Quizzes & Puzzles1 min ago
The Govt Handling Of Covid............
93 Answers
..............is manipulative and alarmist, meant to frighten people. And it's succeeded mainly. Back in April, the figures were the number of deaths from Covid. Then, the figures dropped in summer. When the figures started to rise again in September, we had a different interpretation. It was the number of infections that was published. That sounds more serious doesn't it? A few thousand infections but only a few deaths. Let's go down the infections route. It's more alarming. But even the death figure is inaccurate as it shows only deaths within 28 days of a positive test. That's great Mssrs Whitty and Valance! It's just what we need to frighten the people into mass inactivity. I know, I know. It hasn't worked so far and the figures are still rising but at least we're frightening the tish out of everyone aren't we?
Just call me Boris Canute. I can turn the tide.
Just call me Boris Canute. I can turn the tide.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by 10ClarionSt. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
"A few thousand infections but only a few deaths."
Currently, the UK is recording around 10% more deaths than would be expected, and has done for a number of weeks now. Back in April, that was closer to a 100% excess.
It's boring having to refute your misunderstanding each time you post, but there is a very real threat from Covid, and people are dying in sadly large numbers because of it. If anything, the Government still hasn't taken the threat seriously enough.
Currently, the UK is recording around 10% more deaths than would be expected, and has done for a number of weeks now. Back in April, that was closer to a 100% excess.
It's boring having to refute your misunderstanding each time you post, but there is a very real threat from Covid, and people are dying in sadly large numbers because of it. If anything, the Government still hasn't taken the threat seriously enough.
Well inmy opinion the Government has not frightened the electorate enough...nowhere near enough .
Almost 80,000 deaths in 12 months due to a new virus with no cure.
For Christ's sake, if this is not enough to scare you then I don't know what is.
New variant that is more transmissible than the original virus and all hopes now on a vaccine which may or may not give 70% protection.
Clarion....are you MAD?
Almost 80,000 deaths in 12 months due to a new virus with no cure.
For Christ's sake, if this is not enough to scare you then I don't know what is.
New variant that is more transmissible than the original virus and all hopes now on a vaccine which may or may not give 70% protection.
Clarion....are you MAD?
Where to begin, sadly...
The Tier system (especially up to Tier 3) has obviously been inadequate in dealing with the threat, given the need to introduce a fourth tier (and, more than likely, a fifth tier in a few more weeks). So there's that for starters. More generally, it's just that in the last few months, Government policy has been reactive rather than proactive. Take the announcement about delaying school reopening. That should have been made some weeks ago, and the Government at the very least should never have threatened legal action against schools who tried to pre-empt the threat by closing early.
From October 15th to December 25th, the UK has announced around 27,000 Covid-related deaths. At the start of that period, I suggested that limiting that total to 5,000 (later revised to 10,000) deaths in the same period would represent a success. Perhaps I was being wildly optimistic, and that already the die was cast, but then again this is my exact point: in order to keep excess deaths low, the Government would have needed to take action far earlier than it did. Introducing Tier-3/4 measures when the disease is already out of control is far too late.
That's what I mean about the Government not taking the threat seriously enough: it keeps waiting far too long to take the action needed to halt the spread. Thousands of people have paid for that inaction with their lives.
The Tier system (especially up to Tier 3) has obviously been inadequate in dealing with the threat, given the need to introduce a fourth tier (and, more than likely, a fifth tier in a few more weeks). So there's that for starters. More generally, it's just that in the last few months, Government policy has been reactive rather than proactive. Take the announcement about delaying school reopening. That should have been made some weeks ago, and the Government at the very least should never have threatened legal action against schools who tried to pre-empt the threat by closing early.
From October 15th to December 25th, the UK has announced around 27,000 Covid-related deaths. At the start of that period, I suggested that limiting that total to 5,000 (later revised to 10,000) deaths in the same period would represent a success. Perhaps I was being wildly optimistic, and that already the die was cast, but then again this is my exact point: in order to keep excess deaths low, the Government would have needed to take action far earlier than it did. Introducing Tier-3/4 measures when the disease is already out of control is far too late.
That's what I mean about the Government not taking the threat seriously enough: it keeps waiting far too long to take the action needed to halt the spread. Thousands of people have paid for that inaction with their lives.
Jim, my understanding is the statement by a spokesman from PHE on the BBC some time ago. He said that 95% of deaths are people who had one, or a combination of, heart disease, dementia or Type 1 diabetes.
My understanding is that many, many people who test positive for the virus, do not go on to contract COVID.
My understanding is that tier systems and lockdowns aren't working.
My understanding is that people will suffer more greatly form the effects of the govt handling, than the the disease itself.
My understanding is that if you are a normal, healthy person, (not a super-fit athlete), you hacve mnore chance of being hit by a meteorite than dying of Covid 19.
My understanding is that their is a priority list for the Covid vaccine. That priority list should have been used at the outset as a basis for lockdown, as a personal, not regional lockdown.
My understanding is that the number of deaths is not accurate. "The science" are trying to link any death to Covid. To make it sound worse thatn it is.
Don't start quoting China, Italy, Belgium etc because by doing that you merely endorse the mistakes of Bojo the Clown and Matt (Cpl Jones) Hancock.
My understanding is that many, many people who test positive for the virus, do not go on to contract COVID.
My understanding is that tier systems and lockdowns aren't working.
My understanding is that people will suffer more greatly form the effects of the govt handling, than the the disease itself.
My understanding is that if you are a normal, healthy person, (not a super-fit athlete), you hacve mnore chance of being hit by a meteorite than dying of Covid 19.
My understanding is that their is a priority list for the Covid vaccine. That priority list should have been used at the outset as a basis for lockdown, as a personal, not regional lockdown.
My understanding is that the number of deaths is not accurate. "The science" are trying to link any death to Covid. To make it sound worse thatn it is.
Don't start quoting China, Italy, Belgium etc because by doing that you merely endorse the mistakes of Bojo the Clown and Matt (Cpl Jones) Hancock.
You don't have to take the Government figures of those who have died from Covid as the only measure. The total number of deaths recorded, the all-cause mortality rate, leaves no hiding place. There were marked excesses in April-May, when the first wave hit, and again since early November.
That most of those dying are elderly or have pre-existing conditions isn't somehow an excuse to write off the threat. People aged 70 and above still could have many years of life ahead of them, and that has ben taken away by a new disease. People suffering from other conditions could have lived many years longer with those conditions, until Covid struck. Their lives are of no less value than the healthy.
It's an insult to the dead -- and, indeed, to the living -- to argue that it doesn't matter that they died far sooner than their time.
That most of those dying are elderly or have pre-existing conditions isn't somehow an excuse to write off the threat. People aged 70 and above still could have many years of life ahead of them, and that has ben taken away by a new disease. People suffering from other conditions could have lived many years longer with those conditions, until Covid struck. Their lives are of no less value than the healthy.
It's an insult to the dead -- and, indeed, to the living -- to argue that it doesn't matter that they died far sooner than their time.
Fully agree 10cs . The cure is worse than the disease. I heard a good analogy that constant futile lockdowns is like burning your house down to get rid of a wasps nest.
It has been revealed that back in the early spring the government scientific advisers said that the public would need to be scared into submission. That is what has been happening since with the help of the BBC.
We are not even allowed to protest any more and any opinion contrary to the propaganda is considered to be like some medieval heresy, warranting harsh punishment.
It has been revealed that back in the early spring the government scientific advisers said that the public would need to be scared into submission. That is what has been happening since with the help of the BBC.
We are not even allowed to protest any more and any opinion contrary to the propaganda is considered to be like some medieval heresy, warranting harsh punishment.
Clarion, most of your "understandings" are valid or at least have some credibility,but what can be done at the is not good enough......for many reasons and that incudes not scaring the population enough....particularlythe younger generation.
I say this with a heavy heart, but if the variant affects the younger generation to a greater extent and the vaccines for variant 1 do not give the immunity expected.....then we are in BIG trouble. Luckily my sentences have plenty of "ifs".
Donotbe surprised to see almost 1000 deaths a week for a time in the New Year due to Covid.
THAT'S scary.
I say this with a heavy heart, but if the variant affects the younger generation to a greater extent and the vaccines for variant 1 do not give the immunity expected.....then we are in BIG trouble. Luckily my sentences have plenty of "ifs".
Donotbe surprised to see almost 1000 deaths a week for a time in the New Year due to Covid.
THAT'S scary.
Latest Posts
ChatterBank2 mins ago
ChatterBank4 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles6 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles10 mins ago
Tory Donor Lord Bamford Funds The Reform...
News11 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.