London Imperial College Vaccine

It’s not a straw man argument at all.

Death has an impact on the economy and society as well as its personal impact.

We will see a change in society, but we always see changes in society, TV saw a change in society, the plague saw a change and recently the internet changed it again.

But you didn’t answer my questions, how many infections and deaths is acceptable?

 

34,721 Is that helpful?

 

No wonder I can’t get any tin foil in shops.

 

But that’s less than have actually died.

How are you going to achieve that?

 

I think you will find the figures regarding Covid deaths were reduced significantly to around the 23,000 mark.

 

60,000 more deaths this year.

 

Why do you keep saying it's not the case with flu? Flu kills people of ALL ages. The percentage of flu deaths that are young is much higher than the percentage of covid deaths that are young but you keep saying this is not the case. Why do you say that?

 

The only purpose to that is to stop the NHS being overwhelmed. Which of course is crucial. Beyond that it won't stop the spread only delay it, so those susceptible to the virus will still die.
Unless we are banking on a vaccine, which from what I read would seem to be a very optimistic approach.
Maybe I'm guilty of the same thing as you, getting too emotional about it. The restrictions have made my work and home life horrible.

 

How many of those caused by the lockdown?

Yes, and here’s some grown up academics telling you what’s happened:

https://www.lboro.ac.uk/departments...-universities-suggests-new-approach-to-r.html

 

Apparently you're not allowed to count them all because some had comorbidities that might have killed them anyway one, five, ten years later.

 

And some of them have died of cancer because they had vital treatment removed.
Some have died of after effects of strokes because they've had their treatment removed.
Some have died of heart problems because they've had their treatment removed
Many have died of undiagnosed problems because they've had access to the NHS removed.
Quite a few have died of suicide as a result of losing their job/being locked in their homes etc.

Can I count all of those unnecessary deaths that our attempts to 'flatten the curve' have caused?

 

Do you really think that if the NHS had been swamped with covid cases for months because we hadn't locked down those treatments would have gone ahead?

 

I’m sure it happened, but have you got any stats on how many cancer patients were denied treatment? I know people that had surgeries and treatment during lockdown, so I’m curious of the stats.

I know someone that had foot surgery and someone that had a (non-cancerous) mole removed, both during the later stages of lockdown (both were deferred for a few weeks from initial appointments).

 

Internet trolls have been laughed at throughout for the out there views on Covid but at last they have an actual MP mention new world order. I had to check it wasn't a parody account. More and more control in our future.

 

Not sure about cancer specifically, but the Government’s own report today thinks the number of non Covid deaths specifically caused by the lockdown just to the end of May is 16,000. Sounds conservative to me, but that’s the Government’s own figures:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/news.s...ly-caused-16-000-excess-deaths-study-12044923

 

Terrible. Absolutely terrible. Not sure why you say “specifically caused by the lockdown” though. That’s not what it is at all, it’s caused by care being stopped. It didn’t have to be like this. Lockdown didn’t mean that medical care had to stop. That’s a political decision, nothing to do with lockdown.

What was the reasoning for stopping care? The only reasoning I can think of is that hospitals were overloaded and staff had to be reassigned. I wasn’t under the impression that happened to such an extent. But even if it did, that’s not due to lockdown, is it? In fact it’s the exact opposite.

 

Im using the wording specifically quoted in the report.

As you say, it’s appalling, and I hope people are held accountable in the future.

 

Was lockdown not a political decision too?

 

And the other 37000 excess deaths are just a statistical anomaly that is unlinked to a pandemic that’s killed half a million worldwide.

makes perfect sense.

 

The article does not say ‘specifically’ it says ‘indirectly’.

It’s referring to people not wanting to attend A&E - an indirect result of lockdown yes. Not direct though. That’s peoples choices, probably a result of misunderstood advice.