Toi111da
I find it hard to see your point, perhaps that’s because you want to play Devil’s advocate in your posts.
I think the more concerning thing for me is the issue of when this started in this country - time they told us the truth!
How can you expect them to know when this started in UK, they only have the first reported cases to go on? Yes, there is some anecdotal evidence and models taking into account the delay in symptoms showing themselves and the time lag before the first recorded death that suggest it was here in the middle of January. It’s not feasible that the entire country could have been tested before any symptoms showed up. What is it that concerns you? It would make no difference to how we need to behave now. More testing would help scientists understand the virus but it wouldn’t change the fact that we need to be cautious.
Secondly I worry when I'm told first, it lives on surfaces for 1 day, then 3 days, then 9 days then I read that the virus was alive 17 days after the passengers left the Diamond Princess - this was then denied and they said 24 hours - Time to make their minds up.
Today - having previously been told there was no point wearing a mask - they are changing their minds... we should wear masks!
What we should expect is a sensible concensus of opinion - better to say nothing than to guess or change your mind almost daily. If you tell people something you must speak with consistency not jump from from one opinion to another, changing your mind - or no one will ever believe (or have confidence) in what you say!
How can you expect a consensus of opinion when new information is coming to light?
Personally, I prefer to know about new information. No-one could know how long the virus stays on different surfaces until they tested it. Something researchers have been doing along with the distance that can be travelled by a virus when sneezing. Information about wearing masks may change because of new information coming to light. Masks are not easy to wear properly, but hey, wear one if you want to, that’s if you can get some, but I prefer that the frontline NHS workers had them while there is a shortage.
The loss of life is terrible, BUT how many people died with Covid 19 and how many died because of it?
Also how many people died that DID NOT KNOW THEY HAD UNDERLYING HEALTH CONCERNS?
I'm guessing that post mortems are not being done at the moment - so can you really take it as accurate what we are being told?
I also read that ONS said that during January-February 2019 MORE people died than have died this year - so what do we make of that?
What worries me is I don't think they have a clue.... or do they??
And your point is? How would accurate information help you personally? Do you want to rely on the ONS figures on deaths last year and say what? That we might as well carry on as usual, socialise, and never mind the deaths because they are less than last year and the dead had health problems anyway?? I suppose if you knew that all people who died had underlying health concerns and you haven’t you might feel less anxious, but they can’t preform autopsies on everyone just to relieve the anxiety of healthy people. Anxiety is just something we have to learn to deal with however difficult.
I’m sure you don’t think that but I’m trying to understand why not knowing all these things accurately would worry you. I’m sure we are not being deliberately misled. Why would any Government want to see such a massive hit to the economy when they are fighting a global pandemic in the best way they know how given the knowledge they have. I’m glad that they (with the exception of some like Bolsonaro, and who knows what Trump might do in coming weeks) are showing concern for public health over the economy.
Whether people with Covid19 died because of it or not, or whether they knew they had underlying health concerns, it will be pretty clear that those who couldn’t breathe and were on ventilators died from pneumonia. It is a fact that this virus interacts differently with individual’s immune systems and resistance to the virus, from no symptoms to causing severe and fatal pneumonia.
More testing would help epidemiologists understand the virus, its current distribution and transmission, but I don’t think it should change how we have been told to behave to avoid swamping the NHS with too many cases at once. That could well happen anyway before things get better.
The main facts we need to know remain the same: stay in and away from other people as much as you can, apart from the essential workers who can’t work from home.
Even if people are tested and shown to have antibodies to the virus, that is no guarantee that they would be safe either themselves or in contact with others. The scientists still don’t know how long they last (yes more testing over time might show that, but it will take time for that information to be known). It might be a short time which would be very worrying and cause another spike in illness and deaths, so the way we need to behave remains the same. Even if they do last a long time, how can you police people who are not immune from being out among those who are? First we have to see a consistent drop in infection and deaths and then watch very carefully if restrictions are relaxed.
All that we are is what we have thought.
7ryMJjyBMgowKMZdQ~~_7.JPG "cee-dee"){kind=avatar}
