Jump to content

Coronavirus Super Thread ( merged )


CJGJ

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

I have seen this about serious lifelong chronic conditions and permanent organ damage without seeing any figures. Where is the evidence that this is so serious and that it is worse for example than the deaths and permanent damage from the many illnesses not being treated as a result of the reaction to Covid?

 

The scale of 'long covid' will be directly corrolated to the scale of people infected or who suffer sufficiently serious illness.    So that will be an unknown.    Whether it's worse or not as bad as excess illness from other things is irrelevant.    It will simply be an extra quantum of illness on top of all the other things people suffer from.

 

Studies into long covid are ongoing.   The best way to minimise the scale of long covid is to minimise the scale of infection.    Perhaps a killer blow to the theory of willfully achieved,  infection derived herd immunity then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 107.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • JudyJudyJudy

    7875

  • Victorian

    4204

  • redjambo

    3883

  • The Real Maroonblood

    3626

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

jack D and coke
4 minutes ago, Natural Orders said:

What a mature response 

Mate how you get away with your shite day in day out I don’t know. Why don’t you give us all a ****ing rest🤡🤡🤡

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, jack D and coke said:

Mate how you get away with your shite day in day out I don’t know. Why don’t you give us all a ****ing rest🤡🤡🤡

:rofl:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, redjambo said:

 

Shielding may have finished but those who were shielded, as well as those who are aged or have underlying conditions and whom weren't officially shielded, are I imagine being far more careful now to socially distance and take precautions not to be infected.

 

I don't think there is any evidence that the virus has weakened (I assume you mean in its payload rather than its transmissibility). What is happening though, for example, is that we're detecting Covid far earlier in folk, getting them treated before it really takes hold. Don't get me wrong though -  I'd love to see a mutation with a less potent payload take hold.

 

They have been saying its mutating since july and the figures back that up, infections may be rising but deaths have been single figures for ages now and the number in hospital is tiny. People are panicking about something that 1. Is infecting a tiny % of the population and 2. Is about as deadly as the winter flu.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, jonesy said:

 

I think the logic is to look at things as objectively as possible and make a decision that fits with your own personal take on things. We don't need to be governed. It creates a population that requires others to do their thinking for them.

 

Nope.   The government knows very well that a sufficiently large enough section of society cannot be entrusted with the tasks of being able to think through all of the necessary things for themselves,  as well as those who resist and deny every piece of advice and information,  for a whole variety of reasons and motives.   Because of this,  governments can only proceed on the basis of considering what needs done with the lowest common denominator.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Francis Albert
41 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

The scale of 'long covid' will be directly corrolated to the scale of people infected or who suffer sufficiently serious illness.    So that will be an unknown.    Whether it's worse or not as bad as excess illness from other things is irrelevant.    It will simply be an extra quantum of illness on top of all the other things people suffer from.

 

Studies into long covid are ongoing.   The best way to minimise the scale of long covid is to minimise the scale of infection.    Perhaps a killer blow to the theory of willfully achieved,  infection derived herd immunity then.

So as I suspected  it is unknown. If fear of Long Covid is another reason for restrictions and fear contributing to indirectly to deaths (destruction of jobs, lack of medical treatments, increased inequality and poverty and so on) not directly from Covid19 ,  it is not simply an "extra quantum.of illness on top of all the other things people suffer from".  It an effect of the reaction to Covid which may prove more damaging than the virus.

And I simply don't understand your last sentence. How is it a killer blow to the theory.? The theory may be wrong but it is hardly disproved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, jonesy said:

 

Fair enough. I disagree, and think your perspective is an awfy pessimistic way of looking at our society, but that's maybe your experience with people.

 

The way I see it, the problem with such an approach is that it perpetuates the negative behaviours by encouraging people to lean into them, knowing full well 'good old government' is there to bail them out or tell them to stop. A wee bit of personal responsibility in relation to hygiene, diet, work and other areas of our lives in which the government is prodding its gloved, well-intentioned but ultimately uncomfortable fingers would do everyone the world of good, IMO.

 

It's just a realistic viewpoint based on what one sees and hears anecdotal evidence of.     You only need look at the sheer scale of resistance,  contrarianism and outright denial that goes on against our current measures,   which are pretty mild in the grand scale of things.    

 

You're describing a notional,   albeit admirable,  utopia.    An intelligent,  educated,  willing,  cooperative,  community spirited society.    Everyone depending on everyone else.    Everyone willing to accept that others depend on them.

 

That's not our reality mate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

Nope.   The government knows very well that a sufficiently large enough section of society cannot be entrusted with the tasks of being able to think through all of the necessary things for themselves,  as well as those who resist and deny every piece of advice and information,  for a whole variety of reasons and motives.   Because of this,  governments can only proceed on the basis of considering what needs done with the lowest common denominator.    

Does not say much for the Scottish nation does it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, frankblack said:

So your logic is just pretend we aren't in a pandemic?

 

:cornette:

 

We cant go on like this. The damage it's doing is unsustainable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

Nope.   The government knows very well that a sufficiently large enough section of society cannot be entrusted with the tasks of being able to think through all of the necessary things for themselves,  as well as those who resist and deny every piece of advice and information,  for a whole variety of reasons and motives.   Because of this,  governments can only proceed on the basis of considering what needs done with the lowest common denominator.    

 

Agree.

 

It is hard to comprehend how mind numbingly stupid some people have to be to make up these conspiracy theories.  And then you have the group who don't give a **** about anyone else.

 

The governments gave these clowns a chance to be responsive and its clear they won't be.  Now its time for zero tolerance of the halfwits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Back to 2005 said:

We cant go on like this. The damage it's doing is unsustainable. 

 

I agree.  The arseholes not following the rules need hammered by the law so the rest aren't put back into lockdown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, frankblack said:

 

I agree.  The arseholes not following the rules need hammered by the law so the rest aren't put back into lockdown.

This too 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Francis Albert said:

So as I suspected  it is unknown. If fear of Long Covid is another reason for restrictions and fear contributing to indirectly to deaths (destruction of jobs, lack of medical treatments, increased inequality and poverty and so on) not directly from Covid19 ,  it is not simply an "extra quantum.of illness on top of all the other things people suffer from".  It an effect of the reaction to Covid which may prove more damaging than the virus.

And I simply don't understand your last sentence. How is it a killer blow to the theory.? The theory may be wrong but it is hardly disproved.

 

Because it is unknown it should not be taken lightly.    Deliberately induced herd immunity is said to require about 60% of the population to be immune.   If you discard a vaccine,  to be immune you need to have been infected.    Accepting or even wishing about 35m to 40m people being infected with the virus before any knowledge has been gained regarding the scale or rate of chronic 'long covid' does seem to exclude herd immunity as a serious strategy.    Even if 3% of people infected were to later suffer moderate or serious chronic conditions arising out of infection,   you could be looking at about a million or more people increasing demand on the NHS.   Some of the million or more people liable to be unfit for work or perhaps limited in the type of work they can perform.     What if 10% suffer chronic conditions?    Herd immunity was a theory proposed before long covid became a factor.   It very much changes the game in that regard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Francis Albert
33 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

Nope.   The government knows very well that a sufficiently large enough section of society cannot be entrusted with the tasks of being able to think through all of the necessary things for themselves,  as well as those who resist and deny every piece of advice and information,  for a whole variety of reasons and motives.   Because of this,  governments can only proceed on the basis of considering what needs done with the lowest common denominator.    

Except in Sweden apparently.

 

The idea that advice, rules, restrictions and laws should be based on the lowest common denominator of society is absurd. Dangerously absurd. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Back to 2005 said:

Does not say much for the Scottish nation does it. 

 

Scotland.  UK.  Europe.  USA.   Highly liberal societies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Francis Albert said:

Except in Sweden apparently.

 

The idea that advice, rules, restrictions and laws should be based on the lowest common denominator of society is absurd. Dangerously absurd. 

 

 

Yet that's precisely how they are formed and rolled out.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

Except in Sweden apparently.

 

The idea that advice, rules, restrictions and laws should be based on the lowest common denominator of society is absurd. Dangerously absurd. 

 

Mate, you live in a world that has 'do not use in shower' warnings on hairdryers and 'do not eat' warnings on silica gel packets. Stop talking utter pish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Francis Albert
1 minute ago, Victorian said:

 

Because it is unknown it should not be taken lightly.    Deliberately induced herd immunity is said to require about 60% of the population to be immune.   If you discard a vaccine,  to be immune you need to have been infected.    Accepting or even wishing about 35m to 40m people being infected with the virus before any knowledge has been gained regarding the scale or rate of chronic 'long covid' does seem to exclude herd immunity as a serious strategy.    Even if 3% of people infected were to later suffer moderate or serious chronic conditions arising out of infection,   you could be looking at about a million or more people increasing demand on the NHS.   Some of the million or more people liable to be unfit for work or perhaps limited in the type of work they can perform.     What if 10% suffer chronic conditions?    Herd immunity was a theory proposed before long covid became a factor.   It very much changes the game in that regard.

You have admitted no-one knows. What if it is 1% or 0.1% or 0.01%? How many infected even have symptoms? I didn't suggest it should be taken lightly but in the current state of knowledge  it should not result in actions which we know would certainly result in many more deaths and serious chronic illnesses. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Governor Tarkin
5 hours ago, Lord BJ said:

Exciting news for some. U.K. govt considering setting up a grass line in relation to COVID breaches. 
 

Ahh what an age to be alive. 

 

Let the finger pointing commence.

 

2450325-2412x3532.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

You have admitted no-one knows. What if it is 1% or 0.1% or 0.01%? How many infected even have symptoms? I didn't suggest it should be taken lightly but in the current state of knowledge  it should not result in actions which we know would certainly result in many more deaths and serious chronic illnesses. 

 

Are you for real?   I haven't admitted anything.   The unknown nature of it is what I have been talking about from the outset of this latest topic.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, frankblack said:

 

I agree.  The arseholes not following the rules need hammered by the law so the rest aren't put back into lockdown.

If people think the laws are out of proportion and their civil liberties are being taken away of course they will ignore them or rebel against them.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jonesy said:

Mmm... I get what you mean, but I don't share your horror at and/or mockery of the 'resistance, contrarianism and outright denial', in fact I think it's healthy to question the actions of a government. Very few people seek power to be benevolent and benign, they seek to impose their blueprint for how the world 'should be' onto the status quo. That in itself should automatically deny them any chance to hold power :)

 

My worry is that, once you treat everyone like the bad guy, more people might be inclined to behave like the bad guy since, as we all know, the bad guys sometimes win.

 

Your ideas have merit but perhaps are best placed in normal times.   I think these times require centralised control.   To an extent.   The stakes are as high as they get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Francis Albert
5 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

Are you for real?   I haven't admitted anything.   The unknown nature of it is what I have been talking about from the outset of this latest topic.   

Ok you agree with me about the unknown nature of it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In Blackpool for the weekend with the kids. Pretty shocked at how little regard the folk have for the guidelines. Only place that seems to actually attempt to follow them is pleasure beach but as soon as a ride gets busy the social distancing all goes to ****. Nobody giving a shit about the 6 rule policy although I know this goes live on Monday. Though I suspect it won’t be adhered to.

 

Unless these places totally strip back what they do, put bouncers on every door (which would cost them a fortune) then I simply see places like this impossible to enforce. 

Edited by AlimOzturk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Francis Albert said:

Ok you agree with me about the unknown nature of it. 

 

Let's agree then.   But allow me to amplify.    A potentially secondary covid problem manifests itself.   The scale of which is only just beginning to be studied.   A problem that will probably take a long time to understand and quantify.    Does the scientific community and government say.. ah to hell with it,  let's go for or accept a policy of herd immunity.   Let's just hope that this long covid problem doesn't amount to much.   Or does it say.. oh,  do we really want to see 40m people infected with this virus,  even over a period of years?   We simply don't know what lies ahead in terms of how many people will suffer chronic conditions on a spectrum of mild to very severe?   

 

What do you reckon then?    Blind recklessness or a concerned pause?   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Herbert said:

 

They have been saying its mutating since july and the figures back that up, infections may be rising but deaths have been single figures for ages now and the number in hospital is tiny. People are panicking about something that 1. Is infecting a tiny % of the population and 2. Is about as deadly as the winter flu.

In the scheme of things, Covid is nothing but another one of numerous respiratory diseases that the vast majority of people combat thanks to the human immunity system. Others, with underlying health issues, including obesity or diabetes, take an extreme immune reaction  and require further hospital treatment or sadly pass away. Unfortunately,  115k die in the UK each year as a result of respiratory illnesses, part of the 12k who die every week.

The govt has successfully scared the population into believing , by way of daily lunchtime briefings, that Covid deaths are the only source of fatalities in this country. Consequently,  some have been conditioned into believing that life should be risk free.

If these draconian population control measures are still in place come Christmas, i hope that as many peoole as possible ignore them in order to enjoy a family Christmas with their loved ones. The alternative will do far more damage than Covid ever will.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

Let's agree then.   But allow me to amplify.    A potentially secondary covid problem manifests itself.   The scale of which is only just beginning to be studied.   A problem that will probably take a long time to understand and quantify.    Does the scientific community and government say.. ah to hell with it,  let's go for or accept a policy of herd immunity.   Let's just hope that this long covid problem doesn't amount to much.   Or does it say.. oh,  do we really want to see 40m people infected with this virus,  even over a period of years?   We simply don't know what lies ahead in terms of how many people will suffer chronic conditions on a spectrum of mild to very severe?   

 

What do you reckon then?    Blind recklessness or a concerned pause?   

We have all put our lives on hold for 6 months. The virus wont be eliminated and trying to suppress it does not work either so reckless or otherwise I think we have to go for it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Francis Albert
11 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

Let's agree then.   But allow me to amplify.    A potentially secondary covid problem manifests itself.   The scale of which is only just beginning to be studied.   A problem that will probably take a long time to understand and quantify.    Does the scientific community and government say.. ah to hell with it,  let's go for or accept a policy of herd immunity.   Let's just hope that this long covid problem doesn't amount to much.   Or does it say.. oh,  do we really want to see 40m people infected with this virus,  even over a period of years?   We simply don't know what lies ahead in terms of how many people will suffer chronic conditions on a spectrum of mild to very severe?   

 

What do you reckon then?    Blind recklessness or a concerned pause?   

A concerned pause before extending or prolonging restrictions which we know will kill people and damage their lives. 

Rather than proceed on the basis of made up and extremely speculative numbers based on no evidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

A concerned pause before extending or prolonging restrictions which we know will kill people and damage their lives. 

 

 

More doom and gloom. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Back to 2005 said:

We have all put our lives on hold for 6 months. The virus wont be eliminated and trying to suppress it does not work either so reckless or otherwise I think we have to go for it. 

 

Suppression does work in actual fact.   We suppressed it with lockdown and arrested the exponential growth of spread.    Denying suppression works is a new type of silliness.

 

Suppression is a tool used to a purpose.   The initial purpose was to ensure the NHS was never overwhelmed and to give hospitalised people a chance at treatment and recovery.    Some people hilariously point to the fact that the NHS was never overwhelmed as a reason to say that lockdown was never needed.    Suppression can also act as a brake to buy time to develop other strategies to replace lockdown.   Treatments.   Public health awareness.   Testing and tracking.   Ultimately,  vaccines.

 

We are still in a strategy of suppression and will be for many months.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

A concerned pause before extending or prolonging restrictions which we know will kill people and damage their lives. 

Rather than proceed on the basis of made up and extremely speculative numbers based on no evidence.

 

It's fairly obvious that governments and scientists are still trying to find the right balance.   They don't know how to proceed.   Herd immunity is not a movie coming to a cinema near you anytime soon though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Natural Orders said:

Better than people getting sick 

 

But people are getting sick and more and more are getting sicker and sicker by the day and not from Covid either, but from things such as cancer, heart disease, diabetes and dozens of other illnesses whose treatments have been put on the back burner because of Covid.

 

Mark my words, there will be many more people who will die because of Covid, than there will be from Covid.

 

Edited by Jambo-Jimbo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

But people are getting sick and more and more are getting sicker and sicker by the day and not from Covid either, but from things such as cancer, heart disease, diabetes and dozens of other illnesses whose treatments have been put on the back burner because of Covid.

 

Mark my words, there will be many more people who will die because of Covid, than there will be from Covid.

 

Correct. But Covid is a shiny, new virus that scientists,  pharma companies amd govts have been waiting for, for years. For some, this is a World Cup Final, Open Golf, Wimbledon final moment, all rolled into one. In their eyes, the fact that other diseases are far more prevalent and dangerous,  is neither here nor there.

Edited by Enzo Chiefo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Enzo Chiefo said:

Correct. But Covid is a shiny, new virus that scientists,  pharma companies amd govts have been waiting on for years. For some, this is a World Cup Final, Open Golf, Wimbledon final moment, all rolled into one. In their eyes, the fact that other diseases are far more prevalent and dangerous,  is neither here nor there.

Jesus H Christ :cornette:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here’s a thought why don’t  we-

 

1. have a three week full lockdown (with prior warning to stock up).

 

2. close the borders and ban all but essential travel in and out of Scotland with a quarantine on entry.

 

These two steps would surely eradicate COVID19 and keep it out. 
 

This is probably a sacrifice worth paying to get us through till a vaccine arrives. 
 

Thoughts? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, spirt of 98 said:

Here’s a thought why don’t  we-

 

1. have a three week full lockdown (with prior warning to stock up).

 

2. close the borders and ban all but essential travel in and out of Scotland with a quarantine on entry.

 

These two steps would surely eradicate COVID19 and keep it out. 
 

This is probably a sacrifice worth paying to get us through till a vaccine arrives. 
 

Thoughts?

 

 

naw

Edited by AlimOzturk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, spirt of 98 said:

Here’s a thought why don’t  we-

 

1. have a three week full lockdown (with prior warning to stock up).

 

2. close the borders and ban all but essential travel in and out of Scotland with a quarantine on entry.

 

These two steps would surely eradicate COVID19 and keep it out. 
 

This is probably a sacrifice worth paying to get us through till a vaccine arrives. 
 

Thoughts? 

 

Nope, can't see that working, because those who are asymptomatic will still be asymptomatic and therefore potentially infectious long after a 3 week full lockdown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Enzo Chiefo said:

Sow sow naive 

There's nothing naive about ridiculing your absolutely insane, QAnonsense ramblings. The flat earth theory makes more sense than that utter pish you wrote above. 

 

Down with the pharma companies! Down with scientists! :cornette:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

Nope, can't see that working, because those who are asymptomatic will still be asymptomatic and therefore potentially infectious long after a 3 week full lockdown.

Never knew that people could carry it for over three weeks. 

Edited by spirt of 98
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Sow Easy said:

There's nothing naive about ridiculing your absolutely insane, QAnonsense ramblings. The flat earth theory makes more sense than that utter pish you wrote above. 

 

Down with the pharma companies! Down with scientists! :cornette:

**** the scientists,  those who overegged the threat and ended up with Covid patients being decanted into care homes, should face the consequences when the inevitable public inquiry happens. If you don't think pharma companies and scientists have a vested interest in over playing the virus then you truly are naive

Edited by Enzo Chiefo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • davemclaren changed the title to Coronavirus Super Thread ( merged )
  • JKBMod 12 featured, locked, unlocked and unfeatured this topic

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...