The coronabrexit thread. I mean, coronavirus thread

[JoetheRam]

Not sure where I read it, but average age of bar and pub staff is about 30.

I think that classifies as young people. I hope it does anyway.

Rings true of personal experience as well. 

 

 

[ImARam2]

The United Nations defines youth as persons between the ages of 15 and 24 with all UN statistics based on this range, the UN states education as a source for these statistics. The UN also recognizes that this varies without prejudice to other age groups listed by member states such as 18–30.

Most Brits aged 40 to 64 consider themselves middle aged, as do a plurality (44%) of those aged 65-69. People in their 50s are the most likely to self-identify as middle aged (82-84%). Very few consider themselves old until they hit at least 60.

Today this person would be considered middle aged, and around 93 percent of men survive until that age.
About 150 year ago less then 25% were celebrating their 60th birthday. And indeed, at those times someone at age 60 was consided an old man.

UN defines older persons as those aged 60 year or over. On many occasions it is defined as 65+.

In most industrialized Western nations, someone is considered a senior by the age of 65 or so. But remember: That number is based primarily on retirement age and the age at which social benefits kick in. Many people would not consider someone a senior until they're at least over the age of 70.

 

[ariotofmyown]

1 hour ago, TexasRam said:

Serious question have you got stats to back that up?

The cool hip places that me and my homies hang at are usually staffed by young people.

If I'm totally wrong and hospitality has the same age average as other sectors, then there will still be plenty of younger workers off with Covid and/or self-isolating over the summer.

[Gone]

27 minutes ago, ariotofmyown said:

The cool hip places that me and my homies hang at are usually staffed by young people.

If I'm totally wrong and hospitality has the same age average as other sectors, then there will still be plenty of younger workers off with Covid and/or self-isolating over the summer.

Do you know I owe you an apology, I skimmed read it, and read it as Hospital’s  ?……..

yep I absolutely agree most hospitality staff are young folk, even the not so cool and hip places I frequent. 

[Archied]

4 hours ago, Angry Ram said:

Work life balance.. Hmmm. As an employer, I’m laughing really. With technology nowadays I can see who is logged on and when. Some are good at managing their time, other not so much. People are starting work earlier and finishing later. They feel it’s expected of them but their homes are their homes. I am now having trouble getting people to log off. 
What used to be a 2 min conversation with someone in the office, is now a 30 min Teams call. The days are getting longer because things take longer. I am now starting to question the whole working from home thing. I was pro a hybrid version previously but now I think there should be a clear break between work and home. Most are not really set up to work from home anyway.. perched on a kitchen top or using the dressing table is really not acceptable.. People with a study or any sort of home office dedicated space, okay I can see it. Shut the door and crack on.

Home working will evolve I’m sure, just not sure about it now.

Your right , it is the future in certain sectors and where it fits but there’s a lot of issues to be ironed out ,the problem lies in covid being used to force employers hands and it’s overspill into people’s views on keeping restrictions on people’s lives and choices ,

there’s also big considerations on the effect on jobs of all sorts if a mass work form home switch is pushed through overnight 

Edited July 7, 2021 by Archied

[Miggins]

15 hours ago, maxjam said:

Do you have a family?  A nice house?  A reasonable lifestyle?

What about someone that lives in a noisy flat in a crappy area?  Or someone in an abusive relationship?  Or someone that lives alone miles from any family or friends?  I could go on...

Its strange how many people there are that can sit in a nice house, surrounded by family, drinking Belgium beer that don't seem to be able to understand that for others the social interactions of mixing face to face with real people is what keeps them sane. 

Sure for some people working from home is the future - personally I've done it myself for 10+ years and can't imagine going out to work for someone else ever again but I appreciate that I have a great family, a nice house and all the luxuries I want. 

I always think back to the early days of the first lockdown when Sky News ran an article about covidiots, showing a picture of a park full of people - a park that had several tower blocks in the background.  The writer obviously had no clue about anything other than his own lifestyle and the fact that for some people getting out of their home for an hour was an essential part of their day. 

For others lockdowns/working from home has been akin to solitary confinement - or worse.  Whilst productivity may have not taken a nose dive the need to get back to normal, to get out of the house and talk to real people again is paramount. 

To me its seems that the middle class twitterati minority and media classes moaning about Boris opening up again can't see beyond their own privileged lifestyles, which is why they have lost all connection with the working classes.

Great post, Maxjam, and I agree with much of what you have said. Mr and Mrs Miggins are by no means wealthy but we have family close by who we love and they love us. We only live in a small house but it is enough for the two of us (3 if you count the cat) and we have a decent garden. During the last year we have built raised beds into our garden and enjoyed watching our veg grow (or not!). Mr. Miggins has been working from home since last March. He works in Moorland conservation. He has adapted to working from home but misses the banter and ritual and camaraderie of the workplace. Working from home for 18 months can be so isoating and lonely despite the Zoom meetings.

For those living in cramped and claustrophibic conditions, it must have been hell, especially in hot weather. I cannot imagine what confinement in small spaces has done done to their mental health and if they have had to break the rules everso slightly to maintain their sanity and that of their families then I think that no right minded person would hold it against them.

[Tamworthram]

3 hours ago, ImARam2 said:

The United Nations defines youth as persons between the ages of 15 and 24 with all UN statistics based on this range, the UN states education as a source for these statistics. The UN also recognizes that this varies without prejudice to other age groups listed by member states such as 18–30.

Most Brits aged 40 to 64 consider themselves middle aged, as do a plurality (44%) of those aged 65-69. People in their 50s are the most likely to self-identify as middle aged (82-84%). Very few consider themselves old until they hit at least 60.

Today this person would be considered middle aged, and around 93 percent of men survive until that age.
About 150 year ago less then 25% were celebrating their 60th birthday. And indeed, at those times someone at age 60 was consided an old man.

UN defines older persons as those aged 60 year or over. On many occasions it is defined as 65+.

In most industrialized Western nations, someone is considered a senior by the age of 65 or so. But remember: That number is based primarily on retirement age and the age at which social benefits kick in. Many people would not consider someone a senior until they're at least over the age of 70.

 

What do they mean by “states education as a source for these statistics”?
 

 

[Miggins]

On the subject of face masks - My mum is 90 and was in hospital for a week last August with pneumonia despite our very best efforts to isolate her. My Father-in-law has just come out of hospital today after having a second operation for lung cancer. That is why I will continue to wear a face mask in the future. If others continue to wear face masks in supermarkets and on public transport or any other places it will protect more vulnerable people. It's not just about protecting you, it's about protecting us all!!

[maxjam]

So 2 weeks ago we got this story...

 

And today we get this story...

 

Women's fears, in part rooted in conspiracy theories promoted by anti-vaccination groups online, are unfounded, experts agree, as there is no evidence to believe the COVID jab affects fertility.

 

I posted a video several weeks ago featuring Dr Robert Malone the inventor of the MRNA technology who specifically said that the vaccine was already doing things they didn't anticipate (see video for details, I forget what!) and that the spike proteins it was producing were coalescing in the ovaries and bone marrow - which could lead to fertility problems, cancers, lymphomas etc. 

He sent his data to the FDA but they dismissed his concerns as it was 'unevidenced' - although his whole argument was basically we don't know the long term complications, if any, of these spike proteins in younger people and recommended long term evaluations (up to 10 years). 

Personally, I find the sentence I italicized to be heavily biased and an attack on women to get the jab and ignore any long term concerns.  A more balanced approach would have been to present both sides of the argument and allow women to make a personal decision based on their own risk factors and to recommend they talk to their Doctor should they have any concerns.  

As Dr Malone has said in other things I've seen and read, when we were vaccinating the elderly and vulnerable the benefits far outweighed the risks but as we start vaccinating younger and younger people, who are by and large at minimal risk from covid, any potential long term effects in an ideal world would have been studied first.

We're gambling with the health of a generation ? 

[jimmyp]

1 hour ago, maxjam said:

So 2 weeks ago we got this story...

 

And today we get this story...

 

Women's fears, in part rooted in conspiracy theories promoted by anti-vaccination groups online, are unfounded, experts agree, as there is no evidence to believe the COVID jab affects fertility.

 

I posted a video several weeks ago featuring Dr Robert Malone the inventor of the MRNA technology who specifically said that the vaccine was already doing things they didn't anticipate (see video for details, I forget what!) and that the spike proteins it was producing were coalescing in the ovaries and bone marrow - which could lead to fertility problems, cancers, lymphomas etc. 

He sent his data to the FDA but they dismissed his concerns as it was 'unevidenced' - although his whole argument was basically we don't know the long term complications, if any, of these spike proteins in younger people and recommended long term evaluations (up to 10 years). 

Personally, I find the sentence I italicized to be heavily biased and an attack on women to get the jab and ignore any long term concerns.  A more balanced approach would have been to present both sides of the argument and allow women to make a personal decision based on their own risk factors and to recommend they talk to their Doctor should they have any concerns.  

As Dr Malone has said in other things I've seen and read, when we were vaccinating the elderly and vulnerable the benefits far outweighed the risks but as we start vaccinating younger and younger people, who are by and large at minimal risk from covid, any potential long term effects in an ideal world would have been studied first.

We're gambling with the health of a generation ? 

Out of interest did you watch the sky news piece on this, or just read the article? 

Dr Malone seems to delete lots of his tweets and articles not long after publication. I wonder why. 

[Stive Pesley]

1 hour ago, maxjam said:

I posted a video several weeks ago featuring Dr Robert Malone the inventor of the MRNA technology

Hmmmnoit the inventor exactly, but I can see why people would want to believe that and repeat it ad nauseam

 I found this online which paints a more balanced picture than the video you posted (which was essentially antivax people trying to amplify every little negative or cautious thing Malone said).

Quote

There’s no reason to believe that COVID-19 mRNA vaccines would not be safe in the long term. Robert Malone has made no specific claim that the mRNA vaccines pose any risk, but rather has stated that he believes that the trial group for children and teens was too small for the safety data to be meaningful — and he supports young people not wanting to be vaccinated because their risk is markedly lower than for adults (at least it was, until recently).

It would be a gross overstatement to state that Malone is the inventor of mRNA vaccines. He did some early work in RNA transfection, but he didn’t do so independently nor was he the first. He IS a named inventor on a number of related patents, but he feels that he never received the substantial compensation he felt he deserved from those patents (now expired), so he’s very sour on any mRNA delivery technology for which he’s not getting a cut of the profits. He’s very very upset about it and refers to it as “intellectual rape”. I

Malone now works on a competing vaccine technology, recombinant nanoparticles, which involve producing copies of the antigenic protein in insect cells, purifying them, and linking them together to form small poly-protein particles. He’s been very active in the press lately touting the superiority of the technology over others, ostensibly with the objective of getting the credit and compensation that he feels reflects his importance and the importance of his contributions.

 

 

 

 

Edited July 7, 2021 by Stive Pesley

[Archied]

13 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

Hmmmnoit the inventor exactly, but I can see why people would want to believe that and repeat it ad nauseam

 I found this online which paints a more balanced picture than the video you posted (which was essentially antivax people trying to amplify every little negative or cautious thing Malone said).

 

 

 

 

Suppose you pays your money you takes your choice on what slant you choose to lean towards 

regardless of either I can tell you that if I had young children I would not be having them vaccinated against covid ,vaccinating them against the big child killers is one thing covid is quite another 

[maxjam]

9 minutes ago, jimmyp said:

Out of interest did you watch the sky news piece on this, or just read the article? 

Dr Malone seems to delete lots of his tweets and articles not long after publication. I wonder why. 

Just read the article.  That and probably 100s of others about the vaccine/mrna technology.

 

7 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

Hmmmnoit the inventor exactly, but I can see why people would want to believe that and repeat it ad nauseam

 I found this online which paints a more balanced picture than the video you posted (which was essentially antivax people trying to amplify every little negative or cautious thing Malone said).

There is a good article from Dr Malone here;

Personally I'm not anti-vax but I think for anyone under 50 and relatively healthy there should be far more (balanced) information available about both the risks of covid to you and your family/friends and the concerns surrounding the vaccines. 

We just seem to be bombarded with pro-vaccine arguments everywhere you look and to even question it makes you an outcast.  

The goalposts have moved a long way from vaccinating the elderly and vulnerable and without any long term data the simple fact is we can't be sure there is no long term risk attached to getting jabbed. 

The core of the argument that Dr Malone and others are making - and one I agree with, is that we shouldn't be vaccinating en masse populations of the community that are at minimal risk of covid without providing more information and ideally more data.

[Archied]

1 hour ago, maxjam said:

Just read the article.  That and probably 100s of others about the vaccine/mrna technology.

 

There is a good article from Dr Malone here;

Personally I'm not anti-vax but I think for anyone under 50 and relatively healthy there should be far more (balanced) information available about both the risks of covid to you and your family/friends and the concerns surrounding the vaccines. 

We just seem to be bombarded with pro-vaccine arguments everywhere you look and to even question it makes you an outcast.  

The goalposts have moved a long way from vaccinating the elderly and vulnerable and without any long term data the simple fact is we can't be sure there is no long term risk attached to getting jabbed. 

The core of the argument that Dr Malone and others are making - and one I agree with, is that we shouldn't be vaccinating en masse populations of the community that are at minimal risk of covid without providing more information and ideally more data.

Niel Oliver on gb news gave a very good view point on the morality of vaccinating our children against a virus that’s virtually no threat to them as some kind of shield for us older s ,it’s meant to be the other way round ??‍♂️, haven’t the kids and the young been thrown to the wolves enough 

[maxjam]

Damned if you do, damned if you don't...

 

[Gaspode]

35 minutes ago, maxjam said:

Damned if you do, damned if you don't...

 

I wonder how long Arden is willing to cut New Zealand off from the rest of the world? Covid isn't going away anytime soon (if ever as some countries are years away from administering sufficient vaccinations to make a difference) so we (as a planet) have to find a way to live with it. Refusing to accept that seems naive and may prove to be hugely damaging economically....

[maxjam]

13 minutes ago, Gaspode said:

I wonder how long Arden is willing to cut New Zealand off from the rest of the world? Covid isn't going away anytime soon (if ever as some countries are years away from administering sufficient vaccinations to make a difference) so we (as a planet) have to find a way to live with it. Refusing to accept that seems naive and may prove to be hugely damaging economically....

I have always been of the opinion that whatever path you take people will die - its just a crappy situation all round.  You might save some people from a covid death, but scaring people into not getting other medical problems checked out or killing people economically etc will claim others.

If children are going to start falling ill in places that have imposed long, strict lockdowns then they are risking their children - who are at next to no risk of dying from covid, to save the elderly and vulnerable.  An unintended consequence of lockdown for sure, but an unacceptable one imo.

[Spanish]

4 hours ago, Gaspode said:

I wonder how long Arden is willing to cut New Zealand off from the rest of the world? Covid isn't going away anytime soon (if ever as some countries are years away from administering sufficient vaccinations to make a difference) so we (as a planet) have to find a way to live with it. Refusing to accept that seems naive and may prove to be hugely damaging economically....

They are heavily invested in the benefits of isolation and it will be difficult to abandon this policy.  Their policy has defended the lives of many but they will always be the enemy of the anti controls extremists.  The impact has been on the loss of tourism which is a concept I find difficult to understand because it is not sustainable in the long term.  I live in Spain and it is clear that the past restrictions on holidays have been terribly damaging but ecologically the impact has been very positive.  NZ have the benefit that internal tourism has filled the gaps.  How they integrate back into a world of herd immunity is difficult to anticipate though

[Stive Pesley]

1 hour ago, Spanish said:

They are heavily invested in the benefits of isolation and it will be difficult to abandon this policy.  Their policy has defended the lives of many but they will always be the enemy of the anti controls extremists.  The impact has been on the loss of tourism which is a concept I find difficult to understand because it is not sustainable in the long term.  I live in Spain and it is clear that the past restrictions on holidays have been terribly damaging but ecologically the impact has been very positive.  NZ have the benefit that internal tourism has filled the gaps.  How they integrate back into a world of herd immunity is difficult to anticipate though

Funnily enough they have created the sort of country that many would want to see here. Detached, nationalist island, strictly controlled borders isolationism - and almost no covid restrictions

 

 

[G STAR RAM]

2 hours ago, Stive Pesley said:

Funnily enough they have created the sort of country that many would want to see here. Detached, nationalist island, strictly controlled borders isolationism - and almost no covid restrictions

Many?

I don't think I know anyone that wants what you have described. 

The first bit I will ignore because its not Covid related, but Im not sure of many that have advocated no Covid restrictions throughout.