Coronavirus Page 32

Quote: Kenneth @ 10th April 2020, 12:30 PM

This really upsets me. When is this mainstream culture of derision toward Smurfs going to end? Year after year at the Academy Awards, the Smurfs - and little people of blue color in general - are denied nominations, let alone awards. Yes, there was Avatar in 2009, but its awards were for special effects and editing, rather than for the cast members. This ingrained attitude of apathy toward Smurfs has gone on unchallenged for far too long. And it's not just in Hollywood and British comedy forums - it's in boardrooms and mosques and synagogues across the world. You might think casual smurfism or smurfophobia are nothing serious, but that's precisely the sort of smurfist attitude that has to be stopped.

It's easy from your ivory tower stall at the Red Hill Market to say that Smurfs should be grateful, but until you've paused and walked in their little white shoes, then you don't know the score. I feel you owe all Smurfs an apology.

View original

I endorse these comments.

Could Helen Lederer lead a suitable crowd fund?

"Europe could be close to herd immunity from coronavirus ALREADY with 15% of people carrying antibodies say researchers studying city dubbed 'German Wuhan'"

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8206831/Europe-close-herd-immunity-coronavirus-ALREADY.html

"If 15 per cent of people do have antibodies, then Germany's actual death rate could be as low as 0.37 per cent...... Prof Gunther Hartmann, a member of the study, said: 'The 15 per cent is not that far from the 60 per cent we need for herd immunity".

Ooh yes, that's right. 15 and 60 are really close in number aren't they. We are extremely close now. Good old science.

980 more fatalities in the UK in the last 24 hours, bringing the UK total to almost 9000.

This is the biggest daily death toll so far in Europe.

Quote: Billy Bunter @ 10th April 2020, 9:55 AM

Well it's better than naively believing everything we're fed by the media without question. Where would science be today without theories? As long as it remains just a theory and there's no urge to rush out and set fire today things.

View original

The trouble is conspiracy theories, usually based on no evidence whatsoever just the opinions of armchair scientists and self-annointed experts, can be very damaging. Such as the many baseless ones about MMR shots which led to some people not having their children done and, years later, led to a surge in Measles cases.

Quote: chipolata @ 10th April 2020, 3:26 PM

The trouble is conspiracy theories, usually based on no evidence whatsoever just the opinions of armchair scientists and self-annointed experts, can be very damaging. Such as the many baseless ones about MMR shots which led to some people not having their children done and, years later, led to a surge in Measles cases.

View original

Then there are examples of what started off as conspiracy theories (or would have been called such had the term been in use at the time) that were derided when first put but are now accepted as fact, including: smoking can damage your health: governments & big business using the internet to spy on people: heading footballs leads to brain damage; the adding of poisonous substances to alcohol during prohibition; Thalidomide...

It always pays to question the perceived wisdom. And then there's the theory that Earth isn't flat at all. Of course the jury's still out on that one.

Quote: Rood Eye @ 10th April 2020, 2:25 PM

980 more fatalities in the UK in the last 24 hours, bringing the UK total to almost 9000.

This is the biggest daily death toll so far in Europe.

View original

Bloody horrendous. Pardon me for sounding a sour note but why did Boris suddenly become a saint because he got the virus? If he'd acted more sensibly at the start, fewer people might have died. But he thought he was invincible and to Hell with the rest of us.

Yesterday another 21 Smurfs smurfed positive to coronavirus, bringing the total number of cases to 37. This is the biggest daily increase.

Meanwhile, Papa Smurf, one of the first to test positive, has been smurfed to intensive care. Interestingly, only a week ago, numerous Smurfs were smurfing him for going ahead with a crowded music concert, but now they're all virtue signalling by publicly wishing him well.

As if LFC fans aren't f**ked off enough as it is - Kenny Dalglish has now got the virus too

UK coronavirus-related deaths in the last 24 hours = 917.

Total UK coronavirus-related deaths = 9875.

To put these daily death figures into some sort of perspective, rather that the sensationalism that the Government, and the media, would have us believe:

Firstly these figures are people who died with coronavirus and not necessarily of coronavirus and many of them were already in hospital with potentially fatal complications before they picked up the virus.

Secondly, in the last week for which total deaths are so far recorded on the Office for National Statistics website (w/e 27 March) the total deaths were 11,141. This is 1,011 above the five year average for the corresponding week. That equates to 144 per day.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/weeklyprovisionalfiguresondeathsregisteredinenglandandwales

So, rather than shouting from the rooftops that were over 900 "coronavirus-related deaths" each day, what they should be telling the population, in order to to calm fears (as any responsible government should do), is that there were 144 deaths above the norm. 144 excess deaths per day in a population of 60 million (you do the maths). But, of course, it is not in the government's interests to calm the population at this stage; they want us to panic so that we'll do as they say and they can justify the action they are taking. (And once they have us doing what they say - and once the police wield the power of where we can go and what we can do when we get there - they won't be in any hurry to relinquish that. "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.")

Of course, 144 excess deaths a day is not a good thing. But it is better than pretending it is nearly 1,000. And to put this figure into perspective even further, at the height of the 2015 flu epidemic (ie w/e 9/1/15) there were 16,237 deaths in total that week. That was 3,960 above the five year average for the corresponding week. Which equates to 565 excess deaths a day - far more than we've experienced so far under the current virus.

And, of the 144 excess daily deaths recorded for w/e 27 March 2020, you can be sure that some of those will be of people who have been ill long-term and had their scheduled operations and procedures cancelled to make way for coronavirus patients. This number will only increase as time goes on. So we are trading some deaths for others.

In fact, we had better get used to accepting an increase in the daily and weekly death totals for decades to come. As a result of the government opting to crash the economy (as have France, Italy & Spain but unlike Sweden, where there have been only 887 coronavirus-related deaths in total rather than per day), there will be no funds available for future investment in the NHS (or anything else) and people will be living in poorer and more depressing conditions as a result of job losses and lack of opportunities.

So the question is, while the hope is apparently that we may save some lives from coronavirus from the "lockdown", how many will we in fact lose in the long-term as a knock-on effect? And is it a fair trade? Better ask future generations that one.

Still...

No work Monday!

Yay!!

Billy makes some very good points and it may well be that coronavirus is simply a scam designed to impose a "new world order" upon us.

Be that as it may, Lofthouse doesn't have to go to work on Monday.

And Virgin Media have just given me a load of free channels to watch for the next month.

Swings and roundabouts, I suppose.

Quote: Billy Bunter @ 11th April 2020, 5:10 PM

To put these daily death figures into some sort of perspective, rather that the sensationalism that the Government, and the media, would have us believe:

Firstly these figures are people who died with coronavirus and not necessarily of coronavirus and many of them were already in hospital with potentially fatal complications before they picked up the virus.

Secondly, in the last week for which total deaths are so far recorded on the Office for National Statistics website (w/e 27 March) the total deaths were 11,141. This is 1,011 above the five year average for the corresponding week. That equates to 144 per day.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/weeklyprovisionalfiguresondeathsregisteredinenglandandwales

So, rather than shouting from the rooftops that were over 900 "coronavirus-related deaths" each day, what they should be telling the population, in order to to calm fears (as any responsible government should do), is that there were 144 deaths above the norm. 144 excess deaths per day in a population of 60 million (you do the maths). But, of course, it is not in the government's interests to calm the population at this stage; they want us to panic so that we'll do as they say and they can justify the action they are taking. (And once they have us doing what they say - and once the police wield the power of where we can go and what we can do when we get there - they won't be in any hurry to relinquish that. "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.")

Of course, 144 excess deaths a day is not a good thing. But it is better than pretending it is nearly 1,000. And to put this figure into perspective even further, at the height of the 2015 flu epidemic (ie w/e 9/1/15) there were 16,237 deaths in total that week. That was 3,960 above the five year average for the corresponding week. Which equates to 565 excess deaths a day - far more than we've experienced so far under the current virus.

And, of the 144 excess daily deaths recorded for w/e 27 March 2020, you can be sure that some of those will be of people who have been ill long-term and had their scheduled operations and procedures cancelled to make way for coronavirus patients. This number will only increase as time goes on. So we are trading some deaths for others.

In fact, we had better get used to accepting an increase in the daily and weekly death totals for decades to come. As a result of the government opting to crash the economy (as have France, Italy & Spain but unlike Sweden, where there have been only 887 coronavirus-related deaths in total rather than per day), there will be no funds available for future investment in the NHS (or anything else) and people will be living in poorer and more depressing conditions as a result of job losses and lack of opportunities.

So the question is, while the hope is apparently that we may save some lives from coronavirus from the "lockdown", how many will we in fact lose in the long-term as a knock-on effect? And is it a fair trade? Better ask future generations that one.

View original

Brilliant. That is exactly where I am coming from. I couldn't agree more if I tried. I wrote again to my MP today to say if this is (as I suspect) a rehearsal for a restructuring the economy and saving the planet (rather than the NHS), they will need to get rid of the death cult culture first which arrived with the death of Diana and 9/11 and is now out of control.

On a more important point, I was wondering how people were getting on with snitching on their neighbours.

I mean serious snitching.

The chavs here are having family members round to build patios, the Asian people are travelling to each others houses to deliver unnecessary food and the bloke who thinks he hasn't got long to live anyway (although I disagree) is clearly driving down to Bournemouth every other day to have sex.

I never did get the OBE I deserved but I'm hoping for something good to come from my curtain twitching list.

Quote: Billy Bunter @ 11th April 2020, 5:10 PM

To put these daily death figures into some sort of perspective, rather that the sensationalism that the Government, and the media, would have us believe:

Firstly these figures are people who died with coronavirus and not necessarily of coronavirus and many of them were already in hospital with potentially fatal complications before they picked up the virus.

Secondly, in the last week for which total deaths are so far recorded on the Office for National Statistics website (w/e 27 March) the total deaths were 11,141. This is 1,011 above the five year average for the corresponding week. That equates to 144 per day.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/weeklyprovisionalfiguresondeathsregisteredinenglandandwales

So, rather than shouting from the rooftops that were over 900 "coronavirus-related deaths" each day, what they should be telling the population, in order to to calm fears (as any responsible government should do), is that there were 144 deaths above the norm. 144 excess deaths per day in a population of 60 million (you do the maths). But, of course, it is not in the government's interests to calm the population at this stage; they want us to panic so that we'll do as they say and they can justify the action they are taking. (And once they have us doing what they say - and once the police wield the power of where we can go and what we can do when we get there - they won't be in any hurry to relinquish that. "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.")

Of course, 144 excess deaths a day is not a good thing. But it is better than pretending it is nearly 1,000. And to put this figure into perspective even further, at the height of the 2015 flu epidemic (ie w/e 9/1/15) there were 16,237 deaths in total that week. That was 3,960 above the five year average for the corresponding week. Which equates to 565 excess deaths a day - far more than we've experienced so far under the current virus.

And, of the 144 excess daily deaths recorded for w/e 27 March 2020, you can be sure that some of those will be of people who have been ill long-term and had their scheduled operations and procedures cancelled to make way for coronavirus patients. This number will only increase as time goes on. So we are trading some deaths for others.

In fact, we had better get used to accepting an increase in the daily and weekly death totals for decades to come. As a result of the government opting to crash the economy (as have France, Italy & Spain but unlike Sweden, where there have been only 887 coronavirus-related deaths in total rather than per day), there will be no funds available for future investment in the NHS (or anything else) and people will be living in poorer and more depressing conditions as a result of job losses and lack of opportunities.

So the question is, while the hope is apparently that we may save some lives from coronavirus from the "lockdown", how many will we in fact lose in the long-term as a knock-on effect? And is it a fair trade? Better ask future generations that one.

View original

You'd love living in Sparta. They've got this great 'killing weak children policy' which isn't so great for weak children but is great for the Sparta economy.