Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Just now, Hiram Abiff said:

 


But 12% is okay if it’s flu?

Clearly yes and your shocking indifference to human life.

 

 

The death rate for the flu is something very low like 0.005%, educate yourself. Better yet, leave the decision making to the global health professionals and experts who are on my side on this. Nae luck. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Hiram Abiff said:

 


Spin away.

No it’s not been accepted that the death rate for flu is much lower.

44,000 people died of the flu in 2015 who wouldn’t have died had we locked down the economy.

Your disregard for these deaths is shocking.

 

Like I say, it isn't an effective argument technique. I suppose it's all you have given the health experts are against your view. We use what we can eh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Your view would cripple health services globally & massively increase infected/ avoidable death rates. But hey at least the economy would be back at a higher level (for a while) 


My view is the view of Sweden and it’s not crippling their services any more than its crippling ours.

Your view is based on an estimate by Imperial College which has not been peer reviewed. It’s based on an estimate where they have confirmed that the model is old, the calculations have not been verified and they have not been documented.

They have released neither the code behind their model nor their assumptions.

Other experts have challenged their model including a group at Oxford University.

Their model states that takes no account of the harm that a lockdown will do to the health service and does not estimate for the number of people who will die as a result.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The death rate for the flu is something very low like 0.005%, educate yourself. Better yet, leave the decision making to the global health professionals and experts who are on my side on this. Nae luck. 


And what is the death rate for coronavirus?

“ Nae luck”? Really???

Brilliant!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Hiram Abiff said:

 


My view is the view of Sweden and it’s not crippling their services any more than its crippling ours.

Your view is based on an estimate by Imperial College which has not been peer reviewed. It’s based on an estimate where they have confirmed that the model is old, the calculations have not been verified and they have not been documented.

They have released neither the code behind their model nor their assumptions.

Other experts have challenged their model including a group at Oxford University.

Their model states that takes no account of the harm that a lockdown will do to the health service and does not estimate for the number of people who will die as a result.
 

 

You assume we are just like Sweden with no basis. As I already pointed out to you, it is speculated the much larger number of single occupancy properties in Sweden is a major factor. We don't have that in many built up areas of Scotland. It also may be very premature, we don't know what could happen there. Some experts are predicting mass infection. 

The point that also completely beats you, which I pointed out earlier in the week is we had similar restrictions in place to what you want, 2-4 weeks ago and data that came out of the back of that shows a clear rise in infected. It's only now we are seeing a slowing/ flattening, correlated with the timescales of the lock-down. If we left it as you wanted, the data points to that increase continuing. You can't show why it would suddenly stop. 

In a scenario like this, it is predicted there will be contrasting views. Maybe we are going with the risk adverse view. But I'd take that when it comes to human life everyday. I suppose your views being more aligned to the right, you're more happy to gamble with human life and protect the economy. Fine, I'll never agree with that but you're welcome to have that opinion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You assume we are just like Sweden with no basis. As I already pointed out to you, it is speculated the much larger number of single occupancy properties in Sweden is a major factor. We don't have that in many built up areas of Scotland. It also may be very premature, we don't know what could happen there. Some experts are predicting mass infection. 

The point that also completely beats you, which I pointed out earlier in the week is we had similar restrictions in place to what you want, 2-4 weeks ago and data that came out of the back of that shows a clear rise in infected. It's only now we are seeing a slowing/ flattening, correlated with the timescales of the lock-down. If we left it as you wanted, the data points to that increase continuing. You can't show why it would suddenly stop. 

In a scenario like this, it is predicted there will be contrasting views. Maybe we are going with the risk adverse view. But I'd take that when it comes to human life everyday. I suppose your views being more aligned to the right, you're more happy to gamble with human life and protect the economy. Fine, I'll never agree with that but you're welcome to have that opinion. 

 

Sweden is no different than any other Northern European country in the coronavirus data.

 

And you wouldn’t take your view with flu?

 

You’re happy to throw 44,000 people under a bus?

 

I suppose your views being more aligned to the far right and happy to support a fascist police state means you are more happy to gamble with human life. Fine I’ll agree with that but you’re welcome to your opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This was on the BBC website the other day, no matter how you cut it, it’s bad news all round 

What about the impact of the lockdown?

The lockdown, itself, however could cost lives.

Prof Robert Dinwall, from Nottingham Trent University, says "the collateral damage to society and the economy" could include:

  • mental health problems and suicides linked to self-isolation
  • heart problems from lack of activity
  • the impact on health from increased unemployment and reduced living standards

Others have also pointed to the health cost from steps such as delaying routine operations and cancer screening.

Meanwhile, University of Bristol researchers say the benefit of a long-term lockdown in reducing premature deaths could be outweighed by the lost life expectancy from a prolonged economic dip.

And the tipping point, they say, is a 6.4% decline in the size of the economy - on a par with what happened following the 2008 financial crash. 

It would see a loss of three months of life on average across the population because of factors from declining living standards to poorer health care.



And baz supports this

A shocking disregard for human life

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Hiram Abiff said:

 

Sweden is no different than any other Northern European country in the coronavirus data.

 

And you wouldn’t take your view with flu?

 

You’re happy to throw 44,000 people under a bus?

 

I suppose your views being more aligned to the far right and happy to support a fascist police state means you are more happy to gamble with human life. Fine I’ll agree with that but you’re welcome to your opinion.

Incorrect 

already pointed out differences with flu 

spin 

already shown why this is an ineffective arguing technique but I do appreciate it’s all you’ve got. That clearly frustrates you but feel free to continue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Hiram Abiff said:

 


In other words, you don’t actually know?

Early assessment from Wuhan says 0.04 to 0.12%

 

No, it’s certainly being recorded. There is of course the debate about how many would have died anyway but I have given my view on this already. 

5 minutes ago, Hiram Abiff said:


Dear me, just noticed this. Maybe closer to 0.1% baz.

Inflating the rate 20 times over and then telling me to educate myself.
 

 

Eh? If the flu was 0.1% then I wouldn’t have been inflating it, I would have been underestimating it. I’ve also found nothing that suggests 1 in 1,000 people that get the flu will die but feel free to share. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Slartibartfast said:

From the BBC:

"... in Paisley three men were fined for being in a van together on Saturday.

Police said they had no reasonable excuse to be together and they told officers they had no intention of complying with regulations."

Fcuk em. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/The-evidence-on-Covid-19-is-not-as-clear-as-we-think

"It certainly seems reasonable, now, that a degree of social distancing should be maintained for a while, especially for the elderly and the immune-suppressed."

The writer seems to be somewhat ambivalent.  It is right for any scientist to keep their eyes on all sides of an argument, even when they already have a firm view of what the evidence is telling them

Edited by beyond our ken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Slartibartfast said:

My thoughts entirely.

You would think that anyone with a modicum if sense would at least feign ignorance instead of doing what they did.

Indeed, similar to the article posted a few days ago about woman at a train station, arrogance, feck em all. 

Share this post


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

I know. I apologise. But MI6 won't let me reveal who my relatives really are 🙄😳

I'm beginning to wonder if the weirdo who wanted to film young boys playing football has any family or friends hiimself. 

Apology accepted, don't do it again ya fud. 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, faraway saint said:

Indeed, similar to the article posted a few days ago about woman at a train station, arrogance, feck em all. 

Erm, is it this woman you're talking about - if so the conviction was deemed unsafe & quashed.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/coronavirus/coronavirus-how-woman-loitering-at-train-station-was-wrongfully-convicted-in-shambolic-case/ar-BB125zrP?ocid=spartanntp

Share this post


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

A technicality, feck her. 

Share this post


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

Fcuk em. 

A taser to their balls would be appropriate. We had 2 young females running riot in East Kilbride town centre cursing at security and threatening to lick windows. Would not listen and clear that we have no deterrents in society that garner any respect. Grinds my gears. I would fine the parents and maybe that would be more effective to those neds.

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...