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.

@TheKeatingFive

Your list was obviously a very simplistic set of ideas used for rhetorical emphasis so I am not sure it really warrants much detailed consideration.

Well, what concrete measures do you suggest then? You have to put forward some, otherwise I’d dismiss your position on cancer deaths as empty words.

I'm happy for you to dimiss my words if you wish

I am discussing in good faith, you can interpret my answers in bad faith if you choose to.

I just don’t think you can say ‘we shouldn’t just accept a certain number of cancer deaths’ yet not advocate doing anything about it. They aren’t going to go down because you don’t accept them.

What does your lack of acceptance actually entail?

And that’s not taking your answers in bad faith, that’s asking you to give even the most basic of indications that your position isn’t just hot air.

I think we’re at the number we find acceptable right now, yes. Well clearly we are in terms of public perception or there’d be outrage.
Hopefully, with ongoing vaccination and natural immunity the figure will drop to a lower figure.

It makes little sense to compare a health crisis in a pandemic to cancer.

It is the difference between acute and chronic management.

@TheKeatingFive

What can be done to stop cancer?

Is that a serious question?

A huge amount. Aside from banning all smoking, we could ban all meat production for starters. And alcohol. And high calorie foods. Compulsory exercise for all. Regular weighing in with the GP and enforced dieting. Take all cars off the road to combat air pollution. Ban plastics. Triple everyone’s tax contribution so we can pay for the most expensive drug therapies.

If we did all that I’d say we’d quarter our cancer deaths easily.

Yes!! This needs to be a huge national drive and on the TV etc.

I hope that this covid nightmare has taught many of us to be more hygienic, to care for ourselves to our best ability etc. I’m certainly more aware of my own choices (drinking less etc) but the more info we have on this the better.

@TheKeatingFive

I just don’t think you can say ‘we shouldn’t just accept a certain number of cancer deaths’ yet not advocate doing anything about it. They aren’t going to go down because you don’t accept them.

What does your lack of acceptance actually entail?

I am no cancer expert, but that does not mean I am not sincere in my position I would be very happy to consider changes to improve outcomes from other diseases.

I really don't understand why you mind so much that I do not have a detailed manifesto at this time!

I aboslutely can say anything I like, btw.

@TheKeatingFive

And that’s not taking your answers in bad faith, that’s asking you to give even the most basic of indications that your position isn’t just hot air.

Me not answering a question I openly accept I don;t have enough detailed knowledge to answer properly does not mean my position is hot air. That is you interpreting people in bad faith again.

I really don't understand why you mind so much that I do not have a detailed manifesto at this time!

I’m not asking for a manifesto 😆

Im asking you to indicate a few of the many suggestions on this thread (not just from me) that you think should. be implemented to reduce cancer deaths that you think are at an unacceptably high level. Or suggest some of your own It’s quite straightforward.

I aboslutely can say anything I like, btw

Naturally. And I can absolutely draw conclusions on how genuine I think your position is.

I don;t have enough detailed knowledge to answer properly

Its okay, it won’t be made policy.

Just something beyond ‘yes cancer deaths are at an unacceptably high level, we shouldn’t stand for this, I really hope they go down’

@Warhertisuff

Plenty of people do want to pretend it doesn't exist, or that it is no longer a threat. They want to stop testing, and stop isolating, and stop counting infections and deaths. Some of these people are in the governing party.

So you have to need to want mass testing, mandatory isolation and daily reporting of case numbers to believe an illness exists? Right

The point is that now for the vast majority it is as small of a threat as its ever going to be. There has to be an end point but people are too scared to suggest when. Nothing will change between now and next summer that will mean moving on then rather than now is a better decision.

You are very welcome to draw that conclusion @TheKeatingFive, but that is simply a reflecton of your view of human nature, not a reflecton on me personally.

I’ve found it very interesting, your arguing on this thread, *lannistunut, you’ve made your position very clear, thanks.

Oops bold fail

Nothing will change between now and next summer that will mean moving on then rather than now is a better decision.

Ah, this is Johnson's 'if not now, then when' line isn't it.

But of course by next summer, far more of the UK population will have been vaccinated (including probably those asged 12+) and far more of the world's populaton will have been vaccinated. Plus we will have far more info about how the virus affects a vaccinated population during the more problematic season.

Doing something now because you don;t want to wait is not a good scientific argument, it is a toddler's approach. Johnson has a toddler's approach.

But of course by next summer, far more of the UK population will have been vaccinated

We’re at around 92% single dose now and still rising. We’re close to full vaccination, some won’t anyway.

But you want to delay until next summer? It’s not cost free

The 12 to 15 year olds won’t hold off getting it until Summer will they? Given how transmissible Delta is.

[quote lannistunut]@TheKeatingFive

Your list was obviously a very simplistic set of ideas used for rhetorical emphasis so I am not sure it really warrants much detailed consideration. But the point you make about how much we could potentially acheive was a good one and I personally would be happy to look at other diseases in that way, maybe that will be a positive to come out of covid.[/quote]
So now you want to restrictions life even further than it has been to prevent other deaths.

Sorry to say but the world is massively overpopulated. We can't afford to keep everyone in the world alive its just not logical even if it was possible.

Not saying death is not tragic etc but it's just fact that the population growth of the earth is not sustainable at all. We seem to be so focused on extending every possible life as absolutely long as possible. I probably sound like an asshole but it's just not sustainable.

And as usual people think they know the position of ‘science’ but ignore CMO entirely.

I know you would never ignore Whitty @MarshaBradyo!

We’d more than quarter our cancer deaths. And we’d almost eliminate type 2 diabetes if people were a healthy weight. That kills too

@lannistunut

I know you would never ignore Whitty *@MarshaBradyo*!

And I know you always do.

Odd since what he says goes.

One way to get through this I suppose just ignore what will happen and listen to scientists who agree with you.

Luckily for me I get what I want to happen

Johnson has a toddler's approach.

Indisputably, but that doesn’t mean waiting is necessarily the best approach either. Waiting has a cost too.

Especially waiting with the level of restrictions we’d have to wait with in order to keep cases below 20,000 a day if that number is unacceptable. We had stricter restrictions than we have now back in June, and cases were still high and rising. So what would we need in place to keep them below 20,000? A bit of hand washing and masks in Tesco clearly won’t do it.

All those letter writers - ineffectual and incorrect

Although I know it went down well on here for some. And still does.

@FloFloFloFloFlo

Aye, as long as you aren’t one of the unlucky ‘healthy’ ones eh?

What would you propose then? I mean, what would you seriously propose? There will always be new variants and vaccine effectiveness will only last a certain period of time. We can do annual booster shots for the vulnerable, sure, but we cannot carry on as we have been, with lockdowns and restrictions - this is as good as it's ever going to get.

Eventually the media will stop reporting on cases and deaths, and we will forget about it. People don't talk about the year the flu vaccine failed in 2018 because it wasn't widely reported. The media fuels the fear.

We need to get back to normal, boosters for vulnerable groups, precautions on a personal level where needed .. but on the whole, normality absolutely must return now, as there's nothing going to happen to make it any 'safer' than it is right now.

@LindaEllen absolutely agree with what you said. If people honestly believe it's about protecting everyone we would lockdown every year for flu. People petrwnd itit'about preserving every life but its purely fear of the unknown driven by the media. If it was really that serious still why are we not having press conferences every day like before.