The Lemon Fool

Back to the OP, the key question seems to be "is it better to get infected or avoid being infected?"
I'm pretty sure it's better to avoid infection!

9873210 wrote:

dealtn wrote:
Ultimately it is a political, or societal, issue. How many people (and of what age etc.) is it acceptable to have dying of measles, and Covid "normally"? What is the acceptable trade-off in death, long-illness, suffering etc. against the "necessary" impositions on individuals and society in eradicating it? That question, as applied to measles, didn't really have much visibility, and certainly not among the general public, over much of the last 50 years in the UK. Those arguments are certainly being played out publicly with respect to Covid, if not other diseases, now. Its novelty probably being the main reason, coupled with a large amount of ignorance about both it and risk generally, not aided by the media I would suggest.

While that may be ultimately true it is not currently true.

Even if we have clear answers to "How many people is it acceptable to have dying of Covid?" etc. we do not know what measures to put in place that will have that outcome. Until we know more about Covid it's a rhetorical question that cannot guide policy.

When we learn enough to go from desired results to desired policy we can consider Covid to be endemic and treat it like measles or cholera, by introducing permanent changes to our behaviour such as not dumping chamber pots in the street.

I agree. Plus, at this point, I think measles seems a strangely inappropriate comparison with COVID.

Hallucigenia wrote:

dealtn wrote:Ultimately it is a political, or societal, issue. How many people (and of what age etc.) is it acceptable to have dying of measles, and Covid "normally"? What is the acceptable trade-off in death, long-illness, suffering etc.

Well that's something we have an established framework for - the UK taxpayer (via NICE) is prepared to pay around £25k for medical treatments that give one quality-adjusted life year (QALY) - it's explained in this article :

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-28983924

So if you say life expectancy is 80 then NICE would be prepared to pay up to 25k * (80-10) = £1,750k for a treatment that saved the life of a 10 year-old (with no after-effects).

They would pay £175k to save that 10yo from a disease that caused a 10% disability.

But they would only pay £25k to save a 79-year-old from death.

It's more complicated than that, but you get the general idea - "the system" "cares" far more about children, and "cares" more about preventing even mild disabilities in kids than in keeping oldies alive.

An eloquent explanation of why the NHS is not the friend of those of us who are getting on and want the best possible healthcare.

Update:

This afternoon the two classes from the affected school year were closed until next week. Around 25 people infected in the last week from the two classes.

Apparently it required various meetings and approval from head teacher, local authorities, bureaucrats and Public Health England, hence the multiple days of delays before the necessary action was taken.

A significant proportion of parents had already begun a rebellion and were refusing to send their child to school, so only around half of the children who were still negative were actually in school.

XFool wrote:

9873210 wrote:

dealtn wrote:
Ultimately it is a political, or societal, issue. How many people (and of what age etc.) is it acceptable to have dying of measles, and Covid "normally"? What is the acceptable trade-off in death, long-illness, suffering etc. against the "necessary" impositions on individuals and society in eradicating it? That question, as applied to measles, didn't really have much visibility, and certainly not among the general public, over much of the last 50 years in the UK. Those arguments are certainly being played out publicly with respect to Covid, if not other diseases, now. Its novelty probably being the main reason, coupled with a large amount of ignorance about both it and risk generally, not aided by the media I would suggest.

While that may be ultimately true it is not currently true.

Even if we have clear answers to "How many people is it acceptable to have dying of Covid?" etc. we do not know what measures to put in place that will have that outcome. Until we know more about Covid it's a rhetorical question that cannot guide policy.

When we learn enough to go from desired results to desired policy we can consider Covid to be endemic and treat it like measles or cholera, by introducing permanent changes to our behaviour such as not dumping chamber pots in the street.

I agree. Plus, at this point, I think measles seems a strangely inappropriate comparison with COVID.

But measles is infectious, so here is a your chance, finally, to express your argument about why being infectious alone isn't sufficient in whatever it is that you have been trying to get across these lest few days.

dealtn wrote:

XFool wrote:I agree. Plus, at this point, I think measles seems a strangely inappropriate comparison with COVID.

But measles is infectious, so here is a your chance, finally, to express your argument about why being infectious alone isn't sufficient in whatever it is that you have been trying to get across these lest few days.

When was the measles global pandemic announced? I didn't get the memo.

XFool wrote:

dealtn wrote:

XFool wrote:I agree. Plus, at this point, I think measles seems a strangely inappropriate comparison with COVID.

But measles is infectious, so here is a your chance, finally, to express your argument about why being infectious alone isn't sufficient in whatever it is that you have been trying to get across these lest few days.

When was the measles global pandemic announced? I didn't get the memo.

If it were novel
If measles arrived for the first time now
We'd still be in the mad panic stage because of its exceptional R0 (and infectiousness - most of the horror stories from the start of this pandemic are close to true for measles) and its two week incubation period (I think it's around that)
- I'm not sure we'd have picked up yet on just how commonly it left kids with brain damage or increased their mortality odds for the next few years of life

-sd

dealtn wrote:How many deaths are there now in your industry compared to the 30 before the mandatory Corgi. Genuine question.

The figures were very 'lumpy' last time I had a look, but they remain in a similar range as before the (supposed) £300m a year gas installer registration scheme was set up. It appears to have made little discernible difference, sadly. But I doubt it will ever be scrapped as no parliament would ever support what would probably be spun as "a reduction in gas safety".

The problem is two-fold in my opinion. Arrogant incompetents who have no regard for the law and who carry out gas work regardless, and absence of any meaningful enforcement of the law prior to a 'gas incident' occurring or a consumer complaint arising.

XFool wrote:

dealtn wrote:

XFool wrote:I agree. Plus, at this point, I think measles seems a strangely inappropriate comparison with COVID.

But measles is infectious, so here is a your chance, finally, to express your argument about why being infectious alone isn't sufficient in whatever it is that you have been trying to get across these lest few days.

When was the measles global pandemic announced? I didn't get the memo.

I'm not trivialising this, nor being emotional. I don't understand why you use this deflection technique.

Measles is far from being a global pandemic at the moment, which is obviously a good thing. As I have expressed I think we are on a pathway where Covid will end where measles sits currently. I think we would all be glad if that turns out to be true.

However you consistently argue/reply "it's infectious" or its "global" or it's "pandemic" without any explanation as to what that means to your argument, or more bluntly what you are actually arguing. Whenever you are given the opportunity to expand on these bald facts (to which we all agree) you choose not to explain, just repeat.

Try "it's X, therefore Y", not just "it's X", "it's X" .... "it's X", "it's obvious" and you might find we actually agree with each other!

servodude wrote:

XFool wrote:

dealtn wrote:But measles is infectious, so here is a your chance, finally, to express your argument about why being infectious alone isn't sufficient in whatever it is that you have been trying to get across these lest few days.

When was the measles global pandemic announced? I didn't get the memo.

If it were novel
If measles arrived for the first time now
We'd still be in the mad panic stage because of its exceptional R0 (and infectiousness - most of the horror stories from the start of this pandemic are close to true for measles) and its two week incubation period (I think it's around that)
- I'm not sure we'd have picked up yet on just how commonly it left kids with brain damage or increased their mortality odds for the next few years of life

All that, of course, plus: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Measles_vaccine

To me, in the middle of a global pandemic of a novel infectious virus (that's why it's pandemic...), the significance of "it's infectious" is an example of the right bleedin' obvious.

What is truly remarkable is finding out that, to some proportion of the population, it apparently isn't: "Cor! They didn't shut the pubs in the war."

Mike4 wrote:

dealtn wrote:How many deaths are there now in your industry compared to the 30 before the mandatory Corgi. Genuine question.

The figures were very 'lumpy' last time I had a look, but they remain in a similar range as before the (supposed) £300m a year gas installer registration scheme was set up. It appears to have made little discernible difference, sadly. But I doubt it will ever be scrapped as no parliament would ever support what would probably be spun as "a reduction in gas safety".

The problem is two-fold in my opinion. Arrogant incompetents who have no regard for the law and who carry out gas work regardless, and absence of any meaningful enforcement of the law prior to a 'gas incident' occurring or a consumer complaint arising.

Thank you.

dealtn wrote:

XFool wrote:

dealtn wrote:But measles is infectious, so here is a your chance, finally, to express your argument about why being infectious alone isn't sufficient in whatever it is that you have been trying to get across these lest few days.

When was the measles global pandemic announced? I didn't get the memo.

I'm not trivialising this, nor being emotional. I don't understand why you use this deflection technique.

Yeah... I keep "deflecting" to reality. Really bad habit, must try to get over it. It's obviously so very unsuited to present day discourse and politics.

dealtn wrote:Measles is far from being a global pandemic at the moment, which is obviously a good thing.

Really? So...

dealtn wrote: As I have expressed I think we are on a pathway where Covid will end where measles sits currently. I think we would all be glad if that turns out to be true.

Right, yes.

dealtn wrote:However you consistently argue/reply "it's infectious" or its "global" or it's "pandemic" without any explanation as to what that means to your argument, or more bluntly what you are actually arguing. Whenever you are given the opportunity to expand on these bald facts (to which we all agree) you choose not to explain, just repeat.

Try "it's X, therefore Y", not just "it's X", "it's X" .... "it's X", "it's obvious" and you might find we actually agree with each other!

Don't hit me with them formal logic waves this early in the morning.

XFool wrote:

dealtn wrote:

XFool wrote:When was the measles global pandemic announced? I didn't get the memo.

I'm not trivialising this, nor being emotional. I don't understand why you use this deflection technique.

Yeah... I keep "deflecting" to reality. Really bad habit, must try to get over it. It's obviously so very unsuited to present day discourse and politics.

Reality is "I didn't get the memo"? I guess that's literally true, but doesn't really advance any debate does it? I didn't get a memo either. Did anyone?

dealtn wrote:Reality is "I didn't get the memo"? I guess that's literally true, but doesn't really advance any debate does it? I didn't get a memo either. Did anyone?

Some of us did*, with COVID. Not all though, apparently.


* But not "literally".