The big Coronavirus thread

1117811791181118311841346

Comments

  • joe2019
    joe2019 Posts: 1,338

    joe2019 said:

    Jezyboy said:

    It does make sense? That's a relief, it's good news that knowing each other offers some protection against viral transmission, means we don't have to worry about schools.


    In as much as that they are following the guideline about the wearing of masks in the workplace, then yes it does make sense.
    No it doesn't. Point out the bit that says the advice is to not wear masks when indoors with lots of people.

    I assume you are aware that staff in the house of commons have to wear masks?

    I assume that everyone in your office wearing a mask 100% of the time.

  • Jezyboy
    Jezyboy Posts: 2,872
    I've never seen an office where the density of wheezy windbags is as high as the commons.
  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 25,598

    joe2019 said:

    Jezyboy said:

    It does make sense? That's a relief, it's good news that knowing each other offers some protection against viral transmission, means we don't have to worry about schools.


    In as much as that they are following the guideline about the wearing of masks in the workplace, then yes it does make sense.
    No it doesn't. Point out the bit that says the advice is to not wear masks when indoors with lots of people.

    I assume you are aware that staff in the house of commons have to wear masks?
    See my post on the previous page.
    Guidelines are that you can only catch Covid from strangers. 🤔
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • joe2019 said:

    joe2019 said:

    Jezyboy said:

    It does make sense? That's a relief, it's good news that knowing each other offers some protection against viral transmission, means we don't have to worry about schools.


    In as much as that they are following the guideline about the wearing of masks in the workplace, then yes it does make sense.
    No it doesn't. Point out the bit that says the advice is to not wear masks when indoors with lots of people.

    I assume you are aware that staff in the house of commons have to wear masks?

    I assume that everyone in your office wearing a mask 100% of the time.

    Does that have anything to do with the guidance you claimed you were quoting?
  • Ben6899
    Ben6899 Posts: 9,686
    edited October 2021
    joe2019 said:

    Ben6899 said:

    Jezyboy said:


    WHAT A CLINT

    But what he says makes sense.


    They don't have to wear masks because they "know each other" and have a "convivial fraternal spirit"... makes sense?

    I mean, it objectively doesn't but, whatever Joe.
    Ben

    Bikes: Donhou DSS4 Custom | Condor Italia RC | Gios Megalite | Dolan Preffisio | Giant Bowery '76
    Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ben_h_ppcc/
    Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/143173475@N05/
  • webboo
    webboo Posts: 6,087
    Jezyboy said:


    Does he mean they know each other as in the biblical term. If that’s the case they won’t need masks as protection, it will be something else.
  • joe2019
    joe2019 Posts: 1,338
    Ben6899 said:

    joe2019 said:

    Ben6899 said:

    Jezyboy said:


    WHAT A CLINT

    But what he says makes sense.


    They don't have to wear masks because they "know each other" and have a "convivial fraternal spirit"... makes sense?

    I mean, it objectively doesn't but, whatever Joe.

    It was obvious that he was poking fun at the SNP member.
  • Ben6899
    Ben6899 Posts: 9,686
    joe2019 said:

    Ben6899 said:

    joe2019 said:

    Ben6899 said:

    Jezyboy said:


    WHAT A CLINT

    But what he says makes sense.


    They don't have to wear masks because they "know each other" and have a "convivial fraternal spirit"... makes sense?

    I mean, it objectively doesn't but, whatever Joe.

    It was obvious that he was poking fun at the SNP member.

    I suppose it was... if you fail to see things objectively.
    Ben

    Bikes: Donhou DSS4 Custom | Condor Italia RC | Gios Megalite | Dolan Preffisio | Giant Bowery '76
    Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ben_h_ppcc/
    Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/143173475@N05/
  • joe2019 said:

    Ben6899 said:

    joe2019 said:

    Ben6899 said:

    Jezyboy said:


    WHAT A CLINT

    But what he says makes sense.


    They don't have to wear masks because they "know each other" and have a "convivial fraternal spirit"... makes sense?

    I mean, it objectively doesn't but, whatever Joe.

    It was obvious that he was poking fun at the SNP member.
    Yes, I agree it was clear he was treating the pandemic guidance as a big joke. I'm not convinced that makes it better.
  • Jezyboy
    Jezyboy Posts: 2,872
    I presume if you make the right investment moves during a pandemic, it's not such a bad time.

  • pangolin
    pangolin Posts: 6,283
    Hes just trolling guys...
    - Genesis Croix de Fer
    - Dolan Tuono
  • pangolin said:

    Hes just trolling guys...

    Likewise.
  • Ben6899
    Ben6899 Posts: 9,686
    Jezyboy said:

    I presume if you make the right investment moves during a pandemic, it's not such a bad time.


    To be fair, we low-balled on a property at a time when we knew people were playing it safe with money. And then we completed the purchase without paying any Stamp Duty.

    I still wouldn't rush to repeat the majority of 2020 though; it was otherwise pretty miserable!
    Ben

    Bikes: Donhou DSS4 Custom | Condor Italia RC | Gios Megalite | Dolan Preffisio | Giant Bowery '76
    Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ben_h_ppcc/
    Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/143173475@N05/
  • First.Aspect
    First.Aspect Posts: 14,498
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-59011321

    Here's one to send to your boss to read, RC.
  • kingstonian
    kingstonian Posts: 2,847
    mully79 said:

    It would be nice if we could have some facts nearly 2 years on instead of cherry picked stats to force Uk project fear.

    Last time I looked (month or so ago) Uk was fairly close to USA and France in tests per million population. Now we're double both of those with 4.7 million tests per million population and no other similarly populated country is anywhere near.

    I’m interested in understanding more about test rates, as anecdotal comments I’ve heard from friends and family overseas (mainly France, Holland, the USA) have pointed to it being way easier and/or cheaper to be tested here. So I wondered if our test rate, which has been 1 - 1.2 million per day for months now, is higher or lower.

    Is 4.7 million tests per million population an accurate stat? Does that mean the UK has conducted something like 320 million tests since testing began?
  • briantrumpet
    briantrumpet Posts: 17,690

    mully79 said:

    It would be nice if we could have some facts nearly 2 years on instead of cherry picked stats to force Uk project fear.

    Last time I looked (month or so ago) Uk was fairly close to USA and France in tests per million population. Now we're double both of those with 4.7 million tests per million population and no other similarly populated country is anywhere near.

    I’m interested in understanding more about test rates, as anecdotal comments I’ve heard from friends and family overseas (mainly France, Holland, the USA) have pointed to it being way easier and/or cheaper to be tested here. So I wondered if our test rate, which has been 1 - 1.2 million per day for months now, is higher or lower.

    Is 4.7 million tests per million population an accurate stat? Does that mean the UK has conducted something like 320 million tests since testing began?
    I guess I've done about 60 LFTs, and until the latest un-QR'd batch, they were all logged. There will be a lot of people like me, who have had to do that for their job.
  • Dorset_Boy
    Dorset_Boy Posts: 6,878
    I'd have thought 320 million is on the (very) low side given what Brian says, and you repeat that across all the schools.
  • jimmyjams
    jimmyjams Posts: 707
    So far, the UK has registered around 293 million tests, this last week about 950,000; I don't know if those figures actually mean those with results (you will remember at the beginning, only those sent out were noted, not the ones received back).

    Some people claim the high incidence in the UK is due to the high number of tests (their logic being, the more you test, the more cases you will find), but I don't think it works like that. As in cases like that of briantrumpet (job requiring regular testing) and in cases of people following govt advice to get regularly tested for free (but perhaps without real need, as having been nowhere risky), you end up having a lot of people getting perhaps needlessly tested, and a perhaps misleadingly low positive rate (in the UK it is 2.9%).
  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 40,218
    That may be true but you are also surely likely to pick up more positive asymptomatic cases too?
  • TheBigBean
    TheBigBean Posts: 20,513
    It sounds like it is possible to book a booster at six months on the national vaccine website
  • briantrumpet
    briantrumpet Posts: 17,690

    It sounds like it is possible to book a booster at six months on the national vaccine website

    Not me, though my six months isn't till 19 November.
  • TheBigBean
    TheBigBean Posts: 20,513

    It sounds like it is possible to book a booster at six months on the national vaccine website

    Not me, though my six months isn't till 19 November.
    You've tried and failed? I feel like you should be able to make an appointment for 19th November.
  • briantrumpet
    briantrumpet Posts: 17,690

    It sounds like it is possible to book a booster at six months on the national vaccine website

    Not me, though my six months isn't till 19 November.
    You've tried and failed? I feel like you should be able to make an appointment for 19th November.

    Yup. Just said I wasn't eligible for my booster yet.
  • TheBigBean
    TheBigBean Posts: 20,513
    That's disappointing.
  • briantrumpet
    briantrumpet Posts: 17,690

    That's disappointing.


    It doesn't yet look like the website's been modified at all for over-50s from prior to Javid's 'announcement', though I gather that 12-15yo's can book on it now, as a friend did just that for her son yesterday. (He's in a school where covid's been going nuts, and the vaccine service cancelled its whole-school vaccination day.)
  • briantrumpet
    briantrumpet Posts: 17,690
    I'm so glad that Labour have got a completely clear response to Government hesitancy:

    Shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves said the UK government should introduce its ”plan B” to tackle the rising rates of coronavirus now.

    Speaking on the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show, Reeves was asked what Labour’s position was on reintroducing restrictions such as the wearing of face coverings and working from home.

    She said: “Labour as a responsible opposition have always said that we would follow the science, and we’ve seen today that Sage (Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies) are saying that some aspects of plan B, like wearing masks on public transports and in shops, and also working from home more flexibly should be introduced.

    “I think the first thing is the government have got to do more to make plan A work. If the scientists are saying work from home and masks, we should do that. So get A working better because the vaccination programme has been stalling, introduce those parts of plan B.

    “But there are also things not in A or B that need to be done, like paying statutory sick pay from day one and also better ventilation in public spaces.”

    Asked directly whether plan B should be introduced now, she said: “Yes, but let’s not let the government off the hook with plan A either.”


    What?
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,249
    Early on you can give them the benefit of the doubt for being vague about things as they sort it out but they clearly are not in a position to articulate anything effectively.

    I read all the legal challenges they are still fighting from the Corbin times are sucking up a vast amount of their money.
  • briantrumpet
    briantrumpet Posts: 17,690

    Early on you can give them the benefit of the doubt for being vague about things as they sort it out but they clearly are not in a position to articulate anything effectively.

    I read all the legal challenges they are still fighting from the Corbin times are sucking up a vast amount of their money.


    They seem to be in defensive mode, not wanting to offend anyone. It's not exactly a lesson in leadership.
  • kingstonian
    kingstonian Posts: 2,847

    I'm so glad that Labour have got a completely clear response to Government hesitancy:

    Shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves said the UK government should introduce its ”plan B” to tackle the rising rates of coronavirus now.

    Speaking on the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show, Reeves was asked what Labour’s position was on reintroducing restrictions such as the wearing of face coverings and working from home.

    She said: “Labour as a responsible opposition have always said that we would follow the science, and we’ve seen today that Sage (Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies) are saying that some aspects of plan B, like wearing masks on public transports and in shops, and also working from home more flexibly should be introduced.

    “I think the first thing is the government have got to do more to make plan A work. If the scientists are saying work from home and masks, we should do that. So get A working better because the vaccination programme has been stalling, introduce those parts of plan B.

    “But there are also things not in A or B that need to be done, like paying statutory sick pay from day one and also better ventilation in public spaces.”

    Asked directly whether plan B should be introduced now, she said: “Yes, but let’s not let the government off the hook with plan A either.”


    What?

    That’s a great example of a political party trying to be all things to all people while offending no one. Ridiculous.
  • briantrumpet
    briantrumpet Posts: 17,690

    I'm so glad that Labour have got a completely clear response to Government hesitancy:

    Shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves said the UK government should introduce its ”plan B” to tackle the rising rates of coronavirus now.

    Speaking on the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show, Reeves was asked what Labour’s position was on reintroducing restrictions such as the wearing of face coverings and working from home.

    She said: “Labour as a responsible opposition have always said that we would follow the science, and we’ve seen today that Sage (Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies) are saying that some aspects of plan B, like wearing masks on public transports and in shops, and also working from home more flexibly should be introduced.

    “I think the first thing is the government have got to do more to make plan A work. If the scientists are saying work from home and masks, we should do that. So get A working better because the vaccination programme has been stalling, introduce those parts of plan B.

    “But there are also things not in A or B that need to be done, like paying statutory sick pay from day one and also better ventilation in public spaces.”

    Asked directly whether plan B should be introduced now, she said: “Yes, but let’s not let the government off the hook with plan A either.”


    What?

    That’s a great example of a political party trying to be all things to all people while offending no one. Ridiculous.

    It rather confirms that they have no 'vision' that they can sell to the electorate, in their current state. They aren't even just doing basic opposition at all well, for fear of upsetting some part of the electorate they've been told they have to attract. There's absolutely nothing coherent about them at all. Well, neither have the Tories, but they just make up mendacious promises of jam tomorrow for everyone, and keep their cash funders happy with Spaffer's giveaways, with a has-been entertainer as their titular leader.