Blah Blah

Are you seriously arguing that we should potentially allow millions to die so that we can avoid 100,000 deaths from other things? As for figures, the data is already there. Between 3 and 10 percent of confirmed cases end in death. That has been adapted for unknowns, like true rates of infection, down to 0.3 percent. That is still 30 times the mortality percentage of global flu deaths. So obfuscate all you like, the fact remains that we would be talking of millions of deaths, 30x the base level of flu, if the virus were allowed to spread freely. The data for that is already there, which is why governments are not messing about with this thing.

The test and trace system is going to implode if we don't ramp up laboratory capacity to process the tests. Government were warned about this months ago. They built extra hospital capacity (the Nightingale) but did little to build extra laboratory capacity at the same time.

rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It's good to hear that a special exemption is > being granted to people hunting with guns. They > can meet in groups up to 30. 😒 Yes, this was trending across social media yesterday. It typifies the elitist thinking of Boris and his ilk. One rule for them and another for the rest of us.

And there you go again TE44, failing to answer the question. How many deaths is too many? Clearly nearly 1 million in just six months is not enough for you, so I am genuinely curious as to what point you understand the benchmark of a global pandemic to be. That you won't answer it tells me that deep down, you know there is no good answer to that question that can save your incoherent non evidence based arguments. So you run out into the sunshine, but not before you try to have the last word again. I will keep asking you until you answer it, how many deaths above the million already counted, is too many? We can then compare notes in December, when the northern hemisphere is in the middle of cold and flu season.

Answer the question. How many deaths is too many? Clearly nearly 1 million is not enough for you. That speaks for itself and is why no-one is listening to you.

And to be clear TE44, globally, we are close to 1 million deaths. How high do you think that figure would be without governments around the world taking measures to slow and stop spread? Are you really so unable to see the reasoning behind the measures? Covid is blowing everything else out of the water right now. That is what a global pandemic does.

Stop deflecting TE44. How many deaths from covid have to happen before they are too many? Answer that. You do realise that they have already exceeded the annual flu death toll right, in just six months with lockdown measures in place? So answer the question and let's see how many people you want to die.

And that is why you wait for the facts to be evidenced TE44. You don't just make stuff up because you want it to be true. The figures show a drop in quarterly suicide rates. That is the fact I have referenced. What that means in reality takes longer to establish. I have said that very clearly. You are just not reading my posts properly, and still you ignore the question I keep asking you. How many global deaths from covid would be acceptable to you? You can deflect all you like, but until you answer that, I will keep asking.

You almost make it sound as though those billions are in return for nothing! The Single Market is the ONLY tariff free market for ALL goods and services in the world. Do you really think there is no regulatory alignment required for other trade deals? ALL trade arrangements are a matter of give and take. That is something Farage et al never really explained to leave voters.

Trains and buses will be the perfect space for transmitting Covid when the cold and flu season hits. Something will have to done to enforce compliance in my opinion.

TE44 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Are you reading the Neil Fergusons papers afrom > Imperial College Blah Blah. Are you prepared to > put peoples mental health at risk, peoples > livelyhood, make peoples last days on this planet > hell. 650,000 deaths a year worldwide > From flu, increase yearly despite vaccines. "Those > expert studies are the reason people get care you > need", open your eyes, have you got any older > family in care homes. Your so concerned about > debunking people who have different experiences, > views, you cant see past your own importance, oops > sorry i mean the experts you follow. What a > perfect world we would have with all these experts > that are never wrong, that is if its the experts > you are reading. Nope, I am not letting you get away with this nonsense. I just gave you a clue, in that my job requires a certain level of medical education and continuous reading of new peer reviewed research. You are out of your depth. I just gave you EVIDENCE that suicide rates were down, by a sizeable margin in the first three months of lockdown. You are making assumptions when you should be waiting for the facts. The figures for the second three months seem to be heading the same way. Anecdotal local experience is not representative of anything. That is why I dismiss it. You have to look at the facts overall. And from there, local anomalies can be investigated. You have presented no evidence of anything. Just a load of easily debunked nonsense from cranks that share your conspiracist world view. Yes there are indeed half a million flu deaths globally every year on average. 80 percent of them though are people who did not have the vaccine. But you are offering this against potentially 40 million dying from Covid. So you still are making irrelevant comparisons. I ask you again, how many people dying from Covid is too many? I keep asking you the question. You keep refusing to answer it.

I just saw it. Boris looked like the kid trying to avoid answering a question from the teacher at the back of the class. Slumped in his chair, trying to look as small as possible. The body language said it all.

I think you'll find TE44 that there are different protocols at the moment that are the discretion of a hospital and their staff. Before anyone can go near a highly infectious patient, they have to be put into full protection PPE, and it is not always practical to do that for non essential medical staff let alone relatives. You just have no idea what you are talking about. The 40 million comes from the 0.3 percent death rate that increasing data suggests. But you are deflecting. Are you happy to risk 40 million people dying? Just answer the question. As for expert studies, my job depends on reading them frequently. It is one of the reasons I am able to debunk every nonsensical rabbit hole some people fall down so easily. Those expert studies (that you dismiss so out of hand) are also the reason why people get the care they need. Heaven help us if were left to you and the cranks you like to cite.

Some valid points there J.a. Sunak might not be a bad alternative in the end. And Sunak vs Starmer might make it feel as though the adults are back in the room, even if the mess they have to deal with might be beyond even them.

It is indeed the longish incubation period that is the problem. And that is the idea behind track and trace, to mitigate that when someone presents with symptoms. But that track and trace system has to be comprehensive to work. You can't be half hearted about it, and everyone has to comply. At present, about a quarter of people don't or won't.

You might be right. He certainly doesn't look well these days.

There are already rumours that Boris will be gone within a year. That suggests that discontent behind the scenes is growing. Cummings was never liked by a lot of Tories MPs in the first place. Essentially, the party is in the hands of a cabal at the moment, that has to deliver on its promises, or it is out.

The real horror for May was in losing that majority in that snap election she called. It was all downhill from there.

And as I pointed out to you, suicide rates actually went DOWN in the first three months of the lockdown period. Why are you always questioning the facts, even when the evidence is presented to you? There is no evidence as yet that suicides rates are going up in this quarter either. So just stop it please. I ask you again, how many people are you prepared to let die globally from a pandemic? 40 million not enough for you obviously? That people already die from other things is irrelevant. You are arguing that we add another 40 million to that! There is a very good reason why family were not allowed to sit next to a highly infectious relatives, in hospitals filling up with dying and serious ill patients, being cared for by overworked and stressed out doctors and nurses, more than a 100 of whom died themselves, having caught this thing at that front line. You have no idea what you are talking about and help no-one TE44.

You asked about suicide data TE44. You can find tables here (link below) but the first quarter of 2020 was in line with previous years. The second quarter (which is the spring/ early summer) shows a significant decrease on previous years. Figures for the third quarter are not available yet. Suicide is a complex issue and understanding a decrease is as valid as understanding any increase. It is quite possible that the decrease is the result of people being able to spend more time at home, without the stress of work life and other things. To assume the trend would only go the other way is a bit premature. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/deathscausedbysuicidebyquarterinengland

TE44, would you prefer if 40 million people died from covid over the next 18 months globally instead? Genuine question. How many deaths are too many? Epidemiology and exponential growth have been done to death on this forum.

Firstly, there is little chance of Boris's Bill getting through the Lords, so we might as well all ask what is the point of it. And yes, if the Democrats hold either house (or both), they have clearly stated they will block any trade deal if Boris's amendments go through.

I would argue that the rule of six does little to address where the rises in infection are occurring. Within families is one area, and that was always inevitable. The other is pubs. We all remember those pictures of a packed Soho with little or no social distancing when pubs reopened. Most pubs and restaurants are not taking customers details either. Government has decided it can not risk another full lockdown and is hedging on measures being taken now to prevent it. But perhaps if it had done something about enforcing the measures it had already introduced, we might be in a different place. Hospital admissions are starting to slowly move up but if we really want to get through the winter without lockdown, enforcement of things like masks on public transport and in shops becomes essential. One sneeze can infect 2 or 3 people at a time. Any idea of reopening theatres, clubs and stadiums has to be reconsidered too.

SAD lightboxes do not cost a lot of money these days and and as long as it is a medical standard one they do work for a lot of people. You should begin to feel the benefits within two weeks of using one for up to an hour daily. Daylight bulbs are not bright enough to do the same job. Most SAD lamps use very bright LEDs. The Light Pod by Lifemax is a reasonably priced one. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Lifemax-Light-107a-Simulated-Daylight/product-reviews/B002MRS5OW

Seenbeen is quite right. Syphilis is not a good comparison. Even comparison to the common cold is a poor analogy because that is caused by a human rhinovirus (HRV) which is not a coronavirus. You are absolutely right about complacency leading to a rise in infection rates and there is no way of protecting older people simply by telling them not to mix with younger people. Firstly, many won't do that, but also, if infection rates rise enough, the virus will be transmitted on door handles, from the postman, delivery drivers, and a multitude of other ways that do not require close human contact. This is something we all have to do together, as a society. Making the world a no-go for older people, just so that younger people can do as they please is not the answer.