We all see things in a different way don't we? I see the individual cases and feel the same sympathy, but I think the number view is the most scary.
We know that the virus potentially spreads along the lines of 1...3...9...27...81.. etc and in that chain you can guarantee that someone will be asymptomatic, someone will die, someone will just feel a bit ill - all the possible variants.
If you then break the chain, you are then stopping the next 3, the 9 after that, the...
To me, for the gov to be encouraging links to be made (for no other reason than sentimentality) rather than breaking the chain is just barking. Grouping at Christmas won't just involve the people around that one family table. That is the wrong view in my opinion.
No no no. Please don't present that article in this way. The evidence clearly shows that this virus is most dangerous to those over 60 (50% of all UK deaths are over 80, last time I checked), especially those with other health conditions. You're using a single cherry picked news article as the basis for behavioral decisions and peer pressure. I can do exactly the same in the opposite direction:
Neither your article nor mine provide any useful basis for decisions, other than "oh that's interesting". Being "at risk" doesn't mean anything.
The virus has infected over 74 million people globally (and likely way more than that if undetected cases could be included). Cases such as the one in your article represent but a fraction of a fraction of a percentage of all cases.
With any medical topic, you should absolutely expect these outliers. It's why your box of paracetamol has a massive list of side effects - because at some point, someone somewhere had a third nipple appear after taking one. You still take a paracetamol for a headache though, because you've been habituated to the risk. The same is true with illnesses, medical interventions and everything else. People get bitten by sharks, but we still go for a swim. We read news articles about it precisely because it's so unusual and we're not habituated to the message.
Let me repeat that. The reason there's a news article about both the 55 year old and 108 year old is because it's rare and unusual, and we're not habituated to it. The article isn't there because it's a common occurrence.
The issue is the fear factor has been ratcheted up to such a degree that many people are now unable to properly comprehend the risk, and this virus risk hasn't become habituated yet. As I've said many times, humans are terrible at evaluating risk, and the constant doom laden messages are making it even harder.
Unless we get this under control ourselves, personally, we will be a nation of non functioning nervous wrecks. The virus will not be eradicated, the vaccine is not 100% effective, and there is no current plan to give it to people under 50. Therefore next year and forever more we must learn to accept the risk and place it in context. People will still die from it, just like the flu kills 10,000 to 20,000 people in the UK every year. The vaccine will help to control and reduce deaths, but not eliminate them.
The next argument will of course be, once vulnerable groups are vaccinated, why should restrictions be continued that disproportionately affect the young, when the young will not receive the vaccine.
That’s not why I posted the article ... I did it to stress that we all need to be vigilant because none of us can rely on our age or fitness to protect us exactly because, as you say, there are exceptions ... and none of us can rely on it not being us. That’s why the Lottery sells so many tickets.
Gardening in Central Norfolk on improved gritty moraine over chalk ... free-draining.
The point that is so often missed, is not the deaths, hospitalisations etc due to COVID, but the deaths and increased morbidity due to other conditions that are not treated, because the beds are full of COVID patients, or the doctors and nurses are of sick with COVID. Another reason why we all have a duty to protect the vulnerable.
I have been waiting nearly a year for a tongue reconstruction, after a lump was removed. Normally I would have expected about an 8 week wait. At the moment I would turn the procedure down, even if I was offered it, As I believe the risk of getting COVID is too great.
How can you lie there and think of England When you don't even know who's in the team
@Dovefromabove I agree we all need to be vigilant. But we also need to be vigilant against click bait articles like that, which are absolutely designed to play on our fears. In the current situation, people are so confused about what is risky and what isn't, or what they should or should not do. We all need to avoid perpetuating the fear factor inadvertently, and one way to do that is to not to give this type of reporting any "air time".
@punkdoc indeed. Cancer treatment etc is the rock rolling down the hill.
@strelitzia32 I have to disagree ... that was not a click bait article ... the purpose of click bait is to tempt folk to click past advertising in order to increase revenue.
That was a BBC news article following up an interview with the same man’s family earlier in the year when he was on a ventilator. There was an interview with the man and his wife this morning on the Today programme on R4.
Are you seriously saying that news programmes should not include reports on the possible effects of Covid-19?
Gardening in Central Norfolk on improved gritty moraine over chalk ... free-draining.
I think the opposite of what you are saying is probably more true @strelitzia32 People are not scared about the disease, they are being far too blase about it, hence the rates rising every time they reduce the lockdown levels. Although I don't like the idea of scaring people, I think if it could be done, it might help.
How can you lie there and think of England When you don't even know who's in the team
What was the BMA thinking about when it accepted those contract terms?
My nephew’s wife is a GP and she is in despair.
The article gives the reasons for the GP opt out. Not all surgeries have the staff or the specific storage needs for the Pfizer vaccine. My daughter is a practice nurse and her surgery will have all sorts of problems plus the fact that the other day to day treatments etc are affected.
“Every day is ordinary, until it isn't.” - Bernard Cornwell-Death of Kings
Posts
https://www.itv.com/news/2020-04-15/britain-s-oldest-coronavirus-survivor-aged-106-is-out-of-hospital
Neither your article nor mine provide any useful basis for decisions, other than "oh that's interesting". Being "at risk" doesn't mean anything.
The virus has infected over 74 million people globally (and likely way more than that if undetected cases could be included). Cases such as the one in your article represent but a fraction of a fraction of a percentage of all cases.
With any medical topic, you should absolutely expect these outliers. It's why your box of paracetamol has a massive list of side effects - because at some point, someone somewhere had a third nipple appear after taking one. You still take a paracetamol for a headache though, because you've been habituated to the risk. The same is true with illnesses, medical interventions and everything else. People get bitten by sharks, but we still go for a swim. We read news articles about it precisely because it's so unusual and we're not habituated to the message.
Let me repeat that. The reason there's a news article about both the 55 year old and 108 year old is because it's rare and unusual, and we're not habituated to it. The article isn't there because it's a common occurrence.
The issue is the fear factor has been ratcheted up to such a degree that many people are now unable to properly comprehend the risk, and this virus risk hasn't become habituated yet. As I've said many times, humans are terrible at evaluating risk, and the constant doom laden messages are making it even harder.
Unless we get this under control ourselves, personally, we will be a nation of non functioning nervous wrecks. The virus will not be eradicated, the vaccine is not 100% effective, and there is no current plan to give it to people under 50. Therefore next year and forever more we must learn to accept the risk and place it in context. People will still die from it, just like the flu kills 10,000 to 20,000 people in the UK every year. The vaccine will help to control and reduce deaths, but not eliminate them.
The next argument will of course be, once vulnerable groups are vaccinated, why should restrictions be continued that disproportionately affect the young, when the young will not receive the vaccine.
https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3259
Gardening in Central Norfolk on improved gritty moraine over chalk ... free-draining.
Another reason why we all have a duty to protect the vulnerable.
I have been waiting nearly a year for a tongue reconstruction, after a lump was removed. Normally I would have expected about an 8 week wait. At the moment I would turn the procedure down, even if I was offered it, As I believe the risk of getting COVID is too great.
When you don't even know who's in the team
S.Yorkshire/Derbyshire border
@punkdoc indeed. Cancer treatment etc is the rock rolling down the hill.
Gardening in Central Norfolk on improved gritty moraine over chalk ... free-draining.
Although I don't like the idea of scaring people, I think if it could be done, it might help.
When you don't even know who's in the team
S.Yorkshire/Derbyshire border
Not all surgeries have the staff or the specific storage needs for the Pfizer vaccine.
My daughter is a practice nurse and her surgery will have all sorts of problems plus the fact that the other day to day treatments etc are affected.
When you don't even know who's in the team
S.Yorkshire/Derbyshire border