Covid Roll Call

[MPH]

On 10/08/2024 at 02:47, st albans fox said:

I knew someone who smoked 20 a day till he passed in his mid nineties.  His brother went in his early sixties from lung cancer ….. 

 

just saying like …….: 😉

 

I hope you know that this isn’t the norm..

[Wymsey]

Do some still think it was still man-made / deliberate?

[Parafox]

Let's ask Donald...

 

[Otis]

Yeah around 1% of those infected died.

The majority of those were elderly or had underlying health conditions. 

[leicsmac]

230,000 odd people inside of a couple of years is an awful lot of people to watch die in pretty horrible fashion - whether they were more vulnerable to it shouldn't really come into it unless one wants to make the argument that they were somehow deserving of it - Just World Fallacy?

 

I would hope that folks consider the testimony of those giving it right now pretty carefully and show at least some basic empathy for those who died, in numbers and in misery, and for those who tried to help them but couldn't and had to move onto the next body, again and again.

[Wymsey]

Just now, Otis said:

Yeah around 1% of those infected died.

The majority of those were elderly or had underlying health conditions. 

Wonder how many of those 232,112 unfortunate ones had COVID-19 as the 'cause of death', when it could've been a contributory factor coupled with another underlying condition?..

 

There was accusations that some consultants put a patient's death as COVID-19, even though something else largely caused it.

[Paninistickers]

45 minutes ago, Parafox said:

 

If I had time I'd take a look but you're statement that "for 99% of people it was flu at worst is highly contestable.

 

It wasn't just the weak, elderly and vulnerable that succumbed. I went to 2 deaths in the first month of Covid that were fit, healthy men in their 30's and that's just  in our local area. Extrapolate that nationally and the figures are mind boggling. 

 

You're suggesting that just 1%, 1%, of the infected population died or had serious complications. Utter nonsense.

 

I just wish you would accept the irrefutable facts of the Covid outbreak. I think you're an intelligent person but I also think that your comments aren't fact based and are just what you think to be true.

I'll gladly concede I'm not a stats man. In anything.  Im a back of fag packet maths guy... anything more detailed bores me to tears. 

 

But wasnt the mortality rate 1%? It rings a bell. And if those 1% who copped it, about 80% were over 80.  A quick Google is (interestingly) inconclusive. Either way, anyone not old was almost certainly not going to die. Though, like colds and flu and meningitis and measles and sepsis and car accidents etc, you will always get the unlucky outliers - and I accept that

[leicsmac]

Oh, and a polite reminder.

 

Next time, the act of nature might not "just" have a 1% death rate. Next time, it might come for someone you actually care about. Perhaps acting and preparing accordingly is a good idea.

[st albans fox]

43 minutes ago, MPH said:

 

I hope you know that this isn’t the norm..

Context was the post I was responding to 

 

extreme satire 

[Otis]

14 minutes ago, Wymsey said:

Wonder how many of those 232,112 unfortunate ones had COVID-19 as the 'cause of death', when it could've been a contributory factor coupled with another underlying condition?..

 

There was accusations that some consultants put a patient's death as COVID-19, even though something else largely caused it.

Very true.

Wasn't it recorded as a covid death if they had tested positive for covid in the previous 30 days?

Unfortunately it's doubtful we'll ever know the true figure. 

 

[Paninistickers]

32 minutes ago, Wymsey said:

Wonder how many of those 232,112 unfortunate ones had COVID-19 as the 'cause of death', when it could've been a contributory factor coupled with another underlying condition?..

 

There was accusations that some consultants put a patient's death as COVID-19, even though something else largely caused it.

Exactly this. 

 

Dying with COVID and dying having had COVID isnt the same as dying of COVID. But they all counted the same 

[Otis]

18 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Oh, and a polite reminder.

 

Next time, the act of nature might not "just" have a 1% death rate. Next time, it might come for someone you actually care about. Perhaps acting and preparing accordingly is a good idea.

And this is what this on going inquiry should be looking at.

Not this pointless exercise going over old ground listening to everyones stories for the next 2-3 years. 

[Zear0]

2 minutes ago, Otis said:

And this is what this on going inquiry should be looking at.

Not this pointless exercise going over old ground listening to everyones stories for the next 2-3 years. 

You mean evidence? Not a defence barrister I hope? 

[grobyfox1990]

Yeh I thought it was a 1% death rate. Which by the way as an absolute number is still f’’’’’ing HUGE. But yeh covid certainly isn’t Ebola which is like a 50% mortality rate?! Mad.
We only cared about covid because it irritated our lifestyles rather than those easy-to-forget Africans.

Anyway funny to see @Paninistickers still winding up people and getting their personal anecdotes as hard evidence in response 

[grobyfox1990]

The mental thing is you STILL hear people saying ‘oh no, just tested positive! My first time! Omg!! Managed to dodge it for years xoxo!!’ 

Bro - this thing had a R rate of over 3 at one point. Whatever a cheap, mass produced piece of Chinese plastic is telling you, you’ve had covid before 

[Otis]

1 hour ago, Parafox said:

 

If I had time I'd take a look but you're statement that "for 99% of people it was flu at worst is highly contestable.

 

It wasn't just the weak, elderly and vulnerable that succumbed. I went to 2 deaths in the first month of Covid that were fit, healthy men in their 30's and that's just  in our local area. Extrapolate that nationally and the figures are mind boggling. 

 

You're suggesting that just 1%, 1%, of the infected population died or had serious complications. Utter nonsense.

 

I just wish you would accept the irrefutable facts of the Covid outbreak. I think you're an intelligent person but I also think that your comments aren't fact based and are just what you think to be true.

Isn't nonsense though is it.

The irony is, It seems you're comments are based on what you think are true. Which is sort of understandable given the MSM propaganda at the time, showing middle aged people laying in hospital beds on deaths door. But when you look at the fact this was the exception. 

[Zear0]

1 minute ago, grobyfox1990 said:

Yeh I thought it was a 1% death rate. Which by the way as an absolute number is still f’’’’’ing HUGE. But yeh covid certainly isn’t Ebola which is like a 50% mortality rate?! Mad.
We only cared about covid because it irritated our lifestyles rather than those easy-to-forget Africans.

Anyway funny to see @Paninistickers still winding up people and getting their personal anecdotes as hard evidence in response 

I cared about COVID as it killed two family members and one of my employees.

[grobyfox1990]

Just now, Zear0 said:

I cared about COVID as it killed two family members and one of my employees.

We as in royal we. Systemic we. National we. I think you know what I mean.
I also know 6 people (3 of a family of 4) who died of covid. 

[Otis]

7 minutes ago, Zear0 said:

You mean evidence? Not a defence barrister I hope? 

You don't need to be a barrister to understand that you don't need to hear stories from every single person. I think we all got the jist of what happened during the early months. 

Just get on with it and decide what worked well and what didn't. 

[leicsmac]

13 minutes ago, Otis said:

And this is what this on going inquiry should be looking at.

Not this pointless exercise going over old ground listening to everyones stories for the next 2-3 years. 

Listening to those stories will give us a picture of just how unprepared things were, and how brutal things were in hospital ICU's as a result. That can be carried forward as a cautionary advisory for next time.

[leicsmac]

Just now, Otis said:

You don't need to be a barrister to understand that you don't need to hear stories from every single person. I think we all got the jist of what happened during the early months. 

Just get on with it and decide what worked well and what didn't. 

Judging by attitudes, I'm not entirely sure this is the case. Or if the jist was got, it was taken far more lightly than it needs to be.

[Otis]

1 minute ago, leicsmac said:

Listening to those stories will give us a picture of just how unprepared things were, and how brutal things were in hospital ICU's as a result. That can be carried forward as a cautionary advisory for next time.

It's been a year now and we're still stuck on page 1 hearing the same stories, is anything new being learnt. 

 

[Otis]

14 minutes ago, grobyfox1990 said:

The mental thing is you STILL hear people saying ‘oh no, just tested positive! My first time! Omg!! Managed to dodge it for years xoxo!!’ 

Bro - this thing had a R rate of over 3 at one point. Whatever a cheap, mass produced piece of Chinese plastic is telling you, you’ve had covid before 

Yeah. No one cares mate, chances are you'll be fine.... off you trot... bleeding attention seekers everywhere these days.

[Paninistickers]

The doctor's testimony today was grim and eye opening. 

 

But I'll be interested to see if the inquiry admits/recognises (or even praises) that hospitals soon got things under control, essentially by triaging (aka refusing to treat) the extreme elderly that were packing out the hospitals during the crazy period he described. 

[HighPeakFox]

12 minutes ago, Otis said:

Yeah. No one cares mate, chances are you'll be fine.... off you trot... bleeding attention seekers everywhere these days.

How very perceptive of you.