|
Post by nick on Oct 16, 2021 13:50:58 GMT
My experience of booking a booster:
Tried to book online on the 6 month anniversary of second jab - wasn't allowed. Got a text the day after from GP - went online and booked for a few days later. Meanwhile received a text from St Thomas' (where I had my original vaccines) asking me to phone and book.
Chose to stick with the GP booking as they were doing the flu jab as well but St Thomas' weren't.
Personally I'd always try booking online because: 1/ no waiting for the phone to be answered 2/ not wasting anyone's time 3/ easy to see the options for different centres 4/ can try even when you haven't been contacted
|
|
|
Post by nick on Oct 8, 2021 18:17:02 GMT
Why would someone getter tested if they’re not showing symptoms, unless they have to get tested as part of their employment etc. I test if I'm going to the theater or other indoor venue, if I've been in a medical environment or if I'm going on a train or plane (even if it's not required by my destination). Why? Because I'd prefer to know if I'm contagious before I endanger other people. Isn't that the whole point of the NHS at-home test kits? You are my sort of people. Thank you.
|
|
|
Post by nick on Oct 8, 2021 16:06:35 GMT
Do you ever have any evidence for your various claims that isn't anecdotal. A You Gov poll shows that there is a age divide in if people should be encouraged to return to the offices or not. I suspect that partly comes from the fact a lot of retirement aged people don’t really get technology - I imagine they will be a correlation between internet usage and thinking working from home is good or bad for that age group - the most technically capable are probably mostly in the opposition to encouragement to return category while those who rarely or never use the internet mostly in opposition. So people who are not working think people who are working should go back to the office? Quelle surprise. I'm retired but my daughter has been working from home very successfully full time while her fiancé has to go in 2 days a week because that is what works for him. They both work for the same company who, sensibly, look at people's work pattern and adjust accordingly. I don't see how (or why) this particular Pandora's box can be closed. Many jobs can and will be done from home. In many cases job satisfaction and productivity will rise. In areas where that does not happen then home working will whither away again. That's how it works. The government sticking their oar in with taxes or whatever isn't going to work or happen. Why should it? Add this to the decline of high street shopping as a symptom of how technology is changing our world. Personally I'm all for it.
|
|
|
Post by nick on Oct 8, 2021 15:57:44 GMT
Yes, it's not the total case rates that really indicate what is happening - what you need to look at is the positivity rate since that's telling you what fraction of those tests done show evidence for COVID. For that statistic it doesn't really matter whether testing is widespread or not as long as the samples are statistically equivalent (and they probably are for this).
I would have thought not matter what country, if you show signs of Covid you get tested. Why would someone getter tested if they’re not showing symptoms, unless they have to get tested as part of their employment etc. Conversely this is where I contradict myself and would say that some of the young, examples being anti vaxxers or non mask wearers that want to move on with their lives - may display symptoms but won’t get tested, so the daily figure is likely to be higher than it actually is. You can still get tests (for free) in this country even if you don't have symptoms. My son had a cold last week so, even though he's double vaccinated, he took a couple of tests. They were both negative but I can imagine some being positive - I can also imagine this scenario not happening in other countries. Actually what happens about tests in countries where health care is not free at the point of contact? Do they all offer free covid testing?
|
|
|
Post by nick on Oct 8, 2021 9:39:37 GMT
Not slower. My wife had a January vaccine and only became due for the booster last week so we not yet into the growth of feb/march. But the facilities seem to be ready to cope. We are in some areas. Relatives had their first at the end of January (on one of busiest days of the vaccination programme) and second in April and are getting it today slightly before six months after. Yes we must be close to the rapid rollout. My son gets his tomorrow. I’ll have to wait until November. As the fittest person in our house I’m at the back of the queue. On a side note my son caught a cold and has given it to me. Despite being careful with masks, hand washing etc. I suspect there will be lots of colds around this winter. On a side side note. My wife had both flu and booster while my son is only offered the booster.
|
|
|
Post by nick on Oct 7, 2021 22:29:08 GMT
Through even that can add the strain if lots are getting it at once. Booster jabs seem to be going a bit slower than the peak vaccination figures we saw in February and March where all the over 50’s and younger vulnerable people were getting vaccinated en Mass. Not slower. My wife had a January vaccine and only became due for the booster last week so we not yet into the growth of feb/march. But the facilities seem to be ready to cope.
|
|
|
Post by nick on Oct 7, 2021 21:31:19 GMT
Comparing northern and southern hemisphere is daft. We knew that a year ago. Around these parts we're heading towards winter, and it'll be another wave. The question for policy isn't infections or even deaths, it's double vaxxed deaths. Surely it’s double vax hospitalisations. That puts the strain. Yes. Double vaccinated deaths are minimal. Double vaccinated hospitalisations are inevitable. Like seat belts - when seat belts were made compulsory then accidents with belt wearers went up. Not because belts were dangerous but because many more people were wearing them. But it seems that pretty much every double vaccinated person is either in hospital because they have a different illness (eg they’re in hospital because they have cancer but are then tested for Covid) or they have a condition that makes Covid symptoms worse.
|
|
|
Post by nick on Oct 5, 2021 9:02:13 GMT
Well banning is simply not going to happen. If my boss makes me go back to the office, I'll simply quit and get a job where they continue to let staff work from home. There is not one single justification for office working (yes I know some people like it for social reasons, I am not one of those people!) I have been doing more work in the same hours because I'm more focused and saving hundreds if not thousands from no commute, not to mention eating much healthier where there's no tenptation to buy lunch. What if it’s legally impossible to work from home. Or not financially viable for any company to allow it due to the high tax penalties. Half the country would support measures like this. Not sniping - seriously interested. What would be legally impossible? I can see difficult and possibly a few areas that would be impossible but don’t see a huge problem. And what are the high tax problems?
|
|
|
Post by nick on Oct 5, 2021 6:48:24 GMT
The rise of permanent working from home as a result of Covid will end up being something that is a symbol of the culture war. A lot of people love it while a lot of people want it either taxed for everyone and/or banned in the public sector. For a lot of people it’s symbol of class differences as more working class jobs cannot in any circumstances be done from home than middle class ones. I think you are right but I think the rise of home working in inevitable. The world of work is going through big changes - the rise of automation is taking away low skilled jobs (and beginning to get those needing more skills). And the internet and computing means home working is so much easier. If anyone wants a horror story about how it may end then read EM Forster's short story, The Machine Stops.
|
|
|
Post by nick on Oct 2, 2021 15:23:36 GMT
If ONS data is correct around 10% of deaths from Covid in the UK now are people double vaxxed with no pre-existing. In London, that might be double the number of deaths in road accidents. With the vaccine available on demand everywhere in the country, cancer and heart disease are certainly far greater concerns. For a lot of people I speak to the question has changed to something like 'how far do I go/does my family go to facilitate the tin foil brigade' i.e. the 90% of Covid deaths by choosing not to vaccinate. Everyone has their own answer to that. I think many feel the issue is not with masks as much as with those who don't like science. I agree to an extent except it's not just the 'tin foil brigade' it's also the immunosuppressed. But we must be close to comparing Covid to flu in terms of danger.
|
|
|
Post by nick on Sept 25, 2021 16:07:21 GMT
This is the best news I’ve heard all week. After Its A Sin, I suspect RTD could have named his price and done anything he wanted- but he’s come home to Who. So very, very happy about this, and I look forward to seeing what he does with the 60th anniversary episode Yes the feeling is that he's had some 'fantastic' ideas for Who so much so that he had to return. Although it could be he's excited about the idea of an extended Doctor Who universe that has been rumoured.
|
|
|
Post by nick on Sept 12, 2021 10:08:00 GMT
Selfish and apparently a bit thick if they think using a flash is going to do any good. I was once on holiday and a tour guide was telling people taking pictures of the picturesque town on the other side of the valley that they'd need flash because it was night. There doesn't seem to be any comprehension of what a flash actually does. It's like they think it's a magic spell that allows a camera to work in the dark.
I've seen people using flash to take a picture of the moon.
Love it. Whereas with a flash many cameras will automatically adjust away from low light setting to a high light setting so your pictures will be worse.
|
|
|
Post by nick on Sept 11, 2021 6:19:47 GMT
Why are you asked people here their opinion ? Just reading the spiteful, argumentative opinions on many posts should eliminate this place for parental advice. Have you read the replies? Totally supportive. Personally I find this forum argumentative at times but there's a streak of respect for fellow posters/ And little spite compared to some forums.
|
|
|
Post by nick on Sept 10, 2021 15:12:54 GMT
Can’t see an issue. Just a version of a boarding school but one where the children all want to be there. This is what I was going to write. My wife worked at the Royal Ballet School and it seemed to me that the youngsters had a great time. If they didn't then they left - curiously lots of the boys wanted to join the army. This assumes of course that the production company look after the child to the parent's and the child's satisfaction. We home educated our children and a number of busy bodies could not resist claiming that we were ruining them because they couldn't socialise properly. Not realising that home educated children are generally extremely well socialised because they meet regularly with people of different ages instead of being stuck each day with 30 kids the same age and an couple of adults. The OP's daughter is having a unique experience that will give her memories forever plus helping her to stick out from the crowd in (for example) future job applications. Nowt wrong with that if she's happy.
|
|
|
Post by nick on Aug 27, 2021 17:12:05 GMT
Some "restrictions" became habits in the past though — sleeping in mosquito nets for example. I'm not convinced that will happen with masks, but it is possible that some things (wipes for your trolley handle and hand sanitiser as you enter a shop might be an example) might stay, especially during the winter. I think this is the sensible answer. Some things will stick and others wont. It wont follow a logical pattern I guess. I assume teachers will give more encouragement to hand-washing and other simple measures (catching sneezes, sanitiser in certain places etc) so the next generation may take up those as habits. Like cleaning your teeth, seat belts, looking both ways crossing the road and the many other things we do every day to keep safe. We will reach a balance eventually and that will be the new normal. And the new normal will look very similar to the old normal.
|
|
|
Post by nick on Aug 12, 2021 17:06:55 GMT
Growing up, one of my local theatres was the Manchester Royal Exchange and I would often go back and see a show again if there was a post-show talk, which they were doing back in the 80s, and it's something I still do whenever I can, if it's a production worth sitting through twice, it's got favourite actors and the seats are cheap. An added thing with the Royal Exchange is that it's in the round, so if I go twice I'll book on the opposite side of the theatre and it can sometimes change the feel of a play. As someone who tends to book previews because it's cheaper, if I've really enjoyed the play I'll try to go back later in the run to see how its evolved (I'm trying to write myself, so if it's a new play it's interesting to see where it's grown or been pruned, and the way actors windsurf with the audience, if you see what I mean). And, again, if I've loved it and think someone I know will love it, I'll go back and see it again with them. That's such a lovely theatre. Unfortunately, having moved to London in the 90s, I haven't been for a long time. When I write a mental list of why I should move back up north the Royal Exchange is always on it.
|
|
|
Post by nick on Aug 11, 2021 15:41:26 GMT
If we are talking about the same production then I've seen Menier's Pippin, The Vault's Hair and Regents Park's Evita all three time because I loved the production and wanted the opportunity to see it from different places in the theatre - often because I realised there was a better place to sit.
If it's different productions then Shakespeare because directors are usually keen to put their own stamp so it's interesting to see what can be done.
I've just realised that I'm not particularly that interested in the performers. I appreciate a good performance but it's the staging that really attracts me.
|
|
|
Post by nick on Aug 6, 2021 19:54:19 GMT
Sounds like a cock up by London Theatre Direct rather than LW Theatres. You're probably right. But I should add that they moved the dates once successfully. Then the second time that the dates shifted mine stayed the same. And this time they just cancelled with no communication.
|
|
|
Post by nick on Aug 6, 2021 17:14:54 GMT
I can add to the rumble. I had tickets (using gift vouchers) that ended up on 26th November. I received an email 'thanking' me for choosing to have evouchers - doesn't mention what I've chosen evouchers for but it's the only show I have tickets for. Considering I didn't cancel and certainly didn't ask for evouchers I'm slightly bemused. So you booked direct with LWT? ?The London Theatre Direct website.
|
|
|
Post by nick on Aug 6, 2021 16:56:34 GMT
Rumbles on Facebook about tickets for shows in December being cancelled and credit vouchers issued, but same seats being immediately back on sale. What gives? I can add to the rumble. I had tickets (using gift vouchers) that ended up on 26th November. I received an email 'thanking' me for choosing to have evouchers - doesn't mention what I've chosen evouchers for but it's the only show I have tickets for. Considering I didn't cancel and certainly didn't ask for evouchers I'm slightly bemused. Edit: Just checked - And they are on sale again at the same price
|
|
|
Post by nick on Aug 3, 2021 18:04:18 GMT
But this Cinderella ISN'T a panto and i think calling it a panto is just a way to excuse its various shortcomings. Besides, alot of pantomimes are better than ALW's Cinderella. Let’s say fairy tale then if that suits better. I have seen better written pantos but the music is often worse - the nadir for me was when they use Baby Shark as the singalong song - ugh.
|
|
|
Post by nick on Aug 3, 2021 13:28:15 GMT
We all know it's a pantomime, don't we? I come here to escape from the Doctor Who forums where they are always trying to find logic and continuity in a 60 year old programme - it's not gonna happen. edit: that reads grumpy - I don't mean it - please theorise all you like. The Doctor Who fandom should be a happy one with the prospect of being able to watch a beloved show again in 2023. At least I am. Well Chibnall and Whittaker have certainly divided fans but I'm not seeing much consensus about how it should change in the future. And for Cinderella - it has an internal logic that works on a fantasy level like most pantos I've seen. I don't see that as the problem with the show. Personally I think the plot isn't quite strong and clear enough.
|
|
|
Post by nick on Aug 3, 2021 9:55:03 GMT
We all know it's a pantomime, don't we?
I come here to escape from the Doctor Who forums where they are always trying to find logic and continuity in a 60 year old programme - it's not gonna happen.
edit: that reads grumpy - I don't mean it - please theorise all you like.
|
|
|
Post by nick on Jul 26, 2021 20:44:08 GMT
OK. Sorry. Keeping it consistent then. How about just stage actors? That is harder. Lennie Henry out my original list. Quite a few comics have transitioned to actors - often musical - Josie Lawrence. I shall have to put my thinking cap on. A friend of mine, Sally Bankes, was a bank manager until her 40s and then turned to acting. Worked with Victoria Wood on Housewife 49 and, on stage, Acorn Antiques and was in The Watsons at the Menier and west end transfer until the pandemic hit. A few more: Lee Evans Eddie Izzard Stephen Fry Tracey Ullman
|
|
|
Post by nick on Jul 26, 2021 20:11:00 GMT
Jeepers, it gets worse. Everyone starts somewhere. As just one example, Billy Piper has forged quite a credible career as a serious actor following a pop career some would scoff at. Given that the personality presented by pretty much every pop star is actually a character played someone quite different underneath, I'd say Lily Allen has a great deal more than "zero qualifications or experience". Further take into consideration the careers of other family members, I'd say you're starting to look a bit of an idiot. She is more than welcome to try my job because 1) Im not an asshole, 2) like every other human, she deserves a chance, 3) she's got childrens mouths to feed and ambitions to follow. If your quote below is 'questioning stunt casting' I'd hate to see what you being condescending looks like! Og - Now that Billie has been ruled out because her acting credentials and training have been proved, can you give us some more examples of others who have established successful acting careers following other careers, with no acting experience in their background? I'm not defending Og ,who comes a cross a bit rude but... Not stage acting and some time ago but how about Adam Faith in Budgie? Apparently Cher did Broadway in the 60s before going on to a film career. Madonna? Bowie? Frank Sinatra? That's singers. How about teachers (Greg Davies), comics (Lenny Henry). I think talented people are quite capable of being good in more than one career. Mind you going straight to a West End lead is clearly stunt casting but it MAY work.
|
|