FabSwingers.com > Forums > Virus > 10000 by the weekend?
10000 by the weekend?
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I’m not surprised , just look at the amount of people out and about , obviously think they are immune to it "
The people out now, will only show symptoms next week, sadly the people who are dying now, are the ones who where going out before the lock down, and probably still a little oblivious to how serious this is. The ones still getting sick in 3 or 4 weeks time will either be the front line, or the idiots flouting the rules, or the people who were doing shopping for vulnerable people.... The numbers will be lower, but the numbers will still be there .... We'll only know if the lock down worked 2 weeks from now. I read somewhere that a person can be contagious for up to 21 days, so even if they recovered by day 14 they could still potentially spread it ... So 3 weeks lock down was never going to be enough, more like 5 weeks as a minimum to flatten the curve .... It's my opinion obviously, I have no clue, just applying my own logic to what's been reported as the stages of the illness and when it's contagious |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I live a short drive from the M5. Caravans have been travelling down to Devon and Cornwall throughout the day. It's people like this that ruin it for the rest of us. I hope they get stopped and told to go home!!! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I live a short drive from the M5. Caravans have been travelling down to Devon and Cornwall throughout the day. It's people like this that ruin it for the rest of us. I hope they get stopped and told to go home!!! "
Hopefully the caravan parks and sites are all shut, so their time is wasted like they wasting the police time... Just downright selfish really |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"France have now joined Italy, Spain, USA (and probably China if they gave true figures) in passing 10 000 recorded covid deaths.
At the current rate we will be there by the weekend!!  "
I'd agree with that assessment  .
For further into the future, the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation from the University of Washington has been modelling expected death rates:
https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-kingdom
They just added the UK to their models a couple of days ago and it looks like it's consistently over-estimating by 30-40% at the moment. Maybe they will correct that or maybe (and I hope not) we will "catch up" with the model.
At any rate it currently predicts that our peak will be in about a week. I'm hoping we peak sooner. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *edGrayCouple
over a year ago
Swindon |
We have just past a pub on our exercise route that is closed,but their having a barbecue at the back and there was about 25-30 people in attendance! Which just goes to show, you can't reason with stupidity!  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"France have now joined Italy, Spain, USA (and probably China if they gave true figures) in passing 10 000 recorded covid deaths.
At the current rate we will be there by the weekend!!
I'd agree with that assessment .
For further into the future, the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation from the University of Washington has been modelling expected death rates:
https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-kingdom
They just added the UK to their models a couple of days ago and it looks like it's consistently over-estimating by 30-40% at the moment. Maybe they will correct that or maybe (and I hope not) we will "catch up" with the model.
At any rate it currently predicts that our peak will be in about a week. I'm hoping we peak sooner."
What do you think that peak means and why we will have it ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"We have just past a pub on our exercise route that is closed,but their having a barbecue at the back and there was about 25-30 people in attendance! Which just goes to show, you can't reason with stupidity! "
Have you reported that to the local constabulary? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"France have now joined Italy, Spain, USA (and probably China if they gave true figures) in passing 10 000 recorded covid deaths.
At the current rate we will be there by the weekend!!
I'd agree with that assessment .
For further into the future, the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation from the University of Washington has been modelling expected death rates:
https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-kingdom
They just added the UK to their models a couple of days ago and it looks like it's consistently over-estimating by 30-40% at the moment. Maybe they will correct that or maybe (and I hope not) we will "catch up" with the model.
At any rate it currently predicts that our peak will be in about a week. I'm hoping we peak sooner.
What do you think that peak means and why we will have it ? "
Every country has had it..well the badly hit ones. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"France have now joined Italy, Spain, USA (and probably China if they gave true figures) in passing 10 000 recorded covid deaths.
At the current rate we will be there by the weekend!!
I'd agree with that assessment .
For further into the future, the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation from the University of Washington has been modelling expected death rates:
https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-kingdom
They just added the UK to their models a couple of days ago and it looks like it's consistently over-estimating by 30-40% at the moment. Maybe they will correct that or maybe (and I hope not) we will "catch up" with the model.
At any rate it currently predicts that our peak will be in about a week. I'm hoping we peak sooner.
What do you think that peak means and why we will have it ? "
How can you ask why?
The peak will be, and you can only assess it retrospectively, the highest numbers before taking a down turn. In other words (and the one easiest to measure) the day (or week) we have the most deaths. Another to measure would be the heightest total covid 19 hospital admissions. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"France have now joined Italy, Spain, USA (and probably China if they gave true figures) in passing 10 000 recorded covid deaths.
At the current rate we will be there by the weekend!!
I'd agree with that assessment .
For further into the future, the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation from the University of Washington has been modelling expected death rates:
https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-kingdom
They just added the UK to their models a couple of days ago and it looks like it's consistently over-estimating by 30-40% at the moment. Maybe they will correct that or maybe (and I hope not) we will "catch up" with the model.
At any rate it currently predicts that our peak will be in about a week. I'm hoping we peak sooner."
Any one else puzzled by this "peak" thing.
They started off saying they wanted to push the peak back to give time for NHS to get prepared. Now it seems they want the peak as soon as possible so the numbers can start to reduce again....
???? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Went for a walk today and saw a couple of braindeads just walking past each other. We're all gunna die at this rate as there is nowt so thick as folk"
Your not going to catch anything just from walking past somone.
Its not airborne.
You would need to literaly cough right in front of them or sneeze.
Dont be stressing about somone walking past you even even if its just a few feet.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Went for a walk today and saw a couple of braindeads just walking past each other. We're all gunna die at this rate as there is nowt so thick as folk
Your not going to catch anything just from walking past somone.
Its not airborne.
You would need to literaly cough right in front of them or sneeze.
Dont be stressing about somone walking past you even even if its just a few feet.
"
Yep we are all going to die |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"France have now joined Italy, Spain, USA (and probably China if they gave true figures) in passing 10 000 recorded covid deaths.
At the current rate we will be there by the weekend!!
I'd agree with that assessment .
For further into the future, the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation from the University of Washington has been modelling expected death rates:
https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-kingdom
They just added the UK to their models a couple of days ago and it looks like it's consistently over-estimating by 30-40% at the moment. Maybe they will correct that or maybe (and I hope not) we will "catch up" with the model.
At any rate it currently predicts that our peak will be in about a week. I'm hoping we peak sooner.
Any one else puzzled by this "peak" thing.
They started off saying they wanted to push the peak back to give time for NHS to get prepared. Now it seems they want the peak as soon as possible so the numbers can start to reduce again....
????"
Squashing the curve of the number of cases.
What's so hard to understand that if we have peaked, the numbers will be reducing? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"France have now joined Italy, Spain, USA (and probably China if they gave true figures) in passing 10 000 recorded covid deaths.
At the current rate we will be there by the weekend!!
I'd agree with that assessment .
For further into the future, the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation from the University of Washington has been modelling expected death rates:
https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-kingdom
They just added the UK to their models a couple of days ago and it looks like it's consistently over-estimating by 30-40% at the moment. Maybe they will correct that or maybe (and I hope not) we will "catch up" with the model.
At any rate it currently predicts that our peak will be in about a week. I'm hoping we peak sooner.
Any one else puzzled by this "peak" thing.
They started off saying they wanted to push the peak back to give time for NHS to get prepared. Now it seems they want the peak as soon as possible so the numbers can start to reduce again....
????
Squashing the curve of the number of cases.
What's so hard to understand that if we have peaked, the numbers will be reducing? "
It's not about moving the peak now, it's about hoping to reach it ASAP. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"So things have changed....flattening it was about delaying the peak...."
No, squashing it.
Eg 60,000 hospital admissions is easier to treat/cope with over a period of three months than one. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"At any rate it currently predicts that our peak will be in about a week. I'm hoping we peak sooner.
Any one else puzzled by this "peak" thing.
They started off saying they wanted to push the peak back to give time for NHS to get prepared. Now it seems they want the peak as soon as possible so the numbers can start to reduce again....
????"
Just to be clear, in my post it was me and not some other "they" who wanted the peak to come sooner. I said that not because I want the peak to be higher and sooner but rather because I was expressing the sentiment that it's quite high enough now thank-you-very-much and I'd very much like the numbers to start coming down soon (thus defining said peak). |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"What do you think that peak means and why we will have it ? "
I've been trying to figure out what this question means in order to give some sort of sensible answer. Forgive me if I've misinterpreted.
I presume you know that every infection will have its peak in terms of number of new cases per day? And that this might therefore be asking why in particular we might see a peak soon in the UK?
The answer to that would be that something we did 2-3 weeks prior to the hoped-for peak changed the infection rate, R - the number of people subsequently infected for each infected person, below 1 so that the number of new infections on a given day is less than the number on the day before. I think we're all hoping that the social distancing we started just over 2 weeks ago is going to do that, and that we'll see its effects in the data soon.
Fingers crossed. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So things have changed....flattening it was about delaying the peak....
No, squashing it.
Eg 60,000 hospital admissions is easier to treat/cope with over a period of three months than one. "
If everyone in the UK is vulnerable
If hospital admissions are 15 percent of infections then
15 percent of 65 million is 9 ish million hospital admissions
10 percent would be 6 million
At current rate 60000 every month (yup I know its lower isn't it) that will take erm
100 months
The so called peak is only a plateau due to management
In my opinion they will have to repeatedly peak and reduce
Unless you genuinely think after this small tiny peak that enough humans have been infected so that when released it wont go up again
That I feel is very optimistic and extremely doubtful
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"At any rate it currently predicts that our peak will be in about a week. I'm hoping we peak sooner.
Any one else puzzled by this "peak" thing.
They started off saying they wanted to push the peak back to give time for NHS to get prepared. Now it seems they want the peak as soon as possible so the numbers can start to reduce again....
????
Just to be clear, in my post it was me and not some other "they" who wanted the peak to come sooner. I said that not because I want the peak to be higher and sooner but rather because I was expressing the sentiment that it's quite high enough now thank-you-very-much and I'd very much like the numbers to start coming down soon (thus defining said peak)."
Again let's be blunt
When referring to peak we refer to new daily infections usually requiring hospital
It's around 1000 now and had been near ish doubling every 4 days
It seems the NHS can cope with 30 000 a month let's hope so
But extrapolate upward that's only 300 000 infected per month due to lock down measures
Whilst a majority of the population has not been infected once any lock down is released an exponential rise is most likely
Thus a lock down may be required until 25 million have had it and at 500 000 a month restrictions that's 50 months lock down to keep it managed
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"At any rate it currently predicts that our peak will be in about a week. I'm hoping we peak sooner.
Any one else puzzled by this "peak" thing.
They started off saying they wanted to push the peak back to give time for NHS to get prepared. Now it seems they want the peak as soon as possible so the numbers can start to reduce again....
????
Just to be clear, in my post it was me and not some other "they" who wanted the peak to come sooner. I said that not because I want the peak to be higher and sooner but rather because I was expressing the sentiment that it's quite high enough now thank-you-very-much and I'd very much like the numbers to start coming down soon (thus defining said peak).
Again let's be blunt
When referring to peak we refer to new daily infections usually requiring hospital
It's around 1000 now and had been near ish doubling every 4 days
It seems the NHS can cope with 30 000 a month let's hope so
But extrapolate upward that's only 300 000 infected per month due to lock down measures
Whilst a majority of the population has not been infected once any lock down is released an exponential rise is most likely
Thus a lock down may be required until 25 million have had it and at 500 000 a month restrictions that's 50 months lock down to keep it managed
"
I will reiterate
Figures based upon the suggestion
Per 100 000 infected
10 to 20 000 need hospital
1 to 2000 die
Currently our analog is we only measure hospital or serious cases thus the 10 times up lift for a 10 percent measured cases
If it were 20% that would be worse less would have it and it would take longer in lock down |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Again let's be blunt
When referring to peak we refer to new daily infections usually requiring hospital
It's around 1000 now and had been near ish doubling every 4 days
It seems the NHS can cope with 30 000 a month let's hope so
But extrapolate upward that's only 300 000 infected per month due to lock down measures
Whilst a majority of the population has not been infected once any lock down is released an exponential rise is most likely
Thus a lock down may be required until 25 million have had it and at 500 000 a month restrictions that's 50 months lock down to keep it managed
"
Actually I'd agree that we can't "manage" the infection rate to get enough people infected to achieve herd immunity in a sensible length of time. Nor with what anyone would consider to be a sensible casualty rate (if there is such a thing).
I'm hoping the peak will come soon and that we'll get the number of infections down very low and keep it down until there is a vaccine. Experts suggest that's quite a long time away - 18 months is often quoted - but it's shorter than the 50 months you calculate of "death at the rate we think we can cope with".
If we're very lucky indeed we might even be able to track, trace, and isolate to the point where covid-19 is locally eradicated.
But those are just hopes of mine, not government strategy - not even ideas or proposals for government strategy. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"At any rate it currently predicts that our peak will be in about a week. I'm hoping we peak sooner.
Any one else puzzled by this "peak" thing.
They started off saying they wanted to push the peak back to give time for NHS to get prepared. Now it seems they want the peak as soon as possible so the numbers can start to reduce again....
????
Just to be clear, in my post it was me and not some other "they" who wanted the peak to come sooner. I said that not because I want the peak to be higher and sooner but rather because I was expressing the sentiment that it's quite high enough now thank-you-very-much and I'd very much like the numbers to start coming down soon (thus defining said peak)."
A shared sentiment. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"So things have changed....flattening it was about delaying the peak....
No, squashing it.
Eg 60,000 hospital admissions is easier to treat/cope with over a period of three months than one.
If everyone in the UK is vulnerable
If hospital admissions are 15 percent of infections then
15 percent of 65 million is 9 ish million hospital admissions
10 percent would be 6 million
At current rate 60000 every month (yup I know its lower isn't it) that will take erm
100 months
The so called peak is only a plateau due to management
In my opinion they will have to repeatedly peak and reduce
Unless you genuinely think after this small tiny peak that enough humans have been infected so that when released it wont go up again
That I feel is very optimistic and extremely doubtful
"
My number was purely picked out of the air as an illustrator. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Again let's be blunt
When referring to peak we refer to new daily infections usually requiring hospital
It's around 1000 now and had been near ish doubling every 4 days
It seems the NHS can cope with 30 000 a month let's hope so
But extrapolate upward that's only 300 000 infected per month due to lock down measures
Whilst a majority of the population has not been infected once any lock down is released an exponential rise is most likely
Thus a lock down may be required until 25 million have had it and at 500 000 a month restrictions that's 50 months lock down to keep it managed
Actually I'd agree that we can't "manage" the infection rate to get enough people infected to achieve herd immunity in a sensible length of time. Nor with what anyone would consider to be a sensible casualty rate (if there is such a thing).
I'm hoping the peak will come soon and that we'll get the number of infections down very low and keep it down until there is a vaccine. Experts suggest that's quite a long time away - 18 months is often quoted - but it's shorter than the 50 months you calculate of "death at the rate we think we can cope with".
If we're very lucky indeed we might even be able to track, trace, and isolate to the point where covid-19 is locally eradicated.
But those are just hopes of mine, not government strategy - not even ideas or proposals for government strategy."
Exactly
Minimum 18 months lock down
And I have no idea how long to vaccinate 40 million?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"At any rate it currently predicts that our peak will be in about a week. I'm hoping we peak sooner.
Any one else puzzled by this "peak" thing.
They started off saying they wanted to push the peak back to give time for NHS to get prepared. Now it seems they want the peak as soon as possible so the numbers can start to reduce again....
????
Just to be clear, in my post it was me and not some other "they" who wanted the peak to come sooner. I said that not because I want the peak to be higher and sooner but rather because I was expressing the sentiment that it's quite high enough now thank-you-very-much and I'd very much like the numbers to start coming down soon (thus defining said peak).
Again let's be blunt
When referring to peak we refer to new daily infections usually requiring hospital
It's around 1000 now and had been near ish doubling every 4 days
It seems the NHS can cope with 30 000 a month let's hope so
But extrapolate upward that's only 300 000 infected per month due to lock down measures
Whilst a majority of the population has not been infected once any lock down is released an exponential rise is most likely
Thus a lock down may be required until 25 million have had it and at 500 000 a month restrictions that's 50 months lock down to keep it managed
"
Some people (on social media) have been complaining lockdown happened later than it should have. I believe it was a strategy to allow for a somewhat controlled mass exposure to the virus... The population immunity strategy. Otherwise repetitive lockdowns would be taking place. Fingers crossed, this way is more manageable, however, immeasurable. All in all it's a learning curve. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Again let's be blunt
When referring to peak we refer to new daily infections usually requiring hospital
It's around 1000 now and had been near ish doubling every 4 days
It seems the NHS can cope with 30 000 a month let's hope so
But extrapolate upward that's only 300 000 infected per month due to lock down measures
Whilst a majority of the population has not been infected once any lock down is released an exponential rise is most likely
Thus a lock down may be required until 25 million have had it and at 500 000 a month restrictions that's 50 months lock down to keep it managed
Actually I'd agree that we can't "manage" the infection rate to get enough people infected to achieve herd immunity in a sensible length of time. Nor with what anyone would consider to be a sensible casualty rate (if there is such a thing).
I'm hoping the peak will come soon and that we'll get the number of infections down very low and keep it down until there is a vaccine. Experts suggest that's quite a long time away - 18 months is often quoted - but it's shorter than the 50 months you calculate of "death at the rate we think we can cope with".
If we're very lucky indeed we might even be able to track, trace, and isolate to the point where covid-19 is locally eradicated.
But those are just hopes of mine, not government strategy - not even ideas or proposals for government strategy.
Exactly
Minimum 18 months lock down
And I have no idea how long to vaccinate 40 million?
"
It's very unlikely 40 million will need vaccinating - just the vulnerable. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Again let's be blunt
When referring to peak we refer to new daily infections usually requiring hospital
It's around 1000 now and had been near ish doubling every 4 days
It seems the NHS can cope with 30 000 a month let's hope so
But extrapolate upward that's only 300 000 infected per month due to lock down measures
Whilst a majority of the population has not been infected once any lock down is released an exponential rise is most likely
Thus a lock down may be required until 25 million have had it and at 500 000 a month restrictions that's 50 months lock down to keep it managed
Actually I'd agree that we can't "manage" the infection rate to get enough people infected to achieve herd immunity in a sensible length of time. Nor with what anyone would consider to be a sensible casualty rate (if there is such a thing).
I'm hoping the peak will come soon and that we'll get the number of infections down very low and keep it down until there is a vaccine. Experts suggest that's quite a long time away - 18 months is often quoted - but it's shorter than the 50 months you calculate of "death at the rate we think we can cope with".
If we're very lucky indeed we might even be able to track, trace, and isolate to the point where covid-19 is locally eradicated.
But those are just hopes of mine, not government strategy - not even ideas or proposals for government strategy."
Your track and trace is beyond reach
Actually cov-sars2 has nowhere near taken grip
65 millions in the UK
Estimate 500 000 had and or got
Currently there are lots of pockets of the UK that could be isolated from the virus
Would make living a tad awkward but its possible that villages and small communities could be discovered virus free
A 3 week total lock down would could highlight but ot would need to be total zero outside contact
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Again let's be blunt
When referring to peak we refer to new daily infections usually requiring hospital
It's around 1000 now and had been near ish doubling every 4 days
It seems the NHS can cope with 30 000 a month let's hope so
But extrapolate upward that's only 300 000 infected per month due to lock down measures
Whilst a majority of the population has not been infected once any lock down is released an exponential rise is most likely
Thus a lock down may be required until 25 million have had it and at 500 000 a month restrictions that's 50 months lock down to keep it managed
Actually I'd agree that we can't "manage" the infection rate to get enough people infected to achieve herd immunity in a sensible length of time. Nor with what anyone would consider to be a sensible casualty rate (if there is such a thing).
I'm hoping the peak will come soon and that we'll get the number of infections down very low and keep it down until there is a vaccine. Experts suggest that's quite a long time away - 18 months is often quoted - but it's shorter than the 50 months you calculate of "death at the rate we think we can cope with".
If we're very lucky indeed we might even be able to track, trace, and isolate to the point where covid-19 is locally eradicated.
But those are just hopes of mine, not government strategy - not even ideas or proposals for government strategy.
Exactly
Minimum 18 months lock down
And I have no idea how long to vaccinate 40 million?
It's very unlikely 40 million will need vaccinating - just the vulnerable. "
We dont know who the 20% vulnerable are
That's the point |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Again let's be blunt
When referring to peak we refer to new daily infections usually requiring hospital
It's around 1000 now and had been near ish doubling every 4 days
It seems the NHS can cope with 30 000 a month let's hope so
But extrapolate upward that's only 300 000 infected per month due to lock down measures
Whilst a majority of the population has not been infected once any lock down is released an exponential rise is most likely
Thus a lock down may be required until 25 million have had it and at 500 000 a month restrictions that's 50 months lock down to keep it managed
Actually I'd agree that we can't "manage" the infection rate to get enough people infected to achieve herd immunity in a sensible length of time. Nor with what anyone would consider to be a sensible casualty rate (if there is such a thing).
I'm hoping the peak will come soon and that we'll get the number of infections down very low and keep it down until there is a vaccine. Experts suggest that's quite a long time away - 18 months is often quoted - but it's shorter than the 50 months you calculate of "death at the rate we think we can cope with".
If we're very lucky indeed we might even be able to track, trace, and isolate to the point where covid-19 is locally eradicated.
But those are just hopes of mine, not government strategy - not even ideas or proposals for government strategy.
Exactly
Minimum 18 months lock down
And I have no idea how long to vaccinate 40 million?
It's very unlikely 40 million will need vaccinating - just the vulnerable.
We dont know who the 20% vulnerable are
That's the point"
Just to clarify
There are a known vulnerable group
Currently when this group gets cov-sars2 many die even with the best efforts of our NHS team
However theres a strange but large 10 15 percent who will need medical intervention however will survive if they get it
We cannot predict who this 15 percent will be
Sadly this virus will need a whole population solution to save needless deaths
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *mmabluTV/TS
over a year ago
upton wirral |
"I live a short drive from the M5. Caravans have been travelling down to Devon and Cornwall throughout the day. It's people like this that ruin it for the rest of us. I hope they get stopped and told to go home!!! "
The police should be stopping them and fining them we are to soft at the best of times in this country,now we need to deal with these half wits.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"France have now joined Italy, Spain, USA (and probably China if they gave true figures) in passing 10 000 recorded covid deaths.
At the current rate we will be there by the weekend!! "
Very sad and very true..today more than 900 people died... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Again let's be blunt
When referring to peak we refer to new daily infections usually requiring hospital
It's around 1000 now and had been near ish doubling every 4 days
It seems the NHS can cope with 30 000 a month let's hope so
But extrapolate upward that's only 300 000 infected per month due to lock down measures
Whilst a majority of the population has not been infected once any lock down is released an exponential rise is most likely
Thus a lock down may be required until 25 million have had it and at 500 000 a month restrictions that's 50 months lock down to keep it managed
Actually I'd agree that we can't "manage" the infection rate to get enough people infected to achieve herd immunity in a sensible length of time. Nor with what anyone would consider to be a sensible casualty rate (if there is such a thing).
I'm hoping the peak will come soon and that we'll get the number of infections down very low and keep it down until there is a vaccine. Experts suggest that's quite a long time away - 18 months is often quoted - but it's shorter than the 50 months you calculate of "death at the rate we think we can cope with".
If we're very lucky indeed we might even be able to track, trace, and isolate to the point where covid-19 is locally eradicated.
But those are just hopes of mine, not government strategy - not even ideas or proposals for government strategy.
Exactly
Minimum 18 months lock down
And I have no idea how long to vaccinate 40 million?
It's very unlikely 40 million will need vaccinating - just the vulnerable. "
Now here's a conundrum
Let's suggest that many of the 15 ish percent are smokers
So moraly should the NHS ironicaly vaccinate smokers first
And for the record I say yes |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *umpkinMan
over a year ago
near the sounds of the wimborne quarter jack! |
One thing I`m still puzzled about is this "it`s not the same as the flu virus" bit. OK I do get the science behind that statement but let`s go back to before flu jabs which let`s face it, are not the complete answer anyway because the available vaccination is only the "best guess" at what strain of flu jab is required each year. What if the flu jab wasn`t available? I reckon we`d be looking at far more deaths from the "simple" flu than we are seeing now under the current corona virus. Even now, with the available flu jab, we still have many deaths from flu, probably rivalling those from Covid, but they are "acceptable" and not reported on unless there has been a miss calculation of what vaccine was required. I don`t know how many years we`ve had the flu jab available but I know with my heart problems I`d probably have been a gonner by now if the flu virus wasn`t as under control as it currently is.
And one other thing. In the late 1940s/early 1950s we had the smog. It killed many thousands across the board of those who lived in industrial or city areas. The only relief people had was if it poured with rain or was blowing a gale so any pollution would get blown or washed away. Quite honestly, it was the same difference - many thousands killed. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Again let's be blunt
When referring to peak we refer to new daily infections usually requiring hospital
It's around 1000 now and had been near ish doubling every 4 days
It seems the NHS can cope with 30 000 a month let's hope so
But extrapolate upward that's only 300 000 infected per month due to lock down measures
Whilst a majority of the population has not been infected once any lock down is released an exponential rise is most likely
Thus a lock down may be required until 25 million have had it and at 500 000 a month restrictions that's 50 months lock down to keep it managed
Actually I'd agree that we can't "manage" the infection rate to get enough people infected to achieve herd immunity in a sensible length of time. Nor with what anyone would consider to be a sensible casualty rate (if there is such a thing).
I'm hoping the peak will come soon and that we'll get the number of infections down very low and keep it down until there is a vaccine. Experts suggest that's quite a long time away - 18 months is often quoted - but it's shorter than the 50 months you calculate of "death at the rate we think we can cope with".
If we're very lucky indeed we might even be able to track, trace, and isolate to the point where covid-19 is locally eradicated.
But those are just hopes of mine, not government strategy - not even ideas or proposals for government strategy.
Exactly
Minimum 18 months lock down
And I have no idea how long to vaccinate 40 million?
It's very unlikely 40 million will need vaccinating - just the vulnerable.
We dont know who the 20% vulnerable are
That's the point"
It'd be those we are shielding. Which is more like 2%. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"One thing I`m still puzzled about is this "it`s not the same as the flu virus" bit. OK I do get the science behind that statement but let`s go back to before flu jabs which let`s face it, are not the complete answer anyway because the available vaccination is only the "best guess" at what strain of flu jab is required each year. What if the flu jab wasn`t available? I reckon we`d be looking at far more deaths from the "simple" flu than we are seeing now under the current corona virus. Even now, with the available flu jab, we still have many deaths from flu, probably rivalling those from Covid, but they are "acceptable" and not reported on unless there has been a miss calculation of what vaccine was required. "
And I see a future where there will be "acceptable" deaths with this virus. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"One thing I`m still puzzled about is this "it`s not the same as the flu virus" bit. OK I do get the science behind that statement but let`s go back to before flu jabs which let`s face it, are not the complete answer anyway because the available vaccination is only the "best guess" at what strain of flu jab is required each year. What if the flu jab wasn`t available? I reckon we`d be looking at far more deaths from the "simple" flu than we are seeing now under the current corona virus. Even now, with the available flu jab, we still have many deaths from flu, probably rivalling those from Covid, but they are "acceptable" and not reported on unless there has been a miss calculation of what vaccine was required. I don`t know how many years we`ve had the flu jab available but I know with my heart problems I`d probably have been a gonner by now if the flu virus wasn`t as under control as it currently is.
And one other thing. In the late 1940s/early 1950s we had the smog. It killed many thousands across the board of those who lived in industrial or city areas. The only relief people had was if it poured with rain or was blowing a gale so any pollution would get blown or washed away. Quite honestly, it was the same difference - many thousands killed."
Without being funny.im not really sure what point you are trying to make?
Covid Is much worse than the flu..I thought that had been established?
And the smog bit..well you are talking about a era.
I'm genuinely unsure what your question is?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Covid Is much worse than the flu..I thought that had been established?
Or does it just seem that way as we have an acceptable flu vaccine and we tolerate flu deaths every year"
I'm not sure we 'tolerate'it exactly?
We have the flu jab.
Dont lots who die from it have underlying symptoms? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Dont lots who die from it have underlying symptoms?"
Covid or flu?
Last time they had those stats in the news which was about 10 days ago...37 people of the covid deaths had no underlying medical issues. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Dont lots who die from it have underlying symptoms?
Covid or flu?
Last time they had those stats in the news which was about 10 days ago...37 people of the covid deaths had no underlying medical issues."
Flu..I dont know I'm no expert.
Yep people have died with no underlying causes and young people have died aswell.
Maybe I'm being a bit thick I just dont The op"point
Because the flu kills x amount of people we should just let this run its course? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Maybe I'm being a bit thick I just dont The op"point
Because the flu kills x amount of people we should just let this run its course?"
I don't know the Ops point either but everytime I see the death numbers for the UK, my instinctive reaction is "is that all?". I know it's nowhere near peak yet though.
I sort of get the idea of flattening the curve as destroying the NHS wouldn't be a good idea but in the end 80% of us need to get immunity somehow. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"We have just past a pub on our exercise route that is closed,but their having a barbecue at the back and there was about 25-30 people in attendance! Which just goes to show, you can't reason with stupidity! "
You should of rang the police, they've got a line now haven't they?
Police will make them move on, I heared of an incident near me where people were out in front gardens drinking/dancing and bbqing. Resident got irrate and a riot van turned up, telling them all to get in. Riot vans are patrolling the streets now using speaker phones. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Maybe I'm being a bit thick I just dont The op"point
Because the flu kills x amount of people we should just let this run its course?
I don't know the Ops point either but everytime I see the death numbers for the UK, my instinctive reaction is "is that all?". I know it's nowhere near peak yet though.
I sort of get the idea of flattening the curve as destroying the NHS wouldn't be a good idea but in the end 80% of us need to get immunity somehow. "
I read somewhere The real figure could be a lot higher.old people living alone etc |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Maybe I'm being a bit thick I just dont The op"point
Because the flu kills x amount of people we should just let this run its course?
I don't know the Ops point either but everytime I see the death numbers for the UK, my instinctive reaction is "is that all?". I know it's nowhere near peak yet though.
I sort of get the idea of flattening the curve as destroying the NHS wouldn't be a good idea but in the end 80% of us need to get immunity somehow. "
Is that all?
How many deaths would you like to see? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Is that all?
How many deaths would you like to see?"
I don't want to see any. It's just my instinctive response that of a global population of 7.8 billion, with 50 million deaths a year, the 90000 deaths from Covid 19 seem statistically small. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Maybe I'm being a bit thick I just dont The op"point
Because the flu kills x amount of people we should just let this run its course?
I don't know the Ops point either but everytime I see the death numbers for the UK, my instinctive reaction is "is that all?". I know it's nowhere near peak yet though.
I sort of get the idea of flattening the curve as destroying the NHS wouldn't be a good idea but in the end 80% of us need to get immunity somehow. "
Why do you think the government's strategy has been to ease in measures? I believe we are not under full lockdown in order to have further measures to take. The behaviour of those people not complying with lockdown has been taken into consideration. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Is that all?
How many deaths would you like to see? I don't want to see any. It's just my instinctive response that of a global population of 7.8 billion, with 50 million deaths a year, the 90000 deaths from Covid 19 seem statistically small."
I don't get the point.
What does it mean that it seems small?
And anyway it is not small at all. If we had the same death rate that we have now for an entire year we will end up with 3 million death by COVID-19, but of course the death rate can and will get much worse. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Is that all?
How many deaths would you like to see? I don't want to see any. It's just my instinctive response that of a global population of 7.8 billion, with 50 million deaths a year, the 90000 deaths from Covid 19 seem statistically small."
At a WHO rate of 3.4% you are talking about 265 million additional deaths.
And what happens when the next virus comes along, or this one mutates. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Yes, annual flu does kill a lot of people. However, these deaths take place more or less randomly spread across the country, and randomly spread across the winter. So it is a steady background death rate, not all occurring at in a rush at once.
The big problem with covid-19 is that it is a new disease that nobody has resistance against, and it spreads really quickly. Left unchecked, one infection in the population leads to the numbers infected increasing by times 10 every week. So eventually one tenth of the population of the country has it. And then just one week later every single person has it. So there is a single week where there are about 55 million people in the uk all poorly at the same time. Only about 2 in ten of those will be seriously in danger, so that's just 10 million or so that might need a hospital bed. And maybe only half of them will die if we're lucky. Perhaps 5 million people all dying in the same week.
It would get it over quickly and then we could get back to business as normal. But it's a lot of bodies to dispose of all at once... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Where do we find 10000000 hospital beds?"
Exactly. Of course we don't need the hospital beds if we simply go with business as usual, save the money, and let them just die wherever they are. It's what happens with herds in the wild when a new disease hits.
Of course once we've made that decision about covid-19, we really should follow through and get rid of the health service altogether, it's only sick people that need it, let them die. And why pay pensions? These old people are just a burden on society. Taking money that rightfully belongs to the important people, the millionaires and billionaires... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *obka3Couple
over a year ago
bournemouth |
"One thing I`m still puzzled about is this "it`s not the same as the flu virus" bit. OK I do get the science behind that statement but let`s go back to before flu jabs which let`s face it, are not the complete answer anyway because the available vaccination is only the "best guess" at what strain of flu jab is required each year. What if the flu jab wasn`t available? I reckon we`d be looking at far more deaths from the "simple" flu than we are seeing now under the current corona virus. Even now, with the available flu jab, we still have many deaths from flu, probably rivalling those from Covid, but they are "acceptable" and not reported on unless there has been a miss calculation of what vaccine was required. I don`t know how many years we`ve had the flu jab available but I know with my heart problems I`d probably have been a gonner by now if the flu virus wasn`t as under control as it currently is.
And one other thing. In the late 1940s/early 1950s we had the smog. It killed many thousands across the board of those who lived in industrial or city areas. The only relief people had was if it poured with rain or was blowing a gale so any pollution would get blown or washed away. Quite honestly, it was the same difference - many thousands killed.
Without being funny.im not really sure what point you are trying to make?
Covid Is much worse than the flu..I thought that had been established?
And the smog bit..well you are talking about a era.
I'm genuinely unsure what your question is?
"
No it's not worse than the flu, it's only killing more because it's new, once we get to herd immunity levels no more will die than die from flu, if those people who are in the vulnerable group for cv19 didnt have a flu jab each year many more would die from flu each winter. It's just that being new this virus will have a short and very painful spike in numbers, like it or not this virus us not going away ever, it is likely to mutate, but more likely to a milder version so any vaccine will have to be like the flu one and be a best guess change each year. Most of us will have to take our chances, lockdown is only about slowing the initial spread to slow numbers needing ICU etc. Quite why people cant grasp this very simple fact is beyond me.
There is not a single medical expert claiming we can or will stop it spreading to the vast majority of people, that's why they tell the vulnerable to hide away, and that wont be for three months but until a vaccine comes or its shown not to mutate and with most healthy people having had it the risk will become lower that those at risk might catch it |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"One thing I`m still puzzled about is this "it`s not the same as the flu virus" bit. OK I do get the science behind that statement but let`s go back to before flu jabs which let`s face it, are not the complete answer anyway because the available vaccination is only the "best guess" at what strain of flu jab is required each year. What if the flu jab wasn`t available? I reckon we`d be looking at far more deaths from the "simple" flu than we are seeing now under the current corona virus. Even now, with the available flu jab, we still have many deaths from flu, probably rivalling those from Covid, but they are "acceptable" and not reported on unless there has been a miss calculation of what vaccine was required. I don`t know how many years we`ve had the flu jab available but I know with my heart problems I`d probably have been a gonner by now if the flu virus wasn`t as under control as it currently is.
And one other thing. In the late 1940s/early 1950s we had the smog. It killed many thousands across the board of those who lived in industrial or city areas. The only relief people had was if it poured with rain or was blowing a gale so any pollution would get blown or washed away. Quite honestly, it was the same difference - many thousands killed.
Without being funny.im not really sure what point you are trying to make?
Covid Is much worse than the flu..I thought that had been established?
And the smog bit..well you are talking about a era.
I'm genuinely unsure what your question is?
No it's not worse than the flu, it's only killing more because it's new, once we get to herd immunity levels no more will die than die from flu, if those people who are in the vulnerable group for cv19 didnt have a flu jab each year many more would die from flu each winter. It's just that being new this virus will have a short and very painful spike in numbers, like it or not this virus us not going away ever, it is likely to mutate, but more likely to a milder version so any vaccine will have to be like the flu one and be a best guess change each year. Most of us will have to take our chances, lockdown is only about slowing the initial spread to slow numbers needing ICU etc. Quite why people cant grasp this very simple fact is beyond me.
There is not a single medical expert claiming we can or will stop it spreading to the vast majority of people, that's why they tell the vulnerable to hide away, and that wont be for three months but until a vaccine comes or its shown not to mutate and with most healthy people having had it the risk will become lower that those at risk might catch it"
Arent The death rates much worse than the flu? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
For everybody that is still saying "herd immunity is the answer" can I just ask one thing. You first. You go get yourself a dose first. Then your partner. Then everybody else in your family. Your friends. Your neighbourhood. And go into it willingly, knowing that some of you will die, that you yourself might die, that certainly somebody you love will die. Don't volunteer all the people you don't know to be "the herd" so that you can take advantage of their immunity. If you honestly believe that this policy is the only way through, then do it. You do it first. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"For everybody that is still saying "herd immunity is the answer" can I just ask one thing. You first. You go get yourself a dose first. Then your partner. Then everybody else in your family. Your friends. Your neighbourhood. And go into it willingly, knowing that some of you will die, that you yourself might die, that certainly somebody you love will die. Don't volunteer all the people you don't know to be "the herd" so that you can take advantage of their immunity. If you honestly believe that this policy is the only way through, then do it. You do it first."
Apart from what we are currently doing is herd immunity strategies?
Or are you suggesting we will completely irradiate it and the billions who have not had it will never have to concern themselves?
I'm a huge advocate of lockdown, I dont think we are being responsible enough
However it is still a Herd immunisation strategy hopefully one that will keep needless deaths to a minimum
As it happens I would indeed take the bullet and totally isolate for a month or die
I dont see why my family needs to come into it
I want a slow and controlled approach
But we are nowhere near an irradiation strategy
Until at least x have had it or a vaccination social liberties must be controlled |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"For everybody that is still saying "herd immunity is the answer" can I just ask one thing. You first. You go get yourself a dose first. Then your partner. Then everybody else in your family. Your friends. Your neighbourhood. And go into it willingly, knowing that some of you will die, that you yourself might die, that certainly somebody you love will die. Don't volunteer all the people you don't know to be "the herd" so that you can take advantage of their immunity. If you honestly believe that this policy is the only way through, then do it. You do it first."
Want to go to a shop
You are volunteering someone
Want water? electricity a medical service they are all volunteers
Want post ? Want refuse collection
Then you ARE volunteering others
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"One thing I`m still puzzled about is this "it`s not the same as the flu virus" bit. OK I do get the science behind that statement but let`s go back to before flu jabs which let`s face it, are not the complete answer anyway because the available vaccination is only the "best guess" at what strain of flu jab is required each year. What if the flu jab wasn`t available? I reckon we`d be looking at far more deaths from the "simple" flu than we are seeing now under the current corona virus. Even now, with the available flu jab, we still have many deaths from flu, probably rivalling those from Covid, but they are "acceptable" and not reported on unless there has been a miss calculation of what vaccine was required. I don`t know how many years we`ve had the flu jab available but I know with my heart problems I`d probably have been a gonner by now if the flu virus wasn`t as under control as it currently is.
And one other thing. In the late 1940s/early 1950s we had the smog. It killed many thousands across the board of those who lived in industrial or city areas. The only relief people had was if it poured with rain or was blowing a gale so any pollution would get blown or washed away. Quite honestly, it was the same difference - many thousands killed.
Without being funny.im not really sure what point you are trying to make?
Covid Is much worse than the flu..I thought that had been established?
And the smog bit..well you are talking about a era.
I'm genuinely unsure what your question is?
No it's not worse than the flu, it's only killing more because it's new, once we get to herd immunity levels no more will die than die from flu, if those people who are in the vulnerable group for cv19 didnt have a flu jab each year many more would die from flu each winter. It's just that being new this virus will have a short and very painful spike in numbers, like it or not this virus us not going away ever, it is likely to mutate, but more likely to a milder version so any vaccine will have to be like the flu one and be a best guess change each year. Most of us will have to take our chances, lockdown is only about slowing the initial spread to slow numbers needing ICU etc. Quite why people cant grasp this very simple fact is beyond me.
There is not a single medical expert claiming we can or will stop it spreading to the vast majority of people, that's why they tell the vulnerable to hide away, and that wont be for three months but until a vaccine comes or its shown not to mutate and with most healthy people having had it the risk will become lower that those at risk might catch it
Arent The death rates much worse than the flu?"
Which flu?
Spanish flu 1918 to 1920 infected 500 million people and killed up to 50 million people... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Coronovirus or covid 19 call it what you will has spread around the world so there is no chance of quarantine to stop infection spreading when an estimated 80% of people who become infected will get little or no symptoms, the majority of the 80% can spread the virus being totally unaware they are doing so and as it survives in the air (from you breathing out minute moisture droplets containing the virus which can stay suspended in the air for minutes) breathing in after someone has exhaled the virus puts you at risk of catching it so herd immunity is the only way forward. As nature always had its unfortunately the survival of the fittest.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"One thing I`m still puzzled about is this "it`s not the same as the flu virus" bit. OK I do get the science behind that statement but let`s go back to before flu jabs which let`s face it, are not the complete answer anyway because the available vaccination is only the "best guess" at what strain of flu jab is required each year. What if the flu jab wasn`t available? I reckon we`d be looking at far more deaths from the "simple" flu than we are seeing now under the current corona virus. Even now, with the available flu jab, we still have many deaths from flu, probably rivalling those from Covid, but they are "acceptable" and not reported on unless there has been a miss calculation of what vaccine was required. I don`t know how many years we`ve had the flu jab available but I know with my heart problems I`d probably have been a gonner by now if the flu virus wasn`t as under control as it currently is.
And one other thing. In the late 1940s/early 1950s we had the smog. It killed many thousands across the board of those who lived in industrial or city areas. The only relief people had was if it poured with rain or was blowing a gale so any pollution would get blown or washed away. Quite honestly, it was the same difference - many thousands killed.
Without being funny.im not really sure what point you are trying to make?
Covid Is much worse than the flu..I thought that had been established?
And the smog bit..well you are talking about a era.
I'm genuinely unsure what your question is?
No it's not worse than the flu, it's only killing more because it's new, once we get to herd immunity levels no more will die than die from flu, if those people who are in the vulnerable group for cv19 didnt have a flu jab each year many more would die from flu each winter. It's just that being new this virus will have a short and very painful spike in numbers, like it or not this virus us not going away ever, it is likely to mutate, but more likely to a milder version so any vaccine will have to be like the flu one and be a best guess change each year. Most of us will have to take our chances, lockdown is only about slowing the initial spread to slow numbers needing ICU etc. Quite why people cant grasp this very simple fact is beyond me.
There is not a single medical expert claiming we can or will stop it spreading to the vast majority of people, that's why they tell the vulnerable to hide away, and that wont be for three months but until a vaccine comes or its shown not to mutate and with most healthy people having had it the risk will become lower that those at risk might catch it
Arent The death rates much worse than the flu?
Which flu?
Spanish flu 1918 to 1920 infected 500 million people and killed up to 50 million people... "
I was Thinking The flu that is around today. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Coronovirus or covid 19 call it what you will has spread around the world so there is no chance of quarantine to stop infection spreading when an estimated 80% of people who become infected will get little or no symptoms, the majority of the 80% can spread the virus being totally unaware they are doing so and as it survives in the air (from you breathing out minute moisture droplets containing the virus which can stay suspended in the air for minutes) breathing in after someone has exhaled the virus puts you at risk of catching it so herd immunity is the only way forward. As nature always had its unfortunately the survival of the fittest.."
We are humans not animals. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"We have just past a pub on our exercise route that is closed,but their having a barbecue at the back and there was about 25-30 people in attendance! Which just goes to show, you can't reason with stupidity! "
I would have called the police. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Coronovirus or covid 19 call it what you will has spread around the world so there is no chance of quarantine to stop infection spreading when an estimated 80% of people who become infected will get little or no symptoms, the majority of the 80% can spread the virus being totally unaware they are doing so and as it survives in the air (from you breathing out minute moisture droplets containing the virus which can stay suspended in the air for minutes) breathing in after someone has exhaled the virus puts you at risk of catching it so herd immunity is the only way forward. As nature always had its unfortunately the survival of the fittest..
We are humans not animals."
And human beings are still classed as an animal, |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Coronovirus or covid 19 call it what you will has spread around the world so there is no chance of quarantine to stop infection spreading when an estimated 80% of people who become infected will get little or no symptoms, the majority of the 80% can spread the virus being totally unaware they are doing so and as it survives in the air (from you breathing out minute moisture droplets containing the virus which can stay suspended in the air for minutes) breathing in after someone has exhaled the virus puts you at risk of catching it so herd immunity is the only way forward. As nature always had its unfortunately the survival of the fittest..
We are humans not animals.
And human beings are still classed as an animal, "
I think there are a few key differences. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Those breaking the lock down should be named and shamed "
Agreed and fined and have future liberties removed
However let's be clear
Their actions
A , add extra strain on the NHS and will most likely cause needless deaths
B, hasten the spread and infect rate and thus reducing the time the world must stay an varying states of lock down
My current guess over 18 months |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I live a short drive from the M5. Caravans have been travelling down to Devon and Cornwall throughout the day. It's people like this that ruin it for the rest of us. I hope they get stopped and told to go home!!! "
I bet some of them at least are going to places where they are well away from others.
If i had a well stocked caravan. I may do the same. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Arent The death rates much worse than the flu?
Which flu?
Spanish flu 1918 to 1920 infected 500 million people and killed up to 50 million people...
I was Thinking The flu that is around today."
The "one" that comes round every year is typically referred to as "seasonal" flu. I put "one" in quotes there because I think there's usually more than one strain. Seasonal flu usually has a mortality rate of about 0.1%. The mortality rate of covid-19 is a bit difficult to pin down at the moment, but estimates range from just under 1% to about 5%. Overall this is dependent on things like how many cases are mild and undetected relative to the known ones. More local dependencies are things like demographics (a more elderly than average population will suffer more), air pollution levels (regions of high air pollution have recently been strongly correlated with the much higher mortality rates), and whether a region gets hit hard enough and fast enough to overwhelm the hospitals there.
At any rate, even the low end estimates for covid-19 mortality rate exceed seasonal flu by a factor of 10.
And it spreads faster and more readily.
And it's more difficult to detect while spreading - largely because it can spread quite well while people don't realise they have it.
I'd like to tack on at the end here that when people say "only the flu" it is worth mentioning the Spanish flu that was mentioned above: it was one of the most deadly pandemics of the 20th century |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Coronovirus or covid 19 call it what you will has spread around the world so there is no chance of quarantine to stop infection spreading when an estimated 80% of people who become infected will get little or no symptoms, the majority of the 80% can spread the virus being totally unaware they are doing so and as it survives in the air (from you breathing out minute moisture droplets containing the virus which can stay suspended in the air for minutes) breathing in after someone has exhaled the virus puts you at risk of catching it so herd immunity is the only way forward. As nature always had its unfortunately the survival of the fittest..
We are humans not animals.
And human beings are still classed as an animal,
I think there are a few key differences."
I'm not so sure 
Taking the human perspective away, the species human has no more or less right to live and roam the planet than any other species
Like all animals we put ourselves first but that's an evolved animal trait
The ability to reason does not philosophically give us any greater rights |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Coronovirus or covid 19 call it what you will has spread around the world so there is no chance of quarantine to stop infection spreading when an estimated 80% of people who become infected will get little or no symptoms, the majority of the 80% can spread the virus being totally unaware they are doing so and as it survives in the air (from you breathing out minute moisture droplets containing the virus which can stay suspended in the air for minutes) breathing in after someone has exhaled the virus puts you at risk of catching it so herd immunity is the only way forward. As nature always had its unfortunately the survival of the fittest..
We are humans not animals.
And human beings are still classed as an animal,
I think there are a few key differences.
I'm not so sure
Taking the human perspective away, the species human has no more or less right to live and roam the planet than any other species
Like all animals we put ourselves first but that's an evolved animal trait
The ability to reason does not philosophically give us any greater rights "
I was thinking more about empathy,compassion etc
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
For me complete lockdown will just not work.
I've seen all the arguments for and against but let's take China. Complete lockdown for 11 weeks, let out just a couple of days ago and now we have new infections, and new deaths.
I think we will see China's rate increase again over the next few weeks. Just my thoughts of course |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *obka3Couple
over a year ago
bournemouth |
"
Arent The death rates much worse than the flu?"
Not really, the headline figure is because no one has had it so i will take all those in the first hit whereas virtually all of us have had flu so it only generally takes those with badly compromised immune systems and because its not everyone toether there are more nhs beds to treat those that are saveable.
perhaps the best way of looking at it is by thinking cv19 will take the samenumber of people this year as "normal" flu will in say 7 years but next year cv19 will take the same as normal flu |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Coronovirus or covid 19 call it what you will has spread around the world so there is no chance of quarantine to stop infection spreading when an estimated 80% of people who become infected will get little or no symptoms, the majority of the 80% can spread the virus being totally unaware they are doing so and as it survives in the air (from you breathing out minute moisture droplets containing the virus which can stay suspended in the air for minutes) breathing in after someone has exhaled the virus puts you at risk of catching it so herd immunity is the only way forward. As nature always had its unfortunately the survival of the fittest..
We are humans not animals."
We are animals. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Coronovirus or covid 19 call it what you will has spread around the world so there is no chance of quarantine to stop infection spreading when an estimated 80% of people who become infected will get little or no symptoms, the majority of the 80% can spread the virus being totally unaware they are doing so and as it survives in the air (from you breathing out minute moisture droplets containing the virus which can stay suspended in the air for minutes) breathing in after someone has exhaled the virus puts you at risk of catching it so herd immunity is the only way forward. As nature always had its unfortunately the survival of the fittest..
We are humans not animals.
And human beings are still classed as an animal,
I think there are a few key differences."
Yeah, humans tend to think we're better than other animals, we're arrogant. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Coronovirus or covid 19 call it what you will has spread around the world so there is no chance of quarantine to stop infection spreading when an estimated 80% of people who become infected will get little or no symptoms, the majority of the 80% can spread the virus being totally unaware they are doing so and as it survives in the air (from you breathing out minute moisture droplets containing the virus which can stay suspended in the air for minutes) breathing in after someone has exhaled the virus puts you at risk of catching it so herd immunity is the only way forward. As nature always had its unfortunately the survival of the fittest..
We are humans not animals.
And human beings are still classed as an animal,
I think there are a few key differences.
Yeah, humans tend to think we're better than other animals, we're arrogant. "
Pity we can't be doing things we see on the discovery channel.... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Coronovirus or covid 19 call it what you will has spread around the world so there is no chance of quarantine to stop infection spreading when an estimated 80% of people who become infected will get little or no symptoms, the majority of the 80% can spread the virus being totally unaware they are doing so and as it survives in the air (from you breathing out minute moisture droplets containing the virus which can stay suspended in the air for minutes) breathing in after someone has exhaled the virus puts you at risk of catching it so herd immunity is the only way forward. As nature always had its unfortunately the survival of the fittest..
We are humans not animals.
And human beings are still classed as an animal,
I think there are a few key differences.
I'm not so sure
Taking the human perspective away, the species human has no more or less right to live and roam the planet than any other species
Like all animals we put ourselves first but that's an evolved animal trait
The ability to reason does not philosophically give us any greater rights
I was thinking more about empathy,compassion etc
"
I remember a nature programme about elephants. If a new born's mother dies, "aunties" step in to raise it. Is that not compassion? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Coronovirus or covid 19 call it what you will has spread around the world so there is no chance of quarantine to stop infection spreading when an estimated 80% of people who become infected will get little or no symptoms, the majority of the 80% can spread the virus being totally unaware they are doing so and as it survives in the air (from you breathing out minute moisture droplets containing the virus which can stay suspended in the air for minutes) breathing in after someone has exhaled the virus puts you at risk of catching it so herd immunity is the only way forward. As nature always had its unfortunately the survival of the fittest..
We are humans not animals.
And human beings are still classed as an animal,
I think there are a few key differences.
Yeah, humans tend to think we're better than other animals, we're arrogant. "
Like I said I was thinking more compassion etc
When someone mentions survival of the fittest it worries me |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *obka3Couple
over a year ago
bournemouth |
"For everybody that is still saying "herd immunity is the answer" can I just ask one thing. You first. You go get yourself a dose first. Then your partner. Then everybody else in your family. Your friends. Your neighbourhood. And go into it willingly, knowing that some of you will die, that you yourself might die, that certainly somebody you love will die. Don't volunteer all the people you don't know to be "the herd" so that you can take advantage of their immunity. If you honestly believe that this policy is the only way through, then do it. You do it first."
If you dont want it then stay inside, let those who deliver your food, keep the electric and water and refuse services going, the doctors the nurses the carers, the farmers, firemen, ambulance drivers, truck drivers etc etc are ALL taking that risk now and everytime they go out they protect YOU, especially those working in the hospitals.
You have at least an 80% chance of catching it, you may already have and not know it, I have a slighly raised risk due to very mild asthma and age, my normal risk of dying at my age is 1% with cv19 its around an extra 1 plus say 1 more % for my asthma,of course its a bugger if I happen to be the 1% but I'm not going to hide away if we havent already had it, which is possible as we have had some symptoms a couple of weeks ago, but plenty of other illnesses do too. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Coronovirus or covid 19 call it what you will has spread around the world so there is no chance of quarantine to stop infection spreading when an estimated 80% of people who become infected will get little or no symptoms, the majority of the 80% can spread the virus being totally unaware they are doing so and as it survives in the air (from you breathing out minute moisture droplets containing the virus which can stay suspended in the air for minutes) breathing in after someone has exhaled the virus puts you at risk of catching it so herd immunity is the only way forward. As nature always had its unfortunately the survival of the fittest..
We are humans not animals.
And human beings are still classed as an animal,
I think there are a few key differences.
Yeah, humans tend to think we're better than other animals, we're arrogant.
Pity we can't be doing things we see on the discovery channel...."
I've seen monkeys wanking, I've seen men wanking - both have a gormless look on their faces  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Coronovirus or covid 19 call it what you will has spread around the world so there is no chance of quarantine to stop infection spreading when an estimated 80% of people who become infected will get little or no symptoms, the majority of the 80% can spread the virus being totally unaware they are doing so and as it survives in the air (from you breathing out minute moisture droplets containing the virus which can stay suspended in the air for minutes) breathing in after someone has exhaled the virus puts you at risk of catching it so herd immunity is the only way forward. As nature always had its unfortunately the survival of the fittest..
We are humans not animals.
And human beings are still classed as an animal,
I think there are a few key differences.
Yeah, humans tend to think we're better than other animals, we're arrogant.
Like I said I was thinking more compassion etc
When someone mentions survival of the fittest it worries me"
To my knowledge a lot of herd species try to protect their weaker members from harm and preditation
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Coronovirus or covid 19 call it what you will has spread around the world so there is no chance of quarantine to stop infection spreading when an estimated 80% of people who become infected will get little or no symptoms, the majority of the 80% can spread the virus being totally unaware they are doing so and as it survives in the air (from you breathing out minute moisture droplets containing the virus which can stay suspended in the air for minutes) breathing in after someone has exhaled the virus puts you at risk of catching it so herd immunity is the only way forward. As nature always had its unfortunately the survival of the fittest..
We are humans not animals.
And human beings are still classed as an animal,
I think there are a few key differences.
Yeah, humans tend to think we're better than other animals, we're arrogant.
Like I said I was thinking more compassion etc
When someone mentions survival of the fittest it worries me
To my knowledge a lot of herd species try to protect their weaker members from harm and preditation
"
I'm not a huge zoologist but I thought animals tended to leave the weakest to die..hence survival of the fittest. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asIsaCouple
over a year ago
harrow |
"Went for a walk today and saw a couple of braindeads just walking past each other. We're all gunna die at this rate as there is nowt so thick as folk
Your not going to catch anything just from walking past somone.
Its not airborne.
You would need to literaly cough right in front of them or sneeze.
Dont be stressing about somone walking past you even even if its just a few feet.
"
Absolute rubbish according to every virologist, scientist etc . But obviously you know best - no wonder people are dying |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Coronovirus or covid 19 call it what you will has spread around the world so there is no chance of quarantine to stop infection spreading when an estimated 80% of people who become infected will get little or no symptoms, the majority of the 80% can spread the virus being totally unaware they are doing so and as it survives in the air (from you breathing out minute moisture droplets containing the virus which can stay suspended in the air for minutes) breathing in after someone has exhaled the virus puts you at risk of catching it so herd immunity is the only way forward. As nature always had its unfortunately the survival of the fittest..
We are humans not animals.
And human beings are still classed as an animal,
I think there are a few key differences.
Yeah, humans tend to think we're better than other animals, we're arrogant.
Like I said I was thinking more compassion etc
When someone mentions survival of the fittest it worries me
To my knowledge a lot of herd species try to protect their weaker members from harm and preditation
I'm not a huge zoologist but I thought animals tended to leave the weakest to die..hence survival of the fittest."
Not true when a weak member of bison is attacked the whole herd turns to fight same with elephants and a great deal more |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Coronovirus or covid 19 call it what you will has spread around the world so there is no chance of quarantine to stop infection spreading when an estimated 80% of people who become infected will get little or no symptoms, the majority of the 80% can spread the virus being totally unaware they are doing so and as it survives in the air (from you breathing out minute moisture droplets containing the virus which can stay suspended in the air for minutes) breathing in after someone has exhaled the virus puts you at risk of catching it so herd immunity is the only way forward. As nature always had its unfortunately the survival of the fittest..
We are humans not animals.
And human beings are still classed as an animal,
I think there are a few key differences.
Yeah, humans tend to think we're better than other animals, we're arrogant.
Like I said I was thinking more compassion etc
When someone mentions survival of the fittest it worries me
To my knowledge a lot of herd species try to protect their weaker members from harm and preditation
I'm not a huge zoologist but I thought animals tended to leave the weakest to die..hence survival of the fittest.
Not true when a weak member of bison is attacked the whole herd turns to fight same with elephants and a great deal more "
Like I said I'm not a zoologist. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Coronovirus or covid 19 call it what you will has spread around the world so there is no chance of quarantine to stop infection spreading when an estimated 80% of people who become infected will get little or no symptoms, the majority of the 80% can spread the virus being totally unaware they are doing so and as it survives in the air (from you breathing out minute moisture droplets containing the virus which can stay suspended in the air for minutes) breathing in after someone has exhaled the virus puts you at risk of catching it so herd immunity is the only way forward. As nature always had its unfortunately the survival of the fittest..
We are humans not animals.
And human beings are still classed as an animal,
I think there are a few key differences.
Yeah, humans tend to think we're better than other animals, we're arrogant.
Like I said I was thinking more compassion etc
When someone mentions survival of the fittest it worries me
To my knowledge a lot of herd species try to protect their weaker members from harm and preditation
I'm not a huge zoologist but I thought animals tended to leave the weakest to die..hence survival of the fittest."
However let's be blunt
Anyone who mis uses survival of the fittest as a justification for immoral callous behaviour is closer to nazi than our beloved animals xx |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Coronovirus or covid 19 call it what you will has spread around the world so there is no chance of quarantine to stop infection spreading when an estimated 80% of people who become infected will get little or no symptoms, the majority of the 80% can spread the virus being totally unaware they are doing so and as it survives in the air (from you breathing out minute moisture droplets containing the virus which can stay suspended in the air for minutes) breathing in after someone has exhaled the virus puts you at risk of catching it so herd immunity is the only way forward. As nature always had its unfortunately the survival of the fittest..
We are humans not animals.
And human beings are still classed as an animal,
I think there are a few key differences.
Yeah, humans tend to think we're better than other animals, we're arrogant.
Like I said I was thinking more compassion etc
When someone mentions survival of the fittest it worries me
To my knowledge a lot of herd species try to protect their weaker members from harm and preditation
I'm not a huge zoologist but I thought animals tended to leave the weakest to die..hence survival of the fittest.
However let's be blunt
Anyone who mis uses survival of the fittest as a justification for immoral callous behaviour is closer to nazi than our beloved animals xx"
I agree 100% |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Coronovirus or covid 19 call it what you will has spread around the world so there is no chance of quarantine to stop infection spreading when an estimated 80% of people who become infected will get little or no symptoms, the majority of the 80% can spread the virus being totally unaware they are doing so and as it survives in the air (from you breathing out minute moisture droplets containing the virus which can stay suspended in the air for minutes) breathing in after someone has exhaled the virus puts you at risk of catching it so herd immunity is the only way forward. As nature always had its unfortunately the survival of the fittest..
We are humans not animals.
And human beings are still classed as an animal,
I think there are a few key differences.
Yeah, humans tend to think we're better than other animals, we're arrogant.
Like I said I was thinking more compassion etc
When someone mentions survival of the fittest it worries me
To my knowledge a lot of herd species try to protect their weaker members from harm and preditation
I'm not a huge zoologist but I thought animals tended to leave the weakest to die..hence survival of the fittest."
And please I hope you do know
In evolution the process is natural selection
Only one of many selection strategies nature has evolved is survival of the fittest an even then it will be combined with other evolutionary gene transfer mechanisms
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *i1971Man
over a year ago
Cornwall |
"I live a short drive from the M5. Caravans have been travelling down to Devon and Cornwall throughout the day. It's people like this that ruin it for the rest of us. I hope they get stopped and told to go home!!!
I bet some of them at least are going to places where they are well away from others.
If i had a well stocked caravan. I may do the same."
Sites are closed as is all tourist accommodation. There are currently camper vans and caravans parked at roadsides in some areas & sadly they seem to be mixing with each other. In view of the delay in onset of symptoms, some of these may well be carrying the virus with them & spreading it to other parts of the country. What's difficult in the message to stay at home ffs. Huge fines are needed for these morons |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Don't see a problem with being in your own garden. Whether you're dancing, sunbathing or bbqing, it's not spreading anything "
I agree but the people I mentioned wernt just in their own garden, it was 15 or so people mixing and going in and out of gardens sharing food and drink.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abs..Woman
over a year ago
.. |
"Coronovirus or covid 19 call it what you will has spread around the world so there is no chance of quarantine to stop infection spreading when an estimated 80% of people who become infected will get little or no symptoms, the majority of the 80% can spread the virus being totally unaware they are doing so and as it survives in the air (from you breathing out minute moisture droplets containing the virus which can stay suspended in the air for minutes) breathing in after someone has exhaled the virus puts you at risk of catching it so herd immunity is the only way forward. As nature always had its unfortunately the survival of the fittest..
We are humans not animals.
And human beings are still classed as an animal,
I think there are a few key differences.
Yeah, humans tend to think we're better than other animals, we're arrogant.
Like I said I was thinking more compassion etc
When someone mentions survival of the fittest it worries me
To my knowledge a lot of herd species try to protect their weaker members from harm and preditation
I'm not a huge zoologist but I thought animals tended to leave the weakest to die..hence survival of the fittest.
However let's be blunt
Anyone who mis uses survival of the fittest as a justification for immoral callous behaviour is closer to nazi than our beloved animals xx"
Absolutely! There are plenty on here who appear to feel differently though. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
