Another Lock Down Likely

[nailit]

Vaccines worked out well then?
Not to mention isolation, mask waring, isolation, distancing, sanatizing, etc

[nailit]

//It’s possible you or the family had mild symptoms, and infected your mother ? //

Or its possible that the tests are unreliable?

The wife of a friend of mine was floored recently with coughs, headaches etc. Did THREE home tests, all negative for covid.
Went for a walk in test and tested positive.

[bobbinwales]

Yes home tests are not reliable enough if you have symtoms , they can give a false negative. A PCR is needed

[bednobs]

the lfts are not meant to be used by people with symptoms such as you friend

[Mozz71]

With all due respect Covid, your mum was always likely to get covid, due to her immune system being non-existent because of her cancer. Did you and your sisters get tested for covid? You do realise that many positive tests are asymptomatic? You may well have had the virus without realising.

[anneasquith]

You didn’t answer my question nailit.

[nailit]

//You didn’t answer my question nailit//
Because its ridiculous.

[anneasquith]

Actually it’s not,

[nailit]

Anne, my mother was dying for God's sakes.
Would you have let us let her die alone?
This is madness...

[Atheist]

Nailit, you seem to have retreated into a world of your own where you don't accept any ideas except your own predetermined stuff. Anneasquith asked you a question, but you don't seem to accept it as a valid question, you just accuse Anne of asking a ridiculous question. Why have you got like this? You used to be OK.

[Ellipsis]

> Vaccines do make a difference in that the vaccinated are less likely to die or clog-up beds, but that's about all.

All? That would be enough, if everyone was vaccinated. Too many aren't, and that's why the hospital beds are clogging up.

[anneasquith]

I would surmise nailit has been drinking, no point in further discussion .

[nailit]

You may have let your own mother die alone Atheist,
Myself and my own family didnt!
If that makes me not 'ok' with you, then I can live with that.

[Stickybottle]

Is it possible all the unregulated substances you have previously put into your body have disturbed rational thought ?

Just a thought

[bednobs]

anne is not accusing you of killing your mum, nor saying you should have stayed away

[bobbinwales]

I'd have gone to see mine too nailit if she was definately dying anyway, altho a negative LFT test beforehand would have helped my conscience

[nailit]

//Anne, my mother was dying for God's sakes.
Would you have let us let her die alone?//
This is madness..

Annes answer

//I would surmise nailit has been drinking, no point in further discussion//


LOL.
Cant answer just make a slur.
(BTW, no intoxicating substances have been imbibed) ;-)

[nailit]

//Is it possible all the unregulated substances you have previously put into your body have disturbed rational thought ?//

Go on then Sticky.....
Name them!

[Mozz71]

With statements like //I would surmise nailit has been drinking, no point in further discussion// and //Is it possible all the unregulated substances you have previously put into your body have disturbed rational thought// it's hardly surprising Nailit's becoming defensive. Do try and act like grown ups.

[nailit]

Heroin.
Once

Weed. Occasionally when I was younger.

And err....anymore?

[New Judge]

//So where does your 99.97% figure come from (cos its obvs completely bogus, impossibly high,//

Is it so impossibly high?

At present, there have been 11.45m recorded cases and 147.2k deaths. Leaving aside, for the moment, the potential inaccuracies when recording both these figures, that means 98.7% of those recorded to have contracted the virus survived and 1.3% died. Of course this cannot be relied upon entirely. Some of the 11.45m sufferers may have contracted the virus more than once; they may have survived every time or survived the earlier infection(s) and then died. Then some of those who died allegedly as a result of the virus may well have died of some other cause. But the biggest inaccuracy of all is that it is fairly common ground that the true number of infections is far greater than the 11.45m currently recorded. Possibly as many as two or three times as many.

Of course it’s true that these figures will vary for individual age groups and for those with vulnerabilities and the average figure will not be appropriate for everybody. But if you accept that the 11.45m is a considerable underestimate of the true number of infections, then the overall survival rate (or “ratio” as Peter would prefer) is well into 99% plus, and possibly higher that 99.5%.