So, six months on....

Neither of which posts say

How about asking us how we feel about the fact you’ve stopped posting statistics you don’t understand now they’re definitely going in the wrong direction again.

 

Utter nonsense? Ok.

Based on what?

Your medical and scientific knowledge obviously eclipses that of the ones we see on mainline media, the ones on not so mainline media, and the frontline medical workers in my immediate family and their spouses who seem to think the infection and death rate would have grown uncontrollably without the actions which started in March.

You didn’t answer my question though. How did lockdown increase hospital admissions and lead to the excess deaths figure? You might argue it didn’t reduce admissions (you are wrong), but you can’t argue lockdown increased the drain on nhs resource.

Well, 2/3 of the population of the U.K. don’t live in three cities, so I assume you mean Sweden by that.

If 2/3 of the population of Sweden is in three cities, that makes my argument, it doesn’t break it.

I don’t know your source but I get the total population of Stockholm, Gothenburg and Malmo to be about 4.5mil if you include the greater metropolitan areas, against a population total of over 10 million. So I’d say 45% ish rather than 67%, but it still highlights my point.

You also made a point about my assertion about British people. The swedes might be as bad as us, but I have eyes and ears and have seen idiotic behaviour every single day from people, I’ve seen conspiracy theorists refuse to keep their distance and argue about wearing a mask on regular occasions.

Do the swedes do this? I don’t know. I doubt it, at least not on the scale ‘we’ do. I’m not suggesting it’s a majority, but it is a big enough minority to make a difference when it comes to the spread of infectious diseases.

 

There’s only been one ‘mainstream’ source that’s talked to figures this fantastical, and that’s Neil Ferguson and Imperial, and he’s been both personally and professionally completely discredited not only with his predictions and behaviours for this pandemic but also foot and mouth and others previously.

 

Virus statistics rise going into Winter. I understand that much.
It’s OK to admit you were proved wrong you know. It’s not a sign of weakness.

 

He doesn't know how to do so.vhe will simply call you a liar and then stop responding when you show him the exact quotes of what was said and provide sources too.

 

Your OP quoted lockdown as causing excess deaths due to missed appointments. I’ve pointed out that lockdown whether you agreed with it or not couldn’t have led to more nhs resource being used so couldn’t see how that was true.

I’ve repeatedly asked how this could be true. As yet no response, but I’ll give you chance.

Were you wrong on that?

 

Unless I've missed something isn't he also talking about the lockdown of the NHS and sole focus on covid at the expense of other patients which happened at the same time as people being told to stay indoors? It's that lockdown which has caused numerous excess deaths.

 

Have you been to a hospital during lockdown? They were not operational. That was a fundamental part of lockdown policy, that services were simply stopped. Not because the staff were treating COVID cases and diverted on to critical care, just stopped. That’s one of, if not the main central tenets of lockdown policy that I’ve spent the last six months arguing against.

 

But again, if we hadn’t have locked down would that not have continued for much longer?

I’m not asking if you think it should have, whether you agree with the reasons that they’d have done it, just whether it would.

I think it’s pretty clear to be true. If we hadn’t locked down, just as many, or most likely significantly more appointments and treatments for other conditions would have been missed.

So the argument is against all the actions taken as opposed to lockdown in a nutshell.

What would you have done differently?

What scientifically and medically informed basis that the actions you’d have taken would not have led to many many more deaths as a direct result, and within weeks, not over five years, is this built on?

I don’t disagree that there’s huge long term impact. I don’t disagree it’s an economic disaster and in the hands of this government I am fearful for the future and what my kids are going to grow up and face.

But that doesn’t lead me to believe we shouldn’t have taken action to try and curb the rapid spread of this thing.

You dismiss quite a lot of learned research, a lot of it worst case scenario stuff, yet quote stats from cancer charities and similar sources which are in themselves worst case scenario estimates.

Any avoidable death should be seen as unacceptable - but I don’t concur that we should not have locked down to curb Covid. As eluded to, I have relatives in the medical profession. They have seen some horrors.

I also have a cousin who was on tubes and machines for over a week with it. Months ago, and still now is suffering the effects of it. Struggles to walk to the shop. She’s a bit overweight maybe - not horrendously so and she’s understandably put a bit on since having it as she’s struggling to exercise and so on - but otherwise a healthy hardworking woman in her early 40s.

Suggesting we would have had no more deaths or infections had we not locked down is off the mark in my view, and if you are not doing that, are you saying that we should have sacrificed those who might have died of this for the sake of people who might die of something else?

Maybe sacrifice the elderly or whatever to keep the economy afloat. Cummingsesque.

To be clear, you haven’t said this and I’m not accusing you of it, but I’m failing to see what else you’re getting at. You quote a lot of the fallbacks from locking down, I argue against little of that.

But what do you believe the consequences would have been had we not done it? You dismiss the assertion of more deaths and infections, so what would have happened?

Lastly - “Have you been to a hospital during lockdown? They were not operational.”

Really? I had appointments re my long term knee issues and my step father had an eye appointment in April. My grandmother had a callback about both her knee replacement and her heart valve replacement in April and May.

So to quote you, that’s so much utter nonsense it doesn’t warrant a reply.

 

You love that, you're gonna love Brexit.

And it wasn't lock down that messed us up, it's the chronic underfunding and undermining of services and the outright clownish behaviour of you know who.

 

And anyone who’s been in hospital or knows someone who has been in or had successful treatment without going in must be mistaken, because our very own Karen from Facebook keeps telling us so.

 

Are you honestly denying that certain services have been restricted and reduced during COVID? I’m sorry, there’s no point engaging with you anymore if that’s what you think as you’re just arguing that black is white.

 

I feel awful, terrible that that had to happen. But it still had to happen. I'd have done it differently, I wouldn't have wanked around like this bunch of upper class twits, but I'd have still done it.

It's a choice between a rock and a hard place, neither is ideal but you can only choose one.

Had we not had lockdown someone would be up here now lambasting you about the hundreds of thousands of dead, how they had to go to several funerals, how the economy was now in ruins because we have so many deaths, how being a survivor left you with so much guilt you wanted to kill yourself.

 

I haven't read the rest of this thread in full, so apologies if I'm repeating someone else etc.

If done properly there was absolutely no reason why children could not learn from home. The vast majority would have been able to do so, and those that were unable to should have been identified by teachers and additional measures taken.

It's ******* abhorrent. It should not have happened. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever for it. To say that's a result of the lockdown is completely disingenuous, though. At least not the result of any sort of lockdown that anybody wanted. There's absolutely 0 reason a lockdown means hospitals have to cease operation. In fact it should be the opposite.

I think that's awful. Absolutely awful. It's the failure of the testing system in this country. Testing for negative virus presence should have been doable months ago, which could have been used to get back to normality. That hasn't happened because of Boris and his Fuckwit Friends.

I never said it would bounce back 'by the end of the year' - in fact I didn't expect it to start an upturn until the middle of next year. Quite honestly I couldn't care less. National Debt in reality means **** all. The government should have done far more and locked down far harder. UBI for all and a massive change in the tax system so that those that are lucky enough to be still working pay it back over the next 12 months or whatever in tax.

Honestly, I do not care at all. I'm finding that I'm not getting any less enjoyment out of watching online.

I've put these together, as my answer is the same. It's all completely unnecessary and a result of an inept government. By refusing to lock down fully and in a timely fashion, we're now stuck in limbo in a state that appeases nobody and was completely avoidable.

I never said such a thing. I was very clear that my opinion was that it would be on and off lockdowns for 12 months.

Honestly I do not care. National debt is a buzzword that in reality means very little. The debt is contained within the country and managed, it's not a debt to a foreign nation. Japan ran at 250% GDP national debt a few years ago and it allowed them to prosper. If managed properly by a competent government it won't be an issue at all.

Of course that last part is where the worry comes in...

I think it's absolutely awful. I'm not sure how it could have been avoided though. Would your method of allowing everyone to get on with it have improved their final few months? Either they are the 'at risk' group and under an extreme lockdown with 0 contact for 6 months or they're allowed to do whatever they want and are extremely likely to catch the virus and die even sooner.

What's unforgivable is that the government refused to act quickly and do what they needed to do. They did not do enough and they did it far too late. Nobody, and I mean nobody, asked the government to do what they did.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If I was in charge, here's how I'd have managed it. And I've been posting the same thing since about February, so there's no hindsight being used here.

There should have been a FULL lockdown for 3 weeks. Full. No offices open, no factories open, no warehouses open except for absolute essentials. During this time an app should have been created that used the Google and Apple APIs - rather than what they originally tried to do, thinking they knew best.
Believe me, 3 weeks was more than enough time to get this done, if they wanted to. It's not a difficult app to make.
During these 3 weeks there should have been a payment of £500 a week to every resident of the country. (this would later be paid back over the course of a year with interest in tax for those of us lucky enough to work throughout)

After these 3-4 weeks, when the virus is basically died out in our communities, anybody coming into the country would have to isolate, managed in a hotel for 2 weeks minimum, at which point they have to take 2 tests, 24 hours apart. If they are both negative, they can leave.
Anybody coming into the country for work (HGVs etc.) where it is impossible to isolate for 2 weeks, have to download the app, which tracks where they are going and who they come in contact with. Anyone they come into contact with must take a test within 24 hours.

We'd be in a much better position right now. Both in terms of public health and also economically.

 

https://www.retailgazette.co.uk/blo...-drops-after-governments-work-from-home-call/

Who would have thought that masks, queuing, one way systems, card only etc would have resulted in people not bothering to shop on a high street? The nightmare of it all is in the coming months retail will wish they had the same level of high streets sales than they had last month. Christmas shopping will be done online. Centres around the country will all be ghost towns because people won't queue in the cold, dark and wet to put up with all the restrictions a shop has in place.

 

If I had made the following statement last year

"The world is full of illnesses that can kill us be it flu, cancer or the shits. I dont want to get any of them however I will not let them dictate my life and live in fear of them"

How many of this forum would have agreed or voiced something similar in agreement?


Whats the difference between then and now?

 

I’m not denying they’ve been restricted, in just sick of seeing you post they’ve been ‘closed down’.

 

Oh and before I forget.

There have been people ranting for the last 4 years about needing a visa to visit France now we have left/leaving the EU. The same people now have little chubbies over the fact that you now have to use an app to visit Costa...

Thats where we are now.

I could within 7 days end this pandemic. Its easy. Stop testing everyone and start using hospitalisations for the figures.

 

Thank you, great post, apart from I honestly find it remarkable that someone as bright as you, who's posts I've enjoyed and find entertaining, gives any credibility to the hundreds of thousands dead theory. None of the community can replicate Imperial's results. They all report both the coding and assumption base is flawed. It's beyond me why bright people keep repeating it as if there was a high likelihood of it happening.

 

Fair enough, saying it's been shut down is an exaggeration. They've been significantly reduced particularly in early stage diagnosis and preventative care.