Could you share those figures? I didn't think winter death figures would be release until after winter ...
I was referring to deaths up to end of last year. Will have to wait and see how this winter compares.
Could you share those figures? I didn't think winter death figures would be release until after winter ...
A step too far?people deniers.
I was referring to deaths up to end of last year. Will have to wait and see how this winter compares.
That's an awful lot of wild assumptions there!You're right. Population was much lower. Spanish flu killed about 50 million people. World population was about 1,800,000,000 (estimate), and it infected about 1 in 3 people, so around
50,000,000 of 600,000,000 died, or
So today ... we'd expect around 580,000,000 people to die.
While the UK did not have a government enforced lockdown, many other countries did. And people were wearing masks and generally not going out and mingling.
But it is generally thought that a lack of government planning was the cause of so many deaths. As I said, we really should try to learn from history.
One thing we really don't know about coronavirus is, how many people would be dead if the world did not go into lockdown? Almost 100,000 Brits are dead after less than a year, with no lockdown, that could easily be 10 times more.
I did take one bit of your comment, which was the salient point of your argument, and still is.you took 1 bit of my post and ignored the examples of idiots i gave, i suppose its just easier to blame the government.
as i said there has been errors made, but the biggest issue is the public in keeping it spreading.
i also agree with other sentiments that the borders should have been locked with proper protocols in place.
Angola for instance insist on a covid negative cert before your departure, no certificate you don't get on the plane. Once you get into the country, they take your passport and the hotel keeps you in your room for 10 days. After this you are free to go and get your passport and roam the country. As far as i'm aware this has largely worked, with only 19000 cases to date and 444 deaths to date.
Australia and new zealand seem to be pretty on top of it aswell.
You don't have to be disturbingly controlling for very long.The other countries you refer to were either significantly smaller by population, significantly larger by area or have disturbingly controlling governmental regimes. I'd be interested to know how you think you could beat it in a matter of weeks in this country.
Flu is a virus and mutates year on year. It kills lots of vulnerable people and we vaccinate accordingly, although flu does not seem to be as infectious or as dangerous as Covid.
There is no guarantee that the vaccine will keep the virus at bay, there is never any guarantee of anything. But the strong likelihood is that it will.
Are you anti-vax?
That's an awful lot of wild assumptions there!
Any proof of what you 'believe' is the truth that we should learn from?
After all it wasn't the 'Spanish Flu', it was the 'American Flu'!
That's an awful lot of wild assumptions there!
And first you claim that there was a 'lockdown' back then, and now you claim a 'lack of government planning'...
Which is it?
For sure, essential workers continue to work. That happens in other countries.Presuming :
Seven billion people adhere faithfully to the restrictions (can't / won't happen : carers, healthcare, food production and distribution, essential utilities, security, to name but a few) ;
The only hosts are humans.
Not gonna happen in reality.
I ask the anti-vax question purely because i don't understand what appears to be your concern with relying on the vaccine as a route out of this mess.You don't have to be disturbingly controlling for very long.
The size of the population nor the area of the country are significant factors. The population density is a significant factor. Places like Vietnam, Cambodia etc probably have significantly higher density populations.
Covid is a virus and has the ability to mutate year on year.
No, of course I'm not anti-vax, Surely nothing in my comments comes anywhere near to suggesting I am. I repeat for your benefit: I think it's a mistake to put so much reliance on the vaccine. As much or more effort and reliance should be put on the other measures. They're proven to work.
Sigh! I have already explained and posted several times, the current other measures have been proven to be effective when they are effectively applied.I ask the anti-vax question purely because i don't understand what appears to be your concern with relying on the vaccine as a route out of this mess.
What other measures do you think we should be applying? I'm interested to know what is proven to work elsewhere and discuss whether it would work here.
I got the flu jab last November, next day i was really ill, i thought it was caused by a reaction to the flu jab, it turned out i had coronavirus.But hey if you are happy to trot up and hold out your arm obediently
In addition the penalties for not following the guidance are usually more severe.
I think we can be safely assured that penalty, punishment or the threat of it does not, on its own, deter crime.
Otherwise, other countries with equally harsh penalties would also have low crime rates.
No. You will notice I did say, at the time, that severe penalties on their own do not reduce crime.Do severe penalties only work when they suit your argument then?
I've read from the start of the thread and i don't see your solution other than references to lockdowns and travel restrictions that are already inplace.Sigh! I have already explained and posted several times, the current other measures have been proven to be effective when they are effectively applied.