COVID and Football (Merged)

[Turkish]

1 hour ago, Matthew Le God said:

The starting point is you first defining exactly what you mean by 'accept'. The question can't be answered otherwise.

MLG asked “Is it not worth trying to reduce such numbers of people dying over the next few months?”

to what number?

[Noodles34]

20 hours ago, Turkish said:

MLG asked “Is it not worth trying to reduce such numbers of people dying over the next few months?”

to what number?

has he not answered this yet?

 

[East Kent Saint]

We want to see all the graphs for number of infections , hospital admissions and deaths by people who have had Covid to be on a long term downward trend towards zero .

 

[trousers]

21 hours ago, Turkish said:

MLG asked “Is it not worth trying to reduce such numbers of people dying over the next few months?”

to what number?

It's workoutable...

MLG stated we should aim for a lower number than the 25,000 - 75,000 predicted range, ergo, 24,999 satisfies that criteria.

Edited 12 December, 2021 by trousers

[Turkish]

1 hour ago, trousers said:

It's workoutable...

MLG stated we should aim for a lower number than the 25,000 - 75,000 predicted range, ergo, 24,999 satisfies that criteria.

Well considering his rebuttal to me saying we need to accept it and live with it in response to someone saying one death is too many then he had a massive target area to go for. But he’s still bitter about making an arse of himself trying to prove we’re bigger than Leeds plus being reminded he once said we have more match going fans than Everton so he’s on a revenge mission at the moment. Sadly he’s just making himself appear a bigger prat than usual 

Edited 12 December, 2021 by Turkish

[Matthew Le God]

23 hours ago, Turkish said:

MLG asked “Is it not worth trying to reduce such numbers of people dying over the next few months?”

to what number?

1) The range that article gives is a number if some restrictions are in place. You appear to be advocating no restrictions. In which case the article is suggesting the numbers would be above those estimates.

2) My question was rhetorical. A number doesn't need to be stated. I was merely saying it is worth taking efforts to reduce deaths. You appear to have a blasé attitude towards deaths of ten of thousands of fellow citizens in your country. 

Edited 12 December, 2021 by Matthew Le God

[Turkish]

Just now, Matthew Le God said:

1) The range that article gives is a number if some restrictions are in place. You appear to be advocating no restrictions. In which case the article is suggesting the numbers would be above those estimates.

2) My question was rhetorical. A number doesn't need to be stated. I was merely saying it is worth taking efforts to reduce deaths. You appear to have a blaise attitude towards deaths of ten of thousands of fellow citizens in your country. 

You okay hun?

[Matthew Le God]

5 minutes ago, Turkish said:

You okay hun?

I'm fine thanks honey bun

 

[Noodles34]

2 hours ago, East Kent Saint said:

We want to see all the graphs for number of infections , hospital admissions and deaths by people who have had Covid to be on a long term downward trend towards zero .

 

and for flu and other transmissible diseases too? so when someone dies of flu (approx 20,000 per year), we should lockdown?

[East Kent Saint]

18 minutes ago, Noodles34 said:

and for flu and other transmissible diseases too? so when someone dies of flu (approx 20,000 per year), we should lockdown?

This is a pandemic so requires special attention. Similar to Spanish flu (which originated in USA apparently) and killed millions . Once we have the measure of Covid , like flu and HIV , we can have our yearly jabs or pill regimes etc and get back to global warming . 

[Matthew Le God]

54 minutes ago, Noodles34 said:

and for flu and other transmissible diseases too? so when someone dies of flu (approx 20,000 per year), we should lockdown?

That is massively flawed. Even with the  lockdowns we've had the numbers are significantly higher for Covid than the 20k annual deaths for flu.

[Noodles34]

31 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

That is massively flawed. Even with the  lockdowns we've had the numbers are significantly higher for Covid than the 20k annual deaths for flu.

But ones too many yeah?

[JRM]

12 minutes ago, Noodles34 said:

But ones too many yeah?

 

[Matthew Le God]

15 minutes ago, Noodles34 said:

But ones too many yeah?

Can you really not see the difference? We've had lockdowns for Covid and the death numbers still massively dwarf those for the annual flu. The annual flu does not have lockdowns to prevent it. Without lockdowns hospitals would not be able to cope with the numbers for Covid, they can generally each year for flu despite having no lockdowns.

Edited 12 December, 2021 by Matthew Le God

[JRM]

That was nearly 22 years ago, not much has changed every Jan and Feb since. 

[Noodles34]

3 hours ago, Matthew Le God said:

Can you really not see the difference? We've had lockdowns for Covid and the death numbers still massively dwarf those for the annual flu. The annual flu does not have lockdowns to prevent it. Without lockdowns hospitals would not be able to cope with the numbers for Covid, they can generally each year for flu despite having no lockdowns.

ok, so if we get the deaths from covid down to 20k, we can forget about it and carry on?

Edited 12 December, 2021 by Noodles34

[Matthew Le God]

40 minutes ago, Noodles34 said:

ok, so if we get the deaths from covid down to 20k, we can forget about it and carry on?

Are you going to acknowledge my point and the flaw in using flu as an comparison...?

- Flu is at roughly 20k annually without lockdowns. With flu lockdowns it would be lower.

- Covid is significantly higher than 20k despite having lockdowns.  Without lockdowns it would be even higher!

[AlexLaw76]

3 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

Are you going to acknowledge my point and the flaw in using flu as an comparison...?

- Flu is at roughly 20k annually without lockdowns. With flu lockdowns it would be lower.

- Covid is significantly higher than 20k despite having lockdowns.  Without lockdowns it would be even higher!

covid with the jab is significantly higher?

[Matthew Le God]

10 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

covid with the jab is significantly higher?

Yes, the article has a best case scenario of 25,000 deaths and a worst scenario of upto 75,000 deaths in the next 5 months. That is with plan b and vaccines, without plan b and vaccines it would be even higher.

Edited 12 December, 2021 by Matthew Le God

[AlexLaw76]

1 minute ago, Matthew Le God said:

Yes, the article has a worst scenario of upto 75,000 deaths in the next 4 months. That is with plan b and vaccines, without plan b and vaccines it would be even higher.

ah.  The modelling - which has been wildly inaccurate since day dot (and before if Neil Ferguson is involved).

 

[Matthew Le God]

Just now, AlexLaw76 said:

ah.  The modelling - which has been wildly inaccurate since day dot (and before if Neil Ferguson is involved).

Is your modelling better?

[Wade Garrett]

Just do your civic duty and get your booster jab ASAP.

Think of it as protecting others.

Don’t worry about Bill Gates injecting his chip into you.  We’ve been tracked on our phones for years, and can no longer have a private conversation at home because Alexa is listening. 

[LiberalCommunist]

Just do your civic duty and get your booster jab every six months for the next few years.

Lets do the babies just in case as well. 

Follow the science. 🤪

[Whitey Grandad]

1 hour ago, Matthew Le God said:

Are you going to acknowledge my point and the flaw in using flu as an comparison...?

- Flu is at roughly 20k annually without lockdowns. With flu lockdowns it would be lower.

- Covid is significantly higher than 20k despite having lockdowns.  Without lockdowns it would be even higher!

Out of interest, what is the difference between flu lockdowns and Covid lockdowns?

[Lighthouse]

34 minutes ago, LiberalCommunist said:

Just do your civic duty and get your booster jab every six months for the next few years.

Is that such a problem for you? 15 minutes every six months to protect your health and stay out of hospital.

34 minutes ago, LiberalCommunist said:

Lets do the babies just in case as well. 

Nobody has said anything like that yet and if they did what’s your objection?

35 minutes ago, LiberalCommunist said:

Follow the science. 🤪

Correct. Your goofy emoji does nothing to invalidate that statement.

[JRM]

3 hours ago, Matthew Le God said:

Are you going to acknowledge my point and the flaw in using flu as an comparison...?

- Flu is at roughly 20k annually without lockdowns. With flu lockdowns it would be lower.

- Covid is significantly higher than 20k despite having lockdowns.  Without lockdowns it would be even higher!

Do we count flu deaths as anyone who had flu within 28 days of dying? 

Edited 12 December, 2021 by JRM

[Patrick Bateman]

31 minutes ago, JRM said:

Do we count flu deaths as anyone who had flu within 28 days of dying? 

The BMJ is the only source I will look at or refer to; https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2514

No, flu deaths are not inclusive of a prior 28 day period (explanation in the text).

Yes, Covid is far more dangerous than flu (again, explanation in the text). 

[Nolan]

On 10/12/2021 at 13:27, Whitey Grandad said:

I think you have summed the wrong column there. 34,474 unjabbed deaths in total over the whole period against 4,479 double jabbed. Of those who died were doubly jabbed the over 80s were consistently more than the under 80s.

nope. not taking wrong data. I was looking at the week ending 24th September.

Summing the deaths over the whole period is pointless  as the First and 2nd Dose was in progress.

we need to encapsulate whats happening now, not what was happening before people had two jabs in the first half of the year.

 

[Turkish]

10 hours ago, AlexLaw76 said:

ah.  The modelling - which has been wildly inaccurate since day dot (and before if Neil Ferguson is involved).

 

Interesting that they’re saying we could get to 1m infections in the next few week due to the doubling of infections of omicron. Once we hit 1m does it then stop spreading and stop doubling every few days? After we’ve gone from 500k to 1m in two days then surely we’d be at 2m 2 days later, 4 million 2 days after that with half the country infected within 10 days of hitting this nice round 1m figure. I’m confused as to why they’ve stopped at 1m, surely their modelling would mean everyone in the UK will have it mid January or is it because they know it’s all a load of nonsense? 

[Noodles34]

Embarrassing to see Savid on TV this morning, looked uncomfortable, didn't know the figures and could not say that this  variant was actually medically any worse than the previous. If this is going to be the reaction to every new variant, then we're in for a shitty 'rest of life'. 

[Turkish]

5 minutes ago, Noodles34 said:

Embarrassing to see Savid on TV this morning, looked uncomfortable, didn't know the figures and could not say that this  variant was actually medically any worse than the previous. If this is going to be the reaction to every new variant, then we're in for a shitty 'rest of life'. 

You'd think given the bloated berk has addressed the nation twice in 5 days to tell us all how serious it is then at the very least his top man for health would be briefed with at least some information to sound credible wouldnt you. 

[Whitey Grandad]

2 hours ago, Turkish said:

Interesting that they’re saying we could get to 1m infections in the next few week due to the doubling of infections of omicron. Once we hit 1m does it then stop spreading and stop doubling every few days? After we’ve gone from 500k to 1m in two days then surely we’d be at 2m 2 days later, 4 million 2 days after that with half the country infected within 10 days of hitting this nice round 1m figure. I’m confused as to why they’ve stopped at 1m, surely their modelling would mean everyone in the UK will have it mid January or is it because they know it’s all a load of nonsense? 

The spread slows down as the population starts to become saturated.

[East Kent Saint]

Savid rarely blinks , he has shown he is a tosser by telling care staff to get jabbed or fuck off while losing his rag in an interview . I cease to have any respect for Boris or any his bunch , if Boris comes on the tv it goes off as you know he’s lying , listening to Zahawi telling us that the Boris clip showing he was joining in a Quiz last Xmas was Boris working hard , praising his staff , no drinks or tinsel etc made me I’ll rather than angry 🤮

Edited 13 December, 2021 by East Kent Saint

[Noodles34]

Wish this Tory government of double standards would just tuck off. But like Trump, they actually get voted in. I guess when you read some of the tripe on this thread then you can understand why. It’s shame that KS isn’t the great white hope we thought he might have been. 

[vectraman]

So where does this leave children in the rules? I have a 15 year old and a 13 year old who have been single jabbed….Are children now banned? So confusing. 

[Turkish]

10 hours ago, Whitey Grandad said:

The spread slows down as the population starts to become saturated.

Yes obviously. We won’t be going from 500k one day to 1m two days later as they claim, that’s the point

[wild-saint]

On 10/12/2021 at 14:17, waylander said:

A vaccine that stops transmission probably needs to be intranasal administered so that it induces antibodies in the mucous membranes of the sinus.

Interestingly a pal works for AZ and that’s exactly what they are working on and will be released in the new year. 

[waylander]

1 hour ago, wild-saint said:

Interestingly a pal works for AZ and that’s exactly what they are working on and will be released in the new year. 

Good! The sooner the better.

[Turkish]

1 hour ago, wild-saint said:

Interestingly a pal works for AZ and that’s exactly what they are working on and will be released in the new year. 

Who do you want in the sweepstake for where the variant is from when they are trying to get everyone to take this one?

[adrian lord]

Can someone explain what risk unvaccinated people would pose to the vaccinated at a football match, and why?

[The Cat]

2 hours ago, vectraman said:

So where does this leave children in the rules? I have a 15 year old and a 13 year old who have been single jabbed….Are children now banned? So confusing. 

All the places I have been with the kids just ask for a negative LFT. Taken them to loads of gigs etc and it's always the same, can't see any reason why football would be different.

[AlexLaw76]

2 hours ago, Turkish said:

Yes obviously. We won’t be going from 500k one day to 1m two days later as they claim, that’s the point

The Heath Sec has claimed there are 200k Omicron cases a day already. (So I read).

Why do they lie like this?

Edited 13 December, 2021 by AlexLaw76

[Whitey Grandad]

3 minutes ago, adrian lord said:

Can someone explain what risk unvaccinated people would pose to the vaccinated at a football match, and why?

They can pass on the infection to those around them some of whom may well be unvaccinated themselves for whatever reason. Even those who are vaccinated are not fully protected and there are those people who are vulnerable through no fault of their own.

In short, it would be very selfish and antisocial behaviour.

[Whitey Grandad]

2 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

The Heath Sex has claimed there are 200k Omicron cases a day already. (So I read).

Why do they lie like this?

Nobody knows how many have already been infected. It’s the rate of increase that is open for debate.

[Turkish]

[adrian lord]

2 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

They can pass on the infection to those around them some of whom may well be unvaccinated themselves for whatever reason. Even those who are vaccinated are not fully protected and there are those people who are vulnerable through no fault of their own.

In short, it would be very selfish and antisocial behaviour.

But the unvaccinated chose that path and presumably are happy with the risks. It is their personal responsibility.  Any who are not vaxxed but worried about the risk then they can choose to stay at home and not expose themselves to other unvaxxed at the football match. If you are vaxxed then you are at minimal risk of serious Covid illness and again can take adult personal responsibility for choosing whether to attend or not. 

 

[Turkish]

14 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

The Heath Sec has claimed there are 200k Omicron cases a day already. (So I read).

Why do they lie like this?

 

[AlexLaw76]

Meanwhile.....

 

[Turkish]

4 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Meanwhile.....

 

But remember of the 1700 or so people who died in the UK today Boris has found one who tested positive for Omicron in the last 28 days. So work from home and get your booster so you can have you vaccine passport you cretinous individual 

[egg]

23 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

They can pass on the infection to those around them some of whom may well be unvaccinated themselves for whatever reason. Even those who are vaccinated are not fully protected and there are those people who are vulnerable through no fault of their own.

In short, it would be very selfish and antisocial behaviour.

This keeps getting said. The vaccinated can also pass the virus on. The unvaccinated are putting themselves at risk, ditto the NHS, but aren't a greater risk to the vaccinated than the vaccinated are. 

Edited 13 December, 2021 by egg