Generic Virus Thread

[LakotaDakota]

1 hour ago, Seat68 said:

We don't choose though do we. We cant say well take the ones that have 3 months left. It takes asthma sufferers who are 30 but might live till they are 90. It takes someone who had cancer but is now in remission. It takes fit and healthy 70 year olds. 

But you can't choose who does from flu every year either. Yes I know it isn't the flu & we already have vaccines for that but a good flu season in the uk will see a few thousand die, a bad flu season will see 50,000 die, most of them will be old & vulnerablebut plentyof youngerpeopledie too. never once have we had daily figures of 1000+ being reported on every news outlet. No outrage over how unprepared the country is, no calls for lockdown & isolation to help prevent tens of thousands of people dying despite it maybe actually being a good preventative measure. People don't wear face masks even when they know they have the flu and knowing full well that if the elderly person on the train sat next to them gets it, it could be fatal.  Hell I would put money on every single one of you having gone to work, the pub, football, gigs etc when you have been I'll with flu like symptoms before and not even give a second thought about spreading it, even in the couple of years recently that we have seen nearly 50000 flu deaths.

Edited April 26, 2020 by LakotaDakota

[blandy]

1 minute ago, snowychap said:

Again, why the response? What point is there for me to consider your musings on the motives or requirements of others?

..it doesn't actually represent what they thought or meant.

Why the response? it's a discussion board. I'm interested in your thoughts, and those of others. I don't think either of us know their individual motives fully, if at all.

It's up to you to consider or not my "musings". Though you seem to have no issue with writing your musings on what they thought or meant (and nor should you).

You are assigning opinion on what you think they mean. And I'm doing exactly the same - plus "they" is not one person. You may well be right on some, me on others, or neither of us. Perhaps (it would be nice) if some of them could reply and explain their motivations. I've nothing else to do today than read this board (apart from all the stuff I'm putting off, like the washing up...)

[DCJonah]

2 minutes ago, sidcow said:

BBC news just did quite a piece about how the Government will start to ease out of lockdown.  Pressure is certainly starting to build. 

Awful use of language I felt from one of the correspondents who called the stay at home orders a "rather blunt instrument" 

I wouldn't consider orders which have almost certainly saved the lives of probably hundreds of thousands of people as "blunt" 

However it definitely shows a shifting of attitude from the press, it's obviously going to be the next big story. 

Lockdown will have to be relaxed at some point. But this government have made such a mess of things so far, that I dread to see what the spike in cases will be once things are relaxed. 

 

[DCJonah]

1 minute ago, LakotaDakota said:

But you can't choose who does from flu every year either. Yes I know it isn't the flu & we already have vaccines for that but a good flu season in the uk will see a few thousand die, a bad flu season will see 50,000 die, most of them will be old & vulnerablebut plentyof youngerpeopledie too. never once have we had daily figures of 1000+ being reported on every news outlet. No outrage over how unprepared the country is, no calls for lockdown & isolation to help prevent tens of thousands of people dying. People don't wear face masks even when they know they have the flu and knowing full well that if the elderly person on the train sat next to them gets it, it could be fatal.  Hell I would put money on every single one of you having gone to work, the pub, football, gigs etc when you have been I'll with flu like symptoms before and not even give a second thought about spreading it, even in the couple of years recently that we have seen nearly 50000 flu deaths.

I've asked you about 5 times and never got an answer. 

If you believe all this, why do you think the world has gone into lockdown? What's your opinion on that? You seem to stress that all this is normal, so why isn't the world acting normal in your opinion?

[bannedfromHandV]

2 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

But why are you straying into that territory? I’m not saying you shouldn’t. There’s probably very valid points to be made. But what is it?

The only real point I see is the death toll doesn’t quite show the whole picture because some of those people would likely have died this year anyway. 
 

Fine. That’s a perfectly valid point and one that’s been made before. If that’s the only point being made then I’m not sure why it’s being made again and again. 
 

If there’s some other point beyond that then that’s what I’m asking. What is the point being made if it’s not that?

If I’m being totally honest I’ve ended up in the middle of a debate inadvertently here, I wasn’t looking for a fight, I made the mistake of logging on to VT first thing when I woke up, and yes, I slept in til 11am

I just get wound up by what I deem to be ‘think of the children’ type responses and perspectives. But then I’m probably just projecting my own tensions and frustrations on to here, so I’ll duck out of continuing what is a morbid discussion. 

[bannedfromHandV]

3 minutes ago, snowychap said:

Ha ha ha.

Yep, there we have it. Right on cue.

Come on, so what do you consider the motives to be then?

Pure evil/disregard or a lack of intelligence (emotional or otherwise)?

Nothing is black and white and I’m sure everyone has dealt with conflicting inner feelings on this over the past couple of months.

[Seat68]

4 minutes ago, LakotaDakota said:

But you can't choose who does from flu every year either. Yes I know it isn't the flu & we already have vaccines for that but a good flu season in the uk will see a few thousand die, a bad flu season will see 50,000 die, most of them will be old & vulnerablebut plentyof youngerpeopledie too. never once have we had daily figures of 1000+ being reported on every news outlet. No outrage over how unprepared the country is, no calls for lockdown & isolation to help prevent tens of thousands of people dying despite it maybe actually being a good preventative measure. People don't wear face masks even when they know they have the flu and knowing full well that if the elderly person on the train sat next to them gets it, it could be fatal.  Hell I would put money on every single one of you having gone to work, the pub, football, gigs etc when you have been I'll with flu like symptoms before and not even give a second thought about spreading it, even in the couple of years recently that we have seen nearly 50000 flu deaths.

You say its not flu but then go on to compare it to flu. 

[sidcow]

Aaaagggghhhhhb. 

I started this with a post about deaths being 10,0000 up on average despite 20,000 known coronavirus deaths plus some definitely occurring but unknown community coronavirus deaths. 

I was not saying if this was good or bad or right or wrong or moral or immoral.  It was not meant as a comment on good or bad handling of the crisis.

It was not meant as a comment on anything other than I found the stat interesting and wondered what it meant, and more importantly if it was even accurate. 

No offence was meant to anyone.  It was just a musing. 

Edited April 26, 2020 by sidcow

[blandy]

12 minutes ago, LakotaDakota said:

But you can't choose who dies from flu every year either. Yes I know it isn't the flu & we already have vaccines for that but a good flu season in the uk will see a few thousand die, a bad flu season will see 50,000 die, most of them will be old & vulnerablebut plentyof youngerpeopledie too. never once have we had daily figures of 1000+ being reported on every news outlet. No outrage over how unprepared the country is, no calls for lockdown & isolation to help prevent tens of thousands of people dying. People don't wear face masks even when they know they have the flu and knowing full well that if the elderly person on the train sat next to them gets it, it could be fatal.  Hell I would put money on every single one of you having gone to work, the pub, football, gigs etc when you have been I'll with flu like symptoms before and not even give a second thought about spreading it, even in the couple of years recently that we have seen nearly 50000 flu deaths.

This is a sort of defence of a position, but not an explanation as to why you hold a position.

As with the flu, we can't choose who dies from Covi. Unlike the flu we have no vaccine, so we can't protect from Covi in the "normal" way. Further, Covi is much more lethal. Without the lockdown (and we're already at around 41,000 dead) the figure would have been massively higher, the prediction was for half a million (with no lockdown). So it's 10 times worse, more serious.

Going back to flu - the country isn't as unprepared for flu as it was for this. You're right, people do tend to go to work or wherever with lurgie in normal winters. Not so many with actual flu, mind. More heavy colds and such like. Normal flu knocks you down. But still some will do as you say. Yet it's much less dangerous, less infectious and the elderly are vaccinated (or can be if they wish to be) for free. Flu is unlikely to overwhelm NHS care capability - ventilators, ICU places etc.

It's not the same. It's not a like for like comparison, really, though some traits match.

[LondonLax]

1 minute ago, DCJonah said:

I've asked you about 5 times and never got an answer. 

If you believe all this, why do you think the world has gone into lockdown? What's your opinion on that? You seem to stress that all this is normal, so why isn't the world acting normal in your opinion?

Well hypothetically it could be a result of collective hysteria, brought on by the age of social media? 

Have a read through this list of ‘facts’ about Covid-19 (not all points made here are actually facts some are clearly conjecture). 

https://swprs.org/a-swiss-doctor-on-covid-19/

I’m still open to the possibility that the world has majorly overreacted but with so much still unknown I personally am not taking excess risks and would recommend others do the same. 

[Awol]

1 hour ago, blandy said:

You implied (I felt) that Cummins Brexit connections made him a pantomime villain, triggering lefties who would therefore criticise him as a result. So when criticism comes from Brexity tories, perhaps there's more to it than that. For another thing, it's the Gov't that put him in those meetings, not he himself.

 

I do think that yes, I tried to say so explicitly. The animus between Davis and Cummings is well known (Tim Shipman’s books on Brexit give a full account of this) and this forum, including your good self  have never held him in very high regard. 

However, I believe the general consensus is that Professor Neil Ferguson of Imperial College is a competent, unbiased and reliable source? The video below is really worth watching for a detailed update on the general situation, but at 32:30 he directly addresses the issue of SAGE, observers and Cummings. *spoiler* You’ll be pleased to know he states Cummings has attended “and not interfered with the business of those meetings at all.”

So you could take the word of a man who’s mostly respected on here, or the word of a man who is despised, has no actual experience of the situation and is therefore speculating. Up to you. 

 

[snowychap]

1 minute ago, blandy said:

Why the response? it's a discussion board.

Yep, that's fair enough - I edited that bit out of the original post as it was unnecessarily snappy and easily answered as above.

4 minutes ago, blandy said:

Though you seem to have no issue with writing your musings on what they thought or meant (and nor should you).

Have I taken what they've said, elaborated upon it and posted a whole series of 'what they may have been trying to say here is...' stuff? I don't think I have.

I think that I've largely used the words written by those other posters (sometimes it may not have been verbatim, I admit) and, though my opinion of what I suppose them to mean is probably implicit in the way I have responded to them (e.g. by making objections to what they have said), that's a far way off expounding upon what one may imagine might have been meant by people who could have already clarified that without having to wait for you to post it and then saying, "Yep, that's it."

I'm sorry but that's my final bit on the matter with you, Peter, as I'm afraid I'm not that interested in how you seek to further speak on their behalf.

[blandy]

2 minutes ago, Awol said:

this forum, including your good self  have never held him in very high regard.

Davis. I've agreed with him about civil liberties and.....um....this Cummins thing (I typed pretty much the same as what he said, yesterday, before he said it ) . Beyond that, you're right, I think he's a tube.

I'll look at the vid.

[snowychap]

16 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said:

Come on, so what do you consider the motives to be then?

It's up to you to explain them.

Plenty of people have asked you (and others) to explain them over and over again since you began posting similar stuff earlier in the thread and there hasn't been any sort of answer forthcoming from what I can see until someone else posted something on behalf of those making the same/similar comments and you jumped on it to say:

22 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said:

Snowy, it’s a culmination of all of those things or at least a combination of some plus whatever is personal to each of us.

But you know that already.

Edited April 26, 2020 by snowychap

[blandy]

3 minutes ago, snowychap said:

I'm not that interested in how you seek to further speak on their behalf.

Cool.

I'm not seeking to speak on anyone's behalf, mind. There's that assigning motivation thing again, eh.

I'm genuinely interested and I suppose musing upon what [in general, not just VT or specific posters] these folk have as their underlying motivations or logic for their positions. I know the herd immunity idea is behind some people's thinking, but beyond that I'm sort of trying to think it through out loud [in writing].

[bickster]

8 minutes ago, Awol said:

and this forum, including your good self  have never held him in very high regard.

Well obviously he's a complete dipshit recently (over Brexit) but his stance of some civil liberties laws further back were to be applauded, he was on the right side of the divide a few times

[snowychap]

Just now, blandy said:

I'm not seeking to speak on anyone's behalf, mind. There's that assigning motivation thing again, eh.

I'm not quite sure how else you explain your earlier posts but still - I'm not going to waste any more of my afternoon going around in those circles.

[foreveryoung]

I'm finding it more an more morbid on here the fascination on the number of deaths. Every day people are trying to justify more deaths while poking a stick at a so called political scandal. Now I'm not sure if this happening because its helping some of you through it, or weather you just like taking about death figures every day, but it's getting to the point where I'm finding it hard to come into this thread, as all you guys seem to talk about is the amount of people dying rather than factual and maybe some positive information which is the reason I came into this thread in the first place. Please if you wanna fight over how many people are dying every day split this thread into a general discussion about the actual virus, an start another thread about deaths.

[bickster]

Just now, foreveryoung said:

Every day people are trying to justify more deaths while poking a stick at a so called political scandal.

You have comprehension issues

[foreveryoung]

5 minutes ago, bickster said:

You have comprehension issues

I dont think so chap. It's either slate the goverment, or trying to justify more deaths, or both.

Edited April 26, 2020 by foreveryoung