Cable Forum
Page 55 of 64 « First 54551525354 55 56575859 Last »
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)
-   Current Affairs (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=20)
-   -   Coronavirus (OLD) (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33708712)

OLD BOY 09-09-2020 18:27
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36049201)
Old Boy the contortions that you put yourself in to justify the Governments steps at every stage and the contradictions that result are utterly laughable.

No lockdown - they're going to die anyway - has become we had a late lockdown, there were early deaths but it's alright now. Despite the obvious contradiction that many believe we are better at treating complex cases.

Again there's no evidence to support that we won't go into a second wave unless we keep present restrictions and likely add to them. Steps the Government are taking from next week. It's speculative nonsense, much like your claim that it won't like high temperatures.

---------- Post added at 10:04 ---------- Previous post was at 10:02 ----------



By the point that happens it will simply be too late to intervene. Almost nobody catches Covid and falls into a hospital bed on day 2.

Of course we know the actual numbers are rising - testing has been available for those with symptoms for some weeks now. You can bury your head in the sand, as you have throughout the pandemic, but your 'solutions' neither protect public health or the economy.
You are the one who is confused, jfman. My post made perfect sense to anyone who actually read it properly.

You are digging up old arguments with the seasonal issue. All I did last spring was to speculate that if this virus behaved the same way as flu, it should die off in the summer, but it soon became clear that the virus was spreading very rapidly in both hot and cold countries.

Yes, many of us called it flu - it is similar in a lot of ways. But we all now know the differences, and the impact any new virus or strain of virus can have.

What do you mean, there is no evidence that we won't go into a second wave? Admittedly, we could do, but I've already pointed out that a mathematician has calculated that our late lockdown could have had benefits for us in that respect. It's only a theory, but it is evidence. If we do get a second wave, it proves that this virus is going nowhere and lockdowns, in the end, are futile.

A permanent lockdown is not on, and it won't happen. However, one bit of good news for you. If you want to lockdown yourself, you can do so for as long as you like. No-one is stopping you. Let me know if you need any padlocks. :D

jfman 09-09-2020 18:56
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36049304)
The number of tests continues to increase and that is what is causing a higher number in the statistics. Reduce the testing and guess what? The numbers come down again.
That's funny because the Chief Medical Officer for the United Kingdom said a mere two hours ago that the prevalence of the virus is up, and that's causing positives to rise across all age groups.

I'm wondering who is more likely to be right - open the economy at all costs
Old Boy or the Chief Medical Officer? Hmmm....


Quote:
You are the one who is confused, jfman. My post made perfect sense to anyone who actually read it properly.

You are digging up old arguments with the seasonal issue. All I did last spring was to speculate that if this virus behaved the same way as flu, it should die off in the summer, but it soon became clear that the virus was spreading very rapidly in both hot and cold countries.
You engaged in speculative nonsense - as you have throughout - to justify your nonsensical position of reopening the economy at all costs. It was apparent then that the virus was already spreading in climates aligned to a North European summer.

Quote:
Yes, many of us called it flu - it is similar in a lot of ways. But we all now know the differences, and the impact any new virus or strain of virus can have.

What do you mean, there is no evidence that we won't go into a second wave? Admittedly, we could do, but I've already pointed out that a mathematician has calculated that our late lockdown could have had benefits for us in that respect. It's only a theory, but it is evidence. If we do get a second wave, it proves that this virus is going nowhere and lockdowns, in the end, are futile.
A mathematician? Who?

Again the Chief Medical Officer of the United Kingdom has pointed out that our trajectory is clearly on the up, and mirrors other European countries at round -4 weeks. Again who is more likely to be right here? Him, and a Government that are heeding his advice, or your 'mathematician?

Quote:
A permanent lockdown is not on, and it won't happen. However, one bit of good news for you. If you want to lockdown yourself, you can do so for as long as you like. No-one is stopping you. Let me know if you need any padlocks. :D
In your opinion a lockdown is not on, however it's an emergency brake and if the situation deteriorates - which it will without intervention - then it's inevitable. You will note that Matt Hancock didn't rule it out, nor has Boris Johnson.

Now what's the track record of your opinions here, Old Boy?

While you are right that the good news for me that I can limit my interactions with other people, save on my commute, coffees, muffins. I can now meet colleagues socially on a voluntary basis in the pub on a Friday night rather than be forced into open plan offices to engage with them. Might even do the pub quiz tomorrow too.

That's bad news for the economy Old Boy. It'll remain the case. There's no going back to the old normal without resolving the virus issue. Bad news for those on furlough. Bad news for city centre property developers. Those burying their heads in the sand hoping to leap from one quick fix to another with failure after failure will eventually look back and see that they were wrong. What are we £210bn and a recession in? Boris and his moonshot have been priced at £110bn to do that level of testing for 12 months. We couldn't afford lockdown though. :)

---------- Post added at 18:56 ---------- Previous post was at 18:44 ----------

https://www.standard.co.uk/business/...box=1599660760

Do we think Alan has the begging bowl out for some corporate socialism?

Hugh 09-09-2020 19:05
Re: Coronavirus
 
2 Attachment(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36049304)
You are the one who is confused, jfman. My post made perfect sense to anyone who actually read it properly.

You are digging up old arguments with the seasonal issue. All I did last spring was to speculate that if this virus behaved the same way as flu, it should die off in the summer, but it soon became clear that the virus was spreading very rapidly in both hot and cold countries.

Yes, many of us called it flu - it is similar in a lot of ways. But we all now know the differences, and the impact any new virus or strain of virus can have.

What do you mean, there is no evidence that we won't go into a second wave? Admittedly, we could do, but I've already pointed out that a mathematician has calculated that our late lockdown could have had benefits for us in that respect. It's only a theory, but it is evidence. If we do get a second wave, it proves that this virus is going nowhere and lockdowns, in the end, are futile.

A permanent lockdown is not on, and it won't happen. However, one bit of good news for you. If you want to lockdown yourself, you can do so for as long as you like. No-one is stopping you. Let me know if you need any padlocks. :D
And when asked politely for a link to back up this assertion, failed to provide one.

Also, you stated previously on the 5th that scientists had said that the delay in lockdown made no difference in the impact of the virus, and there would be no 2nd wave - when asked for a link, once again none was forthcoming...

Hom3r 09-09-2020 19:27
Re: Coronavirus
 
Below is what I put on my town face book page in response to those who make excuses to not wearing a mask.

I did have a lot of people back me, but a few villages are missing their idiot.

Quote:
I want to explain my anger towards those who don't wear masks, regardless the reason.

On the 17th of March I picked my mum up from her sisters, we went into Sainsbury's (not much choice due to panic buying) and while walking around I said to her that as of tomorrow ill do all the shopping and when I've eaten my tea at night ill go and stay in my room to avoid contact as I was working and god knows what the idiots at were doing to prevent spread.

On the 18th of March I was up at 6am and went to work I got in at 6pm and my mum said she had to sit as her legs were very painful. Well after several attempts tooing and throwing between 111 & 999 an ambulance arrived, and she was taken to hospital as she had no movement below the waist.

At 6am on the 19th I had to call my sister to ask can she take over as I had been up 24 hours, she took over at 730am, and I was in bed by 8am. I was awoken at 9am with my sister in tears saying that mums O2 had crashed to 50% and I should get here. I did but had to get my dad as we were told to prepare for the worse. I eventually got to bed after being awake for 38½ hours.

On the 26th of March were told that she had the Coronavirus and I had to leave work immediately and self-quarantine.

Days after this I was furloughed.

On the 14th of April we were told that the Coronavirus has left her paralysed.

On the 15th of April she was moved to a nursing home some 30 minutes always.

In that time I have only seen her 3 times, once her wedding anniversary and second birthday.

Now the home is allowing only one household to visit every 3 weeks. So I have told my sister to do it.

I was made redundant on July 1st which means I am at risk of losing my car.

We are currently in the process of getting her home, I spent 9 weeks sorting out the house in 30c heat during the hottest days this year and a bed has been delivered and the mattress is being order, then it's the care package, it will mean me getting up at 3am every morning to move her to another position in bed.

If I knew then what I know now, perhaps she would still be walking, so forgive me if I say there is no reason not to wear a mask or stay at home if you don't, as I wouldn't wish my nightmare on my enemies.

jfman 09-09-2020 19:55
Re: Coronavirus
 
Brave to post on FB with so many idiots on social media.

denphone 09-09-2020 19:58
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36049316)
Brave to post on FB with so many idiots on social media.
Lets not generalise everybody that uses social media as a idiot.;)

Damien 09-09-2020 20:01
Re: Coronavirus
 
Hope things will turn around for you soon Hom3r.

1andrew1 09-09-2020 20:07
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hom3r (Post 36049313)
Below is what I put on my town face book page in response to those who make excuses to not wearing a mask.

I did have a lot of people back me, but a few villages are missing their idiot.
Well done for speaking out. I hope things improve soon.

Hom3r 09-09-2020 21:09
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36049316)
Brave to post on FB with so many idiots on social media.
Not really, I say it as I see.

I will happily and conscious free say what I feel about those not wearing masks.

In fact one person said that they have fought the anxiety that a mask causes.


I have said that perhaps if your breathing is so bad wearing a mask that you should stay at home, also it is selfish not to wear one.

Mad Max 10-09-2020 00:03
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hom3r (Post 36049326)
Not really, I say it as I see.

I will happily and conscious free say what I feel about those not wearing masks.

In fact one person said that they have fought the anxiety that a mask causes.


I have said that perhaps if your breathing is so bad wearing a mask that you should stay at home, also it is selfish not to wear one.
I hope that your mum gets better, although having said that the damage has already been done, imo the wearing of masks is only necessary when in a shop etc or where there are many people close together, i do not wear a mask outwith those conditions.

1andrew1 10-09-2020 09:08
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36049310)
And when asked politely for a link to back up this assertion, failed to provide one.

Also, you stated previously on the 5th that scientists had said that the delay in lockdown made no difference in the impact of the virus, and there would be no 2nd wave - when asked for a link, once again none was forthcoming...
I'll try and help move this debate forwards. My understanding is that no one on the forum has found any scientists supporting Old Boy's assertion and the OP appears not to have done so yet either.

However, Julian did kindly unearth a maths professor in Bristol whose model suggested Britain's infection rate peaked on 18th March which the Daily Mail said threw into question whether Britain's lockdown on 23rd March was necessary.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-lockdown.html

Carth 10-09-2020 10:17
Re: Coronavirus
 
I can't remember what the original assertion was . . . possibly that 'experts' said an early lockdown would cause more/less deaths . . or the general public getting fed up and returning to 'normal' life at the worst possible time? . . . or . . well excuse me, I can't be bothered to trawl back :rolleyes:

I do vaguely remember reading all sorts of stuff pertaining to the above though, but in all honesty can't remember if it was on definite web sites or just people posting stuff from the twitter/facebook accounts of the 'experts'.

What I do know though, is that whatever you read on the internet can be deleted or altered if it then makes people look stupid or incompetent . . . or there is enough 'pressure' from other sources to make it happen.

Not that I'm fussed about this particular assertion anyway, it's probably just the mundane boredom getting to me ;)

Kushan 10-09-2020 10:23
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36049316)
Brave to post on FB with so many idiots on social media.
There's plenty of idiots on this forum as well. Plenty of idiots on reddit, or the BBC, or the Daily mail and so on. Idiots everywhere.

My concern is that in this instance, the idiocy is costing lives and there's a distinct lack of self-awareness about it (at best) or just a complete lack of regard for our fellow humans (at worst).

Sephiroth 10-09-2020 10:39
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan (Post 36049372)
There's plenty of idiots on this forum as well. Plenty of idiots on reddit, or the BBC, or the Daily mail and so on. Idiots everywhere.

My concern is that in this instance, the idiocy is costing lives and there's a distinct lack of self-awareness about it (at best) or just a complete lack of regard for our fellow humans (at worst).
Opens up a huge can of worms, Kush.

Translating your generalisation, what's costing lives is the behaviour of the 19 to 25 year group. Nothing will stop their senselessness because they have nothing in which to root wisdom. Whether or not it can be avoided in the next generation through some form of ideological implantation .....

Kushan 10-09-2020 10:47
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36049375)
Opens up a huge can of worms, Kush.

Translating your generalisation, what's costing lives is the behaviour of the 19 to 25 year group. Nothing will stop their senselessness because they have nothing in which to root wisdom. Whether or not it can be avoided in the next generation through some form of ideological implantation .....
That age group might be pulling in the largest infections, but they're by no means the only ones spreading it. My generalisation isn't directed at a specific age group or demographic, just those that think they "know better", or "don't care about experts" or think wearing a mask is an attack on their human rights or anything like that.

Unfortunately, that group spans plenty of age groups.

1andrew1 10-09-2020 11:01
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan (Post 36049379)
That age group might be pulling in the largest infections, but they're by no means the only ones spreading it. My generalisation isn't directed at a specific age group or demographic, just those that think they "know better", or "don't care about experts" or think wearing a mask is an attack on their human rights or anything like that.

Unfortunately, that group spans plenty of age groups.
Agreed. I was in Aberystwyth recently and the staff in Superdrug didn't even wear masks never mind the customers! And they sell masks too!

Carth 10-09-2020 11:07
Re: Coronavirus
 
I agree that every age group has its share of those who do what they want and sod the rest.

I sometimes wonder if these people are the very same ones that also drive at 40 in a 30 limit while using a mobile phone, steal your car for a 'fun filled' joyride at 3am, or hang around at school gates selling drugs, maybe even rent rooms in a run down 2 bed terrace to 18 migrants.

The I stop thinking, because there's thousands of em :(

Sephiroth 10-09-2020 11:11
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 36049386)
I agree that every age group has its share of those who do what they want and sod the rest.

I sometimes wonder if these people are the very same ones that also drive at 40 in a 30 limit while using a mobile phone, steal your car for a 'fun filled' joyride at 3am, or hang around at school gates selling drugs, maybe even rent rooms in a run down 2 bed terrace to 18 migrants.

The I stop thinking, because there's thousands of em :(
No shit, Sherlock!

jfman 10-09-2020 11:14
Re: Coronavirus
 
See if you were going to design a herd immunity strategy and deploy it on the QT. It’d actually look a lot like this. Not saying that Dominic Cummings is pushing that... not at all.

We’ve encouraged young people back to pubs, schools back in and shortly colleges and universities go back.

Kushan 10-09-2020 11:24
Re: Coronavirus
 
Well it worked for Sweden, right? .....right?!

denphone 10-09-2020 11:28
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan (Post 36049379)
That age group might be pulling in the largest infections, but they're by no means the only ones spreading it. My generalisation isn't directed at a specific age group or demographic, just those that think they "know better", or "don't care about experts" or think wearing a mask is an attack on their human rights or anything like that.

Unfortunately, that group spans plenty of age groups.
Indeed go to a lot of these busy tourist places and people of all ages are ignoring the clear Covid 19 guidelines.

pip08456 10-09-2020 12:22
Re: Coronavirus
 
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan (Post 36049394)
Well it worked for Sweden, right? .....right?!
Sweden doesn't seem to have faired any worse than elsewhere in Europe except France.

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...3&d=1599736883

jfman 10-09-2020 12:26
Re: Coronavirus
 
Sweden had warning signs, along with it’s Scandinavian neighbours, that it didn’t heed. Comparing to Italy (hit first), France, Spain and our inept response isn’t something to be proud of for them.

pip08456 10-09-2020 12:37
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36049404)
Sweden had warning signs, along with it’s Scandinavian neighbours, that it didn’t heed. Comparing to Italy (hit first), France, Spain and our inept response isn’t something to be proud of for them.
Perhaps not but it does show that lockdown made jack shit difference to number of deaths per million of population.

jfman 10-09-2020 12:39
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 36049406)
Perhaps not but it does show that lockdown made jack shit difference to number of deaths per million of population.
It doesn’t. We’d have had more deaths had we not locked down, and could have saved lives by locking down sooner. This is science. You are simply speculating with no basis or evidence whatsoever.

Pierre 10-09-2020 13:04
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36049391)
See if you were going to design a herd immunity strategy and deploy it on the QT. It’d actually look a lot like this. Not saying that Dominic Cummings is pushing that... not at all.

We’ve encouraged young people back to pubs, schools back in and shortly colleges and universities go back.
Teenagers have not been socially distancing etc, ever. Certainly not around here.

I don' think they are trying to gain Herd immunity on the QT, but a rise in infections, on the demographic that can in the main shrug of the infection is a natural by product of reopening the country.

And is pretty much in line with what I posted several weeks ago, in so far as, those in vulnerable groups that need to shield, should shield. Those that are other wise young and healthy should just be allowed to go about their business, whilst ensuring they don't endanger anyone they know that is shielding.

The key metric will be seeing how hospital admission and death increase as a percentage of the infection rate. As long as those two key measures don't increase wildly, then no problem.

1andrew1 10-09-2020 13:05
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 36049403)
Sweden doesn't seem to have faired any worse than elsewhere in Europe except France.
Europe is more than just five countries - what about Germany, Ireland, Switzerland, Austria, Norway etc?

Carth 10-09-2020 13:22
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36049414)
Europe is more than just five countries - what about Germany, Ireland, Switzerland, Austria, Norway etc?

were they on the graph shown?

Hugh 10-09-2020 14:18
Re: Coronavirus
 
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 36049403)
Sweden doesn't seem to have faired any worse than elsewhere in Europe except France.

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...3&d=1599736883
Except France, Ireland, Netherlands, Luxembourg, Romania, Portugal, Germany, Denmark, Bulgaria, Austria, Hungary, Slovenia, and 14 other European countries - the only countries worse than Sweden are the U.K., Belgium, Spain, and Italy...

Hugh 10-09-2020 14:20
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 36049416)
were they on the graph shown?
No, as it only showed the 5 out of the 6 countries with the worst death rate in Europe, and didn’t show the 25 with lesser death rates.

Hugh 10-09-2020 14:37
Re: Coronavirus
 
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36049355)
I'll try and help move this debate forwards. My understanding is that no one on the forum has found any scientists supporting Old Boy's assertion and the OP appears not to have done so yet either.

However, Julian did kindly unearth a maths professor in Bristol whose model suggested Britain's infection rate peaked on 18th March which the Daily Mail said threw into question whether Britain's lockdown on 23rd March was necessary.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-lockdown.html
Thanks for this - Prof Wood’s paper
Quote:
suggests that infections were in decline before UK lockdown, and that infections in Sweden started to decline only a short time later.
Here is the Swedish infection rate for that time, and after - it appears to increasing...

Here is another scientist’s view of Prof Wood’s paper.

https://lbndaily.co.uk/uk-coronaviru...own-necessary/

Sephiroth 10-09-2020 16:07
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36049407)
It doesn’t. We’d have had more deaths had we not locked down, and could have saved lives by locking down sooner. This is science. You are simply speculating with no basis or evidence whatsoever.
I think that with the benefit of hindsight, lock-down bought time, especially for the NHS, while the boffins were able to work on cures/treatments to reduce deaths.

Also had we not locked down, the vulnerable people would have had seriously higher death numbers.

1andrew1 10-09-2020 16:55
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 36049416)
were they on the graph shown?
No

Hom3r 10-09-2020 19:35
Re: Coronavirus
 
In June 2019 the UK consumed £5 millions worth of Tea, Coffee & biscuits.



In June 2020 during lockdown this rose to £19 million.


Thats a lot of tea breaks

pip08456 10-09-2020 20:22
Re: Coronavirus
 
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36049433)
Thanks for this - Prof Wood’s paper

Here is the Swedish infection rate for that time, and after - it appears to increasing...

Here is another scientist’s view of Prof Wood’s paper.

https://lbndaily.co.uk/uk-coronaviru...own-necessary/
Oh, look what happened about 3 hrs ago.

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...7&d=1599765702

Hugh 10-09-2020 20:45
Re: Coronavirus
 
1 Attachment(s)
????

I was referring to the time period March to June - as Prof Wood was in his paper.

What’s your point?

Oh, look what happened about 4 hrs ago.

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...8&d=1599768228

Pierre 10-09-2020 21:31
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36049482)
????

I was referring to the time period March to June - as Prof Wood was in his paper.

What’s your point?

Oh, look what happened about 4 hrs ago.

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...8&d=1599768228
Yeah. That’s annoying, I’m going to play golf there in 4 weeks. But, whatever, I’ll still be going no matter.

Damien 10-09-2020 22:59
Re: Coronavirus
 
Be aware the 14 day isolation is worse than the lockdown in terms of what you're allowed to do.

Pierre 10-09-2020 23:56
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36049495)
Be aware the 14 day isolation is worse than the lockdown in terms of what you're allowed to do.
Yeah, I’m sure it will be policed very stringently.

1andrew1 11-09-2020 09:00
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36049433)
Thanks for this - Prof Wood’s paper

Here is the Swedish infection rate for that time, and after - it appears to increasing...

Here is another scientist’s view of Prof Wood’s paper.

https://lbndaily.co.uk/uk-coronaviru...own-necessary/
Looks like Professor Wood is ploughing a lonely furrow. ;)

Sephiroth 11-09-2020 09:05
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36049500)
Looks like Professor Wood is ploughing a lonely fallow. ;)
"fallow", eh?

1andrew1 11-09-2020 09:29
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36049501)
"fallow", eh?
Oops, thanks, corrected, an over-enthusiastic spell-checker! A fallow furrow. ;)

Meanwhile - was pleased to read this.

Quote:
AstraZeneca’s coronavirus vaccine could still be available by the end of the year, or early next year, according to the company’s chief executive, Pascal Soriot, despite clinical trials being paused after a volunteer fell ill.

AstraZeneca and Oxford University, which are jointly developing the vaccine and testing it on 50,000 to 60,000 people around the world, halted trials on Wednesday to investigate the “potentially unexpected illness” of one participant.
https://www.theguardian.com/business...razeneca-chief

Maggy 11-09-2020 10:10
Re: Coronavirus
 
After listening to the litany of changes of lockdown in the UK on the BBC I'm completely confused.I'm wondering how many others are.

Pierre 11-09-2020 11:07
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maggy (Post 36049512)
After listening to the litany of changes of lockdown in the UK on the BBC I'm completely confused.I'm wondering how many others are.
i don't think it's confusing, just irritating

jfman 11-09-2020 11:44
Re: Coronavirus
 
I’m sure a second lockdown would be more irritating.

Carth 11-09-2020 12:11
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36049525)
I’m sure a second lockdown would be more irritating.

The first one hasn't stopped being irritating yet . . wife & daughter both working from home is having a devastating effect on my 'lazy retirement pursuits' :shocked: ;)

Maggy 11-09-2020 12:36
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36049517)
i don't think it's confusing, just irritating
It's both.

Dave42 11-09-2020 12:51
Re: Coronavirus
 
Coronavirus infections surge by 60% in England with 3,200 new cases each day

COVID-19 infections in England have soared by 60% - with 3,200 new cases now being seen each day, according to official estimates.


https://news.sky.com/story/coronavir...h-day-12068962

1andrew1 11-09-2020 13:15
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 36049532)
The first one hasn't stopped being irritating yet . . wife & daughter both working from home is having a devastating effect on my 'lazy retirement pursuits' :shocked: ;)
So selfish of them. :D

---------- Post added at 13:15 ---------- Previous post was at 13:13 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36049525)
I’m sure a second lockdown would be more irritating.
Totally agree.

Sephiroth 11-09-2020 13:19
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36049539)
So selfish of them. :D

---------- Post added at 13:15 ---------- Previous post was at 13:13 ----------


Totally agree.
You and jfman agree too much!

On a more serious (and ridiculous) note - fines/sanctions on the 19-25 age group could be higher than others as a deterrent.

Pierre 11-09-2020 13:53
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave42 (Post 36049538)
Coronavirus infections surge by 60% in England with 3,200 new cases each day

COVID-19 infections in England have soared by 60% - with 3,200 new cases now being seen each day, according to official estimates.


https://news.sky.com/story/coronavir...h-day-12068962
Like I say, I'll wait until I see the hospital admission rates and/or death rates before I start running around in a panic like Beaker from the muppets.

jfman 11-09-2020 14:07
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36049549)
Like I say, I'll wait until I see the hospital admission rates and/or death rates before I start running around in a panic like Beaker from the muppets.
These are inevitable really, although by the time they come out in the figures it’ll be too late. Cases doubling every 8 days, R definitely above one. Steps need to be taken to slow the spread, and stop it spreading into the most at risk groups. Or it’s lockdown 2. Boris has as much said we are buying time until Operation Moonshot is up to speed.

Damien 11-09-2020 14:10
Re: Coronavirus
 
It's easily the most concerning numbers we've had since coming of lockdown

jfman 11-09-2020 14:19
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36049551)
It's easily the most concerning numbers we've had since coming of lockdown
It’s good news in some respects though - we get to challenge those in denial with actual facts and evidence, from actual reality, on the ground in Britain. Plus the economy will tank for the property parasites like Alan Sugar.

Carth 11-09-2020 14:37
Re: Coronavirus
 
Actual facts and evidence . . . I keep seeing the word estimated in Covid19 news reports ;)

Not saying the figures are wrong, but my estimated fuel bills were usually strange.

Maybe we should go with 'up to' aswell?

Pierre 11-09-2020 14:48
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36049552)
It’s good news in some respects though - we get to challenge those in denial with actual facts and evidence, from actual reality, on the ground in Britain. Plus the economy will tank for the property parasites like Alan Sugar.
Well it won't take long. I'd expect to see very sharp rises in Hospital admission within the next seven days and onward, and obviously subsequent deaths within the next 28+.

I suspect they will inevitably rise, but it is the rate at which they rise that will be the the thing.

---------- Post added at 14:48 ---------- Previous post was at 14:47 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36049550)
and stop it spreading into the most at risk groups.
That's the key.

Kushan 11-09-2020 15:58
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36049543)
You and jfman agree too much!

On a more serious (and ridiculous) note - fines/sanctions on the 19-25 age group could be higher than others as a deterrent.
What's your obsession with punishing younger people? Covid doesn't care what age you are, if you spread it, you spread it. Fine anyone not social distancing or wearing a mask. If you really want to punish the younger folk, take solace in the fact that they have a much lower quality of life than the 50-65 group had when they were younger.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36049550)
These are inevitable really, although by the time they come out in the figures it’ll be too late. Cases doubling every 8 days, R definitely above one. Steps need to be taken to slow the spread, and stop it spreading into the most at risk groups. Or it’s lockdown 2. Boris has as much said we are buying time until Operation Moonshot is up to speed.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54116939 R is above 1 again.

Here comes second lockdown.

jfman 11-09-2020 16:00
Re: Coronavirus
 
It might take longer than you’d expect. If the “I had Covid in January brigade” are right - we of course don’t know as there was no testing, and hasn’t been antibody testing - hospitalisations followed much further down the road.

Unless of course “I think I had Covid in January” was simply a misinformation exercise to reassure people that it wasn’t so bad.

Sephiroth 11-09-2020 16:23
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36049552)
It’s good news in some respects though - we get to challenge those in denial with actual facts and evidence, from actual reality, on the ground in Britain. Plus the economy will tank for the property parasites like Alan Sugar.
You should be less generous with the use of the word "parasites".

---------- Post added at 16:23 ---------- Previous post was at 16:21 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan (Post 36049562)
What's your obsession with punishing younger people? Covid doesn't care what age you are, if you spread it, you spread it. Fine anyone not social distancing or wearing a mask. If you really want to punish the younger folk, take solace in the fact that they have a much lower quality of life than the 50-65 group had when they were younger.



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54116939 R is above 1 again.

Here comes second lockdown.
Are you thinking straight?

1/
The bulk of offenders are in the 19-25 age group. So they do more spreading than others.

2/
What I'm mooting is called disincentive to misbehave. Prolly won't work but some disincentive is needed.

Kushan 11-09-2020 16:55
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36049567)
Are you thinking straight?

1/
The bulk of offenders are in the 19-25 age group. So they do more spreading than others.

2/
What I'm mooting is called disincentive to misbehave. Prolly won't work but some disincentive is needed.
Punishing different age groups differently is basically giving a free pass for other age groups to act less responsibly. If you feel people aren't being discouraged enough, that's fine and I agree because far too many people aren't taking things seriously, but punish everyone that's flouting the law equally.

This isn't an age issue, it's an issue that affects everyone and everyone needs to be on board with it.

There's another side to the statistics as well - correlation is not causation. More young people are being infected, that is true and I have no doubt that a proportion of that, even a significant proportion, is people going out drinking and partying - but that doesn't necessarily mean they're breaking the law, refusing to wear masks or not respecting social distancing. You can do everything "right" and still get infected. A large proportion of frontline workers are young people, that also skews the statistics greatly as well. You don't often find retired people working the checkouts.

We eased restrictions, opened pubs and encouraged people to go out, eat out to help out, etc. and suddenly we've had a rise in cases. If you want to look for someone to blame, blame the government. If you want to look for a group to blame, blame the group that refuses to wear a mask, or spreads stupid conspiracy theories - and those groups span all ages, all demographics.

Sephiroth 11-09-2020 17:05
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan (Post 36049575)
Punishing different age groups differently is basically giving a free pass for other age groups to act less responsibly. If you feel people aren't being discouraged enough, that's fine and I agree because far too many people aren't taking things seriously, but punish everyone that's flouting the law equally.

This isn't an age issue, it's an issue that affects everyone and everyone needs to be on board with it.

There's another side to the statistics as well - correlation is not causation. More young people are being infected, that is true and I have no doubt that a proportion of that, even a significant proportion, is people going out drinking and partying - but that doesn't necessarily mean they're breaking the law, refusing to wear masks or not respecting social distancing. You can do everything "right" and still get infected. A large proportion of frontline workers are young people, that also skews the statistics greatly as well. You don't often find retired people working the checkouts.

We eased restrictions, opened pubs and encouraged people to go out, eat out to help out, etc. and suddenly we've had a rise in cases. If you want to look for someone to blame, blame the government. If you want to look for a group to blame, blame the group that refuses to wear a mask, or spreads stupid conspiracy theories - and those groups span all ages, all demographics.
The rump of misbehaviour is an age issue and you must know that. The offenders can then infect anyone.

Again - what's the matter with you, Kush?

Kushan 11-09-2020 17:07
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36049577)
The rump of misbehaviour is an age issue and you must know that. The offenders can then infect anyone.
Offenders can infect anyone - true.

Only young people are offenders - false.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36049577)

Again - what's the matter with you, Kush?
Why do you keep turning this into a personal argument?

Mad Max 11-09-2020 17:09
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan (Post 36049562)
What's your obsession with punishing younger people? Covid doesn't care what age you are, if you spread it, you spread it. Fine anyone not social distancing or wearing a mask. If you really want to punish the younger folk, take solace in the fact that they have a much lower quality of life than the 50-65 group had when they were younger.



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54116939 R is above 1 again.

Here comes second lockdown.
Really, and you know this, how?

jfman 11-09-2020 17:15
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Max (Post 36049579)
Really, and you know this, how?
Economic data.

There’s plenty of data out there to show that younger people today have less employment opportunities, are saddled with more debt, more likely to stay at home with parents for longer and are further from the housing market than previous generations.

Of course the bitterness that the older generation have means many will not see that and blame eating avocado, and lattes. They live to deny progression for those that fame after them.

Hom3r 11-09-2020 17:16
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36049550)
These are inevitable really, although by the time they come out in the figures it’ll be too late. Cases doubling every 8 days, R definitely above one. Steps need to be taken to slow the spread, and stop it spreading into the most at risk groups. Or it’s lockdown 2. Boris has as much said we are buying time until Operation Moonshot is up to speed.

Just make wearing mask mandatory, no mask no entry in to any building.


Some idiot suggested that a face mask causes a build up of CO2:p:.


Despite the fact a NHS doctor wore a medical spec mask and a O2 reader and his levels did not move.

jfman 11-09-2020 17:19
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hom3r (Post 36049582)
Just make wearing mask mandatory, no mask no entry in to any building.


Some idiot suggested that a face mask causes a build up of CO2:p:.


Despite the fact a NHS doctor wore a medical spec mask and a O2 reader and his levels did not move.
The misinformation around masks is ridiculous. It costs next to nothing, takes little effort and has some effect.

No it’s not a silver bullet. But we don’t have one of those, that doesn’t mean masks isn’t progress.

Sephiroth 11-09-2020 17:20
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan (Post 36049578)
Offenders can infect anyone - true.

Only young people are offenders - false.



Why do you keep turning this into a personal argument?
Quote:
Only young people are offenders - false.
I never said that. Where did I say that?

Quote:
Why do you keep turning this into a personal argument?
Because you are jumping in on replies I make to jfman or Andrew. You obviously have the right but your new found tendency, which has not happened before, leads to a curt reply.

Mad Max 11-09-2020 17:21
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36049581)
Economic data.

There’s plenty of data out there to show that younger people today have less employment opportunities, are saddled with more debt, more likely to stay at home with parents for longer and are further from the housing market than previous generations.

Of course the bitterness that the older generation have means many will not see that and blame eating avocado, and lattes. They live to deny progression for those that fame after them.
Fair enough point on the economic data, but the bit in bold is ridiculous!

Pierre 11-09-2020 17:24
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36049581)
Economic data.

There’s plenty of data out there to show that younger people today have less employment opportunities, are saddled with more debt, more likely to stay at home with parents for longer and are further from the housing market than previous generations.

Of course the bitterness that the older generation have means many will not see that and blame eating avocado, and lattes. They live to deny progression for those that fame after them.
i don't think any generation has been/or is worse off than the generation preceding it.

Hom3r 11-09-2020 17:24
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36049563)
It might take longer than you’d expect. If the “I had Covid in January brigade” are right - we of course don’t know as there was no testing, and hasn’t been antibody testing - hospitalisations followed much further down the road.

Unless of course “I think I had Covid in January” was simply a misinformation exercise to reassure people that it wasn’t so bad.
On Jan 2nd I was around my sisters celebrating my nieces 19th birthday. I wasn't feeling to good, I came home ad was sitting on my sofa shivering and felt like crap.

I went to bed at 8:30pm on the Thursday night and woke a 8am on Saturday I had zero energy, I look back and think did I have Covid then?


This was before CV was really known about.

Pierre 11-09-2020 17:25
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36049583)
The misinformation around masks is ridiculous. It costs next to nothing, takes little effort and has some effect.

No it’s not a silver bullet. But we don’t have one of those, that doesn’t mean masks isn’t progress.
I'm all for mandatory masks indoors (except eateries and pubs)

Mad Max 11-09-2020 17:27
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36049588)
I'm all for mandatory masks indoors (except eateries and pubs)
I agree with you on that, but I wouldn't wear one outside unless it was fairly crowded.

nomadking 11-09-2020 17:42
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36049588)
I'm all for mandatory masks indoors (except eateries and pubs)
Either masks are needed indoors or they're not. If you absolutely need to eat or drink then either do it away from others, or do it quickly and put your mask back in place. The idiotic exceptions highlight the contradictions.
Anything that is classed as being "safe", has to be safe to such a high level, as otherwise more people will do that activity, more often, meaning any "safety" gain is completely lost.

jfman 11-09-2020 17:53
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36049594)
Either masks are needed indoors or they're not. If you absolutely need to eat or drink then either do it away from others, or do it quickly and put your mask back in place. The idiotic exceptions highlight the contradictions.
Anything that is classed as being "safe", has to be safe to such a high level, as otherwise more people will do that activity, more often, meaning any "safety" gain is completely lost.
Again it’s 100% or nothing from nomadking.

nomadking 11-09-2020 18:01
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36049596)
Again it’s 100% or nothing from nomadking.
A principle is just that. If the principle is safety, the exceptions have to be safe to the same level. A room full of people eating or drinking isn't magically safe, compared to a room full of the same people not eating or drinking.:rolleyes:

1andrew1 11-09-2020 18:13
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36049594)
Either masks are needed indoors or they're not. If you absolutely need to eat or drink then either do it away from others, or do it quickly and put your mask back in place. The idiotic exceptions highlight the contradictions.
Anything that is classed as being "safe", has to be safe to such a high level, as otherwise more people will do that activity, more often, meaning any "safety" gain is completely lost.
But that would mean the decimation of many eating and drinking establishments and the jobs, livelihoods and mental good health generated by them. Wearing masks in shops does not hinder purchasing to any significant extent. There will always be apparent contradictions but it's the difficult job of the government to weigh up these opposing forces.

jfman 11-09-2020 18:23
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36049597)
A principle is just that. If the principle is safety, the exceptions have to be safe to the same level. A room full of people eating or drinking isn't magically safe, compared to a room full of the same people not eating or drinking.:rolleyes:
There’s no silver bullet.

Airport screening might be a percentage, masks another, working from home another. All of these push R down.

Doing nothing R continues unmitigated and as Andrew points out that ruins the economy.

nomadking 11-09-2020 18:28
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36049599)
But that would mean the decimation of many eating and drinking establishments and the jobs, livelihoods and mental good health generated by them. Wearing masks in shops does not hinder purchasing to any significant extent. There will always be apparent contradictions but it's the difficult job of the government to weigh up these opposing forces.
If you follow that argument then there should be little or no restrictions of any sort, ie nearer the Swedish model.

I have no problem wearing a mask, but then again I've stayed at home for several weeks. I'm able to "hide away", others can't.

Kushan 11-09-2020 18:31
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36049584)


I never said that. Where did I say that?
You seem hell bent on punishing and blaming young people and young people only.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36049584)

Because you are jumping in on replies I make to jfman or Andrew. You obviously have the right but your new found tendency, which has not happened before, leads to a curt reply.
I'm sorry, I wasn't aware that it was a private discussion on an open forum like this. Isn't this the idea of a good debate? To bring more debate points when you have them and stay away when you don't? If it makes you feel any better, I'm not targeting you specifically.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36049586)
i don't think any generation has been/or is worse off than the generation preceding it.
Depends on how you look at it. Economics is one way:

https://www.cableforum.uk/images/local/2020/09/4.jpg

jfman 11-09-2020 18:36
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36049604)
If you follow that argument then there should be little or no restrictions of any sort, ie nearer the Swedish model.

I have no problem wearing a mask, but then again I've stayed at home for several weeks. I'm able to "hide away", others can't.
Yet in Sweden many voluntarily shield, work from home and the economy is experiencing the same downturn as its neighbours.

All their model has given them is dead Swedes.

nomadking 11-09-2020 18:39
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36049602)
There’s no silver bullet.

Airport screening might be a percentage, masks another, working from home another. All of these push R down.

Doing nothing R continues unmitigated and as Andrew points out that ruins the economy.
Allowing too many exemptions means that the virus is still circulating. As long as the chain of infections is allowed to continue, it is still "out there". You have to completely stop that chaining of infections. The more often people go out and eat or drink, the greater the number of infections and the chaining continues. Too many examples of gatherings where mass outbreaks have resulted.

Kushan 11-09-2020 18:52
Re: Coronavirus
 
I think it's clear from the recent spikes that too many restrictions have eased and people have got complacent.

You're never going to stop the virus entirely. It's just not possible without a vaccine or millions dying. This is a marathon where we have to slow its progression enough that our health services can cope with it, while trying not to slow down the economy too much.

It's going to be a constant juggle of easing then restricting. Some tough calls need to be made. If we want kids to go to school, we might have to give up on pubs. If we want old people to be able to get their shopping, we might have to queue a little longer.

But one thing for sure - if you don't wear a mask and you don't social distance, you're making this take a lot longer and putting many more people at unnecessary risk. If more people could learn this, we'd have less restrictions.

nomadking 11-09-2020 18:54
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36049609)
Yet in Sweden many voluntarily shield, work from home and the economy is experiencing the same downturn as its neighbours.

All their model has given them is dead Swedes.
They kept schools, bars, and restaurants open.
A high proportion of those deaths were in care homes, which a lockdown wouldn't have prevented.
France and Spain currently have higher infection rates than Sweden had at it's peak.

Pierre 11-09-2020 18:59
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36049594)
Either masks are needed indoors or they're not. If you absolutely need to eat or drink then either do it away from others, or do it quickly and put your mask back in place. The idiotic exceptions highlight the contradictions.
Anything that is classed as being "safe", has to be safe to such a high level, as otherwise more people will do that activity, more often, meaning any "safety" gain is completely lost.
At the moment I don’t drink socially in pubs with anyone outside my family. If I go to a restaurant and sit at a table for four, with my family, I don’t expect to, or need to, wear a mask.

Carth 11-09-2020 19:16
Re: Coronavirus
 
I was born 1954, my 'teenage' years were much better than those born in the late 1990's - early 2000's.

We didn't have to worry about not having the latest iPhone, we weren't bewildered and confused by having 300 channels of crap on the TV, the music we listened to was usually performed by people who could sing and/or play instruments without the need for technology to make them sound decent, comedians were actually funny, mums used washpowders that got your clothes clean - in machines that used hot water, boys were boys and girls were girls with very few confused about that, education meant using a brain along with books and pen & paper, food was mainly bought fresh from corner shops and tasted great when cooked, playing and socializing was done with real people not pixels on a screen, getting drunk only took 4 pints, masks were something Batman & The Lone Ranger wore, and one of our biggest fears was mum finding grass stains on the knees of our trousers.

I miss those days :D

Kushan 11-09-2020 19:22
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Max (Post 36049585)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36049581)
Economic data.

There’s plenty of data out there to show that younger people today have less employment opportunities, are saddled with more debt, more likely to stay at home with parents for longer and are further from the housing market than previous generations.

Of course the bitterness that the older generation have means many will not see that and blame eating avocado, and lattes. They live to deny progression for those that fame after them.
Fair enough point on the economic data, but the bit in bold is ridiculous!
Exhbit A:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 36049621)
I was born 1954, my 'teenage' years were much better than those born in the late 1990's - early 2000's.

We didn't have to worry about not having the latest iPhone, we weren't bewildered and confused by having 300 channels of crap on the TV, the music we listened to was usually performed by people who could sing and/or play instruments without the need for technology to make them sound decent, comedians were actually funny, mums used washpowders that got your clothes clean - in machines that used hot water, boys were boys and girls were girls with very few confused about that, education meant using a brain along with books and pen & paper, food was mainly bought fresh from corner shops and tasted great when cooked, playing and socializing was done with real people not pixels on a screen, getting drunk only took 4 pints, masks were something Batman & The Lone Ranger wore, and one of our biggest fears was mum finding grass stains on the knees of our trousers.

I miss those days :D

Mad Max 11-09-2020 19:31
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan (Post 36049622)
Exhbit A:

I'm sure there was a bit of tongue in cheek there......;)

---------- Post added at 19:31 ---------- Previous post was at 19:30 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 36049621)
I was born 1954, my 'teenage' years were much better than those born in the late 1990's - early 2000's.

We didn't have to worry about not having the latest iPhone, we weren't bewildered and confused by having 300 channels of crap on the TV, the music we listened to was usually performed by people who could sing and/or play instruments without the need for technology to make them sound decent, comedians were actually funny, mums used washpowders that got your clothes clean - in machines that used hot water, boys were boys and girls were girls with very few confused about that, education meant using a brain along with books and pen & paper, food was mainly bought fresh from corner shops and tasted great when cooked, playing and socializing was done with real people not pixels on a screen, getting drunk only took 4 pints, masks were something Batman & The Lone Ranger wore, and one of our biggest fears was mum finding grass stains on the knees of our trousers.

I miss those days :D
lol

OLD BOY 11-09-2020 19:50
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36049496)
Yeah, I’m sure it will be policed very stringently.
It's a joke. The family I know who came back to quarantine were not inspected even once. There aren't enough people to police this, so the quarantine has turned out to be totally voluntary.

---------- Post added at 19:39 ---------- Previous post was at 19:36 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave42 (Post 36049538)
Coronavirus infections surge by 60% in England with 3,200 new cases each day

COVID-19 infections in England have soared by 60% - with 3,200 new cases now being seen each day, according to official estimates.


https://news.sky.com/story/coronavir...h-day-12068962
As I've said all along, the virus will be out there until we get herd immunity. It is a very simple principle.

---------- Post added at 19:40 ---------- Previous post was at 19:39 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36049543)
You and jfman agree too much!

On a more serious (and ridiculous) note - fines/sanctions on the 19-25 age group could be higher than others as a deterrent.
Age discrimination?

---------- Post added at 19:41 ---------- Previous post was at 19:40 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36049549)
Like I say, I'll wait until I see the hospital admission rates and/or death rates before I start running around in a panic like Beaker from the muppets.
Me, too. The vulnerables should be advised to keep their heads down unless they want to live dangerously.

---------- Post added at 19:45 ---------- Previous post was at 19:41 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36049552)
It’s good news in some respects though - we get to challenge those in denial with actual facts and evidence, from actual reality, on the ground in Britain. Plus the economy will tank for the property parasites like Alan Sugar.
You have such a perverse way of looking at this.

The virus will not go away until herd immunity is achieved. Is that not what is happening right now?

The only bright spot was that mathematician's calculation that the virus would have reached the peak we had naturally even if we had not locked down. We will soon see if he was right.

Either way, lockdowns just put the inevitable on pause for as long as they are applied.

---------- Post added at 19:50 ---------- Previous post was at 19:45 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hom3r (Post 36049582)
Just make wearing mask mandatory, no mask no entry in to any building.


Some idiot suggested that a face mask causes a build up of CO2:p:.


Despite the fact a NHS doctor wore a medical spec mask and a O2 reader and his levels did not move.
Scientists themselves say that the masks you can buy are not effective, so why require them to be worn unless you just want to give people a false sense of security?

Hugh 11-09-2020 20:25
Re: Coronavirus
 
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-54118022
Quote:
A new Covid-19 contact-tracing app will be launched across England and Wales on 24 September, the government has announced.

The app will let people scan barcode-like QR codes to register visits to hospitality venues and will implement Apple and Google's method of detecting other smartphones.

Businesses are being asked to display QR code posters to support the app.


---------- Post added at 20:25 ---------- Previous post was at 20:23 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36049627)
It's a joke. The family I know who came back to quarantine were not inspected even once. There aren't enough people to police this, so the quarantine has turned out to be totally voluntary.

---------- Post added at 19:39 ---------- Previous post was at 19:36 ----------



As I've said all along, the virus will be out there until we get herd immunity. It is a very simple principle.

---------- Post added at 19:40 ---------- Previous post was at 19:39 ----------



Age discrimination?

---------- Post added at 19:41 ---------- Previous post was at 19:40 ----------



Me, too. The vulnerables should be advised to keep their heads down unless they want to live dangerously.

---------- Post added at 19:45 ---------- Previous post was at 19:41 ----------



You have such a perverse way of looking at this.

The virus will not go away until herd immunity is achieved. Is that not what is happening right now?

The only bright spot was that mathematician's calculation that the virus would have reached the peak we had naturally even if we had not locked down. We will soon see if he was right.

Either way, lockdowns just put the inevitable on pause for as long as they are applied.

---------- Post added at 19:50 ---------- Previous post was at 19:45 ----------



Scientists themselves say that the masks you can buy are not effective, so why require them to be worn unless you just want to give people a false sense of security?
Other scientists (with a link) disagree.

https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2020-07-08...-work-act-now#
Quote:
Cloth face coverings, even homemade masks made of the correct material, are effective in reducing the spread of COVID-19 - for the wearer and those around them - according to a new study from Oxford’s Leverhulme Centre for Demographic Science.

A comprehensive study, the report investigates the effectiveness of different face mask types and coverings, including an international comparison of policies and behavioural factors underlying usage.

Professor Melinda Mills, Director of the Leverhulme Centre and author of the study, says, ‘The evidence is clear that people should wear masks to reduce virus transmission and protect themselves, with most countries recommending the public to wear them. Yet clear policy recommendations that the public should broadly wear them has been unclear and inconsistent in some countries such as England.’
Quote:
Around the world, the study finds, ‘Next to hand washing and social distancing, face masks and coverings are one of the most of widely adopted non-pharmaceutical interventions for reducing the transmission of respiratory infections.’

But, the study shows, some coverings are not as effective as others. Loosely woven fabrics, such as scarves have been shown to be the least effective. Professor Mills says, ‘Attention must also be placed on how well it fits on the face; it should loop around the ears or around the back of the neck for better coverage.’

She insists, ‘The general public does not need to wear surgical masks or respirators. We find that masks made from high quality material such as high-grade cotton, multiple layers and particularly hybrid constructions are effective. For instance, combining cotton and silk or flannel provide over 95% filtration, so wearing a mask can protect others.’
https://www.sciencedaily.com/release...0612172200.htm
Quote:
Summary:
A study has found that not wearing a face mask dramatically increases a person's chances of being infected by the COVID-19 virus.

The team examined the chances of COVID-19 infection and how the virus is easily passed from person to person. From trends and mitigation procedures in China, Italy and New York City, the researchers found that using a face mask reduced the number of infections by more than 78,000 in Italy from April 6-May 9 and by over 66,000 in New York City from April 17-May 9.

"Our results clearly show that airborne transmission via respiratory aerosols represents the dominant route for the spread of COVID-19," Zhang said. "By analyzing the pandemic trends without face-covering using the statistical method and by projecting the trend, we calculated that over 66,000 infections were prevented by using a face mask in little over a month in New York City. We conclude that wearing a face mask in public corresponds to the most effective means to prevent inter-human transmission.

"This inexpensive practice, in conjunction with social distancing and other procedures, is the most likely opportunity to stop the COVID-19 pandemic. Our work also highlights that sound science is essential in decision-making for the current and future public health pandemics."

Sephiroth 11-09-2020 20:42
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36049627)
<SNIP>


Age discrimination?
<SNIP>
Don't you start!

Paul 11-09-2020 21:20
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan (Post 36049605)
You seem hell bent on punishing and blaming young people and young people only.
... and your obsession is getting quite tiresome, move on. :sleep:

Kushan 11-09-2020 21:58
Re: Coronavirus
 
Sorry Paul, but maybe you should ask those ragging and blaming on young people to knock it off instead.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Max (Post 36049624)
I'm sure there was a bit of tongue in cheek there......;)l
I'm sure from Carth it was, but unfortunately these "back in my day" arguments are made without a hint of irony by plenty of people. The whole "avocado toast and iphones" has become a meme at this point.

Carth 11-09-2020 22:47
Re: Coronavirus
 
Some was tongue in cheek, some not.

I do actually feel sorry for the 'lifestyle' of todays youngsters. Almost every aspect of their life is laid bare and open to scrutiny through that marvelous technology called the internet. I doubt there are any who don't have a presence on the major social websites, and it's all good fun . . until it suddenly isn't, and you can't rub out that little error of judgement that may follow you for years.

Progress is wonderful, without it we'd still be using the horse & cart, wood fires & candles, but it comes at a price. Machinery, computers & automation that improves production but reduces jobs. Medical advances that ensure longer life and reduced infant death rates, which means growing populations needing more housing.

No jobs, no housing, but a steady rise in mental health issues . . . I meant it when I said I miss the old days and the 'freedom' we had.

Kushan 11-09-2020 23:15
Re: Coronavirus
 
You're right carth, those are very real problems faced by today's generation. I know the topic will go down like a lead balloon on this forum, but it's one of the reasons we need to seriously consider the Universal Basic Income.

At some point, machines are going to automate people out of jobs and it's going to be cheaper to just get a machine to do it. We need to be prepared for that.

If people were on a UBI, then the pandemic would have wrecked a lot fewer people's lives as their income wouldn't have been affected.

Of course, it's a radical proposal and there's always the topic of "well who's going to pay for it?" and I'd propose those super-rich tech companies that are putting people out of a job start by paying their fare share of tax, then we'll see where we are.

I say this all as someone who has a lot of job security at one of those tech companies.

1andrew1 11-09-2020 23:18
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 36049660)
Some was tongue in cheek, some not.

I do actually feel sorry for the 'lifestyle' of todays youngsters. Almost every aspect of their life is laid bare and open to scrutiny through that marvelous technology called the internet. I doubt there are any who don't have a presence on the major social websites, and it's all good fun . . until it suddenly isn't, and you can't rub out that little error of judgement that may follow you for years.

Progress is wonderful, without it we'd still be using the horse & cart, wood fires & candles, but it comes at a price. Machinery, computers & automation that improves production but reduces jobs. Medical advances that ensure longer life and reduced infant death rates, which means growing populations needing more housing.

No jobs, no housing, but a steady rise in mental health issues . . . I meant it when I said I miss the old days and the 'freedom' we had.
Great post. :tu:

Maggy 11-09-2020 23:25
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36049586)
i don't think any generation has been/or is worse off than the generation preceding it.
You can think that but it's not necessarily true.

Carth 11-09-2020 23:35
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36049586)
i don't think any generation has been/or is worse off than the generation preceding it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maggy (Post 36049665)
You can think that but it's not necessarily true.
It does make you wonder just how many decades the phrase "ee when I were a lad" has been uttered :D

Paul 11-09-2020 23:45
Re: Coronavirus
 
This has nothing to do with the virus, back on topic people.

Sephiroth 12-09-2020 09:10
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 36049621)
I was born 1954, my 'teenage' years were much better than those born in the late 1990's - early 2000's.

We didn't have to worry about not having the latest iPhone, we weren't bewildered and confused by having 300 channels of crap on the TV, the music we listened to was usually performed by people who could sing and/or play instruments without the need for technology to make them sound decent, comedians were actually funny, mums used washpowders that got your clothes clean - in machines that used hot water, boys were boys and girls were girls with very few confused about that, education meant using a brain along with books and pen & paper, food was mainly bought fresh from corner shops and tasted great when cooked, playing and socializing was done with real people not pixels on a screen, getting drunk only took 4 pints, masks were something Batman & The Lone Ranger wore, and one of our biggest fears was mum finding grass stains on the knees of our trousers.

I miss those days :D
Quote:
mums used washpowders that got your clothes clean - in machines that used hot water
We still do - connecting stuff to the hot water pipe.

Quote:
one of our biggest fears was mum finding grass stains on the knees of our trousers
There were better options available!

And, no Coronavirus yet.

Maggy 12-09-2020 12:19
Re: Coronavirus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36049678)


We still do - connecting stuff to the hot water pipe.



There were better options available!

And, no Coronavirus yet.
The comment about Coronavirus doesn't really make this post on topic so please everyone get back on topic.


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 13:34.
Page 55 of 64 « First 54551525354 55 56575859 Last »
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
All Posts and Content are © Cable Forum