Hancock's Half Hour

[Chris152]

Ah, I see.

 

[Andy Kev.]

You quite possibly don't or don't want to but I live in hope.

 

[Lons]

Currently, 100% of the population are suffering the consequences of "saving" the 2%. Why? Every life is valuable beyond calculation, and no suffering is too much suffering, provided we save just one life

You've overlooked the figures published by NHS England that the percentage of infected people dying with no underlying conditions is rising sharply and now at 5% of deaths in hospitals so not only the vulnerable and as certain ethnic groups are much more at risk, as indeed are men where do you draw the line?

except you don't get to be protected if you are a "key worker" - you get the entire street coming out to clap you as you go to work, to use social pressure to ensure that you don't stay at home and hide.

That's crass and utter bulls*t, as you live in the middle of nowhere you have not experienced it so your opinion counts for nothing. We have a large number of family, friends and neighbours in the NHS and it very definitely is the opposite to what you say. Given your views you will be pleased no doubt to note it was probably the final time for most last night!

I'm not going to quote the rest TN but from that and previous posts it seems you have very large chips on your shoulders, must be heavy burdens to carry and in my opinion based on the many I know locally in agriculture I'd say " typical bl**dy farmer! :roll:

 

[Rorschach]

Without the lockdown The NHS would have been swamped. As it was, it was a close-run thing for a few weeks. Without the lockdown they would have run out of ventilators, oxygen, PPE and all the rest. The staff would not have been able to cope. Triage would have been the order of the day. People would have been left to die in ambulances, corridors hospital car parks and worse.

Lockdown has allowed at least a semblance of order, belated as it was. Every week has allowed new systems of social distancing to be developed, further research into effective treatments, development of vaccines, etc., etc.

It's been a pain in the buttocks. I'm a widower, living alone and I have desperately missed my kids and my grandchildren. I have some solace in my workshop and my lathe, but I'm desperate for a hug from my little granddaughter. But like just about everyone I know, I will continue to put up with lockdown because of the lesser burden on the NHS and consequently, from an entirely selfish standpoint, the better chance I will have of surviving covid-19 if and when I catch it.

NHS was nowhere near being swamped, we had ample space in ICU units and never even opened the fully equipped Nightingale hospitals. I am not saying we should have done nothing but we didn't need to do what we did, we could have managed perfectly well like Sweden.

I am sorry you are isolated and alone, if you were living in Switzerland you would be allowed to hug your granddaughter, the risk is absolutely tiny.

 

[Rorschach]

You're wasting your time, it isn't the first time he's said it and been challenged so he's not going to change his mind. He presumably has no parents who would now be elderly and vulnerable, or doesn't care for them or wouldn't have been suggesting as he did once before that they be allowed to die. As it happens he got his wish as many of those in care homes were turned away from the hospitals and didn't survive.

I don't know rorschach or what he does for a living but found his remarks callous, distasteful and the way he presented his personal opinions and google links as fact reminded me of another member who now has disappeared.

My mother is 65, in good health and not fat, my step father is 88, been fighting cancer for the last 30 years but otherwise in excellent health, not fat. They have both already been exposed to C19 on a foreign holiday earlier this year, we don't know if they caught it, tests were not available then. Lockdown has turned what should have been a minor operation for him into something much more serious that might cost him his arm.
A 97 year family member died in a care home in early march from suspected C19.

That enough for you?

 

[MikeG.]

ONS stats show about 6-7% of UK population have so far been exposed to Covid 19. (Channel 4 news this evening.)
DoH figures show 37,837 deaths so far.

That puts the case fatality rate at around 0.8%, getting better, still not as low as many of the experts are predicting on the videos I linked but improving.

It isn't as straight forward as that. First of all "exposed to" doesn't mean "caught". Secondly, the death numbers lag many weeks (at least 4) behind the "had the disease" numbers, so you can't take the deaths and divide it into the number who have had the disease up to todays date, you have to take the deaths and divide it by how many people had the disease 4 or 6 weeks ago. Doing what you have just done mathematically makes the assumption that none of the people who have caught the disease in the last 4-6 weeks will die of it.

 

[Rorschach]

ONS stats show about 6-7% of UK population have so far been exposed to Covid 19. (Channel 4 news this evening.)
DoH figures show 37,837 deaths so far.

That puts the case fatality rate at around 0.8%, getting better, still not as low as many of the experts are predicting on the videos I linked but improving.

It isn't as straight forward as that. First of all "exposed to" doesn't mean "caught". Secondly, the death numbers lag many weeks (at least 4) behind the "had the disease" numbers, so you can't take the deaths and divide it into the number who have had the disease up to todays date, you have to take the deaths and divide it by how many people had the disease 4 or 6 weeks ago. Doing what you have just done mathematically makes the assumption that none of the people who have caught the disease in the last 4-6 weeks will die of it.

If the death number lag at least 4 weeks, lockdown was pointless because the deaths peaked 2 weeks after lockdown started.

My number was only rough to make a point that it isn't 12% mortality as some are pushing. Go and watch one of the videos I posted where a German virologist puts the mortality rate at 0.25-0.34%, some others put it even lower than that.

 

[MikeG.]

.........And finally, one of the great saving graces of the British is that we do not take intellectuals seriously and are instinctively suspicious of them (cf the French who actually give them honours!) I don't dislike all intellectuals. For instance, I would heartily recommend the collected journalism of the late Anthony Burgess, everybody should be given a copy of I Drink, Therefore I Am by the late Prof. Scruton and the reading of God Is Not Great by the equally late Christopher Hitchens should be on the curriculum in all schools. All that said, we should remain deeply suspicious of people presenting themselves as intellectuals.

Bizarre, Andy. Just bizarre.

It's the intellectuals who are doing the work on the vaccines etc as we speak. Imagining not having them as having zero consequences is nuts. The intellectual pursuit is actually what makes us human, and is the only thing which truly separates us from the other animals.

 

[doctor Bob]

A 97 year family member died in a care home in early march from suspected C19.

Her whole life ahead of her ............ taken to early, God's a right barstard.

 

[MikeG.]

.......If the death number lag at least 4 weeks, lockdown was pointless because the deaths peaked 2 weeks after lockdown started............

You're just making stuff up. The date of peak deaths in the UK was the 21st April, and lockdown started 4 weeks previously on the 23rd March.

 

[Rorschach]

A 97 year family member died in a care home in early march from suspected C19.

Her whole life ahead of her ............ taken to early, God's a right barstard.

The vicar actually said "untimely death" in the funeral! I think he meant because she had just been taken into care and got a bit confused in his messaging, it was one of the first video funerals and he seemed nervous.

On a serious note that might sound callous to some, it was a bit of a blessing for her. She lived in her own house until earlier this year, she was almost blind and had mild dementia. She was being cared for daily by her son which is what allowed her to stay in her house where she was happy. Her son died suddenly (aged 76) and she had to be moved into the care home where she rapidly deteriorated mentally and was getting very stressed because she couldn't see anything or find anything and had no independence, of course no family were allowed to visit either.

 

[Rorschach]

.......If the death number lag at least 4 weeks, lockdown was pointless because the deaths peaked 2 weeks after lockdown started............

You're just making stuff up. The date of peak deaths in the UK was the 21st April, and lockdown started 4 weeks previously on the 23rd March.

Peak death was April 8th.

 

[MikeG.]

.......If the death number lag at least 4 weeks, lockdown was pointless because the deaths peaked 2 weeks after lockdown started............

You're just making stuff up. The date of peak deaths in the UK was the 21st April, and lockdown started 4 weeks previously on the 23rd March.

Peak death was April 8th.

Like I said, you're making stuff up. 21st April 1172 people died. On the 8th, 1103 died. Even if you are talking about the 7 day rolling average, that peaked on the 10th April, but of course if you chose, for instance, a 3 or 5 day rolling average you would have a very different date. It's all well and good trying to make whatever argument you are trying to make, but you don't get to make unsustainable claims of fact. That's just lying.

 

[Rorschach]

Like I said, you're making stuff up. 21st April 1172 people died. On the 8th, 1103 died. Even if you are talking about the 7 day rolling average, that peaked on the 10th April, but of course if you chose, for instance, a 3 or 5 day rolling average you would have a very different date. It's all well and good trying to make whatever argument you are trying to make, but you don't get to make unsustainable claims of fact. That's just lying.

7 day rolling average is all that matters, there are peaks after each weekend due to reporting systems.
Last I read the peak was april 8th, ok if you are right it's april 10th, still not 4 weeks after lockdown is it?

 

[doctor Bob]

Even if you are talking about the 7 day rolling average, that peaked on the 10th April, but of course if you chose, for instance, a 3 or 5 day rolling average you would have a very different date.

Surely 7 day is best as per gov't advice due weekends. 3 and 5 days would be terrible to use.

 

[Andy Kev.]

.........And finally, one of the great saving graces of the British is that we do not take intellectuals seriously and are instinctively suspicious of them (cf the French who actually give them honours!) I don't dislike all intellectuals. For instance, I would heartily recommend the collected journalism of the late Anthony Burgess, everybody should be given a copy of I Drink, Therefore I Am by the late Prof. Scruton and the reading of God Is Not Great by the equally late Christopher Hitchens should be on the curriculum in all schools. All that said, we should remain deeply suspicious of people presenting themselves as intellectuals.

Bizarre, Andy. Just bizarre.

It's the intellectuals who are doing the work on the vaccines etc as we speak. Imagining not having them as having zero consequences is nuts. The intellectual pursuit is actually what makes us human, and is the only thing which truly separates us from the other animals.

While you are of course right in the fact that anybody using their brains to work is an intellectual by definition, I am using the word in a widely accepted but looser sense meaning those who are involved in "soft" academic matters e.g. philosophy, the arts and the study thereof, social sciences etc. Much of this activity is essentially pure self-indulgence. For instance, Roger Scruton, who I cited above, was a Professor of philosophy whose speciality was aesthetics and much of his work was thought provoking (I really would recommend the book I mentioned) but there's no doubt in my mind that society doesn't actually "need" such people in the sense that it desperately needs bin men, mechanics, train drivers, tailors etc.

Our mistake is to automatically give weight to the arguments of such people. Even worse are those of their number who themselves think that they are something special. The more pertinent point I was making is that now is not the time for them or their former pupils to be pontificating about the pandemic. The simple reason for this is that we won't be able to sensibly discuss it until it is over. Only then are we likely to be able to come to informed conclusions as to the nature of what is currently being regarded as a crisis. It has certainly been made into a crisis.

I'm suggesting that we don't know yet whether that is justifiable or not. Therefore the chattering class or commentariat would do best to be very sparing with its commentary for the time being.

A simple for instance: the govt. was initially tempted to lean to a herd immunity strategy. Then Prof. Ferguson's figures emerged and were instantly hailed - particularly by those who favour big govt. and who have political axes to grind - as being definitive. However, it now appears that his methods are likely to go down in academic history as some of the most flawed ever employed. The problem was not Prof F. (I think we have to assume that while his mistakes were massive, they were honest. In other words, he was just incompetent.) but rather the way the commentariat seized upon his ideas and the way in which the govt. let itself be influenced by them (how could it not, him being from Imperial College and all that). His cheerleaders seem to have become rather quiet.

This BTW does not vindicate the herd immunity approach. The point is that there have been too many people jumping the intellectual gun in public and proving (to me at least) that ... er ... they are not quite intelligent enough to be regarded as intellectuals.

 

[doctor Bob]

The intellectual pursuit is actually what makes us human, and is the only thing which truly separates us from the other animals.

and riding bicycles ................. oh hang on, chimps ..... Ok playing cricket.......... :wink:

 

[selectortone]

Without the lockdown The NHS would have been swamped....

NHS was nowhere near being swamped, we had ample space in ICU units and never even opened the fully equipped Nightingale hospitals. I am not saying we should have done nothing but we didn't need to do what we did, we could have managed perfectly well like Sweden.

I am sorry you are isolated and alone, if you were living in Switzerland you would be allowed to hug your granddaughter, the risk is absolutely tiny.

Really? I must have imagined those reports night after night of wards rammed with seriously ill people and exhausted NHS staff pleading for more ventilators, oxygen, PPE etc.

I suppose you're going to tell me the evil mainstream media were making it all up :lol:

 

[woodhutt]

Sorry but you are wrong there, you can't save people from C19, you can only delay.
Any country that has managed to keep the numbers of deaths low, NZ and AUS for instance has only delayed the inevitable and is now stuck in limbo, you can't open up the borders either in or out. NZ's economy is 25% tourism, what on earth do you do to replace that?

Sorry, but you are wrong there. By delaying the death of people from the disease you can await the development of a vaccine.
Oz and NZ are already in talks about reopening their borders to one another. Also, NZ had already identified its over-dependency on tourism before the outbreak of the pandemic and had resolved to address it. A four day week to promote domestic tourism is being seriously considered.
Your arguments appear to be based on an assumption that, if the virus is allowed to run its course and dispose of those at risk then the world can move back to where it was 5 - 6 months ago. This IMO will not happen. Whether better or worse, the world will be different. Perhaps this is a chance to make it a better one.
If that means a step back to a time before globalization (and mass tourism) so be it. Globalization has done nothing to improve the lot of most of the world's population other than to give some a more comfortable existence at the expense of other, poorer, countries. It and the mass movement of people, has also led to the ease at which this and other viruses have spread. The pandemic has further exposed the dangers of inter-dependency, whether it be for pharmaceuticals or foodstuffs.
If replacing NZ's tourism industry with other industries that promote more self-sufficiency then bring it on.
Pete

 

[Rorschach]

Without the lockdown The NHS would have been swamped....

NHS was nowhere near being swamped, we had ample space in ICU units and never even opened the fully equipped Nightingale hospitals. I am not saying we should have done nothing but we didn't need to do what we did, we could have managed perfectly well like Sweden.

I am sorry you are isolated and alone, if you were living in Switzerland you would be allowed to hug your granddaughter, the risk is absolutely tiny.

Really? I must have imagined those reports night after night of wzrds rammed with seriously ill people and xhausted NHS staff pleading for more ventilators, oxygen, PPE etc.

I suppose you're going to tell me the evil mainstream media were making it all up :lol:

Nope you didn't imagine it, there were hospitals in certain areas of London that got very close to being overwhelmed. If they had spread those patients around the country more though it wouldn't have been an issue. Plenty of hospitals have seen barely any C19 patients and are ghost towns because they cleared everyone else out.
The NHS as a whole has been absolutely fine, isolated pockets have struggled and things should have been handled better there, for a start once they built the Nightingale hospital in London they should have filled it with patients.