Jump to content

Coronavirus


1of4

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Ewe Ram said:

I’m sorry but I disagree. People have been told to ‘socially distance’ themselves. I wish I could but I have to go to work in a critical role. Kids were kept in school to allow the parents to carry on working. You should count yourself extremely privileged to be able to stay at home. I know there’s financial worries, I have adult children I worry about, but honestly this is not mucking about. I’m not here for an argument, I’ve faced enough stress this week but I won’t change my mind, it was a selfish act by all of them. 

People were told its fine to be in work, fine for your kids to be in school, fine for the pubs to be open..but try not to use them?? Talk about mixed messages....who 'had' to be in a pub?  Just needed shutting...took too long. 

My point is you are blaming the wrong people. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 19.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
22 minutes ago, Chester40 said:

People were told its fine to be in work, fine for your kids to be in school, fine for the pubs to be open..but try not to use them?? Talk about mixed messages....who 'had' to be in a pub?  Just needed shutting...took too long. 

My point is you are blaming the wrong people. 

Maybe the pubs should have been shut earlier but the guidance to us all has been very clear - don't go to pubs & keep distance between ourselves. 

To say that the people aren't responsible for the stupid & selfish behaviour @Ewe Ram witnessed is rubbish. Are people so incapable of taking some responsibility?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Chester40 said:

People were told its fine to be in work, fine for your kids to be in school, fine for the pubs to be open..but try not to use them?? Talk about mixed messages....who 'had' to be in a pub?  Just needed shutting...took too long. 

My point is you are blaming the wrong people. 

So I should be blaming the government? Is that where you’re going? The messages have been out there long enough, wash hands, sanitise, keep your distance. But obviously people couldn’t heed that, they still carried on. Pubs could have implemented rules to distance people like you’re only allowed in if you sit at your table and then space the tables like restaurants did. But no, alcohol is more important. They had their chance but couldn’t have any initiative so the inevitable hard line was drawn. Not the government’s fault at all. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Van Wolfie said:

Maybe the pubs should have been shut earlier but the guidance to us all has been very clear - don't go to pubs & keep distance between ourselves. 

To say that the people aren't responsible for the stupid & selfish behaviour @Ewe Ram witnessed is rubbish. Are people so incapable of taking some responsibility?

Well clearly the answer is yes. ?

'Guidance was don't go into pubs'... but why are they open? As I said before, no one needs to go in the pub, its always a choice. 

Eg People making 'emergency' journeys is much more open to personal interpretation, so I can see how different people would argue /justify being on the train or tube today and it being contentious. 

Expecting people to be in work, have their kids in school and having a pub open but saying 'maybe best you don't go' is crazy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Ewe Ram said:

So I should be blaming the government? Is that where you’re going? The messages have been out there long enough, wash hands, sanitise, keep your distance. But obviously people couldn’t heed that, they still carried on. Pubs could have implemented rules to distance people like you’re only allowed in if you sit at your table and then space the tables like restaurants did. But no, alcohol is more important. They had their chance but couldn’t have any initiative so the inevitable hard line was drawn. Not the government’s fault at all. 

Of course. They have shut them now, so either do it or don't. Allow people the choice to go in or don't. Don't offer them the choice and moan if they do. 

Restaurants are shut too. So what you have said doesn't make sense..its nothing to do with alcohol.

Government made those choices. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SchtivePesley said:

If anyone feels like taking a slightly more cosmic view (as an antidote to general anxiety and panic), and likes poetry...

 

 

christt.png

@christthatisashitpoemwhichdoesn’tevenrhymeinplaces

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this is being handled brilliantly in the most testing circumstances since WW2.

The virus decimates the elderly, if they catch it, and is worse for the infirm. Also as this is a new virus to humans it is roaring through the population as no-one has antibodies to fight it off. The effect of this, if unchecked, is that a bow wave of ill people will swamp the NHS and it, and many of the essential infrastructures we take for granted, will be broken. Society ends. Zombie apocalypse, Mad Max. Or something approximating.

To prevent this, we need herd immunity. This will prevent the rapid spread of the virus. We need around 70% of the population to possess these antibodies to provide a breakwater and isolate the virus from those of us that are susceptible. This can be achieved in each individual through vaccine...maybe 6 months away, maybe 18 months...or exposure and recovery from the illness.

The government, taking and acting upon the best scientific advice from the finest institutions in one of the most developed and educated nations on earth, is attempting to balance the need for us to expose most people to the virus, with the need to allow this exposure to occur over a manageable timeframe (in terms of NHS response) and the imperative to prevent the highly susceptible from contracting the virus in the first place.

From where I'm sitting, we're smashing it in terms of strategy. We just need people to do what they're told, although I bet the models incorporate the ignorant banker factor.

If you don't understand virology, epidemiology, economics, logistics or any of the many things being balanced here (and I sure don't), that is not sufficient a reason to replace the summed majesty of the learned expertise being brought to bear here with whatever random ******** on facebook re-enforces your prejudices, or appeals to your take on 'common sense', or what 'stands to reason' or 'feels fishy'.

Social distancing. Hand washing, Self-isolation if you get a temperature or a new cough. 111 and hospital if, and only if, your symptoms worsen. Look out for vulnerable neighbours. Self-isolate if you're vulnerable.

Above all. try not to be a Bamford.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Alpha said:

People think panic buying is buying bulk. 

You know if you have bought one extra because, you know, never know if you will be able to get more then you're panic buying. 

Everyone buying one extra just thinks their sound. Except there are millions of you doing it. 

Seen helpful people on facebook buying extra to then share. Leave it on the shelf. There's loads of you doing that as well. 

If you're not buying with your normal amounts then you are panic buying and stopping other people getting supplies. 

I know several people now that have bought extra so that the panic buyers don't get it all. Duh! 

We need to get rid of the "50 p each, 2 for 75 p" culture that has completely taken over in British supermarkets. Every time I buy something, I have to go through a complicated mental arithmetic procedure and ask myself if is it really that much cheaper, do we need it, who is going to eat the other one, will it keep?

Coronavirus will have a large influence on the ability of the supply chain to provide the goods and people's ability to afford them. We need an honest pricing culture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, goldstar said:

Its all just a mess and sorry for your wife in such a scary and dangerous position. 

In any case i dont trust that our health is at the forefront of this, it may be 2nd or 3rd, but i think other things are at play here. Not a conspiracy theorist, just looking with a critical eye. Anyone else feel like we are in a mix of 1984, Hunger Games and The Purge? 

What other things do you think are at play?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Needlesh said:

I think this is being handled brilliantly in the most testing circumstances since WW2.

The virus decimates the elderly, if they catch it, and is worse for the infirm. Also as this is a new virus to humans it is roaring through the population as no-one has antibodies to fight it off. The effect of this, if unchecked, is that a bow wave of ill people will swamp the NHS and it, and many of the essential infrastructures we take for granted, will be broken. Society ends. Zombie apocalypse, Mad Max. Or something approximating.

To prevent this, we need herd immunity. This will prevent the rapid spread of the virus. We need around 70% of the population to possess these antibodies to provide a breakwater and isolate the virus from those of us that are susceptible. This can be achieved in each individual through vaccine...maybe 6 months away, maybe 18 months...or exposure and recovery from the illness.

The government, taking and acting upon the best scientific advice from the finest institutions in one of the most developed and educated nations on earth, is attempting to balance the need for us to expose most people to the virus, with the need to allow this exposure to occur over a manageable timeframe (in terms of NHS response) and the imperative to prevent the highly susceptible from contracting the virus in the first place.

From where I'm sitting, we're smashing it in terms of strategy. We just need people to do what they're told, although I bet the models incorporate the ignorant banker factor.

If you don't understand virology, epidemiology, economics, logistics or any of the many things being balanced here (and I sure don't), that is not sufficient a reason to replace the summed majesty of the learned expertise being brought to bear here with whatever random ******** on facebook re-enforces your prejudices, or appeals to your take on 'common sense', or what 'stands to reason' or 'feels fishy'.

Social distancing. Hand washing, Self-isolation if you get a temperature or a new cough. 111 and hospital if, and only if, your symptoms worsen. Look out for vulnerable neighbours. Self-isolate if you're vulnerable.

Above all. try not to be a Bamford.

 

Interesting thought. Not knowing if I have it or not is very worrying to me and most people. I'd rather get it out of the way knowing I cannot pass it onto others.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8137445/Coronavirus-outbreak-killed-28-West-Midlands-linked-church.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Needlesh said:

 

If you don't understand virology, epidemiology, economics, logistics or any of the many things being balanced here (and I sure don't), that is not sufficient a reason to replace the summed majesty of the learned expertise being brought to bear here with whatever random ******** on facebook re-enforces your prejudices, or appeals to your take on 'common sense', or what 'stands to reason' or 'feels fishy'.

Social distancing. Hand washing, Self-isolation if you get a temperature or a new cough. 111 and hospital if, and only if, your symptoms worsen. Look out for vulnerable neighbours. Self-isolate if you're vulnerable.

Above all. try not to be a Bamford.

 


THIS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, bigbadbob said:

What other things do you think are at play?

I honestly dont know, i just dont buy all this concern from the government. Really i dont want to think too much about it as it can get quite depressing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...