YourClassLiberal
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#1
36 local authorities in England have recorded a weekly rise in COVID-19 cases
0
reply
black tea
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#2
Report 1 month ago
#2
surprise surprise
1
reply
Miss Maddie
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#3
Report 1 month ago
#3
Nothing to worry about. Cases were always going to rise when the lockdown was eased. There isn't a way around it. What we will see is cases will rise faster in local authorities that were not hit hard during the first compared against ones that were.
0
reply
black tea
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#4
Report 1 month ago
#4
(Original post by Miss Maddie)
What we will see is cases will rise faster in local authorities that were not hit hard during the first compared against ones that were.
probably the other way around
1
reply
Miss Maddie
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#5
Report 1 month ago
#5
(Original post by black tea)
probably the other way around
Why would it be the other way around?

All the evidence available sees areas hit hardest first time around have an easier ride the second time. The vulnerable and weak in the worst hit areas have already contracted the disease and have an element of immunity to it.
0
reply
YourClassLiberal
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#6
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#6
(Original post by Miss Maddie)
Why would it be the other way around?

All the evidence available sees areas hit hardest first time around have an easier ride the second time. The vulnerable and weak in the worst hit areas have already contracted the disease and have an element of immunity to it.
True, but it’s almost certain that a second wave will hit sometime in the Autumn
0
reply
Miss Maddie
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#7
Report 1 month ago
#7
(Original post by YourClassLiberal)
True, but it’s almost certain that a second wave will hit sometime in the Autumn
If there is a second wave it needs to be now. The worst case scenario is having a second wave coinciding with flu season. The disease should be encouraged to spread now.
0
reply
black tea
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#8
Report 1 month ago
#8
(Original post by Miss Maddie)
Why would it be the other way around?

All the evidence available sees areas hit hardest first time around have an easier ride the second time. The vulnerable and weak in the worst hit areas have already contracted the disease and have an element of immunity to it.
Because places like London, where people live closely together and rely on public transport to get about, will always have more cases than than rural areas, for example.
0
reply
Miss Maddie
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#9
Report 1 month ago
#9
(Original post by black tea)
Because places like London, where people live closely together and rely on public transport to get about, will always have more cases than than rural areas, for example.
More cases is not the same as an overwhelming outbreak spreading quickly. In the US, New York has improved and southern states are suffering. In April the reverse was happening.
0
reply
barnetlad
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#10
Report 1 month ago
#10
I understand why numbers have risen, and no surprise. What we should not forget is that people are still dying each day in the U.K. The response in March was too late and many more people have died than would have been the case if inaction had not occurred.
0
reply
black tea
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#11
Report 1 month ago
#11
(Original post by Miss Maddie)
More cases is not the same as an overwhelming outbreak spreading quickly.
Cases will always spread more quickly in places where there are more people
0
reply
Lightning720
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#12
Report 1 month ago
#12
People really need to find the data behind this. It is nowhere near as bad as it sounds. Some of these rises are by just one case.
0
reply
black tea
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#13
Report 1 month ago
#13
(Original post by Lightning720)
It is nowhere near as bad as it sounds.
Thousands of people dying is "nowhere near as bad as it sounds"?
0
reply
Thecrazydoughnut
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#14
Report 1 month ago
#14
(Original post by black tea)
Thousands of people dying is "nowhere near as bad as it sounds"?
Unless you see it yourself it’s hard to be empathetic. I’ve washed dead bodies recently and each time it just gets harder and harder. 😭
0
reply
nexttime
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#15
Report 1 month ago
#15
(Original post by Miss Maddie)
If there is a second wave it needs to be now. The worst case scenario is having a second wave coinciding with flu season. The disease should be encouraged to spread now.
Our best evidence is that in the 4 months we've had significant covid so far, 5-10% of the population has been infected. What number do you want to infect before Autumn exactly?

We'd be better off going into winter with zero cases than aiming for a weak herd immunity of like 15% and big case burden ready to explode in winter conditions. For a disease where lasting immunity isn't even proven.

More cases is not the same as an overwhelming outbreak spreading quickly. In the US, New York has improved and southern states are suffering. In April the reverse was happening.
Its still those states' first wave though - not really comparable.

I agree that London is probably still the most vulnerable place in the UK. Not quite as vulnerable as it was in April, but still got all the poor hygiene factors there.
Last edited by nexttime; 1 month ago
1
reply
Lightning720
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#16
Report 1 month ago
#16
(Original post by black tea)
Thousands of people dying is "nowhere near as bad as it sounds"?
I clearly wasn't talking about the high death toll. I was talking about the "COVID Case Rise" which is the main topic of the thread.
0
reply
Miss Maddie
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#17
Report 1 month ago
#17
(Original post by nexttime)
Our best evidence is that in the 4 months we've had significant covid so far, 5-10% of the population has been infected. What number do you want to infect before Autumn exactly?

We'd be better off going into winter with zero cases than aiming for a weak herd immunity of like 15% and big case burden ready to explode in winter conditions. For a disease where lasting immunity isn't even proven.



Its still those states' first wave though - not really comparable.

I agree that London is probably still the most vulnerable place in the UK. Not quite as vulnerable as it was in April, but still got all the poor hygiene factors there.
I would be encouraging mass gatherings and festivals. I would do away with everything to spread it to as many people as possible. Lockdown to keep cases low will inevitably see a peak (maybe only a mini one) during flu season. You can't suppress cases forever.
0
reply
black tea
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#18
Report 1 month ago
#18
(Original post by Miss Maddie)
I would be encouraging mass gatherings and festivals. I would do away with everything to spread it to as many people as possible. Lockdown to keep cases low will inevitably see a peak (maybe only a mini one) during flu season. You can't suppress cases forever.
So your aim would be to kill as many people as possible
0
reply
Miss Maddie
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#19
Report 1 month ago
#19
(Original post by black tea)
So your aim would be to kill as many people as possible
More people will die if there is a gradual easing and a second peak during flu season.
0
reply
black tea
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#20
Report 1 month ago
#20
(Original post by Miss Maddie)
More people will die if there is a gradual easing and a second peak during flu season.
Intentionally infecting people through mass gatherings will infect and kill more people than social distancing. There is also no proof that people can't get re-infected.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

How do you feel about your grades? Are they...

What I expected (63)
24.23%
Better than expected (55)
21.15%
Worse than expected (142)
54.62%

Watched Threads

View All