A Government can (and does) pick and choose what experts it listens to though mate.
There are many, many more experts that flat out disagree with the experts that are advising Boris Johnson to do what benefits his Tory Government's Economy the most.
SARS CoV-2 coronavirus / Covid-19 (No tin foil hat silliness please)
- Thread starter Don't Kill Bill
- Start date
There are many, many more experts that flat out disagree with the experts that are advising Boris Johnson to do what benefits his Tory Government's Economy the most.
As Italy are doing? The situation is pretty much out of control in italy. They've got one of the most advanced health care systems and they're completely overwhelmed hence the mortality rate of around 8%. The medical professionals have to decide who lives and who dies. Again, I have no faith in the current government and the measures they're taking so it would appear that I personally think I know better despite being wholly unqualified, so what the feck does that tell you?
Changing my VPN location to Italy for no reason at all...
I'm not into stuff like that personally, time will tell, but I just do not buy into the thought that the government are intentionally putting us in more danger than we will untimely be exposed to during the process of this anyway, I believe they are trying to stage it as best they can to protect the NHS resources.
The last one is the fecking icing on the cake for these idious shitebags. Worse than "topping up your tank" or "popping a couple of cans in your shed" during a fuel shortage. Worse than "we can afford it" for a multi million pound costing divisive politicians funeral during austerity. Worse than "get better at handling money" if you live in poverty.
Nah, it's all just a playful situation isn't it? So playful. Playful language that suits such a little inconvenience. Don't worry about it, no problem, it's all fine. But if it hurts the economy? HOLY FECKING SHIT SOMEONE HELP! Protect it at all costs! Use the proletariat as a meat shield!
cnuts the lot of them.
Reckon a VPN will work?
I don't pretend to know the long term sustainable measures we should take, but I view as cancelling all social gatherings, working from home, restricting non-essential travel etc as good measures that we can take now to help slow down the spread.
I think the government is damned if it does, damned if it doesn't now.
Of known cases, and that you are most likely wrong.
I bet the Tory government are secretly loving this. This virus will off the most vulnerable in the country for them.
Was in a big supermarket there. Every trolley had 1 toilet rolls pack. No hoarders which is good to see.
Other top sellers including San Miguel 2.5 litre bottles of water, 5kg bags of rice, and dry food bags like peas and lentils as you know, you can't get tinned food in Peru like everywhere else.
Other top sellers including San Miguel 2.5 litre bottles of water, 5kg bags of rice, and dry food bags like peas and lentils as you know, you can't get tinned food in Peru like everywhere else.
Yes and no. We (in my case Germany, yours probably the UK) can learn from Italy's experience. But is has to be tailored to the specifics of the country. For example a country that has more ICUs (and staff) per head than Italy, can wait longer than Italy to implement certain measures. A further example, if a country has additionally a lesser percentage of vulnerable in its population than Italy it can even longer wait with such measures, cause fewer ICUs are needed in relation to the total population.
As Johnson and the scientists alongside him explained, they are doing such mathematical models on a daily basis to get the timing for the measures right. And from day to day these models get better, cause more stats and experiences from different countries are included. And still it has to be tailored to the specifics of country and region. A country where elderly are cared more by family, eg Italy that has to be taken into consideration. A country which has more people in care homes, like Germany, has to consider this too.
Another example, lets say the in the UK the first major regional outbreak is in London, you would introduce major measures when the NHS in greater London is in danger of being overwhelmed. If possible you would wait to introduce this measures in Liverpool and Manchester cause the outbreak is behind and you want to wait for the right moment. Obviously you have to consider if the British population would accept these different timings of measures
But it would be much better to cope with it, especially considering economics and logistics.
For that an example: If a country has two major ports, it would be better that the outbreaks and measures are time different, because you would have at least one working port for handling goods and securing logistics.
And to complicate matters, you are dealing with a population that is nervous and has no or little understanding of such considerations.
Manolo Gabbiadini who currently plays for Sampdoria and once played for Southampton has been tested positive. 2nd Serie A player after Rugani
Could definitely ease up the pension crisis, the medium/long term strain on the NHS and the housing stocks.
It will kill their base mostly, 65+ is the Tory’s strongest demographic.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Last edited:
The evidence points to Italian cases being closer to 100,000 then what they are reporting.
Number don’t add up.
Number don’t add up.
What number doesn’t add up for you?
I like you Pidgey, you're a good old bird.
But it's not, it's to stage the 'disruptive decisions' in at what they think is the right time, if it backfires badly then history will remember, but they could get it spot on also.
I think the number of infected in every country is an order of magnitude higher than reported.
Very reliable source informs me that a VPN does indeed work
That day you realize Pornhub is more helpful in a pandemic than the elected government in your own country...
Some of you are nuts. We're being condemned to death and you're ok with it? Couldn't make it up.
Finding the whole 'listening to science' utterly bizarre, sounds like a lot of bollocks. Either that, or the government are actually stupid. Hope it's the former that they're selfish and protecting the economy, I'd rather that than to be living under a stupid government.
I might as well just accept that I will get the virus eventually. Leicestershire has hit 6 cases now.
I might as well just accept that I will get the virus eventually. Leicestershire has hit 6 cases now.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
The stories from Lombardy are horrifying. If the second best health system in the world is collapsing then feck knows what will happen to the HSE and NHS when it hits the fan.
Your sounding more nuts.
I think some of you are just trolling now.
If you want to reduce the number of deaths COVID-19 causes long term, you need to build up resistance in the population. Without a vaccine, the only way to do this in a pandemic is to manage the rate of transmission in such way to allow a steady number of people to acquire the virus and develop antibodies against it, which overtime reduces the virus’ R rate. Chris Witty and Sir Patrick Vallance were transparent and honest about this. Perversely, the more people that get the virus and develop resistance to it, the safer the rest of the population is as it is harder for the virus to spread and produce an unmanageable spike in cases. This is the principle behind vaccinations.
Lets be realistic, not everybody dies just between 1 and 3 percent.
Am I happy about it? No.
Do I feel sorry for every loss? Absolutely. Am I scared to death for my 90 year old father? Definitely.
But in every major western European country and the USA and Canada scientists and medics are saying the same:
This cannot be stopped anymore and it is now about handling the crisis and mitigating the losses. And I am not someone who howls at the dawning sun: "How dare you to leave me?" cause I know she will raise again.
You can handle that crisis personally however you want, but don't tell me how to handle it myself and don't judge me on my reaction to it. And I will not do it publicly to you.
Last edited:
Get a grip.
I wonder would it be a good strategy to encourage infections on young people (those under 40) who have a low chance of dying but are most active people? If we are going to get it anyway, why not artificially create a scenario when young people get infected first, get quarantined, get healthy and then they won't be able to spread it to other people who are more vulnerable.
I don't think there are ways of doing it, but just as a thought experiment.
Di Maria is a spurs fan so his comments are understandable.
I probably should have said many instead of we're.
Your partner is clearly an idiot
Gotta love how The Sun's major concern is that a number of British holidays to Spain are thrown into doubt
The strategy is do nothing and hope it all goes away. Let's see how that works.
thank you @TMDaines @sullydnl - some voices of reason in this thread.
i feel like some people are so used to being anti tory that the default is to blame them on pretty much everything. i'm as left and labour supporting as they come, but can see the logic with the current plan, and applaud them for taking it. as can be seen from this thread, it's not going to be a popular option to take (at least initially).
i feel like some people are so used to being anti tory that the default is to blame them on pretty much everything. i'm as left and labour supporting as they come, but can see the logic with the current plan, and applaud them for taking it. as can be seen from this thread, it's not going to be a popular option to take (at least initially).