by Linden Jones' Tash » 22 Mar 2020 16:25
by morganb » 22 Mar 2020 16:39
by Jagermesiter1871 » 22 Mar 2020 18:32
SnowballJagermesiter1871 [
25,000 a day was what he stated but even that sounds pie in the sky for the moment at least.
and he added, "and on up to 250,000
A journey asked him to clarify and he passed the buck to the scientist who waffled
but did not confirm
by Franchise FC » 22 Mar 2020 18:40
Jagermesiter1871SnowballJagermesiter1871 [
25,000 a day was what he stated but even that sounds pie in the sky for the moment at least.
and he added, "and on up to 250,000
A journey asked him to clarify and he passed the buck to the scientist who waffled
but did not confirm
Well that does sounds like essentially every Boris corona virus update so I'm inclined to believe you. The fact people are suggesting the government have handled this well is baffling. Short of doing literally nothing I can't think of many ways they could have been less effective.
by John Madejski's Wallet » 22 Mar 2020 18:44
by Jagermesiter1871 » 22 Mar 2020 18:45
krapmle China has a population of 1.4 billion yet suffered only 3,261 deaths so far.
Panic leads to irrational decision making.
between 250,000 and 600,000 have been dying of flu each year for many years and we do nothing.
Without understanding how many people have actually been infected (not just tested) we don't know how infectious or how deadly all this is.
I don't know how much of a threat this really is but the figures thrown around at the moment when compared to flu, DO NOT justify destroying the world economy. And it is also a proven fact, that if economies suffer, death rates in the population will rise.
So either governments are panic driven at the moment or they know more than they are telling.
by Snowball » 22 Mar 2020 18:48
by Jagermesiter1871 » 22 Mar 2020 18:50
Franchise FCJagermesiter1871Snowball
and he added, "and on up to 250,000
A journey asked him to clarify and he passed the buck to the scientist who waffled
but did not confirm
Well that does sounds like essentially every Boris corona virus update so I'm inclined to believe you. The fact people are suggesting the government have handled this well is baffling. Short of doing literally nothing I can't think of many ways they could have been less effective.
As one of Johnson’s biggest critics, what would you like him/the government to do ?
We are very clearly in unprecedented times and I’m not sure anyone could provide the perfect answer
by Snowball » 22 Mar 2020 18:51
Jagermesiter1871krapmle China has a population of 1.4 billion yet suffered only 3,261 deaths so far.
Panic leads to irrational decision making.
between 250,000 and 600,000 have been dying of flu each year for many years and we do nothing.
Without understanding how many people have actually been infected (not just tested) we don't know how infectious or how deadly all this is.
I don't know how much of a threat this really is but the figures thrown around at the moment when compared to flu, DO NOT justify destroying the world economy. And it is also a proven fact, that if economies suffer, death rates in the population will rise.
So either governments are panic driven at the moment or they know more than they are telling.
You use China as an example and then completely disregard the fact they went on the most extreme shutdown imaginable for well over a month country wide. How do you think their numbers would look if they had done nothing instead confining the whole country to their homes and shutting essentially all business?
by Jagermesiter1871 » 22 Mar 2020 18:52
Snowball For those who think "This is just SARS Mk II"
The UK reached 281 dead today that times 3 is 743
SARS in the whole of the outbreak, worldwide killed 770
The UK alone will pass the total worldwide SARS deaths,
so can we now agree this is on a scale barely imagined before?
=====================================================
1,543 055 - - - 3.56%
1,950 071 - - - 3.64%
2,626 104 - - - 3.96%
3,269 144 - - - 4.41%
3,983 177 - - - 4.44%
5,018 233 - - - 4.64%
5,683 281 - - - 4.94%
Note the last column.
The percentage of confirmed cases eventually dying has
risen every day of the last week, and that percentage is bound
to grow, even if we had zero more cases.
by sandman » 22 Mar 2020 18:52
krapmle China has a population of 1.4 billion yet suffered only 3,261 deaths so far.
Panic leads to irrational decision making.
between 250,000 and 600,000 have been dying of flu each year for many years and we do nothing.
Without understanding how many people have actually been infected (not just tested) we don't know how infectious or how deadly all this is.
I don't know how much of a threat this really is but the figures thrown around at the moment when compared to flu, DO NOT justify destroying the world economy. And it is also a proven fact, that if economies suffer, death rates in the population will rise.
So either governments are panic driven at the moment or they know more than they are telling.
by Jagermesiter1871 » 22 Mar 2020 18:54
SnowballJagermesiter1871krapmle China has a population of 1.4 billion yet suffered only 3,261 deaths so far.
Panic leads to irrational decision making.
between 250,000 and 600,000 have been dying of flu each year for many years and we do nothing.
Without understanding how many people have actually been infected (not just tested) we don't know how infectious or how deadly all this is.
I don't know how much of a threat this really is but the figures thrown around at the moment when compared to flu, DO NOT justify destroying the world economy. And it is also a proven fact, that if economies suffer, death rates in the population will rise.
So either governments are panic driven at the moment or they know more than they are telling.
You use China as an example and then completely disregard the fact they went on the most extreme shutdown imaginable for well over a month country wide. How do you think their numbers would look if they had done nothing instead confining the whole country to their homes and shutting essentially all business?
A serious article a week ago said that if the Chinese had done nothing
to suppress they would by then have reached 8.9 MILLION cases.
by Jagermesiter1871 » 22 Mar 2020 18:55
sandmankrapmle China has a population of 1.4 billion yet suffered only 3,261 deaths so far.
Panic leads to irrational decision making.
between 250,000 and 600,000 have been dying of flu each year for many years and we do nothing.
Without understanding how many people have actually been infected (not just tested) we don't know how infectious or how deadly all this is.
I don't know how much of a threat this really is but the figures thrown around at the moment when compared to flu, DO NOT justify destroying the world economy. And it is also a proven fact, that if economies suffer, death rates in the population will rise.
So either governments are panic driven at the moment or they know more than they are telling.
You actually believe the Communist Chinese government when they say they only had that many deaths? The same Chinese government that hid the thing for over a month?
They're not telling the truth.
They've had way more than that.
by Snowball » 22 Mar 2020 18:58
Jagermesiter1871
Not to mention the bogus non-peer reviewed 'science' that we were following from our 'experts' when pursuing herd immunity, which even at the time seemed at odds to every other nations experts advice. Advice we are now actually following.
by Snowball » 22 Mar 2020 19:00
Jagermesiter1871Snowball For those who think "This is just SARS Mk II"
The UK reached 281 dead today that times 3 is 743
SARS in the whole of the outbreak, worldwide killed 770
The UK alone will pass the total worldwide SARS deaths,
so can we now agree this is on a scale barely imagined before?
=====================================================
1,543 055 - - - 3.56%
1,950 071 - - - 3.64%
2,626 104 - - - 3.96%
3,269 144 - - - 4.41%
3,983 177 - - - 4.44%
5,018 233 - - - 4.64%
5,683 281 - - - 4.94%
Note the last column.
The percentage of confirmed cases eventually dying has
risen every day of the last week, and that percentage is bound
to grow, even if we had zero more cases.
Does anyone think its comparable to SARS? Part of the issue with SARs what that it was so limited in spread that it barely registered on the conscious of Europe.
by Snowball » 22 Mar 2020 19:08
Jagermesiter1871
And that's bearing in mind they openly admit their method of recording numbers will allocate a fair chunk of covid deaths to other causes.
by Jagermesiter1871 » 22 Mar 2020 19:18
SnowballJagermesiter1871
And that's bearing in mind they openly admit their method of recording numbers will allocate a fair chunk of covid deaths to other causes.
Not just the Chinese. There are people in Old People's homes getting sick and dying
with the exact CV19 symptoms, without being tested, without being logged as CV cases
I presume they are effectively being triaged (AKA deliberately allowed to die) because
they are very old and weak, very likely to die anyway and, if they went to hospital, hospitals would crash.
NO, I do not categorically KNOW this or can prove it, but I have a contact in Sicily
who I respect greatly and is in no way a bullshitter, a biologist with a Masters
who told me this was happening and that his contacts in Spain were saying the same.
It's not "a conspiracy" just something that countries under pressure are having to do.
But it DOES (if true) underestimate the COVID-19 death figures
by Snowball » 22 Mar 2020 19:19
by Jagermesiter1871 » 22 Mar 2020 19:20
SnowballJagermesiter1871Snowball For those who think "This is just SARS Mk II"
The UK reached 281 dead today that times 3 is 743
SARS in the whole of the outbreak, worldwide killed 770
The UK alone will pass the total worldwide SARS deaths,
so can we now agree this is on a scale barely imagined before?
=====================================================
1,543 055 - - - 3.56%
1,950 071 - - - 3.64%
2,626 104 - - - 3.96%
3,269 144 - - - 4.41%
3,983 177 - - - 4.44%
5,018 233 - - - 4.64%
5,683 281 - - - 4.94%
Note the last column.
The percentage of confirmed cases eventually dying has
risen every day of the last week, and that percentage is bound
to grow, even if we had zero more cases.
Does anyone think its comparable to SARS? Part of the issue with SARs what that it was so limited in spread that it barely registered on the conscious of Europe.
A few days ago WWII etc was saying we'd soon forget this "just like we did SARS"
by Snowball » 22 Mar 2020 19:22
Jagermesiter1871
Again I could believe it but the reporting in China is skewed to whole different degree. I imagine a lot of deaths there will be attributed to pneumonia or lung disease.
Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 191 guests