Coronavirus (Non-Politics)

[Chalky]

It also blows away the myth that Covid deaths are mainly of people who are ill anyway and would die in a few months of their undelying illness - if that were the case then the cumulative excess deaths would be falling by now

But it's not a myth though. The CDC literally said 94% of Coronavirus deaths were people who had 2 and sometimes even 3/4 current Comorbidities

 

[Napster]

But it's not a myth though. The CDC literally said 94% of Coronavirus deaths were people who had 2 and sometimes even 3/4 current Comorbidities

People Think the CDC Said 94% of COVID-19 Deaths Were Actually Caused by Something Else—but That's Not Accurate at All

The CDC said 6% of people who died from COVID-19 did not have the disease on their death certificate. Find out why people on social media are misinterpreting the stat and what the facts are.

www.health.com

Its never that simple. Common practise to list more than one contributory factor. Covid has sped things up.

 

[Chalky]

People Think the CDC Said 94% of COVID-19 Deaths Were Actually Caused by Something Else—but That's Not Accurate at All

The CDC said 6% of people who died from COVID-19 did not have the disease on their death certificate. Find out why people on social media are misinterpreting the stat and what the facts are.

www.health.com

Its never that simple. Common practise to list more than one contributory factor. Covid has sped things up.

So, either way it still pretty much proves the point. People who are dying of Covid already have something wrong with them. What am I missing?

 

[Massimo Giovanni]

Do a bit of research,...

Agrre.
And then think what questions any statistics are answering and also what answers those statics can not support, or disprove.
I read a lot of social media quoting half truths and also calling measures a waste or people being "sheep" when what is needed is people to make informed choices and select responses and actions that might be individually (and collectively beneficial) but will certainly not cause any harm.

 

[Massimo Giovanni]

So, either way it still pretty much proves the point. People who are dying of Covid already have something wrong with them. What am I missing?

They are dying "before" their time, in very unpleasant circumstances and, imo, most deaths have knock effects on many many other persons.

 

[Member]

Do you think the two things are mutually exclusive?

Could there not be other factors as to why cases have risen, or do you genuinely think the mandating of masks have caused the rise?

There is a legitimate concern that masks have lead to ‘risk compensation’ and I don’t think the messaging has been clear enough that masks only benefit if you don’t decide to go out loads more or ignore social distancing/hand washing. I think masks have resulted in people being more risky in their behaviour than they would have been otherwise. But it’s complex to disentangle and I think probably on balance masks have been a net benefit.

 

[GBJ]

There is a legitimate concern that masks have lead to ‘risk compensation’ and I don’t think the messaging has been clear enough that masks only benefit if you don’t decide to go out loads more or ignore social distancing/hand washing. I think masks have resulted in people being more risky in their behaviour than they would have been otherwise. But it’s complex to disentangle and I think probably on balance masks have been a net benefit.

I think masks give a false sense of security, which emboldens people to do things that they wouldn’t do, without one.

I see them for what they are; a item that reduces the risk of me spreading particles.

Sadly, that has been lost on a lot of people, especially those who are prone to believing the misinformation from conspiracy videos on YouTube & Facebook.

I still laugh when I see someone pointing out that masks don’t protect you from Covid, because it says so on the side of the boxes. Wait until they discover that crash helmets, seatbelts & airbags aren’t a magical prevention from injury in an RTA.

 

[GBJ]

A guy I work with - although not closely - has tested positive.

Few nervous faces in work today.

A second person at my workplace has tested positive today.

A lot more nervous faces now.

 

[rigsby]

There is a legitimate concern that masks have lead to ‘risk compensation’ and I don’t think the messaging has been clear enough that masks only benefit if you don’t decide to go out loads more or ignore social distancing/hand washing. I think masks have resulted in people being more risky in their behaviour than they would have been otherwise. But it’s complex to disentangle and I think probably on balance masks have been a net benefit.

Which is why they don't have to wear masks in Sweden.

 

[londonblue]

I think masks give a false sense of security, which emboldens people to do things that they wouldn’t do, without one.

I see them for what they are; a item that reduces the risk of me spreading particles.

Sadly, that has been lost on a lot of people, especially those who are prone to believing the misinformation from conspiracy videos on YouTube & Facebook.

I still laugh when I see someone pointing out that masks don’t protect you from Covid, because it says so on the side of the boxes. Wait until they discover that crash helmets, seatbelts & airbags aren’t a magical prevention from injury in an RTA.

Spot on. Even during the proper lockdown I went shopping in the local Tescos and numerous times a guy would be in there with gloves and what I can only describe as a gas mask. He was all over everyone getting what he needed. He had no concept of social distancing.

 

[Member]

Which is why they don't have to wear masks in Sweden.

They don't wear masks in Sweden because they don't have a legal system that enables them to make them mandatory in public places.

They also don't wear masks in Sweden because the scientific evidence about their benefit is mixed/weak, and rather than taking a risk-averse perspective like pretty much the rest of the world, they decided to take a different route. A route that probably hasn't gone particularly well for them, relative to neighbouring countries in particular. They are already changing their recommendations for masks and literally yesterday mentioned that even though they acknowledge the evidence is weak, they admit that there are times where it may be useful to wear them.

Finally, Sweden probably doesn't 'need' masks as much as other countries because of lower population density and therefore they don't have millions of commuters packing out tubes and buses and coming into as close contact as people in other countries.

 

[Holy Joe]

So, either way it still pretty much proves the point. People who are dying of Covid already have something wrong with them. What am I missing?

The myth isn't that they have something else wrong - it's that they were going to die in the next month or so anyway.

They are dying on average 5 years earlier than they would have. Plus they may not know that they have something else wrong with them, could be leading a totally normal life up until Covid.

So in a few years time excess deaths will be lower than average

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

They are dying "before" their time, in very unpleasant circumstances and, imo, most deaths have knock effects on many many other persons.

Quite.I know 2 people in the UK of my age, one a cancer survivor and the other with an underlying heart condition.They were both told to shield by the NHS during the lockdown.

I'm also well aware as someone with an underlying medical condition (Type 2 diabetes in my case) that at my age (69) I almost certainly won't survive a heart attack (my late father,who was a diabetic died of a massive coronary aged just 50 ) if I'm unlucky enough to end up on a ventilator.Otherwise I'm reasonably fit and healthy.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Which is why they don't have to wear masks in Sweden.

We do have to wear face masks in public in Spain.It's not a big deal.You soon get used to it. Even my wife,who's quite a rebel soon adapted.

 

[rigsby]

They don't wear masks in Sweden because they don't have a legal system that enables them to make them mandatory in public places.

They also don't wear masks in Sweden because the scientific evidence about their benefit is mixed/weak, and rather than taking a risk-averse perspective like pretty much the rest of the world, they decided to take a different route. A route that probably hasn't gone particularly well for them, relative to neighbouring countries in particular. They are already changing their recommendations for masks and literally yesterday mentioned that even though they acknowledge the evidence is weak, they admit that there are times where it may be useful to wear them.

Finally, Sweden probably doesn't 'need' masks as much as other countries because of lower population density and therefore they don't have millions of commuters packing out tubes and buses and coming into as close contact as people in other countries.

How do people commute to work in Stockholm then?.....Nearly 1m in the city and another 1m in the urban area.

 

[Member]

How do people commute to work in Stockholm then?.....Nearly 1m in the city and another 1m in the urban area.

they have a metro system that isn't as typically crowded like the London underground. From speaking with a Swedish colleague (based nr. Malmo) he said that people have adapted to working from home like most other places, leaving empty public transport for key workers etc.

The point about population density isn't just about commuting, but also about multigenerational living/smaller households, smaller class sizes, less busy urban centres/shops etc. it all adds up.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

they have a metro system that isn't as typically crowded like the London underground. From speaking with a Swedish colleague (based nr. Malmo) he said that people have adapted to working from home like most other places, leaving empty public transport for key workers etc.

The point about population density isn't just about commuting, but also about multigenerational living/smaller households, smaller class sizes, less busy urban centres/shops etc. it all adds up.

There was an interesting couple of points made on Spanish news earlier (TVE1) by two Spanish politicians (who also happen to be doctors), trying to explain why the rate of infection in Spain is so high. They both identified multiple factors.Among them were the high popuation density in major cities like Madrid,Barcelona etc.Also the well-known conviviality of most Spaniards.The latter point is well worth bearing in mind compared to Swedes who generally (as I know from personal experience) tend to socialise in much smaller groups.

 

[Sandbach Shrimper]

I’ll say it again, the issue wasn’t the lockdown. Lockdown worked. It’s proven that it worked.

The issue is/was the sheer lack of an exit strategy.

But isn't that precisely the problem with lockdowns? There is no exit strategy, no way out. We're stuck in this cycle of restrictions eased > cases go back up > restrictions imposed again. I agree the government could've handled it better since the summer and their messaging and communication has been poor, but there was always going to be a 'second wave' anyway. Germany apparently has a brilliant test and trace system and they've just announced another lockdown...

By what measure did lockdown work? We'll never know how many lives it may have saved, but we do know the huge damage it's caused to the economy, to education, to people's mental health. All lockdowns do is delay and prolong the agony. The virus isn't just going to go away, I'm afraid.

 

[Massimo Giovanni]

Lockdown worked? Exit strategy?
Political and social bias?

Maybe all these things are salient but what is THE primary objective of covid dealing in the UK, and it is worth comparing it to other countries be they 1st or 3rd world.

I haven't seen much evidence of a prime goal from Boris or anyone else.

But, in my reading of it, the first objective was attained in lockdown: keeping the NHS from having folks dying or being treated in corridors or on floors, and staff crumbling into collapse.

From then on it, the aim, got confused and hidden within conflicting hopes and dreams
of vaccines, immunity, test, trace, responsible behaviour, intelligence etc.

Now what is the, imo, option forward?.

Restate the commitment to the NHS.
Make the rules simple; hands, face, distance, alert, sanatise, respect vulnerable.

Scrap the tier 1,2, 3 etc as the use of "local" is a misnomer, obvious for example by the crossing of Warners Bridge!

The schools have gone back, and had hiccups BUT no huge calamity in them. But with an evident lack of teaching to children and parents of the basics. WTF don't they understand.?

Workplaces need to get back to business, fully,

All other areas need to start on the journey back opening, by planning and taking the first steps, an example, as this is a football zone, is for 2000 ticket holders to be allowed back in Roots Hall.

AND get the big stick out, those that can't and won't do what they are required, the distance, sit, mask, hands etc; then educate them with reasonable, forewarned consequences.

 

[Holy Joe]

Scrap the tier 1,2, 3 etc as the use of "local" is a misnomer, obvious for example by the crossing of Warners Bridge!

I'm in the west country today. On the radio they were discussing the prospect of Bristol going into Tier 1 plus. Now that's just complicating things!!!

Apparently tier 1 plus is they will enforce the rules of tier 1!