Cable Forum - Coronavirus (OLD)

BREAKING: Cable Forum Co-owner, Mick, has tested “Negative” for Covid-19.

I was tested earlier this week and will be tested on a regular basis with working in the healthcare sector.

Phew. For now. :D

Nice one Mick, couldn't happen to a nicer bloke ...

. . . *casually checks if a new bronze rep star has appeared* :naughty:

Seriously though, great news and hope many more of us get similar news in the next few weeks :)

Maggy

14-05-2020 19:49

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36035047)

:cleader::cleader::cleader:

ianch99

14-05-2020 20:37

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36034991)

You are accusing me of bias in this matter towards the Conservative government.

To back that up, you've mixed in my complaint that the Torygraph (among others) was headlining the 40% without any discussion of the cause(s). The article (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/202...us-fatalities/ link to the paywall) does not discuss government policy documents.

I also posed a question as to whether I had misunderstood anything in questioning the scandal. Accordingly, it was made clear by other (more reasonable people) that I had misunderstood the situation - namely I'd not taken into account the scandal of positive tested patients being moved into care homes.

You really need to back down and not politicise this matter nor insult me.

You can have the last word if you want.

I think you are conflating being insulted with being told by someone you are wrong.

Mr K	14-05-2020 20:55

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36035034)

Even if the furlough scheme manages to close in October (which is not guaranteed) there will still be restrictions. Working from home, mass gatherings, etc.

Obviously, we know capitalists really like corporate socialism so Comrade Rishi doesn't want to stand there and promise it longer term and have some companies continue to rely on it unnecessarily. In October they will want to keep it to a minimum where those businesses can't open for safety reasons rather than commercial ones.

There is a plan. Send the riff raff back to work, and see how many deaths occur. It's a nothing lost litmus test for the Tory boys, to see if it's safe for them to come out yet.

Carth

14-05-2020 21:23

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36035083)

There is a plan. Send the riff raff back to work, and see how many deaths occur. It's a nothing lost litmus test for the Tory boys, to see if it's safe for them to come out yet.

riff raff?

Quite a few of the riff raff (not NHS) have been busy working since day one, ensuring people like you have food & drink, a fresh water supply, the power required to heat and light your home (and run your computer), and even take all your rubbish away.

They may be low paid, have a very basic education, and quite possibly don't speak much English . . . but they're currently worth a lot more to the country than you Mr K

riff raff :rolleyes:

Pierre

14-05-2020 21:28

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36035083)

There is a plan. Send the riff raff back to work, and see how many deaths occur. It's a nothing lost litmus test for the Tory boys, to see if it's safe for them to come out yet.

You know, you’ll die a bitter old man with all that bottled up hatred.

Mrs Pierre is going back to work and she isn’t Riff Rafi. As per a previous post of yours, regarding cleaners ( or which we have one) you have a very outdated idea of What working class/ middles class is nowadays as it is not like it was in the 70’s, where it would appear you still reside.

I don’t think those terms are relevant any longer.

jfman

14-05-2020 21:41

Re: Coronavirus

Watching Channel 4s “The Country that beat the virus”. Plenty of lessons to be had, looks like a relative bargain compared to Comrade Rishi’s furlough scheme, never mind 35% of GDP.

---------- Post added at 21:41 ---------- Previous post was at 21:32 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36035091)

I don’t think those terms are relevant any longer.

Someone who supports (or sorry doesn’t - regularly leaps to the defence of?) the party that has increased inequality wants to remove the terminology that defines it from regular discourse.

As interesting as it is contemptible.

1andrew1

14-05-2020 21:51

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36035047)

Great news and even better news that you and your colleagues have the reassurance of regular testing. :clap:

---------- Post added at 21:51 ---------- Previous post was at 21:49 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 36035038)

I think you made a slight mistake there Den. The virus has been found.;)

:D Lol. Not normally much to laugh at on this thread.

Damien

15-05-2020 10:31

Re: Coronavirus

Looks like a much more interventionist stance on obesity will be coming in the aftermath of the viru: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/n...care-flgswhmvx

Chris

15-05-2020 10:39

Re: Coronavirus

A comment copied over from the Keir Starmer thread:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36035126)

Can I recommend that you apply for a position with Dominic Cummings?

Your ability to spin from one subject to the next, ignoring any previous point you may have made, would fit right in with him... ;)

And as Den said, Sir Patrick Vallance, the government's chief scientific adviser, said 20,000 would be a good outcome, so your second point has been addressed as well.

The Vallance quote is however lacking context.

It was made on best evidence at the time, but it was made at a specific and quite early stage of the crisis and was not qualified in any way as far as I can see. Did he offer 20,000 as a pinpoint for 'good' beyond which all is 'bad', or is it at the lower, mid or upper range of a scale of 'good'? How far beyond it is 'meh'? At what point do we hit 'truly awful'?

And ultimately, are we more interested in whether it's 20,000 extremely sick people who would have died this year anyway but now have Covid-19 on their death certificate too, or are we interested in an 'excess death' figure that tries to get closer to the actual impact on the size and health of the population?

I'm not trying to obfuscate here; simply pointing out that regardless of who it was who stood up and said '20,000' its value in isolation is strictly limited. And also that cold, dispassionate statistics, collated many months from now, are the only things that can actually give us a good idea how good or bad the government's response was.

jfman

15-05-2020 10:40

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36035136)

Looks like a much more interventionist stance on obesity will be coming in the aftermath of the viru: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/n...care-flgswhmvx

Nice deflection by the Government. It's the fault of people that they are fat and died from Coronavirus, not that we didn't put in place internationally recognised and established methodologies for containing a virus.

Sephiroth

15-05-2020 10:45

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36035140)

If that's not your occasional sarcasm, jfman, that's a pretty cruel judgement made by you.

People aren't necessarily to blame in the way you imply for being fat, nor could they have foreseen CV.

Perhaps you could elaborate and further elucidate.

---------- Post added at 10:45 ---------- Previous post was at 10:44 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36035083)

There is a plan. Send the riff raff back to work, and see how many deaths occur. It's a nothing lost litmus test for the Tory boys, to see if it's safe for them to come out yet.

Might you remove the word "Liberal" from your caption?

Carth

15-05-2020 10:49

Re: Coronavirus

To be fair, we the public are made well aware of the health problems that can result from being overweight . . and smoking . . and excessive alcohol

Damien

15-05-2020 11:26

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carth (Post 36035144)

To be fair, we the public are made well aware of the health problems that can result from being overweight . . and smoking . . and excessive alcohol

True but this pandemic shows the degree to which an individual's health is of concern to wider society and the state. The unhealthier the population as a whole is the greater burden on the NHS and the more it costs us in terms of capacity of that service and the cost to provide it.

We're still going to have to depend on personal responsibility but the Government doing what it can to encourage that and help people can't hurt.

I was thinking the other day in how smoking is a known risk factor, how we've had a decade of aggressive government intervention to slower the rates of smoking and how many lives may have been saved as a result.

If we see a similar success to that in obesity then in a decade's time we'll have fewer rates of people being admitted in in-patient and out-patient care.

jfman

15-05-2020 12:39

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36035141)

[COLOR="Blue"]If that's not your occasional sarcasm, jfman, that's a pretty cruel judgement made by you.

People aren't necessarily to blame in the way you imply for being fat, nor could they have foreseen CV.

Perhaps you could elaborate and further elucidate.

Sorry I forgot quotation marks. I was paraphrasing the sentiment of the article, and other articles, that I view as deflecting from the pertinent questions around this. Testing and contact tracing.

We get this right and the lockdown is worth it. We get this wrong and we will be back in lockdown by August.

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 16:14.

Page 225 of 421

225

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page