Tier 4 as the government cancels Christmas for millions

[dbgtz]

i mean many people have touched on that already but:
as stated in the same bbc report, some areas have hospitals far closer to capacity (hence why i keep asking if you even read the full report, but obviously you werent that interested!)
its not overly useful to just look at beds as a number - the "value" of a bed in a "standard" ward is not the same as one in an ICU

the trend of covid patients taking up hospital beds is positive, and this links back to my first point if certain areas are affected more than others then its not unreasonable and why these areas would be subject to higher tiers

[-:Undertaker:-]

i mean many people have touched on that already but:
as stated in the same bbc report, some areas have hospitals far closer to capacity (hence why i keep asking if you even read the full report, but obviously you werent that interested!)
its not overly useful to just look at beds as a number - the "value" of a bed in a "standard" ward is not the same as one in an ICU

Indeed, however - how do you know those small numbers of Covid patients are:

1. Occupying ICU beds rather than standard beds.
2. Occupying an ICU bed because of Covid or occupying an ICU bed with Covid.

From what we know of the death figures, most dying of this disease are very old with existing co-morbidites. We also know that in many cases, hospitals themselves are places of infection much like care homes where the opportunistic disease spreads like wildfire and heavily effects those on the edge of death from other conditions/poor health, much as the flu and pnuemonia do. The spike in hospital cases of Covid therefore doesn't always correlate to either the actual infection rate out there in the area, or the death rate that would result if the virus were allowed to burn out in that area.

To lockdown society based on these small numbers is an extreme overreaction would you not agree given the context? I can fully understand if the situation arose where hospitals had people bursting into the hallways with this disease to introduce some relief... but we just haven't had that. Nightingale hospitals were never used.

the trend of covid patients taking up hospital beds is positive, and this links back to my first point if certain areas are affected more than others then its not unreasonable and why these areas would be subject to higher tiers

It is positive and is not unusual for this time of year to see an uplift in respiratory illnesses, however cases this time around are outstripping hospitalisations/deaths by a large amount because of a range of possibilities. One argument is that the disease has already "picked off" those in extremely ill health back in the first wave, another is that natural immunity in the population is better than it was and that treatment has improved for the disease. Those scenes in Burgamo in Italy back in March are not what we are anywhere close to seeing.

[GoldenMerc]

Just want to put this here to show how dangerous this is;

https://twitter.com/tyleroakley/stat...699199488?s=20

1-1000 in US will die from Covid.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Just want to put this here to show how dangerous this is;

https://twitter.com/tyleroakley/stat...699199488?s=20

1-1000 in US will die from Covid.

What does it say at the top of the graph?

[dbgtz]

Indeed, however - how do you know those small numbers of Covid patients are:

1. Occupying ICU beds rather than standard beds.
2. Occupying an ICU bed because of Covid or occupying an ICU bed with Covid.

From what we know of the death figures, most dying of this disease are very old with existing co-morbidites. We also know that in many cases, hospitals themselves are places of infection much like care homes where the opportunistic disease spreads like wildfire and heavily effects those on the edge of death from other conditions/poor health, much as the flu and pnuemonia do. The spike in hospital cases of Covid therefore doesn't always correlate to either the actual infection rate out there in the area, or the death rate that would result if the virus were allowed to burn out in that area.

To lockdown society based on these small numbers is an extreme overreaction would you not agree given the context? I can fully understand if the situation arose where hospitals had people bursting into the hallways with this disease to introduce some relief... but we just haven't had that. Nightingale hospitals were never used.

number of beds in icu (adults): 4123 https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistic...-2019-20-data/
number occupied by covid 19 patients: 1364 https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/c...t&country=~GBR

easy to see how some hospitals could be overrun. i do not agree its extreme, its called having foresight.

It is positive and is not unusual for this time of year to see an uplift in respiratory illnesses, however cases this time around are outstripping hospitalisations/deaths by a large amount because of a range of possibilities. One argument is that the disease has already "picked off" those in extremely ill health back in the first wave, another is that natural immunity in the population is better than it was and that treatment has improved for the disease. Those scenes in Burgamo in Italy back in March are not what we are anywhere close to seeing.

treatment is better, but it doesn't really matter if the demand for treatment outstrips the supply

[-:Undertaker:-]

I disagree with you that those numbers justify anywhere near the types of restrictions that are being imposed. As has been pointed out before, a normal winter flu surge in the NHS is more serious than the currency Covid numbers in hospitals, and yet we do not close the country down even when NHS beds are at 95% capacity. No work has been done weighing up the deaths (in many cases merely only delayed) by these measures vs the preventable deaths/economic damage that lockdowns perpetuate.

I have another question for the lockdown enthusiasts... given lockdowns do not stop the virus but only delay the virus spreading, if these two new mutated strains (and any others that emerge, which they will) prove to make any vaccination redundant - will you still argue for lockdowns for the next 2, 4, 8 and 12 years? A serious question given it is mutating like the flu and may well be incurable. At what point or will there ever come a point where you would accept that this virus is here to stay and we have to live with it?

[dbgtz]

I disagree with you that those numbers justify anywhere near the types of restrictions that are being imposed. As has been pointed out before, a normal winter flu surge in the NHS is more serious than the currency Covid numbers in hospitals, and yet we do not close the country down even when NHS beds are at 95% capacity.

that's not been proven in the slightest

I have another question for the lockdown enthusiasts... given lockdowns do not stop the virus but only delay the virus spreading, if these two new mutated strains (and any others that emerge, which they will) prove to make any vaccination redundant - will you still argue for lockdowns for the next 2, 4, 8 and 12 years? A serious question given it is mutating like the flu and may well be incurable. At point or will there ever come a point where you would accept that this virus is here to stay and we have to live with it?

the flu has a vaccine which is altered twice a year, we dont just "live with it".

[-:Undertaker:-]

that's not been proven in the slightest

We get a flu surge (in terms of NHS beds used) every year during winter with thousands of deaths resulting from it. True or false?

the flu has a vaccine which is altered twice a year, we dont just "live with it".

It does, but it is *always* behind the flu viruses which continue to mutate, that is why millions of people still die of flu around the world every year. It is quite possible that this is what could happen with Coronavirus, as we're seeing more mutations appear. If this happens, would you countenance simply living with the virus as we do with flu?

[A]

Something had to be done in all fairness, cases are coming out of control again. I did read somewhere that they knew about this new strain in September though so why the UK Government failed to act sooner once again baffles me? It really makes no sense at all why the lockdown was lifted even though they new cases was not falling and there was a new strain?

Slightly confusing and worrying, but hope everyone stays safe out there!

[-:Undertaker:-]

The cruelty and suffering imposed by the lockdown zealots is beyond words.

Quite honestly I think this is the most shocking and appalling thing done by our government in modern history. Beats Iraq hands down.