Apologies for the delay in answering: this is my first visit here since Thursday afternoon. I don't appreciate being described as a raving loon as you chose to further down this thread so I'll respond in kind and if you take umbrage then tough titty. As for your requirement that I be limited to six paragraphs: go and feck yourself. Separate from this Covid-19 affair I had always regarded you as an eminently sensible contributor and Bobsy Wilson's only worthy rival as the message board's numero uno concerning football knowledge. I'm perfectly fine with you or anyone else questioning what I believe is the true purpose of this Covid-19 psyop. I tend to object to those who don't do so civilly.
I didn't think that post of mine you have quoted parts of required further clarification as anyone with internet access can easily discover that never before have governments shut down large areas of their economies to combat the spread of a disease. It was packed with facts and figures all of which were accurate that any calculator would have confirmed. You have years and years of form for adoring statistics. Prior to submitting that message I knew from reading some of your prior posts re Covid-19 that you had totally bought into the hysteria fomented by corporate media and the UK government. Hence I was restrained and rather more polite when describing you as incredibly gullible instead of someone who has been conned into being reduced to a fearful halfwit who preferred to remain so in spite of the welter of information to the contrary which anyone can determine by the numbers is indeed a massively exaggerated threat.
I referenced twice before in threads here what I'm about to again to illustrate why I believe the UK lockdowns are mystifying when not viewed through a lens of serving an entirely different agenda to that of saving British lives (I.e. stripping us of our civil liberties, decimating small businesses, ensuring joblessness figures go through the roof, creating an atmosphere of increasing despair, etc, etc). No-one who clicked the link I'm about to include again appeared to comprehend the enormity of the information found there at a UK government site relaying its own official Covid-19 guidance.
I'll bold the words found there beneath for the benefit of those wary of clicking on links.
My interpretation of them - as succinctly as I can - sometime in January Covid-19 was considered a HCID (high consequence infectious disease). On March 19 Covid-19 was no longer deemed a HCID and its threat level was lowered. Between January and March 19 no pubs, restaurants, etc, were ordered to close nor were any of the other impositions we have been subjected to post that date were implemented between January and March 19.
To me (and I daresay anyone else you regard as crackers), what has been instituted since then has been counter-intuitive to an absolutely breathtaking degree. Perhaps you can rationalise an alternative viewpoint to help me understand why what should have been done before March 19 wasn't, and why they were rolled out afterwards when the last bullet point below suggests restrictions would only be introduced had Covid-19 remained as a HCID. Something else my crazed brain cannot understand is the government says the transmission of Covid-19 occurs mostly through people coughing and sneezing. I get that the masks most people wear are crap and do little to halt the spread of droplets. Nevertheless, many governments, the Chinese amongst them (whose declared Covid-19 deaths are below 4k after placing 600 million of their citizens under lockdown), deemed the wearing of them in public as both mandatory and essential. Tell me why Blighty's hasn't because to me it would have been amongst the first of the restrictions imposed had it been genuinely concerned about its spread and to help protect the health of everyone and particularly those adjudged most at risk.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/high-con...-diseases-hcid
Status of COVID-19
As of 19 March 2020, COVID-19 is no longer considered to be a high consequence infectious diseases (HCID) in the UK.
The 4 nations public health HCID group made an interim recommendation in January 2020 to classify COVID-19 as an HCID. This was based on consideration of the UK HCID criteria about the virus and the disease with information available during the early stages of the outbreak. Now that more is known about COVID-19, the public health bodies in the UK have reviewed the most up to date information about COVID-19 against the UK HCID criteria. They have determined that several features have now changed; in particular, more information is available about mortality rates (low overall), and there is now greater clinical awareness and a specific and sensitive laboratory test, the availability of which continues to increase.
The Advisory Committee on Dangerous Pathogens (ACDP) is also of the opinion that COVID-19 should no longer be classified as an HCID.
The need to have a national, coordinated response remains, but this is being met by the government’s COVID-19 response.
Cases of COVID-19 are no longer managed by HCID treatment centres only. All healthcare workers managing possible and confirmed cases should follow the updated national infection and prevention (IPC) guidance for COVID-19, which supersedes all previous IPC guidance for COVID-19. This guidance includes instructions about different personal protective equipment (PPE) ensembles that are appropriate for different clinical scenarios.
Definition of HCID
In the UK, a high consequence infectious disease (HCID) is defined according to the following criteria:
- acute infectious disease
- typically has a high case-fatality rate
- may not have effective prophylaxis or treatment
- often difficult to recognise and detect rapidly
- ability to spread in the community and within healthcare settings
- requires an enhanced individual, population and system response to ensure it is managed effectively, efficiently and safely
Originally Posted by Organ Morgan.
Reply With Quote