Main Coronavirus / Covid-19 Discussion Thread

[darkwolf666]

COVID-19 is a virus that spreads either through face to face contact or on contaminated surfaces. Are you seriously suggesting that bringing in rules that reduce face to face contact and people touching surfaces didn't reduce the spread of it, and by extension hospital admissions and deaths?

Dying of COVID-19 is categorised as having had a positive test in the 28 days before dying (this was changed to put a time limit on it for reasons you are hinting at). Bearing in mind people weren't getting tested at all in the early days I think that is as good a method as any of counting them.

The Flu killing as many people as Covid-19 in the UK is incorrect and has been disproved several times on here.

Please don’t waste your breath I’ve made that mistake and would hate to see someone else do the same!

It won’t matter what facts, data or information you provide you will only get whataboutery back...

 

[BeHereNow]

Ok, now I understand why Harry Wilson’s Tackle has you on ignore...

For telling the truth! Yeah, a lot of people can’t handle the truth on here.

Now I understand why you’re a cheeky ****.

I saw your ‘Sorry for winding people up’ post. Then you come out with that shit.

You’re a ****ing wanker.

 

[darkwolf666]

For telling the truth! Yeah, a lot of people can’t handle the truth on here.

Now I understand why you’re a cheeky ****.

I saw your ‘Sorry for winding people up’ post. Then you come out with that shit.

You’re a ****ing wanker.

And you are a Covid denier. You said earlier when did 28,000 people die of flu in one month, maybe the answer there is that that many people haven’t died of Covid in one month precisely because we have taken precautions, precautions we haven’t taken with flu.

Your stance is quite clear when you mention the age of those that have died, clearly you think old people are valueless... “think the average age of a Covid death was 84” - that’s ok then!

I would make a suggestion you spend more than 2% of your time away from your home, as obviously you are indestructible, and this is all a lie anyway.

I won’t stoop to your depths with profanity, just wish you well and hope no one close to you has to suffer from Covid because of your actions and ignorance.

The families of some of the 100+ members of NHS staff who have died treating patients may be interested in your views on Covid.

 

[Guinness Boy]

The 43,726 number you quote isn’t the actual number of Covid deaths. I’d be surprised if half of those people had it let alone died because of it.

Factually incorrect.

I think I saw that the average age of a Covid death is 84.

You THINK?

Almost all people that have died with it would have died of flu or pneumonia anyway. This has killed far less than what flu did a few years ago, yet we didn’t have the news constantly fear mongering about it all the time.

Evidence please.

I also saw the other day that flu is killing more people than Covid at the moment.

Evidence please

seeing it for what it really is.

Which is what, exactly?

 

[e77]

Wel, it’s not incorrect. You tell me when Covid has killed over 28,000 in 1 month.

No, I am not suggesting the reduction face to face contact has, ultimately, stopped the spread of this particular virus, it has merely drawn it out for much longer. The people who died ‘of’ it were always going to get it unless we developed herd immunity as quickly as possible.

When the government made us have the 3 week lockdown, they must have fully well known that the virus wouldn’t just disappear. In a way, the lockdown has proven that it does nothing to stop people from getting it. If the government really wanted to stop Covid getting here, they would’ve stop travel into this country, but they didn’t, they knew exactly what they were doing.

No, I don’t think the recording of other deaths as a Covid death is very helpful at all. It just makes it looks more dangerous than it is as keeps people in fear, but that’s probably what they want. They way they’ve gone about it is psychological warfare.

Since March, I’ve been inside my house about 98% of the time. I’m 29, single, should be meeting people, trying to get somewhere in my life. I am unable to because of a virus that people have been scared into believing is worse than flu. How do you think I feel? How would you feel?

Half a year of my life wasted for a virus that was always going to infect a certain amount of people, lockdown or not.

Go find me evidence of flu killing 28000 people in a month or retract

The three week initial lockdown was always going to be reviewed.

As for the rest, have you considered it isn’t all about you?

 

[clapham_gull]

He has simply passed on the misrepresentation of recent ONS figures by the very "mainstream" press he chooses to selectively ignore or quote.

The real picture can easily be found at fullfact.org.

More confirmation bias and and fake news from our resident flat earthers.


Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

 

[darkwolf666]

Go find me evidence of flu killing 28000 people in a month or retract

The three week initial lockdown was always going to be reviewed.

As for the rest, have you considered it isn’t all about you?

After he made that comment I did some digging and couldn’t find anywhere near that figure, so basically more made up data to prove a point...

 

[darkwolf666]

We're just throwing more and more money at this virus. We will be repaying this for a lifetime and then some.

If we threw this kind of money at the NHS in the past, considerably more people would have had their lives prolonged or even saved. More so than this virus can ever take.

We just need to accept it is here, we have to live with it, and get back to normal now. Need to think of the future.

I am not having a go, as you clearly sound very fed up with the whole thing, but are you actually suggesting that we just let the virus rip through the vulnerable members of society and more? Are you happy with the numbers that is likely to generate?

 

[clapham_gull]

For telling the truth! Yeah, a lot of people can’t handle the truth on here.

Now I understand why you’re a cheeky ****.

I saw your ‘Sorry for winding people up’ post. Then you come out with that shit.

You’re a ****ing wanker.

Nurse....

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

 

[darkwolf666]

I believe that vulnerable groups should be shielded, while the rest of society gets back to normal.

There is so much tunnel vision with coronavirus that people aren't considering the amount of lives that are being lost or will be lost as a result of the restrictions, not to mention the economic issues we will have to live with for decades.

The unfortunate reality is that vulnerable groups are likely to die of something else if not covid. Of course they need protecting... but at what cost?

I read the first paragraph of your reply and thought, yep, pretty much now my way of thinking, proper protection for the vulnerable and their immediate families.

Then I read your last paragraph, with the crass "vulnerable groups are likely to die of something else" comment and I sat, shaking my head at the sad state of affairs we now find ourselves in, where people are apparently happy to let the vulnerable die...

Whatever happened to protecting the old and vulnerable in our society?

 

[darkwolf666]

There's only so much we can do... the costs are already too great. People will be losing their lives in other ways as an indirect result of covid restrictions. Why is this acceptable to you?

Why is it acceptable to you that we are plunging the economy further and further down a black hole. How many lives will be lost as a result of that?

There is no middle ground unfortunately. We've tried that. The virus is here, it's not going away. We need to live with it, and that involves going back to normal while protecting the vulnerable groups. There's nothing more we can do.

Agree 100% with this, I took exception to your the vulnerable will probably die of something else anyway stance. That is indefensible in a civilised society...

 

[e77]

Your weekly reminder that shielding the vulnerable would involve 12 million people and although the virus isn’t going to disappear there is a very good chance vaccines are on the way that would as a minimum keep it in check.

 

[Yoda]

Your weekly reminder that shielding the vulnerable would involve 12 million people and although the virus isn’t going to disappear there is a very good chance vaccines are on the way that would as a minimum keep it in check.

I would assume the closer we get to having the vaccine ready to roll out the Government may well go down that route. Shield those vulnerable (and families) so they can then be inoculated in their own safety, while opening up all sectors to everyone (but still socially distanced & not fully to begin with) so the virus will spread through those unlikely to have complications (slowly, as letting rip could overload the NHS IF there were too many that become too ill.

I've never been in the group of letting this thing rip, but we can't keep going from lock down, to trickling the tap open, to closing things, to eventually locking down again and repeat.

 

[Bozza]

Why? It’s a fact.

Life expectancy in the UK is 81.2 years. The average age of Covid victims is 82.4 years. Therefore it is probable that these people being finished off by Covid would have died of something else soon.

Life expectancy doesn’t work like that.

81.2 years, if that’s what it is, is based on someone being born now.

Someone who is 82 years old today is expected to live to 91 (female) or 90 (male).

So even your expendable, it seems, 82-y-o has a fair few years left.

 

[darkwolf666]

Surely that can’t be true? Life expectancy is going up all the time so why would somebody who is already 80+ today be expecting to hit 91 when a newborn is only going to make 81?

I am sure someone can explain better, but it’s because it’s based on averages... for everyone that makes 100 someone dies at birth, so the average age comes down, but having already exceeded the average age there then comes into play a new average, that of people who exceed the average - I think!

 

[Weststander]

Surely that can’t be true? Life expectancy is going up all the time so why would somebody who is already 80+ today be expecting to hit 91 when a newborn is only going to make 81?

The newborn’s average life expectancy is far greater than 81.

 

[darkwolf666]

Why? It’s a fact.

Life expectancy in the UK is 81.2 years. The average age of Covid victims is 82.4 years. Therefore it is probable that these people being finished off by Covid would have died of something else soon.

My wife is 59 and due to her chemotherapy is extremely vulnerable to Covid. She has a 50% chance of surviving more than 10 years from her cancer - does she deserve to die in your brave new survival of the fittest, they were going to die anyway world? Or is it just old vulnerable people you don’t like?