• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Coronavirus

scaramanga said:
Every time I've heard that claim it's accompanied with a comparison to the common cold, stating that they're the same kind of virus.

That's only true in the same sense that a Fiesta and a 720S are both cars.

More credible people compare it to SARS for which it seems immunity does exist.
Click to expand...

I think we just don't know for certain right now but I would imagine experts would now be quietly thinking you are right. It's going that way.
 
Legohamster said:
You are quite correct

However the full lock down will not be looked back on as a good idea.

the fall out is already happening and people are suffering because of it
Click to expand...

A full early lockdown and a comprehensive track and trace system and we would now be fully open with a lot less dead.

What they did was some weird indecisive brick fest.
 
LutonSpurs said:
I think we just don't know for certain right now but I would imagine experts would now be quietly thinking you are right. It's going that way.
Click to expand...
I think any hesitation is simply being cautious - the risk of announcing immunity exists when it doesn't is far greater than the reverse.
 
LutonSpurs said:
A full early lockdown and a comprehensive track and trace system and we would now be fully open with a lot less dead.

What they did was some weird indecisive brick fest.
Click to expand...

shielding the at risk and care homes means we wouldn’t have to have shut down fully.

We are now going to have an unacceptable unemployment levels and buffoons in charge with no idea how to stop it.
 
SpurMeUp said:
Can you privately order an Anti-Body test? Super Drug were offering one, but I think the government stepped in and stopped it? Or is there an NHS antibody test available?

Also if you had the virus with mild symptoms, would you produce enough antibodies for the test to identify?
Click to expand...

You might want to take two or three tests to be more certain that you have some immunity as the accuracy can be suss. The last thing you want is to expose yourself in the false understanding you have had it and are immune.
Or save your cash, don’t accept you have had it and maintain your disciplines.
 
Legohamster said:
shielding the at risk and care homes means we wouldn’t have to have shut down fully.

We are now going to have an unacceptable unemployment levels and buffoons in charge with no idea how to stop it.
Click to expand...

That was never suggested and in hindsight we know it may have been the best option.
 
Interesting and concerning the latest developments of coronavirus being more airborne than first anticipated.

Also, it seems the news was published as they felt the WHO were not listening to the evidence as much as they should have. Not for one moment saying WHO is quite what Trump mentions, but it's clear it does need some reform.
 
scaramanga said:
Those are all really, really low numbers.

Insignificant in terms of public policy.
Click to expand...

They are also really really s.h.i.t numbers when compared with Germany - particularly if you are a family member of one of the 60,000 people who have died in the UK (Germany, for the record, has less than 10,000 deaths - largely as a result of having a competent government).
 
Mikey10 said:
They are also really really s.h.i.t numbers when compared with Germany - particularly if you are a family member of one of the 60,000 people who have died in the UK (Germany, for the record, has less than 10,000 deaths - largely as a result of having a competent government).
Click to expand...
They're really not big enough numbers for anyone to be worrying about in a public health sense. I suspect those numbers will become even more insignificant as we fall further below the average death rate and realise that most would have died fairly soon anyway.
 
scaramanga said:
They're really not big enough numbers for anyone to be worrying about in a public health sense. I suspect those numbers will become even more insignificant as we fall further below the average death rate and realise that most would have died fairly soon anyway.
Click to expand...

Still thousands of people have died who were not geriatric. Thousands...
 
scaramanga said:
They're really not big enough numbers for anyone to be worrying about in a public health sense. I suspect those numbers will become even more insignificant as we fall further below the average death rate and realise that most would have died fairly soon anyway.
Click to expand...

What are the rules to your absurd philosophy? How old and ill does a person have to be before you stop trying to let them live as long as possible?
 
LutonSpurs said:
What are the rules to your absurd philosophy? How old and ill does a person have to be before you stop trying to let them live as long as possible?
Click to expand...
Depends on the cost.

If the balance is fudging the economy and the mental health for millions of otherwise healthy people, it's a fairly simple equation.
 
Diamond Lights said:
Interesting and concerning the latest developments of coronavirus being more airborne than first anticipated.

Also, it seems the news was published as they felt the WHO were not listening to the evidence as much as they should have. Not for one moment saying WHO is quite what Trump mentions, but it's clear it does need some reform.
Click to expand...

WHO made some pretty some pretty questionable judgement calls and critically many came early on in this whole pandemic. The problem is as far as I could see is that they were the gold star of voices to listen to at the start
 
scaramanga said:
Depends on the cost.

If the balance is fudging the economy and the mental health for millions of otherwise healthy people, it's a fairly simple equation.
Click to expand...

That doesn't answer my question. You know it is entirely subjective and could never be measured in anyway hence why the need for lockdown has been entirely justifiable and ethical.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back