Coronavirus UK: Only 10% parents happy to send kids back to school

First topic message reminder :

Most parents do not want their children to return to school as soon as the coronavirus lockdown is ended, with some happy to wait as long as 18 months, a survey has today revealed.

Just one in ten parents said they would happily send their children back to school as soon as the lockdown ends, results from the survey suggests.

A quarter of parents said the would feel comfortable with a September return date if it was confirmed now, while 7 per cent favoured July, according to data from the survey by charity Parentkind.

One in ten parents said they would only be happy to send their children back when staff and pupils had been vaccinated against Covid-19 - even if this took up to 18 months.

The figures come as union bosses today warned that teachers in fear of catching coronavirus are being asked to come back to schools, including for face-to-face meetings, to prepare for the return of students.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8296605/Teachers-risk-catching-coronavirus-asked-return-schools-prepare-reopening.html

phil wrote:For those who like more detail up to date stats on deaths by age in hospital, gender, ethnicity here. 95% of those who have died have pre existing medical conditions.

Most of the preexisting conditions you cite are stubbed toes and acid reflux. In order for this statistic to be relevant, it has to interact somehow with coronavirus, in the way it exacerbates the problem. It must be causally connected to be a 'qualified' condition.

Otherwise, one could have a bad haircut preexist death, and it would suffice.

Syl wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:


Under 45s is around 350 deaths, majority with underlying health issues... If you include those up to 50 too then I think it's 3000 deaths... Again vast majority had underlying health issues too...

Have you got any recent links to support those figures Tommy.
Medics and care workers alone have suffered quite a lot of deaths, and presumably many of them are not in the vulnerable groups.

"...ONS figures released this week show that as of April 24, only 322 people under the age of 45 had died from coronavirus in the UK..."


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-8290353/ALEX-BRUMMER-Madness-45s-work-economy-burns.html

eddie wrote:Didge, would you send a huge part of your heart into the world knowing that you may be putting them at risk?
Screw the statistics. Even scientists don’t have an angle on this.

I’ll do what I think is right.

She’s eight. She will miss two months of school. I’m fine with that. I homeschool her.

So you think it's ok for you and those precious to you to be able to stay in a nice comfortable safe little cocoon bubble... and maybe also thinking its right for you and yours to get paid a load of free money to be able to do this, and to be able to support your privileged existence... while also expecting all the "other" people to have to go to work, not just so they can earn the money they need to live, but because they also have to do the work needed so that you can have all the food/water/electricity/gas/TV/internet/safety/security/services etc that you think you deserve, without having to contribute in any way for the provision of anything in this new way of life that you are a net beneficiary of...!!!???

I don't mean to sound harsh... But...

Syl wrote:

Maddog wrote:


Brits went to work under far worse conditions because the survival of the nation wasn't just fought for on the battlefield.


Tally Ho chaps!!

I wonder why he was delivering milk instead of fighting for his country?

Maybe he was a coward.

eddie wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Who runs most of your schools?

Everyone. The teachers union have a big say. It’s not America dude.

OK, then I guess it doesn't matter what Boris wants. Problem solved. Keep the kids home until the teachers say it's OK.

Tommy Monk wrote:So you think it's ok for you and those precious to you to be able to stay in a nice comfortable safe little cocoon bubble... and maybe also thinking its right for you and yours to get paid a load of free money to be able to do this, and to be able to support your privileged existence... while also expecting all the "other" people to have to go to work, not just so they can earn the money they need to live, but because they also have to do the work needed so that you can have all the food/water/electricity/gas/TV
/internet/safety/security/services etc that you think you deserve, without having to contribute in any way for the provision of anything in this new way of life that you are a net beneficiary of...!!!???

Tom, it’s necessary for survival. Not that it is ok, but that it simply isn't an equity issue. The virus doesn't single out any one person, so the issue is survival, not equities. If everyone goes out, and gets sick, and we all then have to go home and leave our jobs, the economy collapses.

If it were an equitable issue, you would hurl those accusations up to the fat capitalists who are waiting the virus out while enjoying their 250-foot yacht. That’s inequity.

Maddog wrote:

Syl wrote:

Maddog wrote:


Brits went to work under far worse conditions because the survival of the nation wasn't just fought for on the battlefield.


Tally Ho chaps!!

I wonder why he was delivering milk instead of fighting for his country?

Maybe he was a coward.

and maybe he didnt pass the medical
or his work was deemed essential
dont judge people by your own standards

Victorismyhero wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Maybe he was a coward.

and maybe he didnt pass the medical
or his work was deemed essential
dont judge people by your own standards

I was being sarcastic.

Why can't Brits pick up on that?

I mean he was walking around where bombs had just been falling.

He's no coward.

Ben Reilly wrote:

eddie wrote:Perhaps I’m being overly cautious but rather that than have her put at risk.

Night mate. Speak soon.

I remember the time she was so worried that a snail in the road was going to be crushed that she calmly picked it up, carried it over to a bush, and gently set it down -- and then ran screaming into the house to wash her hands.

She's a really special kid. Too special to take chances with.

Good for you two....stick to your guns.

Statistics may show that only 10 or 20 children have died from the virus in the UK.....that's 10 or 20 little lives lost needlessly, and 10 or 20 families, mums, dads, nans, grandads, etc, etc, that will never be the same again.

Tommy Monk wrote:

eddie wrote:Didge, would you send a huge part of your heart into the world knowing that you may be putting them at risk?
Screw the statistics. Even scientists don’t have an angle on this.

I’ll do what I think is right.

She’s eight. She will miss two months of school. I’m fine with that. I homeschool her.

So you think it's ok for you and those precious to you to be able to stay in a nice comfortable safe little cocoon bubble... and maybe also thinking its right for you and yours to get paid a load of free money to be able to do this, and to be able to support your privileged existence...  while also expecting all the "other" people to have to go to work, not just so they can earn the money they need to live, but because they also have to do the work needed so that you can have all the food/water/electricity/gas/TV/internet/safety/security/services etc that you think you deserve, without having to contribute in any way for the provision of anything in this new way of life that you are a net beneficiary of...!!!???

What the actual fuck has that got to do with my daughter going to school???

Maddog wrote:

Victorismyhero wrote:

and maybe he didnt pass the medical
or his work was deemed essential
dont judge people by your own standards

I was being sarcastic.

Why can't Brits pick up on that?

I mean he was walking around where bombs had just been falling.

He's no coward.

If you've gotta explain your sarcasm, it isn't working, is it?

Tommy, that sounds like it's really out of line. You better be able to explain that you're not saying that we only say that we want to keep our girl out of school because we want to lay around the house and get free money.

This has fucked up our visa and set us back to square one. This has fucked up our girl's education and social life.

So you better not be saying that we only want her not to go back to school because we want the lockdown to continue, because we're that fucking lazy and selfish.

Tommy Monk wrote:

Syl wrote:

Have you got any recent links to support those figures Tommy.
Medics and care workers alone have suffered quite a lot of deaths, and presumably many  of them are not in the vulnerable groups.

"...ONS figures released this week show that as of April 24, only 322 people under the age of 45 had died from coronavirus in the UK..."


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-8290353/ALEX-BRUMMER-Madness-45s-work-economy-burns.html

Ok, thanks.

Another 13.000 deaths have happened in the UK since that chart was published, obviosly more youngsters have died since then, and I didn't see where it stated the vast majority had underlying health issues......not that that would make the deaths easier to bare.

Maddog wrote:

Victorismyhero wrote:

and maybe he didnt pass the medical
or his work was deemed essential
dont judge people by your own standards

I was being sarcastic.

Why can't Brits pick up on that?

I mean he was walking around where bombs had just been falling.

He's no coward.

Oooops, it was me who  started with the sarcasm, no one picked up on it.....and you got the blame.

eddie wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:

eddie wrote:Didge, would you send a huge part of your heart into the world knowing that you may be putting them at risk?
Screw the statistics. Even scientists don’t have an angle on this.

I’ll do what I think is right.

She’s eight. She will miss two months of school. I’m fine with that. I homeschool her.

So you think it's ok for you and those precious to you to be able to stay in a nice comfortable safe little cocoon bubble... and maybe also thinking its right for you and yours to get paid a load of free money to be able to do this, and to be able to support your privileged existence...  while also expecting all the "other" people to have to go to work, not just so they can earn the money they need to live, but because they also have to do the work needed so that you can have all the food/water/electricity/gas/TV/internet/safety/security/services etc that you think you deserve, without having to contribute in any way for the provision of anything in this new way of life that you are a net beneficiary of...!!!???

What the actual fuck has that got to do with my daughter going to school???

Seriously. In the first instance, how has my wishing to keep my daughter safe got to do with anything that you said?

Secondly, do you actually fucking think that this hasn’t hampered my life? The visa for my husband?

I’m waiting for you to give me the answers to both these questions Tommy.

Me too, Tommy.

Syl wrote:

Maddog wrote:

I was being sarcastic.

Why can't Brits pick up on that?

I mean he was walking around where bombs had just been falling.

He's no coward.

Oooops, it was me who  started with the sarcasm, no one picked up on it.....and you got the blame.

Put a winky or smirky face after and I will pick up on it.

Maddog wrote:

Syl wrote:
Oooops, it was me who  started with the sarcasm, no one picked up on it.....and you got the blame.

Put a winky or smirky face after and I will pick up on it.

Why cant Americans pick up on English humour without an obvious clue?

Syl wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Put a winky or smirky face after and I will pick up on it.

Why cant Americans pick up on English humour without an obvious clue?

Because we can't see your droll expressions over the internet.

Original Quill wrote:

phil wrote:For those who like more detail up to date stats on deaths by age in hospital, gender, ethnicity here. 95% of those who have died have pre existing medical conditions.

Most of the preexisting conditions you cite are stubbed toes and acid reflux.  In order for this statistic to be relevant, it has to interact somehow with coronavirus, in the way it exacerbates the problem.  It must be causally connected to be a 'qualified' condition.

Otherwise, one could have a bad haircut preexist death, and it would suffice.

Well considering those conditions are not listed as vulnerable with this virus and you are in fact clearly lying by producing no evidence for this claim

Its why I tend to ignore you these days

The NHS has been very clear on exactly what conditions are vulnerable and these stats come from the NHS

Thorin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Most of the preexisting conditions you cite are stubbed toes and acid reflux.  In order for this statistic to be relevant, it has to interact somehow with coronavirus, in the way it exacerbates the problem.  It must be causally connected to be a 'qualified' condition.

Otherwise, one could have a bad haircut preexist death, and it would suffice.

Well considering those conditions are not listed as vulnerable with this virus and you are in fact clearly lying by producing no evidence for this claim

Its why I tend to ignore you these days

The NHS has been very clear on exactly what conditions are vulnerable and these stats come from the NHS

You got nothing. Bye-bye.

Original Quill wrote:

Thorin wrote:



Well considering those conditions are not listed as vulnerable with this virus and you are in fact clearly lying by producing no evidence for this claim

Its why I tend to ignore you these days

The NHS has been very clear on exactly what conditions are vulnerable and these stats come from the NHS

You got nothing.  Bye-bye.

So no citation for your false claim then

No surprise there then

Class sizes should be split in half with a 15 pupil limit and corridors should operate a “one way” system, the Government’s new coronavirus guidance for schools says.

When primary schools begin their phased reopening next month, the beginning and end of the day will be staggered to avoid congestion at the gates, according to advice published on Monday by the Department for Education.

Children will be expected to spend their break times and lunch with the other children in their class, to ensure that they are only mixing within their group of 15 pupils plus their teacher.

If a child displays Covid-19 symptoms and tests positive, the rest of their class as well as their teacher would need to self-isolate and they would all be offered free tests.

Headteachers will be encouraged to make the most of the space in their school building to accommodate the smaller class sizes, by holding lessons in sports halls, assembly halls and libraries.

The Government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) said it has a “high degree of confidence” that coronavirus is less severe for children than it is for adults. The group has a “moderately high degree of confidence” that children under the age of 11 are less susceptible to catching it.


http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/coronavirus/school-classes-to-have-15-pupil-limit-governments-new-coronavirus-guidance-says/ar-BB13VZ1l?li=BBoPWjQ&ocid=iehp

eddie wrote:

eddie wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:

eddie wrote:Didge, would you send a huge part of your heart into the world knowing that you may be putting them at risk?
Screw the statistics. Even scientists don’t have an angle on this.

I’ll do what I think is right.

She’s eight. She will miss two months of school. I’m fine with that. I homeschool her.

So you think it's ok for you and those precious to you to be able to stay in a nice comfortable safe little cocoon bubble... and maybe also thinking its right for you and yours to get paid a load of free money to be able to do this, and to be able to support your privileged existence...  while also expecting all the "other" people to have to go to work, not just so they can earn the money they need to live, but because they also have to do the work needed so that you can have all the food/water/electricity/gas/TV/internet/safety/security/services etc that you think you deserve, without having to contribute in any way for the provision of anything in this new way of life that you are a net beneficiary of...!!!???

What the actual fuck has that got to do with my daughter going to school???

Seriously. In the first instance, how has my wishing to keep my daughter safe got to do with anything that you said?

Secondly, do you actually fucking think that this hasn’t hampered my life? The visa for my husband?

I’m waiting for you to give me the answers to both these questions Tommy.

Tommy????

I think people need to get a grip a little bit...


Most of us have got much more chance of being killed in a road accudent every year than dying from covid19... And that has never stopped us going out and about, working, living life outside etc...


And you've got twice as much chance dying in an accident at home than you have outside in a road accident!!!


We can't carry on with taxpayers funding some to sit at home having what is essentially a nice long paid holiday staycation, scared to step outside the front doir... While everyone else is expected to just carry on going to work as usual, to have to earn their money to live and eat etc, and wondering why others are getting a nice easy ride being govt funding to sit at home doing fuck all...


Seems "we are all equal... but some are more equal than others"...!


We know that under 50s with no underlying health cobditions account for a very very small fraction of the deaths from covid19... And that the amount of deaths in total is a very small fraction of the real likely number of cases so far... And we know that the numbers for even younger people and children is miniscule...


And as I said above... Many more times likely to die from a road accident... And even twice as likely to die from an accident at home than of an accident outside...

Tommy Monk wrote:


I think people need to get a grip a little bit...


Most of us have got much more chance of being killed in a road accudent every year than dying from covid19... And that has never stopped us going out and about, working, living life outside etc...


And you've got twice as much chance dying in an accident at home than you have outside in a road accident!!!


We can't carry on with taxpayers funding some to sit at home having what is essentially a nice long paid holiday staycation, scared to step outside the front doir... While everyone else is expected to just carry on going to work as usual, to have to earn their money to live and eat etc, and wondering why others are getting a nice easy ride being govt funding to sit at home doing fuck all...


Seems "we are all equal... but some are more equal than others"...!


We know that under 50s with no underlying health cobditions account for a very very small fraction of the deaths from covid19... And that the amount of deaths in total is a very small fraction of the real likely number of cases so far... And we know that the numbers for even younger people and children is miniscule...


And as I said above... Many more times likely to die from a road accident... And even twice as likely to die from an accident at home than of an accident outside...

Agreed, the fear is way out of line in relation to the risk. We accept risk in our lives daily, yet trudge on.

Sorta reminds me of tornados in Texas. If they have been part of your life forever, you respect them, realize they can kill you, but you dont drop everything and dive in the closet everytime they issue a warning. Most of us dont even do that when the sirens go off. We just pay more attention.

Now a transplant from say the UK may be running for cover with a tornado warning. That's because it's a new risk to them and they haven't had time to adapt.

I bet if we took someone out of the jungles of Borneo and put them on a jet they would be terrified. Yet most of us will board a winged metal tube that flies 600 mph without batting an eye. The fear of the new and unknown is fairly strong and probably helped many of our ancestors survive.

Up to 1 May 2020, there were 33,408 deaths registered in England and Wales involving the coronavirus (COVID-19) (19,130 men and 14,278 women). The majority of deaths involving COVID-19 have been among people aged 65 years and over (29,495 out of 33,408), with 45% (13,214) of these occurring in the over-85 age group.

Yesterday (Monday) the US death toll due to Covid-19 passed 81,000. That's 81,000 souls that have died needlessly owing to hostility and the absence of leadership in the White House

In addition, coronavirus has been linked to Inflamatory Syndrome (IS) in children, and Kawasaki disease.

Kawasaki disease is an illness in children that is characterized by high fever of at least five days' duration, together with at least four of five symptoms: (1) inflammation with reddening of the whites (conjunctivae) of the eyes (conjunctivitis) without pus; (2) redness or swelling of the feet or hands, or generalized skin peeling; (3) rash; (4) lymph node swelling in the neck; (5) cracking, inflamed lips or throat, or red "strawberry" tongue

Tommy Monk wrote:


Up to 1 May 2020, there were 33,408 deaths registered in England and Wales involving the coronavirus (COVID-19) (19,130 men and 14,278 women). The majority of deaths involving COVID-19 have been among people aged 65 years and over (29,495 out of 33,408), with 45% (13,214) of these occurring in the over-85 age group.

Well that's touching 4000 deaths of younger people Tommy, not 322 as you mentioned before.

You also said people are more likely to die in a car accident....on average in the UK 5 people a day die in RTA's.
Coronavirus is many killing hundreds a day.

Syl... Age ranges are key to the figures I gave...


Under 65s is about 4000... Under 45s is about 350...


And this virus has been going round in UK since mid December...


Road deaths around 3000 a year...


Every year across the UK, there are approximately 6,000 deaths as a result of home accidents.

Syl wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:


Up to 1 May 2020, there were 33,408 deaths registered in England and Wales involving the coronavirus (COVID-19) (19,130 men and 14,278 women). The majority of deaths involving COVID-19 have been among people aged 65 years and over (29,495 out of 33,408), with 45% (13,214) of these occurring in the over-85 age group.

Well that's touching 4000 deaths of younger people Tommy, not 322 as you mentioned before.

You also said people are more likely to die in a car accident....on average in the UK 5 people a day die in RTA's.
Coronavirus is many killing hundreds a day.

Younger?

Under 1  there is no deaths recorded
1-14 years there is 2 deaths recorded
15-44 there was 382 deaths recorded

The majority number you are counting as younger Syl is the 44-65 bracket. Where there has been 3,529 deaths

Its certainly younger than 65, but not what people would class as younger people per say. Where again 95% had underlining health conditions

Based on the update in figures, Tommy is again spot on with his firgures

Those numbers also shows the risk to school children is extremely low

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/articles/coronaviruscovid19roundup/2020-03-26

Thank you Didge!

Tommy Monk wrote:



Thank you Didge!

You are welcome Tommy

Tommy Monk wrote:


I think people need to get a grip a little bit...


Most of us have got much more chance of being killed in a road accudent every year than dying from covid19... And that has never stopped us going out and about, working, living life outside etc...


And you've got twice as much chance dying in an accident at home than you have outside in a road accident!!!


We can't carry on with taxpayers funding some to sit at home having what is essentially a nice long paid holiday staycation, scared to step outside the front doir... While everyone else is expected to just carry on going to work as usual, to have to earn their money to live and eat etc, and wondering why others are getting a nice easy ride being govt funding to sit at home doing fuck all...


Seems "we are all equal... but some are more equal than others"...!


We know that under 50s with no underlying health cobditions account for a very very small fraction of the deaths from covid19... And that the amount of deaths in total is a very small fraction of the real likely number of cases so far... And we know that the numbers for even younger people and children is miniscule...


And as I said above... Many more times likely to die from a road accident... And even twice as likely to die from an accident at home than of an accident outside...

I see you haven't answered mine and eddie's questions.

Let's be honest. Children should be taken by the state at birth and raised in homes managed by government professionals. It's too risky to leave them with amateurs that will let them run amok.

It's a dangerous world out there.

Tommy Monk wrote:


Syl... Age ranges are key to the figures I gave...


Under 65s is about 4000... Under 45s is about 350...


And this virus has been going round in UK since mid December...


Road deaths around 3000 a year...


Every year across the UK, there are approximately 6,000 deaths as a result of home accidents.

I'm not arguing the fact that older people are more vulnerable and far more likely to die of the virus, just questioning your earlier comments that the younger people are almost untouched by it...every death is a tragedy.

So RTA deaths and home accidental deaths amount to 9000 annually, this virus has killed over 40000 in 3 months.
I cant understand why you think people are over reacting to be wary of going back to work and sending their kids back to school.

Maddog wrote:Let's be honest. Children should be taken by the state at  birth and raised in homes managed by government professionals.  It's too risky to leave them with amateurs that will let them run amok.

It's a dangerous world out there.  

Syl wrote:

Maddog wrote:Let's be honest. Children should be taken by the state at  birth and raised in homes managed by government professionals.  It's too risky to leave them with amateurs that will let them run amok.

It's a dangerous world out there.  

Just trying to keep the children safe!!

Maddog wrote:

Syl wrote:

Just trying to keep the children safe!!

Good, make sure you keep em off school till the infection rate is far lower then.

Maddog wrote:Let's be honest. Children should be taken by the state at birth and raised in homes managed by government professionals. It's too risky to leave them with amateurs that will let them run amok.

It's a dangerous world out there.

Nonsense. The 'natural' parents should raise children. We don't say the government should create artificial potatoes or celery; we rely on the natural means of planting and working with nature. So it is with parenting.

But Healthcare depends on science and technology, not natural means. It is a craft, not an innate process. Moreover, healthcare has undergone the same changes as the industrial revolution: all the tooling (technology) is expensive. There are two different paths, and so there should be two different processes for fulfilling the mission.

Healthcare should be socialized, as with all things near and dear to our hearts. We don't defend ourselves with each person hiring his or her own soldiers. We maintain a military. We should not have to defend our bodies with each person hiring his or her own physicians/nurses, etc.

Syl wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:


Syl... Age ranges are key to the figures I gave...


Under 65s is about 4000... Under 45s is about 350...


And this virus has been going round in UK since mid December...


Road deaths around 3000 a year...


Every year across the UK, there are approximately 6,000 deaths as a result of home accidents.

I'm not arguing the fact that older people are more vulnerable and far more likely to die of the virus, just questioning your earlier comments that the younger people are almost untouched by it...every death is a tragedy.

So RTA deaths and home accidental deaths amount to 9000 annually, this virus has killed over 40000 in 3 months.
I cant understand why you think people are over reacting to be wary of going back to work and sending their kids back to school.

The overwhelming vast majority of working people, and all school children, are under 50... and those of this age category who have no ubderlying health conditions are extremely unlikely to have any serious symptoms from this virus... And even more extremely unlikely to actually die from it...


As didge pointed out in his figures above from the ONS...


It is also highly likely that millions in this age group have already had this virus, so are immune to reinfection...


I'm just trying to make the argument, although maybe a little clumsily, that vast majority of under 50s should go back to work and kids should go back to school...

Tommy Monk wrote:

Syl wrote:

I'm not arguing the fact that  older people are  more vulnerable and far more likely  to die of the virus, just questioning your earlier comments that the younger people are almost untouched by it...every death is a tragedy.

So RTA deaths and home accidental deaths amount to 9000 annually, this virus has killed over 40000 in 3 months.
I cant understand why you think people are over reacting to be wary of going back to work and sending their kids back to school.

The overwhelming vast majority of working people, and all school children, are under 50... and those of this age category who have no ubderlying health conditions are extremely unlikely to have any serious symptoms from this virus... And even more extremely unlikely to actually due from it...


As didge pointed out in his figures above from the ONS...


It is also highly likely that millions in this age group have already had this virus, so are immune to reinfection...


I'm just trying to make the argument, although maybe a little clumsily, that vast majority of under 50s should go back to work and kids should go back to school...

I understand where you are coming from, I just don't agree.
Germany's infection rate has gone up again since they eased the lockdown, I fear this will happen here too because it's too soon.

Also Tommy, children may not generally get seriously ill with the virus, but they can pass it on to older members of the community.

Tommy Monk wrote:It is also highly likely that millions in this age group have already had this virus, so are immune to reinfection...

"Highly likely" is not the standard. How would you know without proper diagnostics?

Original Quill wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:It is also highly likely that millions in this age group have already had this virus, so are immune to reinfection...

"Highly likely" is not the standard. How would you know without proper diagnostics?

Because this virus has been going around in UK since before Christmas...


When antibody testing comes round... I will be proved right.

Tommy Monk wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

"Highly likely" is not the standard.  How would you know without proper diagnostics?

Because this virus has been going around in UK since before Christmas...

When antibody testing comes round... I will be proved right.

No, you really can't tell until after the event, true. Perhaps I should have qualified that.

But it is also true that scientific testing is better than someone's hunch. Antibody testing that is never administered tells us nothing.

Syl wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:



The overwhelming vast majority of working people, and all school children, are under 50... and those of this age category who have no ubderlying health conditions are extremely unlikely to have any serious symptoms from this virus... And even more extremely unlikely to actually due from it...


As didge pointed out in his figures above from the ONS...


It is also highly likely that millions in this age group have already had this virus, so are immune to reinfection...


I'm just trying to make the argument, although maybe a little clumsily, that vast majority of under 50s should go back to work and kids should go back to school...

I understand where you are coming from, I just don't agree.
Germany's infection rate has gone up again since they eased the lockdown, I fear this will happen here too because it's too soon.

Also Tommy, children may not generally get seriously ill with the virus, but they can pass it on to older members of the community.

But what I'm saying is that older people and those with serious underlying health issues should still keep away from it all by staying indoors...


While the rest of us actually fight this virus head on by going out to work and going to school as normal...

Syl wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:



The overwhelming vast majority of working people, and all school children, are under 50... and those of this age category who have no ubderlying health conditions are extremely unlikely to have any serious symptoms from this virus... And even more extremely unlikely to actually due from it...


As didge pointed out in his figures above from the ONS...


It is also highly likely that millions in this age group have already had this virus, so are immune to reinfection...


I'm just trying to make the argument, although maybe a little clumsily, that vast majority of under 50s should go back to work and kids should go back to school...

I understand where you are coming from, I just don't agree.
Germany's infection rate has gone up again since they eased the lockdown, I fear this will happen here too because it's too soon.

Also Tommy, children may not generally get seriously ill with the virus, but they can pass it on to older members of the community.

But what I'm saying is that older people and those with serious underlying health issues should still keep away from it all by staying indoors...


While the rest of us actually fight this virus head on by going out to work and going to school as normal...

Original Quill wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:

Because this virus has been going around in UK since before Christmas...

When antibody testing comes round... I will be proved right.

No, you really can't tell until after the event, true. Perhaps I should have qualified that.

But it is also true that scientific testing is better than someone's hunch. Antibody testing that is never administered tells us nothing.

Not a hunch quill... Only an idiot would think that the number of confirmed cases by testing is the same as the real number of cases out there...



Everyone acknowledges that the true number of cases is much higher than is shown by number of confirmed tested cases...

Tommy Monk wrote:

Syl wrote:

I understand where you are coming from, I just don't agree.
Germany's infection rate has gone up again since they eased the lockdown, I fear this will happen here too because it's too soon.

Also Tommy, children may not generally get seriously ill with the virus, but they can pass it on to older members of the community.

But what I'm saying is that older people and those with serious underlying health issues should still keep away from it all by staying indoors...


While the rest of us actually fight this virus head on by going out to work and going to school as normal...

OK...I understand what you are saying.