UK now has the worst death rate in the WORLD from CoVid19

[Smithy]

The UK now has the highest death rate from Covid-19 of any country in the world, the latest data has revealed.

An average of 935 daily deaths in the UK over the last week was the equivalent of more than 16 people in every million dying each day from coronavirus.

Figures compiled by University of Oxford-based research platform Our World in Data show that no other country matches the UK’s per capita rate of deaths.

The UK overtook the Czech Republic, which had held the top spot since 11 January, after the government published the latest coronavirus deaths on Sunday night.

The weekend’s figures tend to be lower due to a lag in reporting, meaning the number of new daily deaths in the UK will likely rise once again when new figures are announced on Monday.

https://static.independent.co.uk/2021/01/18/11/ZycQK-top-30-countries-by-covid-19-death-rate.png?width=640&auto=webp&quality=75


There’s honestly no words :/

[Niamh.]

I thought Belgium were really bad there for ages but they're not even on that list now?

[Oliver_W]

Jesus, how much longer is BoJo gonna cling on? Bloody stupid winnet.

[Smithy]

I thought Belgium were really bad there for ages but they're not even on that list now?

That was back in October when they were at their worst

[Ammi]

...I don’t understand, this one says USA...U.K. 5th...

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1093256/novel-coronavirus-2019ncov-deaths-worldwide-by-country/

[Ammi]

...so Spain isn’t in the top 30 at all with the first one...

[Smithy]

...I don’t understand, this one says USA...U.K. 5th...

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1093256/novel-coronavirus-2019ncov-deaths-worldwide-by-country/

That’s the cumulative number of deaths which isn’t the same as the death rate

[Niamh.]

...I don’t understand, this one says USA...U.K. 5th...

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1093256/novel-coronavirus-2019ncov-deaths-worldwide-by-country/

Smithys one is per capita, your one is just total deaths I think?

[user104658]

...I don’t understand, this one says USA...U.K. 5th...

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1093256/novel-coronavirus-2019ncov-deaths-worldwide-by-country/

I think the OP is slightly misleading; this figure doesn't represent the full length of the pandemic, it is the number of deaths per million population in the last 7 days only... thus, places that are currently in a "dip" in the infection cycle will be low on the list, those currently "peaking" will be high, and the list order will change constantly over time.

As different countries are in different phases at different times... to be honest it's a bit of a meaningless stat. You can only really compare two countries if you compare the numbers for both at peak, which will not be in the same snapshot of time.

[Ammi]

That’s the cumulative number of deaths which isn’t the same as the death rate

Smithys one is per capita, your one is just total deaths I think?

...oh ok, really wow...we’re an island and in theory we could have been COVID free because of that, if the government had acted in the beginning to close down travel...to make some errors is excusable ...but to have the worst death rate...?...is just an horrendous reflection of their action and inaction...

[user104658]

What the stat tells us:

Over the last 7 days the UK has had the highest death rate of any country per capita.


What it doesn't tell us:

Anything else at all.

[Niamh.]

What the stat tells us:

Over the last 7 days the UK has had the highest death rate of any country per capita.


What it doesn't tell us:

Anything else at all.

I think we were the highest last week (or the week before) we've gone right down the list now though so yeah

[Ammi]

I think the OP is slightly misleading; this figure doesn't represent the full length of the pandemic, it is the number of deaths per million population in the last 7 days only... thus, places that are currently in a "dip" in the infection cycle will be low on the list, those currently "peaking" will be high, and the list order will change constantly over time.

As different countries are in different phases at different times... to be honest it's a bit of a meaningless stat. You can only really compare two countries if you compare the numbers for both at peak, which will not be in the same snapshot of time.

...oh ok again...:laugh:...but surely we should never be or have been the worst at any point in time, though...

[arista]

There’s honestly no words :/



Nations Above 10,000 Covid-19 deaths.



395,851 USA deaths
209,296 Brazil deaths
152,274 India deaths
140,241 Mexico deaths
88,747 United Kingdom deaths
81,800 Italy deaths
70,093 France deaths
64,601 Russia deaths
56,803 Iran deaths
53,314 Spain deaths
48,256 Colombia deaths
46,674 Germany deaths
45,295 Argentina deaths
38,654 Peru deaths
36,851 South Africa deaths
33,355 Poland deaths
25,987 Indonesia deaths
23,832 Turkey deaths
21,767 Ukraine deaths
20,396 Belgium deaths
17,887 Canada deaths
17,435 Chile deaths
17,164 Romania deaths
14,338 Czechia deaths
14,316 Ecuador deaths
13,066 Netherlands deaths
12,935 Iraq deaths
11,341 Hungary deaths
10,951 Pakistan deaths
10,323 Sweden deaths





https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html

[arista]

I thought Belgium were really bad there for ages but they're not even on that list now?


Nations Above 10,000 Covid-19 deaths.



395,851 USA deaths
209,296 Brazil deaths
152,274 India deaths
140,241 Mexico deaths
88,747 United Kingdom deaths
81,800 Italy deaths
70,093 France deaths
64,601 Russia deaths
56,803 Iran deaths
53,314 Spain deaths
48,256 Colombia deaths
46,674 Germany deaths
45,295 Argentina deaths
38,654 Peru deaths
36,851 South Africa deaths
33,355 Poland deaths
25,987 Indonesia deaths
23,832 Turkey deaths
21,767 Ukraine deaths
20,396 Belgium deaths
17,887 Canada deaths
17,435 Chile deaths
17,164 Romania deaths
14,338 Czechia deaths
14,316 Ecuador deaths
13,066 Netherlands deaths
12,935 Iraq deaths
11,341 Hungary deaths
10,951 Pakistan deaths
10,323 Sweden deaths





https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html

[bots]

...oh ok again...:laugh:...but surely we should never be or have been the worst at any point in time, though...

it's been reported all over the world that we have a new variant here that has spiked the infection rate and forced us in to lockdown. With a spiking infection rate, the death rate goes up, thats a fact, and as we are approaching or at the peak infection rate now ... we are going to be the highest death rate at this point in time. It's the same old story that has been present since the beginning of the pandemic. Manipulated statistics to push a narrative

[Jessica.]

Absolutely embarrassing, same for us here in Portugal, we were doing amazingly well, slowing the curve and then the breaks between restrictions just made things go mad again.

[Crimson Dynamo]

it's been reported all over the world that we have a new variant here that has spiked the infection rate and forced us in to lockdown. With a spiking infection rate, the death rate goes up, thats a fact, and as we are approaching or at the peak infection rate now ... we are going to be the highest death rate at this point in time. It's the same old story that has been present since the beginning of the pandemic. Manipulated statistics to push a narrative

And using death to do so....


:skull:

[arista]

Absolutely embarrassing, same for us here in Portugal, we were doing amazingly well, slowing the curve and then the breaks between restrictions just made things go mad again.



Soon you will be in my 10,000 Covid Death List

Like Sweden is Now



10,323 Sweden deaths
9,909 Philippines deaths
9,636 Bolivia deaths
9,028 Portugal deaths



Professional Data : https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html

[joeysteele]

...oh ok again...:laugh:...but surely we should never be or have been the worst at any point in time, though...

No we shouldn't.
I'll not try to make any excusing for this government on covid, sorry.
No way will I.

[UserSince2005]

were too ****ing honest, we should just do what germany does and if there something wrong with you other than covid then that is what you died from.

[Vicky.]

were too ****ing honest, we should just do what germany does and if there something wrong with you other than covid then that is what you died from.
Our way of counting is bloody ridiculous tbh. I thought it was crappy when it was 28 days after a positive covid test, regardless of actual death. And I recently found out that they switched this to anyone who has a positive test in the previous 60 days! Which will bloody obviously make the numbers shoot up?! Like, if you did this with other illnesses, you could make the likes of norovirus seem deadly (not saying covid is not an issue or anything though, obviously I know its very serious for some people), if we were recording deaths of any kind, 2 months after the infection.

Surely there are better way to do it..just seems so weird and has never really made sense to me at 28 days, let alone 60 :umm2:

Is it right that some countries don't add in carehomes and such?

Regardless though, every time there is a decision to be made, it appears to be the wrong one (the xmas thing was ridiculous, days after saying Starmer was 'trying to steal xmas' :rolleyes: ). I am not surprised our deaths are quite high.

Ontop of this, the whole eat out to help out thing..was stupid. I took advantage of it mind don't get me wrong, but to encourage mixing like that, only to whinge that people who did what they were told/paid to do were spreading the virus..which was entirely unpredictable and shocked people to their very core.

[Beso]

Well we halved the daily deaths today, so boris must have done double good if the deaths are his fault.

[user104658]

It's Monday, Sunday/Monday rates have always been lower.

[UserSince2005]

Our way of counting is bloody ridiculous tbh. I thought it was crappy when it was 28 days after a positive covid test, regardless of actual death. And I recently found out that they switched this to anyone who has a positive test in the previous 60 days! Which will bloody obviously make the numbers shoot up?! Like, if you did this with other illnesses, you could make the likes of norovirus seem deadly (not saying covid is not an issue or anything though, obviously I know its very serious for some people), if we were recording deaths of any kind, 2 months after the infection.

Surely there are better way to do it..just seems so weird and has never really made sense to me at 28 days, let alone 60 :umm2:

Is it right that some countries don't add in carehomes and such?

Regardless though, every time there is a decision to be made, it appears to be the wrong one (the xmas thing was ridiculous, days after saying Starmer was 'trying to steal xmas' :rolleyes: ). I am not surprised our deaths are quite high.

Ontop of this, the whole eat out to help out thing..was stupid. I took advantage of it mind don't get me wrong, but to encourage mixing like that, only to whinge that people who did what they were told/paid to do were spreading the virus..which was entirely unpredictable and shocked people to their very core.

OMG i didnt realised that is how it works!
I was always confused about the 28 day thing.
Of course we have the highest in the world then!
China only recorded a death if it happen on a full moon it would seem.

[MTVN]

I think the OP is slightly misleading; this figure doesn't represent the full length of the pandemic, it is the number of deaths per million population in the last 7 days only... thus, places that are currently in a "dip" in the infection cycle will be low on the list, those currently "peaking" will be high, and the list order will change constantly over time.

As different countries are in different phases at different times... to be honest it's a bit of a meaningless stat. You can only really compare two countries if you compare the numbers for both at peak, which will not be in the same snapshot of time.

Was coming in to say this, we're currently at the very peak of what's been a pretty horrendous spike in infections so it's no surprise really

I highly doubt it will still be the case in a months time when lockdown will have brought rates down quite a bit

[Smithy]

Was coming in to say this, we're currently at the very peak of what's been a pretty horrendous spike in infections so it's no surprise really

I highly doubt it will still be the case in a months time when lockdown will have brought rates down quite a bit

5th worst death toll in the world, but whatever makes you feel better about trying to downplay this absolute **** show I guess matt

[MTVN]

Charming. There's lot of metrics you could point to to show how badly the pandemic has hit the UK, just saying that this isn't one of them

[Vicky.]

OMG i didnt realised that is how it works!
I was always confused about the 28 day thing.
Of course we have the highest in the world then!
China only recorded a death if it happen on a full moon it would seem.

I honestly thought it was conspiracy nonsense not that long ago. But it does seem to be true.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-reported-sars-cov-2-deaths-in-england/sars-cov-2-confirmed-england-deaths-report-to-31-december-2020
https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/deaths?areaType=nation&areaName=England

Still counting the 28 days, but now count 60 days also. The 60 days thing, quite obviously numbers are up.

[Beso]

It's Monday, Sunday/Monday rates have always been lower.

That's a Tuesday when that happens

[Beso]

Our way of counting is bloody ridiculous tbh. I thought it was crappy when it was 28 days after a positive covid test, regardless of actual death. And I recently found out that they switched this to anyone who has a positive test in the previous 60 days! Which will bloody obviously make the numbers shoot up?! Like, if you did this with other illnesses, you could make the likes of norovirus seem deadly (not saying covid is not an issue or anything though, obviously I know its very serious for some people), if we were recording deaths of any kind, 2 months after the infection.

Surely there are better way to do it..just seems so weird and has never really made sense to me at 28 days, let alone 60 :umm2:

Is it right that some countries don't add in carehomes and such?

Regardless though, every time there is a decision to be made, it appears to be the wrong one (the xmas thing was ridiculous, days after saying Starmer was 'trying to steal xmas' :rolleyes: ). I am not surprised our deaths are quite high.

Ontop of this, the whole eat out to help out thing..was stupid. I took advantage of it mind don't get me wrong, but to encourage mixing like that, only to whinge that people who did what they were told/paid to do were spreading the virus..which was entirely unpredictable and shocked people to their very core.

I believe we should be counting all deaths cause these people may have died from a different illness whilst having covid, but if hey didnt have covid then they would maybe have had better care.

I also think the poor people who die because they couldn't get treatment because of full beds or health risks should also be added. As should the suicides brought on by isolation and a whole plethora of other reasons.

[Vicky.]

I believe we should be counting all deaths cause these people may have died from a different illness whilst having covid, but if hey didnt have covid then they would maybe have had better care.

I also think the poor people who die because they couldn't get treatment because of full beds or health risks should also be added. As should the suicides brought on by isolation and a whole plethora of other reasons.

Yeah records like that would be useful. Feels awful to talk about people dying in that way like.

[DouglasS]

Absolutely embarrassing, same for us here in Portugal, we were doing amazingly well, slowing the curve and then the breaks between restrictions just made things go mad again.

A lot of people have to work though to keep the economy going, ‘breaks from restrictions’ were in reality people returning to work to prevent future poverty and financial distress among millions

[DouglasS]

Also U.K. are over counting our deaths by just including anyone with covid in their system within a month of their time of death, many of these will have been asymptotic and have died entirely of something else, many would have died anyway of other illnesses and they just happened to have covid. Most countries aren’t including these as true cases and so the data is not a true comparison between countries

It’s like saying China has the one of the lowest death rates of covid in the world, they’re just choosing not to record their deaths properly...

[Braden]

Charming. There's lot of metrics you could point to to show how badly the pandemic has hit the UK, just saying that this isn't one of them

Totally agree.

[Tom4784]

Whether we're first or fifth is irrelevant. The point is that the government are failing.

Crying about the economy is pointless, we're gonna suffer more the longer this is dragged out with half arsed measures by the government. Bleating about people needing to go to work and coming out of lockdown at this point will just ensure another one in a few weeks/months time.

[DouglasS]

If the title post was data used as part of a scientific journal/ assignment or data was presented in its fashion this way it’d get an F. Full of misleading information, incorrect title, redundant data being used as a comparison between countries. Definitely Daily Mail kind of reporting. As a scientist and published author it can be frustrating seeing posts/articles like this full of scaremongering, exaggeration and misinformation

[user104658]

That's a Tuesday when that happens:think: no, Tuesday and Wednesday have always been the highest days when weekend numbers catch up. The numbers collated the previous day are reported, thus Sunday/Monday reports are Saturday/Sunday numbers, and are lower because hospital admin departments typically work Monday to Friday.

[Crimson Dynamo]

If the title post was data used as part of a scientific journal/ assignment or data was presented in its fashion this way it’d get an F. Full of misleading information, incorrect title, redundant data being used as a comparison between countries. Definitely Daily Mail kind of reporting. As a scientist and published author it can be frustrating seeing posts/articles like this full of scaremongering, exaggeration and misinformation

:clap1:

[Tom4784]

Sounds like downplaying to me, you might find 5th worst in the world acceptable, but I do not.

[Beso]

What do other countries do?
The WHO recommendation is to report on death certification, which England will continue to do through the ONS. For daily reported death figures, there is no international consensus on methods.

[Beso]

:think: no, Tuesday and Wednesday have always been the highest days when weekend numbers catch up. The numbers collated the previous day are reported, thus Sunday/Monday reports are Saturday/Sunday numbers, and are lower because hospital admin departments typically work Monday to Friday.

I always had that down as a tuesday..:shrug:

[Elliot]

Congratulations Boris Johnson and the Tory majority :clap1:

[Ammi]

...even though these figures aren’t overall and given at a time when we’re peaking, it’s still horrendous...we’re an island so being more decisive and ‘closing down’ was the key, while Boris dithered../...and decisions made for the economy...as awful as it is that livelihoods have been and will be lost because of this world catastrophe, there is nothing to be had or lost if there isn’t life as the first thing...

[Nicky91]

A lot of people have to work though to keep the economy going, ‘breaks from restrictions’ were in reality people returning to work to prevent future poverty and financial distress among millions

health is more important than economy

we can deal with economic crisis later on once pandemic is over

[Mystic Mock]

That's horrible news, although it's not a shock to me sadly.

I understand that Boris has to answer to people within his party so it's not entirely his fault, but the way that him and his party have handled this Pandemic is a disgrace, they prioritised Brexit over the wellbeing of their people.

I thought that they were a disgusting party under Cameron, but this is a new low for the Conservatives.

The only thing that's genuinely surprised me from that chart is that the USA isn't second.

[Crimson Dynamo]

I think the OP is slightly misleading; this figure doesn't represent the full length of the pandemic, it is the number of deaths per million population in the last 7 days only... thus, places that are currently in a "dip" in the infection cycle will be low on the list, those currently "peaking" will be high, and the list order will change constantly over time.

As different countries are in different phases at different times... to be honest it's a bit of a meaningless stat. You can only really compare two countries if you compare the numbers for both at peak, which will not be in the same snapshot of time.

That's horrible news, although it's not a shock to me sadly.

I understand that Boris has to answer to people within his party so it's not entirely his fault, but the way that him and his party have handled this Pandemic is a disgrace, they prioritised Brexit over the wellbeing of their people.

I thought that they were a disgusting party under Cameron, but this is a new low for the Conservatives.

The only thing that's genuinely surprised me from that chart is that the USA isn't second.

you may have missed this post Mock

[Vanessa]

I think it's because of the new variant, which is a lot more contagious.

[Mystic Mock]

you may have missed this post Mock

Not really because as Dezzy's already said on the thread, first or fifth is an atrocious showing for the UK, especially considering the four countries above us have way bigger populations than us so we may as well be number one on the overall death list.

I'm sorry but either way Toy Soldier's argument doesn't really hold up in this scenario.

[Vanessa]

Italy is doing well at the moment.
I'm confident I can go on holiday this year.
But I will definitely have the vaccine.
Things will improve here, it will just take time.

[Nicky91]

Italy is doing well at the moment.
I'm confident I can go on holiday this year.
But I will definitely have the vaccine.
Things will improve here, it will just take time.

no, since even if you are vaccinated, you can still spread the virus onto others

[Vanessa]

no, since even if you are vaccinated, you can still spread the virus onto others

I'll get tested if I have to. No worries.

[Mystic Mock]

Italy is doing well at the moment.
I'm confident I can go on holiday this year.
But I will definitely have the vaccine.
Things will improve here, it will just take time.

Oh I agree Vanessa that things will improve over here, but it will be thanks to the Scientists and Doctors more than anything the Tories have done.

And I'm glad that Italy is doing better because they were the first victims outside of China to handle Covid head on.

[Mystic Mock]

no, since even if you are vaccinated, you can still spread the virus onto others

Are you sure that's not some weird anti-Vaccer nonsense Nicky?:laugh:

[Nicky91]

Are you sure that's not some weird anti-Vaccer nonsense Nicky?:laugh:

no

vaccinating makes yourself immune, but you can still carry the virus and spread it onto others

which is why it is important everyone gets the vaccine (otherwise covid-19 will never really go away)

[Cherie]

Are you sure that's not some weird anti-Vaccer nonsense Nicky?:laugh:

No that is correct Mock, you can still carry the virus even if vaccinated

the point of vaccination is that you don't develop the disease in a serious way or enough to be hospitalised

[Mystic Mock]

No that is correct Mock, you can still carry the virus even if vaccinated

the point of vaccination is that you don't develop the disease in a serious way or enough to be hospitalised

I was wondering if it would be weak enough to actually not spread to someone else if you got vaccinated.

Thank god I'm not a Scientist.:joker:

[user104658]

Not really because as Dezzy's already said on the thread, first or fifth is an atrocious showing for the UK, especially considering the four countries above us have way bigger populations than us so we may as well be number one on the overall death list.



I'm sorry but either way Toy Soldier's argument doesn't really hold up in this scenario.I wasn't even arguing that the UK has done well/badly/whatever I just don't like dodgy graphic and stats that are of limited use :joker:. I don't think a tiered list that shows a small snapshot of time is particularly useful for knowing how well things have been handled; too easy to manipulate. If the same graph had been posted in August it would have looked like The UK had done amazingly because our deaths per million per day were way down.

I agree that the UK's overall deaths per capita are an obvious indication that we have been hammered hard, especially if you adjust for scale. I think anyone being totally honest knows there are multiple reasons for that - London's status as an international travel hub and the overall density of population in the UK are two big and uncontrollable factors - but I'm not going to say that it's been handled well or that the numbers wouldn't very possibly be lower if it had been. The government struggled to "pick a lane" so they flipped and flopped between telling people to stay home, and encouraging people to get back out... Things like "eat out to help out" and the heavy push to get consumers back onto the high street was in hindsight disastrous.

My argument is ONLY that taking a short span of time and graphing "who was worst in that small snapshot" is not a particularly useful metric.

[Nicky91]

No that is correct Mock, you can still carry the virus even if vaccinated

the point of vaccination is that you don't develop the disease in a serious way or enough to be hospitalised

i heard this from my country's ICU chief Diederik Gommers, whom is educating the youth on corona, why lockdowns are important, why vaccinating is important here, using social media

[joeysteele]

Not really because as Dezzy's already said on the thread, first or fifth is an atrocious showing for the UK, especially considering the four countries above us have way bigger populations than us so we may as well be number one on the overall death list.

I'm sorry but either way Toy Soldier's argument doesn't really hold up in this scenario.


I totally agree with you Mock.

Also as to your other post of this being an even nastier, cruel( that's my addition to your words), Con party under Johnson.

I actually, liked Michael Howard as Con Leader.
I think the rot started to set in again more forcefully as to deceit under Cameron.
It was actually Theresa May who stated he party was being seen as the nasty party.

Cameron caved in to the anti EU extremist side of the party, which John Major had fought to sideline particularly on the EU.

Theresa May had little control and things just got worse and nastier under her farcical leadership.

However Johnson has taken deceit, heartlessness and blatant cruelty to a new low in the Con party.
Particularly on the handling of both brexit and covid.
.

His refusal to even meet with bereaved families is and should be a national scandal as should be our death rates.
There was kind of lauding of the government when Italy stepped ahead of us on official deaths from covid.
Now we are heading to near 15,000 more deaths again than Italy.

It is shocking, and largely caused by the failure to prepare and protect properly and for longer by this government.
Their procrastination in vital decision making also adding to the problem of unnecessary deaths of loved ones.

I can't wait for the proper inquiry into this which I hope all other Parties insist on..
Despite Johnson trying to hold back on that.
When all those bereaved families, and other groups who know all that's been done wrong can present all to the said inquiry, when it eventually comes.
Which it will and I can't wait.

[Mystic Mock]

I wasn't even arguing that the UK has done well/badly/whatever I just don't like dodgy graphic and stats that are of limited use :joker:. I don't think a tiered list that shows a small snapshot of time is particularly useful for knowing how well things have been handled; too easy to manipulate. If the same graph had been posted in August it would have looked like The UK had done amazingly because our deaths per million per day were way down.

I agree that the UK's overall deaths per capita are an obvious indication that we have been hammered hard, especially if you adjust for scale. I think anyone being totally honest knows there are multiple reasons for that - London's status as an international travel hub and the overall density of population in the UK are two big and uncontrollable factors - but I'm not going to say that it's been handled well or that the numbers wouldn't very possibly be lower if it had been. The government struggled to "pick a lane" so they flipped and flopped between telling people to stay home, and encouraging people to get back out... Things like "eat out to help out" and the heavy push to get consumers back onto the high street was in hindsight disastrous.

My argument is ONLY that taking a short span of time and graphing "who was worst in that small snapshot" is not a particularly useful metric.

I get what you're saying, but to me the fact that we do badly in every type of death rate chart throughout most of the Pandemic does have to be taken seriously, even if the method of how the one on this thread has been counted is questionable.

To me if it was just a dodgy graphic or whatever I would be way less critical of the Tories handling of the disease, but sadly a lot of other graphics always show us high up on the death rates too.

[Cherie]

i heard this from my country's ICU chief Diederik Gommers, whom is educating the youth on corona, why lockdowns are important, why vaccinating is important here, using social media

:thumbs:

[Mystic Mock]

I totally agree with you Mock.

Also as to your other post of this being an even nastier, cruel( that's my addition to your words), Con party under Johnson.

I actually, liked Michael Howard as Con Leader.
I think the rot started to set in again more forcefully as to deceit under Cameron.
It was actually Theresa May who stated he party was being seen as the nasty party.

Cameron caved in to the anti EU extremist side of the party, which John Major had fought to sideline particularly on the EU.

Theresa May had little control and things just hot worse and nastier under her farcical leadership.

However Johnson has taken deceit, heartlessness and blatant cruelty to a new low in the Con party.
Particularly on the handling of both brexit and covid.
.

His refusal to even meet with bereaved families is and should be a national scandal as should be our death rates.
There was kind of lauding of the government when Italy stepped ahead of us on official deaths from covid.
Now we are heading to near 15,000 more deaths again than Italy.

It is shocking, and largely caused by the failure to prepare and protect properly and for longer by this government.
Their procrastination in vital decision making also adding to the problem of unnecessary deaths of loved ones.

I can't wait for the proper inquiry into this which I hope all other Parties insist on..
Despite Johnson trying to hold back on that.
When all those bereaved families, and other groups who know all that's been done wrong can present all to the said inquiry, when it eventually comes.
Which it will and I can't wait.

I liked Michael Howard too (and John Major when I've heard him speak) but sadly they're seen as too soft by some of the public because they don't want to be inhumane psychopaths who have a fetish of playing the buffoon.

And I'm interested in the inquiry too Joey.

[user104658]

I get what you're saying, but to me the fact that we do badly in every type of death rate chart throughout most of the Pandemic does have to be taken seriously, even if the method of how the one on this thread has been counted is questionable.

To me if it was just a dodgy graphic or whatever I would be way less critical of the Tories handling of the disease, but sadly a lot of other graphics always show us high up on the death rates too.Again I don't disagree but I would argue that if one has better stats and graphics that can be used to illustrate an argument, those are the ones that should be used, instead of cherry picking figures to create more graphs. It's a common media tactic but really all it does is create weak points in the argument that can easily be picked apart by a critic.

In short, you don't bolster existing robust statistics by including weaker contrived statistics... You actually knock the legs out from under them by introducing the element of doubt.

[Vicky.]

No that is correct Mock, you can still carry the virus even if vaccinated

the point of vaccination is that you don't develop the disease in a serious way or enough to be hospitalised

I thought this was just the pfizer one? Sure I read the oxford one actually stops catching/transmisson. Which is why I find it a bit baffling that the pfizer one is the one being pushed really. Its awkward to store, and seems to not actually help the spread or anything. Meanwhile, the oxford one can just be stored in a bog standard fridge for 3 days..it seems the pfizer one is still the key, according to the government, but I cannot see how. It was a good stopgap until others came, but unless I have understood it all wrong (which is entirely possible!) the oxford one should be the main one used..

(otherwise covid-19 will never really go away)
This bit though, is very optomistic. I wish I could believe it will 'go away' but I cannot see it. Much more likely to behave like other coronaviruses, and become a kind of..seasonal illness. That might need a vaccine topup every now and again (possibly alongside the flu jab, as the high risk people for both seem to overlap a lot). There would be a LOT more work involved in totally eradicating it, and I am sure we only ever managed that with smallpox..and that was due to everyone working together and a very very aggressive fight, and a crapload of money because of the sheer numbers dying everywhere. Which I cannot see covid being deemed 'serious enough' for all that effort. Especially if it keeps mutating. My friend who works in virology swears blind that the huge majority of mutations are the virus becoming naturally less deadly..as a virus that kills its host is a crappy virus, in virus terms, its meant to spread easily person to person but not kill them. Or something along those lines. If this follows the same route, in time it will become more and more like..well a cold really (not saying it is this now, bu its the logical endpoint to me). I have found nothing to contradict what she said either..seems it is largely correct in that viruses do tend to get less deadly over time, rather than more.

While it sounds horrendous, 2m people over the whole world dying in a year..I cannot see being deemed serious enough for a smallpox type reaction from leaders.

[user104658]

I thought this was just the pfizer one? Sure I read the oxford one actually stops catching/transmisson. Which is why I find it a bit baffling that the pfizer one is the one being pushed really. Its awkward to store, and seems to not actually help the spread or anything. Meanwhile, the oxford one can just be stored in a bog standard fridge for 3 days..it seems the pfizer one is still the key, according to the government, but I cannot see how. It was a good stopgap until others came, but unless I have understood it all wrong (which is entirely possible!) the oxford one should be the main one used..

It's unknown for both; the trials have all been a simple "vaccines to number of cases" measure of effectiveness, there has been little to no testing at all on whether vaccinated people are totally immune or can still be asymptomatic carriers... figuring that out takes far longer. There's also no reason to assume that one vaccine is better/worse than another at this point when it comes to this.

However, either way, it's worth remembering that vaccinated or not, people can still transmit the virus to others on their hands/clothes/posessions etc. if there's a short enough time between contamination and contact.

[Vicky.]

It's unknown for both; the trials have all been a simple "vaccines to number of cases" measure of effectiveness, there has been little to no testing at all on whether vaccinated people are totally immune or can still be asymptomatic carriers... figuring that out takes far longer. There's also no reason to assume that one vaccine is better/worse than another at this point when it comes to this.

However, either way, it's worth remembering that vaccinated or not, people can still transmit the virus to others on their hands/clothes/posessions etc. if there's a short enough time between contamination and contact.

This bit is very interesting to me actually..as am now wondering if this is the case for other vaccines or not? Like, could you still spread chickenpox like this, if you had the vaccine? Honestly (and maybe naively too) I kind of assumed that 'the norm' for vaccinations was..that you cannot get it, nor pass it to anyone high risk who cannot have the vaccine for whatever reason.

[bots]

This bit is very interesting to me actually..as am now wondering if this is the case for other vaccines or not? Like, could you still spread chickenpox like this, if you had the vaccine? Honestly (and maybe naively too) I kind of assumed that 'the norm' for vaccinations was..that you cannot get it, nor pass it to anyone high risk who cannot have the vaccine for whatever reason.

i'm pretty sure there are vaccines that don't stop you getting the particular virus, but stop you spreading it, so there are a few variations around that theme

[user104658]

This bit is very interesting to me actually..as am now wondering if this is the case for other vaccines or not? Like, could you still spread chickenpox like this, if you had the vaccine? Honestly (and maybe naively too) I kind of assumed that 'the norm' for vaccinations was..that you cannot get it, nor pass it to anyone high risk who cannot have the vaccine for whatever reason.

It depends on the virus - some can survive without a host (on objects) for a prolonged time, some die within minutes or even seconds outside of a host so can only spread directly from person to person. Also the "amount of exposure" needed to infect varies so for example some could spread just with that's transferred on someone's hands... some would need there to be an actual gob of spit or something (bleh...) so you could catch it from, say, someone's used tissues but not from someone's coat.

I can't say I know the answer specifically for chicken pox :think:. It does seem to be surprisingly still quite unknown for MANY regular vaccines, and I cas see lots of studies that suggest large reductions but not "complete" halting e.g. a vaccine giving 95% individual protection in a population but only stopping spread by about 70%... which would suggest that 70% of people gain full immunity, and then a further 25% gain a level of immunity that stops them developing symptoms but the virus is still replicating asymptomatically in them.

In theory... it SHOULDN'T be a problem so long as all of the vulnerable categories are vaccinated, and assuming that the vaccine effects are long-term... as it should mean that even if it continues to spread, anything more than mild cases will become very rare.

I do agree with you above though; the scale of spread at this point means it's a complete fantasy that we'll ever live in a 100% covid-free world, viruses like this that are "out of the bag" so to speak can't just be eradicated... if they could, we would have eradicated chicken pox, measles, glandular fever etc. years ago but they still go around.

Covid will HOPEFULLY be rendered "not really a problem" by vaccination and then life can go back to normal. People get seriously ill and die of viruses all the time and always have, we carry on. The key is in bringing the scale of them problem WAY down so that we can treat it as we do those viruses. And I agree that it will most likely be a "minor ailment of the future", one of a multitude of minor viruses that circulate, but we're likely talking a century or more for that to happen really. Essentially, it's possible or even likely that the existing circulating coronaviruses were pretty nasty in humans when they first appeared... but they've been around for a LONG time.

[arista]

1351449282679894016

[bots]

the answer to that is simple Arista, people like Morgan ignore the restrictions

[Vicky.]

Well yeah, vulnerable categories safeguarded against severe infection would definitely help a lot, especially NHS/other health system wise. A few mornings ago I was watching bbc news (something I have avoided for months actually..) and they were saying they were expecting to have everyone over 18 vaccinated by june. Which seems a bit..wasteful to me. Can't see that happening, maybe they are saying that to calm the younger people who are panicking and it will all be a bit 'ok, we have done it' once the vulnerable are sorted..I do think it will be a requirement for foreign travel though for most places..which is not that different to needing malaria jabs and stuff.

I would think that the 'actual plan' IS just to do the vunerable, as really, you cannot avoid a small amount of death completely, nor should we try to eradicate death IMO which some seem to be expecting. The issue is the NHS. If we can get it all to a level where the health system can function, that will be 'good enough'. What we have currently is loads dying of stuff that wouldn't usually kill them, because all resources are taken by covid patients. So now things that were not deadly before, can be.

The june thing..sounded fantasy for the whole country though, and just an hour later this was changed to 'all over 18s by september'

There was also a bit of attitude towards Israel and the implication they are not doing well with their vaccine rollout, yet..they have 25/100 people done apparently, while we are on much lower ..obviously we have a higher population, but it did come across very..sneering which seemed daft.

I seemingly cannot convince my mother in law that she should get the vaccine. She has declined so far, partly because of hearsay around her street. One of the women had it a week or so back, and said she was told 'if you feel a bit spaced out for a few days, dont worry, thats normal'. I am 100% positive she misheard/misremembered this, but it seems to have worried the people round there, which are mainly elderly/ill as its basically a form of sheltered housing the place she lives. Things like that certainly do not help matters, though I doubt she did it on purpose. Result of her spreading that about, seems to be half the street dropping out :S

That said though, my mother in law was not too keen on the idea to start with (though she gets the flu jab every year..) as she had covid ages back now and didn't even know she had it, despite being one of those that..to look at you would think would at least be hospitalised. She remains convinced, regardless of how many scientists say a vaccine is still needed, that natural imunity will be good enough. Her neighbour telling her to expect weird side effects cemented it in her. I have said that while it does appear getting it again is extremely rare, its clearly possible. Also it looks like usually a second infection..is not as bad as the first, but the potential is there for her to get it badly a second time, even if unlikely. I now feel I am just lecturing a nearly 70 year old woman..so just leaving her to it. But I do wnder how many 'vulnerable' are actually taking it up. The same bbc news thing, they had some health guy on and he was asked how good the takeup rate was. He gave a politicians answer, and it was something like 'shielding people who have not seen their families since march are very grateful for the advances' or something..which made me worry takeup is NOT very good, as if it was, he would have just said that surely?!

I guess time will tell. It will be 'interesting' to read all the studies and such in 30 years time, thats for sure!

[Cherie]

the answer to that is simple Arista, people like Morgan ignore the restrictions

I am so annoyed that he got away with swanning off at Christmas even if 'technically' it was within the rules, it certainly wasn't in the spirit of lockdown, he is shameless

[Vicky.]

Good god, that was an essay and a half. And a lot of irrelevant waffle too really :laugh:

I thik am storing it all up for when I come on forums, as I dare not post any statuses to do with it, as its divided the country even more than brexit did, and anyone who posts anything, be it that they are a lockdown fan, or think things are to strict, gets jumped on immediately.

Am awaiting a pile on actually, as saying that I did post what I think is my first covid related status this morning. After reading about people kicking off that some shops are still selling clothes. As clothes are not a necessity apparently. like, try having yung children who grow at a ridiculous rate, or speaking to the likes of NHS staff who are working so long/hard that their uniforms are hanging on by threads. Yeah, theres the amazn option, however..my experience of clothes buying on amazon, or online in general really..has been you order a size 14, and it comes 3 weeks later and says 14 but is either a 6 or a 20 :laugh:

I cannot begin to even try working out how its been deemed clothes are not essential, yet takeaway coffee and mcdonalds and such is..

[bots]

My impression is that the take up has been pretty good so far. I think as they go through the categories to those less vulnerable, the take up will reduce dramatically. The idea that we will get herd immunity through vaccination is fatally flawed I think, for all sorts of reasons, so I wish they would stop projecting it as the big solution.

[DouglasS]

Good god, that was an essay and a half. And a lot of irrelevant waffle too really :laugh:

I thik am storing it all up for when I come on forums, as I dare not post any statuses to do with it, as its divided the country even more than brexit did, and anyone who posts anything, be it that they are a lockdown fan, or think things are to strict, gets jumped on immediately.

Am awaiting a pile on actually, as saying that I did post what I think is my first covid related status this morning. After reading about people kicking off that some shops are still selling clothes. As clothes are not a necessity apparently. like, try having yung children who grow at a ridiculous rate, or speaking to the likes of NHS staff who are working so long/hard that their uniforms are hanging on by threads. Yeah, theres the amazn option, however..my experience of clothes buying on amazon, or online in general really..has been you order a size 14, and it comes 3 weeks later and says 14 but is either a 6 or a 20 :laugh:

I cannot begin to even try working out how its been deemed clothes are not essential, yet takeaway coffee and mcdonalds and such is..

I think it’s moreso that takeaway food that can produce it under covid reactions is deemed essential, it’s not McDonald’s. And I agree with it. There will be hospital nurse/doctor shift workers and other essential workers working 13 hour shifts and getting a takeaway after working 8am-9pm could be something they require / deemed essential. There are many more examples that could be given for example.

Quite a few of my friends working in the hospital will get a takeaway after their really long shifts as they don’t have the time to shop or cook something and usually the shops are closed by the time they finish, often they get called in on the day or as an emergency so they can’t prepare food in advance.

I do agree with the clothes as well though, they should just restrict the number of people able to enter the shop and have someone who does that, meaning people should expect queues outside shops, And so i agree with you there

[Vicky.]

I think it’s moreso that takeaway food that can produce it under covid reactions is deemed essential, it’s not McDonald’s. And I agree with it. There will be hospital nurse/doctor shift workers and other essential workers working 13 hour shifts and getting a takeaway after working 8am-9pm could be something they require / deemed essential. There are many more examples that could be given for example.

Quite a few of my friends working in the hospital will get a takeaway after their really long shifts as they don’t have the time to shop or cook something and usually the shops are closed by the time they finish, often they get called in on the day or as an emergency so they can’t prepare food in advance.

I do agree with the clothes as well though, they should just restrict the number of people able to enter the shop and have someone who does that, meaning people should expect queues outside shops, And so i agree with you there
Oh I agree that takeaways and such should be open..don't get me wrong. Its much easier, and possibly the only option for some keyworkers to just get something in the rare times they are not at work. Its more the...clothes are not essential, you aren't going anywhere!!! lot who are perfectly happy for other 'non essential' places being open as they use those, that are bloody anoying me. They don't need/want to buy clothes, great. That doesn't mean noone else should be able to buy them if needed..not everyone is in the house 24/7, as many have to work, or have other reasons fr leaving the house. And arguably, its not a good route to go down, telling people that if they are in the house, they don't need to/shouldn't wear clothes ever :laugh:

Technically takeaways, clothes etc could be deemed non essential, but that would make life far too hard for people. All the kickoffs about clothes is reminding me of the huge amount of people in lockdown1, who were screaming that literally only the NHS and carehomes should be functioning. Which even a few seconds of though shows thats bloody nonsense. No buses, no power plants, no internet, no banking, etc?! People actively wanted that and thought it was a possibility? Just seems weird.

The 'essential' argument is an interesting one too, as you could make the argument that most things are essential for some people. My mum brought that up and its true really. She used a bottle of vodka as her example, and I thought she had gone a bit mad at first. But she meant, a bottle of vodka is an essential to someone who is alcohol dependant. They could be fined or whatever for going to the shop just for vodka, but it IS essential to them, else they could end up dead or in hospital. Something like..puzzle books. Sound a ridiculous 'essential' to most, however, I am fairly sure that my mother in law would have hurt herself by now if she didn't buy daily puzzlebooks to keep her mind busy. My brother in law was questioned by police about why he was buying child wellies. Now, this was not essential as such, however he was out to get the normal shopping, he didn't go specifically to get the wellies. Seems..harsh and even counterproducitve to me really sometimes. I totally get not wanting people to go out browsing the aisles for hours just to get out of the house. But picking up a non essential during an essential visit is wrong too..