What's new
PNE Online
Welcome to PNE-Online. Why not register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox! You can also join up as a forum Patron to help support in the running costs of the forum.

This corona virus thing...

I feel like on one hand we have the likes of @sliper saying that the overall excess deaths in the uk aren’t really that extraordinary- and that deaths are being unfairly attributed to Covid. On the other, people saying that these excess deaths really are massively out of line with both normality- and other countries - and it’s our shite government to blame.

It would be good if both “sides” took a deep breath and try to look for evidence that the other side might be right- or that at least the middle ground is nearer the truth. Then come back with honest opinions (which might be not changed much - but the national debate is getting circular)
 
portisheadpete said:
And? If we werent taking care, the deaths from both Covid and flu and accidents would be through the roof rather than just markedly higher than usual in toto. No?
Click to expand...

I've added a chart..

It shows that two countries with distinctly different strategies have remarkably similar mortality curves. To my mind this adds weight to the argument that UK lockdowns have made little difference.

If "lockdown" was controlling the spread of the virus... we would surely expect that Sweden (with its more lax restrictions) would continue to see mortality rise after the UK's Covid mortality begins to decline last Spring but it doesn't ?

The second point is "can you identify the point on this chart when the first lockdown was lifted ?" we know the date but can you see any difference in the chart after the first lock down was lifted ? Even if you accept that seasonal factors are generally bringing the mortality down we would surely see some upturn in mortality a week or two after the lockdown was lifted if "lockdown" was preventing deaths ?Covid mortality.jpg

@Regardless the chart also "seems" to confirm the existence of the second wave.
 
Last edited:
sliper said:
I've added a chart..

It shows that two countries with distinctly different strategies have remarkably similar mortality curves. To my mind this adds weight to the argument that UK lockdowns have made little difference.

If "lockdown" was controlling the spread of the virus... we would surely expect that Sweden (with its more lax restrictions) would continue to see mortality rise after the UK's Covid mortality begins to decline last Spring but it doesn't ?

The second point is "can you identify the point on this chart when the first lockdown was lifted ?" we know the date but can you see any difference in the chart after the first lock down was lifted ? Even if you accept that seasonal factors are generally bringing the mortality down we would surely see some upturn in mortality a week or two after the lockdown was lifted if "lockdown" was preventing deaths ?View attachment 2765

@Regardless the chart also "seems" to confirm the existence of the second wave.
Click to expand...

Well clearly you didn’t like the suggestion I made half an hour ago!
 
The UK is hampered by it's relatively number of beds in the health system. Reducing that systematically over the last few decades show it's a factor in both the reasoning behind having lockdowns, the reason for our high mortality rates outside of hospital and on the long term impact on people who haven't been able to attend for treatment in the meantime. Not withstanding the long term effects that aren't even measureable yet but will probably have the biggest impact

www.health.org.uk

Did hospital capacity affect mortality during the pandemic’s first wave? | The Health Foundation

The Health Foundation is an independent charity committed to bringing about better health and health care for people in the UK. Find out more about us.
www.health.org.uk www.health.org.uk

Conclusions​

Hospital capacity was a concern entering the crisis. The COVID-19 case fatality rate early in the pandemic estimated at around 0.4–1%, and speed of transmission, created a strong imperative for governments to act to protect health systems. Indeed, the risk of cases exceeding hospital capacity has been an important part of the justification for imposing the first, and now a second, lockdown.

While the UK entered the pandemic with low hospital capacity (eg beds) compared with other countries, steps were taken to prevent hospital capacity being overwhelmed. The data presented here suggest the timing of interventions to slow transmission (eg to impose a lockdown) was important in determining the death rate from COVID-19. Our data are largely descriptive, but consistent with the argument that locking down a week or two earlier in the UK would have reduced the number of deaths – a suggestion reinforced by subsequent research.

The NHS did not run out of capacity during the first spike in COVID-19 cases, but there are other ways that low hospital capacity could have impacted death rates. Messaging early in the pandemic may have discouraged people from accessing health services; while a focus on hospital capacity seemed to take priority over other areas where action was needed, such as care homes. There are signs, as we enter a second lockdown, that policymakers in the UK are more mindful of the need to ensure health care remains available and of the risks in care homes.

Finally, it is important to acknowledge that a lockdown imposes other societal costs, both directly through increases in isolation and other mental health impacts, and indirectly via the overall economy, that should be considered when weighing up the overall response. Some of these effects will not be fully understood for years.
Click to expand...
 
Regardless said:
I feel like on one hand we have the likes of @sliper saying that the overall excess deaths in the uk aren’t really that extraordinary- and that deaths are being unfairly attributed to Covid. On the other, people saying that these excess deaths really are massively out of line with both normality- and other countries - and it’s our shite government to blame.

It would be good if both “sides” took a deep breath and try to look for evidence that the other side might be right- or that at least the middle ground is nearer the truth. Then come back with honest opinions (which might be not changed much - but the national debate is getting circular)
Click to expand...

The problem with that is the extremely one sided nature of the debate.. on the one side you have the MSM and government and the politicisation of the whole debate and on the other various folks being censored and labelled in derogatory ways because they dare to question things.

This is why I appealed for mods to do their job and ensure here we maintained more of a level playing field. For me this was always the value of a forum like this.
 
Regardless said:
Well clearly you didn’t like the suggestion I made half an hour ago!
Click to expand...

I didnt either. Sliper obviously thinks that Im at no lesser risk of catching the virus cooped up at home not seeing anyone than running up Corn St and kissing all the beautiful people of Bristol. Im out of here.
 
portisheadpete said:
I didnt either. Sliper obviously thinks that Im at no lesser risk of catching the virus cooped up at home not seeing anyone than running up Corn St and kissing all the beautiful people of Bristol. Im out of here.
Click to expand...

I would say that if anything brought infection and mortality rates down it was most likely those things that we did in common with Sweden.. social distancing, handwashing. But based on the evidence of this chart forcing people to stay in their homes for months actually makes little difference.

A closer look at the charts just prior to the first lockdown indicates (to me) that these measures were starting to work.. but I'll leave others to check that for themselves.
 
Last edited:
sliper said:
The problem with that is the extremely one sided nature of the debate.. on the one side you have the MSM and government and the politicisation of the whole debate and on the other various folks being censored and labelled in derogatory ways because they dare to question things.

This is why I appealed for mods to do their job and ensure here we maintained more of a level playing field. For me this was always the value of a forum like this.
Click to expand...

my suggestion is for everyone to really consider the “other” view. For you, that would include challenging your own fixed view that the entire MSM and government are against you. Yes - it’s possible that you’re right- but history tells us when everyone holds a different view to an individual, in almost every case, it’s the individual that’s wrong.

For other people, the challenge is to consider the possibility that ‘group-think” is playing a part here - and that there is more to the story.
 
Regardless said:
my suggestion is for everyone to really consider the “other” view. For you, that would include challenging your own fixed view that the entire MSM and government are against you. Yes - it’s possible that you’re right- but history tells us when everyone holds a different view to an individual, in almost every case, it’s the individual that’s wrong.

For other people, the challenge is to consider the possibility that ‘group-think” is playing a part here - and that there is more to the story.
Click to expand...

I don't think the "entire MSM and government are against me" I just disagree with a lot of what they are saying and doing... and want to point it out.
But in the new spirit of forum "love and peace".. I look forward to your detailed and sympathetic defence of the Brexit argument. ;)
 
raefil said:
Bollocks.

that is total and utter nonsense.
Click to expand...
It's not Bollocks; there is a lot of truth in it

No doubt covid can be a Secondary cause to other conditions like Cancer, Heart or Lung problems, but to always say it’s the Primary cause I believe is misleading

That’s not to say it’s nor dangerous, of Course it is
 
sliper said:
I would say that if anything brought infection and mortality rates down it was most likely those things that we did in common with Sweden.. social distancing, handwashing. But based on the evidence of this chart forcing people to stay in their homes for months actually makes little difference.

A closer look at the charts just prior to the first lockdown indicates (to me) that these measures were starting to work.. but I'll leave others to check that for themselves.
Click to expand...

What would you do tomorrow. Practical suggestions I mean, not charts and comparisons with Sweden.
 
portisheadpete said:
.
Click to expand...
sliper said:
I don't think the "entire MSM and government are against me" I just disagree with a lot of what they are saying and doing... and want to point it out.
But in the new spirit of forum "love and peace".. I look forward to your detailed and sympathetic defence of the Brexit argument. ;)
Click to expand...

And when I’ve done that, I will do some research and provide a PowerPoint on the merits of arguments put forward by the Flat Earth Society 😂
 
portisheadpete said:
I didnt either. Sliper obviously thinks that Im at no lesser risk of catching the virus cooped up at home not seeing anyone than running up Corn St and kissing all the beautiful people of Bristol. Im out of here.
Click to expand...

By my suggestion, the challenge for you would perhaps be to look behind his blindingly stupid (imo) mantra of “lockdowns don’t work”. Your post clearly illustrates an obvious truth.

But on the other hand, they don’t work as effectively in the real world as I would expect. (they work a lot better than sliper gives credit for though!) There is a lot of behavioural science, and other considerations that aren’t taken account of when we propose lockdowns etc.

We have top division health service and yet a horrendous death toll. Why?

As incompetent and corrupt as this government has been, are we really sure that other countries are all much more competent? Is it really as simple as saying that we don’t implement lockdowns as well as other countries?

Going back to my first post of the morning, something doesn’t quite add up - and time for reevaluation, I think.
 
Top