theweatheroutlook

Remove ads from site

fairweather
04 May 2020 17:45:31


 


Good spot, did they mention that at the briefing? Agree that if you take the London line then it is fairly flat although generally a slight decrease.


Originally Posted by: JHutch 


It was noted and was implied this one of the five tests wasn't going as well and needed monitoring.

S.Essex, 42m ASL
fairweather
04 May 2020 17:49:48


 


The last sentence is spot on, we have ruined the lives of the many to save the few.


Originally Posted by: springsunshine 


 I think death trumps your concept of "ruined". 

S.Essex, 42m ASL
Polar Low
04 May 2020 17:52:02

It’s different if it affects you or loved ones and family.


I can’t think of anything more important than life only exception I would make if the individual was in so much pain and nothing could be done, it was not worth being here.


If any chance of recovery then life and loved ones  imo is always utmost first priority.


 




 


The last sentence is spot on, we have ruined the lives of the many to save the few.


Originally Posted by: springsunshine 

ozone_aurora
04 May 2020 17:53:28

Dave Greenfield, of punk/rock group The Stranglers, died yesterday after a prolonged stay in hospital for heart problems, during which he was tested positive for Coronavirus.

Brian Gaze
04 May 2020 17:53:30

Dave Greenfield of the Stranglers dies from C19:


Dave Greenfield: The Stranglers keyboard player dies at 71


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52537293


 

Brian Gaze
Berkhamsted
TWO Buzz - get the latest news and views 
"I'm not socialist, I know that. I don't believe in sharing my money." - Gary Numan
The Beast from the East
04 May 2020 17:54:04


 


 


A simple 20x multiplication to assume everyone gets it gives:


    0-19 - 220
    20-39 - 3040
    40-59 - 34120
    60-79 - 166200
    80+ - 224100


A total of just over 420000 - not far off the initial herd immuniy estimates.


 


Now, from a purely economic point of view it makes sense to just let it rip. Take the losses of economically inactive and already ill people, save the considerable costs of looking after them and gain an economic advantage as the rest of the world continues to struggle (at least until a vaccine is developed). It'd rejuvenate the housing market too and we could all - well, those of us left - get back to normal by the end of the year. Economically, it'd be brilliant.


Society wise? Not so much. And that's why we had the lockdown, of course, as in addition to the raw numbers above there would be lots of extra people dying as the NHS imploded... not to mention the ethical aspects of letting hundreds of thousands die.


 


 


 


Originally Posted by: Retron 


I have no elderly relatives, so there is no one I care about who is likely to die. I am in the 40-59 category and will have to be very unlucky to be one of the 34,000 that die - I am more likely to die crossing the road


If a vaccine is not going to be widely available till next year, we will have to make hard ethical choices. Money talks at the end of the day unless the govt is willing to pay everyone to stay at home, pay their rent, etc for another year


 

"We have some alternative facts for you"
Kelly-Ann Conway - special adviser to the President
ozone_aurora
04 May 2020 17:55:05


Dave Greenfield of the Stranglers dies from C19:


Dave Greenfield: The Stranglers keyboard player dies at 71


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52537293


 


Originally Posted by: Brian Gaze 


We must be like minded as I posted this at (almost) exactly the same time.


RIP Dave 

fairweather
04 May 2020 17:56:02

Now, from a purely economic point of view it makes sense to just let it rip. Take the losses of economically inactive and already ill people, save the considerable costs of looking after them and gain an economic advantage as the rest of the world continues to struggle (at least until a vaccine is developed)


...........................................................................................................................


Eugenics is a wonderful concept. Very popular if your first name is Adolf I hear.

S.Essex, 42m ASL
fairweather
04 May 2020 17:58:06


It’s different if it affects you or loved ones and family.


I can’t think of anything more important than life only exception I would make if the individual was in so much pain and nothing could be done, it was not worth being here.


If any chance of recovery then life and loved ones  imo is always utmost first priority.


 


 


Originally Posted by: Polar Low 


   "The last sentence is spot on" 

S.Essex, 42m ASL
The Beast from the East
04 May 2020 18:00:36

UK data


People tested - 62,956

Originally Posted by: Gavin D 


What happened to the 100,000?


 

"We have some alternative facts for you"
Kelly-Ann Conway - special adviser to the President
fairweather
04 May 2020 18:01:37


 


I have no elderly relatives, so there is no one I care about who is likely to die. I am in the 40-59 category and will have to be very unlucky to be one of the 34,000 that die - I am more likely to die crossing the road


If a vaccine is not going to be widely available till next year, we will have to make hard ethical choices. Money talks at the end of the day unless the govt is willing to pay everyone to stay at home, pay their rent, etc for another year


 


Originally Posted by: The Beast from the East 


Why don't you start a new Party? Call it the SSP.  Selfish Socialist Party.  

S.Essex, 42m ASL
Essan
04 May 2020 18:03:59


Just a thought that TV shows, films, other entertainment  production etc have ceased since March. We are going to run out of new material on TV to watch very soon and how can you restart filming with social distancing?

Originally Posted by: The Beast from the East 



I doubt I would get through watching every TV programme made last year if I live to be 501 

Or even 5001 ....

Andy
Evesham, Worcs, Albion - 35m asl
Weather & Earth Science News 

Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job - DNA
fairweather
04 May 2020 18:10:30


 


What happened to the 100,000?


 


Originally Posted by: The Beast from the East 


It only applies to May 1st - target day ! If ever a fiddled statistic stands out like a sore thumb, that was it. They even put the graph up which shows a massive jump from April 30th to May 1st and then falls again sharply the following days. Hilarious. That's not to say they haven't done well getting them up to where we are now from the early daft promises. And it's not even their fault if they do have more capacity than demand other than it reflects the apparent success of the lockdown..


 

S.Essex, 42m ASL
Gavin D
04 May 2020 18:19:09

UK data

Number of tests - 85,186
People tested - 62,956
All settings deaths - 288

Originally Posted by: Gavin D 


 


Confirmed rate for positive tests is 6.33% - The lowest since around March 17th

Joe Bloggs
04 May 2020 18:21:53


 


Can't see that working in the Red Lion Joe. When I used to go there it was shoulder to shoulder even on a Monday. They could all congregate on the bowling green I suppose.


Originally Posted by: Sharp Green Fox 


The bowling green is no more sadly, it has gone. 


Needless to say, the Red Lion is also now rough as ****. 😃  


Manchester City Centre, 31m ASL
four
  • four
  • Advanced Member
04 May 2020 18:26:25


Remains to be seen whether this line of thought has any merit but there seems to be a growing number of people thinking this way - 


https://unherd.com/thepost/nobel-prize-winning-scientist-the-covid-19-epidemic-was-never-exponential/


"I think the policy of herd immunity is the right policy. I think Britain was on exactly the right track before they were fed wrong numbers. And they made a huge mistake. I see the standout winners as Germany and Sweden. They didn’t practise too much lockdown and they got enough people sick to get some herd immunity. I see the standout losers as countries like Austria, Australia and Israel that had very strict lockdown but didn’t have many cases. They have damaged their economies, caused massive social damage, damaged the educational year of their children, but not obtained any herd immunity.


There is no doubt in my mind, that when we come to look back on this, the damage done by lockdown will exceed any saving of lives by a huge factor."


Originally Posted by: Northern Sky 


I posted this late yesterday, makes sense to me.
The sooner lockdown is more or less abandoned for those under 60 the better.
The costs (and not just economic) of continuing with it are infinitely worse than the disease.

North York Moors weather 
Gavin D
04 May 2020 18:32:39

Northern Sky
04 May 2020 19:08:08


Now, from a purely economic point of view it makes sense to just let it rip. Take the losses of economically inactive and already ill people, save the considerable costs of looking after them and gain an economic advantage as the rest of the world continues to struggle (at least until a vaccine is developed). It'd rejuvenate the housing market too and we could all - well, those of us left - get back to normal by the end of the year. Economically, it'd be brilliant.


Society wise? Not so much. And that's why we had the lockdown, of course, as in addition to the raw numbers above there would be lots of extra people dying as the NHS imploded... not to mention the ethical aspects of letting hundreds of thousands die.


Originally Posted by: Retron 


The line of thinking behind the link I ( and four!) posted is that the idea that hundreds of thousands would die is wrong - and to be fair the history of predictions by Imperial College and Prof Ferguson is pretty dreadful when you look at what they predicted for other diseases. 


I don't know what will turn out to be right or what will turn out to be the best policy. We'll only know that with hindsight but I'm starting to think the long term consequences of the lockdown may be worse in terms of health impacts than Covid 19, but as I say that is just a guess.

Heavy Weather 2013
04 May 2020 19:17:13


 


The last sentence is spot on, we have ruined the lives of the many to save the few.


Originally Posted by: springsunshine 


This sentence makes me feel so sad.


Life should be sacrosanct whenever possible. There are nearly 30,000 grieving family’s right now.


The government are currently paying the wages of many people - who is most case can’t really spend it.


I appreciate that not everyone is in the same boat - some livelihoods will be threatened.  The economy will bounce back. 


Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but I think it’s just sad that life is given such little regard.

Mark
Beckton, E London
Less than 500m from the end of London City Airport runway.
fairweather
04 May 2020 19:21:47


 


This sentence makes me feel so sad.


Life should be sacrosanct whenever possible. There are nearly 30,000 grieving family’s right now.


The government are currently paying the wages of many people - who is most case can’t really spend it.


I appreciate that not everyone is in the same boat - some livelihoods will be threatened.  The economy will bounce back. 


Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but I think it’s just sad that life is given such little regard.


Originally Posted by: Heavy Weather 2013 


S.Essex, 42m ASL
Polar Low
04 May 2020 19:29:14

Lest we forget 


many who have passed have done wonderful things for country and family it is our  time to protect those in most need we will look back  with pride and future generations will say we did the right  thing


we can rebuild again but life has to be no 1 priority.


 


 


 



 


T This sentence makes me feel so sad.


Life should be sacrosanct whenever possible. There are nearly 30,000 grieving family’s right now.


The government are currently paying the wages of many people - who is most case can’t really spend it.


I appreciate that not everyone is in the same boat - some livelihoods will be threatened.  The economy will bounce back. 


Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but I think it’s just sad that life is given such little regard.


Originally Posted by: Heavy Weather 2013 

John p
04 May 2020 19:42:53


 


The line of thinking behind the link I ( and four!) posted is that the idea that hundreds of thousands would die is wrong - and to be fair the history of predictions by Imperial College and Prof Ferguson is pretty dreadful when you look at what they predicted for other diseases. 


I don't know what will turn out to be right or what will turn out to be the best policy. We'll only know that with hindsight but I'm starting to think the long term consequences of the lockdown may be worse in terms of health impacts than Covid 19, but as I say that is just a guess.


Originally Posted by: Northern Sky 


But to believe that, you surely must think that the lockdown and social distancing has made no difference to the number of infections or deaths?  

Camberley, Surrey
John p
04 May 2020 19:44:18


 


This sentence makes me feel so sad.


Life should be sacrosanct whenever possible. There are nearly 30,000 grieving family’s right now.


The government are currently paying the wages of many people - who is most case can’t really spend it.


I appreciate that not everyone is in the same boat - some livelihoods will be threatened.  The economy will bounce back. 


Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but I think it’s just sad that life is given such little regard.


Originally Posted by: Heavy Weather 2013 


I agree, but by now we well know the members of the forum who think a certain way, so such posts shouldn’t surprise us anymore. 

Camberley, Surrey
Brian Gaze
04 May 2020 20:00:34



We must be like minded as I posted this at (almost) exactly the same time.


RIP Dave 


Originally Posted by: ozone_aurora 


Yes, I noticed after I'd posted. 

Brian Gaze
Berkhamsted
TWO Buzz - get the latest news and views 
"I'm not socialist, I know that. I don't believe in sharing my money." - Gary Numan
Hippydave
04 May 2020 20:27:08


Lest we forget 


many who have passed have done wonderful things for country and family it is our  time to protect those in most need we will look back  with pride and future generations will say we did the right  thing


we can rebuild again but life has to be no 1 priority.


 


 


 


 


Originally Posted by: Polar Low 


I know I've said it before but I think it's worth mentioning again, if nothing else just to add some balance to things.


The lockdown is killing people -this clearly shows up in the stats. Our clearing of people from hospitals as part of the lockdown has killed people. The mental health of hundreds of thousands of people is being adversely impacted, which medically will kill some of them, lead to significant additional health problems for others and lead to shorter life expectancy with a significantly lower quality of life for some too. Poverty will increase due to the lockdown, which we know kills people and has a significant detrimental impact on life expectancy and good health.


Our closing of cancer screening and treatment will kill people. The media hype of the virus (it's dangerous, sure I get that but you'd think no one died in the UK before this happened) and the constant bombardment of 'stay at home' messages and stats of how many people have died, has lead to people avoiding hospitals, which undoubtedly forms part of the extra deaths stats. It will also undoubtedly mean people who should have been diagnosed with all sorts of treatable illnesses/conditions haven't been, with a knock on effect for their health and life expectancy.  


Whilst some kind of self isolation for the most at risk groups if they wished to do so seems like a good idea, the negative impact of the measures we have taken may not be. IMO it's certainly no where near as clear cut as people seem to think judging by the comments made. A softer approach, with targeted lockdowns and preferably schools staying open would IMO have been a better idea.


Perhaps those stating life is sacrosanct etc. can take a moment to explain why therefore they fail to acknowledge the deaths the actions they're championing are causing? I take it death by coronavirus is something to be avoided at all costs, death by the measures taken (particularly as it's not newsworthy and highlighted in daily graphs) is irrelevant? Or are you just not considering it at all?


I suspect we may never know if what we're doing at the moment was right or wrong (or  which shade in between) but just as I can see why people would be upset/angry about suggestions that letting the most at risk people risk death because most people would be fine, it's equally annoying when the same people are just focussing on deaths by covid-19 and ignoring the deaths being caused (and which will continue to result long after this is over), along with the myriad of other problems we're creating.


 


 


 


 


 

Home: Tunbridge Wells
Work: Tonbridge

Remove ads from site

Ads