Coronavirus (COVID-19)

[Billy Jean King]

I don’t need to read your posts again to appraise myself of their content.
I couldn’t care less what your political views are but making claims that are blatantly wrong when it’s so easy to fact check make you look as idiotic as Leitch and Devi.

Appears half a dozen of us must have had a discussion on here last night based on imagined words then !

[Left Back]

1 minute ago, topcat(The most tip top) said:

 

Curiously the French and Spanish already have national identity card schemes. People here seem staunchly opposed to them but happily tolerate far more CCTV cameras than our neighbours.

Why this is the case and whether we’re being more or less sensible or they are is an essay question that probably belongs elsewhere

 

It’s often been written that we’re the most observed nation in the world with all the CCTV.  I think that’s a totally different thing to domestic passports or ID cards though.

[Todd_is_God]

7 minutes ago, Left Back said:

It’s often been written that we’re the most observed nation in the world with all the CCTV.  I think that’s a totally different thing to domestic passports or ID cards though.

CCTV is only useful for identifying people if someone recognises who you are, or your face is stored in a database.

It's very different to electronically logging in to a particular place.

[Elixir]

I'd imagine any 'new normal' will err... look a lot like the 'old normal', or just simply, 'normal'. The media and governments can call it what they like, but life will be normal once social distancing restrictions and mask wearing are fired in the bin, and hopefully without any nonsense 'domestic vaccine passports'.

Everything else in between is largely noise. In the 'old normal', things would change all the time and we would roll with it. The same will eventually happen again, but once we're free to get rinsed down the pub, go to the football, and go on holiday, we'll stop noticing as much.

[craigkillie]

2 hours ago, Todd_is_God said:

For anyone interested, the full strategic framework can be found here:

https://t.co/Y63Woi4Ai0?amp=1

Note it includes this:

We appreciate that everyone in Scotland wants to know when things will feel more normal again and what “the new normal” will look like. 

Given the uncertainty that surrounds the virus, no-one can be fully confident about the answers at this stage. But looking to the future, we hope and expect that the vaccination programme will significantly reduce both the morbidity and mortality associated with COVID. New treatments are also emerging and will continue to be 
developed that may further reduce the direct 
harm of COVID. 

In the full course of time, these positive 
developments should mean that COVID no longer poses a serious threat to public health in Scotland. 

However, it is likely that it will still remain a 
public health concern: as a society we are likely to have to live with COVID as a permanent feature. 

And although we may have to make keep some public health measures in place, and be vigilant to the risk of future outbreaks, we can look forward to the general lifting of restrictions. 

 

It also includes this:

"Ultimately we want to progress to the stage where, although COVID-19 is unlikely to have disappeared entirely, it stops having such a disruptive impact on our daily lives and is no longer considered a serious threat to public health. This stage is Phase 4 from our original Route Map and remains our goal. However, to get to this stage, a strategy of maximum suppression is essential. As a society, we are likely to have to live with COVID as a permanent feature. It will not have been eradicated, and we will always have to be vigilant because of the risk of new variants, or further outbreaks."

That would appear to drive a massive bus through your suggestion that the Scottish Government are pursuing any sort of "zero covid fantasy", which I think is your favourite phrase.

In terms of your second bolded part, how concerning or otherwise it is depends on exactly what those public health measures are. If it's social distancing and continued limits on mass gatherings, then it's clearly a big issue. However, if it's maintaining some form of test, track and trace, or requiring businesses to have hand sanitisers at their doors then it's not really a big deal.

 

[Left Back]

3 minutes ago, Todd_is_God said:

CCTV is only useful for identifying people if someone recognises who you are, or your face is stored in a database.

It's very different to electronically logging in to a particular place.

For crime detection yes.

it also has uses in crime prevention. You can argue whether those are justified, reasonable, useful or not..

I don’t have an issue with CCTV.  Never once have I walked down a street and looked for cameras.  Similarly I’ve never done, or not done, something based on the thought they might be present.  They have no impact on me at all so don’t worry me.

Domestic passports/ID’s likely would.

[Left Back]

4 minutes ago, Elixir said:

I'd imagine any 'new normal' will err... look a lot like the 'old normal', or just simply, 'normal'. The media and governments can call it what they like, but life will be normal once social distancing restrictions and mask wearing are fired in the bin, and hopefully without any nonsense 'domestic vaccine passports'.

Everything else in between is largely noise. In the 'old normal', things would change all the time and we would roll with it. The same will eventually happen again, but once we're free to get rinsed down the pub, go to the football, and go on holiday, we'll stop noticing as much.

So why make the distinction then?  Why not just say normal?

[Todd_is_God]

9 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

It also includes this:

"Ultimately we want to progress to the stage where, although COVID-19 is unlikely to have disappeared entirely, it stops having such a disruptive impact on our daily lives and is no longer considered a serious threat to public health. This stage is Phase 4 from our original Route Map and remains our goal. However, to get to this stage, a strategy of maximum suppression is essential. As a society, we are likely to have to live with COVID as a permanent feature. It will not have been eradicated, and we will always have to be vigilant because of the risk of new variants, or further outbreaks."

That would appear to drive a massive bus through your suggestion that the Scottish Government are pursuing any sort of "zero covid fantasy", which I think is your favourite phrase.

 

Not really, it actually supports it. Unless you too are confused between the difference between eradication and #ZeroCovid

 

9 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

In terms of your second bolded part, how concerning or otherwise it is depends on exactly what those public health measures are. If it's social distancing and continued limits on mass gatherings, then it's clearly a big issue. However, if it's maintaining some form of test, track and trace, or requiring businesses to have hand sanitisers at their doors then it's not really a big deal.

 

Ok that's fair. I have my opinion on what they may be (I doubt it's hand sanitiser given fomite transmission isn't a thing), but you aren't wrong.

Edited February 24, 2021 by Todd_is_God

[craigkillie]

6 minutes ago, Todd_is_God said:

Not really, it actually supports it. Unless you too are confused between the difference between eradication and #ZeroCovid

The phrase used is "suppression", and not "elimination" (or "eradication"). If you're not sure how the Scottish government have defined suppression, then you can always refer back to your own post from earlier today.

10 hours ago, Todd_is_God said:

Elimination = #ZeroCovid

[Todd_is_God]

14 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

The phrase used is "suppression", and not "elimination" (or "eradication"). If you're not sure how the Scottish government have defined suppression, then you can always refer back to your own post from earlier today.

The phrase used was actually "maximum suppression" which, unfortunately, isn't on that table.

It's interesting, however, that you chose to use your opinion / interpretation of what the SG plan is, rather than NS's own words from just 5 days ago.

Ignoring advisers telling them it is impossible to achieve if England doesn't adopt the same strategy, hearing BJ & CW say it's not happening, and coming out and essentially saying we are going to go for it anyway, is incredibly arrogant.

Add in Leitch's dummy spitting "how many deaths are acceptable so people can have freedom?" and it's clear the two Governments are on different wavelengths.

The main difference being WM can still achieve their goal if the SG go down a different route, but the SG cannot achieve theirs.

Edited February 24, 2021 by Todd_is_God

[Left Back]

9 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

 

It also includes this:

"Ultimately we want to progress to the stage where, although COVID-19 is unlikely to have disappeared entirely, it stops having such a disruptive impact on our daily lives and is no longer considered a serious threat to public health. This stage is Phase 4 from our original Route Map and remains our goal. However, to get to this stage, a strategy of maximum suppression is essential. As a society, we are likely to have to live with COVID as a permanent feature. It will not have been eradicated, and we will always have to be vigilant because of the risk of new variants, or further outbreaks."

That would appear to drive a massive bus through your suggestion that the Scottish Government are pursuing any sort of "zero covid fantasy", which I think is your favourite phrase.

In terms of your second bolded part, how concerning or otherwise it is depends on exactly what those public health measures are. If it's social distancing and continued limits on mass gatherings, then it's clearly a big issue. However, if it's maintaining some form of test, track and trace, or requiring businesses to have hand sanitisers at their doors then it's not really a big deal.

 

Not really.  Billions has been spunked on testing and tracing and has achieved pretty much nothing.  Continuing that in an indiscriminate form for no valid reason or benefit is a big deal.  The taxpayer has to shell out for it.

If it was a programme with distinct engagement parameters and criteria to mobilise then it may be a worthwhile contingency.

[Forest_Fifer]

You already get a drink and a snack with the one true faith 

The menu's a bit limited though

[Thereisalight..]

55 minutes ago, topcat(The most tip top) said:

 

Curiously the French and Spanish already have national identity card schemes. People here seem staunchly opposed to them but happily tolerate far more CCTV cameras than our neighbours.

Why this is the case and whether we’re being more or less sensible or they are is an essay question that probably belongs elsewhere

 

ID cards are one thing, but proof of vaccination to get into fcking Primark is quite another 

[Todd_is_God]

19 minutes ago, Thereisalight.. said:

ID cards are one thing, but proof of vaccination to get into fcking Primark is quite another 

Is it not proof of vaccination or a recent negative test result?

Providing it is a short term thing, which allows things to open earlier than they would otherwise (or with much fewer / no restrictions), what's the problem?

If you don't want to use such an app, no one is forcing you, and you can instead wait another couple of months to visit places like you would have had to do without said "passport" anyway.

Much more detail about anything like this is needed in order to have a proper discussion on it.

Edited February 24, 2021 by Todd_is_God

[Inanimate Carbon Rod]

2 hours ago, Caledonian1 said:

Have you guys got a pact that you will refer to Jason Leitch as "Clownshoes" every time - a wee bit like Oliver Lewis' really clever idea to get Boris to continually call the SNP the Scottish Nationalist Party

Hi Jason. 

[Thereisalight..]

5 minutes ago, Todd_is_God said:

Is it not proof of vaccination or a recent negative test result?

Providing it is a short term thing, which allows things to open earlier than they would otherwise, what's the problem?

If you don't want to use such an app, no one is forcing you, and you can instead wait another couple of months to visit places like you would have had to do without said "passport" anyway.

Much more detail about anything like this is needed in order to have a proper discussion on it.

From the news clip I seen it didnt mention if it was a short time thing or here for good. 

There was talk of how it would be discriminatory to the BAME communities as there will be a high level of vaccine declines for them. Tbh I didnt see the whole segment on it 

[Left Back]

5 minutes ago, Inanimate Carbon Rod said:

Hi Jason. 

Can’t be him. He won’t hang out on P&B.  Get yourself over to breadandwine.com

[Thereisalight..]

Further to that post, why are BAME more likely to decline it anyway?

[Left Back]

1 minute ago, Thereisalight.. said:

From the news clip I seen it didnt mention if it was a short time thing or here for good. 

There was talk of how it would be discriminatory to the BAME communities as there will be a high level of vaccine declines for them. Tbh I didnt see the whole segment on it 

Sturgeon also seemed to be tacitly against it although, even when pressed, she kept referring to access to public services, rather than just a blanket no.

[Thereisalight..]

6 minutes ago, Left Back said:

Sturgeon also seemed to be tacitly against it although, even when pressed, she kept referring to access to public services, rather than just a blanket no.

Gove etc were against it a few days ago as well. I wonder what theyd class as public services