bazil85

Just don't have such poor moral standards and it would never be an issue. 😷

We can look at a very real example of a country that has failed regarding coronavirus to prove you wrong. USA Flu P/A - 9 - 45 million illnesses, 145k - 810k hospitalisations, 12k - 61k deaths Coronavirus since 20th January (less than six months) - 3.43 million illnesses, 264,651 hospitalisations, 138k deaths. this is despite lockdown and social distancing measures that have outweighed any flu season in history by far. We aren't even six months since the first recorded virus in that country and it has been a present factor in almost 140k (properly recorded) deaths. Far few recorded cases so far and far higher death rates than the flu. To think it's "nothing more than the flu" is simply and categorically wrong.

Lock down being the right call is practically beyond doubt, that's the view of the overwhelming majority of experts. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/07/05/lockdown-really-worth-telegraph-writers-experts-give-verdict/ You holding onto a view that you were categorically wrong about doesn't change anything. If you're saying "haven't got a clue" why are you so sure they're all wrong and you're right? It defies logic, you've shown you're in no way equipped to make such a sure statement as you have done many times. As for scientific evidence to back it up, how could we possibly have had that? We acted with caution which is the right approach when it comes to human life. To have a view that they should have gambled with this virus to save the economy is ridiculous and failed in countries like Sweden where the economic protection is highly questionable. Look at USA as well, they gambled, they are going back into lockdown in many states, the gamble didn't pay off, why should ours? The NHS would have been overwhelmed, all evidence points to it, it's fact that more contact = more cases. Hospitals were still busy for a time with a lockdown, if there had been none, factually more people would have passed on the virus and more people would end up in hospital, you not understanding that is staggering. Again Sweden can't be used as a direct comparison, it's a country bigger than the UK with a fraction of our population density among other caveats. What we do know about Sweden is no lockdown did not save their economy from a big hit. If Covid was no different from the flu, it wouldn't have been treated as such. Your view defies logic and scientific evidence. If every measure is stopped, we end up worse than USA & Brazil, countries where some measures are in place but Covid19 is still running wild, your claim is again beaten by evidence.

I feel Oaks language is purposelessly designed to make people panic here. He's guilty of the Sue Denim go to in saying something is a "will" happen and not a "could" The article is very clear they are modelling worst case scenarios. It even says: "Sir Patrick Vallance, stresses there is still a high degree of uncertainty over how the coronavirus pandemic will play out this winter."

Incorrect, I took the point you made and gave my own view on the stat, it wasn't a situation of "multiple views." I would bet you actually agree with me on the death per millions figures not being a complete picture. But you're so warped you have to turn everything into an argument.

Good stuff man, he'll still rage at your presence on BAWA I have no doubt about that.

You gave me a fact (agreed based on tested cases), I built on what you had said. That's how discussions work. BAWA would be a very boring place if it was only ever Comment "I agree & have nothing to add" Comment "I agree & have nothing to add" I did feck up earlier and I admitted it. I gave you too much credit that you had realised you had made mistakes on this subject and treated it far lighter than it actually was. lol making a comment on population density and other factors impacting number of coronavirus cases is absolutely relevant in this debate. So where you get not having the capability I don't know.

Tried to engage you in a an adult conversation, you do what you always do to practically everyone on here and get defensive. Sweden is a good example to have given their choice not to lock-down. the same cautions exist when comparing them to other nations though, I have never hid that in fact I've brought it up many times. For example, comparison between Sweden and UK has a lot more caveats than a comparison between say Sweden and Norway or Finland or Denmark. That's not to say there are any areas we can do exact like for like comparisons. Simple stuff really, yet you've really struggled with it.

I think that can be taken with a pinch of salt, deaths per million will have a number of variables. Population density, multi-generation households, single occupancy households as a few examples. Somewhere as big as US would need to be drilled down to a state level to be more beneficial from a stats perspective.

I just thought it was a waste of time bringing it up so I commented as such. I didn't make any attempt to tell you that you should see it as worthwhile, that's your call Yes that is wrong, it's absolutely unacceptable for you to follow this path and it could result in you sending me more than 1,095 posts a year lol. We'll just mark it down as a cheat day

It's a bit baffling, anything and everything to have a pop. hOw DaRe YoU uSe A wOrD uSeD bEfOrE

I made my point very well, you don't have to agree with it. 👍

So what do you suggest we do? I don't see at all the point you are making here. That's a lie isn't it? And like Ricky notes, I didn't say you did.

Yes you appear to be, I don't understand why else you would bring it up, hardly a big deal.

So what?