Covid-19
Re: Coronavirus
In all the years of flu going around I don’t know anyone who has been hospitalised and certainly not in intensive care.
Good Lowbank but it does happen and pregnant women can be badly affected by flu
Some get ARDS which it seems is what is happening to some of these coronavirus folk and is what kills them
If 60% of us were to get this and only 0.01% gets ARDS, that is a lot of work for ITU
Good Lowbank but it does happen and pregnant women can be badly affected by flu
Some get ARDS which it seems is what is happening to some of these coronavirus folk and is what kills them
If 60% of us were to get this and only 0.01% gets ARDS, that is a lot of work for ITU
-
- Posts: 6576
- Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
- Been Liked: 1233 times
- Has Liked: 56 times
Re: Coronavirus
Even the experts are getting worried about what I pointed out a day ago.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... -fear.html
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... -fear.html
-
- Posts: 6576
- Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
- Been Liked: 1233 times
- Has Liked: 56 times
Re: Coronavirus
It’s me who is being accused of over reacting and apparently predicting an apocalypse, which I have never said.mdd2 wrote: ↑Sat Feb 22, 2020 6:06 pmIn all the years of flu going around I don’t know anyone who has been hospitalised and certainly not in intensive care.
Good Lowbank but it does happen and pregnant women can be badly affected by flu
Some get ARDS which it seems is what is happening to some of these coronavirus folk and is what kills them
If 60% of us were to get this and only 0.01% gets ARDS, that is a lot of work for ITU
I just look at the data and suggest this is way more severe than flu.
Re: Coronavirus
I suspect the true picture in China is far worse than is being reported.
-
- Posts: 2103
- Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
- Been Liked: 500 times
- Has Liked: 509 times
Re: Coronavirus
Purely out of boredom, I've just had a go at working this out (it's a bold thing to do because I might have made a silly mistake somewhere, and it must not in any way be seen as a prediction of what I think will actually happen, or in any way be seen as 'stressing' or 'spreading false rumours', it is just an academic exercise and no more, based entirely on the question posed in the quoted post, and I welcome any counter analysis):mdd2 wrote: ↑Sat Feb 22, 2020 6:06 pmIn all the years of flu going around I don’t know anyone who has been hospitalised and certainly not in intensive care.
Good Lowbank but it does happen and pregnant women can be badly affected by flu
Some get ARDS which it seems is what is happening to some of these coronavirus folk and is what kills them
If 60% of us were to get this and only 0.01% gets ARDS, that is a lot of work for ITU
If 40,000,000 in the UK get this, spread out perfectly evenly over 150 days, and 0.01% get ARDS requiring HDU/ICU care, and their length of stay is an average of 14 days, then I reckon at any point in such atheoretical epidemic, 373 NHS ICU/HDU beds will be taken up by coronovirus patients. This is just under 10% of the total high dependency capacity of the NHS.
Better hope it's not 0.1% rather than 0.01% then! (Official data seems to suggest it's actually about 20%, though it surely can't be this high.)
Last edited by If it be your will on Sun Feb 23, 2020 1:29 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 3748
- Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2017 9:49 am
- Been Liked: 927 times
- Has Liked: 716 times
Re: Coronavirus
I counter that by suggesting that 0.01% is an entirely made up number with no basis. I'll go 99.9% or 0.00001% instead if we're just making numbers up.If it be your will wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2020 1:23 amPurely out of boredom, I've just had a go at working this out (it's a bold thing to do because I might have made a silly mistake somewhere, and it must not in any way be seen as a prediction of what I think will actually happen, or in any way be seen as 'stressing' or 'spreading false rumours', it is just an academic exercise and no more, and I welcome any counter analysis):
If 40,000,000 in the UK get this, spread out perfectly evenly over 150 days, and 0.01% get ARDS requiring HDU/ICU care, and their length of stay is an average of 14 days, then I reckon at any point in such atheoretical epidemic, 373 NHS ICU/HDU beds will be taken up by coronovirus patients. This is just under 10% of the total high dependency capacity of the NHS.
Better hope it's not 0.1% rather than 0.01% then! (Official data seems to suggest it's actually about 20%, though it surely can't be this high.)
Oh, and official data doesn't suggest 20%, unless it's misinterpreted by our usual suspect.
-
- Posts: 2103
- Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
- Been Liked: 500 times
- Has Liked: 509 times
Re: Coronavirus
Oh my God! I have a go at answering a purely theoretical point posed by someone else and you jump down my throat within 2 minutes!thatdberight wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2020 1:28 amI counter that by suggesting that 0.01% is an entirely made up number with no basis. I'll go 99.9% or 0.00001% instead if we're just making numbers up.
Oh, and official data doesn't suggest 20%, unless it's misinterpreted by our usual suspect.
(The 20% was based on the data of how many are being recorded as 'serious or critical'. I've no idea what that precisely means either.)
-
- Posts: 3748
- Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2017 9:49 am
- Been Liked: 927 times
- Has Liked: 716 times
Re: Coronavirus
You said counters were welcome.If it be your will wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2020 1:32 amOh my God! I have a go at answering a purely theoretical point posed by someone else and you jump down my throat within 2 minutes!
(The 20% was based on the data of how many are being recorded as 'serious or critical'. I've no idea what that precisely means either.)
OK, then. I'll put it another way. What credibility does the 0.01% have in your view? What's its source? Why's it an appropriate number to base your calcs on?
The 20% continues to ignore the likely (that's experts talking, not me) very large number of mild cases that go unnoticed. That's why it's bunkum.
-
- Posts: 2103
- Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
- Been Liked: 500 times
- Has Liked: 509 times
Re: Coronavirus
None whatsoever. I just thought, having been presented with that number, it would be vaguely interesting to see what the impact would be if it turned out to be right, that's all.thatdberight wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2020 1:38 amYou said counters were welcome.
OK, then. I'll put it another way. What credibility does the 0.01% have in your view? What's its source? Why's it an appropriate number to base your calcs on?
The 20% continues to ignore the likely (that's experts talking, not me) very large number of mild cases that go unnoticed. That's why it's bunkum.
Re: Coronavirus
Last night in Bangkok before we set off for home.
No panic or overreaction here at all.
Taxi drivers still not wearing masks, and we didn't see anyone wearing one in Koh Lanta. However, our internal flight to Bangkok was almost exclusively filled by Europeans, and they were mostly wearing masks.
I'm not 100% sure of the number of people affected here, but the government seem to have it in perspective. As I posted before, around 40 cases in a country of 70 million, and the majority of those are Chinese visitors.
No sense of panic, everyone just going about their normal business.
However, I have not been able to log in here for a few days and it seems like the UK is worried, and news channels and uk papers seem to be suggesting a potential epidemic in GB. Hope not, but it seems a hell of a lot calmer here, on China's doorstep than in the UK which is thousands of miles away.
What a win yesterday. Saw Dwight,s goal. Champions league next season?
No panic or overreaction here at all.
Taxi drivers still not wearing masks, and we didn't see anyone wearing one in Koh Lanta. However, our internal flight to Bangkok was almost exclusively filled by Europeans, and they were mostly wearing masks.
I'm not 100% sure of the number of people affected here, but the government seem to have it in perspective. As I posted before, around 40 cases in a country of 70 million, and the majority of those are Chinese visitors.
No sense of panic, everyone just going about their normal business.
However, I have not been able to log in here for a few days and it seems like the UK is worried, and news channels and uk papers seem to be suggesting a potential epidemic in GB. Hope not, but it seems a hell of a lot calmer here, on China's doorstep than in the UK which is thousands of miles away.
What a win yesterday. Saw Dwight,s goal. Champions league next season?
-
- Posts: 3982
- Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:04 pm
- Been Liked: 855 times
- Has Liked: 605 times
Re: Coronavirus
I really do not understand the Asian penchant for wearing masks in these situations. Don't people over there realise how small germs and viruses are? Obviously people can still breathe normally wearing masks, and if you can breathe in air, you will still breath in any germs or viruses. It makes no sense at all to me.
This whole outbreak needs putting into some sort of perspective. Normal Flu kills 650,000 people worldwide every year, including 10,000 each year in the UK alone. No one panics about that, so why are people panicking about Covid-19? Most normally healthy people appear to be recoving in the same way as flu victims. Still, I suppose it sells newspapers which is all the publishers care about.
This whole outbreak needs putting into some sort of perspective. Normal Flu kills 650,000 people worldwide every year, including 10,000 each year in the UK alone. No one panics about that, so why are people panicking about Covid-19? Most normally healthy people appear to be recoving in the same way as flu victims. Still, I suppose it sells newspapers which is all the publishers care about.
Re: Coronavirus
If 60% of the UK population get the death rate is 1% thats 400,000 deaths over here.
That is very worrying
That is very worrying
-
- Posts: 6576
- Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
- Been Liked: 1233 times
- Has Liked: 56 times
Re: Coronavirus
A super example of why many people don’t post anything on social media, within seconds you were attacked in a very strong and unwarranted manner.If it be your will wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2020 1:23 amPurely out of boredom, I've just had a go at working this out (it's a bold thing to do because I might have made a silly mistake somewhere, and it must not in any way be seen as a prediction of what I think will actually happen, or in any way be seen as 'stressing' or 'spreading false rumours', it is just an academic exercise and no more, based entirely on the question posed in the quoted post, and I welcome any counter analysis):
If 40,000,000 in the UK get this, spread out perfectly evenly over 150 days, and 0.01% get ARDS requiring HDU/ICU care, and their length of stay is an average of 14 days, then I reckon at any point in such atheoretical epidemic, 373 NHS ICU/HDU beds will be taken up by coronovirus patients. This is just under 10% of the total high dependency capacity of the NHS.
Better hope it's not 0.1% rather than 0.01% then! (Official data seems to suggest it's actually about 20%, though it surely can't be this high.)
I thought it was very interesting and the use of a base value in tenths means is easy to scale the data .
This user liked this post: If it be your will
Re: Coronavirus
I find the main issue is not being able to trust the official numbers coming out of China.
I wouldnt be surprised if the real numbers infected are in the millions and 1,000’s of bodies being burnt daily,
I wouldnt be surprised if the real numbers infected are in the millions and 1,000’s of bodies being burnt daily,
This user liked this post: Jakubclaret
-
- Posts: 6576
- Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
- Been Liked: 1233 times
- Has Liked: 56 times
Re: Coronavirus
The official data is just that official data.thatdberight wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2020 1:28 amI counter that by suggesting that 0.01% is an entirely made up number with no basis. I'll go 99.9% or 0.00001% instead if we're just making numbers up.
Oh, and official data doesn't suggest 20%, unless it's misinterpreted by our usual suspect.
You do however only want to believe speculation and predictions. Interestingly you then attack someone who uses a number you disagree with.
I am not sure who makes the comment further down the thread that the 20% is invalid because there are loads of cases going unreported. I also disagree with that, I think I read that 7,000 have been tested in the UK.
The people on the ship were being tested nearly daily, or are you suggesting the test is flawed?
The other point I would make on that is, if there are thousands of people wandering around with it in a mild form, they will be spreading it all around the world and we will have a pandemic on our hands.
-
- Posts: 6576
- Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
- Been Liked: 1233 times
- Has Liked: 56 times
-
- Posts: 3748
- Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2017 9:49 am
- Been Liked: 927 times
- Has Liked: 716 times
Re: Coronavirus
It was warranted. Making up a stat is just nonsense. It's not as unhinged as nearly everything you've had to say about this topic but it is nonsense.Lowbankclaret wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2020 8:31 amA super example of why many people don’t post anything on social media, within seconds you were attacked in a very strong and unwarranted manner.
I thought it was very interesting and the use of a base value in tenths means is easy to scale the data .
-
- Posts: 3748
- Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2017 9:49 am
- Been Liked: 927 times
- Has Liked: 716 times
Re: Coronavirus
That's a number that's been doing the rounds for a little while from one of this country's leading experts (who, perhaps surprisingly, doesn't post on here).
But then I see you've joined the ranks of the conspiracy theorists. LowBankClaret believed/believes that it's all a Chinese government plot to kill their own people so no wonder they're hiding the evidence.
-
- Posts: 3748
- Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2017 9:49 am
- Been Liked: 927 times
- Has Liked: 716 times
Re: Coronavirus
thatdberight wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2020 8:53 amThat's a number that's been doing the rounds for a little while from one of this country's leading experts (who, perhaps surprisingly, doesn't post on here.
I’v seen those numbers from different sources so I think they are very credible.
What is certain is that self isolation is not going to solve the problem
-
- Posts: 9474
- Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 10:47 pm
- Been Liked: 1185 times
- Has Liked: 779 times
Re: Coronavirus
Bang on, the day the doctor died letting the truth out & how the authority’s dealt with that before & after, at that moment for me anyway it became impossible to believe anything what the Chinese had to say. It shows the desperation to pretend everything’s ok & understate pretty much anything bad.
-
- Posts: 3748
- Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2017 9:49 am
- Been Liked: 927 times
- Has Liked: 716 times
Re: Coronavirus
Sorry, you're saying it's "bang on" that thousands of bodies are being burned daily to mask the size of the problem?Jakubclaret wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2020 10:35 amBang on, the day the doctor died letting the truth out & how the authority’s dealt with that before & after, at that moment for me anyway it became impossible to believe anything what the Chinese had to say. It shows the desperation to pretend everything’s ok & understate pretty much anything bad.
I'm just checking you're agreeing with that.
-
- Posts: 9474
- Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 10:47 pm
- Been Liked: 1185 times
- Has Liked: 779 times
Re: Coronavirus
I agreed with the general content mainly we can’t take any credence from the Chinese figures without being specific, the thousands of bodies being incinerated was a tad hyperbole, some may disagree after the doctors death & the way they do things anything’s possible, who really knows for sure.thatdberight wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2020 10:49 amSorry, you're saying it's "bang on" that thousands of bodies are being burned daily to mask the size of the problem?
I'm just checking you're agreeing with that.
This user liked this post: paulatky
-
- Posts: 132
- Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2018 11:54 am
- Been Liked: 29 times
Re: Coronavirus
2 dead out of 79 infected in Italy?
Can anyone give reasons as to why this is nothing to worry about?
Or is it time to start stocking up on water and tinned food?
Can anyone give reasons as to why this is nothing to worry about?
Or is it time to start stocking up on water and tinned food?
This user liked this post: paulatky
-
- Posts: 9474
- Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 10:47 pm
- Been Liked: 1185 times
- Has Liked: 779 times
Re: Coronavirus
I think all flights to China from the UK now should be 1 way if at all, until all this sorted out, you go there but it’s at your own risk & you are not coming back until you can prove you are clear. If people want to visit these countries & chance there arm I don’t see why the uk taxpayers should be footing the bill organising flights back & quarantine, if you can’t hack it don’t back it.KellyClaret wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2020 11:11 am2 dead out of 79 infected in Italy?
Can anyone give reasons as to why this is nothing to worry about?
Or is it time to start stocking up on water and tinned food?
This user liked this post: paulatky
Re: Coronavirus
They're taking it very seriously in Italy. Four Serie A matches postponed today
This user liked this post: paulatky
-
- Posts: 3748
- Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2017 9:49 am
- Been Liked: 927 times
- Has Liked: 716 times
Re: Coronavirus
We should be closing our borders now,
Re: Coronavirus
I think the authorities are working desperately to get a vaccine sorted . The death rate is highest amongst older people it would be devastating if it got into care homes etc.
-
- Posts: 25445
- Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
- Been Liked: 6930 times
- Has Liked: 11660 times
- Location: Leeds
-
- Posts: 2588
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:36 pm
- Been Liked: 562 times
- Has Liked: 142 times
- Location: the ghost in the atom
Re: Coronavirus
umm i've started to write something 3 times now, and stopped myself as this virus will do what its gonna do until a vaccine is released.
it would be prudent for people to prepare for self isolation and to have enough food and drink. In addition those services that are considered essential to the maintainence of effective govt received there preparedness backs yesterday, this will probably leak into the press in a soft way next week
it would be prudent for people to prepare for self isolation and to have enough food and drink. In addition those services that are considered essential to the maintainence of effective govt received there preparedness backs yesterday, this will probably leak into the press in a soft way next week
-
- Posts: 3748
- Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2017 9:49 am
- Been Liked: 927 times
- Has Liked: 716 times
-
- Posts: 25445
- Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
- Been Liked: 6930 times
- Has Liked: 11660 times
- Location: Leeds
Re: Coronavirus
Tell me more.Goalposts wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2020 1:57 pmit would be prudent for people to prepare for self isolation and to have enough food and drink. In addition those services that are considered essential to the maintainence of effective govt received there preparedness backs yesterday, this will probably leak into the press in a soft way next week
Re: Coronavirus
2 dead out of 75 infected in Italy is a frightening statistic.
Were they Italians or people who had travelled from China.
-
- Posts: 3748
- Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2017 9:49 am
- Been Liked: 927 times
- Has Liked: 716 times
Re: Coronavirus
2 out of 3 by some people's preferred measure.
I haven't seen an update on the likely outcome from people who know what they're talking about since the estimate of c.2% of cases from the WHO.
-
- Posts: 2103
- Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
- Been Liked: 500 times
- Has Liked: 509 times
Re: Coronavirus
I know! It doesn't seem to matter however many caveats you put into a post, or however strongly you stress that you're just attempting to solve a purely hypothetical puzzle, the "Don't Panic! It's only like flu!" brigade immediately fly off the handle!Lowbankclaret wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2020 8:31 amA super example of why many people don’t post anything on social media, within seconds you were attacked in a very strong and unwarranted manner.
I thought it was very interesting and the use of a base value in tenths means is easy to scale the data .
-
- Posts: 3748
- Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2017 9:49 am
- Been Liked: 927 times
- Has Liked: 716 times
Re: Coronavirus
I've never said it's only like flu. But then I've never said it was a chemical weapon created by the Chinese government nor that they're burning thousands of bodies a day. Nor have I made a prediction of bed usage in the NHS that was based on a number I just made up (or that someone else made up that I co-opted).If it be your will wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2020 3:30 pmI know! It doesn't seem to matter however many caveats you put into a post, or however strongly you stress that you're just attempting to solve a purely hypothetical puzzle, the "Don't Panic! It's only like flu!" brigade immediately fly off the handle!
Last edited by thatdberight on Sun Feb 23, 2020 3:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 2103
- Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
- Been Liked: 500 times
- Has Liked: 509 times
Re: Coronavirus
I agree. For the first wave at least, any vaccination program will likely be irrelevant. Chloroquine (which I mentioned ages ago) is showing considerable promise, though.FactualFrank wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2020 1:48 pm18 months at the very least according to the people working on a vaccine. Phase 1 is due to start in April.
-
- Posts: 3748
- Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2017 9:49 am
- Been Liked: 927 times
- Has Liked: 716 times
Re: Coronavirus
Not true.FactualFrank wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2020 1:48 pm18 months at the very least according to the people working on a vaccine. Phase 1 is due to start in April.
18 months usually but could be accelerated if they can prove efficacy and safety is what at least one of those people actually said.
Strange how many misinterpretations of facts that are reported in a straightforward way happen.
"While it can take 18 months before any vaccine is ready to be distributed to the public, Prof Young said this process could be accelerated if there are assurances the safety of clinical trials would not be compromised."
Professor Paul Young, head of the school of chemistry and molecular biosciences at University of Queensland.
-
- Posts: 6576
- Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
- Been Liked: 1233 times
- Has Liked: 56 times
Re: Coronavirus
SingaporeClarets wrote: ↑Fri Feb 07, 2020 6:19 amVery few places have stocks of face masks here but the government advice is to only to wear if you are ill and that hand washing and other general good hygiene practices are as equally important.
What’s happening now in Singapore???
Any latest news?
-
- Posts: 16896
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:37 pm
- Been Liked: 6963 times
- Has Liked: 1484 times
- Location: Leeds
Re: Coronavirus
I can’t believe you’re spending your final few days on this earth worrying about this.Lowbankclaret wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2020 5:14 pmWhat’s happening now in Singapore???
Any latest news?
This user liked this post: thatdberight
-
- Posts: 3748
- Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2017 9:49 am
- Been Liked: 927 times
- Has Liked: 716 times
-
- Posts: 6576
- Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
- Been Liked: 1233 times
- Has Liked: 56 times
Re: Coronavirus
Glad the panic is over!!thatdberight wrote: ↑Thu Feb 13, 2020 11:22 pmSince I'm no expert, I'm going to go with the sort of consensus which those with knowledge seem to be going for that it could be anything up to 2% but possibly less when you factor in under reporting of mild cases and the likelihood that we will get some respite due to seasonality if we can get as far as spring with no spread. They're not simply sitting dividing deaths by cases to come up with this.
This would not be "biblical levels of catastrophe". It would certainly be significant but 1.5% of the population die every year anyway.
Anyway, I understand from later posts it's only a Chinese government plot to reduce their own population so, unless you're ethnically Chinese, it seems the panic is over.
-
- Posts: 6576
- Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
- Been Liked: 1233 times
- Has Liked: 56 times
-
- Posts: 3748
- Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2017 9:49 am
- Been Liked: 927 times
- Has Liked: 716 times
Re: Coronavirus
Some people are still panicking. Among the manifestations is asking random people for sitreps from across the world. Honestly, it's true.
-
- Posts: 16896
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:37 pm
- Been Liked: 6963 times
- Has Liked: 1484 times
- Location: Leeds
Re: Coronavirus
It was a joke. Pipe down and chill out.Lowbankclaret wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2020 6:10 pmI am sure you would rejoice and laugh if that actual came to pass.
That’s obviously the type of human being you are!
-
- Posts: 6576
- Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
- Been Liked: 1233 times
- Has Liked: 56 times
Re: Coronavirus
Let’s all laugh at these two doctors fighting to save people, it’s hilarious after all that these young doctors have died trying to save people.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... vince.html
-
- Posts: 16896
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:37 pm
- Been Liked: 6963 times
- Has Liked: 1484 times
- Location: Leeds
Re: Coronavirus
I don’t think that’s something to laugh about personally. If you want to joke about it then that’s your choice but it’s in poor taste.Lowbankclaret wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2020 7:32 pmLet’s all laugh at these two doctors fighting to save people, it’s hilarious after all that these young doctors have died trying to save people.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... vince.html
-
- Posts: 6576
- Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
- Been Liked: 1233 times
- Has Liked: 56 times
-
- Posts: 16896
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:37 pm
- Been Liked: 6963 times
- Has Liked: 1484 times
- Location: Leeds
Re: Coronavirus
I didn’t make a joke about you dying. I made a joke about how much you seem to be concerning yourself over this virus, and how if it is as deadly as you think then we don’t have much time left, so why spend the rest of your days worrying about it. You seem to have taken it very personally.Lowbankclaret wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2020 8:58 pmYou were the person making a joke about me dying, it was you thought it was a subject of humour.
Suddenly it’s not funny