Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Harrydc said:

I for one will never report my neighbours for having a few family members round. 

Same. 

 

It's like they want to break the communities apart and ditch the blame on people even more than they already have.

 

 

I agree people have to take responsibility and I'd like to think the majority are compliant, abide by the rules and it's just a few that ruin it for the others.

 

But as @Mark 'expert' Lawrenson's post, we were told to go out, socialise, go to the pub, go to work, get back out to go back towards 'normality'. Surely the government have to take up some responsibility too?

 

They don't really help themselves either and just goes more towards thinking it's one rule for them while they shit on others who have to follow other rules.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Following the rule of 6 and not having parties won't make a difference in the grand scheme of things, with schools and universities open, this virus will spread, you can't halt it. Passing the blame back onto the public is a ridiculous thing to do, even if everyone followed all the rules 24/7, it would still spread.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

As expected Blackpool is heaving this weekend. lots of people coming just to take a picture of how busy it is so they can show social media how noone is taking it seriously. Illuminations are busy of course and very little mask wearing because majority are outside, personally glad to see a bit of normality this time of year. 

The problem with all the threat of lockdown is that it encourages people to think we might as well go now before we don't get the chance. If you're going to lockdown, just ****ing do it rather than keep saying it might happen. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, RowlattsFox said:

As expected Blackpool is heaving this weekend. lots of people coming just to take a picture of how busy it is so they can show social media how noone is taking it seriously. Illuminations are busy of course and very little mask wearing because majority are outside, personally glad to see a bit of normality this time of year. 

The problem with all the threat of lockdown is that it encourages people to think we might as well go now before we don't get the chance. If you're going to lockdown, just ****ing do it rather than keep saying it might happen. 

Fvcking hate this shit,  no doubt any pics are taken with the long len shots too just to make it look worse again.

 

Reminds of the guy who has a tweet going viral back in April when he took pictures and complained about how busy his flight was from London to Belfast, was interviewed by the BBC and it made numerous national media ouets. The ironically was off the scale.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Paninistickers said:

The alternative is to get on with it...a bit like how we get along with cancer. We just carry on. 

 

Allow 'at risk' groups to take indefinite sick leave. Set strategies for those who wish or need to shield. Provide guidance and advice to the rest of us.... who'll then get on doing whatever we want to do, go where we want to go and everything else.

I know your point but can we catch cancer ? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Lionator said:

Correct. Covid will always exist because the vaccine won't be 100% successful (no vaccine is) and a portion of the population wont take the vaccine but if 70-80% do then it'll be epidemic over in the UK.

 

There's the Oxford/Astra vaccine which now has a built a bit of a tinfoil hat following given the pause in progression, though this is our best bet for mass vaccination.

 

Then we have the Moderna vaccine which the UK hasn't got a deal for but looks promising.

 

However all good bets are on the Pfizer/BioNtech vaccine from US/Germany. We've got a 30M dose deal and they're predicted to have enough data to seek approval at the end of October.

 

I think what we'll see is that healthcare workers and the most vulnerable will be vaccinated with the BioNtech vaccine around Christmas before the Oxford vaccine or perhaps another will be available for the general population from around March/April next year.

 

So we just have to get through for a few more months. If there was no hope of a vaccine then I don't think we'd be considering locking down again.

If we are forced to opt for a vaccine that gives only one year of protection, then obviously we are doomed to have Covid become endemic, and the infection will always with us. The world has changed and people need to learn to adapt to this. We need to be prepared for programmes of extensive monitoring for infections backed up by swift outbreak containment. People must play their part too, by maintaining handwashing, physical distancing and avoiding gatherings, particularly in enclosed spaces - unfortunately, we know that many are flagrantly flouting regulations and guidelines hence the Hancock's clumsily worded punitive rhetoric.

 

Repurposed drugs are faster to test than vaccines, so that raises the possibility of antiviral or an antibody treatment that works before the latter becomes available. Immediate treatment when symptoms come on could at least reduce the death rate. Although equal access, full transparency and cost are a concern - I am reminded of the Tamiflu farce. 

 

Fascinatingly, there is t speculation amongst leading epidemiologists and virologists that common cold coronaviruses crossed into humans in the distant past and caused similar illness before settling down.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Line-X said:

If we are forced to opt for a vaccine that gives only one year of protection, then obviously we are doomed to have Covid become endemic, and the infection will always with us. The world has changed and people need to learn to adapt to this. We need to be prepared for programmes of extensive monitoring for infections backed up by swift outbreak containment. People must play their part too, by maintaining handwashing, physical distancing and avoiding gatherings, particularly in enclosed spaces - unfortunately, we know that many are flagrantly flouting regulations and guidelines hence the Hancock's clumsily worded punitive rhetoric.

 

Repurposed drugs are faster to test than vaccines, so that raises the possibility of antiviral or an antibody treatment that works before the latter becomes available. Immediate treatment when symptoms come on could at least reduce the death rate. Although equal access, full transparency and cost are a concern - I am reminded of the Tamiflu farce. 

 

Fascinatingly, there is t speculation amongst leading epidemiologists and virologists that common cold coronaviruses crossed into humans in the distant past and caused similar illness before settling down.

I saw that this week, it would make sense I guess. I also wonder if SARS 1 would've been similar to this in terms of IFR if it had gotten out of control. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Lionator said:

I saw that this week, it would make sense I guess. I also wonder if SARS 1 would've been similar to this in terms of IFR if it had gotten out of control. 

There's a thought.

 

It seems to be that the more severe that the strain is, the less virulent it tends to be and the more likely it is to burn itself out. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Line-X said:

There's a thought.

 

It seems to be that the more severe that the strain is, the less virulent it tends to be and the more likely it is to burn itself out. 

That would tally given what we know about infectious diseases in general - for instance there's a reason why the really terrible haemorrhagic fevers, have, thankfully, never spread across vast distances. For the time being, anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, whoareyaaa said:

Anyone that is in the 1% category should do everything they can to protect there self and the other 99% of which it has little effect on should get on with there lives imo.

 

this is getting ridiculous.

 

way to much scaremongering going on from the gov and media when the stats show it effect hardly 1% of the population

What's the 1% category? 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Line-X said:

If we are forced to opt for a vaccine that gives only one year of protection, then obviously we are doomed to have Covid become endemic, and the infection will always with us. The world has changed and people need to learn to adapt to this. We need to be prepared for programmes of extensive monitoring for infections backed up by swift outbreak containment. People must play their part too, by maintaining handwashing, physical distancing and avoiding gatherings, particularly in enclosed spaces - unfortunately, we know that many are flagrantly flouting regulations and guidelines hence the Hancock's clumsily worded punitive rhetoric.

 

Repurposed drugs are faster to test than vaccines, so that raises the possibility of antiviral or an antibody treatment that works before the latter becomes available. Immediate treatment when symptoms come on could at least reduce the death rate. Although equal access, full transparency and cost are a concern - I am reminded of the Tamiflu farce. 

 

Fascinatingly, there is t speculation amongst leading epidemiologists and virologists that common cold coronaviruses crossed into humans in the distant past and caused similar illness before settling down.

Just like flu I imagine

People have the flu jab every year because the strain mutates

Covid will do the same 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Col city fan said:

I imagine it’s bound to mate, it’s a virus

In the same way scientists have to determine how the flu vaccine looks every year, they’ll be having to do the same with Corona Virus

If/when it becomes endemic, yes I entirely agree. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Lionator said:

I’m intrigued why we aren’t trying the stuff that we know works before going into a full blown lockdown.

 

The 2 metre rule for example, with or without a mask reduces circulation of this virus. Why hasn’t it been reintroduced? 

 

We know it barely transmits outside, so why are we banning outdoor meetings? People would be less tempted to break rules and meet indoors then. 
 

Nothing makes sense, the government blew it over the summer when they should’ve been making plans for an increase of infections and now they’re crapping the bed. Instead all we got was an exams fiasco and ‘normal by Christmas’. Such infuriating incompetence. 

So accurate. A great post..

 

I personally just feel we have such a staggeringly low intellectual pool of talent at Whitehall compared with generations past. 

 

Regardless of views on policy, we've had big leaders with string cabinets in the past; Thatcher had huge intellectual figures in the cabinet  (albeit some if them bullied by her) and on the benches.  Blair had big beasts like mandelson and brown. Even Cameron had political thinkers of Hague, Clegg even Clarke in the hinterground. 

 

This lot are league 1 level politicians. And cowards to boot. Leading isn't about rules.of six and blaming students and soundbite moonshots. Leadership is taking tough decisions AND taking people with you

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Closing pubs would just punish those who already socially distance in pubs. The people that dont socially distance in pubs will end up at illegal parties / raves so it would end being a counter productive measure.

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Nalis said:

Closing pubs would just punish those who already socially distance in pubs. The people that dont socially distance in pubs will end up at illegal parties / raves so it would end being a counter productive measure.

You can police social distancing in pubs too (the bar staff can limit people on a table etc.), but in someones house there will be no social distancing in the majority of cases.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

Following the rule of 6 and not having parties won't make a difference in the grand scheme of things, with schools and universities open, this virus will spread, you can't halt it. Passing the blame back onto the public is a ridiculous thing to do, even if everyone followed all the rules 24/7, it would still spread.

Exactly.

 

The people complaining are the first to talk up how infectious the disease is, but are happy to say it's the fault of 'selfish b*stards' that we're experiencing a second wave. 

 

Did people really just start being selfish b*stards all of a sudden or is it something bigger, like schools opening again? 

 

It's obviously going to spread, and all the signs are that it's much less deadly and the health service is much more prepared for it.

 

Our only concern should be any impending lockdown because the virus doesn't realistically cause us all that many issues at this point. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lionator said:

I’m intrigued why we aren’t trying the stuff that we know works before going into a full blown lockdown.

 

The 2 metre rule for example, with or without a mask reduces circulation of this virus. Why hasn’t it been reintroduced? 

 

We know it barely transmits outside, so why are we banning outdoor meetings? People would be less tempted to break rules and meet indoors then. 
 

Nothing makes sense, the government blew it over the summer when they should’ve been making plans for an increase of infections and now they’re crapping the bed. Instead all we got was an exams fiasco and ‘normal by Christmas’. Such infuriating incompetence. 

Their policy is to shift blame on to the population. One look at Twitter and it's working. Most used phrase must be 'selfish b*stards'. 

 

Policy isn't about doing what's best, it's about what absolves blame. They want the conclusion of the whole thing to be that they tried to do the right thing, but people didn't follow the guidelines and so they are to blame. 

 

I'm the first to criticise, but I think one massive thing to learn from this is that (and maybe I'm giving them too much credit here), if there was genuinely a huge threat to the population, the government might strategise their moves based on what the population needs. I think privately their stance is still to continue as normal as there's little threat, but they know that won't wash at this point. 

 

Everything they do now is with public perception firmly in mind. If that means locking down because demand dictates, so be it. So be it, even if it causes more long term harm.

Edited by Nod.E
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   1 member

×
×
  • Create New...