Coronavirus Thread

[Nuneatonfox in Manchester 286]

1 hour ago, whoareyaaa said:

The fourth self employed grant won't be paid out until late April ridiculous, that's almost a  month after it ended  

Tbf with it (finally!) including people who became self employed in 19/20, the time will be needed to redo all of the calculations, which is fair enough.

[String fellow 465]

43 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

That doesn't really answer my question, though; if you were expected to work until you were in your seventies, would you be ok with that? Or would you rather spend the winter of your years travelling or enjoying the grandkids, or just having a well-earned rest after 50+ years of hard graft?

 

 

You are labouring under a misapprehension if you assume I'm a Labour supporter; when Labour get my vote it's only because we live in a functionally two-party state and they at least represent some of my values.

 

But after ten years of failed austerity policies, the Tories have lost the right to be considered a safe pair of hands with the economy.

 

It's all about social justice, for me; if you don't believe in that concept, we'll have to agree to disagree.

Don't forget that many older people actually want to continue working after their official retirement date. Another point is about retirement itself. Like many other folk, I used to dream of it - not having to get up every morning and trek across town to get to work. But now, although that burden has gone (though not my now unpaid caring duties at home haven't) the reality is that life isn't the bed of roses you might expect. All life's other struggles and anxieties are still there, and some are actually increasing. So please don't assume that retirement is all it's cracked up to be! On the question of social justice, it's such a vague term that it can used to fit virtually any narrative, depending on one's perspective. Generally speaking, I'm a proponent of the embourgeoisement thesis. 

 

[Stoopid 1,303]

12 minutes ago, String fellow said:

Don't forget that many older people actually want to continue working after their official retirement date. Another point is about retirement itself. Like many other folk, I used to dream of it - not having to get up every morning and trek across town to get to work. But now, although that burden has gone (though not my now unpaid caring duties at home haven't) the reality is that life isn't the bed of roses you might expect. All life's other struggles and anxieties are still there, and some are actually increasing. So please don't assume that retirement is all it's cracked up to be! On the question of social justice, it's such a vague term that it can used to fit virtually any narrative, depending on one's perspective. Generally speaking, I'm a proponent of the embourgeoisement thesis. 

 

Have to say, retirement's fine by me. There again, I never really bought into the 9 - 5 view of the world or being a wage slave for the purpose of affording stuff you're supposed to want. In truth  I could do without most of it. 

Not sure what 'embourgeoisment' is, but I never had any desire to join the middle-classes. 

What people tend to forget about us oldies is that we grew up in the 60s, most of us, and quite often retain the pretty weird and non-materialistic views of that time.

Not having to go to some yes-boss workplace everyday gets my vote. 

[Buce 12,233]

10 minutes ago, String fellow said:

Don't forget that many older people actually want to continue working after their official retirement date.

 

And there is nothing preventing them from doing so, if they wish. I know a lady of 82 who chooses to work, but that's her choice.

 

10 minutes ago, String fellow said:

 

Another point is about retirement itself. Like many other folk, I used to dream of it - not having to get up every morning and trek across town to get to work. But now, although that burden has gone (though not my now unpaid caring duties at home haven't)

 

That raises another point: do you really think it fair that your caring was so undervalued by the govt, that you had to work an extra year to get a full pension?

 

10 minutes ago, String fellow said:

 

the reality is that life isn't the bed of roses you might expect. All life's other struggles and anxieties are still there, and some are actually increasing. So please don't assume that retirement is all it's cracked up to be!

 

It is what it is but adding the burden of actively seeking work to all those other (increasing) stresses just makes life even shitter.

 

 

[BenTheFox 1,887]

Massive increase in the number of second doses being issued in the latest vaccination figures. We'll start to see even more as the Oxford Vaccine started to be rolled out two months ago. 

[UpTheLeagueFox 10,940]

9 hours ago, whoareyaaa said:

The fourth self employed grant won't be paid out until late April ridiculous, that's almost a  month after it ended  

 

8 hours ago, Nuneatonfox in Manchester said:

Tbf with it (finally!) including people who became self employed in 19/20, the time will be needed to redo all of the calculations, which is fair enough.

Had the email re SEISS 4. Was very surprised to see you can't claim until mid-late April. This period (if I recall correctly) was due to cover Feb/Mar/April.

Then SEISS 5 (to cover from May-Sep) isn't available until late July.

Going to have to juggle some savings around as I hoped we'd be getting SEISS 4 paid this month.

First world problems though, eh. Crack on.

[yorkie1999 4,769]

12 hours ago, BenTheFox said:

Massive increase in the number of second doses being issued in the latest vaccination figures. We'll start to see even more as the Oxford Vaccine started to be rolled out two months ago. 

Just reading about the over 80's who've now had 2 jabs, over 50% of them are breaking lockdown rules as they believe they are now safe. Don't know whether that's a good thing or bad but there can't be many of em jogging and spreading it to the the rest of us.

[Leicester_Loyal 5,957]

And now after 12 months the Government is telling us to start eating healthier Not like we've had ICU nurses on this very forum telling us most of their younger patients are fatties, yet it's took this Government 12 months to notice

[Nuneatonfox in Manchester 286]

3 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

And now after 12 months the Government is telling us to start eating healthier Not like we've had ICU nurses on this very forum telling us most of their younger patients are fatties, yet it's took this Government 12 months to notice

It didn't take the government 12 months to notice, there was a big campaign last summer. They can't force people to eat healthy, that is the responsibility of the individual.

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-obesity-strategy-unveiled-as-country-urged-to-lose-weight-to-beat-coronavirus-covid-19-and-protect-the-nhs

[filbertway 3,157]

Is this Health Minister suggesting that we're likely to get mutations because we're vaccinating people/currently in lock down.

 

Is he under the belief that the virus has consciousness and it making a conscious effort to change in the face of adversity?

 

High infection rate i'm on board with, that makes sense. The fact it changes because it realises that it's in danger seems ludicrous to me haha

 

 

 

[Leicester_Loyal 5,957]

6 minutes ago, Nuneatonfox in Manchester said:

It didn't take the government 12 months to notice, there was a big campaign last summer. They can't force people to eat healthy, that is the responsibility of the individual.

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-obesity-strategy-unveiled-as-country-urged-to-lose-weight-to-beat-coronavirus-covid-19-and-protect-the-nhs

Fair enough, I don't remember hearing any of that last summer but it feels like a lifetime ago, so I'll admit I was wrong there.

 

It's definitely not up to them, but we should have been encouraging people to go to the gyms rather than going to McDonalds throughout lockdowns. Sticking a tax on sugar items or whatever just punishes everyone rather than the fat people, why should I pay more because some fatty can't stop drinking full fat coke

[Innovindil 3,000]

5 minutes ago, filbertway said:

Is this Health Minister suggesting that we're likely to get mutations because we're vaccinating people/currently in lock down.

 

Is he under the belief that the virus has consciousness and it making a conscious effort to change in the face of adversity?

 

High infection rate i'm on board with, that makes sense. The fact it changes because it realises that it's in danger seems ludicrous to me haha

 

 

 

Eh? Thought it was common knowledge by now that viruses mutate to survive? 

[bovril 8,473]

2 minutes ago, filbertway said:

Is this Health Minister suggesting that we're likely to get mutations because we're vaccinating people/currently in lock down.

 

Is he under the belief that the virus has consciousness and it making a conscious effort to change in the face of adversity?

 

High infection rate i'm on board with, that makes sense. The fact it changes because it realises that it's in danger seems ludicrous to me haha

 

 

 

um.....

[filbertway 3,157]

Just now, Innovindil said:

Eh? Thought it was common knowledge by now that viruses mutate to survive? 

My understanding that a virus mutation is an accidental replication, if it happens to be more transmissable/better at surviving then it'll carry on being replicated.

 

Thus, the more people infected, the more chance of a mutation occuring that improves the virus.

 

What I'm fair sure doesn't happen is that the virus sits down to watch the news at 6 and goes "crap, they're onto us, better change".

 

I might be wrong, but that seems absurd to me

 

[egg_fried_rice 1,245]

Just now, filbertway said:

My understanding that a virus mutation is an accidental replication, if it happens to be more transmissable/better at surviving then it'll carry on being replicated.

 

Thus, the more people infected, the more chance of a mutation occuring that improves the virus.

 

What I'm fair sure doesn't happen is that the virus sits down to watch the news at 6 and goes "crap, they're onto us, better change".

 

I might be wrong, but that seems absurd to me

 

A vaccine acts as a selection pressure on a pathogen, meaning the 'fittest' (read: mutated) versions of the virus will be the ones most likely to survive 

[Nuneatonfox in Manchester 286]

.

 

 

Edited 4 March by Nuneatonfox in Manchester

[Nuneatonfox in Manchester 286]

17 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

Fair enough, I don't remember hearing any of that last summer but it feels like a lifetime ago, so I'll admit I was wrong there.

 

It's definitely not up to them, but we should have been encouraging people to go to the gyms rather than going to McDonalds throughout lockdowns. Sticking a tax on sugar items or whatever just punishes everyone rather than the fat people, why should I pay more because some fatty can't stop drinking full fat coke

I agree on the gyms, I work in a gym and we were bang on it with covid security, a lot of pressure was applied from those higher up in the industry and many believe that the government did somewhat relent when they allowed gyms to re-open in tier 4 just before christmas time.

 

It seems to me that obesity has always been one of the major risk factors and may well go a long way to explain some of the few cases of people supposedly dying without a 'pre-existing' condition, I may be wrong but I don't think obesity is registered as one of those conditions. Also with UK having the worst death rate it is not surprising that experts are linking that to the obesity crisis.https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/03/03/uks-covid-death-toll-fuelled-obesity-epidemic-say-experts/

You would hope that the increasing risk of death in a pandemic would focus the minds of those who are overweight, but then again the health risks aside from covid have been well known for decades, and it doesn't seem to have helped much.

[filbertway 3,157]

Just now, egg_fried_rice said:

A vaccine acts as a selection pressure on a pathogen, meaning the 'fittest' (read: mutated) versions of the virus will be the ones most likely to survive 

 

Surely having a high level of infection is the most likely way of having mutations. Reducing infection levels seems to logically mean to me that there's less chance of mutations happening.

 

If somebody develops a "fitter" version of the virus, then whether they've been vaccinated or not, surely is more likely to survive? 

 

I'm going to need some more information backing up that guys statement for me to bow down on this one I think. I'm still fairly sure he thinks that the virus will actively mutate because it senses "danger" haha

[dsr-burnley 580]

5 minutes ago, filbertway said:

 

Surely having a high level of infection is the most likely way of having mutations. Reducing infection levels seems to logically mean to me that there's less chance of mutations happening.

 

If somebody develops a "fitter" version of the virus, then whether they've been vaccinated or not, surely is more likely to survive? 

 

I'm going to need some more information backing up that guys statement for me to bow down on this one I think. I'm still fairly sure he thinks that the virus will actively mutate because it senses "danger" haha

I think the problem is that you have taken your own, self-admittedly simple, view of viruses and projected it onto the health minister.  Specifically, there is no hint in his quote that he thinks the virus is a sentient being; you appear to be projecting your own thoughts onto him.  

 

Like you, I don't know much about vaccines.  But is it so unreasonable to think that the spread and mutation of viruses is different under lockdown than not?  I think it's a mistake to assume that just because neither of us can understand why the health minister and his plethora of medical advisers think what they do, that we should automatically assume he is wrong.  Let's start with the idea that the experts may be right and we're wrong, not the other way round, shall we?

[Sol thewall Bamba 8,429]

51 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

And now after 12 months the Government is telling us to start eating healthier Not like we've had ICU nurses on this very forum telling us most of their younger patients are fatties, yet it's took this Government 12 months to notice

And the gyms are still shut  

[Nalis 5,571]

Last Thurs: 9,985 new cases and 323 new deaths

 

This Thurs: 6,573 new cases and 242 new deaths

 

Schools reopening might halt the slowdown or increase cases slightly in the next few weeks but we are still on the right track.

[filbertway 3,157]

6 minutes ago, dsr-burnley said:

I think the problem is that you have taken your own, self-admittedly simple, view of viruses and projected it onto the health minister.  Specifically, there is no hint in his quote that he thinks the virus is a sentient being; you appear to be projecting your own thoughts onto him.  

 

Like you, I don't know much about vaccines.  But is it so unreasonable to think that the spread and mutation of viruses is different under lockdown than not?  I think it's a mistake to assume that just because neither of us can understand why the health minister and his plethora of medical advisers think what they do, that we should automatically assume he is wrong.  Let's start with the idea that the experts may be right and we're wrong, not the other way round, shall we?

I'm not convinced a lad born into the elite and given a job as a junior minister is actually an expert to be honest. A brief look at his history on wiki doesn't mentioned anything about being an expert in virology or any kind of scientific background. If a virologist was quoted I'd happily take it.

 

The Hon. James Nicholas Bethell was educated at the independent, fee-paying Harrow School before going on to study for a Scottish Master of Arts (an undergraduate degree) at the University of Edinburgh.[2]

Bethell worked as a journalist, and then managed the Ministry of Sound nightclub, before founding Westbourne Communications which he sold to Cicero Group after succeeding to his family titles.[3]

 

 

Anyway @potter3 just explained to me how vaccincations can give mutations an improved chance of spreading. 

 

"yeah so high number of infections means greater chance of mutations occurring
+ more vaccinated people that block transmission of the regular strain but not necessarily some of these mutated variants = greater transmission of mutant variants that might otherwise have been superseded by the regular strain"

 

Still, I think Lord Bethell is full of it! haha.

[Corky 14,460]

1 hour ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

And now after 12 months the Government is telling us to start eating healthier Not like we've had ICU nurses on this very forum telling us most of their younger patients are fatties, yet it's took this Government 12 months to notice

Maybe shutting the gyms and restricting people to one lot of exercise per day wasn't the best move?

[filbertway 3,157]

Just now, Nalis said:

Last Thurs: 9,985 new cases and 323 new deaths

 

This Thurs: 6,573 new cases and 242 new deaths

 

Schools reopening might halt the slowdown or increase cases slightly in the next few weeks but we are still on the right track.

Love them numbers! I'm really excited to see the effect schools re-opening has. If hospitalisations and deaths are still dropping at a good rate in a month it's gonna be looking like we've cracked it.

 

[dsr-burnley 580]

10 minutes ago, filbertway said:

I'm not convinced a lad born into the elite and given a job as a junior minister is actually an expert to be honest. A brief look at his history on wiki doesn't mentioned anything about being an expert in virology or any kind of scientific background. If a virologist was quoted I'd happily take it.

I suspect that he has advisers who have some experience in the medical field.