NPR

I like neeps wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2020 10:22 am

Northern Lights wrote: ↑
Life has undoubtedly changed but i certainly dont like the move to an authortarian government and fail to see the need for this. I agree with Bimbo that the risk to health on the Under 65's is being overstated, quite simply there is a risk to life, that doesnt mean we dont take precautions to mitigate against risk whether that is wearing seat belts or wearing a mask, we do, well the majority do there will always be nuggets that dont, such is the fabric of life.

An example of the overreach for me is with the local lockdown we are still in, in Aberdeen. The police have been going into the carparks of golf clubs number plate checking to see if anyone has travelled more than 5 miles, this for me is a very worrying heavy handed approach to dealing with the pandemic and the restrictions being placed on our lives.

Not sure the risks are being overstated. I think everyone accepts under a certain age without underlying health problems you're extremely unlikely to die. However, it's about keeping other people safe. If I live in a society where I'm going into an office then into a bar and into a gym without any restrictions I wouldn't have the confidence to go to say spend Christmas with my Dad - because he is in a high risk category. I'm not worried for myself - I'm a bit worried about the unknown long term effects some people seem to have (yes even younger people) with lung scarring et al.

Agree the checking number plates in Aberdeen golf courses is ridiculous. But most of the restrictions aren't really that authoritarian. You wear masks - like you say you wear seatbelts and you stand in a slightly longer queue. That's more the Sweden model from the start with everyone was a fan of.

I get that regarding the interaction with older people but for me this is where trade offs come in to play. I would rather see more of the economy being opened up with increased shielding of the vulnerable, i would caveat this is at the choice of the vulnerable if they want to continue shielding as i know my parents and a number of their friends want to get on and enjoy as much as life offers them before they die whilst there are others like my P-I-L that arent going within 2m of their grandchildren and only seeing them in the garden etc etc and taking far greater precautions, horses for courses, different people have different appetite to risk.

On the long term effects the studies and reports i have seen are on those that were hospitalised, i am not aware of there being long term effects from the vast bulk of younger people who only experience mild syptoms, not saying there isnt only that i havent seen any studies. I would also say that i would categorise anything at the moment as medium term as it is still pretty early days on knowing exactly how the body will recover long term in years down the line.

I regard shutting down businesses and premises and restricting movement of the populace to within 5 miles as authoritarian, not to mention the increased use of the police to enforce "guidance". It is in my opinion a very worrying direction we are travelling.

Northern Lights wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2020 8:17 am.

The problem as i see it for those like NZ that locked down so hard is that you havent gone through the pain that others have and if/when it gets hold it will rip through you guys like the rest of us, you are just delaying the inevitable, obviously just my opinion. We may get a vaccine that proves effective, early results are encouraging but the fastest vaccine ever develop i believe was for mumps which took 3/4 years.

Treatment options are far better than at the start of the pandemic, vaccines will be ready next year.

Bimbowomxn wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2020 8:27 am

JM2K6 wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2020 8:03 am

Bimbowomxn wrote: ↑Thu Aug 20, 2020 5:59 pm



To anyone under 40 and healthy it’s 1 in a million. You know that right ?

That's a bimbo-fact, not a real one. And the definition of "healthy" needs to be stretched pretty far there.

It’s an actual measurable fact. As in statistically true.

Even in unhealthy under 40’s the chances of death are miniscule. Nothing needs “stretching” unless you’ve an agenda.

The virus doesn’t kill the young or even the older healthy.

Lose weight should be the public health message.

I'm willing to be corrected. Show me the data you're working off:

1) What your definition of healthy is
2) How many people fitting this definition under 40 have had covid
3) How many of the above have died
4) How many of the above have suffered serious health consequences

Calculon wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2020 11:30 am

Northern Lights wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2020 8:17 am.

The problem as i see it for those like NZ that locked down so hard is that you havent gone through the pain that others have and if/when it gets hold it will rip through you guys like the rest of us, you are just delaying the inevitable, obviously just my opinion. We may get a vaccine that proves effective, early results are encouraging but the fastest vaccine ever develop i believe was for mumps which took 3/4 years.

Treatment options are far better than at the start of the pandemic, vaccines will be ready next year.

I certainly hope so for all our sakes but it far from assured.

I'm willing to be corrected. Show me the data you're working off:

1) What your definition of healthy is
2) How many people fitting this definition under 40 have had covid
3) How many of the above have died
4) How many of the above have suffered serious health consequences

1) Theres official scores for healthy applied within the health system. People with heart/liver/kidney/ cancer etc wouldn’t be considered “healthy”.
2) No one knows.
3) not many.
4) not many.

A better example would be whether anyone considers Obese people “healthy” , or people with metabolic syndrome or type 2 diabetes “healthy”, they’re not.

30% plus of deaths across all age ranges had Diabetes.

50% of hospitalised covid patients had Diabetes.

There’s similar risk statistics regarding obesity and outcomes from the Virus. There’s plenty of evidence that fat people get diabetes, there’s plenty of evidence fat people have much worse outcomes from Covid.

I’m more than comforting saying lose weight and be healthier and lower a bad outcome from Covid risk.

robmatic wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2020 9:13 am

Northern Lights wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2020 7:58 am

robmatic wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2020 7:53 am

I'm not yet 40 so I know that I am very unlikely to die from covid19, but I do know someone roughly my age who spent 20 days in intensive care with it and I am very keen to avoid that experience.

Yes and i know people who died in their 20's from a range of different things, some through illness others through accidents. What's your point, crater the economy, destroy our way of life because there is a minute risk that you will end up in intensive care with this?

I don't really class it as a minute risk if it's severely affecting people I know, and to be honest I'm not so emotionally attached to GDP figures that I would risk myself or family members for the sake of the economy.

This is rather silly though.

You don’t need to be wedded to GDP to know a healthy economy gives a healthier population, you don’t have one without the other. To fixate on one relatively low risk illness over all other isnt sensible.

Bimbowomxn wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2020 12:42 pm

I'm willing to be corrected. Show me the data you're working off:

1) What your definition of healthy is
2) How many people fitting this definition under 40 have had covid
3) How many of the above have died
4) How many of the above have suffered serious health consequences

1) Theres official scores for healthy applied within the health system. People with heart/liver/kidney/ cancer etc wouldn’t be considered “healthy”.
2) No one knows.
3) not many.
4) not many.

A better example would be whether anyone considers Obese people “healthy” , or people with metabolic syndrome or type 2 diabetes “healthy”, they’re not.

30% plus of deaths across all age ranges had Diabetes.

50% of hospitalised covid patients had Diabetes.

There’s similar risk statistics regarding obesity and outcomes from the Virus. There’s plenty of evidence that fat people get diabetes, there’s plenty of evidence fat people have much worse outcomes from Covid.

I’m more than comforting saying lose weight and be healthier and lower a bad outcome from Covid risk.

So what you're actually saying is that your bimbo stats were not actually "measurable fact" but stuff you made up. You can be young and healthy and still die, and it's nowhere NEAR a one-in-a-million chance.

https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/no ... y-18471098

End of June, 36 young and healthy people had died of it. Died that is, not just suffered serious health consequences. There's simply no way that 36,000,000 young and healthy people in the UK have been infected by the virus, so I would suggest that the number you pulled out of thin air is nowhere near reality.

Remember, you claimed this:

To anyone under 40 and healthy it’s 1 in a million. You know that right ?

...

It’s an actual measurable fact. As in statistically true.

It isn't. You weren't even close. Hope that helps.

Here's some more reading:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/health-fitn ... ronavirus/
https://www.advisory.com/daily-briefing ... ung-people

I don't disagree about co-morbidities, but the fact is that a huge proportion of the population would not be considered healthy. 35% are overweight, and 29% are obese. That's before you look at any other factors. So when the majority isn't considered healthy, then you've got a big problem and shouldn't be so blasé about the virus infecting the general population, regardless of their age.

End of June, 36 young and healthy people had died of it. Died that is, not just suffered serious health consequences. There's simply no way that 36,000,000 young and healthy people in the UK have been infected by the virus, so I would suggest that the number you pulled out of thin air is nowhere near reality.

You want to assume “everyone” catches to measure the chances of dying ?

It isn't. You weren't even close. Hope that helps.

Ok, that’s odd. Either way you’re right 36 (Newcastle chronicle ⎌source) is about 1 in 900,000.

Either way the under 40’s are at far more risk than covid from many many other things. Shall we make a list of other things we should eliminate, I’ll start.


Driving.

I don't disagree about co-morbidities, but the fact is that a huge proportion of the population would not be considered healthy. 35% are overweight, and 29% are obese. That's before you look at any other factors. So when the majority isn't considered healthy, then you've got a big problem and shouldn't be so blasé about the virus infecting the general population, regardless of their age.

As I said people should be told to lose weight.


Plus even with all the fat under 40’s they’re dying in very very small numbers so I will be blasé about the nonsense of living with no risk.

Bimbowomxn wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2020 2:17 pm

End of June, 36 young and healthy people had died of it. Died that is, not just suffered serious health consequences. There's simply no way that 36,000,000 young and healthy people in the UK have been infected by the virus, so I would suggest that the number you pulled out of thin air is nowhere near reality.

You want to assume “everyone” catches to measure the chances of dying ?

It isn't. You weren't even close. Hope that helps.

Ok, that’s odd. Either way you’re right 36 (Newcastle chronicle ⎌source) is about 1 in 900,000.

Either way the under 40’s are at far more risk than covid from many many other things. Shall we make a list of other things we should eliminate, I’ll start.


Driving.

You seem to have forgotten we were talking about the risk of dying (or getting seriously ill) after being infected by COVID. You know, because you said we wanted people to get infected. So you look at how many people have been infected, and how many have died (or become seriously ill) as a result in order to judge the changes of dying from the infection. There's no point talking about uninfected people, because they clearly cannot die from it.

So no, it's not 1 in 900,000. 32,400,000 young and healthy people have not been infected by COVID.

Driving is not contagious and we go to great lengths (and spend a lot of money) to ensure it's kept as safe as possible. We restrict speed. We restrict where you're allowed to drive. We restrict who's allowed to drive. We spend a fortune on improving the safety of cars. And, most importantly, driving literally has nothing to do with an infectious disease so this is an asinine comparison. But driving is pretty dangerous - happily, the lockdown has led to a 70% reduction in road deaths. That's good. Fewer dead people is good.

Bimbowomxn wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2020 2:20 pm

I don't disagree about co-morbidities, but the fact is that a huge proportion of the population would not be considered healthy. 35% are overweight, and 29% are obese. That's before you look at any other factors. So when the majority isn't considered healthy, then you've got a big problem and shouldn't be so blasé about the virus infecting the general population, regardless of their age.

As I said people should be told to lose weight.


Plus even with all the fat under 40’s they’re dying in very very small numbers so I will be blasé about the nonsense of living with no risk.

Ah that'll cure it - tell people to lose weight. It's as easy as that.

Of course, people lose weight very quickly, there's no way it's difficult for people to do so, there's no chance of any contributing factors, and doing so during a pandemic is a piece of piss really.

JM2K6 wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2020 2:27 pm

Bimbowomxn wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2020 2:20 pm

I don't disagree about co-morbidities, but the fact is that a huge proportion of the population would not be considered healthy. 35% are overweight, and 29% are obese. That's before you look at any other factors. So when the majority isn't considered healthy, then you've got a big problem and shouldn't be so blasé about the virus infecting the general population, regardless of their age.

As I said people should be told to lose weight.


Plus even with all the fat under 40’s they’re dying in very very small numbers so I will be blasé about the nonsense of living with no risk.

Ah that'll cure it - tell people to lose weight. It's as easy as that.

Of course, people lose weight very quickly, there's no way it's difficult for people to do so, there's no chance of any contributing factors, and doing so during a pandemic is a piece of piss really.

It’s certainly one factor that massively lowers the risk of being ill, far more effective than masks for example and we are all wearing them.

So yes personal responsibility , like sensible social distancing etc is important. I can’t imagine why you’d be against it.

Bimbowomxn wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2020 2:34 pm

JM2K6 wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2020 2:27 pm

Bimbowomxn wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2020 2:20 pm


As I said people should be told to lose weight.


Plus even with all the fat under 40’s they’re dying in very very small numbers so I will be blasé about the nonsense of living with no risk.

Ah that'll cure it - tell people to lose weight. It's as easy as that.

Of course, people lose weight very quickly, there's no way it's difficult for people to do so, there's no chance of any contributing factors, and doing so during a pandemic is a piece of piss really.

It’s certainly one factor that massively lowers the risk of being ill, far more effective than masks for example and we are all wearing them.

So yes personal responsibility , like sensible social distancing etc is important. I can’t imagine why you’d be against it.

I didn't say I was against it. A healthier population is a real positive. I think it's irrational to think that sort of change can happen quickly and easily. It'll take years.

Wearing masks is one quick and easy way to reduce the risks that's available to basically everyone, no matter their background, personal circumstances, or financial situation. There's no quick and easy way out of obesity I'm afraid. Which is why it's not really worth talking about right now; the problems we are discussing are far more short term.

You seem to have forgotten we were talking about the risk of dying (or getting seriously ill) after being infected by COVID. You know, because you said we wanted people to get infected. So you look at how many people have been infected, and how many have died (or become seriously ill) as a result in order to judge the changes of dying from the infection. There's no point talking about uninfected people, because they clearly cannot die from it.

So no, it's not 1 in 900,000. 32,400,000 young and healthy people have not been infected by COVID.

Driving is not contagious and we go to great lengths (and spend a lot of money) to ensure it's kept as safe as possible. We restrict speed. We restrict where you're allowed to drive. We restrict who's allowed to drive. We spend a fortune on improving the safety of cars. And, most importantly, driving literally has nothing to do with an infectious disease so this is an asinine comparison. But driving is pretty dangerous - happily, the lockdown has led to a 70% reduction in road deaths. That's good. Fewer dead people is good.

Yes, oddly I do think the risk assessment of actual risk should factor in actually catching the virus in the first place...... I’m surprised you don’t.

Indeed we have imposed some safety measure on driving, it’s still killing far far more under 40’s than covid. We could easily make all driving a 20 mph maximum and save more lives. The reason we don’t is we make a sensible risk assessment and off set a number of deaths for convenience and other societal factors.

I didn't say I was against it. A healthier population is a real positive. I think it's irrational to think that sort of change can happen quickly and easily. It'll take years.

Wearing masks is one quick and easy way to reduce the risks that's available to basically everyone, no matter their background, personal circumstances, or financial situation. There's no quick and easy way out of obesity I'm afraid. Which is why it's not really worth talking about right now; the problems we are discussing are far more short term.

I went from being diabetic to non diabetic through Diet and gentle exercise in 3-4 months. The current recommended diet treatment for Type 2 is effective in similar time frames.

There’s a quick and easy way if required, and I tell you what if Covid killed 50% of fatties and your chances improved by 1% of every pound lost you’d see a lot more dieting bloody quickly.

Bimbowomxn wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2020 2:42 pmYes, oddly I do think the risk assessment of actual risk should factor in actually catching the virus in the first place...... I’m surprised you don’t.

Indeed we have imposed some safety measure on driving, it’s still killing far far more under 40’s than covid. We could easily make all driving a 20 mph maximum and save more lives. The reason we don’t is we make a sensible risk assessment and off set a number of deaths for convenience and other societal factors.

You're moving the goalposts again, bimbo. The discussion was never "the risk of catching COVID and then dying". This started with you saying "We want these people getting infected", and then I started talking about the risk to people who've been infected by saying "every infection is a gamble".

If you want to argue about something else, then go right ahead! But I'm merely arguing the point that, as I said, every infection is a gamble, as a counter point to you wanting people to get infected.

Literally no point talking about people who don't have the disease, or their chances of catching it, in a discussion about what happens when you have the disease.

I had a quick look at some road death stats. 26k in year ending June 2018 is about half of what COVID has cost us in ~8 months despite months of lockdown. I reject the assertion that driving is a bigger risk than COVID, particularly as you're presumably not advocating we stick with lockdowns in perpetuity.

Bimbowomxn wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2020 2:46 pm

I didn't say I was against it. A healthier population is a real positive. I think it's irrational to think that sort of change can happen quickly and easily. It'll take years.

Wearing masks is one quick and easy way to reduce the risks that's available to basically everyone, no matter their background, personal circumstances, or financial situation. There's no quick and easy way out of obesity I'm afraid. Which is why it's not really worth talking about right now; the problems we are discussing are far more short term.

I went from being diabetic to non diabetic through Diet and gentle exercise in 3-4 months. The current recommended diet treatment for Type 2 is effective in similar time frames.

There’s a quick and easy way if required, and I tell you what if Covid killed 50% of fatties and your chances improved by 1% of every pound lost you’d see a lot more dieting bloody quickly.

Congratulations. However, anecdotes are not data, and there's plenty of people whose obesity is inextricably tied to their personal circumstances.

Sorry, that was because we moved on to co morbidity as well.

Congratulations. However, anecdotes are not data, and there's plenty of people whose obesity is inextricably tied to their personal circumstances.

There are, but there’s a much larger % who their obesity is tied to eating and drinking too much and not exercising......


And if you want “data” check the University of Newcastle and more recently output from Glasgow uni. The “facts” of type 2 diabetes have changed dramatically in 10 years.

JM2K6 wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2020 2:49 pm

Bimbowomxn wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2020 2:42 pmYes, oddly I do think the risk assessment of actual risk should factor in actually catching the virus in the first place...... I’m surprised you don’t.

Indeed we have imposed some safety measure on driving, it’s still killing far far more under 40’s than covid. We could easily make all driving a 20 mph maximum and save more lives. The reason we don’t is we make a sensible risk assessment and off set a number of deaths for convenience and other societal factors.

You're moving the goalposts again, bimbo. The discussion was never "the risk of catching COVID and then dying". This started with you saying "We want these people getting infected", and then I started talking about the risk to people who've been infected by saying "every infection is a gamble".

If you want to argue about something else, then go right ahead! But I'm merely arguing the point that, as I said, every infection is a gamble, as a counter point to you wanting people to get infected.

Literally no point talking about people who don't have the disease, or their chances of catching it, in a discussion about what happens when you have the disease.

I had a quick look at some road death stats. 26k in year ending June 2018 is about half of what COVID has cost us in ~8 months despite months of lockdown. I reject the assertion that driving is a bigger risk than COVID, particularly as you're presumably not advocating we stick with lockdowns in perpetuity.

For a healthy under 40 year old driving is a much higher risk to life.


26k where ? Road deaths are about 3,000 a year.

Of course 90% plus of covid deaths are n the elderly and again relative risk was the discussion. There’s a very good argument for letting the virus run rampant through the young and the healthy if there isn’t going to be a vaccine.

Bimbowomxn wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2020 2:52 pm

Congratulations. However, anecdotes are not data, and there's plenty of people whose obesity is inextricably tied to their personal circumstances.

There are, but there’s a much larger % who their obesity is tied to eating and drinking too much and not exercising......


And if you want “data” check the University of Newcastle and more recently output from Glasgow uni. The “facts” of type 2 diabetes have changed dramatically in 10 years.

I'm well aware of the impact of dieting on diabetes. But when I say personal circumstances, I mean not only other conditions that lead to obesity, but also a lack of funds to healthily diet, other stressors that make dieting hard, and the nature of available food.

People like you - independently wealthy, no genetic issues predisposing you to obesity, semi-retired(?) at a reasonably young age, are something of a perfect storm for losing weight.

Bimbowomxn wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2020 2:55 pm For a healthy under 40 year old driving is a much higher risk to life.


26k where ? Road deaths are about 3,000 a year.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistic ... -june-2018

road deaths vs people killed or seriously injured is an odd metric. I went with the higher number because I didn't want to cherry pick the lower number.

There's no statistical basis for the suggestion that a healthy young person is at much higher risk from driving than from the outcome of getting COVID.

Of course 90% plus of covid deaths are n the elderly and again relative risk was the discussion. There’s a very good argument for letting the virus run rampant through the young and the healthy if there isn’t going to be a vaccine.

But there isn't. Everything we know so far suggests the antibodies drop off significantly after 3-4 months, and that young and healthy people can die from it too, and that there's also the risk of serious illness, which is much higher than the risk of death. Even those who don't suffer from lasting consequences can still be hit badly by it for a long time too. That's nothing to be sniffed at.

It's just too simplistic to divide this between "people likely to die because they're old / ill" and "everyone else". We simply cannot afford to gamble on such an awful disease. Herd immunity is a strategy that only works with a vaccine.

JM2K6 wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2020 2:56 pm

Bimbowomxn wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2020 2:52 pm

Congratulations. However, anecdotes are not data, and there's plenty of people whose obesity is inextricably tied to their personal circumstances.

There are, but there’s a much larger % who their obesity is tied to eating and drinking too much and not exercising......


And if you want “data” check the University of Newcastle and more recently output from Glasgow uni. The “facts” of type 2 diabetes have changed dramatically in 10 years.

I'm well aware of the impact of dieting on diabetes. But when I say personal circumstances, I mean not only other conditions that lead to obesity, but also a lack of funds to healthily diet, other stressors that make dieting hard, and the nature of available food.

People like you - independently wealthy, no genetic issues predisposing you to obesity, semi-retired(?) at a reasonably young age, are something of a perfect storm for losing weight.

The cost issue isn’t one that holds up in the real world at all. There’s also nothing stopping people with “bad diets” eating less.

There’s tiny tiny amounts where genetic issue predispose obesity, the Big boned most often just eat too much.

I was 39, working a 70 hour week with an hours commute.....

Bimbowomxn wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2020 3:07 pm

JM2K6 wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2020 2:56 pm

Bimbowomxn wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2020 2:52 pm


There are, but there’s a much larger % who their obesity is tied to eating and drinking too much and not exercising......


And if you want “data” check the University of Newcastle and more recently output from Glasgow uni. The “facts” of type 2 diabetes have changed dramatically in 10 years.

I'm well aware of the impact of dieting on diabetes. But when I say personal circumstances, I mean not only other conditions that lead to obesity, but also a lack of funds to healthily diet, other stressors that make dieting hard, and the nature of available food.

People like you - independently wealthy, no genetic issues predisposing you to obesity, semi-retired(?) at a reasonably young age, are something of a perfect storm for losing weight.

The cost issue isn’t one that holds up in the real world at all. There’s also nothing stopping people with “bad diets” eating less.

There’s tiny tiny amounts where genetic issue predispose obesity, the Big boned most often just eat too much.

I was 39, working a 70 hour week with an hours commute.....

Cost and availability are absolutely real world issues. Loads of people will buy the cheaper options and the vast majority of those available to them will be less healthy.

Apols, thought you lost the weight quite recently. I lost mine a decade ago, but then had to have my gall bladder out as a result and cannot maintain the same diet I had before without serious complications. So the weight's back on.

There's no statistical basis for the suggestion that a healthy young person is at much higher risk from driving than from the outcome of getting COVID.

Well apart from the actual statistics.......

I’m sorry but healthy young people are hardly at any risk of dying from Covid (far more risk of dying from flu).

36 deaths in healthy under 40’s.

I’ll wager more motorcyclist died so far this year.

Cost and availability are absolutely real world issues. Loads of people will buy the cheaper options and the vast majority of those available to them will be less healthy.

Who’s forcing them to buy double the amount they should eat ?

And with respect it’s still much cheaper to buy and cook food.

Anyone has the fruit and veg section available.

This argument is nonsense politics rather than factual at all.

Apols, thought you lost the weight quite recently. I lost mine a decade ago, but then had to have my gall bladder out as a result and cannot maintain the same diet I had before without serious complications. So the weight's back on.

Arghhh bummer. You probably had other endocrine issues. Sorry about gall bladder.

Financial circumstances and inequality are an issue: https://www.nhs.uk/news/obesity/childre ... d-obesity/

I'm not interested in a shit-fight over obesity. I believe that telling people to lose weight is not going to make any real difference without major societal changes and help, and even then would take a long period of time to see any meaningful statistical shift. You don't agree. We're not going to find common ground, so I'll move on.

I’m sorry but healthy young people are hardly at any risk of dying from Covid (far more risk of dying from flu).

36 deaths in healthy under 40’s.

I’ll wager more motorcyclist died so far this year.

Plenty more healthy young people drive than have caught COVID, so I'd expect more deaths. However this is a difficult one because literally no-one records comorbidities when it comes to RTAs, so there's no way to prove it either way.

However, here's the point: by comparing road deaths to COVID while also wanting COVID to "run rampant", you're essentially advocating for people to take the risk of serious illness, life-changing complications, or death, for the purposes of... some ill-defined view of herd immunity? There's no "well, people need to drive" comparison. It's not "well, people need to get COVID". They do not. And people getting COVID not only opens them up to the risks, but other people too.

A small percentage of the population has had COVID. Despite that, 36 (probably more now, but let's go with that) of young and healthy people have died. Scale that up. How many deaths are you happy with for this nebulous goal of yours? How many more with life-altering complications, or months of serious illness? Where does the confidence come from that it will have a long term benefit to the population? How do you ensure that it runs rampant through a swathe of society but not through the >50% of the population that's overweight or obese (let alone those with other illnesses)? How does the medical system cope with such a plan?

It just is not a workable solution: it's based on a misreading of the dangers to those who are infected and a whole lot of guesswork about the benefits of getting this horrible disease.

And on that note: I've enjoyed our chat, but I really should do some work today. Cya later.

Bimbowomxn wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2020 3:18 pm

Apols, thought you lost the weight quite recently. I lost mine a decade ago, but then had to have my gall bladder out as a result and cannot maintain the same diet I had before without serious complications. So the weight's back on.

Arghhh bummer. You probably had other endocrine issues. Sorry about gall bladder.

It was a mystery as to why I got it until the doc asked about weight loss. I lost weight too fast - it's just not fair :(

Yep. It’s not an easy choice. And remember I’m talking about relative risk not it being risk free.


I am off to cook pizza for the kids and a quiche for me.

So, which industries do people think would be doing better if there were no restrictions and more disease, more hospitalisations etc? Does anyone think that the hospitality or tourist trade would actually be any better off in that situation?

Biffer wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2020 3:41 pm So, which industries do people think would be doing better if there were no restrictions and more disease, more hospitalisations etc? Does anyone think that the hospitality or tourist trade would actually be any better off in that situation?

Group tourism does not exist yet, and hospitalisaions/deaths will not help.
The age profile of these travellers is either under 18 or over 65. Parents will restrict the school tours, and the older people are still nearly in hiding.
This is applicable to both incoming and outgoing tourism.

Independent travel is hitting bumps every week. For multiple reasons anyone spending money in this sector is gambling.
The companies are working on very tight cash flows. Any hiccup anywhere is likely to send them over.
You may get refunded in time, but if there is any reason not to refund, it will not happen.

Bimbowomxn wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2020 3:12 pm

There's no statistical basis for the suggestion that a healthy young person is at much higher risk from driving than from the outcome of getting COVID.

Well apart from the actual statistics.......

I’m sorry but healthy young people are hardly at any risk of dying from Covid (far more risk of dying from flu).

36 deaths in healthy under 40’s.

I’ll wager more motorcyclist died so far this year.

Getting on a motorcycle and then breaking your neck on a lamppost doesn’t affect the life expectancy of anyone else.

Covid is nothing like a road accident. It’s a stupid comparison of number of deaths.

Sandstorm wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2020 7:49 pm

Bimbowomxn wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2020 3:12 pm

There's no statistical basis for the suggestion that a healthy young person is at much higher risk from driving than from the outcome of getting COVID.

Well apart from the actual statistics.......

I’m sorry but healthy young people are hardly at any risk of dying from Covid (far more risk of dying from flu).

36 deaths in healthy under 40’s.

I’ll wager more motorcyclist died so far this year.

Getting on a motorcycle and then breaking your neck on a lamppost doesn’t affect the life expectancy of anyone else.

Covid is nothing like a road accident. It’s a stupid comparison of number of deaths.

It was a comparison of relative risk. The risk to the under 40’s is minimal.

The life expectancy of the UK is lower than the average age of covid deaths.

Lots of rugby on!

https://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/surrey ... y-18810096

Coronavirus R rate rises in Surrey and South East as three other regions also increase

Other regions of England including London are seeing the R rate lift to "epidemic growing" levels

Insane_Homer wrote: ↑Sat Aug 22, 2020 7:14 am https://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/surrey ... y-18810096

Coronavirus R rate rises in Surrey and South East as three other regions also increase

Other regions of England including London are seeing the R rate lift to "epidemic growing" levels

It’s bound to happen. People are out everywhere in groups, travelling to see friends or go to the beach and only wearing masks inside a shop.

There’s a completely different mindset to people going out compared with June. Last Saturday morning our High Street looked like New Years Eve with many hundreds of people standing chatting with mates in close proximity and no-one had a mask on.

“You can’t catch Covid19 outside” .....apparently

They'll need to make the vaccine mandatory.
There's too many anti-vaxer morons out there these days.
For example a conspiracy theorist clown I met who suggested everyone should just get Covid-19 but said he wouldn't take a vaccine for it.

Zig wrote: ↑Sat Aug 22, 2020 8:10 am They'll need to make the vaccine mandatory.
There's too many anti-vaxer morons out there these days.
For example a conspiracy theorist clown I met who suggested everyone should just get Covid-19 but said he wouldn't take a vaccine for it.

Being anti a specific rushed vaccine isn’t the same as being anti all vaccines. As pointed out it’s likely to be ineffective in the long run with the virus anyway.

You first.

Sandstorm wrote: ↑Sat Aug 22, 2020 7:24 am

Insane_Homer wrote: ↑Sat Aug 22, 2020 7:14 am https://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/surrey ... y-18810096

Coronavirus R rate rises in Surrey and South East as three other regions also increase

Other regions of England including London are seeing the R rate lift to "epidemic growing" levels

It’s bound to happen. People are out everywhere in groups, travelling to see friends or go to the beach and only wearing masks inside a shop.

There’s a completely different mindset to people going out compared with June. Last Saturday morning our High Street looked like New Years Eve with many hundreds of people standing chatting with mates in close proximity and no-one had a mask on.

“You can’t catch Covid19 outside” .....apparently

The pubs have been open for 7 weeks, the beach madness 10 weeks ago, hospitals are empty. There’s some proof in the science.