You're wrong.
One-*** efficacy questions
- Thread starter Chris152
- Start date
Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:
- Status
You're wrong.
It's hard enough to know whats going on in our own country the clearest world data I can find is here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_death_rates_by_country
Comparing India and the UK
India UK
ICU beds 1 per 20000 1 per 11000
Cases 19557457 4434157
Deaths 215542 127782
Fatality rate 1.1% 2.9%
Does that mean India is nearly 3 times better at treating Covid than we are? Or that their population is more resilient than ours, when in our country the worst effected part of our population is of south east Asian origin. Or that a lot of Indian deaths are going unrecorded, possibly only those who die after getting medical attention are being recorded?
To quote India's chief minister in 2016 "There exist pervasive inconsistencies in the population estimates"
In short we do not know what is happening in many parts of the world but the sooner mass vaccination gets delivered the better for everyone. Never forget how privileged we are to have the choice of accepting a free at point of use medical service.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_death_rates_by_country
Comparing India and the UK
India UK
ICU beds 1 per 20000 1 per 11000
Cases 19557457 4434157
Deaths 215542 127782
Fatality rate 1.1% 2.9%
Does that mean India is nearly 3 times better at treating Covid than we are? Or that their population is more resilient than ours, when in our country the worst effected part of our population is of south east Asian origin. Or that a lot of Indian deaths are going unrecorded, possibly only those who die after getting medical attention are being recorded?
To quote India's chief minister in 2016 "There exist pervasive inconsistencies in the population estimates"
In short we do not know what is happening in many parts of the world but the sooner mass vaccination gets delivered the better for everyone. Never forget how privileged we are to have the choice of accepting a free at point of use medical service.
RobinBHM
Established Member
Dr John Lee writes controversial stuff for self promotion....he writes articles for Daily Mail, Telegraph and appears on shows like Julie Hartley Brewer.
It's plausible stuff in a shallow way....not backed up by data or evidence.
RobinBHM
Established Member
Ive quoted from reliable, trusted sources, I wonder what makes you think they are wrong?
One question I would put to Dr Lee. If as he said masks and social distancing have no significant effect on the transmission of respiratory virus could he explain this winters flu related death total.
Flu kills vulnerable people, Covid kills vulnerable people, Flu isn't generally tested for and it's method of killing is similar to that of Covid. More thant 30% of Covid cases are caught in hospital. Essentially anyone who enters hospital with Flu catches Covid or already had Covid, gets tested, dies and gets marked as a Covid death. Nobody cares about Flu, it's old hat.
flu is less transmissible and generally kills a smaller subset of older people. It doesn't have a significant impact in cohorts like people age 50 who are moderately obese, but covid takes a slice out of those.
I don't think the catching of covid in hospitals is that standard or the staff would've all gone down early. Spouse works in a hospital a floor above the ER but not critical patient area (or maybe it's below, whatever it is, the ER is close in proximity). If you come into the hospital with flu, you'll be identified as having the flu and not put with the covid patients.
How do I know that the covid catching isn't that big of an issue in places outside of the negative pressure areas where covid patients are? Only one person in spouse's practice has gotten covid prior to vaccination (out of ten). Most work full time and only with surgical masks (they weren't allowed to wear even their own N95 due to hospital rules - which is stupid - but very big on "if you have your own, people will think you're taking them from the ER and ICU".)
Nobody wearing a surgical mask in an area with covid in the air would last long before they get it (their patients are noncompliant).
I suspect the care taken in avoiding exposure to covid has made enormous differences in flu since flu isn't passed as easily. My kids are back in school 4 days a week - when the flu goes around, they're puking in their lunchboxes at lunch and putting on all kinds of spectacular displays. Nothing this year.
I don't think the catching of covid in hospitals is that standard or the staff would've all gone down early. Spouse works in a hospital a floor above the ER but not critical patient area (or maybe it's below, whatever it is, the ER is close in proximity). If you come into the hospital with flu, you'll be identified as having the flu and not put with the covid patients.
How do I know that the covid catching isn't that big of an issue in places outside of the negative pressure areas where covid patients are? Only one person in spouse's practice has gotten covid prior to vaccination (out of ten). Most work full time and only with surgical masks (they weren't allowed to wear even their own N95 due to hospital rules - which is stupid - but very big on "if you have your own, people will think you're taking them from the ER and ICU".)
Nobody wearing a surgical mask in an area with covid in the air would last long before they get it (their patients are noncompliant).
I suspect the care taken in avoiding exposure to covid has made enormous differences in flu since flu isn't passed as easily. My kids are back in school 4 days a week - when the flu goes around, they're puking in their lunchboxes at lunch and putting on all kinds of spectacular displays. Nothing this year.
(by the way, the CDC does track positive flu samples - they're at about 1/10th the rate of last year. There are, of course, flu deaths involved. Limited contact in nursing homes and with the elderly almost certainly makes a huge difference. Covid deaths are WAY down in the elderly population here, too, due to vaccinations, but flu deaths haven't bounced back with covid deaths disappearing).
rwillett
Established Member
It's not a storm in a teacup at all. It's not about the money per se, it's about the possible advantage that loaning/donating the £58K gives the loaner/donater.
The PM appears to have an expensive lifestyle, having >= 6 kids, plus expensive divorces, means he is struggling to survive on his PM's salary of £150K.
Lending or donating money to him creates an 'obligation' that will have to paid at some time. This might be a small favour of getting access to the PM to talk them about something, having them lean on a civil servant in a procurement bid, help write an obscure updater to the tax code, perhaps introducing them to somebody in a foreign government. Once you have bent the rules ever so slightly, the next time is easier and the next time easier still. No doubt the PM will bluster as he nornally does, try to switch the topic, but the rules are there for a reason, to stop corruption. Corruption is not normally £100M arms deals to the Saudis (see Private Eye passim), but little things adding up and up and up.
The money means nothing, the debt is everything. I work very closely with govt depts though I am not and never have been a civil servant. I have to be 100% up front about what I can do, what I say and if I go out with good friends who are civil servants, they are very insistent that they MUST pay their own way. There can be no hint of improprietry. I respect that. What the PM is done is appalling, he has opened himself up to suggestions of influence and potentially criminal liability. He knows the rules as he has broken them repeatedly.
I also note that James Clevelly has already started laying the groundwork for the PM not to resign if he has been caught lying. I fully expect other ministers to start supporting this position. So if you're caught taking dodgy loans and you're caught lying to Parliament, does this mean it's still a "storm in a teacup"? please don't say they all do it, so thats OK coz it's not. He's the PM, he's the head of the govt, he signs the ministerial code of conduct and is expected to abide by it though his past history as a serial lier does rather suggest he had his fingers crossed behind his back when he did so.
As an aside it does appear that one can get onto VIP PPE equipment contracts with nothing more than a good word from your local publican to a health minister so Boris might have got a good deal on his loan.
Rob
Selwyn
Established Member
Lockdown isn't based on data or evidence. We've not even done a cost benefit on it!
Selwyn
Established Member
Selwyn
Established Member
Was it even a loan, or was the cost 'covered' by him when BJ realised he'd been caught out? Obviously that's an incredibly difficult question for him to answer, and will require a complicated enquiry that'll take long enough that hopefully people will have forgotten about it.
And yes, I've given up trying to keep the thread on track, and this should be in the secret forum.
Yes, some. But not the majority, unless there was a particularly well-protected cohort who was only exposed in hospitals.
I would suspect there are some flu cases that went unreported just due to poor focus (as in, flu cases are confirmed cases - which means someone needs to send something to a lab). We haven't had unrestricted indoor access to vulnerable classes, though, so the hump that usually exists for flu season just didn't happen this year in the US, but the non-seasonal rate appears to be little changed.
RobinBHM
Established Member
the term "lockdown" really means a collection of non pharmaceutical interventions, lockdown as a term doesnt have any definition.
there is evidence that confirms the effectiveness of NPIs
here is one such report from a trusted source:
"Our results show that major non-pharmaceutical interventions—and lockdowns in particular—have had a large effect on reducing transmission. Continued intervention should be considered to keep transmission of SARS-CoV-2 under control."
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2405-7
RobinBHM
Established Member
PCR testing is accurate.
a covid death is one where the person dies within 28 days of a positive test -it would be a stretch to say flu got that person first.
Selwyn
Established Member
Not the majority no. But where there were lots of covid deaths localised in one hospital (where the blame went on people having parties or breaking lockdown rules) it was often a spread within the hospital environment.
Remember when people die when they are old it is not one single virus or morbidity that carts them off.
Selwyn
Established Member
You still don't get it. Watch the video I put up. When you are old and die there are many multiples of factors that will cause you to take your last breath.
selectortone
Still waking up not dead in the morning
And if there is any veracity at all in this evidence, it beggars belief that people can still push the argument that we should all just go back to pre-lockdown norms right now and to hell with the consequences.
btw; if anyone is wondering why I keep jumping on Rorschach because of his to-hell-with-them-it's-hurting-my-business views on the risks to others; I have a daughter who has a chronic condition that requires medication that cripples her immune system. Idiots wandering unmasked around supermarkets (as has been her experience twice) who could be asymptomatic scare me to death.
Ps: and despite his predictions, she's somehow, at the age of 34, survived both AZ jabs without incident.
Last edited:
It didn't hurt my business too much in the end, an initial lull picked up pretty well and with government handouts I had a pretty good year after all.
I am sorry to hear about your daughter, but I don't think that justifies lockdowns. Your daughter was/is at risk of all sorts of infectious diseases when she leaves the house, it's up to her to take steps to protect herself. Ironically the lockdown that was intended to keep her safe will likely in the long run cause her more harm because we are storing up major healthcare problems for the future. You might just find in a few years time there isn't the money to treat her illness. If she had taken steps to shield herself while the healthy carried on with life we would all benefit in the long run. Too late now though. As I have mentioned before, a family member is now permanently disabled and dying of cancer because of lockdown, their consultant has admitted that if lockdown had not delayed treatment they would have a (pretty much) fully functioning arm and their cancer would be cured rather than killing them.
- Status
