When will this shit end?

[st dan]

Never a truer word spoken ...

[Crazyfool01]

1 hour ago, WestCountryGirl said:

It could have just been great numbers of people spooked and speculating before Boris' speech, but when I went to collect a drive-thru click & collect from ASDA at about 4ish yesterday, the queues to get in were massive - longest I've ever seen them. It made me think that the store were being more cautious about numbers allowed in, and managing the direction? Hopefully that's the case.

No changes I’m afraid ... have just had a meeting with store manager ref safety .... seems like it’s at the stores discresion and they don’t have to impose limits 

[RobertProsineckisLighter]

8 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

He’s just after a reaction, don’t feed him.

Polling shows an overwhelming majority of Brits support this lockdown which has risen from last month. Ignore him.

 

6 minutes ago, gigpusher said:

Sadly society seems to have too many who think like him and they are prolonging the pain and heartache for others. 

I think your both being very harsh just because you don't agree with someone. 

You can't just change the culture of a nation to be more like Japan. Its engrained in people over many, many generations. 

Threat of catching the virus and the threat of the virus to them are very different things - and there are people who are of the opinion the old and the vuberable should be isolating and the rest should get on with their lives because the threat of the virus (not the threat of catching the virus) to them is minimal. Its possible to be in support of a lockdown to control the flow of people I to hospital and save additional lives without being scared of the virus. 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, st dan said:

Never a truer word spoken ...

[gigpusher]

9 minutes ago, Homer said:

Yeah, my mate lives in Wanaka and went to the second one. I think it's basically a rave populated by people generally half her age - but she was delighted to go to anything that was on offer (am sure we can all relate to that!).

I think I'd dance at a kids concerts at this stage 😄 

[RobertProsineckisLighter]

8 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Interesting theory

 

The lockdowns and the restrictions are there to control the flow of people needing treatment. I assumed that was just a given people understood this? 

 

[Tranquility of Solitude]

33 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

Also you inadvertently bring up an interesting point that’s been bugging me recently, the new “Andy Murray is Scottish when he loses and British when he wins”

 

Young people who catch covid - Reckless, irresponsible superspreaders who should have been socially distancing

 

Old people who catch covid - Tragic victims who’s own lack of social distancing is completely ignored 

Very well put Fuzzy. This is exactly my experience. Myself, Mrs ToS, siblings and grandkids all desperate to keep 2 x ageing grannies from harm. 
Grannies.... “ oooh, I can’t be doing with this fuss and nonsense, of course I’m coming to visit, and go to the shops, and see my friends. I’m too old to be told what to do”.

 

[Fuzzy Afro]

3 minutes ago, Tranquility of Solitude said:

Very well put Fuzzy. This is exactly my experience. Myself, Mrs ToS, siblings and grandkids all desperate to keep 2 x ageing grannies from harm. 
Grannies.... “ oooh, I can’t be doing with this fuss and nonsense, of course I’m coming to visit, and go to the shops, and see my friends. I’m too old to be told what to do”.

 

I’m out of greenies sadly. I have less greens than the salad bar at butlins. But I owe you one. 

Edited January 5, 2021 by Fuzzy Afro

[gigpusher]

1 minute ago, RobertProsineckisLighter said:

 

I think your both being very harsh just because you don't agree with someone. 

You can't just change the culture of a nation to be more like Japan. Its engrained in people over many, many generations. 

Threat of catching the virus and the threat of the virus to them are very different things - and there are people who are of the opinion the old and the vuberable should be isolating and the rest should get on with their lives because the threat of the virus (not the threat of catching the virus) to them is minimal. Its possible to be in support of a lockdown to control the flow of people I to hospital and save additional lives without being scared of the virus. 

I'm not personally particularly scared of the virus at all. I'm not in any of the high risk groups but common sense says that the number of people who are are way more than any reasonable society can decide are worth throwing to the wolves. I'm not hiding away terrified. We know people on here like @crazyfool1who is perfectly young and can reasonably expect to live for many more decades but *could* be at higher risk of serious illness if he caught the virus. Also how do you know that catching this virus now wouldn't put you in a vulnerable category in 10 years times should a particularly virulent flu strain come along. The problem is people who have been lucky enough not to have much exposure to serious ill health think they are invincible and it could never happen to them but it's possible. 

A good analogy I saw today is if someone told you 2 out of every 100 jellybeans could make you really sick or even die would you keep eating jelly beans or would you avoid them even if they said for your age and gender it's 1 in 1000 that could kill you would you take the risk? 

[DeanoL]

39 minutes ago, efcfanwirral said:

I do wonder if the general population vaccinations should be offered to those with school age children first - that will probably be the final bit that protects the NHS and allows the tier system to go

I can't imagine the post-vulnerable vaccinations being based on any system other than "book in here, first come, first served"

10 minutes ago, RobertProsineckisLighter said:

 

I think your both being very harsh just because you don't agree with someone. 

You can't just change the culture of a nation to be more like Japan. Its engrained in people over many, many generations.  

You can push to make the change though. We had a culture much closer to that in the 80s and Thatcherism changed it.

[DeanoL]

1 minute ago, gigpusher said:

I'm not personally particularly scared of the virus at all. I'm not in any of the high risk groups but common sense says that the number of people who are are way more than any reasonable society can decide are worth throwing to the wolves. I'm not hiding away terrified. We know people on here like @crazyfool1who is perfectly young and can reasonably expect to live for many more decades but *could* be at higher risk of serious illness if he caught the virus. Also how do you know that catching this virus now wouldn't put you in a vulnerable category in 10 years times should a particularly virulent flu strain come along. The problem is people who have been lucky enough not to have much exposure to serious ill health think they are invincible and it could never happen to them but it's possible. 

A good analogy I saw today is if someone told you 2 out of every 100 jellybeans could make you really sick or even die would you keep eating jelly beans or would you avoid them even if they said for your age and gender it's 1 in 1000 that could kill you would you take the risk? 

The issue with that is the vaccine is 90% effective, so after you've had the jab would you eat the 1 in 10000 jelly bean? I think there's a degree of making sure people still feel safe after the vaccine so that the economy starts going again...

[stuartbert two hats]

44 minutes ago, gigpusher said:

But surely they realise society is made up of more than just them and they wouldn't inadvertently want to be killing others and that sucking it up in the short term would mean that you could remove even the minimal threat in the long term and go back to our normal lives quicker. Whether we like it or not the list of vulnerable people in our society is extensive and whilst people try and carry on as though it doesn't exist they are prolonging the heartache suffering and the lack of normality for everyone. 

You'd think.

[gigpusher]

16 minutes ago, st dan said:

Never a truer word spoken ...

Amen to that and I'm an atheist!! 

[steviewevie]

8 minutes ago, Tranquility of Solitude said:

Very well put Fuzzy. This is exactly my experience. Myself, Mrs ToS, siblings and grandkids all desperate to keep 2 x ageing grannies from harm. 
Grannies.... “ oooh, I can’t be doing with this fuss and nonsense, of course I’m coming to visit, and go to the shops, and see my friends. I’m too old to be told what to do”.

 

yeah, well everyone has some anecdotal evidence...my Mum is 90 and has been very careful, followed the rules as much as poss, and has told family members not to visit.

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

6 minutes ago, gigpusher said:

I'm not personally particularly scared of the virus at all. I'm not in any of the high risk groups but common sense says that the number of people who are are way more than any reasonable society can decide are worth throwing to the wolves. I'm not hiding away terrified. We know people on here like @crazyfool1who is perfectly young and can reasonably expect to live for many more decades but *could* be at higher risk of serious illness if he caught the virus. Also how do you know that catching this virus now wouldn't put you in a vulnerable category in 10 years times should a particularly virulent flu strain come along. The problem is people who have been lucky enough not to have much exposure to serious ill health think they are invincible and it could never happen to them but it's possible. 

A good analogy I saw today is if someone told you 2 out of every 100 jellybeans could make you really sick or even die would you keep eating jelly beans or would you avoid them even if they said for your age and gender it's 1 in 1000 that could kill you would you take the risk? 

In that analogy you just wouldn’t eat The jelly beans and you’d eat another sweet wouldn’t you? No problem.

There is no real life alternative to that at the moment. 

[gigpusher]

1 minute ago, DeanoL said:

The issue with that is the vaccine is 90% effective, so after you've had the jab would you eat the 1 in 10000 jelly bean? I think there's a degree of making sure people still feel safe after the vaccine so that the economy starts going again...

I thought they were much more effective from you becoming seriously ill as in over 95% chance of hospitalisation required. If eating a jelly bean might give me tummy ache I'll go with it (It was effectively my Christmas eating plan anyway eating until I felt sick 😄) 

I think there's a big difference between knowing you might get or give someone else a shitty cold and knowing you might give them an ICU stay. 

[steviewevie]

I'm not worried about dying from the virus, think I'll probably be ok (famous last words), but still don't want to get it as a few people I know who've had it said it really knocked them out and took ages to recover.

[Fuzzy Afro]

Boris saying the words “national lockdown” last night really speaks to the severity of the situation in the NHS. Even in November he just called it “extended restrictions”

[duke88]

5 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

The issue with that is the vaccine is 90% effective, so after you've had the jab would you eat the 1 in 10000 jelly bean? I think there's a degree of making sure people still feel safe after the vaccine so that the economy starts going again...

It's 100% effective in preventing death and hospitalisation though isn't it?

[eFestivals]

8 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

I can't imagine the post-vulnerable vaccinations being based on any system other than "book in here, first come, first served"

You can push to make the change though. We had a culture much closer to that in the 80s and Thatcherism changed it.

did we? lol

[gigpusher]

Just now, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

In that analogy you just wouldn’t eat The jelly beans and you’d eat another sweet wouldn’t you? No problem.

There is no real life alternative to that at the moment. 

But there is. I know because I've been doing it for nearly a year. It's a much shitter alternative admittedly but I've read more and watched more TV in the last year than in the last decade. I've had more chats, spent more time on this forum. I haven't actually stopped living though. I hate to think how people would have coped if this had happened in the 80's. At least with technology we do have workarounds. They are not as good but I would have thought this would be the motivation for compliance. Do the shitter alternative in the short term so that we can get back to the longer term better stuff. 

[steviewevie]

 

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, gigpusher said:

But there is. I know because I've been doing it for nearly a year. It's a much shitter alternative admittedly but I've read more and watched more TV in the last year than in the last decade. I've had more chats, spent more time on this forum. I haven't actually stopped living though. I hate to think how people would have coped if this had happened in the 80's. At least with technology we do have workarounds. They are not as good but I would have thought this would be the motivation for compliance. Do the shitter alternative in the short term so that we can get back to the longer term better stuff. 

Definitely. If we can all pull together again and follow these rules then we will be out of this and some form of normality will resume!

[Fuzzy Afro]

Briefing with PM, Whitty and Vallance tonight. Wonder if they’re bringing back daily briefings. 

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

1 minute ago, gigpusher said:

But there is. I know because I've been doing it for nearly a year. It's a much shitter alternative admittedly but I've read more and watched more TV in the last year than in the last decade. I've had more chats, spent more time on this forum. I haven't actually stopped living though. I hate to think how people would have coped if this had happened in the 80's. At least with technology we do have workarounds. They are not as good but I would have thought this would be the motivation for compliance. Do the shitter alternative in the short term so that we can get back to the longer term better stuff. 

But many people are merely existing compared to how they would otherwise choose to live their lives, so a choice between curtailing their life and being miserable vs taking a very small risk doesn’t fit the analogy.

Its not as if a Covid is the only kid in town, I’d hazard a guess that for under 50s, when stacked up again at all the other risks/diseases/illnesses in life it’s actually negligible, something else (whatever it is) is just as likely to get you (and it be bad) as Covid.

So you cant really compare one particular sweet having a minor risk of death to the situation.