China Coronavirus

[Angelo]

I see Sweden have gone past 10,000 deaths due to Covid and their PM is facing calls to resign.

Can anyone confirm if it's true that 50% of patients in hospital with Covid got it in hospital. I didn't see that on the news or in any of the papers.

Hopefully with the Modena vaccine approved the rate of vaccinations can speed up here and around Europe. It's interesting that Germany have sourced their own supply of vaccines outside of the EU allocation to speed up the process of vaccinating everyone. When Paul Reid of the HSE was asked on Newstalk this morning wold Ireland source their own supply like he wouldn't be drawn on the idea but didn't sound like it was something Ireland would be doing.

Dr Henry said "secondary outbreaks" are also taking place in hospitals and said the proportion of people who are acquiring Covid-19 in hospital is half of the total number of patients.

https://www.rte.ie/news/coronavirus/2021/0114/1189739-vaccine-numbers/

SOME OF THE HOSPITALS. was left out the quote you copied and pasted.

If you're going to quote the doctor, at least quote him correctly. You really do see things different to everybody else

Oh right.

So you have resorted to semantics.

It's perfectly ok now because it is some of the hospitals.

No problem at all there then, no accountability needed there then.

[dublin7]

I see Sweden have gone past 10,000 deaths due to Covid and their PM is facing calls to resign.

Can anyone confirm if it's true that 50% of patients in hospital with Covid got it in hospital. I didn't see that on the news or in any of the papers.

Hopefully with the Modena vaccine approved the rate of vaccinations can speed up here and around Europe. It's interesting that Germany have sourced their own supply of vaccines outside of the EU allocation to speed up the process of vaccinating everyone. When Paul Reid of the HSE was asked on Newstalk this morning wold Ireland source their own supply like he wouldn't be drawn on the idea but didn't sound like it was something Ireland would be doing.

Dr Henry said "secondary outbreaks" are also taking place in hospitals and said the proportion of people who are acquiring Covid-19 in hospital is half of the total number of patients.

https://www.rte.ie/news/coronavirus/2021/0114/1189739-vaccine-numbers/

SOME OF THE HOSPITALS. was left out the quote you copied and pasted.

If you're going to quote the doctor, at least quote him correctly. You really do see things different to everybody else

Oh right.

So you have resorted to semantics.

It's perfectly ok now because it is some of the hospitals.

No problem at all there then, no accountability needed there then.

To use your analogy. If one person gets the flu its just one case. If some people get the flu its more serious. If everyone gets the flu it's a pandemic

Why did you delete that part from his quote though?

[Angelo]

I see Sweden have gone past 10,000 deaths due to Covid and their PM is facing calls to resign.

Can anyone confirm if it's true that 50% of patients in hospital with Covid got it in hospital. I didn't see that on the news or in any of the papers.

Hopefully with the Modena vaccine approved the rate of vaccinations can speed up here and around Europe. It's interesting that Germany have sourced their own supply of vaccines outside of the EU allocation to speed up the process of vaccinating everyone. When Paul Reid of the HSE was asked on Newstalk this morning wold Ireland source their own supply like he wouldn't be drawn on the idea but didn't sound like it was something Ireland would be doing.

Dr Henry said "secondary outbreaks" are also taking place in hospitals and said the proportion of people who are acquiring Covid-19 in hospital is half of the total number of patients.

https://www.rte.ie/news/coronavirus/2021/0114/1189739-vaccine-numbers/

SOME OF THE HOSPITALS. was left out the quote you copied and pasted.

If you're going to quote the doctor, at least quote him correctly. You really do see things different to everybody else

Oh right.

So you have resorted to semantics.

It's perfectly ok now because it is some of the hospitals.

No problem at all there then, no accountability needed there then.

To use your analogy. If one person gets the flu its just one case. If some people get the flu its more serious. If everyone gets the flu it's a pandemic

Why did you delete that part from his quote though?

But the flu is widespread every winter.

The UK had 50k excess deaths during flu season in 17/18.

The north had a record high of 2,101 deaths in the bad flu season of Jan 18 - Covid has yet to reach this level of deaths in one month.

In the South you regularly have 700 people on hospital trolleys every winter waiting for hospital beds.

Is that not an annual pandemic?

This winter we are led to believe flu has been eradicated from society. So we can save all those lives we lose every winter with seasonal lockdowns you'll be happy to know. All those extra deaths you happily accept every year.

[dublin7]

That's all been said before by you.

I'll try again - Why did you delete part of the doctor's quote when making your point?

If your going to quote someone at least tell everyone what he actually said

[Angelo]

That's all been said before by you.

I'll try again - Why did you delete part of the doctor's quote when making your point?

If your going to quote someone at least tell everyone what he actually said

You're.

And you're deflecting over semantics. You clearly don't see a problem with it, which says a lot. The facts don't seem to bother you.

[Mike Tyson]

Angelo, few questions for you that will hopefully help me understand your approach.

1. Why are you comparing Covid to Flu?
2. You've stated that Covid in the main hit the elderly. So the majority of deaths would come from that cohort. As a consequence of this, should we not expect Jan deaths '18 to be higher than '20 given the amount of deaths on the elderly cohort already as opposed to the preceding months in 2018 - i.e there is less numbers of the elderly cohort so logically the total number of deaths should be less?
3. You've stated lockdowns don't work. What level of compliance would you say has been adhered to during lockdowns by the general public?
4. Have you any examples of areas which didn't initiate a lockdown which has successfully suppressed the spread of the virus?
5. Why are you comparing 'Winter' as Jan - Mar?

Apologies if these have been covered in previous posts but I haven't read back in detail. If they have, should be easy enough to just copy the answers.

1. Why not? They are both viruses. The only difference is we seem to accept excess death from flu every year willy nilly, record deaths in Jan 2018 - why did barely anyone bat an eyelid, a vaccine was also available. What we are being told by the health experts is that there is no flu this year. So if we locked down every winter, the death tolls would fall rapidly you expect. So why are we willing to accept deaths with flu every year but not with Covid? The number in the Winter flu season in Dec-Mar 17/18 was off the charts.

2. Old people die, it's life. As you get older your body gives up on you, what's the excess death levels like this year? Probably higher, I don't deny is a massive threat to this cohort but anymore so than flu? I don't think so, if you're 85 and have heart disease, alzheimers, cancer or any other debilitating disease, a mild enough ailment can push you over the edge. It's a sad reality of life, we don't live forever. What I'd like to see is how many of that cohort have died from cancer, heart disease, respiratory illness etc in 2020 compared to prior years. If that's fallen significantly then can we say that all they have done is substitute large numbers of deaths of one ailment for another due to the arbitrary nature of recording deaths.

3. So your saying compliance is the issue with why lockdowns don't work? Well this is lockdown no 3, the issue is why have governments not put in place better measures in that time. We were told by the WHO months back that Lockdowns should not be used as the only strategy, yet they are. People aren't complying because lockdowns are not sustainable, they are not practical. They have been proven to fail before, they will fail again.

4. I haven't said that if we don't lockdown we will suppress the virus, that is nonsense. What I have contended is the hugely damaging nature to society as a whole - the economy, employment, mental health, physical wellbeing, social interaction, support services for vulnerable groups are going to have huge and long lasting consequences. Lockdowns as you have acknowledged have not brought the no of cases down.

5. Dec - Mar is regarded as the peak months for seasonal flu. If we are comparing and contrasting the actual damage of Covid v seasonal flu we should compare them in the same area.

This virus is of minimal threat to the under 60s, virtually no threat to anyone in that age group who do not have underlying health concerns. What special provisions have governments put in place to protect those groupings? What's happening in the hospitals now is disgraceful and on government's hands.

Thanks for replying.

1. But why particularly the flu as opposed to any other virus? Why not compare it to other Coronavirus? I don't think anyone is willing to accept deaths to be honest. I would hazard a guess that given this virus is unknown and a vaccine only now on the scene, that is why extreme measures such as lockdowns happen.
2. You're going off on a tangent here from my question - should we not expect the Jan 18 numbers to be higher than Jan 20? Regarding excess deaths, I'm unsure about this year given we are only 15 days in, however 2020 has the highest since 1945.
3. I'm asking you what do you think the level of compliance to the measures implemented has been? If compliance is the issue, more iterations of the same rules but with the same level of compliance isn't going to make a difference is it?
4. Never said you did! I'm asking for examples of areas which haven't locked down and have successfully suppressed the virus?
5. Yes agree, apologies I had thought you had referenced it as 'Winter' in the past and so was more querying your definition of winter.

Completely agree on your last sentence.

Do you believe that we should abandon lockdowns and if so what should be the approach? And genuinely do you believe they have had no bearing on the spread of Covid?

[Angelo]

Thanks for replying.

1. But why particularly the flu as opposed to any other virus? Why not compare it to other Coronavirus? I don't think anyone is willing to accept deaths to be honest. I would hazard a guess that given this virus is unknown and a vaccine only now on the scene, that is why extreme measures such as lockdowns happen.
2. You're going off on a tangent here from my question - should we not expect the Jan 18 numbers to be higher than Jan 20? Regarding excess deaths, I'm unsure about this year given we are only 15 days in, however 2020 has the highest since 1945.
3. I'm asking you what do you think the level of compliance to the measures implemented has been? If compliance is the issue, more iterations of the same rules but with the same level of compliance isn't going to make a difference is it?
4. Never said you did! I'm asking for examples of areas which haven't locked down and have successfully suppressed the virus?
5. Yes agree, apologies I had thought you had referenced it as 'Winter' in the past and so was more querying your definition of winter.

Completely agree on your last sentence.

Do you believe that we should abandon lockdowns and if so what should be the approach? And genuinely do you believe they have had no bearing on the spread of Covid?

1. Because the winter flu kills annually and in particularly bad strains, it kills excessively. We have been told we have no winter flu this year, so we have had the means of getting rid of flu every winter so it turns out we actually accept deaths from flu every year, sometimes in huge waves while doing very little to combat it. This is why I find it hard to see the logic in our reaction to Covid when we accept massive death tolls on an annual basis from flu.

2. Absolutely not. If we accept such large numbers of death from flu then how can we justify the long term damages lockdowns inflict on us. It defies logic.

3. That's not my decision and I think it's irrelevant. If lockdowns are neither going to be complied with or if there is not appetite for people to comply with them, then what's the point? Why are we using them when we know they won't work? When we know they are not practical? When we know they are no sustainable? People are tired of lockdowns and restrictions so they lose their effectiveness. The problem is governments did very little in those lockdown periods and not just use them to absolve themselves of their failures.

4. They don't exist, but it's not a relevant point as Lockdowns have failed and caused countless other issues in addition to their failure.

5. Agreed.

I think lockdowns have failed and cause long lasting additional problems. I would go with reasonable restrictions and a much more focused effort on protecting the vulnerable and hospital infections.

[Milltown Row2]

I wonder is flu tested? There was a poster saying flu wasn't tested

[dublin7]

That's all been said before by you.

I'll try again - Why did you delete part of the doctor's quote when making your point?

If your going to quote someone at least tell everyone what he actually said

You're.

And you're deflecting over semantics. You clearly don't see a problem with it, which says a lot. The facts don't seem to bother you.

So you're saying misquoting someone doesn't count as misrepresenting the facts? does that not bother you? You're still deflecting the question. I'll try for a 3rd time. Why did you misquote the doctor?

[Mike Tyson]

1. Because the winter flu kills annually and in particularly bad strains, it kills excessively. We have been told we have no winter flu this year, so we have had the means of getting rid of flu every winter so it turns out we actually accept deaths from flu every year, sometimes in huge waves while doing very little to combat it. This is why I find it hard to see the logic in our reaction to Covid when we accept massive death tolls on an annual basis from flu.

2. Absolutely not. If we accept such large numbers of death from flu then how can we justify the long term damages lockdowns inflict on us. It defies logic.

3. That's not my decision and I think it's irrelevant. If lockdowns are neither going to be complied with or if there is not appetite for people to comply with them, then what's the point? Why are we using them when we know they won't work? When we know they are not practical? When we know they are no sustainable? People are tired of lockdowns and restrictions so they lose their effectiveness. The problem is governments did very little in those lockdown periods and not just use them to absolve themselves of their failures.

4. They don't exist, but it's not a relevant point as Lockdowns have failed and caused countless other issues in addition to their failure.

5. Agreed.

I think lockdowns have failed and cause long lasting additional problems. I would go with reasonable restrictions and a much more focused effort on protecting the vulnerable and hospital infections.

1. I don't think we accept deaths, we simply try to manage flu as best we can. As I stated, given this is a new virus and no one has any idea about implications of it & vaccines are only arriving on the scene I would say that's why the measures of lockdown etc have happened. I'm not an expert in anything related to infectious diseases so I could be completely wrong.
2. Again I dont think anyone is accepting deaths - I'm talking about expectations. You can expect deaths to be higher/lower for a given period but it doesnt mean the deaths are acceptable. We expect people to die on the roads for example but that doesn't mean we just accept it, we (car manufacturers etc) try to improve safety all the time.
3. Well we know that people dont pay tax, declare income, stick to the speed limits, wear their seatbeat etc but does that mean we should stop having those laws in place? This is where personal responsibility comes into the equation. Like most things, be it claiming expenses at work, keeping your dog from $hiting on public parks or not abiding by lockdown rules, it only takes a few people to take the pi$$ and ruin it for everyone. I agree people are tired of them and govts are far from blameless.
4. I wouldnt agree that they have failed, I would think they have certainly suppressed spreading the virus more than if everything was to continue as per Feb 2020. If we take New Zealand & Australia as examples of islands which implemented lockdowns at the start they seem to have coped a lot better than the island of Ireland, but maybe that speaks more about the ineptitude of the politicians on the island.

I completely agree with your last sentence again. However as touched upon in point 3, people will push it and think it shouldn't apply to them. We have seen it with masks, social bubbles etc already which then results in harsher lockdowns. Slightly off topic but every European govt saw this coming and had time to implement restrictions which would lessen the impact. Baffles me why it wasn't done. RadioGAAGAA listed actions to take at the very beginning which weren't and if they were I think we would be in a much better place.

[Angelo]

That's all been said before by you.

I'll try again - Why did you delete part of the doctor's quote when making your point?

If your going to quote someone at least tell everyone what he actually said

You're.

And you're deflecting over semantics. You clearly don't see a problem with it, which says a lot. The facts don't seem to bother you.

So you're saying misquoting someone doesn't count as misrepresenting the facts? does that not bother you? You're still deflecting the question. I'll try for a 3rd time. Why did you misquote the doctor?

And again why are you focusing on the semantics rather than the core issue.

Will you address the core issue at all or are you just interested in talking about something else?

[HiMucker]

1. Do we test for flu? For contrast the UK has carried out a recorded 62m tests for Covid. How many flu tests have been carried out?

We don't need to test for flu because it is far less virulent and far less lethal.

This was pointed out, oh I don't know, about 9 f*kking months ago.

2. How many positive cases of flu have been confirmed? There have been 3.2m confirmed cases of Covid due to the mass testing in place.

If someone has died of pneumonia without having COVID, then they won't be a COVID death.

If someone has had both, then it'll likely be attributed to COVID.

But here's the thing that you STILL aren't getting - with transmission vectors all but strangled for the flu - its more or less negligible this winter.

3. Look at the arbitrary way in which we record deahts. We know that if you die within 28 days of a positive Covid test you are classified as a Covid death, arbitrarily. See snippet below from a BBC report, link attached. Also see the note on the attached on the published NISRA figures

The chart I pointed out is more detailed than the f**king BBC.

It also differentiates between factor and cause - which is different from the footer detail which applies to the catch all number. Again, you aren't reading and interpreting your own information!

Finally "beneath the 5 year average". How did the winter flu season of 17/18 read with the 5 year average prior to that? 50k excess deaths over the normal for that time of year was the reported figure for the UK. In the O6, we had a record 2,101 death toll for a month in January 2018, something yet to be surpassed during Covid as of yet. And nobody even batted an eyelid about it. Why was that?

You have the floor now. It will be interesting to see how you formulate a response, will you actually be able to address what I said with facts or will you resort to hysterical accusations, lie and insults which seems to the modus operandi from the other posters in discussing the differences here.

This is very simple. The flu of 17/18 did what it did without any significant public health measures in place to reduce transmissions as much as possible. You have seen over the past few weeks the sensitivity of transmission rates to public health measures.

Now - just think - what would the covid rates be if we did what was done in 17/18? (i.e. nothing bar a few incidentals)

Ive just done a comparison of 2020 to 2018 for NI - based on the data here, and the relative death rates are:

Jan: -21%
Feb: -12%
Mar: -7%
April: +51%
May: +24%
June: +14%
July: +9%
Aug: -5%
Sept: +26%
Oct: +12%
Nov: +32%
Dec: +34%

Over the whole year, (including your Jan 2018) deaths are up ~1500 in 2020, or 10%. Since April, they are up ~2400 in 2020, or 22%.


You pointing toward Jan 2018 is farcical. If the country had locked down for then like it has now, then the number of deaths would have been a fraction of what it was, and well down on normal.

Utterly incredible ignorance here.

The whole world has got it wrong and Angelo has got it right

Nice that you ignored the rest of the post backed up by confirmed statistics, quotes and facts.

It's clear that the governments have got it wrong as we are now in Lockdown no 3 with case numbers not having dropped and spreading like wildfire in hospital settings where those most vulnerable to the virus are contained.

Look I couldn't be bothered to debate with you. As someone has already pointed out this whole thread has turned in to a different poster taking up the mantle daily for a rebuttal to your posts, and you continually fail to even look at or interpret correctly the simple stats and information presented to you. Fair play to you, you have invested some time and energy in to your preposterous stance, but again as another poster has pointed out, you have won not a single person over. Maybe you could ask yourself why you think that is?

[Rossfan]

Has any Government gone with "Angelo's way" or are they sticking with the WHO's way of dealing with the Pandemic?

[JoG2]

1. Do we test for flu? For contrast the UK has carried out a recorded 62m tests for Covid. How many flu tests have been carried out?

We don't need to test for flu because it is far less virulent and far less lethal.

This was pointed out, oh I don't know, about 9 f*kking months ago.

2. How many positive cases of flu have been confirmed? There have been 3.2m confirmed cases of Covid due to the mass testing in place.

If someone has died of pneumonia without having COVID, then they won't be a COVID death.

If someone has had both, then it'll likely be attributed to COVID.

But here's the thing that you STILL aren't getting - with transmission vectors all but strangled for the flu - its more or less negligible this winter.

3. Look at the arbitrary way in which we record deahts. We know that if you die within 28 days of a positive Covid test you are classified as a Covid death, arbitrarily. See snippet below from a BBC report, link attached. Also see the note on the attached on the published NISRA figures

The chart I pointed out is more detailed than the f**king BBC.

It also differentiates between factor and cause - which is different from the footer detail which applies to the catch all number. Again, you aren't reading and interpreting your own information!

Finally "beneath the 5 year average". How did the winter flu season of 17/18 read with the 5 year average prior to that? 50k excess deaths over the normal for that time of year was the reported figure for the UK. In the O6, we had a record 2,101 death toll for a month in January 2018, something yet to be surpassed during Covid as of yet. And nobody even batted an eyelid about it. Why was that?

You have the floor now. It will be interesting to see how you formulate a response, will you actually be able to address what I said with facts or will you resort to hysterical accusations, lie and insults which seems to the modus operandi from the other posters in discussing the differences here.

This is very simple. The flu of 17/18 did what it did without any significant public health measures in place to reduce transmissions as much as possible. You have seen over the past few weeks the sensitivity of transmission rates to public health measures.

Now - just think - what would the covid rates be if we did what was done in 17/18? (i.e. nothing bar a few incidentals)

Ive just done a comparison of 2020 to 2018 for NI - based on the data here, and the relative death rates are:

Jan: -21%
Feb: -12%
Mar: -7%
April: +51%
May: +24%
June: +14%
July: +9%
Aug: -5%
Sept: +26%
Oct: +12%
Nov: +32%
Dec: +34%

Over the whole year, (including your Jan 2018) deaths are up ~1500 in 2020, or 10%. Since April, they are up ~2400 in 2020, or 22%.


You pointing toward Jan 2018 is farcical. If the country had locked down for then like it has now, then the number of deaths would have been a fraction of what it was, and well down on normal.

Utterly incredible ignorance here.

The whole world has got it wrong and Angelo has got it right

Nice that you ignored the rest of the post backed up by confirmed statistics, quotes and facts.

It's clear that the governments have got it wrong as we are now in Lockdown no 3 with case numbers not having dropped and spreading like wildfire in hospital settings where those most vulnerable to the virus are contained.

Look I couldn't be bothered to debate with you. As someone has already pointed out this whole thread has turned in to a different poster taking up the mantle daily for a rebuttal to your posts, and you continually fail to even look at or interpret correctly the simple stats and information presented to you. Fair play to you, you have invested some time and energy in to your preposterous stance, but again as another poster has pointed out, you have won not a single person over. Maybe you could ask yourself why you think that is?

What furlough is for, spending days productively

[Angelo]

1. Do we test for flu? For contrast the UK has carried out a recorded 62m tests for Covid. How many flu tests have been carried out?

We don't need to test for flu because it is far less virulent and far less lethal.

This was pointed out, oh I don't know, about 9 f*kking months ago.

2. How many positive cases of flu have been confirmed? There have been 3.2m confirmed cases of Covid due to the mass testing in place.

If someone has died of pneumonia without having COVID, then they won't be a COVID death.

If someone has had both, then it'll likely be attributed to COVID.

But here's the thing that you STILL aren't getting - with transmission vectors all but strangled for the flu - its more or less negligible this winter.

3. Look at the arbitrary way in which we record deahts. We know that if you die within 28 days of a positive Covid test you are classified as a Covid death, arbitrarily. See snippet below from a BBC report, link attached. Also see the note on the attached on the published NISRA figures

The chart I pointed out is more detailed than the f**king BBC.

It also differentiates between factor and cause - which is different from the footer detail which applies to the catch all number. Again, you aren't reading and interpreting your own information!

Finally "beneath the 5 year average". How did the winter flu season of 17/18 read with the 5 year average prior to that? 50k excess deaths over the normal for that time of year was the reported figure for the UK. In the O6, we had a record 2,101 death toll for a month in January 2018, something yet to be surpassed during Covid as of yet. And nobody even batted an eyelid about it. Why was that?

You have the floor now. It will be interesting to see how you formulate a response, will you actually be able to address what I said with facts or will you resort to hysterical accusations, lie and insults which seems to the modus operandi from the other posters in discussing the differences here.

This is very simple. The flu of 17/18 did what it did without any significant public health measures in place to reduce transmissions as much as possible. You have seen over the past few weeks the sensitivity of transmission rates to public health measures.

Now - just think - what would the covid rates be if we did what was done in 17/18? (i.e. nothing bar a few incidentals)

Ive just done a comparison of 2020 to 2018 for NI - based on the data here, and the relative death rates are:

Jan: -21%
Feb: -12%
Mar: -7%
April: +51%
May: +24%
June: +14%
July: +9%
Aug: -5%
Sept: +26%
Oct: +12%
Nov: +32%
Dec: +34%

Over the whole year, (including your Jan 2018) deaths are up ~1500 in 2020, or 10%. Since April, they are up ~2400 in 2020, or 22%.


You pointing toward Jan 2018 is farcical. If the country had locked down for then like it has now, then the number of deaths would have been a fraction of what it was, and well down on normal.

Utterly incredible ignorance here.

The whole world has got it wrong and Angelo has got it right

Nice that you ignored the rest of the post backed up by confirmed statistics, quotes and facts.

It's clear that the governments have got it wrong as we are now in Lockdown no 3 with case numbers not having dropped and spreading like wildfire in hospital settings where those most vulnerable to the virus are contained.

Look I couldn't be bothered to debate with you. As someone has already pointed out this whole thread has turned in to a different poster taking up the mantle daily for a rebuttal to your posts, and you continually fail to even look at or interpret correctly the simple stats and information presented to you. Fair play to you, you have invested some time and energy in to your preposterous stance, but again as another poster has pointed out, you have won not a single person over. Maybe you could ask yourself why you think that is?

We know you couldn't be bothered debating with me - you can't.

It's easier to fool someone than convince someone they have been fooled.