Coronavirus

Originally Posted by jfman

they'll all at least agree I've been consistent .

I agree, you've definitely been consistently argumentative

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

The answer to your question at the end is as many lockdowns as it takes to get a vaccine.

:

You hinted at having a lockdown for a very long time in the above answer, but you were more explicit in the previous coronavirus thread, but I’m not trawling through all that to prove the point. You know what you have said.

I’m getting off this annoying merry-go-round now. I don’t think anyone has anything new to add.

[jfman]

You're going to have to do better than 'hinted at' OB.

---------- Post added at 20:15 ---------- Previous post was at 20:14 ----------

Originally Posted by Paul

I agree, you've definitely been consistently argumentative

I'll take this as a polite nudge for the evening.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

You're going to have to do better than 'hinted at' OB.

No, I don’t.

[jfman]

Not sure if this got picked up:

https://twitter.com/paulbranditv/sta...712959489?s=21

NEW: 68% of people support a circuit breaker lockdown during half term, according to new @YouGov poll. That includes 65% of Conservative voters.

That's the scientists, the opposition and now the public all putting pressure on the PM to do a u-turn.

I’m curious just exactly who makes up the minority opposed to this temporary measure. The young and invincible, parasitic property developers, finance sector, airlines, pubs. Anyone else I’ve missed?

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Ah, people who want to protect the vulnerable and are concerned about the unknown dangers of long COVID are "pussies’?

Nice to see rational, reasoned arguments being put forward...

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showpost.php?p=36053686&postcount=187

Totally agree.


---------- Post added at 22:26 ---------- Previous post was at 22:24 ----------

Originally Posted by jfman

Not sure if this got picked up:

https://twitter.com/paulbranditv/sta...712959489?s=21



I’m curious just exactly who makes up the minority opposed to this temporary measure. The young and invincible, parasitic property developers, finance sector, airlines, pubs. Anyone else I’ve missed?

OB, me and prolly a few others on the forum.

Originally Posted by jfman

I’m curious just exactly who makes up the minority opposed to this temporary measure.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

There is absolutely no evidence that long COVID is going to cause problems in a significant number of cases. Yes, it is there, but this is all about taking the least worst option.

By the way, if you are trying to tell us we can’t protect the vulnerable, then I have to ask - what is the point of a lockdown?

---------- Post added at 19:37 ---------- Previous post was at 19:33 ----------



Is that what you thought, jfman? Well, in which case you were wrong, weren’t you?

I refer you to my question

can you cite where "The healthy population has little to worry about"

Re ‘long COVID”

What is long-Covid?

The term long-Covid (also known as long-haul or long-tail) is not an official medical term. It is used by people suffering symptoms of the virus for longer than the official WHO-endorsed two week period, which is meant to be long enough for the virus to come and go.

Sufferers report a huge spectrum of problems beyond the three NHS-approved symptoms (persistent cough, fever and loss of taste or smell). These include fatigue, breathlessness, muscle aches, joint pain, 'brain fog,' memory loss, lack of concentration, and depression. It is not thought that people are infectious for the long period, but just suffer long-term effects.

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-s...y-b693848.html

[Mad Max]

Originally Posted by Paul

Snap

[jfman]

So of Max, Seph and Paul - would you ever introduce restrictions? Or do you just not view a later, longer lockdown as the inevitable outcome of not acting now versus say in 2, 4, 6 weeks time?

[Mad Max]

Originally Posted by jfman

So of Max, Seph and Paul - would you ever introduce restrictions? Or do you just not view a later, longer lockdown as the inevitable outcome of not acting now versus say in 2, 4, 6 weeks time?

Personally, I'd go with the Tier system that's in force now, and is likely to be introduced by Sturgeon, can't see why areas with little or no infections should be shut down, just my opinion of course.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by jfman

So of Max, Seph and Paul - would you ever introduce restrictions? Or do you just not view a later, longer lockdown as the inevitable outcome of not acting now versus say in 2, 4, 6 weeks time?

It's complicated because of public ignorance (not a criticism) and public confidence.

My helicopter view accords with that of OB but for the caveats I've mentioned previously. I'm certain, though, that the lockdowns just kick the CV can down the road, perpetually.

But if the hospitals are full, there has to be some sort of "circuit breaker" although it is by no means certain that hospitals will be full because of the Nightingale hospitals that were wisely built.

Then there's public psychology. Let it rip, some will say. I say let it rip when the outcomes can be predicted and proper measures are in place to assist vulnerable people.

And then what? Unless every country reaches the same state, our borders will need strict control.

jfman's ostensibly simple question must have been asked with a wry smile.

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by jfman

Not sure if this got picked up:

https://twitter.com/paulbranditv/sta...712959489?s=21



I’m curious just exactly who makes up the minority opposed to this temporary measure. The young and invincible, parasitic property developers, finance sector, airlines, pubs. Anyone else I’ve missed?

I'm curious as to who is taking the poll as i never seem to be involved

I just wish they would sort out test and trace so it's more efficiently run and more cost effective.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...CMP=GTUK_email

Management consultants are being paid as much as £6,250 a day to work on the British government’s struggling coronavirus testing system, sources have confirmed.

Senior executives from Boston Consulting Group (BCG) are being paid fees equivalent to £1.5m a year to help speed up and reorganise the £12bn network that Boris Johnson said in May would be “world-beating”.

The figures, first disclosed by Sky News, come amid growing concern about the cost of the UK’s Covid-19 testing system, which has been criticised for being slow, disorganised and unable to cope with rising demand.

BCG, one of the largest and most prestigious consultancies in the world, charged £10m for 40 people to work on the virus test-and-trace programme over the course of four months, a source with knowledge of the contract said.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by Maggy

I just wish they would sort out test and trace so it's more efficiently run and more cost effective.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...CMP=GTUK_email

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WN6a...l=SithsInSpace