FabSwingers.com > Forums > Virus > 108,000
108,000
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. " What would you consider to be a high and unacceptable figure? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. " 108,000 unnecessary deaths is a negative... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. What would you consider to be a high and unacceptable figure? " I don't think there is a high and unacceptable figure when dealing with viruses. I think we are extremely lucky to be alive in this day and age for it to be intervened with and kept low. I can also imagine we dodged a huge bullet that it wasn't some other virus with a much higher transmission rate and far lower survival rate. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. What would you consider to be a high and unacceptable figure? I don't think there is a high and unacceptable figure when dealing with viruses. I think we are extremely lucky to be alive in this day and age for it to be intervened with and kept low. I can also imagine we dodged a huge bullet that it wasn't some other virus with a much higher transmission rate and far lower survival rate. " Have that conversation with every family who have lost a loved one ! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. 108,000 unnecessary deaths is a negative... " It's a virus. They aren't unnecessary deaths. Some portion of them may be due to mishandling. But it's nature (or a man made twist on nature) versus part of its own creation. We aren't meant to win that battle. We are lucky we live now and have the know how and tech to take it on. Its bad but it could be infinitely worse. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I think the death numbers are too high and once this is over the government need to be held accountable for this,lack of leadership " Definitely, there is a big portion of that 108k that are on the shoulders of leadership. It could definitely have been far far worse though. Against a much worse virus even with the best actions to combat it that number could easily be eclipsed. We are still very lucky. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. 108,000 unnecessary deaths is a negative... It's a virus. They aren't unnecessary deaths. Some portion of them may be due to mishandling. But it's nature (or a man made twist on nature) versus part of its own creation. We aren't meant to win that battle. We are lucky we live now and have the know how and tech to take it on. Its bad but it could be infinitely worse. " This boils my piss!!!! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. What would you consider to be a high and unacceptable figure? I don't think there is a high and unacceptable figure when dealing with viruses. I think we are extremely lucky to be alive in this day and age for it to be intervened with and kept low. I can also imagine we dodged a huge bullet that it wasn't some other virus with a much higher transmission rate and far lower survival rate. Have that conversation with every family who have lost a loved one !" People lose loved one's every day, its part of life. Naturally occurring viruses are nature's balancing act. (Now if this was a lab leak, then that just 1 death is unacceptable, because then a person or people are directly responsible right from the off.) This could easily have been a different virus, far more lethal and far more transmissible. We could have less ability to combat it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I think the death numbers are too high and once this is over the government need to be held accountable for this,lack of leadership "  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. What would you consider to be a high and unacceptable figure? I don't think there is a high and unacceptable figure when dealing with viruses. I think we are extremely lucky to be alive in this day and age for it to be intervened with and kept low. I can also imagine we dodged a huge bullet that it wasn't some other virus with a much higher transmission rate and far lower survival rate. Have that conversation with every family who have lost a loved one ! People lose loved one's every day, its part of life. Naturally occurring viruses are nature's balancing act. (Now if this was a lab leak, then that just 1 death is unacceptable, because then a person or people are directly responsible right from the off.) This could easily have been a different virus, far more lethal and far more transmissible. We could have less ability to combat it. " I could say so much more but not worth getting a ban for . | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. 108,000 unnecessary deaths is a negative... It's a virus. They aren't unnecessary deaths. Some portion of them may be due to mishandling. But it's nature (or a man made twist on nature) versus part of its own creation. We aren't meant to win that battle. We are lucky we live now and have the know how and tech to take it on. Its bad but it could be infinitely worse. This boils my piss!!!! " Is there a reason why your having that reaction? Do you disagree that this could have been so much worse? That there could even yet be a twist that takes it from what it is right now into a far far worse situation? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. What would you consider to be a high and unacceptable figure? I don't think there is a high and unacceptable figure when dealing with viruses. I think we are extremely lucky to be alive in this day and age for it to be intervened with and kept low. I can also imagine we dodged a huge bullet that it wasn't some other virus with a much higher transmission rate and far lower survival rate. Have that conversation with every family who have lost a loved one !" . Pointless and simplistic comment to make. You could say that about every death for every reason, but deaths happen. You can’t stop life because of death. The show must go on and it all needs to be discussed and evaluated. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. " I think you're confusing the natural order of life with a most un-natural occurrence. 108,000 is 108,000 too high. E | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I work with this virus around me everyday and when I going in to work I cry as I know more poorly people are going to pass away so the numbers will get worse before this gets better and I lost a family member to trying to keep positive stay safe x" I understand that, and am sorry to hear that. My post is not to downplay the loss of lives. Simply that it could have been an entirely different and much worse story. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I think the death numbers are too high and once this is over the government need to be held accountable for this,lack of leadership " As does every single human being we are all responsible of transmission for these death numbers. Some knowingly some not and we need to stop mixing. Today Matt Hancock even advised eating the food in your house rather than going out shopping on a daily basis... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. What would you consider to be a high and unacceptable figure? I don't think there is a high and unacceptable figure when dealing with viruses. I think we are extremely lucky to be alive in this day and age for it to be intervened with and kept low. I can also imagine we dodged a huge bullet that it wasn't some other virus with a much higher transmission rate and far lower survival rate. Have that conversation with every family who have lost a loved one !. Pointless and simplistic comment to make. You could say that about every death for every reason, but deaths happen. You can’t stop life because of death. The show must go on and it all needs to be discussed and evaluated. " Am i not allowed to comment on a post ? Give MY opinion even if it differs to yours ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. I think you're confusing the natural order of life with a most un-natural occurrence. 108,000 is 108,000 too high. E" It's only unnatural if this is a man made occurrence, in which case just one death is too many. But, if this is truly a naturally caused virus then the conversation flips from the number of deaths being a negative into the number of deaths prevented\ avoided being the positive. And that is a far far higher number nit just in Britain but globally. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"People do die. Everyone dose it at least once. Every year influenza kills a lot of people. Every ten years or so we get a stronger strain. I think numbers have been inflated, I'm sure there's an agenda. If you had any money a year ago an know the basics of investment you're rich now! If you didn't you're poorer. How many people die every year as a direct result of smoking?? If the government really cared about protecting the masses tobacco would be an illegal drug." Whats the agenda? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"People do die. Everyone dose it at least once. Every year influenza kills a lot of people. Every ten years or so we get a stronger strain. I think numbers have been inflated, I'm sure there's an agenda. If you had any money a year ago an know the basics of investment you're rich now! If you didn't you're poorer. How many people die every year as a direct result of smoking?? If the government really cared about protecting the masses tobacco would be an illegal drug. Whats the agenda?" I'm not saying that this is part of an agenda, but, I have heard talk of it over years and it does fit this situation a little bit, and that is cashless society. Cash is a bit of a dirty word at the moment, that sentiment may go away, it may not. Cash is one of the last bastions of being able to keep your purchases private, it's far harder to track, cards are tracked constantly. A society without or with less cash is far easier to keep tabs on. Like I said, I don't think there is any agenda behind this saga, but it is possible that advantages have been taken in response to it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Japan is a larger island nation with 2x the population of the UK and they are currently sitting at under 8,000 deaths from Covid. Yes. Deaths from any new deadly virus are to be expected and are par for the course but the fact that our number is so disgustingly high compared to the rest of the world is exactly the reason so many people are furious about it. The questions must be asked... why did the UK, as an island nation, get it so incredibly wrong. " That's the big question. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"People do die. Everyone dose it at least once. Every year influenza kills a lot of people. Every ten years or so we get a stronger strain. I think numbers have been inflated, I'm sure there's an agenda. If you had any money a year ago an know the basics of investment you're rich now! If you didn't you're poorer. How many people die every year as a direct result of smoking?? If the government really cared about protecting the masses tobacco would be an illegal drug. Whats the agenda? I'm not saying that this is part of an agenda, but, I have heard talk of it over years and it does fit this situation a little bit, and that is cashless society. Cash is a bit of a dirty word at the moment, that sentiment may go away, it may not. Cash is one of the last bastions of being able to keep your purchases private, it's far harder to track, cards are tracked constantly. A society without or with less cash is far easier to keep tabs on. Like I said, I don't think there is any agenda behind this saga, but it is possible that advantages have been taken in response to it. " That would require a cross country multi national top secret conspiracy theory ..ran by a man who combs his hair with a balloon. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I think the death numbers are too high and once this is over the government need to be held accountable for this,lack of leadership "absolutely 100% | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Japan is a larger island nation with 2x the population of the UK and they are currently sitting at under 8,000 deaths from Covid. Yes. Deaths from any new deadly virus are to be expected and are par for the course but the fact that our number is so disgustingly high compared to the rest of the world is exactly the reason so many people are furious about it. The questions must be asked... why did the UK, as an island nation, get it so incredibly wrong. " Japan are a disaster prepared nation, they have lived through so many natural disasters and been guided through every one so efficiently by their government that there is a huge trust and pride in following their guidance. Japan was also already a mask wearing society, especially in cities, and due to their extremely respectful culture they were already quite distant from each other so social distancing was not too far out of their comfort zone. Japan is a nation the entire world should look up to. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"People do die. Everyone dose it at least once. Every year influenza kills a lot of people. Every ten years or so we get a stronger strain. I think numbers have been inflated, I'm sure there's an agenda. If you had any money a year ago an know the basics of investment you're rich now! If you didn't you're poorer. How many people die every year as a direct result of smoking?? If the government really cared about protecting the masses tobacco would be an illegal drug. Whats the agenda? I'm not saying that this is part of an agenda, but, I have heard talk of it over years and it does fit this situation a little bit, and that is cashless society. Cash is a bit of a dirty word at the moment, that sentiment may go away, it may not. Cash is one of the last bastions of being able to keep your purchases private, it's far harder to track, cards are tracked constantly. A society without or with less cash is far easier to keep tabs on. Like I said, I don't think there is any agenda behind this saga, but it is possible that advantages have been taken in response to it. That would require a cross country multi national top secret conspiracy theory ..ran by a man who combs his hair with a balloon." No it wouldn't. And Johnson wouldn't know a thing, he's as controllable as every other politician. The people that can shape this sort of thing bit by bit are the kind of people that have fuck you money. And it wouldn't take a conspiracy to encourage a society to remain cashless when it already currently is by accident. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Japan is a larger island nation with 2x the population of the UK and they are currently sitting at under 8,000 deaths from Covid. Yes. Deaths from any new deadly virus are to be expected and are par for the course but the fact that our number is so disgustingly high compared to the rest of the world is exactly the reason so many people are furious about it. The questions must be asked... why did the UK, as an island nation, get it so incredibly wrong. Japan are a disaster prepared nation, they have lived through so many natural disasters and been guided through every one so efficiently by their government that there is a huge trust and pride in following their guidance. Japan was also already a mask wearing society, especially in cities, and due to their extremely respectful culture they were already quite distant from each other so social distancing was not too far out of their comfort zone. Japan is a nation the entire world should look up to. " They are also very close to china with a dense population. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Japan is a larger island nation with 2x the population of the UK and they are currently sitting at under 8,000 deaths from Covid. Yes. Deaths from any new deadly virus are to be expected and are par for the course but the fact that our number is so disgustingly high compared to the rest of the world is exactly the reason so many people are furious about it. The questions must be asked... why did the UK, as an island nation, get it so incredibly wrong. Japan are a disaster prepared nation, they have lived through so many natural disasters and been guided through every one so efficiently by their government that there is a huge trust and pride in following their guidance. Japan was also already a mask wearing society, especially in cities, and due to their extremely respectful culture they were already quite distant from each other so social distancing was not too far out of their comfort zone. Japan is a nation the entire world should look up to. " Exactly - which is why 108,000 is such a negative numbers for a western world country that should have been much more prepared for this than we were. I think you just answered your own original post. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. " Please come spend sometime on the frontline and see the true horror of what covid delivers to our cities within our critical care system. Realise that 100,000 deaths means another 500,000 people who barely survived. Realise that icu departments with typically 24 beds are now expanded across hospitals to manage 250 odd beds. Before you sit from your armchair to judge impact or seriousness please realise your lack of perception or understanding of conditions makes your viewpoint extremely irrelevant. Covid-19 has been and remains a shit storm, don’t dumb it down or disrespect the many thousands affected by it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Japan is a larger island nation with 2x the population of the UK and they are currently sitting at under 8,000 deaths from Covid. Yes. Deaths from any new deadly virus are to be expected and are par for the course but the fact that our number is so disgustingly high compared to the rest of the world is exactly the reason so many people are furious about it. The questions must be asked... why did the UK, as an island nation, get it so incredibly wrong. Japan are a disaster prepared nation, they have lived through so many natural disasters and been guided through every one so efficiently by their government that there is a huge trust and pride in following their guidance. Japan was also already a mask wearing society, especially in cities, and due to their extremely respectful culture they were already quite distant from each other so social distancing was not too far out of their comfort zone. Japan is a nation the entire world should look up to. Exactly - which is why 108,000 is such a negative numbers for a western world country that should have been much more prepared for this than we were. I think you just answered your own original post. " There's still a marked difference between Japan and the UK due to the amount of experience and level of preparedness they have to have daily. They are constantly prepared for disaster because of their geo location. And I still think that our number is extremely low. It could have been worse. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Japan is a larger island nation with 2x the population of the UK and they are currently sitting at under 8,000 deaths from Covid. Yes. Deaths from any new deadly virus are to be expected and are par for the course but the fact that our number is so disgustingly high compared to the rest of the world is exactly the reason so many people are furious about it. The questions must be asked... why did the UK, as an island nation, get it so incredibly wrong. Japan are a disaster prepared nation, they have lived through so many natural disasters and been guided through every one so efficiently by their government that there is a huge trust and pride in following their guidance. Japan was also already a mask wearing society, especially in cities, and due to their extremely respectful culture they were already quite distant from each other so social distancing was not too far out of their comfort zone. Japan is a nation the entire world should look up to. They are also very close to china with a dense population. " Those two nations have historical issues that probably decrease the movement between them. Also, regardless, Japan is 24/7 prepared for disaster. They will always out perform the rest of the world when any given day they may have a matter of ours to react to an earthquake or tsunami. apples and oranges... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Japan is a larger island nation with 2x the population of the UK and they are currently sitting at under 8,000 deaths from Covid. Yes. Deaths from any new deadly virus are to be expected and are par for the course but the fact that our number is so disgustingly high compared to the rest of the world is exactly the reason so many people are furious about it. The questions must be asked... why did the UK, as an island nation, get it so incredibly wrong. That's the big question. " The UK has a very high density of population. Higher density will naturally lead to higher transmission. We are also an international hub, which will also have the effect of higher transmission. Combine that with the fact that we as a population are not good at following rules and it always was going to be a perfect storm. Why do we need to be told to isolate? Most people are bright enough to know it is the only way to control the virus, yet many many people wait until told to, and then complain t they have been. The brits are great at looking for ways around rules, and saying why its 'not fair. The figures are as high as they are because people have spread the virus. People who should have known better. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. Please come spend sometime on the frontline and see the true horror of what covid delivers to our cities within our critical care system. Realise that 100,000 deaths means another 500,000 people who barely survived. Realise that icu departments with typically 24 beds are now expanded across hospitals to manage 250 odd beds. Before you sit from your armchair to judge impact or seriousness please realise your lack of perception or understanding of conditions makes your viewpoint extremely irrelevant. Covid-19 has been and remains a shit storm, don’t dumb it down or disrespect the many thousands affected by it. " Sorry, because I'm not part of it I can't say that we were extremely lucky that it isn't far far worse? And no, 100k deaths doesn't mean that 500k barely survived. 500k surviving means that 500k survived. You are making my point for me! It could very easily be 100k that survived and 500k that died! Just because you are looking at the worst aspects of it, it does not mean that it could not be far worse. Like I said, in the grand scheme of things, the number is still low. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Japan is a larger island nation with 2x the population of the UK and they are currently sitting at under 8,000 deaths from Covid. Yes. Deaths from any new deadly virus are to be expected and are par for the course but the fact that our number is so disgustingly high compared to the rest of the world is exactly the reason so many people are furious about it. The questions must be asked... why did the UK, as an island nation, get it so incredibly wrong. That's the big question. The UK has a very high density of population. Higher density will naturally lead to higher transmission. We are also an international hub, which will also have the effect of higher transmission. Combine that with the fact that we as a population are not good at following rules and it always was going to be a perfect storm. Why do we need to be told to isolate? Most people are bright enough to know it is the only way to control the virus, yet many many people wait until told to, and then complain t they have been. The brits are great at looking for ways around rules, and saying why its 'not fair. The figures are as high as they are because people have spread the virus. People who should have known better." Are we the only country we have a high density? The figures are high because the situation has been handled completely ineptly. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You realise that the appropriate response to an earthquakes or tsunamis is different from the appropriate response to an airborne virus right? " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You realise that the appropriate response to an earthquakes or tsunamis is different from the appropriate response to an airborne virus right? " Obviously, but the reaction of the population to their governments direction is not. They have been guided perfectly through major disasters. I bet if you talk to a Japanese person about the tsunami, a great portion would be thankful to their government and they'd know how much worse things could have been. Here however, it's the other way around, a situation that could have been infinitely worse is being treated like it couldn't be worse. Its why there is so much darkness and anger in our nation right now. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You realise that the appropriate response to an earthquakes or tsunamis is different from the appropriate response to an airborne virus right? Obviously, but the reaction of the population to their governments direction is not. They have been guided perfectly through major disasters. I bet if you talk to a Japanese person about the tsunami, a great portion would be thankful to their government and they'd know how much worse things could have been. Here however, it's the other way around, a situation that could have been infinitely worse is being treated like it couldn't be worse. Its why there is so much darkness and anger in our nation right now. " Maybe their gmnt were just better prepared? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Japan is a larger island nation with 2x the population of the UK and they are currently sitting at under 8,000 deaths from Covid. Yes. Deaths from any new deadly virus are to be expected and are par for the course but the fact that our number is so disgustingly high compared to the rest of the world is exactly the reason so many people are furious about it. The questions must be asked... why did the UK, as an island nation, get it so incredibly wrong. That's the big question. The UK has a very high density of population. Higher density will naturally lead to higher transmission. We are also an international hub, which will also have the effect of higher transmission. Combine that with the fact that we as a population are not good at following rules and it always was going to be a perfect storm. Why do we need to be told to isolate? Most people are bright enough to know it is the only way to control the virus, yet many many people wait until told to, and then complain t they have been. The brits are great at looking for ways around rules, and saying why its 'not fair. The figures are as high as they are because people have spread the virus. People who should have known better. Are we the only country we have a high density? The figures are high because the situation has been handled completely ineptly." One of the top 20 most densely populated. Combine that with the international hub situation and the shameful irresponsibility of many sectors of the population. The dethbtoll was always going to be high. I don't really see it asxa leadership issue. I am not particularly pro Boris or anti Boris. I do think he was handed a poison chalice. A pandemic situation and a populace that are more concerned with rights than responsibilities. Lockdown = half the population complaining its draconian. No Lockdown = half the population calling for tougher measures. I say again, why did we have to wait to be told? The information was out there. People chose to ignore it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Japan is a larger island nation with 2x the population of the UK and they are currently sitting at under 8,000 deaths from Covid. Yes. Deaths from any new deadly virus are to be expected and are par for the course but the fact that our number is so disgustingly high compared to the rest of the world is exactly the reason so many people are furious about it. The questions must be asked... why did the UK, as an island nation, get it so incredibly wrong. That's the big question. The UK has a very high density of population. Higher density will naturally lead to higher transmission. We are also an international hub, which will also have the effect of higher transmission. Combine that with the fact that we as a population are not good at following rules and it always was going to be a perfect storm. Why do we need to be told to isolate? Most people are bright enough to know it is the only way to control the virus, yet many many people wait until told to, and then complain t they have been. The brits are great at looking for ways around rules, and saying why its 'not fair. The figures are as high as they are because people have spread the virus. People who should have known better. Are we the only country we have a high density? The figures are high because the situation has been handled completely ineptly." Regardless, it could still be far far worse. And according to all the positivity regarding vaccines, we may end up being the first Western nation to nearly entirely eradicate it and be in a position to help the rest of the world. It could have been so much worse and there is huge potential for positivity in the future. One things certain, the government and future governments will learn a huge lesson through this saga. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You realise that the appropriate response to an earthquakes or tsunamis is different from the appropriate response to an airborne virus right? Obviously, but the reaction of the population to their governments direction is not. They have been guided perfectly through major disasters. I bet if you talk to a Japanese person about the tsunami, a great portion would be thankful to their government and they'd know how much worse things could have been. Here however, it's the other way around, a situation that could have been infinitely worse is being treated like it couldn't be worse. Its why there is so much darkness and anger in our nation right now. Maybe their gmnt were just better prepared?" I've said that a number of times now. They are THE most prepared nation on earth and have a huge amount of trust in their government to do the right thing in a disaster. Whereas here, our politicians and police break their own rules. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. " 108,000 is too high, considering other countries with similar population and /or populations densities have had lower deaths compared to us. Our death toll would have been much higher without lockdowns and other restrictions. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I work with this virus around me everyday and when I going in to work I cry as I know more poorly people are going to pass away so the numbers will get worse before this gets better and I lost a family member to trying to keep positive stay safe x"  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I do understand what your trying to say. One of the big worries in parts of the scientific communities is as its so widespread even though cornovirus tend to be stable the sheer volume of infections is leading to new mutations on a regular basis. Imagine for a second a new mutation had a mortality rate that SARS 1 Coronavirus had i.e. 10% then combine it with the high transmission of the UK Covid19 Kent variant? So yes things could be and may still be far worse. https://www.newscientist.com/article/2266429-uk-coronavirus-variant-gets-nastier-as-south-african-variant-spreads/ https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20210127-covid-19-variants-how-mutations-are-changing-the-pandemic"  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. " These are people your talking about not statistics. 1 is too many | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. " Look into the eyes of the families of those 108,000 and tell them that. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. These are people your talking about not statistics. 1 is too many" You can't avoid death, it happens in the millions every day? We are extremely lucky this isn't worse. People are acting like it couldn't be. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. Look into the eyes of the families of those 108,000 and tell them that." Do you disagree that we aren't extremely lucky it isn't far worse? Which was the point of the post. So many people are looking at the number of deaths and ignoring the vastly larger amount of survivors. This saga is far more positive than it could have been. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I do understand what your trying to say. One of the big worries in parts of the scientific communities is as its so widespread even though cornovirus tend to be stable the sheer volume of infections is leading to new mutations on a regular basis. Imagine for a second a new mutation had a mortality rate that SARS 1 Coronavirus had i.e. 10% then combine it with the high transmission of the UK Covid19 Kent variant? So yes things could be and may still be far worse. https://www.newscientist.com/article/2266429-uk-coronavirus-variant-gets-nastier-as-south-african-variant-spreads/ https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20210127-covid-19-variants-how-mutations-are-changing-the-pandemic" Thank you, I just believe that this whole situation is being looked at from the wrong side, by the amount that have died and not the amount that have survived. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. 108,000 is too high, considering other countries with similar population and /or populations densities have had lower deaths compared to us. Our death toll would have been much higher without lockdowns and other restrictions." Thats a fair view. Me personally I think we have been extremely lucky, and focus more on the amount that have survived. And that's not to lessen the impact of the deaths and the devastation that has been caused, it is tragic. its just the way I view it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. Please come spend sometime on the frontline and see the true horror of what covid delivers to our cities within our critical care system. Realise that 100,000 deaths means another 500,000 people who barely survived. Realise that icu departments with typically 24 beds are now expanded across hospitals to manage 250 odd beds. Before you sit from your armchair to judge impact or seriousness please realise your lack of perception or understanding of conditions makes your viewpoint extremely irrelevant. Covid-19 has been and remains a shit storm, don’t dumb it down or disrespect the many thousands affected by it. Sorry, because I'm not part of it I can't say that we were extremely lucky that it isn't far far worse? And no, 100k deaths doesn't mean that 500k barely survived. 500k surviving means that 500k survived. You are making my point for me! It could very easily be 100k that survived and 500k that died! Just because you are looking at the worst aspects of it, it does not mean that it could not be far worse. Like I said, in the grand scheme of things, the number is still low. " They aren’t low, survival chances with modern medicine are extremely high for most major illnesses. We have lost far too many people to covid-19. Nationally our critical care has expanded by 500%... there’s nothing lucky about that. And no, barely survived isn’t simply survived. We have thousands with now reduced life expectancy, compromised lives, ongoing perhaps incurable conditions. Try telling them they are lucky. As I said... your armchair isn’t a place to judge where we are. Your point is just laughable compared to a terrible reality. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. Please come spend sometime on the frontline and see the true horror of what covid delivers to our cities within our critical care system. Realise that 100,000 deaths means another 500,000 people who barely survived. Realise that icu departments with typically 24 beds are now expanded across hospitals to manage 250 odd beds. Before you sit from your armchair to judge impact or seriousness please realise your lack of perception or understanding of conditions makes your viewpoint extremely irrelevant. Covid-19 has been and remains a shit storm, don’t dumb it down or disrespect the many thousands affected by it. Sorry, because I'm not part of it I can't say that we were extremely lucky that it isn't far far worse? And no, 100k deaths doesn't mean that 500k barely survived. 500k surviving means that 500k survived. You are making my point for me! It could very easily be 100k that survived and 500k that died! Just because you are looking at the worst aspects of it, it does not mean that it could not be far worse. Like I said, in the grand scheme of things, the number is still low. They aren’t low, survival chances with modern medicine are extremely high for most major illnesses. We have lost far too many people to covid-19. Nationally our critical care has expanded by 500%... there’s nothing lucky about that. And no, barely survived isn’t simply survived. We have thousands with now reduced life expectancy, compromised lives, ongoing perhaps incurable conditions. Try telling them they are lucky. As I said... your armchair isn’t a place to judge where we are. Your point is just laughable compared to a terrible reality. " This isn't simply a major illness though is it? It's a unforeseen global catastrophe. That could very very easily have been far worse. And that is undeniable. And don't assume what my position to view it from is. You don't know me. Don't assume that you have a unique or special position or knowledge that entitles you to say my view is laughable. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. Please come spend sometime on the frontline and see the true horror of what covid delivers to our cities within our critical care system. Realise that 100,000 deaths means another 500,000 people who barely survived. Realise that icu departments with typically 24 beds are now expanded across hospitals to manage 250 odd beds. Before you sit from your armchair to judge impact or seriousness please realise your lack of perception or understanding of conditions makes your viewpoint extremely irrelevant. Covid-19 has been and remains a shit storm, don’t dumb it down or disrespect the many thousands affected by it. Sorry, because I'm not part of it I can't say that we were extremely lucky that it isn't far far worse? And no, 100k deaths doesn't mean that 500k barely survived. 500k surviving means that 500k survived. You are making my point for me! It could very easily be 100k that survived and 500k that died! Just because you are looking at the worst aspects of it, it does not mean that it could not be far worse. Like I said, in the grand scheme of things, the number is still low. They aren’t low, survival chances with modern medicine are extremely high for most major illnesses. We have lost far too many people to covid-19. Nationally our critical care has expanded by 500%... there’s nothing lucky about that. And no, barely survived isn’t simply survived. We have thousands with now reduced life expectancy, compromised lives, ongoing perhaps incurable conditions. Try telling them they are lucky. As I said... your armchair isn’t a place to judge where we are. Your point is just laughable compared to a terrible reality. " Simple question, if it was 500,000 deaths and 100,000 surviving, would that be better or worse? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. Please come spend sometime on the frontline and see the true horror of what covid delivers to our cities within our critical care system. Realise that 100,000 deaths means another 500,000 people who barely survived. Realise that icu departments with typically 24 beds are now expanded across hospitals to manage 250 odd beds. Before you sit from your armchair to judge impact or seriousness please realise your lack of perception or understanding of conditions makes your viewpoint extremely irrelevant. Covid-19 has been and remains a shit storm, don’t dumb it down or disrespect the many thousands affected by it. Sorry, because I'm not part of it I can't say that we were extremely lucky that it isn't far far worse? And no, 100k deaths doesn't mean that 500k barely survived. 500k surviving means that 500k survived. You are making my point for me! It could very easily be 100k that survived and 500k that died! Just because you are looking at the worst aspects of it, it does not mean that it could not be far worse. Like I said, in the grand scheme of things, the number is still low. They aren’t low, survival chances with modern medicine are extremely high for most major illnesses. We have lost far too many people to covid-19. Nationally our critical care has expanded by 500%... there’s nothing lucky about that. And no, barely survived isn’t simply survived. We have thousands with now reduced life expectancy, compromised lives, ongoing perhaps incurable conditions. Try telling them they are lucky. As I said... your armchair isn’t a place to judge where we are. Your point is just laughable compared to a terrible reality. This isn't simply a major illness though is it? It's a unforeseen global catastrophe. That could very very easily have been far worse. And that is undeniable. And don't assume what my position to view it from is. You don't know me. Don't assume that you have a unique or special position or knowledge that entitles you to say my view is laughable. " Your post is so far removed from the reality that anyone working with in the frontline of this pandemic would view it as laughable, myself included. When you look at our death tally it’s horrific, there’s no positive or “could be worst” to be found... we should have saved more, we haven’t been able to deliver enough care, provisions and help despite every frontline workers desire too. That’s the bottom line. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. Please come spend sometime on the frontline and see the true horror of what covid delivers to our cities within our critical care system. Realise that 100,000 deaths means another 500,000 people who barely survived. Realise that icu departments with typically 24 beds are now expanded across hospitals to manage 250 odd beds. Before you sit from your armchair to judge impact or seriousness please realise your lack of perception or understanding of conditions makes your viewpoint extremely irrelevant. Covid-19 has been and remains a shit storm, don’t dumb it down or disrespect the many thousands affected by it. Sorry, because I'm not part of it I can't say that we were extremely lucky that it isn't far far worse? And no, 100k deaths doesn't mean that 500k barely survived. 500k surviving means that 500k survived. You are making my point for me! It could very easily be 100k that survived and 500k that died! Just because you are looking at the worst aspects of it, it does not mean that it could not be far worse. Like I said, in the grand scheme of things, the number is still low. They aren’t low, survival chances with modern medicine are extremely high for most major illnesses. We have lost far too many people to covid-19. Nationally our critical care has expanded by 500%... there’s nothing lucky about that. And no, barely survived isn’t simply survived. We have thousands with now reduced life expectancy, compromised lives, ongoing perhaps incurable conditions. Try telling them they are lucky. As I said... your armchair isn’t a place to judge where we are. Your point is just laughable compared to a terrible reality. This isn't simply a major illness though is it? It's a unforeseen global catastrophe. That could very very easily have been far worse. And that is undeniable. And don't assume what my position to view it from is. You don't know me. Don't assume that you have a unique or special position or knowledge that entitles you to say my view is laughable. Your post is so far removed from the reality that anyone working with in the frontline of this pandemic would view it as laughable, myself included. When you look at our death tally it’s horrific, there’s no positive or “could be worst” to be found... we should have saved more, we haven’t been able to deliver enough care, provisions and help despite every frontline workers desire too. That’s the bottom line. " It could always be worse. Easily. Denying that it could be is laughable. Like I said, if it was 500k deaths, that would be worse, right? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. Please come spend sometime on the frontline and see the true horror of what covid delivers to our cities within our critical care system. Realise that 100,000 deaths means another 500,000 people who barely survived. Realise that icu departments with typically 24 beds are now expanded across hospitals to manage 250 odd beds. Before you sit from your armchair to judge impact or seriousness please realise your lack of perception or understanding of conditions makes your viewpoint extremely irrelevant. Covid-19 has been and remains a shit storm, don’t dumb it down or disrespect the many thousands affected by it. Sorry, because I'm not part of it I can't say that we were extremely lucky that it isn't far far worse? And no, 100k deaths doesn't mean that 500k barely survived. 500k surviving means that 500k survived. You are making my point for me! It could very easily be 100k that survived and 500k that died! Just because you are looking at the worst aspects of it, it does not mean that it could not be far worse. Like I said, in the grand scheme of things, the number is still low. They aren’t low, survival chances with modern medicine are extremely high for most major illnesses. We have lost far too many people to covid-19. Nationally our critical care has expanded by 500%... there’s nothing lucky about that. And no, barely survived isn’t simply survived. We have thousands with now reduced life expectancy, compromised lives, ongoing perhaps incurable conditions. Try telling them they are lucky. As I said... your armchair isn’t a place to judge where we are. Your point is just laughable compared to a terrible reality. This isn't simply a major illness though is it? It's a unforeseen global catastrophe. That could very very easily have been far worse. And that is undeniable. And don't assume what my position to view it from is. You don't know me. Don't assume that you have a unique or special position or knowledge that entitles you to say my view is laughable. Your post is so far removed from the reality that anyone working with in the frontline of this pandemic would view it as laughable, myself included. When you look at our death tally it’s horrific, there’s no positive or “could be worst” to be found... we should have saved more, we haven’t been able to deliver enough care, provisions and help despite every frontline workers desire too. That’s the bottom line. It could always be worse. Easily. Denying that it could be is laughable. Like I said, if it was 500k deaths, that would be worse, right? " Tell that to the 110,000 families and counting... they’d spit in your face and rightly so. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. Please come spend sometime on the frontline and see the true horror of what covid delivers to our cities within our critical care system. Realise that 100,000 deaths means another 500,000 people who barely survived. Realise that icu departments with typically 24 beds are now expanded across hospitals to manage 250 odd beds. Before you sit from your armchair to judge impact or seriousness please realise your lack of perception or understanding of conditions makes your viewpoint extremely irrelevant. Covid-19 has been and remains a shit storm, don’t dumb it down or disrespect the many thousands affected by it. Sorry, because I'm not part of it I can't say that we were extremely lucky that it isn't far far worse? And no, 100k deaths doesn't mean that 500k barely survived. 500k surviving means that 500k survived. You are making my point for me! It could very easily be 100k that survived and 500k that died! Just because you are looking at the worst aspects of it, it does not mean that it could not be far worse. Like I said, in the grand scheme of things, the number is still low. They aren’t low, survival chances with modern medicine are extremely high for most major illnesses. We have lost far too many people to covid-19. Nationally our critical care has expanded by 500%... there’s nothing lucky about that. And no, barely survived isn’t simply survived. We have thousands with now reduced life expectancy, compromised lives, ongoing perhaps incurable conditions. Try telling them they are lucky. As I said... your armchair isn’t a place to judge where we are. Your point is just laughable compared to a terrible reality. This isn't simply a major illness though is it? It's a unforeseen global catastrophe. That could very very easily have been far worse. And that is undeniable. And don't assume what my position to view it from is. You don't know me. Don't assume that you have a unique or special position or knowledge that entitles you to say my view is laughable. Your post is so far removed from the reality that anyone working with in the frontline of this pandemic would view it as laughable, myself included. When you look at our death tally it’s horrific, there’s no positive or “could be worst” to be found... we should have saved more, we haven’t been able to deliver enough care, provisions and help despite every frontline workers desire too. That’s the bottom line. It could always be worse. Easily. Denying that it could be is laughable. Like I said, if it was 500k deaths, that would be worse, right? Tell that to the 110,000 families and counting... they’d spit in your face and rightly so." Completely sidestepped what I said because it is undeniable. And boosted the number by a couple of thousand even though you claim to be Frontline. And if someone spat in my face for what is undeniable fact they'd have serious problems to deal with right then and there. Saying things could be worse, doesn't diminish the impact of what has already happened. You should try to wrap your head around that notion. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. " You have to count your blessings. It's not shameful to feel thankful. Even when it does come and you lose a loved one, you need to count your blessings that it was only one or only two and not five. That's the perspective you need to get through this and your mental health will thank you for it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. You have to count your blessings. It's not shameful to feel thankful. Even when it does come and you lose a loved one, you need to count your blessings that it was only one or only two and not five. That's the perspective you need to get through this and your mental health will thank you for it. " That what I was trying to get across. Maybe I didn't say it quite right, some seem to have taken the view I'm diminishing the loss we have seen, but that was the sentiment and intent. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. " All life is precious even if it cut short by a pandemic. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. All life is precious even if it cut short by a pandemic. " I disagree that ALL life is precious, but mostly I agree, I wasn't trying to say it isn't, just that things could be far worse. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Completely sidestepped what I said because it is undeniable. And boosted the number by a couple of thousand even though you claim to be Frontline. And if someone spat in my face for what is undeniable fact they'd have serious problems to deal with right then and there. Saying things could be worse, doesn't diminish the impact of what has already happened. You should try to wrap your head around that notion. " Claim? Oh my you are quite something aren’t you... #clapthekeyboardwarrior The filed figures from yesterday stand at 108k... we’ve likely suffered another 1.5k today... pretty sure as a ball park figure that puts my ballpark 110 as fairly accurate. In fact a fuck load more accurate than your 100k. Yes I agree statistically 500k deaths would be a larger figure... as would 111k deaths. But likewise I wouldn’t dare say: “The 1,000,000 Jews killed in the Holocaust could have been worst as 8,500,000 European Jews survived.” I’d have missed the fkn point and belittled a horrific part of history whilst offending ridiculous numbers connected with the Jewish population of that time... A bit like your uniformed post does for our horrific tally. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Completely sidestepped what I said because it is undeniable. And boosted the number by a couple of thousand even though you claim to be Frontline. And if someone spat in my face for what is undeniable fact they'd have serious problems to deal with right then and there. Saying things could be worse, doesn't diminish the impact of what has already happened. You should try to wrap your head around that notion. Claim? Oh my you are quite something aren’t you... #clapthekeyboardwarrior The filed figures from yesterday stand at 108k... we’ve likely suffered another 1.5k today... pretty sure as a ball park figure that puts my ballpark 110 as fairly accurate. In fact a fuck load more accurate than your 100k. Yes I agree statistically 500k deaths would be a larger figure... as would 111k deaths. But likewise I wouldn’t dare say: “The 1,000,000 Jews killed in the Holocaust could have been worst as 8,500,000 European Jews survived.” I’d have missed the fkn point and belittled a horrific part of history whilst offending ridiculous numbers connected with the Jewish population of that time... A bit like your uniformed post does for our horrific tally." My post wasn't uninformed, it had almost exact UK and global figures on it. You agreed 500k was worse, so in turn agreed that this situation COULD be far worse. We eventually agreed on something, that's good. Again, knowing that something could have been worse doesn't belittle the tragedy that's occurred, it's just a truth. Also, a murderous genocide compared to a virus (part of nature) is a non comparison. If you want to take the view that what i posted was to belittle the dead rather than simply acknowledge the reality that things could be far worse and could easily still turn worse, then that's your prerogative. Me, I prefer to look at the positive. I know it's hard these days. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. Please come spend sometime on the frontline and see the true horror of what covid delivers to our cities within our critical care system. Realise that 100,000 deaths means another 500,000 people who barely survived. Realise that icu departments with typically 24 beds are now expanded across hospitals to manage 250 odd beds. Before you sit from your armchair to judge impact or seriousness please realise your lack of perception or understanding of conditions makes your viewpoint extremely irrelevant. Covid-19 has been and remains a shit storm, don’t dumb it down or disrespect the many thousands affected by it. Sorry, because I'm not part of it I can't say that we were extremely lucky that it isn't far far worse? And no, 100k deaths doesn't mean that 500k barely survived. 500k surviving means that 500k survived. You are making my point for me! It could very easily be 100k that survived and 500k that died! Just because you are looking at the worst aspects of it, it does not mean that it could not be far worse. Like I said, in the grand scheme of things, the number is still low. They aren’t low, survival chances with modern medicine are extremely high for most major illnesses. We have lost far too many people to covid-19. Nationally our critical care has expanded by 500%... there’s nothing lucky about that. And no, barely survived isn’t simply survived. We have thousands with now reduced life expectancy, compromised lives, ongoing perhaps incurable conditions. Try telling them they are lucky. As I said... your armchair isn’t a place to judge where we are. Your point is just laughable compared to a terrible reality. This isn't simply a major illness though is it? It's a unforeseen global catastrophe. That could very very easily have been far worse. And that is undeniable. And don't assume what my position to view it from is. You don't know me. Don't assume that you have a unique or special position or knowledge that entitles you to say my view is laughable. " Your view is laughable though. You've clearly got 0 first hand experience of the virus and the impact it can have on not only those who lost loved ones to it, but survivors as well, you ignore all the points put forward with strong evidence counter to your opinion and you just keep repeating the same question over and over again like a hamster in a wheel, unable and/or unwilling to change course. That is about as laughable as it gets. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. Please come spend sometime on the frontline and see the true horror of what covid delivers to our cities within our critical care system. Realise that 100,000 deaths means another 500,000 people who barely survived. Realise that icu departments with typically 24 beds are now expanded across hospitals to manage 250 odd beds. Before you sit from your armchair to judge impact or seriousness please realise your lack of perception or understanding of conditions makes your viewpoint extremely irrelevant. Covid-19 has been and remains a shit storm, don’t dumb it down or disrespect the many thousands affected by it. Sorry, because I'm not part of it I can't say that we were extremely lucky that it isn't far far worse? And no, 100k deaths doesn't mean that 500k barely survived. 500k surviving means that 500k survived. You are making my point for me! It could very easily be 100k that survived and 500k that died! Just because you are looking at the worst aspects of it, it does not mean that it could not be far worse. Like I said, in the grand scheme of things, the number is still low. They aren’t low, survival chances with modern medicine are extremely high for most major illnesses. We have lost far too many people to covid-19. Nationally our critical care has expanded by 500%... there’s nothing lucky about that. And no, barely survived isn’t simply survived. We have thousands with now reduced life expectancy, compromised lives, ongoing perhaps incurable conditions. Try telling them they are lucky. As I said... your armchair isn’t a place to judge where we are. Your point is just laughable compared to a terrible reality. This isn't simply a major illness though is it? It's a unforeseen global catastrophe. That could very very easily have been far worse. And that is undeniable. And don't assume what my position to view it from is. You don't know me. Don't assume that you have a unique or special position or knowledge that entitles you to say my view is laughable. Your view is laughable though. You've clearly got 0 first hand experience of the virus and the impact it can have on not only those who lost loved ones to it, but survivors as well, you ignore all the points put forward with strong evidence counter to your opinion and you just keep repeating the same question over and over again like a hamster in a wheel, unable and/or unwilling to change course. That is about as laughable as it gets." You can't counter the fact that it could be a far worse situation. It's undeniable. Again, saying it could be worse, doesn't diminish the tragedy thus far. The fact that the number isn't 2,3,10,20 times higher as it quite easily could have been under a different virus, is exactly what makes us lucky. And don't try and say clearly this that and the other, you also don't know me. Trying to pin me as someone that said something negative when what I was actually doing was looking at the positive. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. Please come spend sometime on the frontline and see the true horror of what covid delivers to our cities within our critical care system. Realise that 100,000 deaths means another 500,000 people who barely survived. Realise that icu departments with typically 24 beds are now expanded across hospitals to manage 250 odd beds. Before you sit from your armchair to judge impact or seriousness please realise your lack of perception or understanding of conditions makes your viewpoint extremely irrelevant. Covid-19 has been and remains a shit storm, don’t dumb it down or disrespect the many thousands affected by it. Sorry, because I'm not part of it I can't say that we were extremely lucky that it isn't far far worse? And no, 100k deaths doesn't mean that 500k barely survived. 500k surviving means that 500k survived. You are making my point for me! It could very easily be 100k that survived and 500k that died! Just because you are looking at the worst aspects of it, it does not mean that it could not be far worse. Like I said, in the grand scheme of things, the number is still low. They aren’t low, survival chances with modern medicine are extremely high for most major illnesses. We have lost far too many people to covid-19. Nationally our critical care has expanded by 500%... there’s nothing lucky about that. And no, barely survived isn’t simply survived. We have thousands with now reduced life expectancy, compromised lives, ongoing perhaps incurable conditions. Try telling them they are lucky. As I said... your armchair isn’t a place to judge where we are. Your point is just laughable compared to a terrible reality. This isn't simply a major illness though is it? It's a unforeseen global catastrophe. That could very very easily have been far worse. And that is undeniable. And don't assume what my position to view it from is. You don't know me. Don't assume that you have a unique or special position or knowledge that entitles you to say my view is laughable. Your view is laughable though. You've clearly got 0 first hand experience of the virus and the impact it can have on not only those who lost loved ones to it, but survivors as well, you ignore all the points put forward with strong evidence counter to your opinion and you just keep repeating the same question over and over again like a hamster in a wheel, unable and/or unwilling to change course. That is about as laughable as it gets. You can't counter the fact that it could be a far worse situation. It's undeniable. Again, saying it could be worse, doesn't diminish the tragedy thus far. The fact that the number isn't 2,3,10,20 times higher as it quite easily could have been under a different virus, is exactly what makes us lucky. And don't try and say clearly this that and the other, you also don't know me. Trying to pin me as someone that said something negative when what I was actually doing was looking at the positive. " Your point is illogical and grossly insensitive. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. Please come spend sometime on the frontline and see the true horror of what covid delivers to our cities within our critical care system. Realise that 100,000 deaths means another 500,000 people who barely survived. Realise that icu departments with typically 24 beds are now expanded across hospitals to manage 250 odd beds. Before you sit from your armchair to judge impact or seriousness please realise your lack of perception or understanding of conditions makes your viewpoint extremely irrelevant. Covid-19 has been and remains a shit storm, don’t dumb it down or disrespect the many thousands affected by it. Sorry, because I'm not part of it I can't say that we were extremely lucky that it isn't far far worse? And no, 100k deaths doesn't mean that 500k barely survived. 500k surviving means that 500k survived. You are making my point for me! It could very easily be 100k that survived and 500k that died! Just because you are looking at the worst aspects of it, it does not mean that it could not be far worse. Like I said, in the grand scheme of things, the number is still low. They aren’t low, survival chances with modern medicine are extremely high for most major illnesses. We have lost far too many people to covid-19. Nationally our critical care has expanded by 500%... there’s nothing lucky about that. And no, barely survived isn’t simply survived. We have thousands with now reduced life expectancy, compromised lives, ongoing perhaps incurable conditions. Try telling them they are lucky. As I said... your armchair isn’t a place to judge where we are. Your point is just laughable compared to a terrible reality. This isn't simply a major illness though is it? It's a unforeseen global catastrophe. That could very very easily have been far worse. And that is undeniable. And don't assume what my position to view it from is. You don't know me. Don't assume that you have a unique or special position or knowledge that entitles you to say my view is laughable. Your view is laughable though. You've clearly got 0 first hand experience of the virus and the impact it can have on not only those who lost loved ones to it, but survivors as well, you ignore all the points put forward with strong evidence counter to your opinion and you just keep repeating the same question over and over again like a hamster in a wheel, unable and/or unwilling to change course. That is about as laughable as it gets." If you don't see 500,000 getting and surviving a vicious virus and surviving as more positive than them also dying and taking the total to 610k deceased then I don't know what to say to you. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. Please come spend sometime on the frontline and see the true horror of what covid delivers to our cities within our critical care system. Realise that 100,000 deaths means another 500,000 people who barely survived. Realise that icu departments with typically 24 beds are now expanded across hospitals to manage 250 odd beds. Before you sit from your armchair to judge impact or seriousness please realise your lack of perception or understanding of conditions makes your viewpoint extremely irrelevant. Covid-19 has been and remains a shit storm, don’t dumb it down or disrespect the many thousands affected by it. Sorry, because I'm not part of it I can't say that we were extremely lucky that it isn't far far worse? And no, 100k deaths doesn't mean that 500k barely survived. 500k surviving means that 500k survived. You are making my point for me! It could very easily be 100k that survived and 500k that died! Just because you are looking at the worst aspects of it, it does not mean that it could not be far worse. Like I said, in the grand scheme of things, the number is still low. They aren’t low, survival chances with modern medicine are extremely high for most major illnesses. We have lost far too many people to covid-19. Nationally our critical care has expanded by 500%... there’s nothing lucky about that. And no, barely survived isn’t simply survived. We have thousands with now reduced life expectancy, compromised lives, ongoing perhaps incurable conditions. Try telling them they are lucky. As I said... your armchair isn’t a place to judge where we are. Your point is just laughable compared to a terrible reality. This isn't simply a major illness though is it? It's a unforeseen global catastrophe. That could very very easily have been far worse. And that is undeniable. And don't assume what my position to view it from is. You don't know me. Don't assume that you have a unique or special position or knowledge that entitles you to say my view is laughable. Your view is laughable though. You've clearly got 0 first hand experience of the virus and the impact it can have on not only those who lost loved ones to it, but survivors as well, you ignore all the points put forward with strong evidence counter to your opinion and you just keep repeating the same question over and over again like a hamster in a wheel, unable and/or unwilling to change course. That is about as laughable as it gets. You can't counter the fact that it could be a far worse situation. It's undeniable. Again, saying it could be worse, doesn't diminish the tragedy thus far. The fact that the number isn't 2,3,10,20 times higher as it quite easily could have been under a different virus, is exactly what makes us lucky. And don't try and say clearly this that and the other, you also don't know me. Trying to pin me as someone that said something negative when what I was actually doing was looking at the positive. " You are saying something grossly insensitive, there is nothing 'positive' about it. If you believe what you're saying is some statement of positivity then you're utterly delusional. As for my assumption, you're yet to deny it is correct. If it was incorrect you wouldn't be saying what you're saying now, it's really as simple as that. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. Please come spend sometime on the frontline and see the true horror of what covid delivers to our cities within our critical care system. Realise that 100,000 deaths means another 500,000 people who barely survived. Realise that icu departments with typically 24 beds are now expanded across hospitals to manage 250 odd beds. Before you sit from your armchair to judge impact or seriousness please realise your lack of perception or understanding of conditions makes your viewpoint extremely irrelevant. Covid-19 has been and remains a shit storm, don’t dumb it down or disrespect the many thousands affected by it. Sorry, because I'm not part of it I can't say that we were extremely lucky that it isn't far far worse? And no, 100k deaths doesn't mean that 500k barely survived. 500k surviving means that 500k survived. You are making my point for me! It could very easily be 100k that survived and 500k that died! Just because you are looking at the worst aspects of it, it does not mean that it could not be far worse. Like I said, in the grand scheme of things, the number is still low. They aren’t low, survival chances with modern medicine are extremely high for most major illnesses. We have lost far too many people to covid-19. Nationally our critical care has expanded by 500%... there’s nothing lucky about that. And no, barely survived isn’t simply survived. We have thousands with now reduced life expectancy, compromised lives, ongoing perhaps incurable conditions. Try telling them they are lucky. As I said... your armchair isn’t a place to judge where we are. Your point is just laughable compared to a terrible reality. This isn't simply a major illness though is it? It's a unforeseen global catastrophe. That could very very easily have been far worse. And that is undeniable. And don't assume what my position to view it from is. You don't know me. Don't assume that you have a unique or special position or knowledge that entitles you to say my view is laughable. Your view is laughable though. You've clearly got 0 first hand experience of the virus and the impact it can have on not only those who lost loved ones to it, but survivors as well, you ignore all the points put forward with strong evidence counter to your opinion and you just keep repeating the same question over and over again like a hamster in a wheel, unable and/or unwilling to change course. That is about as laughable as it gets. You can't counter the fact that it could be a far worse situation. It's undeniable. Again, saying it could be worse, doesn't diminish the tragedy thus far. The fact that the number isn't 2,3,10,20 times higher as it quite easily could have been under a different virus, is exactly what makes us lucky. And don't try and say clearly this that and the other, you also don't know me. Trying to pin me as someone that said something negative when what I was actually doing was looking at the positive. Your point is illogical and grossly insensitive." Thats your view. It isn't illogical because its undeniable that we could easily be in a worse position. If you want to spin that into a negative, that's on you. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. Please come spend sometime on the frontline and see the true horror of what covid delivers to our cities within our critical care system. Realise that 100,000 deaths means another 500,000 people who barely survived. Realise that icu departments with typically 24 beds are now expanded across hospitals to manage 250 odd beds. Before you sit from your armchair to judge impact or seriousness please realise your lack of perception or understanding of conditions makes your viewpoint extremely irrelevant. Covid-19 has been and remains a shit storm, don’t dumb it down or disrespect the many thousands affected by it. Sorry, because I'm not part of it I can't say that we were extremely lucky that it isn't far far worse? And no, 100k deaths doesn't mean that 500k barely survived. 500k surviving means that 500k survived. You are making my point for me! It could very easily be 100k that survived and 500k that died! Just because you are looking at the worst aspects of it, it does not mean that it could not be far worse. Like I said, in the grand scheme of things, the number is still low. They aren’t low, survival chances with modern medicine are extremely high for most major illnesses. We have lost far too many people to covid-19. Nationally our critical care has expanded by 500%... there’s nothing lucky about that. And no, barely survived isn’t simply survived. We have thousands with now reduced life expectancy, compromised lives, ongoing perhaps incurable conditions. Try telling them they are lucky. As I said... your armchair isn’t a place to judge where we are. Your point is just laughable compared to a terrible reality. This isn't simply a major illness though is it? It's a unforeseen global catastrophe. That could very very easily have been far worse. And that is undeniable. And don't assume what my position to view it from is. You don't know me. Don't assume that you have a unique or special position or knowledge that entitles you to say my view is laughable. Your view is laughable though. You've clearly got 0 first hand experience of the virus and the impact it can have on not only those who lost loved ones to it, but survivors as well, you ignore all the points put forward with strong evidence counter to your opinion and you just keep repeating the same question over and over again like a hamster in a wheel, unable and/or unwilling to change course. That is about as laughable as it gets. You can't counter the fact that it could be a far worse situation. It's undeniable. Again, saying it could be worse, doesn't diminish the tragedy thus far. The fact that the number isn't 2,3,10,20 times higher as it quite easily could have been under a different virus, is exactly what makes us lucky. And don't try and say clearly this that and the other, you also don't know me. Trying to pin me as someone that said something negative when what I was actually doing was looking at the positive. You are saying something grossly insensitive, there is nothing 'positive' about it. If you believe what you're saying is some statement of positivity then you're utterly delusional. As for my assumption, you're yet to deny it is correct. If it was incorrect you wouldn't be saying what you're saying now, it's really as simple as that." Ive been surrounded by death since I was a very young child, and that continues to this day, don't assume. If you want to cling to the negative side of what my original post said, rather than the actual point of it which was, we could easily be looking at much higher numbers, then you do you. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My post wasn't uninformed, it had almost exact UK and global figures on it. You agreed 500k was worse, so in turn agreed that this situation COULD be far worse. We eventually agreed on something, that's good. Again, knowing that something could have been worse doesn't belittle the tragedy that's occurred, it's just a truth. Also, a murderous genocide compared to a virus (part of nature) is a non comparison. If you want to take the view that what i posted was to belittle the dead rather than simply acknowledge the reality that things could be far worse and could easily still turn worse, then that's your prerogative. Me, I prefer to look at the positive. I know it's hard these days. If you can’t see that for many hundreds of thousands within this country that someone telling them we should be positive is inappropriate then I don’t think I can help you. As for your positive life outlook... good for you, go celebrate the current state of affairs and perhaps be disrespectful enough to challenge the validity of those who have met the victims, their families and the past year from within the red zone. If I lose one of my parents or perhaps one of my boys in the coming weeks please remind me to rejoice at the fact that it’s not all of them... I’m sure your armchair wisdom will cheer me the fuck up straight away. If I do spit in your face... please understand it’s purely because I’m not blessed with your visionary wisdom x " Do you work on the frontline in the NHS? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. Please come spend sometime on the frontline and see the true horror of what covid delivers to our cities within our critical care system. Realise that 100,000 deaths means another 500,000 people who barely survived. Realise that icu departments with typically 24 beds are now expanded across hospitals to manage 250 odd beds. Before you sit from your armchair to judge impact or seriousness please realise your lack of perception or understanding of conditions makes your viewpoint extremely irrelevant. Covid-19 has been and remains a shit storm, don’t dumb it down or disrespect the many thousands affected by it. Sorry, because I'm not part of it I can't say that we were extremely lucky that it isn't far far worse? And no, 100k deaths doesn't mean that 500k barely survived. 500k surviving means that 500k survived. You are making my point for me! It could very easily be 100k that survived and 500k that died! Just because you are looking at the worst aspects of it, it does not mean that it could not be far worse. Like I said, in the grand scheme of things, the number is still low. They aren’t low, survival chances with modern medicine are extremely high for most major illnesses. We have lost far too many people to covid-19. Nationally our critical care has expanded by 500%... there’s nothing lucky about that. And no, barely survived isn’t simply survived. We have thousands with now reduced life expectancy, compromised lives, ongoing perhaps incurable conditions. Try telling them they are lucky. As I said... your armchair isn’t a place to judge where we are. Your point is just laughable compared to a terrible reality. This isn't simply a major illness though is it? It's a unforeseen global catastrophe. That could very very easily have been far worse. And that is undeniable. And don't assume what my position to view it from is. You don't know me. Don't assume that you have a unique or special position or knowledge that entitles you to say my view is laughable. Your view is laughable though. You've clearly got 0 first hand experience of the virus and the impact it can have on not only those who lost loved ones to it, but survivors as well, you ignore all the points put forward with strong evidence counter to your opinion and you just keep repeating the same question over and over again like a hamster in a wheel, unable and/or unwilling to change course. That is about as laughable as it gets. You can't counter the fact that it could be a far worse situation. It's undeniable. Again, saying it could be worse, doesn't diminish the tragedy thus far. The fact that the number isn't 2,3,10,20 times higher as it quite easily could have been under a different virus, is exactly what makes us lucky. And don't try and say clearly this that and the other, you also don't know me. Trying to pin me as someone that said something negative when what I was actually doing was looking at the positive. Your point is illogical and grossly insensitive. Thats your view. It isn't illogical because its undeniable that we could easily be in a worse position. If you want to spin that into a negative, that's on you. " it's only undeniable because you keep saying so it doesn't make it true. So using your logic. War unfortunately is a undeniable and one inevitable part of human life, through the ages people have died in wars.(once again I'm using your logic). Sadly and tragically 75million people died during WW2, but hey could have been worse! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My post wasn't uninformed, it had almost exact UK and global figures on it. You agreed 500k was worse, so in turn agreed that this situation COULD be far worse. We eventually agreed on something, that's good. Again, knowing that something could have been worse doesn't belittle the tragedy that's occurred, it's just a truth. Also, a murderous genocide compared to a virus (part of nature) is a non comparison. If you want to take the view that what i posted was to belittle the dead rather than simply acknowledge the reality that things could be far worse and could easily still turn worse, then that's your prerogative. Me, I prefer to look at the positive. I know it's hard these days. If you can’t see that for many hundreds of thousands within this country that someone telling them we should be positive is inappropriate then I don’t think I can help you. As for your positive life outlook... good for you, go celebrate the current state of affairs and perhaps be disrespectful enough to challenge the validity of those who have met the victims, their families and the past year from within the red zone. If I lose one of my parents or perhaps one of my boys in the coming weeks please remind me to rejoice at the fact that it’s not all of them... I’m sure your armchair wisdom will cheer me the fuck up straight away. If I do spit in your face... please understand it’s purely because I’m not blessed with your visionary wisdom x " I didn't challenge any validity. I've repeatedly said I'm not diminishing the tragedy, but you seem to have a mental block as to my point of view. Which is fair, no one person see things the same. Keep seeing the dark side of things till it consumes you if that's what you want to do. I choose not to. Its a spiral that I'd rather avoid. If you did spit in my face I'd bless you with a different type of vision  for someone who claims to be some sort of person involved with this situation professionally, you don't seem too professional.
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. Please come spend sometime on the frontline and see the true horror of what covid delivers to our cities within our critical care system. Realise that 100,000 deaths means another 500,000 people who barely survived. Realise that icu departments with typically 24 beds are now expanded across hospitals to manage 250 odd beds. Before you sit from your armchair to judge impact or seriousness please realise your lack of perception or understanding of conditions makes your viewpoint extremely irrelevant. Covid-19 has been and remains a shit storm, don’t dumb it down or disrespect the many thousands affected by it. Sorry, because I'm not part of it I can't say that we were extremely lucky that it isn't far far worse? And no, 100k deaths doesn't mean that 500k barely survived. 500k surviving means that 500k survived. You are making my point for me! It could very easily be 100k that survived and 500k that died! Just because you are looking at the worst aspects of it, it does not mean that it could not be far worse. Like I said, in the grand scheme of things, the number is still low. They aren’t low, survival chances with modern medicine are extremely high for most major illnesses. We have lost far too many people to covid-19. Nationally our critical care has expanded by 500%... there’s nothing lucky about that. And no, barely survived isn’t simply survived. We have thousands with now reduced life expectancy, compromised lives, ongoing perhaps incurable conditions. Try telling them they are lucky. As I said... your armchair isn’t a place to judge where we are. Your point is just laughable compared to a terrible reality. This isn't simply a major illness though is it? It's a unforeseen global catastrophe. That could very very easily have been far worse. And that is undeniable. And don't assume what my position to view it from is. You don't know me. Don't assume that you have a unique or special position or knowledge that entitles you to say my view is laughable. Your view is laughable though. You've clearly got 0 first hand experience of the virus and the impact it can have on not only those who lost loved ones to it, but survivors as well, you ignore all the points put forward with strong evidence counter to your opinion and you just keep repeating the same question over and over again like a hamster in a wheel, unable and/or unwilling to change course. That is about as laughable as it gets. You can't counter the fact that it could be a far worse situation. It's undeniable. Again, saying it could be worse, doesn't diminish the tragedy thus far. The fact that the number isn't 2,3,10,20 times higher as it quite easily could have been under a different virus, is exactly what makes us lucky. And don't try and say clearly this that and the other, you also don't know me. Trying to pin me as someone that said something negative when what I was actually doing was looking at the positive. Your point is illogical and grossly insensitive. Thats your view. It isn't illogical because its undeniable that we could easily be in a worse position. If you want to spin that into a negative, that's on you. it's only undeniable because you keep saying so it doesn't make it true. So using your logic. War unfortunately is a undeniable and one inevitable part of human life, through the ages people have died in wars.(once again I'm using your logic). Sadly and tragically 75million people died during WW2, but hey could have been worse! " Yes it could have been. Obviously. Saying so doesn't diminish the tragedy unless that's the view you wish to take. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. Please come spend sometime on the frontline and see the true horror of what covid delivers to our cities within our critical care system. Realise that 100,000 deaths means another 500,000 people who barely survived. Realise that icu departments with typically 24 beds are now expanded across hospitals to manage 250 odd beds. Before you sit from your armchair to judge impact or seriousness please realise your lack of perception or understanding of conditions makes your viewpoint extremely irrelevant. Covid-19 has been and remains a shit storm, don’t dumb it down or disrespect the many thousands affected by it. Sorry, because I'm not part of it I can't say that we were extremely lucky that it isn't far far worse? And no, 100k deaths doesn't mean that 500k barely survived. 500k surviving means that 500k survived. You are making my point for me! It could very easily be 100k that survived and 500k that died! Just because you are looking at the worst aspects of it, it does not mean that it could not be far worse. Like I said, in the grand scheme of things, the number is still low. They aren’t low, survival chances with modern medicine are extremely high for most major illnesses. We have lost far too many people to covid-19. Nationally our critical care has expanded by 500%... there’s nothing lucky about that. And no, barely survived isn’t simply survived. We have thousands with now reduced life expectancy, compromised lives, ongoing perhaps incurable conditions. Try telling them they are lucky. As I said... your armchair isn’t a place to judge where we are. Your point is just laughable compared to a terrible reality. This isn't simply a major illness though is it? It's a unforeseen global catastrophe. That could very very easily have been far worse. And that is undeniable. And don't assume what my position to view it from is. You don't know me. Don't assume that you have a unique or special position or knowledge that entitles you to say my view is laughable. Your view is laughable though. You've clearly got 0 first hand experience of the virus and the impact it can have on not only those who lost loved ones to it, but survivors as well, you ignore all the points put forward with strong evidence counter to your opinion and you just keep repeating the same question over and over again like a hamster in a wheel, unable and/or unwilling to change course. That is about as laughable as it gets. You can't counter the fact that it could be a far worse situation. It's undeniable. Again, saying it could be worse, doesn't diminish the tragedy thus far. The fact that the number isn't 2,3,10,20 times higher as it quite easily could have been under a different virus, is exactly what makes us lucky. And don't try and say clearly this that and the other, you also don't know me. Trying to pin me as someone that said something negative when what I was actually doing was looking at the positive. Your point is illogical and grossly insensitive. Thats your view. It isn't illogical because its undeniable that we could easily be in a worse position. If you want to spin that into a negative, that's on you. it's only undeniable because you keep saying so it doesn't make it true. So using your logic. War unfortunately is a undeniable and one inevitable part of human life, through the ages people have died in wars.(once again I'm using your logic). Sadly and tragically 75million people died during WW2, but hey could have been worse! " Plus if something is undeniable then it's undeniable. Regardless of who says it? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My post wasn't uninformed, it had almost exact UK and global figures on it. You agreed 500k was worse, so in turn agreed that this situation COULD be far worse. We eventually agreed on something, that's good. Again, knowing that something could have been worse doesn't belittle the tragedy that's occurred, it's just a truth. Also, a murderous genocide compared to a virus (part of nature) is a non comparison. If you want to take the view that what i posted was to belittle the dead rather than simply acknowledge the reality that things could be far worse and could easily still turn worse, then that's your prerogative. Me, I prefer to look at the positive. I know it's hard these days. If you can’t see that for many hundreds of thousands within this country that someone telling them we should be positive is inappropriate then I don’t think I can help you. As for your positive life outlook... good for you, go celebrate the current state of affairs and perhaps be disrespectful enough to challenge the validity of those who have met the victims, their families and the past year from within the red zone. If I lose one of my parents or perhaps one of my boys in the coming weeks please remind me to rejoice at the fact that it’s not all of them... I’m sure your armchair wisdom will cheer me the fuck up straight away. If I do spit in your face... please understand it’s purely because I’m not blessed with your visionary wisdom x I didn't challenge any validity. I've repeatedly said I'm not diminishing the tragedy, but you seem to have a mental block as to my point of view. Which is fair, no one person see things the same. Keep seeing the dark side of things till it consumes you if that's what you want to do. I choose not to. Its a spiral that I'd rather avoid. If you did spit in my face I'd bless you with a different type of vision for someone who claims to be some sort of person involved with this situation professionally, you don't seem too professional.
"So now you are just resorting to personal insult's if people don't agree with your opinion. Have you considered a career in politics? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. Please come spend sometime on the frontline and see the true horror of what covid delivers to our cities within our critical care system. Realise that 100,000 deaths means another 500,000 people who barely survived. Realise that icu departments with typically 24 beds are now expanded across hospitals to manage 250 odd beds. Before you sit from your armchair to judge impact or seriousness please realise your lack of perception or understanding of conditions makes your viewpoint extremely irrelevant. Covid-19 has been and remains a shit storm, don’t dumb it down or disrespect the many thousands affected by it. Sorry, because I'm not part of it I can't say that we were extremely lucky that it isn't far far worse? And no, 100k deaths doesn't mean that 500k barely survived. 500k surviving means that 500k survived. You are making my point for me! It could very easily be 100k that survived and 500k that died! Just because you are looking at the worst aspects of it, it does not mean that it could not be far worse. Like I said, in the grand scheme of things, the number is still low. They aren’t low, survival chances with modern medicine are extremely high for most major illnesses. We have lost far too many people to covid-19. Nationally our critical care has expanded by 500%... there’s nothing lucky about that. And no, barely survived isn’t simply survived. We have thousands with now reduced life expectancy, compromised lives, ongoing perhaps incurable conditions. Try telling them they are lucky. As I said... your armchair isn’t a place to judge where we are. Your point is just laughable compared to a terrible reality. This isn't simply a major illness though is it? It's a unforeseen global catastrophe. That could very very easily have been far worse. And that is undeniable. And don't assume what my position to view it from is. You don't know me. Don't assume that you have a unique or special position or knowledge that entitles you to say my view is laughable. Your view is laughable though. You've clearly got 0 first hand experience of the virus and the impact it can have on not only those who lost loved ones to it, but survivors as well, you ignore all the points put forward with strong evidence counter to your opinion and you just keep repeating the same question over and over again like a hamster in a wheel, unable and/or unwilling to change course. That is about as laughable as it gets. You can't counter the fact that it could be a far worse situation. It's undeniable. Again, saying it could be worse, doesn't diminish the tragedy thus far. The fact that the number isn't 2,3,10,20 times higher as it quite easily could have been under a different virus, is exactly what makes us lucky. And don't try and say clearly this that and the other, you also don't know me. Trying to pin me as someone that said something negative when what I was actually doing was looking at the positive. Your point is illogical and grossly insensitive. Thats your view. It isn't illogical because its undeniable that we could easily be in a worse position. If you want to spin that into a negative, that's on you. it's only undeniable because you keep saying so it doesn't make it true. So using your logic. War unfortunately is a undeniable and one inevitable part of human life, through the ages people have died in wars.(once again I'm using your logic). Sadly and tragically 75million people died during WW2, but hey could have been worse! " Since when is war an inevitable part of human life??? Its a human created occurrence. You're making an invalid comparison. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My post wasn't uninformed, it had almost exact UK and global figures on it. You agreed 500k was worse, so in turn agreed that this situation COULD be far worse. We eventually agreed on something, that's good. Again, knowing that something could have been worse doesn't belittle the tragedy that's occurred, it's just a truth. Also, a murderous genocide compared to a virus (part of nature) is a non comparison. If you want to take the view that what i posted was to belittle the dead rather than simply acknowledge the reality that things could be far worse and could easily still turn worse, then that's your prerogative. Me, I prefer to look at the positive. I know it's hard these days. If you can’t see that for many hundreds of thousands within this country that someone telling them we should be positive is inappropriate then I don’t think I can help you. As for your positive life outlook... good for you, go celebrate the current state of affairs and perhaps be disrespectful enough to challenge the validity of those who have met the victims, their families and the past year from within the red zone. If I lose one of my parents or perhaps one of my boys in the coming weeks please remind me to rejoice at the fact that it’s not all of them... I’m sure your armchair wisdom will cheer me the fuck up straight away. If I do spit in your face... please understand it’s purely because I’m not blessed with your visionary wisdom x I didn't challenge any validity. I've repeatedly said I'm not diminishing the tragedy, but you seem to have a mental block as to my point of view. Which is fair, no one person see things the same. Keep seeing the dark side of things till it consumes you if that's what you want to do. I choose not to. Its a spiral that I'd rather avoid. If you did spit in my face I'd bless you with a different type of vision for someone who claims to be some sort of person involved with this situation professionally, you don't seem too professional.
So now you are just resorting to personal insult's if people don't agree with your opinion.
Have you considered a career in politics?"Which bit was an insult? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. Please come spend sometime on the frontline and see the true horror of what covid delivers to our cities within our critical care system. Realise that 100,000 deaths means another 500,000 people who barely survived. Realise that icu departments with typically 24 beds are now expanded across hospitals to manage 250 odd beds. Before you sit from your armchair to judge impact or seriousness please realise your lack of perception or understanding of conditions makes your viewpoint extremely irrelevant. Covid-19 has been and remains a shit storm, don’t dumb it down or disrespect the many thousands affected by it. Sorry, because I'm not part of it I can't say that we were extremely lucky that it isn't far far worse? And no, 100k deaths doesn't mean that 500k barely survived. 500k surviving means that 500k survived. You are making my point for me! It could very easily be 100k that survived and 500k that died! Just because you are looking at the worst aspects of it, it does not mean that it could not be far worse. Like I said, in the grand scheme of things, the number is still low. They aren’t low, survival chances with modern medicine are extremely high for most major illnesses. We have lost far too many people to covid-19. Nationally our critical care has expanded by 500%... there’s nothing lucky about that. And no, barely survived isn’t simply survived. We have thousands with now reduced life expectancy, compromised lives, ongoing perhaps incurable conditions. Try telling them they are lucky. As I said... your armchair isn’t a place to judge where we are. Your point is just laughable compared to a terrible reality. This isn't simply a major illness though is it? It's a unforeseen global catastrophe. That could very very easily have been far worse. And that is undeniable. And don't assume what my position to view it from is. You don't know me. Don't assume that you have a unique or special position or knowledge that entitles you to say my view is laughable. Your view is laughable though. You've clearly got 0 first hand experience of the virus and the impact it can have on not only those who lost loved ones to it, but survivors as well, you ignore all the points put forward with strong evidence counter to your opinion and you just keep repeating the same question over and over again like a hamster in a wheel, unable and/or unwilling to change course. That is about as laughable as it gets. You can't counter the fact that it could be a far worse situation. It's undeniable. Again, saying it could be worse, doesn't diminish the tragedy thus far. The fact that the number isn't 2,3,10,20 times higher as it quite easily could have been under a different virus, is exactly what makes us lucky. And don't try and say clearly this that and the other, you also don't know me. Trying to pin me as someone that said something negative when what I was actually doing was looking at the positive. Your point is illogical and grossly insensitive. Thats your view. It isn't illogical because its undeniable that we could easily be in a worse position. If you want to spin that into a negative, that's on you. it's only undeniable because you keep saying so it doesn't make it true. So using your logic. War unfortunately is a undeniable and one inevitable part of human life, through the ages people have died in wars.(once again I'm using your logic). Sadly and tragically 75million people died during WW2, but hey could have been worse! Since when is war an inevitable part of human life??? Its a human created occurrence. You're making an invalid comparison. " Illogical comparison maybe? I'm simply using your argument for your so called"optimism" against you. It's as illogical as it's undeniable. I am not going to carry on with this pointless conversation except to say. Spanish flu well, could have been worse! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. Please come spend sometime on the frontline and see the true horror of what covid delivers to our cities within our critical care system. Realise that 100,000 deaths means another 500,000 people who barely survived. Realise that icu departments with typically 24 beds are now expanded across hospitals to manage 250 odd beds. Before you sit from your armchair to judge impact or seriousness please realise your lack of perception or understanding of conditions makes your viewpoint extremely irrelevant. Covid-19 has been and remains a shit storm, don’t dumb it down or disrespect the many thousands affected by it. Sorry, because I'm not part of it I can't say that we were extremely lucky that it isn't far far worse? And no, 100k deaths doesn't mean that 500k barely survived. 500k surviving means that 500k survived. You are making my point for me! It could very easily be 100k that survived and 500k that died! Just because you are looking at the worst aspects of it, it does not mean that it could not be far worse. Like I said, in the grand scheme of things, the number is still low. They aren’t low, survival chances with modern medicine are extremely high for most major illnesses. We have lost far too many people to covid-19. Nationally our critical care has expanded by 500%... there’s nothing lucky about that. And no, barely survived isn’t simply survived. We have thousands with now reduced life expectancy, compromised lives, ongoing perhaps incurable conditions. Try telling them they are lucky. As I said... your armchair isn’t a place to judge where we are. Your point is just laughable compared to a terrible reality. This isn't simply a major illness though is it? It's a unforeseen global catastrophe. That could very very easily have been far worse. And that is undeniable. And don't assume what my position to view it from is. You don't know me. Don't assume that you have a unique or special position or knowledge that entitles you to say my view is laughable. Your view is laughable though. You've clearly got 0 first hand experience of the virus and the impact it can have on not only those who lost loved ones to it, but survivors as well, you ignore all the points put forward with strong evidence counter to your opinion and you just keep repeating the same question over and over again like a hamster in a wheel, unable and/or unwilling to change course. That is about as laughable as it gets. You can't counter the fact that it could be a far worse situation. It's undeniable. Again, saying it could be worse, doesn't diminish the tragedy thus far. The fact that the number isn't 2,3,10,20 times higher as it quite easily could have been under a different virus, is exactly what makes us lucky. And don't try and say clearly this that and the other, you also don't know me. Trying to pin me as someone that said something negative when what I was actually doing was looking at the positive. Your point is illogical and grossly insensitive. Thats your view. It isn't illogical because its undeniable that we could easily be in a worse position. If you want to spin that into a negative, that's on you. it's only undeniable because you keep saying so it doesn't make it true. So using your logic. War unfortunately is a undeniable and one inevitable part of human life, through the ages people have died in wars.(once again I'm using your logic). Sadly and tragically 75million people died during WW2, but hey could have been worse! Since when is war an inevitable part of human life??? Its a human created occurrence. You're making an invalid comparison. Illogical comparison maybe? I'm simply using your argument for your so called"optimism" against you. It's as illogical as it's undeniable. I am not going to carry on with this pointless conversation except to say. Spanish flu well, could have been worse!" You should think before you type because you are saying the exact thing I am, only you are attempting to use it against me as sarcasm, so I'll give you proper logic. We could be looking at Spanish flu numbers right now. Which would be worse. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. Please come spend sometime on the frontline and see the true horror of what covid delivers to our cities within our critical care system. Realise that 100,000 deaths means another 500,000 people who barely survived. Realise that icu departments with typically 24 beds are now expanded across hospitals to manage 250 odd beds. Before you sit from your armchair to judge impact or seriousness please realise your lack of perception or understanding of conditions makes your viewpoint extremely irrelevant. Covid-19 has been and remains a shit storm, don’t dumb it down or disrespect the many thousands affected by it. Sorry, because I'm not part of it I can't say that we were extremely lucky that it isn't far far worse? And no, 100k deaths doesn't mean that 500k barely survived. 500k surviving means that 500k survived. You are making my point for me! It could very easily be 100k that survived and 500k that died! Just because you are looking at the worst aspects of it, it does not mean that it could not be far worse. Like I said, in the grand scheme of things, the number is still low. They aren’t low, survival chances with modern medicine are extremely high for most major illnesses. We have lost far too many people to covid-19. Nationally our critical care has expanded by 500%... there’s nothing lucky about that. And no, barely survived isn’t simply survived. We have thousands with now reduced life expectancy, compromised lives, ongoing perhaps incurable conditions. Try telling them they are lucky. As I said... your armchair isn’t a place to judge where we are. Your point is just laughable compared to a terrible reality. This isn't simply a major illness though is it? It's a unforeseen global catastrophe. That could very very easily have been far worse. And that is undeniable. And don't assume what my position to view it from is. You don't know me. Don't assume that you have a unique or special position or knowledge that entitles you to say my view is laughable. Your view is laughable though. You've clearly got 0 first hand experience of the virus and the impact it can have on not only those who lost loved ones to it, but survivors as well, you ignore all the points put forward with strong evidence counter to your opinion and you just keep repeating the same question over and over again like a hamster in a wheel, unable and/or unwilling to change course. That is about as laughable as it gets. You can't counter the fact that it could be a far worse situation. It's undeniable. Again, saying it could be worse, doesn't diminish the tragedy thus far. The fact that the number isn't 2,3,10,20 times higher as it quite easily could have been under a different virus, is exactly what makes us lucky. And don't try and say clearly this that and the other, you also don't know me. Trying to pin me as someone that said something negative when what I was actually doing was looking at the positive. You are saying something grossly insensitive, there is nothing 'positive' about it. If you believe what you're saying is some statement of positivity then you're utterly delusional. As for my assumption, you're yet to deny it is correct. If it was incorrect you wouldn't be saying what you're saying now, it's really as simple as that. Ive been surrounded by death since I was a very young child, and that continues to this day, don't assume. If you want to cling to the negative side of what my original post said, rather than the actual point of it which was, we could easily be looking at much higher numbers, then you do you. " And? Same here. Don't push your own warped ideas around bereavement onto other people, sort you own shit out. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What really annoys me about the last 10 months is the way people are being conditioned to instantly chastise anything that doesn't fit the narrative, which makes it very difficult to have a healthy discussion with some people. The op made a very clear and concise statement about covid deaths and asked for an opinion on whether or not we think we could be much worse off than we already are right now. I read the same message as everybody else, and at no point did I think he was being insensitive to others who have lost people to covid. At no point did I feel like he was downplaying the covid related death of my cousin a few weeks ago. But some people read the "why is this number seen as negative" and instantly shat themselves in anger. People have responded with hate - "there are no words", "this forum has sunk to a new low" and most comments were just one sentence with no explanation, no opinion, just an instant (and in my opinion, learned) shut down against the op, who was actually offering a somewhat healthy view in these troubled times. The message being - It could be a LOT worse, we all could be dead right NOW. Kudos to the op, there have been a lot of nasty and unnecessary drivel spewed in your direction and I think you are handling it rather well. "Thank you. My intention was never to hurt or upset anyone or diminish the tragedy. I understand that my way of seeing things is different so it stands to reason there would be opposition. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. Please come spend sometime on the frontline and see the true horror of what covid delivers to our cities within our critical care system. Realise that 100,000 deaths means another 500,000 people who barely survived. Realise that icu departments with typically 24 beds are now expanded across hospitals to manage 250 odd beds. Before you sit from your armchair to judge impact or seriousness please realise your lack of perception or understanding of conditions makes your viewpoint extremely irrelevant. Covid-19 has been and remains a shit storm, don’t dumb it down or disrespect the many thousands affected by it. Sorry, because I'm not part of it I can't say that we were extremely lucky that it isn't far far worse? And no, 100k deaths doesn't mean that 500k barely survived. 500k surviving means that 500k survived. You are making my point for me! It could very easily be 100k that survived and 500k that died! Just because you are looking at the worst aspects of it, it does not mean that it could not be far worse. Like I said, in the grand scheme of things, the number is still low. They aren’t low, survival chances with modern medicine are extremely high for most major illnesses. We have lost far too many people to covid-19. Nationally our critical care has expanded by 500%... there’s nothing lucky about that. And no, barely survived isn’t simply survived. We have thousands with now reduced life expectancy, compromised lives, ongoing perhaps incurable conditions. Try telling them they are lucky. As I said... your armchair isn’t a place to judge where we are. Your point is just laughable compared to a terrible reality. This isn't simply a major illness though is it? It's a unforeseen global catastrophe. That could very very easily have been far worse. And that is undeniable. And don't assume what my position to view it from is. You don't know me. Don't assume that you have a unique or special position or knowledge that entitles you to say my view is laughable. Your view is laughable though. You've clearly got 0 first hand experience of the virus and the impact it can have on not only those who lost loved ones to it, but survivors as well, you ignore all the points put forward with strong evidence counter to your opinion and you just keep repeating the same question over and over again like a hamster in a wheel, unable and/or unwilling to change course. That is about as laughable as it gets. You can't counter the fact that it could be a far worse situation. It's undeniable. Again, saying it could be worse, doesn't diminish the tragedy thus far. The fact that the number isn't 2,3,10,20 times higher as it quite easily could have been under a different virus, is exactly what makes us lucky. And don't try and say clearly this that and the other, you also don't know me. Trying to pin me as someone that said something negative when what I was actually doing was looking at the positive. You are saying something grossly insensitive, there is nothing 'positive' about it. If you believe what you're saying is some statement of positivity then you're utterly delusional. As for my assumption, you're yet to deny it is correct. If it was incorrect you wouldn't be saying what you're saying now, it's really as simple as that. Ive been surrounded by death since I was a very young child, and that continues to this day, don't assume. If you want to cling to the negative side of what my original post said, rather than the actual point of it which was, we could easily be looking at much higher numbers, then you do you. And? Same here. Don't push your own warped ideas around bereavement onto other people, sort you own shit out." I didn't, you're the one telling me my view is wrong because it doesn't fit with yours. You made an assumption, I relied to your assumption. Sort your shit out. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What really annoys me about the last 10 months is the way people are being conditioned to instantly chastise anything that doesn't fit the narrative, which makes it very difficult to have a healthy discussion with some people. The op made a very clear and concise statement about covid deaths and asked for an opinion on whether or not we think we could be much worse off than we already are right now. I read the same message as everybody else, and at no point did I think he was being insensitive to others who have lost people to covid. At no point did I feel like he was downplaying the covid related death of my cousin a few weeks ago. But some people read the "why is this number seen as negative" and instantly shat themselves in anger. People have responded with hate - "there are no words", "this forum has sunk to a new low" and most comments were just one sentence with no explanation, no opinion, just an instant (and in my opinion, learned) shut down against the op, who was actually offering a somewhat healthy view in these troubled times. The message being - It could be a LOT worse, we all could be dead right NOW. Kudos to the op, there have been a lot of nasty and unnecessary drivel spewed in your direction and I think you are handling it rather well. "This is also how I took it but you e written it better than I ever could have | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. Please come spend sometime on the frontline and see the true horror of what covid delivers to our cities within our critical care system. Realise that 100,000 deaths means another 500,000 people who barely survived. Realise that icu departments with typically 24 beds are now expanded across hospitals to manage 250 odd beds. Before you sit from your armchair to judge impact or seriousness please realise your lack of perception or understanding of conditions makes your viewpoint extremely irrelevant. Covid-19 has been and remains a shit storm, don’t dumb it down or disrespect the many thousands affected by it. Sorry, because I'm not part of it I can't say that we were extremely lucky that it isn't far far worse? And no, 100k deaths doesn't mean that 500k barely survived. 500k surviving means that 500k survived. You are making my point for me! It could very easily be 100k that survived and 500k that died! Just because you are looking at the worst aspects of it, it does not mean that it could not be far worse. Like I said, in the grand scheme of things, the number is still low. They aren’t low, survival chances with modern medicine are extremely high for most major illnesses. We have lost far too many people to covid-19. Nationally our critical care has expanded by 500%... there’s nothing lucky about that. And no, barely survived isn’t simply survived. We have thousands with now reduced life expectancy, compromised lives, ongoing perhaps incurable conditions. Try telling them they are lucky. As I said... your armchair isn’t a place to judge where we are. Your point is just laughable compared to a terrible reality. This isn't simply a major illness though is it? It's a unforeseen global catastrophe. That could very very easily have been far worse. And that is undeniable. And don't assume what my position to view it from is. You don't know me. Don't assume that you have a unique or special position or knowledge that entitles you to say my view is laughable. Your view is laughable though. You've clearly got 0 first hand experience of the virus and the impact it can have on not only those who lost loved ones to it, but survivors as well, you ignore all the points put forward with strong evidence counter to your opinion and you just keep repeating the same question over and over again like a hamster in a wheel, unable and/or unwilling to change course. That is about as laughable as it gets. You can't counter the fact that it could be a far worse situation. It's undeniable. Again, saying it could be worse, doesn't diminish the tragedy thus far. The fact that the number isn't 2,3,10,20 times higher as it quite easily could have been under a different virus, is exactly what makes us lucky. And don't try and say clearly this that and the other, you also don't know me. Trying to pin me as someone that said something negative when what I was actually doing was looking at the positive. You are saying something grossly insensitive, there is nothing 'positive' about it. If you believe what you're saying is some statement of positivity then you're utterly delusional. As for my assumption, you're yet to deny it is correct. If it was incorrect you wouldn't be saying what you're saying now, it's really as simple as that. Ive been surrounded by death since I was a very young child, and that continues to this day, don't assume. If you want to cling to the negative side of what my original post said, rather than the actual point of it which was, we could easily be looking at much higher numbers, then you do you. And? Same here. Don't push your own warped ideas around bereavement onto other people, sort you own shit out." Nowhere in this whole thread have I said anything about bereavement. You're the kne that span what I said into a whole bunch of negative shite, which shows your state of mind, not mine. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What really annoys me about the last 10 months is the way people are being conditioned to instantly chastise anything that doesn't fit the narrative, which makes it very difficult to have a healthy discussion with some people. The op made a very clear and concise statement about covid deaths and asked for an opinion on whether or not we think we could be much worse off than we already are right now. I read the same message as everybody else, and at no point did I think he was being insensitive to others who have lost people to covid. At no point did I feel like he was downplaying the covid related death of my cousin a few weeks ago. But some people read the "why is this number seen as negative" and instantly shat themselves in anger. People have responded with hate - "there are no words", "this forum has sunk to a new low" and most comments were just one sentence with no explanation, no opinion, just an instant (and in my opinion, learned) shut down against the op, who was actually offering a somewhat healthy view in these troubled times. The message being - It could be a LOT worse, we all could be dead right NOW. Kudos to the op, there have been a lot of nasty and unnecessary drivel spewed in your direction and I think you are handling it rather well. "Whilst I sort of get the argument that it could have been worse,I think hitting over 100,000 has been a grim milestone. The NHS has been nearly overwhelmed and have 1 of the worst death rates in the world. To say we have been lucky is a tad controversial imho. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What really annoys me about the last 10 months is the way people are being conditioned to instantly chastise anything that doesn't fit the narrative, which makes it very difficult to have a healthy discussion with some people. The op made a very clear and concise statement about covid deaths and asked for an opinion on whether or not we think we could be much worse off than we already are right now. I read the same message as everybody else, and at no point did I think he was being insensitive to others who have lost people to covid. At no point did I feel like he was downplaying the covid related death of my cousin a few weeks ago. But some people read the "why is this number seen as negative" and instantly shat themselves in anger. People have responded with hate - "there are no words", "this forum has sunk to a new low" and most comments were just one sentence with no explanation, no opinion, just an instant (and in my opinion, learned) shut down against the op, who was actually offering a somewhat healthy view in these troubled times. The message being - It could be a LOT worse, we all could be dead right NOW. Kudos to the op, there have been a lot of nasty and unnecessary drivel spewed in your direction and I think you are handling it rather well.
Whilst I sort of get the argument that it could have been worse,I think hitting over 100,000 has been a grim milestone.
The NHS has been nearly overwhelmed and have 1 of the worst death rates in the world.
To say we have been lucky is a tad controversial imho."That is simply my view on it. I'm not in any way diminishing the tragedy, at least I didn't intend for that to be what was taken from it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Ive been surrounded by death since I was a very young child, and that continues to this day, don't assume. If you want to cling to the negative side of what my original post said, rather than the actual point of it which was, we could easily be looking at much higher numbers, then you do you. And? Same here. Don't push your own warped ideas around bereavement onto other people, sort you own shit out. I didn't, you're the one telling me my view is wrong because it doesn't fit with yours. You made an assumption, I relied to your assumption. Sort your shit out. " OP, you are literally out here telling people that they should see it as a positive that more people haven't died whilst we are in the middle of a pandemic and people are still dying every day. It's like comforting someone who has just watched their house burn down by saying "well it could be worse" whilst they're still watching the embers simmer away. People are going through collective trauma right now. Just because your solution to that is to tell yourself "well it could be worse" doesn't mean you can expect that to work for other people. No amount of projection will change that. So yes, you really do need to sort your own shit out because your views of death, grief and trauma are clearly warped from past experiences and have left you unable to properly empathise with other human beings experiencing things that you have come to see as normal. That is not your fault and for that you have my empathy, so I hope you can find a healthier way of relating to people on this matter. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Completely sidestepped what I said because it is undeniable. And boosted the number by a couple of thousand even though you claim to be Frontline. And if someone spat in my face for what is undeniable fact they'd have serious problems to deal with right then and there. Saying things could be worse, doesn't diminish the impact of what has already happened. You should try to wrap your head around that notion. Claim? Oh my you are quite something aren’t you... #clapthekeyboardwarrior The filed figures from yesterday stand at 108k... we’ve likely suffered another 1.5k today... pretty sure as a ball park figure that puts my ballpark 110 as fairly accurate. In fact a fuck load more accurate than your 100k. Yes I agree statistically 500k deaths would be a larger figure... as would 111k deaths. But likewise I wouldn’t dare say: “The 1,000,000 Jews killed in the Holocaust could have been worst as 8,500,000 European Jews survived.” I’d have missed the fkn point and belittled a horrific part of history whilst offending ridiculous numbers connected with the Jewish population of that time... A bit like your uniformed post does for our horrific tally." For your information, 6 million Jews were killed in the holocaust | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"OP, you are literally out here telling people that they should see it as a positive that more people haven't died whilst we are in the middle of a pandemic and people are still dying every day." He is literally NOT doing what you just said he did. He has LITERALLY only asked for YOUR OPINION!!!! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Ive been surrounded by death since I was a very young child, and that continues to this day, don't assume. If you want to cling to the negative side of what my original post said, rather than the actual point of it which was, we could easily be looking at much higher numbers, then you do you. And? Same here. Don't push your own warped ideas around bereavement onto other people, sort you own shit out. I didn't, you're the one telling me my view is wrong because it doesn't fit with yours. You made an assumption, I relied to your assumption. Sort your shit out. OP, you are literally out here telling people that they should see it as a positive that more people haven't died whilst we are in the middle of a pandemic and people are still dying every day. It's like comforting someone who has just watched their house burn down by saying "well it could be worse" whilst they're still watching the embers simmer away. People are going through collective trauma right now. Just because your solution to that is to tell yourself "well it could be worse" doesn't mean you can expect that to work for other people. No amount of projection will change that. So yes, you really do need to sort your own shit out because your views of death, grief and trauma are clearly warped from past experiences and have left you unable to properly empathise with other human beings experiencing things that you have come to see as normal. That is not your fault and for that you have my empathy, so I hope you can find a healthier way of relating to people on this matter." I didn't tell anyone anything. I asked a question and gave my own personal view. Everyone is telling me I'm wrong for how I see it. I haven't said that theirs or yours is. I've simply stood up for my own view of things. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"OP, you are literally out here telling people that they should see it as a positive that more people haven't died whilst we are in the middle of a pandemic and people are still dying every day. He is literally NOT doing what you just said he did. He has LITERALLY only asked for YOUR OPINION!!!!" If you repeatedly, dogmatically reiterate a point over and over again whilst failing to consider anything to the contrary, you are not having a discussion, you are forcing your opinion on someone else. Their opinion is also morally reprehensible and dismissive, as they have been told numerous times by many people. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Ive been surrounded by death since I was a very young child, and that continues to this day, don't assume. If you want to cling to the negative side of what my original post said, rather than the actual point of it which was, we could easily be looking at much higher numbers, then you do you. And? Same here. Don't push your own warped ideas around bereavement onto other people, sort you own shit out. I didn't, you're the one telling me my view is wrong because it doesn't fit with yours. You made an assumption, I relied to your assumption. Sort your shit out. OP, you are literally out here telling people that they should see it as a positive that more people haven't died whilst we are in the middle of a pandemic and people are still dying every day. It's like comforting someone who has just watched their house burn down by saying "well it could be worse" whilst they're still watching the embers simmer away. People are going through collective trauma right now. Just because your solution to that is to tell yourself "well it could be worse" doesn't mean you can expect that to work for other people. No amount of projection will change that. So yes, you really do need to sort your own shit out because your views of death, grief and trauma are clearly warped from past experiences and have left you unable to properly empathise with other human beings experiencing things that you have come to see as normal. That is not your fault and for that you have my empathy, so I hope you can find a healthier way of relating to people on this matter." And don't try that shit about having empathy for me, when I replied to your assumption about me and said i had a lot of experience with death you dismissed it with "and?" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Completely sidestepped what I said because it is undeniable. And boosted the number by a couple of thousand even though you claim to be Frontline. And if someone spat in my face for what is undeniable fact they'd have serious problems to deal with right then and there. Saying things could be worse, doesn't diminish the impact of what has already happened. You should try to wrap your head around that notion. Claim? Oh my you are quite something aren’t you... #clapthekeyboardwarrior The filed figures from yesterday stand at 108k... we’ve likely suffered another 1.5k today... pretty sure as a ball park figure that puts my ballpark 110 as fairly accurate. In fact a fuck load more accurate than your 100k. Yes I agree statistically 500k deaths would be a larger figure... as would 111k deaths. But likewise I wouldn’t dare say: “The 1,000,000 Jews killed in the Holocaust could have been worst as 8,500,000 European Jews survived.” I’d have missed the fkn point and belittled a horrific part of history whilst offending ridiculous numbers connected with the Jewish population of that time... A bit like your uniformed post does for our horrific tally. For your information, 6 million Jews were killed in the holocaust" And by 1945, only about 3.5 million Jews were remaining in Europe, from pre War numbers of approx 9.5 million. However, whilst the specific numbers were quite far out, I accept the sentiments under which that poster made them. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I didn't challenge any validity. I've repeatedly said I'm not diminishing the tragedy, but you seem to have a mental block as to my point of view. Which is fair, no one person see things the same. Keep seeing the dark side of things till it consumes you if that's what you want to do. I choose not to. Its a spiral that I'd rather avoid. If you did spit in my face I'd bless you with a different type of vision for someone who claims to be some sort of person involved with this situation professionally, you don't seem too professional.
"What a piece of work. To quote your original and above statement “for someone who claims”... excuse me but how fkn dare you. Seriously, take your opinion elsewhere and don’t even start to tell someone who deals with the very worst of this pandemic on a daily basis how they should think. I’ll take my reassurance from the patients, families and colleagues who’ve respect I’ve earned. I’ll take it as read that the fact I get up every day and have the desire to help those who need it as a sign that I’m not consumed by the darkness... You are to life coaching skills what pablo Escobar was to the international pharmaceutical trade. Your positivity as you term is delusional. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Ive been surrounded by death since I was a very young child, and that continues to this day, don't assume. If you want to cling to the negative side of what my original post said, rather than the actual point of it which was, we could easily be looking at much higher numbers, then you do you. And? Same here. Don't push your own warped ideas around bereavement onto other people, sort you own shit out. I didn't, you're the one telling me my view is wrong because it doesn't fit with yours. You made an assumption, I relied to your assumption. Sort your shit out. OP, you are literally out here telling people that they should see it as a positive that more people haven't died whilst we are in the middle of a pandemic and people are still dying every day. It's like comforting someone who has just watched their house burn down by saying "well it could be worse" whilst they're still watching the embers simmer away. People are going through collective trauma right now. Just because your solution to that is to tell yourself "well it could be worse" doesn't mean you can expect that to work for other people. No amount of projection will change that. So yes, you really do need to sort your own shit out because your views of death, grief and trauma are clearly warped from past experiences and have left you unable to properly empathise with other human beings experiencing things that you have come to see as normal. That is not your fault and for that you have my empathy, so I hope you can find a healthier way of relating to people on this matter. I didn't tell anyone anything. I asked a question and gave my own personal view. Everyone is telling me I'm wrong for how I see it. I haven't said that theirs or yours is. I've simply stood up for my own view of things. " OP, you need to have a good look at what you're saying and how strong you're coming on with it over the course of this thread and think about why it has generated such a strong reaction from people. I have gone through the whole thread and nobody has told you you're "wrong". You have claimed people have said that twice throughout this thread, but nobody has actually said it to you. What I'm suggesting you consider is that your views have been informed by experiences beyond your control, possibly traumatising experiences, and that how you have interpreted and/or coped with those experiences has led you to saying what you have said today and thinking it is a fairly normal perspective to have on 108,000 people dying. And that, possibly, instead of being told it "could be worse", other people have a different way of responding to this situation, and instead choose to deal with it by acknowledging the reality of it - that it is fucking awful. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"OP, you are literally out here telling people that they should see it as a positive that more people haven't died whilst we are in the middle of a pandemic and people are still dying every day. He is literally NOT doing what you just said he did. He has LITERALLY only asked for YOUR OPINION!!!! If you repeatedly, dogmatically reiterate a point over and over again whilst failing to consider anything to the contrary, you are not having a discussion, you are forcing your opinion on someone else. Their opinion is also morally reprehensible and dismissive, as they have been told numerous times by many people." I didn't, I gave MY view and asked a question. I was attacked by some for MY view. The people attacking me for my view are the ones trying to force their view. About spitting on my face and all that shit? How is that me forcing my view on people? It's simply defending my own view. I didn't tell anyone to accept it, I simply gave it and asked a question. You and the ones I've been attacked by are the ones trying to force your view onto me by attacking me for my view. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"OP, you are literally out here telling people that they should see it as a positive that more people haven't died whilst we are in the middle of a pandemic and people are still dying every day. He is literally NOT doing what you just said he did. He has LITERALLY only asked for YOUR OPINION!!!! If you repeatedly, dogmatically reiterate a point over and over again whilst failing to consider anything to the contrary, you are not having a discussion, you are forcing your opinion on someone else. Their opinion is also morally reprehensible and dismissive, as they have been told numerous times by many people." There is a big difference between forcing your opinion on somebody and defending what you're trying to say. At no point is the op suggesting that his original post is the definitive be all and end all..... he is asking people for their opinions! Nobody is obliged to agree with him, but I think it's quite clear that many have misinterpreted what he's saying, or some simply just don't agree with him. Which is fine! You can't dismiss him as simply "repeatedly reinterating a point" when he is having multiple agruments with several people at once! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I didn't challenge any validity. I've repeatedly said I'm not diminishing the tragedy, but you seem to have a mental block as to my point of view. Which is fair, no one person see things the same. Keep seeing the dark side of things till it consumes you if that's what you want to do. I choose not to. Its a spiral that I'd rather avoid. If you did spit in my face I'd bless you with a different type of vision for someone who claims to be some sort of person involved with this situation professionally, you don't seem too professional.
What a piece of work.
To quote your original and above statement “for someone who claims”... excuse me but how fkn dare you.
Seriously, take your opinion elsewhere and don’t even start to tell someone who deals with the very worst of this pandemic on a daily basis how they should think.
I’ll take my reassurance from the patients, families and colleagues who’ve respect I’ve earned. I’ll take it as read that the fact I get up every day and have the desire to help those who need it as a sign that I’m not consumed by the darkness... You are to life coaching skills what pablo Escobar was to the international pharmaceutical trade.
Your positivity as you term is delusional."I don't think you're in a position to call anyone a 'piece of work'. You advocate spitting in someone's face because they dont see things your way ffs  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Ive been surrounded by death since I was a very young child, and that continues to this day, don't assume. If you want to cling to the negative side of what my original post said, rather than the actual point of it which was, we could easily be looking at much higher numbers, then you do you. And? Same here. Don't push your own warped ideas around bereavement onto other people, sort you own shit out. I didn't, you're the one telling me my view is wrong because it doesn't fit with yours. You made an assumption, I relied to your assumption. Sort your shit out. OP, you are literally out here telling people that they should see it as a positive that more people haven't died whilst we are in the middle of a pandemic and people are still dying every day. It's like comforting someone who has just watched their house burn down by saying "well it could be worse" whilst they're still watching the embers simmer away. People are going through collective trauma right now. Just because your solution to that is to tell yourself "well it could be worse" doesn't mean you can expect that to work for other people. No amount of projection will change that. So yes, you really do need to sort your own shit out because your views of death, grief and trauma are clearly warped from past experiences and have left you unable to properly empathise with other human beings experiencing things that you have come to see as normal. That is not your fault and for that you have my empathy, so I hope you can find a healthier way of relating to people on this matter. And don't try that shit about having empathy for me, when I replied to your assumption about me and said i had a lot of experience with death you dismissed it with "and?" " I do have empathy for you. I have empathy with anyone who has experienced death at a young age, especially if it is an abnormal amount of death for a young person to experience. The reason I said "And?" was because I don't believe for a second that it justifies things you have said throughout this thread, and you need to realise much of what you have said and how you have presented your opinion is highly insensitive. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Ive been surrounded by death since I was a very young child, and that continues to this day, don't assume. If you want to cling to the negative side of what my original post said, rather than the actual point of it which was, we could easily be looking at much higher numbers, then you do you. And? Same here. Don't push your own warped ideas around bereavement onto other people, sort you own shit out. I didn't, you're the one telling me my view is wrong because it doesn't fit with yours. You made an assumption, I relied to your assumption. Sort your shit out. OP, you are literally out here telling people that they should see it as a positive that more people haven't died whilst we are in the middle of a pandemic and people are still dying every day. It's like comforting someone who has just watched their house burn down by saying "well it could be worse" whilst they're still watching the embers simmer away. People are going through collective trauma right now. Just because your solution to that is to tell yourself "well it could be worse" doesn't mean you can expect that to work for other people. No amount of projection will change that. So yes, you really do need to sort your own shit out because your views of death, grief and trauma are clearly warped from past experiences and have left you unable to properly empathise with other human beings experiencing things that you have come to see as normal. That is not your fault and for that you have my empathy, so I hope you can find a healthier way of relating to people on this matter. I didn't tell anyone anything. I asked a question and gave my own personal view. Everyone is telling me I'm wrong for how I see it. I haven't said that theirs or yours is. I've simply stood up for my own view of things. OP, you need to have a good look at what you're saying and how strong you're coming on with it over the course of this thread and think about why it has generated such a strong reaction from people. I have gone through the whole thread and nobody has told you you're "wrong". You have claimed people have said that twice throughout this thread, but nobody has actually said it to you. What I'm suggesting you consider is that your views have been informed by experiences beyond your control, possibly traumatising experiences, and that how you have interpreted and/or coped with those experiences has led you to saying what you have said today and thinking it is a fairly normal perspective to have on 108,000 people dying. And that, possibly, instead of being told it "could be worse", other people have a different way of responding to this situation, and instead choose to deal with it by acknowledging the reality of it - that it is fucking awful." What is telling me my view is morally reprehensible and claiming they'd spit in my face for my view if it isnt telling me I'm wrong and despicable for my view? Which was simply looking at it from a positive view. Which I acknowledged several times is a different viewpoint! And said over and over that my intent was not to diminish the deaths. My original post was simply my view and a question. And I was attacked for it and made out to be scum because I looked at it from a different angle? How was I the one coming on strong? You expect me not to react to people making out I'm a piece of shit? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"OP, you are literally out here telling people that they should see it as a positive that more people haven't died whilst we are in the middle of a pandemic and people are still dying every day. He is literally NOT doing what you just said he did. He has LITERALLY only asked for YOUR OPINION!!!! If you repeatedly, dogmatically reiterate a point over and over again whilst failing to consider anything to the contrary, you are not having a discussion, you are forcing your opinion on someone else. Their opinion is also morally reprehensible and dismissive, as they have been told numerous times by many people. There is a big difference between forcing your opinion on somebody and defending what you're trying to say. At no point is the op suggesting that his original post is the definitive be all and end all..... he is asking people for their opinions! Nobody is obliged to agree with him, but I think it's quite clear that many have misinterpreted what he's saying, or some simply just don't agree with him. Which is fine! You can't dismiss him as simply "repeatedly reinterating a point" when he is having multiple agruments with several people at once!" I agree, there is a big difference between forcing your opinion on somebody and defending what you're trying to say. They are doing the former. Well, I can when they are repeatedly reiterating a point without considering anything anyone else has to say. That in itself is dismissive. They've been given both statistical and anecdotal evidence on why their opinion on this is crass and insensitive and have ignored all of it whilst reiterating their own point over and over again. I don't know what planet you've been living for the past however many years you've been alive, but usually when someone says something crass and insensitive people don't tend to go "I don't agree with you there old chap, but I do wish you a good day. Tally ho!" This is real life, not some polite Victorian handlebar moustache fantasy. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I didn't challenge any validity. I've repeatedly said I'm not diminishing the tragedy, but you seem to have a mental block as to my point of view. Which is fair, no one person see things the same. Keep seeing the dark side of things till it consumes you if that's what you want to do. I choose not to. Its a spiral that I'd rather avoid. If you did spit in my face I'd bless you with a different type of vision for someone who claims to be some sort of person involved with this situation professionally, you don't seem too professional.
What a piece of work.
To quote your original and above statement “for someone who claims”... excuse me but how fkn dare you.
Seriously, take your opinion elsewhere and don’t even start to tell someone who deals with the very worst of this pandemic on a daily basis how they should think.
I’ll take my reassurance from the patients, families and colleagues who’ve respect I’ve earned. I’ll take it as read that the fact I get up every day and have the desire to help those who need it as a sign that I’m not consumed by the darkness... You are to life coaching skills what pablo Escobar was to the international pharmaceutical trade.
Your positivity as you term is delusional."I didn't tell you anything, you read what I said and tried telling me how to think and saying you'd spit in my face because I looked at it from a positive angle. Don't think just because you claim to be something that I'll believe you and if you are it doesn't give you some fucking moral highground to talk to people however the fuck you want because their view isn't yours. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"OP, you are literally out here telling people that they should see it as a positive that more people haven't died whilst we are in the middle of a pandemic and people are still dying every day. He is literally NOT doing what you just said he did. He has LITERALLY only asked for YOUR OPINION!!!! If you repeatedly, dogmatically reiterate a point over and over again whilst failing to consider anything to the contrary, you are not having a discussion, you are forcing your opinion on someone else. Their opinion is also morally reprehensible and dismissive, as they have been told numerous times by many people. There is a big difference between forcing your opinion on somebody and defending what you're trying to say. At no point is the op suggesting that his original post is the definitive be all and end all..... he is asking people for their opinions! Nobody is obliged to agree with him, but I think it's quite clear that many have misinterpreted what he's saying, or some simply just don't agree with him. Which is fine! You can't dismiss him as simply "repeatedly reinterating a point" when he is having multiple agruments with several people at once! I agree, there is a big difference between forcing your opinion on somebody and defending what you're trying to say. They are doing the former. Well, I can when they are repeatedly reiterating a point without considering anything anyone else has to say. That in itself is dismissive. They've been given both statistical and anecdotal evidence on why their opinion on this is crass and insensitive and have ignored all of it whilst reiterating their own point over and over again. I don't know what planet you've been living for the past however many years you've been alive, but usually when someone says something crass and insensitive people don't tend to go "I don't agree with you there old chap, but I do wish you a good day. Tally ho!" This is real life, not some polite Victorian handlebar moustache fantasy." None of that evidence was relevant to my post? I never said anything about it not being bad, I never said fuck the deaths, they don't matter... I simply gave the positive of a tragic situation. And you, and a few others took that as an opportunity to attack me for my view. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Ive been surrounded by death since I was a very young child, and that continues to this day, don't assume. If you want to cling to the negative side of what my original post said, rather than the actual point of it which was, we could easily be looking at much higher numbers, then you do you. And? Same here. Don't push your own warped ideas around bereavement onto other people, sort you own shit out. I didn't, you're the one telling me my view is wrong because it doesn't fit with yours. You made an assumption, I relied to your assumption. Sort your shit out. OP, you are literally out here telling people that they should see it as a positive that more people haven't died whilst we are in the middle of a pandemic and people are still dying every day. It's like comforting someone who has just watched their house burn down by saying "well it could be worse" whilst they're still watching the embers simmer away. People are going through collective trauma right now. Just because your solution to that is to tell yourself "well it could be worse" doesn't mean you can expect that to work for other people. No amount of projection will change that. So yes, you really do need to sort your own shit out because your views of death, grief and trauma are clearly warped from past experiences and have left you unable to properly empathise with other human beings experiencing things that you have come to see as normal. That is not your fault and for that you have my empathy, so I hope you can find a healthier way of relating to people on this matter. I didn't tell anyone anything. I asked a question and gave my own personal view. Everyone is telling me I'm wrong for how I see it. I haven't said that theirs or yours is. I've simply stood up for my own view of things. OP, you need to have a good look at what you're saying and how strong you're coming on with it over the course of this thread and think about why it has generated such a strong reaction from people. I have gone through the whole thread and nobody has told you you're "wrong". You have claimed people have said that twice throughout this thread, but nobody has actually said it to you. What I'm suggesting you consider is that your views have been informed by experiences beyond your control, possibly traumatising experiences, and that how you have interpreted and/or coped with those experiences has led you to saying what you have said today and thinking it is a fairly normal perspective to have on 108,000 people dying. And that, possibly, instead of being told it "could be worse", other people have a different way of responding to this situation, and instead choose to deal with it by acknowledging the reality of it - that it is fucking awful. What is telling me my view is morally reprehensible and claiming they'd spit in my face for my view if it isnt telling me I'm wrong and despicable for my view? Which was simply looking at it from a positive view. Which I acknowledged several times is a different viewpoint! And said over and over that my intent was not to diminish the deaths. My original post was simply my view and a question. And I was attacked for it and made out to be scum because I looked at it from a different angle? How was I the one coming on strong? You expect me not to react to people making out I'm a piece of shit? " Your view is morally reprehensible. I empathise with where it comes from, but not with the unapologetic expression of that view at a time when people's lives are still being impacted by Coronavirus on a daily basis. I never called *you* despicable, nor did I "make out you were a piece of shit, nor did I threaten to spit in your face". I'm not responsible for what other people say to you. I don't believe for a second that you don't understand, on at least some level, why people have reacted badly to what you have said. This isn't just a case of to 'thinking differently' no matter how much you tell yourself it is, it's about you saying something - and saying it in a manner - that was inflammatory. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Ive been surrounded by death since I was a very young child, and that continues to this day, don't assume. If you want to cling to the negative side of what my original post said, rather than the actual point of it which was, we could easily be looking at much higher numbers, then you do you. And? Same here. Don't push your own warped ideas around bereavement onto other people, sort you own shit out. I didn't, you're the one telling me my view is wrong because it doesn't fit with yours. You made an assumption, I relied to your assumption. Sort your shit out. OP, you are literally out here telling people that they should see it as a positive that more people haven't died whilst we are in the middle of a pandemic and people are still dying every day. It's like comforting someone who has just watched their house burn down by saying "well it could be worse" whilst they're still watching the embers simmer away. People are going through collective trauma right now. Just because your solution to that is to tell yourself "well it could be worse" doesn't mean you can expect that to work for other people. No amount of projection will change that. So yes, you really do need to sort your own shit out because your views of death, grief and trauma are clearly warped from past experiences and have left you unable to properly empathise with other human beings experiencing things that you have come to see as normal. That is not your fault and for that you have my empathy, so I hope you can find a healthier way of relating to people on this matter. I didn't tell anyone anything. I asked a question and gave my own personal view. Everyone is telling me I'm wrong for how I see it. I haven't said that theirs or yours is. I've simply stood up for my own view of things. OP, you need to have a good look at what you're saying and how strong you're coming on with it over the course of this thread and think about why it has generated such a strong reaction from people. I have gone through the whole thread and nobody has told you you're "wrong". You have claimed people have said that twice throughout this thread, but nobody has actually said it to you. What I'm suggesting you consider is that your views have been informed by experiences beyond your control, possibly traumatising experiences, and that how you have interpreted and/or coped with those experiences has led you to saying what you have said today and thinking it is a fairly normal perspective to have on 108,000 people dying. And that, possibly, instead of being told it "could be worse", other people have a different way of responding to this situation, and instead choose to deal with it by acknowledging the reality of it - that it is fucking awful. What is telling me my view is morally reprehensible and claiming they'd spit in my face for my view if it isnt telling me I'm wrong and despicable for my view? Which was simply looking at it from a positive view. Which I acknowledged several times is a different viewpoint! And said over and over that my intent was not to diminish the deaths. My original post was simply my view and a question. And I was attacked for it and made out to be scum because I looked at it from a different angle? How was I the one coming on strong? You expect me not to react to people making out I'm a piece of shit? Your view is morally reprehensible. I empathise with where it comes from, but not with the unapologetic expression of that view at a time when people's lives are still being impacted by Coronavirus on a daily basis. I never called *you* despicable, nor did I "make out you were a piece of shit, nor did I threaten to spit in your face". I'm not responsible for what other people say to you. I don't believe for a second that you don't understand, on at least some level, why people have reacted badly to what you have said. This isn't just a case of to 'thinking differently' no matter how much you tell yourself it is, it's about you saying something - and saying it in a manner - that was inflammatory." If my posing a more positive view on a tragic situation where people are faced everyday with darkness with no end in sight, just surrounded by more and more darkness, makes me morally reprehensible in your eyes, then there's something wrong with you, not me. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I agree, there is a big difference between forcing your opinion on somebody and defending what you're trying to say. They are doing the former. Well, I can when they are repeatedly reiterating a point without considering anything anyone else has to say. That in itself is dismissive. They've been given both statistical and anecdotal evidence on why their opinion on this is crass and insensitive and have ignored all of it whilst reiterating their own point over and over again. I don't know what planet you've been living for the past however many years you've been alive, but usually when someone says something crass and insensitive people don't tend to go "I don't agree with you there old chap, but I do wish you a good day. Tally ho!" This is real life, not some polite Victorian handlebar moustache fantasy." I don't think that there is anything at all crass and insensitive about his original post, and I'm not the only one. We both don't agree with this and that's ok. Have a good night yourself and stay safe | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Ive been surrounded by death since I was a very young child, and that continues to this day, don't assume. If you want to cling to the negative side of what my original post said, rather than the actual point of it which was, we could easily be looking at much higher numbers, then you do you. And? Same here. Don't push your own warped ideas around bereavement onto other people, sort you own shit out. I didn't, you're the one telling me my view is wrong because it doesn't fit with yours. You made an assumption, I relied to your assumption. Sort your shit out. OP, you are literally out here telling people that they should see it as a positive that more people haven't died whilst we are in the middle of a pandemic and people are still dying every day. It's like comforting someone who has just watched their house burn down by saying "well it could be worse" whilst they're still watching the embers simmer away. People are going through collective trauma right now. Just because your solution to that is to tell yourself "well it could be worse" doesn't mean you can expect that to work for other people. No amount of projection will change that. So yes, you really do need to sort your own shit out because your views of death, grief and trauma are clearly warped from past experiences and have left you unable to properly empathise with other human beings experiencing things that you have come to see as normal. That is not your fault and for that you have my empathy, so I hope you can find a healthier way of relating to people on this matter. I didn't tell anyone anything. I asked a question and gave my own personal view. Everyone is telling me I'm wrong for how I see it. I haven't said that theirs or yours is. I've simply stood up for my own view of things. OP, you need to have a good look at what you're saying and how strong you're coming on with it over the course of this thread and think about why it has generated such a strong reaction from people. I have gone through the whole thread and nobody has told you you're "wrong". You have claimed people have said that twice throughout this thread, but nobody has actually said it to you. What I'm suggesting you consider is that your views have been informed by experiences beyond your control, possibly traumatising experiences, and that how you have interpreted and/or coped with those experiences has led you to saying what you have said today and thinking it is a fairly normal perspective to have on 108,000 people dying. And that, possibly, instead of being told it "could be worse", other people have a different way of responding to this situation, and instead choose to deal with it by acknowledging the reality of it - that it is fucking awful. What is telling me my view is morally reprehensible and claiming they'd spit in my face for my view if it isnt telling me I'm wrong and despicable for my view? Which was simply looking at it from a positive view. Which I acknowledged several times is a different viewpoint! And said over and over that my intent was not to diminish the deaths. My original post was simply my view and a question. And I was attacked for it and made out to be scum because I looked at it from a different angle? How was I the one coming on strong? You expect me not to react to people making out I'm a piece of shit? Your view is morally reprehensible. I empathise with where it comes from, but not with the unapologetic expression of that view at a time when people's lives are still being impacted by Coronavirus on a daily basis. I never called *you* despicable, nor did I "make out you were a piece of shit, nor did I threaten to spit in your face". I'm not responsible for what other people say to you. I don't believe for a second that you don't understand, on at least some level, why people have reacted badly to what you have said. This isn't just a case of to 'thinking differently' no matter how much you tell yourself it is, it's about you saying something - and saying it in a manner - that was inflammatory." Funny how you are dictating to me and the people that didn't react the way you have and don't agree with you that we are the problem. That we can't have a different point of view. Because it doesn't fit yours. And yet I'm the one forcing views on people. Jog on. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Ive been surrounded by death since I was a very young child, and that continues to this day, don't assume. If you want to cling to the negative side of what my original post said, rather than the actual point of it which was, we could easily be looking at much higher numbers, then you do you. And? Same here. Don't push your own warped ideas around bereavement onto other people, sort you own shit out. I didn't, you're the one telling me my view is wrong because it doesn't fit with yours. You made an assumption, I relied to your assumption. Sort your shit out. OP, you are literally out here telling people that they should see it as a positive that more people haven't died whilst we are in the middle of a pandemic and people are still dying every day. It's like comforting someone who has just watched their house burn down by saying "well it could be worse" whilst they're still watching the embers simmer away. People are going through collective trauma right now. Just because your solution to that is to tell yourself "well it could be worse" doesn't mean you can expect that to work for other people. No amount of projection will change that. So yes, you really do need to sort your own shit out because your views of death, grief and trauma are clearly warped from past experiences and have left you unable to properly empathise with other human beings experiencing things that you have come to see as normal. That is not your fault and for that you have my empathy, so I hope you can find a healthier way of relating to people on this matter. I didn't tell anyone anything. I asked a question and gave my own personal view. Everyone is telling me I'm wrong for how I see it. I haven't said that theirs or yours is. I've simply stood up for my own view of things. OP, you need to have a good look at what you're saying and how strong you're coming on with it over the course of this thread and think about why it has generated such a strong reaction from people. I have gone through the whole thread and nobody has told you you're "wrong". You have claimed people have said that twice throughout this thread, but nobody has actually said it to you. What I'm suggesting you consider is that your views have been informed by experiences beyond your control, possibly traumatising experiences, and that how you have interpreted and/or coped with those experiences has led you to saying what you have said today and thinking it is a fairly normal perspective to have on 108,000 people dying. And that, possibly, instead of being told it "could be worse", other people have a different way of responding to this situation, and instead choose to deal with it by acknowledging the reality of it - that it is fucking awful. What is telling me my view is morally reprehensible and claiming they'd spit in my face for my view if it isnt telling me I'm wrong and despicable for my view? Which was simply looking at it from a positive view. Which I acknowledged several times is a different viewpoint! And said over and over that my intent was not to diminish the deaths. My original post was simply my view and a question. And I was attacked for it and made out to be scum because I looked at it from a different angle? How was I the one coming on strong? You expect me not to react to people making out I'm a piece of shit? " Was not your intent... yet you did so yet lack the humility to retract, apologise or realise the affect you could have on people on this site. I don’t know why your surprised that I would support someone who’s lost a mum, dad, husband, child etc wanting to spit in your face for your stance and belittlement of their tragedy... heck if it was me I’m very happy to say my reaction would be far stronger. You should consider the number of people on this site, you should consider how many people on here have been directly affected by this pandemic in the very worst of ways. Insensitive is one word, I’d probably choose another. Goodnight | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just saying.....I wouldn't believe these numbers for a minute. Not doubting some have died of Covid but the fact soneone can die in many other ways and be labelled a Covid death because of a positive test within a 28 day window is mystifying "I'm sure they have a very good reason for inflating the death rate,making them look even more incompetent. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Ive been surrounded by death since I was a very young child, and that continues to this day, don't assume. If you want to cling to the negative side of what my original post said, rather than the actual point of it which was, we could easily be looking at much higher numbers, then you do you. And? Same here. Don't push your own warped ideas around bereavement onto other people, sort you own shit out. I didn't, you're the one telling me my view is wrong because it doesn't fit with yours. You made an assumption, I relied to your assumption. Sort your shit out. OP, you are literally out here telling people that they should see it as a positive that more people haven't died whilst we are in the middle of a pandemic and people are still dying every day. It's like comforting someone who has just watched their house burn down by saying "well it could be worse" whilst they're still watching the embers simmer away. People are going through collective trauma right now. Just because your solution to that is to tell yourself "well it could be worse" doesn't mean you can expect that to work for other people. No amount of projection will change that. So yes, you really do need to sort your own shit out because your views of death, grief and trauma are clearly warped from past experiences and have left you unable to properly empathise with other human beings experiencing things that you have come to see as normal. That is not your fault and for that you have my empathy, so I hope you can find a healthier way of relating to people on this matter. I didn't tell anyone anything. I asked a question and gave my own personal view. Everyone is telling me I'm wrong for how I see it. I haven't said that theirs or yours is. I've simply stood up for my own view of things. OP, you need to have a good look at what you're saying and how strong you're coming on with it over the course of this thread and think about why it has generated such a strong reaction from people. I have gone through the whole thread and nobody has told you you're "wrong". You have claimed people have said that twice throughout this thread, but nobody has actually said it to you. What I'm suggesting you consider is that your views have been informed by experiences beyond your control, possibly traumatising experiences, and that how you have interpreted and/or coped with those experiences has led you to saying what you have said today and thinking it is a fairly normal perspective to have on 108,000 people dying. And that, possibly, instead of being told it "could be worse", other people have a different way of responding to this situation, and instead choose to deal with it by acknowledging the reality of it - that it is fucking awful. What is telling me my view is morally reprehensible and claiming they'd spit in my face for my view if it isnt telling me I'm wrong and despicable for my view? Which was simply looking at it from a positive view. Which I acknowledged several times is a different viewpoint! And said over and over that my intent was not to diminish the deaths. My original post was simply my view and a question. And I was attacked for it and made out to be scum because I looked at it from a different angle? How was I the one coming on strong? You expect me not to react to people making out I'm a piece of shit? Your view is morally reprehensible. I empathise with where it comes from, but not with the unapologetic expression of that view at a time when people's lives are still being impacted by Coronavirus on a daily basis. I never called *you* despicable, nor did I "make out you were a piece of shit, nor did I threaten to spit in your face". I'm not responsible for what other people say to you. I don't believe for a second that you don't understand, on at least some level, why people have reacted badly to what you have said. This isn't just a case of to 'thinking differently' no matter how much you tell yourself it is, it's about you saying something - and saying it in a manner - that was inflammatory. Funny how you are dictating to me and the people that didn't react the way you have and don't agree with you that we are the problem. That we can't have a different point of view. Because it doesn't fit yours. And yet I'm the one forcing views on people. Jog on. " The reality is that there are healthy and unhealthy ways to react to things. That isn't 'my opinion' that is something backed up by medical science and psychology. If your reaction leaves you unable to relate to those around you, that is a sign of an unhealthy reaction. Enjoy your night. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Ive been surrounded by death since I was a very young child, and that continues to this day, don't assume. If you want to cling to the negative side of what my original post said, rather than the actual point of it which was, we could easily be looking at much higher numbers, then you do you. And? Same here. Don't push your own warped ideas around bereavement onto other people, sort you own shit out. I didn't, you're the one telling me my view is wrong because it doesn't fit with yours. You made an assumption, I relied to your assumption. Sort your shit out. OP, you are literally out here telling people that they should see it as a positive that more people haven't died whilst we are in the middle of a pandemic and people are still dying every day. It's like comforting someone who has just watched their house burn down by saying "well it could be worse" whilst they're still watching the embers simmer away. People are going through collective trauma right now. Just because your solution to that is to tell yourself "well it could be worse" doesn't mean you can expect that to work for other people. No amount of projection will change that. So yes, you really do need to sort your own shit out because your views of death, grief and trauma are clearly warped from past experiences and have left you unable to properly empathise with other human beings experiencing things that you have come to see as normal. That is not your fault and for that you have my empathy, so I hope you can find a healthier way of relating to people on this matter. I didn't tell anyone anything. I asked a question and gave my own personal view. Everyone is telling me I'm wrong for how I see it. I haven't said that theirs or yours is. I've simply stood up for my own view of things. OP, you need to have a good look at what you're saying and how strong you're coming on with it over the course of this thread and think about why it has generated such a strong reaction from people. I have gone through the whole thread and nobody has told you you're "wrong". You have claimed people have said that twice throughout this thread, but nobody has actually said it to you. What I'm suggesting you consider is that your views have been informed by experiences beyond your control, possibly traumatising experiences, and that how you have interpreted and/or coped with those experiences has led you to saying what you have said today and thinking it is a fairly normal perspective to have on 108,000 people dying. And that, possibly, instead of being told it "could be worse", other people have a different way of responding to this situation, and instead choose to deal with it by acknowledging the reality of it - that it is fucking awful. What is telling me my view is morally reprehensible and claiming they'd spit in my face for my view if it isnt telling me I'm wrong and despicable for my view? Which was simply looking at it from a positive view. Which I acknowledged several times is a different viewpoint! And said over and over that my intent was not to diminish the deaths. My original post was simply my view and a question. And I was attacked for it and made out to be scum because I looked at it from a different angle? How was I the one coming on strong? You expect me not to react to people making out I'm a piece of shit? Was not your intent... yet you did so yet lack the humility to retract, apologise or realise the affect you could have on people on this site. I don’t know why your surprised that I would support someone who’s lost a mum, dad, husband, child etc wanting to spit in your face for your stance and belittlement of their tragedy... heck if it was me I’m very happy to say my reaction would be far stronger. You should consider the number of people on this site, you should consider how many people on here have been directly affected by this pandemic in the very worst of ways. Insensitive is one word, I’d probably choose another. Goodnight " Why would I apologise for my own view? That did literally none of the things you claim it did. No belittlement, no diminishing, no dismissal... I gave a positive view instead of a negative view and asked a question. How you took that is your problem. Have whatever reaction you want. You say these things online but I'd wager in real life it'd be different, like most. Just know that if you react like that to things you don't agree with for the rest of your life you're going to end up in serious problems. And if you do really work where you say you do, you really shouldn't with the way you handle yourself outside of it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Ive been surrounded by death since I was a very young child, and that continues to this day, don't assume. If you want to cling to the negative side of what my original post said, rather than the actual point of it which was, we could easily be looking at much higher numbers, then you do you. And? Same here. Don't push your own warped ideas around bereavement onto other people, sort you own shit out. I didn't, you're the one telling me my view is wrong because it doesn't fit with yours. You made an assumption, I relied to your assumption. Sort your shit out. OP, you are literally out here telling people that they should see it as a positive that more people haven't died whilst we are in the middle of a pandemic and people are still dying every day. It's like comforting someone who has just watched their house burn down by saying "well it could be worse" whilst they're still watching the embers simmer away. People are going through collective trauma right now. Just because your solution to that is to tell yourself "well it could be worse" doesn't mean you can expect that to work for other people. No amount of projection will change that. So yes, you really do need to sort your own shit out because your views of death, grief and trauma are clearly warped from past experiences and have left you unable to properly empathise with other human beings experiencing things that you have come to see as normal. That is not your fault and for that you have my empathy, so I hope you can find a healthier way of relating to people on this matter. I didn't tell anyone anything. I asked a question and gave my own personal view. Everyone is telling me I'm wrong for how I see it. I haven't said that theirs or yours is. I've simply stood up for my own view of things. OP, you need to have a good look at what you're saying and how strong you're coming on with it over the course of this thread and think about why it has generated such a strong reaction from people. I have gone through the whole thread and nobody has told you you're "wrong". You have claimed people have said that twice throughout this thread, but nobody has actually said it to you. What I'm suggesting you consider is that your views have been informed by experiences beyond your control, possibly traumatising experiences, and that how you have interpreted and/or coped with those experiences has led you to saying what you have said today and thinking it is a fairly normal perspective to have on 108,000 people dying. And that, possibly, instead of being told it "could be worse", other people have a different way of responding to this situation, and instead choose to deal with it by acknowledging the reality of it - that it is fucking awful. What is telling me my view is morally reprehensible and claiming they'd spit in my face for my view if it isnt telling me I'm wrong and despicable for my view? Which was simply looking at it from a positive view. Which I acknowledged several times is a different viewpoint! And said over and over that my intent was not to diminish the deaths. My original post was simply my view and a question. And I was attacked for it and made out to be scum because I looked at it from a different angle? How was I the one coming on strong? You expect me not to react to people making out I'm a piece of shit? Your view is morally reprehensible. I empathise with where it comes from, but not with the unapologetic expression of that view at a time when people's lives are still being impacted by Coronavirus on a daily basis. I never called *you* despicable, nor did I "make out you were a piece of shit, nor did I threaten to spit in your face". I'm not responsible for what other people say to you. I don't believe for a second that you don't understand, on at least some level, why people have reacted badly to what you have said. This isn't just a case of to 'thinking differently' no matter how much you tell yourself it is, it's about you saying something - and saying it in a manner - that was inflammatory. Funny how you are dictating to me and the people that didn't react the way you have and don't agree with you that we are the problem. That we can't have a different point of view. Because it doesn't fit yours. And yet I'm the one forcing views on people. Jog on. The reality is that there are healthy and unhealthy ways to react to things. That isn't 'my opinion' that is something backed up by medical science and psychology. If your reaction leaves you unable to relate to those around you, that is a sign of an unhealthy reaction. Enjoy your night." Take your own fucking advise, you reacted to my view in a negative way. I haven't had an issue relating to the many people on here who didn't attack me for my view and simply said that they disagreed? I didn't end up in an argument with them. Why? Because I can understand that my positive angle is not a common view by a long shot. And I wouldn't attack them because they don't agree with my view. Because unlike you and the ones who've been attacking me, I know how to conduct myself like an adult and accept that everyone views things differently. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Why would I apologise for my own view? " That’s the difference between us... regardless of my beliefs if I hit the wrong chord with people and had no intent with my words I’d apologise. Call it caring, call it my vocation perhaps but the reality is knowing I had intentionally or unintentionally caused hurt to someone would bother me, causing it to people who are suffering from loss would make me feel quite ashamed. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Why would I apologise for my own view? That’s the difference between us... regardless of my beliefs if I hit the wrong chord with people and had no intent with my words I’d apologise. Call it caring, call it my vocation perhaps but the reality is knowing I had intentionally or unintentionally caused hurt to someone would bother me, causing it to people who are suffering from loss would make me feel quite ashamed." Fuck off, nothing I originally said was meant to be taken the way you took it, and definitely didn't deserve the shit you said. Everyone that simply disagreed with me, I didn't belittle them or tell them their view point was wrong or attack them for it. Nothing I said in that post was in any way deserving of the way you reacted. If you'd have simply disagreed with me, then that's fine, I posed a positive angle and asked for opinions, and of course I'll get opposing views, thats par for the course. And I respected every single one that wasn't delivered in the way you did yours. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Why would I apologise for my own view? That’s the difference between us... regardless of my beliefs if I hit the wrong chord with people and had no intent with my words I’d apologise. Call it caring, call it my vocation perhaps but the reality is knowing I had intentionally or unintentionally caused hurt to someone would bother me, causing it to people who are suffering from loss would make me feel quite ashamed. Fuck off, nothing I originally said was meant to be taken the way you took it, and definitely didn't deserve the shit you said. Everyone that simply disagreed with me, I didn't belittle them or tell them their view point was wrong or attack them for it. Nothing I said in that post was in any way deserving of the way you reacted. If you'd have simply disagreed with me, then that's fine, I posed a positive angle and asked for opinions, and of course I'll get opposing views, thats par for the course. And I respected every single one that wasn't delivered in the way you did yours. " Don’t make it singular... plenty of people have posted in disagreement to your pie in the sky outlook. And read back... I wouldn’t waste my spit on you, I’d fully endorse any of the victims families who chose to do so... I’m sure there would be plenty. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Why would I apologise for my own view? That’s the difference between us... regardless of my beliefs if I hit the wrong chord with people and had no intent with my words I’d apologise. Call it caring, call it my vocation perhaps but the reality is knowing I had intentionally or unintentionally caused hurt to someone would bother me, causing it to people who are suffering from loss would make me feel quite ashamed. Fuck off, nothing I originally said was meant to be taken the way you took it, and definitely didn't deserve the shit you said. Everyone that simply disagreed with me, I didn't belittle them or tell them their view point was wrong or attack them for it. Nothing I said in that post was in any way deserving of the way you reacted. If you'd have simply disagreed with me, then that's fine, I posed a positive angle and asked for opinions, and of course I'll get opposing views, thats par for the course. And I respected every single one that wasn't delivered in the way you did yours. " 
Whats positive about hundreds of people dying before their time, and devastated families? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You are openly telling those who have suffered loss that they should be positive. You are openly saying you have a better knowledge of how to deal with mental stress and trauma that myself and my colleagues have to live with every single day. Sorry, you’re not qualified to do either, you’re not the fucking messiah and you obviously have zero insight into either reality." No I didn't. Read my original post again. I gave my own alternate view, the clue was in the word PERSONALLY. I never said that it wasnt a tragedy and that the death count was something to be dismissed. I never dismissed people who have died nor the people that have been left behind. I never would. I was simply saying that I believe we are lucky in the sense that we aren't seeing the people who have survived making that number far worse. Look, I am sorry that I upset you. I honestly didn't mean to. And my intention was not to rubbish the loss of anyone. Or to diminish this tragedy. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Why would I apologise for my own view? That’s the difference between us... regardless of my beliefs if I hit the wrong chord with people and had no intent with my words I’d apologise. Call it caring, call it my vocation perhaps but the reality is knowing I had intentionally or unintentionally caused hurt to someone would bother me, causing it to people who are suffering from loss would make me feel quite ashamed. Fuck off, nothing I originally said was meant to be taken the way you took it, and definitely didn't deserve the shit you said. Everyone that simply disagreed with me, I didn't belittle them or tell them their view point was wrong or attack them for it. Nothing I said in that post was in any way deserving of the way you reacted. If you'd have simply disagreed with me, then that's fine, I posed a positive angle and asked for opinions, and of course I'll get opposing views, thats par for the course. And I respected every single one that wasn't delivered in the way you did yours.
Whats positive about hundreds of people dying before their time, and devastated families?"Read the original post, that's not what I said. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We just lost a close family friend... his mum and his dad all within a few days.. to covid... "As you know, my Grandad and my stepfather died of Covid within a week of each other. This Monday and last. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I’ve changed my profile pic just so people can view your “so called front line worker” in context... Like I said... you’ve not earned the right to tell myself, other workers or victims families how they should think." You don't know what I've earned. And I didn't tell anyone what to think. I gave my own alternate view. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Why would I apologise for my own view? That’s the difference between us... regardless of my beliefs if I hit the wrong chord with people and had no intent with my words I’d apologise. Call it caring, call it my vocation perhaps but the reality is knowing I had intentionally or unintentionally caused hurt to someone would bother me, causing it to people who are suffering from loss would make me feel quite ashamed. Fuck off, nothing I originally said was meant to be taken the way you took it, and definitely didn't deserve the shit you said. Everyone that simply disagreed with me, I didn't belittle them or tell them their view point was wrong or attack them for it. Nothing I said in that post was in any way deserving of the way you reacted. If you'd have simply disagreed with me, then that's fine, I posed a positive angle and asked for opinions, and of course I'll get opposing views, thats par for the course. And I respected every single one that wasn't delivered in the way you did yours.
Whats positive about hundreds of people dying before their time, and devastated families?
Read the original post, that's not what I said. ""I posed a positive angle" is what you said | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Why would I apologise for my own view? That’s the difference between us... regardless of my beliefs if I hit the wrong chord with people and had no intent with my words I’d apologise. Call it caring, call it my vocation perhaps but the reality is knowing I had intentionally or unintentionally caused hurt to someone would bother me, causing it to people who are suffering from loss would make me feel quite ashamed. Fuck off, nothing I originally said was meant to be taken the way you took it, and definitely didn't deserve the shit you said. Everyone that simply disagreed with me, I didn't belittle them or tell them their view point was wrong or attack them for it. Nothing I said in that post was in any way deserving of the way you reacted. If you'd have simply disagreed with me, then that's fine, I posed a positive angle and asked for opinions, and of course I'll get opposing views, thats par for the course. And I respected every single one that wasn't delivered in the way you did yours.
Whats positive about hundreds of people dying before their time, and devastated families?
Read the original post, that's not what I said.
"I posed a positive angle" is what you said"In my original post, I simply posed that I believe this situation could easily have been far far worse. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You are openly telling those who have suffered loss that they should be positive." Can you please show me a quote where the op has explicitly stated that he is telling people how they should feel or think? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I was simply saying that I believe we are lucky in the sense that we aren't seeing the people who have survived making that number far worse. Look, I am sorry that I upset you. I honestly didn't mean to. And my intention was not to rubbish the loss of anyone. Or to diminish this tragedy. " 
You have no concept of how the survivors are. You think people off ventilation missing months of their lives with long term, life changing damage are feeling lucky?
The moment people stop dumbing down this pandemic to lived or died statistics is the day they’ll truly understand the suffering that’s gone on, the damage done and the legacy which we’ll see for decades ahead.
You’re welcome to your PERSONAL view... if for whatever reason you want to publish it to a public forum perhaps understand those with a better insight and understanding are also welcome to rubbish it. By posting, that’s the risk you ran.
Getting angry, being ridiculously insulting to the point where you question the validity of someone who deals with this trauma day to day.... well, I don’t think you paint yourself as a particularly intelligent or more importantly, a compassionate human. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I was simply saying that I believe we are lucky in the sense that we aren't seeing the people who have survived making that number far worse. Look, I am sorry that I upset you. I honestly didn't mean to. And my intention was not to rubbish the loss of anyone. Or to diminish this tragedy.
You have no concept of how the survivors are. You think people off ventilation missing months of their lives with long term, life changing damage are feeling lucky?
The moment people stop dumbing down this pandemic to lived or died statistics is the day they’ll truly understand the suffering that’s gone on, the damage done and the legacy which we’ll see for decades ahead.
You’re welcome to your PERSONAL view... if for whatever reason you want to publish it to a public forum perhaps understand those with a better insight and understanding are also welcome to rubbish it. By posting, that’s the risk you ran.
Getting angry, being ridiculously insulting to the point where you question the validity of someone who deals with this trauma day to day.... well, I don’t think you paint yourself as a particularly intelligent or more importantly, a compassionate human."Well said Charli | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I was simply saying that I believe we are lucky in the sense that we aren't seeing the people who have survived making that number far worse. Look, I am sorry that I upset you. I honestly didn't mean to. And my intention was not to rubbish the loss of anyone. Or to diminish this tragedy.
You have no concept of how the survivors are. You think people off ventilation missing months of their lives with long term, life changing damage are feeling lucky?
The moment people stop dumbing down this pandemic to lived or died statistics is the day they’ll truly understand the suffering that’s gone on, the damage done and the legacy which we’ll see for decades ahead.
You’re welcome to your PERSONAL view... if for whatever reason you want to publish it to a public forum perhaps understand those with a better insight and understanding are also welcome to rubbish it. By posting, that’s the risk you ran.
Getting angry, being ridiculously insulting to the point where you question the validity of someone who deals with this trauma day to day.... well, I don’t think you paint yourself as a particularly intelligent or more importantly, a compassionate human."The only reason I questioned it is because I don't know you, just as you don't know me. I didn't insult or get angry at anyone except you because of your response to me, assuming things about me and talking about spitting in my face. What reaction did you expect to receive in response to that? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I was simply saying that I believe we are lucky in the sense that we aren't seeing the people who have survived making that number far worse. Look, I am sorry that I upset you. I honestly didn't mean to. And my intention was not to rubbish the loss of anyone. Or to diminish this tragedy.
You have no concept of how the survivors are. You think people off ventilation missing months of their lives with long term, life changing damage are feeling lucky?
The moment people stop dumbing down this pandemic to lived or died statistics is the day they’ll truly understand the suffering that’s gone on, the damage done and the legacy which we’ll see for decades ahead.
You’re welcome to your PERSONAL view... if for whatever reason you want to publish it to a public forum perhaps understand those with a better insight and understanding are also welcome to rubbish it. By posting, that’s the risk you ran.
Getting angry, being ridiculously insulting to the point where you question the validity of someone who deals with this trauma day to day.... well, I don’t think you paint yourself as a particularly intelligent or more importantly, a compassionate human.
Well said Charli"Have you read the shit they've been saying on this thread? If you have maybe you'll understand why I reacted the way I did to them... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"*he or she. Just realised that it's a couples profile" He lol | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Well said Charli Have you read the shit they've been saying on this thread? If you have maybe you'll understand why I reacted the way I did to them... " Obviously she has... is she not allowed to have a different outlook to yours? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Well said Charli Have you read the shit they've been saying on this thread? If you have maybe you'll understand why I reacted the way I did to them... Obviously she has... is she not allowed to have a different outlook to yours? " Of course she is. However the way you have conducted yourself when you have replied is despicable for someone in your profession and definitely shouldn't be applauded. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Well said Charli Have you read the shit they've been saying on this thread? If you have maybe you'll understand why I reacted the way I did to them... Obviously she has... is she not allowed to have a different outlook to yours? Of course she is. However the way you have conducted yourself when you have replied is despicable for someone in your profession and definitely shouldn't be applauded. " I think he's held a lot of constraint with you and a piss taking thread... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Well said Charli Have you read the shit they've been saying on this thread? If you have maybe you'll understand why I reacted the way I did to them... Obviously she has... is she not allowed to have a different outlook to yours? Of course she is. However the way you have conducted yourself when you have replied is despicable for someone in your profession and definitely shouldn't be applauded. " That’s the opinion of someone who thinks we should all look at 108,000 deaths and their grieving families, 100’s of thousands of recovering critical care patients and a large chunk of a younger generation suffering life changing long covid symptoms, a crippled economy and vast increase in mental health issues as a positive thing because we could have had more deaths.... I have 100’s of patients and family members who have thanked me personally for my compassion and care, I have colleagues who respect me. I don’t need the approval of some internet hero who hasn’t the slightest concept of what so many have endured. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Well said Charli Have you read the shit they've been saying on this thread? If you have maybe you'll understand why I reacted the way I did to them... Obviously she has... is she not allowed to have a different outlook to yours? Of course she is. However the way you have conducted yourself when you have replied is despicable for someone in your profession and definitely shouldn't be applauded. I think he's held a lot of constraint with you and a piss taking thread..." You're entitled to your view. As am I. If saying things could be so much worse, which they could, and in no way saying that what has already occurred is not a tragedy is taking the piss to you, cool. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" That’s the opinion of someone who thinks we should all look at 108,000 deaths " Can you please point out a quote where the op has explicitly told us that we should all share his view? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Well said Charli Have you read the shit they've been saying on this thread? If you have maybe you'll understand why I reacted the way I did to them... Obviously she has... is she not allowed to have a different outlook to yours? Of course she is. However the way you have conducted yourself when you have replied is despicable for someone in your profession and definitely shouldn't be applauded. That’s the opinion of someone who thinks we should all look at 108,000 deaths and their grieving families, 100’s of thousands of recovering critical care patients and a large chunk of a younger generation suffering life changing long covid symptoms, a crippled economy and vast increase in mental health issues as a positive thing because we could have had more deaths.... I have 100’s of patients and family members who have thanked me personally for my compassion and care, I have colleagues who respect me. I don’t need the approval of some internet hero who hasn’t the slightest concept of what so many have endured. " Do you need your eyes testing or comprehension sharpening? I simply said it could easily be far worse. You are putting words in my mouth because you don't see it in the way I put in the original post. They respect a sham, the way you have conducted yourself and the things you have said would very quickly change a lot of minds about you. Go tell your bosses and patients that you were talking about spitting in my face because of my own view, or that you'd "probably go further“ I'm sure they'll love to hear that. You'd think someone who claims so much compassion and says they care so much about this virus and the deaths it has caused would have thought of a less despicable way to disagree with someone. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" That’s the opinion of someone who thinks we should all look at 108,000 deaths Can you please point out a quote where the op has explicitly told us that we should all share his view?" They can't, because I didn't. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" That’s the opinion of someone who thinks we should all look at 108,000 deaths Can you please point out a quote where the op has explicitly told us that we should all share his view?" No, you can read the thread yourself hun, I’m not wasting my time reading back and copy and pasting quotes. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. I think you're confusing the natural order of life with a most un-natural occurrence. 108,000 is 108,000 too high. E It's only unnatural if this is a man made occurrence, in which case just one death is too many. But, if this is truly a naturally caused virus then the conversation flips from the number of deaths being a negative into the number of deaths prevented\ avoided being the positive. And that is a far far higher number nit just in Britain but globally. " Why have any medicines and health care then. Just let people die when they die. Who cares, it's natural? Someone has a work accident and chops thier hand off, who cares, bleed out, that's the natural occurence of chopping your hand off pal. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" That’s the opinion of someone who thinks we should all look at 108,000 deaths Can you please point out a quote where the op has explicitly told us that we should all share his view? No, you can read the thread yourself hun, I’m not wasting my time reading back and copy and pasting quotes. " You couldn't anyway because I didn't say that once, you just took it that way! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Well said Charli Have you read the shit they've been saying on this thread? If you have maybe you'll understand why I reacted the way I did to them... Obviously she has... is she not allowed to have a different outlook to yours? Of course she is. However the way you have conducted yourself when you have replied is despicable for someone in your profession and definitely shouldn't be applauded. That’s the opinion of someone who thinks we should all look at 108,000 deaths and their grieving families, 100’s of thousands of recovering critical care patients and a large chunk of a younger generation suffering life changing long covid symptoms, a crippled economy and vast increase in mental health issues as a positive thing because we could have had more deaths.... I have 100’s of patients and family members who have thanked me personally for my compassion and care, I have colleagues who respect me. I don’t need the approval of some internet hero who hasn’t the slightest concept of what so many have endured. Do you need your eyes testing or comprehension sharpening? I simply said it could easily be far worse. You are putting words in my mouth because you don't see it in the way I put in the original post. They respect a sham, the way you have conducted yourself and the things you have said would very quickly change a lot of minds about you. Go tell your bosses and patients that you were talking about spitting in my face because of my own view, or that you'd "probably go further“ I'm sure they'll love to hear that. You'd think someone who claims so much compassion and says they care so much about this virus and the deaths it has caused would have thought of a less despicable way to disagree with someone. " I’d wager the families of those who have died in my trust would quite strongly disagree with you. I still maintain most of them would spit in your face if you presented your concept to them... despite your outrage, I still maintain I would fully support them for doing so. That’s my personal view however... so, you know, don’t take it to heart x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. I think you're confusing the natural order of life with a most un-natural occurrence. 108,000 is 108,000 too high. E It's only unnatural if this is a man made occurrence, in which case just one death is too many. But, if this is truly a naturally caused virus then the conversation flips from the number of deaths being a negative into the number of deaths prevented\ avoided being the positive. And that is a far far higher number nit just in Britain but globally. Why have any medicines and health care then. Just let people die when they die. Who cares, it's natural? Someone has a work accident and chops thier hand off, who cares, bleed out, that's the natural occurence of chopping your hand off pal. " My point was that even with the best of our abilities we will always struggle to defeat nature, it is far cleverer than we are. And your point is as misdirected as the ones who have mentioned war, a workplace accident is a man made occurrence again. We are currently fighting against a natural(unless it is not, in which case I have said that even 2 death then is too many) system that is designed to target and remove life forms on mass. I never said we shouldn't combat it. I actually have said on this thread as part of my point that it could easily be far worse if we didn't have the technology and knowledge that we have! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" That’s the opinion of someone who thinks we should all look at 108,000 deaths Can you please point out a quote where the op has explicitly told us that we should all share his view? No, you can read the thread yourself hun, I’m not wasting my time reading back and copy and pasting quotes. " The only reason it would be a waste of time is because he didn't, as far as I can see (but I'm not trawling through this entire shit show either), at any point tell anybody what they should think. The reason I asked you to quote where he has told people what they should think is because you can't. All he was asking for was opinions and people have reacted emotionally, instead of rationally, and they have misinterpreted what he's said - yourself included. I took something positve from the initial post, I may be in the minority but that's ok. I fully agree with his point, many of us are lucky to still be alive - yourself included as a frontline worker. Good night, take care, and be safe. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My point was that even with the best of our abilities we will always struggle to defeat nature, it is far cleverer than we are. And your point is as misdirected as the ones who have mentioned war, a workplace accident is a man made occurrence again. We are currently fighting against a natural(unless it is not, in which case I have said that even 2 death then is too many) system that is designed to target and remove life forms on mass. I never said we shouldn't combat it. I actually have said on this thread as part of my point that it could easily be far worse if we didn't have the technology and knowledge that we have! " And I think the point myself and many here have made is... How many users are there on fab, how many of them have suffered family loses, worked in the epi centre and experienced all the sorrow and trauma this pandemic has and continues to deliver. How much do you think they appreciate your words and positive could be worst outlook? I’ve spoken to dozens of U.K. members on fab who have suffered horribly during this pandemic for a variety of reasons. At best your post is really Inconsiderate, at worst it’s just intentionally hurtful and to be frank vile. Make no mistake, too many it will be read as highly insulting. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the UK number of deaths, apparently all caused by covid. It may be more or less, its hard to know, there's been talk of covid being attached to other causes of death, but let's for a moment say it's 100% accurate. Why is this number seen as a negative? 108,000 (out of 66.6 million) in the grand scheme of things is not many. On a worldwide scale, 2.2 million (out of 7.67 billion) is the number. Again, not much in the grand scheme of things. Considering how lethal this virus can be. Is it because, here, the government, to suppress hysteria in supermarkets gave a prediction of 20,000? Do you believe the number is too high OR are you of the belief that we are extremely lucky that its not far far more? Personally, I think we are extremely lucky and that considering how lethal its mean to be, that number is very low. Please come spend sometime on the frontline and see the true horror of what covid delivers to our cities within our critical care system. Realise that 100,000 deaths means another 500,000 people who barely survived. Realise that icu departments with typically 24 beds are now expanded across hospitals to manage 250 odd beds. Before you sit from your armchair to judge impact or seriousness please realise your lack of perception or understanding of conditions makes your viewpoint extremely irrelevant. Covid-19 has been and remains a shit storm, don’t dumb it down or disrespect the many thousands affected by it. Sorry, because I'm not part of it I can't say that we were extremely lucky that it isn't far far worse? And no, 100k deaths doesn't mean that 500k barely survived. 500k surviving means that 500k survived. You are making my point for me! It could very easily be 100k that survived and 500k that died! Just because you are looking at the worst aspects of it, it does not mean that it could not be far worse. Like I said, in the grand scheme of things, the number is still low. They aren’t low, survival chances with modern medicine are extremely high for most major illnesses. We have lost far too many people to covid-19. Nationally our critical care has expanded by 500%... there’s nothing lucky about that. And no, barely survived isn’t simply survived. We have thousands with now reduced life expectancy, compromised lives, ongoing perhaps incurable conditions. Try telling them they are lucky. As I said... your armchair isn’t a place to judge where we are. Your point is just laughable compared to a terrible reality. This isn't simply a major illness though is it? It's a unforeseen global catastrophe. That could very very easily have been far worse. And that is undeniable. And don't assume what my position to view it from is. You don't know me. Don't assume that you have a unique or special position or knowledge that entitles you to say my view is laughable. Your view is laughable though. You've clearly got 0 first hand experience of the virus and the impact it can have on not only those who lost loved ones to it, but survivors as well, you ignore all the points put forward with strong evidence counter to your opinion and you just keep repeating the same question over and over again like a hamster in a wheel, unable and/or unwilling to change course. That is about as laughable as it gets. You can't counter the fact that it could be a far worse situation. It's undeniable. Again, saying it could be worse, doesn't diminish the tragedy thus far. The fact that the number isn't 2,3,10,20 times higher as it quite easily could have been under a different virus, is exactly what makes us lucky. And don't try and say clearly this that and the other, you also don't know me. Trying to pin me as someone that said something negative when what I was actually doing was looking at the positive. " Yes it could have been worse, it would have been a struggle for it to be worse though, you'd need someone even more incompetent than Boris. Before we take a breath, on your premise that it could have been a whole lot worse, than you must agree that it could have been a whole lot sodding better, as evidence from almost every other country in the world suggests... As to an early comment about unforeseen, which is about as credible as Boris spouting unprecedented... Surely you must agree that a simply look back at the history books, or wikipedia, would confirm, that pandemics have occurred throughout human history and are being misused in place of unprepared... Why would a government hold a full scale classified exercise within the last ten years if it was unprecedented or unforeseen? We have no problem remembering the millions that were sent to their deaths in WW1 on the 11th hour or the 11th day of the 11th month every year, yet we forget a more recent pandemic in 1917 that killed millions... So yeah, it could have been worse, but it could have and should have been a whole lot better! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I work with this virus around me everyday and when I going in to work I cry as I know more poorly people are going to pass away so the numbers will get worse before this gets better and I lost a family member to trying to keep positive stay safe x" Thank you for your efforts. Stay safe | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's one of the highest, if not THE highest, rates of deaths per capita in the whole world. It is totally shameful." Yes, but not every country releases credible figures!! Also importantly is Covid discriminates on age, you can discount many parts of the world who simply don’t have many old people! The average age of people on the planet is 30 years old, in the UK it is 40. Comparing some countries with the UK is like comparing care home deaths against school age deaths! I suspect the table would look rather different if you weighted the figures to account for population demographics. That’s no to say our figures couldn’t have been better... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's one of the highest, if not THE highest, rates of deaths per capita in the whole world. It is totally shameful." Look at the post immediately after yours. Plus, you are aware that all countries count differently. The 108,000 are deaths with covid or tested positive with covid in the last 28 days. Not necessarily died OF covid but WITH covid. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
