"We are suffering from a media epidemic"

[papasmurf]

Action is being taken , and all those over 70 arent going to get it and die.

Precisely.  (I suspect the government saw the theory extrapolation from the Chinese experience and why Dominic Cummings who wanted the herd immumunity option has not been seen since he legged it from 10 Downing Street.)

[Thomas]

No it didn't the Chinese data is actuarial data for those who died, known cases. For those aged 70 and over they death rate was from 7.9% to 14 % the older the age group.

If ALL those age over 70 caught it, extrapololating from the Chinese data would give 1.2 million dead. That is the THEORY if no action were taken to give herd immunity.

Action is being taken , and all those over 70 arent going to get it and die.

[papasmurf]

So its went from 250 000 imperial college figures , 500 000 neil ferguson figures , to 1.2 million acturial chinese figures?

No it didn't the Chinese data is actuarial data for those who died, known cases. For those aged 70 and over they death rate was from 7.9% to 14 % the older the age group.

If ALL those age over 70 caught it, extrapololating from the Chinese data would give 1.2 million dead. That is the THEORY if no action were taken to give herd immunity.

[DeppityDawg]

So its went from 250 000 imperial college figures , 500 000 neil ferguson figures , to 1.2 million acturial chinese figures?



Why not  10 million theoretical Javert figures?



You will probably have some people on board when you are being reasonable pappy , but when you over egg the pudding like this , you start to lose all credibility.



The actual figure as i understand it that government , scientists and medical experts are taking more serious than the worst worst case scenario figures in the entire world based on coughing and sneezing in every single one of the 67 million uk inhabitants faces is around 20 000 based on current factual restrictions being applied.



The rest is nonsensical rubbish which is to be frank switching people off.

Pity we lost the thanks button.....it's a plot I tells ya ...  ::

[DeppityDawg]

Talking to the clouds? Dunno I'm down here actually,and you don't know that if the lockdown hadn't happened many more people would've died by now and the implications for the economy worse.

And so on the one hand you say that there are enough articles in the press to demonstrate your guesses as fact and on the other say people are panicked by press induced speculation

Which is it? :crzy

Ffs have I not already said "I could be wrong"? Have I not already said "it does not mean a deep recession will happen"? Did I imagine writing those things? Ffs they are opinions, which is not the same as stating  "half a million" deaths is a virtual certainty. Where have I said any of my opinions are facts? Show me?



I stated that there are articles in the press to show there are OTHER opinions than  just "we are all going to die" Dad's army clichés about half a million dead (Javerts, before you go into one, not yours) and they at least deserve to be aired. We've had all this before with SARS, with Bird Flu, with CJD, and others. I'm fecked if I'm not going to state my opinion, even if you don't like it.

[Thomas]

Totally theoretically around 1.2 million deaths of those aged 70 or over could die, death rate range thus far between 7.9% and 14% the older people (Chinese acturial data,) applied to UK.

Then there are those in the population with known health issues like disabetes.

So its went from 250 000 imperial college figures , 500 000 neil ferguson figures , to 1.2 million acturial chinese figures?



Why not  10 million theoretical Javert figures?



You will probably have some people on board when you are being reasonable pappy , but when you over egg the pudding like this , you start to lose all credibility.



The actual figure as i understand it that government , scientists and medical experts are taking more serious than the worst worst case scenario figures in the entire world based on coughing and sneezing in every single one of the 67 million uk inhabitants faces is around 20 000 based on current factual restrictions being applied.



The rest is nonsensical rubbish which is to be frank switching people off.

[cromwell]

I'm saying that our societies and their governments are reacting as much to public fear/panic and press induced speculation as they are by factual appraisal. The facts are not known yet. The driving force of these decisions is then the capacity of a nations health services to cope with the cases, not the actual numbers. Has any countries health service collapsed yet or has any countries response yet been shown to be wrong? Sweden? South Korea? Spain? We don't KNOW yet. And the reason we don't know is because no country knows how many of its population is infected, or have already had it. And that is because no country has yet tested anywhere near enough people, or have the capacity to test, for the diesease.  Is there not enough articles in the press to demonstrate this, or am I talking at the clouds?



Where is the FACTUAL data that half a million will die if (by virtually every countries own admission) we don't actually know how many people have been infected? Is it 30000? Or is it 1.5 million? Is the death rate 1%? Or is it 0.1%? Where are the facts? And if you can't point to them, then what else would you say the information our government is acting on is based on?

Talking to the clouds? Dunno I'm down here actually,and you don't know that if the lockdown hadn't happened many more people would've died by now and the implications for the economy worse.

And so on the one hand you say that there are enough articles in the press to demonstrate your guesses as fact and on the other say people are panicked by press induced speculation

Which is it? :crzy

[Thomas]

Exactly. How can we avoid figures and estimates being conflated into facts like the "half a million will die" claim when the actual facts are much more complicated? We are basing a kill or cure reaction to this on at best incomplete and at worse.unknown facts.

Exactly deppity. Totally agree.



Not being funny , but i hardly think javert"the boy who cried wolf" is the go to barometer for common sense and a middle ground after listening to his hysterics for the last four years regarding brexit.

[T00ts]

I'm saying that our societies and their governments are reacting as much to public fear/panic and press induced speculation as they are by factual appraisal. The facts are not known yet. The driving force of these decisions is then the capacity of a nations health services to cope with the cases, not the actual numbers. Has any countries health service collapsed yet or has any countries response yet been shown to be wrong? Sweden? South Korea? Spain? We don't KNOW yet. And the reason we don't know is because no country knows how many of its population is infected, or have already had it. And that is because no country has yet tested anywhere near enough people, or have the capacity to test, for the diesease.  Is there not enough articles in the press to demonstrate this, or am I talking at the clouds?



Where is the FACTUAL data that half a million will die if (by virtually every countries own admission) we don't actually know how many people have been infected? Is it 30000? Or is it 1.5 million? Is the death rate 1%? Or is it 0.1%? Where are the facts? And if you can't point to them, then what else would you say the information our government is acting on is based on?

Surely the only information any Government can go on is what has gone before. I am sure our Government has been watching intently as other countries deal with this. It might be the same virus but each country has modified what has gone before . It doesn't look as though China was honest to start with and once that was suspected it threw a spanner in the works. There  will be a degree of public opinion/media led action because at the end of the day it is human nature to want to have leaders looking as though they are doing the right thing. Our Government have largely followed the lead of other European countries. It is not foolproof as we have discovered but no-one has a crystal ball. Surely even with the so called modelling it is basically guesswork. We pay our money and take a chance. I don't see how we can expect anyone to do much different.

[DeppityDawg]

So are you saying practically the whole world has been shutdown  and world leaders taken in by some con trick and guesses.





Aren't the govt acting on information and advice rather than guesses?

I'm saying that our societies and their governments are reacting as much to public fear/panic and press induced speculation as they are by factual appraisal. The facts are not known yet. The driving force of these decisions is then the capacity of a nations health services to cope with the cases, not the actual numbers. Has any countries health service collapsed yet or has any countries response yet been shown to be wrong? Sweden? South Korea? Spain? We don't KNOW yet. And the reason we don't know is because no country knows how many of its population is infected, or have already had it. And that is because no country has yet tested anywhere near enough people, or have the capacity to test, for the diesease.  Is there not enough articles in the press to demonstrate this, or am I talking at the clouds?



Where is the FACTUAL data that half a million will die if (by virtually every countries own admission) we don't actually know how many people have been infected? Is it 30000? Or is it 1.5 million? Is the death rate 1%? Or is it 0.1%? Where are the facts? And if you can't point to them, then what else would you say the information our government is acting on is based on?

[cromwell]

Exactly. How can we avoid figures and estimates being conflated into facts like the "half a million will die" claim when the actual facts are much more complicated? We are basing a kill or cure reaction to this on at best incomplete and at worse.unknown facts.



Cromwell, I'm not claiming that the younger generation suffering is a fact, it's an opinion. It is Javerts assertion (further back in the thread) that half a million deaths is a virtual certainty. That is the difference. There are plenty of expert opinions on the effects of lockdown, I am not claiming they are facts either, but they ARE risks that need to be balanced against facts too. All the signs that we are heading into a deep recession are there. It doesn't mean there will be one, but as a betting man, I'd sooner bet my shirt on there being a recession than on Javerts claim that half a million (in the UK) will die because of the virus.

So are you saying practically the whole world has been shutdown  and world leaders taken in by some con trick and guesses.

As Thomas pointed out, how will we ever know how many died of their primary health problem, rather than the diesease itself,.or how much longer they would have survived without the covid 19 Pandemic? Where is the information on this? It is not being made available. Im sorry if this sounds callous, but HOW can we make informed decisions for the good of all based on incomplete information and estimates based on guesses?

Aren't the govt acting on information and advice rather than guesses?

[DeppityDawg]

For what its worth deppity , i havent followed the thread all the way back , but im not sure where javert is getting this half a million people dying of covid 19 from?



Imperial college released a paper last week or so , and from that they adivsed the uk government that  ,without a full on suppression strategy , they ESTIMATE potentially 250 000 people may die of covid 19 , and of that 250 000 , half to two thirds may very well have died of another cause over the course of this year.

Exactly. How can we avoid figures and estimates being conflated into facts like the "half a million will die" claim when the actual facts are much more complicated? We are basing a kill or cure reaction to this on at best incomplete and at worse.unknown facts.



Cromwell, I'm not claiming that the younger generation suffering is a fact, it's an opinion. It is Javerts assertion (further back in the thread) that half a million deaths is a virtual certainty. That is the difference. There are plenty of expert opinions on the effects of lockdown, I am not claiming they are facts either, but they ARE risks that need to be balanced against facts too. All the signs that we are heading into a deep recession are there. It doesn't mean there will be one, but as a betting man, I'd sooner bet my shirt on there being a recession than on Javerts claim that half a million (in the UK) will die because of the virus. As Thomas pointed out, how will we ever know how many died of their primary health problem, rather than the diesease itself,.or how much longer they would have survived without the covid 19 Pandemic? Where is the information on this? It is not being made available. Im sorry if this sounds callous, but HOW can we make informed decisions for the good of all based on incomplete information and estimates based on guesses?

[papasmurf]

cant see it.



...but thinking about it , we are now in the farcical situation of arguing which worst case scenario "Guesstimate" is correct in terms of possible deaths?

Totally theoretically around 1.2 million deaths of those aged 70 or over could die, death rate range thus far between 7.9% and 14% the older people (Chinese acturial data,) applied to UK.

Then there are those in the population with known health issues like disabetes.



It is now obvious, (to most people on the forum,) than the age of the those being hospitalised for it/dying is dropping.

Anyone who still thinks they are fireproof from getting seriously ill and or dying, are playing Russian Roulette.

[Thomas]

Posted in this thread a long way back.

cant see it.



...but thinking about it , we are now in the farcical situation of arguing which worst case scenario "Guesstimate" is correct in terms of possible deaths?

[cromwell]

I have not claimed anything else. I have three pensions, and will probably be ok. But I've earned every single one of them, and when I say with blood sweat and tears I fecking well mean just that.

And I didn't say you haven't earned your pensions did I?

But I'm not the one supporting the total lockdown of society that will impact the youngest and those with so little the most, and deny them a future as secure as most people posting on here. You weren't singled out or referred to personally. The average age of posters on here is probably 50 plus at least.

Oh I see so the scientists models are not proven facts but you can safely say that younger people  will be denied a secure future because of this are?