Coronavirus

[PaulSmith]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Do we have a clue about long(er) term health implications yet?

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

Of what, Covid 19? Dare I suggest that it will be the same as all the other variations of corona type virus that have been around for decades?

What do you think the long term health implications are of a lockdown, of which has never happened in modern history?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Callum_62]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Of what, Covid 19? Dare I suggest that it will be the same as all the other variations of corona type virus that have been around for decades?

What do you think the long term health implications are of a lockdown, of which has never happened in modern history?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

That's not what Devi Sridhar was suggesting recently

It seems too easy to cast a general net and say young folk are fine

At the moment, that's not actually known to be the case

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[matty_f]

I’ll qualify this post by making it clear that i haven’t done research into the circumstances but isn’t the elephant in the room in the “lockdown wasn’t necessary” argument countries like America and Brazil, who are getting absolutely rogered by the virus?

Quite likely that this can be shot down very quickly as I’ve stopped following the issue as closely over the last few weeks.

[PaulSmith]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

That's not what Devi Sridhar was suggesting recently

It seems too easy to cast a general net and say young folk are fine

At the moment, that's not actually known to be the case

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

When does she expect the younger generation to start falling ill, as its been several months now. Does she think it will be next year, the year after or decades later?

Did she explain why this corona virus is different to others or did she simply state that’s unknown so we need to be very careful?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The first graph is from English ONS data


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I'm referring specifically to the graph comparison between Scotland and scandic countries. Post 6 in the thread. Why only Scotland and not England Northern Ireland and Wales?

[PaulSmith]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I’ll qualify this post by making it clear that i haven’t done research into the circumstances but isn’t the elephant in the room in the “lockdown wasn’t necessary” argument countries like America and Brazil, who are getting absolutely rogered by the virus?

Quite likely that this can be shot down very quickly as I’ve stopped following the issue as closely over the last few weeks.

Belarus is an interesting one. Zero lockdown and a death rate per million on a par with the UK.

The number of cases seems less relevant now than at the outset (protect the NHS, give us time to flatten the curve...remember those hourly reminders).

The argument has NEVER been lockdown wasn’t necessary. It had however to be proportionate to the risks and also had to be targeted at the most vulnerable.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I think you’ve confused what’s been said.

Younger people have always been very susceptible to the virus but the vast majority don’t even know they’ve got it and if they do then its nothing more than a common cold symptom. Indisputable factual based evidence from around the world.


The science clearly shows us that its still the very sick and 80 year plus age group that are more susceptible to actually dying or becoming that ill that they need ICU treatment. Again the evidence is fairly conclusive but I’ll happily be corrected.


If the Scottish Govt had been alert and focussed on caring for the elderly that were already in confined spaces (care homes/hospitals) and had measures in place from the outset then they would’ve saved hundreds (thousands?)of lives.

They’ve got away lightly with this by now making it about saving the general population...However it was never ever about saving the general population as we didn’t need saved from it in the first place.

We needed the Govt to step up and protect the vulnerable at the time and they failed spectacularly. The Scot Govt weren’t alone in this but still failed.

What we do now need saved from is the impact of lockdown, the draconian restrictions and the way that we’ve bankrupt the country for the next 50 odd years.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

You accuse the Scottish government of not being alert, but in the early stages of the pandemic Scotland was following the same advice as the rest of the UK.

You then say we've bankrupt the country for the next 50 years, ignoring the fact that the Scottish government has not borrowed money from anywhere, that was Westminster. But how else would you have suggested handling the paralysis of the economy?

[PaulSmith]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I'm referring specifically to the graph comparison between Scotland and scandic countries. Why only Scotland and not England Northern Ireland and Wales?

Dunno. I’m sure though that you could capture the data and make that comparison?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Smartie]

I’d imagine it would be reasonably (!!!) straightforward to protect vulnerable people of maybe 80+ years old, so there’s a borderline valid argument that we might manage that. The people who believe in this approach tend not to give a flying one about the well-being of that demographic though, and would happily see their personal tax liability for looking after their healthcare and pension eased.

The under 40s will by and large be ok, that’s not to say that some of the individual stories of people within that group who have become infected and either died or been seriously ill have been quite chilling.

The problem is the huge chunk of people who are neither old nor decrepit and who are vulnerable. How do you protect working people in their 50s who have type 2 diabetes for example? There are people who are a long way from needing the knackers yard, who will need to continue to work and be social who could be very vulnerable under measures short of lockdown.

[Moulin Yarns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Dunno. I’m sure though that you could capture the data and make that comparison?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The answer is obviously that by doing so would not have supported their particular opinion.

[PaulSmith]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

You accuse the Scottish government of not being alert, but in the early stages of the pandemic Scotland was following the same advice as the rest of the UK.

You then say we've bankrupt the country for the next 50 years, ignoring the fact that the Scottish government has not borrowed money from anywhere, that was Westminster. But how else would you have suggested handling the paralysis of the economy?

Healthcare was, and still is devolved to Scotland, you cant say that they are absolved of any blame by suggesting that they followed the advice from another country?


We’ve bankrupt the country (UK this time) by imposing a lockdown which was not in proportion to the risk.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[PaulSmith]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The answer is obviously that by doing so would not have supported their particular opinion.

But you happily believe the stats and headlines on the BBC and Sky News everyday which is also there to support a particular opinion...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Sergio sledge]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

https://twitter.com/inproportion2/st...175958529?s=21

Is the above all fake news, genuinely interested to hear the views of the more informed.

I have one ask, don’t instantly dismiss it and read it with an open mind.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I doubt I'm more informed, but I'm not sure if that was meant as a dig or not.

My comment on the link is that it is virtually impossible to compare countries because there are so many factors which go into death rates.

Because of this I think that is is going to be something that, unfortunately, we will never fully know whether lockdown had any impact, or was fully necessary, as we can't compare like for like.

It is interesting that a lot of the comparisons trying to show the ineffectiveness of lockdown completely ignore New Zealand, a country who were demonstrably different in their approach to much of the developed world and who locked down hard and extremely early.

[Smartie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Healthcare was, and still is devolved to Scotland, you cant say that they are absolved of any blame by suggesting that they followed the advice from another country?


We’ve bankrupt the country (UK this time) by imposing a lockdown which was not in proportion to the risk.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Tell me a bit more about the country being bankrupt.

[Moulin Yarns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Healthcare was, and still is devolved to Scotland, you cant say that they are absolved of any blame by suggesting that they followed the advice from another country?


We’ve bankrupt the country (UK this time) by imposing a lockdown which was not in proportion to the risk.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

You have forgotten the "4 nations approach" which was being spouted at the beginning.

SAGE was providing the advice at the beginning, Scotland had not set up their own scientific advisory group then.

As for proportionate lockdown, hindsight is a wonderful thing.

[Moulin Yarns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

But you happily believe the stats and headlines on the BBC and Sky News everyday which is also there to support a particular opinion...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Do I? That's news to me.

[Moulin Yarns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I doubt I'm more informed, but I'm not sure if that was meant as a dig or not.

My comment on the link is that it is virtually impossible to compare countries because there are so many factors which go into death rates.

Because of this I think that is is going to be something that, unfortunately, we will never fully know whether lockdown had any impact, or was fully necessary, as we can't compare like for like.

It is interesting that a lot of the comparisons trying to show the ineffectiveness of lockdown completely ignore New Zealand, a country who were demonstrably different in their approach to much of the developed world and who locked down hard and extremely early.

👍

[PaulSmith]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I’d imagine it would be reasonably (!!!) straightforward to protect vulnerable people of maybe 80+ years old, so there’s a borderline valid argument that we might manage that. The people who believe in this approach tend not to give a flying one about the well-being of that demographic though, and would happily see their personal tax liability for looking after their healthcare and pension eased.

The under 40s will by and large be ok, that’s not to say that some of the individual stories of people within that group who have become infected and either died or been seriously ill have been quite chilling.

The problem is the huge chunk of people who are neither old nor decrepit and who are vulnerable. How do you protect working people in their 50s who have type 2 diabetes for example? There are people who are a long way from needing the knackers yard, who will need to continue to work and be social who could be very vulnerable under measures short of lockdown.

I think you’re second sentence in the first paragraph just plays to the crowd mentality rather than having any substance, all IMO of course.

People under 40 die from infections and virus, they have done since the age of time.

There’s some brilliant data out there around the impact of C19 on the 45-60 age group.

However the fundamental choice that we have is do we enforce a lockdown or restrictions (of any degree) for an indefinite amount of time and prevent our kids from enjoying the brilliant social experiences that we’ve had?

I’d ask the question who is then being selfish.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[jonty]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Healthcare was, and still is devolved to Scotland, you cant say that they are absolved of any blame by suggesting that they followed the advice from another country?


We’ve bankrupt the country (UK this time) by imposing a lockdown which was not in proportion to the risk.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Despite the lockdown there has been 50,000+ deaths than normal. That's a simple fact.

How many deaths would you tolerate before implementing a lockdown?

[PaulSmith]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

You have forgotten the "4 nations approach" which was being spouted at the beginning.

SAGE was providing the advice at the beginning, Scotland had not set up their own scientific advisory group then.

As for proportionate lockdown, hindsight is a wonderful thing.

So Scotland, despite C19 being on the radar for months prior to March, didn’t think to take precautions that they had jurisdiction to do so and it’s the UK Govt’s fault.

The thing is that we now know and Nicola Sturgeon is still threatening us daily that we’ll go back to stage 1 and have a total lockdown. So even with hindsight there appears to still be the same solution to a problem.

It was only a few months ago that Jason Leitch was on the news telling us that it was wrong to implement a lockdown and that face masks weren’t able to protect against C19....now we are supposed to hang onto his very word.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[PaulSmith]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Despite the lockdown there has been 50,000+ deaths than normal. That's a simple fact.

How many deaths would you tolerate before implementing a lockdown?

Jonty...what proportion of those excess deaths were in care homes or were from patients who were already in hospital and caught it there?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[jonty]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Jonty...what proportion of those excess deaths were in care homes or were from patients who were already in hospital and caught it there?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

You do like to avoid answering questions with a question, don't you.


So, how many people would you like to have died before you would have deemed a lockdown proportionate?

[Smartie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I think you’re second sentence in the first paragraph just plays to the crowd mentality rather than having any substance, all IMO of course.

People under 40 die from infections and virus, they have done since the age of time.

There’s some brilliant data out there around the impact of C19 on the 45-60 age group.

However the fundamental choice that we have is do we enforce a lockdown or restrictions (of any degree) for an indefinite amount of time and prevent our kids from enjoying the brilliant social experiences that we’ve had?

I’d ask the question who is then being selfish.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I’m not playing to any crowd, it’s merely an opinion/ observation.

Interestingly, yours isn’t an opinion that is widely held on here but it is quite popular on another forum I use.

Generally speaking, they are people who are used to earning decent amounts of money and gauge success in life by money and possessions. They’re simply lost when that is taken away from them. I have no idea if this applies to you, as I don’t know you.

This is perhaps out of order, but I general know them to be total cu***. And I don’t buy the “false equivalence” of who are actually the selfish baddies here one bit.

Diplomatically though - different opinions on how to deal with a crisis. It will be interesting, once the dust has settled, to quantify the financial costs and suffering that happens as a result of lockdown compared to the death toll that continues to rise as a result of Covid 19. Or 5G masts, or space lizards, or whatever.

[Moulin Yarns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Tell me a bit more about the country being bankrupt.

He can't because it isn't.

For reference the UK has been in worse condition economically in the past.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_British_national_debt

[Moulin Yarns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Jonty...what proportion of those excess deaths were in care homes or were from patients who were already in hospital and caught it there?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I'll give you the same answer you gave me when I asked you about comparison between countries in the twitter thread you cited. Find the data and extrapolate to get the figures to support your opinion.

[Sir David Gray]

Daily Scottish update;

19 new cases since yesterday - highest in 3 weeks
Decrease of 56 in hospital but an increase of 7 in the confirmed cases
No change in intensive care
4124 have left hospital since 5th March
No deaths registered since yesterday

[grunt]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If the Scottish Govt had been alert and focussed on caring for the elderly that were already in confined spaces (care homes/hospitals) and had measures in place from the outset then they would’ve saved hundreds (thousands?)of lives.

Classic 20:20 hindsight.

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

What we do now need saved from is the impact of lockdown, the draconian restrictions and the way that we’ve bankrupt the country for the next 50 odd years.

For a minute there I thought you were going to exaggerate, but I'm pleased to see you stuck to the facts.

[Moulin Yarns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

So Scotland, despite C19 being on the radar for months prior to March, didn’t think to take precautions that they had jurisdiction to do so and it’s the UK Govt’s fault.

The thing is that we now know and Nicola Sturgeon is still threatening us daily that we’ll go back to stage 1 and have a total lockdown. So even with hindsight there appears to still be the same solution to a problem.

It was only a few months ago that Jason Leitch was on the news telling us that it was wrong to implement a lockdown and that face masks weren’t able to protect against C19....now we are supposed to hang onto his very word.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

A bit of context.


24 January Five people were tested for COVID-19 in Scotland, all returning negative as an incident team was established for the disease.

22 February COVID-19 was made into a notifiable disease.
UK Gov announced the Coronavirus Action Plan on 11th March, the same day as the first community transmission case in Scotland.

15th March the Scottish Government said everyone should avoid all "non-essential" travel and contact with others, also to work from home if possible. Those with symptoms, and their household, were asked to self-isolate. Pregnant women, the over 70s, and those with certain illnesses were asked to self-isolate for longer.

On 20 March 2020, schools were told to close, along with pubs, cafes and cinemas. On 23 March 2020, a 'Stay at Home' order was announced which lead to more 'non-essential' work to close and limiting movement to stop the transmission of the virus, this would be referred to as the 'UK Lockdown'.

By 27 April, more than 22,000 former staff and students had volunteered to join or rejoin the healthcare and social care services in Scotland since the epidemic began, signalling a significant re-organisation of health care services By 9 May 2020 there had been 4,503 cumulative cases of suspected COVID-19 in care homes and up to 3,672 staff had reported as absent in adult care homes due to COVID-19, representing 8.5% of all adult care home staff (43,403) for whom figures had been provided. (Care homes are in the private sector and not under the control of the NHS in Scotland)

Testing for Covid-19 began in Scotland on 24th January. The first positive case was in Tayside on March 1st, a man who returned from Italy, and 698 negative tests.

6th March daily cases began to double.

23 March With the UK death toll hitting 335 deaths and 14 in Scotland, Boris Johnson announced a nationwide 'Stay at Home' order would come into effect as of midnight and it would be reviewed every 3 weeks. This would become known as the UK Lockdown.

25 March The First Minister confirmed that the Scottish Government was establishing a COVID-19 Advisory group to supplement the advice it was receiving from the UK-wide Scientific Advisory Group on Emergencies




Now, if you want to throw blame about, try and come up with solid facts. I get it, you don't like the fact you had to sit on your hands for 3 months for the good of the country, but it is what it is and all governments in the world will have made mistakes, most will acknowledge that fact, but we both know that the UK government is not one of them.

[Callum_62]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

When does she expect the younger generation to start falling ill, as its been several months now. Does she think it will be next year, the year after or decades later?

Did she explain why this corona virus is different to others or did she simply state that’s unknown so we need to be very careful?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I'm guessing proclaiming young folk are totally fine isn't being careful

https://twitter.com/devisridhar/stat...694004224?s=19

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[grunt]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Daily Scottish update: 19 new cases since yesterday - highest in 3 weeks

11 of these new cases in Glasgow.