Jump to content

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Rory said:
7 hours ago, Regal Beagle said:
900 people in hostpital with Covid yesterday in the country.
 
Why are we locking down whole regions?
 
Why are we being asked to call the police on our neighbours if they have 7 people in their garden?
 
I'm starting to think that we should never have locked down in the first place.
 
 

That's the problem, we were conned the first time. I don't like being conned.

Maybe. The media told us herd immunity was plan A. The Government told us that protecting the NHS was their primary aim. Neither have been true.

 

I've been ignoring the constant garbage on coronavirus for a few months now, it was depressingly pessimistic and not really based in fact. I'm not sure the Government knows how many of the daily cases are false positives or not, Hancock dodged the question on Talk Radio.

 

I've also found out that the R number is completely arbitrary based on estimations of risk. It's not scientific in the slightest. The decision to open pubs actually increased the number apparently.

 

Now we're supposedly locking down in case some more people die in a few weeks? Based on what evidence? Prof Ferguson's model?

 

I think the whole world has lost its mind currently.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Hi all, An announcement from OVF Towers... this evening I will be putting a few things in place to hopefully help some users out during the pandemic,  particularly during the self-isolation perio

I am a law abiding citizen. I have never even had a parking ticket and I am in my 60th year. I accept that the Government has had a very difficult job but they have made a complete horlicks of it. The

Just don’t understand the need for politics to become involved in this. It’s a world wide pandemic come what may. Let’s rally round together. Sadly impossible as too many keep trying to gain some form

Posted Images

Maybe. The media told us herd immunity was plan A. The Government told us that protecting the NHS was their primary aim. Neither have been true.
 
I've been ignoring the constant garbage on coronavirus for a few months now, it was depressingly pessimistic and not really based in fact. I'm not sure the Government knows how many of the daily cases are false positives or not, Hancock dodged the question on Talk Radio.
 
I've also found out that the R number is completely arbitrary based on estimations of risk. It's not scientific in the slightest. The decision to open pubs actually increased the number apparently.
 
Now we're supposedly locking down in case some more people die in a few weeks? Based on what evidence? Prof Ferguson's model?
 
I think the whole world has lost its mind currently.
 
Yeah, after the last con I will not trust them. They can <ovf censored>.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I imagine that the severity of any lockdown will depend on the number of ICU admissions in the next few weeks.

While I agree a lot of the statistics have been modelled and extrapolated based on a small and not necessarily reliable data set, the one thing that can't be argued with is the number of excess deaths. There is a contagious virus out there and people have been dying in significant numbers. We locked down and it reduced. Then we opened up again and it crept up. That we know.

Is this all a con? No, I don't think so. The conspiracy theories aligned to the likes of Qanon on Facebook says a lot about the concerted disinformation warfare campaign the world has been subjected to over the last few years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The voice of reason, Santa.

I gave a few of the most recent statistics above. Hopefully things won't be anywhere near as bad as they were in late Spring. Most people wear masks and try and smart distance, though 2 metres is clearly far safer than 1. We wash our hands more often and we are all a lot more aware. These things will hopefully keep the figures down and manageable but as you say with force we've had the best part of c. 67,000 excess deaths with some form of a lock-down, and we can't afford to let this virus let rip. It kills people. Huge numbers are seriously ill with it. We have no vaccine. So only tight restrictions appear to prevent it from going through the roof. I'd imagine we're waiting another day or two to see how the land lies but some form of lock-down of sorts would not surprise me. It's being spread at the moment by younger people 20-40 and especially at home and in pubs and bars.

It would help a lot if we'd used the last 6 months productively and wisely to set up a reliable T&T system, but we've cocked that up and time is running out.

The government has even handed Hayes Travel a role in this. The mind boggles. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the point of going to all that effort to save the National HEALTH Service then giving the key job of testing to some random private companies with no serious experience of such a role?
I bet you'd end up waiting for a letter sent by second class post to tell you that your test is booked for next Easter.
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jacko51 said:

What is the point of going to all that effort to save the National HEALTH Service then giving the key job of testing to some random private companies with no serious experience of such a role?

An obsession with start up companies?  Especially ones that need a lot of state finance.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's the rule of 6?

It seems to be no more than 6 people may gather..... with exceptions.

I can understand it not applying to hospitals, a large number of staff would be laid off if it did.

It doesn't seem to apply to weddings, funerals or churches. Children under a certain age don't count in some places. It doesn't seem to apply to businesses in some circumstances.....

Drafted and enacted within 24 hours? Presented to parliament 10 hours after enactment?

Confused?

There is nothing quite like a statutory instrument to clarify the confusion. The public are now supposed to know what the rule of six is all about, not just what isn't allowed but what is allowed and what the exceptions are..... more worryingly the people who enforce the rule of six are supposed to know before they issue warnings or fines..... that didn't work well when enforcing social distancing rules.

Underreaction Overreaction Confusion........ "that's the way to do it"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Santa said:

I imagine that the severity of any lockdown will depend on the number of ICU admissions in the next few weeks.

While I agree a lot of the statistics have been modelled and extrapolated based on a small and not necessarily reliable data set, the one thing that can't be argued with is the number of excess deaths. There is a contagious virus out there and people have been dying in significant numbers. We locked down and it reduced. Then we opened up again and it crept up. That we know.

Is this all a con? No, I don't think so. The conspiracy theories aligned to the likes of Qanon on Facebook says a lot about the concerted disinformation warfare campaign the world has been subjected to over the last few years.

I think we know enough about the people who are most at risk to be able to shield them, without shutting down the economy any further though.

 

The number of people who have died of covid who are younger than 60 and have no underlying health conditions is around 308 (correct as of Friday). That's less than a 1/5 of the people who die each year on our roads, for some context. We're not banning vehicles or crossing roads.

 

Surely we could use the money we would be spending to lock everyone down on properly shielding the vulnerable, instead of spreading it so thinly to shield those who have almost no chance of fatalities?

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Jacko51 said:

What is the point of going to all that effort to save the National HEALTH Service then giving the key job of testing to some random private companies with no serious experience of such a role?

Maybe because the NHS are incompetent?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Rory said:
14 hours ago, Jacko51 said:
What is the point of going to all that effort to save the National HEALTH Service then giving the key job of testing to some random private companies with no serious experience of such a role?

I bet you'd end up waiting for a letter sent by second class post to tell you that your test is booked for next Easter.

Correct, and when you turn up they realise they’ve messed the booking up and you should have been there last week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Fosse69 said:

An obsession with start up companies?  Especially ones that need a lot of state finance.  

Or an obsession with ploughing more and more money in to a state funded organisation that simply does not work. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a balancing act, agreed, but the first priority of the government must be to look after our health. To save lives. And not play Russian roulette and take any risks when we still don't know enough about this terrible virus.

Younger people survive better than older people. But that's true of almost all illnesses. It can still kill them. And don't forget the numbers who survive but get very serious long term health problems - very serious.  There have been a few recent reports detailing that. Breathing problems, blood clots, lung disease, mobility issues, etc. And the more young people who catch it the greater chance it'll be passed on to others. They have families and relatives and work friends so it's quite hard to separate people in this way. More people have underlying health issues than you might imagine, especially asthma, obesity, diabetes and a few other worrying ailments. l'd also guess that the over 60s (many of whom are as fit as some in the 40-60 age bracket) don't want to be locked away, confined to barracks and shut out from the world.

I do take the point but it isn't easy to find a way through all this. Never lose sight of the fact that this is a killer virus, very infectious and can do serious long term damage even if you survive.

For me the key to getting through this until we can find a vaccine (looking like the middle of next year at the moment) is by having an effective test, trace and isolate system that we've singularly failed to develop. Had we made a better first of that we'd be in a better position to knock these moles on the head and prevent it from getting out of hand. The government has failed us on that. No question.

The other key point is surely the messaging which again has been pretty dreadful. I bet no-one in the whole of the UK could tell you what the precise rules now are. The crystal clear message at the start was very good but now it's become fuzzy and a lot of folk think it's inconsistent and unfair. Say what you like but the first hole in the strategy was Cummings taking the mike and getting away with it. And now you can't do y or z but you can go grouse hunting. You can't do this family party but you can meet 5 different mates inside a pub.

Apart from getting these two things right (T&T and messaging) we have to continually warn people of the dangers of inside spaces and spending time together in confined areas. That's crucial. That's where it spreads.  Make everyone wear a mask for goodness sake (and get a grip on these lunatics who won't wear one), and go back to the 2 metre rule, not 1. Have daily broadcasts, say after the news and weather every evening. Keep banging the drum.

I'd be hopeful that if we do that well we can avoid a national lock down.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, philpvfc said:

Maybe because the NHS are incompetent?

I find that trite comment insulting.

600 health and care workers have died saving our lives in the past 6 months.

it's the government that's incompetent not the NHS.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely fining people who have tested positive £10k for leaving their houses reduces the likelihood of people getting tested? Counter productive?

Oh and don’t forget it’s fine if you want to test your eyesight by driving your wife and child to a beauty spot on her birthday. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, TheSage said:

I find that trite comment insulting.

600 health and care workers have died saving our lives in the past 6 months.

it's the government that's incompetent not the NHS.

 

Very insulting to the NHS considering my recent  experience of the prompt care and treatment my daughter has had in Leicester over the last few days. 

Test and Trace is not part of the NHS and run by people without a medical back ground. It was obvious weeks ago that  with increased mingling increased risks were being taken so more testing would be required and not less. Why not a £35,000 machine and £60 test for all schools and not only. Eton.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, TheSage said:

It's a balancing act, agreed, but the first priority of the government must be to look after our health. To save lives. And not play Russian roulette and take any risks when we still don't know enough about this terrible virus.

Younger people survive better than older people. But that's true of almost all illnesses. It can still kill them. And don't forget the numbers who survive but get very serious long term health problems - very serious.  There have been a few recent reports detailing that. Breathing problems, blood clots, lung disease, mobility issues, etc. And the more young people who catch it the greater chance it'll be passed on to others. They have families and relatives and work friends so it's quite hard to separate people in this way. More people have underlying health issues than you might imagine, especially asthma, obesity, diabetes and a few other worrying ailments. l'd also guess that the over 60s (many of whom are as fit as some in the 40-60 age bracket) don't want to be locked away, confined to barracks and shut out from the world.

I do take the point but it isn't easy to find a way through all this. Never lose sight of the fact that this is a killer virus, very infectious and can do serious long term damage even if you survive.

For me the key to getting through this until we can find a vaccine (looking like the middle of next year at the moment) is by having an effective test, trace and isolate system that we've singularly failed to develop. Had we made a better first of that we'd be in a better position to knock these moles on the head and prevent it from getting out of hand. The government has failed us on that. No question.

The other key point is surely the messaging which again has been pretty dreadful. I bet no-one in the whole of the UK could tell you what the precise rules now are. The crystal clear message at the start was very good but now it's become fuzzy and a lot of folk think it's inconsistent and unfair. Say what you like but the first hole in the strategy was Cummings taking the mike and getting away with it. And now you can't do y or z but you can go grouse hunting. You can't do this family party but you can meet 5 different mates inside a pub.

Apart from getting these two things right (T&T and messaging) we have to continually warn people of the dangers of inside spaces and spending time together in confined areas. That's crucial. That's where it spreads.  Make everyone wear a mask for goodness sake (and get a grip on these lunatics who won't wear one), and go back to the 2 metre rule, not 1. Have daily broadcasts, say after the news and weather every evening. Keep banging the drum.

I'd be hopeful that if we do that well we can avoid a national lock down.

 

No mask  then confined to barracks.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, philpvfc said:

Or an obsession with ploughing more and more money in to a state funded organisation that simply does not work. 

Of course it works although under funded, under staffed , and over managed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Reporting Posts and Ignoring Users

    Moderators don't read everything. Please don't assume we'll spot rule breaking (e.g. personal abuse) - use the orange report button above a post to alert them.

    If you can't get on with another forum user you can select the "ignore" option. Simply click on the link below, type in their username and save - Click here




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy