Wumminator
The Qatar Pounder
even if there was no virus....
what is wrong with people?
even if there was no virus....
I asked you about the Spectator article but next time I will try to be clearer. And I don't disagree with the conclusion, I just think that the conclusion is more nuanced than what The Spectator wrote.Then be more forthright next time.
And if you disagree with the conclusion of that study, that's fine. We know SO LITTLE about Covid-19 and its impact on children (and everyone obviously)
What are you on about?If people were disciplined and unified, this thread would've been locked already. But nobody accounted for the entitled and affluent, like-minded individuals. Let's face it. Our desire for "freedom" is what fecked us here. Damn majority. Why don't I live in New Zealand?
even if there was no virus....
what is wrong with people?
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
If nobody leaves their home the virus would die. Obviously.What are you on about?
By any measure the British public have been incredibly obedient during this lockdown.
Okay yeah that's a point, but as people do need to leave their home it's a ridiculous one. Obviously.If nobody leaves their home the virus would die. Obviously.
Welcome to a ridiculous reality. Everything is. A hard lockdown (with food deliveries, obviously ) was the only thing that could've saved us from this economic and medical ridiculousness. Now we have to give a little and take a little to make a living. We have to find a balance between death and livelihoods. Now that is ridiculous.Okay yeah that's a point, but as people do need to leave their home it's a ridiculous one. Obviously.
Supermarkets don't have the ability to deliver food to every household in this country.Welcome to a ridiculous reality. Everything is. A hard lockdown (with food deliveries, obviously ) was the only thing that could've saved us from this economic and medical ridiculousness. Now we have to give a little and take a little to make a living. We have to find a balance between death and livelihoods. Now that is ridiculous.
Seriously. Why do most people have to leave their home? Explain it to me as if I don't have a developed frontal lobe. ALL we have to do is stay indoors for 21 feckin days dude! That can't be that hard? Ramp up 100% hygienic deliveries for goodness sake.Supermarkets don't have the ability to deliver food to every household in this country.
Even if they did, they'd need thousands of workers in a warehouses preparing deliveries, you'd need mechanics maintaining the vans. Why am I even explaining this?
Everyone who has a developed frontal lobes knows that people have to leave their homes and in the end there is a trade off between health and economy. Not in a single country on our planet is going to lockdown until there's vaccine.
We're going to have to come up with a new normal. A normal, that allows us to have some sort of economy, whilst keeping infections to a minimum thus not collapsing our health service.
To organize those deliveries you will need a lot of people and those people will have to leave their home.Seriously. Why do most people have to leave their home? Explain it to me as if I don't have a developed frontal lobe. ALL we have to do is stay indoors for 21 feckin days dude! That can't be that hard? Ramp up 100% hygienic deliveries for goodness sake.
Are you also saying it is impossible to stay indoors for 21 days?To organize those deliveries you will need a lot of people and those people will have to leave their home.
Well most people don't have access to deliveries, so in many cases it's impossible to stay indoors for 21 days. Also I'm not sure what staying indoors is supposed to do, you want people to drastically limit contacts with people that aren't in their household but going outside won't see catch the virus or spread it as long as you keep your distances.Are you also saying it is impossible to stay indoors for 21 days?
It's clearly impossible for people to live and for all of those people to stay indoors for 3 weeks. Think about it for more than a few seconds.Are you also saying it is impossible to stay indoors for 21 days?
You've answered your own question.Seriously. Why do most people have to leave their home? Explain it to me as if I don't have a developed frontal lobe. ALL we have to do is stay indoors for 21 feckin days dude! That can't be that hard? Ramp up 100% hygienic deliveries for goodness sake.
No offence, but I don't quite follow that bolded part.Well most people don't have access to deliveries, so in many cases it's impossible to stay indoors for 21 days. Also I'm not sure what staying indoors is supposed to do, you want people to drastically limit contacts with people that aren't in their household but going outside won't see catch the virus or spread it as long as you keep your distances.
Yes.Are you also saying it is impossible to stay indoors for 21 days?
OK, I thought about it for 10. Supposed someone leaves their home for whatever reason. If they follow a strict social distancing regime and adhere to all the rules set out then the virus would also bite the dust. So, staying indoors for 21 days, which I still think is possible, isn't quite so vital.It's clearly impossible for people to live and for all of those people to stay indoors for 3 weeks. Think about it for more than a few seconds.
The virus could have been snuffed out if the majority adhered to a hard lockdown. Not everyone needs to stay indoors. Essential services, and all the rest can be excluded (on the condition that they respect what's happening and take the proper precautions.)Yes.
Explain to me how you're going to get essential services if nobody runs power stations, warehouses, drives trucks, nobody for emergency gas/electrical/fire, what about food manufacturing? Yeah we may have enough for 21 days, then once that is up nobody has been making food for 21 days so we have nothing to eat.
Then you get all the emergency services.
No, not really, because those infected in hospitals could still pass on to NHS staff who then have to go home to their families and kids, who then have to goto school because their parents are key workers, who can then pass it on to other kids, which pass it on to their parents.OK, I thought about it for 10. Supposed someone leaves their home for whatever reason. If they follow a strict social distancing regime and adhere to all the rules set out then the virus would also bite the dust. So, staying indoors for 21 days, which I still think is possible, isn't quite so vital.
21 feckin days. I stayed indoors for 21 days. It wasn't that hard. The maskless people walking down our road clearly disagree.
You don't need to stay indoors all the time, you can go outside as long as you keep your distances with people that aren't from your household. For some reason you are fixated on staying indoors for 21 days.No offence, but I don't quite follow that bolded part.
As for the rest, we have now entered years of shite. We will suffer for years man! All because we couldn't snuff it out when we had the chance (like NZ). Ah well. So be it.
I thought like that about a month ago, but the more I read things and see what's happening the less I believe it would work.The virus could have been snuffed out if the majority adhered to a hard lockdown. Not everyone needs to stay indoors. Essential services, and all the rest can be excluded (on the condition that they respect what's happening and take the proper precautions.)
C'mon. Tell me you agree. We could have beaten this thing.
True... So, what you're saying is it is absolutely impossible to contain the spread?No, not really, because those infected in hospitals could still pass on to NHS staff who then have to go home to their families and kids, who then have to goto school because their parents are key workers, who can then pass it on to other kids, which pass it on to their parents.
Open the country up 21 days later and boom, it all starts again pretty much.
Yeah, I've mutated. I'm no longer fixated with staying indoors for 21 days.You don't need to stay indoors at all the time, you can go outside as long as keep your distances with people that aren't from your household. For some reason you are fixated on staying indoors for 21 days.
How is it that this makes so much sense, yet no country did it? Surely it's not just a case of hindsight. It's so frustrating that the best minds on the planet couldn't reach that simple conclusion.I thought like that about a month ago, but the more I read things and see what's happening the less I believe it would work.
Only way it would have worked is a complete lock down of the country, nobody in or out. And lockdown of regions as it started. That way it would have been contained to certain areas. Maybe the north of England would never have had a case. Maybe Wales wouldn't, that way, those areas could have produced like normal, while the hub cities were locked down. It's too late for that now anyway.
I think we can limit the spread, and contain it to a certain extent, but it's not a case of contain and it's gone. It's contain and slow the rate of infection down so NHS can cope. Eventually waiting for a vaccine, or a drug to deal with it, or herd immunity.True... So, what you're saying is it is absolutely impossible to contain the spread?
Yeah, I've mutated. I'm no longer fixated with staying indoors for 21 days.
Think it's very difficult to police tbh, the locking borders was much more simple to me, but the threat wasn't realised fast enough. We had warning of mass deaths and infections from other virus' that originated in the east, but they never came true. That's probably part of why it wasn't taken as seriously.How is it that this makes so much sense, yet no country did it? Surely it's not just a case of hindsight. It's so frustrating that the best minds on the planet couldn't reach that simple conclusion.
Because it's easier said than done, where did it start? Which regions had or didn't had the virus? In theory it works because we are omniscient but in reality we know that the virus is somewhere when it's obvious because we can't test everyone in a matter of seconds. Think about it this way, the US have the best testing capacities at the moment and they barely tested the equivalent of London.How is it that this makes so much sense, yet no country did it? Surely it's not just a case of hindsight. It's so frustrating that the best minds on the planet couldn't reach that simple conclusion.
The way we can 'beat this thing' is by herd immunity.The virus could have been snuffed out if the majority adhered to a hard lockdown. Not everyone needs to stay indoors. Essential services, and all the rest can be excluded (on the condition that they respect what's happening and take the proper precautions.)
C'mon. Tell me you agree. We could have beaten this thing.
I get itYou've answered your own question.
The people who deliver the food need to leave their homes. The people who process the orders need to leave their home. The mechanics mending this vans need to leave their homes. The cleaners disinfecting the facilities these people use need to leave their homes etc etc
Do you get it yet?
Are essential Service staff immune?The virus could have been snuffed out if the majority adhered to a hard lockdown. Not everyone needs to stay indoors. Essential services, and all the rest can be excluded (on the condition that they respect what's happening and take the proper precautions.)
C'mon. Tell me you agree. We could have beaten this thing.
Some places did similar. That’s why countries in Europe are relaxing their lockdowns now. A lot of places had very strict rules where you couldn’t leave your town, unless there was a very good reason. They also closed borders. We cant even control or test the people coming onto an island.How is it that this makes so much sense, yet no country did it? Surely it's not just a case of hindsight. It's so frustrating that the best minds on the planet couldn't reach that simple conclusion.
Wow.@Shakesey ,
My man, don't feel bad, or like we are against you. It's not personal. I see you're starting to understand our point of view a bit more now, while still holding your own.
Glad you haven't turned this into a childish argument like can so easily happen.
The good thing is we are all learning about what's happening and other people's opinions and views.
No hard feelings!@Shakesey ,
My man, don't feel bad, or like we are against you. It's not personal. I see you're starting to understand our point of view a bit more now, while still holding your own.
Glad you haven't turned this into a childish argument like can so easily happen.
The good thing is we are all learning about what's happening and other people's opinions and views.
I'm not doing that at all. From our latest death figures you can assume aminimum of around 20-30% of the population already HAS had the virus. In all likelyhood it's going to be something well above that as we have no fully accurate way of knowing how many people get it without showing symptoms. We're still getting over 4,000 new cases a day just from people who are being tested. From the number of recorded deaths, the virus IS running riot. It is going through care homes. It has infecting "at risk" people faster than our government has been able to test them.You’re doing it again, noods. Pretending that letting the virus run riot wouldn’t also cause economic impacts and non virus-related deaths. As per my previous post, the cost (to the economy and in terms of people dying) of not flattening the curve of an outbreak would go far beyond the numbers of people killed by the virus. You can’t keep claiming that the lockdown alone is what’s causing the economic hardship we’ll endure in the next year or two. It’s actually way more complicated than that and the economy would likely be scuppered whatever we do.
I dont see the virus getting weaker. Where have you heard that?I think we can limit the spread, and contain it to a certain extent, but it's not a case of contain and it's gone. It's contain and slow the rate of infection down so NHS can cope. Eventually waiting for a vaccine, or a drug to deal with it, or herd immunity.
There's been talk of the virus becoming weaker the longer it goes on, hopefully if that is true then the herd immunity thing won't be as bad as everyone initially thought. However, studies also show the opposite aswell, so who knows.
What I think is going to happen is social distancing rules for quite some time anyway, and those who manage to stick to them will be pretty fine. The people flouting them will probably catch it in groups and all be infected within the next couple months, and hopefully that builds the immunity so they can't catch it again.
Once the community or spreaders(those who ignore social distancing) have had it, hopefully then the rate of spread drastically drops and it'll die out that way.
Obviously it's not ideal as even those trying to practice social distancing still have a chance of catching it.
Cant remember exactly, I'll try finding it. I look at allsorts during break at work, it was a piece about how virus' can naturally become weaker over time and how this from some testing was looking like it could be on a similar path.I dont see the virus getting weaker. Where have you heard that?