Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Gruesome Son of a Bitch said:

 

It's morally superior to virtue signal and tell people to "Stay home! Save lives!", especially if those people are in a cushy menial work-from-home desk job and unaffected by the China Virus. Had the world not been shut down to save the elderly in poor health, many of which were in nursing homes and already in isolation, most people would still be unaffected by the virus. It's the at-risk that should be staying home and being kept in isolation while the rest of the world moves on. Instead, we're bankrupting everyone and undoubtedly destroying the lives of people who would have always been left alive when the dust settles.

 

Plus tens of thousands more people than normal are suffering due to undiagnosed cancer conditions and vital missed treatments. 

 

And mental health.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 4.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Yeah, I don't notice anything either.

Time for me to chime in I guess.   1- I am not dead, as apparently some of you have theorised.   2- Things are....pretty dire over here. 546 dead according to the latest numbers, a

We've known from the start that it was going to be mainly geezers practically on their deathbeds who were going to die. It sucks, but let's get them locked down and socially distanced, not everyone else. The fat 70-something year old Trump was checked in to the hospital for Covid and emerged after a weekend stay with a slight recurring cough and unrelated spraytan to show for it. Let's all take the Trump Regeneration Pills and get back to business. Pro-Lockdowners are picking at straws with Long Term Effects conspiracy theories and such.

 

The hospitals were never strained in California. They sent away the medical ship and never used the arena space they spent millions converting into field hospitals. It's a joke.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Quintus said:

 

Plus tens of thousands more people than normal are suffering due to undiagnosed cancer conditions and vital missed treatments. 

 

And mental health.

 

Are there areas where physical and mental health services have stopped being offered due to the pandemic? That would be news to me.

 

Otherwise, it sounds like you're saying that people who've chosen not to take care of their medical needs during lockdowns would have chosen differently if not for these lockdowns. Why would someone avoid medical care only when case numbers had been lowered by lockdowns?

 

Personally, I'm at risk due to preexisting conditions and extremely keen to avoid getting this thing as a result. (Even though I'm definitely not a "geezer on my deathbed", as @Gruesome Son of a Bitch might so callously say.) As things are, with some measures still being taken to slow the spread, I'm still taking care of my body and mind with the help of the appropriate professionals. On the other hand, if the young and healthy were resuming business as usual right now, I would be more inclined to avoid medical care, or at least consider it. After all, that would inevitably increase the transmission risk anytime I left the home.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The At-Risk should have to make a lifestyle change, not everyone. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one. Also, I said it was mainly geezers, which is absolutely true. The survival rate for this thing is astronomical  and includes most people on Earth.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gruesome Son of a Bitch said:

picking at straws with Long Term Effects conspiracy theories

 

Observed and oft-reported symptoms? 

2 hours ago, Gruesome Son of a Bitch said:

The fat 70-something year old Trump was checked in to the hospital for Covid and emerged after a weekend stay with a slight recurring cough and unrelated spraytan

 

Don't forget the six-room private suite with a literally round the clock medical team. Of course, the overall verdict is still out.

 

 

2 hours ago, Gruesome Son of a Bitch said:

Let's all take the Trump Regeneration Pills and get back to business.

 

The ones derived from fetal tissue?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gruesome Son of a Bitch said:

The At-Risk should have to make a lifestyle change, not everyone. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one. Also, I said it was mainly geezers, which is absolutely true. The survival rate for this thing is astronomical  and includes most people on Earth.

 

Someone never made it past TWOK.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Datameister said:

 

Are there areas where physical and mental health services have stopped being offered due to the pandemic? That would be news to me.

 

 

Really? You honestly haven't heard anything about this? That's astonishing. At one point during the peak, I think just chemotherapy treatments alone were effectively paused for thousands of cancer patients. Additionally, the effects of isolation (in lockdown) are feared to have been disastrous for millions, desperately struggling with mental health issues, and with no end in sight. The inadvertent health ramifications of the pandemic's lockdown and restrictions have been a key concern throughout the duration of the pandemic, much reported on and debated (at least here). 

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-54418913

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-54253776

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-54470934

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8753923/Cancer-patients-betrayal-surgery-treatments-cancelled-NHS-battling-pandemic.html?&ampcf=1

 

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/cancer-patients-only-guaranteed-treatment-22803240?ampcf=1

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-54337646

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-54195580

 

That's just the UK, and recently. But such reporting goes all the way back to April. By now the numbers of those affected one way or another - without catching the virus - is easily in the tens of thousands, and just in the UK alone. Then there's overseas:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/20/health/treatment-delays-coronavirus.html?

 

Tip of the iceberg really. 

 

14 hours ago, Datameister said:

 

Otherwise, it sounds like you're saying that people who've chosen not to take care of their medical needs during lockdowns would have chosen differently if not for these lockdowns. Why would someone avoid medical care 

 

I wasn't actually saying that at all, but since you brought it up, that's also exactly what has been happening:

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52417599?&ampcf=1

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/patients-with-heart-attacks-strokes-and-even-appendicitis-vanish-from-hospitals/2020/04/19/9ca3ef24-7eb4-11ea-9040-68981f488eed_story.html?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Quintus said:

 

Really? You honestly haven't heard anything about this? That's astonishing. At one point during the peak, I think just chemotherapy treatments alone were effectively paused for thousands of cancer patients. Additionally, the effects of isolation (in lockdown) are feared to have been disastrous for millions, desperately struggling with mental health issues, and with no end in sight. The inadvertent health impact of the pandemic has been a key concern throughout the duration of the pandemic, much reported on and debated (at least here). 

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-54418913

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-54253776

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-54470934

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8753923/Cancer-patients-betrayal-surgery-treatments-cancelled-NHS-battling-pandemic.html?&ampcf=1

 

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/cancer-patients-only-guaranteed-treatment-22803240?ampcf=1

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-54337646

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-54195580

 

That's just the UK, and recently. But such reporting goes all the way back to April. By now the numbers of those affected one way or another - without catching the virus - is easily in the tens of thousands, and just in the UK alone. Then there's overseas:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/20/health/treatment-delays-coronavirus.html?

 

Tip of the iceberg really. 

 

 

I wasn't actually saying that at all, but since you brought it up, that's also exactly what has been happening:

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52417599?&ampcf=1

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/patients-with-heart-attacks-strokes-and-even-appendicitis-vanish-from-hospitals/2020/04/19/9ca3ef24-7eb4-11ea-9040-68981f488eed_story.html?

 

 

Thank you for including sources. The mental health ramifications are not news to me; in fact, I myself am receiving treatment for just that, as should anyone affected. On the other hand, I legitimately did not realize the degree to which cancer treatments had been impacted beyond the spring peak. That is very sad to hear, and should not be case. (On the other hand, people who are actively choosing to avoid medical care are being idiots, and there ain't no cure for that.)

 

Still, that doesn't strike me as an argument for a return to normalcy for all but the elderly or...preexistingly conditioned. :eh:  A world in which the virus flows freely through everyone else would obviously see a surge in cases and thus hospitalizations - even with the percentage of serious cases being much lower for healthy youngsters, the absolute numbers would be large. This means medical personnel and resources would be spread even thinner, again endangering medical care for those with any sort of affliction.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Datameister said:

 (On the other hand, people who are actively choosing to avoid medical care are being idiots, and there ain't no cure for that.)

 

Or they're just frightened? 

 

There's also plenty of recordings of sick people staying away from hospitals and local surgeries purely because they don't want to add to the burden currently felt by health institutions. They don't consider their complaint to be bad enough to bother their doctor with, at this time. I don't think that's idiocy, but rather overly considerate. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Quintus said:

 

Or they're just frightened? 

 

There's also plenty of recordings of sick people staying away from hospitals and local surgeries purely because they don't want to add to the burden currently felt by health institutions. They don't consider their complaint to be bad enough to bother their doctor with, at this time. I don't think that's idiocy, but rather overly considerate. 

 

Tomayto, tomahto.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Generallissimo Gruesome lays down his latest dictums. He is " allowing" us to gather. How kind of him-'Thank you', your Grace.Once he again he says it's safe to gather outdoors ; but, you still must wear a mask and stay six-feet apart!😳

Well, which is it, Gav?.

 

" Today California, tomorrow the World!"

1602366401789.jpg

You better hope and pray this wannabe dictator never becomes

President#

ihttps://amp-usatoday-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/5917472002?amp_js_v=a6&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQHKAFQArABIA%3D%3D#aoh=16023671719265&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From %1%24s&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.usatoday.com%2Fstory%2Ftravel%2F2020%2F10%2F07%2Fdisneyland-california-gov-newsom-slows-push-reopen-theme-parks%2F5917472002%2Fdent.

 

 

 

 

1602368611459.jpg

Every study says the same thing:

Covid is spread person-to-person, in crowded INDOOR spaces.

 

Not outdoors.

Not on surfaces like swings or slides.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

We should really stay shut down for the next several years, at the very least. There's so much we don't know about this virus. There are potentially thousands of Skilled Nursing Facility patients who could die, and so many millions of people to bankrupt yet. Gotta shut it down. Listen. To. The Scientists.

 

*adjusts mask*

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wrong! Better to divide the world into two groups: the young and well, and the old or sick. Make sure there's complete separation between the two groups for the foreseeable future. They can each take care of themselves - the young/well by living their lives as usual, and the old/sick by staying locked down. They can provide medical care to each other in special facilities where no one in good health and younger than 65 can set foot. Everyone wins!

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Datameister said:

Respiratory droplets don't disappear when you go outside. What every study says is that respiratory droplets coming into contact with mucous membranes are the primary mode of transmission. If you're unmasked and talking at a close distance for a while, those droplets will still end up in the nose and mouth no matter where you are.

 

To my knowledge, the benefits of being outdoors are that it's much harder for the smaller aerosols to accumulate and any virions they might carry are more likely to be degraded by the elements. I'm not trying to minimize that advantage, but generally speaking, aerosols don't seem to be as much of a transmission risk as droplets.

 

Jesus christ you're living on a different planet to the one I've been on since May. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's pretty hard to catch it - my son, who is 7, was sent home from school a few weeks ago after coming into contact with someone who had tested positive. His mum got him a test at her hospital, it was negative. But he still lost yet more time at school (which to me is the ongoing harmful aspect of being around this damn disease). 

 

Later, my stepdaughter had a similar situation. She lost two further weeks of school education, and tested negative. 

 

Months ago, my wife shared an office for 8hrs with a person who had tested positive but kept the information to themselves. But they were found out. So again, they proceeded with the rigmarole. Negative result, but two weeks off work were required. 

 

It just seems like some people are not affected whatsoever by the disease.

 

Even if Alex's son does somehow qualify as Covid positive, the chances are he'll shrug it off. 

 

Yes, I know this makes for really vexing reading for some of you guys, but it is what it is *shrug*. 

 

I'm sorry for being so recklessly upbeat about most people's chances. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's been a lot of mudslinging in this thread over the weeks and months, so yes, I'm sure it does read that way, depending on one's point of the view. Fair game and added spice. Combine it with months of scornful back-and-forth in the BREXIT thread prior to this one, and you're talking years of toxicity over the course of the two threads. To me this isn't surprising in the least, given the highly divisive nature of both topics. I've always had a thick skin about these things though, so I can take it (as well as dish it out). The main thing to know about me though is that ultimately, I literally couldn't care less about what any of you chaps think or do. I'm just here for the craic. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/12/2020 at 4:52 PM, Gruesome Son of a Bitch said:

easily triggered

 

Easily tested? As far as I'm concerned, WHO should just call off the insanity of testing every person left and right but only those who suffer from real symptoms. Suddenly it would become much more quiet on daily news and Twitter - even more time for Trump coverage, but you have to take the good with the bad.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...