|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 22, 2020 15:42:47 GMT
sf Really? My experience of Covid is that it has brought out the best in people far more than the worst. There are more people around my way volunteering to help people than there are needing to be helped; I've met loads and loads of neighbours I've never even seen before through various mutual support groups, collections for food banks, etc. At the start of lockdown and just before, strangers were chatting on the street and in shops and being kind to each other like I've never seen before. I've absolutely hated the whole coronavirus thing and I'm still having sleepless nights about the long-term impact it's going to have on things like theatre and my employment prospects, but aspects of it have been exceptionally moving. Though not the mawkish clapping thing, I hated that.
|
|
724 posts
|
Post by basdfg on Jul 22, 2020 16:20:21 GMT
Sainsbury's should enforce it with some way to identitfy those exempt - too many people are naive enough to think most people will comply - a ride on a London bus will tell you otherwise.
Honestly no one is following every rule.
|
|
724 posts
|
Post by basdfg on Jul 22, 2020 16:23:16 GMT
sf Really? My experience of Covid is that it has brought out the best in people far more than the worst. There are more people around my way volunteering to help people than there are needing to be helped; I've met loads and loads of neighbours I've never even seen before through various mutual support groups, collections for food banks, etc. At the start of lockdown and just before, strangers were chatting on the street and in shops and being kind to each other like I've never seen before. I've absolutely hated the whole coronavirus thing and I'm still having sleepless nights about the long-term impact it's going to have on things like theatre and my employment prospects, but aspects of it have been exceptionally moving. Though not the mawkish clapping thing, I hated that. Varies by area and people you come into contact with. |
|
724 posts
|
Post by basdfg on Jul 22, 2020 16:26:47 GMT
|
|
724 posts
|
Post by basdfg on Jul 22, 2020 16:31:41 GMT
It will be interesting to see if they get a vaccine how they prioritize who gets it after the front-line health workers. On Loose Womwn yesterday we had Janet Street Porter representing the over 70's, Kelle Bryan who is immune surpressed and BAME and Coleen Nolan who is a larger woman. So all three/four characteristics could be at threat. I think we agree that healthcare front line/police should be first then those at most risk ( the ones who were told to shelter), other frontline workers like delivery drivers/shop staff are done in roughly that order. But where do you go then, age, gender,race, size, milder underlying conditions. I'm nearly 50 and overweight so am I more at risk than a younger fitter BAME person who may not be able to WFH as much as me for example. The best suggestion I heard from the Loose Women was you start with the oldest and work back after you've done the key/at risk. But if a son or daughter took their parent/parents to be immunized surely it would make sense yo do all at once. Will the government risk annoying many less enlightened people by offering it to BAME people earlier as a blanket policy - it doesn't feel like the government would want to allow the far right something to campaign on.
I suspect it will go
1. Shielding 2. Health workers most at risk
3. Other health conditions.
4. 65+
5. Less at risk workers
6. 50-64 7. Everyone else.
As immune suppressed people usually get the flu jab but being overweight doesn't Kelle will get it first I imagine.
|
|
1,972 posts
|
Post by sf on Jul 22, 2020 16:33:52 GMT
sf Really? My experience of Covid is that it has brought out the best in people far more than the worst. There are more people around my way volunteering to help people than there are needing to be helped; I've met loads and loads of neighbours I've never even seen before through various mutual support groups, collections for food banks, etc. At the start of lockdown and just before, strangers were chatting on the street and in shops and being kind to each other like I've never seen before. I've absolutely hated the whole coronavirus thing and I'm still having sleepless nights about the long-term impact it's going to have on things like theatre and my employment prospects, but aspects of it have been exceptionally moving. Though not the mawkish clapping thing, I hated that. I hated the clapping thing too - and this week 340 Tory MPs proved beyond a shadow of a doubt how transparently insincere their participation in it was. It is not contradictory to note individual acts of kindness AND to recognise that, overall, this has become a much more selfish country than it used to be. |
|
1,972 posts
|
Post by sf on Jul 22, 2020 16:36:42 GMT
Sainsbury's should enforce it with some way to identitfy those exempt - too many people are naive enough to think most people will comply - a ride on a London bus will tell you otherwise.
Honestly no one is following every rule.
Far too many people aren't even paying attention to basic distancing, never mind face coverings. I think it's partly a misguided perception that the danger is now passed - it REALLY isn't, although the infection rates have gone down it wouldn't take much for them to begin to rise again - and partly naivety, and partly just plain selfishness: masks are more about protecting other people than about protecting yourself, so people simply can't be bothered.
|
|
724 posts
|
Post by basdfg on Jul 22, 2020 16:38:26 GMT
Sainsbury's should enforce it with some way to identitfy those exempt - too many people are naive enough to think most people will comply - a ride on a London bus will tell you otherwise.
Honestly no one is following every rule.
Far too many people aren't even paying attention to basic distancing, never mind face coverings. I think it's partly a misguided perception that the danger is now passed - it REALLY isn't, although the infection rates have gone down it wouldn't take much for them to begin to rise again - and partly naivety, and partly just plain selfishness: masks are more about protecting other people than about protecting yourself, so people simply can't be bothered.
The weeks of the government and press telling people they were useless doesn't help at all. |
|
724 posts
|
Post by basdfg on Jul 22, 2020 16:40:53 GMT
I thought more than two households can't sit at one table - As the aides are there that is four households breaking the 1m plus rule.
|
|
1,972 posts
|
Post by sf on Jul 22, 2020 16:47:53 GMT
Far too many people aren't even paying attention to basic distancing, never mind face coverings. I think it's partly a misguided perception that the danger is now passed - it REALLY isn't, although the infection rates have gone down it wouldn't take much for them to begin to rise again - and partly naivety, and partly just plain selfishness: masks are more about protecting other people than about protecting yourself, so people simply can't be bothered.
The weeks of the government and press telling people they were useless doesn't help at all.
Quite. Anybody who'd paid any attention to what had been happening in Singapore or Taiwan or Japan could see very clearly that masks in certain kinds of spaces were important, and it's a message the government should have begun reinforcing as soon as it became necessary to shut down performance spaces.
Unfortunately, promoting masks at that point would have also meant taking some responsibility for making sure they were widely available, and for this government that looked too much like hard work.
|
|
19,799 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Jul 22, 2020 18:24:17 GMT
The WHO said masks weren’t effective. The messaging was coming from the so-called experts.
|
|
724 posts
|
Post by basdfg on Jul 22, 2020 19:01:18 GMT
|
|
146 posts
|
Post by lou on Jul 22, 2020 19:04:42 GMT
I thought more than two households can't sit at one table - As the aides are there that is four households breaking the 1m plus rule. From The Metro: How many people can you go to the pub with? In England – where pubs are now open – you can meet one other household indoors. There is no restriction on the number of people you can meet, as long as your group is made up of no more than two households. However, if you are eating or drinking outside, you can meet up in groups of up to six people from different households. In both cases, social distancing should be observed, with people in England told to stay ‘one-metre plus’ apart, while ensuring they take other measures such as wearing a mask or washing their hands. Under the new pub rules, no more than 30 people can congregate indoors, even if a venue has capacity for it. So outdoors can be more than one household. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 22, 2020 19:52:58 GMT
Sainsbury's should enforce it with some way to identitfy those exempt - too many people are naive enough to think most people will comply - a ride on a London bus will tell you otherwise.
Honestly no one is following every rule.
What are the exemptions, does anyone know. They have talked about people with breathing issues but they might be more sustainable to the pandemic. But what about people who might be claustrophobic or not like having their face covered for many reasons. Others may have a job putting a mask if they have arthritis or a hand disability. What about partially sighted people? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 22, 2020 20:00:07 GMT
It will be interesting to see if they get a vaccine how they prioritize who gets it after the front-line health workers. On Loose Womwn yesterday we had Janet Street Porter representing the over 70's, Kelle Bryan who is immune surpressed and BAME and Coleen Nolan who is a larger woman. So all three/four characteristics could be at threat. I think we agree that healthcare front line/police should be first then those at most risk ( the ones who were told to shelter), other frontline workers like delivery drivers/shop staff are done in roughly that order. But where do you go then, age, gender,race, size, milder underlying conditions. I'm nearly 50 and overweight so am I more at risk than a younger fitter BAME person who may not be able to WFH as much as me for example. The best suggestion I heard from the Loose Women was you start with the oldest and work back after you've done the key/at risk. But if a son or daughter took their parent/parents to be immunized surely it would make sense yo do all at once. Will the government risk annoying many less enlightened people by offering it to BAME people earlier as a blanket policy - it doesn't feel like the government would want to allow the far right something to campaign on.
I suspect it will go
1. Shielding 2. Health workers most at risk
3. Other health conditions.
4. 65+
5. Less at risk workers
6. 50-64 7. Everyone else.
As immune suppressed people usually get the flu jab but being overweight doesn't Kelle will get it first I imagine.
Makes sense I might flip 1 and 2 but the the list is logical and everyone in roughly the right place. Categories 1 and 2 and then 3 and 3 and 4 can be done in tandem. A care home would all be vaccinated in one go logically. Just hope this vaccine or one works ASAP. |
|
5,066 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Jul 22, 2020 20:08:03 GMT
It is better to control the low infection rate now and keep it that way than let it blow up again, which it will and trying to control it, when; it is out of control, as it was 2 months ago. Get the armed forces in to hand out fines, if necessary and that includes public transport as well.
And if Sainsbury’s aren’t going to help enforce the law, I won’t be shopping there.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 22, 2020 20:09:53 GMT
|
|
724 posts
|
Post by basdfg on Jul 22, 2020 21:36:07 GMT
It is better to control the low infection rate now and keep it that way than let it blow up again, which it will and trying to control it, when; it is out of control, as it was 2 months ago. Get the armed forces in to hand out fines, if necessary and that includes public transport as well. And if Sainsbury’s aren’t going to help enforce the law, I won’t be shopping there. The government have dillied about masks for too long so I doubt the Army are going to ever going to patrol supermarkets. Usage on trains is pretty good so not needed there.
The government should give the police the power to fine shops but USDAW are reluctant to allow their staff to be made effective police officers - not that many shops employ trained security guards.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 22, 2020 21:44:55 GMT
It is better to control the low infection rate now and keep it that way than let it blow up again, which it will and trying to control it, when; it is out of control, as it was 2 months ago. Get the armed forces in to hand out fines, if necessary and that includes public transport as well. And if Sainsbury’s aren’t going to help enforce the law, I won’t be shopping there. With something as virulent as this the answer is to take measures long before you think they are necessary. We’ve seen this already and savvy countries are clamping down hard on the slightest outbreak (we aren’t, we have sustained low level transmission). If you think it’s too soon to react, it’s the right time to react. As for vaccine, the question is at what point the viral risk outweighs the side effect risk. |
|
724 posts
|
Post by basdfg on Jul 22, 2020 21:46:36 GMT
|
|
724 posts
|
Post by basdfg on Jul 22, 2020 22:47:34 GMT
|
|
2,342 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Jul 22, 2020 22:54:41 GMT
It is better to control the low infection rate now and keep it that way than let it blow up again, which it will and trying to control it, when; it is out of control, as it was 2 months ago. Get the armed forces in to hand out fines, if necessary and that includes public transport as well. And if Sainsbury’s aren’t going to help enforce the law, I won’t be shopping there. You sure about the army? |
|
5,066 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Jul 22, 2020 23:52:51 GMT
It is better to control the low infection rate now and keep it that way than let it blow up again, which it will and trying to control it, when; it is out of control, as it was 2 months ago. Get the armed forces in to hand out fines, if necessary and that includes public transport as well. And if Sainsbury’s aren’t going to help enforce the law, I won’t be shopping there. With something as virulent as this the answer is to take measures long before you think they are necessary. We’ve seen this already and savvy countries are clamping down hard on the slightest outbreak (we aren’t, we have sustained low level transmission). If you think it’s too soon to react, it’s the right time to react. As for vaccine, the question is at what point the viral risk outweighs the side effect risk. We are on the same song sheet for your first paragraph. With regards to vaccine, there are people who will not take a vaccine, which is fine, if they want to catch Covid and risk the complications that goes with it, then I have absolutely no problem with that. What people don’t have a right to do is transmit it to other people, who are going about their own law abiding way of life. It is better to control the low infection rate now and keep it that way than let it blow up again, which it will and trying to control it, when; it is out of control, as it was 2 months ago. Get the armed forces in to hand out fines, if necessary and that includes public transport as well. And if Sainsbury’s aren’t going to help enforce the law, I won’t be shopping there. You sure about the army? Absolutely, they are there for national emergencies, if the supermarket and the police don’t enforce it, the armed forces can and should. No point in making laws, if they’re not going to be enforced. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 23, 2020 6:37:46 GMT
With something as virulent as this the answer is to take measures long before you think they are necessary. We’ve seen this already and savvy countries are clamping down hard on the slightest outbreak (we aren’t, we have sustained low level transmission). If you think it’s too soon to react, it’s the right time to react. As for vaccine, the question is at what point the viral risk outweighs the side effect risk. We are on the same song sheet for your first paragraph. With regards to vaccine, there are people who will not take a vaccine, which is fine, if they want to catch Covid and risk the complications that goes with it, then I have absolutely no problem with that. What people don’t have a right to do is transmit it to other people, who are going about their own law abiding way of life. Agree with that and, presumably, other countries will legislate so that anti vaxxers will face fines, maybe more, to have them comply. Johnson melts into a puddle at the thought of telling people to do something for the common good, however, so the chances of it happening here are, sadly, remote. |
|
4,993 posts
|
Post by Someone in a tree on Jul 23, 2020 7:36:23 GMT
|
|
