COVID-19 - Thread

Will you get the Vaccine?

  • Yes, I plan too

    Votes: 13 8.4%
  • Yes, already 1st dose

    Votes: 18 11.6%
  • Yes, I am 100% vaxxed

    Votes: 93 60.0%
  • No

    Votes: 21 13.5%
  • Indecisive

    Votes: 10 6.5%

  • Total voters
    155
Status
Not open for further replies.

the_insider

Kennel Established
Joined
Mar 15, 2007
Messages
880
Reaction score
540
The 'experts' are locking us down (prison term), destroying businesses & restricting freedoms. I would not trust them.
Virologists and immunologists aren't locking you down that's public health officials, most researchers study for years on end and dedicate themselves to their field, yet you'd rather take advice from people like your dickhead mate Romeo Georges who's spent about 3 minutes reading conspiracy theories whilst he was sitting on the toilet. I mean why don't you put your money where your mouth is since you obviously have no trust in medical professionals and cut up your Medicare card.
 

Cook

Kennel Addict
Joined
Aug 15, 2014
Messages
6,096
Reaction score
5,479
That was my original question, how much is 'a few' elderly lives worth and at what number do you think is too many?
It’s a hard question. Say we have 25 million population, probably an aging nation also. Id think it’s reasonable to keep everything moving with a loss of say 30 000 people. Sounds a lot but it’s not really it’s only 0.12%
 

Cook

Kennel Addict
Joined
Aug 15, 2014
Messages
6,096
Reaction score
5,479
Got to say I am a little stunned.
I understand, people may. It’s 0.012%. Assuming ten families of 100 people. That’s only one life lost in total out of those 10 large families. It’s really not that high in my opinion. I’m trying to home school kids at present. It’s a joke, there falling well behind, there’s a lot of negative things opposed to just death rates. I could only imagine what kids with less focused parents are going to be at when school resumes
 

CaptainJackson

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Nov 28, 2016
Messages
16,215
Reaction score
19,732
This assumes that the economy will do better if there is no lockdown. If the assumption is wrong, and economically long term having no lockdown but a much larger death and illness count would be worse than having a lockdown and a much lower death and illness count, then your argument is invalid.
Yep, I don't think people are considering this about opening up. The virus will spread and infect people, this results in different things happening to proportions of the population:-

- Some won't even know they got it and be asymptomatic
- Some will get sick and isolate at home to recover
- Some will get sick and need hospitalisation
- Some will get seriously sick and require ICU/respirators
- Some will die

With the recent count, it was said half are under the age of 40. Hence couple this, with the consequences of the virus, you won't only be affecting the people who catch but you will also affect:

- Business who may lose, for a period, a vital component of their business because that person is sick
- Overflowing of hospitals and a crash of the health care system
- People needing to mourn a death which will again make them unproductive for business
- Some people will get long covid which again makes them unproductive for business

These consequences build and will lead to inevitable downturn in economic activity anyways and given the sheer numbers this natural imposed lockdown may last a lot longer than any government imposed lockdown.
 

steeliz

Kennel Addict
Joined
Sep 8, 2012
Messages
7,088
Reaction score
7,816
I understand, people may. It’s 0.012%. Assuming ten families of 100 people. That’s only one life lost in total out of those 10 large families. It’s really not that high in my opinion. I’m trying to home school kids at present. It’s a joke, there falling well behind, there’s a lot of negative things opposed to just death rates. I could only imagine what kids with less focused parents are going to be at when school resumes
Don't know about your kids but I know how my kids would react if they were told, sorry your grandparents had to die because it was a bit expensive to keep them alive, but don't worry the death rate isn't that high.
 

south of heaven

Kennel Immortal
Premium Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2014
Messages
29,247
Reaction score
25,695
I understand, people may. It’s 0.012%. Assuming ten families of 100 people. That’s only one life lost in total out of those 10 large families. It’s really not that high in my opinion. I’m trying to home school kids at present. It’s a joke, there falling well behind, there’s a lot of negative things opposed to just death rates. I could only imagine what kids with less focused parents are going to be at when school resumes
I made a fucking idiot of myself trying to home school year one , lack of sleep and not thinking, the question said jump back 3 places ,well I took a bit to literally ,I corrected myself but fuck I felt stupid, the kids are teaching me more than I am them
 

Cook

Kennel Addict
Joined
Aug 15, 2014
Messages
6,096
Reaction score
5,479
Don't know about your kids but I know how my kids would react if they were told, sorry your grandparents had to die because it was a bit expensive to keep them alive, but don't worry the death rate isn't that high.
Had to die, very dramatic. Why weren’t they being cautious they know there at a vulnerable age. Ur makings it sound as if everyone will die who gets it
 

dogluva

Kennel Immortal
Joined
Nov 23, 2007
Messages
17,562
Reaction score
8,150
Older people need to be cautious it’s pretty simple. It’s on them. As should people with existing illnesses, like weak heart diabetes etc. I don’t believe in locking down everyone and racking up a lifetime of debt to save a few lives, when they’ve been told from outset there vulnerable and shop be cautious
Yes we do as with most other things in life,but it is a bit rough to say it "is on them". ( I am extremely cautious yet I still am a risk every time I step out of my front door and the way things are going that will be the case for a while yet.) It is like saying that just because you are north of a certain age you don't matter. You may not have said it in that exact way but that is how it comes across.

Don't forget the young are still getting the virus, passing it on and also have had recorded deaths .( Even ONE death in an age group is important to those who were related to them.) A lot of older people in their sixties and believe it or not their seventies are still productive members of the workforce too so they should not be allowed to work so the young may do their thing?
People who think that just because it seems to not be as prevalent in the young that they should be able to go about business as usual, need to realise that the deaths in the older people could quite easily have been caused by contracting the virus from someone younger...most likely a family member. So your solution would be to lock away all the old people even from family and let the young people have their lives? What about the young who have compromised immune systems lock them away too or those with cancer or any other problem for that matter. The chain of infection does not discriminate due to age, gender or race. An apparently healthy young person gets COVID too...

 

Cook

Kennel Addict
Joined
Aug 15, 2014
Messages
6,096
Reaction score
5,479
I made a fucking idiot of myself trying to home school year one , lack of sleep and not thinking, the question said jump back 3 places ,well I took a bit to literally ,I corrected myself but fuck I felt stupid, the kids are teaching me more than I am them
It’s a tough gig. Keeping them focused, whilst trying to manage the household, working from home and then there’s the Kennel!!!!
 

wendog33

Kennel Immortal
Premium Member
Ladder Champion
Joined
Aug 6, 2016
Messages
24,741
Reaction score
27,950
T

True, it’s only my opinion, people don’t need to get upset. I don’t need to believe what’s happening is right and there isn’t a better course of action
This is a good way of dealing with this Cook. Only an opinion...(for all of us re opinions....we're all in the same boat).
Exchanging ideas, different views without carrying on like an emotional pork chop.

It is said it will take 60 years to economically recover from this. The testing alone across the country must be billions.

I'm just relying on the scientists etc and the basic principal that we can't ecomonically recover until the population is overwhelmingly healthy.

No one knows at this stage whats to be done going forward, but those with opposite to mainstream views, sure get the opportunity to have others listen when they remain calm and let their unemotional opinions be assessed, as you've done.

Seriously nice to see a conservative viewpoint offered up so it doesn't cause all the usual crap and aggressive arguments we usually have on TK. Shows members can be calm and logical :grinning:
 

Dogna88

Kennel Addict
Joined
Mar 12, 2014
Messages
7,553
Reaction score
6,701
What realistically happens if the numbers dont go down in 4 weeks?

Government setting itself up for failure
 

steeliz

Kennel Addict
Joined
Sep 8, 2012
Messages
7,088
Reaction score
7,816
Had to die, very dramatic. Why weren’t they being cautious they know there at a vulnerable age. Ur makings it sound as if everyone will die who gets it
'Had to die'?

Now that is dramatic.
 

N4TE

DogsRhavnaParty
Joined
Mar 26, 2012
Messages
5,486
Reaction score
6,817
What realistically happens if the numbers dont go down in 4 weeks?

Government setting itself up for failure
Yeah and it won’t either I’m assuming so I don’t know I guess we have a unique little community here that people mostly hate each other but least we all talk I guess that’s something. I guess we have to try and help each other out even if it is by arguing on here least we are keeping each other busy..
 

CaptainJackson

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Nov 28, 2016
Messages
16,215
Reaction score
19,732
What realistically happens if the numbers dont go down in 4 weeks?

Government setting itself up for failure
I personally think they're going to extend for another 4 week, with the end goal actually being get as many people vaccinated as possible and then open up.
 

Psycho Doggie

Kennel Immortal
Joined
Mar 25, 2014
Messages
17,850
Reaction score
25,355
These consequences build and will lead to inevitable downturn in economic activity anyways and given the sheer numbers this natural imposed lockdown may last a lot longer than any government imposed lockdown.
This possibility is being considered, some opinions are that stronger lockdown = worse economy. However, it is being subject to analysis. We don't have to 100% assume, though It is early days yet, here (https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)00978-8/fulltext) is an example of analysis for a 12 month period mostly in 2020. They only have mortality data, not illness data, but they acknowledge this, and the facts provided from the information they do put together are very interesting.

Recognising that governments have to make decisions that "trade-off" considerations for public health, economic growth, political solidarity, and civil liberties, they took 5 OECD countries including Australia who have used elimination strategies (stronger lockdown aimed at stopping the spread), and compared them with OECD countries who have used mitigation strategies (weaker lockdown aimed at preventing hospitals being too overwhelmed).

1627526033807.png


The three charts are easy to understand. The orange line is Australia and the other elimination countries, the blue line would include the UK, US, and much of Europe. The first chart shows deaths per million population is much lower for elimination (duh), but the chart of real interest is the second one, which shows that GDP has been overall better for the countries doing stronger lockdowns.

Yes we can think and believe what we choose, I agree with @Cook, this is important in any democracy. Also important is to consider research and analysis. There are many years to come and long term outcomes may look different. But the current data shows that we probably don't need to be too worried about the impact of Australia's choices about lockdown measures on the economy. In fact it appears that the countries who have gone with weaker lock downs are the ones who might have more cause to be worried about the prospects of their economy.

It remains to be seen, but I think the odds are better that long term the stronger lockdown countries will overall do better economically, even more than this research of a 12 month period reveals.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top