Coronavirus (COVID-19)

[Pcplum]

3 hours ago, D.A.F.C said:

People dying in field hospitals because they went for a meal. 

 

Where was this?

[vikingTON]

3 minutes ago, pub car king said:

They are opening cinema's, shops, pubs and restaurants all of which are inside. Then surely there is scope for arguments sake letting 1500 people into a ground that holds 10,000. Most grounds have 4 stands/open terraces that can be used to spread out people and one way systems will be put into place.  The biggest issue would be everyone leaving at the full time which would need a bit of planning. At the end of the day you are stood/sat outdoors.

The clownshoes has already said no though so we'll presumably have to wait until December as his mind slowly trundles round to the reality that he's talking utter shite yet again.

[madwullie]

1 minute ago, Mad Capsule said:

Sorry if this is a stupid question but now with the 5 mile restrictions lifted and the ability to travel to a second home if facilities are not shared as of tomorrow would this mean I can travel to my parents house from my flat and stay over? The house and it's rooms are of a big enough size to socially distance and they only ever use their own on suite and never the main bathroom.

I don't want to go full on Dominic Cummings here and take my own interpretation of the rules but I'm a bit confused by this. I don't know if I'm maybe trying to bend the "second home" part to my own situation though. I've checked the route map and still no clearer.

Mate just do it. If you've been careful and they've been careful then there shouldn't be an issue. If you feel you could have been in contact with someone who had the virus, well, getting the green light from NS won't make a difference if you spread it. 

To answer your question specifically, I don't think going to your mum and dad's could be considered a second home. Think that's more another gaff younown, or like a caravan or lodge or something that someone else doesn't normally live in imo

[Todd_is_God]

2 minutes ago, virginton said:

The clownshoes has already said no though so we'll presumably have to wait until December as his mind slowly trundles round to the reality that he's talking utter shite yet again.

It'll be October. The lower leagues would be pissed off at chucking 25% of their revenue away for no reason if crowds were allowed before then.

[Wee Bully]

I'm still laughing at the latest pish.
Aye wear face masks months after lockdown starts coz its noo important.  Well doh.
2m but 1m sometimes if mitigation allows and if you're 11 and 364 days f**k distancing but one day older stay away.
Basically giving you're inside leg measurement if you want to go for a drink or a meal.  Next up an App that limits you to one drink.
Well today should see the final collapse of the hospitality sector until they u-turn.
The science says, what about the science that doesn't say that but has been successful elsewhere.  Doesnt fit the agenda sorry.
Good luck ever going back to a gym or a concert or a sporting event.  Well unless you're under 12 that us.  Ah but the science says.
Some job has been done of terrifying the public over a virus that has a mortality rate of 0.08 pct.  A virus that unless you have loads of co-morbidities and unlucky you will be fine.
Punish the majority of a population and wreck your future for a small risk.
Let those who wish to sit in the house do do.  Let those who want to get on with their life do so.  
Better lock the country up again in November to March for flu season too.
Aye but but Nicola is keeping us all safe.  Sledgehammer to crack a fucking nut.

This is just “verge of tears” pish.

Especially the bit about “11 years and 364 days”. Any variation has a cut off. Why can you drink legally at 18 and not 17 +364 days? You sound like that gammon in Leicester complaining about the edge of the lockdown zone.

[Caledonian1]

21 minutes ago, Tynierose said:

I'm still laughing at the latest pish.

Aye wear face masks months after lockdown starts coz its noo important.  Well doh.

2m but 1m sometimes if mitigation allows and if you're 11 and 364 days f**k distancing but one day older stay away.

Basically giving you're inside leg measurement if you want to go for a drink or a meal.  Next up an App that limits you to one drink.

Well today should see the final collapse of the hospitality sector until they u-turn.

The science says, what about the science that doesn't say that but has been successful elsewhere.  Doesnt fit the agenda sorry.

Good luck ever going back to a gym or a concert or a sporting event.  Well unless you're under 12 that us.  Ah but the science says.

Some job has been done of terrifying the public over a virus that has a mortality rate of 0.08 pct.  A virus that unless you have loads of co-morbidities and unlucky you will be fine.

Punish the majority of a population and wreck your future for a small risk.

Let those who wish to sit in the house do do.  Let those who want to get on with their life do so.  

Better lock the country up again in November to March for flu season too.

Aye but but Nicola is keeping us all safe.  Sledgehammer to crack a fucking nut.

Jeeso….if I ever were in the same vicinity as you then I would be looking for the social distancing to be increased to at least 10m.

Some people are nae happy unless they have something to moan about.

You still laughing...?

[Diamonds are Forever]

4 hours ago, D.A.F.C said:

People dying in field hospitals because they went for a meal. Definitely create drama about this because it could happen here as well.

Got shot down for saying people shouldn't cram into pubs before the lockdown.

I get that people are bored but there's no easy and quick way out of this. Opening back up too early will result in another total lockdown and massive unemployment and an overwhelmed nhs. This isn't drama its just how viruses work. We have only contained it slightly. Unless we test everyone daily then it will just spread again via close indoor environments.

 

 

Apart from your made up statement about 'it's just how viruses work', could you please tell me what evidence you are basing this on? Out of all the countries in the world who have been reducing their lockdowns, which ones have seen a subsequent increase in ICU admissions and/or deaths leading to their health service being overwhelmed? Or even anything remotely approaching that?

It is a seasonal virus and the pattern across the board in the northern hemisphere is that deaths from the virus peak and then tail off into the summer, regardless of what measures countries took. Sweden didn't even have a lockdown and have followed the same pattern of deaths as every other country. South America are getting a battering just now as they head into winter. The idea that removing restrictions quickly will lead to the NHS being overwhelmed is just utter nonsense, it didn't even lead to that the first time when we were ill prepared, why would it now when we are prepared?

We still need to be careful because it is a serious virus, as winter approaches we'll need to be extra vigilant, and sensible social distancing measures need to be encouraged. But we also need to remember the countless other negative social and economic impacts of over-caution like you are displaying. Hysterical comments based on nothing like yours are completely unhelpful.

Edited July 2, 2020 by Diamonds are Forever

[Honest_Man#1]

31 minutes ago, Tynierose said:

I'm still laughing at the latest pish.

Aye wear face masks months after lockdown starts coz its noo important.  Well doh.

2m but 1m sometimes if mitigation allows and if you're 11 and 364 days f**k distancing but one day older stay away.

Basically giving you're inside leg measurement if you want to go for a drink or a meal.  Next up an App that limits you to one drink.

Well today should see the final collapse of the hospitality sector until they u-turn.

The science says, what about the science that doesn't say that but has been successful elsewhere.  Doesnt fit the agenda sorry.

Good luck ever going back to a gym or a concert or a sporting event.  Well unless you're under 12 that us.  Ah but the science says.

Some job has been done of terrifying the public over a virus that has a mortality rate of 0.08 pct.  A virus that unless you have loads of co-morbidities and unlucky you will be fine.

Punish the majority of a population and wreck your future for a small risk.

Let those who wish to sit in the house do do.  Let those who want to get on with their life do so.  

Better lock the country up again in November to March for flu season too.

Aye but but Nicola is keeping us all safe.  Sledgehammer to crack a fucking nut.

COVID and lockdown appears to have broken you. You used to be a decent poster but these regular heads gone posts you’re coming out with now are dreadful.

Relax.

[Paco]

Sorry if this is a stupid question but now with the 5 mile restrictions lifted and the ability to travel to a second home if facilities are not shared as of tomorrow would this mean I can travel to my parents house from my flat and stay over? The house and it's rooms are of a big enough size to socially distance and they only ever use their own on suite and never the main bathroom.

I don't want to go full on Dominic Cummings here and take my own interpretation of the rules but I'm a bit confused by this. I don't know if I'm maybe trying to bend the "second home" part to my own situation though. I've checked the route map and still no clearer.

Do you currently live on your own? If so, you’ve been able to travel and stay with your parents for a few weeks now.

[Billy Jean King]

 
Apart from your made up statement about 'it's just how viruses work', could you please tell me what evidence you are basing this on? Out of all the countries in the world who have been reducing their lockdowns, which ones have seen a subsequent increase in ICU admissions and/or deaths leading to their health service being overwhelmed? Or even anything remotely approaching that?
It is a seasonal virus and the pattern across the board in the northern hemisphere is that deaths from the virus peak and then tail off into the summer, regardless of what measures countries took. Sweden didn't even have a lockdown and have followed the same pattern of deaths as every other country. South America are getting a battering just now as they head into winter. The idea that removing restrictions quickly will lead to the NHS being overwhelmed is just utter nonsense, it didn't even lead to that the first time when we were ill prepared, why would it now when we are prepared?
We still need to be careful because it is a serious virus, as winter approaches we'll need to be extra vigilant, and sensible social distancing measures need to be encouraged. But we also need to remember the countless other negative social and economic impacts of over-caution like you are displaying. Hysterical comments based on nothing like yours are completely unhelpful.

Texas, Florida, California. Seasonal you say [emoji848]

[carpetmonster]

8 minutes ago, Diamonds are Forever said:

 

Apart from your made up statement about 'it's just how viruses work', could you please tell me what evidence you are basing this on? Out of all the countries in the world who have been reducing their lockdowns, which ones have seen a subsequent increase in ICU admissions and/or deaths leading to their health service being overwhelmed? Or even anything remotely approaching that?

 

Southern states of the US, notably Florida, Texas and Arizona are reporting record numbers and breaking those records every day this week. Houston - the city with most hospital beds in the country - was at 97% of its ICU capacity on June 24th and then stopped reporting capacity figures. 

Edited July 2, 2020 by carpetmonster

[DeeTillEhDeh]

It's a bit of a slap in the face to shop workers who have spent four months working without masks but now need to wear them because the SNP want to be seen to be doing something.

No shock - H_B in SNP Baaaaaaaaaaaaad mode.

[carpetmonster]

1 minute ago, Tynierose said:

In pointing out the stupidity and hypocrisy of it all.  Keep following the party line though.

Definitely.  10m will be as effective as 1m so don't worry.

I'm perfectly fine thank you.

Astonished by the brain washing that has been achieved tbh.

wAKE up SHeEpLE!!

[mizfit]

The face masks mandatory requirement should’ve been announced at phase 1, one thing that does annoy me.

[DeeTillEhDeh]

I'm still laughing at the latest pish.
Aye wear face masks months after lockdown starts coz its noo important.  Well doh.
2m but 1m sometimes if mitigation allows and if you're 11 and 364 days f**k distancing but one day older stay away.
Basically giving you're inside leg measurement if you want to go for a drink or a meal.  Next up an App that limits you to one drink.
Well today should see the final collapse of the hospitality sector until they u-turn.
The science says, what about the science that doesn't say that but has been successful elsewhere.  Doesnt fit the agenda sorry.
Good luck ever going back to a gym or a concert or a sporting event.  Well unless you're under 12 that us.  Ah but the science says.
Some job has been done of terrifying the public over a virus that has a mortality rate of 0.08 pct.  A virus that unless you have loads of co-morbidities and unlucky you will be fine.
Punish the majority of a population and wreck your future for a small risk.
Let those who wish to sit in the house do do.  Let those who want to get on with their life do so.  
Better lock the country up again in November to March for flu season too.
Aye but but Nicola is keeping us all safe.  Sledgehammer to crack a fucking nut.

Sounds more like you're raging?

[Detournement]

1 hour ago, Caledonian1 said:

Eh....whilst masks in shops have not been mandatory they have been recommended so surely those shop workers who are so concerned would have been wearing them anyway.

This will also have protected them from the aforementioned " slap in the face "

Clearly most shop workers don't want to wear them. All the supermarkets have been providing PPE for on a voluntary basis for months and non vunerable workers have largely chosen not to wear them because it's fucking pointless.

Wearing them whilst shopping is fair enough but making staff wear them for 40 hours a week whilst they also have to handle thousands of products which have also been handled by random punters is crazy. 

 

[Detournement]

4 minutes ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:

45 minutes ago, Tynierose said:

I'm still laughing at the latest pish.
Aye wear face masks months after lockdown starts coz its noo important.  Well doh.
2m but 1m sometimes if mitigation allows and if you're 11 and 364 days f**k distancing but one day older stay away.
Basically giving you're inside leg measurement if you want to go for a drink or a meal.  Next up an App that limits you to one drink.
Well today should see the final collapse of the hospitality sector until they u-turn.
The science says, what about the science that doesn't say that but has been successful elsewhere.  Doesnt fit the agenda sorry.
Good luck ever going back to a gym or a concert or a sporting event.  Well unless you're under 12 that us.  Ah but the science says.
Some job has been done of terrifying the public over a virus that has a mortality rate of 0.08 pct.  A virus that unless you have loads of co-morbidities and unlucky you will be fine.
Punish the majority of a population and wreck your future for a small risk.
Let those who wish to sit in the house do do.  Let those who want to get on with their life do so.  
Better lock the country up again in November to March for flu season too.
Aye but but Nicola is keeping us all safe.  Sledgehammer to crack a fucking nut.

Sounds more like you're raging?

People who want a life outside their house should be raging. Today's announcement was a joke by a government who can't resist any chance to indulge their nanny state streak. 

[pawpar]

Loving the HYS comments on the BBC website at the moment. Wee Jimmy Krankie's no telling me tae wear a face mask etc etc.

[Detournement]

8 minutes ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:

1 hour ago, Detournement said:

It's a bit of a slap in the face to shop workers who have spent four months working without masks but now need to wear them because the SNP want to be seen to be doing something.

No shock - H_B in SNP Baaaaaaaaaaaaad mode.

They are the government in Scotland you utter dunce ie the only party responsible for this. 

[carpetmonster]

2 minutes ago, Detournement said:

Clearly most shop workers don't want to wear them. All the supermarkets have been providing PPE for on a voluntary basis for months and non vunerable workers have largely chosen not to wear them because it's fucking pointless.

Wearing them whilst shopping is fair enough but making staff wear them for 40 hours a week whilst they also have to handle thousands of products which have also been handled by random punters is crazy. 

 

People won’t do anything until they’re compelled to. We’ve been mandated to wear them since May 1st. There’s been very little pushback. Ain’t that difficult.

Someone working with surfaces which may have been contaminated putting a barrier between themselves and the contaminant is crazy? Wow.