Jump to content

Don't Miss a Beat

Join the UK's most passionate festival community. Keep up with the latest conversations, line-up rumours, and music news.

250,000+ Members

Connect with a massive network of fellow festival-goers.

Lively Discussions

Thousands of active topics on music, campsites, and tips.

Hot Rumours & News

Hear about secret sets and lineup drops before anyone else.

Create Free Account
OR
  • Sign Up!

    Join our friendly community of music lovers and be part of the fun 😎

When will this shit end?


Chrisp1986

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Homer said:

I guess at least with gyms there is also a tangible health benefit 

Personally, on the 2nd December I could see gyms and non essential shopping reopening for the run up to Christmas.

As for the rest of hospitality: pubs, bars, restaurants, theme parks etc. There’s a risk if we reopen anything in the run up to Christmas, and then let people have 5 days of “freedom” on top of that, come New Year’s Day the numbers are going to be pretty horrific, and we simply don’t know whether a vaccine really will start to be distributed next month or not. So there’s a real risk of moving everything back to tiers and going back to how it was before.

Also regarding the vaccine, it’s only been tested on people who haven’t had the virus before. My aunt said she wants to see data of people suffering from long covid having the vaccine (of course there isn’t any) before she takes it, because that’s not something that has been tested yet.

As for the vaccine news itself, it’s all very promising, but the NHS timeline is quite over-ambitious that I choose to remain cautious and not get too ahead of myself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, eFestivals said:

gyms are really just a convenient way of getting a health benefit.

The health benefit can be got without needing gyms, so I don't really think they deserve special consideration on that basis.

Not entirely true for everybody. 

Plenty of females do not want to train outside in the dark for safety reasons. 

Amongst other things gyms offer a safe space for women to exercise in these dark Winter months.

Aside from that there is a lot of research to show that gyms have one of the lowest transmission rates.

The pros of gyms being open would far outweigh any potential cons. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
2 hours ago, Havors said:

Have to disagree there. Have you ever tried working out outside in the freezing pissing down rain or snow?  The health benefits of gyms are massive, not just physically but mentally. Gyms offer much better forms of exercise than you can get outside on your own or in the house, not to mention the mental well being from getting to the gym 

There's more than one option for getting exercise.

I'm sure that anyone smart enough to get themselves to a gym is smart enough to come up with some short term alternatives that can be done at home or in outdoor space.

And I don't doubt that people wanting anything they do can come up with some reason for why they think it should be allowed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
2 hours ago, Mark E. Spliff said:

I think you intended to alternate your points with quotes from me?  I'll respond as best I can:

I presume you were intending to quote me from our last debate back in June where I accepted I was biased against the state of Israel?  That was my open and honest confession that my jaded views on the Israeli state means I am susceptible to bullshit stories about it, just as Maxine Peake was.  We're all biased against lots of things - it doesn't mean that I question their right to exist.  I'm a pragmatist when it comes to Israel/Palestine.  The best solution is whatever produces a long-term, just, settlement.  Getting rid of Israel is the diametric opposite of that - i.e. it would be World War 3.

I genuinely don't know what you could have been quoting me on regarding the Israeli Govt. and Zionism.  I despise the current Israeli Govt but they're supposedly secular and I wouldn't have been accusing them of being Zionist.  They do use Zionists as pawns in the bigger political game - i.e. giving the green light to their illegal settlements.

I don't understand your last sentence out of context.  Yes, I think it's a dangerous situation when debate about the Israel/Palestine situation is being silenced by claims of antisemitism, however that won't stop me from wading through that treacle.  My point throughout this discussion is that I think Labour should have had the balls to do the same.

Zionism and the Israeli govt are not the same thing. 

When you attack Zionism and blame it and not the Israeli govt for the policies of the Israeli govt, guess what..?

Cmon, you're a smart lad. To claim attacks from that angle are not tinged with AS is being deliberately obtuse, given the central tenet of Zionism is a Jewish homeland.

If you don't mean to attack the idea of an Israeli state you can chose to use different words and make all ambiguity go away along with the accusations that tend to come with that choice of words.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
1 hour ago, crazyfool1 said:

My bath isn’t conducive to swimming ... I don’t know quite how it do 2k in that ? ... understand the general point but my gym closing has stopped my exercise altogether ... badminton outside isn’t much kop either ... so my exercise has stopped for a month 

The idea that you're unable to take exercise unless it's done at a gym is laughable.

you choosing to take no exercise is nothing other than you choosing to not take exercise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

The idea that you're unable to take exercise unless it's done at a gym is laughable.

you choosing to take no exercise is nothing other than you choosing to not take exercise.

Absolutely.

As if people didn’t get exercise before gyms came along. Gyms have been used for less than 1% of mankind’s existence.

If the will is there you can exercise. Go for a cost-free run, get a cheap exercise bike, do some free youtube aerobics etc etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/19/2020 at 2:54 PM, Andre91 said:

Nobody is going to social distance in their family members’ homes on Christmas Day. Nobody. People can insist that they will all they like but they won’t be able to for the whole day. Someone will get up to go to the toilet, nip out for a cigarette, go to grab the bowl of spuds and end up closer to their family members than they should.
 

Someone will be leaning against the counter top in the kitchen having a glass of wine without a mask on, touch their face, put their glass of wine down on the side. Someone else will touch that surface later on forgetting that the other person was there earlier and didn’t wipe down the area with sanitiser. 
 

It is a fallacy to say that you will ensure that your day is as ‘COVID secure’ as it can be. It won’t be. If you’re ‘willing to risk things for one day’ just say that and don’t pretend that you’re going to be as careful and safe as you would in say, most pubs, which are set up with strict measures to ensure that things are as close to safe as they can be. 

Disagree entirely with that - all these things you are talking about: someone brushing past someone, shared facilities, people from different households being closer than they should be etc. were happening in pubs too.

If we had been proper strict with pubs and restaurants, it would be a good model for people to follow at home (and I would take the point it would be harder to enforce at home), but we didn't.

3 hours ago, stuartbert two hats said:

I thought that despite gyms seeming like they would be a hot bed of infection, there have been very few outbreaks linked to gyms. We do have quite a lot of evidence at this point, don't we?

 

3 hours ago, eFestivals said:

and pubs say there's very few outbreaks linked to in pubs, and until the new lockdown there were very few outbreaks linked to supermarkets.

Haven't repeated this in a while, but outbreaks are not infections. Outbreaks happen in places where *the same* people gather every day: places of work, homes, school etc. Because one person gets it, transmits it to a few others in the office, who transmit it to a few more in the office - then you have an outbreak linked to that place.

This doesn't happen in gyms, schools and restaurants as different people go there every day. The same infections happen - one person catches it and gives it to a couple of others on a night out, but then those other people are not back at that same pub the next day to pass it on to more people. They're at home passing it on there. Or at a different pub. So there is no "outbreak" linked to a specific pub. That doesn't make it less likely to spread there. It's just the way it spreads is different. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

The idea that you're unable to take exercise unless it's done at a gym is laughable.

you choosing to take no exercise is nothing other than you choosing to not take exercise.

Oh absolutely my point is that the ease of the gym made it convenient for me to excercise ... I like my routines and that comes to exercising too ... I’m sure many others will have just stopped too ... ultimately by choice but whatever way it’s still not providing the health benefits.... I’m in 2 minds on this though ... we are trying to bring down the numbers in a pandemic and lines need to be drawn somewhere ... 1 case is just where it starts so however safe we might perceive them as they are still and added risk ... like it or not ... and more people out and about also increases risk .... trip to the supermarket might not be a massive risk ... but that 10min chat at the end of an aisle with a friend about how things are going and what plans you have for xmas with masks pulled down might be .. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
5 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

Haven't repeated this in a while, but outbreaks are not infections. Outbreaks happen in places where *the same* people gather every day: places of work, homes, school etc. Because one person gets it, transmits it to a few others in the office, who transmit it to a few more in the office - then you have an outbreak linked to that place.

This doesn't happen in gyms, schools and restaurants as different people go there every day. The same infections happen - one person catches it and gives it to a couple of others on a night out, but then those other people are not back at that same pub the next day to pass it on to more people. They're at home passing it on there. Or at a different pub. So there is no "outbreak" linked to a specific pub. That doesn't make it less likely to spread there. It's just the way it spreads is different. 

Simply a poor choce of words by me.

Infections happen in gyms, same as they happen in pubs and everywhere else.

Infections happen because of an infected person infecting other people.

Being a gym doesn't keep out infected people who can pass on the infection, anymore than being a pub or supermarket does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, RobertProsineckisLighter said:

More importantly why are garden centres allowed to open?

 

And the places people most visited in the five days before a positive case we're:

Supermarkets.

Secondary Schools.

Somewhere else.

I think we worked that out that they are just places that everyone goes ..... especially at the moment so they would always get listed as most visited 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Simply a poor choce of words by me.

Infections happen in gyms, same as they happen in pubs and everywhere else.

Infections happen because of an infected person infecting other people.

Being a gym doesn't keep out infected people who can pass on the infection, anymore than being a pub or supermarket does.

Yeah sorry, I was quoting you to agree with you and the other poster to disagree, bit confusing!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

The idea that you're unable to take exercise unless it's done at a gym is laughable.

you choosing to take no exercise is nothing other than you choosing to not take exercise.

Yeah I have to admit I agree. There’s loads of exercise that can be done without a gym, it’s a choice if someone doesn’t do exercise at the moment. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

Yeah I have to admit I agree. There’s loads of exercise that can be done without a gym, it’s a choice if someone doesn’t do exercise at the moment. 

do you go to the gym ? have u ever been to the gym ? there is also lots that cant be done without .... It isn't quite so black and white ...... but overall at the moment I think they are best kept closed ..... its a choice yes .... but its a choice that prevents people exercising which is the point .... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, priest17 said:

I wonder if everyone that said you shouldn't go to pubs coz you can drink at home think the same about gyms.

I find I keep to a more regular pace when I’m drinking at the pub. That environment helps me go for personal bests as well as having a larger range of beverages to try that I don’t necessarily have at home. 
 

The limited opening times are an issue though and you tend to get disapproving looks when you go for a 7am pre work session. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, crazyfool1 said:

do you go to the gym ? have u ever been to the gym ? there is also lots that cant be done without .... It isn't quite so black and white ...... but overall at the moment I think they are best kept closed ..... its a choice yes .... but its a choice that prevents people exercising which is the point .... 

Yeah I’ve been to a gym quite a few times. I get that the motivation might not be there with gyms shut and gyms have certain equipment to help work out but if someone says they can’t exercise because a gym is shut then that’s a choice they are making as there’s loads of different exercise that can be done. Gyms being closed doesn’t prevent people from exercising though.

I know it’s difficult given the time of year etc but it’s definitely worthwhile to get out for some exercise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Euphoricape said:

https://metro.co.uk/2020/11/21/christmas-plans-to-allow-families-to-mix-to-be-announced-next-week-13631748/

Everything stays shut until 22nd December then closing again 28th..?? Chancellor wants pubs and restaurants open from 22nd to 28th December along with household mixing. Statement coming Monday possibly.. 

Sorry for sounding like a broken record but I still think this isn’t the right course of action. I hope I’m wrong but having people being able to go to pubs/restaurants then have households mix at Christmas doesn’t sound like the wisest move. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Euphoricape said:

https://metro.co.uk/2020/11/21/christmas-plans-to-allow-families-to-mix-to-be-announced-next-week-13631748/

Everything stays shut until 22nd December then closing again 28th..?? Chancellor wants pubs and restaurants open from 22nd to 28th December along with household mixing. Statement coming Monday possibly.. 

That's a crackpot scheme if true. Given that there's a cost to opening up again after nearly 2 months mothballed, and then a cost to shut down again, I would imagine a significant amount of pubs / resturants would choose to stay closed throughout - especially those not intending to be open on the 25th anyway and any that are unsure about trade levels on the other days.

You get all the disadvantages of extra risk, without really even helping the businesses much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Latest Activity

    • Restore getting more than Lib Dems is not good.
    • https://x.com/amirtibon/status/2083054470871535853   Some thoughts on the Gaza agreement announced overnight, which despite my reservations and concerns, I hope will be implemented. 1. Donald Trump is trying to collect "wins" and "achievements" ahead of the midterm elections. His party is entering that election at a disadvantage, but because Democrats may choose weak and unpopular candidates in specific states, much like Republicans did in 2022, there's a reason for Trump to at least try achieving a surprising result like the one Biden secured four years ago.   2. The will to provide Trump such a "win" was an important motivation for all sides involved in this agreement: Hamas, Netanyahu, Qatar, Egypt, UAE and Turkey. All of them hope, each for their own reasons, that the transactional president will remember their role in the agreement and the positive media coverage it has generated and will continue to generate. You can like it or not, but that's the nature of diplomacy, especially in the Middle East, under Trump.   3. Netanyahu and his band of liars in the Israeli media (and the last few suckers in the American media still buying his spin) are already trying to oversell the agreement and present it in terms that contradict the Board of Peace statements and briefings. Of course, the October 7 Prime Minister can't just say the truth on this one, which goes something like: "I'm trying to stay on good terms with Trump ahead of an election here in Israel that will determine my personal fate and whether or not I go to jail in 2027."   4. For Hamas, the agreement is a way to buy time and survive, which is basically the organization's overarching goal since October 7. They lost most of their leadership and thousands of their fighters; they will also, I believe, give up some of their weapons to the new Gaza-based Palestinian government, which is a good thing. But at the bottom of all their decisions is a simple calculation: being able to say, "we committed the most deadly and humiliating attack against Israel since the start of the conflict, and survived as a movement and an organization to tell about it."   5. Hamas was able to say that yesterday, before the agreement was signed, and it can also say that today, after the conclusion of the negotiations. So in that regard, the agreement is preferable to the murky post-war reality that preceded it, in which Hamas was recruiting again thousands of young fighters, holding on to all its weapons, and controlling 99% of Gaza's population, making money off people buying fuel and cigarettes. Changing even a part of that terrible reality, by collecting some of the weapons and allowing progress on reconstruction under a non-Hamas government, is better. It means coming to terms with the fact that Israel under this government failed to dismantle Hamas and allowed its survival even before this agreement was signed.   6. Do I think the agreement will be fully implemented over the next 300 days, as I understand the timeline? I'm highly skeptical. But I'm also asking: what are the alternatives? Netanyahu, in his quest for political survival at all costs, ignored David Ben-Gurion's national security strategy of seeking short and decisive wars, which was based on Israel's unique internal and external challenges that make it dangerous for this country to have long wars of attrition. The result is an Israel that is hated, isolated and denounced around the world like never before, and is totally reliant on the support of one man (TRUMP) to avoid crushing international sanctions. Going to war in Gaza once again based on the same promise of "finishing Hamas," which this government failed to achieve after three long years, would have been suicidal unless Trump promised his full backing. And Trump, for good reasons, can't give such a commitment after his bitter experience with Netanyahu in Iran and Lebanon.   7. For me and my family, these are all very personal, not only political, questions. My six-year-old daughter will start school on the Gaza border in exactly one month, as we rebuild our life in the same home where Hamas tried to murder us on October 7. We've learned over the years to be highly skeptical of premature victory announcements and diplomatic celebrations. When these things collapse under the cynical realities of the conflict, most of those announcing them are not around to face the consequences. Still, I don't see a better alternative to the 20-Point Plan that Trump presented last year, at least not with Israel's current position of isolation and exhaustion under this government. So I have some hope that the agreement will succeed, even partially, and deliver a period of quiet. For us on the border, that would be significant after three years of war and trauma. And maybe in the long run, with different Israeli and Palestinian leadership, this will become a first step in a broader positive change for the region.
    • Until they're through the first round of votes there's no point believing any reports about who'll win.
    • David Byrne’s obviously got a few hits to play, but he’s not cheesy enough for the Legend Slot. Other headliner perhaps?
    • Too good for the legends slot 
  • Featured Products

  • Hot Topics

  • Latest Tourdates

×
×
  • Create New...