Off Topic SARS-CoV-2 Covid-19

I do hope you're not thinking that we need the people working to service the economy rather than the other way round. Do you not agree with the basic concept of slowing down the spread of the disease to avoid a) overwhelming the healthcare systems b) ensure there are enough well people to keep infrastructure like electricity, water, telecoms, food supply going?

My only real quibble with what we're doing is that we're not doing enough testing - people are off sick at home that could be at essential work as they have a "normal" bug rather than covid-19. Plus if we identify who has already had it and is well, those people could be working in some of the higher risk areas to protect those who haven't had it yet.

 

Played for fools.

I think we've got consensus and government governed by loud voices in the media and social media waves and globalist forces who will sacrifice us to suit their aims, then expect us to wear the costs. This virus was in the public sphere mid January and it's effect was well known by February.. Up until last week, groups of international tourists and business people , mainly from the far East, were being flown into Tromsø and showed round on collective bus tours. One week later, teenagers in Bergen are being fined ca. £150 for meeting their mates. It's a joke.

 

We will see after the effects of the disease have receded, how the essential workers are rewarded by society for theirs and their families sacrifice.

I don't agree that the effects of the illness amongst the 'healthy' group are that severe enough to cripple the economy and services.

 

Ok, so you're in the "people service the economy" camp. I suspect we have such different world-views that we'll never agree on this one.

Just pointing out though that no-one knows if they are in the majority that gets mild symptoms or the minority that need medical attention until they get actually get it. That's the science, whether you "agree" or not.

 

The frontline staff are being told not to report ppe shortages!
On the testing front some of the chemical companies have reported not being asked to help !
NHS workers saying that the supplies are shambolic !
Our friends daughter who is a nurse has said that there is not enough supply!

 

That's fantastic news. I hope it's repeated across the board.

I'd like to see the private sector fund the equivalent of the standard of private healthcare for all working through this period in essential roles.

 

If Iceland is taken as an example, in the 18-65 age range, 99% of the infected don't need hospital treatment. This isnt entirely accurate and reliant on many varying factors, I know, but the effect is largely the burden on the elderly and infirm. They should be isolated and protected. The rest allowed paid sick leave and to carry on as normal.

 

It appears that there are people around who believe this virus is NOT a loaded gun, and that it's ok for irresponsible members of society to run riot against sensible precautions to prevent it spreading.
Nothing like self defining the value of human lives is there. Remarkable.

 

Round them up and put them down.

 

Right, so even if we take a figure as low as 1% needing hospitalisation, and extrapolate that out to the U.K. population, that’s still 400,000 18-65 year olds needing hospital care over the next few months if we just let everyone get it.

Plus, the more it circulates, the more likely it is that the elderly and medically vulnerable will get it. The “healthy” elderly are still going to the shops and for a walk like the rest of us, they’re not under house arrest.

 

If the "management" of the NHS can't organise the distribution of PPE then we should get the army to do it. Threatening NHS frontline workers is not on and NHS managers who do, should be sacked. If they are as completely useless as I suspect, then they will be no loss.

 

Building extra hospitals? considering that most scheduled operations have been cancelled and the emergency admissions must be way down. Does anyone know the number of hospitalised with the virus compared to the regular number of patients in hospital?

 

But why?
Whats the hidden agenda?

 

That's a wilful misinterpretation of what I have written.

I believe that the vulnerable and elderly should be supported to isolate and protect themselves, as the virus is a loaded gun for them. This should be done for the period it takes for group immunity to develop. For the majority of the rest of society, my belief having experienced similar before, is that with adequate enforced sick pay, society can survive without the lock down and economic crash. I also believe that the economic crash will cause more deaths than the virus, going from previous economic crashes and the suicides and breakdowns that follow.

A full lock down, but not for tourists, business travel, London underground commuters and certain minority groups, is not a sensible precaution.

 

Which is why I have written 4 times now that the elderly and vulnerable need to be isolated and supported throughout this period.

 

Ha, there's a no politics rule which I have been censored before, so I can't answer this.

 

Right, but how would you do that over and above current measures? You can’t seal them in their houses in this country.

 

That's disingenuous maths. Your figures are if the whole population is infected, which is unprecedented and unlikely.

 

It can be enforced the same way that its being enforced for 100% of the population now. I'd like to see utilities billing holidays and free delivery costs for food via phone and Internet for those affected.