Coronavirus (COVID-19)

[HeartsOfficialMoaner]

9 hours ago, Todd_is_God said:

Ok mystic meg

The Harvard epidemiology professor Marc Lipsitch is exacting in his diction, even for an epidemiologist. Twice in our conversation he started to say something, then paused and said, “Actually, let me start again.” So it’s striking when one of the points he wanted to get exactly right was this: “I think the likely outcome is that it will ultimately not be containable.”

Lipsitch is far from alone in his belief that this virus will continue to spread widely. The emerging consensus among epidemiologists is that the most likely outcome of this outbreak is a new seasonal disease—a fifth “endemic” coronavirus. With the other four, people are not known to develop long-lasting immunity. If this one follows suit, and if the disease continues to be as severe as it is now, “cold and flu season” could become “cold and flu and COVID-19 season.”

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/02/covid-vaccine/607000/

[Thereisalight..]

I was just reading an article about the test and trace programme, and how it could be in place for 2 years and anytime you come into contact with someone with covid you’ve to isolate for 14 days. How on earth is any of that “doable” 

[D.A.F.C]

[Todd_is_God]

31 minutes ago, HeartsOfficialMoaner said:

The Harvard epidemiology professor Marc Lipsitch is exacting in his diction, even for an epidemiologist. Twice in our conversation he started to say something, then paused and said, “Actually, let me start again.” So it’s striking when one of the points he wanted to get exactly right was this: “I think the likely outcome is that it will ultimately not be containable.”

Lipsitch is far from alone in his belief that this virus will continue to spread widely. The emerging consensus among epidemiologists is that the most likely outcome of this outbreak is a new seasonal disease—a fifth “endemic” coronavirus. With the other four, people are not known to develop long-lasting immunity. If this one follows suit, and if the disease continues to be as severe as it is now, “cold and flu season” could become “cold and flu and COVID-19 season.”

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/02/covid-vaccine/607000/

An article from the 24th of February. Really?

Interesting you left this quote about lockdowns out, however

"Despite the apparent ineffectiveness of such measures—relative to their inordinate social and economic cost, at least—the crackdown continues to escalate."

Edited June 5, 2020 by Todd_is_God

[Todd_is_God]

I found this both surprising, and interesting (particularly when it comes to things like facemasks and social distancing).

Edited June 5, 2020 by Todd_is_God

[DeeTillEhDeh]

So it's got nothing to do with wearing masks at all then, even if you're paranoid enough to think that someone moving briefly within a magical two metre personal space is an act declaring that they 'feel invincible'. 
I think lockdown has got to some people's brains tbh.

Your brain by the rants you've had today.

[bendan]

12 hours ago, MixuFruit said:

There's plenty to criticise about how the Scottish government has handled things but the brass tacks of it is without lockdown and BoE £££ we could do only minor things differently. We, Wales, NI had no choice in when lockdown started, what is England's excuse?

There's plenty the SG could have done differently. I said at the time it was amazing the schools didn't close on March 13 - instead they went on until March 20 because 'the timing wasn't right'. What exactly were we waiting for? We could have been getting proper PPE in much earlier; we could have done massively better in terms of infections acquired in care homes and hospitals. We then swung from an it-absolutely-wasn't-herd-immunity strategy that looked remarkably like a herd immunity strategy to an uber cautious strategy that has stopped people doing things that weren't risky at all and has thus f***** with people's mental health and the economy to an unnecessary degree.

I'm not some unionist having a go here. I've supported independence all my life. I think we should accept that we had a lot more scope to do things on this issue than we actually used.

Edited June 6, 2020 by bendan

[Billy Jean King]

I do.
But looking at the hospital figures you now need to go back 6 days to find triple figures.
Even allowing for those hospital figures to be half the figure for deaths in all settings the real "now" picture is considerably better than the one painted by the announced figures.

But hospital deaths are neither the real or full picture so why use them. Deaths from C19 happen in care homes, at home and in hospital. Either way by earlier point remains, no matter what death figure you use, as long as you keep using the same one, a comparison is valid and I stand by my statement that deaths are stubbornly high given the claimed fall in infection rates, the two simply do not compute.

[bendan]

9 minutes ago, Billy Jean King said:

12 hours ago, Todd_is_God said:

I do.
But looking at the hospital figures you now need to go back 6 days to find triple figures.
Even allowing for those hospital figures to be half the figure for deaths in all settings the real "now" picture is considerably better than the one painted by the announced figures.

But hospital deaths are neither the real or full picture so why use them. Deaths from C19 happen in care homes, at home and in hospital. Either way by earlier point remains, no matter what death figure you use, as long as you keep using the same one, a comparison is valid and I stand by my statement that deaths are stubbornly high given the claimed fall in infection rates, the two simply do not compute.

But if there are huge time lags between a confirmed infection and a confirmed death, how do they not compute? 

[Todd_is_God]

11 minutes ago, Billy Jean King said:

12 hours ago, Todd_is_God said:

I do.
But looking at the hospital figures you now need to go back 6 days to find triple figures.
Even allowing for those hospital figures to be half the figure for deaths in all settings the real "now" picture is considerably better than the one painted by the announced figures.

But hospital deaths are neither the real or full picture so why use them. Deaths from C19 happen in care homes, at home and in hospital. Either way by earlier point remains, no matter what death figure you use, as long as you keep using the same one, a comparison is valid and I stand by my statement that deaths are stubbornly high given the claimed fall in infection rates, the two simply do not compute.

You can stand by it for as long as you like.

It doesn't make it true.

[Steven W]

Sky News running an article about the Qatar World Cup and how they're ready to comply with any health and safety changes relating to the pandemic.

First time I've seen something so far in advance mentioned in the same breath.

[bendan]

9 minutes ago, Steven W said:

Sky News running an article about the Qatar World Cup and how they're ready to comply with any health and safety changes relating to the pandemic.

First time I've seen something so far in advance mentioned in the same breath.

The World Cup in Qatar is depressing enough - doing it with added social distancing and health measures would make it as sterile an operating theatre.

[peasy23]

But if there are huge time lags between a confirmed infection and a confirmed death, how do they not compute? 

I don't agree with a lot of what Todd has posted in this thread, but have to agree with him on this point. It's perfectly plausible for new infections to be dropping off while deaths are still comparatively high. My brother in laws workmate passed away last weekend, fully 6 weeks after he had first taken ill, and spending his final 4 weeks in hospital. People dying today would have been a new infection around a month ago, as far as the figures go it computes perfectly well.

[Wee Willie]

 

13 hours ago, Jacksgranda said:

That's a hard one to answer...

Phone a friend

1 hour ago, bendan said:

There's plenty the SG could have done differently. I said at the time it was amazing the schools didn't close on March 13 - instead they went on until March 20 because 'the timing wasn't right'. What exactly were we waiting for? We could have been getting proper PPE in much earlier; we could have done massively better in terms of infections acquired in care homes and hospitals. We then swung from an it-absolutely-wasn't-herd-immunity strategy that looked remarkably like a herd immunity strategy to an uber cautious strategy that has stopped people doing things that weren't risky at all and has thus f***** with people's mental health and the economy to an unnecessary degree.

I'm not some unionist having a go here. I've supported independence all my life. I think we should accept that we had a lot more scope to do things on this issue than we actually used.

Then we're on the same side.

Surely if Westminster holds the purse strings then ultimately they make the decisions.

If WM decides to end funding  for whatever group of people, or makes decisions which cost a lot of money, what can the devolved governments do about it?

All your questions you've asked there look great in hindsight but in reality everyone was learning new things.

I still prefer to be cautious and look at what other countries are doing and take note of the outcome to see if it would work in Scotland.

 

[Wee Willie]

14 hours ago, Theroadlesstravelled said:

Too many Independence fan boys have no interest in holding the SNP accountable as they see the party as the only way to get that to utopia of independence.

In the mean time they are happy burying their head in the sand and blaming everything on England.

I'm glad ye posted this political post cos it allows me tae revisit mine when I didnae get an answer.

On 04/06/2020 at 08:08, alta-pete said:

I think we’re ahead of that curve here in Scotland. Your post even confirms your view on what you are trying to criticise.

Everything is framed from a Nat/Yoon perspective with very little, if any, reasoned middle ground. 

 

On 04/06/2020 at 08:59, Wee Willie said:

 

If you have Nationalists on one side and unionists on the other side what is a 'reasoned middle ground'?

 

On 04/06/2020 at 09:20, NotThePars said:

 

Me

 

 

On 04/06/2020 at 09:36, Wee Willie said:

I'm agog! What's your  'reasoned middle ground'?

I'm still agog.

alta-pete & NotThePars care tae answer?

[D.A.F.C]

SNP fanboy = normal
Anyone else = nutcase who doesn't realise how brilliant the snp are.


This is the attitude that cost the yes vote imo.

[Wee Willie]

Blame whit's his name for posting something political.

It allows me tae repost mine whit wisnae answered the first time.

 

On 04/06/2020 at 10:31, WhiteRoseKillie said:

Looking around Europe, you would have to say that the UK Labour Party comes closest to what the majority of Europeans would regard as reasonable and non-controversial. Just a shame the Mail, Express and Sun have the influence they do, eh?

 

On 04/06/2020 at 10:50, Wee Willie said:

Whit! Non-controversial! So do you accept that the British (& Scottish) Labour party supports Trident in Scottish waters. And that's no controversial?

Do you also accept the British (& Scottish) Labour party supports Scotland paying a share of HS2 and other expensive English projects. And that's no controversial?

Do you agree with me that the Tory & Labour parties are twa cheeks o' the same arse regarding their disdain for Scotland?

How do you explain a royalist as the heid man of a so-called socialist party?

On 04/06/2020 at 11:03, WhiteRoseKillie said:

The two main parties' disdain, and perceived disdain, for Scotland just reflects the casually racist attitude a majority of potential voters down here hold towards all the Celtic Nations.

It's no just the casual racism of potential English voters. It's also the same thing from the English political parties.

The Tory and the Labour party (& the LibDems) have all refused to acknowledge that Scotland can decide herself  (through a referendum) whether to stay or go .

Would you agree with me it is the Scottish electorate who will make the decisions and no BoJo or Starmer.

There's a lot of Labour members, MPs and yes, even a very recent leader, who want rid of all Nuclear weapons. It is an idea which has been pushed aside in the priority queue by Brexit, imho. Let's see where we go in future.

Rubbish! This is from 3 years ago

THE LABOUR PARTY MANIFESTO 2017

Labour supports the renewal of the Trident nuclear deterrent. As a nuclear-armed power, our country has a responsibility to fulfil our obligations under the Nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty.

 and this is the Scottish Labour version. Weasel words  from a weasel party

THE SCOTTISH LABOUR PARTY MANIFESTO 2017

Defence is a reserved issue and UK Labour continues to support the renewal of the Trident nuclear deterrent.

Whit's the betting that the next manifesto says exactly the same.

__________________

What exactly makes you think that Labour supports HS2 in the form promoted by the Tories? There was a party which had a manifesto pledge to continue the line into Scotland, which I assume you would be in favour of. Shame England wanted to Get Brexit Done...

I've no idea but I've yet to read anything from a UK/Scottish Labour party decrying the fact that Scotland has to pay a share of the HS2 costs as well as other expensive English projects. Also I'm no in favour of extending HS2 to Scotland. It would make far more sense to electrify the whole of main line Scottish Routes.

How much of a Royalist is Starmer? How important is his view on that issue to his psition as leader? Again, I would say there is a large minority of the Party (YT included) who would kick the Windsors and all their extanded family of parasites onto the streets and use their property portfolio as housing for the deserving, but that is something we'd be swimming against the tide with at the moment.

He is enough of a royalist to bend the knee and acknowledge Charlie Windsor as his better/superior. If he is the heid man of a socialist party then why does he no reject his title?

I do enjoy reading your posts, Willie, but at times you do come over a wee bit McGlashan-ey.

I always enjoy reading your posts and usually concur with the sentiments but how can you say that the Labour Party is non-controversial.

And what or who is McGlashan?

 

[dirty dingus]

3 minutes ago, D.A.F.C said:

SNP fanboy = normal
Anyone else = nutcase who doesn't realise how brilliant the snp are.


This is the attitude that cost the yes vote imo.

[welshbairn]

On 04/06/2020 at 08:59, Wee Willie said:

 

If you have Nationalists on one side and unionists on the other side what is a 'reasoned middle ground'?

 

15 minutes ago, Wee Willie said:

I'm glad ye posted this political post cos it allows me tae revisit mine when I didnae get an answer.

 

 

 

I'm still agog.

alta-pete & NotThePars care tae answer?

I'll have a go Willie. Independence is probably the best way ahead for Scotland, but it doesn't mean nothing else matters.

[pandarilla]

I'll have a go Willie. Independence is probably the best way ahead for Scotland, but it doesn't mean nothing else matters.

Absolutely this.