But you don’t seem to understand that when 9 experts are saying one thing, and the other 1 saying is saying another (for the uk) that it’s perfectly reasonable to question why that is and whether that’s correct.Those leading the government.
Could it be that there are usually at least 4 people coughing in your office at this time of year, but you don’t normally notice it?I can tell you one thing this self isolation is totally bollox must be at least 4 people coughing in my office yet they are still in work! Wtf
Hahaha. I think you may have missed a joke there bud.sneezing is not a symptom of covid 19...
Why?We should also not take generalised advice, that’s being given to other countries, as the definite course of action we should be taking here.
Apologies if its been covered as this thread moves quite quickly but in regards to "Herd immunity" last week they were saying if you contract it and recover you are not immune and can catch it again, so what has changed that we now think we will be ok if 60% of the population get it? Also if we already have two strains you'd imagine it could mutate again and even if you become immune to one strain would you necessarily be immune to the others?
In fairness, the Chief Medical Officer said their worst case scenario model was that 80% of the population would get it.I was trying to ascertain where you got the "extra 500,000" deaths line from, as it is dangerous to quote this (unless you have a reliable source) because it will affect other people's opinions if they choose to believe it and ultimately support it. Do you really think the government would be choosing this option? And people defending it? I wouldn't if it was predicted. (By the way, odd that you accept this prediction but nothing else).
I have no idea what you mean by me dreaming up anything, I am however aware of the dangers of spreading false or incorrect data, whether maliciously or inadvertently. I'm not trying to score points and if you read any of my posts I always try to include supporting links to my sources so people can choose to either agree or ignore it.
Here's another professor of epidemiology, this time at Berkeley University explaining the likely short- to mid-term outcome of this virus.
https://www.nbcnews.com/now/video/e...ty-flattens-the-coronavirus-curve-80512581952
Guys, I don't know if you've noticed from what your correspondents in Italy have said, but there's no panic buying here lol. Food stores (and food shops) are open, farms are a-working and so are factories.
You can go outside and buy food and useful stuff as you usually do.
There's no need to ridicule yourselves with panic buying that causes more harm than good.
So what?But then there’s no chance to build herd immunity?
But not an EXTRA 500,000 deaths, i.e. 1million.In fairness, the Chief Medical Officer said their worst case scenario model was that 80% of the population would get it.
He also said it appears to have just less than 1% mortality rate.
A journalist asked him the potential deaths if those figures come to pass.
He said he didn’t want to quote that figure as it would become a headline that would alarm people, but it was a simple calculation anyone could do.
If 80% of the British public got it and around 1% of them died, it would be roughly 500,000 deaths. A similar figure to WW2.
When a vaccine arrives then that surely builds any immunity thats needed.But then there’s no chance to build herd immunity?