to not understand what Sue Perkins is referring to?

[avrilpoissons]

"I see Britain’s third best eugenicist has been using the crayons again...."

WTF is she on about? It's obviously something super intelligent but it's beyond me.

This virus has brought out the very worst in human nature, @Wrinklesareenhancing

I, too, would be glad to carry on and take the risk.

Nope - just capable of reading an entire article and considering someone's points instead of a posting a virtue signalling lame twitter offering.

And that seems optimistic, given that the average age of those who’ve died from the virus in the UK to date is 79.5 and average UK life expectancy is just short of 81. This suggests the lockdown is extending the lives of 370,000 people by an average of less than one-and-a-half years.

I think this looks like some dodgy maths going on here.

There are plenty of people younger than 79 dying - who die way before their time.

How many 50 - 60 year olds dying before their time is acceptable?

50,000?
75 000?

£500,000 is that all he thinks he's worth? Surely we could crowdfund?

(Is a joke HQ plz don't ban me)

I am completely unsuprised this little pricked wankstain would happily slaughter the vulnerable and elderly.

Nope - just capable of reading an entire article and considering someone's points instead of a posting a virtue signalling lame twitter offering

If 200,000 people die, how many under 50 - 60 year olds dying before their time is acceptable?

How many asthmatic children is acceptable?
How many young people with underlying conditions is acceptable?

Sacrificing them for the future

"he choice politicians are making is not between saving lives and economic growth, but between sacrificing lives now and sacrificing them in the future. Being politicians, they’ve plumped for short-termism but they shouldn’t pretend that’s an act of great moral courage"

Maybe we should look at what happened in austerity and build a better world and do our best to prevent future deaths?

Redistribute wealth and resources in a fairer way.

Learn from this as a society.

Or learn from this as a world?

I am not sure a Virus cares how much you are worth to your country or how many years you might have left to live, it would be super if it differentiated between the worthy and not worthy wouldn't it ?

How many people on this thread think the point of people is to service the economy?

And how many think that's a completely arse-backwards idea?

Money is intrinsically value-less; a shared dream. Why the fuck shouldn't we be looking after as many people as we can for as long as we can, even if it means fewer bits of plastic shite changing hands, fewer people making obscene money gambling on the stock exchange?

Social distancing /lockdown are not going to stop people getting Covid--19 but just slow down the rate the NHS have to deal with it.

Most of us are going to get this.

Only those who are being shielded whilst the rest of us try and achieve herd immunity are likely not to succumb giving how long the vaccine is off being available.

I think that we need to crack on as a society as soon as possible in getting back to some semblance of normality and make sure that those who are in the shielded category are supported and helped as much as possible until we are through this.

For a site that smugly prides itself on it’s “intelligent/educated” demographic, there really are a lot of idiots on here.

This virus is unlikely to be more deadly to the elderly & infirm (or anyone) than a particularly virulent seasonal flu strain. A few years ago we lost 30,000 to one in a single winter.

(And, by the way, a rather large number of young/healthy people die from the flu every year too).

No one has ever suggested a lockdown for that.

Sue Perkins is not especially intelligent if she doesn’t understand that every single journalist OUGHT to be questioning the draconian measures currently being taken - that’s their job.

Are we killing more people than we are saving - taking into account potential suicides & stress induced heart attacks & strokes caused by this lockdown? Possibly.

So good for Toby Young for having the wit to express what he actually thinks rather than falling in with the populist party line, Like most Tweeters & MNers.

The scientific jury is currently out & all debate is valid, as far as I’m concerned.

I despise Sue Perkins

Well said, Forza14

Meh... Toby Young.. Professional dickhead

@Forza14

Whilst I get the massive damage we are doing to our economy/cancer patients/other illnesses that won't be detected due to the redefining of hospital activity. Without the measures in place, a minimum of 500,000 deaths would occur. With the unending pressure on the nhs that was already at breaking point, those figure would likely be much higher. If you're happy with 50 year olds not getting a ventilator when needed and such large numbers of the population being ill and or caring for dependents that basic functions of society collapse (fuel, utilities, bin collection etc) then yes, we could stop the social distancing measures

Maybe we should all push our grannies off the nearest bridge then?

Without the measures in place, a minimum of 500,000 deaths would occur

Based on what evidence?

Easy words, easy words. I don't believe it for a minute.

I have, tellingly, NC to say that I completely agree with Toby Young.

Why NC? If you believe it then to be right then why NC...unless you know you're wrong.

Forza14 Tue 31-Mar-20 20:29:10
For a site that smugly prides itself on it’s “intelligent/educated” demographic, there really are a lot of idiots on here.

This virus is unlikely to be more deadly to the elderly & infirm (or anyone) than a particularly virulent seasonal flu strain. A few years ago we lost 30,000 to one in a single winter.

Even the most optimistic estimate is that about 0.66% of those infected with the covod19 will die. That is over six times higher than flu.

If the number of deaths from covid19 stays below 30,000, it will be because of the measures taken to curtail the spread. Without measures, it would kill in the region of 300,000.

And when did I say that we should “stop social distancing measures”?

Nope - just capable of reading an entire article and considering someone's points instead of a posting a virtue signalling lame twitter offering

Twitter has a character limit...it isn't there for analysis of articles.

His article rather ignores the implications for the NHS and the care sector and the people who work there. If relatively healthy people working there can get the virus and die, due to increased viral load, then presumably his approach would lead to a lot more doctors and nurses and cleaners and carers becoming seriously ill. Of course, if we had a government that had ensured they were properly protected, then that would be less of an issue, but we don't. Or does he not care about them, because a lot of them are just "key workers"? Twat.

I have NC, @avrilpoissons, because I have severe MH problems which have been re-awakened by the lockdown, and I can't be doing with the abuse which comes with saying anything on here which goes against the 'lockdown is good' dogma.

Have people here even read full article

I keep saying this for context, but 250,000 people in the UK died from flu, despite us having vaccinations.
It wasn't even reported, let alone social distancing recommendations or a lockdown. I stumbled across it when looking on WHO website.
So, he isn't on his own considering old people to be collateral.

Have people here even read full article

I have, crispy.