When will this shit end?

[zahidf]

 

[fraybentos1]

Just now, zahidf said:

 

Supply issues indeed. Hopefully the talk of a huge boost in March from Hancock is accurate!

[zahidf]

 

[Quark]

2 minutes ago, fraybentos1 said:

That's very liberal use of 'lot of people'. Who on earth are these people you speak of.

Hi there.

I generally try not to unless I really have to.

[incident]

Just now, zahidf said:

 

The target is officially April 15th though.

[zahidf]

Just now, incident said:

The target is officially April 15th though.

Ah yes was moved forward!

[xxialac]

2 minutes ago, zahidf said:

no way did 'all restrictions are off by 21st June' turn up before Boris's statement

This pre-dates the Bristol announcement.

[fraybentos1]

2 minutes ago, Quark said:

Hi there.

I generally try not to unless I really have to.

So if you had bad hayfever you wouldn't take an anti hystamine?

A bad headache you wouldn't take a painkiller?

Why would you do that to yourself?

[Quark]

3 minutes ago, xxialac said:

That's a very good counter-argument.

That said, having no targets means the government can do whatever it wants with no accounatability.

I also see Johnson has said he is "VERY CONFIDENT" all restrictions will end on June 21.

This seems reckless to me, given the unknowns ahead.

Agreed on the target thing, although it does seem to be a bit of a rock and a hard place.

The very confident thing is similar. I think there needs to be an air of confidence that what he's doing is going ot work, otherwise it's even harder to justify the road map. We as the public need to see confidence in it, otherwis why would we trust it and go along with it? The whole minimum 5 week thing has given me a slightly higher level of confidence that he's not doing the "here to save Christmas" bollocks again.

He also, surprisingly for me, slapped down the dickhead from the  Heil last night who was twattering on about buccaneering Boris, so maybe some lessons have finally wormed their through his skull.

[fraybentos1]

4 minutes ago, Barry Fish said:

Was really low yesterday - Hancock blamed supply but Pfizer called bullshit

What else could it possibly be, if not supply issues?

[xxialac]

With too much overconfidence on June 21, you get this sort of thing which goes viral and just raises expectations even more

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/555205 

[incident]

1 minute ago, fraybentos1 said:

What else could it possibly be, if not supply issues?

Not sure if it was ever officially confirmed or not but there's been suggestions that they've started holding back a certain number of doses so they can be sure of covering the second doses, which start coming due fairly soon.

[Quark]

1 minute ago, fraybentos1 said:

So if you had bad hayfever you wouldn't take an anti hystamine?

A bad headache you wouldn't take a painkiller?

Why would you do that to yourself?

If the hayfever's bad and really impairing my day then yes.  If it's just an irritant then no.

Ditto headache. If it's crippling me to the point that I'm struggling to function then yes. If it's unpleasant then no.

It's served me well enough over the years.  I don't like medication to be my default go to option as soon as something's wrong, and rightly or wrongly I trust my body and immune system to do its job and heal me unless it needs some additional support.

[fraybentos1]

Just now, incident said:

Not sure if it was ever officially confirmed or not but there's been suggestions that they've started holding back a certain number of doses so they can be sure of covering the second doses, which start coming due fairly soon.

That kinda is supply issues even if it is that imo.

[zahidf]

6 minutes ago, xxialac said:

This pre-dates the Bristol announcement.

That tweet says 3.59 after the parliamentary announcement. 

 

[zahidf]

Just now, Barry Fish said:

Lots of issues...

• Internal distribution
• People not turning up
• People not booking for that day

 

Be weird for it to be 2 and 3 nationwide 

[DeanoL]

3 minutes ago, Quark said:

If the hayfever's bad and really impairing my day then yes.  If it's just an irritant then no.

Ditto headache. If it's crippling me to the point that I'm struggling to function then yes. If it's unpleasant then no.

It's served me well enough over the years.  I don't like medication to be my default go to option as soon as something's wrong, and rightly or wrongly I trust my body and immune system to do its job and heal me unless it needs some additional support.

Do you also only take caffeine and alcohol when absolutely necessary too?

[stuie]

Here’s Nicola Sturgeon to say exactly the same thing with a few details changed. 

[st dan]

Has it been confirmed yet what the plans are for the vaccine rollout for those under 50’s that fall outside the 1-9 priority groups?

Are they going to continue working their way through the age brackets and offering appointments, or if supplies allow, are they going to operate a ‘turn up’ and queue policy at the vaccination centres?

[gizmoman]

13 minutes ago, fraybentos1 said:

That's very liberal use of 'lot of people'. Who on earth are these people you speak of.

OK I'll change it to "quite a few" doesn't really matter, the point is there are some who don't like to take medication, I was one, for many years I dIdn't bother with paracetamol etc when i had a cold, you know it's going away in a few days anyway, as I've got older I'm more inclined to take stuff, maybe I'm just getting soft!

[Quark]

1 minute ago, DeanoL said:

Do you also only take caffeine and alcohol when absolutely necessary too?

No, I choose to enjoy those as I see fit because they're inherent parts of things I find enjoyable in life.  The others not so much.

I mean, I'm giving you an actual answer but I think we both know the question's pretty unnecessary. 

[xxialac]

3 minutes ago, zahidf said:

That tweet says 3.59 after the parliamentary announcement. 

 

Govt announcement c.3pm

Bristol Sounds announcement 6.51pm

Therefore in that 3 or 4 hour period, Bristol Sounds could verbally tell the Bristol Post reporter they're giving up on going ahead end of June.

We're talking a simple 5 minute call with a journalist, it's not complicated.

[DeanoL]

1 minute ago, Quark said:

No, I choose to enjoy those as I see fit because they're inherent parts of things I find enjoyable in life.  The others not so much.

I mean, I'm giving you an actual answer but I think we both know the question's pretty unnecessary. 

They make you feel better. Same reason you'd take any drug. 

It wasn't an unnecessary question, I know plenty of people who avoid meds as much as possible, don't drink or take caffeine or alcohol.

You can obviously draw your dividing line wherever you want and different things work for different people but there's no fundamental difference - drugs is drugs is drugs.

[JoeyT]

 

[steviewevie]

15 minutes ago, Quark said:

If the hayfever's bad and really impairing my day then yes.  If it's just an irritant then no.

Ditto headache. If it's crippling me to the point that I'm struggling to function then yes. If it's unpleasant then no.

It's served me well enough over the years.  I don't like medication to be my default go to option as soon as something's wrong, and rightly or wrongly I trust my body and immune system to do its job and heal me unless it needs some additional support.

I preemptively take pain killers if I think I'm going to get a headache.