Covid-19 Are we being told the truth ?

[iris123 15,358]

1 minute ago, DC2 said:

Ah, rudeness, the last defence of a lost debate.

My contribution, as always, is the alternative response to Covid.

It ain't rude, and I proved you wrong. End of.....

[chris4gillian 1,672]

Just now, DC2 said:

Now you’re sounding daft.

You queried my alternative response because you didn’t understand the definition of “vulnerable”.

I have now clarified it for you.

So it is not for me to “try again” but for you to reply to my suggestion.

Ahhh bless.  You made a pretty general statement using the term 'vulnerable'.  You did not state 'vulnerable as per government definition'.  It looks like my ESP is failing me today.

 

[DC2 10,664]

Just now, chris4gillian said:

Ahhh bless.  You made a pretty general statement using the term 'vulnerable'.  You did not state 'vulnerable as per government definition'.  It looks like my ESP is failing me today.

 

Anyway, now that you know the definition of “vulnerable”, would you like to say whether my suggestion of quarantine is an alternative solution and whether you have any evidence (studies or modelling) to say it won’t work?

[Tsunami 10,138]

2 minutes ago, DC2 said:

Ah, rudeness, the last defence of a lost debate.

My contribution, as always, is the alternative response to Covid.

Given most of your replies before your enforced "holiday",  that's a bit rich coming from you. You must accept you lost the debate weeks ago then.

[chris4gillian 1,672]

4 minutes ago, DC2 said:

Ah, rudeness, the last defence of a lost debate.

My contribution, as always, is the alternative response to Covid.

I would exchange the highlighted word to 'opinion'.  It would make your statement far more accurate.

[DC2 10,664]

4 minutes ago, iris123 said:

It ain't rude, and I proved you wrong. End of.....

You’ve proved that press coverage of Covid hasn’t been sensationalist?

Really?  

 

[DC2 10,664]

1 minute ago, Tsunami said:

Given most of your replies before your enforced "holiday",  that's a bit rich coming from you. You must accept you lost the debate weeks ago then.

Enforced holiday?

What are you on about?

[chris4gillian 1,672]

2 minutes ago, DC2 said:

Anyway, now that you know the definition of “vulnerable”, would you like to say whether my suggestion of quarantine is an alternative solution and whether you have any evidence (studies or modelling) to say it won’t work?

You didn't suggest quarantine, you suggested an open society for all but (your definition) of the vulnerable.  How's your memory my dear chap?

[DC2 10,664]

2 minutes ago, chris4gillian said:

I would exchange the highlighted word to 'opinion'.  It would make your statement far more accurate.

Fine.

I repeat: now that you know the definition of “vulnerable”, would you like to say whether my suggestion of quarantine is an alternative solution and whether you have any evidence (studies or modelling) to say it won’t work?

[chris4gillian 1,672]

1 minute ago, DC2 said:

Fine.

I repeat: now that you know the definition of “vulnerable”, would you like to say whether my suggestion of quarantine is an alternative solution and whether you have any evidence (studies or modelling) to say it won’t work?

It's not just your memory, your eyes aren't so good either are they. See above!

Edited November 2, 2020 by chris4gillian

[DC2 10,664]

1 minute ago, chris4gillian said:

You didn't suggest quarantine, you suggested an open society for all but (your definition) of the vulnerable.  How's your memory my dear chap?

This is what I said:

“So offering proper quarantine to the vulnerable and open society to everyone else is not an alternative?

Of course it is. 

And thousands of experts, academics and the public support that view.”

Can you not see the word “quarantine”?

[iris123 15,358]

4 minutes ago, DC2 said:

You’ve proved that press coverage of Covid hasn’t been sensationalist?

Really?  

 

See that, that's you, that is

 

 

[chris4gillian 1,672]

7 minutes ago, DC2 said:

This is what I said:

“So offering proper quarantine to the vulnerable and open society to everyone else is not an alternative?

Of course it is. 

And thousands of experts, academics and the public support that view.”

Can you not see the word “quarantine”?

I immediately agreed with that!!  Keep up

And I also commented on the open society suggestion.

What more do you want?

Edited November 2, 2020 by chris4gillian

[DC2 10,664]

1 minute ago, chris4gillian said:

I immediately agreed with that!!  Keep up.

So, as we’ve established that I did say quarantine, that you now know the definition of vulnerable and that you agree that the vulnerable should be quarantined, what is your objection to an open society for everyone else?

And do you have any studies or modelling to support your objection?

[Vince 9,063]

13 minutes ago, chris4gillian said:

Ahhh bless.  You made a pretty general statement using the term 'vulnerable'.  You did not state 'vulnerable as per government definition'.  It looks like my ESP is failing me today.

 

So the definition of the word vulnerable decides whether it is an alternative or not?

In the meantime your definition of how many people under 60 with no other health problems have died is 'plenty' 

I can say that the number of undiagnosed cancer cases is approaching 70,000 lower than normal.

A relative number of those not in the now well defined vulnerable category and under the age of 60 you are using to justify lockdown therefore needs to be a little more accurate than 'plenty'