Jump to content

faraway saint

Coronavirus

Recommended Posts


10 hours ago, bazil85 said:

You again show it is beyond reasonable doubt that lockdown limits the spread of the virus and saves lives. US collectively has had a poor response to this virus and that is reflected in its infection and death rates. Trying to use this country to evidence you're clearly incorrect view is madness. Is the pandemic still "over" in the UK?

Shut ur puss!

Share this post


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

Well I have to go with FTOF rather than faraway, despite BJ saying for a week or so "it's about data not dates" it appears he's veering towards his right wing backbenchers and away from his scientific advisers...

Whitty at odds with Johnson over 'big bang' reopening of schools in England | Schools | The Guardian

Haven't you already said Johnson would have been gone previously? :rolleyes:

You're getting mixed up with wishful thinking and probability. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, faraway saint said:

Haven't you already said Johnson would have been gone previously? :rolleyes:

You're getting mixed up with wishful thinking and probability. 

Don't think so - I always fancied this summer with the "triumphant exit" I've already described,. Factors like "sources close to the PM :rolleyes:" telling the press that his salary isn't enough to cover all his needs make me reckon riding off into the sunset, giving £100k a pop after dinner speeches, a mega book deal and company directorships will look like the cushier option compared to staying on, rebuilding the economy, saving the union and managing the right wing of his party.

Desperate to see him go, quite the opposite, as a supporter of Scottish Independence I can't think of a better Tory leader.

Anyway we won't have long to wait...

Edited by Bud the Baker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Slarti said:
9 minutes ago, faraway saint said:
It says his e-mail was dated on 13th January last year? 

That just looks like a typo.

When looking at documents that could be fake things like that, for starters, are things that ring alarm bells. 

While I agree with the sentiment, the REAL numbers are people that have died from Covid, I do wonder why an enquiry, as you say below. 

2 minutes ago, Slarti said:

A public enquiry about what?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Even if it's genuine, I still don't see any reason for an enquiry. It's been very clear what the numbers announced mean (within 28 days), so I don't see anything sinister about only 10 in one particular hospital having ONLY covid mentioned as cause of death. Whether "within 28 days" means that the person died due to covud and whether it is a useful measure are different matters. Personally, I don't think it's very useful and neither is "covid mentioned on the death certificate". I think they only use them as they are quick and easy to count, so enable more up to date reporting.

Share this post


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

Even if it's genuine, I still don't see any reason for an enquiry. It's been very clear what the numbers announced mean (within 28 days), so I don't see anything sinister about only 10 in one particular hospital having ONLY covid mentioned as cause of death. Whether "within 28 days" means that the person died due to covud and whether it is a useful measure are different matters. Personally, I don't think it's very useful and neither is "covid mentioned on the death certificate". I think they only use them as they are quick and easy to count, so enable more up to date reporting.

This "28 days" has been a discussion point since way back.

Extreme deaths, such as car crashes and other "accidents" have been used to drastically minimise the numbers but there is no doubt that any set of numbers that are used are way over the deaths FROM Covid.

I remember finding an early study from Italy that reckoned only 12% or 18% od deaths were actually caused by Covid.

Share this post


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

Even if it's genuine, I still don't see any reason for an enquiry. It's been very clear what the numbers announced mean (within 28 days), so I don't see anything sinister about only 10 in one particular hospital having ONLY covid mentioned as cause of death. Whether "within 28 days" means that the person died due to covud and whether it is a useful measure are different matters. Personally, I don't think it's very useful and neither is "covid mentioned on the death certificate". I think they only use them as they are quick and easy to count, so enable more up to date reporting.

Agreed. It's not a useful metric at all.

Having covid presumably can trigger other things to actual cause a death and accurately attributing that death solely to covid would be nigh on impossible I'd have thought.

Whether we like it or not, the covid death figures are just not going to be accurate one way or another.

I don't see any reason for having a public enquiry.

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...