Caithness Map :: Links to Site Map Paying too much for broadband? Move to PlusNet broadband and save£££s. Free setup now available - terms apply. PlusNet broadband.  
Page 23 of 26 FirstFirst ... 131920212223242526 LastLast
Results 441 to 460 of 506

Thread: Coronavirus

  1. #441

    Default

    Oh, and you've had a confirmed case in Orkney in the last 24 hours.

  2. #442
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    3,345

    Default

    Dear Auntie Nicola,

    Thank you very much for your help, but I am still a bit worried. I have been taking advice from PARSLEY (Professors And Retired Scientists who Love Egg Yolks) and they are advising me differently. Professor Donald "Duck" Wit tells me that if the increasing measures are not finding eggs that don't break, then we need even more measures. It was he who suggest the road roller, since the tarmac whacker seemed to break all the eggs. He also suggested that we should wrap up all the eggs individually in little white and blue pouches with elastic ties, and seperate them by 2m, before testing them with the road roller. But its not made one bit of difference. The road roller simply crushes the eggs through the pouches, and travels 2m before crushing each one. Duck Wit is now suggesting we get more and bigger roadrollers, as the previous roadrollers are obviously not enough. He also suggest laying the eggs down 3m apart instead of 2m.

    All this plant hire is costing me a fortune. But Professor Wit is a very highly respected rocket scientist, so that obviously makes him very knowledgeable about eggs. And road making equipment.

    There are egg soaked blue and white pouches everywhere. Its a bit of an environmental nightmare, as I understand they do not break down due to all the plastic in them.

    I did try your advice, and broke an egg into a pan, the way we used to, and was a bit stunned to see that it still fries and tastes as good as I remember. But PARSLEY, and their advice, must know the truth? Don't they?

    Love

    Orkneycadian

  3. #443
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    3,345

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fulmar View Post
    Oh, and you've had a confirmed case in Orkney in the last 24 hours.
    Just the one? Not the 800 or 900 as in the Southern Belt? Bummer, its going to take ages to get to herd immunity at this rate.

    See what happens when you go and shut the pubs.

  4. #444

    Default

    It's not you then- was starting to worry due to feverish posts above. If I were you, I would change where I buy my eggs.

  5. #445

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by orkneycadian View Post
    Bummer, its going to take ages to get to herd immunity at this rate.
    I just think that a radio phone-in show should not be the basis for a nation's pandemic response.

    I'm curious as to what you think it should be, non-suppression?

  6. #446
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    3,345

    Default

    Suppression? Of a virus so deadly, most folk have to be tested to know they have it?

    Sounds like time for some perspective again.

    Lets remember some of the reliable stats we have had;


    • Oxford Universities Centre for Evidence Based Medicine has this week highlighted that the average age of Conoravirus deaths (with, from, the lot) is above the average age of all the rest, and above the average life expectancy
    • There have been various figures bandied about as to how many folk who are reported as dying with conoravirus actually died from conoravirus. Ian Duncan Smith told Jeremy Vine some months ago it was 4%, someone posted on here since then, it was 6%. Either way, its in the same ball park. worldometers is today reporting 42,760 for the UK. So taking 5% of that, then its 2138 who have died from conoravirus
    • In August in England, deaths with conoravirus was the 24th leading "cause" of death. In Wales, it was 19th. Lung cancer was in the top 10.
    • In 2016, there were 77,900 smoking related deaths (source = https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-info...-and-mortality) Now smoking is an awful lot easier to "suppress" and therefore suppress the deaths and ill health arising from it. Shutting down a few tobacconists here and there is nothing compared to the hospitality shutdown that Scotland has had foisted upon it. Now, some have argued in the past that the government would never outlaw smoking, as it rakes in too much tax for them. How much? About £12 billion, according to https://fullfact.org/economy/does-sm...akes-treasury/ with about £3.2 billion (same source) lost from the Treasury in cost of treating the smokers. So the Government "makes" about 9 billion a year from smokers. But yet, it has been prepared to throw away many, many times that sum on a virus that is 24th in the league table? Why not simply ban all smoking and sale of tobacco in the UK tomorrow? Would save 77,900 lives a year (eventually), which is an awful lot more than 2138 in 9 months.
    • The mortality rate of conoravirus is well under 1%, and almost all of those are above the life expectancy age, and the average mortality age of other causes of death.


    So Neil, I guess since you have asked about suppression, how do you feel we should be tackling the 77,900 annual avoidable deaths arising from smoking? At just £9 billion of net revenue to the government, is it worth it? Its the easiest 77,900 deaths to avoid - Just needs a simple bit of legislation passing through parliament. And the revenue loss is peanuts by comparison to the eventual cost of the conoravirus farce which is likely to run to trillions.

  7. #447
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    3,345

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by orkneycadian View Post
    So looking to see how the 4 nations are doing with cases per 100,000

    https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/cases



    And taking the 6th, as the data for the 7th looks incomplete so far.

    England - 7138 positive tests out of a population of 56,286,961 (source = wikipedia, 2019 estimate) = 12.68 per 100,000
    Scotland - 949 positive tests out of a population of 5,463,300 (source = wikipedia, 2019 estimate) = 17.37 per 100,000
    Wales - 130 positive tests out of a population of 3,153,000 (source = wikipedia, 2019 estimate) = 4.12 per 100,000
    Northern Ireland - 763 positive tests out of a population of
    1,893,700 (source = wikipedia, 2019 estimate) = 40.29 per 100,000

    So Northern Ireland are making the biggest pigs ear of it. Scotland are in second place. England are doing considerably better than Scotland, and Wales are glad they managed to go so long without farcemasks. But as we saw from the grpahic above posted yesterday, its the south of Scotland that is really dragging the rest down with it. She's not doing very well is she?


    Oh dear, its all going pear shaped now. Using the same data source as above for the 8th of October;

    Scotland = 17.46 per 100,000
    Northern Ireland = 35.22 per 100,000
    England = 7.36 per 100,000
    Wales = 1.61 per 100,000

    England and Wales making good progress. Northern Ireland still the worst but a bit better. Scotland have changed by 0.1 per 100,000

  8. #448

    Default

    Although I don’t have the greatest trust in the motivations of the left wing organisation Skawkbox, their claim that only 4% of virus transmission occurs via hospitality venues bothers me. They claim 38% of transmission occurs in schools/universities, 26% in the workspace and 18% in care homes. That was data for week 40, which was presumably very recently.

    https://skwawkbox.org/2020/10/09/tor...chools-are-38/

  9. #449
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    3,345

    Default

    And very recently, when faced with rising positive test results in the Glasgow area, way in excess of what required a lockdown in Aberdeen, The High Priestess of Holyrood told us that the issue was not in hospitality (so the Weegie pubs could stay open! - Unlike the Aberdeen ones) but in household visiting. the 4% for hospitality you mention above Aqua, sounds familiar. So households visits were banned in the Glasgow area. But yet, the number of positive tests kept rising.

    There is no correlation whatsoever between any of the measures being taken, and the resulting data.

  10. #450

    Default

    Most of the words and arguments on Skawkbox are either plain wrong or loony leftie lies and the sort of pathetic unmitigated garbage that you’d expect from them. But I worry about the numbers.

  11. #451

    Default

    You didn't answer my question if you wanted any measures.

    Seems to me like you're falling with a parachute and you're thinking, this isn't working, might as well take it off.

  12. #452

    Default

    New stats out in Europe, show that altho there is a resurgence of Covid cases, less people are going to Hosp.....and there have been less deaths!
    Just heard a Swedish Scientist talk about it.......

  13. #453
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    3,345

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Neil Howie View Post
    You didn't answer my question if you wanted any measures.
    Sorry, that was maybe in an earlier posting - To re-iterate, for those that want to lock themselves away, wrapped up in 70% alcohol soaked cotton wool, feel free. But there's no furlough money this time. If thats your lifestyle choice, you need to fund it yourselves. The rest of us will get on with it, and wonder why the 23 causes of death above Conoravirus (In England in August) are now not getting similar treatment to what Conoravirus did to date.

    Quote Originally Posted by Neil Howie View Post
    Seems to me like you're falling with a parachute and you're thinking, this isn't working, might as well take it off.
    Exactly the right thing to do if the parachute ain't working - https://vimeo.com/280184515


    Skydiver forced to cut away main parachute, low. Lands Reserve on hay bale!


    If he hadn't cut away his non working parachute, he would be dead. But he had the wisdom to know that a non working parachute was useless, so he ditched it. Top man, and then landed on his feet on a bale!

  14. #454

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by orkneycadian View Post


    If he hadn't cut away his non working parachute, he would be dead. But he had the wisdom to know that a non working parachute was useless, so he ditched it. Top man, and then landed on his feet on a bale!
    touche!

    Yes if your parachute's not working use a parachute.

    OK, so still a little unclear on your plans but here goes. (and maybe it might come down to it one day so who know...)

    We drop furlough, masks, no more lockdown - other than everyone above the age of 65 has to stay at home. (I'm assuming you're not that heartless)

    What you will have everywhere is a rapidly escalating spread. r number goes crazy.

    So let's assume we see much higher than April levels of infection. Do you still accept people with coronavirus into hospital or do you triage them? What's your plan?

  15. #455
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    3,345

    Default

    As stated before, if any snowflakes want to wrap themselves in alcohol soaked cotton wool, and lock themselves away, feel free. But they have to fund that lifestyle choice themselves.

  16. #456
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    3,345

    Default

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotla...-fife-54571043

    Coronavirus: Pubs urged to do whatever it takes to avoid closure

    "Pub and hotel owners are being urged to do whatever it takes to avoid closing down amid the coronavirus pandemic."


    Er, open as normal?

  17. #457

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by orkneycadian View Post
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotla...-fife-54571043

    Coronavirus: Pubs urged to do whatever it takes to avoid closure

    "Pub and hotel owners are being urged to do whatever it takes to avoid closing down amid the coronavirus pandemic."


    Er, open as normal?

    no comment on your proposed plan? No estimated deaths, no long term casualties?
    Last edited by Neil Howie; 18-Oct-20 at 23:37.

  18. #458

    Default

    They are all dying of other things according to orkneycadian.

  19. #459
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    3,345

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Neil Howie View Post
    no comment on your proposed plan? No estimated deaths, no long term casualties?
    Don't you read the postings? Those that wish to, wrap themselves up in alcohol soaked cotton wool and stay at home at their own expense. The rest get on with it. Deaths are recorded only as due to conoravirus and not with conoravirus. So right away, the media divide the number they are using by 20, and we are down at about 2k territory. And we start paying attention to the 23 causes of death that were above conoravirus in England in August, and put everything back into perspective.

  20. #460
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,068

    Default

    question = Do we need 10/12 people on testing duty in Thurso?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •