Will this level of cases now just be acceptable?

[Tuba437]

Just having a think to myself. We're now at around 30k cases a day in general. The 7 day average daily deaths is about 89 (this was for around 45-50k cases a day). We can assume that I a month or so deaths will be at around 60 a day.

Over a year that works out at about 21k worth of deaths. Will this just be the acceptable number. We know the vaccine doesn't stop the spread so I highly doubt were ever just going to get down to sub 5k cases a day again.

21k is considered a very mild flu death rate for the year. We have a new virus around now so more deaths a year are going to be a thing whether we like it or not.

I also think red list countries should only be for countries with worrying variants. If I don't have to isolate if my wife tests positive (just daily testing) then why on earth would I have to spend 1500 on a government hotel to quarantine as I've been to a country with a lower covid rate than us?

Sorry about the rant.

The last I heard, cancer doesn't spread through the air, grow exponentially, have the potential to kill within a week or two, and shut down the entire globe?

No it doesn’t. And I never said it did, did I?

It causes deaths that could be prevented if we took extreme measures though. That is the point I’m making.

@TheKeatingFive

The last I heard, cancer doesn't spread through the air, grow exponentially, have the potential to kill within a week or two, and shut down the entire globe?

No it doesn’t. And I never said it did, did I?

It causes deaths that could be prevented if we took extreme measures though. That is the point I’m making.

Not all cancers have "causes" at all. Some are pretty much random and nothing can be done to avoid them (well with present knowledge/science anyway), particularly blood cancers.

Other cancers are preventable, but would take pretty severe measures to prevent them, i.e. cancers caused by pollution.

Then we have the group of cancers that are down to lifestyle, such as lung cancer etc.

Not all cancers have "causes" at all. Some are pretty much random and nothing can be done to avoid them (well with present knowledge/science anyway), particularly blood cancers.

Sure.

But there are a variety of actions we could take to make a significant impact on cancers that are preventable, outlined in detail earlier in this thread.

@lannistunut

I would prefer to treat flu/cancer deaths more like covid, rather than treat covid deaths more like flu/cancer, so I agree there should be more attention given to 'acceptable' death levels from a variety of causes.

Perhaps covid will start to change the midset that we can't do anything about illnesses.

are you serious?

I have seen two people die of other PREVENTABLE conditions during this pandemic because they could not get seen by a HCP.

We all KNOW that there are things you can do about illnesses, but a good start would be being able to see a doctor, wouldn't it? but alas, these people could not do that because their GP wouldn't see them face to face and when they did both eventually get to hospital they died because it was too late to take action.

Both of them WOULD still be alive now if they had intervention soon enough. But GPs not seeing patients "because covid" killed them both.

I’ve been thinking about this further and think there are valid points on all sides.

What concerns me is that the current level of cases is not allowing the nhs to function appropriately (as I understand it). How long are we willing to have this level of hospitalisation and death (and nhs resource usage) if it means that cancer patients etc don’t get the treatment they need.

It’s one thing saying we need to get back to normal and accept a level of death but we need to have a functioning health service to treat other conditions. Perhaps this is a question of funding.

@TheKeatingFive

Not all cancers have "causes" at all. Some are pretty much random and nothing can be done to avoid them (well with present knowledge/science anyway), particularly blood cancers.

Sure.

But there are a variety of actions we could take to make a significant impact on cancers that are preventable, outlined in detail earlier in this thread.

yes, like being able to see a GP when you feel unwell, instead of being told to stay at home and take a covid test.

It is infuriating to me that Cancer deaths are just seen as "one of those things" but how many people are going to die because its too late for them to be saved now? whereas in "normal times" they would have lived a long healthy life because action to tackle the cancer happened early enough.,

It is utterly fucking terrifying to me that the government want to save everyone from one thing, but in that basically leave a lot of other people to die and then shrug because well cancer isn't a transmissable disease.

@FloFloFloFloFlo

I’ve been thinking about this further and think there are valid points on all sides.

What concerns me is that the current level of cases is not allowing the nhs to function appropriately (as I understand it). How long are we willing to have this level of hospitalisation and death (and nhs resource usage) if it means that cancer patients etc don’t get the treatment they need.

It’s one thing saying we need to get back to normal and accept a level of death but we need to have a functioning health service to treat other conditions. Perhaps this is a question of funding.

and staffing. so many staff are isolating now.

Iannutstut "perhaps covid will change the mindset that we can't do anything about illnesses"?

Do you even know what you are saying here?

Let's ban smoking, drinking,flying, driving and all un healthy foods..... these all cause preventable deaths but I'm pretty sure you wouldn't give all of them up for the sake of other people's lives.

I think you're missing the point. We CAN take actions to reduce COVID in other, more vulnerable people. We already have taken actions to reduce these risks, even though the main risk is to the individual not to people around them.

Of course we have to learn to live with COVID. But I hope we can do this at a much lower risk level than we currently have.

Nobody is missing the point. That's an arrogant thing to say on such an emotive topic.

We already have taken actions to reduce these risks, even though the main risk is to the individual not to people around them.

We could take more extreme actions, which would save more lives. We don’t though. It hasn’t even really been a topic of discussion. before covid.

@Peteycat

Nobody is missing the point. That's an arrogant thing to say on such an emotive topic.

but you seem to think that we think there is "nothing you can do" about illnesses, we all know that there is and there has to be a balance. But it seems that we are willing to sacrifice a lot to suppress covid but absolutely nothing to lessen cancer deaths, and seem to accept that tactics to suppress covid will increase said cancer deaths. I just dont think thats okay.

I never said there is nothing we can do. I'm in full agreement with you I don't accept cancer deaths increasing.

@TheKeatingFive

We already have taken actions to reduce these risks, even though the main risk is to the individual not to people around them.

We could take more extreme actions, which would save more lives. We don’t though. It hasn’t even really been a topic of discussion. before covid.

But do you not think now that discussing it is a good thing?

Personally, I’m certainly thinking more deeply about how my lifestyle can change to reduce my risk of other diseases.

But do you not think now that discussing it is a good thing?

My point is that we’re not discussing it now. Many people who are very accepting of hard measures to tackle covid, don’t seem to even countenance things we could do to limit deaths from other diseases.

Exactly, we aren't discussing it. We have been told to accept MORE deaths from other causes, if anything.

Sorry, I’m confused - we literally are discussing it now?

Or do you mean wider society is not discussing it?

@FloFloFloFloFlo

Or do you mean wider society is not discussing it?

yes. Because wider society has been tough that covid deaths = bad - everything else = meh

@IcedPurple

‘And with all that, there are traffic accidents all the time.’

You are entirely missing the point here.

With sensible restrictions, people will die of COVID. And, no, shutting down society is not worth it to save these lives.

Are you an advocate of free-for-all driving, though? More a Mad Max world where everyone makes their own risk assessment and, if an old person can’t dodge the speeding car, tough luck…,

As I said in an earlier post, it is about the correct compromise point between providing enough safety vs allowing enough life.

Until Science (and natural immunity) conquers COVID we cannot be 100% safe or 100% ‘free’.

A few people are raising it on this thread. It’s not going down too well with some posters. It’s certainly not a significant part of wider public discourse.

Well let's for now put on one side the (probably non-existent) category of people who care about nothing except reducing infections.

Do you think that the person in the gazebo cares more about reducing transmission than the person eating indoors?

I would imagine they care more about reducing potential transmission to themselves, because they're eating outside rather than inside.

I would imagine they either do not care massively more than the indoor diner or are not thinking massively more about broader impacts on transmission that 'going out to eat but in a gazebo' involves than the indoor diner, because all the people involved in the work to make their food in that restaurant will be doing it exactly the same way, in the same conditions, with the same people, and all the same exposure risk, than they would if they were taking the plate to an indoor table.

it is about the correct compromise point between providing enough safety vs allowing enough life.

This would require, though, that we remember one person's 'enough life' looks very different to someone else's. Quite a lot of people in our society seem content to define 'sensible measures' as 'measures that let us do the things I want to do but not the things I don't.'

There was a thread on here a while back by a poster who was going to a wedding and felt that singing in the church should be banned. Not all the other parts of the wedding, which she was happy to do despite the risk of spreading covid. Just the one bit that she wasn't that fussed about anyway. I mean, come on.

@GoldenOmber,

'This would require, though, that we remember one person's 'enough life' looks very different to someone else's. Quite a lot of people in our society seem content to define 'sensible measures' as 'measures that let us do the things I want to do but not the things I don't.''

Yes, that is entirely correct.

In the same way that there are some people who don't care about driving at all and would rather it were banned completely to save the environment and protect other users, but there are others to whom driving is incredibly important and detest the impacts on their freedom of speed limits, 'road calming' measures and cycle lanes.

Agreeing a compromise position for everyone is one of the points of a democratic society (not that it always works). Politicians, with expert advice, decide on this compromise point and others have to obey it. And, if they get it wrong, they don't get re-elected.

Honestly the argument of keeping restrictions to save one life presumes that all of us impacted by Covid deaths want restrictions to continue.Not true !!

My teenagers father died of Covid so they have suffered the biggest loss possible . However the have not only lost their Dad they are now stressing about how much college and uni will be online will there be another lockdown? They have been at home for 18months , online school and then online college.Also can you imagine living in a world where as a teenager the disease that killed your dad is in every news programme and discussed constantly?
They lost their Dad they now need some normality , to go to uni , go to pubs . They aren't silly they can make risk assessed decisions like we all can .

So if you have used the grieving families reason.Please stop using others grief to make a point , it's not yours. Covid has taken enough from my family ,my poor kids need their lives back ( fuck it I'm crying now !!! )