tangerinenotorange
Well-known member
3000 new positive cases yesterday. The daily increase is definitely a problem that needs addressing.
2 deaths, again.Nearly 3000 again today. Can only keep our distance and our fingers crossed now it seems.
2 deaths, again.
At what deaths per day is it going to be classed as safe ?
Fingers crossed for that scenario.To be honest I think if we are still getting 2 deaths and several thousand confirmed cases a day in five or six weeks time it will probably be time for the Government to start looking at things differently.
What determines safe though?At what deaths per day is it going to be classed as safe ?
Yes that is where the hope lies isn’t it. Too early to call it either way yet.
What determines safe though?
What's the death rate of being hit by a car?
Being knocked over by a dog?
Falling over in public
Being stabbed?
Being punched?
I'm not under playing this as it's a LONG way to go but there has to be some common sense if we don't see hospitalisations and death rate rise.
Quite a jump in number of people in hospital in England today, up from 464 to 537. Highest number since end of July. Hoping it is just a blip but starting to get a bit worrying.
Couldn’t agree more... There’s been far too much compliance....One thing that has to happen is people need to get rid of the compliancy, or be forced to have it taken away from them.
And you still haven’t got a clue have you.I'll remind you that you asked that question in January.
Kurt, your talking to someone who has said over and over that there will be massive repercussions if we don’t at least try and get on with it. lets Get on with it ffs, how long are we going to live like this for.What determines safe though?
What's the death rate of being hit by a car?
Being knocked over by a dog?
Falling over in public?
Being stabbed?
Being punched?
I'm not under playing this as it's a LONG way to go but there has to be some common sense if we don't see hospitalisations and death rate rise.
For the rest of your natural.Kurt, your talking to someone who has said over and over that there will be massive repercussions if we don’t at least try and get on with it. lets Get on with it ffs, how long are we going to live like this for.
It’s also about agendas as I keep saying. Just under 300 people die every day from alcohol related deaths. 300!!!!
Hopefully a vaccine will be available soon, that is the realistic way out of this situation
I’ll drink to that!!Do you have a source for that?
The only way I can see that claim stacking up is if you're including heart disease in that number, but whilst alcohol is a risk factor it's not the only one and most likely is a minor risk compared to other factors such as diet, smoking, exercise etc.
What a pathetic reply.For the rest of your natural.
You’ll be forced to wear a mask; even sat at home, on your own.
No more pubs. No more clubs. And certainly no footie clubs.
You might though be allowed out to work. Assuming you can climb over the bodies.
This is the new normal.
I know. I ended with a joke but managed to delete it.What a pathetic reply.
In a nutshell - that’s the point.Saying that only 2 people died doesn't resolve the increasing infection rate problem. Inevitably, the more young people that are infected, the more elderly people that are going to be infected. The more elderly that become infected, the higher the death rate will be.
And you still haven’t got a clue have you.
Yeah, but what if the death rate doesn't increase dramatically? We were told a second wave was coming two months ago when everyone was crying about marches and people at the beaches? There's no way we can see cases rise by 3k a day and not start to see hospital admissions rise irrespective of the timescale. The virus is everywhere and yet we're still at 2 deaths per day and low hospital admissions. Something doesn't add up.Saying that only 2 people died doesn't resolve the increasing infection rate problem. Inevitably, the more young people that are infected, the more elderly people that are going to be infected. The more elderly that become infected, the higher the death rate will be.
Hospital admissions have started rising if you look at the supporting data. The top level reported number (124) is nearly 2 weeks (26/8) out of date due to Scotland not reporting daily of which 52 were admitted in England. There were 94 admissions in England on the last reported date (5/9).Yeah, but what if the death rate doesn't increase dramatically? We were told a second wave was coming two months ago when everyone was crying about marches and people at the beaches? There's no way we can see cases rise by 3k a day and not start to see hospital admissions rise irrespective of the timescale. The virus is everywhere and yet we're still at 2 deaths per day and low hospital admissions. Something doesn't add up.
Something doesn't add up.
But we were told the same in July? We won't see the effects until the end of August. It's like there is a clamouring for a second spike. It's kinda weird tbh.Mostly demographics, if the rise in infection is concentrated amongst those under 30 then it'll have very little effect on the death rate, probably low single figures will die each day from that age group at the current rate of infection.
The problem is that the rise in infections in the above age group likely leads to a rise in infections amongst those aged 30+ two or three weeks later followed by a rise in hospital admissions and deaths 2 or 3 weeks after that, so you likely won't see the effects of the current upturn until the end of this month.
But we were told the same in July?
Yep, you must have been in a coma for when the beaches were opened and the BLM marches happened.We're we?
IIRC we were told that a second spike was a risk but I was under the impression that the autumn/winter was the biggest concern and where we would likely see such a thing, now it seems that the warnings are coming true.
Yep, you must have been in a coma for when the beaches were opened and the BLM marches happened.
What claim? I don't need a link. Just being alive and paying attention is enough. A second spike warning was given for August. As I said, you must have been in a coma. I didn't mis understand.Or you may have misunderstood what was being said.
Any chance of a link to support your original claim.
Just use google mate, I did and there was loads of stuff littered around June July and start of August. Not hard.Or you may have misunderstood what was being said.
Any chance of a link to support your original claim.
We're we?
IIRC we were told that a second spike was a risk but I was under the impression that the autumn/winter was the biggest concern and where we would likely see such a thing, now it seems that the warnings are coming true.
What claim?
But we were told the same in July? We won't see the effects until the end of August. It's like there is a clamouring for a second spike. It's kinda weird tbh.
I don't need a link. Just being alive and paying attention is enough.
A second spike warning was given for August.
Just use google mate, I did and there was loads of stuff littered around June July and start of August. Not hard.
You mean a bit like Woolly and Recidivist.Says the man who gets a nosebleed if he writes a two line answer.
You must be ** blind then or can't use google properly. Looks like a bit of both.This one:
Often what you remember is not the same as what actually happened, and if you don't provide a link it's much harder to examine your claim further (often why links aren't provided).
- Who gave this warning?
- On what day was the warning given?
- What were the precise details of the warning?
- Was it a specific warning that something was going to happen or a general warning that something might?
Just done that and it's easy to prove that no such warning was given, just use Google if you don't believe me.
You must be ** blind then or can't use google properly. Looks like a bit of both.
In fairness, we’ve had regular warnings of a second spike / wave ever since the first spike started to fall. Up until fairly recently we haven’t seen a significant rise in cases in the U.K.
Agreed, however they've always been general warnings about what could happen at an unspecified point in the future.
The claim I'm disputing seems to be that because we haven't had a second spike already we're not going to get one.
There's a paradox in Hancock blaming the surge on 17-21 year olds in one breath while Williamson insists schools and colleges are safe and get back in there. How does that square up?All the scenarios you present are one offs. A point in time events. COVID is on going and all around (to a degree).
One thing that has to happen is people need to get rid of the compliancy, or be forced to have it taken away from them.
This is why I get so frustrated with the press and also Government and expert messaging. It’s all good if you have a population that’s capable of drawing those sorts of distinctions, but unfortunately that’s not the case.
I’ve used the term “boy who cried wolf” before and whilst I 100% agree, previous warnings have been largely non-specific, they still add to the issue.
We now have a situation where many people won’t take the situation seriously, because the past warnings/predictions have not materialised.
There's a paradox in Hancock blaming the surge on 17-21 year olds in one breath while Williamson insists schools and colleges are safe and get back in there. How does that square up?
Well they're f***ed either way then aren't they?
Personally I think there's no way these warnings couldn't have been given, the risk was there, the public had to be made aware of it, anything else would have been irresponsible.
- Issue warnings about the risk, the public gets used to them and starts to ignore them and the virus spreads;
- don't issue warnings, there's nothing for the public to ignore and the virus spreads.
Finally, can you imagine the leftist glee had the government remained silent as we now start to see the emergence of a second spike.
I just think that many people have got “second spike” burnout.