The coronabrexit thread. I mean, coronavirus thread

[Eddie]

1 hour ago, Archied said:

My god your views and opinions really are extremely unpleasant and blinkered and self centred , do you see people with mental and or emotional problems as pathetic too ? My wife is on the verge of panic attacks after 5 mins wearing a mask ,I don’t understand it fully as that’s not the case FOR ME but I know it’s very real for her , I do do know she is not pathetic though 

 

My argument has never been with those who can't wear a mask - just those who won't. Your wife is clearly one of those who satisfies the conditions for being exempt.

Quote

If you have an age, health or disability reason for not wearing a face covering:

you do not routinely need to show any written evidence of this

you do not need show an exemption card

This means that you do not need to seek advice or request a letter from a medical professional about your reason for not wearing a face covering.

However, some people may feel more comfortable showing something that says they do not have to wear a face covering. This could be in the form of an exemption card, badge or even a home-made sign.

 

Edited June 8, 2021 by Eddie

[Andicis]

3 minutes ago, Eddie said:

 

My argument has never been with those who can't wear a mask - just those who won't. Your wife is clearly one of those who satisfies the conditions for being exempt.

 

No, your argument is that if you don't like it you're pathetic. A different thing altogether. Proudly pathetic, I don't like wearing them.

[Eddie]

40 minutes ago, Andicis said:

No, your argument is that if you don't like it you're pathetic. A different thing altogether. Proudly pathetic, I don't like wearing them.

I can't say I'm fond of them, but after 15 minutes I really was no longer particularly aware of it unless I thought about it. It strikes me that it's worth persevering if you can, especially when the purpose of wearing one is to help OTHER people.

A bit of altruism never goes amiss.

I had a year of being stuck indoors (shielding) because I was categorically told that if I contracted the virus, then I would be at best a burden on the NHS and at worst dead. 

I really don't give a flying fig if people like you think that I'm a little too forthright with my opinions for your sensitivities. 

Edited June 8, 2021 by Eddie

[Archied]

6 hours ago, Eddie said:

I can't say I'm fond of them, but after 15 minutes I really was no longer particularly aware of it unless I thought about it. It strikes me that it's worth persevering if you can, especially when the purpose of wearing one is to help OTHER people.

A bit of altruism never goes amiss.

I had a year of being stuck indoors (shielding) because I was categorically told that if I contracted the virus, then I would be at best a burden on the NHS and at worst dead. 

I really don't give a flying fig if people like you think that I'm a little too forthright with my opinions for your sensitivities. 

People like you? What sort of person is ancidis then that makes your venom towards him ok?

[G STAR RAM]

10 hours ago, Stive Pesley said:

Yes - appreciate the nuance was "no earlier than" but in the dumbed-down media era, you know people just saw the date and words "all restrictions lifted" and that's why so many are kicking off at the prospect of it being put back 2 weeks

Exactly - that statement was ridiculous "it's about data not dates" and then proceeded to real off a series of dates

The whole thing should have been based on data. Certain conditions met = restrictions gradually lifted

It was very clearly explained that the dates were 'no earlier than'.

It was also very clearly explained that there would be 5 weeks between each stage to allow the data to be analysed.

If you've chosen to ignore this, or more likely let the media tell you that the guidance was confusing then more fool you.

The reason people are 'kicking off' (although not sure exactly who is doing this) is because the vital data (hospitalizations and deaths) do not really support the notion that an extension is needed.

If we are going to lockdown everytime a disease hospitalises 1000 people and kills on average 10 people a day then its unlikely that we will ever return to normal.

[MrPlinkett]

30 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

It was very clearly explained that the dates were 'no earlier than'.

It was also very clearly explained that there would be 5 weeks between each stage to allow the data to be analysed.

If you've chosen to ignore this, or more likely let the media tell you that the guidance was confusing then more fool you.

The reason people are 'kicking off' (although not sure exactly who is doing this) is because the vital data (hospitalizations and deaths) do not really support the notion that an extension is needed.

If we are going to lockdown everytime a disease hospitalises 1000 people and kills on average 10 people a day then its unlikely that we will ever return to normal.

Hospitilisations fell again for the second week running. Usually you see these a couple of weeks after an uplift in infections but that doesnt seem to be happening this time.

Hopefully the vaccine is indeed working, it appears to be.

I get that people feel it wont make much difference, for a lot of people the notion of sitting in a pub garden being served on is great, and it is i love it, its just like being on holiday, but i guess wont we dont see is the P&L for the Pub etc in question, and especially those that havent opened because they simply cant operate under the current restrictions.

I have been supportive of lockdowns, but feel we need to push on.

My gut feeling though is scientists and experts who dont have an economy to worry about will push for an extension and thats what they will get.

 

[Stive Pesley]

1 hour ago, G STAR RAM said:

It was very clearly explained that the dates were 'no earlier than'.

It was also very clearly explained that there would be 5 weeks between each stage to allow the data to be analysed.

If you've chosen to ignore this, or more likely let the media tell you that the guidance was confusing then more fool you.

I was talking about how it was reported. The official statement is on the gov.uk website and it's clearly explained if you like reading memos from your boss. The media (as always) translated it into child speak, because we are indeed a nation of fools

 

[RoyMac5]

1 hour ago, G STAR RAM said:

It was very clearly explained that the dates were 'no earlier than'.

It was also very clearly explained that there would be 5 weeks between each stage to allow the data to be analysed.

If you've chosen to ignore this, or more likely let the media tell you that the guidance was confusing then more fool you.

Because the Govt always stick to what they say they'll do? Either way we were told they were basing it on the data - except of course that is open to different interpretations. So they could just as easily open the country up before, on or after 21st June and no-one will be able to say owt. 

[Tamworthram]

23 minutes ago, MrPlinkett said:

Hospitilisations fell again for the second week running. Usually you see these a couple of weeks after an uplift in infections but that doesnt seem to be happening this time.

Hopefully the vaccine is indeed working, it appears to be.

I get that people feel it wont make much difference, for a lot of people the notion of sitting in a pub garden being served on is great, and it is i love it, its just like being on holiday, but i guess wont we dont see is the P&L for the Pub etc in question, and especially those that havent opened because they simply cant operate under the current restrictions.

I have been supportive of lockdowns, but feel we need to push on.

My gut feeling though is scientists and experts who dont have an economy to worry about will push for an extension and thats what they will get.

 

It not yet “a couple of weeks” since the recent uplift in infections though is it? 10 days ago the daily rates were c3300 compared to more than 5500 for 4 out of the last 5 days. Maybe scaremongering but I heard on the radio this morning fears that rates may rise to 10k a day by the 21st June.

I guess the government want to feel confident that the increase in infections has levelled off and, as you say, the 2 week lag between infections and hospitalisations, doesn’t materialise.

[MrPlinkett]

16 minutes ago, Tamworthram said:

It not yet “a couple of weeks” since the recent uplift in infections though is it? 10 days ago the daily rates were c3300 compared to more than 5500 for 4 out of the last 5 days. Maybe scaremongering but I heard on the radio this morning fears that rates may rise to 10k a day by the 21st June.

I guess the government want to feel confident that the increase in infections has levelled off and, as you say, the 2 week lag between infections and hospitalisations, doesn’t materialise.

I think they have been gradually going up over the last 3 or 4 weeks. I do get what you are saying.

Thankfully i can have my opinion and it doesnt cost lives, which is why i do understand the difficult position those who make decisions are in though.

[Gone]

14 hours ago, Eddie said:

Just had a trip to the hospital. I wore a mask for around 6 out of 7 hours.

No big deal. After a while, I was no longer really aware that I was wearing it. If it really upsets you, then you really are a bit pathetic.

I can’t imagine anyone would be upset.  However if there’s no need to wear one why would you? 

[Marriot Ram99]

1 hour ago, MrPlinkett said:

Hospitilisations fell again for the second week running. Usually you see these a couple of weeks after an uplift in infections but that doesnt seem to be happening this time.

Hopefully the vaccine is indeed working, it appears to be.

I get that people feel it wont make much difference, for a lot of people the notion of sitting in a pub garden being served on is great, and it is i love it, its just like being on holiday, but i guess wont we dont see is the P&L for the Pub etc in question, and especially those that havent opened because they simply cant operate under the current restrictions.

I have been supportive of lockdowns, but feel we need to push on.

My gut feeling though is scientists and experts who dont have an economy to worry about will push for an extension and thats what they will get.

 

The scientists can get ducked. 

If there was half a death a day they'd advocate more lockdowns. We should have been fully opened up as soon as the over 50 s got vaccinated a while back.  Talking about more restrictions when deaths are very low is nonsense. 

[FindernRam]

24 minutes ago, Marriott Ram99 said:

The scientists can get ducked.

You do realise it was scientists who developed the vaccine that have, or will have. 

Personally I have no sympathy at all for those people who got caught out in Portugal. So desperate to say I've been away! They knew the risks.

I would have quarantined instantly. What logic says get home at 03.59 you're fine.04.01 you're a danger to everyone.

Same with India what idiots travelled to a place riddled with the stuff then get allowed back in with no restrictions at all. Government stupidity.

 

[Gone]

7 minutes ago, FindernRam said:

you're a danger to everyone

Whom are you a danger too? 99% of the people detrimentally effected by this virus have been vaccinated against it. The 1% of that group who have chose not too, that’s their risk to manage. 

[JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta]

If one of the outcomes of this pandemic is that people think scientists were the problem then that will be a terrible shame. Vaccines, treatment methods, pandemic research and all of the other work that scientists have undertaken globally will have done more to save lives and kill off this virus and it's variants than any government when all is said and done.

Regardless of if you are New Zealand that coped well or Brazil that has coped terribly, science is what will ultimately bring COVID and it's variants down to manageable levels globally. No amount of anti-science or anti-vaccination rhetoric can change that fact.

 

[ariotofmyown]

12 minutes ago, JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta said:

If one of the outcomes of this pandemic is that people think scientists were the problem then that will be a terrible shame. Vaccines, treatment methods, pandemic research and all of the other work that scientists have undertaken globally will have done more to save lives and kill off this virus and it's variants than any government when all is said and done.

Regardless of if you are New Zealand that coped well or Brazil that has coped terribly, science is what will ultimately bring COVID and it's variants down to manageable levels globally. No amount of anti-science or anti-vaccination rhetoric can change that fact.

 

You can't blame the masses for doubting scientists. They had just been told we'd all had enough of experts!

[Eddie]

22 minutes ago, ariotofmyown said:

You can't blame the masses for doubting scientists. They had just been told we'd all had enough of experts!

People don't like being told things which run counter to their pre-conceived opinions and which maybe are outside their comfort zone.

[Marriot Ram99]

I'm not against all  scientists at all, just some of them.

Science alone shouldn't be used  to make decisions on whether to lockdown or not, and by saying we should have further restrictions they are delving into politics which isn't their field. 

Science, Economics, politics and common sense combined should be used to make decisions. You can't make decisions using cases and deaths as the only metrics, deaths from Covid is inevitable the government have to make a judgement based off alot of factors and for me if theres few deaths any under 100 a day I'd say then restrictions shouldn't be increased apart from maybe in local areas with outbreaks. 

Edited June 9, 2021 by Marriot Ram99

[G STAR RAM]

58 minutes ago, Eddie said:

People don't like being told things which run counter to their pre-conceived opinions and which maybe are outside their comfort zone.

Its good to see that you are finally admitting your faults...

[FindernRam]

2 hours ago, TexasRam said:

Whom are you a danger too? 99% of the people detrimentally effected by this virus have been vaccinated against it. The 1% of that group who have chose not too, that’s their risk to manage. 

You are taking it out of context 03'59 Govt says no quarantine you're fine. 04,01 deemed a risk therefore quarantine. Nonsense from a logical point of view. How dangerous you are either side of 04.00 is debateable.