Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
Sam_Brown wrote: ↑Sat Apr 25, 2020 12:33 pm
Some good points. I have one of my own. Tough decisions have to be made but if we’re accepting that more people will get ill and that’s ok then what do you do about the increase of people who become ill? Do you just not bother treating them at all? How do you expect the NHS to cope if there are a lot more cases or do we just have some Logan’s run style culling for everyone over the age of 60?
In regards to herd immunity is that a realistic goal? There is growing concern that you don’t become immune after having it.
Are we treating folks or just doing the best we can? I don't know....and I don't have the answers
As for the concern that you don't become immune....well....what's the alternative?
Are we all going to hide every year twice a year forever? Give up football, going to the bar and rock concerts? Let me make that decision please.
As a poor comparison, take "Valley Fever" I'll save you looking it up but its a nasty fungal disease that lives in the soil mostly in Arizona and Oklahoma and is spread during dusty conditions. We simply live with it....we don't evacuate 2 States. If you live there, get educated, adapt and take sensible precautions. My whole point here is that this current thing is not a million miles away from a host of other things that kill people that we don't do much of anything about other than research and try to fix and mitigate as best we cAN. Why for instance, do we not mandate flu vaccines? That would save 30000 people a year in USA.
No Shot Sherlock wrote: ↑Sat Apr 25, 2020 10:54 pm
There's one huge problem with getting the world back to work, and nowhere more so than in the good old US of A. Who's going to pick up the litigation costs when customers start suing businesses, and employees start suing their employers when they catch Covid because they went back to work? And likewise when employers start suing governments because they said it was okay for them to re-commence operations?
I'm OK with the Logans Run solution for lawyers.
Seriously though, I guess you could conceivably legislate some sort of "at yer own risk" legalese for consumers at least. Employees is a bit more complex. I'm more worried about your lack of cigar smoking. You can order Cubans from Switzerland (so I'm told)
The Cincinnati Kid wrote: ↑Sat Apr 25, 2020 11:27 pm I'm more worried about your lack of cigar smoking. You can order Cubans from Switzerland (so I'm told)
Been to Cuba 4 times. Happened to go to Bruges a few months after one Cuban trip and visited a proper Tabac. Couldn't believe they were selling the same Cuban cigars I'd bought in the duty free shop at the airport in Varadero - but for less money!
The Cincinnati Kid wrote: ↑Sat Apr 25, 2020 11:27 pm I'm more worried about your lack of cigar smoking. You can order Cubans from Switzerland (so I'm told)
Been to Cuba 4 times. Happened to go to Bruges a few months after one Cuban trip and visited a proper Tabac. Couldn't believe they were selling the same Cuban cigars I'd bought in the duty free shop at the airport in Varadero - but for less money!
I'm envious to the max. Best I can get is allegedly Cuban gars sold on the beach in Mexico that I have to take the labels off before returning home.
My mate does import from Switzerland but he's a class or two wealthier than me.
Here's the view from Sweden which is more where I'm sitting. I guess we'll see over time what the best strategy is. I'm glad every nation isn't doing the same thing so we'll have some comparative data in the nearish future.
The Cincinnati Kid wrote: ↑Sat Apr 25, 2020 11:20 pm
Why for instance, do we not mandate flu vaccines? That would save 30000 people a year in USA.
The Cincinnati Kid, your argument (very eloquently portrayed by the way) is based around comparing death figures with flu, although I appreciate that you do concede that Covid-19 is different to flu.
My counter to this is that twice as many people have died in the US with covid-19 than the 30,000 annual figure from flu. In UK we have had over 20,000 covid deaths (in hospitals alone actual figure is considerably higher) compared to 1,692 who died from flu last year (although I do concede this was an exceptionally low figure compared with other years). And the covid-19 figures in both the UK and US are continuing to rise.
The difference is that the covid-19 figures are being kept artificially low by the social distancing/stay at home measures imposed by governments and it is where your argument falls flat on its face. Without these "Live on our knees" measures the figures would be exponentially larger. Would those people have died anyway? Yes but not now. Yes, a large majority of people in their later years are becoming victims or those with underlying health issues but now we are seeing large numbers of people in neither of the above groups dying.
Should people have the '"freedom" (choice) to decide for themselves whether they follow the Coronavirus guidelines? I won't offer a suggestion on that (although you can probably guess what that would be) however these measures are to protect others not you (necessarily). If we let this thing run rife, others who want to live another day may not have that option due to those who want to let the virus run its 'natural' course.
Sam_Brown wrote: ↑Sat Apr 25, 2020 12:33 pm
Some good points. I have one of my own. Tough decisions have to be made but if we’re accepting that more people will get ill and that’s ok then what do you do about the increase of people who become ill? Do you just not bother treating them at all? How do you expect the NHS to cope if there are a lot more cases or do we just have some Logan’s run style culling for everyone over the age of 60?
In regards to herd immunity is that a realistic goal? There is growing concern that you don’t become immune after having it.
Are we treating folks or just doing the best we can? I don't know....and I don't have the answers
As for the concern that you don't become immune....well....what's the alternative?
Are we all going to hide every year twice a year forever? Give up football, going to the bar and rock concerts? Let me make that decision please.
As a poor comparison, take "Valley Fever" I'll save you looking it up but its a nasty fungal disease that lives in the soil mostly in Arizona and Oklahoma and is spread during dusty conditions. We simply live with it....we don't evacuate 2 States. If you live there, get educated, adapt and take sensible precautions. My whole point here is that this current thing is not a million miles away from a host of other things that kill people that we don't do much of anything about other than research and try to fix and mitigate as best we cAN. Why for instance, do we not mandate flu vaccines? That would save 30000 people a year in USA.
I’d day the first question is very important though. From my point of view the main point of the lockdown is to try and prevent the health service being overwhelmed. If you abandon the lock down and end up with a lot of people I’ll you need a plan to know what to with them. Or are we suggesting anyone that comes down with it doesn’t get treated?
[quote="The Cincinnati Kid" post_id=894952 time=1587855651 user_id=370]
Here's the view from Sweden which is more where I'm sitting. I guess we'll see over time what the best strategy is. I'm glad every nation isn't doing the same thing so we'll have some comparative data in the nearish future.
My Wife`s Son emigrated to Sweden last year and we visited there for just over 2 weeks last summer. It is a huge country with about 10 million population, but most of the populace are concentrated around the 3 big Cities. My Stepson lives out in the sticks where social distancing is the norm. It is a totally different scenario and they show their figures in a more positive fashion: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavir ... ry/sweden/
In other words their situation and geography is totally different to ours or the more populated States in the US of A
You can take the man out of Pompey
But you can`t take Pompey out of the man
Sam_Brown wrote: ↑Sat Apr 25, 2020 12:33 pm
Some good points. I have one of my own. Tough decisions have to be made but if we’re accepting that more people will get ill and that’s ok then what do you do about the increase of people who become ill? Do you just not bother treating them at all? How do you expect the NHS to cope if there are a lot more cases or do we just have some Logan’s run style culling for everyone over the age of 60?
In regards to herd immunity is that a realistic goal? There is growing concern that you don’t become immune after having it.
Are we treating folks or just doing the best we can? I don't know....and I don't have the answers
As for the concern that you don't become immune....well....what's the alternative?
Are we all going to hide every year twice a year forever? Give up football, going to the bar and rock concerts? Let me make that decision please.
As a poor comparison, take "Valley Fever" I'll save you looking it up but its a nasty fungal disease that lives in the soil mostly in Arizona and Oklahoma and is spread during dusty conditions. We simply live with it....we don't evacuate 2 States. If you live there, get educated, adapt and take sensible precautions. My whole point here is that this current thing is not a million miles away from a host of other things that kill people that we don't do much of anything about other than research and try to fix and mitigate as best we cAN. Why for instance, do we not mandate flu vaccines? That would save 30000 people a year in USA.
I’d day the first question is very important though. From my point of view the main point of the lockdown is to try and prevent the health service being overwhelmed. If you abandon the lock down and end up with a lot of people I’ll you need a plan to know what to with them. Or are we suggesting anyone that comes down with it doesn’t get treated?
That's exactly what he's suggesting. We all know that any increase in the rates of infections will lead to the health services being unable to treat everyone (they are already making these choices now). I'd rather maintain the current approach to protect the NHS than completely overwhelm it. A few months of restrictions is a small price to pay.
phat_chris wrote: ↑Sun Apr 26, 2020 12:45 pm
A few months of restrictions is a small price to pay.
Whilst few would disagree with that (and I certainly don't) it does raise a couple of questions.
Firstly, what do people mean by a few? This will differ for everyone, but I can't see people being so compliant with the rules if we celebrate Christmas in lockdown. As time goes by, the number of people breaking the rules will increase until a point is reached where people just don't bother because no-one else is doing so. It is important that the government publicises an exit strategy to give people (and businesses) an idea of what to expect, even if no dates/timescale can be fixed at this time. To keep people on board this whole idea that everything can be kept secret, and just tell people what to do has to change. (Incidently, the publication of the 2016 UK pandemic test exercise could be published as a first step towards transparency; the argument that we can't tell people because they will be too scared should come to an end).
Secondly, at some point we are going to have to address the idea that this won't be a one-off. It could be a second wave Covid-19 or something different, but in either case would people be willing to go through all this again (and could the economy, in any form, sustain it)? Our pandemic response and readiness has to be a lot better. I think we have learned that saving money in these areas is very much a false economy.
I was enjoying this topic and it all seems to have gone quiet. I’ll try and kick it off again.
The US now has 1/3 of the worlds known Corona Virus cases. Does this change how people feel about the current steps the US are taking and that perhaps the lockdown should continue or are the deaths a price your happy for other people to make?
The Cincinnati Kid wrote: ↑Sat Apr 25, 2020 11:27 pm I'm more worried about your lack of cigar smoking. You can order Cubans from Switzerland (so I'm told)
Been to Cuba 4 times. Happened to go to Bruges a few months after one Cuban trip and visited a proper Tabac. Couldn't believe they were selling the same Cuban cigars I'd bought in the duty free shop at the airport in Varadero - but for less money!
I'm envious to the max. Best I can get is allegedly Cuban gars sold on the beach in Mexico that I have to take the labels off before returning home.
My mate does import from Switzerland but he's a class or two wealthier than me.
Playa Del Carmen down 5th Ave there's several shops that make them whilst you wait. Problem is most times instead of some young lovely nubile Cuban lady rolling them on her thigh its usually some grizzled old Mexican bloke.
Sam_Brown wrote: ↑Wed Apr 29, 2020 8:47 am
The US now has 1/3 of the worlds known Corona Virus cases.
... yet the mad man keeps telling us that the rest of the World are envious of what the US is doing re. Covid-19. The clown is clearly a complete nut-case or deluded.
Sam_Brown wrote: ↑Wed Apr 29, 2020 8:47 am
The US now has 1/3 of the worlds known Corona Virus cases.
... yet the mad man keeps telling us that the rest of the World are envious of what the US is doing re. Covid-19. The clown is clearly a complete nut-case or deluded.
Fair point. I can see why some states are feeling a bit pressured at the moment over opening up sooner when comments like this are being thrown around from Washington.
The medium to long term fall out from this pandemic are going to be fascinating to watch and see the analysis for. I just hope there won't be too much revisionism going on.
"Over the last week, two overlapping teams of scientists in California released the first results of big antibody surveys to determine how many people have already been infected with the coronavirus. Their estimates were jaw-dropping.
In Silicon Valley, the true number of coronavirus infections could be 50 to 85 times higher than the number of reported ones. And in Los Angeles County, there might be 28 to 55 times more people infected than the official count."
This might indicate the US has had 25-50 million cases. That antibody test is becoming widely available (yes, I know there are many versions and that there are some issues with the non FDA Approved ones) and those will show the true stats (FACTS) of the situation.
Also the differences between NZ and Sweden. I'd say both countries are relatively similar in size, population, # of cities and relative isolation from other countries. As mentioned, Sweden has educated the public but more or less carried on as normal where as NZ has possibly the tightest lockdown around and has really minimized cases more than any other. So, when this all comes around again, NZ will have to shut up shop again and Sweden will carry on as normal again. I'd rather live in Sweden. If y'all would rather live in NZ that's fine! Sweden for me though.
