Mounts Kipper Posted October 7, 2020 Posted October 7, 2020 Just now, peelyfeet said: They looked at it right from the start. Not one country chose it. I don't think folk have grasped how long it would take and the consequences. Locking up millions of over 60s and loads of vulnerables for several months would be a logistical nightmare, and would bring economic problems too. Ethically wise, telling the country, "listen were going to pretty much do what we want if we're young, so the virus is going to be fucking rife for you oldies, best stay in until May" wouldn't be accepted in Western democracies. Older folk been doing this since March, it ain’t worked. Quote
peelyfeet Posted October 7, 2020 Posted October 7, 2020 Just now, Mounts Kipper said: Older folk been doing this since March, it ain’t worked. How do you know it ain't worked? Quote
Mounts Kipper Posted October 7, 2020 Posted October 7, 2020 1 minute ago, peelyfeet said: What about the people who live or work or care for, or are dependant on the individual ? Sensible precautions should be taken, limit time in close contact where masks, use best practice. Nothing is 100% foolproof. Crack on. Quote
Mounts Kipper Posted October 7, 2020 Posted October 7, 2020 2 minutes ago, peelyfeet said: How do you know it ain't worked? Because were now talking about more lockdowns. Quote
Tonge moor green jacket Posted October 7, 2020 Posted October 7, 2020 3 minutes ago, peelyfeet said: What about the people who live or work or care for, or are dependant on the individual ? This. Who delivers food and medicine etc? The rest of the population who will largely have it. What happens when there are insufficient workers well enough to keep supermarkets fully functioning as they're ill. Or indeed food producers, power and water suppliers etc etc. A weird concept that everyone who isn't high risk will somehow have a brief illness and be back to work in no time. Quote
Spider Posted October 7, 2020 Posted October 7, 2020 2 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said: Because were now talking about more lockdowns. It is what it is If that’s the decision that you abide by it. Quote
Tonge moor green jacket Posted October 7, 2020 Posted October 7, 2020 7 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said: Older folk been doing this since March, it ain’t worked. What hasn't- older folk being kept apart? Quote
MickyD Posted October 7, 2020 Posted October 7, 2020 5 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said: Older folk been doing this since March, it ain’t worked. 4 minutes ago, peelyfeet said: How do you know it ain't worked? 1 minute ago, Mounts Kipper said: Because were now talking about more lockdowns. Well it’s certainly worked for my mum. The only folk she’s interacting with, and has been since March, are me and my family and my brother and his family. She has no wish to go to local supermarket with folk she doesn’t know. Quote
Boby Brno Posted October 7, 2020 Posted October 7, 2020 7 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said: Older folk been doing this since March, it ain’t worked. Your missing the point. Some people on here think you’re ‘Older Folk’ What age is the cut off point? Quote
birch-chorley Posted October 7, 2020 Posted October 7, 2020 (edited) 24 minutes ago, peelyfeet said: They looked at it right from the start. Not one country chose it. I don't think folk have grasped how long it would take and the consequences. Locking up millions of over 60s and loads of vulnerables for several months would be a logistical nightmare, and would bring economic problems too. Ethically wise, telling the country, "listen were going to pretty much do what we want if we're young, so the virus is going to be fucking rife for you oldies, best stay in until May" wouldn't be accepted in Western democracies. Nobody is locking anyone up are they ffs They can do whatever they fuck they like, just like I could flout ‘the rules’ now. It would be guidance given they are in the at risk groups. If it was under 4’s at risk I’d advise them to stay in doors as well If they don’t fancy it, no worries, they are putting themselves at risk I was all for saving the NHS, they’ve had enough time to build capacity of beds and ventilators (should the over 60’s flout the recommendations) In terms of how long it would take, I guess you’d need to look at regions hit hardest first time round. In Bergamo 25% have tested positive for the antibody, so it’s safe to say that they were about half way to some form of herd immunity, a third of the way to very good herd immunity. Yes they got clobbered as many elderly people got ill, but still their health system didn’t collapse! With the benefit of better capacity (ventilators / beds), better treatments and the ones most likely to require hospitalisation (over 60’s) hopefully taking additional precautions such as staying at home they should be able to cope. I think it’s a viable option, living with the virus whilst not killing the economy. Edited October 7, 2020 by birch-chorley Quote
Mounts Kipper Posted October 7, 2020 Posted October 7, 2020 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Boby Brno said: Your missing the point. Some people on here think you’re ‘Older Folk’ What age is the cut off point? It should be left to your own discretion, it’s not difficult, government should issue guidance but it’s up to you the individual, if I was 90 I’d still not isolate. Edited October 7, 2020 by Mounts Kipper Quote
peelyfeet Posted October 7, 2020 Posted October 7, 2020 Folk don't want more lockdowns because it's shit and effects them. So instead the youngsters think if we just crack on and make all the vulnerable people take more precautions, it will be reet. Taking more precautions means doing miles less than they already are doing now, for months. It means everyone who comes into contact with vulnerables takes more precautions than they do now, for months, HOW? Won't happen. Too complex. They'll tweak bits of the lockdowns, refine restrictions work out what works best. Cant in a million years see us going for herd immunity of the young, on purpose, its an ethical minefield. Quote
Mounts Kipper Posted October 7, 2020 Posted October 7, 2020 4 minutes ago, MickyD said: Well it’s certainly worked for my mum. The only folk she’s interacting with, and has been since March, are me and my family and my brother and his family. She has no wish to go to local supermarket with folk she doesn’t know. That’s great, it’s her choice, wouldn’t be mine. Quote
Spider Posted October 7, 2020 Posted October 7, 2020 Just now, Mounts Kipper said: It should be left to your own discretion, it’s not difficult, government should issue guidance but it’s up to you he individual, if I was 90 I’d still not isolate. That’s like saying switch all traffic lights off and remove all road signs. Wear a seat belt if you want to but, whatever. you’re making the massively daft assumption that everyone will use discretion. Quote
peelyfeet Posted October 7, 2020 Posted October 7, 2020 2 minutes ago, birch-chorley said: Nobody is licking anyone up are they ffs They can do whatever they fick they like, just like I could flout ‘the rules’ now. It would be guidance given they are in the at risk groups. If it was under 4’s at risk I’d advise them to stay in doors as well If they don’t fancy it, no worries, they are putting themselves at risk I was all for saving the NHS, they’ve had enough time to build capacity of beds and ventilators (should the over 60’s flour the recommendations) In terms of how long it would take, I guess you’d need to look at regions hit hardest first time round. In Bergamo 25% have tested positive for the antibody, so it’s safe to say that they were about half way to some form of herd immunity, a third of the way to very good herd immunity. Yes they got clobbered as many elderly people got ill, but still their health system didn’t collapse! With the benefit of better capacity (ventilators / beds), better treatments and the ones most likely to require hospitalisation (over 60’s) hopefully taking additional precautions such as staying at home, I think your making a case for ‘living with the virus whilst not killing the economy. The choice vulnerable people would have is stay in for months, or go out into the community with a massivley higher chance of dying or being ill than they have now. If you're 65 and obese what you going to choose, and how would you take that news, and what extra do they need to do that they arent already doing now? Won't happen I'm 99% sure, there's too many old folk, there would be zimmer riots on the streets, cops getting pelted with Werthers Quote
Casino Posted October 7, 2020 Posted October 7, 2020 19 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said: A weird concept that everyone who isn't high risk will somehow have a brief illness and be back to work in no time. Is it? Quote
peelyfeet Posted October 7, 2020 Posted October 7, 2020 1 minute ago, Casino said: Is it? https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8804953/Long-Covid-bigger-public-health-issue-excess-deaths-academic-warns.html Quote
Casino Posted October 7, 2020 Posted October 7, 2020 Just like to pick up on a point above Dont be planning on using the 'nightingales' They might be pretty but im fcuked if theres any nurses available Quote
Escobarp Posted October 7, 2020 Posted October 7, 2020 Nightingales will be manned by the military in the main. Folk in there will be there to die. (Apparently) Quote
birch-chorley Posted October 7, 2020 Posted October 7, 2020 1 minute ago, peelyfeet said: The choice vulnerable people would have is stay in for months, or go out into the community with a massivley higher chance of dying or being ill than they have now. If you're 65 and obese what you going to choose, and how would you take that news, and what extra do they need to do that they arent already doing now? Won't happen I'm 99% sure, there's too many old folk, there would be zimmer riots on the streets, cops getting pelted with Werthers Scratch my last post, just read another report showing 57% of people in Bergamo having tested positive on the antibody test... https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/06/09/half-people-tested-italys-coronavirus-epicentre-bergamo-have/ anyway, like I say, if the old folk don’t want to adhere to the rules then fine, they can crack on by all means but it’s at their own risk You’ve talked a lot about Cancer patients, let’s park the fact that diagnosis’s are down 50% this year due to the restrictions that are in place. These people would be shielding anyway to a certain extent, most immunosuppressive day people do in the Winter months for fear of catching a variation of Flu that isn’t covered by the vaccine. What we don’t do is get everyone to lock themselves away every Winter to protect these at risk groups, why change that now? Quote
jules_darby Posted October 7, 2020 Posted October 7, 2020 3 minutes ago, peelyfeet said: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8804953/Long-Covid-bigger-public-health-issue-excess-deaths-academic-warns.html FFS Peely You didn’t like my sources and then you go and produce a snippet of a “report from Tony Blair Institute of Global Change” Thats printed in the Daily Fucking Mail I think you’re a WUM 🤣 Quote
peelyfeet Posted October 7, 2020 Posted October 7, 2020 Just now, birch-chorley said: Scratch my last post, just read another report showing 57% of people in Bergamo having tested positive on the antibody test... https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/06/09/half-people-tested-italys-coronavirus-epicentre-bergamo-have/ anyway, like I say, if the old folk don’t want to adhere to the rules then fine, they can crack on by all means but it’s at their own risk You’ve talked a lot about Cancer patients, let’s park the fact that diagnosis’s are down 50% this year due to the restrictions that are in place. These people would be shielding anyway to a certain extent, most immunosuppressive day people do in the Winter months for fear of catching a variation of Flu that isn’t covered by the vaccine. What we don’t do is get everyone to lock themselves away every Winter to protect these at risk groups, why change that now? Let's reconvene in May and see what happens. Quote
buckhurstwhite Posted October 7, 2020 Posted October 7, 2020 2 minutes ago, Casino said: Just like to pick up on a point above Dont be planning on using the 'nightingales' They might be pretty but im fcuked if theres any nurses available Correct, but not really needed last time, and hopefully not this time round as well Quote
Casino Posted October 7, 2020 Posted October 7, 2020 5 minutes ago, peelyfeet said: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8804953/Long-Covid-bigger-public-health-issue-excess-deaths-academic-warns.html Fair does Noted Quote Daniel Sleat, co-author of the report, said: 'While long Covid poses a significant risk, it must be assessed alongside the wider impacts of Covid restrictions, both in economic and health terms, as governments determine their next steps on containment measures to avoid a full lockdown.' Quote
peelyfeet Posted October 7, 2020 Posted October 7, 2020 1 minute ago, jules_darby said: FFS Peely You didn’t like my sources and then you go and produce a snippet of a “report from Tony Blair Institute of Global Change” Thats printed in the Daily Fucking Mail I think you’re a WUM 🤣 Its kings college pal, the blokes running ZOE. Quote
Recommended Posts
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.