Jump to content

coronavirus


Recommended Posts

Just now, Dave T said:

This is exactly my point. I'd expect a scientist to understand this and be passionate about explaining the theory, to the general public it sounds horrendous. 

And we should never forget, the experts and their science said Cheltenham was fine and that Cas v Saints was something people were safe to attend. I'm aware that isn't exactly the case, but if it keeps being positioned that science is making every decision (it isn't), then it looks odd when we consider those events just 4 weeks ago. 

To be fair, I think most experts said "I don't know". The science of virology is not useful, I suspect, it is more about sociology.

"You clearly have never met Bob8 then, he's like a veritable Bryan Ferry of RL." - Johnoco 19 Jul 2014

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 7.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Just now, gingerjon said:

The Danish easing of lockdown might not also be the one that some people here want to see.

For example, whatever else changes, there is no organised sport to be played, behind closed doors or not, until September (I read, please correct if wrong).

Correct.

"You clearly have never met Bob8 then, he's like a veritable Bryan Ferry of RL." - Johnoco 19 Jul 2014

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Bob8 said:

To be fair, I think most experts said "I don't know". The science of virology is not useful, I suspect, it is more about sociology.

Absolutely, but we are being told very very clearly and explicitly that the science will tell us what to do, ultimately human decisions still need to be made on the back of any 'science' even if there was perfect science out there. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think many don't understand he ' protect the NHS ' part of all this , if we hadn't locked down , or indeed unlock too early , then it wouldn't be beyond the realms that the NHS could collapse , the implications of that would be , parents and Grandparents dieing at home , no normal funerals , just a body bag being dropped off , for the family to fill and place outside , till it was collected and taken to a mass grave ( the council's were told to find sites for mass graves about 5 weeks ago ) 

It really is that simple 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, GUBRATS said:

I think many don't understand he ' protect the NHS ' part of all this , if we hadn't locked down , or indeed unlock too early , then it wouldn't be beyond the realms that the NHS could collapse , the implications of that would be , parents and Grandparents during at home , no normal funerals , just a body bag being dropped off , for the family to fill and place outside , till it was collected and taken to a mass grave ( the council's were told to find sites for mass graves about 5 weeks ago ) 

It really is that simple 

It really is. The NHS has completely reorganised in a few weeks to divert virtually everything towards this and we're coping, but not by too much. A sharper peak would break it and tough decisions on who gets to survive would be needed.

"When in deadly danger, when beset by doubt; run in little circles, wave your arms and shout"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ckn said:

It really is. The NHS has completely reorganised in a few weeks to divert virtually everything towards this and we're coping, but not by too much. A sharper peak would break it and tough decisions on who gets to survive would be needed.

Not forgetting the number that would also die due to ' normal ' medical conditions not being able to be treated 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Absolutely, but we are being told very very clearly and explicitly that the science will tell us what to do, ultimately human decisions still need to be made on the back of any 'science' even if there was perfect science out there. 

This is really well put. It's science, not magic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mumby Magic said:

Well I work in Tescos and there were people queuing all round the car park today.

I've just done the weekly shop to ASDA.  We were snaking around the car park and on to the road, all standing 6ft apart from each other, waiting patiently for our turn and actually, the shopping experience once inside the store was really pleasant.  Sure, there were still some penises that are deliberating ignoring the arrows and I give them a proper stare, but for the most part it is quiet, there is lots of space, time can be taken to avoid missing anything off the list, and the check out people are more relaxed.  They are behind their screens, they wear their gloves and they aren't stressed by loads of customers at once (or so said the checkout person at the end of my shop today!).

I feel far safer shopping now than I did a couple of weeks back.  But sadly, the consequences of those times of mayhem a couple of weeks back will now be showing in all the dismal figures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Absolutely, but we are being told very very clearly and explicitly that the science will tell us what to do, ultimately human decisions still need to be made on the back of any 'science' even if there was perfect science out there. 

What we are being told is that the science is advising the politicians.  I don't remember anyone saying the science was telling them what to do like they weren't engaging their own brains and perspectives.  They are being guided by the science at all times, which to me seems completely reasonable and utterly correct.  I don't understand what the problem is here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Saintslass said:

I've just done the weekly shop to ASDA.  We were snaking around the car park and on to the road, all standing 6ft apart from each other, waiting patiently for our turn and actually, the shopping experience once inside the store was really pleasant.  Sure, there are still some penises that are deliberating ignoring the arrows and I give them a proper stare, but for the most part it is quiet, there is lots of space, time can be taken to avoid missing anything off the list, and the check out people are more relaxed.  They are behind their screens, they ware their gloves and they aren't stressed by loads of customers at once (or so said the checkout person at the end of my shop today!).

I feel far safer shopping now than I did a couple of weeks back.  But sadly, the consequences of those times of mayhem a couple of weeks back will now be showing in all the dismal figures.

Agreed; once you get let in through the doors, it is so much nicer than a non-crisis shopping trip. And, with the nice weather, being in a queue is fine, if you have a good book to read or something else to make the time pass. 

Let me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted whenever I am contradicted.
Ralph Waldo Emerson

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Saintslass said:

What we are being told is that the science is advising the politicians.  I don't remember anyone saying the science was telling them what to do like they weren't engaging their own brains and perspectives.  They are being guided by the science at all times, which to me seems completely reasonable and utterly correct.  I don't understand what the problem is here. 

I don't think it's that there's a problem, just making the point that if people think that science goes in one end and decisions come out the other, they'll be disappointed to find that it's a bit more complicated than that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you see programmes in the schedule like at 7:30pm tonight on ITV Lockdown, How long can it last?, allied to some of the media this week and reporters questions in the briefing, its hard not to think that some of the media are trying to push an agenda. There has been a big change in emphasis this week that isn't reflected in anyone I know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Damien said:

When you see programmes in the schedule like at 7:30pm tonight on ITV Lockdown, How long can it last?, allied to some of the media this week and reporters questions in the briefing, its hard not to think that some of the media are trying to push an agenda. There has been a big change in emphasis this week that isn't reflected in anyone I know.

Surveying shows 90%+ of the population support the lockdown or want more lockdown. So if you see any “balance” in the media calling for easing then it’s on a par with the sort of balance you see them doing in climate science debates.

They can’t help themselves.

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Bob8 said:

FFS

I am not defending him BUT,

In the article he said he went to take supplies to his elderly parents and did not enter their house. IF that is the case, is it not unreasonable to do that?

Ron Banks

Midlands Hurricanes and Barrow

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Bearman said:

I am not defending him BUT,

In the article he said he went to take supplies to his elderly parents and did not enter their house. IF that is the case, is it not unreasonable to do that?

It's not unreasonable.

Unless you criticised the Kinnocks that is.  

With the best, thats a good bit of PR, though I would say the Bedford team, theres, like, you know, 13 blokes who can get together at the weekend to have a game together, which doesnt point to expansion of the game. Point, yeah go on!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, gingerjon said:

The Danish easing of lockdown might not also be the one that some people here want to see.

For example, whatever else changes, there is no organised sport to be played, behind closed doors or not, until September (I read, please correct if wrong).

The plan is for teachers and pupils to spend considerably more time outside with increased distancing inside, so re-opening schools isn't exactly going back to how they were either. Also it would appear that not everyone believes the Government's scientific advisors have got it right.

Allan Randrup Thomsen, Professor in the Department of Immunology at Copenhagen University, said that the decision to reopen was risky. "We do not know how big the infection pressure is among smaller children," he told Danish state broadcaster DR. "They are holding the binoculars to their blind eye. It may be that the epidemic starts to take off again." 

 

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Bearman said:

I am not defending him BUT,

In the article he said he went to take supplies to his elderly parents and did not enter their house. IF that is the case, is it not unreasonable to do that?

True. 

Again, driving your car is not an infection risk, but is a bad look. 

"You clearly have never met Bob8 then, he's like a veritable Bryan Ferry of RL." - Johnoco 19 Jul 2014

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Bedford Roughyed said:

It's not unreasonable.

Unless you criticised the Kinnocks that is.  

One difference: Jenrick said he left the supplies at the door; the Kinnocks didn't do that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Bob8 said:

True. 

Again, driving your car is not an infection risk, but is a bad look. 

I hardly think that taking medication to your elderly parents is a 'bad look' for heaven's sake!

The Guardian is just doing it's usual click bait stirring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.