"Only the elderly/immune suppressed are at risk" - attitude of dicks?

[SylvanianFrenemies]

People who say not to worry about Coronavirus, because "Only the elderly/chronically ill/immune suppressed" are dicks.

Some of us fall into these categories. Some love people who fall into these categories. Some have some essence of humanity. Stop using "Only the xxx" to dismiss concerns. Stop conflating it with flu.

Wash your hands. Isolate yourself as required. Err on the side of caution.

YABU = I agree with these dicks.
YANBU = I am human.

The part that pisses me off is that people don't fucking THINK about who they are speaking to before they open their mouths

Agree - talking about the demographics of who is most at risk may well be fine. Sounding as if you're OK with other people dying (which it all too easily can tip in to) is by crass ad rude

Let's hope Dominic Cummings eugenics loving mate Andrew Sabisky no longer has the ear of government or Boris Johnson (who refused to distance himself or sack Sabisky). I can't help thinking Cummings is adding up the numbers and seeing a solution to the social care crisis.

This is a serious post, I'm not even joking.
All they need next is a way to stop poor people breeding.

Oh well, we get what we vote for and we've just voted in a government that has starved the NHS and public services of funds for a decade. I can only assume we must approve.

RuffleCrow from the sources I found, flu mortality is somewhere between about 0.1 to 1%. COVID mortality estimates range from about 1 to about 2%.

There's a comparative graph in this article:

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/03/06/coronavirus-vs-sars-flu-mers-death-toll/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook

Flu mortality isn't anything like 1%. So in the last week of January when flu was hitting a peak we know that hospital admissions for flu were around 7.14 per 100,000, that is just admissions mind not deaths.

www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-flu-levels-according-to-phe-statistics-2019-to-2020

The mortality in Italy is 3.4%

Wait, disregard the above, I think 7.15 must be per 100, 000 of the population not 100,000 of people with the flu. So, a figure like that must be about 4,500 hospital admissions in a week- that sounds more likely

I do think people are dicks to say this stuff - I've heard it a lot too - I just counter with well X number of my family members are vulnerable.

I think there's something psychological going on here though - people are in denial about the seriousness of this. They can't contemplate that the real world could really include coronavirus. They can't contemplate that their lives may fundamentally change for the worse. They're desperately clinging to whatever slim justification they can find to hold onto the belief that nothing will change.

Like all those Jews who left Germany when they could before the Holocaust ramped up were often told they were overreacting and hysterical (which history shows us actually wasn't the case at all). Because people don't want to believe bad things can happen and when they've lived most of their lives without bad things happening they cling onto that as long as possible even when the evidence points the other way.

@FourTeaFallOut But you've still not taken into account the fact that those people who are most vulnerable to COVID-19 will have had the flu jab so they won't even catch it, will they! It's not a genuine comparison.

Yanbu.

No, the only point that I was making, badly it seems, it that when the media say flu has a CFR than less than 1% as a point of comparison to vivid, that 1% is hugely over stated.

My god, I think stress is interfering with my thumbs...
Right, I'll try again...

The media like to say that flu has a CFR of less than 1% to offer there readership a point of comparison to the CFR of covid at 3.4%. But a mortality rate of 1% for flu is hugely overstated.

Their, not there.

I give in now.

Agree with you 100%

People are in denial.

Just been announced that a child has it in Alder Hey hospital. Perhaps they have immune system issues but if not, that would knock the argument that children probably won't get it. No details given on age, m or f etc

I dont think anyone has argued that children dont get it, just that they tend to get it mildly.

I think the point is that no child has yet died of the coronavirus, not that children don't catch it. That doesn't mean that no child will ever die of it, though; the child in Alder Hey Hospital will without doubt have underlying health issues, so there are no guarantees that he/she will pull through sadly.

Oh no, that’s so very sad. I wish the government would stop dragging its heels about going to the next stage - “delay”. Leading biologists are already saying we should be closing schools and cancelling big events.

I don't have any underlying health issues and I am not old -> I am not worried. I haven't taken any precautions and I am still going to Rome if the flight isn't cancelled. I continue living as usual and if I get Coronavirus it's just bad luck.

The response moved to the "delay" stage yesterday I think

Also - wash your hands everyone. For at least 20 seconds each time. When you get home from outside, before you eat, before you touch your face, after you sneeze, etc.

Yanbu. The number of times I've heard this already - it's just flu and it only really affects those who are already sick or elderly. As someone with two long term lung diseases I do feel fairly rubbish when people say this. Yep I'm buggered if I get it, but it doesn't matter because I'm already sick so that's ok then.

We're still in the contain phase - I misread the news yesterday about that

I am very sure I heard the Chief medical officer say we were moving onto the 'delay' stage... I wonder if he's been politically over-ruled?