Old duffers rebellion.

[artie]

I guess you may not be familiar with how death is recorded or how serious viral infection works? Bilateral interstitial pneumonia is exactly and precisely the most common presentation of C19. It means that in both lungs the tissue becomes inflamed and fluid fills the spaces between the cells and floods the small air spaces.

So I would expect that an otherwise healthy person who succumbed to Covid to most commonly (>90%) have consequential pneumonia. The linked question asks for certificates only specifying C19. Those found are virtually certainly in error. They almost 100% should have found an associated condition, pneumonia.

The "story" (if there is one) in your link is not that C19 doesn't kill. It is that in a small percentage of cases doctors did not fully record the modality of the consequences of infection.

Those doctors made a mistake - and I'm 100% confident they'd admit it.

But they're probably pretty tired, having not had a break since the summer.

And they're probably a bit worn, having watched too many patients drown in their own fluids; some because other folk think they're above the guidance.

And they're probably a bit despairing, having to explain basic science to idiots that post nonsense on the internet to ?somehow, well, what? Why? Why do you guys insist on spouting rubbish in a way that, if the stakes were lower, you'd be embarassed to be so ignorant about?

And yes, I'm upset. The truth is actually very simple to understand. The virus is dangerous. No category is exempt. We may not be able to save you. You can help by getting vaccinated. Even when you are, you should follow the guidance.

And, please, stop posting dung you know nothing about on the internet.

I'd like you to read that again in twenty four hours, and if you think it's a fair and honest, good faith comment on the FOI answer. Post it again.

BTW is the .gov website all dung or just the parts you don't want to consider.

 

[Rorschach]

Some sensible people at the WTO it seems.

I think it madness to be vaccinating young people like myself when we could be saving the lives of those in poorer countries, not only is it a good thing to do but it is in our self interest as well as it will open up worldwide travel faster and lead to less problems of importation.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56135778

 

[Ozi]

I guess you may not be familiar with how death is recorded or how serious viral infection works? Bilateral interstitial pneumonia is exactly and precisely the most common presentation of C19. It means that in both lungs the tissue becomes inflamed and fluid fills the spaces between the cells and floods the small air spaces.

So I would expect that an otherwise healthy person who succumbed to Covid to most commonly (>90%) have consequential pneumonia. The linked question asks for certificates only specifying C19. Those found are virtually certainly in error. They almost 100% should have found an associated condition, pneumonia.

The "story" (if there is one) in your link is not that C19 doesn't kill. It is that in a small percentage of cases doctors did not fully record the modality of the consequences of infection.

Those doctors made a mistake - and I'm 100% confident they'd admit it.

But they're probably pretty tired, having not had a break since the summer.

And they're probably a bit worn, having watched too many patients drown in their own fluids; some because other folk think they're above the guidance.

And they're probably a bit despairing, having to explain basic science to idiots that post nonsense on the internet to ?somehow, well, what? Why? Why do you guys insist on spouting rubbish in a way that, if the stakes were lower, you'd be embarassed to be so ignorant about?

And yes, I'm upset. The truth is actually very simple to understand. The virus is dangerous. No category is exempt. We may not be able to save you. You can help by getting vaccinated. Even when you are, you should follow the guidance.

And, please, stop posting dung you know nothing about on the internet.

And please keep posting stuff you obviously do know about to balance all the crap

 

[Deadeye]

I'd like you to read that again in twenty four hours, and if you think it's a fair and honest, good faith comment on the FOI answer. Post it again.

BTW is the .gov website all dung or just the parts you don't want to consider.

My reply stands. The FOI is of course accurate...but the question asked is deliberately chosen and gives a very misleading picture, which then turns up in internet fora posted by people thinking they've found evidence of something.
They haven't but the posting adds to the noise.
Misinformation includes misusing genuine data or misunderstanding the limitations of data.
So, no I'm not selective in my willingness to review information. However I am very careful to understand what it actually means.

 

[artie]

The FOI is of course accurate..

So why the tirade of abuse?

I simply posted the link, I found it interesting you called it dung.

 

[Jelly]

So why the tirade of abuse?

I simply posted the link, I found it interesting you called it dung.

I think he's made it very clear that he considers that a question was carefully selected, in bad faith to ensure the FOI outcome would, support an argument which when correctly presented in with proper contextualisation is clearly invalid.

 

[artie]

I think he's made it very clear that he considers that a question was carefully selected, in bad faith to ensure the FOI outcome would, support an argument which when correctly presented in with proper contextualisation is clearly invalid.

Are you his interpreter, if so it's refreshing that you can make a point without using the words, ***** and dung.

 

[artie]

Anyone know why ***** is censored for some and not others?

 

[Jelly]

Are you his interpreter, if so it's refreshing that you can make a point without using the words, silly person and dung.

I am a person who interpreted his words successfully and didn't feel the need to ask questions with answers which are self evident from the information provided in those words having done so.

I of course don't feel it quite as strongly as he does, because I'm somewhat removed from the realities of people dying of COVID, so don't have the same viscerally emotional response.

I assure you that in his shoes my language pallette would be rather coarser and more expletive laden.

Anyone know why silly person is censored for some and not others?

I would guess the singular (*****) is censored, whilst the plural (idiots) is not in the filter list to be replaced with "silly people"; phpBB is not particularly sophisticated in that regard.

Edit: yep, that confirms it, the original word in brackets is censored, but not it's plural.

 

[selectortone]

.

 

[Mark Karacsonyi]

I get my vaccine next Wednesday. I hear if it’s the Russian one, I need to drink vodka to activate it. If it’s the Chinese one, bat should be eaten.

Regardless, after I will get a vaccination passport, allowing me to go to open and sporting events. Bit like a pet passport I suppose.

 

[OldWood]

Yes. Yes we do. We are all entirely free to do exactly what we each want to do and part of that is choosing which laws we obey. The sting in the tail is that our decisions are not consequence-free. As a result of that awareness, and conditioning, and humanity, and morality and self preservation etc. we mostly obey most laws. That shouldn't stop each of us critically examining laws and challenging them when, by our own judgement, they are wrong.

Umm - please change 'judgement' to 'convenience' and then that makes social sense.

 

[Rorschach]

Umm - please change 'judgement' to 'convenience' and then that makes social sense.

Judgement works perfectly fine in what he is saying. We have to apply our own moral judgement to laws before we choose if we are going to follow them.

 

[artie]

I am a person who interpreted his words successfully and didn't feel the need to ask questions with answers which are self evident from the information provided in those words having done so.

I of course don't feel it quite as strongly as he does, because I'm somewhat removed from the realities of people dying of COVID, so don't have the same viscerally emotional response.

I assure you that in his shoes my language pallette would be rather coarser and more expletive laden.

Methinks Thou doth protest too much.

Especially to a link from a .gov website posted without comment other than that I found it interesting.

So I'll save you any trouble of resorting to expletives instead of adult discourse. I won't reply to you again.

 

[RobinBHM]

.gov website all dung or just the parts you don't want to consider

It is sadly no better than any of the rest of the spin they produce these days

 

[RobinBHM]

You have large swathes of the public who see e.g. 200 deaths a day and think that sounds awful and must be stopped, not realising that 500 a day die of cancer, and another 500 of heart disease and so on.

No you dont have large swathes of the public thinking that.

please dont make assumptions on others to support your argument.

 

[Davey44]

And please keep posting stuff you obviously do know about to balance all the rubbish

Thank you so much for your 'No Holds Barred' response to what has largely become OPINION based on little or no factual evidence at all. Please repeat ad-infinitum.

 

[RobinBHM]

Learning to live with the virus has social and economic benefits but is politically a bad move because it means the government must choose a number of deaths that they are willing to accept in order for normality to resume.

Government strategy is not based on number of deaths that are acceptable -that is not the criteria used, although I realise it is yours, as you like to use the simplistic binary argument if lockdown versus economy as the over simplistic choice.

the real concern for PHE and govt is that viral transmissions grow exponentially -so their strategy to keep community transmission low to prevent that happening.

 

[RobinBHM]

I guess you may not be familiar with how death is recorded or how serious viral infection works? Bilateral interstitial pneumonia is exactly and precisely the most common presentation of C19. It means that in both lungs the tissue becomes inflamed and fluid fills the spaces between the cells and floods the small air spaces.

So I would expect that an otherwise healthy person who succumbed to Covid to most commonly (>90%) have consequential pneumonia. The linked question asks for certificates only specifying C19. Those found are virtually certainly in error. They almost 100% should have found an associated condition, pneumonia.

The "story" (if there is one) in your link is not that C19 doesn't kill. It is that in a small percentage of cases doctors did not fully record the modality of the consequences of infection.

Those doctors made a mistake - and I'm 100% confident they'd admit it.

But they're probably pretty tired, having not had a break since the summer.

And they're probably a bit worn, having watched too many patients drown in their own fluids; some because other folk think they're above the guidance.

And they're probably a bit despairing, having to explain basic science to idiots that post nonsense on the internet to ?somehow, well, what? Why? Why do you guys insist on spouting rubbish in a way that, if the stakes were lower, you'd be embarassed to be so ignorant about?

And yes, I'm upset. The truth is actually very simple to understand. The virus is dangerous. No category is exempt. We may not be able to save you. You can help by getting vaccinated. Even when you are, you should follow the guidance.

And, please, stop posting dung you know nothing about on the internet.

I listened to Theo Usherwood, political correspondent on LBC talking about his experience of having covid. He is 38 an got covid in March last year

he spent a week at home until too ill, then 6 days in hospital.
He was saying that afterwards he was so weak he had to have a lie down every day for 3 hours
and even now, almost a year later, he says his stamina is considerably lower -playing sport for example, he can only play for 10 ins before being exhausted.

the damage to the lungs is considerable.

 

[Droogs]

Seems to me that people who get Covid are an the whole being left with some form of COPD