Alan Dugdales Moustache
Well-Known Member
They'll all be clamouring for a covid test now. It'll take most of them well beyond 14 days to get a test and by the time they get a test they'll all test negative and won't ever know if they've had it.
They'll all be clamouring for a covid test now. It'll take most of them well beyond 14 days to get a test and by the time they get a test they'll all test negative and won't ever know if they've had it.Yep...Liverpool has now gone over the 100 mark...and it appears the whole of the north-west is there or thereabouts.
My kids school just sent home the whole of year 5 as one child had a positive test.......seems fucking barmy to me as year 5s have siblings across every year group.
A totally unworkable solution.
What a fucking mess.
Yeah...I’m starting to think we learned the grand total of fuck all from the first wave. It’s true what they say. If you vote in a clown you get the circus.
Off the scale but at least some truth
Up To 750,000 Covid Test Requests Going Unanswered EVERY Day
The NHS Test and Trace chief is under fire after saying the September surge in demand was “unexpected”.m.huffingtonpost.co.uk
I just don't understand what the Nightingale is for. My understanding from colleagues who worked on it was that it was for step down care for people coming out of hospital. This just suggests it was a complete gimmick.
Crazy shit. Also heard Harding say earlier that they slowed the turn around time down on tests so they can process more tests. I don't get how that makes sense.
I heard on the radio this morning that people that have died from this without underlying health conditions is 307 since February.
If that is true then what the fuck is this all about?
That’s the thing that I’m getting fed up with. It doesn’t seem to kill anyone (relative) that’s not got underlying health issues.
Why the fuck are we going into another lockdown?
I'd count as having an underlying health condition, but would otherwise be seen as healthy. It's an underlying health condition that's not visible or obvious, wouldn't have me shielded or kept off work, but would otherwise be a tick in a box.
View attachment 16967
That's what it's about.
I heard on the radio this morning that people that have died from this without underlying health conditions is 307 since February.
If that is true then what the fuck is this all about?
Yeah...
Believe it or not, if Government sold me what Grendel, Brighton, Steve are all saying, and showed me a coherent plan and what they were wanting to get out of it, I'd buy into it.
They're not, though. It really is like we expected it to just go away and they wouldn't have to do any planning, and learn from what they did last time. First time around is excusable (nobody knew!) second time though?
Objectively, it's likely you'd be OK. Objectively, it's nature saying we're over populated and doing something about it.I'm seeing a lot of this- "it ain't gonna kill me so why the fuck should I listen, fuck covid and lets crack on" Its like nobody was watching or listening last time, its just about to be let loose in care homes again too, who wants to take a chance on infecting someone working in one of those places? I'd like to think its not all callousness or selfishness, so why don't people get what is happening outside their front door?
Matt Hancock was pretty good on radio 4. Clearly said minimise spread, safeguard vulnerable members of community, test and trace, etc etcObjectively, it's likely you'd be OK. Objectively, it's nature saying we're over populated and doing something about it.
There is, certainly, an argument for letting it do its thing... but in doing that, you'd have to acknowledge there'd be a lorra lorra deaths.
If it’s your kids school I’d be challenging being sent home with a positive test in the year and no symptoms it’s not advised by public health England and for the reason you say isn’t following test and trace process either. Those in close contact need to be asked to self isolate but if kids in the same house but in a different year aren’t being sent home the neither should the whole year be sent home for 2 weeksI'm still fuming over the farcical schools situation. Over 100 hundred schools in the north-west alone have now sent full cohorts home just because of a single case......if we carry on like this, all schools will be effectively closed before half-term.
its a fucking joke.
If a kid tests positive, isolate the kid & let the rest of them remain in school.
The virus is circulating freely in all environments anyhow....approx. 60% of all people (even higher in the younger population) will never even know they got it.....so disrupting kids education & their families & wider communities lives for every single case is just plain dumb IMHO.
Its causing way more harm than good.
1. Have you seen the scope of 'underlying health conditions'? it's massive and includes a big 'other' group which is the non obvious stuff.
2. Do people with underlying health conditions not matter?
I'm seeing a lot of this- "it ain't gonna kill me so why the fuck should I listen, fuck covid and lets crack on" Its like nobody was watching or listening last time, its just about to be let loose in care homes again too, who wants to take a chance on infecting someone working in one of those places? I'd like to think its not all callousness or selfishness, so why don't people get what is happening outside their front door?
Well, you can stop being so dramatic with point number two. In fact, I'm not even going to answer that it is such a ridiculous thing to say.
It is completely irrelevant what the scope is. The fact is, anyone that is completely healthy has to have a test to see if they have the killer virus, and it has killed 300 odd people in 7 months indicates to me that there is something not quite right.
All I did was point out what I had heard, which actually wasn't even disputed by anyone.
Well, you can stop being so dramatic with point number two. In fact, I'm not even going to answer that it is such a ridiculous thing to say.
It is completely irrelevant what the scope is. The fact is, anyone that is completely healthy has to have a test to see if they have the killer virus, and it has killed 300 odd people in 7 months indicates to me that there is something not quite right.
All I did was point out what I had heard, which actually wasn't even disputed by anyone.
Of course it's relevant, if the scope is so broad that it includes 50% of the population then the 307 number is utterly meaningless. Why are epidemiologists so nervous about it? Why are critical care consultants so worried about it?
As far as I can see, literally no one on this thread has displayed that attitude.
I do see on places such as twitter, people being obnoxious about this. But if they were being honest with us and said, you are at almost no risk, but people who have certain health conditions are, so please be considerate of them, you would probably find more of those twerps would listen.
If it is true, and only 307 'healthy' people have died then that is extremely far from the notions that have been put out.
Matt Hancock was pretty good on radio 4. Clearly said minimise spread, safeguard vulnerable members of community, test and trace, etc etc
The questioner was really good about saying we just need a plan and we need to stick to it
Same rhetoric as was about for the first lockdown (once they'd dropped the herd immunity nonsense (publically at least)) but we failed to do any of it. It looks like we're going to fail again and are about to make all the same mistakes we did first time round. I'm still clinging to the hope that deaths are staying relatively low compared to cases compared to before, but that could start to change if more people require hospitalisation and health services start to get stretched. I'm not pinning my hopes on a vaccine, as great as that'd be, and effective tracking and tracing isn't going to happen if they're obsessed with ensuring testing contracts go to private industry run by their mates.
Last time it was annoying that they didn't heed what was going on abroad and use it to make their plans. This time they're seemingly not only ignoring the similar trends in Europe like last time but also their own experiences. Except this time I doubt they'll even lockdown.
"Save a grand, not a granny"
Cases aren’t really comparable to the start when we were only testing those presenting to hospital really. We’re probably picking up 10-20 times more than we were then (numbers from my ass)
About 4-5 times from my mine.Cases aren’t really comparable to the start when we were only testing those presenting to hospital really. We’re probably picking up 10-20 times more than we were then (numbers from my ass)
Good point.
But the upward trend is still worrying and I fear we'll sleepwalk into another situation whereby people start needing hospitalising as it spreads into the more vulnerable areas, plus as we go into flu season the effect of possibly having two bad respiratory diseases at once, the system becomes stretched and people start dying in greater numbers, At which point Hancock et al will be out blaming the public for (not) doing something. Or the hospital/care workers for (not) following guidelines. Basically anything but their own incompetence and inability to lead.
The reports that care homes are being coerced into taking positive patients are shocking and shows that not only have they learnt nothing, they don't care. If it were a home their own parent/grandparent was in and it was taking in Covid positive patients they'd be the first up in arms about it. Complete lack of empathy, which for me is requirement no.1 to hold public office.
People have had enough of the experts...Of course it's relevant, if the scope is so broad that it includes 50% of the population then the 307 number is utterly meaningless. Why are epidemiologists so nervous about it? Why are critical care consultants so worried about it?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?