Coronavirus - Part Two.

[tinfoilhat]

27 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

Depends how the rest of the world are recording their death statistics, what variables are being applied, what time frames, what caveats need to be considered.....

 

I don't take big scary numbers at face value without full context and full disclosure.

 

The death numbers are of course shocking and it is a tragedy for anyone to have to suffer as a result of this disease.

 

But 100,000 people passing away for potentially a multitude of reasons but who also coincidentally had a positive test to coronavirus up to 28 days prior is very different to simply spouting the phrase "...100,000 people have died of the virus..."

 

The media, twitterati the Talking Heads blowing their hot air and doing the finger pointing need to be very aware of that simple caveat.  

 

If they want to be doing the the comparison leagues and looking for the blame game then they need to be sure that the statistics are coming from a level playing field.

Send that through to Boris, it will be good for him to hear he's still blameless.

 

Send a comb too.

12 minutes ago, hobinfoot said:

I’ve been lucky enough to travel widely and like America we seem to produce obese people in large numbers. Europe don’t seem far behind. We also have a sizable ethnic population who are it appears more susceptible to the virus. And while most people are obeying measures to combat the spread we still have a sizable number who are not.

Italians have an older population, French has many ethnic minorities. As far population density goes we are, I believe, 32nd. It isn't good enough.

Edited January 27, 2021 by tinfoilhat

[Mister M]

41 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

Depends how the rest of the world are recording their death statistics, what variables are being applied, what time frames, what caveats need to be considered.....

 

I don't take big scary numbers at face value without full context and full disclosure.

 

The death numbers are of course shocking and it is a tragedy for anyone to have to suffer as a result of this disease.

 

But 100,000 people passing away for potentially a multitude of reasons but who also coincidentally had a positive test to coronavirus up to 28 days prior is very different to simply spouting the phrase "...100,000 people have died of the virus..."

 

The media, twitterati the Talking Heads blowing their hot air and doing the finger pointing need to be very aware of that simple caveat.  

 

If they want to be doing the the comparison leagues and looking for the blame game then they need to be sure that the statistics are coming from a level playing field.

 

 

I was going by the figures that the Prime Minister spoke about in his address broadcast yesterday.

I wonder if members of the Government aren't aware that those 100,000 people testing positive for coronavirus could have died from something other than Coronavirus. I'm sure that if they were aware they would be saying so very explicitly.

Edited January 27, 2021 by Mister M

[Mister M]

22 minutes ago, hobinfoot said:

I’ve been lucky enough to travel widely and like America we seem to produce obese people in large numbers. Europe don’t seem far behind. We also have a sizable ethnic population who are it appears more susceptible to the virus. And while most people are obeying measures to combat the spread we still have a sizable number who are not.

It does seem though that death rates go down after a lockdown is announced, then when a lockdown eased the death rates go up, so I think environmental factors are at play as well.

[ECCOnoob]

41 minutes ago, tinfoilhat said:

Send that through to Boris, it will be good for him to hear he's still blameless.

 

Send a comb too.

Italians have an older population, French has many ethnic minorities. As far population density goes we are, I believe, 32nd. It isn't good enough.

I didnt mention the word blameless.

 

All I'm saying is there are some very simplistic views being thrown around at the moment. Lots of know it all's who seem to think that these figures are cut and dried proof that all these deaths are on the government or in some cases even all the personal fault of Boris himself.

 

They are not.  The harsh reality is that some of those 100,000 would have died anyway irrelevant of the existence of coronavirus.  

 

Could they have done better? Should they have done better? Yes of course. With benefit of hindsight there are lots of things they should have done earlier quicker faster.

 

Do I think Boris is likely to get the chop..... yes  but who replaces him?  Who is guaranteed to do any better facing the same  circumstances and the same time frame?  What actual difference would it make when we are still dealing with a previous unknown and ever-changing global pandemic and still having to deal with the extremely difficult balance between medical experts, academic theory, probability of risk, practical realities, economic need, social needs and basic human lifestyle whom all simultaniously demand their priorities are the highest?

 

For all the bloodthirsty media, finger pointing opinionators and rhetoric it cannot be argued whatsoever that the general public or even the WHO have been entirely blameless in their actions either.

 

This is not going away anytime soon, maybe even never.  We need to stop with this barrage of oversimplification, soundbites, gotchas, point scoring, selective editing and headline grabbing to start focusing on the practical realities, facts and proper collaborative efforts to resolve it.

 

An unprecedented crisis such as this should be well beyond "them and us" politics, tribal loyalties and pot stirring attention-seeking Media personalities.

 

[apelike]

38 minutes ago, Mister M said:

It does seem though that death rates go down after a lockdown is announced, then when a lockdown eased the death rates go up, so I think environmental factors are at play as well.

Very true. Its also true that despite the numbers of infected rising the actual percentage of deaths are now lower.

[ECCOnoob]

44 minutes ago, Mister M said:

 

 

I was going by the figures that the Prime Minister spoke about in his address broadcast yesterday.

I wonder if members of the Government aren't aware that those 100,000 people testing positive for coronavirus could have died from something other than Coronavirus. I'm sure that if they were aware they would be saying so very explicitly.

Yeah right. God forbid they tell us something we are not prepared to hear. The media would have a field day.

 

It was proved only as recently yesterday when when Big Mouth Morgan and his nodding dog Reed exploded just because the minister dared to say that there were other contributing factors to deaths. 

[apelike]

2 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

An unprecedented crisis such as this should be well beyond "them and us" politics, tribal loyalties and pot stirring attention-seeking Media personalities.

Agreed wholeheartedly.

[Thirsty Relic]

6 hours ago, El Cid said:

Several vaccines against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are on the cusp of regulatory approval.

Their safety and efficacy in older people is critical to their success. Older people with co-morbidities and frailty have once again been largely excluded from the vaccine trails and there are no published data on safety and efficacy in this group.

Data from several Phase II trials have given cause for optimism, with strong antibody responses and reassuring safety profiles but, with the exception of AstraZeneca’s vaccine, recruited few older people.

 

https://academic.oup.com/ageing/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ageing/afaa274/6016483

This makes sense to me.   We've already got the Pfizer and Oxford vaccines that cover all ages, and are rushing them out to the over 80's, over 75's etc, but are also suffering from slow supply problems.  Reserve them for the elderly, and if these others are proved to protect the under 60's say, when approved, roll them out to those who want vaccinating for those people.

[Mister M]

4 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

Yeah right. God forbid they tell us something we are not prepared to hear. The media would have a field day.

 

It was proved only as recently yesterday when when Big Mouth Morgan and his nodding dog Reed exploded just because the minister dared to say that there were other contributing factors to deaths. 

But why wouldn't Ministers and their backbenchers do this? They don't even need to go on Good Morning Britain to offer an explanation.

They have plenty of backers in the press and media who would be delighted to support Boris and his Government.

[tinfoilhat]

12 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

I didnt mention the word blameless.

 

All I'm saying is there are some very simplistic views being thrown around at the moment. Lots of know it all's who seem to think that these figures are cut and dried proof that all these deaths are on the government or in some cases even all the personal fault of Boris himself.

 

They are not.  The harsh reality is that some of those 100,000 would have died anyway irrelevant of the existence of coronavirus.  

 

Could they have done better? Should they have done better? Yes of course. With benefit of hindsight there are lots of things they should have done earlier quicker faster.

 

Do I think Boris is likely to get the chop..... yes  but who replaces him?  Who is guaranteed to do any better facing the same  circumstances and the same time frame?  What actual difference would it make when we are still dealing with a previous unknown and ever-changing global pandemic and still having to deal with the extremely difficult balance between medical experts, academic theory, probability of risk, practical realities, economic need, social needs and basic human lifestyle whom all simultaniously demand their priorities are the highest?

 

For all the bloodthirsty media, finger pointing opinionators and rhetoric it cannot be argued whatsoever that the general public or even the WHO have been entirely blameless in their actions either.

 

This is not going away anytime soon, maybe even never.  We need to stop with this barrage of oversimplification, soundbites, gotchas, point scoring, selective editing and headline grabbing to start focusing on the practical realities, facts and proper collaborative efforts to resolve it.

 

An unprecedented crisis such as this should be well beyond "them and us" politics, tribal loyalties and pot stirring attention-seeking Media personalities.

 

Boris is in charge. End of.

 

He ignored advice to lock down earlier in March.  This isn't hindsight. Plenty said this at the time, plenty of organisations took action themselves. PPE procurement, whilst admittedly  difficult was bent. There was no oversight on a test and trace contact worth £22bn, awarded to the wife of the minister in charge of corruption. Thats not hindsight, it was wrong at the time. The fact it still doesn't work just makes it worse. He buried the fact there was more transmissible variet about in September going directly against SAGE advice. Not "who'd have thought it" a wrong decision in September. 

 

We've decided to track (not quarantine) passengers coming in from abroad 10 (TEN) months later than new Zealand and Australia. For the £22bn we've spent on track and trace I bet we don't where half of those travellers are now who arrived this week. We might put them hotels - 10 months after other countries.

 

The free pass Cummings got didnt help. It was a sacking offence, but only highlights the ineptitude. Eat out to help out, im not going to batter (sorry) him for that, I'd thought it was a manageable idea at the time to help out alot of businesses. 

 

But hindsight isn't needed for most of his bad decisions. The vaccine could save the day. That hinges on whether the gamble - and it is that, of giving one jab followed by a 12 week gap won't bite us all on the arse.