|
|
Post by yappledapple on Oct 18, 2020 20:06:13 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by allan 1958 (OAF-WROY)(SSLFF) on Oct 18, 2020 21:38:52 GMT 1
The virus can only be beaten with a combination of measures. If people are allowed to go back to football grounds (and get to them on crowded trains and buses) and there is still no proper track and trace system because it has been farmed out to cowboy operators with no competence run by mates of the government, then the virus will run out of control and hospitals will once again be overwhelmed, with Covid patients then infecting hospital workers. In Germany fans have gone back because other measures are properly in place. Germany currently have more Covid infections than at any time this year |
|
|
|
Post by lossiemouthtownfan on Oct 19, 2020 13:26:42 GMT 1
Reading in the paper that there were just over 46,000 people at the All Blacks - Australia game over the weekend in Auckland.
May be a start in getting people back into grounds?
|
|
|
|
Post by richhtfc on Oct 19, 2020 13:29:03 GMT 1
Reading in the paper that there were just over 46,000 people at the All Blacks - Australia game over the weekend in Auckland. May be a start in getting people back into grounds? That’s because they’ve had about 5 deaths compared to our 45,000 |
|
|
|
Post by Mecha Corte on Oct 19, 2020 16:58:34 GMT 1
Just seen that Newcastle fans acting to an online anti pay per view campaign donated £20k to a food bank rather than paying to watch the Man U game, apparently the most donated to the same cause in bucket collections at previous home games was under £6k.
|
|
|
|
Post by kramyelnia on Oct 19, 2020 18:46:04 GMT 1
Call me cynical but this is a petition that's going nowhere, no matter how many people sign up. There's too much fear in British society at the moment. Other countries are dealing with the situation so much better. IF YOU HAVE FEAR YOU WILL NEVER WIN COME ON YOU BOYS IN BLUE UTFT |
|
|
|
Post by 28901 on Oct 19, 2020 22:32:38 GMT 1
Reading in the paper that there were just over 46,000 people at the All Blacks - Australia game over the weekend in Auckland. May be a start in getting people back into grounds? That’s because they’ve had about 5 deaths compared to our 45,000 That's because they have a proper government. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2020 23:33:07 GMT 1
That’s because they’ve had about 5 deaths compared to our 45,000 That's because they have a proper government. It’s more likely because they’ve got a population smaller than Scotland living in a landmass about the size of the UK and with the total number of overseas visitors annually being typically less than a quarter of the visitors we get to London alone. Auckland covers an area roughly the size of Yorkshire and has around a quarter of the number of inhabitants. You ain’t going to catch an airborne human transmissible virus on an empty island. |
|
|
|
Post by 28901 on Oct 19, 2020 23:42:10 GMT 1
That's because they have a proper government. It’s more likely because they’ve got a population smaller than Scotland living in a landmass about the size of the UK and with the total number of overseas visitors annually being typically less than a quarter of the visitors we get to London alone. Auckland covers an area roughly the size of Yorkshire and has around a quarter of the number of inhabitants. You ain’t going to catch an airborne human transmissible virus on an empty island. I know. It doesn't change my opinion on the NZ government or the half witted drunken, dog whistling, lazy, fat, bumbling priveliged moron we have in power in the UK. |
|
|
|
Post by yoy on Oct 20, 2020 0:47:26 GMT 1
Dortmund were allowed 11,000 fans, up from 9,000 the game before. No plans for any fans in England. It’s a total disaster. Even the WHO have said this week that the death rate is just 1 in 1000 infected people, similar to flu. Ten times more people are currently dying from flu and pneumonia than from COVID. A survey a few weeks ago showed that people here perceive that 6% of people die of COVID when the reality is 0.1% We’ve lost all common sense, it’s a collective mass hysteria fuelled by irresponsible clickbait modern media and crap modern politicians on all sides. I say all this as a lifelong Labour voter not a right winger or Ike conspiracy loon. I have no problem with spacing and masks to protect others, but the rest of the restrictions are unacceptable. I don’t disagree with aspects of what you say... I’m not sure the action we take is proportionate to the impact of the virus, however.... Globally we have had double the number of deaths so far from covid than the average annual flu levels. In the U.K. it is running at over four times the number. That’s despite major major disruption to society that has prevented it from being significantly worse. Similar death rates are irrelevant if it spreads so much more quickly and therefore you have significantly higher levels of transmission. You’ll get more deaths. Mean age of U.K. death is c. 82. Which means that there’s an argument to say that death rates are very low for the vast majority. But your 0.1% looks exaggeratedly low for the U.K. for sure. If you’re able to contain it such that it doesn’t get to those at risk, and therefore doesn’t overload the health service then by all means - you can significantly reduce restrictions. Not sure how you can guarantee that though. I’d be interested to understand the demographic attending Huddersfield matches. Doesn’t often appear the most youthful gathering ever. There are some restrictions which in my view, should be lifted. Big gatherings.... I’m sorry, but I can’t agree that there’s any sense until we have much better ways of dealing with the fallout of infection. |
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Oct 20, 2020 9:58:51 GMT 1
Dortmund were allowed 11,000 fans, up from 9,000 the game before. No plans for any fans in England. It’s a total disaster. Even the WHO have said this week that the death rate is just 1 in 1000 infected people, similar to flu. Ten times more people are currently dying from flu and pneumonia than from COVID. A survey a few weeks ago showed that people here perceive that 6% of people die of COVID when the reality is 0.1% We’ve lost all common sense, it’s a collective mass hysteria fuelled by irresponsible clickbait modern media and crap modern politicians on all sides. I say all this as a lifelong Labour voter not a right winger or Ike conspiracy loon. I have no problem with spacing and masks to protect others, but the rest of the restrictions are unacceptable. I don’t disagree with aspects of what you say... I’m not sure the action we take is proportionate to the impact of the virus, however.... Globally we have had double the number of deaths so far from covid than the average annual flu levels. In the U.K. it is running at over four times the number. That’s despite major major disruption to society that has prevented it from being significantly worse. Similar death rates are irrelevant if it spreads so much more quickly and therefore you have significantly higher levels of transmission. You’ll get more deaths. Mean age of U.K. death is c. 82. Which means that there’s an argument to say that death rates are very low for the vast majority. But your 0.1% looks exaggeratedly low for the U.K. for sure. If you’re able to contain it such that it doesn’t get to those at risk, and therefore doesn’t overload the health service then by all means - you can significantly reduce restrictions. Not sure how you can guarantee that though. I’d be interested to understand the demographic attending Huddersfield matches. Doesn’t often appear the most youthful gathering ever. There are some restrictions which in my view, should be lifted. Big gatherings.... I’m sorry, but I can’t agree that there’s any sense until we have much better ways of dealing with the fallout of infection. ONS stats show average life expectancy in England and wales is 81.5 years. Average age of person dying of Covid 19 is 82.3 years. If any stat highlighted the absurdity of what we are currently doing ( and there are many others ) then it could be that one! But even in octogenarians, covid is far from a death sentence. At least 95 out of 100 having it will survive.. the ones who dont almost entirely having one or more very serious existing comorbidities. Eventually we will accept the fact that this virus isnt going to be 'beat' and even if a successful vaccine is produced, it will be here all the time, returning in seasonal waves of differing strains and strengths, much as flu does. And we will have to get on with life. Its just a case of how much damage we do to ourselves until we do in this futile attempt to 'beat' it in the meantime. |
|
|
|
Post by yoy on Oct 20, 2020 14:19:48 GMT 1
I don’t disagree with aspects of what you say... I’m not sure the action we take is proportionate to the impact of the virus, however.... Globally we have had double the number of deaths so far from covid than the average annual flu levels. In the U.K. it is running at over four times the number. That’s despite major major disruption to society that has prevented it from being significantly worse. Similar death rates are irrelevant if it spreads so much more quickly and therefore you have significantly higher levels of transmission. You’ll get more deaths. Mean age of U.K. death is c. 82. Which means that there’s an argument to say that death rates are very low for the vast majority. But your 0.1% looks exaggeratedly low for the U.K. for sure. If you’re able to contain it such that it doesn’t get to those at risk, and therefore doesn’t overload the health service then by all means - you can significantly reduce restrictions. Not sure how you can guarantee that though. I’d be interested to understand the demographic attending Huddersfield matches. Doesn’t often appear the most youthful gathering ever. There are some restrictions which in my view, should be lifted. Big gatherings.... I’m sorry, but I can’t agree that there’s any sense until we have much better ways of dealing with the fallout of infection. ONS stats show average life expectancy in England and wales is 81.5 years. Average age of person dying of Covid 19 is 82.3 years. If any stat highlighted the absurdity of what we are currently doing ( and there are many others ) then it could be that one! But even in octogenarians, covid is far from a death sentence. At least 95 out of 100 having it will survive.. the ones who dont almost entirely having one or more very serious existing comorbidities. Eventually we will accept the fact that this virus isnt going to be 'beat' and even if a successful vaccine is produced, it will be here all the time, returning in seasonal waves of differing strains and strengths, much as flu does. And we will have to get on with life. Its just a case of how much damage we do to ourselves until we do in this futile attempt to 'beat' it in the meantime. Concluding that it will be present indefinitely is not controversial. The severity however does change with developments in treatment or immunity. A large gathering today is unlikely to have exactly the same fallout as a large gathering in a year would. So yes , we do need to learn to live with it , but that does not mean ignoring the reality of it and carrying on. |
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Oct 20, 2020 15:36:14 GMT 1
Treatment has improved a lot since the spring peak and that can be seen in the lengths of stay in hospital for those that need it and the actual death figures ( mortality rate )
It may be that theres still more improvements to be made in that and of course a vaccine 'might' be on the way, though the effectiveness of vaccines in their early years is likely to mean it wont be the saviour many presume it will be.
So it that respect you are right.
What were doing at the moment though is not only destroying our economy and society, causing enormous unemployment with all its effects and seriously damaging our youths futures but we're also causing huge amounts of non-covid deaths.. the average age of which will be much younger than the 82.3 years of a covid victim.
Referrals for cancer and other huge killers massively down on previous years.. this will lead to tens upon tens of thousands of avoidable deaths.
Lunacy on a grand scale IMO.
Football, like the rest of life should take the attitude of shielding the vulnerable whilst the rest of society get on with life.
Dont fear the virus spreading throughout the healthy population.. welcome it...the herd immunity it will create is actually the best thing available to protect the vulnerable.
|
|
|
|
Post by allan 1958 (OAF-WROY)(SSLFF) on Oct 20, 2020 16:47:10 GMT 1
Treatment has improved a lot since the spring peak and that can be seen in the lengths of stay in hospital for those that need it and the actual death figures ( mortality rate ) It may be that theres still more improvements to be made in that and of course a vaccine 'might' be on the way, though the effectiveness of vaccines in their early years is likely to mean it wont be the saviour many presume it will be. So it that respect you are right. What were doing at the moment though is not only destroying our economy and society, causing enormous unemployment with all its effects and seriously damaging our youths futures but we're also causing huge amounts of non-covid deaths.. the average age of which will be much younger than the 82.3 years of a covid victim. Referrals for cancer and other huge killers massively down on previous years.. this will lead to tens upon tens of thousands of avoidable deaths. Lunacy on a grand scale IMO. Football, like the rest of life should take the attitude of shielding the vulnerable whilst the rest of society get on with life. Dont fear the virus spreading throughout the healthy population.. welcome it...the herd immunity it will create is actually the best thing available to protect the vulnerable. I totally agree! It takes 2 things one some of the youngsters to give those that are sheltering some space/respect and the minority of old gits to use their brains Social segregation is not something I would normally suggest but it is the best option for all. Segregate pubs shops restaurants gyms and cinemas. I don’t think some of the people in the uk are bright enough to see the benefit Ps and no international travel and limited to your geographic area until a vaccine is available |
|
|
|
Post by The King's Head 1230 on Oct 20, 2020 17:17:11 GMT 1
Treatment has improved a lot since the spring peak and that can be seen in the lengths of stay in hospital for those that need it and the actual death figures ( mortality rate ) It may be that theres still more improvements to be made in that and of course a vaccine 'might' be on the way, though the effectiveness of vaccines in their early years is likely to mean it wont be the saviour many presume it will be. So it that respect you are right. What were doing at the moment though is not only destroying our economy and society, causing enormous unemployment with all its effects and seriously damaging our youths futures but we're also causing huge amounts of non-covid deaths.. the average age of which will be much younger than the 82.3 years of a covid victim. Referrals for cancer and other huge killers massively down on previous years.. this will lead to tens upon tens of thousands of avoidable deaths. Lunacy on a grand scale IMO. Football, like the rest of life should take the attitude of shielding the vulnerable whilst the rest of society get on with life. Dont fear the virus spreading throughout the healthy population.. welcome it...the herd immunity it will create is actually the best thing available to protect the vulnerable. You don't fancy running the country do yeah |
|
ben1987
Mental Health Support Group
Posts: 6,878
|
Post by ben1987 on Oct 20, 2020 22:18:20 GMT 1
It’s more likely because they’ve got a population smaller than Scotland living in a landmass about the size of the UK and with the total number of overseas visitors annually being typically less than a quarter of the visitors we get to London alone. Auckland covers an area roughly the size of Yorkshire and has around a quarter of the number of inhabitants. You ain’t going to catch an airborne human transmissible virus on an empty island. I know. It doesn't change my opinion on the NZ government or the half witted drunken, dog whistling, lazy, fat, bumbling priveliged moron we have in power in the UK. Let me guess, you voted conservative in the last election mate? |
|
|
|
Post by thrice on Oct 20, 2020 22:19:45 GMT 1
Imagine being let back in now.
We could take the roof off.
|
|
|
|
Post by overtonterrierspirit on Oct 20, 2020 22:29:33 GMT 1
Imagine being let back in now. We could take the roof off. I was just thinking that myself. Hopefully we are going to kick on so that we can create that special Town atmosphere soon! |
|
|
|
Post by yoy on Oct 20, 2020 22:30:57 GMT 1
Treatment has improved a lot since the spring peak and that can be seen in the lengths of stay in hospital for those that need it and the actual death figures ( mortality rate ) It may be that theres still more improvements to be made in that and of course a vaccine 'might' be on the way, though the effectiveness of vaccines in their early years is likely to mean it wont be the saviour many presume it will be. So it that respect you are right. What were doing at the moment though is not only destroying our economy and society, causing enormous unemployment with all its effects and seriously damaging our youths futures but we're also causing huge amounts of non-covid deaths.. the average age of which will be much younger than the 82.3 years of a covid victim. Referrals for cancer and other huge killers massively down on previous years.. this will lead to tens upon tens of thousands of avoidable deaths. Lunacy on a grand scale IMO. Football, like the rest of life should take the attitude of shielding the vulnerable whilst the rest of society get on with life. Dont fear the virus spreading throughout the healthy population.. welcome it...the herd immunity it will create is actually the best thing available to protect the vulnerable. For me... it is about finding the optimal point between minimised needles interactions for the least amount of disruption. Allowing football crowds in does not even come close to being a priority. |
|
|
|
Post by 28901 on Oct 20, 2020 22:33:51 GMT 1
I know. It doesn't change my opinion on the NZ government or the half witted drunken, dog whistling, lazy, fat, bumbling priveliged moron we have in power in the UK. Let me guess, you voted conservative in the last election mate? It's no longer a case of Conservative and Labour. This govt. are beyond the pale and are totally unaccountable. They have removed the boundaries of what is acceptable. |
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Oct 21, 2020 0:35:40 GMT 1
Treatment has improved a lot since the spring peak and that can be seen in the lengths of stay in hospital for those that need it and the actual death figures ( mortality rate ) It may be that theres still more improvements to be made in that and of course a vaccine 'might' be on the way, though the effectiveness of vaccines in their early years is likely to mean it wont be the saviour many presume it will be. So it that respect you are right. What were doing at the moment though is not only destroying our economy and society, causing enormous unemployment with all its effects and seriously damaging our youths futures but we're also causing huge amounts of non-covid deaths.. the average age of which will be much younger than the 82.3 years of a covid victim. Referrals for cancer and other huge killers massively down on previous years.. this will lead to tens upon tens of thousands of avoidable deaths. Lunacy on a grand scale IMO. Football, like the rest of life should take the attitude of shielding the vulnerable whilst the rest of society get on with life. Dont fear the virus spreading throughout the healthy population.. welcome it...the herd immunity it will create is actually the best thing available to protect the vulnerable. For me... it is about finding the optimal point between minimised needles interactions for the least amount of disruption. Allowing football crowds in does not even come close to being a priority. Well that attitude must include all entertainment venues too.. cinema, recreation places like bowling alleys and clubs, theme parks, zoos, all sports stadiums, etc etc etc Drinking in pubs isnt a priority,, or eating out,,even seeing your friends and family at all isnt. I get what youre saying and why you think it would help stop the spread..it almost certainly will,,. but in doing all that we are going to lose a lot of the fabric of our society , the things that bind communities and form our ways of life, whilst putting an awful lot of people out of work to boot.. Theres a line where the 'cure' becomes worse than the problem.. and IMO we crossed that line about 5 months ago! It isnt worth it. and it isnt even saving lives.. its largely just prolonging very old people's lives ( often in isolated misery ) that will inevitably end soon anyway, whilst costing many more younger lives to do it though a whole host of different ways. Its lunacy. The WHO's latest estimate of worldwide cases puts covids mortality rate at 0.15%... flu, which we stop absolutely nothing for and barely even consider, has a rate of about 0.1% Shield the vulnerable as best you can and put enormous resources into that..and the rest get on with life as normal... including football. Let the virus spread naturally through the healthy population and create the herd immunity that might actually offer a more viable longer term shield for the vulnerable. |
|
|
|
Post by yoy on Oct 21, 2020 20:51:41 GMT 1
For me... it is about finding the optimal point between minimised needles interactions for the least amount of disruption. Allowing football crowds in does not even come close to being a priority. Well that attitude must include all entertainment venues too.. cinema, recreation places like bowling alleys and clubs, theme parks, zoos, all sports stadiums, etc etc etc Drinking in pubs isnt a priority,, or eating out,,even seeing your friends and family at all isnt. I get what youre saying and why you think it would help stop the spread..it almost certainly will,,. but in doing all that we are going to lose a lot of the fabric of our society , the things that bind communities and form our ways of life, whilst putting an awful lot of people out of work to boot.. Theres a line where the 'cure' becomes worse than the problem.. and IMO we crossed that line about 5 months ago! It isnt worth it. and it isnt even saving lives.. its largely just prolonging very old people's lives ( often in isolated misery ) that will inevitably end soon anyway, whilst costing many more younger lives to do it though a whole host of different ways. Its lunacy. The WHO's latest estimate of worldwide cases puts covids mortality rate at 0.15%... flu, which we stop absolutely nothing for and barely even consider, has a rate of about 0.1% Shield the vulnerable as best you can and put enormous resources into that..and the rest get on with life as normal... including football. Let the virus spread naturally through the healthy population and create the herd immunity that might actually offer a more viable longer term shield for the vulnerable. As mentioned before. Comparing death rates without comparing infection rates is simply not relevant. But even so, the numbers you quote have the death rate as being 50% greater. There’s no other measure on which you’d place such a large disparity as being equal. The assessment does have to apply to all leisure venues - I agree. But again, you have to add another dynamic which is the economic impact. I haven’t researched it but I just don’t believe that closing a venue that operates on average for less than an hour a week has the same economic impact as one open and operating 10 hours or more every day. I doubt there are many cities where the football club generates as many hours of employment as the pubs do. Fundamentally I agree with most of what you say. I simply don’t agree that allowing crowds into football matches brings enough benefit to warrant the incremental misery and suffering (Covid rather than the standard of what’s being watched). By and large the other points you make are in line with my views I’ve spouted to anyone who’ll listen for months. |
|
|
|
Post by yappledapple on Oct 21, 2020 22:38:30 GMT 1
|
|
leroy212
Steve Kindon Terrier
Posts: 1,601 
|
Post by leroy212 on Oct 21, 2020 23:33:57 GMT 1
My mate was there last night and said it was full. Said the staff who work there think it's mad fans can't go in
|
|
Amigo
Jimmy Glazzard Terrier
Posts: 4,822
|
Post by Amigo on Oct 22, 2020 1:34:21 GMT 1
For me... it is about finding the optimal point between minimised needles interactions for the least amount of disruption. Allowing football crowds in does not even come close to being a priority. Well that attitude must include all entertainment venues too.. cinema, recreation places like bowling alleys and clubs, theme parks, zoos, all sports stadiums, etc etc etc Drinking in pubs isnt a priority,, or eating out,,even seeing your friends and family at all isnt. I get what youre saying and why you think it would help stop the spread..it almost certainly will,,. but in doing all that we are going to lose a lot of the fabric of our society , the things that bind communities and form our ways of life, whilst putting an awful lot of people out of work to boot.. Theres a line where the 'cure' becomes worse than the problem.. and IMO we crossed that line about 5 months ago! It isnt worth it. and it isnt even saving lives.. its largely just prolonging very old people's lives ( often in isolated misery ) that will inevitably end soon anyway, whilst costing many more younger lives to do it though a whole host of different ways. Its lunacy. The WHO's latest estimate of worldwide cases puts covids mortality rate at 0.15%... flu, which we stop absolutely nothing for and barely even consider, has a rate of about 0.1% Shield the vulnerable as best you can and put enormous resources into that..and the rest get on with life as normal... including football. Let the virus spread naturally through the healthy population and create the herd immunity that might actually offer a more viable longer term shield for the vulnerable. Does the worldwide figure of covid deaths include the "tested positive for covid in the last 28 days" whether they died of it or not or is that just us as a nation that do that? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2020 1:49:44 GMT 1
Well that attitude must include all entertainment venues too.. cinema, recreation places like bowling alleys and clubs, theme parks, zoos, all sports stadiums, etc etc etc Drinking in pubs isnt a priority,, or eating out,,even seeing your friends and family at all isnt. I get what youre saying and why you think it would help stop the spread..it almost certainly will,,. but in doing all that we are going to lose a lot of the fabric of our society , the things that bind communities and form our ways of life, whilst putting an awful lot of people out of work to boot.. Theres a line where the 'cure' becomes worse than the problem.. and IMO we crossed that line about 5 months ago! restara It isnt worth it. and it isnt even saving lives.. its largely just prolonging very old people's lives ( often in isolated misery ) that will inevitably end soon anyway, whilst costing many more younger lives to do it though a whole host of different ways. Its lunacy. The WHO's latest estimate of worldwide cases puts covids mortality rate at 0.15%... flu, which we stop absolutely nothing for and barely even consider, has a rate of about 0.1% Shield the vulnerable as best you can and put enormous resources into that..and the rest get on with life as normal... including football. Let the virus spread naturally through the healthy population and create the herd immunity that might actually offer a more viable longer term shield for the vulnerable. As mentioned before. Comparing death rates without comparing infection rates is simply not relevant. But even so, the numbers you quote have the death rate as being 50% greater. There’s no other measure on which you’d place such a large disparity as being equal. The assessment does have to apply to all leisure venues - I agree. But again, you have to add another dynamic which is the economic impact. I haven’t researched it but I just don’t believe that closing a venue that operates on average for less than an hour a week has the same economic impact as one open and operating 10 hours or more every day. I doubt there are many cities where the football club generates as many hours of employment as the pubs do. Fundamentally I agree with most of what you say. I simply don’t agree that allowing crowds into football matches brings enough benefit to warrant the incremental misery and suffering (Covid rather than the standard of what’s being watched). By and large the other points you make are in line with my views I’ve spouted to anyone who’ll listen for months. Its not England, but you can read Irelands scientific evidence on the evidential efficacy of various measures in reducing the R-rate. www.health-ni.gov.uk/sites/default/files/publications/health/exec-paper-240920.pdfClosures of pubs and restaurants limited to takeaway only - reduce by around 0.2 Curfews expected to have marginal impact. Restrictions on outdoor gatherings including prohibiting large events, low impact, less than 0.05 R-Rate reduction. In essence, they suggest anything other than "stay at home" orders are likely to have minimal impact. AND THEN IMPLEMENT THE MEASURES ANYWAY.... |
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Oct 22, 2020 23:58:01 GMT 1
Well that attitude must include all entertainment venues too.. cinema, recreation places like bowling alleys and clubs, theme parks, zoos, all sports stadiums, etc etc etc Drinking in pubs isnt a priority,, or eating out,,even seeing your friends and family at all isnt. I get what youre saying and why you think it would help stop the spread..it almost certainly will,,. but in doing all that we are going to lose a lot of the fabric of our society , the things that bind communities and form our ways of life, whilst putting an awful lot of people out of work to boot.. Theres a line where the 'cure' becomes worse than the problem.. and IMO we crossed that line about 5 months ago! It isnt worth it. and it isnt even saving lives.. its largely just prolonging very old people's lives ( often in isolated misery ) that will inevitably end soon anyway, whilst costing many more younger lives to do it though a whole host of different ways. Its lunacy. The WHO's latest estimate of worldwide cases puts covids mortality rate at 0.15%... flu, which we stop absolutely nothing for and barely even consider, has a rate of about 0.1% Shield the vulnerable as best you can and put enormous resources into that..and the rest get on with life as normal... including football. Let the virus spread naturally through the healthy population and create the herd immunity that might actually offer a more viable longer term shield for the vulnerable. As mentioned before. Comparing death rates without comparing infection rates is simply not relevant. But even so, the numbers you quote have the death rate as being 50% greater. There’s no other measure on which you’d place such a large disparity as being equal. The assessment does have to apply to all leisure venues - I agree. But again, you have to add another dynamic which is the economic impact. I haven’t researched it but I just don’t believe that closing a venue that operates on average for less than an hour a week has the same economic impact as one open and operating 10 hours or more every day. I doubt there are many cities where the football club generates as many hours of employment as the pubs do. Fundamentally I agree with most of what you say. I simply don’t agree that allowing crowds into football matches brings enough benefit to warrant the incremental misery and suffering (Covid rather than the standard of what’s being watched). By and large the other points you make are in line with my views I’ve spouted to anyone who’ll listen for months. Depends on what value you put on football clubs. Plenty are teetering on the brink right now id imagine with no light at the end of the tunnel in sight. Theyre quite unique in many ways and their importance shouldnt be downplayed. One of the rare things that transcends pretty much everything when it comes to bringing a community together.. age, gender, sexuality, race, religion...a football crowd is a mix of everything, all with a common purpose. Its not just the club that dies and that key social hub, its the businesses that rely on it in the local area. Shield the vulnerable and get on with life. Herd immunity is and has always been the key way to protect vulnerable people from C19 yet we fight achieving it at every turn. |
|
|
|
Post by birchencliffe on Oct 23, 2020 7:07:01 GMT 1
no crowds will be allowed in this season.. next August ..probably but sat socially distanced with masks on hand washing tracking apps political messages before the game all will be the norm..Not Towns fault but fuck that its not for me the younger generation will learn to accept it imm at that age where i remember far better times.
|
|
|
|
Post by yoy on Oct 23, 2020 8:03:16 GMT 1
As mentioned before. Comparing death rates without comparing infection rates is simply not relevant. But even so, the numbers you quote have the death rate as being 50% greater. There’s no other measure on which you’d place such a large disparity as being equal. The assessment does have to apply to all leisure venues - I agree. But again, you have to add another dynamic which is the economic impact. I haven’t researched it but I just don’t believe that closing a venue that operates on average for less than an hour a week has the same economic impact as one open and operating 10 hours or more every day. I doubt there are many cities where the football club generates as many hours of employment as the pubs do. Fundamentally I agree with most of what you say. I simply don’t agree that allowing crowds into football matches brings enough benefit to warrant the incremental misery and suffering (Covid rather than the standard of what’s being watched). By and large the other points you make are in line with my views I’ve spouted to anyone who’ll listen for months. Depends on what value you put on football clubs. Plenty are teetering on the brink right now id imagine with no light at the end of the tunnel in sight. Theyre quite unique in many ways and their importance shouldnt be downplayed. One of the rare things that transcends pretty much everything when it comes to bringing a community together.. age, gender, sexuality, race, religion...a football crowd is a mix of everything, all with a common purpose. Its not just the club that dies and that key social hub, its the businesses that rely on it in the local area. Shield the vulnerable and get on with life. Herd immunity is and has always been the key way to protect vulnerable people from C19 yet we fight achieving it at every turn. Football clubs return. The game in general needs to press the reset button. A couple of years of turmoil may be no bad thing. The piece on Ireland does make me reconsider my views. Though I’m still not convinced. I neither agree nor disagree with your point on herd immunity. It’ll take a long time to know. In ten years perhaps we can compare Sweden to the other Scandinavian countries to see which fared best in the long run. What I will say is this though... If immunity doesn’t exist then we need to get on with finding a new balance in our way of living. That cannot simply be a terminal lockdown. The only counter to that remains that there’s merit in slowing the flow of infection until treatment develops. I do in general share the view that those who can , should get on with it. I’m just not convinced it should include mass gatherings. What I will say is this... government will not act for the long term of the country. It simply isn’t in their interests. Getting it wrong by being over protecting is far less damaging for your legacy than getting it wrong by easing restrictions too far too soon and creating the 500,000 U.K. deaths that were initially modelled by Imperial College. |
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Oct 23, 2020 9:10:23 GMT 1
Agree very much about the government.
Its a weakness of democracy in a way, that governments are forced to take a short termist approach to everything, when a more long term, pragmatic approach might be better.
This now is a great example.
Easier to cause a lot of deaths and misery in the future than fewer deaths in the here and now, even when they are people very much at deaths door anyway on the whole.
Thing is though that when you look at the stats, they arent even achieving that.
Saw a stat the other day that deaths at home from heart failures are up 26,000 from the norm since the C19 crisis started.
Thats people having symptoms but either not seeking medical help or being stopped having it because the focus is so much on C19.
Cancer referrals down 79% in April alone for the same reasons, referrals for breast cancer being particularly effected.
This will lead to tens of thousands of premature deaths... average age way younger than Covids 82.3.
Doesnt directly relate to football of course and all the other events that are now banned.. but these things are all part of a wider policy of lunacy IMO.. one designed to halt herd immunity being achieved whilst also causing massive economic and social damage.
Ferguson at Imperial was always an odd choice of scientist to follow the predictions of, baring in mind he has a long history of wildly over-exaggerating his predictions around various health concerns.
Swedens mortality rate of 0.06 is the same as the Uks and several other european countries ( better than some too ) despite a very different approach.
Measures dont seem to have anywhere near as much effect on C19 death rates as the severity of the preceding flu season each nation had does... ie how much 'dry timber' they had for covid to attack.
Its no coincidence that the countries that had an unusually mild flu season last winter had higher C19 deaths,, and vice versa.
|
|
