SteveAWOL
Chris Jones
Either those sneaky Germans have devised a weather machine allowing them to enjoy summer temperatures all year round or they enjoy cold fresh air more than us Brits...
-
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
- Thread starter markysimmo
- Start date
Yet they've had a spike at almost precisely the same time.
So the spikes are clearly seasonal, the size of the spikes are down to how much we want to give away to avoid getting a cough.
Mikey10
Jimmy Neighbour
Amazing to think that around 60,000 people in the U.K. have died so far from having a cough.
tommysvr
Vedran Corluka
A good article on the steps Australia is taking to come out of lockdown and avoid going back into it: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-10-25/coronavirus-preparing-for-the-third-wave/12802070
We have the luxury of thinking about this. Is the UK is still tripping over what to call the fake lockdown?
We have the luxury of thinking about this. Is the UK is still tripping over what to call the fake lockdown?
Most of them were probably not far from death anyway.
How many young and fit people have died from it?
How many didn't even notice having it?
Gilzeantoscore
Justin Edinburgh
It is on the record that survivors of the virus, even comparatively fit ones can had on going serious organ damage particularly to the heart. Your dismissal of this disease does you no credit. But then again, I guess other people's health doesn't amount to much when there is money to be made.
I've seen that there are a few (meaning virtually none) that have had COVID-19 and also have some long term conditions.
So far nobody credible has gone further than to say there may be a link.
So if you're asking me how much I care about something that might not exist and, if it does, only exists in immeasurably small numbers, my answer is not at all.
markysimmo
Johnny nice-tits
Now know 5 of my friends who have had it and all had real minor symptoms
None of their other halves and kids have had it though (all tested and clear)
ricky2tricky4city
Steffen Freund
Other people's health comes in many guises. There are clearly symptoms of the virus and then side effects of dealing with the virus.
There is no evidence to prove or disprove that @scaramanga approach would have a greater overall impact on people's health (all health) than any approach you would choose to take. We simply don't know.
So although it's easy to think 'you don't give a f.ck', it could potentially turn out the other way?
Grays_1890
Chris Jones
Its a bigger issue than money, the government has decided that some peoples health means more to people than others anyway, joe public has not decided that. As I said earlier even with the measures that have included lockdowns and restrictions the NHS is still priritised on Covid, rightly so, its a global pandemic but the backlog to treat other cases of illness is still growing, there was absolutely no dent made in it from the first lockdown which was suppose to be the point. So as an example 3m people missing cancer screenings thus far and your chances of survival 3 times higher catching it early, its not a good look. So other peoples health does amount to a hell of alot but we should be looking at big picture as far as I am concerned because a parent having to tell its child why he cant get the cancer treatment he or she requires is no different to kids worrying about their elderly parents exposure to Covid. The situation is fudged
Suggesting a million is a lot is simply failing to grasp just how many people there are and how many people die all the time.
Mortality is around 1% of 1% of the population. That's not a number worth worrying about.
Last edited:
johnola
Jermaine Jenas
60,000? From covid? It’s not even that many who have died with covid let alone because of it.
Grays_1890
Chris Jones
Conversely if the long term effects were more widespread and non discriminative surely football for example would be shut down, along with other sports,? Surely the risk would be too high?
Legohamster
Ian Walker
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www....ys-many-would-have-vulnerable-died-first/amp/
backed up by the ONS
it’s amazing how we’ve found a cure for the flu this year as well
That’s a made up figure
Even if it wasn’t - that’s still short of the 200,000 predicted to die because of the lockdown by the government.
A million out of over 7 billion world wide?
how many will die world wide because of lockdown?
https://www.newscientist.com/articl...15-million-indian-children-risk-malnutrition/
115 million children in one country will suffer food shortages.
Or how about those 4 babies that died in Australia because of the lockdown?
slowly the truth about what happened back in March with the NHS is coming out now, people left to die of other things, covid patients shipped off to care homes and others giving DNR notes.
whilst people clapped, they killed granny.
ricky2tricky4city
Steffen Freund
Cut and paste it then you tease
Legohamster
Ian Walker
As part of a three-month investigation into the Government’s handling of the crisis during the lockdown weeks, we have spoken to more than 50 witnesses, including doctors, paramedics, bereaved families, charities, care home workers, politicians and advisers to the government. Our inquiries have unearthed new documents and previously unpublished hospital data. Together, they show what happened while most of the country stayed at home.
There were 59,000 extra deaths in England and Wales compared with previous years during the first six months of the pandemic. This consisted of 26,000 excess fatalities in care homes and another 25,000 in people’s own homes.
Surprisingly, only 8,000 of those excess deaths were in hospital, even though 30,000 people died from the virus on the wards. This shows that many deaths that would normally have taken place in hospital had been displaced to people’s homes and the care homes.
This huge increase of deaths outside hospitals was a mixture of coronavirus cases – many of whom were never tested – and people who were not given treatment for other conditions that they would have had access to in normal times. Ambulance and admission teams were told to be more selective about who should be taken into hospital, with specific instructions to exclude many elderly people. GPs were asked to identify frail patients who were to be left at home even if they were seriously ill with the virus.
In some regions, care home residents dying of COVID-19 were denied access to hospitals even though their families believed their lives could have been saved.
The sheer scale of the resulting body count that piled up in the nation’s homes meant special body retrieval teams had to be formed by police and fire phalanx to transfer corpses from houses to mortuaries. Some are said to have run out of body bags.
NHS data obtained by Insight shows that access to potentially life-saving intensive care was not made available to the vast majority of people who died with the virus. Only one in six COVID-19 patients who lost their lives in hospital during the first wave had been given intensive care. This suggests that of the 47,000 people who died of the virus inside and outside hospitals, just an estimated 5,000 – one in nine – received the highest critical care, despite the government claiming that intensive care capacity was never breached.
The chief medical officer, Chris Whitty, commissioned an age-based frailty score system that was circulated for consultation in the health service as a potential “triage tool” at the beginning of the crisis. It was never formally published.
It gave instructions that in the event of the NHS being overwhelmed, patients over the age of 80 should be denied access to intensive care and in effect excluded many people over the age of 60 from life-saving treatment. Testimony by doctors has confirmed that the tool was used by medics to prevent elderly patients blocking up intensive care beds.
Indeed, new data from the NHS shows that the proportion of over-60s with the coronavirus who received intensive care halved between the middle of March and the end of April as the pressure weighed heavily on hospitals during the height of the pandemic. The proportion of the elderly being admitted then increased again when the pressure was lifted off the NHS as COVID-19 cases fell in the summer months.
Grays_1890
Chris Jones
The issue I have is that when we went into lockdown the NHS went into Covid lockdown and since we have come out we have got nowhere near making a dent in cases that lockdown was suppose to help with. We cant continue to just have a one track approach where we prioritize Covid deaths over in other which are more deadly, more common (one in two will get cancer) and have a wider age of attack. I am not saying by any stretch we should not treat Covid but it has to stop being a one of the other approach now, otherwise you can level the same argument about Covid deaths and ask is ok to just sit back and let people die because they did not die of Covid, I would love people to put what they believe is an acceptable death rate from other illness?
johnola
Jermaine Jenas
It’s too extensive. Essentially the delay to lockdown causes a spike in admissions the nhs was underprepared for. There then seems to have been a panic accompanied by a tight suppression of the politically unpalatable triaging rules, and also the purge of elderly into care homes. I guess D notice sort of stuff...
The article surmises that these decisions were made to disguise the inevitable overwhelming of nhs resources in the first wave. But this was done by shovelling most of the deaths into care homes and private homes out of sight. The nhs was protected and saved, but cannot be truly said to have coped.
Disturbingly most nhs covid deaths were elderly people on bog standard wards - because the triage process pushed the most vulnerable group out of scope for Intensive care treatment (Based on age, sex, health, frailties). Meanwhile there was actually capacity in icu......