Jump to content

Schools - yawn -


Observer II
 Share

Recommended Posts

Getting bored now with the incessant whinging and whining over schools re-opening - just to get a sense of perspective,  the loss of 12 months schooling does not compare with the loss of a life.   No doubt they will be reopened, when it is safe to do so and in a phased and gradual manner, starting with the youngest age groups. But that should not be before the "R" rate has been radically reduced, and if that's beyond Easter, so be it.    😠     😷

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The media doesn't seem to get anything does it. The danger comes from number of infections. The number of mutations is proportional the number of infections. We need R to be low enough to keep the number of infections down. The number of infections drives the number of deaths, the number of Infections drives the number of hospitalisations. Secondary school children are 7 times more likely to bring the infection into a household. What is the matter with these people.

Primary schools pupils are only about 2.5 time better at spreading than adults. Secondary schools need to be kept shut.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well i have been told in no uncertain terms that the schools cannot be used as vaccination centres as they are not actually fully closed.

They are open for children of key workers and certain age groups. People i know who work at schools have informed me of this, in quite vehement terms in some cases.:oops:

Same goes for universities.

which leaves fitness centres, bingo halls and theatres as possible sites.....:rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t always agree with some of the decisions that the government makes but I sure as heck feel sorry for Boris when the media ask stupid questions like this that they know full well that he can’t possibly answer. How he manages to reply without sarcasm or insulting their intelligence I’ll never know. If it were me it’d definitely be both barrels, but I suppose that’s why he’s PM and not me. 😊

 

Bill 😊

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with Boris is that he hasn't learned by his mistakes, he's still repeating them. The reason for this is clearly pressure from the libertarian wing of his Party, where his instincts lie.   Almost before the latest lockdown was announced, they were demanding road maps for a return to schools etc; what they can't accept is that in a balance between health and the economy, health must take priority, otherwise we'll get groundhog day every year, and continued higher death tolls.    😷

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So 100,000 deaths is being proclaimed as a landmark figure, with no consideration of the facts. In any year in the UK there are around 600,000 deaths and many, if not most, of the people who have died this year would have died anyway, a lot of them from respiratory diseases. The way things are being blown up we could be forgiven for thinking that nobody ever died before, and trying to blame Boris for anyone dying, let alone 100,000 people dying, is nothing short of insanity. It's probably an understandable human trait when something goes wrong, to cast around for someone to blame, especially when the TV and newspaper "experts" are justifying their existence by pointing their fingers. I know it's unpopular to say this, but how many of the people who have died of Covid contributed to their own demise by being, what some posters on here like to refer to as, "covidiots"? What's that you say? No? They were all good and obeyed the rules, it was those stupid "covidiots" who didn't obey the rules but were somehow immune who passed the infection on to the "good" people by some unknown mechanism?

It's also apparently unpopular to ask awkward questions like how many of the 100,000 died "of" covid and how many "with" covid". How many went into hospital without the virus but were infected while there (at one point it was estimated that 25% of covid patients had caught it in hospital). How many excess deaths have there been/will there be from non-covid related diseases that have gone undectected due to the NHS becoming covid-centric?

Mean-time lets ask Boris helpful questions (/sarc) about why he didn't do x,y and z sooner/later/faster/slower, why he didn't do the NHS's and PHE's jobs for them? In fact, what's he doing sat in Downing Street when he should be out there vaccinating the masses in person?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I particularly liked the Daily Mirrors question yesterday that I had to rewind to confirm it was even said “Have you spoken to the families of all those who have died” Why didn’t he just reply “Yes, every single one of them” just to see how they’d react.

As for the numbers, no not good at all and the debate for why this happened will no doubt roll on for a long time. The thing is Asp and I’ve said this so many times, the numbers could be argued to be not much worse than a normal year with a bit of a flu outbreak. But the numbers are only being held at this level because we are in an imposed lockdown without which they would be off the scale and you don’t seem to be grasping this point.

Twelve months down the line and I think that most of the sceptics have come to the conclusion that this maybe isn’t fake news after all and their negative comments on sites such as www are now thankfully few and between. The with covid or from covid argument might have had some relevance at the start of the outbreak but these days it’s totally meaningless.

And as for covidiots, we all have differing opinions so I can only speak for myself when I say that I’d define them as those people who openly and deliberately refuse to comply with the rules and guidance. I have said in the past that these people because of their actions have probably already been infected and so may be less of a risk than the “normal” people around us. I don’t think this point of view is too far off the mark or difficult to understand.

 

Bill 😊

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's actually closer to 120,000, the 100,000 was passed around 3 weeks ago, there's a reporting delay in the death certification.   There's actually been a strange reduction in non-covid deaths, a reduction from the seasonal average, which may be due to an absence of flu, or the contracting of flu, due to the extra precautions.   When this all kicked off, the Chief Medical Officer said that if it claimed less than 20,000 lives we will be lucky; the ham fisted response and the incessant bleating of the sceptics has ensured that it's now six times that figure.   Of course many were infected in hospitals, as that's where people go when they're sick (note GP's surgeries rapidly closed down);  that's why there should have been separate isolation hospitals and deep cleaning regimes, with adequate PPE.   But in order to prevent bed blocking, they sent infected old folk back to their care homes, making certain they would die and so to, the rest of their occupants.   So they would have died anyway, tell that to relatives, on average most have lost 10 years of life expectancy; lots of younger people have died or are now smitten with long covid.   As for Boris, he's at least been man enough to accept that the buck stops with him, and there's plenty of buck to be passed.      😷

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bill, you say the numbers are "not good". Not good compared with what? As for the numbers being held down because of the lockdown, well that is debateable because, as other people have said, we haven't had a lockdown that's effective in stopping the spread (obviously) but one that's effective in destroying lives and businesses and stopping people going for a walk in the park on their own, that's "not good".

Why is the "with covid of covid" distinction "meaningless"? It's only meaningless if you aren't interested in the truth. I know I'd be more upset if a relation of mine was taken into hospital having suffered a heart-attack and subsequently died of the heart-attack but found his/her death certificate stated he/she had died "with covid" oh, and his/her heart had been a cause as well. Even worse if I knew he/she was otherwise healthy when the initial heart-attack occurred, but caught covid in hospital. You can put it down as an accounting detail if you like, but when deaths are being constantly shoved at us to tell us what a naughty population we've been by not obeying nanny it does matter. I'm not saying it's a conspiracy but I'm sure most people are aware of friends or relatives who have died (I'm not talking about covid here) and who have been given a cause of death which has later been shown to be erroneous, only initially ascribed as cause because it was easier than investigating further - laziness in other words. I know it's happened to me three times!

How can somebody who has already been infected "because of their actions" be less of a risk than "normal people" (whoever they may be)? Are you saying that your "covidiots" are somehow different physically than"normal" people? Doesn't make sense to me!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am surprised that the very sage Sir Kier has not been made the Covid Tsar....sat in a very comfortable position on the benches opposite he only needs to snipe & carp at Boris's heels to score political points ,ably supported by Lisa "Jack Russell" Nandy. I'm surprised this knowledgeable knight has not offered his foresight to save the population from covid.

As for catching the virus , my ex caught it in hospital into which she had gone for heart & kidney problems ,also she is diabetic. She was in the Borough for nearly a month during which time she caught covid which you would not expect her to recover from but a course of strong antibiotics on the ward did the trick..

My cousin went into hospital with covid ,only early 60s, & was horrified to find she had a "Do not resuscitate" notice on her file. As it happened she recovered & came home, but how many more covid patients could have succumbed to a DNR notice.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Observer II said:

It's actually closer to 120,000, the 100,000 was passed around 3 weeks ago, there's a reporting delay in the death certification.   There's actually been a strange reduction in non-covid deaths, a reduction from the seasonal average, which may be due to an absence of flu, or the contracting of flu, due to the extra precautions.   When this all kicked off, the Chief Medical Officer said that if it claimed less than 20,000 lives we will be lucky; the ham fisted response and the incessant bleating of the sceptics has ensured that it's now six times that figure.   Of course many were infected in hospitals, as that's where people go when they're sick (note GP's surgeries rapidly closed down);  that's why there should have been separate isolation hospitals and deep cleaning regimes, with adequate PPE.   But in order to prevent bed blocking, they sent infected old folk back to their care homes, making certain they would die and so to, the rest of their occupants.   So they would have died anyway, tell that to relatives, on average most have lost 10 years of life expectancy; lots of younger people have died or are now smitten with long covid.   As for Boris, he's at least been man enough to accept that the buck stops with him, and there's plenty of buck to be passed.      😷

Has " the incessant bleating of the sceptics" gone down on many death certificates?

"on average most have lost 10 years of life expectancy" - Really? The average age of covid deaths is 82, not 92, while the average life expectancy for males in 2019 was 79.9 years and 83.6 for females. Most deaths have been of people with co-morbidities so your claim of them losing 10 years of life is dubious to say the least. And again people die, it's part of our existence!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, asperity said:

Has " the incessant bleating of the sceptics" gone down on many death certificates?

"on average most have lost 10 years of life expectancy" - Really? The average age of covid deaths is 82, not 92, while the average life expectancy for males in 2019 was 79.9 years and 83.6 for females. Most deaths have been of people with co-morbidities so your claim of them losing 10 years of life is dubious to say the least. And again people die, it's part of our existence!

This is what "the experts" are saying on TV news.😷

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's scary Davy. I've always said that if you're sick the last place you want to be is in hospital. Unfortunately for a lot of sick people hospital is the last place they find themselves.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...