Jump to content
British Speedway Forum
jrs

Covid-19 Are we being told the truth ?

Recommended Posts

Just now, DC2 said:

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?

Once again, I gave my reaction to the open society 'alternative' in the same post.

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, chris4gillian said:

Once again, I gave my reaction to the open society 'alternative' in the same post.

Yes, but your reaction depended on your misinterpretation of the word “vulnerable”.

Now that vulnerable has been defined for you do you have any objection?

Tell us, Chris.

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Vince said:

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' :rolleyes:

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'

Your source?

The cancer thing has been done to death (excuse the pun once again) a few days ago so I'm not going to go full circle on that issue.

'Plenty' is the only word I'm comfortable using as nobody really knows an accurate number.  There have been many reports and personal testimonies from those that have lost perfectly healthy loved ones throughout the pandemic. 

Share this post


Link to post
33 minutes ago, chris4gillian said:

Follow the government law.  That's all everyone can do.  We don't have to agree with it, but we all have to follow it.

No we don’t, that’s how tyranny starts...

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, chris4gillian said:

Your source?

The cancer thing has been done to death (excuse the pun once again) a few days ago so I'm not going to go full circle on that issue.

'Plenty' is the only word I'm comfortable using as nobody really knows an accurate number.  There have been many reports and personal testimonies from those that have lost perfectly healthy loved ones throughout the pandemic. 

The same way as there is no accurate number for the number of people that have died from Covid 19, but the media keeps giving the figures as though they are real

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, DC2 said:

Yes, but your reaction depended on your misinterpretation of the word “vulnerable”.

Now that vulnerable has been defined for you do you have any objection?

Tell us, Chris.

Strewth.

READ MY INTIAL RESPONSE which I still stand by.

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, The Third Man said:

The same way as there is no accurate number for the number of people that have died from Covid 19, but the media keeps giving the figures as though they are real

I don't disagree.

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, chris4gillian said:

Strewth.

READ MY INTIAL RESPONSE which I still stand by.

Here’s your initial response:

“Proper protection for the vulnerable, absolutely.

But, open society to everyone else?  Great, the strong survive and those with weak immune systems and other health issues don't :t:  Cases and deaths will just keep on rising just as they are today.  Try again.”

So, if we remove the third sentence as those people are covered by the vulnerable group, we’re left with:

“But, open society to everyone else? Cases and deaths will just keep on rising just as they are today”

Yes, Cases would continue to rise in the healthy population but they would not result in the same rising deaths because Covid kills very few non-vulnerable people.

In short, while rising cases in the healthy population might have some negative impacts, such as “Long Covid” and long term lung and heart damage, for a small proportion of people, it would have the positive benefits of increasing numbers of people with anti-bodies, possibly to the point of herd immunity, and a near-normal economy and society.

Do you agree?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Can anyone answer his question ?

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
55 minutes ago, wealdstone said:

As long as we have those that insist on having pre lockdown raves  they will never work 

But in reality it’s such a small number of people doing this it will hardly make a difference. Just the press jumping on any indiscretion for a story.

I wonder if those moaning about the young have forgotten how many laws they broke in there younger days, I can honestly say I broke my fair share.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, Blupanther said:

Can anyone answer his question ?

 

Not sure what he is looking for, but this does seem sensationally worrying on the face of it

Between 24th-30th October 2020 there were 175 registered deaths in Liverpool, of which 37% (n=64) were Covid-19 deaths. 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, racers and royals said:

Today’s UK  Hospital Covid 19 reported deaths
England  118     33110

Scotland  0  (2849)

Wales  3  (1891)

NI   8  (724)

Today`s total UK reported is 136 which is Hospital 129 other 7

Share this post


Link to post
30 minutes ago, chris4gillian said:

Plenty' is the only word I'm comfortable using as nobody really knows an accurate number.  There have been many reports and personal testimonies from those that have lost perfectly healthy loved ones throughout the pandemic. 

So, in lamens terms would it be ok to say that, plenty will die from covid and a lot more than plenty won't?

But either way there is gonna be plenty mess to clear up.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, racers and royals said:

Today`s total UK reported is 136 which is Hospital 129 other 7

But how many died of Covid out of the 136 who died of any cause within 28 days of being tested positive for Covid

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, The Third Man said:

But how many died of Covid out of the 136 who died of any cause within 28 days of being tested positive for Covid

I don`t really know but i would suspect over 95% did.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy