Coronavirus

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by Ms NTL

NHS has no money. They will give the sequencing to private companies with new funding.

So there is sequencing in the UK. Right?

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

So there is sequencing in the UK. Right?

Yes

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/metrics/doc/variants

https://www.genomicsengland.co.uk/initiatives/newborns

https://www.sanger.ac.uk/collaborati...eillance-unit/

[Sephiroth]

I was wondering what point Ms_NTL was trying to make.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by nffc

Because it shows that as ever you are quite happy to sit there calling everyone's ideas and points crap without coming up with your own solutions to the issue.

As you seem to have nothing positive to offer, then you have lost rights to criticise.

An extremely flawed interpretation. I’m unsurprised.

If there’s nothing positive to offer it could simply be a case of having exhausted every viable or credible option. The inherent contradiction of trying to stop variants abroad, while allowing unmitigated spread at home. Indeed, as we’ve got “immunity” the evolutionary pressure means it’s far more likely to appear in a vaccinated or population with (sometimes multiple) previous infections.

You don’t confer rights to anyone to criticise anything.

The only practical purpose of testing is to delay (in the order of hours and days rather than weeks or months). What would we do with that time? What mitigations to slow such spread once it inevitably enters our population would have political or popular support?

[nffc]

Originally Posted by jfman

An extremely flawed interpretation. I’m unsurprised.

If there’s nothing positive to offer it could simply be a case of having exhausted every viable or credible option. The inherent contradiction of trying to stop variants abroad, while allowing unmitigated spread at home. Indeed, as we’ve got “immunity” the evolutionary pressure means it’s far more likely to appear in a vaccinated or population with (sometimes multiple) previous infections.

You don’t confer rights to anyone to criticise anything.

The only practical purpose of testing is to delay (in the order of hours and days rather than weeks or months). What would we do with that time? What mitigations to slow such spread once it inevitably enters our population would have political or popular support?

Originally Posted by jfman

An extremely flawed interpretation. I’m unsurprised.

If there’s nothing positive to offer it could simply be a case of having exhausted every viable or credible option. The inherent contradiction of trying to stop variants abroad, while allowing unmitigated spread at home. Indeed, as we’ve got “immunity” the evolutionary pressure means it’s far more likely to appear in a vaccinated or population with (sometimes multiple) previous infections.

You don’t confer rights to anyone to criticise anything.

The only practical purpose of testing is to delay (in the order of hours and days rather than weeks or months). What would we do with that time? What mitigations to slow such spread once it inevitably enters our population would have political or popular support?

I suspect the essence of what he was saying was that you’ve lost the right to be taken seriously, and it’s easy to see why based on the above.

You’ve been peddling the same cocktail of cynical pessimism since day one of the pandemic and to be honest for me at least it has just become background noise. A sustained discussion ought to move forward in order to maintain interest but you’re still re-hashing the same complaints, namely ‘policy is flawed, vaccines don’t work, there’s no immunity’

If you’d ever taken the trouble to explore nuance with regard to this subject there might be some basis to debate how well or how poorly the various medical and political responses to the pandemic have performed. But you’re still banging on the same way, despite the fact that blind Freddie can see this population isn’t susceptible to covid in anything like the way it was 2 years ago. There is still an important debate to be had about what worked well and what could have been done better but I’m struggling to see what contribution you have to make to that.

In that sense I think you have ‘lost the right to criticise’.

Subsequent posts removed.

I'm fast losing my patience with the same argumentative members.

If this continues, expect thread bans.

[Taf]

The figures are now only published once a week on the site I frequent, hence the blocky look for the past months.

Is it all being swept under the carpet to "normalise" the deaths that are still happening?

Anyway, a big jump this past week.

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by Taf

The figures are now only published once a week on the site I frequent, hence the blocky look for the past months.

Is it all being swept under the carpet to "normalise" the deaths that are still happening?

Anyway, a big jump this past week.

The Christmas effect coming through? I always said relatives were bad for you.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Taf

The figures are now only published once a week on the site I frequent, hence the blocky look for the past months.

Is it all being swept under the carpet to "normalise" the deaths that are still happening?

Anyway, a big jump this past week.

Meh.

Originally Posted by Taf

The figures are now only published once a week on the site I frequent, hence the blocky look for the past months.

Is it all being swept under the carpet to "normalise" the deaths that are still happening?

Anyway, a big jump this past week.

Might just not figure much compared to the number of excess deaths happening generally. The Times has a story tomorrow that it's the highest deaths - excluding the pandemic - since 1951. The NHS is a lot of trouble.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Damien

Might just not figure much compared to the number of excess deaths happening generally. The Times has a story tomorrow that it's the highest deaths - excluding the pandemic - since 1951. The NHS is a lot of trouble.

I suspect you meant to say "The NHS is in a lot of trouble".

but I think you got it right the first time.

Yes, in a lot of trouble.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-64209221

Oddly enough, despite what that article says, I started on BP tablets last year [ I already took statins, since 2018 ].

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Taf

The figures are now only published once a week on the site I frequent, hence the blocky look for the past months.

Is it all being swept under the carpet to "normalise" the deaths that are still happening?

Anyway, a big jump this past week.

Who'd have thunk it.

Ambulances queueing up, temporary morgues. But at least we protected the economy.

---------- Post added at 01:04 ---------- Previous post was at 00:52 ----------

Originally Posted by Damien

Might just not figure much compared to the number of excess deaths happening generally. The Times has a story tomorrow that it's the highest deaths - excluding the pandemic - since 1951. The NHS is a lot of trouble.

And here I was thinking all the pandemic deaths were the low hanging fruit being pulled forward. We should have less excess deaths, if that were actually true.