Coronavirus Thread

[Farrington fox]

Only joking 

[z-layrex]

52 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

And this is what I can’t get my head round. The nhs is in danger of being overwhelmed due to the sheer quantity of people that would need icu beds. So in Leicestershire, we have 45 icu beds, now, I’m not being funny, but 45 beds doesn’t seem that difficult to overwhelm. I dunno, maybe there’s only 6 or 7 nurses and doctors, but I very much doubt it especially when you consider it’s kind of human nature to exaggerate how busy you actually are, I do it all the time,  but when you consider there’s quite a lot of people who live in Leicestershire and as far as I’m aware, our hospitals didn’t turn away people needing a bed and there hasn’t really been oxygen tents in the streets. Is there a picture being painted of something a lot worse than it actually is.

 Also, wasn’t Leicester the epicentre of the virus at one point and was in lockdown for the longest period, well, I think the solution would have been to get a couple more icu beds in place.

And staff them with who?

 

Leicestershire is pretty quiet on the critical care front whilst we are slammed down here again.

Edited 3 December 2021 by z-layrex

[weller54]

This new Ormondroyd strain has mutated into a tall lanky shape I'm hearing.

[WigstonWanderer]

Here’s another video from John Campbell about the recent papers noting a possible mechanism for why the AZ vaccine can have (very rare) blood clot complications. As I mentioned in an earlier post, for many months he has been advising that the vaccination protocol should include a check to make sure the needle has not pierced a blood vessel before proceeding (known as aspirating). As a nurse, and nursing educator, this does fall within his area of expertise.

I assume the reason why this is not done is that the vaccination process would take a few seconds longer

 

If he’s right, such complications could possibly be reduced substantially. He also speculates that the rare Pfizer vaccine complications could have the same primary cause, I.e. vaccine getting into the blood stream.

 

Worth a watch.

 

 

Edited 4 December 2021 by WigstonWanderer

[yorkie1999]

1 hour ago, z-layrex said:

And staff them with who?

 

Leicestershire is pretty quiet on the critical care front whilst we are slammed down here again.

Look, I’m not having a pop or anything, people who save other peoples lives are hero’s in my book but I don’t work in the nhs so I don’t know what the staffing levels actually are. From an outsiders point of view being fed information from the government via the media, 45 beds doesn’t seem a lot spread over 3 hospitals and they’ve not suddenly put those beds in so surely the staffing is sufficient for those beds and those 45 beds must have been sufficient prior to the pandemic considering how few there are. Or am I massively mistaken and under normal circumstances 45 beds wouldn’t be needed. We’re being told there are 50000 people a day contracting this virus, 1 in 60, that’s 350000 a week, and it’s going to get worse, where are all these people? Football grounds are full, pubs are packed as are shopping centres and everywhere else that is open to the public, surely you’d expect to notice something like less people out and about. I dunno, maybe it’s my small world I live in but it just makes you think someone’s exaggerating a bit

[Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot]

I've handed my notice in at my job and am intending to have 3 weeks off over Christmas before getting another one (I am a chef, so I can walk in to almost any pub/restaurant and say 'gizza job' and I've got a job, the industry is absolutely on its arse) now what are the realistic chances of us going in to a full blown, pubs are closed lockdown in the next 5 weeks? Even if it's only 10% I dont want to risk missing out on furlough as I'll be unemployed for 3 weeks through the middle of December until early January and that would absolutely decimate my capacity to provide for my family. 

[Babylon]

8 hours ago, Harrydc said:

I think what annoys people is how we were promised our 'freedom' back and was told we can 'get on with our lives' when the vaccine program was approved. I'm not sure how many people recall Matt Hancock stating this whilst 'crying'. We were told that once we've been double jabbed we're more or less out of the woods. 

 

Now, I know countless people who are double jabbed but are not getting the booster as they do not see where it will end. & I don't blame them one bit. Surely it's understandable that people are fed up when they did what they were told yet still are having to do more whilst simultaneously being threatened with nonsense such as vaccine passports. 

Hi Harry,

 

just watched his whole interview and he never said anything if the sort.

 

Is there any reason you ignored all the scientists who did regularly discuss how long this could go on for, potential for variants and waning immunity. Because they categorically never said have a vaccine and that’s it, nothing to worry about.

[Babylon]

13 hours ago, adam said:

Are these the same people who were predicting 100k cases a day in the summer. 

Nobody predicted, they projected based on trends at the time. They also make a number of projections, best case, worst case etc. 
 

The actual numbers were very close to one of their projections. Hope that helps. 
 

 

[kyleolly]

5 hours ago, Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot said:

I've handed my notice in at my job and am intending to have 3 weeks off over Christmas before getting another one (I am a chef, so I can walk in to almost any pub/restaurant and say 'gizza job' and I've got a job, the industry is absolutely on its arse) now what are the realistic chances of us going in to a full blown, pubs are closed lockdown in the next 5 weeks? Even if it's only 10% I dont want to risk missing out on furlough as I'll be unemployed for 3 weeks through the middle of December until early January and that would absolutely decimate my capacity to provide for my family. 

Do you not have to be in a job for a certain amount of time to get furlough?

[Phil Bowman]

6 hours ago, yorkie1999 said:

Or am I massively mistaken and under normal circumstances 45 beds wouldn’t be needed

I’m no expert, but I’m pretty sure intensive care isn’t intended to run at full capacity all the time. Isn’t there supposed to be a bit of space to cope with emergencies?

 

6 hours ago, yorkie1999 said:

that’s 350000 a week, and it’s going to get worse, where are all these people? Football grounds are full, pubs are packed as are shopping centres and everywhere else that is open to the public, surely you’d expect to notice something like less people out and about

350 000 people is less than 1% of the population, so I don’t think it would actually be noticeable, huge though the number sounds. A 1% reduction on a full house at a Leicester game, for example, would only mean about 320 people not being there.

[Soup]

10 hours ago, yorkie1999 said:

Doubt it, there’s a general election in the middle of all that and things always get better in the run up to a general election.

Haha true, we'll see

[adam]

1 hour ago, Babylon said:

Nobody predicted, they projected based on trends at the time. They also make a number of projections, best case, worst case etc. 
 

The actual numbers were very close to one of their projections. Hope that helps. 
 

 

To one of their projections? I suppose if you keep making them you will eventually get one right  Their modeling has been way off throughout this covid nightmare. 

[leicsmac]

23 minutes ago, adam said:

To one of their projections? I suppose if you keep making them you will eventually get one right  Their modeling has been way off throughout this covid nightmare. 

If someone is expecting certainty from a scientific process that did and still does have a ridiculous amount of variables, then that someone might be better off seeking the certainty provided by organised religion instead (as wrong as it appears to be regarding a certain universe).

 

Projections and probabilities and measuring risk by them is the name of the game here and it pretty much always has been based on what we know about the world at any one time, as much as some of the public would like the assurance that we'll know all about tomorrow because of today.

 

Life lacks certainty, particularly when it comes to novel events.

Edited 4 December 2021 by leicsmac

[CosbehFox]

32 minutes ago, adam said:

To one of their projections? I suppose if you keep making them you will eventually get one right  Their modeling has been way off throughout this covid nightmare. 

Their modelling is based on a number of what if’s. For example, if you carry on with no restrictions, this is the projection.
 

It’s that information which then informs the govt to introduce lockdowns or outdoor only meetings etc. It’s very much a worst case scenario they have to project. 
 

I don’t why people find that so hard to work out. Those publicised projections were not with figures which allowed for restrictions or lockdowns. So hence you introduce certain rules and what a surprise, everything is below the projection 

Edited 4 December 2021 by Cardiff_Fox

[Farrington fox]

40 minutes ago, adam said:

To one of their projections? I suppose if you keep making them you will eventually get one right  Their modeling has been way off throughout this covid nightmare. 

Prof Neil Ferguson and his models innit. Let's hope the global temperature rise models are a bit more, well, accurate.

[Babylon]

54 minutes ago, adam said:

To one of their projections? I suppose if you keep making them you will eventually get one right  Their modeling has been way off throughout this covid nightmare. 

No it hasn’t, they project a number of scenarios. You and your mates ignore them all and choose the “worst case” for comparison.

[SpacedX]

But you said this...

 

On 29/11/2021 at 15:17, Farrington fox said:

So this is my last post. Cheers. 

...Yet another that stages a melodramatic exit when their bullshit is challenged only to go back on their pledge. 

 

5 minutes ago, Farrington fox said:

Prof Neil Ferguson and his models innit. Let's hope the global temperature rise models are a bit more, well, accurate.

Not all - but yes, modelling, it's been explained on here innumerable times now. Are you still struggling? 

 

Regarding global temperature rise, trust me, you really want to be hoping the opposite - that the projections from the IPCC are inaccurate. 

[leicsmac]

7 minutes ago, Farrington fox said:

Prof Neil Ferguson and his models innit. Let's hope the global temperature rise models are a bit more, well, accurate.

They are, seeing as they are based on data accumulated and verified over a much longer period of time.

 

But in any case, the point, as made before, is that even if these natural threats aren't a certainty, the mere risk of their consequences is enough to merit action simply because those consequences are so dire. It's a reverse Pascal's Wager of sorts. Regarding climate change, it goes as follows:

 

If you're right, I'm wrong and we take action, then many countries suffer a nasty, but recoverable economic hit and perhaps we get some interesting new tech out of it all

If you're wrong, I'm right and we take action, then we save countless millions, perhaps billions of people from a most horrible future.

If you're right, I'm wrong and we don't take action, then nothing changes and life goes on pretty much as it always has done.

If you're wrong, I'm right and we don't take action...then it's worst case scenario time - at best hundreds of millions of people without food and potable water, at worst complete societal collapse.

 

The risk of that last one, even if the risk wasn't that high (newsflash: it is) should be making the logical choice to take action, because the worst-case scenario there is so much less worse than the one where nothing is done. And the same applies with pretty much every natural event that has the power to destablise society. Covid, while not totally at that stage yet, belongs in a similar bracket.

[reynard]

11 hours ago, Harrydc said:

I think what annoys people is how we were promised our 'freedom' back and was told we can 'get on with our lives' when the vaccine program was approved. I'm not sure how many people recall Matt Hancock stating this whilst 'crying'. We were told that once we've been double jabbed we're more or less out of the woods. 

 

Now, I know countless people who are double jabbed but are not getting the booster as they do not see where it will end. & I don't blame them one bit. Surely it's understandable that people are fed up when they did what they were told yet still are having to do more whilst simultaneously being threatened with nonsense such as vaccine passports. 

I know you've had a tough time through all this but what exactly are you being prevented from doing right now?

Ok, you can't travel to a few countries in Southern Africa and probably not to New Zealand or Australia right now but apart from that?

You can go to work

You can go the pub

you can go to the football

You can meet friends and family in people's homes

You can go to the theatre to museums to galleries to music concerts

In fact the list is pretty comprehensive concerning all the things you can do that you used to do 2 years ago/

 

Can't understand why they won't get a booster jab. Would they not get a flu jab each year if they were eligible? It is the same idea. Strangely I know loads of people who have been double jabbed and not one of them has turned down or intends to turn down getting a booster. People need to get a grip on reality. This virus isn't going to go away. We are going to have to live with it and vaccinations will be a permanent part of our lives for many years to come and possibly for ever. So will the concept of people having to wash their hands and maybe even a few ups and downs along the path to this becoming endemic in society. This might take some years and is likely to take longer the slower vaccine roll out across the world takes place and the fewer people in countries where vaccines are readily available get themselves vaccinated.

 

 

[adam]

11 minutes ago, Babylon said:

No it hasn’t, they project a number of scenarios. You and your mates ignore them all and choose the “worst case” for comparison.

I just read what gets published and all of their scenarios that they predict are a lot more doom and gloom compared to what actually happens.  I thought you would of noticed by now. Been happening since the start of this. 

[leicsmac]

9 minutes ago, Line-X said:

But you said this...

 

...Yet another that stages a melodramatic exit when their bullshit is challenged only to go back on their pledge. 

 

Not all - but yes, modelling, it's been explained on here innumerable times now. Are you still struggling? 

 

Regarding global temperature rise, trust me, you really want to be hoping the opposite - that the projections from the IPCC are inaccurate. 

Or if they're not, that at least there might still be someone around to record the events for posterity and for the amusement of future, smarter, species thereafter.

[Sol thewall Bamba]

2 hours ago, kyleolly said:

Do you not have to be in a job for a certain amount of time to get furlough?

Let's face it there won't be any more furlough. And there won't be any major restrictions to force a need for it anyway.

[Farrington fox]

40 minutes ago, Line-X said:

But you said this...

 

...Yet another that stages a melodramatic exit when their bullshit is challenged only to go back on their pledge. 

 

Not all - but yes, modelling, it's been explained on here innumerable times now. Are you still struggling? 

 

Regarding global temperature rise, trust me, you really want to be hoping the opposite - that the projections from the IPCC are inaccurate. 

I know. I just couldn't stay away!  I had been looking in though. And besides there is some useful information to be be gleaned. I was interested in the video concerning blood clots and aspirating the syringe. 

[CosbehFox]

34 minutes ago, adam said:

I just read what gets published and all of their scenarios that they predict are a lot more doom and gloom compared to what actually happens.  I thought you would of noticed by now. Been happening since the start of this. 

Out of interest what do you read to see the scenarios ? Via newspapers or news ? 

Edited 4 December 2021 by Cardiff_Fox

[MonmoreStef]

It’s reached the stage for me where the actual virus itself is the least scary thing about this whole pandemic and how things are going.