John52 Posted November 5, 2020 Posted November 5, 2020 This is an interesting short read https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/nov/04/england-lockdown-peril-young-people-mental-health BoJo's original idea of having no lockdown might have worked if it had been done properly Sweden avoided lockdown and their death rate is far lower than predicted, but then they took control of their borders back in March
John52 Posted November 5, 2020 Author Posted November 5, 2020 They say BoJo is a libertarian at heart, and if he hadn't been Prime Minister enforcing the lockdown, he would have been a well paid columnist in the Torygraph writing articles against it :-S
Guest pelmetman Posted November 5, 2020 Posted November 5, 2020 John52 - 2020-11-05 8:25 AM They say BoJo is a libertarian at heart, and if he hadn't been Prime Minister enforcing the lockdown, he would have been a well paid columnist in the Torygraph writing articles against it :-S Why aren't you bitching about the Gorbals Gobbess who is also locking down large areas of Jockland? *-) ........ Hypocrite >:-) ..........
John52 Posted November 5, 2020 Author Posted November 5, 2020 pelmetman - 2020-11-05 8:41 AM John52 - 2020-11-05 8:25 AM They say BoJo is a libertarian at heart, and if he hadn't been Prime Minister enforcing the lockdown, he would have been a well paid columnist in the Torygraph writing articles against it :-S Why aren't you bitching about the Gorbals Gobbess who is also locking down large areas of Jockland? *-) ........ Hypocrite >:-) .......... Because she doesn't have anywhere near as much power - especially control of the English border that BoJo has of the UK border. Now I've answered your question, will you answer mine *-) Why are you changing the subject *-)
John52 Posted November 5, 2020 Author Posted November 5, 2020 pelmetman - 2020-11-05 8:41 AM John52 - 2020-11-05 8:25 AM They say BoJo is a libertarian at heart, and if he hadn't been Prime Minister enforcing the lockdown, he would have been a well paid columnist in the Torygraph writing articles against it :-S Why aren't you bitching about the Gorbals Gobbess who is also locking down large areas of Jockland? *-) ........ Hypocrite >:-) .......... because you are paying for our lockdown :D .. and higher public spending :D (although I wish you weren't because then BoJo would get voted out of Scotland)
colin Posted November 5, 2020 Posted November 5, 2020 Sweden is in a terrible state compared to it's nearest nabours, they are now introducing tighter controls as the death rate is fast rising.
John52 Posted November 6, 2020 Author Posted November 6, 2020 colin - 2020-11-05 1:56 PM Sweden is in a terrible state compared to it's nearest nabours, That may be so But I was comparing it to England, which makes it look good :-S
Guest pelmetman Posted November 6, 2020 Posted November 6, 2020 John52 - 2020-11-05 9:02 AM pelmetman - 2020-11-05 8:41 AM John52 - 2020-11-05 8:25 AM They say BoJo is a libertarian at heart, and if he hadn't been Prime Minister enforcing the lockdown, he would have been a well paid columnist in the Torygraph writing articles against it :-S Why aren't you bitching about the Gorbals Gobbess who is also locking down large areas of Jockland? *-) ........ Hypocrite >:-) .......... Because she doesn't have anywhere near as much power - especially control of the English border that BoJo has of the UK border. Now I've answered your question, will you answer mine *-) Why are you changing the subject *-) More Joke52 lies *-) ......... She has TOTAL control of her response to Chinky Flu......and TOTAL RESPONSIBLITY >:-) .........
John52 Posted November 6, 2020 Author Posted November 6, 2020 pelmetman - 2020-11-06 12:32 PM John52 - 2020-11-05 9:02 AM pelmetman - 2020-11-05 8:41 AM John52 - 2020-11-05 8:25 AM They say BoJo is a libertarian at heart, and if he hadn't been Prime Minister enforcing the lockdown, he would have been a well paid columnist in the Torygraph writing articles against it :-S Why aren't you bitching about the Gorbals Gobbess who is also locking down large areas of Jockland? *-) ........ Hypocrite >:-) .......... Because she doesn't have anywhere near as much power - especially control of the English border that BoJo has of the UK border. Now I've answered your question, will you answer mine *-) Why are you changing the subject *-) More Joke52 lies *-) ......... She has TOTAL control of her response to Chinky Flu......and TOTAL RESPONSIBLITY >:-) ......... How could she have stopped the virus coming into Scotland - like BoJo could have used his control of our borders to have stopped it coming into England?
jumpstart Posted November 7, 2020 Posted November 7, 2020 According to the scientists we are already past the peak so further lockdown probably not necessary.
Guest pelmetman Posted November 7, 2020 Posted November 7, 2020 John52 - 2020-11-06 1:24 PM pelmetman - 2020-11-06 12:32 PM John52 - 2020-11-05 9:02 AM pelmetman - 2020-11-05 8:41 AM John52 - 2020-11-05 8:25 AM They say BoJo is a libertarian at heart, and if he hadn't been Prime Minister enforcing the lockdown, he would have been a well paid columnist in the Torygraph writing articles against it :-S Why aren't you bitching about the Gorbals Gobbess who is also locking down large areas of Jockland? *-) ........ Hypocrite >:-) .......... Because she doesn't have anywhere near as much power - especially control of the English border that BoJo has of the UK border. Now I've answered your question, will you answer mine *-) Why are you changing the subject *-) More Joke52 lies *-) ......... She has TOTAL control of her response to Chinky Flu......and TOTAL RESPONSIBLITY >:-) ......... How could she have stopped the virus coming into Scotland - like BoJo could have used his control of our borders to have stopped it coming into England? Did Labour not close the border to Wales? ;-) ..........
John52 Posted November 7, 2020 Author Posted November 7, 2020 pelmetman - 2020-11-07 4:28 PM John52 - 2020-11-06 1:24 PM pelmetman - 2020-11-06 12:32 PM John52 - 2020-11-05 9:02 AM pelmetman - 2020-11-05 8:41 AM John52 - 2020-11-05 8:25 AM They say BoJo is a libertarian at heart, and if he hadn't been Prime Minister enforcing the lockdown, he would have been a well paid columnist in the Torygraph writing articles against it :-S Why aren't you bitching about the Gorbals Gobbess who is also locking down large areas of Jockland? *-) ........ Hypocrite >:-) .......... Because she doesn't have anywhere near as much power - especially control of the English border that BoJo has of the UK border. Now I've answered your question, will you answer mine *-) Why are you changing the subject *-) More Joke52 lies *-) ......... She has TOTAL control of her response to Chinky Flu......and TOTAL RESPONSIBLITY >:-) ......... How could she have stopped the virus coming into Scotland - like BoJo could have used his control of our borders to have stopped it coming into England? Did Labour not close the border to Wales? ;-) .......... Can't you see the difference between a land border, and an island surrounded by 20 miles of ocean?
Brian Kirby Posted November 8, 2020 Posted November 8, 2020 To address the title of the string, there isn't really a case against, because every other option involves less effective, or more intrusive, interventions. SARS-CoV-2 is a virus. It causes the disease called Covid-19. It is spread from person to person, mainly through being exhaled by one person and inhaled by another. Secondary routes of infection involve direct contagion from surfaces on which the virus has settled. It is a Coronavirus, not the Coronavirus. It is not a living organism, and has to invade living organisms to complete its life cycle. It spreads by invading mammals, and is able by random adaptation to cross from one mammal species to others. It originated in bats, crossed to pangolins, and from them to humans, and now, apparently, to mink. It is completely passive. Unlike animals, it has no intelligence or means of mobility: it does not eat, drink, think, or breed. It just goes where we carry it. So, if the virus is spread, in humans, from one to another, areas where its incidence is greatest merely reveal locations in which people have failed to properly adhere to the guidelines given to prevent it spreading. These are, to recap: two metres between all people from different family groups, the wearing of face coverings (of unspecified type, but apparently intended to both restrict the amount of virus freely projected to air while exhaling, and to attenuate inhalation of the virus when inhaling), and frequent hand washing to eliminate contact contagion. If everyone scrupulously adhered to those rules there would be little to no spread. It really is that simple. But people do not do that, so the virus is spread in proportion to the number of non adherents. Were the virus just left to do its thing, because it is so readily transmissible and spreads so rapidly, with each infected person infecting, on average, between 2 and 3 other people, the entire population (with the exception of those who have natural, or acquired, resistance) would quickly become infected. Of those infected, somewhere around 30% require hospital treatment - the greater the age of the person infected the higher the probability - of whom about 15% would die. It is that brutally simple. So, unless measures are taken to coerce the reluctant to adhere to the general guidelines, the number of people infected and needing hospital treatment would rapidly rise to exceed the number of available hospital beds (including all those "Nightingale" beds), and the number of dead would overwhelm our ability to deal with the corpses (see the creation of what amount to mass grave "plague-pits" in New York). Since general (though poorly expressed and targeted) exhortations to comply do not get to the necessary parts, and because the rate of rise of cases is inherently so rapid, compulsion, in the form of so-called lockdown measures, must be adopted in lieu of coercion. The alternatives to lock-down, involving such measures as obligatory testing (with penalties for non-compliance), the implementation of obligatory quarantine measures for all entrants to the UK (with penalties for non-compliance), the obligatory carrying at all times of suitable means of identification (with penalties for non-compliance), the implementation of checks for compliance with the guidance on distance and masks (with penalties for non-compliance), the monitoring of all quarantined people (with penalties for non-compliance), and the imposition of stringent separation measures at places of work (with monitoring and penalties for non-compliance), etc.etc. Such measures would probably be judged by the great majority wholly unacceptable (and in some cases are in any case unfeasible - for example obligatory mass testing), potentially leading to civil unrest, so the least worst option where people refuse to comply becomes a lockdown. This should ideally (IMO) be more stringent that that now imposed, but should be limited to the areas affected, with control over entry/exit to/from those areas. The latter seems to be unacceptable for political reasons (I suspect party political) so we have a blanket lockdown of the whole of England instead. However, the severe outbreaks are localised, and not country wide. So now the majority must suffer for the sins of a minority. That, IMO, is the case for lockdown. It is the only (broadly) politically acceptable and achievable measure. The "cases against" are just discordant, libertarian, gripes, and offer no practical, realistically achievable, alternatives. We collectively have to suffer because a number of stupid, inconsiderate, irresponsible, in some cases ignorant, in some cases belligerent, people are spread among "our great British public". Such is life - get on with it, and stop moaning! In the long run, we are all dead!
Guest pelmetman Posted November 8, 2020 Posted November 8, 2020 John52 - 2020-11-07 6:41 PM pelmetman - 2020-11-07 4:28 PM John52 - 2020-11-06 1:24 PM pelmetman - 2020-11-06 12:32 PM John52 - 2020-11-05 9:02 AM pelmetman - 2020-11-05 8:41 AM John52 - 2020-11-05 8:25 AM They say BoJo is a libertarian at heart, and if he hadn't been Prime Minister enforcing the lockdown, he would have been a well paid columnist in the Torygraph writing articles against it :-S Why aren't you bitching about the Gorbals Gobbess who is also locking down large areas of Jockland? *-) ........ Hypocrite >:-) .......... Because she doesn't have anywhere near as much power - especially control of the English border that BoJo has of the UK border. Now I've answered your question, will you answer mine *-) Why are you changing the subject *-) More Joke52 lies *-) ......... She has TOTAL control of her response to Chinky Flu......and TOTAL RESPONSIBLITY >:-) ......... How could she have stopped the virus coming into Scotland - like BoJo could have used his control of our borders to have stopped it coming into England? Did Labour not close the border to Wales? ;-) .......... Can't you see the difference between a land border, and an island surrounded by 20 miles of ocean? The lurgy was already here in January you Muppet *-) ........... When you were wandering the UK dumping your sh1tbags :-| ........ Maybe you're a superspreader? >:-) .........
John52 Posted November 8, 2020 Author Posted November 8, 2020 Brian Kirby - 2020-11-08 12:51 PM It is not a living organism, and has to invade living organisms to complete its life cycle. How can it have a life cycle if it's not living? Brian Kirby - 2020-11-08 12:51 PM the entire population (with the exception of those who have natural, or acquired, resistance) would quickly become infected Not those of us who follow social distancing... Just those who don't (their choice) Or Can't - and will still get it, lockdown or not
Birdbrain Posted November 9, 2020 Posted November 9, 2020 Meanwhile in EU world ... https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8924687/Patients-treated-floor-Italys-healthcare-collapses.html?ito=social-twitter_mailonline ... Where they are dealing with the virus with much more success than our nasty Tory Government
John52 Posted November 9, 2020 Author Posted November 9, 2020 Birdbrain - 2020-11-09 6:36 AM Meanwhile in EU world ... https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8924687/Patients-treated-floor-Italys-healthcare-collapses.html?ito=social-twitter_mailonline ... Where they are dealing with the virus with much more success than our nasty Tory Government Thats the basis of the article in the link I posted, which I guess you haven't read. The damage caused by the lockdown is hidden (so politicians can't be blamed), wheras the damage caused by not having the lockdown - hospitals overwhelmed - is visible. (so politicians can be blamed)
John52 Posted November 9, 2020 Author Posted November 9, 2020 Then there is the Elephant in the room everyone ignores, because its too difficult. Population is growing at a rate the earth cannot sustain, hence pollution, starvation, migration, deforestation, global warming, etc etc. Coronovirus would have been a natural solution, and one that does not discriminate against people on grounds of parentage, race, wealth, etc. Thinning out the population like we thin out grapes on the vine to give the others a chance to grow. If you could stop coronovirus (wrecking the economy in the process) the crisis caused by over population won't go away. It will get far worse. How do you deal with the intractable problems its causing? Often the best course of action is doing nothing. But politicians want to be seen to be doing something dramatic they can take the credit for. And in the case of our Government, use coronovirus as an excuse for giving away £billions of our money in secret deals >:-)
Guest pelmetman Posted November 9, 2020 Posted November 9, 2020 John52 - 2020-11-05 8:25 AM They say BoJo is a libertarian at heart, and if he hadn't been Prime Minister enforcing the lockdown, he would have been a well paid columnist in the Torygraph writing articles against it :-S It's funny how you convienently ignore the FACT that Snakey Starmer had been demanding Boris Lockdown sooner *-) ..............
John52 Posted November 9, 2020 Author Posted November 9, 2020 pelmetman - 2020-11-09 8:59 AM John52 - 2020-11-05 8:25 AM They say BoJo is a libertarian at heart, and if he hadn't been Prime Minister enforcing the lockdown, he would have been a well paid columnist in the Torygraph writing articles against it :-S It's funny how you convienently ignore the FACT that Snakey Starmer had been demanding Boris Lockdown sooner *-) .............. If you decide on a lockdown, its best to do it before its too late. BoJo's late lockdown, then stoking up the second wave with Eat out fraud, followed by another late lockdown after insisting there wouldn't be one, has given us the worst of both worlds. >:-) BTW, Does it not concern you that £billons of our money is unaccounted for?
John52 Posted November 9, 2020 Author Posted November 9, 2020 I knew there would be another lockdown when BoJo said it would be the height of absurdity, and he would avoid it at all costs. But we didn't need to stock up this time. Still got stuff from stocking up for the last lockdown :-S And stocking up for BoJo's Brexit deadline .... And his Brexit deadline before that... And his Brexit deadline before that... And his Brexit deadline before that... ...etc
Guest pelmetman Posted November 9, 2020 Posted November 9, 2020 John52 - 2020-11-09 9:19 AM I knew there would be another lockdown when BoJo said it would be the height of absurdity, and he would avoid it at all costs. But we didn't need to stock up this time. Still got stuff from stocking up for the last lockdown :-S And stocking up for BoJo's Brexit deadline .... And his Brexit deadline before that... And his Brexit deadline before that... And his Brexit deadline before that... ...etc You are still ignoring the FACT that Snakey Starmer was demanding a Lockdown for weeks before *-) ........ Why is that? >:-) ...........
John52 Posted November 9, 2020 Author Posted November 9, 2020 pelmetman - 2020-11-09 9:22 AM You are still ignoring the FACT that Snakey Starmer was demanding a Lockdown for weeks before *-) ........ Why is that? >:-) ........... Gawd this is hard work How can I explain that an earlier lockdown would have been more effective? There is a case for and against lockdown But if you decide for lockdown its best to do it early.
Brian Kirby Posted November 9, 2020 Posted November 9, 2020 John52 - 2020-11-08 10:10 PM Brian Kirby - 2020-11-08 12:51 PM 1 It is not a living organism, and has to invade living organisms to complete its life cycle. How can it have a life cycle if it's not living? Brian Kirby - 2020-11-08 12:51 PM the entire population (with the exception of those who have natural, or acquired, resistance) would quickly become infected 2 Not those of us who follow social distancing... Just those who don't (their choice) Or Can't - and will still get it, lockdown or not 1 Due to my inability to adequately explain something I do not adequately understand. Stuart would probably do a lot better! The virus is not a living entity in the same sense that an animal or a plant lives. It exists, but only relatively briefly, outside a host body which it must invade to replicate itself. Without suitable hosts it dies out. Probably another poor analogy, but it is a kind of parasite, incapable of reproduction in its own right. 2 Not entirely, I think, because in the wrong place (for example inside a poorly ventilated enclosed space in which there is an infected individual or individuals) the virus will survive in exhaled droplets, or aerosols, for others to inhale. The same also seems possible out of doors, for example in still air in populated narrow streets or alleys, where the best defence seems to be face coverings. But then, what is the clinically relevant definition of a face covering? There would certainly be very low transmission if everyone cooperated, but I think there would still, inevitably, be some - as a consequence of chance.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.