[Coronavirus]

[emoji23][emoji23][emoji23]
That's wonderful straw clutching antrin.

Or have you converted to the "they would all have died soon enough anyway" approach favoured by the sociopaths?

It's not really. Unless you can prove that none of these people will later die from CV19.

[Coronavirus]

Baz, if you could stop talking shite and actually listen to the views of others you'd contribute a lot more to this discussion than you are doing.
Oh and BTW, you definitely don't know the difference between causation and correlation. I wasn't asking for your opinion on that. I was educating you.

I went to my mum's today after going to the skip to dump some rubbish. I did the exact same thing on Friday. It's obvious that, due to this correlation, going to the skip was the cause of me going to my mum's.

Before he died, my dad farted. Farting must have caused his death.

[Coronavirus]

Sigh!
Clearly you need breastfed through this as well.
Who exactly are these 3 people you claim are supporting Andy's view that lockdown saved zero lives?

Nobody. He's just erecting strawmen so he can keep arguing his (flawed) point.

[Coronavirus]

 

1. What are all the ways that CV19 can be transmitted?
Not fully known, irrelevant to my point. 
2. Does it? Or does it suppress the immune system so that other things kill?
Also irrelevant, people not contracting covid19 because they have avoided it through lockdown is the point being made. Again you go to the pedantic. 
3. Irrelevant if you don't know the answer to 1.
It's not, I've shown that you are wrong above. 
Prove it. How do you know that anyone who hasn't died, would have died if the had got CV19? Just tell me about any specific one of them.
Again pedantic, see previous points.  
You DON'T know., that is what I am saying - about both sides of the argument.
See point to Oaky above, pre-held vendettas has got you trying to argue that zero extra people would have died linked to Covid19 if there wasn't a lockdown. [emoji1787]

It's not irrelevant to your point. You said (paraphrasing) "less contact equals less transmission". If you don't know all the ways it can be spread then you don't know if what you said is true.

Also not irrelevant. You stated, unambiguously that CV19 kills people, that's what I was replying to. Stop trying to change the goalposts.

No, you haven't. You have, as usual, stated your opinion as fact.

Not pedantic, but even if it is, just answer the question. No? Didn't think so, because if you do answer it honestly you will prove yourself wrong.

Where did I say, or even imply, that "zero extra people would have died linked to Covid19 if there wasn't a lockdown"? I have specifically said that neither of you have enough evidence to know either way. Now, stop misrepresenting what I am saying.

[Coronavirus]

You are confusing correlation and causation again.

He's already been telt, keep up.

[Coronavirus]

Incorrect.
The claim is not single person has been saved from a Covid19 related death in Britain due to lockdown. It is ridiculous given what we know.:  
1. Contact = chance of transmission
2. Covid19 kills people. 
3. Millions of people in lockdown were factually in much less (or even zero) contact with other people.
It is pedantic to claim we don't know in a population of 66 million if a single person has avoided death by not being in contact with someone with the coronavirus. Of course people's lives have been saved. 

1. What are all the ways that CV19 can be transmitted?
2. Does it? Or does it suppress the immune system so that other things kill?
3. Irrelevant if you don't know the answer to 1.

Prove it. How do you know that anyone who hasn't died, would have died if the had got CV19? Just tell me about any specific one of them.

You DON'T know., that is what I am saying - about both sides of the argument.

[Coronavirus]

You haven't all the relevant evidence you have shared doesn't show this. There's correlation between locking-down and drops in relevant factors. It is completely baseless to say it hasn't saved "anyone" 

You still at it?

Correlation does not equal causation.

It is also completely baseless to say that it has saved lives.

Both of you are claiming things that are unproven, as I have already said.

[Coronavirus]

Really, you try getting an ethic committee to agree to infecting people with Covid-19 

Not at all If you look at NICE guidelines to assessing literature as evidence Randomised Controlled experiements are actually the leve weakest evidence. I know this is not what you are taught at as undergraduate. But the point is about the universal application of the evidence to the entire population. As a result very few RC experiements are conducted, and none on human populations where case control and/or cohort studies are much more comment  There is no need nor benefit from RC experiments in this case, or indeed in the majority of medical studies. 
example. A RC experiment in vitro shows that drug A cures cancer.  This will not be released until a case control study is carried out because the case control study give superior quality of evidence. 
 
https://www.nice.org.uk/process/pmg6/chapter/reviewing-the-evidence

Are you saying that people would need to be "given cancer"?

[Coronavirus]

The same can be said for praying and masturbation but nobody is advocating either of those as preventative measures against covid.

Aren't they?? I better stop all that mast..., eh, praying that I'm doing then.

[Free faraway saint!]

It’s quite obvious that div doesn’t read the forum as much anymore and is probably going on people crying to him as faraways hurt their feelings. Pretty pathetic if you ask me. Proper moderation would work wonders, I’d get rid of the sin bin too, people get sent in here, and the majority of the forum ends up in here, so it’s a bit pointless [emoji23]. If you can’t handle someone giving you some banter, put them on ignore, don’t be a grass [emoji23]

Think that's why I, eh, I mean Slartibartfast, got banned.

[Free faraway saint!]

Ah, I see. I’ve been wondering where he is nonetheless. 

Banned, that's why ah cannae be him, cos he's no' oan here.

[Free faraway saint!]

Where have you been? 

Ahem, cough, cough, I'm, eh, no him, no siree, definitely not him.

[Free faraway saint!]

Faraway saint should be freed.
I know he’s a c**t but one of the forum’s top posters.
Free shull too!
No one should be binned. Apart from [mention=4199]oaksoft[/mention]. I’d bin him [emoji12]

Hey!!!!

Why no "Reinstate Slartibartfast" thread? [emoji38]

[Coronavirus]

Andy, FYI, Venezuela also borders Brazil so your reason that you chose Peru because it borders Brazil seems a bit silly. As an aside, Chile and Ecuador are the only South American countries that don't border Brazil.

For the main protagonists, you know who you are, there is no conclusive evidence either way whether or not lockdown was the right call, so stop trying to pretend that "the data" shows you to be right. There is no control group to compare events to so it will be after the fact that events will be evaluated and a consensus reached on right/wrong actions and, even then, it won't be a definitive answer. All that anyone can do just now is use a best guess with the information at hand.