50 deaths in Barnsley from CO-19

So some of the "extra", staff are in place to the determinant of other peoples health? I accept that non essential will mean not life threatening so I appreciate the logic behind the move and that it was probably the only sensible option. It will however lead to long term issues both for people's health and for the NHS.

 

I understand he's worried sick for his family but for some reason it means he's refusing to read the words in front of him and he's lost all clarity which is a shame as he's a smart and balanced man usually. Shows just how scared he must be though which I understand as I am equally scared for the lives of my family members

 

ST. You've been arguing throughout against the lockdown.
It can't go on forever but has been vital for these two months.
my father in law had a stroke last week. He's in hospital. He's in his late 70s. Without the lockdown and with hospitals overrun with covid patients he'd probably be dead.

 

I don't think anyone posting on here takes that stance. People are just worried about the long term consequences of the measures.
It's a classic trolley problem, and it's impossible to answer as we don't know the real numbers. How many lives will be shortened by the lockdown? We won't know the answer for years.
Could we achieve the same result by just isolating those in the most vulnerable groups? I don't know, is that even practical?

 

I've been arguing for more protection for the vulnerable throughout too but that always gets ignored.

 

https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/news...re-coronavirus-deaths-hospitals-drop-18226071

Yorkshire is improving all the time. There has to be a time when people are trusted to be sensible, which people would be as they wouldn't risk a second wave. I dread over the next five years or so the increases we will see in deaths of other things such as cancer from cancelled appointments.

 

The key point for me is that churton has got the trolley problem completely the wrong way round with his posts.

The runaway train is called covid-19. It's heading towards 5 people called the vulnerable. You can either let it wipe them out or divert the trolley towards one otherwise unaffected person called suicide.

That is the reality of the situation but he mistakenly posed the trolley question to SM the wrongg way round.

 

Did you see any news pictures from yesterday?

People won’t be sensible! Tell them all to stay at home and 90% will follow the rules, ask them to just ‘be sensible’ and they’ll revert to being their usual selfish selves.

 

And in this analogy I think the long term (or medium term depending on treatment,/vaccine) solution has to be to move the vulnerable out of the way rather than divert the trolley.

 

So do I but for some reason it appears to be a measure that won't even be entertained either by the government or the public

 

I think the real question is will those most vulnerable be sensible if we ease some restrictions for everyone else and ask them to continue to shield themselves.

 

I think the government don't think it will work. That if the lockdown is eased even the vulnerable will be going out too. To some extent I think that is the case too. It's just a matter of how many do follow it and how many don't. Continue to ban mass gatherings and implement social distancing in public spaces. The current situation is unsustainable and tellingly the chancellor said as much last week.

 

What frustrates me most is that if the same amount of money that has been spent preventing the fit and healthy from working and closing businesses down had instead been spent giving much more support for the vulnerable and ensure that they isolated while being given everything needed to keep them alive and healthy I'm certain the death rate would have been much lower.

 

Hard to argue agaisnt that, the situation was certainly misread. Hopefully it is what we are now trying to move towards.

 

I'm not I'm afraid.

 

Thanks for the name drop, who am I shooting? You are gonna have to lend me a gun as I had my license revoked

 

May I ask why you think that?

 

Nor me. Fit and healthy people still get ill and some die. The more people who catch covid 19, the more will die. Over 30 million people work in the uk (I'll use this as a rough estimateof people who wouldn't be locked down). If 60% were to get covid 19 (herd immunity number) that's 18 million people. If only 0.2% of those die (quoted death rate of people under 40, to put a semi-sensible number in) then it's 360,000 deaths. That's my logic.

As an individual a fit healthy adult under 50 is unlikely get seriously ill or die from covid 19. However statistically some will. Work up the numbers and a large number of fit healthy adults would die from contracting it.

Edit: my maths is wrong (I'm a chemist, notoriously rubbish at maths) 0.2% of 18,000,000 is 36,000

 

See Plankton Petes post. Obviously a Tory government would have done what you suggested if it was at all possible, they don't want the workers hans off the plough for any time, let alone the weeks of lockdown we ve had.

 

Eyup, it’s Neil Ferguson ;-)