Jump to content

Coronavirus


faraway saint

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Dickson said:

Yes only. If we had copied them we would only have locked down London. Instead we've got people in the Shetlands scared to go for a walk

So copied them by locking down a population in the region of 55-65 million say? 

Again Dicko thinks he knows best on a subject in contrast to multiple experts and people much closer to it. Will he ever learn? Maybe 10-15 usernames down the line haha. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Guest TPAFKATS
So copied them by locking down a population in the region of 55-65 million say? 
Again Dicko thinks he knows best on a subject in contrast to multiple experts and people much closer to it. Will he ever learn? Maybe 10-15 usernames down the line haha. 
Imagine picking Shetland as an example - he really doesn't have a clue. Just yet more attention seeking pish.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Dickson said:

Here we go. Bazil, the self appointed expert has ramped up again. How long before he starts making up graphs with wrong predictions too? 

No, I'll go with the people advising to lock-down countries and save lives thanks. You made a ridiculous point about who will now die because we've stopped screening for other things. Do you think that problem goes away if we open Scotland back up? Or should we just stop testing people for corona all together? 

This is your go to, you have to go to the opposite side of debates because you get off on it. It's why you've had to return (after saying you wouldn't) to BAWA multiple times, it's your fix.

We both know you were a regular visitor even between usernames, wonder how many times you started typing out a new profile before stopping yourself.... Can't imagine I was the only one to get a private Facebook message from you as well. 

15 minutes ago, Dickson said:

When Catherine whatever her name is announces new bespoke measures for Scotland will you be on here criticising her lack of knowledge? 

As above, I'll go with the advice as it evolves. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Slartibartfast said:


 

 


Shit, is he back? Maybe his mum has given him his phone back. I should have known he was back due to the increased number of ignored posts.

I confidently predict that he will end up in tit-for-tats with two or three people and just keep repeating the same stuff over and over and over and ...

He'll probably even regurgitate the same arguments that have already happened on this thread but, of course, he will be "right", even though the exact same arguments have already been proven wrong.

I also predict that he will comment on me commenting on him.

How am I doing so far?

 

Mind reader... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

These are released on a regular basis, why would you need me to provide them?

 

I’ve seen numbers released showing the number of people who have died and tested positive for coronavirus

 

I haven’t seen any figures showing how many people the virus has ‘literally killed’

 

Can you provide those numbers?

 

 

At this stage, it's genuinely staggering you don't get this.

 

 

I’m genuinely staggered that you don’t get that coronavirus has caused no excess mortality in the UK or indeed in Europe this year.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Hiram Abiff said:

 

 


It’s a moot point now that we know that the pandemic has been grossly over exaggerated

 

Go on find another google quote to back up the total pish you spout

Do you actually know what a pandemic means ? 

adjective
adjective: pandemic
  1. (of a disease) prevalent over a whole country or the world
     
     
    Hmmm - seems to be one doesn't it, ??
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Slartibartfast said:


 

 

 


Shit, is he back? Maybe his mum has given him his phone back. I should have known he was back due to the increased number of ignored posts.

I confidently predict that he will end up in tit-for-tats with two or three people and just keep repeating the same stuff over and over and over and ...

He'll probably even regurgitate the same arguments that have already happened on this thread but, of course, he will be "right", even though the exact same arguments have already been proven wrong.

I also predict that he will comment on me commenting on him.

How am I doing so far?

 

You're doing great

 

We have to remember the "virus" we have..... only known cure is for Div or whoever  to bin them once and for all

 

Mind you more chance of St Mirren being named champions this year, however I think we have a solid case

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Go on find another google quote to back up the total pish you spout
Do you actually know what a pandemic means ? 
adjective adjective: pandemic
  1. (of a disease) prevalent over a whole country or the world     Hmmm - seems to be one doesn't it, ??


er, yes, there does seem to be one!

thanks for the irrelevant contribution [emoji106]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Hiram Abiff said:

 

I’ve seen numbers released showing the number of people who have died and tested positive for coronavirus

I haven’t seen any figures showing how many people the virus has ‘literally killed’

Can you provide those numbers?

I said "related" to, these are the same releases as you're talking about. 

I’m genuinely staggered that you don’t get that coronavirus has caused no excess mortality in the UK or indeed in Europe this year.

We aren't talking about deaths as it stands right now, why would we be? We are trying to prevent a future state where it's massively significant. If we didn't take the measures we are taking and left the virus largely unchecked, you realise the growth in infected/ deaths won't stop anytime soon? If we take no/ limited action you can guarantee the death rate this time next year will be much higher. 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TPAFKATS said:

I have a friend who is a nurse managing a care home. Last week she was instructed to put all residents into one 'wing' of the home and keep the other one ffee for hospital discharges.

Nicola Sturgeon just explaining in her daily q and a that Scotland has 3000 extra capacity lined up, SEC is about 1000 of those.

Must be only certain homes that have been earmarked, as this could only really work in NHS contracted care homes.

My wife's company has between 20-30 care homes in Scotland. She had a conference call with her senior management colleagues this morning and they had no communication regarding anything like this from the NHS/Government/Care inspectorate.

Edited by FTOF
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 


I said "related" to, these are the same releases as you're talking about.


They don’t tell us who specifically died of coronavirus.

How many of them would have died anyway?



We aren't talking about deaths as it stands right now, why would we be? We are trying to prevent a future state where it's massively significant. If we didn't take the measures we are taking and left the virus largely unchecked, you realise the growth in infected/ deaths won't stop anytime soon? If we take no/ limited action you can guarantee the death rate this time next year will be much higher.





As I asked initially, can you provide some evidence to back this up?

Coronavirus is believed to have spread to the UK in January.

Over 2 months later, coronavirus has caused no excess mortality in the UK.

In the winters of 14/15 and 99/00, the flu caused excess mortality of around 500 per day. That’s on top of the numbers who usually die of flu.

Other than advising people who are vulnerable to take extra precautions or isolate, as they are doing in Sweden, I see no reason to lockdown the rest of the population.

There is no evidence to support it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest TPAFKATS
Must be only certain homes that have been earmarked, as this could only really work in NHS contracted care homes.
My wife's company has between 30-40 care homes in Scotland. She had a conference call with her senior management colleagues this morning and they had no communication regarding anything like this from the NHS/Government/Care inspectorate.
Not contracted as far as I am aware, but it is palliative so not "long term" care for most.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, faraway saint said:

I think I caught a piece on the news (not sure which one as it's on almost every channel right now) that, at the minute the numbers DON'T include deaths in the community.

Also, apologies being a tad unclear here, that this will be included in the near future.

Firstly I was surprised the current numbers ONLY include deaths in hospitals.

They then indicated that the people recording deaths in the community were, somehow, not as reliable? 

If/when this comes in then I'd imagine there would be a fairly noticeable increase in daily fatalities. 

Looks like the new method of recording, or including deaths in the community, has started today, 400 fatalities for the UK. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Hiram Abiff said:

 


They don’t tell us who specifically died of coronavirus.

How many of them would have died anyway?


They tell us "related" which was my point. Why are you trying to make it out like I typed something I didn't? 

Is that supposed to be some kind of justification for not doing all we can to stop people dying? 

As I asked initially, can you provide some evidence to back this up?

Coronavirus is believed to have spread to the UK in January.

Over 2 months later, coronavirus has caused no excess mortality in the UK.

In the winters of 14/15 and 99/00, the flu caused excess mortality of around 500 per day. That’s on top of the numbers who usually die of flu.

Other than advising people who are vulnerable to take extra precautions or isolate, as they are doing in Sweden, I see no reason to lockdown the rest of the population.

There is no evidence to support it.

Sure

- Today the death toll related to Coronavirus jumped over 25% remember there is a lag in these figures, so the death related is likely higher still. This is with similar measures like "advising people who are vulnerable to take extra precautions or isolate," being in place for some time. So why do you think they are enough and we don't need to take the further steps we have? Is rising death toll of 25% PER DAY within your tolerance in fighting this? 

- Other countries have shown exponential rises in cases and related deaths, there is no "evidence" we will not follow a similar pattern if we don't follow health professionals advice

- If that kind of growth continues (which it almost certainly would left untreated/ the efforts you suggested, this is evidenced in my first point) then the death toll in March 2020 will not be the important figure as I have repeatedly told you. Imagine if you will, standing 200 meters from a beach looking at a tsunami coming towards you over the beach. It's killed 20 people on the beach but there's 5,000 in the area saying "no excess mortality" rate yet. That would be pretty short-sighted don't you think?

- We don't know a great deal about this yet but signs are it is at least as contagious as the flu and many times more deadly. if in 99/00 (particularly bad flu virus) & 14/15 the same number of people got this coronavirus, common sense says the mortality rate would be much higher. Hence why (yet again) medical experts of which I'm sure you are not are worried. 

- Why only look at Sweden as guidance for Scotland? What if we actually mirror Spain or Italy? Have you done some sort of research that proves we're closer to Sweden than worse impacted countries and the experts are wrong? 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Due to bazils cnut of a way in replying I can't quote but a couple of things in his glee at today's figures.

This "delay" isn't just for today, this is the same method used everyday so to try to use this as some sort of reason that today's numbers are, in fact bigger, is utter shite.

Also, yesterday there was a 12.7% rise, the day before 17%, using today, or any single day, as any sort of a guide is utterly pointless, as oakys graph has proved. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, faraway saint said:

Looks like the new method of recording, or including deaths in the community, has started today, 400 fatalities for the UK. 

 

22 minutes ago, cockles1987 said:

Brought back down to reality. emoji26.png

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-scotland-52052932

Coronavirus: 1,801 people have now died across the UK

A further 393 people with coronavirus have died in the UK in the past day - the biggest daily total so far.
A total of 1,801 people have now died with the virus across the UK, including 367 more in England, 13 in Scotland, seven in Wales and six in Northern Ireland.

 

There must have been a few resurrections, number now amended to 381? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, faraway saint said:

Due to bazils cnut of a way in replying I can't quote but a couple of things in his glee at today's figures.

This "delay" isn't just for today, this is the same method used everyday so to try to use this as some sort of reason that today's numbers are, in fact bigger, is utter shite.

Also, yesterday there was a 12.7% rise, the day before 17%, using today, or any single day, as any sort of a guide is utterly pointless, as oakys graph has proved. 

 

There is no glee, don't be so vile. 

I know, that's my point. Hiram suggesting measures we had in previous to the near full lock-down would be enough isn't accurate because it was still causing a significant increase in the death numbers. More measures were taken (correct call). 

It was only a matter of comparison, I completely accept that it will vary and never in anyway claimed it wouldn't.

Still, it's the right thing to do having this lock down... Well according to the leading health advisers, not a few raging moaners on BAWA, sure we can go without their opinion lol 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, faraway saint said:

I've used 2 of my 3 maxim replies this clown, there's no point using my 3rd, pointless. :hammer

OK I'll try.  Briefly, I'm afraid...

3 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

according to the leading health advisers, not a few raging moaners on BAWA, sure we can go without their opinion lol 

This thread has already offered several links to many leading health experts, epidemiologists and other health professionals - worldwide - who believe the CV19 data is as useful as wet toilet paper, the lockdowns to be disproportionate and the doom-laden pronouncements are overkill...   :rolleyes:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  They tell us "related" which was my point. Why are you trying to make it out like I typed something I didn't?   

 

 You said they were “literally dying related to coronavirus” Just because they tested positive to coronavirus does not mean it was related to the death

 

People who are dying can contract coronavirus as well as people who aren’t!

 

 

 

 

 

 Is that supposed to be some kind of justification for not doing all we can to stop people dying?   

 

 

  We can advise particularly vulnerable people to isolate if they wish. 

Destroying the economy despite their being no excess mortality will result in an actual increase in excess mortality.

 

 

 

 

 

- Today the death toll related to Coronavirus jumped over 25% remember there is a lag in these figures, so the death related is likely higher still. This is with similar measures like "advising people who are vulnerable to take extra precautions or isolate," being in place for some time. So why do you think they are enough and we don't need to take the further steps we have? Is rising death toll of 25% PER DAY within your tolerance in fighting this?    

 

 If you’ve been reading this thread you’ll see that the death toll is exactly what I’ve been predicting for a week now. We’ve been at 65% of where Italy were 2 weeks ago for over a week now.

 

I predict we may hit 600 deaths by the weekend.

 

But as mentioned earlier, we do not know if this has increased the excess mortality.

 

Patrick Vallance advised yesterday that you can’t take much notice of single day mortality. I’m guessing you missed that?

 

The death toll announced yesterday was 30% lower than it was 2 days ago.

 

Is a decreasing death toll of 30% every 2 days within your tolerance of fighting this?

 

 

 

 

- If that kind of growth continues (which it almost certainly would left untreated/ the efforts you suggested, this is evidenced in my first point)  

 

 

 

You haven’t evidenced at all. You haven’t provided any evidence of an increase in excess mortality nor evidence that there would be if left untreated.

 

 

 

 

 

 then the death toll in March 2020 will not be the important figure as I have repeatedly told you. Imagine if you will, standing 200 meters from a beach looking at a tsunami coming towards you over the beach. It's killed 20 people on the beach but there's 5,000 in the area saying "no excess mortality" rate yet. That would be pretty short-sighted don't you think?
 

 

I don’t think anything of your irrelevant analogy.

 

 

 

 

 

- We don't know a great deal about this yet

My point exactly  

 

 

 

 

but signs are it is at least as contagious as the flu and many times more deadly.

Can you provide evidence of this?  

 

 

 

if in 99/00 (particularly bad flu virus) & 14/15 the same number of people got this coronavirus, common sense says the mortality rate would be much higher.

 This makes no sense   

 

 

 

 - Why only look at Sweden as guidance for Scotland? What if we actually mirror Spain or Italy? Have you done some sort of research that proves we're closer to Sweden than worse impacted countries and the experts are wrong?   

 

 

 

 Have you some sort of research that proves we’re closer to Spain or Italy? The “experts” have already been proved themselves wrong on multiple occasions already.

 

First of all the government said we could overcome this with herd immunity and no lockdown was required.

 

Then they predicted 500,000 deaths.

 

Then they admitted most of these people would have died anyway.

 

Then they reckoned 20,000 would die if we imposed a lockdown.

 

Now they reckon it’ll be 6,000.

 

But they still don’t know how many of them would have died anyway.

 

They’re making it up as they go along.

 

Now remember, the excess mortality in a bad flu season is 50,000. That’s over and above the 000s who die of flu anyway. That’s over and above the 600,000 who die in the UK every year.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...