Coronavirus (COVID-19)

[D.A.F.C]

6 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:

 

 

Was watching some news earlier today, Andrew Neil and some Radio punter were labouring the point about how shit this is going to be over winter. I think there has been a huge dose throughout all of this, of something that really fucks me off as regards mental health. Rewind back to April and lockdown mk 1. Loads of folk went on and on about how big an impact this will have on mental health. But that was it. Folk seem to think that if you acknowledge the existence of a mental health issue that's it dealt with. Meanwhile, the radio guy I heard this morning said that in London last month suicides were up by 70%.

Stop fucking talking about it and do something. Let's see the fucking money, the recognition, the support. The measures being taken against covid are literally, without any degree of exaggeration, destroying people. Their health, their livelihoods, their methods of coping with the shit life already throws at them. I have ranted about this before that tokenism is huge as regards mental health, and it has gotten fully worse with this.


I genuinely dont believe either UK or Scotgov have an idea if whats coming at the back of this.

 

Going to let you into a secret,  most people are full of shit and couldn’t care less about others. Especially people with mental health problems.

If it makes them look good on Facebook they will post meaningless shite like ‘it’s ok to not be okay’ then ridicule celebrities or sportsmen with that issue.

Theres a severe lack of empathic people and this is seen as weak, especially amongst men. We show respect to arseholes, loud mouths and enable them by laughing at them putting others down.

To me that’s the reality and why thousands suffer in silence.

The depression thread on here is rare and thankfully there is some good people out there. My advice would be get active, don’t overthink things and try to talk to someone you really trust.

Perhaps this is a cynical view but look at what the government did. Allowed the economy to continue, sent old people into homes infected, ran the nhs into the ground. They don’t care. Never have done.

 

[Distant Doonhamer]

8 minutes ago, Bob Mahelp said:

I reckon most people now know that governments are taking the calculated decision to destroy the economy, make millions unemployed, ruin the future of a generation of teenagers and young people, and sacrifice those with 'non covid' diseases and mental health issues, all with the goal of trying to eradicate something that can't be eradicated. 

The decisions of the last 8 months (and the next 8 months) will have profoundly negative effects on all our lives for years...maybe even decades...to come. 

 

6 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:

I dont know. I have spoken to a few people in recent days whose outlook has turned to something approaching sheer doom. People who I didnt expect it from. You can argue all you like about what was realistic to expect over winter but the media and Boris have a lot of blame to carry for overstating what was possible. There also the constant downplaying of a vaccine or other measures which effectively follows that normal life is impossible to achieve. That's not how I interpret it but folk can be forgiven for thinking that way based on the coverage. Maybe I am over optimistic. 

 

The governments might have an idea, cant rule that out I suppose but I cant help thinking that by the time they realise the scale of the damage being done, it will be too late. 

For the first time in this whole pandemic, I have been really disheartened recently by the damage I have seen versus the mitigatikns in place. 

I've no doubt that this whole thing and the decisions around it will impact negatively on many things in the medium to long term (short term is a given).

It's difficult for any of us to know what the governments  are planning. 

I'm still pretty positive re a vaccine.

Edited November 4, 2020 by Distant Doonhamer

[Billy Jean King]

I don't understand why the SG cannot / will not use the briefings to display data like this.
Displaying data by report date is much more useful for gauging the shape of what is happening, and is less sensitive to any bottlenecks with results.
Add to that, as we are now being threatened daily with level 4 lockdowns "to protect the NHS" we really should be talking about overall hospital / ICU capacity and occupancy too (and vs normal levels), rather than just covid. I don't think that's an unreasonable ask, and doing so would reduce the number of people questioning the figures.
A set of of audio only, contextless figures 7½ months down the line is amateur stuff.

The criteria for moving to T4 have been clearly defined already. As for graphs you just need to see the shitstorm directed at Wittey and the other clowns down south for their graphics to see why others might not think it's such a great idea.

[Genuine Hibs Fan]

23 minutes ago, D.A.F.C said:

Going to let you into a secret,  most people are full of shit and couldn’t care less about others. Especially people with mental health problems.

If it makes them look good on Facebook they will post meaningless shite like ‘it’s ok to not be okay’ then ridicule celebrities or sportsmen with that issue.

Theres a severe lack of empathic people and this is seen as weak, especially amongst men. We show respect to arseholes, loud mouths and enable them by laughing at them putting others down.

To me that’s the reality and why thousands suffer in silence.

The depression thread on here is rare and thankfully there is some good people out there. My advice would be get active, don’t overthink things and try to talk to someone you really trust.

Perhaps this is a cynical view but look at what the government did. Allowed the economy to continue, sent old people into homes infected, ran the nhs into the ground. They don’t care. Never have done.

 

I understand and empathise that you have very reasonable justification for thinking this and being a bit of a cynic, but the highlighted above is bullshit.

I agree with your last paragraph though, public information campaigns about "Hey, we've all got mental health y'know!" and having the odd ward for those who are a danger to themselves or others is a shocking state of affairs in 2020

[101]

41 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:

 

 

Was watching some news earlier today, Andrew Neil and some Radio punter were labouring the point about how shit this is going to be over winter. I think there has been a huge dose throughout all of this, of something that really fucks me off as regards mental health. Rewind back to April and lockdown mk 1. Loads of folk went on and on about how big an impact this will have on mental health. But that was it. Folk seem to think that if you acknowledge the existence of a mental health issue that's it dealt with. Meanwhile, the radio guy I heard this morning said that in London last month suicides were up by 70%.

Stop fucking talking about it and do something. Let's see the fucking money, the recognition, the support. The measures being taken against covid are literally, without any degree of exaggeration, destroying people. Their health, their livelihoods, their methods of coping with the shit life already throws at them. I have ranted about this before that tokenism is huge as regards mental health, and it has gotten fully worse with this.


I genuinely dont believe either UK or Scotgov have an idea if whats coming at the back of this.

 

I think the £15m funding for mental health services in the winter months is about as much as can be done in the current circumstances.

Let's not try and pretend that we can't live with restrictions and also deal with the mental health challenges. Providing secure employment, furlough would do this. Providing clear guidance, with clear decisions in and out of the restrictions is key. These are just two things that will lift some anxiety that everyone will be feeling. I would hope a vaccine being rolled out over the winter period will also help keep lift spirits and most importantly look after each other.

[vikingTON]

1 hour ago, Juanhourjoe said:

Agree the policy around schools have been a joke. But not traveling to other area's keeps the potential down the potential spread. And if people know they're not allowed to go for a wee trip. Why not a fine for doing it anyway?

If the government really wants to discourage people travelling to infection hotspots then it could just bung those hotspots in the highest tier of its own fucking restriction setup while putting everywhere else in tiers 0-3 to reflect the actual local circumstances. That would have the obvious practical effect of deterring people from travelling to the areas of concern because there'd be nothing to do there and would clearly map out the genuine risk as well for the public to make their own informed choices. They'd be absolutely right to fine people for travelling to lower tier areas ie to Shetland or somewhere from South Lanarkshire regardless. They haven't done any of that though.

Pointing to a map of council boundaries between areas in the same tier of restrictions and trying to issue fines off the back of it - when they've bunged the vast majority of the population in the same category for no valid reason - is not a credible policy response. In fact it is a moronic one.

Edited November 4, 2020 by vikingTON

[D.A.F.C]

8 minutes ago, Genuine Hibs Fan said:

I understand and empathise that you have very reasonable justification for thinking this and being a bit of a cynic, but the highlighted above is bullshit.

I agree with your last paragraph though, public information campaigns about "Hey, we've all got mental health y'know!" and having the odd ward for those who are a danger to themselves or others is a shocking state of affairs in 2020

It’s not really bs though. Mental health is stigmatised and mocked and seen as a sign of weakness. People enable arseholes much more than help people struggling.

[vikingTON]

23 minutes ago, Billy Jean King said:

1 hour ago, Todd_is_God said:

I don't understand why the SG cannot / will not use the briefings to display data like this.
Displaying data by report date is much more useful for gauging the shape of what is happening, and is less sensitive to any bottlenecks with results.
Add to that, as we are now being threatened daily with level 4 lockdowns "to protect the NHS" we really should be talking about overall hospital / ICU capacity and occupancy too (and vs normal levels), rather than just covid. I don't think that's an unreasonable ask, and doing so would reduce the number of people questioning the figures.
A set of of audio only, contextless figures 7½ months down the line is amateur stuff.

The criteria for moving to T4 have been clearly defined already. As for graphs you just need to see the shitstorm directed at Wittey and the other clowns down south for their graphics to see why others might not think it's such a great idea.

Lol wut

South Lanarkshire scored 4s in the SG's own rubric across the board last week but was placed in, err, tier 3 alongside Clackmannanshire and other places with 4-5 times fewer cases. Moving to tier 4 or indeed any other category is an entirely opaque political judgement. 

[Genuine Hibs Fan]

1 minute ago, D.A.F.C said:

It’s not really bs though. Mental health is stigmatised and mocked and seen as a sign of weakness. People enable arseholes much more than help people struggling.

You said most people are full of shit and couldn't care less about others. That's what I'd contest because you could walk for 10 minutes in any busy area and see countless examples of people doing big and little things which show they care about other. 

The rest, I'm not sure of either and hasn't been my experience with the majority of folk; but maybe I've just been incredibly lucky for 27 years with poor mental health since I was a child. I think you're generalising wildly which is fair enough but don't expect it to go unchallenged

[Bairnardo]

14 minutes ago, Genuine Hibs Fan said:

I understand and empathise that you have very reasonable justification for thinking this and being a bit of a cynic, but the highlighted above is bullshit.

I agree with your last paragraph though, public information campaigns about "Hey, we've all got mental health y'know!" and having the odd ward for those who are a danger to themselves or others is a shocking state of affairs in 2020

I agree with yourself way more often than I agree with D.A.F.C, but I am with him here. Mental health is one of the very few occasions where I will maybe accept use of the term "virtue signalling" because hate it though I do, it fits. Understanding of mental health is light years behind where it should be, stigmatising of the issues is way more accepted than it should be and at a high level, naturally permeating downwards, "man the f**k up" is the prevailing  attitude. 

I mean, honestly..... tell me at your workplace (or anyone elses)  when someone goes off ok the sick with stress....  tell me what the water cooler talk is..? Colour me shocked if you work at a place where the general attitude isnt "he's at it" or similar. 

 

 

 

[Genuine Hibs Fan]

13 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:

I agree with yourself way more often than I agree with D.A.F.C, but I am with him here. Mental health is one of the very few occasions where I will maybe accept use of the term "virtue signalling" because hate it though I do, it fits. Understanding of mental health is light years behind where it should be, stigmatising of the issues is way more accepted than it should be and at a high level, naturally permeating downwards, "man the f**k up" is the prevailing  attitude. 

I mean, honestly..... tell me at your workplace (or anyone elses)  when someone goes off ok the sick with stress....  tell me what the water cooler talk is..? Colour me shocked if you work at a place where the general attitude isnt "he's at it" or similar. 

 

 

 

I can genuinely say my work is good for mental health, and very proactive about assisting people with it. No one has ever said to me that someone was at it. My previous workplace was largely similar, there was pretty much universal protest when someone was disciplined for having too many sick days due to mental health issues. I have worked places where it's been more of an issue though, and have been involved with sacking someone in a previous job for taking the piss out of mental health  leave and using the time off to start an aromatherapy business (not that I'd assume that anyone was taking the piss, she got grassed by someone who was pissed off with her)

I don't disagree that some people have disgraceful attitudes towards mental health and that much much more needs to be done to normalise it (or just maybe have a serious conversation about the reasons many people have poor mental health as opposed to formal mental illness.) My issue is with the massive leap from "there is a major issue with how we deal with mental health as a society" to the conspiratorial, misanthropic hyperbole of "no one gives a shit about anyone else !"

Edited November 4, 2020 by Genuine Hibs Fan

[DAFC.]

Chief Exec of NHS has said today that vaccine rollout for the most vulnerable is unlikely before Christmas, but not entirely out the picture. Most likely the opposite side of Christmas we’ll see a rollout of the Oxford vaccine. It begs the question: how many months would it take to be enrolled to the widespread population? Then of course comes the questions of lasting immunity. There is no way it would be authorised and rolled out if it didn’t have a lasting effect, though. All that effort just immunise people for a couple of months before we’re back to square one again in the wintertime 2021? Doubt it.

I believe Doctor Hilary Jones has stated that the information from the Oxford vaccine will be known “very soon” once phase 3 trials have complete. I assume then that this will indicate how long immunisation lasts but going by his statement it sounds very positive. The German trials are showing very positive signs as well according to him.

If, best case scenario, the vaccine induces lasting immunisation, you’ve got to hope that we’ll see some sort of normality by summer 2021, although nothing is certain with these things.

[D.A.F.C]

33 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:

I agree with yourself way more often than I agree with D.A.F.C, but I am with him here. Mental health is one of the very few occasions where I will maybe accept use of the term "virtue signalling" because hate it though I do, it fits. Understanding of mental health is light years behind where it should be, stigmatising of the issues is way more accepted than it should be and at a high level, naturally permeating downwards, "man the f**k up" is the prevailing  attitude. 

I mean, honestly..... tell me at your workplace (or anyone elses)  when someone goes off ok the sick with stress....  tell me what the water cooler talk is..? Colour me shocked if you work at a place where the general attitude isnt "he's at it" or similar. 

 

 

 

I would go as far as saying that in some cases some people actually enjoy making people suffer at work and seeing them struggle. Especially if they are different, talented or are nice and helpful. Not sure if it’s the environment doing this or if they are genuinely nasty. As mentioned when leadership sets standards and actually cares then it’s very different. I’ve also heard bosses say open door policy and confidential then repeat everything to their cronies and make comments about the appraisal process ‘ need to get a chez longe’. Seen a group of colleagues take pleasure in bullying a lassie into tears, no idea why. Spoke to someone, she was sacked for not phoning in for being off sick ‘she was always fuckin greeting anyway’.

I realise this is the very worst of the worst and have experienced much better. Have went full joker levels of misanthropy towards workspaces tbh. 
:lol:

[bendan]

4 hours ago, Billy Jean King said:

4 hours ago, bendan said:

 

Isn't that just a single measure though ? There are at least 5 that determine an LAs level.

Yes, the guy does say that in his post. Still interesting to see them plotted out like that, though.

Edited November 4, 2020 by bendan

[vikingTON]

32 minutes ago, DAFC. said:

Chief Exec of NHS has said today that vaccine rollout for the most vulnerable is unlikely before Christmas, but not entirely out the picture. Most likely the opposite side of Christmas we’ll see a rollout of the Oxford vaccine. It begs the question: how many months would it take to be enrolled to the widespread population? Then of course comes the questions of lasting immunity. There is no way it would be authorised and rolled out if it didn’t have a lasting effect, though. All that effort just immunise people for a couple of months before we’re back to square one again in the wintertime 2021? Doubt it.

I believe Doctor Hilary Jones has stated that the information from the Oxford vaccine will be known “very soon” once phase 3 trials have complete. I assume then that this will indicate how long immunisation lasts but going by his statement it sounds very positive. The German trials are showing very positive signs as well according to him.

If, best case scenario, the vaccine induces lasting immunisation, you’ve got to hope that we’ll see some sort of normality by summer 2021, although nothing is certain with these things.

They likely won't roll it out to the population at large - at least not in its first versions. It'll be like an expanded version of the flu vaccine with the rest of the population then left to get on with the task of infecting themselves, which will of course render the second half of 2020's 'EVERYONE MUST FOLLOW THE RULES - NO SHIELDING' exercise completely and utterly pointless.

[ICTChris]

One of the issues around mental health provision is that “mental health” is such a wide ranging term covering a huge variety of conditions with different severities. I shared an article earlier in this thread from a psychiatrist who opposed the use of the term mental health when discussing the feelings of students who were told to return to campus and then quarantined. In most cases that’s not a health risk, the students were angry, upset, sad, worried, anxious -this is a normal and rational reaction to what happened to them. They aren’t ill. I also listened to a podcast about university teaching from the other side and lecturers who were reluctant to return to in person teaching were offered cognitive behavioural therapy to ‘treat’ them!

It’s this conflict which causes a lot of issues with mental health provision. I used to follow a mental health campaigner on Twitter who has bipolar disorder and reported going to hospital with suicidal ideation in a severely depressive state and being given a leaflet about breathing techniques and told to ring a hotline if she got worse. She needed hospitalised not taught yoga. Of course, many people will get great benefit from yoga or breathing exercises or CBT and many people will get great help from a hotline but those are the easy things, providing treatment to people with schizophrenia, alcoholism, bipolar disorder is very different.

I’m not saying that if you aren’t hearing voices or about to jump in front of a train you don’t have mental health issues I just think that to the point made, “doing something”about mental health is very very difficult, to balance off the acute crisis based provisions with investing in treatments for less acute issues. I don’t really know how you do it in the short term and in the long term it requires huge investment that probably isn’t coming.

[Todd_is_God]

2 hours ago, Billy Jean King said:

3 hours ago, Todd_is_God said:

I don't understand why the SG cannot / will not use the briefings to display data like this.
Displaying data by report date is much more useful for gauging the shape of what is happening, and is less sensitive to any bottlenecks with results.
Add to that, as we are now being threatened daily with level 4 lockdowns "to protect the NHS" we really should be talking about overall hospital / ICU capacity and occupancy too (and vs normal levels), rather than just covid. I don't think that's an unreasonable ask, and doing so would reduce the number of people questioning the figures.
A set of of audio only, contextless figures 7½ months down the line is amateur stuff.

The criteria for moving to T4 have been clearly defined already. As for graphs you just need to see the shitstorm directed at Wittey and the other clowns down south for their graphics to see why others might not think it's such a great idea.

It's not a good idea to show actual data? Why not? NS & JL claim daily that they are starting to see slowing etc - these charts would aid them with that message versus the all over the place report date stuff. Today, for example, there was a 'jump' of 500, which generates tears and snotters on twitter etc. The reality is a very slight increase on a single day (so far), and they could add context like if there were extra tests done that day, or if they were more targetted etc etc.

There is a clear difference between displaying historical data, and projecting future trends by taking a small sample of that data and extrapolating the trend indefinitely.

[Todd_is_God]

1 hour ago, DAFC. said:

It begs the question: how many months would it take to be enrolled to the widespread population?

This was discussed on here some time back.

Even with an ambitious 500k per day, and offering them 7 days a week, it would take not far off 20 weeks.

Cutting it down to 5 days a week takes you up over 26 weeks.

[DAFC.]

They likely won't roll it out to the population at large - at least not in its first versions. It'll be like an expanded version of the flu vaccine with the rest of the population then left to get on with the task of infecting themselves, which will of course render the second half of 2020's 'EVERYONE MUST FOLLOW THE RULES - NO SHIELDING' exercise completely and utterly pointless.

This is why I don’t see the need for lockdowns and heavy restrictions in the case that lasting immunisations are being slowly trickled through the most vulnerable in our society from very early next year.

This is all precisely for the protection of the most vulnerable in our society ie the elderly and the extremely sick, and if they are immunised fairly rapidly, then the rest of us can surely see some normality back in our lives? (Given the fact that the average UK citizen will get over coronavirus in the same way they would get over the flu, as the data seems to be suggesting)

I understand the certain aspects of our FACTS guidance will still be in place for quite some time, however.

It’ll probably pan out that the elderly and vulnerable get immunised very quickly and the rest of us will be told to shop and drink in the pubs like mad to keep the economy ticking, which, like you say, sort of renders this whole exercise we’re currently adhering to utterly futile.

[welshbairn]

2 hours ago, virginton said:

They likely won't roll it out to the population at large - at least not in its first versions. It'll be like an expanded version of the flu vaccine with the rest of the population then left to get on with the task of infecting themselves, which will of course render the second half of 2020's 'EVERYONE MUST FOLLOW THE RULES - NO SHIELDING' exercise completely and utterly pointless.

Aye, the LOCK UP THE OLD AND VULNERABLE AND KEEP THE PUBS OPEN message would have worked much better.