This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
Stirlingsays 20 Feb 21 12.52am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by SW19 CPFC
On some things. As for endorsement... I'm not sure. If your approach was so obviously viable then someone would have taken a punt on it, tried it and succeeded. It's easy to argue for alternatives nearly a year after the fact, harder to put them into practice right at the beginning with so much unknown and so much at stake. Your opinion may or may not gain traction but only due to hindsight. A critical decision had to be taken in March 2020 in realtime, not with the luxury of time. Ultimately it could just have been left to play out but no one was advocating for that at the time – the decision makers are not scientists – do you really think it's realistic to suggest they would have asked for advice then completely ignored it based on nothing other than personal opinion? I find that view odd, certainly illogical and entirely unscientific. Also, it depends if the fire in question is in fact needed to prevent the rest of the house from burning down. There are three points to make in response to your post. One, Johnson and co, did indeed outlay much of what would have been similar to my approach early on.....and then bottled it seemingly due to media reaction. Second, there are countries that didn't go down the economic lockdown and media fear route (the media fear propaganda makes the lockdown almost irrelevant). Belarus didn't lockdown for example but did implement responses during winter ....we could also say Sweden but in reality Sweden did effectively put out propaganda which had the same result as a lockdown....which can be seen in their economic results. Third, as for being illogical, I will point to the irrationality of worsening an already fatally damaged economy (and other economies) in an unrealistic and failed attempt at controlling a coronavirus....which will never be eradicated due to its nature. It's probable that all that has happened is that infection has and is stretched out over a far longer period. The vaccine will hopefully reduce death tolls however the lockdowns would have increased death in other areas now and going forward, not to mention considerably aboard in poorer countries due to cuts in aid. Edited by Stirlingsays (20 Feb 2021 12.52am)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Hrolf The Ganger 20 Feb 21 1.07am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
I'm obviously way out of sync with the main consensus as I disagree with the whole approach. I don't think it's ok to lock down the economically viable....destroy small businesses for the benefit of the large....This is the only time locking up healthy people has been done in history. It's not only wrong economically, it's wrong on a civil liberties front...the problem is that now the line has been breached it becomes acceptable. I'm in the 'at risk' category however I can't accept the reasoning where essentially the future of the young are sacrificed for tiny percentage gains for those in the winter of their lives...whose summers are behind them. The motivations of society are upside down.....what was it that Whitney Houson sang?....'I believe that children are our future'.....errrr. This was never the black death....I consider this all madness and when the economic pain comes in none of the normies have a leg to stand on.
I have great admiration for your pragmatism Stirling, but I just can't dismiss the lives of old people who might be our mothers, fathers, grandparents or friends so easily.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
BlueJay UK 20 Feb 21 2.41am | |
---|---|
This really has been a nightmarish situation for the elderly. In an ideal world we'd be able to neatly separate people out based on age but we don't live in that world. The closest to that is care homes and they have experienced significant tragedy despite best efforts. And for countless elderly living with family, again it's not as simple as 'get on with it' when the health of loved ones is on the line. Carrying on as normal isn't sacrifice, and isn't difficult, this is. The idea of people demeaning these efforts while viewing themselves as having a wartime spirit for being against the current strategy (while simultaneously writing those very generations off during the pandemic as being 'at deaths door') is of course silly. The NHS, scientists and the public at large have all done a remarkable job over the past year, and have on the whole shown tremendous dignity. I for one am proud of them and our country. If the government had elected to prioritise the economy after lockdown one and carried on as normal regardless of the consequences I'd have just got on with things and supported local businesses (as I still try to now in any way I can) but I wouldn't be patting myself on the back for doing so since as with any strategy it comes at a significant cost to some. In fact any course of action looks terrible when compared to what came before it. Most recognise this and blame the hand we've been dealt rather than their fellow man. Edited by BlueJay (20 Feb 2021 3.14am)
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Eden Eagle Kent 20 Feb 21 8.35am | |
---|---|
My concern is not what has happened - we cannot change that -however looking forward with the case numbers falling dramatically and the large take up of the vaccine the government rhetoric still appears to be more of the same, social distance, wear masks, stay home, keep everything shut etc and the constant shifting of the goal posts from “not overwhelming” the NHS to a zero Covid position. I cannot believe that there is anyone now who does not recognise the immense damage being done both economically and healthwise through these continued lockdowns and we should now be looking to lift these very quickly and lets hope that Johnson delivers on this next week. If he fails on this I would hope to see some movement to remove him and hancock.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
The Dolphin 20 Feb 21 8.44am | |
---|---|
Interesting article by Bel Mooney this morning. Edited by The Dolphin (20 Feb 2021 8.45am)
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Mapletree Croydon 20 Feb 21 9.23am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by The Dolphin
Interesting article by Bel Mooney this morning. Edited by The Dolphin (20 Feb 2021 8.45am) As this is the Daily Mail, I wonder what the truth is The article will certainly fuel the type of scepticism on which the ERG and 1922 Committee thrive.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Badger11 Beckenham 20 Feb 21 9.25am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by The Dolphin
Interesting article by Bel Mooney this morning. Edited by The Dolphin (20 Feb 2021 8.45am) Yup I read it. Obviously this is just one case but I wonder if this highlights bad practice rather than some conspiracy. My mum died of bowel cancer but that is not what the doctor put on the death certificate (I can't remember what it was). Maybe COVID has just highlighted something that has gone on for decades we just haven't noticed it. It will always be debatable what to put on a death certificate hopefully someone will look at this a bit harder.
One more point |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Mapletree Croydon 20 Feb 21 9.36am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Badger11
Yup I read it. Obviously this is just one case but I wonder if this highlights bad practice rather than some conspiracy. My mum died of bowel cancer but that is not what the doctor put on the death certificate (I can't remember what it was). Maybe COVID has just highlighted something that has gone on for decades we just haven't noticed it. It will always be debatable what to put on a death certificate hopefully someone will look at this a bit harder. Covid was not put on my mother’s death certificate in July under similar circumstances. Nor was it on death certs in our homes, again in similar circumstances. There is a difference between death with and death of Covid. Note that the father in this case REFUSED a test. There was a Covid outbreak so at least two had tested positive on that floor. In probability he did have Covid. We aren’t told the wording on the death certificate. It doesn’t just say died of Covid. There will have been detail but for some reason Mooney doesn’t choose to give this.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
becky over the moon 20 Feb 21 9.37am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Badger11
Yup I read it. Obviously this is just one case but I wonder if this highlights bad practice rather than some conspiracy. My mum died of bowel cancer but that is not what the doctor put on the death certificate (I can't remember what it was). Maybe COVID has just highlighted something that has gone on for decades we just haven't noticed it. It will always be debatable what to put on a death certificate hopefully someone will look at this a bit harder. Bel Mooney isn't the only case like this that I have heard of - two other people I 'know' on social media have had the same, and have taken it up with the Coroner's office to have the death certificate changed. Death certificated generally have to list three causes of, or contributing to death. Thus, whilst your Mum may have had bowel cancer, it could well have caused her to suffer something else, like pneumonia, which was the actual primary cause. I had similar with my Dad.
A stairway to Heaven and a Highway to Hell give some indication of expected traffic numbers |
|
Alert a moderator to this post | Board Moderator |
Hrolf The Ganger 20 Feb 21 10.05am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Badger11
Yup I read it. Obviously this is just one case but I wonder if this highlights bad practice rather than some conspiracy. My mum died of bowel cancer but that is not what the doctor put on the death certificate (I can't remember what it was). Maybe COVID has just highlighted something that has gone on for decades we just haven't noticed it. It will always be debatable what to put on a death certificate hopefully someone will look at this a bit harder. I don't think it is a secret that establishing exact cause of death is something that coroners spend too much time on unless there is a good reason.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Badger11 Beckenham 20 Feb 21 10.22am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
I don't think it is a secret that establishing exact cause of death is something that coroners spend too much time on unless there is a good reason. Agreed.
One more point |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Stirlingsays 20 Feb 21 10.32am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
I have great admiration for your pragmatism Stirling, but I just can't dismiss the lives of old people who might be our mothers, fathers, grandparents or friends so easily. As on aspects of tribalism it appears we differ on this as well Hrolf. That's fine, I regard ourselves as pretty similar on topics and no two people agree on everything. Still, I'll put forward the view that I'm not dismissing the elderly at all. I've always supported looking to support the vulnerable as much as is practical. However, there's a balance and a line, and I think we stepped over that line and fell quite a while ago. Reason was replaced with fear and the noise of the media and governmental frightened public has overcome all other mostly censored voices. However, with what comes from this I can genuinely say that I was not complicit in destroying the futures of generations of youngsters to save such a small percent. It's elitist driven madness. I'm in the 'at risk' category myself as I said, but it appears I'm the only one who isn't balancing the future consequences......As you yourself said Hrolf, we are but the carriers of genes. Edited by Stirlingsays (20 Feb 2021 10.33am)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Registration is now on our new message board
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.