Boris & The Pandemic

[Baggiemadguern]

Last week we had 195 Covid deaths whist Spain had 1077 and France had 563.

In terms of deaths per million residents we had 49 per million,

Spain had 586

France had 110.

On average we have 1687 deaths per day in the U.K. made up of,

124 from flu

460 from heart disease

450 from cancer

240 from dementia

84 from lung disease

16 from DIY accidents

16 from stomach bugs and CDiff

15 from suicide

9 still births

5 in road accidents

Covid killed 11 people a day on the week ending the 4th Sept.


DIY is more dangerous than Covid and this has proved I was right in my lifetime of avoiding doing any!

On a serious note though........the figures above do nothing but convince me that government is not bothered about protecting people.......it’s all about the NHS not looking bad.

Not sure of what point you are making Mick. I do recall you saying you were self isolating until it was safe to go out and that you only went back to your business as a last resort.

Are you of the mind that we should all go about life as normal and take it on the chin and deal with the virus. Those people that suggest herd immunity, are they saying they are prepared to sacrifice their elderly loved ones so the rest can build up the immunity? And for clarity I am not suggesting that is what you are saying, I am simply asking where do you stand, lockdown or herd immunity or other?

[SwedishBaggie]

Not sure of what point you are making Mick. I do recall you saying you were self isolating until it was safe to go out and that you only went back to your business as a last resort.

Are you of the mind that we should all go about life as normal and take it on the chin and deal with the virus. Those people that suggest herd immunity, are they saying they are prepared to sacrifice their elderly loved ones so the rest can build up the immunity? And for clarity I am not suggesting that is what you are saying, I am simply asking where do you stand, lockdown or herd immunity or other?

Just asking, are you willing to sacrifice all the (young and healthy on many counts) lives and the bad health that will come out of a lockdown (which will not stop the virus, as we have seen in so many countries)? Lockdowns create more death and bad health than the Corona virus.

Btw, I (think I) understand the point that Mick’s figures are showing.

[baggieal]

Not sure of what point you are making Mick. I do recall you saying you were self isolating until it was safe to go out and that you only went back to your business as a last resort.

Are you of the mind that we should all go about life as normal and take it on the chin and deal with the virus. Those people that suggest herd immunity, are they saying they are prepared to sacrifice their elderly loved ones so the rest can build up the immunity? And for clarity I am not suggesting that is what you are saying, I am simply asking where do you stand, lockdown or herd immunity or other?

Difficult one Baggiemadguern! If we have another lock down - are we just suppressing the virus and then it will subside a little but be rampant again when lock down ends? What about more cancers going undetected and mental health issues increasing in another lock down? More importantly - what about the economy in another lock down and those family/children who might lose a job or whose companies could go bust? I honestly don't think the economy could take another lock down!

Boris has had since March to really boost the NHS resources - as he done this? As he recruited more NHS staff and boosted PPE and ventilators? Probably not!

Rather than another lock down - should Boris grow a ball of balls - ban all protests ( whilst pandemic is rife ), ban all social gathering -stop immigrants coming in - impose stricter rules ie masks for everyone including ALL shop workers - bigger fines etc etc. Other European countries are much stricter and our rules and regulations are considered weak in comparison! Should we say ( tough one ) that all vulnerable and over 65's stay indoors although difficult to enforce? Some of the elderly would rather take their chances as opposed to not seeing family/grand children etc as their view is - they could go anytime anyway. I get that!

Personally, I would go the route of Sweden which is stopping short of herd immunity but carry on with much stricter measures in place and recommendations that the elderly and vulnerable stay indoors. The economy can't take another hit or the younger generation could be doomed! We can't really close schools again as children really can't miss more important schooling. Pubs without outdoor space could be made to close, and likewise places of worship, etc where there's a greater risk.

Whichever route Boris chooses he needs to act quickly before the problem is huge - but he's a complete clown. Without being callous we need to really calculate out of the 42,000 - how many died without any underlying health conditions and put it into perspective! Not many fit and healthy people have died. Many would say shutting down schools and the economy where the younger generation would hugely suffer could be quite selfish especially when the elderly or those with underlying health conditions could or should stay at home. If not staying at home - chances are taken!

As said - there's no right answer but for the working younger generation - I would go with the flow and don't shut down the economy and try to ride through it.

How many elderly die with the flu? How many with underlying health conditions die with other complications? Factor that into a lock down - how many have died or will die because of suicides/mental health/cancer etc!

[SwedishBaggie]

Difficult one Baggiemadguern! If we have another lock down - are we just suppressing the virus and then it will subside a little but be rampant again when lock down ends? What about more cancers going undetected and mental health issues increasing in another lock down? More importantly - what about the economy in another lock down and those family/children who might lose a job or whose companies could go bust? I honestly don't think the economy could take another lock down!

Boris has had since March to really boost the NHS resources - as he done this? As he recruited more NHS staff and boosted PPE and ventilators? Probably not!

Rather than another lock down - should Boris grow a ball of balls - ban all protests ( whilst pandemic is rife ), ban all social gathering -stop immigrants coming in - impose stricter rules ie masks for everyone including ALL shop workers - bigger fines etc etc. Other European countries are much stricter and our rules and regulations are considered weak in comparison! Should we say ( tough one ) that all vulnerable and over 65's stay indoors although difficult to enforce? Some of the elderly would rather take their chances as opposed to not seeing family/grand children etc as their view is - they could go anytime anyway. I get that!

Personally, I would go the route of Sweden which is stopping short of herd immunity but carry on with much stricter measures in place and recommendations that the elderly and vulnerable stay indoors. The economy can't take another hit or the younger generation could be doomed! We can't really close schools again as children really can't miss more important schooling. Pubs without outdoor space could be made to close, and likewise places of worship, etc where there's a greater risk.

Whichever route Boris chooses he needs to act quickly before the problem is huge - but he's a complete clown. Without being callous we need to really calculate out of the 42,000 - how many died without any underlying health conditions and put it into perspective! Not many fit and healthy people have died. Many would say shutting down schools and the economy where the younger generation would hugely suffer could be quite selfish especially when the elderly or those with underlying health conditions could or should stay at home. If not staying at home - chances are taken!

As said - there's no right answer but for the working younger generation - I would go with the flow and don't shut down the economy and try to ride through it.

How many elderly die with the flu? How many with underlying health conditions die with other complications? Factor that into a lock down - how many have died or will die because of suicides/mental health/cancer etc!

Good post Al!

[Baggiemadguern]

Just asking, are you willing to sacrifice all the (young and healthy on many counts) lives and the bad health that will come out of a lockdown (which will not stop the virus, as we have seen in so many countries)? Lockdowns create more death and bad health than the Corona virus.

Horses for courses perhaps. We are a heavily populated island, Sweden is not a heavily populated country, therefore the spread is likely to be less than densely populated areas.

I did not suggest sacrificing is the way to go, albeit younger lives is less likely to die. You have made an assumption and have distorted what I have written. Any life is valuable, more valuable than a businesses success or failure. Young people tend to carry the virus but are far less likely to die from it and herd immunity will most likely kill the elderly rather than the young. Indeed, the reason for the resurgence in numbers is due to young people socialising and not taking basic hygiene precautions.

I did not suggest young people should be placed at risk, they are already at less risk than the elderly etc. We are free from the virus here (Guernsey) because our Government dealt with the situation effectively in the first place, unlike many Governments. (For an update- We now have two cases of people returning from hols).

For clarity, I was not having a go at Mickd. I was unclear of what Mick was thinking in regard to what he considered is the best way forward, i.e. is he in favour of herd immunity or going back into lockdown.

I do find that there are a lot of posters with very strong views, anyone that disagrees is in for a rough ride, which is a shame really.

[mickd1961]

Not sure of what point you are making Mick. I do recall you saying you were self isolating until it was safe to go out and that you only went back to your business as a last resort.

Are you of the mind that we should all go about life as normal and take it on the chin and deal with the virus. Those people that suggest herd immunity, are they saying they are prepared to sacrifice their elderly loved ones so the rest can build up the immunity? And for clarity I am not suggesting that is what you are saying, I am simply asking where do you stand, lockdown or herd immunity or other?

I locked down 9 days earlier than the government rules BMG and stayed isolated for 9 weeks in total.

Went back to word out of necessity rather than choice because we were so busy but I'm glad I did as it helped me gain a better sense of perspective I think.

I've mixed with young and old during the working day but stayed sensible and I've remained healthy and none of my staff or their families or people who call regularly upon us have had Covid and we are based in Dudley which is supposed to be a dicey area.

We are trashing businesses and our economy for the sake of protecting hospital beds and not lives so I've changed my view considerably.

I'm not unhealthy and thankfully non of my family are either so I want to live my life as normal whilst respecting those with bigger challenges.

If you have health issues it's up to you and those close of you to take the required care...........we cannot have a situation where 99.7% of the population are paying the price to protect 0.3% of the "at risk" population of which many would die of all of the other things listed above.

This government is worse than any Left Wing "Nanny State" government I could've immagined.

[SwedishBaggie]

Horses for courses perhaps. We are a heavily populated island, Sweden is not a heavily populated country, therefore the spread is likely to be less than densely populated areas.

I did not suggest sacrificing is the way to go, albeit younger lives is less likely to die. You have made an assumption and have distorted what I have written. Any life is valuable, more valuable than a businesses success or failure. Young people tend to carry the virus but are far less likely to die from it and herd immunity will most likely kill the elderly rather than the young. Indeed, the reason for the resurgence in numbers is due to young people socialising and not taking basic hygiene precautions.

I did not suggest young people should be placed at risk, they are already at less risk than the elderly etc. We are free from the virus here (Guernsey) because our Government dealt with the situation effectively in the first place, unlike many Governments. (For an update- We now have two cases of people returning from hols).

For clarity, I was not having a go at Mickd. I was unclear of what Mick was thinking in regard to what he considered is the best way forward, i.e. is he in favour of herd immunity or going back into lockdown.

I do find that there are a lot of posters with very strong views, anyone that disagrees is in for a rough ride, which is a shame really.

No one should have to have a rough ride due to different views.

When I wrote that young and healthy people were sacrificed and put at risk I was not talking about the virus. I was talking about the extremely negative effects a lockdown has on: economy, suicide increase with unemployment, mental health due to isolation, domestic violence, children with needs deprived of schools etc, etc. I could go on but I think you get my idea - and there is a lot of research regarding these matters.

The figures I have presented during the pandemic and Mick’s recent ones show, with some emphasis in my opinion, that lockdowns are not justified.

I am very anti lockdown etc which I think people know by now (&#128522, but as you can read in a previous post on this thread I do think there are lots of things that could be done and should be respected.

And, I do respect that people have other views. My parents are 84 and 88, and I don’t want to see them gone, but, that does not change my opinion, and death is a part of life, whatever we think.

[baggieal]

Horses for courses perhaps. We are a heavily populated island, Sweden is not a heavily populated country, therefore the spread is likely to be less than densely populated areas.

I did not suggest sacrificing is the way to go, albeit younger lives is less likely to die. You have made an assumption and have distorted what I have written. Any life is valuable, more valuable than a businesses success or failure. Young people tend to carry the virus but are far less likely to die from it and herd immunity will most likely kill the elderly rather than the young. Indeed, the reason for the resurgence in numbers is due to young people socialising and not taking basic hygiene precautions.

I did not suggest young people should be placed at risk, they are already at less risk than the elderly etc. We are free from the virus here (Guernsey) because our Government dealt with the situation effectively in the first place, unlike many Governments. (For an update- We now have two cases of people returning from hols).

For clarity, I was not having a go at Mickd. I was unclear of what Mick was thinking in regard to what he considered is the best way forward, i.e. is he in favour of herd immunity or going back into lockdown.

I do find that there are a lot of posters with very strong views, anyone that disagrees is in for a rough ride, which is a shame really.

I can only give my view on this as I see it! As I mentioned there is no right or wrong, and can understand every view. I honestly would protect the economy/schools as the younger generation ( not me ) need the world to keep going round/schooling to keep educating our little ones otherwise we will have a huge problem. Consideration should be high on those cancers increasing and mental health issues in a lock down. If i was 75 plus - i would be thankful for another year each year and every year and would want to see my grandchildren/family and if I caught the virus - well so be it - I could catch anything at that age. I also understand those who are elderly who want to take no risks and stay at home. If you are elderly and vulnerable you stay at home, or take a risk but isn't anything a risk! You can't have it both ways!

I do feel Boris should get tough - no protests ( in a pandemic ) - prison sentences - stop immigrants crossing the channel - masks for EVEN all shop employees too! Pathetic inconsistencies everywhere in this country! 123 whilst has strong political views - I can now understand some of what he was saying! I even have little faith now in Boris regarding Brexit!

[BaggieBlood]

The whole regulation on mask wearing cannot be enforced. The Government know this so they threaten to fine you at ever increasing amounts. The Equality Act will not be changed. If they tried it it would be defeated as it would need to be debated. Currently this crazy Government just tag on rafts of conflicting regs onto the Public Health Act via Statutory instrument.

Those who flout the regulation on not wearing a mask covering can do so whether we like it or not.

No they cannot if you require them to get proof from their gp of their exemption and you limit the time they shop.

Because of this s hit government and its handling of enforcement we are looking at second lockdown which will absolutely Foook the economy which is teetering on the brink of collapse.

When the supermarkets said they weren't going to enforce they should have enacted emergency legislation to include fines of £10,000 for every person found in their supermarket without a mask.

The supermarkets are a disgrace as they have profited a lot from covid as sales went through the roof and they disgustingly reduced the amounts of offers they had on, as shown by price monitoring companies.

The foookers don't even get their staff to wear masks.

It's spreading again because no one is enforcing the law the supermarkets are taking the piss as all they would have to do is not let anyone in without a mask, but no that would lead to a loss of sales.

Absolute joke governance.

[baggieal]

No they cannot if you require them to get proof from their gp of their exemption and you limit the time they shop.

Because of this s hit government and its handling of enforcement we are looking at second lockdown which will absolutely Foook the economy which is teetering on the brink of collapse.

When the supermarkets said they weren't going to enforce they should have enacted emergency legislation to include fines of £10,000 for every person found in their supermarket without a mask.

The supermarkets are a disgrace as they have profited a lot from covid as sales went through the roof and they disgustingly reduced the amounts of offers they had on, as shown by price monitoring companies.

The foookers don't even get their staff to wear masks.

It's spreading again because no one is enforcing the law the supermarkets are taking the piss as all they would have to do is not let anyone in without a mask, but no that would lead to a loss of sales.

Absolute joke governance.

Can't disagree Blood as it would be easy to prove/get exemption! The fact that supermarket or shop workers don't wear masks make the whole thing a joke and shambolic. In M&S young shelf packers were walking around freely stacking shelves without masks - do they have superpowers in that the virus can't get them?

****in joke the whole thing!