What's more important ?

I lost a friend at school to cancer and not long after University it took my mother. I know the effect it had on me and wouldnt wish that on my worst enemy, let alone the majority of the population! Pretty sure a lot have similar tales to tell :(

Lost both parents to cancer. My dad went within 12 months of diagnosis and both have left a huge and irreparable hole in not just my life but that of my wife who was also close to both. The only crumb of comfort I have is I was there at the very end for both and got to say everything I wanted to say to them while they were still alert enough to comprehend. So much of a help compared to so many families at the moment losing their loved ones and being incapable of being there or saying goodbye properly
 
The BBC reported yesterday that the current death rate is about 1/3rd higher than it would normally be around this time of year after you factor in the usual death rate from things like flu etc.
 
The BBC reported yesterday that the current death rate is about 1/3rd higher than it would normally be around this time of year after you factor in the usual death rate from things like flu etc.

There was a weekly stat on the Beeb a week or so back that made for sobering viewing. Typically, weekly death rate inc. seasonal flu, 10,000. Deaths that week, 16,000.

One Swallow doesn't make a summer, and one week's numbers don't paint an accurate picture, but Jeez, a 60% increase.
 
I've been thinking about this question for a while (it appeared in another thread earlier), and i must admit i dont fully understand why 'trashing' the economy in the short term will lead to countless more deaths in the long term. I understand the correlation between poverty and death rates, but how cant we then support the welfare state further after this. We also seem to be pumping trillions into the economy at the moment, are we effectively saying that's not going to work and the economy wont recover, if so why dont we hold back and give more again to the welfare state in the future.

It also raises the question of how are we measure the economy going forward, I dont really understand how the FTSE being down then means that my life expectancy is less. I am sure there is an in depth answer relating to investment and quality of life, and taxes etc, but from my simplistic view if people can put food on the table etc then surely this is a better metric.

I appreciate these are probably naive questions, but to me the answer seems obvious, save as many lives as possible now and then look to pull people out of poverty after.
 
Completely unchecked you just have to look at the figures for Spanish Flu and remember how long it took to travel anywhere in the world in those times and how relatively few actually travelled anywhere.

I think there are enough people travelling all round the place and not socially isolating to see this going on for a very long time so the economy really does have to be taken in to consideration there is no way we can stay in lock down for absolutely months without a near total collapse of of our economy (except for Amazon and the like).
 
We should not forget that behind every one of these numbers is a real person with families and friends. I've had one of my children who lives in London on her own catch Covid and she was terribly ill with it, she is still very weak after three weeks, I really feared I would lose her at one point and what made it worse was I couldnt be with her.

Regarding how we move on from here. I would suggest that when the infection rates drop off we would probably keep the current isolation policy with vunerable people and start opening certain businesses and shops that are vital to the economy while maintaining social distancing. I think there will soon be this contact tracing app available aIong with suitable testing, of course this depends on enough people using it. I dont see places of social gatherings opening for quite a long time. Hopefully there will also be a vaccine avalable before too long and a policy to vaccinate as many as possible, probably starting with the most vunerable.

Currently we have to keep our nerve and be guided by the Scientific and Medical guidelines.
 
Last edited:
I would suggest that when the infection rates drop off we would probably keep the current isolation policy with vunerable people and start opening certain businesses and shops that are vital to the economy while maintaining social distancing..

Do you think it's bizarre that we locked down with 6,500 UK cases and might come back out again with +200,000?
 
I’m not seeing the value in keeping this up any longer to be frank. I’ll apologise now if I upset anyone but I view death quite nonchalantly.
But we’re reaching 20000 deaths which is roughly 0.03% of the population most of which would of died anyway.
I’m thinking of those who will be out at work at the end of this, no money, bills to pay, mortgages, food to eat, shortage of jobs to slip into, High streets decimated.
I’d rather be on my death bed than be struggling like that. And I imagine it’ll be a struggle like no other for some.

Open the doors, quarantine the vulnerable. They’ll be no cure, we don’t even have one for SARS, or MERS.
 
There was a weekly stat on the Beeb a week or so back that made for sobering viewing. Typically, weekly death rate inc. seasonal flu, 10,000. Deaths that week, 16,000.

One Swallow doesn't make a summer, and one week's numbers don't paint an accurate picture, but Jeez, a 60% increase.
The worrying bit is that of those 6000 extra, only about 3000 were attributed to covid19 - so there were about 3000 more non-covid deaths than normal. It begs the question why? Are all the resources being devoted to Covid and therefore "normal problems" falling by the wayside? (Note: I'm not suggesting, but asking)
 
The worrying bit is that of those 6000 extra, only about 3000 were attributed to covid19 - so there were about 3000 more non-covid deaths than normal. It begs the question why? Are all the resources being devoted to Covid and therefore "normal problems" falling by the wayside? (Note: I'm not suggesting, but asking)

Or maybe they were listed based on an underlying condition which got worse due to Covid…?
 
Or maybe they were listed based on an underlying condition which got worse due to Covid…?

Indeed. It was said earlier on here about a 90+ woman dying, now as sad as that may be and any death is always a shock, someone dying in their 90s really shouldn't be attributed to CV19.
 
I’m not seeing the value in keeping this up any longer to be frank. I’ll apologise now if I upset anyone but I view death quite nonchalantly.
But we’re reaching 20000 deaths which is roughly 0.03% of the population most of which would of died anyway.
I’m thinking of those who will be out at work at the end of this, no money, bills to pay, mortgages, food to eat, shortage of jobs to slip into, High streets decimated.
I’d rather be on my death bed than be struggling like that. And I imagine it’ll be a struggle like no other for some.

Open the doors, quarantine the vulnerable. They’ll be no cure, we don’t even have one for SARS, or MERS.
Do you possess the certain knowledge to support your view or is it your gut feeling? You say there wont be a cure, you know that how?
 
No, the second part of your question had no relevance to you asking my age.

In case you've forgot, you asked my age, then you asked a completely different question altogether.
I thought my comment would have indicated my reason to ask the question. A younger person may have the ability to recover from Covid, I had the Impression from your comment you were young and not overly concerned about catching it. Now you have told me your age I can see that's not the case.
 
Top