Why are we relaxing rules?

The government never learn. They should have only given advance warning of things like the schools and shops that they want to open. There was no need to announce the meeting people changes until Monday. A lot of people are bound to do it with immediate effect. They have also not made it clear enough that it doesn't include the vulnerable who are shielding. Piss poor communication as usual.

 

[QUOTE="pontyender, post: 2479323, member: They have also not made it clear that it doesn't include the vulnerable who are shielding. Piss poor communication as usual.[/QUOTE]

I think the message to the vulnerable has been terrible throughout. We were told before lockdown that the vulnerable would be asked to shield. This ended up coinciding with the lockdown. Then as measures are eased I think many of the vulnerable will think it applies to them too. Seems to be a real lack of appetite politically to tell a group of people they will be treated differently from everyone else.

 

I'll admit to not knowing a single thing about the man before this pandemic started but to suggest he's spreading "lies" is untrue. And he's certainly not saying that everything's fine - he is merely highlighting reasons for optimism, as am I.

 

No. It absolutely doesn't.

Are you seriously suggesting that this man is spreading optimism in the hope that the NHS is overwhelmed and people die?

 

Safe to say, we're not 'following the science'

 

I wouldn't suggest that. I would suggest that he has interests - in the treatment of cancer, and political/financial interests - that conflict with the continued lockdown.

 

London is reporting an upturn in hospital admissions

 

He has a vested interest in the treatment of cancer? I don't know even where to start with that one, so I won't.

In terms of financial interests - haven't we all bud?

This really hasn't got anything to do with the left, the right, up or down. It's about savings lives and protecting our economy.

There's nothing wrong with having optimism, we really do need it.

 

36/149 announced today by NHS England were from yesterday with the rest going back as far as March 19th. 12/149 deaths were in the 59 and under category with two of that from yesterday.

Last Friday the UK death total was 351. Today it's 177 so when all settings is given later it's going to be down from last week.

 

He is an oncologist that makes money from the treatment of cancer patients. If cancer treatments stop, his money stops and the outcome for his patients deteriorates - which is bad for the patients.

He is also one of the oncologists who said the Lockerbie bomber had 3 months to live (he survived nearly 3 years) after a suggestion from the Libyan government to get the bomber early release.

Optimism is fine. Cherry-picking facts and information to give an overly optimistic view in order to start earning money again probably isn't as fine.

 

Why do you keep listing the number of people under 59 who died? My dad's 62 and my mam turns 60 next year. If she died now you'd count her in your figures as noteworthy but if she died in a few months you'd not even think her death mattered as she's be in the '60 and over' category (well, you wouldn't actually count her now as she has underlying health conditions - nothing that will kill her prematurely though). There's a hell of a lot of people who post on here who are over 60 who it feels like you are sending a message to them that if they died, so what, they're so old they're practically dead anyway so who cares if they die of this tomorrow.

 

Not at all my point is the over 60s and those of any age who are high risk should be looked after better as that's where most deaths are. Whilst if you're healthy and under 59 you have to be very unlucky to die from this so don't need to worry as much as MSM would like you to, although you should still be sensible.

 

Because, like anyone with half a brain cell, he’s noticed the extreme drop off in the death rate in people under 60 and can’t understand why that population are being subjected to the same restrictions as those multiple more times at risk.

Unfortunately our Government seem to have this bizarre notion that everyone has to be treated the same regardless of their risk profile. It is literally the most retarded policy in political history.

 

Firstly let me say, I respect your opinion.

However I really don't think the cancer argument is a strong one. He has a profession, we all do. It's struggling, everyone's is.

I also think it's somewhat ironic of you to accuse him of 'cherry-picking facts and information'.

I honestly don't think this guy is being 'overly optimistic', he's simply looking at the stats (as is everyone) and theorising about a possible best case scenario. Most, if not all, of his predictions re. COVID have been correct thus far, I desperately hope that they continue to be.

 

Also no reason why our schools can't be as safe as they have been in Denmark.

 

You know what they say about hoping in one hand and shitting in the other and seeing which one is full first... I prefer plan for rain, hope for sun.

According to the latest figures, the UK is still at threat level 4, but is relaxing lockdown anyway despite previously promising not to until it got to 3. Parts of London, the south coast, the South West and Cumbria and others are reporting R > 1 (in last few days), there are an estimated 50000+ active cases in the UK and there is an increase in hospital admissions. Some experts are predicting 150000 excess deaths in the UK this year.

 

Danish schools have been part-time, many classes outside and only certain years have returned (+ Danish kids start later). I hope this is correct. I really do, but its a gamble with the lives of 10m kids and their parents - probably 3-4 times the population of Denmark.

 

Absolutely completely agree - as does Mr. Sikora

 

https://www.france24.com/en/2020052...lf-of-may-lower-than-in-2019-despite-covid-19

France showing us exactly how badly we have done.

 

Figures for U.K. deaths are at a Conservative estimate of 65k. Accept that and move forwards. Regurgitating figures that are clearly wrong helps no one.