Politics Coronavirus

Scouse

Job-worshipper and all round follower of cunts.
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
28,888
Notice that the excess deaths graph has been growing steadily under Tory rule since 2010, when it's been steadily declining since the 1960's.

Economic circumstances leading to excess death will certainly be felt on some level. Perchance even a brexit - voting level eh? ;)
 

Tay

Grumpy old fecker
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
1,187
Well the old Mum, got her second shot today.

Completely weird considering the government going with the strategy of 12 weeks apart to vaccinate more of the population. Another point to note is that my Step Dad in his 70s and considered in an at risk group due to him recovering from the Big C a number of years ago is yet to be asked for his first jab
I suspect the most at risk folks will get 2 shots, My mum has had her second as have several other elderly relatives, however, the wife has just got a letter saying her second shot is now deferred.
 

Bodhi

Once agreed with Scouse and a LibDem at same time
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
8,252
Wow, holy misleading reporting Batman! Highest since WW2 on an absolute level yes, but considering the growth in population since then, entirely irrelevant. It's mentioned a bit further down the page:

On one hand, excess deaths are at their highest since World War Two, while on the other, death rates, once age and size of population are taken into account, are at their worst level for a little over a decade 'only'
So about where we were before the flu vaccines got rolled out. If you also dig a little bit deeper into the ONS report as well, you see there are a significant amount of non-COVID excess deaths - up to around 35k, which are the collateral damage from lockdown. Guessing they don't count tho.

Bad yes. Unprecedented? Not in the slightest. Apart from the lockdown deaths of course, but that happens when you focus Public Health on one thing.
 

Tay

Grumpy old fecker
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
1,187
So Whittys bigging up a severe lockdown.
Once a week outing, no talking in public etc, banding numbers like 30K in hospital with covid compared to 18K at April peak.
But thats 'with' covid, not rushed to hospital with breathing problems and the massive increase in testing is bound to increase that number.

Anyway the Mail started predicting yesterday and now its looking more likely, they are rarely wrong about these kinds of government decisions, so I think were looking at practically martial law over the next few weeks if numbers dont start dropping.
Martial Law? If only, the number of cases would be significantly lower if the military had been out and about.

As for hospitals, to be admitted to hospital with Covid is a worry, you don't get admitted for a runny nose ffs its because you are struggling to breath typically.

If people spent half as much time doing positive things instead of thinking of ways to subvert the guidelines, the numbers would be down.
 

Tay

Grumpy old fecker
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
1,187
Wow, holy misleading reporting Batman! Highest since WW2 on an absolute level yes, but considering the growth in population since then, entirely irrelevant. It's mentioned a bit further down the page:



So about where we were before the flu vaccines got rolled out. If you also dig a little bit deeper into the ONS report as well, you see there are a significant amount of non-COVID excess deaths - up to around 35k, which are the collateral damage from lockdown. Guessing they don't count tho.

Bad yes. Unprecedented? Not in the slightest. Apart from the lockdown deaths of course, but that happens when you focus Public Health on one thing.
Alas, the true number of deaths 'caused' by covid will never be known, I take the ONS stuff with a massive pinch of salt, much like accounts they can turn a profit into a loss, a loss into profit.

A friend of our family died a couple of days ago, the death certificate will say he died of Covid. What the covid "stats" wont say is that he was admitted for a Pneumonia, he then had a mini stroke and caught Covid whilst in hospital he was 94.

Death rates due to avoidable diseases have been dropping for decades, every now and again they get the flu shot wrong and the winter deaths go through the roof, this hasnt been the case for 5-6 years, but as you say its not unprecedented.
 

Tay

Grumpy old fecker
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
1,187
I read the govt Greenbook papers from a couple of weeks ago and the papers from the Pfizers/Astrazenica teams some time ago, and the advice has chanced since then, I suspect it'll change again before this shit show is over.

We're already considering deviating from the manufacturers guidance because in order to meet the govts 14 mill by mid feb were going to have to change to way its delivered. I just hope that decision doesn't come back and bite us in the ass. As it stands, my mum and my mother in law have both had their second shots so at least they 'should' have some degree of resistance to it. The wife has had 1 shot because she is front line NHS and I'll be suprised if she gets another tbh, by the time the 11/12 week booster period ends they decision will probably be to get it out to the rest of us asap thus kipping the 2nd shot to the NHS staff.
 

Moriath

I am a FH squatter
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
14,876
Wow, holy misleading reporting Batman! Highest since WW2 on an absolute level yes, but considering the growth in population since then, entirely irrelevant. It's mentioned a bit further down the page:



So about where we were before the flu vaccines got rolled out. If you also dig a little bit deeper into the ONS report as well, you see there are a significant amount of non-COVID excess deaths - up to around 35k, which are the collateral damage from lockdown. Guessing they don't count tho.

Bad yes. Unprecedented? Not in the slightest. Apart from the lockdown deaths of course, but that happens when you focus Public Health on one thing.
Yes misleading. But they are obviously under some level trying to find real things to show the public how bad this is to get them to stay inside and stop bending and breaking the rules. That seems to be the nudge theory way of doing things to counter act the deniers etc.
 

Bodhi

Once agreed with Scouse and a LibDem at same time
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
8,252
Yes misleading. But they are obviously under some level trying to find real things to show the public how bad this is to get them to stay inside and stop bending and breaking the rules. That seems to be the nudge theory way of doing things to counter act the deniers etc.
I shall point you again to the BMJ article I linked to - written by members of SAGE - on why blaming the outbreak on rule breakers is an incredibly dodgy road to go down, especially as adherance is over 90%. I would suggest that if your strategy relies upon 100% compliance of 66 million people, it's a shit strategy and is doomed to fail. Also, considering the number of outbreaks in care homes and nosocomial infections in hospital, who we blaming for those then?

I blame the virus personally, but YMMV.
 

Moriath

I am a FH squatter
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
14,876
I shall point you again to the BMJ article I linked to - written by members of SAGE - on why blaming the outbreak on rule breakers is an incredibly dodgy road to go down, especially as adherance is over 90%. I would suggest that if your strategy relies upon 100% compliance of 66 million people, it's a shit strategy and is doomed to fail. Also, considering the number of outbreaks in care homes and nosocomial infections in hospital, who we blaming for those then?

I blame the virus personally, but YMMV.
Im not blaming anyone. The virus is a natural thing that happens.

i am looking and seeing the media trying to make the current situation look as bad as it is to try and counteract all the shite out there that says its not real. In an effert to convince those who are easily influenced by nut jobs to stay at home.

the more that stay at home the quicker we will be put of this. Unfortunately in a society thats more and more on instant gratification and reward its difficult to sell the long game.
 

Talivar

Resident Freddy
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
2,026
I think its unfair to compare the death rates of Covid and previous Flu outbreaks as we have never done a country wide lockdown before. To compare the effects just look at how few standard Flu Deaths we had last year as a result of the lockdown.
 

Raven

Brrrrr!
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 27, 2003
Messages
39,394
I like how the "edgy AF mate" among us still think Covid is nothing to worry about :)
 

Job

The Carl Pilkington of Freddyshouse
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
21,597
Heres the annual death rate since 2000, I presume thats the whole of the UK because for some bizarre reason they keep including and excluding various countries, to just muddy the waters I suppose.

Then complain that theres fake news on social media, oh that stat doesnt include Scotland and that ones England Wales only.
The term UK seems very flexible atm if you work in death stats.

 

caLLous

I am a FH squatter
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
16,911
Heres the annual death rate since 2000, I presume thats the whole of the UK because for some bizarre reason they keep including and excluding various countries, to just muddy the waters I suppose.

Then complain that theres fake news on social media, oh that stat doesnt include Scotland and that ones England Wales only.
The term UK seems very flexible atm if you work in death stats.

Since 2000, but only up to 2018. What point do you think you're making here?
 

Scouse

Job-worshipper and all round follower of cunts.
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
28,888
I feel very much for this couple but right now they are technically in breach of the rules.

Went to see their 94 year old mum who's in a care home, stood in a car park and talked to her through the window.

However, the mum won't be part of their "support bubble" because technically she's being supported in the care home. By law that means there's no exception for them.

Add to that - care homes are a high risk - from viruses being brought in, and for viruses being taken away.

So, yeah, technically I think it's correct. But very hard :(

Edit: Once they'd been vaccinated properly and time had passed to enable the vaccine to work for them I'd be very tempted to break that rule though.
 

Yoni

Cockb@dger / Klotehommel www.lhw.photography
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 11, 2003
Messages
4,455
As I said earlier my mum has heart disease and was hospitalised end of August (she is out now doing what she can to delay the inevitable), due to the rules on the IOM (which I whole heartedly agree with as do my family), I am forbidden to go there. In order to visit mum she has to be either nearly dying or dead... neither of which I want for her. It is hard even though am not very close with my mum, BUT I would like to visit her or work from there for a while - she is very hard of hearing so telephone calls do not do it. We facetime as a family on Sunday mornings, up to very recently on the Island they were livng their day to day lives as normal but they just could not leave and come back easily (my sister chose to go to her house in greece and is struggling to return) and she has my other sister and brothers to help out and ensure she is not lonely, it is this that keeps me from getting obsessively upset and worrying.

As humans we should learn to be grateful for what we have around us, especially if we have a "family unit" and not living alone. I really really feel for those who are alone at this time with very little option to have company when you want it. If it were 10 years ago and I was in NL - I would have huge issues... i lived for 3 years with my husband and I commuting every two weeks with visit from friends from the UK or for weekends when TdC and I were both free.... I had a life out side of people i knew before moved out there but it was centered around my local pub and during Corona time it would not be possible to visit it.

I am very greatful that our WoW guild is still going as this clearly brings some company to those who are on their own and also to my husband and I as we can chill out with others whilst killing demons and dragons. I am also grateful for my fellow photography masterclass members as the construcive criticism appears to be a motivator for us all to keep on taking pictures and improve as much as we all can even if our movement is restricted - the debates and the discussions are also excellent.
 

Tay

Grumpy old fecker
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
1,187
I shall point you again to the BMJ article I linked to - written by members of SAGE - on why blaming the outbreak on rule breakers is an incredibly dodgy road to go down, especially as adherance is over 90%. I would suggest that if your strategy relies upon 100% compliance of 66 million people, it's a shit strategy and is doomed to fail. Also, considering the number of outbreaks in care homes and nosocomial infections in hospital, who we blaming for those then?

I blame the virus personally, but YMMV.
I blame the virus too, but there have been some pretty fucking glaring issues, lack of mandatory masks outdoors at all times is the main one. Poor compliance is another, but certainly less than the first. Xmas was a shambles, I understand what the govt was trying to do, but it gradually turning into another 'sending the old folks home from hospital'.

For every SAGE member there is an equal (maybe more) and opposite number that disagrees, yes, its the best we have right now but it isnt the be all and end all. People need to take responsibility for their own actions.
The common denominator in this pandemic is that this virus is spread from human to human. So blaming something else for the rise in infection rates is daft.

As for care homes, hospitals were told to brace for a huge influx of infected cv19 people and it made sense to get the elderly and frail out of hospitals fast and thats what they did. Alas, that had a pretty horrendous outcome as we all know because it was too late by then. You can blame the virus on that.
 

Tay

Grumpy old fecker
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
1,187
I think its unfair to compare the death rates of Covid and previous Flu outbreaks as we have never done a country wide lockdown before. To compare the effects just look at how few standard Flu Deaths we had last year as a result of the lockdown.
The last several years have been exceptions to the normal rules, the got the correct flu inoculations for the last few years, this undoubtably would have brought the numbers down

Due to the way covid deaths are counted the true death toll for covid and non covid will never be known.
 

Tay

Grumpy old fecker
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
1,187
I feel very much for this couple but right now they are technically in breach of the rules.

Went to see their 94 year old mum who's in a care home, stood in a car park and talked to her through the window.

However, the mum won't be part of their "support bubble" because technically she's being supported in the care home. By law that means there's no exception for them.

Add to that - care homes are a high risk - from viruses being brought in, and for viruses being taken away.

So, yeah, technically I think it's correct. But very hard :(

Edit: Once they'd been vaccinated properly and time had passed to enable the vaccine to work for them I'd be very tempted to break that rule though.
The vaccination has an almost immediate affect, the time tables are to give the recipient the highest possible chance of not contracting the virus. What is still not known is if the person that has been vaccinated is a carrier afterwards, does the virus still mutate etc..that messes the plans up slightly.

Breaking THAT rule in this case would be exceedingly selfish and retarded, you risk infecting others, this is the whole fucking point of staying at home. So many fucking experts looking for excuses to break the rules its infuriating.
 

Bodhi

Once agreed with Scouse and a LibDem at same time
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
8,252
I blame the virus too, but there have been some pretty fucking glaring issues, lack of mandatory masks outdoors at all times is the main one. Poor compliance is another, but certainly less than the first. Xmas was a shambles, I understand what the govt was trying to do, but it gradually turning into another 'sending the old folks home from hospital'.

For every SAGE member there is an equal (maybe more) and opposite number that disagrees, yes, its the best we have right now but it isnt the be all and end all. People need to take responsibility for their own actions.
The common denominator in this pandemic is that this virus is spread from human to human. So blaming something else for the rise in infection rates is daft.

As for care homes, hospitals were told to brace for a huge influx of infected cv19 people and it made sense to get the elderly and frail out of hospitals fast and thats what they did. Alas, that had a pretty horrendous outcome as we all know because it was too late by then. You can blame the virus on that.
I think the reason we haven't gone down the masks outdoors route is that there is no real evidence they will have any effect - the evidence base is even weaker than it is for masks indoors. I follow Professor Dingwall from SAGE on Twitter, as he's been one of the more reasonable voices throughout this, and he posted this the other day on masks outdoors:

View: https://twitter.com/rwjdingwall/status/1348642511565320193?s=20


He also restates the SAGE view on masks in general in the replies - weak evidence of a small potential benefit, but more likely to be a placebo. Hasn't transferred to the rhetoric sadly, but that is their view.

Interestingly on compliance, Sky posted a survey that showed people were complying more this time round than in March, so I do suspect people's views on compliance are like their views on driving - everyone thinks they're better at it than everyone else :)

The emptying hospitals out into care homes in March is one of the biggest, most deadly clusterfucks I have ever seen frankly - I've seen figures from 15k to 25k deaths attributed to this. Add in 35k non-COVID excess deaths and it's starting to look like the response to the virus was more deadly than the virus itself. I'd heard rumours this had started again, but I note that Hancock was talking about using hotels for this - this would make sense, but what would make even more sense, is to use some of the Private Healthcare capacity that is pretty much just sitting on the shelf, and could easily be used for non-electives/recovery, and would take some of the strain off the frontline workers. Doesn't look like that is an option sadly, because politics:


Gotta say I have massive respect for the front line NHS workers, but the senior management can go fuck themselves, frankly.
 

Bodhi

Once agreed with Scouse and a LibDem at same time
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
8,252
I feel very much for this couple but right now they are technically in breach of the rules.

Went to see their 94 year old mum who's in a care home, stood in a car park and talked to her through the window.

However, the mum won't be part of their "support bubble" because technically she's being supported in the care home. By law that means there's no exception for them.

Add to that - care homes are a high risk - from viruses being brought in, and for viruses being taken away.

So, yeah, technically I think it's correct. But very hard :(

Edit: Once they'd been vaccinated properly and time had passed to enable the vaccine to work for them I'd be very tempted to break that rule though.
Must be a Welsh thing, as I've had an email this morning from my nan's care home saying we can go and visit her if we like. It's her 99th birthday in a couple of days, and she's had her first shot, so I expect we will be taking them up on that offer - especially as I haven't seen her since her 98th birthday.
 

Scouse

Job-worshipper and all round follower of cunts.
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
28,888
The vaccination has an almost immediate affect
Nope. It takes time for the body to develop an immune response.

Vaccines don't protect you. Your immune system protects you. All vaccines do is provoke an immune response that the body can repeat if it comes across the real thing.
 

Moriath

I am a FH squatter
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
14,876
Nope. It takes time for the body to develop an immune response.

Vaccines don't protect you. Your immune system protects you. All vaccines do is provoke an immune response that the body can repeat if it comes across the real thing.
This it gets greater over time. Building up. So you are more likely to get the virus the closer to the vaccine date you get exposed.
 

Job

The Carl Pilkington of Freddyshouse
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
21,597
I was pointing out the very poor quality of stats that are being pushed out by supposedly reliable sources, the confusion is supporting 'fakenews' theories and then they complain about them..
Put the fucking stats out officially, stop hiding them in endless obtuse parameters and spread out over multiple papers.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top Bottom