| Two sides of the Covid argument 07:29 - Feb 11 with 11782 views | ElderGrizzly |
One from a privileged Tory MP who has demanded we open up, the other from an actual scientist with evidence
|  | | |  |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 10:03 - Feb 11 with 2745 views | tractordownsouth |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 09:54 - Feb 11 by 26_Paz |
No need for the abuse |
Calling people names isn’t very nice, but have you considered how offensive your words are to people affected by Covid? At work, one of our residents had to say what may well be the last words he’ll ever say to his mum over the phone because he’s unable to visit her in hospital - she’s on a ventilator with Covid. And I’m sure BlueBadger has been through and seen even worse.
By ending restrictions, you’re just creating more situations like that. Yes I know mental health issues have become even more common since lockdown, but the solution to that is to provide more support rather than risk even more lives to the virus. Thing is, it won’t be the likes of Hartley Brewer, Wootton and Grimes that have to comfort those who are ill and grieving, it’s NHS and care home staff. These cranks spouting rubbish are awful people, and the media producers that give them air time in the name of ‘balance’ aren’t much better. [Post edited 11 Feb 2021 10:04]
|  |
| |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 10:11 - Feb 11 with 2718 views | Herbivore |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 10:01 - Feb 11 by 26_Paz |
There are two sides to it, it’s about the amount of deaths that are deemed ‘acceptable’ to enable wider freedoms. Some think this amount is higher than others. |
There aren't two sides to it. There's evidence based arguments like those made by Devi Sridhar, drawing on her expertise to suggest the best way to exit lockdown to avoid excess deaths and future lockdowns. She is presenting an argument. Then there's whingy little bitches like Charles Walker, and some posters on this thread, who just want to be able to do what they want and are happy for people to die to make that happen. There's no argument being offered there, just an expression of entitlement. |  |
| |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 10:14 - Feb 11 with 2711 views | eireblue |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 10:01 - Feb 11 by 26_Paz |
There are two sides to it, it’s about the amount of deaths that are deemed ‘acceptable’ to enable wider freedoms. Some think this amount is higher than others. |
Definition: Cockwomble — A person, usually male or female, prone to making outrageously stupid statements and/or inappropriate behavior while generally having a very high opinion of his own wisdom and importance.
So not abuse to call you a Cockwomble. |  | | |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 10:27 - Feb 11 with 2697 views | Eireannach_gorm |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 10:11 - Feb 11 by Herbivore |
There aren't two sides to it. There's evidence based arguments like those made by Devi Sridhar, drawing on her expertise to suggest the best way to exit lockdown to avoid excess deaths and future lockdowns. She is presenting an argument. Then there's whingy little bitches like Charles Walker, and some posters on this thread, who just want to be able to do what they want and are happy for people to die to make that happen. There's no argument being offered there, just an expression of entitlement. |
This is the kernel of the problem. The whingy little bitch only has to give a sound bite with no justification while the expert has to give a long and reasoned explanation in response.Its all down to feelings Vs facts. |  | | |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 10:31 - Feb 11 with 2689 views | ElderGrizzly |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 08:54 - Feb 11 by Swansea_Blue |
They could always just tell people that, rather than constantly dangle end dates under people's noses. It's an option. |
Indeed.
Scientist asked a direct question, gives an honest answer based on evidence and then those who wanted a different answer criticise it
| | | |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 10:37 - Feb 11 with 2672 views | Pendejo |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 10:01 - Feb 11 by 26_Paz |
There are two sides to it, it’s about the amount of deaths that are deemed ‘acceptable’ to enable wider freedoms. Some think this amount is higher than others. |
It is not about deaths per se, it is about overwhelming our health service and suffering preventable deaths.
With a mortality rate of around 1% ( https://www.imperial.ac.uk/mrc-global-infectious-disease-analysis/covid-19/repor covid is not likely to cause the extinction of the human race.
Ebola is about 50%
https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/ebola-virus-disease
However
Covid is easily transmitted, and Kent mutation upped the transmission rate. The more people infected, the more that need hospital treatment, the more people in hospital the less able the health service are able to manage the illness, then there are deaths that were preventable.
We will all die, we all have an expiry date that we don't know. You can die of natural causes from birth to aged well over 100 years old.
But those magnificent folks in the health service can save some people but they need to have time, equipment, other ancillary products and more importantly, rest.
Lock down has always been about protecting the NHS, by protecting the NHS there's a chance of minimising preventable deaths.
Arguing that it's not needed is akin to, say, putting in an hour's delay before despatching an ambulance and saving only those who survive the "golden hour"
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_hour_(medicine)
(My apologies to those of you in medicine if my understanding of presenting of the subject matter is somewhat lacking. Logic and basic first aid skills applied) |  |
| |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 10:57 - Feb 11 with 2656 views | Eireannach_gorm |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 10:37 - Feb 11 by Pendejo |
It is not about deaths per se, it is about overwhelming our health service and suffering preventable deaths.
With a mortality rate of around 1% ( https://www.imperial.ac.uk/mrc-global-infectious-disease-analysis/covid-19/repor covid is not likely to cause the extinction of the human race.
Ebola is about 50%
https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/ebola-virus-disease
However
Covid is easily transmitted, and Kent mutation upped the transmission rate. The more people infected, the more that need hospital treatment, the more people in hospital the less able the health service are able to manage the illness, then there are deaths that were preventable.
We will all die, we all have an expiry date that we don't know. You can die of natural causes from birth to aged well over 100 years old.
But those magnificent folks in the health service can save some people but they need to have time, equipment, other ancillary products and more importantly, rest.
Lock down has always been about protecting the NHS, by protecting the NHS there's a chance of minimising preventable deaths.
Arguing that it's not needed is akin to, say, putting in an hour's delay before despatching an ambulance and saving only those who survive the "golden hour"
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_hour_(medicine)
(My apologies to those of you in medicine if my understanding of presenting of the subject matter is somewhat lacking. Logic and basic first aid skills applied) |
An additional note is that the ' Golden Hour' is irrelevant if the patient cant get into the hospital.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/patients-treated-in-ambulances-as-letterk | | | |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 11:14 - Feb 11 with 2638 views | BABLUE |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 10:01 - Feb 11 by 26_Paz |
There are two sides to it, it’s about the amount of deaths that are deemed ‘acceptable’ to enable wider freedoms. Some think this amount is higher than others. |
Here he is again, more odious comments
You are now RHMC Paz to me [Post edited 11 Feb 2021 11:14]
|  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 11:28 - Feb 11 with 2614 views | Ewan_Oozami |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 10:01 - Feb 11 by 26_Paz |
There are two sides to it, it’s about the amount of deaths that are deemed ‘acceptable’ to enable wider freedoms. Some think this amount is higher than others. |
So in theory, that same logic could be used to say, get rid of speed limits, or the seat-belt wearing laws, or the need for roadworthy vehicles...I don't see anybody making those arguments...
And how would you argue for a particular amount of "acceptable" deaths? Is 120k fine? 200k? 500k? Until we see body bags piling up in the streets? |  |
| |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 12:00 - Feb 11 with 2580 views | 26_Paz |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 11:28 - Feb 11 by Ewan_Oozami |
So in theory, that same logic could be used to say, get rid of speed limits, or the seat-belt wearing laws, or the need for roadworthy vehicles...I don't see anybody making those arguments...
And how would you argue for a particular amount of "acceptable" deaths? Is 120k fine? 200k? 500k? Until we see body bags piling up in the streets? |
I’m sure if all speed limits were set at 20 miles per hour there would be less deaths in the road, but it’s set higher because it is accepted that a higher speed limit may mean a slightly higher number of road deaths but that’s worth it or the country’s roads would be paralysed.
Once Covid is more manageable in terms of hospitalisations there will be a point where some deaths from it are inevitable, the same as it is for flu every single winter. |  |
| |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 12:03 - Feb 11 with 2581 views | eireblue |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 11:28 - Feb 11 by Ewan_Oozami |
So in theory, that same logic could be used to say, get rid of speed limits, or the seat-belt wearing laws, or the need for roadworthy vehicles...I don't see anybody making those arguments...
And how would you argue for a particular amount of "acceptable" deaths? Is 120k fine? 200k? 500k? Until we see body bags piling up in the streets? |
I think what is happening here is that Paz, has an opinion, that he thinks is so important, that if carried out, more people will die, but that is okay with Paz
And in his thinking, he has ignored some obvious consequences, e.g. if the NHS is overloaded, more people will die.
So one might say he has been somewhat stupid and has a high opinion of his importance.
Paz really does seem to fit the official Wikipedia definition of a Cockwomble.
And since, that term gets passed the carefully constructed language filter without obfuscation, a technique Paz uses when he wants to be sweary, it is not even sweary. | | | |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 12:09 - Feb 11 with 2572 views | Ewan_Oozami |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 12:00 - Feb 11 by 26_Paz |
I’m sure if all speed limits were set at 20 miles per hour there would be less deaths in the road, but it’s set higher because it is accepted that a higher speed limit may mean a slightly higher number of road deaths but that’s worth it or the country’s roads would be paralysed.
Once Covid is more manageable in terms of hospitalisations there will be a point where some deaths from it are inevitable, the same as it is for flu every single winter. |
So who decides when "Covid is more manageable in terms of hospitalisations" then? | |
| |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 12:09 - Feb 11 with 2570 views | BLUEGOLD |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 12:00 - Feb 11 by 26_Paz |
I’m sure if all speed limits were set at 20 miles per hour there would be less deaths in the road, but it’s set higher because it is accepted that a higher speed limit may mean a slightly higher number of road deaths but that’s worth it or the country’s roads would be paralysed.
Once Covid is more manageable in terms of hospitalisations there will be a point where some deaths from it are inevitable, the same as it is for flu every single winter. |
I know what the RHM stands for and can guess at the C based on his posts
Good work |  | | |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 12:11 - Feb 11 with 2561 views | Swansea_Blue |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 10:01 - Feb 11 by 26_Paz |
There are two sides to it, it’s about the amount of deaths that are deemed ‘acceptable’ to enable wider freedoms. Some think this amount is higher than others. |
Or you can manage a public health emergency properly, which results in fewer and shorter lockdowns, impacts the economy less, leads to the earlier return to normality, and saves many, many lives.
Why do people like you want to live with this thing and prolong all the associated types of suffering that go with it? It's borderline sadistic. |  |
| |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 12:11 - Feb 11 with 2561 views | tractordownsouth |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 12:00 - Feb 11 by 26_Paz |
I’m sure if all speed limits were set at 20 miles per hour there would be less deaths in the road, but it’s set higher because it is accepted that a higher speed limit may mean a slightly higher number of road deaths but that’s worth it or the country’s roads would be paralysed.
Once Covid is more manageable in terms of hospitalisations there will be a point where some deaths from it are inevitable, the same as it is for flu every single winter. |
Car accidents weren’t contagious the last time I checked. | |
| |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 12:18 - Feb 11 with 2546 views | 26_Paz |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 12:11 - Feb 11 by tractordownsouth |
Car accidents weren’t contagious the last time I checked. |
Point is you are never going to get it to zero and an amount of deaths caused by this thing will be acceptable to open the country up ... I’m not saying that point is now I’m just saying it will come | |
| |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 12:18 - Feb 11 with 2552 views | Herbivore |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 12:11 - Feb 11 by Swansea_Blue |
Or you can manage a public health emergency properly, which results in fewer and shorter lockdowns, impacts the economy less, leads to the earlier return to normality, and saves many, many lives.
Why do people like you want to live with this thing and prolong all the associated types of suffering that go with it? It's borderline sadistic. |
Me want pint! Me want holiday! | |
| |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 12:22 - Feb 11 with 2545 views | eireblue |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 12:11 - Feb 11 by tractordownsouth |
Car accidents weren’t contagious the last time I checked. |
And as with many things, Paz did not describe accurately why the 30mph limit was used.
Also, many places are moving to 20 mph speed limits where they think it appropriate. | | | |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 12:29 - Feb 11 with 2521 views | 26_Paz |
There will need to be a sensible debate around acceptable number of deaths. Once this is similar to flu opening up will be inevitable. I didn’t realise that was so controversial. Wow, you lefties really are in the mood for a pile on today. [Post edited 11 Feb 2021 12:29]
| |
| |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 12:29 - Feb 11 with 2518 views | reusersfreekicks |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 10:01 - Feb 11 by 26_Paz |
There are two sides to it, it’s about the amount of deaths that are deemed ‘acceptable’ to enable wider freedoms. Some think this amount is higher than others. |
Yep I am happy for people to die so I can piss it up on the Algarve |  | | |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 12:30 - Feb 11 with 2515 views | Herbivore |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 12:18 - Feb 11 by 26_Paz |
Point is you are never going to get it to zero and an amount of deaths caused by this thing will be acceptable to open the country up ... I’m not saying that point is now I’m just saying it will come |
That's not really your argument, you're on record saying that "You can't put a price on freedom" when challenged on how many deaths would be acceptable. In other threads you've expressed that older people should be sacrificed so young people can have more freedom. | |
| |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 12:32 - Feb 11 with 2504 views | jaykay |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 12:18 - Feb 11 by 26_Paz |
Point is you are never going to get it to zero and an amount of deaths caused by this thing will be acceptable to open the country up ... I’m not saying that point is now I’m just saying it will come |
good old mark twain
Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience. |  |
| forensic experts say footers and spruces fingerprints were not found at the scene after the weekends rows |
| |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 12:43 - Feb 11 with 2478 views | 26_Paz |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 12:30 - Feb 11 by Herbivore |
That's not really your argument, you're on record saying that "You can't put a price on freedom" when challenged on how many deaths would be acceptable. In other threads you've expressed that older people should be sacrificed so young people can have more freedom. |
It will essentially boil down to that at some point. Covid will kill an amount of people every year going forwards (like flu does). At some point in the future we will have to decide when to open up and accept an amount of deaths as inevitable. | |
| |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 12:47 - Feb 11 with 2475 views | Herbivore |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 12:43 - Feb 11 by 26_Paz |
It will essentially boil down to that at some point. Covid will kill an amount of people every year going forwards (like flu does). At some point in the future we will have to decide when to open up and accept an amount of deaths as inevitable. |
Again, that's not been your argument. Your argument has been that they should let old people die so you and your mates can go to the pub, and you've been vocal about not really caring how many old people's lives this costs. Also, other countries have pursued - quite successfully in many cases - a zero Covid approach so it's not as inevitable as you suggest that we have to accept X number of deaths. | |
| |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 12:54 - Feb 11 with 2455 views | 26_Paz |
| Two sides of the Covid argument on 12:47 - Feb 11 by Herbivore |
Again, that's not been your argument. Your argument has been that they should let old people die so you and your mates can go to the pub, and you've been vocal about not really caring how many old people's lives this costs. Also, other countries have pursued - quite successfully in many cases - a zero Covid approach so it's not as inevitable as you suggest that we have to accept X number of deaths. |
It’s exactly that. I just consider the point at which we would accept x amount as being sooner than you. It’s fine to disagree, we are not going to all have exactly the same opinions. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
