14 day quarantine
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,464
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Had the government instituted lockdown just a week earlier a substantial number of lives would have been saved, and most of the economy would have suffered far less. But they didn't. They asked us to do social distancing instead of telling us. The telling happened on the 23rd March.
Spain has a higher death rate per head of population, you know the country that’s opening its borders right now? We’re also broadly in line with Italy. (And that’s even using the official government figures, the same ones it has been shown are distorted by misreporting deaths). Please don’t make statements that aren’t in line with the actual facts, that’s one reason we’re in the mess we are right now.
Whatever the facts about death rates, they are largely irrelevant to the question of whether or not to open up. The dead reflect what happened 2, 3, 4 perhaps more weeks ago. What is important today is new infection rates, and irrespective of what Spain, Greece or Italy are doing, the UK rates of new infections is far too high, and those countries ought not to be considering letting UK visitors arrive without quarantine unless and until the UK gets the epidemic under control, and new infections down to the hundreds, not thousands.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: West Country
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whatever the facts about death rates, they are largely irrelevant to the question of whether or not to open up. The dead reflect what happened 2, 3, 4 perhaps more weeks ago. What is important today is new infection rates, and irrespective of what Spain, Greece or Italy are doing, the UK rates of new infections is far too high, and those countries ought not to be considering letting UK visitors arrive without quarantine unless and until the UK gets the epidemic under control, and new infections down to the hundreds, not thousands.
Surely that is a decision for those countries. If their politicians and scientific advisers feel it is safe who are we to tell them otherwise?
Surely it's their decision, but sitting where they are, having in many cases put their own people through draconian restrictions, would you risk all by letting in visitors from countries that haven't, such as the UK, and more especially Sweden? Unless of course, in their judgement the tourist economy trumps public health. Their populations would judge them harshly if they got the call wrong.
The fact remains that, despite hysterical assertions on this forum that the U.K. is the hotbed of Covid-19 in Europe, in actual fact Spain has the highest numbers of deaths per capita and is proposing opening borders imminently. Address that please rather than attacking the straw man.
OK fine. Would you have been happier if I’d written in the process of opening borders right now? Seeing as that’s clearly what I meant I stand by the comment about pedantry. Strawman tactics at their best, bravo.
The fact remains that, despite hysterical assertions on this forum that the U.K. is the hotbed of Covid-19 in Europe, in actual fact Spain has the highest numbers of deaths per capita and is proposing opening borders imminently. Address that please rather than attacking the straw man.
The fact remains that, despite hysterical assertions on this forum that the U.K. is the hotbed of Covid-19 in Europe, in actual fact Spain has the highest numbers of deaths per capita and is proposing opening borders imminently. Address that please rather than attacking the straw man.
PS
87,9% (!) of all Covid-19 deaths have been 70+ years old, and usually suffering from one or more chronic diseases. Thus, the prudent and logical approach would have been to lock that age group down whilst allowing the rest of society to continue more or less as per normal. Why that hasn't been done is one of the great mysteries of how this has been handled.
OK fine. Would you have been happier if I’d written in the process of opening borders right now? Seeing as that’s clearly what I meant I stand by the comment about pedantry. Strawman tactics at their best, bravo.
The fact remains that, despite hysterical assertions on this forum that the U.K. is the hotbed of Covid-19 in Europe, in actual fact Spain has the highest numbers of deaths per capita and is proposing opening borders imminently. Address that please rather than attacking the straw man.
The fact remains that, despite hysterical assertions on this forum that the U.K. is the hotbed of Covid-19 in Europe, in actual fact Spain has the highest numbers of deaths per capita and is proposing opening borders imminently. Address that please rather than attacking the straw man.
On the basis of CURRENT figures the statement that the UK is the worst affected in Europe stands up.
And yet we are walking slowly away from lockdown. All, even the Foreign Secretary this morning, agree that this is a very delicate moment and many of the scientists who have been involved in the decision making process have described the steps taken as risky. Clearly we rightly delegate these decisions to our politicians - it is their job. Nor am i pretending that it is wrong to take public health decisions separately from economic ones - they have to be linked in some way. I hope this gamble pays off. But it IS a gamble presently
It's been pointed out just a few post above your, that death rates are largely meaningless - it's the rate of new infections that's important. And where e.g. Germany (c. 400) Italy (ca. 500), France (ca. 100) and Spain (ca. 300) seemingly are getting the spread under control, the UK is at around 2000.
PS
87,9% (!) of all Covid-19 deaths have been 70+ years old, and usually suffering from one or more chronic diseases. Thus, the prudent and logical approach would have been to lock that age group down whilst allowing the rest of society to continue more or less as per normal. Why that hasn't been done is one of the great mysteries of how this has been handled.
PS
87,9% (!) of all Covid-19 deaths have been 70+ years old, and usually suffering from one or more chronic diseases. Thus, the prudent and logical approach would have been to lock that age group down whilst allowing the rest of society to continue more or less as per normal. Why that hasn't been done is one of the great mysteries of how this has been handled.
[QUOTE=SMT Member;10798415]It's been pointed out just a few post above your, that death rates are largely meaningless - it's the rate of new infections that's important. And where e.g. Germany (c. 400) Italy (ca. 500), France (ca. 100) and Spain (ca. 300) seemingly are getting the spread under control, the UK is at around 2000.
No its far worse....the UK daily infection rate is currently 8,000. How is this possible? I can only assume that there are areas where CV is highly prevelent where people are simply saying 'Dominic Cummings'
No its far worse....the UK daily infection rate is currently 8,000. How is this possible? I can only assume that there are areas where CV is highly prevelent where people are simply saying 'Dominic Cummings'
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: europe
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Errrm so >12% of deaths UNDER THE CURRENT ARRANGEMENTS have been of folk <70 - do you not think this would rise? It's not the death rate that is controlled by lockdown but the rate of infection. Your suggestion would spread the disease far faster amongst the freely roaming population, thus ramping up the numbers of dead. Also in passing, removing from the population vast numbers of workers who become ill but do not die, thus having the dire economic effect that you are seeking to avoid.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: West Country
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Which is what we all want isn't it? The young who are less threatened by the virus to go about their lives, go to the pub, get back to school, work etc - and those who are at most risk (the old, obese, those with underlying conditions etc) stay isolated.
I know several people who have had Covid19 - all were under 60 and fairly fit. Not one of them needed a day off work as the symptoms were so slight and a couple of them didnt even realise they had had it. Telling them to stay isolated instead of allowing them to resume normal life is not going to save tens of thousands of jobs in the economy.
Which is what we all want isn't it? The young who are less threatened by the virus to go about their lives, go to the pub, get back to school, work etc - and those who are at most risk (the old, obese, those with underlying conditions etc) stay isolated.
I know several people who have had Covid19 - all were under 60 and fairly fit. Not one of them needed a day off work as the symptoms were so slight and a couple of them didnt even realise they had had it. Telling them to stay isolated instead of allowing them to resume normal life is not going to save tens of thousands of jobs in the economy.
I know several people who have had Covid19 - all were under 60 and fairly fit. Not one of them needed a day off work as the symptoms were so slight and a couple of them didnt even realise they had had it. Telling them to stay isolated instead of allowing them to resume normal life is not going to save tens of thousands of jobs in the economy.
...and I know...... (actually I do, early 40s mother of 2, off her feet for 10 days). Also we know Dominic and Boris.... but enough of that anecdotal evidence.
You may want to ask yourself why no other jurisdiction has gone down your suggested route. You might also want to read the minutes of SAGE meetings from January onwards in which questions such as yours were considered.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: West Country
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...and I know...... (actually I do, early 40s mother of 2, off her feet for 10 days). Also we know Dominic and Boris.... but enough of that anecdotal evidence.
You may want to ask yourself why no other jurisdiction has gone down your suggested route. You might also want to read the minutes of SAGE meetings from January onwards in which questions such as yours were considered.
You may want to ask yourself why no other jurisdiction has gone down your suggested route. You might also want to read the minutes of SAGE meetings from January onwards in which questions such as yours were considered.
My problem with the advice from SAGE, is that SAGE contains nobody who is an economist or even looking at the economic consequences of their decisions and it also contained nobody who was in any danger of becoming unemployed by their decisions. Now you can argue that the Government should have been weighing those issues with the advice from SAGE but the political reality is that if SAGE had put forward a recommendation no Government was going to go against that recommendation as the political cost in not 'following the science' would have been too high.
So we are where we are with unemployment going back to 1930's levels and all the misery and death that brings with it.
Dom's lips turned blue (allegedly, evidence from spouse)
SAGE is tasked with giving scientific advice, it is true. Reading the minutes is a sobering experience - on March 3rd and 5th SAGE concluded that there was no useful purpose to be served by cancelling mass events, on March 10th SAGE concluded that the evidence of a benefit of such a cancellation was marginal. Cheltenham festival started on March 10th and is now widely seen as a significant occasion of cross infection.
SAGE did consider mental health effects (and the risk, incidentally, of social unrest - they concluded that we are a docile lot :-) )
If you are not prepared to read and consider the Minutes of these meetings then I do recommend that you consider why the course of action you propose has not been adopted elsewhere on the planet. Surely if it is obvious to you......
SAGE is tasked with giving scientific advice, it is true. Reading the minutes is a sobering experience - on March 3rd and 5th SAGE concluded that there was no useful purpose to be served by cancelling mass events, on March 10th SAGE concluded that the evidence of a benefit of such a cancellation was marginal. Cheltenham festival started on March 10th and is now widely seen as a significant occasion of cross infection.
SAGE did consider mental health effects (and the risk, incidentally, of social unrest - they concluded that we are a docile lot :-) )
If you are not prepared to read and consider the Minutes of these meetings then I do recommend that you consider why the course of action you propose has not been adopted elsewhere on the planet. Surely if it is obvious to you......