Coronavirus (2021) thread

[lancs blue]

Here's what I don't get right,, your far far far more likely to die from smoking or get seriously ill through smoking than covid,
This is coming from a 20 a day man,, I know stupid twat I am.
But here's the thing if the governments of the world are so hell bent on saving lives all of a sudden, why do they simply not ban cigarettes and you could probably say alcohol,
That would save millions of lives world wide on a yearly basis, I don't get it.
It's almost like nothing bad exists anymore other than covid...... Anyway love some one to explain,, I think I know the reasons for not banning cigarettes, as I think most do,or alcohol come to that, but as I said if the world has become hell bent on saving the worlds population as they'd have you believe ,
Then surely they would start with those 2 "evils",, no... Or am I missing something???

The interest is not so much in saving lives as preventing healthcare infrastructure being overrun with serious/critically ill covid-19 patients - a possibility that terrifies politicians because articles about people lying seriouly ill in corridors (or even out in the car parks) are bad for their future prospects. Tobacco and booze do not (yet!) threaten to cause such a situation so they can be "managed" (i.e. taxed) to partly pay for the costs of treatment while running inept campaigns to try and reduce consumption.

 

[Marvin]

Here's what I don't get right,, your far far far more likely to die from smoking or get seriously ill through smoking than covid,
This is coming from a 20 a day man,, I know stupid twat I am.
But here's the thing if the governments of the world are so hell bent on saving lives all of a sudden, why do they simply not ban cigarettes and you could probably say alcohol,
That would save millions of lives world wide on a yearly basis, I don't get it.
It's almost like nothing bad exists anymore other than covid...... Anyway love some one to explain,, I think I know the reasons for not banning cigarettes, as I think most do,or alcohol come to that, but as I said if the world has become hell bent on saving the worlds population as they'd have you believe ,
Then surely they would start with those 2 "evils",, no... Or am I missing something???

The infection fatality rate before vaccines was around 0.50%. Work it out.

 

[BobKowalski]

Here's what I don't get right,, your far far far more likely to die from smoking or get seriously ill through smoking than covid,
This is coming from a 20 a day man,, I know stupid twat I am.
But here's the thing if the governments of the world are so hell bent on saving lives all of a sudden, why do they simply not ban cigarettes and you could probably say alcohol,
That would save millions of lives world wide on a yearly basis, I don't get it.
It's almost like nothing bad exists anymore other than covid...... Anyway love some one to explain,, I think I know the reasons for not banning cigarettes, as I think most do,or alcohol come to that, but as I said if the world has become hell bent on saving the worlds population as they'd have you believe ,
Then surely they would start with those 2 "evils",, no... Or am I missing something???

Smoking is a quantifiable risk with decades of data. X number of people smoke so Y number of people will have heart disease and Z number of people will die. The system can cope with this because we have the data.

Covid is an unquantifiable risk with little to no data, so there is an excess of caution to protect the system. No one knows if vaccinated people are safe or how long protection will last or how Covid may mutate or anything really because there is no data. We are not protecting individual people, we are protecting the system, or society if you prefer, from breaking down or being overwhelmed.

We are the first to experience this virus, so, we are the first data entry point. The actions we take and the mistakes we make, will determine how we deal with Covid in the future.

 

[Kippax1973]

As I may have mentioned about 200 times.

it’s not the deaths that is the focus.

It is the NHS being overwhelmed and not enough ICU beds and nurses to staff them - if the NHS has no room for sick patients unable to breathe going into hospitals then we are simply in a world of hell.

Smoking comparison is pointless as the need for hospitalisation doesn’t come anywhere close to how rapid Covid patients can increase - if smoking suddenly caused a huge concern for the NHS to cope with then they would ban cigarettes and probably start to inflict stricter rules and regulations - at present, they don’t burden the NHS, and if people want to smoke themselves to death - that’s on them. There’s enough warnings about it.

At first I get the point about them been overwhelmed, now, sorry the figures don't stack up.
There is evidence it does not affect the young in the same way as the elderly, so the "SCIENCE" says anyway.
Now with the majority of the vulnerable and elderly been vaccinated hence far less chance of becoming very ill or at the worst dying,, so what now, what we waiting for now?.
And not a chance on earth would they ban cigarettes or alcohol, as I said we all know the reasons why they wouldn't, money plain and simple

 

[Kippax1973]

The infection fatality rate before vaccines was around 0.50%. Work it out.

At first I got that, sorry not now, this country anyway

 

[Kippax1973]

Smoking is a quantifiable risk with decades of data. X number of people smoke so Y number of people will have heart disease and Z number of people will die. The system can cope with this because we have the data.

Covid is an unquantifiable risk with little to no data, so there is an excess of caution to protect the system. No one knows if vaccinated people are safe or how long protection will last or how Covid may mutate or anything really because there is no data. We are not protecting individual people, we are protecting the system, or society if you prefer, from breaking down or being overwhelmed.

We are the first to experience this virus, so, we are the first data entry point. The actions we take and the mistakes we make, will determine how we deal with Covid in the future.

So again I will ask the question at what point do we say, right Uve had your jabs that takes the risk down considerably, now its over to you to decide for yourselfs what risks to take?

 

[BlueHammer85]

At first I get the point about them been overwhelmed, now, sorry the figures don't stack up.
There is evidence it does not affect the young in the same way as the elderly, so the "SCIENCE" says anyway.
Now with the majority of the vulnerable and elderly been vaccinated hence far less chance of becoming very ill or at the worst dying,, so what now, what we waiting for now?.
And not a chance on earth would they ban cigarettes or alcohol, as I said we all know the reasons why they wouldn't, money plain and simple

of course they would ban them if the NHS couldn’t cope and you had people lying dead on the streets like over in India.

today we had 16,000 new cases , some of that will translate into hospitalisation and deaths (3-4 weeks we’ll know) at the moment, the vaccines are having a huge effect in keeping numbers down - but it’s still too early to be 100% confident that we are out of the woods - especially with more variants possibly on the horizon.

 

[Kippax1973]

of course they would ban them if the NHS couldn’t cope and you had people lying dead on the streets like over in India.

today we had 16,000 new cases , some of that will translate into hospitalisation and deaths (3-4 weeks we’ll know) at the moment, the vaccines are having a huge effect in keeping numbers down - but it’s still too early to be 100% confident that we are out of the woods - especially with more variants possibly on the horizon.

So please tell me this then, how long do we go on collecting data at what point do we tell the unfortunate ones who's lives have been compleatly ruined through covid, ie... Money mental health, that it's OK you can come out now and live normally again?.... 1 year more.. 5 more... 10... 15... Go on tell me

 

[Barcon]

Oh but don’t try and say that it’s a disgrace or that we should be moving faster.
We should be concerned about the scarients and covid spreads therefore it’s more important than trying to get back to normal NHS duties like diagnosing cancer.

You're talking to yourself again.

 

[Marvin]

At first I got that, sorry not now, this country anyway

Then you've changed your argument. The risk is reduced now but only because of massive effort in vaccinating people and in quarantining people.

And you can't just forget about it because it keeps changing hence over time you will lose some immunity.