Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Bud the Baker said:

We're I reckon you're in a minority about improved treatments.

I think it's a different demographic being infected over the summer - a lot of younger folk and the just recently the student intake into Halls of Residence which as I said earlier are just petri dishes.

Um like I said the increase is already being reflected in the figures, if "the timetable" between phases has to be revised then so be it - the pandemic is less than a year old and our knowledge is being refined by the day.

 

Have a nice evening, it's been interesting.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Russian Saint said:

 


The alleged 4 Covid deaths were on Friday, the figure of 1,526 was reported on STV, I’m assuming either for Friday & Saturday or Saturday and Sunday.

Out of that figure, I’ve no idea the age grouping, how many had underlying conditions or how many actually died directly from Covid.


Scottish Government

@scotgov

801,319 people in Scotland have been tested for #coronavirus

The total confirmed as positive has risen by 758 to 32,209 (32,209 is the overall total, not the current amount of people that have Covid)

The number of deaths of patients who tested positive remains at 2,530


 

 

That's fine being in a minority of one on this site means at present I'm being bombarded with different information from different people.

4 on Friday, 0 today = 4 over the last two days.

In the scheme of things it doesn't change anything I've been saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Bud the Baker said:

Well I wouldn't be changing my opinion based on one days figures, which are for Scotland only as the UK figures have been published yet - FSs graph was for the UK so you're changing horses mid-stream :whistle apples & oranges and all that! Plus we all know that the stattos like to take the weekend off so the figure is going to be artificially low anyway. 

A more relevant figure would be the rolling total for the week or does that not suit YOUR narrative? 

*****************

Not that I want to bang on about the lack of competency in the governments figures but the delay in the governments track&testing procedure led to them changing policy earlier in the week saying that tests could now be taken after 8 days and not 5 - you can't top changing your policy to suit the science incompetence.

******************

For the record, here is the provisional UK total for today - it's called comparing apples with apples! 

 

So even your stats show we are nowhere near the levels reached early in the campaign when testing was in its infancy. More proof if proof was needed the current restrictions are overkill. Many ails kill far more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bud the Baker said:

It's already occurring as you admit in your other post.

 

If it's already flatlining and I'm wrong then I'll be as glad as anyone. 

2428 in hospital for Covid in the UK on Oct 1 up from around 500 in mid-Sept see Graph 3

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/04/covid-cases-and-deaths-today-coronavirus-uk-map

 

2428 is less than 2 people per hospital across the UK.

And we've shut down most of the country for that.

Do you genuinely that is a proportionate response?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, faraway saint said:

You've done nothing but muddy the water all day.

The initial point was that deaths are not proportional to the numbers of cases.

Therefore the current measures are not proportional, never mind another 2 week lockdown at Christmas.

🎅

 

 

Oh FFS as cases go up the deaths are going up as well so they ARE directly proportional to each other.

The proportionality constant is almost zero but that's not the same thing as saying they are not proportional.

Honestly, stick to grommet fitting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, theknickerwetter said:

What are the myths ? Are you saying Mastur Gates didn't make those pay-offs? lts pretty much common knowledge , if you care to look or you could just go on being brainwashed by the lamestream media . The new religion is the telliesvision , you are supposed to believe everything they say is gospel and if you want to continue to do that , that is your right .

You clearly don't want to debate , all you want to do is have a wee chat about what the latest is on the narrative , which is fine . You are perfectly free to keep on believing everything the tell-lies-vision tells you , which has filled the void in your life since the decline of organised religion and you now being stopped attending your favourite fitba stadium.

The trouble with the science , during this time of mass hysteria is , it is not very scientific

 

If it’s common knowledge then where is the proof? 
 

Your quote about science is confusing? I have found a “scientific” research paper that highlights my previous point rather well.

 

 

 

D99C992B-9B2A-4B54-A80D-C0E6A155AFFC.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, ALBIONSAINT said:

Czechoslovakia going into lockdown again, Paris and Madrid both in lockdown and cases increasing in southern Italy. I can see a short lockdown coming our way soon.  

Let us know when it happens so i can buy 500 toilet rolls!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, oaksoft said:

Oh FFS as cases go up the deaths are going up as well so they ARE directly proportional to each other.

The proportionality constant is almost zero but that's not the same thing as saying they are not proportional.

Honestly, stick to grommet fitting.

Are you ok, it seems you're having a wee episode? :blink:

You're making a fool of yourself, everyone knows what the point is except you?

Maybe you should pass the business over to one of your family before it's too late. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, stlucifer said:

So even your stats show we are nowhere near the levels reached early in the campaign when testing was in its infancy. More proof if proof was needed the current restrictions are overkill. Many ails kill far more.

I never said the situation was as bad as March/April. I am saying that  

  • Number of cases recorded 

  • Hospitalizations due to the virus 

  • Deaths due to the virus 

 Are all currently on the rise, given this what current restrictions do you think are overkill?

*******************

Although I am in favour of masks in public transport/shops I have also listed some of the current measures that I feel were foreseeable mistakes (Opening Halls of Residence, certainly at full capacity) or unlikely to be well heeded (the10pm curfew). 

As for “many ails kill far more” I’d say that is complacent and unproveable going into our first Covid winter, that these Covid deaths will be in addition to all our other "ails" and as I have said on many occasions in this thread my inclination is to err on the side of caution. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, oaksoft said:

2428 is less than 2 people per hospital across the UK.

And we've shut down most of the country for that.

Do you genuinely that is a proportionate response?

I think saying that most of the country is shut down at present is an exaggeration, however look at the trend – the number of people hospitalized with Covid is about 3 times what it was a month ago and rising. This as we enter winter when we know the NHSs capacity will be tested. 

 So yeah, I’m still broadly in favour of the current restrictions. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shockerooney! :o

Quote

Many people have been hoping that when a vaccine becomes available, that will be the wonder development that allows life to return to normal.

But the FT has been speaking to Kate Bingham, head of the government’s UK vaccine taskforce, and she said that if or when a vaccine does become available, less than half the population is likely to get it. In their story (paywall) Anna Gross and Jasmine Cameron-Chileshe report:

Kate Bingham told the Financial Times that vaccinating everyone in the country was “not going to happen”, adding: “We just need to vaccinate everyone at risk” ...

Ms Bingham said the government was aiming to vaccinate about 30m people, compared with a UK population of about 67m, if a successful vaccine against Covid-19 was found.

“People keep talking about ‘time to vaccinate the whole population’, but that is misguided,” she said.

“There’s going to be no vaccination of people under 18. It’s an adult-only vaccine, for people over 50, focusing on health workers and carehome workers and the vulnerable” ...

Ms Bingham said vaccination policy would be aimed at those “most at risk” and noted that vaccinating healthy people, who are much less likely to have severe outcomes from Covid-19, “could cause them some freak harm”, potentially tipping the scales in terms of the risk-benefit analysis.

To me this seems to be endorsing anti-vaxxers to an extent, if your saying over half the population might be better off without getting the vaccine then how many eligible gammon types will say it's not for me?

Edited by Bud the Baker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Bud the Baker said:

Shockerooney! :o

To me this seems to be endorsing anti-vaxxers to an extent, if your saying over half the population might be better off without getting the vaccine then how many gammon types will say it's not for me?

No way is that endorsing the anti-vac lobby, no medicine is without risk and the ultra-common "flu-like symptoms" that arise from most vaccines can make someone sick-ish for a day.  No need to makr loe- tisk hrslty people ill when they are unlikely to be bafly affected by the virus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bud the Baker said:

I think saying that most of the country is shut down at present is an exaggeration, however look at the trend – the number of people hospitalized with Covid is about 3 times what it was a month ago and rising. This as we enter winter when we know the NHSs capacity will be tested. 

 So yeah, I’m still broadly in favour of the current restrictions. 

 

 

But 3 times almost zero is still almost zero. It's just 2 people per hospital in the UK.

Libraries, cinemas, theatres, football stadia, doctors surgeries, dentists surgeries, pubs, restauarants, universities, colleges, nightclubs, soft play centres..... We can argue over the word "most" but what is happening right now is catastrophic. And for just 2 hospitalisations due to covid per hospital in the UK.

Edited by oaksoft

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, beyond our ken said:

No way is that endorsing the anti-vac lobby, no medicine is without risk and the ultra-common "flu-like symptoms" that arise from most vaccines can make someone sick-ish for a day.  No need to makr loe- tisk hrslty people ill when they are unlikely to be bafly affected by the virus

"Sickish for a day" is different to the "some freak harm" that Ms. Bingham seems prepared to accept - I'd say bringing in a risky vaccine would be counterproductive and would rather wait until a safe(ish) vaccine that wasn't considered to be potentially more harmful than beneficial to over 50% of the population was available. A vaccine with that level of efficacy will be a hard sell to many of it's target audience of which I am one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Bud the Baker said:

Shockerooney! :o

To me this seems to be endorsing anti-vaxxers to an extent, if your saying over half the population might be better off without getting the vaccine then how many eligible gammon types will say it's not for me?

It's irrelevant. People should be and will be free to make these decisions for themselves.

The anti-vaxxer thing was about preventing their kids from being protected from measles and was a different thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, oaksoft said:

It's irrelevant. People should be and will be free to make these decisions for themselves.

The anti-vaxxer thing was about preventing their kids from being protected from measles and was a different thing.

I agree you're correct, however I still reckon introducing a vaccine as risky as Ms. Bingham seems prepared to accept seems counterproductive to me or perhaps I'm just reaching the gammon "tipping point"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Bud the Baker said:

I agree you're correct, however I still reckon introducing a vaccine as risky as Ms. Bingham seems prepared to accept seems counterproductive to me or perhaps I'm just reaching the gammon "tipping point"

"Gammon tipping point".

That's a great line right there. 😄

Share this post


Link to post
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...