Slow news day? The real deal? End of the world? 
 

They’re saying it probably came from an animal, has Somebody been shagging monkeys again? 

1 minute ago, Boby Brno said:

Not bragging pal. Our figure is up 70% in the last 7 days. For whatever reason, this thing is spreading rapidly and moving north.

No I wasn’t having a pop sorry if it came across that way. 
 

sadly people will Be believing it’s a success because London is so high. 300 2 months ago was seen as catastrophic. Now it’s a drop in the ocean. 
 

yet some people think there’s no problem still. 🤯

how many people have died of flu symptoms in the last 28 days ?

2 minutes ago, victor meldrew said:

how many people have died of flu symptoms in the last 28 days ?

I give up. How many?

16 minutes ago, Escobarp said:

What would have happened in your opinion if we were just cracking on right now? Genuine question? No restrictions at Xmas etc new year and pubs open. What numbers would be seeing in your opinion? I’m interested ?

Sean of the Dead stuff I reckon

13 minutes ago, Escobarp said:

What would have happened in your opinion if we were just cracking on right now? Genuine question? No restrictions at Xmas etc new year and pubs open. What numbers would be seeing in your opinion? I’m interested ?

Good question, let me think.

My point was as much to those who said that cases declined in summer because of the first lockdown, that the cases picked up because of the Eat Out scheme, and, as ever, the government should have done this, that or other sooner. Whatever most Governments have tried, aside of extreme lockdowns, has hardly scratched the surface. Witness the surge of cases in London that must have started during the last lockdown.

I do get that the risks of letting it rip would have been untenable for the NHS/Govt.

1 minute ago, boltondiver said:

Good question, let me think.

My point was as much to those who said that cases declined in summer because of the first lockdown, that the cases picked up because of the Eat Out scheme, and, as ever, the government should have done this, that or other sooner. Whatever most Governments have tried, aside of extreme lockdowns, has hardly scratched the surface. Witness the surge of cases in London that must have started during the last lockdown.

I do get that the risks of letting it rip would have been untenable for the NHS/Govt.

But what do you think would have happened to case numbers? Based on your statement that lockdowns don’t work. So by virtue they can only have had , at best , a neutral effect on numbers? Correct or have I misunderstood?

Just now, Escobarp said:

But what do you think would have happened to case numbers? Based on your statement that lockdowns don’t work. So by virtue they can only have had , at best , a neutral effect on numbers? Correct or have I misunderstood?

I’m thinking

4 minutes ago, Spider said:

Sean of the Dead stuff I reckon

I wonder how much further case numbers need to rise in Bolton for hospital to implode?

im told Glasgow and lanarkshire it’s almost at crisis point now and won’t be able to take any more patients in very shortly. What happens then is anyone’s guess 

Just now, boltondiver said:

I’m thinking

Ok pal. Ive got all night 😊

3 minutes ago, Escobarp said:

Ok pal. Ive got all night 😊

Funny

here is my overall view on lockdowns;

1. We have no evidence that they work. The scientists say that if we don’t lock down, then this will happen. We’ve never seen the non-lockdown outcome. 

2. We do know the damage they have caused; financially, other health, education etc. @birch-chorleyhas gone quiet, perhaps he’s just too frustrated.

I would think that when the future checklist is analysed, it will be that the cure will be far greater than the disease.

As I’ve said, I think, from very early, the job was to keep those vulnerable out of the way of the virus. Hardly any healthy under 60s have died, so, again, could we have better allocated resource?

But, from where we are, we have to, it seems, look after the NHS.

But, is there a lot of spin there?

as ever, I’m happy to be wrong, especially with this virus 

Just now, boltondiver said:

Funny

here is my overall view on lockdowns;

1. We have no evidence that they work. The scientists say that if we don’t lock down, then this will happen. We’ve never seen the non-lockdown outcome. 

2. We do know the damage they have caused; financially, other health, education etc. @birch-chorleyhas gone quiet, perhaps he’s just too frustrated.

I would think that when the future checklist is analysed, it will be that the cure will be far greater than the disease.

As I’ve said, I think, from very early, the job was to keep those vulnerable out of the way of the virus. Hardly any healthy under 60s have died, so, again, could we have better allocated resource?

But, from where we are, we have to, it seems, look after the NHS.

But, is there a lot of spin there?

as ever, I’m happy to be wrong, especially with this virus 

So back to my point. Where do YOU think case numbers would be if we hadn’t locked down or had these current restrictions and had the pubs open at new year? Neutral impact yes? In your opinion?

Having read up a bit more on viruses

The only way to stop them, is to stop letting the spread.

The new variant is a reminder that without a vaccine, we are entirely at the mercy of an invisible menace

The virus spreads as people have contact with other people. 
 

If as a result of a lockdown people have less contacts it slows the spread. 
 

Surely that is not in doubt ? 

4 minutes ago, Escobarp said:

So back to my point. Where do YOU think case numbers would be if we hadn’t locked down or had these current restrictions and had the pubs open at new year? Neutral impact yes? In your opinion?

Answer; probably not as bad as some of the scientists outlined

Not neutral, but not end of the world. Probably.

Number of cases? Double?

Only my view. I’d love to know.

47 minutes ago, Escobarp said:

What would have happened in your opinion if we were just cracking on right now? Genuine question? No restrictions at Xmas etc new year and pubs open. What numbers would be seeing in your opinion? I’m interested ?

000000 cause COVID dont go in pubs if your having a meat ITK FACT 

7 minutes ago, boltondiver said:

Funny

here is my overall view on lockdowns;

1. We have no evidence that they work. The scientists say that if we don’t lock down, then this will happen. We’ve never seen the non-lockdown outcome. 

2. We do know the damage they have caused; financially, other health, education etc. @birch-chorleyhas gone quiet, perhaps he’s just too frustrated.

I would think that when the future checklist is analysed, it will be that the cure will be far greater than the disease.

As I’ve said, I think, from very early, the job was to keep those vulnerable out of the way of the virus. Hardly any healthy under 60s have died, so, again, could we have better allocated resource?

But, from where we are, we have to, it seems, look after the NHS.

But, is there a lot of spin there?

as ever, I’m happy to be wrong, especially with this virus 

Wrong. Lockdowns do have an effect.

1 minute ago, Ani said:

The virus spreads as people have contact with other people. 
 

If as a result of a lockdown people have less contacts it slows the spread. 
 

Surely that is not in doubt ? 

It’s not in doubt but we can see it only delays the virus and deaths, if the vaccine hadn’t come deaths would have been same with or without lockdown just over longer period. 

Was the first lockdown the right course of action?

I understand why the govt did it, but history might show it to be a mistake

2nd

They should have had better solutions by then

3rd

same

Just now, Mounts Kipper said:

It’s not in doubt but we can see it only delays the virus and deaths, if the vaccine hadn’t come deaths would have been same with or without lockdown just over longer period. 

But there is a vaccine coming. 

2 minutes ago, boltondiver said:

Answer; probably not as bad as some of the scientists outlined

Not neutral, but not end of the world. Probably.

Number of cases? Double?

Only my view. I’d love to know.

Thanks. I would rather not know Personally. The end is nigh now and we will be all Back to normal soon enough now. 
 

double case numbers and the health service would have collapsed of that I’m confident in my reasoning. That’s good for nobody. 

3 minutes ago, little whitt said:

000000 cause COVID dont go in pubs if your having a meat ITK FACT 

😁😁 good point 

Just now, boltondiver said:

Was the first lockdown the right course of action?

I understand why the govt did it, but history might show it to be a mistake

2nd

They should have had better solutions by then

3rd

same

What solutions ? 
 

You say no lockdown might have doubled numbers. (I know it is a guess). Nearly 2m dead across the world. So no lockdowns would kill 2m people, so far. 

2 minutes ago, Underpants said:

Wrong. Lockdowns do have an effect.

That’s fine

there isn’t lots of evidence that I can see, but always happy to be proven wrong.

We’re all amateur observers in this

3 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said:

It’s not in doubt but we can see it only delays the virus and deaths, if the vaccine hadn’t come deaths would have been same with or without lockdown just over longer period. 

No because there would have been more infections so more infections means more deaths ?

Just now, boltondiver said:

That’s fine

there isn’t lots of evidence that I can see, but always happy to be proven wrong.

We’re all amateur observers in this

Why did infections drop in the summer ?