Jump to content

Coronavirus (COVID-19)


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

What statement was made by any government spokesperson makes you believe that?  

I'm really not being facetious but I understood that 'herd immunity' wasn't an explicit short term strategy either. Is there some statement from the governments saying that it was?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, throbber said:

It will surely get far worse among countries like the Philippines that are so densely populated that don’t have the best health care though. If it doesn’t take off that badly in the poorer countries it will send the 5g conspiracy nut jobs into overdrive. 

f**k you!

You do have a point though - my 1G phone is clear of any viruses. I just did a virus check.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

You do realise that if the government had said “you can exercise for a maximum of two miles” loads of folk would have claimed that was too prescriptive?

You would probably have been one of them.

I don't think that's something you can level at me throughout the last few weeks tbh.

"Loads of folk" who don't have any authority on the topic might claim that. The leadership from the government has been near enough non existent and a lot of the the public have taken full advantage of that. Both are big factors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly. Too many morons out there who'd be crying "no deaths are acceptable" for the general public to understand that part of this is weighing up acceptable number of deaths versus the damage this does to the economy, exactly as it should be.

 

Trouble with that is it reduces people’s lives to an extra column on a profit and loss balance sheet. It’s ethically heinous. Pragmatic, perhaps, but morally there’s not a lot to say for it. It is, however, the way things are rather than how they should be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Gordon EF said:

Exactly. Too many morons out there who'd be crying "no deaths are acceptable" for the general public to understand that part of this is weighing up acceptable number of deaths versus the damage this does to the economy, exactly as it should be.

Think that's partly down to the behavioural scientists and media advisers telling the government to push that it's about saving lives, rather than slowing down the infection rate, sending out a more emotive and less technical message, bit like Take Back Control!

Edited by welshbairn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, bennett said:

To start with we had the herd immunity routine, catching the virus would help.  Then Boris suggested that people stay in and avoid pubs/cafes/large gatherings etc, rather than ordering it.

That lack of clarity was always going to suggest to some that it wasn't that big a deal. 

 

 

 

Agreed. The early part of March (when cases were low)  could quite easily have been used to prepare folk for lockdown, before enforcing a week or two before they eventually did. 

We are starting to see the effects of the lockdown now as numbers of new cases are falling every day. Pity this couldn't have been done earlier. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Gordon EF said:

I'm really not being facetious but I understood that 'herd immunity' wasn't an explicit short term strategy either. Is there some statement from the governments saying that it was?

It was a position being taken by a government that didn’t know what they were doing and weren’t reacting quickly enough.

Maybe if we hadn’t had 15 years of Tory austerity then a wee bit more could and should have been spent on planning for something like this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Todd_is_God said:

Going to the promenade or to the park because it is a nice day does make you an arsehole, sorry.

The guidelines may be blurry, but it's quite clear neither of those two examples are allowed.

It's ok to blame both the government and these idiots

It’s not even remotely a 50-50 split though. What has contributed to greater transmission until now: a minority being in a public space on two nice weekends or the government ignoring its own pandemic advisory group and keeping schools open until just two weeks ago? What is putting a greater strain on the NHS right now: those same actions by the general public or the fact that the government didn’t get enough testing kits despite two months’ advance warning, so almost all NHS staff have to self isolate for 14 days even if they’ve only got a cold?

And it’s also worth remembering that the government itself repeatedly told the general public until three weeks ago that there was little chance of the virus spreading during outdoor activities so the Cheltenham Festival and all the football (including an Old Firm game) could still go ahead. I’m not surprised in the slightest then that the government is not getting 100% compliance on its latest back of a fag packet policy then.

Edited by vikingTON
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Savage Henry said:

 

Trouble with that is it reduces people’s lives to an extra column on a profit and loss balance sheet. It’s ethically heinous. Pragmatic, perhaps, but morally there’s not a lot to say for it. It is, however, the way things are rather than how they should be.

The said reality is that on a political level, that's all it ever is. The same logic applies to what medicines the NHS will supply to someone for example or how much funding goes into researching particular diseases etc. Its just that it's a bit more acute this time and a bit more public. Like ou say, theres the world we have and the world we would like. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Savage Henry said:

Trouble with that is it reduces people’s lives to an extra column on a profit and loss balance sheet. It’s ethically heinous. Pragmatic, perhaps, but morally there’s not a lot to say for it. It is, however, the way things are regather than how they should be.

 

If you're actually in charge of these things, there is no other way of doing this. To give it to pandering and posturing would cost more lives in the long run.

If you ask every person in Britain, would you accept the death of one person if it meant our society returning to the stone age, nobody would accept it. An extreme example but it proves that everyone thinks that way, it's just a matter of where you are on the scale. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

It was a position being taken by a government that didn’t know what they were doing and weren’t reacting quickly enough.

Maybe if we hadn’t had 15 years of Tory austerity then a wee bit more could and should have been spent on planning for something like this.

I'm not defending them. I've just heard lots of folk talk about herd immunity as if the govt came out and said this was their strategy but I couldn't find any evidence of them saying that, only people reacting to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

Sturgeon should bin that c**t Calderwood, she has zero credibility after this second home fiasco.  

Yes if they were 100% serious about it they would rather than put out a statement defending what she did  If someone in private sector employment had undermined their boss that much at the very least they would be looking at would be a suspension from work

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, welshbairn said:

It's frightening what's happening in India where millions of people in the cities have lost their jobs and have been forced to head out across the country to their villages, taking the virus as they go most likely.

Same thing happened here albeit on a smaller scale number wise but maybe not %age wise. The lunacy of a government saying ok guys, we're going to lockdown in 48 hours so get out while you can beggars belief. 

And apparently the rich who can afford cars are immune as they can move freely and in unrestricted  numbers whilst poor c***s like me are restricted to my community and only me or the wife can go out but not both together. 

Swings and roundabouts I suppose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Gordon EF said:

I'm not defending them. I've just heard lots of folk talk about herd immunity as if the govt came out and said this was their strategy but I couldn't find any evidence of them saying that, only people reacting to it.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.ft.com/content/38a81588-6508-11ea-b3f3-fe4680ea68b5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, maicoman said:

Yes if they were 100% serious about it they would rather than put out a statement defending what she did  If someone in private sector employment had undermined their boss that much at the very least they would be looking at would be a suspension from work

Could be that punting a highly qualified medical professional during a pandemic isn't optimal tbf.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The tories are making a rip roaring c**t of it but folk have to take some personal responsibility. We are starting to see the full on lockdown in Italy and Spain starting to bring the figures down after a few weeks of hard pain. The whole laissez faire approach is just going to see the UK get absoloutly blootered with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...