Coronavirus

[no eyed deer]

And over 1k excess deaths a week not COVID related but silence on here.

If you see syd tell him !!

[SydneyRover]

nc is going to put up the data and explain it

[no eyed deer]

nc is going to put up the data and explain it

Can't wait.

 

[SydneyRover]

I look forward to you ned, nc and nudga's discussion on the non-covid excess deaths, the accuracy of the information, what led to them, how they could have been avoided and what steps should be taken to plan for a future without any.

[Colin C No.3]

No way should this post just drift into obscurity.

I think if Elon Musk was in charge of twitter back then we might not be in this mess.

And if Hitler would have just been left to ‘do his thing’ in Europe look at how many hospital beds would have been freed up not having been filled with OAP’s slipping on snow & ice this winter & all needing orthopaedic surgery.

Ah yes. ‘Jack boots’ for the elderly. Those beggars don’t slip in the snow.

[Bristol Red Rover]

No way should this post just drift into obscurity.

I think if Elon Musk was in charge of twitter back then we might not be in this mess.

And if Hitler would have just been left to ‘do his thing’ in Europe look at how many hospital beds would have been freed up not having been filled with OAP’s slipping on snow & ice this winter & all needing orthopaedic surgery.

Ah yes. ‘Jack boots’ for the elderly. Those beggars don’t slip in the snow.

Instead we have a bunch of elitist Tories robbing poorer people, keeping them in their place, reducing health services, denying access of the dying to their relatives whilst phillandering around themselves etc etc etc. But at least they fly the right flag.

My point here is that bringing up Hitler is so far off the mark. Stick to the problem we do have rather than the one planted in your head.

[BillyStubbsTears]

So the price of lockdown is now coming to the surface.

A few were trying to put our concerns forward only to be called out and ridiculed.

Do you ever stop and think what would have happened without lockdowns?

[TommyC]

So the price of lockdown is now coming to the surface.

A few were trying to put our concerns forward only to be called out and ridiculed.

Do you ever stop and think what would have happened without lockdowns?

Constantly. Particularly when faced with the economic cost of paying for it.

You present it as a black and white choice between lockdown or no lockdown but you and I both know the debate is (or should be) far more nuanced than that. It's a question of balance. Risk v reward etc.

I've asked you before and I'll ask you again. Why could we not take an approach whereby the elderly or vulnerable or nervous (because I appreciate people have differing attitudes to risk) were encouraged to stay at home but those of us like myself who are relatively fit and healthy, young-ish (I'm 40) and with a more relaxed attiude to the alleged dangers of the virus, were allowed to go about our business, live our lives, keep the economy going and reduce the huge economic cost that we're now faced with. Why the one size fits all approach? Our workforce are all my age or younger and not one of them wanted to be sat at home. They wanted to be working and living their lives.

It was a monumental and catastrophic overreaction and an appalling attack on civil liberty by a weak and feeble government who cared only about the opinion polls, focus groups and the newspaper headlines. It didn't have to be that way.

And don't even get me started on the banging your pots and pans on a Thursday night. They'll be out on strike very shortly i see. At the busiest time of the year for the NHS. People will  lose their lives if they do strike. Clap that!

[BillyStubbsTears]

Tommy.

That "lock up the vulnerable and let the rest of us crack on" take is THE most intellectually bone idle line of this entire issue.

Run me through how it would have worked. How would you have isolated the vulnerable population (15 million, maybe more). How would they have been fed when the virus was rampaging round the rest of society for 6 months? How would they have received medical treatment for any problem.

Why do you think not a single country anywhere in the world implemented that policy?

And your "alleged dangers" line is beyond belief. I've said a dozen times that there was one city in the entire world that had an unmitigated outbreak. Bergamo lost 0.6% of its entire population in 6 weeks. That outbreak brought the entire medical system of Northern Italy to breaking point.

YOU were saved from seeing your country have to deal with that. You never had to live through that alternative universe where 400,000 British people died in April/May 2020. Where bodies were stored in makeshift freezers before being incinerated. Where the health system collapsed for half a year.

You can repeat this idle trope that it was all unnecessary. Safe from the consequences of it.

[TommyC]

Nobody has suggested "lock up the vulnerable". What i said was that people should be allowed to make their own choices on the matter. I appreciate that concept is anathema to you on pretty much every subject under the sun.

If you're vulnerable (or even if you aren't vulnerable but nevertheless feel nervous, as many did), by all means stay at home. And I agree the government and employers should have supported those that wished to do so. 

You ask the question "how would you have isolated the vulnerable population". Well presumably they have isolated themselves haven't they? If they haven't then I'm afraid an element of personal responsibility needs to come into play. Once again I know you don't like leaving decisions to the individual as they tend to have a habit of choosing something you don't approve of don't they BST.

My "alleged dangers" line is absolutely spot on. The danger to anyone under 50 with no pre-existing health conditions was piffling. Give me the age/demographic of the bodies that were piling high? If that age\demographic stayed at home (which they did anyway), you tell me how the rest of us getting on with life would have adversely impacted them assuming they have taken the wise decision to stay at home? Give me some examples.

[SydneyRover]

A bit of a free-for-all then, just how the government behaved really

[TommyC]

A bit of a free-for-all then, just how the government behaved really

Indeed. Which I think speaks volumes as to not only what a bunch of feckless hypocrites they are, but also demonstrates perfectly the level of fear they themselves clearly had of catching this deadly virus! 

Remind me, who were the mugs again?

[BillyStubbsTears]

Tommy

There are 21 million people in this country over the age of 50. People in their 50s had a 1.3% COVID IFR. So anyone over 50 would have been playing at the very best, 75:1 odds Russian Roulette if they'd not locked themselves away.

By allowing the virus to rip through the population as you suggest, you're effectively telling 21 million people that they have to isolate (unless they are happy to take a chance far more dangerous than crossing the Donny-London mainline with a blindfold and earplugs on).

Now there's two questions.

1) How do you ensure the wellbeing of those 21 million, given that they have to totally isolate themselves from a society in which the virus is spreading freely? How do you feed them? How do you treat them for heart attacks or strokes?

2) When do you let them out? If there are no processes to mitigate the spread, they are still vulnerable until a vaccine is produced. Go back to March 2020. The best guess was that we'd be lucky to get a vaccine within 2 years. So you are saying that 21 million people should have been given the choice between complete isolation for 2 years or a (at best) 1:75 chance of dying. Because it made life better for you.

What really does my head in about this debate is that the evidence is crystal clear. The countries that did best, broadly were the ones who locked down hard and fast and effectively. Because they got the outbreaks under control quickly. So they had few deaths, little strain on the health service and because the outbreak wasn't big when they locked down, it didn't take them long to get control back. So the lockdowns were shorter. So the economic hit was less.

Look at Denmark. Textbook example if hard and effective and rapid response. They had one third of our deaths. They had shorter lockdowns. And their economy is now 6-8% bigger than it was pre-COVID, whereas ours won't reach its pre-COVID level for another 2 years.

[BillyStubbsTears]

And over 1k excess deaths a week not COVID related but silence on here.

Aye.
Might be connected to the fact that the NHS has been chronically underfunded for a decade? Or is it more likely that some gobshite on social media is right and we're all going to die of unspecified vaccine reactions.

Place your bets.

[Bristol Red Rover]

And over 1k excess deaths a week not COVID related but silence on here.

Aye.
Might be connected to the fact that the NHS has been chronically underfunded for a decade? Or is it more likely that some gobshite on social media is right and we're all going to die of unspecified vaccine reactions.

Place your bets.

Bit of both of course, life isn't the black and white you always paint.

What is your knowledge of adverse vaccine effects - short, medium and lobg term?

[no eyed deer]

So the price of lockdown is now coming to the surface.

A few were trying to put our concerns forward only to be called out and ridiculed.

Do you ever stop and think what would have happened without lockdowns?

No... and we will never find out.

You can't expect that most you posted never materialised.

As some said a couple of years ago, more will die from the fallout of lockdown !!

[Colin C No.3]

And over 1k excess deaths a week not COVID related but silence on here.

Aye.
Might be connected to the fact that the NHS has been chronically underfunded for a decade? Or is it more likely that some gobshite on social media is right and we're all going to die of unspecified vaccine reactions.

Place your bets.

Bit of both of course, life isn't the black and white you always paint.

What is your knowledge of adverse vaccine effects - short, medium and lobg term?

Being on the list of those at ‘High Risk’ I had my first jab as soon as the vaccines were rolled out & had my 6th two weeks ago.

So, short term I had ‘covid like’ symptoms after jab 4 & 5 which lasted two days on both occasions. On jab 1, 2, 4 & 5, I had a stiff arm with a bruise like feeling lasting 24-48 hours. Nothing on my last jab.

Medium to long term, nothing. Not hearing voices in my head, not picking up static on my radio, no dreams or nightmares out of the ‘ordinary’.

So nothing to report, oh, except I did have covid in 2020. It was like a bad dose of the flu (which I’ve had 3 times in my life & remember how s**t I felt on each occasion even the first bout which was forty odd years ago) except the covid ‘put me in bed’ for 48 hours, I walked around the house in my ‘comfies’ for a week feeling 10 years older but the very worst thing was how it left me feeling really fatigued for months after.

I’d have days where I would get up & feel great in the morning & early afternoon then come around 16.00 ish ‘bang’, all my energy drained & I just had to go to bed & sleep.

I’m ok now & am back attempting to fit in ‘my 10,000 steps’ a day when ‘life’ doesn’t get ‘in the way!’.

What’s your knowledge on the subject Brr?

[no eyed deer]

And over 1k excess deaths a week not COVID related but silence on here.

Aye.
Might be connected to the fact that the NHS has been chronically underfunded for a decade? Or is it more likely that some gobshite on social media is right and we're all going to die of unspecified vaccine reactions.

Place your bets.

Bit of both of course, life isn't the black and white you always paint.

What is your knowledge of adverse vaccine effects - short, medium and lobg term?

Being on the list of those at ‘High Risk’ I had my first jab as soon as the vaccines were rolled out & had my 6th two weeks ago.

So, short term I had ‘covid like’ symptoms after jab 4 & 5 which lasted two days on both occasions. On jab 1, 2, 4 & 5, I had a stiff arm with a bruise like feeling lasting 24-48 hours. Nothing on my last jab.

Medium to long term, nothing. Not hearing voices in my head, not picking up static on my radio, no dreams or nightmares out of the ‘ordinary’.

So nothing to report, oh, except I did have covid in 2020. It was like a bad dose of the flu (which I’ve had 3 times in my life & remember how s**t I felt on each occasion even the first bout which was forty odd years ago) except the covid ‘put me in bed’ for 48 hours, I walked around the house in my ‘comfies’ for a week feeling 10 years older but the very worst thing was how it left me feeling really fatigued for months after.

I’d have days where I would get up & feel great in the morning & early afternoon then come around 16.00 ish ‘bang’, all my energy drained & I just had to go to bed & sleep.

I’m ok now & am back attempting to fit in ‘my 10,000 steps’ a day when ‘life’ doesn’t get ‘in the way!’.

What’s your knowledge on the subject Brr?

As someone who is  low risk I had my two jabs... but no more.

[Nudga]

Anecdotes aren't allowed on here Mr C as I was told after I said I'd had COVID , felt a bit rough for a few days but carried on working, zero jabs.

I wonder if BST would reconsider sitting next to me in the pub or the football seeing as though the myth of unvaccinated super spreaders has been busted?

[no eyed deer]

Anecdotes aren't allowed on here Mr C as I was told after I said I'd had COVID , felt a bit rough for a few days but carried on working, zero jabs.

I wonder if BST would reconsider sitting next to me in the pub or the football seeing as though the myth of unvaccinated super spreaders has been busted?

BST had so much to say on this subject, only to go a little cold lately

[BillyStubbsTears]

Anecdotes aren't allowed on here Mr C as I was told after I said I'd had COVID , felt a bit rough for a few days but carried on working, zero jabs.

I wonder if BST would reconsider sitting next to me in the pub or the football seeing as though the myth of unvaccinated super spreaders has been busted?

BST had so much to say on this subject, only to go a little cold lately

Why would I carry on talking about it?

The crisis phase is long over. And there's only so many times you can lay the facts out to conspiracy theorists who won't listen to anything that contradicts them.

As far as I can see, you and Nudga are convinced that people are dying in their many thousands because of vaccines and damage to the health service caused by lockdown.

1) There's no evidence at all of deaths from vaccines remotely matching the number who would have died of COVID without the vaccines. If you have evidence, show it.

2) Have a think what would have happened to the health service if we'd had an unmitigated COVID epidemic without lockdowns. Maybe 2 million people requiring in patient hospital treatment in 3-4 months. Have a think what effect that would have had on other health care.

You have this luxury of not having had to experience that world, because the correct action was taken to prevent it from occurring. It's your choice if you refuse to think what it would have been like and insist you are right. 

[BillyStubbsTears]

Anecdotes aren't allowed on here Mr C as I was told after I said I'd had COVID , felt a bit rough for a few days but carried on working, zero jabs.

I wonder if BST would reconsider sitting next to me in the pub or the football seeing as though the myth of unvaccinated super spreaders has been busted?

Nudga.

What I said, as I'm sure you remember really, is that just because YOU were OK, it didn't mean that everyone who took your stance on the vaccines would be. Our cleaner at work had your attitude to the vaccines. She's about your age. COVID very nearly killed her. As it did about one in every 3-400 people your age who caught it.

What I said was that the fact that you didn't cork it didn't change the fact that thousands of people like you would have corked it if they hadn't been vaccinated. And many more would have needed hospital treatment, meaning other people without COVID wouldn't have got treated and would have corked it.

If you disagree with that, please tell me why. Otherwise, stop misrepresenting what I said.

[Nudga]

You also said for me to not sit next to you in the stands because I hadn't been vaccinated, which made me piss my knickers because basically you were saying that your vaccine wouldn't work if I hadn't had mine.

[BillyStubbsTears]

You really don't get how probability works do you Nudga? No matter how many times I've tried to explain it.

[Nudga]

Did you manage to bully your employee into getting the vaccine he didn't want?

[ncRover]

why don't you show us the data and explain what it all means

UK

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/deathsregisteredweeklyinenglandandwalesprovisional/weekending07october2022


Europe

https://unherd.com/thepost/excess-deaths-keep-rising-across-eu/

Myriad reasons for this, all of which are up for debate. I don’t have time for a full analysis.

[ncRover]

Tommy.

That "lock up the vulnerable and let the rest of us crack on" take is THE most intellectually bone idle line of this entire issue.

Run me through how it would have worked. How would you have isolated the vulnerable population (15 million, maybe more). How would they have been fed when the virus was rampaging round the rest of society for 6 months? How would they have received medical treatment for any problem.

Why do you think not a single country anywhere in the world implemented that policy?

And your "alleged dangers" line is beyond belief. I've said a dozen times that there was one city in the entire world that had an unmitigated outbreak. Bergamo lost 0.6% of its entire population in 6 weeks. That outbreak brought the entire medical system of Northern Italy to breaking point.

YOU were saved from seeing your country have to deal with that. You never had to live through that alternative universe where 400,000 British people died in April/May 2020. Where bodies were stored in makeshift freezers before being incinerated. Where the health system collapsed for half a year.

You can repeat this idle trope that it was all unnecessary. Safe from the consequences of it.

Did that % of Sweden’s population die?

[BillyStubbsTears]

Did you manage to bully your employee into getting the vaccine he didn't want?

Nope. Because I don't bully my employees, I try to protect them.

We lost 20 man-weeks of time from other staff who had COVID symptoms and who we asked to stay at home to protect this colleague.

Then he copped a dose. Was off for two weeks stuck in bed, while we organised food for him. Said it's the worst illness he's ever had, and is significantly weaker and less productive than he was before.

See, you were one of the many lucky ones Nudga. But I f**king despise the people who infected my colleague's head and our cleaner's head with that sort of shite that you push. Because they never have to face up to the damage they do to people.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Tommy.

That "lock up the vulnerable and let the rest of us crack on" take is THE most intellectually bone idle line of this entire issue.

Run me through how it would have worked. How would you have isolated the vulnerable population (15 million, maybe more). How would they have been fed when the virus was rampaging round the rest of society for 6 months? How would they have received medical treatment for any problem.

Why do you think not a single country anywhere in the world implemented that policy?

And your "alleged dangers" line is beyond belief. I've said a dozen times that there was one city in the entire world that had an unmitigated outbreak. Bergamo lost 0.6% of its entire population in 6 weeks. That outbreak brought the entire medical system of Northern Italy to breaking point.

YOU were saved from seeing your country have to deal with that. You never had to live through that alternative universe where 400,000 British people died in April/May 2020. Where bodies were stored in makeshift freezers before being incinerated. Where the health system collapsed for half a year.

You can repeat this idle trope that it was all unnecessary. Safe from the consequences of it.

Did that % of Sweden’s population die?

Christ it's like being on a hamster wheel.

Sweden had a lockdown in all but name.

Sweden has a society where lone living and working from home are very common. They also have very large physical distanced in their urban spaces. So they were able to effectively social distance without having to enforce it to the level we did.

They still had twice the fatality rate of Denmark and three times that of Norway, similar countries who DID have enforced lockdowns. And they also had significantly worse economic losses than either of them, because their softer touch lockdowns went on for much longer, because they didn't suppress the virus.

Why is it that the sceptics ALWAYS throw Sweden into the pot when Sweden is nothing like most of Europe? And never ever address what happened in Bergamo, when that is very much like most of urbanised Europe?

[ncRover]

Tommy.

That "lock up the vulnerable and let the rest of us crack on" take is THE most intellectually bone idle line of this entire issue.

Run me through how it would have worked. How would you have isolated the vulnerable population (15 million, maybe more). How would they have been fed when the virus was rampaging round the rest of society for 6 months? How would they have received medical treatment for any problem.

Why do you think not a single country anywhere in the world implemented that policy?

And your "alleged dangers" line is beyond belief. I've said a dozen times that there was one city in the entire world that had an unmitigated outbreak. Bergamo lost 0.6% of its entire population in 6 weeks. That outbreak brought the entire medical system of Northern Italy to breaking point.

YOU were saved from seeing your country have to deal with that. You never had to live through that alternative universe where 400,000 British people died in April/May 2020. Where bodies were stored in makeshift freezers before being incinerated. Where the health system collapsed for half a year.

You can repeat this idle trope that it was all unnecessary. Safe from the consequences of it.

Did that % of Sweden’s population die?

Christ it's like being on a hamster wheel.

Sweden had a lockdown in all but name.

Sweden has a society where lone living and working from home are very common. They also have very large physical distanced in their urban spaces. So they were able to effectively social distance without having to enforce it to the level we did.

They still had twice the fatality rate of Denmark and three times that of Norway, similar countries who DID have enforced lockdowns. And they also had significantly worse economic losses than either of them, because their softer touch lockdowns went on for much longer, because they didn't suppress the virus.

Why is it that the sceptics ALWAYS throw Sweden into the pot when Sweden is nothing like most of Europe? And never ever address what happened in Bergamo, when that is very much like most of urbanised Europe?

I’m aware of the differences. I was just trying to quash your hyperbole about the 400,000 figure.