onewheeldave

He is a chief epidemiologist.

There's loads, I'm just not good at remembering contingent facts like names. However someone's just posted a link about Sweden- Anders Tegnell was basically the person behind Sweden's strategy, he clearly disagreed with aspects of the lockdown- he's a chief epidemiologist.

Yes, I think that those who are especially vulnerable to covid should, if they choose to shield, be supported. And everyone who is not especially vulnerable, should get back to their working lives. I think if that had been done the first time round it would have made a lot more sense, and, the cost of supporting the self isolating vulnerable would have been minor compared to the economic devastation caused by locking down everyone.

Yes. Most, if not all, conditions which leave the sufferer especially vulnerable to covid are also long term. The converse isn't true- many long term conditions do not mean the person is especially vulnerable to covid [eg autism] 'Vulnerable to covid' is a sub-set of 'long term conditions' and therefore smaller. Originally, in direct response to my- you said i.e. that the vulnerable make up "about 25% of the population of England" I asked for a link- you instead provided one saying that 25% of the population have long term conditions, of which the vulnerable are a smaller subset. If you are going to maintain that 25% of the population are vulnerable, you need to provide a link to that- do you have one?

That's about long term conditions. People with long term conditions are not necessarily especially vulnerable to covid. Being autistic as I am, is a life long condition- I'm not especially vulnerable to covid. Obesity, diabetes, heart conditions, elderly etc- they're vulnerable. Obviously, I'm talking about the vulnerable who do know they have an underlying condition that makes them susceptible- it makes sense for them to self isolate, rather than quaranteen everyone [thus causing economic devastation and the ensuing mortality]

Clearly not, as I said they should have the right to not self-isolate- it's their choice. I expect most would, as it makes sense. They would then be as safe as it's possible to be, while everyone else gets on with keeping the economy going.

Where are you getting 25% from?

I've no problem with vulnerable people shielding [if they choose to, equally, if they choose not to, that's their decision]. It makes far more sense for the vulnerable to be in quaranteen, rather that everyone.

20% of those infected get kidney and heart and even brain damage?!?

You got a link?

Coronavirus mainly kills the vulnerable, who made up the majority of fatalities during the first wave, so there are now less people who are vulnerable, therefore less deaths. Maybe also the virus is mutating to something less serious, that does happen with viruses.

Just infections going up, deaths are low. Possibly one reason more people are congregating is that they are aware that deaths are very low?

We do have the infections actually, just not the deaths.

I wouldn't know, I'm not a conspiracy theorist. It also doesn't take much thinking to knee jerkedly label anyone who disagrees with aspects of the covid measures a conspiracy theorist. Just another form of ad hominem attack, and we know what that implies.

We'll see. I'm betting they won't get that high.

In addition to the recently mentioned highly negative consequences of lockdown [especially a new lockdown now that deaths are so very, very low] there is also the issue of selling our civil liberties down the river- do you want the kind of regime that China has to become the global norm?

There are plenty of fine scientific minds who disagree with aspects of the lockdown measures. But yes, I'm happy to think for myself and I do frequently disagree with 'experts'.

Fear of what?

Another way to avoid lockdown is to simply not have another lockdown- acknowledge that the mortality consequences of economic destruction combined with the fact that less than 28 people a day are dying from coronavirus contraindicates another lockdown. With the benefit of hindsight I'd say it would have made more sense for the vulnerable to quarantine, while everyone else gets on with things, thus avoiding the economic devastation that is to come.

The problems I'm highlighting are- "the mortality consequences of thousands of failed small businesses, mass unemployment, destruction of entire industries, the mental health consequences of tens of thousands being forced onto an inept and cruel benefits system, people dying from cancer because they could not access diagnosis or treatment." Clearly, every single one of them will be a direct consequence of the lockdown measures and nothing else- the 'expert guidance' was the source of the lockdown. People need to question 'expert guidance' that leads to such consequences.

Talk to the government experts who put exemptions for disabled people in place for full details- they clearly believe that masks are harmful to some. Obviously anyone with breathing issues would likely be harmed by being forced to wear a mask; many autistic people find them highly distressing.

True or false is irrelevant to the point I was making- that many people are against the covid hysteria, but keep quiet due to fear of losing their jobs, in this case, nurses and NHS workers who know the measures are excessive and harmful, but can't express their views. Ad hominem attacks simply indicate a lack of rational response. Misrepresentation with intent to ridicule- it's not about "Cotton masks/being inside for a bit”, it's about the mortality consequences of thousands of failed small businesses, mass unemployment, destruction of entire industries, the mental health consequences of tens of thousands being forced onto an inept and cruel benefits system, people dying from cancer because they could not access diagnosis or treatment.

No. They are filters, a consequence of evolution, finely tuned to a balance between filtering out potentially harmful substances, without going so far that it affects the organisms health adversely. Crucially, they are very different from sheets of fabric- if sheets of fabric were optimal, then we would have evolved to have something similar to sheets of fabric covering our mouths and noses- we don't, hence, they aren't [optimal]. Though very few are being killed by it [less than 28 a day in the UK] so more people having it isn't leading to more deaths. Of course, the virus only ceases to be a problem if we don't have herd immunity, acheivable by either a vaccine or just most of the population having had the virus. More people having the virus, along with very few deaths, seems to be progress towards that.

Given that covering mouth and nose provides only benefits and no negatives, strange how evolution didn't provide the biological equivalent, but stuck with just nasal hairs and cilia, not like evolution to get things wrong. Oh yes- while the vocal pro-lockdown majority demand limiting freedom further and ensuring a catastrophe of economic devastation and deaths from mental illness, there are plenty of people who see this for the hysteria it is; unfortunately those who dissent are bullied into silence. Many social media channels have been deplatformed due to being critical of the measures. I've also spoken to several taxi drivers who have had conversations with NHS staff who say that, in their opinion, the measures are totally out of proportion and, in their eyes, doing far more harm than good- yet they not only have to go along with the measures, but can't object, as they are fearful of being sacked. Yes- I'm talking about NOW- UK deaths are lower than 28 a day now. Incidently, in the UK hospitals came nowhere near being overwhelmed. Sadly, many thousands of non-covid patients couldn't get treatment due to the lockdown, while nurses where so bored at the lack of things to do that there are many youtube videos of them doing complex dance routines that must have required many hours of practice. The increase in cases is in large part due to the increase in testing- the more you test, the more you'll find, obviously. And, again, the increase in cases is an increase in detected infections, not deaths. Deaths in the UK are currently under 28 a day. As for exemptions, in the social enterprise I work for, we have many autisitc and disabled clients who are exempt, but who either force themselves to wear a mask, despite it harming them, or, avoid using public transport, because, even though exempt, they feel highly intimidated by the judgemental public. While, if I was going to pick one positive thing about the hysteria measures, it would be that disabled people are exempt, and, there have been clear instructions from the authorities that people not wearing masks are not to be challenged, we still need to be aware that there is bullying going on. In fact there was a post on SF from a shopkeeper who openly declared that he would not allow exempt people into his shop without a mask- several posters gave their thumbs up to that. When I pointed out he was breaking the law, posters argued against me!

To anyone who is aware of the coming deaths from mental illness, economic devastation, lack of access to GP's, cancer treatment, the impossible backlog of cases for the NHS, who have seen the small businesses of friends and relatives destroyed by the covid measures; and realise that said measures/lockdowns will cause far more misery and mortality than any lives saved from the virus. This state of affairs can only continue as long as the majority of the public are kept in a constant state of irrational fear- and due to the constant whipping up of said fear by the authorities and media, that is likely to continue. My advice would be to focus on spreading awareness of the actual death statisitics, currently 28/day in the UK- we are not seeing this very important statistic on the front pages of the newspapers which are focusing only on further fear mongering. In my opinion, if every member of the public knew that this virus is killing 28 people a day, they would be considerably less tolerant of lockdown measures which will lead to many thousands of deaths from economic damage, mental illness, mass unemployment, lack of access to healthcare etc.