Coronavirus

[Sue Denim]

1 hour ago, oaksoft said:

He's baziling everyone to death here.

Every other sane and reasonable person (on both sides of the argument by the way) understand that it will take some time to be certain whether lockdown is the way to deal with things like this.

 

And we will never know because lockdown started way too late to have an effect. Europe was past the point of peak infection at lockdown.

And if we had locked down sooner then it would have meant that there would still be a large number of people out there susceptible to infection this winter. 
 

Governments around the world panicked when things started kicking off in Italy and then Imperial College predicted that 80% of the U.K. population would get infected and 500,000 would die.

We originally locked down solely in an attempt to “flatten the curve” so that the NHS wouldn’t become overwhelmed.

We now know that the NHS was never in any danger of becoming overwhelmed by Covid but now, ironically faces becoming overwhelmed with dealing with the backlog to come as a result of lockdown policies. 

[Sue Denim]

AMERICAN DOCTORS ADDRESS COVID-19 MISINFORMATION WITH CAPITOL HILL PRESS CONFERENCE

https://www.bitchute.com/video/71W1O4TdJxo0/

[portmahomack saint]

2 hours ago, Sue Denim said:

Stats man why do you keep comparing Sweden with the UK,  Anyone with a bit of common sense would compare Sweden with it's neighbours with whom they share borders Norway and Finland who did do lockdown,   Swedens death toll per population is over 10 times that of Norway and Finland, for someone purports to be a covid expert you really do talk some shite.     P.S. How are things at Conservative Head Office these days Susan? 

[stlucifer]

On 7/27/2020 at 12:32 PM, antrin said:

Eg tu, Brute!

 

On 7/27/2020 at 1:35 PM, oaksoft said:

You don't listen to anyone on any issue. I assume he's just showing his frustration.

I thought he was making a yolk.

[Guest TPAFKATS]

He's baziling everyone to death here.
Every other sane and reasonable person (on both sides of the argument by the way) understand that it will take some time to be certain whether lockdown is the way to deal with things like this.
In Scotland we are at the point where there really is very little justification for continuing lockdown. We have almost no live cases here, very few new ones each day and almost zero deaths. In the meantime, whilst Sturgeon continues to panic about potential deaths, hundreds of thousands are being denied treatment for their very real life threatening problems.
As for masks. If they are including holding a jumper or a scarf to your face (and they are) then IMO there is absolutely no chance that these are preventing anything. There is very recent peer reviewed science which states that categorically they do no real good. Unless jumper technology has made huge advancements in the last 10 weeks nothing will have changed.
Of course what Sturgeon says, the natters repeat ad nauseum as though she was the reincarnation of Jesus himself.
With people like bazil and TPAK thingy in the debate emoting like a pair of tweenies, you just can't have a decent discussion where people feel they can question what we are being told.

Hiya oaky pal. You needing attention again?
You do have my empathy for the situation you are in being self employed but any sympathy wears a bit thin due to you being a complete wank these last couple of weeks.

[oaksoft]

2 hours ago, TPAFKATS said:

Hiya oaky pal. You needing attention again?
You do have my empathy for the situation you are in being self employed but any sympathy wears a bit thin due to you being a complete wank these last couple of weeks.

I am certainly looking for nothing from you - sympathy, empathy or anything else you arrogant oaf. 🤣🤣

[insaintee]

On 7/24/2020 at 7:08 PM, Sue Denim said:

All discarded medical waste is marked and handled appropriately, what is your point?

[salmonbuddie]

... you arrogant oaf. [emoji1787][emoji1787]

7 hours and no-one? Aw, f**k it...

Pot/kettle?

[emoji23][emoji1787][emoji23]

[beyond our ken]

18 hours ago, Doakes said:

I regularly look at the NS Scotland deaths table - it is weird that the way people are dying is seeming to change - but the numbers of people dying (compared to previous years) is pretty much the same. Off the top of my head, 2015 was actually a worse year for people dying.

Perhaps improving hygiene and behaviors has a positive impact on life expectancy. I read a post the other day that the average age of covid deaths is actually higher than our life expectancy - so using that logic - any further lockdown measures would seem way over the top. Time to move on and get back to normality.

But we don't just leave people to die, we treat the sick and the lockdown was primarily introduced as a means of reducing hospital admissions rather than a way of direct prevention of deaths.

[Sue Denim]

@bazil85

 

[Sue Denim]

1 hour ago, beyond our ken said:

But we don't just leave people to die, we treat the sick and the lockdown was primarily introduced as a means of reducing hospital admissions rather than a way of direct prevention of deaths.

But we didn’t treat the sick.

We threw sick patients out of hospital and seeded Covid into care homes.

We frightened people into not seeking NHS help.

Thousands of people who have died because we did just leave them to die.
 

And while we continue to ‘protect the NHS and continue to prepare for a ‘second wave’, thousands of people are continuing to die because they can’t get NHS treatment.

The stats are all there in the ONS and NRS but the media just won’t report on it and people just aren’t aware.

All the media focus has been on scaremongering about a virus which is no different from viruses we already live with.

A rare media article highlighting what is going on below

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/07/28/deaths-home-causes-coronavirus-increase-ons-figures-reveal/

[Doakes]

1 hour ago, beyond our ken said:

But we don't just leave people to die, we treat the sick and the lockdown was primarily introduced as a means of reducing hospital admissions rather than a way of direct prevention of deaths.

Yeah that's the point - I'd agree that lockdown was a good idea to ensure the NHS wasn't overwhelmed during the first wave

Turns out, the NHS was able to cope, so if any second wave occurs- I don't think we should consider the repeat of a national lockdown (unless the NHS was literally drowning)

Our life expectancy is still the same as it was before this virus existed

Edited July 29, 2020 by Doakes

[bazil85]

18 hours ago, antrin said:

If there IS such evidence... I feel sure you would have pointed people towards it so we can share your pov?

You're still pissing pointlessly into wind.  Spinning ironically, from what I can tell...

 

There is no way that any sense can yet be made of all the irrelevant and clashing numbers that are being bandied about.

 

Hindsight MIGHT offer conviction.

Comparisons to similar sized, located and population dense countries. Sweden has done far worse than practically all it's neighbours. I also did share evidence. 

Sweden deaths - 5,700

Denmark, Finland & Norway combined - 1,197

Pretty strong evidence IMO that if Sweden followed lockdown paths like these countries, their deaths would be far lower. 

I don't see anywhere where I have spun, possibly just your default position where you have to disagree with practically anything I post that you engage in? 

I think we can start to make some educated conclusions on certain points based on what we do know but yes, there is much still to validate. Like Andy's claim that there WILL be far more deaths caused by lockdown than by the virus. Time will tell but it isn't looking overlay likely right now. 

[portmahomack saint]

1 hour ago, Sue Denim said:

@bazil85

 

[bazil85]

17 hours ago, Sue Denim said:

All over the place again baz

Why just compare them with their neighbours?

Why not compare them with a country such as Scotland where the death rate has been higher?

And I’ve shared a number of graphs and figures I’m any case which shows that excess mortality in Sweden has been no different to their neighbours.

Both of these facts render your entire reply irrelevant. 

 

1 hour ago, Sue Denim said:

@bazil85

 

We can compare to a country like Scotland, we can also compare it to a country like New Zealand, USA, Brazil, Finland, Zimbabwe and any country from any part of the world you like.

The point people make to you often is you completely disregard caveats. For example in Scotland we are a more densely populated country, we have far more multi-generational households, we are close to and have massive people movement to one of the most populated areas in Europe (London). You are welcome to just look in isolation but if you are going to look in isolation vs Scotland, surely you'll be willing to do the same to other countries on Sweden's doorstep.

As such do you accept a lockdown would have saved lives in Sweden based on their neighbours? 

You are also guilty of looking at individual stats in isolation that fit your world view while ignoring all others. In this case excessive death. It completely disregards differences in reporting the world over. For example the countries with the highest number of cases in the world are Bahrain, Qatar and French Guiana, yet they don't have the highest mortality rates. Do you think it's likely these countries just have far superior health and treatment than other countries or is there going to be issues with reporting? 

Lack of common sense or stubbornness, it has to be one of these to explain your view.  

[Sue Denim]

17 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

Comparisons to similar sized, located and population dense countries. Sweden has done far worse than practically all it's neighbours. I also did share evidence. 

Sweden deaths - 5,700

Denmark, Finland & Norway combined - 1,197

Pretty strong evidence IMO that if Sweden followed lockdown paths like these countries, their deaths would be far lower. 

 

What are the excess deaths in the nordics baz?

whats the comparison like between Sweden and Scotland?

[bazil85]

Just now, Sue Denim said:

What are the excess deaths in the nordics baz?

whats the comparison like between Sweden and Scotland?

Already addressed your point in another post ^^^ Again you are guilty of looking just at individual stats that meet your needs in isolation.

You refuse to look bigger picture or understand a combination of information. I guarantee if it was reversed and Sweden had far fewer deaths but far bigger excess death stats, your view would flip.  

[bazil85]

19 hours ago, oaksoft said:

He's baziling everyone to death here.

Every other sane and reasonable person (on both sides of the argument by the way) understand that it will take some time to be certain whether lockdown is the way to deal with things like this.

In Scotland we are at the point where there really is very little justification for continuing lockdown. We have almost no live cases here, very few new ones each day and almost zero deaths. In the meantime, whilst Sturgeon continues to panic about potential deaths, hundreds of thousands are being denied treatment for their very real life threatening problems.

As for masks. If they are including holding a jumper or a scarf to your face (and they are) then IMO there is absolutely no chance that these are preventing anything. There is very recent peer reviewed science which states that categorically they do no real good. Unless jumper technology has made huge advancements in the last 10 weeks nothing will have changed.

Of course what Sturgeon says, the natters repeat ad nauseum as though she was the reincarnation of Jesus himself.

With people like bazil and TPAK thingy in the debate emoting like a pair of tweenies, you just can't have a decent discussion where people feel they can question what we are being told.

If it turns out that lockdown has killed far more people than Covid19 and has doomed us all, blah, blah, blah I'll put my hands up. Yes there is much still to understand but it does fully appear locking down was the correct approach. As I have said before, the resources are there to support everyone through a lockdown and the fallout. 

As for your complete ignorance that lifting "all" restrictions could easily see a resurgence in the virus as other countries have, I fear you are beyond help to understand that point.

My understanding throughout this has also always been a risk based approach. If you have or fear you have a serious condition, get help but there are some groups of people where being out and in medical facilities poses a very real risk from Covid19 (hence the shielding guidance). There was never a solution to save everyone, it's very sad but that is our reality and it should pain the people of this world.  

As for masks, cry me a river. It impacts very few people and there are exemptions. In the chance they do help, suck it up. 

People are welcome to question all they want, the issue you have is we still disagree with you and (me anyway) still have a view yours is ignorant and shameful. You get upset that people don't agree with you, not that they're arguing with you. 

[Sue Denim]

17 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

Already addressed your point in another post ^^^ Again you are guilty of looking just at individual stats that meet your needs in isolation.

You refuse to look bigger picture or understand a combination of information. I guarantee if it was reversed and Sweden had far fewer deaths but far bigger excess death stats, your view would flip.  

So let me get this straight, I’m guilty of only focusing on individual stats in isolation and refuse to look at the big picture because......

I asked you to look at the bigger picture - excess deaths - instead of the isolated picture - Covid deaths.

You didn’t really think that through baz, did you? 😂

Excess deaths are the gold standard comparison. Different countries count Covid deaths in different ways. Even England and Scotland have wildly different ways of counting them.

Covid deaths in isolation take no account of the differences. They take no account of the vulnerable population at risk due to excess / non excess deaths in the months beforehand.

Take your own advice baz and look at the bigger picture.

Edited July 29, 2020 by Sue Denim

[oaksoft]

15 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

If it turns out that lockdown has killed far more people than Covid19 and has doomed us all, blah, blah, blah I'll put my hands up. Yes there is much still to understand but it does fully appear locking down was the correct approach. As I have said before, the resources are there to support everyone through a lockdown and the fallout. 

As for your complete ignorance that lifting "all" restrictions could easily see a resurgence in the virus as other countries have, I fear you are beyond help to understand that point.

My understanding throughout this has also always been a risk based approach. If you have or fear you have a serious condition, get help but there are some groups of people where being out and in medical facilities poses a very real risk from Covid19 (hence the shielding guidance). There was never a solution to save everyone, it's very sad but that is our reality and it should pain the people of this world.  

As for masks, cry me a river. It impacts very few people and there are exemptions. In the chance they do help, suck it up. 

People are welcome to question all they want, the issue you have is we still disagree with you and (me anyway) still have a view yours is ignorant and shameful. You get upset that people don't agree with you, not that they're arguing with you. 

Honestly Baz, I stopped reading when I read the words "the resources are there".

There's only so much nonsense I can absorb from another human being in 24 hours.

Maybe if you had actually been directly affected in some way by this situation you'd show a bit more understanding.

Edited July 29, 2020 by oaksoft

[Sue Denim]

22 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

 

We can compare to a country like Scotland, we can also compare it to a country like New Zealand, USA, Brazil, Finland, Zimbabwe and any country from any part of the world you like.

The point people make to you often is you completely disregard caveats. For example in Scotland we are a more densely populated country, we have far more multi-generational households, we are close to and have massive people movement to one of the most populated areas in Europe (London). You are welcome to just look in isolation but if you are going to look in isolation vs Scotland, surely you'll be willing to do the same to other countries on Sweden's doorstep.

As such do you accept a lockdown would have saved lives in Sweden based on their neighbours? 

You are also guilty of looking at individual stats in isolation that fit your world view while ignoring all others. In this case excessive death. It completely disregards differences in reporting the world over. For example the countries with the highest number of cases in the world are Bahrain, Qatar and French Guiana, yet they don't have the highest mortality rates. Do you think it's likely these countries just have far superior health and treatment than other countries or is there going to be issues with reporting? 

Lack of common sense or stubbornness, it has to be one of these to explain your view.  

taking your 5 paragraphs in turn 
 

1. First paragraph is meaningless and irrelevant

2. Do you have any stats to back up your claims in paragraph 2? You do realise that people in Sweden don’t spread themselves evenly throughout the country don’t you?

I know you don’t like facts but I’ll give you some anyway

85% of people in Sweden live in urban centres of population.

A quarter of the Swedish population has an immigrant background. A third of the Swedish population has at least one parent born abroad.

3. Third paragraph - answer is obviously no

4. Another meaningless, irrelevant and fact free paragraph.

5. I’d say they both explain yours 

 

[bazil85]

Just now, oaksoft said:

Honestly Baz, I stopped reading when I read the words "the resources are there".

Not responding would have achieved the same goal then. 

[oaksoft]

Just now, bazil85 said:

Not responding would have achieved the same goal then. 

No I think you need to be told directly.

Like I said in my edited response, - maybe if you had actually been directly affected in some way by this situation you'd show a bit more understanding of the bigger picture.

[bazil85]

7 minutes ago, Sue Denim said:

So let me get this straight, I’m guilty of only focusing on individual stats in isolation and refuse to look at the big picture because......

I asked you to look at the bigger picture - excess deaths - instead of the isolated picture - Covid deaths.

You didn’t really think that through baz, did you? 😂

Excess deaths are the gold standard comparison. Different countries count Covid deaths in different ways. Even England and Scotland have wildly different ways of counting them.

Covid deaths in isolation take no account of the differences. They take no account of the vulnerable population at risk due to excess / non excess deaths in the months beforehand.

Take your own advice baz and look at the bigger picture.

Utter nonsense, the bigger picture globally is that lockdown appears to have been the right call. You've been shown to be wrong and the only way you can hang onto it for your pride is to go "but but but Sweden"

Excess deaths are not the "gold standard" there isn't a "gold standard" on comparing countries, as even the small number of people on your side have said. Given population density, multi-generational households, people movement, etc, etc, etc, looking only at excessive deaths for countries that need to be compared with caveats doesn't work.

But do you accept that given excessive death in the UK has overwhelmingly been Covid19 related and that we factually know more contact = more transmission, you have been wrong on your lockdown views to date? 

You completely contradict yourself with the second to last paragraph. 

[Sue Denim]

That’s the ONS and NRS weekly stats now both out.

deaths in Scotland were 2.5% below the average while they were 2.7% below the average in England.

Over the past 5 weeks, deaths in Scotland have been 2.0% below the average compared with 2.7% below the average in England.

This isn’t quite matching up with the impression that the SNP are giving, that the situation is better in Scotland than in England.

The problem with England is their ridiculous method of counting Covid deaths.

First table below is excess deaths in Scotland by setting for all of 2020. Second table is for last week. Yet again, we can see that people were dying last week because they couldn’t access the NHS.

Final graph compares weekly deaths per million in Scotland and England this year. Slight timing difference between ONS and NRS stats.