|
|
Post by lindalovely on Feb 6, 2022 13:58:23 GMT 1
lindalovely I have agreed with your post. The question is, if we are killing over 200 people per day (so 80,000 per year), is now the right time to be relaxing? Everyone will indeed make their own decision on that one but to the headline question, the answer must surely be no, far from it. That's a difficult one to judge in my opinion. People will die from Covid and continue to do so. I was reading some stats yesterday that said the majority of people dying were in the 70+ unvaccinated group, or those with many comorbidities. Of course I don't know how true those statistics are and even amongst them there will be some previously healthy, younger people that die. So what would be an acceptable number, because it isn't ever going to be zero..and then how do you quantify and balance that against the numbers whose lives are cut short because of confinements? I think France is trying to balance the trade offs..So some constraints are still in place, masks are still being worn, despite Mysty's experience, but businesses are allowed to operate and people are allowed to socialize. I read an interesting thread from an epidemiologist the other day, who said rather than using the term 'learning to live with it', we should be thinking about 'learning to adapt to it's, as new variants, increasing knowledge, different treatments and more effective vaccines will all change the course of the pandemic over time but may mean changing behaviours and ways of doing things many times over. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 6, 2022 14:18:39 GMT 1
But what number is acceptable to start to adapt to I certainly don’t think into the hundreds a day is it
|
|
|
|
Post by pcpa on Feb 6, 2022 14:41:12 GMT 1
Sorry if that sounds a bit blunt pcpa but I have heard that so many times in the last 2 years as an excuse to pretend that Covid is not a problem. Very blunt but I am more concerned that you are attributing those views to me.
As you have said, any death where a person has had a positive covid test result in the last 28 days (wasn't it once 90 days?) is classed as a Covid death including the person run over by a bus.
It is so widespread at present (one in 12 primary school children) that a significant percentage of people in hospital (who are all routinely tested) will be recorded as a Covid death if they die within 28 days for whatever reasons.
It does seem strange that the "Excess deaths" measure seems to have dissapeared.
|
|
|
|
Post by lindalovely on Feb 6, 2022 14:52:09 GMT 1
But what number is acceptable to start to adapt to I certainly don’t think into the hundreds a day is it Well what number would be acceptable to you? And if the majority of those dying were those who refused vaccination would that make it different? And how many people have died or will die indirectly because of confinement measures. And what do you do with the omicron variant, which is so infectious that none of the current measures stop it. Since Christmas pretty much all my circle of acquaintances have had covid, mostly caught from kids at school who then spread it round their entire family. My French class, my students, my colleagues from work, my friends..have all had it. Some got tested and got it confirmed, some tested and were negative despite being in close contact with an infected person and having exactly the same symptoms, some had symptoms but didn't get tested and some were tested, were positive, but had no symptoms. No one that I know had symptoms worse than a cold. I am not anti some of the measures that have been taken and are continuing to be taken but also I am not in the mood to go back into isolation and I can come out of isolation without increasing the risk to others more vulnerable that me by getting vaccinated and wearing a mask in the areas where that is proscribed. I also, voluntarily, stay away from children, but that is a different issue. |
|
|
|
Post by lindalovely on Feb 6, 2022 14:59:06 GMT 1
So the question was 'is the end in sight?' and in my view, there is no 'end' with Covid (HIV never ended ..we just got better at treating it)..but a way of adapting to it is very much in sight..and this is a view shared by the WHO. This from a publication in 'NAture' : " Countries must decide how they will live with COVID-19 — and living with COVID-19 does not mean ignoring it. Each region must work out how to balance the deaths, disability and disruption caused by the virus with the financial and societal costs of measures used to try to control the virus, such as mask mandates and business closures. This balance will vary from one place to another, and with time, as more therapies and vaccines become available — and as new variants emerge."www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-00057-y |
|
exile
Member
Massif Central
Posts: 2,680
|
Post by exile on Feb 6, 2022 17:30:18 GMT 1
Sorry if that sounds a bit blunt pcpa but I have heard that so many times in the last 2 years as an excuse to pretend that Covid is not a problem. Very blunt but I am more concerned that you are attributing those views to me.
As you have said, any death where a person has had a positive covid test result in the last 28 days (wasn't it once 90 days?) is classed as a Covid death including the person run over by a bus.
It is so widespread at present (one in 12 primary school children) that a significant percentage of people in hospital (who are all routinely tested) will be recorded as a Covid death if they die within 28 days for whatever reasons.
It does seem strange that the "Excess deaths" measure seems to have dissapeared.
My apologies I did not mean to imply that you were trying to suggest that Covid was not a problem but I was trying to explain my exasperation because many who have used that line indeed have tried to suggest that Covid was just in the mind and not a problem. My understanding of excess deaths is that it based on the average number of deaths at a particular point in time over the last 5 years compared with the actual number of deaths at that point in time. The problem is that there were so many Covid related deaths in 2020 and into Q1 2021 that that average number is now heavily distorted. While people are undoubtedly dying as a result of Covid now, I suspect that excess deaths as conventionally calculated would be negative. |
|
exile
Member
Massif Central
Posts: 2,680
|
Post by exile on Feb 7, 2022 0:52:41 GMT 1
Now here is an interesting statement which goes contrary to much of what we have been led to believe. "The pandemic has been a net lifesaver for younger people, if you look at people between 15 and 30 in 2020, 300 fewer died than would normally have died and that includes the 100 that died from COVID sadly," Sir David said. news.sky.com/story/covid-19-cambridge-professor-admits-he-was-over-optimistic-at-the-start-of-the-coronavirus-pandemic-12534429No way I can corroborate that but as above it goes completely against what we have been led to think regarding young people and their reactions to isolation. That of course is not to say that people who feel isolated and feel there is nothing more to live for are to be ignored or forgotten. |
|
|
|
Post by lindalovely on Feb 7, 2022 8:41:09 GMT 1
Now here is an interesting statement which goes contrary to much of what we have been led to believe. "The pandemic has been a net lifesaver for younger people, if you look at people between 15 and 30 in 2020, 300 fewer died than would normally have died and that includes the 100 that died from COVID sadly," Sir David said. news.sky.com/story/covid-19-cambridge-professor-admits-he-was-over-optimistic-at-the-start-of-the-coronavirus-pandemic-12534429No way I can corroborate that but as above it goes completely against what we have been led to think regarding young people and their reactions to isolation. That of course is not to say that people who feel isolated and feel there is nothing more to live for are to be ignored or forgotten. Certainly true that accidental deaths and road traffic deaths were down during the confinements, as were injuries and deaths related to street crime. Maybe that is the answer to crime in general...keep everyone shut at home. It's interesting though...all life comes with risk and the more you 'live it' the higher the risk I guess. I think France has done quite well at striking a balance for young people by prioritizing schooling over, for example, the opening of restaurants. I think older people have had a harder time with isolation, particularly if you live alone. In fact anyone who lives alone has had it hard. Technically if you followed the rules it was 2 years with very limited opportunities to meet people and start new relationships. |
|
|
|
Post by landmannnn on Feb 7, 2022 11:37:51 GMT 1
In answer to the original question, I suspect we are at beginning of the end of COVID 19 counter measures A small example, but Australia has now opened its borders after 2 years.
The developed world has pretty much eradicated smallpox, typhus, polio by vaccination, it will be the case one day that a combination of herd immunity and vaccination will mean it is unlikely to kill people, but that is a generation away.
|
|
|
|
Post by ForumUser2 on Feb 7, 2022 15:29:58 GMT 1
The developed world has pretty much eradicated smallpox, typhus, polio by vaccination, it will be the case one day that a combination of herd immunity and vaccination will mean it is unlikely to kill people, but that is a generation away. There is no vaccine against typhus. Smallpox has been eradicated worldwide and polio in most of the developed world but is endemic in many 3rd World countries. SARS-CoV-2 is a coronavirus, as is'flu and the common cold. And I think we all know the unreliability of vaccines against those Coronaviruses. Unless and until SARS-CoV-2 becomes less infective, less virulent or both it will continue to circulate. Should more infective or virulent variants evolve? Then all bets are off. |
|
