Coronavirus Thread

[Lionator]

Just now, HighPeakFox said:

Or, in the case of the scientists (who know better than you or me, by the way) they're just going to be cautious.

The problem is, shutting down large sectors of the economy for something which turns out to have a minimal disease burden is just as dangerous as leaving it open a bit longer, in a political sense anyway.

 

As someone who has several friends in South Africa and has been following their data quite closely, I'm confident this variant is nowhere near as bad in their environment.

[kingfox]

5 minutes ago, HighPeakFox said:

Or, in the case of the scientists (who know better than you or me, by the way) they're just going to be cautious.

The same scientists who throughout this pandemic have always pushed the scaremongering and worst case scenario agenda.

 

It’s no surprise to see many getting fed up whenever Sage and their cronies have something to say.

[HighPeakFox]

3 minutes ago, Lionator said:

The problem is, shutting down large sectors of the economy for something which turns out to have a minimal disease burden is just as dangerous as leaving it open a bit longer, in a political sense anyway.

 

As someone who has several friends in South Africa and has been following their data quite closely, I'm confident this variant is nowhere near as bad in their environment.

Well it hasn't happened yet, and it won't be the media or the scientists who make that decision either.

[HighPeakFox]

Just now, kingfox said:

The same scientists who throughout this pandemic have always pushed the scaremongering and worst case scenario agenda.

 

It’s no surprise to see many getting fed up whenever Sage and their cronies have something to say.

When you have a deadly, unknown and highly virulent threat to deal with, the only responsible thing to do is prepare for the worst case scenario. Anything else is to be wildly reckless and gamble with so many peoples' lives, and God knows we have a government intent on that as it is - thank goodness that the scientists might have reined the irresponsible con artists in a bit.

[st albans fox]

1 minute ago, Lionator said:

The problem is, shutting down large sectors of the economy for something which turns out to have a minimal disease burden is just as dangerous as leaving it open a bit longer, in a political sense anyway.

 

As someone who has several friends in South Africa and has been following their data quite closely, I'm confident this variant is nowhere near as bad in their environment.

The govt are walking a tightrope 

as it happens, because they absolutely won’t shut us down ahead of Xmas, we will get a lot of data whilst we’re still open and mixing.  And they will be hell bent on allowing us to have NYE parties too.  The scientists will be cautious (that’s how they’re made ) but the ministers will not want to be remembered for cancelling Xmas/new year twice. The period 2 jan to 16 jan is notoriously quiet across hospitality and retail. They may judge a two week shut down isn’t that damaging and will take the edge off the spread. 
 

Assuming we are allowed to carry on as we are until new year, we will know what the score seems to be …..

[st albans fox]

7 minutes ago, kingfox said:

The same scientists who throughout this pandemic have always pushed the scaremongering and worst case scenario agenda.

 

It’s no surprise to see many getting fed up whenever Sage and their cronies have something to say.

They present a range of predictions based on different factors 

the media choose what to highlight and you/me choose which reports to take notice of and which not to 

 

the scientists are just doing their jobs . 

[Dunge]

13 minutes ago, kingfox said:

The same scientists who throughout this pandemic have always pushed the scaremongering and worst case scenario agenda.

 

It’s no surprise to see many getting fed up whenever Sage and their cronies have something to say.

Frankly, one of the reasons they’re worried and cautious is because Covid actually exceeded their models in the first place. We obviously hope there is good news here, but their experiences before this autumn have been largely negative.

 

 

2 hours ago, FoxesDeb said:

You take them daily because you think they help you sleep though don't you? If you were my son, and I have one around your age, I'd be concerned about the potential damage that's causing your liver, and the problems that could lead to if you contract covid. 

 

It also really and truly absolutely baffles me that you have been one of the most outspoken here about the angst that lockdown caused you, and yet you are refusing to do the one thing that can help us get out of this. You asked why bother to take the vaccine, and the answer is simple but you already know that. Protect yourself as much as you can, help to protect others, and get out of this covid hell as soon as we possibly can. 

 

Where do you get your info from? Do you talk to your parents about this? So many of us here have tried to explain the risks and the reasons and the science behind it all to you, many times over the last 18 months or so, but you really don't seem to be helping yourself 

I don't know whether you don't believe any of us who've tried to help you here, or if you are just being contrary for the sake of it, or maybe you do believe much of the complete and utter bollccks on the internet which seems to be referred to as misinformation these days, but I wish you well whatever you decide. 

 

I’ve never felt that we’ve truly got the the heart of Harry’s concerns here. Everything I’ve ever seen from him on this thread has felt like it’s danced around what he really wants to say. But ultimately that’s up to him.

[kingfox]

1 minute ago, st albans fox said:

They present a range of predictions based on different factors 

the media choose what to highlight and you/me choose which reports to take notice of and which not to 

 

the scientists are just doing their jobs . 

Throughout the pandemic it’s always been a case of “Could”. Yet again with this Omicron variant, they are pushing the “Could be this, could be that” agenda. You may not agree, but throughout this pandemic the media, scientists and government have all been as bad as each other, the constant scaremongering is a joke.

 

You see certain data and reports especially out of South Africa pushing a more positive agenda(never makes main headline news here) you don’t see them constantly hammer away with the scaremongering, but here in the UK, media, scientists and government constantly do it.

 

It’s no wonder people get sick and tired of their negative agendas on a daily basis.

[StanSP]

 

 

[FoxesDeb]

1 minute ago, kingfox said:

Throughout the pandemic it’s always been a case of “Could”. Yet again with this Omicron variant, they are pushing the “Could be this, could be that” agenda. You may not agree, but throughout this pandemic the media, scientists and government have all been as bad as each other, the constant scaremongering is a joke.

 

You see certain data and reports especially out of South Africa pushing a more positive agenda(never makes main headline news here) you don’t see them constantly hammer away with the scaremongering, but here in the UK, media, scientists and government constantly do it.

 

It’s no wonder people get sick and tired of their negative agendas on a daily basis.

Of course they say 'could', they don't know for certain do they 

 

They're not Mystic fvcking Meg 

[Phil Bowman]

4 minutes ago, kingfox said:

they are pushing the “Could be this, could be that” agenda.

‘Could be this, could be that’ really isn’t an agenda. It’s simply saying some things it could be. In all honesty, you seem to have more of an agenda regarding government, media and ‘scientists’ than they have regarding covid.

[kingfox]

1 minute ago, FoxesDeb said:

Of course they say 'could', they don't know for certain do they 

 

They're not Mystic fvcking Meg 

And as I said previously, our scientists always seem to concentrate on worst case.

 

They’ve been quick to jump on all media outlets to push this agenda, this morning you had one scientist saying that you’ll contact Omicron unless you live like a hermit, scaremongering at its finest.

 

But they are just doing their “job”.

[FoxesDeb]

2 minutes ago, kingfox said:

And as I said previously, our scientists always seem to concentrate on worst case.

 

They’ve been quick to jump on all media outlets to push this agenda, this morning you had one scientist saying that you’ll contact Omicron unless you live like a hermit, scaremongering at its finest.

 

But they are just doing their “job”.

That's probably true though isn't it? Whether or not people choose to live like hermits is up to them. 

[Phil Bowman]

5 minutes ago, FoxesDeb said:

That's probably true though isn't it? Whether or not people choose to live like hermits is up to them. 

Exactly. They didn’t say it was going to kill us all, just that we’d almost certainly meet it, what with it being very infectious and all.

[st albans fox]

11 minutes ago, kingfox said:

And as I said previously, our scientists always seem to concentrate on worst case.

 

They’ve been quick to jump on all media outlets to push this agenda, this morning you had one scientist saying that you’ll contact Omicron unless you live like a hermit, scaremongering at its finest.

 

But they are just doing their “job”.

Maybe make your own judgment on the scientist and what he’s saying/how he’s saying it ….….. whether you think he’s pushing a worse case scenario or being realistic.  The science is the science but yes, delivery varies and some of them are way more cautious than others. 
 

I won’t question the veracity of the science but I will question what it means for me and the future ……  I’m pretty optimistic about what comes post February ……I’m a bit concerned about what might happen in January.  That’s not because a scientist or minister has said something specific - I’m looking at what evidence I can find out there and making my own assessment of what the ‘experts’ are saying. 

[CosbehFox]

17 minutes ago, kingfox said:

And as I said previously, our scientists always seem to concentrate on worst case.

 

They’ve been quick to jump on all media outlets to push this agenda, this morning you had one scientist saying that you’ll contact Omicron unless you live like a hermit, scaremongering at its finest.

 

But they are just doing their “job”.

To be fair I think that statement is very accurate. Plenty of examples occurring where parties etc with 1 omicron infected person has seen 90% upwards report infection. 

Edited 11 December 2021 by Cardiff_Fox

[kingfox]

3 minutes ago, FoxesDeb said:

That's probably true though isn't it? Whether or not people choose to live like hermits is up to them. 

Maybe, maybe not, we just don’t know yet.

 

It’s another constant cycle of mixed messaging that unsurprisingly frustrates the public.

 

Sage have been so far out with their modelling in terms of our previous waves, who knows what to think anymore.

 

You see scientists and doctors out of South Africa that have been quite positive regarding this variant, here in the UK though it’s completely the opposite from our scientists, there’s the problem.

[Lionator]

21 minutes ago, kingfox said:

Maybe, maybe not, we just don’t know yet.

 

It’s another constant cycle of mixed messaging that unsurprisingly frustrates the public.

 

Sage have been so far out with their modelling in terms of our previous waves, who knows what to think anymore.

 

You see scientists and doctors out of South Africa that have been quite positive regarding this variant, here in the UK though it’s completely the opposite from our scientists, there’s the problem.

A suppose a key difference is that South Africans live with a high level of infectious disease. I didn’t realise until this week that 50k+ people die each year there from tuberculosis and roughly 20% of their population live with HIV. So I can’t imagine covid is particularly intimidating for them. Whereas here, these modellers have waited their whole careers for a moment like this pandemic. 

[dsr-burnley]

5 hours ago, Babylon said:

I’m sure that steep rise in cases and those hospitalised is a coincidence.

 

Even of its less severe, with it being so transmissible that’s really bad in terms of essential services being flooded and it can be for deaths also…

 

” even a 30% more transmissible variant can be way worse than a variant that is 30% more deadly. At the heart of this counter-intuitive assertion lies an old foe that has plagued us right from the start of this pandemic: exponential growth. Here’s a simple thought experiment that helps to explain why.

Imagine the old variant spreading under measures that have reduced R to 1. Starting with 10,000 infected people, every generation interval (time becoming infected and infecting someone else) they will infect 10,000 more. Of everyone that gets infected, let’s assume that 1% of them will die. After ten generations, 100,000 new infections will have occurred leading to 1,000 deaths. 

With a variant that is 30% more deadly, the same number of infections will occur, but they will lead to 1,300 deaths. Yet with a variant that is 30% more transmissible but not more deadly, because cases will grow exponentially, the eventual death toll over the same period stretches to over 4,200. The longer this goes on for, the bigger the death toll discrepancy between the more transmissible and the more deadly strain becomes.”

4C180B04-0CEC-48B1-91E4-C5E5E2F1EC5F.webp 24.02 kB · 2 downloads

Though that is implying that the virus will fizzle out after a certain time, whereas real world experience suggests that it is more likely to fizzle out after it has reached a certain number of cases. The current government policy, and official government policy for at least part of the last two years, has not been to reduce the number of deaths. It has been to slow down the death rate so that we can have a long drawn out pandemic which the NHS can apparently cope with better than a huge sudden spike. 

[Babylon]

4 hours ago, dsr-burnley said:

Though that is implying that the virus will fizzle out after a certain time, whereas real world experience suggests that it is more likely to fizzle out after it has reached a certain number of cases. The current government policy, and official government policy for at least part of the last two years, has not been to reduce the number of deaths. It has been to slow down the death rate so that we can have a long drawn out pandemic which the NHS can apparently cope with better than a huge sudden spike. 

No sure what you are trying to argue against. 

[phoneticerror]

Had booster yesterday. Pfizer for the first time (Astra before). Feeling fairly okay today so far. Just a bit groggy and stiff arm but nothing compared to the side effects I got from the first AZ.

[Farrington fox]

All the talk now is of Junkie Gove pushing for vaccine passports to be introduced for pubs. This man this government have lost their minds. The cabinet is now split according to the Telegraph. 

[SpacedX]

2 minutes ago, Farrington fox said:

All the talk now is of Junkie Gove pushing for vaccine passports to be introduced for pubs. This man this government have lost their minds. The cabinet is now split according to the Telegraph. 

You voted for them 

[reynard]

10 hours ago, kingfox said:

And as I said previously, our scientists always seem to concentrate on worst case.

 

They’ve been quick to jump on all media outlets to push this agenda, this morning you had one scientist saying that you’ll contact Omicron unless you live like a hermit, scaremongering at its finest.

 

But they are just doing their “job”.

I'm not sure that is actually completely true. I think what happens is scientists run projected models based on data and they produce several possible scenarios. Then the press pick up on them and inevitably focus on the most dramatic for the best headlines. It wouldn't be much clickbait or headline making if the media picked up on very few people expected to die angle.

Not saying some projections aren't very incorrect in the end but I don't think it as simple a scientists, themselves, concentrating on the worst case scenarios.

[reynard]

55 minutes ago, phoneticerror said:

Had booster yesterday. Pfizer for the first time (Astra before). Feeling fairly okay today so far. Just a bit groggy and stiff arm but nothing compared to the side effects I got from the first AZ.

Glad to hear this. I'm sure this is the outcome for the vast majority of people too.