Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Main Coronavirus / Covid-19 Discussion Thread











RossyG

Well-known member
Dec 20, 2014
2,630
Happening in Brighton and Oxford. But why did it take so long? They’ve been talking about it for ages.

Link: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/health-52737169?__twitter_impression=true

A213021F-5D67-4885-97C1-4B6477EA8CCD.jpeg
 










Harry Wilson's tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle
NSC Patron
Oct 8, 2003
56,063
Faversham
Every time I drive I keep aware that there maybe a drunk driver/ boy racer just about to smash into me....I do know the risk of driving, I just try to be aware. Likewise I know the risk ( very small) of me dying of a virus, I just keep awear.

We cant spend the rest of our lives wrapped in cotton wool, the virus is hear and maybe here to stay...get on with it and be careful.

You maybe prepared to never go to football, cricket, pub or gig again but I am not, TBH these are things that make life worth living and family of course.

You misunderstand my analogy. Sumption wants no restrictions. The analogy is with a change in the law so there are no restrictions on drink driving. Of course there is a risk of being hit by a drunk driver, but the stats show the risks have reduced hugely by restriction (drink driving laws) and indeed education. Sumpion is sending the opposite message.

Of course I'm not advocating that everyone spends their lives wrapped in cotton wool. But I am not going out yet to mingle given the likes of you, intent on getting on with it. Presumably you are fit and young enough to imagine you can do a bit of Covid 'standin' on yer 'ed'. I cant.
 




Harry Wilson's tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle
NSC Patron
Oct 8, 2003
56,063
Faversham
Happening in Brighton and Oxford. But why did it take so long? They’ve been talking about it for ages.

Link: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/health-52737169?__twitter_impression=true

View attachment 123894

It causes torsades de pointes. This could actually increase mortality. In fact a recent meta analysis suggests this to be the case:

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.16.20065920v2

Unfortunately (in my view) it is typical that everyone wants to get on the bandwagon. There are currently around 300 trials of this drug worldwide. One 'positive' research paper from 2020 has been cited over 800 times. This is borderline insanity.

My prediction is the risks associated with use of the drug will outweigh benefits, but people will continue arguing the toss about it for months if not years.
 
Last edited:


Billy Seagull

Bookie Basher
Jul 5, 2003
1,445
I’m confused - perhaps somebody can explain the following:
On the 19th of May Worldometer recorded the UK total cases as 248,818. Yesterday, the 20th May, it recorded the new total to be 248,293. That’s 525 FEWER than the previous day. How is that possible?
Has there been an explanation for the above that I’ve missed?

The government made official changes in the data, yesterday I believe.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-information-for-the-public
 


Harry Wilson's tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle
NSC Patron
Oct 8, 2003
56,063
Faversham
What an absolutely absurd comparison, talk about clutching at straws. Some people just don't want to hear the truth.

I plan to stay alive as long as possible. My analogy (not a comparison) is entirely appropriate. If you are young and fit enough to take a chance, and have no friends or family at risk who you care sufficiently about, just be honest. You're alright, Jack.....

This is not a libertarian issue. I have heard people defend all sorts on the grounds of liberty. It normally boils down to simple selfishness.
 




loz

Well-known member
Apr 27, 2009
2,482
W.Sussex
You misunderstand my analogy. Sumption wants no restrictions. The analogy is with a change in the law so there are no restrictions on drink driving. Of course there is a risk of being hit by a drunk driver, but the stats show the risks have reduced hugely by restriction (drink driving laws) and indeed education. Sumpion is sending the opposite message.

Of course I'm not advocating that everyone spends their lives wrapped in cotton wool. But I am not going out yet to mingle given the likes of you, intent on getting on with it. Presumably you are fit and young enough to imagine you can do a bit of Covid 'standin' on yer 'ed'. I cant.

No, neither particularly fit and in my mid 50s, but I cycle for pleasure so that is a risky thing to do on the roads. I like a drink another risky thing for my health, I even have the occasional smoke very risky for my health...I am a service engineer and drive about 30,000 + miles a year in my job, I deal with heavy equipment and live high current 3 phase wiring...again those 2 are really risky for my well being.

On the scale of all those Covid 19 comes a long way down list of dangers to my life. As I would suggest is does to 99.9% of people under 70 who are up and about with no underlying problems.

If you are of feel you and your loved ones should take care and not go out fine but its not for me. ( and yes I spent 6 weeks at home being good, but now I am back at work, as is most manufacturing)
 
Last edited:


Albion Dan

Banned
Jul 8, 2003
11,125
Peckham
It causes torsades de pointes. This could actually increase mortality. In fact a recent meta analysis suggests this to be the case:

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.16.20065920v2

Unfortunately (in my view) it is typical that everyone wants to get on the bandwagon. There are currently around 300 trials of this drug worldwide. One 'positive' research paper from 2020 has been cited over 800 times. This is borderline insanity.

My prediction is the risks associated with use of the drug will outweigh benefits, but people will continue arguing the toss about it for months if not years.

The drug itself is relatively harmless. My wife takes it already for Arthritis as do millions of others. Could even explain why she had zero symptoms when I had a serious case of Covid.
 






Albion Dan

Banned
Jul 8, 2003
11,125
Peckham
I plan to stay alive as long as possible. My analogy (not a comparison) is entirely appropriate. If you are young and fit enough to take a chance, and have no friends or family at risk who you care sufficiently about, just be honest. You're alright, Jack.....

This is not a libertarian issue. I have heard people defend all sorts on the grounds of liberty. It normally boils down to simple selfishness.

Again I put your side of the argument down to an inability to see the much more disastrous impact of all aspects of health and destroyed standards of living from the recession that's coming and will get worse the longer lockdown prevails. What do you actually suggest if we still dont have a vaccine in a years time btw?
 


Harry Wilson's tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle
NSC Patron
Oct 8, 2003
56,063
Faversham
I can't agree with this. One big difference being a drink driver would knowingly drink, then knowingly drive - whereas he's talking about an asymptomatic person who doesn't know anything.

Furthermore an asymptomatic person is likely to be a low risk of spreading the virus, particularly as the main method of spread of the virus is coughing.

He's taking about someone who is asymptomatic but has at least five days of continuing to be asymptomatic while infectious. He's arguing that because everyone knows they are taking a risk and may be sat next to such a person, that makes it OK. That is claptrap.

  • There will be lots of people who will think that if they are allowed to go to the theatre they will be safe. Even with little or no social distancing.
  • Second, there is a big difference between not knowing that you are infectious and knowing that you are not infectious.
  • If you are sat next to someone who is asymptomatic, they don't have to cough in your face to infect you.

Essentially an asymptomatic person 'who doesn't know anything' but is infectious is no more innocent, if they spread the virus, than your average bloke in the 1960s who knew they wouldn't crash their car when pissed because they 'know how to handle their drink'. 'Socially acceptable at the time' is an understandable excuse, but it isn't justifiable in the name of liberty.

Sumption is giving a sense of rightousness to people who just want to do what they want.

Until there is a vaccine we are at risk. I have agreed to drive an old fellah to London soon because he needs a heart operation. I'm not going to feel best pleased if I have to wade through a throng of idiots, swanning about and not social distancing, because they have been empowered to 'get back to normal' by the great libertarian.
 


Albion Dan

Banned
Jul 8, 2003
11,125
Peckham
Until there is a vaccine we are at risk. .

So you are proposing everyone hides for a year or maybe forever if no vaccine is found whilst the society we know burns in flames pushing us all into never ending poverty because a very very small amount of the population might die of a virus? Absurd. Again like Sumption said leaders need to make decisions of Statesmen and not bow to public opinion which has been fueled by media fear porn.
 


Green Cross Code Man

Wunt be druv
Mar 30, 2006
20,721
Eastbourne
So you are proposing everyone hides for a year or maybe forever if no vaccine is found whilst the society we know burns in flames pushing us all into never ending poverty because a very very small amount of the population might die of a virus? Absurd.
Talk about throw the baby out with the bathwater. If only things were so black and white. Managing a situation is very different to shrugging and ignoring it.
 




Mellotron

I've asked for soup
Jul 2, 2008
32,468
Brighton
The tricky (and important) thing is judging the point at which the lockdown causes more problems than it solves.

There will come a time when the effects of the lockdown - missed cancer referrals, poverty, suicides etc - claims more lives than a continued lockdown saves. The question is when that moment is, and acting appropriately - it's not the economy vs lives, its lives vs lives.

Evidently we are all at differing points on the scale - the two extremes being A> End the lockdown now/shouldn't have been a lockdown, to B> No end to lockdown until we have a vaccine (if we get one).

I don't know where I am, myself. Probably somewhere in the middle.
 


Albion Dan

Banned
Jul 8, 2003
11,125
Peckham
Talk about throw the baby out with the bathwater. If only things were so black and white. Managing a situation is very different to shrugging and ignoring it.

We haven't ignored it unless I slept through the last 3 months. We have protected the NHS, always the plan, now we should start the process of bringing life back to normal. What do you think the result of the worst recession for 300 YEARS is going to look like? That's from 3 months of this. What do you think will be the long term scenario if this was allowed to carry on for another 3 months? Thankfully the government aren't prepared to find out but it astounds me how many people on here would like it to.
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here