown would be very difficult.

[MoncurMacdonaldMercer]

2 hours ago, Smithee said:

Fair enough, but I'd say the stats make mine much more compelling.

 

10,000 extra deaths in a single week, a month into lockdown. That's a LOT, half of tynecastle.

 

lockdown saved covid lives the net affect on mortality won’t be known until some time in the future

 

1999 48000 excess winter deaths 

2014 44000 excess winter deaths 

 

that’s significantly from the (much derided on here) flu with a vaccine

 

44000+ in both winters poor people dying before their time while the majority of us were out spreading our germs at Christmas parties and like unrestricted

 

if lockdown was about numbers then why no lockdown in either of those times - surely lockdown could have saved significant numbers then

 

are we going to lockdown the next heavy flu season - maybe save 20000 lives?

 

meaning a lockdown strict and widespread enough to potentially trash the economy like this one

Edited July 17, 2020 by MoncurMacdonaldMercer

[Governor Tarkin]

56 minutes ago, Lord BJ said:

Kids going  for an overnight with family. The wife and I are going out for dinner and a couple of drinks.

 

Not entirely sure what to expect but looking forward to a nice meal out. Tables are  booked. 

 

The wife seems a bit nervy about it, albeit I suspect it’s because, doesn’t see the hairdresser till early next week. As she has given no ****s about rules when suits her. 
 

Can’t lie. Looking forward to nice meal

snd glass of red and a bit of normality. 
 

 

 

Enjoy. 👍

 

I'm sure your wife will relax after a glass or two of red.

 

We chucked the little man in to my folks for a couple of hours last night and went out for a steak dinner. Staff were great and the food was delicious. We can both cook a bit (the Mrs is chucking out restaurant quality fare these days) but we've really missed eating out. 

As an unexpected bonus the extra space between tables in the restaurant was actually really nice. Probably not economically viable long term, but I'll continue to appreciate it while it lasts.

 

✌

[Enzo Chiefo]

2 hours ago, Walter Bishop said:

Dont think there was ever 10,000 extra deaths in any 1 week due to covid, but fair enough if it suits your opinion. 

There wasn't. The only way to measure the excess deaths is at the year end, given the shocking admission from PHE that anyone who had Covid and has subsequently died, is counted as  a Covid related death. There are vested interests out there, from the scientific world to the pharma companies , to over-exaggerate the potency of this virus. But the majority of people can now assess for themselves,  the  miniscule risk of getting back to normal life.

 

 

[Walter Bishop]

Just now, Enzo Chiefo said:

There wasn't. The only way to measure the excess deaths is at the year end, given the shocking admission from PHE that anyone who had Covid and has subsequently died, is counted as  a Covid related death. There are vested interests out there, from the scientific world to the pharma companies , to over-exaggerate the potency of this virus. But the majority of people can now assess for themselves,  the  miniscule risk of getting back to normal life.

 

 

Exactly. Let's judge the excess deaths in November/December, impossible to use this halfway through the year to justify anything.

Many of those who sadly have passed away may have done so anyway but another 3 or 4 months down the line. Incompetence has taken their lives earlier than they should have been taken, the virus just sped things up. 

 

[Walter Bishop]

A very interesting video on excess deaths and spikes from Ivor Cummins, if you have couple of minutes to spare give it a watch.... 

 

 

 

 

 

[Frank]

5 hours ago, The Real Maroonblood said:

Yeah, I'm against masks, but definitely for not being a total nutjob! Mucho extreme behaviour going on.

 

As the great George Carlin so succinctly put it - "When you're born into this world, you're given a ticket to the freak show. If you're born in America you get a front row seat." 😆

[Unknown user]

2 hours ago, MoncurMacdonaldMercer said:

 

lockdown saved covid lives the net affect on mortality won’t be known until some time in the future

 

1999 48000 excess winter deaths 

2014 44000 excess winter deaths 

 

that’s significantly from the (much derided on here) flu with a vaccine

 

44000+ in both winters poor people dying before their time while the majority of us were out spreading our germs at Christmas parties and like unrestricted

 

if lockdown was about numbers then why no lockdown in either of those times - surely lockdown could have saved significant numbers then

 

are we going to lockdown the next heavy flu season - maybe save 20000 lives?

 

meaning a lockdown strict and widespread enough to potentially trash the economy like this one

You're missing the point spectacularly. Its easy to be Captain Hindsight and compare to other things (although "why no lock down 20 years ago??" is a really weak argument).

 

When lockdown started it was the right thing to do - we didn't know anything about covid and the rate of deaths was accelerating like crazy. For all anyone knew it was a game changer on a massive scale. 

You can rationalise the figures as much as you like 3 months later, but it was a scary and unknown threat, so much so that even the tories had to hurt their precious economy. 

 

Agree or don't, I'm sound either way, but it's pretty obvious what happened and why.

[hearts151]

40 minutes ago, Smithee said:

You're missing the point spectacularly. Its easy to be Captain Hindsight and compare to other things (although "why no lock down 20 years ago??" is a really weak argument).

 

When lockdown started it was the right thing to do - we didn't know anything about covid and the rate of deaths was accelerating like crazy. For all anyone knew it was a game changer on a massive scale. 

You can rationalise the figures as much as you like 3 months later, but it was a scary and unknown threat, so much so that even the tories had to hurt their precious economy. 

 

Agree or don't, I'm sound either way, but it's pretty obvious what happened and why.

 

3 hours ago, MoncurMacdonaldMercer said:

 

lockdown saved covid lives the net affect on mortality won’t be known until some time in the future

 

1999 48000 excess winter deaths 

2014 44000 excess winter deaths 

 

that’s significantly from the (much derided on here) flu with a vaccine

 

44000+ in both winters poor people dying before their time while the majority of us were out spreading our germs at Christmas parties and like unrestricted

 

if lockdown was about numbers then why no lockdown in either of those times - surely lockdown could have saved significant numbers then

 

are we going to lockdown the next heavy flu season - maybe save 20000 lives?

 

meaning a lockdown strict and widespread enough to potentially trash the economy like this one

Smithee is correct. The flu spikes you've mentioned was on a very known virus base already. So yes shutting down probably could of saved alot of lifes.. 

 

But with COVID-19 it was very unknowing. Images of packed hospitals in Italy etc with people of ventilators pointed to this being worse - indeed I don't remember ever seeing such scenes for flu. In anycase this seemed worse.. Maybe it's not? (compared to yrs you have highlighted) but that's hindsight. 

 

But weirdly enough your comment has separately made me consider an even worse scenario.. What if this winter we have a bad flu season (many strains of flu which they predict will be the worst and vaccine against those), along with a spike in COVID-19.. That 44k extra could easily be double or triple! 

[manaliveits105]

Doomed wur all doomed

[The Real Maroonblood]

7 hours ago, Frank said:

Yeah, I'm against masks, but definitely for not being a total nutjob! Mucho extreme behaviour going on.

 

As the great George Carlin so succinctly put it - "When you're born into this world, you're given a ticket to the freak show. If you're born in America you get a front row seat." 😆

👍

[MoncurMacdonaldMercer]

6 hours ago, Smithee said:

You're missing the point spectacularly. Its easy to be Captain Hindsight and compare to other things (although "why no lock down 20 years ago??" is a really weak argument).

 

When lockdown started it was the right thing to do - we didn't know anything about covid and the rate of deaths was accelerating like crazy. For all anyone knew it was a game changer on a massive scale. 

You can rationalise the figures as much as you like 3 months later, but it was a scary and unknown threat, so much so that even the tories had to hurt their precious economy. 

 

Agree or don't, I'm sound either way, but it's pretty obvious what happened and why.

 

if you re-read your last few posts versus this one I’ve quoted the emphasis of this one is much different to the others

 

thanks for clarifying what you meant for me or anyone else where it wasn’t entirely clear

 

im assuming from the emphasis of this post that the answer to my last question about implementing a financially damaging lockdown in the future to save say 20000 flu lives - you wouldn’t expect to happen being that it’s a much more known threat

[MoncurMacdonaldMercer]

5 hours ago, hearts151 said:

 

Smithee is correct. The flu spikes you've mentioned was on a very known virus base already. So yes shutting down probably could of saved alot of lifes.. 

 

But with COVID-19 it was very unknowing. Images of packed hospitals in Italy etc with people of ventilators pointed to this being worse - indeed I don't remember ever seeing such scenes for flu. In anycase this seemed worse.. Maybe it's not? (compared to yrs you have highlighted) but that's hindsight. 

 

But weirdly enough your comment has separately made me consider an even worse scenario.. What if this winter we have a bad flu season (many strains of flu which they predict will be the worst and vaccine against those), along with a spike in COVID-19.. That 44k extra could easily be double or triple! 

 

if you see my reply to smithee I was really just asking him to clarify his point (which he has) as it wasn’t entirely clear to me

 

in heavy flu seasons the nhs is overwhelmed - it’s not on the tv for extended periods tho so not so visible

 

but as you also say a more known threat - so much familiar that 10s of thousands are lost every year and the nhs is often temporarily overwhelmed (and if you saw an early post of mine the nhs is basically always overwhelmed to a degree as always has a funding shortfall and hard choices need to be made regarding resources)

 

which takes me back to my point is what happened to “protect the nhs to save lives” 

 

looking at smithee’s most recent post and yours - can you think of a more accurate slogan that could have been used?

[Unknown user]

26 minutes ago, MoncurMacdonaldMercer said:

 

if you re-read your last few posts versus this one I’ve quoted the emphasis of this one is much different to the others

 

thanks for clarifying what you meant for me or anyone else where it wasn’t entirely clear

 

im assuming from the emphasis of this post that the answer to my last question about implementing a financially damaging lockdown in the future to save say 20000 flu lives - you wouldn’t expect to happen being that it’s a much more known threat

 

 

The conversation you came into was about Walter saying the virus is fear not covid. He's been roundly denouncing the lock down, saying its something more sinister, that lock down didn't have to happen, and questioning figures all over the place. I disagree with him, lockdown had to happen.

[Don Dan]

Good news.

 

https://apple.news/Aruec-HD-QYKpwhZuG-6F4w

https://apple.news/ADyxmdJYNT_2XQcQv9uYmog
 

[MoncurMacdonaldMercer]

28 minutes ago, Smithee said:

 

 

The conversation you came into was about Walter saying the virus is fear not covid. He's been roundly denouncing the lock down, saying its something more sinister, that lock down didn't have to happen, and questioning figures all over the place. I disagree with him, lockdown had to happen.

 

i agree some lockdowns/mitigation had to happen

 

i think it’s good to question things tho especially when there are a lot of contradictions

[kila]

1 hour ago, Dannie Boy said:

Good news.

 

https://apple.news/Aruec-HD-QYKpwhZuG-6F4w

https://apple.news/ADyxmdJYNT_2XQcQv9uYmog

 

Can't be far away from proven treatments and vaccine. This year has been such a blur that it's easy to forget scientists have only had months to research and develop. What an effort and I imagine because of the huge investment the learnings from this virus and immunity tests/developments will better our understanding of other diseases and viruses leading to more breakthroughs in the future.

 

 

[Cade]

Everybody in the local shop was wearing a mask this time around.

No stigma or moaning about it. 

Took a few seconds when coming in to put it on, took it right back off again upon leaving.

It's not a great hassle.

[JudyJudyJudy]

22 hours ago, vegas-voss said:

Wives cousin is a hairdresser and she said it was costing quite a bit to kit out her salon to how the guidelines say it should be.

They are at it . What about the money businesses received from furlough etc ? I went to local barber other day and same prices . 

[The Real Maroonblood]

11 minutes ago, Cade said:

Everybody in the local shop was wearing a mask this time around.

No stigma or moaning about it. 

Took a few seconds when coming in to put it on, took it right back off again upon leaving.

It's not a great hassle.

This.