Dutch Prime Minister gives a different approach to Corona

[Howard Is]

I already gave his explanation earlier in the thread.
His message seemed clear, ie, it's from China...not from
the US Army (unleashed in China, as China claimed).

I have long thought that if global population reduction was enacted deliberately, best it appeared to be accidental, to reduce the trauma and resentment in survivors.

I am in no position to know if this was deliberate, but I have been expecting it.

It is so obviously necessary IMO. Would it be more monstrous to allow a global catastrophe through inaction ?

This may be natural, may be an unfortunate leak from a lab, or may be a live test.
I don’t want to be alarmist, but the planet is cracking under the strain of industrialised overpopulation.

We can stare at our sneakers and deny that...

 

[Augustus]

I think it is more than just a few thousand. Many people in USA suffer obesitas. And this might be related with diabetes, which is trouble when getting the corona virus. I am not sure, so checked it:

So do I actually.

'Herd immunity' would need somewhere from 60-90% of people to become immune via infection (or vaccination which is probably 18 months minimum away as even after the find it needs 14 months of human trials).

It might kill around 15% of over 80s, and might be closer to 25-30% of those who have no access to ventilators (which won't be available to all if health service gets overrun).

 

[Mock Turtle]

Because we are trying to understand. Because we may learn something from someone.
Mainly because we just can’t help it.
The screen is screaming ‘Megadeath !’
Hard to ignore.

If we had the facts and the ability possibly, but even the experts don't appear to have all the facts, hence the hesitation and changing of policy when new data arrives - from all the other countries similarly suffering. I'll just take the advice but tempered with a bit of common sense.

 

[Howard Is]

If we had the facts and the ability possibly, but even the experts don't appear to have all the facts, hence the hesitation and changing of policy when new data arrives - from all the other countries similarly suffering. I'll just take the advice but tempered with a bit of common sense.

That is our only reasonable choice.
I think common sense should also cater for the possibility that things could get way more out of hand than we would like.
By that I don’t mean panic, but allow yourself to consider worst case scenarios. Not seriously considering that is just avoidance. I don’t expect a worst case scenario (just yet, lol), but I don’t want to get caught with my pants down either.

 

[Mock Turtle]

That is our only reasonable choice.
I think common sense should also cater for the possibility that things could get way more out of hand than we would like.
By that I don’t mean panic, but allow yourself to consider worst case scenarios. Not seriously considering that is just avoidance. I don’t expect a worst case scenario (just yet, lol), but I don’t want to get caught with my pants down either.

Well I fully understand my worst case scenario - catching it and dying because the hospitals will be overloaded - but I can also envisage society getting worse because of the panicking and where this might lead. We are essentially moving into a wartime scenario or something close. Few of us perhaps can predict the outcome of all this especially as the virus tends to return in waves, as most seem to do.

 

[Howard Is]

Well I fully understand my worst case scenario - catching it and dying because the hospitals will be overloaded - but I can also envisage society getting worse because of the panicking and where this might lead. We are essentially moving into a wartime scenario or something close. Few of us perhaps can predict the outcome of all this especially as the virus tends to return in waves, as most seem to do.

Getting sick and dying is normal. To be expected. Most of the covid-19 victims were not long for this world as it was, and a dose of influenza may well have killed them.

That is something I don’t see included in the data btw - what was the life expectancy of those who died with a covid-19 infection before they were infected ?
Was their death entirely attributable to covid-19, or was that only a factor ?

So there is that. However, the social effects we are seeing are what you really need to think about and protect yourself from. That is the real and present danger IMO.

 

[Mock Turtle]

Getting sick and dying is normal. To be expected. Most of the covid-19 victims were not long for this world as it was, and a dose of influenza may well have killed them.

That is something I don’t see included in the data btw - what was the life expectancy of those who died with a covid-19 infection before they were infected ?
Was their death entirely attributable to covid-19, or was that only a factor ?

So there is that. However, the social effects we are seeing are what you really need to think about and protect yourself from. That is the real and present danger IMO.

Well I do have the option of shopping at a store quite close to me rather than using my usual supermarket, so I can limit my time out and about, and I already get stuff delivered via online shopping. I think also, living in a rural setting possibly protects one against the worst that might be seen. But who knows? (Clockwork Orange?)

 

[Howard Is]

Clockwork Orange?

Don’t worry, I’m too old for that now.

 

[Revoltingest]

I have long thought that if global population reduction was enacted deliberately, best it appeared to be accidental, to reduce the trauma and resentment in survivors.

I am in no position to know if this was deliberate, but I have been expecting it.

It is so obviously necessary IMO. Would it be more monstrous to allow a global catastrophe through inaction ?

This may be natural, may be an unfortunate leak from a lab, or may be a live test.
I don’t want to be alarmist, but the planet is cracking under the strain of industrialised overpopulation.

We can stare at our sneakers and deny that...

I agree that we have more population than is optimum.

 

[stvdv]

Bar anyone working in the medical field and having the relevant credentials, no one here is qualified to answer the poll question. I don't see the point in it, nor do I feel I'm qualified to answer it in good conscience.
My only answer right now is, "Whatever the experts such as WHO decide is the wisest approach to follow."

Thank you for your view. I also hope the experts such as WHO choose wisely, and keep us well informed. The better we understand, the better we can cooperate.

Just a few hours ago, our Prime Minister said that option 3) Full Lock Down will be needed if option 1) is not working. I expected him to have to change the plan he told us in the link in the OP, I did not expect it to happen that soon. I think we have to take it 1 day at a time, but we should look at China and Italy and learn, not gamble too much with alternative options, because even with Full Lock Down in Italy, still 350 die on daily basis now.

3 days ago the experts advised "option 1" ... 2 days later the experts advised "option 3"
This was a good example, that sometimes it's wise to think for yourself, and don't follow experts blindly
When I express what I feel about something, does give me some insight and I train myself to think for myself, so when difficult situations come, I will be better prepared.

That was the kind of the point of this poll, just allow myself to think about such a major problem
Not to be right, but just to think and process the emotions going through my system

 

[stvdv]

01) Scientists have been quick to point out that it's not yet known whether people who survive COVID-19 are then resistant to it.

02) Japanese authorities said on March 16 that a man who recovered from the disease tested positive for COVID-19 again several weeks later.
(That could have been a testing error.)

03) But Diego Silva, a lecturer in bioethics at the University of Sydney, says we still don't know everything about this virus and the body's response to it.

Herd immunity also accepts that some people will die
When discussing herd immunity, the Dutch Prime Minister said vulnerable people would need to be protected.
04) "This assumes you can actually shield those at risk in the first place, and it's not clear to me that you can," Dr Silva warns. (see also point 06).)

05) Scientists have pointed out that if COVID-19 is allowed to spread, there will be fewer younger people to look after the vulnerable.

06) UK: At the moment only people in hospital are being routinely tested, so if you have symptoms and you are not sure if you have the virus, you may well not be able to find out.
Source: Why isn't the UK testing more?

07) Dr Silva: "Intentionally allowing the virus to spread requires accepting that people will die in the short term, in part due to hospitals and the health system being overwhelmed,"

08) British virologist Professor John Oxford from Queen Mary University of London said letting the virus spread also takes governments into murky ethical waters.

source: 'People will die': Some countries have discussed just letting coronavirus run its course