Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

I told you.


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

12 hours ago, dances with sheeple said:

No, the majority in the UK followed the rules quite tightly, there are a small percentage of morons of all ages hitting the headlines, most countries have some morons but the UK chav/Hipster type who is all me me me look how loud I can be in public is probably a unique species, other countries have their own version but the UK does Celeb/Self obsessed Moron better than most?

The UK does have a problem with the seriously anti-social who simply don't give a crap about anything or anyone around them (all the stories about heaps of litter being left everywhere for example, but you don't have to look far to realise that it's not a recent problem). Those scum are an issue not only because of the problems they cause but also when things descend to treating everyone as potentially like that, without really bothering to do anything that'll target those who really are a problem (they ignore the rules and restrictions anyway).

Then there's the more sophisticated version of the same, who don't go around leaving heaps of litter, they show their complete disregard for everyone and everything around them on a much larger scale...

Edited by Riedquat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Killer Bunny said:

No. Younger demographics countries no lockdown no issues! FactsNot Fearmongering.

What's your point? Younger demographics means fewer serious cases (in some places few enough to be barely noticeable against the generally low life expectancy too). Which seems to agree with what I said, so why the "no"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Riedquat said:

Ah, doing so well until the end there, due to my annoyance with the obsession with saving time and not generally caring all that much about non-extreme financial changes :D

No, I broadly agree with you, and in this case certainly with the general sentiment. Whilst I'm of the opinion a lot of restrictions were over the top (and / or part of a viscious circle of people acting brainlessly) "there are bigger issues" is also a line of argument I frequently find annoying, partially because it's often just used to dismiss a genuine concern, and because I see it as another example of trying to look at things in extremely over-simplified black and white terms.

Haha - I mainly meant just saving time commuting : now instead of travelling to work I can spend more time with my family in the morning and evening ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Peter Hun said:

I believe the excess  death statistics, which don't come from the government. The government, I take with a huge dose of salt.

I don't invent numbers to suit my hopes/desires/agenda.

Interesting, whats your view on the decline in deaths since the cv19 excess buldge? Same thing is being shown in France, Italy etc. 

"A total of 8,946 deaths were registered in England and Wales in the last week of July, according to the ONS - 90 fewer than the five-year average of 9,036. This is the seventh week in a row that deaths have been below the five-year average." 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, captainb said:

Being concerned is one thing but that concern needs to be based in a reality where there is an acceptable level of risk. Otherwise nobody would ever drive to work, ride a bike, go up a step ladder etc etc.

I do agree, I think the "novel" nature has been taken advantage of a little too much.  IMHO before the vaccine they should place much efforts of trying to determine the likelihood of being whacked hard with this virus or not. 

15 hours ago, captainb said:

In the last month there has been a grand total of 160 deaths under the age of 80 of people who have ever tested positive with CV19 at any point, in a population of 70 odd million..... At some point we need to move on. 

The public dont have faith in the current track+trace system, which is not helping matters.

Death isnt the issue, its reoccurring long term issues that may become the issue IMHO.  Being fatigued for 2-3 months at a time etc.  We're only just starting to understand the long term consequences, but rarely is it ever discussed widely.

Interestingly I wonder if weak employment rights are somewhat to blame?  Lets say somehow you got COVID and as a result you're not performing 100% for a good 3-6m (with some of that off sick from work).  Surely if an org had to cut back, they'd be first in line?  Given many people live month to month, this could be a real sticky issue.

Edited by blackhole
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, scottbeard said:

Haha - I mainly meant just saving time commuting : now instead of travelling to work I can spend more time with my family in the morning and evening ?

I don't mind the time travelling to work - I like the break between home and work, both in time and space (although I'm no more keen on being stuck in traffic than anyone else). In any case you can bet that eventually it'll be work that tries to get its grubby mitts on that time. It's a bit like faster travel - all it seems to do is result in people having to do more travelling. Just takes things at a generally slow pace most of the time; out of all the things I grumble about I never feel like I'm wasting time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, blackhole said:

I do agree, I think the "novel" nature has been taken advantage of a little too much.  IMHO before the vaccine they should place much efforts of trying to determine the likelihood of being whacked hard with this virus or not. 

The public dont have faith in the current track+trace system, which is not helping matters.

Death isnt the issue, its reoccurring long term issues that may become the issue IMHO.  Being fatigued for 2-3 months at a time etc.  We're only just starting to understand the long term consequences, but rarely is it ever discussed widely.

I do get what you say. 

On the long term effects, with SARs and MERs two very similar viruses, the studies in HK following the outbreak showed in a small % of cases, shortness of breath and reduced lung capacity post infection. Also worth noting that in 12months those longer term symptoms also went. So there is hope there as well. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, captainb said:

On the long term effects, with SARs and MERs two very similar viruses, the studies in HK following the outbreak showed in a small % of cases, shortness of breath and reduced lung capacity post infection. Also worth noting that in 12months those longer term symptoms also went. So there is hope there as well. 

Early studies are showing much more than a small % of people suffering from breathing issues, but again its much too novel to really make a call at this point.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, blackhole said:

Also worth noting that in 12months those longer term symptoms also went. So there is hope there as well. 

Thats wrong, SARS victims still have symptoms.

 

3 minutes ago, captainb said:

Historically the NHS doesnt pick up any postive samples from monitoring may to Sept or so. 

There was a report yesterday noting the fall in infectious diseases.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, captainb said:

Flu common in june and july? 

Historically the NHS doesnt pick up any postive samples from monitoring may to Sept or so. 

Perhaps not, but it will have had some impact on all sorts of other diseases. Then there's people doing less anyway, which will result in fewer blundering into doing themselves in (although maybe that would be counteracted by an increase in DIY accidents). Or it might simply be luck of the draw, pure random noise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Peter Hun said:

Thats wrong, SARS victims still have symptoms.

 

There was a report yesterday noting the fall in infectious diseases.

Some SARs victims have long term damage - particularly those that had large dose steroid pulse therapy, they don't tend to do that anymore.. 

However; a lot of disease based lung damage did reverse in the majority of the minority of cases that had lung damage over the next two years. I agree though there is a risk that long term damage is done. 

 

Just checking, this was a reduction in "cold and flu" in June and July? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

Perhaps not, but it will have had some impact on all sorts of other diseases. Then there's people doing less anyway, which will result in fewer blundering into doing themselves in (although maybe that would be counteracted by an increase in DIY accidents). Or it might simply be luck of the draw, pure random noise.

Maybe, although given the now 18 month recovery pathway for cancer treatment, failure for heart problem patients to present at A&E etc. It would be surprising that the nation is healthy... Or those could be offset by DIY accidents. 

 

Does seem rather odd to cause mass panic over "excess deaths" then causally dismiss deaths being lower than normal for 7 weeks on a trot.. What metric is it then? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, captainb said:

Maybe, although given the now 18 month recovery pathway for cancer treatment, failure for heart problem patients to present at A&E etc. It would be surprising that the nation is healthy... Or those could be offset by DIY accidents. 

 

Does seem rather odd to cause mass panic over "excess deaths" then causally dismiss deaths being lower than normal for 7 weeks on a trot.. What metric is it then? 

But the amount of excess was monstrous whereas the lower deaths are more moderate - that’s why the excess was bigger news.

I mean, eventually every excess death will be “made good” since everyone who died would have died at SOME point later.  By definition every excess death will be offset one day.  The fact however that only moderate lower figures are coming through now suggests only a small number of victims were on the verge of death anyway, with most having months or years cut from their lives. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, scottbeard said:

But the amount of excess was monstrous whereas the lower deaths are more moderate - that’s why the excess was bigger news.

I mean, eventually every excess death will be “made good” since everyone who died would have died at SOME point later.  By definition every excess death will be offset one day.  The fact however that only moderate lower figures are coming through now suggests only a small number of victims were on the verge of death anyway, with most having months or years cut from their lives. 

Monstrous is a very strong word.

You are looking at ~ 60,000 excess deaths this year. Against 620,000 deaths a year in the UK. So if there is no change till the end of the year, despite the last 7 weeks being lower thats an increase from base case of 10%. Increase of 10% a monstrous excess? 

 60,000 deaths is hardly something to be proud of, far from it, but has to be seen in context. For example smoking still kills 80,000 a year despite public health campaigns since the 1970s. 

The problem with all these figures is they are never given in context. its 8 deaths today of people who have tested at some point positive for CV19. Yet without context that still seems "high "for lots of people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Peter Hun said:

I believe the excess  death statistics, which don't come from the government. The government, I take with a huge dose of salt.

I don't invent numbers to suit my hopes/desires/agenda.

Belie all you want. It’s a pack of lies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Peter Hun said:

Lots less infections for cold/flu etc due to masks and social distancing.

??? for masks that have holes bigger than the virus, and that are used day after day after day - which should only be used once. ???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Killer Bunny said:

It was NEVER about health services. Lies. All lies.

Nightingales being dismantled. NOT A SINGLE PATIENT!!!

It's a good job the Nightingales were not needed because the NHS couldn't staff them.

Running its existing ICUs and HDWs at 100% required more staff than they have even without lots of them off ill with Covid.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

9 hours ago, Killer Bunny said:

??? for masks that have holes bigger than the virus, and that are used day after day after day - which should only be used once. ???

The clever thing about mask filters is that they filter out particles far smaller than their pore size. The science behind it is quite interesting but from this series of posts I am guessing you don't really do science. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Confusion of VIs said:

 

The clever thing about mask filters is that they filter out particles far smaller than their pore size. The science behind it is quite interesting but from this series of posts I am guessing you don't really do science. 

Not to mention the carrier of said virus is usually a water droplet, which is the entire reason for wearing the mask in the first place. Preventing spread to others is the goal here, personal protection comes by way of the herd.

Provided there are not too many selfish idiots crying about wearing a mask that is.

Link to comment
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...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.