SIGN UP

Answers

1 to 20 of 35rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by pastafreak. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I believe it is, barring a vaccine, it's here to stay.
I think so yes.
This chap IMO is quite right.
Living with it with restrictions for now. You can’t be tested unless you have symptoms. Despite the fact that many many people can be infectious with no symptoms.
You can be told to self isolate equally with no symptoms and no prospect of a test.
I thought we was?
I`ve said we should learn to live with it from the beginning. Viruses are part of life. You wouldn`t lock everyone away for months and expect the common cold to die out so I don`t know why anyone expects that to happen here. Seems to me (a layperson) that viruses come along, have their day and fizzle out. Locking everyone down etc is only prolonging the process. Boris needs to start listening to other scientists and not just Whitty who seems not to see the human side of anything. Still, lets have another lockdown and trash even more of the economy.
I think if you read the article one thing that shouts out to me is that its really easy to hold such opinions if you don't have to take the responsibility when you are wrong. Academe is not public health neither is it politics with a small p.
It will come as no surprise to learn that I am in complete agreement. I saw the point of the first lockdown whilst the NHS got its act together to deal with those infected. I imagined it to have lasted a month or thereabouts at most and then we'd have to live with the virus. It is now six months on. The virus will continue to spread whatever restrictions the government introduces. The reason for that is simple - people will socialise whatever they are told. Threatening to fine people ridiculous amounts for minor transgressions is stupid and in any case will almost certainly be ruled unlawful if they are ever tested in court. Fines must be based on ability to pay. There is no point fining somebody who is unemployed or on low pay £10,000. You might as well fine them £10 million and any court dealing with such a matter is bound by law to consider the defendant's means.

As I keep saying (and am often soundly rebuked for my trouble) a completely different approach is necessary.
Question Author
The thing with public health and politics in particular, is that they may be too reliant on favourable public opinion. There are many scientists and medics who do not agree with all of current policy on Covid, but their views get lost in the current atmosphere, and media decisions on what makes good headlines.
Your hair looks nice NJ. how much?
//...its really easy to hold such opinions if you don't have to take the responsibility when you are wrong.//

You can rest assured, woofy, that nobody who unconditionally accepts that the virus will continue to spread will be wrong. It's the inability or refusal to accept that, somehow believing the virus can be contained, controlled or even eliminated, that is causing much of the trouble.
//Your hair looks nice NJ. how much?//

Thanks TC. Mrs NJ thinks so too. It cost about 1.5 times as much as it did pre-lockdown. Mind you, much of the charge these days is in the form of a search fee. :-)
Fundamentally I don’t see how you can be “wrong” about this.
I meant about the virus not NJ’s “hair” :-)
Absolutely we do, as 237SJ has already pointed out, the virus is here already, hiding from it achieves nothing. If we have another lockdown (please, no), the number of infections will decrease (common sense), then after lockdown, the number of infections will increase (more common sense). We will have Groundhog Day for the next how many years?

Again, the briefing at 11.00 from Chris Whitty, gives estimates for October certainly, not actuals. I realise everything is best guess, but most people testing positive now for Covid have little or no symptoms. It does not follow that there will be a huge upsurge in hospital admissions, and deaths.
I get that covid is here to stay....the bit that academe don't have to take responsibility for is what should be done about it.
Maybe, woof, the general public should be given the opportunity to make an informed decision for themselves. At the moment Covid seems to be "paralysing" everything else, including the treatment of non Covid related illness etc., which will lead to an even bigger rise in the death rates.
Something I, along with others have said since the begining but were castigated by the Covid worshipers.

I wonder if same people will label this as 'COVIDIOTS'?
"general public" "informed" you don't often see those two concepts in the same post
Yes - and the sooner the better.
Might be too late. FTSE down 3% already thanks to Witless.

I wonder if he has a gold plated pension, not one that relies on markets like the rest of us?
we have no choice, you cannot lock down the country as it's economic suicide..i would not like to catch the virus myself, but if i do, i do.
if i live, even better..but i will not be fatalistic.

1 to 20 of 35rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Is It Time We Learnt To Live With Covid?

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.