Forums
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
CLYDEBANK29
18 Mar 20 11:11
Joined:
Date Joined: 10 Jan 02
| Topic/replies: 15,381 | Blogger: CLYDEBANK29's blog
Which is over 100,000 today adjusted for population growth.  I suspect, like most people on here, I'd never heard of it.

So a question for our senior forumites is what are your recollections of it?

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
Page 1 of 2  •  Previous 1 | 2 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 53
By:
CLYDEBANK29
When: 18 Mar 20 11:13
In 1968 the median age in the UK was 34.  Now it's 40.
By:
Reynard
When: 18 Mar 20 11:25
86 surely ? I was 6 in 1968 , now I'm 58 ............... Basic maths !
By:
CLYDEBANK29
When: 18 Mar 20 11:29
the median age of the population in 1968 was 34.   I'm not talking about 34 years ago!
By:
Reynard
When: 18 Mar 20 11:32
I know , I was just being facetious ......................... I'm bored ffs ! Blush
By:
Dr Crippen
When: 18 Mar 20 11:34
And the point is, life went on without all this disruption we're seeing today.

Let's remember, many people have put themselves in the firing line, such as smokers and people who have eaten themselves into suffering chronic illness.

An eighty year old man with an underlying illness dies after getting coronavirus, yet any bug that was going the rounds could have polished him off with regard to his general health.

My advice would be the same as it always is when bugs are around, if you're vulnerable have as little contact with others as possible.

Because the bug will eventually go.

And if we're going to have this song and dance every time there's a bug around, where will it end?
By:
CLYDEBANK29
When: 18 Mar 20 11:47
Dr C, I'd concur that would normally be the best approach as with Swine Flu, but it's evident this virus is much more deadly and much more resource dependent.  I'd guesstimate that were this virus just allowed to run it's course, there wouldn't be the capacity to treat 90% plus of the sick and the death rate would soar.
By:
casemoney
When: 18 Mar 20 11:48
Crip you have to be running round Screaming and Crying , You must be in a state of Panic and counting Sheets everytime you have a shyte

Get with the Programme FFS ,your letting the side down ....
By:
CLYDEBANK29
When: 18 Mar 20 11:50
Instead of a death rate of 1-2%, you could be talking 10%.
By:
thegiggilo
When: 18 Mar 20 11:53
https://twitter.com/ejwlfc/status/1240027503609229312

Cry
By:
Dr Crippen
When: 18 Mar 20 11:57
but it's evident this virus is much more deadly

But is it?

Only if you have an underlying illness, and with more older people about than there used to be, there are more about with these chronic illnesses.

It's becoming a case of how far are we prepared to go to preserve the lives of the very old and sick, at the extreme expense of the young.
By:
casemoney
When: 18 Mar 20 12:00
All seems a little strange to me we have an Aging world population , and a bug suddenly appears that kills old people .....

If people have hit 80 they have had their Innings ,a lot of us wont regardless of any virus ....

THE MEDIA IS PUSHING A REIGN OF TERROR ....

1 WASH YOUR HANDS

2 ISOLATE IF TOLD OR HAVE TO

3 STOP THE RUN ON FOOD THERE IS NO NEED FOR IT

4 GTF ON WITH IT

IF 100,000 DIE SO BE IT. WONT BE THE FIRST OR LAST TIME IT HAS HAPPENED ........

I HAVE A COLD AND I AM COUGHING WHAT DO I DO SIT IN FOR 2 WEEKS ????

THERE ARE ALOT OF 70/80 YEAR  OLDS THAT ARE A LOT FITTER THAN ME ,THEY WONT BE DYING IMVHO
By:
casemoney
When: 18 Mar 20 12:01
10 % LaughLaugh 6 million LaughLaughLaugh

Go away FFS
By:
Crisp77
When: 18 Mar 20 12:15
I put my dog in my dressing gown earlier and he looked a bit Hong Kong Fluey
By:
CLYDEBANK29
When: 18 Mar 20 12:22
10% death rate for those infected, not the population as a whole ffs, if we just let it run it's course.  Wuhan and Italy medical centres can't cope with running infections of 0.001%, so how the hell can we cope letting it run it's course

Personally I reckon the number of dead will be below 20k, but only because of strong measures taken.
By:
CLYDEBANK29
When: 18 Mar 20 12:25
I mean 0.1%
By:
Dr Crippen
When: 18 Mar 20 12:42
It'll run its course anyway.

All we're doing is slowing down the rate at which people get infected.

As people recover they provide a barrier to its spread.
By:
Dr Crippen
When: 18 Mar 20 12:44
You need a total clampdown on movement for it to run out in two-three weeks.

Isn't that what they did in China?
By:
CLYDEBANK29
When: 18 Mar 20 12:54
The percentage of infected people requiring hospital treatment is I believe close to 20%, and that duration of treatment 2-3 weeks, so if we were to let it run and 40% of people caught it over the year, that's a running average of over 2% infection rate.  Hospitals can't cope with 0.1%, as we've seen in China and Italy.  If 90-95% of people who get good hospital treatment eventually recover, how many of them would recover without it?  I'm not a medic, but it seems bleedingly obvious it won't be anywhere near 90%.  OK, it might be 70-80%, but it could easily also be below 50%.

And that's why countries are doing what they are doing.
By:
Dr Crippen
When: 18 Mar 20 13:10
Most people who phone in with symptoms are told to stay at home.
So people recover from it quite well.

The hospitals only take the most severe cases, which mostly come from the elderly who are advised not to put themselves at risk by mixing with others in the first place.

These are the ones who would overwhelm the hospitals if they didn't take precautions, regardless of what the rest of the population did.
By:
onlooker
When: 18 Mar 20 13:16
In 2018, there were 541,589 deaths registered in England and Wales -

- an increase of 1.6% compared with 2017 (533,253); this is the highest annual number of deaths since 1999.

Those figures - Without any major illness outbreak
By:
CLYDEBANK29
When: 18 Mar 20 13:25
The hospitals only take the most severe cases,

Which is what I said

which mostly come from the elderly who are advised not to put themselves at risk by mixing with others in the first place.

Loads of people aged 30-60 require hospital intervention.  It was on the news yesterday.  Whereas mortality rates increase rapidly with advancing years, that's nowhere near the case with hospitalisations.
By:
CLYDEBANK29
When: 18 Mar 20 13:26
that's nowhere near as steep with hospitalisations.
By:
CLYDEBANK29
When: 18 Mar 20 13:30
If you let it's run it's course, I imagine hospitals would have to refuse the most severe cases on an industrial scale, they'd have to only accept the less severe cases as they'd be less resource intensive compared to chances of survival.
By:
thegiggilo
When: 18 Mar 20 13:34
They are already handing out 4 drugs to old peoples homes morphine for end of life Shockedwtf presuming that the capabilitues won't be there to treat them,euthanasia before even needed,disgraceful.
By:
CLYDEBANK29
When: 18 Mar 20 13:38
China has had 600 new cases in the last 2 weeks, but it still has 2,600 patients in a serious or critical condition.  That gives you an indication of the length of hospital durations
By:
jollyswagman
When: 18 Mar 20 13:40
2-3 weeks in icu is common.
By:
Dr Crippen
When: 18 Mar 20 13:43
Loads of people aged 30-60 require hospital intervention.

I'm sure they could whittle those down if they had to.
By:
CLYDEBANK29
When: 18 Mar 20 13:50
Yeah, come back when you are worse.  Not sure that policy being very effective.
By:
SontaranStratagem
When: 18 Mar 20 14:14
80,000 died yet this one is going to kill less?

They wont stop public rage after this, you can't pull this kind of stunt off without getting some proper blow back
By:
Dr Crippen
When: 18 Mar 20 14:15
That's what they do when there's a shortage of beds.

If they're prioritising this then they must be cutting back on hospitalising other conditions.

They've been telling us for ages that they're understaffed with not enough beds.
Now suddenly there's extra capacity in the system.

Where has it come from?
By:
SontaranStratagem
When: 18 Mar 20 14:16
I really don't understand this game they're playing, its utterly self destructing for the governments to play along with it
By:
SontaranStratagem
When: 18 Mar 20 14:18

Mar 18, 2020 -- 2:15PM, Dr Crippen wrote:


That's what they do when there's a shortage of beds.If they're prioritising this then they must be cutting back on hospitalising other conditions.They've been telling us for ages that they're understaffed with not enough beds.Now suddenly there's extra capacity in the system.Where has it come from?


This is the point

People are going to die from this "event" and its not the virus they need to fear, this is the most disgusting stunt ever pulled by these people

They can't be allowed to get away with this, forget the government this has gone well above your "elected officials", its absolutely disgraceful what we're witnessing

Bill Gates and co are marked and they need to be facking arrested and sentenced to death

By:
CLYDEBANK29
When: 18 Mar 20 14:51
80,000 died yet this one is going to kill less?

It's only going to kill less because of the measures being taken.  It would kill far more if we let it run amok.
By:
Cardinal Scott
When: 18 Mar 20 14:59

Mar 18, 2020 -- 2:18PM, SontaranStratagem wrote:


Mar 18, 2020 --  1:15PM, Dr Crippen wrote:That's what they do when there's a shortage of beds.If they're prioritising this then they must be cutting back on hospitalising other conditions.They've been telling us for ages that they're understaffed with not enough beds.Now suddenly there's extra capacity in the system.Where has it come from?This is the pointPeople are going to die from this "event" and its not the virus they need to fear, this is the most disgusting stunt ever pulled by these people They can't be allowed to get away with this, forget the government this has gone well above your "elected officials", its absolutely disgraceful what we're witnessing Bill Gates and co are marked and they need to be facking arrested and sentenced to death


If you don't mind I will place my trust in scientists rather than you.

By:
dunlaying
When: 18 Mar 20 15:14
I dont remember Hong Kong flu but was taken out for a month by flu . I thought it was in the early seventies . It is not to be taken lightly .
By:
SontaranStratagem
When: 18 Mar 20 15:15
They are saying 20,000

That's a number over a 2 month period, sorry but its been a total scam if that's the finishing total and I refer you to my thread regarding public anger

China got 80,000 cases and 5,000 deaths, this whole thing has been a total fraud
By:
SontaranStratagem
When: 18 Mar 20 15:17
Dunlaying

I've had flu and I've had it severe, its absolutely nothing to fear, a fever met with aches, all it is is your body killing the bacteria/virus, its nothing to fear

Give it me and I'll show you how to deal with it, rest up let the fever pass and then go for a steady walk (AWAY from people), gets the immune system into top gear because you keep the temp high in the body

Its a piece of cake fighting off viruses and bugs
By:
SontaranStratagem
When: 18 Mar 20 15:18
People are running round panic buying tablets ffs

Its ridiculous how pathetically dumbed down people are
By:
SontaranStratagem
When: 18 Mar 20 15:21
2 days max before you start to feel better and you can go out walking even a slow jog

Ridiculous
Page 1 of 2  •  Previous 1 | 2 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
‹ back to topics
www.betfair.com