International COVID-19 Updates & Discussion 2

Status
Not open for further replies.

flippakitten

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2015
Messages
2,107
Seriously?


Article 1:
Mr Johnson, from NHS England said: "What we were concerned to do, when the virus was increasing very rapidly in the population, was to make sure that we could get the right balance between the risk of catching the virus, and the risk of having people's cancer get worse.
So not lockdowns but COVID19

Article 2:
Was for 2019

Article 3:
Has always been a concern and has been brought up plenty of times. I haven't seen anything recent about this.

Article 4:
Famine in as many as three dozen countries is "a very real and dangerous possibility" due to ongoing wars and conflicts, economic crises and natural disasters, World Food Program Executive Director David Beasley told the U.N. Security Council during a virtual briefing.

It's easy to connect all these things and simply blame lockdowns but the reality is lockdown did what it was supposed to especially in the UK.

If you look and listen now, there's a lot more hospital capacity. You don't see medical staff wearing plastic aprons and home made visors or cloth masks or sharing respirators. There's better treatments. It's just in a much stronger position now than in March.

Without lockdown (voluntary or mandated) it could have easily collapsed medical systems, which would have taken much longer to restore than 3 months.
 

flippakitten

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2015
Messages
2,107
Nothing different to what they had before - goverment announces what precautions should be taken and leaves the rest to its citizens. Exactly what has been happening for months and Sweden got criticized heavily.
All of a sudden, there are discussions about Sweden actually having had a form of a lockdown + recommendations going forward being portrayed as a lockdown itself.

Someone's really trying very hard to make seem like Swedens current and future success actually being down to a lockdown

I'm guessing your only measure of success is not having a lockdown, otherwise they seem to be on par with rest of the world. Econmically and COVID statistics wise they're not doing any better.

Hospitals did not become as overwhelmed as those in northern Italy or New York City, but that was in part because many severely ill patients weren’t hospitalized. A 17 March directive to Stockholm area hospitals stated patients older than 80 or with a body mass index above 40 should not be admitted to intensive care, because they were less likely to recover. Most nursing homes were not equipped to administer oxygen, so many residents instead received morphine to alleviate their suffering. Newspaper reports told stories of people who died after being turned away from emergency rooms because they were deemed too young to suffer serious COVID-19 complications.

 

garp

Executive Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2004
Messages
8,624
Without lockdown (voluntary or mandated) it could have easily collapsed medical systems, which would have taken much longer to restore than 3 months.
Instead they collapsed many medical systems unrelated to Covid-19, including reducing the capacity to screen, refer and treat cancer patients to the extent that there will be almost as many avoidable cancer deaths as there were Covid-19 deaths, and that's just one medical condition. How does that make any sense?
 

Chris_the_Brit

High Tory
Joined
Mar 6, 2004
Messages
32,393

Wales will go into a "short, sharp" national lockdown from Friday, 23 October until Monday, 9 November.
People will be told to stay at home, while pubs, restaurants and non-essential shops will shut.
Primary schools will reopen after the half term break, but only Years Seven and Eight in secondary schools will return at that time.
Gatherings indoors and outdoors with people not in a single household will be banned as part of the "firebreak".
Leisure businesses, community centres, libraries and recycling centres will shut. Places of worship will be closed for normal services, except for funerals and weddings.
The announcement follows rising case numbers in Wales and increasing hospital admissions, and replaces the 17 local lockdowns that had been in place.
 

flippakitten

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2015
Messages
2,107
Instead they collapsed many medical systems unrelated to Covid-19, including reducing the capacity to screen, refer and treat cancer patients to the extent that there will be almost as many avoidable cancer deaths as there were Covid-19 deaths, and that's just one medical condition. How does that make any sense?

and if all those patients went for screening when hospitals were nearing capacity who's to say they wouldn't have caught and/or died from COVID19 thus sending those numbers in the opposite direction.

It's not as simple as X will cause Y.
 

flippakitten

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2015
Messages
2,107
Ah yes, my bad, however, you will find reams of material about mental health concerns arising from the fallout due to the Covid response.

Here's one from Japan, for example:


Japan is probably not a great example considering their response was apparently more lax than Sweden and they have a significally higher population age. Suicide rate there would be due to COVID19 itself and not lockdowns.

Although, have I understood you wrong? Are you talking about lockdowns, or COVID19 in general?
 

dualmeister

Honorary Master
Joined
Oct 15, 2005
Messages
28,698
5K infected then -1K die?
The - bars are seem out of proportion. Not sure what I'm missing :unsure:
 

tetrasect

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2009
Messages
1,390
Ah yes, my bad, however, you will find reams of material about mental health concerns arising from the fallout due to the Covid response.

Here's one from Japan, for example:


Yeah except when they actually had a lockdown the suicide rate dropped by 20%.


So it seems it's not the lockdown, but instead the ending of the lockdown that is responsible for the increase in suicides...
 

tetrasect

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2009
Messages
1,390
Seriously?
Article 3:
Has always been a concern and has been brought up plenty of times. I haven't seen anything recent about this.

The whole TB thing is a total sham. Using typical WHO logic to conclude that because there are significantly less TB cases being reported that must mean that there is actually a massive increase in cases and all of those unreported cases will die because of lack of treatment. So give us more money!

They even upped the number to 1.8 million deaths that "could happen" in 2020. And this is now, half way through October!
So all the "unreported" (ie probably non-existent) TB cases magically survived without treatment but will all die in the next 2 months? What a load of BS!

Did they ever stop to think that the reason there are less TB cases is because the measures we use against Covid are equally if not even more effective against TB?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top