China Coronavirus

[RadioGAAGAA]

But scientists were exceptionally quick and forceful to try to convince us that a virus they still do not understand was a global destroyer; the Spanish Flu Mark II. It's not. Nor is it going to be. Nor would it have been if left unchecked.

I'm sure someone somewhere will come back to me with half arsed, dubious and red-penned data to "prove" I'm wrong. All I have is little pieces of clear evidence. Such as that a Tory government which is pilloried by all and sundry for its approach, yet still doesn't need an overflow hospital in its largest and most diverse city.

You do realise the need for that was reduced by lockdown measures?

If you want evidence for how bad it can be when even top rate western health services are overwhelmed look at Italy.

That is clear evidence of what could happen. In Lombardy the case fatality rate was over 18%. That is nearly 1 in 5 cases dying from it. There is of course the open question of how many had it and were not tested.


South Korea is a better example, with extensive testing and tracing, they had 253 deaths out of 10,804 cases, or 2.4%. I've seen places where its indicated the Spanish flu had a mortality rate of around 2.5%. I suppose that completely vindicates you that covid is ~0.1% "better".


If you think the measures taken were not justified - then sorry - but you don't have a fuckin clue what your talking about. The biggest problem with the measures taken is that they were not drastic enough and not early enough.

[RadioGAAGAA]

Ogra the mortality rate has been officially confirmed at 0.26 so for every 1000 people that get infected 2.6 people die from it.

Citation please.

Or are you going to f**k off under your rock again like you did when asked to produce a citation after proclaiming the WHO lauded Sweden's approach?

[Rossfan]

Trailer and Smurf could outdo Karen on facebook with their virusian expertise.

[Smurfy123]

Radio how do you know lockdown saved life's? Are you listening to all the bullshitters at these press briefings? They have got everything wrong.
Now the first place that should have been on lockdown was carehomes. Nobody in nobody out.
Radio what's with the abuse calm down it's a discussion board

[OgraAnDun]

Having a look at the increased death tolls per country and city, even with lockdowns, it seems fair to me to say that without pretty radical measures this has the potential to be an incredibly serious "Spanish flu like" disease. The excess mortality numbers for London for April 2020 (compared to a normal April) were worse than during the worst 4 week period of the Blitz, according to figures from the FT.


The fact that death rates only started jumping in line with registered Covid deaths a lot later than December I think debunks the myth that this was circulating in Europe freely in December. The number of deaths for pneumonia was actually below its 5 year average in the U.K. for the first few months of the year.

https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1257589774648565760?s=21

And what? That's an absolutely f**king stupid comparison. Can you compare the death rate on the titanic to Covid-19 please? Like f**k me.

If you can't really work out the significance of that then there's no point debating with you... similar enough to most of your contributions to this board.

[thewobbler]

Radio how do you know lockdown saved life's? Are you listening to all the bullshitters at these press briefings? They have got everything wrong.
Now the first place that should have been on lockdown was carehomes. Nobody in nobody out.
Radio what's with the abuse calm down it's a discussion board

He doesn't.

He is, for whatever reasons, a Covid zealot.


Trying to get him to admit that there this a complex and grey scenario where nobody has definitive answers, is like asking a Christian hardliner to concede that God may not exist.

[LeoMc]

Radio how do you know lockdown saved life's? Are you listening to all the bullshitters at these press briefings? They have got everything wrong.
Now the first place that should have been on lockdown was carehomes. Nobody in nobody out.
Radio what's with the abuse calm down it's a discussion board

He doesn't.

He is, for whatever reasons, a Covid zealot.


Trying to get him to admit that there this a complex and grey scenario where nobody has definitive answers, is like asking a Christian hardliner to concede that God may not exist.

So in this complex and grey scenario do you advocate caution and trying to prepare or just see how it goes?

[gallsman]

A "covid zealot"

Christ, that's a new one.

[thewobbler]

But scientists were exceptionally quick and forceful to try to convince us that a virus they still do not understand was a global destroyer; the Spanish Flu Mark II. It's not. Nor is it going to be. Nor would it have been if left unchecked.

I'm sure someone somewhere will come back to me with half arsed, dubious and red-penned data to "prove" I'm wrong. All I have is little pieces of clear evidence. Such as that a Tory government which is pilloried by all and sundry for its approach, yet still doesn't need an overflow hospital in its largest and most diverse city.

If you think the measures taken were not justified - then sorry - but you don't have a fuckin clue what your talking about. The biggest problem with the measures taken is that they were not drastic enough and not early enough.

Although you will never be able to produce the data to back this up, you will never admit even a tiniest morsel of doubt in what you believe in.

That's called blind faith.

There is a wonderful irony in how men of science can so readily mimic  men of faith, when the situation suits.

[Smurfy123]

Well said wobbler
No caution needed. What needed to be done in my opinion lock all carehomes down. Pay the staff extra to stay in the carehomes. And anyone over 65 in total lockdown for 8/12 weeks. Total lockdown no grey areas. If someone of the age below 65 living with someone over that age they must lockdown too.
But no put everyone into lockdown. Stop everything. The aftermath of this is going to be catastrophic but didn't need to be

[thewobbler]

Radio how do you know lockdown saved life's? Are you listening to all the bullshitters at these press briefings? They have got everything wrong.
Now the first place that should have been on lockdown was carehomes. Nobody in nobody out.
Radio what's with the abuse calm down it's a discussion board

He doesn't.

He is, for whatever reasons, a Covid zealot.


Trying to get him to admit that there this a complex and grey scenario where nobody has definitive answers, is like asking a Christian hardliner to concede that God may not exist.

So in this complex and grey scenario do you advocate caution and trying to prepare or just see how it goes?

Look we have gone down a path now. Whether I agreed with that path or not doesn't matter, I've followed it closely. That's what's citizens should do. So we should see it out.

But I should never be construed as the worry for scientists. I don't accept any situation as black and white, and when future pandemics come along, I'll address them with an open mind.

The problem is, not everyone is open minded. There is a sizeable population who will literally believe anything they hear, and follow any direction they are told, as long as they trust the source. Even if that source is as consistent as a runny turd; they will still follow.

Governments and media will not trust science after this. There will be dozens of studies of Sweden's approach undertaken in the next 5 years and each of them will produce different findings. Not different good. But different enough for politicians and the media to pay less heed to scientific advice.


As such, what I would advocate is that the scientific community is a bit more honest, starting now, about what they know. To reflect inwardly that maybe they don't know everything. To begin building bridges, whether they think they are needed now or not. To err is human.

[LeoMc]

Well said wobbler
No caution needed. What needed to be done in my opinion lock all carehomes down. Pay the staff extra to stay in the carehomes. And anyone over 65 in total lockdown for 8/12 weeks. Total lockdown no grey areas. If someone of the age below 65 living with someone over that age they must lockdown too.
But no put everyone into lockdown. Stop everything. The aftermath of this is going to be catastrophic but didn't need to be

Will 8-12 weeks be enough? Surely they would then catch it from the general population when they are released!
What about those living with or looking after over 65's, do they get paid to stay locked down also?
What about people with underlying health conditions, should they undergo the same lock-down?

[thebigfella]

Radio how do you know lockdown saved life's? Are you listening to all the bullshitters at these press briefings? They have got everything wrong.
Now the first place that should have been on lockdown was carehomes. Nobody in nobody out.
Radio what's with the abuse calm down it's a discussion board

He doesn't.

He is, for whatever reasons, a Covid zealot.


Trying to get him to admit that there this a complex and grey scenario where nobody has definitive answers, is like asking a Christian hardliner to concede that God may not exist.

So in this complex and grey scenario do you advocate caution and trying to prepare or just see how it goes?

Look we have gone down a path now. Whether I agreed with that path or not doesn't matter, I've followed it closely. That's what's citizens should do. So we should see it out.

But I should never be construed as the worry for scientists. I don't accept any situation as black and white, and when future pandemics come along, I'll address them with an open mind.

The problem is, not everyone is open minded. There is a sizeable population who will literally believe anything they hear, and follow any direction they are told, as long as they trust the source. Even if that source is as consistent as a runny turd; they will still follow.

Governments and media will not trust science after this. There will be dozens of studies of Sweden's approach undertaken in the next 5 years and each of them will produce different findings. Not different good. But different enough for politicians and the media to pay less heed to scientific advice.


As such, what I would advocate is that the scientific community is a bit more honest, starting now, about what they know. To reflect inwardly that maybe they don't know everything. To begin building bridges, whether they think they are needed now or not. To err is human.

Is that scientific studies? 

[LeoMc]

Radio how do you know lockdown saved life's? Are you listening to all the bullshitters at these press briefings? They have got everything wrong.
Now the first place that should have been on lockdown was carehomes. Nobody in nobody out.
Radio what's with the abuse calm down it's a discussion board

He doesn't.

He is, for whatever reasons, a Covid zealot.


Trying to get him to admit that there this a complex and grey scenario where nobody has definitive answers, is like asking a Christian hardliner to concede that God may not exist.

So in this complex and grey scenario do you advocate caution and trying to prepare or just see how it goes?

Look we have gone down a path now. Whether I agreed with that path or not doesn't matter, I've followed it closely. That's what's citizens should do. So we should see it out.

But I should never be construed as the worry for scientists. I don't accept any situation as black and white, and when future pandemics come along, I'll address them with an open mind.

The problem is, not everyone is open minded. There is a sizeable population who will literally believe anything they hear, and follow any direction they are told, as long as they trust the source. Even if that source is as consistent as a runny turd; they will still follow.

Governments and media will not trust science after this. There will be dozens of studies of Sweden's approach undertaken in the next 5 years and each of them will produce different findings. Not different good. But different enough for politicians and the media to pay less heed to scientific advice.


As such, what I would advocate is that the scientific community is a but more honest, starting now, about what they know. To reflect inwardly that maybe they don't know everything.

Are "Scientists" as one great homogeneous body claiming they have all the answers?

If whichever Government came out and said "we don't know if this will work but sure we will give it a go" what would that do to compliance levels and how would the effectiveness of the measures then be critiqued for future pandemics?

[trailer]

Trailer and Smurf could outdo Karen on facebook with their virusian expertise.

Says you with 16000+ posts.