1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

WHY ARE WE DOING THIS ?

Discussion in 'Education news' started by ACOYEAR8, Jun 3, 2020.

  1. ridleyrumpus

    ridleyrumpus Star commenter

    Whoa there.

    The scientists job is to make no such decisions or recommendations. They present the modelling for different scenarios and it is the politicians that make decisions on level of risk etc that they are prepared to accept.

    I am sick of the scientists being bet up by the government, and you are repeating it.

    Scientists do not make the decisions.
     
  2. ridleyrumpus

    ridleyrumpus Star commenter

    You don't know what is meant by clinically vulnerable but are happy to opine that restrictions are not needed? Why should I take you seriously?

    What makes you think that teachers (and support staff) are more vulnerable?

    Where do you get the 1/1000 from?

    "I do know that people over 90 have survived"

    Well that's all right then, let's start Covid parties in those care homes straight away, we'll have herd immunity in there in no time.

    I quite agree that we need to find a way of opening up, but just ignoring the problem and hoping it will go away is a very dangerous game both re lives and the economy.
     
  3. bessiesmith2

    bessiesmith2 New commenter

    I was presuming this might be your risk of dying before you catch the virus - as in the probability of catching it AND the subsequent probability of dying from it. Once you have caught it, then obviously your risk of dying increases significantly.
     
  4. Jonntyboy

    Jonntyboy Lead commenter

    All good points, very clearly expressed. Thank you.
     
  5. PeterQuint

    PeterQuint Lead commenter

    Some talk here of isolating more vulnerable people and letting the rest get on with it.

    Time and time again, when asked about risk (for example) to BAME people, the governments chief scientist and medical officer point out that age is by far the biggest factor.

    And yet we’re re-opening workplaces to 18 year olds and 65 year olds alike. That’s madness.

    The statistics show clearly - if you catch the virus in your 50s you’re 20 times more likely to die than someone in their 20s.

    It’s absolutely crazy that this isn’t being taken into account, either in society in general, or with school staff in particular.

    For example, if schools only require 20% of staff back to teach Year 10s, those over a certain age should be told to work from home.
     
  6. Jonntyboy

    Jonntyboy Lead commenter

    Nor in mine.
     
    agathamorse likes this.
  7. Jonntyboy

    Jonntyboy Lead commenter

    I think that's what is happening. It is with us anyway.
     
    PeterQuint likes this.
  8. Jonntyboy

    Jonntyboy Lead commenter

    I live in England: the world is as it is and I don't find it scary. I think it's rather wonderful actually!

    Others can answer your question far better than I can. Though some of the stories below may be journalistically exaggerated, i think the studies will make the point adequately.

    https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/05/unintended-consequences-of-the-lockdown.php

    https://www.lifenews.com/2020/05/15...ay-kill-almost-as-many-people-as-coronavirus/

    https://summit.news/2020/05/08/1-4-...rom-untreated-tb-due-to-coronavirus-lockdown/

    https://www.itv.com/news/2020-04-22...-diagnosis-oncologist-on-coronavirus-dilemma/

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-led-increase-suicides-police-chiefs-say.html

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-52620321

    https://www.theguardian.com/society...-at-home-during-covid-19-pandemic-uk-analysis
     
  9. Jonntyboy

    Jonntyboy Lead commenter

    Hi. Not sure if it's my English that is at fault or yours, but as far as I can see the two phrases I quoted say much the same thing. What have I missed?
     
  10. Jonntyboy

    Jonntyboy Lead commenter

    About 66,000,000 people in the UK. About 50,000 deaths. I used a calculator! But I'm not good at maths or manipulating numbers so I could have got it wrong...
     
  11. ridleyrumpus

    ridleyrumpus Star commenter

    Nope, non of them showed any support for your statement that 40,000+ YOUNG people will die from restrictions.

    Hyperbole.
     
  12. ridleyrumpus

    ridleyrumpus Star commenter

    Comprehension perhaps is lacking.

    One statement said we need to get out of lockdown restrictions soon and get the economy running, yours added because more young people will die if we don't.

    There are many reasons to get the economy running but your assertion that you both of you think that unless we do thousands will die is not bourne out from the comments made.
     
  13. ridleyrumpus

    ridleyrumpus Star commenter

    It is a very strange way of calculating risk due to disease.

    Ebola kills about 1 in 2 of those that catch it.

    If there was an outbreak that infected 200 and killed 100 you could say using your calc that the chance of dying from it is 100/7,500,000,000 = 0.00000001% so we shouldn't worry about it.

    Not sure I agree with you there.
     
    jiin71 likes this.
  14. Jonntyboy

    Jonntyboy Lead commenter

    Sorry. I assumed that within the many - even millions - that they assess as eventually dying from all the other causes due to the lockdown there would be many people much younger than the over 70s that make up the vast majority of those who are currently dying of Covid.

    You clearly know better, and are also adept at manufacturing straws at which to clutch, so I won't waste time dissenting further.
     
  15. Jonntyboy

    Jonntyboy Lead commenter

    I'm not sure why you would worry about a 0.00000001% chance of dying from something.

    I wouldn't!
     
  16. Jonntyboy

    Jonntyboy Lead commenter

    Fair point. It should, ultimately, be our elected reps who decide, based on advice and options provided.

    But it doesn't alter my assertion that at some point there has to ben assessment of the risk from the virus as against the risk of the lockdown and a decision based on that. We can't live in a no risk society.
     
  17. ridleyrumpus

    ridleyrumpus Star commenter

    Or lets let it another way.

    Say 1 person dies by running across a motorway it does not follow that the chances of dying by running across a motorway in the UK are 1/66,000,000. Or 0.000001%
     
  18. ridleyrumpus

    ridleyrumpus Star commenter

    As you said, you're not that good with numbers might I suggest that you add logic to that.
     
  19. ridleyrumpus

    ridleyrumpus Star commenter

    Of course there has to be, but that is a political decision.
     
  20. ridleyrumpus

    ridleyrumpus Star commenter

    So we have gone from 40,000 young people to possibly millions dying as a result of lockdown.

    Are you just plucking these numbers out of thin air?

    I have asked for evidence for your assertions, you haven't been able to, you are now saying I am clutching at straws. Might I suggest that you are now using a straw man argument?
     

Share This Page