[Albionic]

comparison with USA doesnt stand up purely down to population density despite all other factors

UK (not england) pop dens = 725 sq mile
USA only 4 of the 50 states are more densely populated than 725 which includes DC and New Jersey
Both DC and NJ are far less dense than London

The US is one big empty country with pockets of density (not that dense relative to europe) along the coasts.

as a reference, the most populus US state
california is 424sq k with pop of 40m
england   is 130sq k with pop of 56m

[gazberg]

comparison with USA doesnt stand up purely down to population density despite all other factors

UK (not england) pop dens = 725 sq mile
USA only 4 of the 50 states are more densely populated than 725 which includes DC and New Jersey
Both DC and NJ are far less dense than London

The US is one big empty country with pockets of density (not that dense relative to europe) along the coasts.

as a reference, the most populus US state
california is 424sq k with pop of 40m
england   is 130sq k with pop of 56m

I agree that you can't compare UK to US and i wasn't doing that. My point was similar internal comparisons within the US, density of population etc made no difference whether locked down or not.

[boinging_along]

Very hard to make direct comparisons between different countries. That's why i looked at the USA and even that wouldnt be a perfect comparison. Every state is like it's own country obviously so it's as close as you can get and like i say lockdown didn't alter anything but empty the economy of those who have locked down. Life goes on as normal now for the non-lockdown states but those states that were locked down as now in the proverbial. Same amount of deaths but now they aint got a pot to **** in and years of hardship to come.

Only 7 states did not issue stay at home orders for the public.  And out of those 7 only 1 didn't get business to shut.  And all 7 shut schools.  So that's literally 1 state out of all america that didn't lockdown - and even then that one did shut schools.  The state that was closest to 'no lockdown' was South Dakota.  They still declared a state of emergency, limited indoor gatherings to 10, and notified high risk citizens to stay at home.

And if you look at how those states have done, despite being low population density states, they've done pretty bad.  South Dakota is 9th in the list of deaths - there's only 4 more states with lower population density than South Dakota, yet still ranks in the top 10 for deaths per 100,000.  Here's an article questioning South Dakota's approach...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/12/08/kristi-noem-hails-south-dakota-coronavirus-success-story-using-badly-cherry-picked-numbers/

I'm not sure where you're getting the pot to **** in data from and how you're comparing that to the states that you think didn't lockdown? 

It's still a bit odd though that you're having to dig into a few states in America to find a "no lockdown" success story.  What about all the countries that did lockdown? 

[Albionic]

I agree that you can't compare UK to US and i wasn't doing that. My point was similar internal comparisons within the US, density of population etc made no difference whether locked down or not.

yep, got that, I took that as a given, just making the point that US and UK are very different animals indeed

[gazberg]

Pot to **** in was wrong phrase BA, borrowing billions from the Fed and placing themselves into trouble would have been more accurate but end results the same. Quality of life will be lower. Deaths will occur from the knock on effects of lockdowns.

In the US the non-lockdown state deaths were similar to locked down states. The point of a blanket lockdown is to stop this surely? If a lockdown can't drastically reduce deaths then don't bother with it. If you are going to destory life for 18 months then it MUST be worth it. Again we wont know for a few years until all data/excess deaths is available whether what has been done is worth it.  It's only then we can look at the genuine figure of deaths from covid and compare them to deaths caused by lockdowns.

Most deaths came from a mixture of bad policy, sending the carriers into care homes, not taking action early enough etc and a mixture of cultural choices multi-generational housing, 3 bed houses with 8/9 people etc in.  Covid is obviously very nasty if you are past your natural expectancy and have a serious illness to boot but then thats old age. We all die. On average thats 80. Covid takes you at 82 with an existing serious health issue on average.

[Albionic]

I do find the state to state & over here the England to wales, thing (nominal lines on a map) ridiculous, surely science can see this is stupid but politicians seem to ignore the sense / logic / science in this regard - baffling !

[boinging_along]

Covid is obviously very nasty if you are past your natural expectancy and have a serious illness to boot but then thats old age. We all die. On average thats 80. Covid takes you at 82 with an existing serious health issue on average.

I just don't get this view.  It's clearly not exclusively reserved for those at that age.  Like I said earlier, I know someone who was put into an induced coma, in his 30's, because of covid.  If the hospital had other patients taking up the beds he would have died.  It's not just the death rate, it's those who need hospital treatment to survive - if you don't lockdown then there's more strain on the services, that means fewer people get the treatment they need, that means more and more people die.  That's without taking into consideration the effects of long covid, the mental health damage that would be done to people losing loved ones in an entirely preventable manner.   Unlike those that have died, the economy will recover, there's more damage being done to the economy by our leaders under the B word than is being done due to covid.

And really - who are we to say "sorry, you're 80+, just tough that you're going to die from this disease - I want to go to the pub"?  So many people have died and have direct experience of a loved one dying, it seems massively insensitive to be just like "well, they're old, it happens".  I'm just not ok with sacrificing our elderly to this disease and if the price I have to pay is wearing a mask and not going on holiday for a year or two - I'm perfectly fine with that.  We haven't destroyed life - we've had a few limitations put on us.  Amazing how many people hark back to the "Blitz Spirit", yet when it comes to wearing a mask or not playing football it's something impossible to do.  Those same people would be flicking their lights on during the Blitz "they 'ay going to tell me what to do" 

(There's some interesting articles on why government spending is not like having a household bank account, that's a trick that successive governments want you to believe.  When you can print your own money - like we do - then it's nothing like that at all.  I'll try and dig them out.)

[gazberg]

I just don't get this view.  It's clearly not exclusively reserved for those at that age.

No, it's not exclusively reserved for those but the majority of victims are that age and with an existing serious condition.

And really - who are we to say "sorry, you're 80+, just tough that you're going to die from this disease - I want to go to the pub"?  So many people have died and have direct experience of a loved one dying, it seems massively insensitive to be just like "well, they're old, it happens".  I'm just not ok with sacrificing our elderly to this disease and if the price I have to pay is wearing a mask and not going on holiday for a year or two - I'm perfectly fine with that.

I don't feel ok with it and no one is saying do nothing. I don't understand how you see things so black and white. Most deaths were caused by bad handling of the situation by those in charge. Nothing i've done or could have done, or any other individual would ever approach that number. You might not mind sacrificing 2 years of your life but others do. If that makes you feel great then great. To say it's about going on holiday is completely wrong. You have no right to take anyones life from them, nor does the government.

I supported the first initial lockdown while a battleplan/strategy so to speak was drawn up. That's what we were told it was for remember? "just 2 weeks, another 2 weeks, oh just need to flatten the curve etc "  I don't support ongoing blanket lockdowns. They are destructive. You also wrongly assume that everyone over 80 wants to live forever. They don't. You are born and owe a death and you will pay it. I think most people accept that.

What you say about the elderly being left to die basically i could throw back at you, why do you want children to suffer?  It's a statement full of emotion but nothing valid even though you support lockdowns i dont believe you want others to suffer it's just a conclusion you have reached which i respect but disgree with and vice versa No one wants the elderly to die thats daft. Regarding the kids I'm not ok with that and i'm not a parent. If i had kids i'd be raging the way they have been treated.

Regarding what might have happened if we didnt have a permanent lockdown then who knows but i won't take the lockdown scientists models and predictions at any face value because they have been wrong, wrong wrong. I do not value their predictions or analysis. They were chosen as the voices of  COVID19 as they provided the data the government wanted to enable lockdowns and keep people schtum. The other scientists who warned that lockdowns wouldn't work were (largely) not heard from on national media.

Just for clarification when i say the economy i don't mean someones lost some money, i mean the economy as a reflection of society. If the economy is struggling then so are the people at the bottom of society and we all know a worse off economy leads to more deaths. Printing money for the sake of printing money is irresponsible in my view but that's a whole different subject!!!

[WBAinDEVON]

stay cation it is then, holidays abroad over for the summer without quarantining on return. Portugal now on the amber list.

gridlock down here in devon this week   

the double jab doesn't guarantee your freedom then

[hardtobeat]

Prices already way over previous years watch them go up again  !!

[TheJacko2000]

It's only a matter of time before these airlines refuse to comply. They're going out of business if this carries on much longer. Any travel ban is an absolute farce while exemptions remain.

[hardtobeat]

Totally agree Jacko  the biggest problem is that any travel insurance would in all likelihood become void 

[TheJacko2000]

Totally agree Jacko  the biggest problem is that any travel insurance would in all likelihood become void

There are already specialist brokers offering travel insurance against FCDO essential travel only advice.

[gerry m]

Prices already way over previous years watch them go up again  !!

Hopefully when this is over the public remember these people and avoid them. But what really do you expect from them. Rip Off Britain back again!

[lewisant]

Booked my trip to Portugal last week and bought my ridiculous 3 Covid tests a few days back. Now I can’t go because I can’t be off work on my return. And I’ve now got £300 worth of Covid tests at home. Which by the way is 6 tests. At work I have about 300 - quick maths people - how much moneys worth do I have? It’s actually £0 because NHS tests are worth nowt but would be fun to work it out.

I’m gutted. Portugal only went on the list to host the Champions League final.

What do I do with these Covid tests?! I must be a mug for having the audacity to Ben positive enough and spontaneous to book a holiday within 3 weeks of a location being on the green list.

This is a completely poorly thought out post as I’m really gutted as I thought I had my first holiday since 2017 to look forward to.

[costa blanca baggie]

Booked my trip to Portugal last week and bought my ridiculous 3 Covid tests a few days back. Now I can’t go because I can’t be off work on my return. And I’ve now got £300 worth of Covid tests at home. Which by the way is 6 tests. At work I have about 300 - quick maths people - how much moneys worth do I have? It’s actually £0 because NHS tests are worth nowt but would be fun to work it out.

I’m gutted. Portugal only went on the list to host the Champions League final.

What do I do with these Covid tests?! I must be a mug for having the audacity to Ben positive enough and spontaneous to book a holiday within 3 weeks of a location being on the green list.

This is a completely poorly thought out post as I’m really gutted as I thought I had my first holiday since 2017 to look forward to.

I feel gutted for you. It seems like every decision is politically and economically motivated. The Valencia region was one of the strictest regions for the initial lockdown. The curfew has just been changed from 12 midnight, to 1 am till 6am. I wonder why? Holiday season? There’s a lot of Northern European visitors turning up. I predict our region’s Covid numbers will rise sharply, and the summer tourist season will be lost here. I truly believe no Government knows what they’re doing health wise, but politically wise, it’s game on.

[kc56wba]

The missus has a nephew over in Portugal on holiday at the moment, he only went on Monday and is staying for a fortnight. 

[Albionic]

I hadnt sussed the "portugal goes green for champions league final, now its over stuff it" thing.

Does seem entirely plausible and if so, its disgraceful to put 
a) a football match before science and logic, or
b) football fans before tourists.

Someone at FCO a Chelski / Man C fan perhaps ?  (that bit is sarcasm)

[Adder]

I hadnt sussed the "portugal goes green for champions league final, now its over stuff it" thing.

Does seem entirely plausible and if so, its disgraceful to put 
a) a football match before science and logic, or
b) football fans before tourists.

Someone at FCO a Chelski / Man C fan perhaps ?  (that bit is sarcasm)

Harks back to Cheltenham races 2020....all those lucrative little links between certain politicians and members of the jockey club. Just had to squeeze that in prior to lockdown.

[KYA]

Considering the flux Europe is in at the minute with far worse current death figures and lower vaccination levels it strikes me as being unwise to even try to go on holiday there
 Save yourselves the aggravation and have a staycation.

[TheJacko2000]

Considering the flux Europe is in at the minute with far worse current death figures and lower vaccination levels it strikes me as being unwise to even try to go on holiday there
 Save yourselves the aggravation and have a staycation.

Or, you do that and let the rest of us get back to normal...

[KYA]

Or, you do that and let the rest of us get back to normal...

Normal sounds great but where are you flying to?

[johnny Cash]

There are already specialist brokers offering travel insurance against FCDO essential travel only advice.

In the main, the travel insurance policies that 'will cover' travelling against FCO advise are picking up emergency medical expenses. Which to be fair is the risk that could come with Life changing medical bills if uninsured.

However most are still incredibly restrictive / excluding cancellation and curtailment either due to government restrictions or catching the disease and having that affect your situation which is the much more likely risk, particulalry post vaccination.

For example, if you failed a Pre flight home test test abroad, and an airline refused boarding, they may have no obligation to offer you an alternative flight for free later on. You could then also face the cost of a 10 day quarantine (additional hotel stay) and a new flight home.  This is despite being asymptomatic or only having mild symptoms.

Those type of bills may only be a £1,000 and some inconvenience rather than £40k for spending four months on a ventilator in a foreign hospital, but that is a big bill for a lot of people and is multiplied in respect of families potentially.

I've not seen any insurer providing a policy that doesn't have any covid restrictions at all. 

[section5]

I’m probably going against the grain here but I can’t believe we still allow these infringements on our liberties.

The actual virus itself has a Global Infection Fatality Rate
0.15‐0.20% (0.03‐0.04% in those <70yrs)” Prof Ioannidis  With a recommendation of “Targeted/precise management of pandemic & avoiding past mistakes would minimize mortality”.
https://www.who.int/bulletin/online_first/BLT.20.265892.pdf

Ioannidis also conducted a study into the efficacy of non medical interventions. Which found that “While small benefits cannot be excluded, we do not find significant benefits on case growth of more restrictive NPIs”. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/eci.13484

Ioannidis (Stanford) is in the top 100 cited researchers and is certainly no mug with over 260,000 citations.

I would advise to look at the BMA report into the serious backlog the nhs now faces and the impact the measures have had to millions of people whether through cancer care,diabetes,cardiovascular etc the impact is quite astonishing. https://www.bma.org.uk/advice-and-support/nhs-delivery-and-workforce/pressures/pressure-points-in-the-nhs

Some worrying snippets:
The BMA estimates that, between April 2020 and March 2021, there were:

3.37 million fewer elective procedures
21.4 million fewer outpatient attendances.

While the overall median waiting time for treatment decreased to 11.6 weeks in March 2021, the total number of patients waiting over 18 weeks for treatment increased again to 1.76 million.

Moreover, the number of patients waiting over one year for treatment hit 436,127 in March and has risen 378-fold since March 2019. This figure has consistently risen since March 2020 and is now the highest it has been since August 2007.

This 14-year high highlights the scale of unmet need in a significant portion of the waiting list, with patients having been de-prioritised for care and experiencing extremely long waits.

This decrease in cancer treatment and screening is unacceptable given the Government’s statements that cancer care would be unaffected during the pandemic.

There is irrefutable evidence that cancer treatment was severely affected during the first peak of COVID-19 hospitalisations. All measures need to be put in place to prevent such large activity drops occurring as we grapple with the larger second peak.

Then comes to the basing our decision making processes based on pcr testing which are not a reliable indicator of whether a person is actually waking around infecting people with the virus.

“The only test for live virus is viral culture. PCR and lateral flow tests do not distinguish live virus. No test of infection or infectiousness is currently available for routine use”
https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4851

“ WHO reminds IVD users that disease prevalence alters the predictive value of test results; as disease prevalence decreases, the risk of false positive increases (2). This means that the probability that a person who has a positive result (SARS-CoV-2 detected) is truly infected with SARS-CoV-2 decreases as prevalence decreases, irrespective of the claimed specificity.

Most PCR assays are indicated as an aid for diagnosis, therefore, health care providers must consider any result in combination with timing of sampling, specimen type, assay specifics, clinical observations, patient history, confirmed status of any contacts, and epidemiological information.”
https://www.who.int/news/item/20-01-2021-who-information-notice-for-ivd-users-2020-05

As you can see the pcr method alone is not an indication of a persons infectiousness and doesn’t add value to the implementation of the non medical interventions. If you’ve done the research you’ll understand that covid isn’t transmissible after day 10 of infection. The pcr method can detect shedding virus/dead nucleotides depending on the cycle threshold and sensitivity, these fragments are not a sign of infection and merely the body doing its normal process with immunity- they could take up to three months to fully shed.
https://www.eurosurveillance.org/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.32.2001483?crawler=true

There has been evidence in natural immunity and immunity in the unexposed through “cross” immunity. This leads to the dependence on a vaccine for everyone and not just the vulnerable as questionable now in terms of policy and protection of those statistically vulnerable to covid.

https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3563
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.17.20061440v1.article-info#disqus_thread
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S120197122100120X
https://www.gavi.org/vaccineswork/natural-immunity-covid-19-may-be-long-lasting

There’s probably plenty more I could rant about but that’s my opinion and I’ve tried to base it in science so you can’t just label me a conspiracy theorist or lunatic.
Normal needs to get back now there’s no excuse for it

[gazberg]

Excellent post Section 5. Sadly we deserve what we have stood for.