Coronavirus (1 Viewer)

  • Thread starter Thread starter AGinAg (37)
  • Start date Start date

Are you worried about contracting coronavirus?

  • Yes, I am absolutely terrified

    Votes: 12 15.6%

  • Yes, I am slightly concerned

    Votes: 35 45.5%

  • I am neither concerned or unconcerned

    Votes: 7 9.1%

  • No, I am slightly unconcerned

    Votes: 6 7.8%

  • No, I am totally unconcerned

    Votes: 6 7.8%

  • Bring back the old poll

    Votes: 3 3.9%

  • Charlotte Awbrey tits out doing the Macarena

    Votes: 2 2.6%

  • I believe VoR is evil

    Votes: 11 14.3%
  • Total voters
    77
big ron said:
Nope we're all fine. Seeing as he's now 7 days in, any infection would have been in the run up to that. I'm fairly certain we had it in March.

Funnily enough no one in their company has been contacted by track and trace. World beating!
Click to expand...
We haven’t been contacted by the bar that we were in with our Covid-infected friend either!
 
Soldi said:
We haven’t been contacted by the bar that we were in with our Covid-infected friend either!
Click to expand...

It's a farce, I wish I were a full blown tin foil conspiracist, because dark forces operating to remove our civil liberties sounds a lot more appealing than the truth; It's just all one big fuck up.
 
Back at work after a week off (probably unwise to use up holidays in case they're needed for isolation but I needed a break, first one since Christmas) and now about 5% of our workforce is self isolating so that's nice...
 
My department has been split into 2 teams, each back in 2 days a week from this week. The first team (which I'm not in) went back today and apparently only 3 out of 12 people turned up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SDF
It seems the new conditions will be the same across all 4 nations, although I am not sure who will announce first?
 
She is waiting for confirmation from UK on the 4 nation approach, and will deliver the new restrictions to the Scottish parliament tomorrow or Wednesday. I imagine Scotland will end up a little stricter than England, as seems to be our way.
 
big ron said:
Only if those cases turn into hospital admissions and deaths though.
Click to expand...
And long-Covid. And non-covid death go up due to a health system that doesn't have the throughput to deal with too much. Whilst we shouldn't panic, minimising the issue because you are a bit bored isn't helpful either.
 
I must say it is a bit of a PEST having to wait until tomorrow. Surely they could have had it all sewn up and ready to announce today.
 
I think she wants to try to tie up with Boris etc but she's not prepared to wait too long for him to make his mind up
 
ZenGiraffe said:
And long-Covid. And non-covid death go up due to a health system that doesn't have the throughput to deal with too much. Whilst we shouldn't panic, minimising the issue because you are a bit bored isn't helpful either.
Click to expand...

I'm not minimising anything. Nor am I bored. I'm looking at the available data.
 
big ron said:
I'm not minimising anything. Nor am I bored. I'm looking at the available data.
Click to expand...
So are the scientists, and if they are issuing warnings, we would do well to listen. We are trying to avoid the below.

d3220a62-73aa-4d78-8b60-196c19010cc6.jpg
 
Whats your point? Where have I dismissed the advice and warnings? Where have I said cases aren't going up and aren't set to get higher?
 
big ron said:
Again, I’m no antimasker, but how long do we sacrifice so much when death rates remain low?
Click to expand...

My point is that you seem to be clinging to an analysis of the deaths that is flawed and using that as a justification to downplay the risk. Which runs counter to what the people with the qualifications and experience to actually know what they are talking about are saying.

Not that this argument is particularly helpful, I imagine we are both just going to dig our heels in so I will leave it here and listen to more Enya.
 
Boris showing his usual leadership by waiting to see how it all goes down, if Scotland and/or Wales do anything and, of course, to hear what the papers tell him to do.

He must be planning an escape route.
 
ZenGiraffe said:
My point is that you seem to be clinging to an analysis of the deaths that is flawed and using that as a justification to downplay the risk. Which runs counter to what the people with the qualifications and experience to actually know what they are talking about are saying.

Not that this argument is particularly helpful, I imagine we are both just going to dig our heels in so I will leave it here and listen to more Enya.
Click to expand...

I'm not downplaying anything, and I at least have the courtesy to not be patronising in my replies.

Would you consider the head of the Centre for Evidence Based Medicine at Oxford University to be someone who has the qualifications and experience to actually know what they are talking about are saying?

The argument put forward by Prof Heneghan and a number of other experts is that more weight needs to be put on disease rather than cases. While hospital admissions have started rising they are still incredibly low compared to the spring and the increase is much more gradual than it was.
Click to expand...
 
big ron said:
I'm not downplaying anything, and I at least have the courtesy to not be patronising in my replies.

Would you consider the head of the Centre for Evidence Based Medicine at Oxford University to be someone who has the qualifications and experience to actually know what they are talking about are saying?
Click to expand...
From your same article:

The problem of relying on hospital admissions is that you can find yourself behind the curve. Hospital cases are a result of infections from a few weeks back - so if they spiral out of control more draconian measures may be needed than would have been otherwise.

The other issue, says Prof Christina Pagel, from University College London, is "Long Covid" - the patients who still struggle months after an infection. She says it would be "irresponsible" to allow the virus to spread as it is still less than a year old and we are still not certain of what the long-term risks are.

She also says if infection rates go up in the younger, healthier age groups it will be difficult to keep it from spilling over into more vulnerable ones.
Click to expand...
 
I'm with @ZenGiraffe on this one... The peak of deaths earlier this year happened nearly A MONTH after the UK was in FULL lockdown. There's an obvious pattern with timings that you'll not be able to spot if you are looking at deaths alone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: COB
* sigh *

I'm not saying deaths won't go up.

I'm not saying we shouldn't be looking at the risk of long covid, co-mortality, hospital capacity etc

I'm not an antimask Karen.

My point is that we're focusing on cases as a metric/measure, and that is flawed.
 
It's flawed like every other method of measuring an INVISIBLE, ASYMPTOMATIC IN MOST CASES VIRUS, yes. What better metric do you suggest looking at to gauge the penetration of the virus in society though?
 
Can you lot just all stay inside so I can get to London? :eyes:
 
Peekaboo said:
It's flawed like every other method of measuring an INVISIBLE, ASYMPTOMATIC IN MOST CASES VIRUS, yes. What better metric do you suggest looking at to gauge the penetration of the virus in society though?
Click to expand...

Deaths and hospital admissions?
 
FWIW I'm not saying there isn't some merit in looking at and modelling cases - of course there will be a correlation between that and my preferred metrics, my issue is that all of the data discussed in the public forum and media seems to be solely cases, which seems erroneous.
 
And I do believe my initial point last week was more around what happens IF those cases and admissions don't follow the predicted trend - how long do we enact policies based on one single metric?
 
But you do realize that deaths going up is a delayed result of an overwhelming number of infections right? The more infections, the more deaths will eventually happen once the incubation period is over and the disease takes hold on someone etc. So by the time your death rate is starting to look alarming and dangerous you are already potentially WEEKS into a huge number of asymptomatic people already spreading the disease by which time putting the breaks and going into lockdown will be useless because you'll be dealing with a backlog of infections.

That's literally what happened in spring. The UK highest death toll was in April, a full month after we went into lockdown. Looking at deaths is going to get us to the same situation again.
 
I don’t know, saying “let’s just wait and see if the death toll skyrockets before doing anything” sounds a bit like gambling with people’s lives to me. Probably because it is, and while that’s not unusual for this government, in this case there’d be stats to prove it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top Bottom