Tim of the Oak
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Dec 2012
- Messages
- 18,111
Even the Mail doesn’t claim that mate. Have a read of the headline again that says 25k died of the virus.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
COVID-19 — Coronavirus
- Thread starter urban genie
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
Even the Mail doesn’t claim that mate. Have a read of the headline again that says 25k died of the virus.
Len Rum
Well-Known Member
I read it as 16k died FOR every 25k who died of coronavirus i.e. not 16k OF every 25k.https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...killed-two-people-three-died-coronavirus.html
@kaz7
I know it’s the Mail but they’re using the government’s own figures.
16,000 out 25,000 that died during the peak, died not from Coronavirus but because of lockdown, in 5 weeks.
Tim of the Oak
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Dec 2012
- Messages
- 18,111
I read it as 16k died FOR every 25k who died of coronavirus i.e. not 16k OF every 25k.
Yes mate.
I wonder if Cummings wrote this paper?
I read it as 16k died FOR every 25k who died of coronavirus i.e. not 16k OF every 25k.
Regardless it proves my point that a significant amount are dying from lockdown itself, in fact, it’s more than I thought.
It’s early... still proves the point I wanted to make which was a significant number will die due to lockdown.Even the Mail doesn’t claim that mate. Have a read of the headline again that says 25k died of the virus.
Tim of the Oak
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Dec 2012
- Messages
- 18,111
It’s early... still proves the point I wanted to make which was a significant will die due to lockdown.
I know mate and I’m sure we were all celebrating a fine win.
I was off the booze, been up early for a golf trip today.I know mate and I’m sure we were all celebrating a fine win.
It was a great night though.
urban genie
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 11 May 2008
- Messages
- 31,252
It’s early... still proves the point I wanted to make which was a significant number will die due to lockdown.
Because our public services are not sufficient to deal with a lockdown, patients removed from hospitals and treatments put off so the main hospitals could deal with covid.
All along the nightingale hospitals with non specialist medical staff sat empty, a health secretary with a brain would have utilized them for non covid care once it was clear they were not needed.
Lockdown didn't kill them a failiure of common sense and governance did.
lancs blue
Well-Known Member
But even if there was no lockdown, while the virus was still around those 6,000 people who were too "scared" to go to hospitals/surgeries would still stay away and die while even more would die of the virus.It’s early... still proves the point I wanted to make which was a significant number will die due to lockdown.
But even if there was no lockdown, while the virus was still around those 6,000 people who were too "scared" to go to hospitals/surgeries would still stay away and die while even more would die of the virus.
Spot on. The anti-lockdown people all operate around the presumption that behaviours would have been different. They wouldn't.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.