Coronavirus Thread

[dsr-burnley]

31 minutes ago, ealingfox said:

 

Have you read the clearly linked article?

I have now.  You and I have a different definition of "clearly linked", but that's by the by.  The post clearly linked a Twitter post.  Not being twitterati, I didn't know that when you click on a Twitter post it takes to to a news article.

 

The article is certainly padded out to try and make things seem worse than they are.  A government minister holds shares in AstraZeneca which implies there is something dodgy going on with the contract?  A lot of people own shares with AstraZeneca.  They're a standard part of a share portfolio.  Unless they have any more evidence that he plays a leading role in astraZeneca, which is unlikely because the Stock Exchange has rules about disclosure, I think they're clutching at straw there.

 

Have they challenged the government claim that 99.5% of the stuff they bought was good?  It's OK to mention two contracts that went wrong, but of course they went wrong.  This was urgent, and normal procedures could not be followed.  a balanced article would stress that these were exceptional circumstances and things could not be done properly.  And then compare what was done with what could reasonably have been done in the time, and see if the government did OK in the circumstances.

 

They still don't give much definition to what they called "histories of controversy".  I suspect virtually all the Indian-and-third-world sourced stuff could be accused of human rights abuses, both existing and new.  I suspect virtually all the multinational companies involved could be accused of tax evasion.  How controversial is controversial?  Would Amazon, for example, count as controversial in their statisitcs?

 

Of course there is ample evidence of cronyism (buying from who you know), waste, and poor due diligence.  The latter two in particular, there had to be.  The choice was to buy loads of PPE fast and wastefully, or to buy smaller quantities slowly and carefully.  There was no option available to buy fast and carefully.  Let's see a bit of balance, perhaps comparing with how other countries did it, to see just how wasteful the government was. 

[Leicester_Loyal]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-55354564

 

The Government now asking headteachers and teachers to start organising mass testing?

 

This is from another forum I'm on:

'Yesterday’s Government announcement, that secondary schools would run a mass testing programme from 4 January, is evidence of the Government’s incompetent and cavalier attitude to school and college staff.

School and college leaders – already required to organise contact tracing until 23 December – were now told, on the last day of term, that they should organise parents and governors to administer lateral flow tests to pupils at the beginning of the school year.

Teachers, for whom the end of term cannot come soon enough, have now been told they have to prepare remote learning for years 7 – 10 and 12 for the first week of the new term. And support staff face the prospect of their work being re-prioritised to support the testing programme.

We have been told that this mass testing programme is essential to combat the increased rates of Covid-19 amongst secondary school pupils as a result of Christmas holiday mingling in families.'

 

 

This can't be real surely? It must be bollocks.

[yorkie1999]

Why don't they take the opportunity to stick a needle in them at the same time.

[Happy Fox]

Post-Christmas lockdown? Would people be happy with a lockdown till the vaccine is rolled out across the board and returning to some level of normality May / June time next year?

[Dahnsouff]

1 minute ago, Happy Fox said:

Post-Christmas lockdown? Would people be happy with a lockdown till the vaccine is rolled out across the board and returning to some level of normality May / June time next year?

Yeah, sure

[Corky]

I thought the whole point of the tier system was to avoid national lockdowns? Why would Herefordshire which has seen cases drop to a level where they go to Tier 1 need to have every shut along with other areas?

 

If rates in areas increase then restrictions increase. If they don't, nothing should change.

[Buce]

17 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-55354564

 

The Government now asking headteachers and teachers to start organising mass testing?

 

This is from another forum I'm on:

'Yesterday’s Government announcement, that secondary schools would run a mass testing programme from 4 January, is evidence of the Government’s incompetent and cavalier attitude to school and college staff.

School and college leaders – already required to organise contact tracing until 23 December – were now told, on the last day of term, that they should organise parents and governors to administer lateral flow tests to pupils at the beginning of the school year.

Teachers, for whom the end of term cannot come soon enough, have now been told they have to prepare remote learning for years 7 – 10 and 12 for the first week of the new term. And support staff face the prospect of their work being re-prioritised to support the testing programme.

We have been told that this mass testing programme is essential to combat the increased rates of Covid-19 amongst secondary school pupils as a result of Christmas holiday mingling in families.'

 

 

This can't be real surely? It must be bollocks.

 

 

Is that even allowed?

[Leicester_Loyal]

15 minutes ago, Happy Fox said:

Post-Christmas lockdown? Would people be happy with a lockdown till the vaccine is rolled out across the board and returning to some level of normality May / June time next year?

Yes, if they could guarantee it, but they won’t nor can they. They’ll tell us this, with the promise of normality returning by May/June, then they’ll balls it up somehow and say actually we’re now going into tiers until September and nothings changed, just as they’ve done about 3 times now (Told us when normality is resuming then gone back on the promise). 

[Chrysalis]

3 hours ago, ealingfox said:

 

The mass embezzlement of hundreds of millions of pounds of public money and brazen corruption is not normal, and it seems it hasn't gone unnoticed. Both staggering and deeply depressing that the national media is so biased in favour of the ruling party that barely any outlets tried to shine a light on this.

 

But hey, I'm sure this is all part of that sinister global conspiracy to try and make the Conservative Party look bad, which now apparently includes UNICEF I hear.

I expect similar is happening with HS2.

[foxile5]

3 hours ago, ealingfox said:

 

The mass embezzlement of hundreds of millions of pounds of public money and brazen corruption is not normal, and it seems it hasn't gone unnoticed. Both staggering and deeply depressing that the national media is so biased in favour of the ruling party that barely any outlets tried to shine a light on this.

 

But hey, I'm sure this is all part of that sinister global conspiracy to try and make the Conservative Party look bad, which now apparently includes UNICEF I hear.

Doing the best they can. People only want to bash the government. Boris is my mate. Etc etc etc. 

[Houdini Logic]

4 hours ago, ealingfox said:

 

The mass embezzlement of hundreds of millions of pounds of public money and brazen corruption is not normal, and it seems it hasn't gone unnoticed. Both staggering and deeply depressing that the national media is so biased in favour of the ruling party that barely any outlets tried to shine a light on this.

 

But hey, I'm sure this is all part of that sinister global conspiracy to try and make the Conservative Party look bad, which now apparently includes UNICEF I hear.

If I was a member of Government, facing a national emergency and with the need to act quickly to save lives, I'd probably also reach out to anyone and everyone I knew in the first instance. Will there be a few dodgy transactions... probably.

But what's the alternative? A long and 'fair' procurement process? Automatically exclude any company which meets certain criteria, such as affiliations (even if they are able to provide the required PPE)?

 

I'm as far from a conservative supporter as you could imagine but I think it's easy to sensationalise without really thinking it through or providing realistic alternatives. 

[WigstonWanderer]

4 hours ago, ealingfox said:

 

The mass embezzlement of hundreds of millions of pounds of public money and brazen corruption is not normal, and it seems it hasn't gone unnoticed. Both staggering and deeply depressing that the national media is so biased in favour of the ruling party that barely any outlets tried to shine a light on this.

 

But hey, I'm sure this is all part of that sinister global conspiracy to try and make the Conservative Party look bad, which now apparently includes UNICEF I hear.

We’re getting the same here in Australia. There Is a brief burst of media coverage about the latest government corruption scandal, then silence. Nothing seems to happen, there is no resolution, the perps just carry on as before. It’s like the Shaggy song “It wasn’t me”.

 

The conservative side especially seem to be trying to normalise corruption. I seem to remember something similar during the latter period of the Tory government prior to Blair (known as sleaze at the time IIR). I realise that corruption is not limited to conservatives, but they seem to raise it to the level of an art form.

[BKLFox]

1 hour ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

Yes, if they could guarantee it, but they won’t nor can they. They’ll tell us this, with the promise of normality returning by May/June, then they’ll balls it up somehow and say actually we’re now going into tiers until September and nothings changed, just as they’ve done about 3 times now (Told us when normality is resuming then gone back on the promise). 

Your not the guy from One Foot in the Grave are you Loyal?

 

Quick sum will tell you that we not going to be normal until around September next year anyway, the sum being the amount of vaccine & the amount of time it will take to inject the UK populus.
Quick check on the Omni vaccine calculator puts the 50's age group around end of June anyone below down to 16 is anywhere from end June to end Sep, again this is only an estimate worked out that supply keeps up with demand.

 

I worked that out without the aid of Mr Hancock, i am now at peace there is a estimated date i can work too, if this is brought forward then great but until then my blood pressure will remain low as i won't give it a seconds thought now, along with all the many other things that happen in life that i personally have no control over.

[Leicester_Loyal]

22 minutes ago, BKLFox said:

Your not the guy from One Foot in the Grave are you Loyal?

 

Quick sum will tell you that we not going to be normal until around September next year anyway, the sum being the amount of vaccine & the amount of time it will take to inject the UK populus.
Quick check on the Omni vaccine calculator puts the 50's age group around end of June anyone below down to 16 is anywhere from end June to end Sep, again this is only an estimate worked out that supply keeps up with demand.

 

I worked that out without the aid of Mr Hancock, i am now at peace there is a estimated date i can work too, if this is brought forward then great but until then my blood pressure will remain low as i won't give it a seconds thought now, along with all the many other things that happen in life that i personally have no control over.

'We'll be back to normal by April' 'We'll be back to normal by July' 'Well be back to normal by October' 'We'll be back to normal by Christmas' 'We'll be back to normal by spring'

 

All quotes from this Government. I'm fed up of the lies from these bunch of *****. If we aren't going to be back to normal until September, that's fine, but don't sit there and constantly lie day in day about it like they have done. My mates businesses are going down the pan (along with it probably their houses) whilst these willy pullers stroll around handing themselves payrises and contracts from the public purse.

 

Guy Fawkes had the right idea.

 

EDIT: I should add the payrises comment relates to Cummings and how they just stick everything on expenses, as well as how most of them will accept the payrise coming their way next year, rather than give it to charity or something. 

Edited 18 December 2020 by Leicester_Loyal

[yorkie1999]

2 hours ago, Corky said:

I thought the whole point of the tier system was to avoid national lockdowns? Why would Herefordshire which has seen cases drop to a level where they go to Tier 1 need to have every shut along with other areas?

 

If rates in areas increase then restrictions increase. If they don't, nothing should change.

Because the powers that be can't stop people from tier 3 areas travelling into tier 1 areas for a booze up,

[dsr-burnley]

30 minutes ago, BKLFox said:

Your not the guy from One Foot in the Grave are you Loyal?

 

Quick sum will tell you that we not going to be normal until around September next year anyway, the sum being the amount of vaccine & the amount of time it will take to inject the UK populus.
Quick check on the Omni vaccine calculator puts the 50's age group around end of June anyone below down to 16 is anywhere from end June to end Sep, again this is only an estimate worked out that supply keeps up with demand.

 

I worked that out without the aid of Mr Hancock, i am now at peace there is a estimated date i can work too, if this is brought forward then great but until then my blood pressure will remain low as i won't give it a seconds thought now, along with all the many other things that happen in life that i personally have no control over.

Once everyone over 50 is done, then there should be no reason for lockdown.  As of 4th December, the number of under 50's whose death certificate recorded covid-19 at all, primary or secondary cause of death, was 1,324.  Even if you only count the peak periods, that's about 10 a day.  then the risk will be reduced by the over 50's not getting it, by the hospitals not spreading it, by summer making it harder to spread, and by whatever degree of immunity has happened naturally, and we will be way below the threshhold at which a national lockdown (or any restriction at all) makes sense.  

 

They don't lockdown for flu.  By the time the over 50's have been vaccinated, this disease will (all being well) be having less impact than flu.

Edited 18 December 2020 by dsr-burnley

[BKLFox]

3 minutes ago, dsr-burnley said:

Once everyone over 50 is done, then there should be no reason for lockdown.  As of 4th December, the number of under 50's whose death certificate recorded covid-19 at all, primary or secondary cause of death, was 1,324.  Even if you only count the peak periods, that's about 10 a day.  then the risk will be reduced by the over 50's not getting it, by the hospitals not spreading it, by summer making it harder to spread, and by whatever degree of immunity has happened naturally, and we will be way below the threshhold at which a national lockdown (or any restriction at all) makes sense.  

 

They don't lockdown for flu.  By the time the over 50's have been vaccinated, this disease will (all being well) be having less impact than flu.

fngers crossed dsr & fits into my "if its before September then great" but will still put the window end of June which is better than September but hardly a few sleeps away.  If we all make peace with the fact theres still a few more months of shite, unless theres a christmas miracle, we can set our own expectations & not listen to the white noise.

[dsr-burnley]

27 minutes ago, BKLFox said:

fngers crossed dsr & fits into my "if its before September then great" but will still put the window end of June which is better than September but hardly a few sleeps away.  If we all make peace with the fact theres still a few more months of shite, unless theres a christmas miracle, we can set our own expectations & not listen to the white noise.

My fingers are crossed harder than yours, I reckon.  I have a (delayable) flight and accommodation booked for some baseball in Milwaukee in April.

 

Good news - my mother's first vaccine shot is on Tuesday.

 

If they have most of the vulnerable, including the over 70's, inoculated by April, coupled with surely a drop in cases caused by vaccination coupled with Spring, then they won't be able to maintain lockdown.

[reporterpenguin]

40 minutes ago, dsr-burnley said:

They don't lockdown for flu.  By the time the over 50's have been vaccinated, this disease will (all being well) be having less impact than flu.

Yes, hopefully, but that’s with all the restrictions that have been in place.
 

Surely the fact that it has been, or has nearly been, as impactful as flu despite the wide ranging and long duration of restrictions shows how much the restrictions have been needed? With all the lockdowns, restrictions and tiering, it has still been as impactful as flu. 
 

The Leicester hospitals are at their highest level of alert, yet the city has been under restrictions since March. Doesn’t that give an idea of how bad things could have been without lockdown?

[dsr-burnley]

27 minutes ago, reporterpenguin said:

Yes, hopefully, but that’s with all the restrictions that have been in place.
 

Surely the fact that it has been, or has nearly been, as impactful as flu despite the wide ranging and long duration of restrictions shows how much the restrictions have been needed? With all the lockdowns, restrictions and tiering, it has still been as impactful as flu. 
 

The Leicester hospitals are at their highest level of alert, yet the city has been under restrictions since March. Doesn’t that give an idea of how bad things could have been without lockdown?

I'm talking about the future time when lockdown won't be needed, after the over 50's have been vaccinated.  Nothing (in this bit of the conversation, anyway) about whether it was needed before.

[yorkie1999]

30 minutes ago, reporterpenguin said:

Yes, hopefully, but that’s with all the restrictions that have been in place.
 

Surely the fact that it has been, or has nearly been, as impactful as flu despite the wide ranging and long duration of restrictions shows how much the restrictions have been needed? With all the lockdowns, restrictions and tiering, it has still been as impactful as flu. 
 

The Leicester hospitals are at their highest level of alert, yet the city has been under restrictions since March. Doesn’t that give an idea of how bad things could have been without lockdown?

No, because it's it's a rolling event with no direct comparison. It probably makes a difference but it might not have made any difference and it might have made it worse. Personally, it makes it worse because my mrs and my daughter both work at schools and i'm spending far more time with them than i ordinarily would indoors at the weekends, so the risks are going to be higher.

[BKLFox]

59 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

'We'll be back to normal by April' 'We'll be back to normal by July' 'Well be back to normal by October' 'We'll be back to normal by Christmas' 'We'll be back to normal by spring'

 

All quotes from this Government. I'm fed up of the lies from these bunch of *****. If we aren't going to be back to normal until September, that's fine, but don't sit there and constantly lie day in day about it like they have done. My mates businesses are going down the pan (along with it probably their houses) whilst these willy pullers stroll around handing themselves payrises and contracts from the public purse.

 

Guy Fawkes had the right idea.

 

EDIT: I should add the payrises comment relates to Cummings and how they just stick everything on expenses, as well as how most of them will accept the payrise coming their way next year, rather than give it to charity or something. 

I do believe they said "some sense of normality" which to be fair when in the lower Tiers, namely not 3, then that is some sense of normality.
If the only thing that can put us back to true normal is a vaccine then no matter how much you shout at a brickwall to collapse it won't unless you have the tools to knock it down, we now have the tool.

 

I get the lashing out in frustration for your friends, we are all in that boat but the cold hard facts are that despite what might have been said with regards to normality it looks the world over that this is only to be achieved by a vaccine, had they not "lied" as you put it & said nothing, the events leading to business closures & family homes etc would sadly still happen & will continue too.

[Guest Harrydc]

Lockdown 3 in January.

 

3 weeks to flatten the curve. 

 

But it's just about a virus. 

[Mark 'expert' Lawrenson]

Boris just be honest for once and tell the public there will be a 3rd lockdown.

 

[Sampson]

2 hours ago, dsr-burnley said:

Once everyone over 50 is done, then there should be no reason for lockdown.  As of 4th December, the number of under 50's whose death certificate recorded covid-19 at all, primary or secondary cause of death, was 1,324.  Even if you only count the peak periods, that's about 10 a day.  then the risk will be reduced by the over 50's not getting it, by the hospitals not spreading it, by summer making it harder to spread, and by whatever degree of immunity has happened naturally, and we will be way below the threshhold at which a national lockdown (or any restriction at all) makes sense.  

 

They don't lockdown for flu.  By the time the over 50's have been vaccinated, this disease will (all being well) be having less impact than flu.

Of course there is - ring vaccination for people who can't have vaccines like pregnant women or people with allergies.

 

It makes no sense to lift restrictions until everyone who can be vaccinated has been.