RussG Posted July 2, 2022 Share Posted July 2, 2022 I've joined the club as well today, urgh. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted July 2, 2022 Moderator Share Posted July 2, 2022 2 hours ago, mjmooney said: Obviously if this is not translating into a big rise in hospital admissions/ventilator cases/deaths it's not too worrying Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted July 2, 2022 VT Supporter Share Posted July 2, 2022 3 minutes ago, blandy said: Yes, I know. But that is measuring hospital admissions (for whatever reason) of people who are covid-positive. Which is not the same as people who are hospitalised purely due to severe covid symptoms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted July 2, 2022 Moderator Share Posted July 2, 2022 19 minutes ago, mjmooney said: Yes, I know. But that is measuring hospital admissions (for whatever reason) of people who are covid-positive. Which is not the same as people who are hospitalised purely due to severe covid symptoms. Indeed. Yet it's a like for like graph - the trend is back upwards and now higher than it was in march before the relaxing took place. it's just a piece of information. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted July 2, 2022 VT Supporter Share Posted July 2, 2022 It's only local and anecdotal, but I continue to rely on reports from the frontline by Her Next Door. And she confirms that covid per se is so far not proving too big a problem for the hospital (Bradford). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted July 2, 2022 Share Posted July 2, 2022 In Nottingham, Covid cases themselves seem to be barely a blip on the hospital radar at this point, but for many, many years we'll be feeling the effects of the lockdowns, delayed and cancelled procedures, and people either unable or unwilling to get concerns checked out early. A small anecdotal insight into the current pressures due to the backlog, in one of my daughter's reviews, I noticed they'd flagged a surgical procedure we're waiting for as an emergency. I queried it, as we'd like it doing, and the sooner the better, but it's certainly not life threatening, but it is going to improve her quality of life. What I was told was "With the covid backlog, if we don't mark it as an emergency, it's simply not getting done. If we mark it as an emergency we can probably get her in within a couple of months, so we have to say it is.". It's going to be fascinating reading when we have good visibility of the long term impacts of the lockdowns, and whether they really were in our best interests. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicho Posted July 2, 2022 Share Posted July 2, 2022 1 hour ago, Davkaus said: In Nottingham, Covid cases themselves seem to be barely a blip on the hospital radar at this point, but for many, many years we'll be feeling the effects of the lockdowns, delayed and cancelled procedures, and people either unable or unwilling to get concerns checked out early. A small anecdotal insight into the current pressures due to the backlog, in one of my daughter's reviews, I noticed they'd flagged a surgical procedure we're waiting for as an emergency. I queried it, as we'd like it doing, and the sooner the better, but it's certainly not life threatening, but it is going to improve her quality of life. What I was told was "With the covid backlog, if we don't mark it as an emergency, it's simply not getting done. If we mark it as an emergency we can probably get her in within a couple of months, so we have to say it is.". It's going to be fascinating reading when we have good visibility of the long term impacts of the lockdowns, and whether they really were in our best interests. Obviously not good for your daughters situation so sorry to hear that. But in general I think looking back on the lockdowns in hindsight is really not useful, it was completely unprecedented and ultimately had it been more deadly (potentially as deadly as they thought) then not locking down could have been catastrophic. Better safe than sorry approach was the only approach, regardless of what we may think of how the government handled implementing it (acting late, not following rules ect). I think on the basis of its actual impact the lockdowns will be shown to have been overkill with a dramatic impact on the NHS. My dad is still waiting for checks on bladder cancer that should have been done in March. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted July 2, 2022 Share Posted July 2, 2022 (edited) I disagree @Nicho, but you might have thought I had different motives. I think it's very useful - not for the purpose of throwing people under the bus, because as you say, it was unprecedented in the modern world, incredibly scary, and we're never really going to know just how bad it could have got if we'd just let it rip. I think it's vital to research and discuss the longterm costs though, and learn about what the real impact of the lockdown has been, economically, socially, effects on health, the education of the kids who had sub-standard schooling for, what, 18 months? I thought at the time it was absolutely necessary, and I think you're right "better safe than sorry" when we look back at the context of those Italian hospitals. We couldn't risk it. Looking back on it in hindsight, from my perspective, isn't to initiate the blamegame, it's to learn just what adverse impacts it's had, which ones we could still correct, which ones we can't, and allows us to make more informed decisions should we ever have to go through something like this again. It was very difficult to have a conversation about the side-effects and costs associated with lockdown at the time without being accused of being heartless, part of a death cult, or an anti-vaxx conspiracy-theorist. Although I was broadly in favour of the lockdowns, I remember getting some scathing responses on here one time when I broached the question of how low the bodycount had to get before the cure was worse than the disease (probably wasn't the time, in fairness). I think it's vital to have a look back on what we actually consented to, with the benefit of some of the fear and other emotions taken out of it. Edited July 2, 2022 by Davkaus 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted July 2, 2022 Moderator Share Posted July 2, 2022 10 minutes ago, Davkaus said: we're never really going to know just how bad it could have got if we'd just let it rip. We're not, but extrapolations can be made, and it would have been extremely, extremely bad. I think the more useful looking back is around the closure of stuff like schools and maybe Universities, because in terms of the medical side (hospitals) it's entirely logical to think (given how bad the hospitals got anyway (and still haven't recovered) all those operations that were cancelled and so on - it would absolutely have been far far more if there had been no lockdowns and more spreading of virus. During the worst of it I initially thought the Swedish approach might prove better, and then I changed my mind and thought it might end up looking a mistake and now I don't know (I don't suppose anyone can). There are so many variables apart from just lockdown/don't, because stuff like demographics, trust in Government, general population health, state of health services, the amount of travel necessary, the climate, how well ventilated public buildings are and so much more are all significant factors that differ between countries. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidcow Posted July 2, 2022 VT Supporter Share Posted July 2, 2022 Can't believe people are still questioning the lockdown. The NHS only barely, and in all honesty probably didn't cope with the pandemic as it was even with the lockdown. If we hadn't have locked down it would have been absolutely crushed, so many unvaccinated people would have died due to becoming seriously ill at the same time. Oxygen would have run out, life support beds would have been totally inadequate. People would have been dying in the streets and in their homes NHS would have lost so many more people to deaths and unavailability due to illness so there wouldn't have been any staff in anyway. Absenteeism due to illness would have seen the food supply chain absolutely collapse, supermarkets wouldn't have had any staff to open anyway. We were very very close to much of this happening even with lockdown. 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted July 2, 2022 Share Posted July 2, 2022 1 minute ago, sidcow said: Can't believe people are still questioning the lockdown. This. There we’re over 40,000 people in hospital with Covid at one stage. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted July 2, 2022 Share Posted July 2, 2022 Who's questioning the lockdown? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xela Posted July 2, 2022 Share Posted July 2, 2022 19 minutes ago, Davkaus said: Who's questioning the lockdown? I was hoping the lockdown would continue for another 10 years or so, until i'd retired! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seat68 Posted July 5, 2022 Share Posted July 5, 2022 My daughter the hypochondriac has brought it into the house. As I am triple jabbed and therefore invisible I haven't caught it....yet. The problem is just over this past weekend she has had aids, cancer and a gangrenous foot, I just assumed she was laying it on thick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted July 15, 2022 Share Posted July 15, 2022 (edited) NHS offering 4th jabs by end of November, to everyone over 50. Edited July 15, 2022 by chrisp65 Everywhere! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidcow Posted July 15, 2022 VT Supporter Share Posted July 15, 2022 1 hour ago, chrisp65 said: NHS offering 4th jabs by end of November, to everyone over 50. Ace. I will be getting mine ASAP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KentVillan Posted July 19, 2022 Share Posted July 19, 2022 Noticed that Stones, Foden and Gundogan haven’t travelled to the US with the City squad because they “don’t meet the country’s entry requirements”. Gundogan apparently has only had one vaccine shot and then caught Covid when he was due to get his second. Fair enough. But sounds like Stones and Foden haven’t had it - or they’ve got serious criminal connections. Smart of City to not release any detailed info, but seems a bit bizarre that there are still players at top clubs who have probably succumbed to antivax misinformation, especially when their job involves regular travel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ml1dch Posted July 24, 2022 Share Posted July 24, 2022 SHAFT! 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rugeley Villa Posted July 24, 2022 Share Posted July 24, 2022 I haven’t got a monkey, don’t intend to have a monkey and will just stay away from monkeys . Next year it will be Crab pox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted July 24, 2022 Share Posted July 24, 2022 2 minutes ago, Rugeley Villa said: . Next year it will be Crab pox Planning your seaside holiday already? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts