Corona Virus: How Are We Doing?

[winjim]

So you're happy for older people to die then. Face masks do not protect the wearer from catching Covid 19, what they do is limit the chances of a fit carrier (who may not have any symptoms) from passing it on to the more vulnerable'

There's been a rather saddening narrative all the way through this that older people and those with underlying health conditions are somehow expendable, when really they are vulnerable and we should be doing all we can to protect them.

 

[stephec]

I've just found out that a little old lady five doors away from me has died.

An ambulance was called for her last week but she was told it was normal flu and sent home.

Another one had to be called yesterday and she was kept in hospital but died this morning, first one so far that's been anywhere near to me.

Now I've heard that her son committed suicide a few days ago, he'd always lived with his mum and was apparently really struggling on his own.

 

[Oldhippy]

Genuinely don't understand the mask arguments, I lived in Asia for many years and they are everyday things on transport and if people have colds. Some of the healthiest populations anywhere and they have the courtesy to wear a mask to minimise coughs and splitters on their fellow human beings. No it won't stop people getting it necessarily but anything to slow the spread is a good thing surely? Have we really sunk to a level where as long as we personally are ok no one else matters?

 

[SkipdiverJohn]

Yeah, but no one was asked to wear a mask were they, so... oh wait, hang on...

As protection against German poison gas attacks and you know it. Not as a stage prop for general use in public, which is all the wear masks on public transport and in the shops nonsense is all about. What's rather interesting is virus rates were declining before masks were mandated, and since they were mandated the numbers are rising again. I don't think the two things are entirely unconnected either. Some people think having a mask on means they don't need to do anything else like not crowding each other and having good hygiene. And what about all the germ-laden corona masks being discarded all over the place or taken off and put down on surfaces where they will transfer any virus from the wearer to the surface, then to be touched by someone else?.
Masks are at best a placebo, at worst they are actually helping to spread the virus not contain it.

 

[classic33]

Can someone explain why I, and 1,000's like me, should be denied medical treatment. Pre-existing conditions.

The consequences of this will be around long after this current outbreak is finished. The cost should things go wrong isn't cheap. I passed the £10,000 mark in the first half of this year. Multiply this by the number in similar situations and you start to see it'll never be cheap.

If those who are, in their opinion, are fit and healthy are saying that their "right" to get drunk beats my right to simply stay alive, will they give their reasons.

"Economic activity"(getting drunk) doesn't come into it as far as I'm concerned. Maybe when treatment is refused for me, they'll not mind me blaming them and their attitude and actions for it.

 

[classic33]

As protection against German poison gas attacks and you know it. Not as a stage prop for general use in public, which is all the wear masks on public transport and in the shops nonsense is all about. What's rather interesting is virus rates were declining before masks were mandated, and since they were mandated the numbers are rising again. I don't think the two things are entirely unconnected either. Some people think having a mask on means they don't need to do anything else like not crowding each other and having good hygiene. And what about all the germ-laden corona masks being discarded all over the place or taken off and put down on surfaces where they will transfer any virus from the wearer to the surface, then to be touched by someone else?.
Masks are at best a placebo, at worst they are actually helping to spread the virus not contain it.

You totally miss the distinct difference between the two items.

One is to prevent a limited number of airborne particles getting into your lungs. The ones you moan about are to try and rectify simple hygiene measures not being adhered to. They are there to stop any contaminants from your lungs getting into the atmosphere.

 

[SkipdiverJohn]

There's been a rather saddening narrative all the way through this that older people and those with underlying health conditions are somehow expendable, when really they are vulnerable and we should be doing all we can to protect them.

They aren't expendable but the best way for them to avoid their personal risk from the virus is them minimising their own contact with everybody else. And yes, I do think the authorities should help them do it by delivering food, medicines etc to them so they don't need to go out so much.
Trying to protect the sick by shutting down the country is going to cause carnage, and the fallout from that will be worse than the virus. That's why Sweden played it right. Despite having quite a lot of cases, they haven't pressed the self-destruct button and now they are over the worst of it. Some of the countries like Spain and France that had strict lockdowns are now suffering with more coronavirus now than they had before, plus all the economic damage. They've paid a high price to be in a worse position now than they were six months ago!

 

[roubaixtuesday]

That's why Sweden played it right. Despite having quite a lot of cases, they haven't pressed the self-destruct button and now they are over the worst of it.

Sweden have suffered more deaths than other Nordics and similar or worse economic damage. It remains illegal to stand at a bar in Sweden and visiting relatives in care homes is forbidden. I work with Swedes all the time; the cliché of a country free from restrictions is entirely false.

 

[SkipdiverJohn]

Sweden have suffered more deaths than other Nordics and similar or worse economic damage. It remains illegal to stand at a bar in Sweden and visiting relatives in care homes is forbidden. I work with Swedes all the time; the cliché of a country free from restrictions is entirely false.

No-one said it was business as usual but Sweden maintained relative normality. When the virus is over for them, it really will be over. For the countries that persued a hard lockdown strategy the virus is just the beginning of their woes. The real impact will hit once the infection has largely gone then all the other knock-on effects will come to the fore. BTW, hanging around at the bar or visiting relatives isn't allowed here either. The Swedes have not had idiotic mask edicts or shut all their public facilities and non-food shops though.

 

[numbnuts]

Still haven't received my results as yet

 

[Oldhippy]

It's a horrid wait isn't it. Hope it's the right result for you.

 

[roubaixtuesday]

When the virus is over for them, it really will be over.

There is absolutely no reason to suppose this, other than it suits your pre-judged outcome.

Seroprevalence in Sweden is comparable to other European countries; it is near equally prone to a second wave and a very long way from herd immunity, as far as current understanding allows us eg:

The main impact of the Swedish approach to date has simply been to kill more people than the nearest comparable countries.

The only reason we managed to be so much worse was by taking too much heed of the kind of views you espouse, and delaying restrictions (the Swedes, whilst less severe, were more timely).

 

[SkipdiverJohn]

Those figures are hardly up to date, some of them are nearly six months old. A lot more people will have gained immunity during that period. An up to date set of figures for the USA would be interesting, US coronavirus cases are now dropping off substantially from the peak. I would suspect in hard hit areas there is now a substantial immune cohort that is hindering the virus's transmission.

 

[Mugshot]

What's rather interesting is virus rates were declining before masks were mandated, and since they were mandated the numbers are rising again.

I could have sworn there were some other measures introduced, before mandatory mask wearing, which may have reduced rates, about 3 months worth of them if memory serves.

 

[roubaixtuesday]

I could have sworn there were some other measures introduced, before mandatory mask wearing, which may have reduced rates, about 3 months worth of them if memory serves.

The skientific method:
1. Decide your conclusion.
2. Quote any facts which correlate to your conclusion, however weakly. Ignore any confounding information.
3. Repeat.
4. Carry on repeating.