That's not what they said though is it? They said they didn't want to shut things down too soon, and felt it was worth the festival going ahead.
Why must people always deal in absolutes?
SARS CoV-2 coronavirus / Covid-19 (No tin foil hat silliness please)
- Thread starter Don't Kill Bill
- Start date
Why must people always deal in absolutes?
And that fecking Pool v Atletico game at Anfield
Mind you that one was probably worth it.
Prince Albert
Mild symptoms? Then why the feck is he being tested?
That's what it would mean. If you look at it from the experience of an individual ICU doctor though, they might have seen only one instance in their hospital - probably in someone 70+ with other risk factors. They wouldn't necessarily see anything other than another pneumonia. Hopefully someone is looking at the history now, it would be great to think that with hindsight we could see something in the data.
Maybe too great though, and certainly bordering on wishful thinking until an antibody test tells us who has had the virus.
Why not?
Spain
Cases: 47,610 (+7.937, 3.166 in ICU)
Deaths: 3,434 (+738)
Recovered: 5,367
If you look at worldmeters they have added deaths throughout the day after the last official figures and when today's official numbers come out they added 443 more but the official figure is 738 in last 24 hours.
Cases: 47,610 (+7.937, 3.166 in ICU)
Deaths: 3,434 (+738)
Recovered: 5,367
If you look at worldmeters they have added deaths throughout the day after the last official figures and when today's official numbers come out they added 443 more but the official figure is 738 in last 24 hours.
Last edited:
Because the NHS isn’t testing regular people with average symptoms
If me or you called up with mild symptoms we will be told to stay at home and self isolate. Not a chance we’d be tested until we had to go to hospital.
He's the future head of state, he's not a regular person.
He is a regular person though. If he died there would just be another head of state in waiting. If you think it’s alright that certain people get more or better treatment then knock yourself out.
I think that a lot of that depends on what percentage of cases are asymptomatic or very mild. Also, didn't China broaden their definition of Coronavirus symptoms for testing around February, thus an increase in confirmed cases? It's very possible to me that in that time, a lot more people could have already been exposed to it, thinking it was just the common cold or a bad bout of flu. Seems crazy but I remember in late January being bed ridden, had a pounding headache, fever and body aches. Probably just the regular flu, but it makes you think.
Yea I know they’re not saying you can’t do it, it just seemed a strange thing to say can be overlooked when I first heard it.
You don’t need to SORN a car with no MOT, but insurance renewal is a fair point I hadn’t considered, I think the vehicle needs an MOT to insure doesn’t it?
More to it than I’d initially thought tbf.
Getting back from the garage and going back to collect is another fair point, yes.
Those assumptions are based on NHS guidelines, not private healthcare guidelines.
It would be quite a big deal of he died.
Local MP has written to them apparently.
He said, and I quote 'shutting will have little effect.
He was wrong and stop defending it.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...t-announces-mass-gatherings-continue-now.html
True, but its still illegal to drive without a current MOT and it invalidates your insurance. If the MOT's run out don't drive the car is best bet!
People live to politicise things... even pandemics.
Shame that all those people were forced (against their will) to go for a piss up at Cheltenham.
Of course people who have important positions should be tested first. Everyone was criticising Trump a week back for not getting a test.
Again though, testing shouldn’t be available to people just because they’re rich or some outdated traditions make them ‘important’.
What is his important position? What is Prince Charles doing on a daily basis?
That's exactly what they said, just one quick Google
“However based upon the current scientific advice from the Government's medical experts there is no rationale to close or cancel sporting events as things stand."
When people talk of failure in comms from the government and mixed messages this is exactly what it refers to. Expecting people to go from being told it's fine to be in a mass crowd to them then accepting they need to stay at home is ridiculous messaging
60,000 people at a largely outdoor meeting will have had little effect to the infection rates in a country of 60,000,000. Most people will spread this in confined areas, it's why we can't just shut down sporting events and say, that's good enough.
Exactly, "as things stand" is the key phrase.
it was the NHS which tested him
While it's difficult to find testing facilities to screen front line NHS staff I do think it important that there be enough tests kept in reserve for the richest among us to still get tested at the opening of a wallet.
I agree with you fully that he's a parasite but surely you can see that in the UK any member of the Royal Family is going to be getting preferential treatment for this. It's just the way the world works.
Their statement says he "met the criteria required for testing" but then also says he has mild symptoms. Weird. Maybe his age or underlying conditions had something to do with it?
Definitely. Especially those born into wealth because centuries ago people fought battles and declared themselves royalty. What would we do if those poor people didn’t survive?
If we can feasibly do 25k a day (and they’ve said we are ramping that up further) then we should 100% have drive thru testing available to the general public soon. If they can’t see how that would be worth the considerable resource then there’s definitely no exit strategy to this.
I didn't like the Atletico match being played but I looked recently and there wasn't any sign of a jump in cases in Liverpool or Manchester.
I know they will. It’s not just royalty either. There’s a high number of celebrities being tested and testing positive. When you compare that to the numbers actually declared you can see there’s a huge disparity. Doesn’t mean we shouldn’t get annoyed about it. In fact times like this are when we should be getting annoyed about it.
Exactly this. It's a different argument about whether we should have a royal family, but given we do and the constitution gives them importance their health is one of the priorities of state.
It's why we pay so much for their security.
I thought this quite comprehensive for figures across the world.
https://www.ft.com/coronavirus-latest
Also 'free to read', good for the FT.
https://www.ft.com/coronavirus-latest
Also 'free to read', good for the FT.
Last edited:
This is just patently untrue.
And you can't just change your argument (and say something incorrect anyway) because your initial statement has proven to be incorrect.
Also, who has said this bolded bit?
Finally, whatever the morality of testing Charles, he is not the same as Trump.
What he does and who he is are two different things. The queen is very old, he's next in line and if anything happened to him, William would very unexpectedly be next in line.
They have their own medical staff, anyway (the Medical Household, who are employed to look after members of the Royal Family).
I assume those celebrities are paying for it themselves rather than the government bending over backwards to look after them, which is what would happen with the Royal Family.
Why is it patently untrue?