How would you rate the UK's handling of this pandemic?

[Selwyn]

No it isn't.

You mean Covid deaths, DESPITE millions of people shielding, massive govt efforts to restrict social gatherings, massive collective effort to reduce shielding......so no equivalence to flu.

Also please can you give me an example of a bad flu year where over 700 healthcare workers have died, hundreds of essential, workers like bus drivers have died, where thousands of people are suffering long Covid, where hospitals are overwhelmed to the extent they are now.

Look we employ 1 million people plus in the healthcare industry of course some are going to die from something. You cannot say that no healthcare workers will die ever. How many supermarket workers have died that can be traced to covid deaths? How many teachers? Its very very small and they kept working.

 

[Rorschach]

Look we employ 1 million people plus in the healthcare industry of course some are going to die from something. You cannot say that no healthcare workers will die ever. How many supermarket workers have died that can be traced to covid deaths? How many teachers? Its very very small and they kept working.

It's obvious it isn't a rate any higher than the normal mortality rate because otherwise the BBC would be running it as headline stories everyday.

 

[Selwyn]

Strawman....I never said they were.
Please try to avoid logical fallacies, they weaken your argument.

I was talking specifically about Covid and mypost was in response to your apparent claim that it's pointless testing or isolating asymptomatic people.

Asymptomatic people are a key vector for Covid.

BMJ concurs:

"The absence of strong evidence that asymptomatic people are a driver of transmission is another good reason for pausing the roll out of mass testing in schools, universities, and communities."

It is pointless testing asymptomatics. Lots of countries refuse to test for antibodies because they know it will tie them up in knots.

 

[RobinBHM]

The constant testing of asymptomatics or even those who don't have it using a super sensitive pcr is total skewing the whole thing. We will never escape from this if we keep pcr testing like this

I see.

Now that I've disproved your argument that asymptomatic people aren't vectors, you've engaged in whataboutery and switched to questioning the efficacy of the PCR test.

Ok.

So please can you qualify: "we will never escape from this if we keep PCR testing like this"

Firstly I will gently remind you, that you are presenting opinion as fact, same with:

"a super sensitive pcr is total skewing the whole thing"

 

[rafezetter]

If something like the pandemic should happen again in say 20 or 30 years time I wonder if the people who have the "let the old people die" attitude will have suddenly found a convincing reason to change their minds.

Who has said that?

I suppose you are currently saying let the suicides Increase and the sod the cancer screenings now then are you?

I would do my very best to protect myself if I was old and vulnerable in 30 years time and possibly choose to keep away from people . I wouldnt expect to destroy younger peoples lives just so I can have the feeling of being in this together. Not least because it doesn't work - demonstrably so.

Thank you for asking that Selly, - the answer is : rorchach did, here:

No you have it bang on. I want the vulnerable to protect themselves (voluntarily with support) and the less vulnerable to carry on with minimal restrictions in order to reach a state of natural immunity. Of course this was my thoughts long before a vaccine was even on the horizon.
Basically I am in agreement with the Great Barrington Declaration. I am not for "let it rip" as some say. What really annoyed people though was that I stated I accepted the fact that some (elderly and sick) people would die in order for the rest of the country to survive. Instead it seems that the elderly and sick still died, but plenty of younger healthy people will now suffer long after the old we "saved" have died. That opinion was not taken well, probably because a few people on this forum would be on that list (unless they protected themselves as I suggested).

and here is my post where I link multiple posts that rorschach has made stating exactly the same thing - "protect the young and the economy, and let the old and vulnerable die" [becausethey are going to die anyway].

https://www.ukworkshop.co.uk/thread...handling-of-this-pandemic.127767/post-1429660
It's all there Selly, and why I have a very hard time accepting why he's even still allowed to remain on the forum - this isn't a "difference of opinion", rorschach is openly advocating genocide for "the good of the economy and future generations from debt" and to protect businesses like his from losing money (which he admits he hasn't BTW, he's made posts stating he's been able to continue to work AND claim the govt bailouts - from what I can tell, he's made the best profits of his business so far this last year). - what a nice young man.

When pointed out that covid deaths ARE NOT only the "old" but spread across the entire age spectrum of humanity, his reply is unapologetic and essentially "lalalala I'm not listening" or a HAHA emoji.

When asked to explain the practicalities of how the vulnerable people should protect themselves if there had been no lockdown, when everyone else is not taking similar steps in order to reduce transmission of infection by proxy - he has no answer AT ALL, not even an impractical one merely a "not my problem gov'nor" (paraphrased), and just inserts another HAHA emoji.

Here's my problem with this standpoint and him - I firmly beleive his standpoint could be very much likened to: "Let the Nazi's invade Poland and kill the Jews - as long as British men and women are protected and not sent to war to die". After the war I beleive his standpoint would have been "See? The Jews still died anyway, you didn't save them**, but now we have hundreds of thousands of British men and women dead, AND an economical debt of £120 BILLION, that will take generations to pay back".

(** convenietly ignoring all those lives we did save and his life would have been VERY VERY different, with a possibility if he is of an ethnic minority he wouldn't even exist as his grandparents would have been killed). Edit: that gives me another thought - there are people now who will not be born, solely because of an unnecessary covid death - sombering thought.

He seems absolutely pathalogically incapable of seeing the "bigger, bigger picture" only the one that pertains to him and those HE cares about, which seems to be about right for many of the younger generations. - The fact that those brave souls ALSO happened to eradicate the Nazi regime from potential global domination seems to be largely irrelevant - just as the eradication of Covid and reduction of UNNECESSARY loss of life, was the goal of the lockdowns.

To him, as he has said verifiably stated repeatedly, the damaged economy and the debt incurred to the younger generation (him, he's only 35) isn't worth the price of lives saved.

This isn't just my personal "vendetta" opinion, there are multple posts from other members calling him out for the same reasons with phrases like "despicable human being".

It's sickening beyond words and description.

I also predict when he reads this he will respond with yet another "haha" emoji. (edit: I was right)

 

[Selwyn]

It's an often repeated statement that needs to be qualified.

If the economy was fully open and Covid was allowed to spread through the community unhindered, hospitals would be overwhelmed, essentials workers would become sick.....and at some point the govt would have to impose much much harder restrictions.


In fact if governments impose far harder and tougher restrictions very very early, then community infection rate is lower and economies recover faster.
And that contradicts your argument....because it means far tougher restrictions can have less damage on the economy.

In fact all we are doing is aggregating people in the same big 4 or 5 supermarkets. If you have the virus and are emitting it then you will give it to others.

Peru went turbo on lockdown, no damn difference. Ireland, Spain ,France went hard early on and now it makes no difference. All over Western Europe the epidemic curve is very similar be it in Spain, Wales, Sweden or Germany. The virus is now everywhere - you will not eliminate this one any more than any other. Lockdown wasn't about stopping the virus.

 

[RobinBHM]

It's obvious it isn't a rate any higher than the normal mortality rate because otherwise the BBC would be running it as headline stories everyday.

Strawman

You constantly ignore a simple fact:

the death figures you are using for your argument is "Covid deaths despite massive non pharmaceutical interventions"

It is the whole basis for your ever repeated false arguments.


Please can you explain why you keep ignoring it?

 

[doctor Bob]

Is the goal at present to remove a poster from the thread?

 

[Selwyn]

I see.

Now that I've disproved your argument that asymptomatic people aren't vectors, you've engaged in whataboutery and switched to questioning the efficacy of the PCR test.

Ok.

So please can you qualify: "we will never escape from this if we keep PCR testing like this"

Firstly I will gently remind you, that you are presenting opinion as fact, same with:

"a super sensitive pcr is total skewing the whole thing"

No you have not disproved it. I told you asymptomatics do not drive pandemics and I am right. They do not and you tried to claim the asymptomatic spread is driving it and it isn't. So don't put words in my mouth thanks.

Remember we are recording people who have died within 28 days of a covid positive test as covid deaths. PCR is extremely sensitive and so its almost a surprise that no one in a warm hospital for a week or so with poor immune system or care home for 6 months does not test positive.

You only have to look at the death curves and IFR to see demonstrably that now is not April and never will be. Read the Diamond Princess and see how the virus spreads. Ignore the China data and your obsession with lockdowns as a tool that works - it doesn't. Do you think any country has eliminated it through lockdown once it is endemic?

 

[Rorschach]

Is the goal at present to remove a poster from the thread?

Rafezetter wants me removed from the gene pool! lol

 

[Selwyn]

Thank you for asking that Selly, - the answer is : rorchach did, here:



and here is my post where I link multiple posts that rorschach has made stating exactly the same thing - "protect the young and the economy, and let the old and vulnerable die" [becausethey are going to die anyway].

https://www.ukworkshop.co.uk/thread...handling-of-this-pandemic.127767/post-1429660
It's all there Selly, and why I have a very hard time accepting why he's even still allowed to remain on the forum - this isn't a "difference of opinion", rorschach is openly advocating genocide for "the good of the economy and future generations from debt" and to protect businesses like his from losing money (which he admits he hasn't BTW, he's made posts stating he's been able to continue to work AND claim the govt bailouts - from what I can tell, he's made the best profits of his business so far this last year). - what a nice young man.

When pointed out that covid deaths ARE NOT only the "old" but spread across the entire age spectrum of humanity, his reply is unapologetic and essentially "lalalala I'm not listening" or a HAHA emoji.

When asked how the vulnerable people should protect themselves, when everyone else is not taking similar steps in order to reduce transmission of infection by proxy - he has no answer AT ALL, not even an impractical one "not my problem gov'nor" (paraphrased), and merely inserts another HAHA emoji.

Here's my problem with this and him - I firmly beleive his standpoint could be very much likened to: "Let the Nazi's invade Poland and kill the Jews - as long as British men and women are protected and not sent to war to die". After the war I beleive his standpoint would have been "See? The Jews still died anyway you didn't save them**, but now we have hundreds of thousands of British men and women dead, AND an economical debt of £120 BILLION, that will take generations to pay back".

(** convenietly ignoring all those lives we did)

He seems absolutely pathalogically incapable of seeing the "bigger, bigger picture" only the one that pertains to him and those HE cares about, which seems to be about right for many of the younger generations. - The fact that those brave souls ALSO happened to eradicate the Nazi regime from potential global domination seems to be largely irrelevant - just as the eradication of Covid and reduction of UNNECESSARY loss of life, was the goal of the lockdowns.

To him, as he has said verifiably stated repeatedly, the damaged economy and the debt incurred to the younger generation (him, he's only 35) isn't worth the price of lives saved.

This isn't just my personal "vendetta" opinion, there are multple posts from other members calling him out for the same reasons with phrases like "despicable human being".

It's sickening beyond words and description.

I also predict when he reads this he will respond with yet another "haha" emoji.

He is not advocating genocide. For goodness sake. Hippocratic oath - first do no harm. There is definitely an argument that the death of an 87 year old in a care home is not the same as the death of a 65 year old from a missed mammogram in my world. Possibly not in yours?

I've already written we have 30 thousand excess deaths in the home in 2020 (non covid no less) in 2020. 30 - f***kin thousand!!!! And no one gives a toss! I'm just astonished that people want to skate over this so quickly! That is 30k people which we may have saved if they had had some cursory antibiotics or even saw a GP.

 

[RobinBHM]

It is pointless testing asymptomatics. Lots of countries refuse to test for antibodies because they know it will tie them up in knots.

The PCR test does not test for antibodies.


Which countries are refusing to PCR test?

How will it tie them up in knots?

 

[Selwyn]

The PCR test does not test for antibodies.


Which countries are refusing to PCR test?

How will it tie them up in knots?

Where did I say it did? Where did I say countries were not doing PCR tests? Read my posts and then think about it and then write legibly please Strawman.

 

[RobinBHM]

Lockdown wasn't about stopping the virus.

Strawman

Lockdowns objective have never been to stop the virus. Their purpose is to stop the bath tub overflowing.

Lowering community infection lowers the chance of each person getting Covid and keeps hospital,admissions at manageable levels.

By the way there is no such thing as "lockdown" what we really mean is non pharmaceutical interventions.....multiple restrictions with each country using different approaches.

There is no binary lockdown Vs no lockdown choice

 

[rafezetter]

He is not advocating genocide. For goodness sake. Hippocratic oath - first do no harm.

I've already written we have 30 thousand excess deaths (non covid no less) in 2020. 30 - f***kin thousand!!!! And no one gives a toss! I'm just astonished that people want to skate over this so quickly!

errr what? How does "let the old and vulnerable die..." fit in with your interpretation of the hippocratic oath? Please don't tell me you are in the medical profession.

I'd also like you to explain how "let the old and vulnerable die - because they will die anyway soon" is NOT genocide? - you do know what genocide means right?

Here let me help you:

" Genocide is the intentional action to destroy a people—usually defined as an ethnic, national, racial, or religious [a] group—in whole or in part. "

I think "the old and vulnerable" when used as a global "label" qualifies as "a group".

I think "let the old and the vulnerable die.." qualifies as "intentional".

Care to revise?

This debate isnt about those whom have died for non covid related reasons, because that happens every year ANYWAY and CANNOT be used by people to whitewash over excess covid deaths.

 

[doctor Bob]

........ you are misquoting by edit

 

[RobinBHM]

Where did I say it did? Where did I say countries were not doing PCR tests? Read my posts and then think about it and then write legibly please Strawman.

Here:
"t is pointless testing asymptomatics. Lots of countries refuse to test for antibodies because they know it will tie them up in knots"

I presumed that you actually meant PCR because antibody testing of asymptomatic would be pointless.....you don't test to see if somebody has had the virus, you test to see if people have antigens.

Perhaps you don't understand the difference

 

[RobinBHM]

And no one gives a toss

Strawman

Who says nobody gives a toss?

 

[rafezetter]

Is the goal at present to remove a poster from the thread?

People have been removed temporarily or permanently from this forum for reasons far less - ask Jacob; yet advocating mass death (I fail to see how else it can be described) seems to be allowed to stand, no matter how many times it's pointed out, repeated and even confirmed by rorschach. Again not my trainset, but I'm finding it hard to balance the reasons for the former, when measured against the latter.

Anyone with historic knowledge of this forum cannot dispute this.

 

[selly]

The people that have died, have done so despite considerable non pharmaceutical interventions to reduce spread.

There are millions of people in this country that would quite possibly die if they caught Covid.

Those people would have a far far higher chance of being infected if the government followed your policy of no lockdown.


I am sorry you can't see the importance of minimising the infection rate in the community.

It is important because the higher the level of infection, the higher numbers of vulnerable people are exposed to the virus.

Please can you explain why you don't understand that?

No millions will not die. You have a. 2-.5% chance of dieing if over 80.

errr what? How does "let the old and vulnerable die..." fit in with your interpretation of the hippocratic oath? Please don't tell me you are in the medical profession.

I'd also like you to explain how "let the old and vulnerable die - because they will die anyway soon" is NOT genocide? - you do know what genocide means right?

Here let me help you:

" Genocide is the intentional action to destroy a people—usually defined as an ethnic, national, racial, or religious [a] group—in whole or in part. "

I think "the old and vulnerable" when used as a global "label" qualifies as "a group".

I think "let the old and the vulnerable die.." qualifies as "intentional".

Care to revise?

This debate isnt about those whom have died for non covid related reasons, because that happens every year ANYWAY and CANNOT be used by people to whitewash over excess covid deaths.

You do realise the medical world can often people alive for a few more months or even years at times but chose not to? We could technically keep people ventilated for a long time and alive but for what end when they are 86?

What is your opinion of the 30k excess deaths in the home this year? Necessary collateral damage? That sounds genocidal too!