When will this shit end?

[steviewevie]

6 minutes ago, Mr.Tease said:

Not really, if it passes it will likely act as a deterrent for Johnson introducing stricter measures, which are actually needed. 

There are a lot of tories (and blowhards in the media who have been out in force the last few weeks) who look at the US and its world leading 200,000 death toll and think "yes that's the way we should be handling this!" 

I wonder what labour will do with this amendment...tricky. And SNP...the scottish parliament make their lockdown/restriction decisions don't they, so what do SNP care?

[steviewevie]

Just now, Fuzzy Afro said:

I’m sure Graham Medley is one of those Dr Doomsday-in-chief types, like John Edmunds and Devi Sridhar. 

Well, he's professor of infectious disease modelling at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine and the director of the Centre for the Mathematical Modelling of Infectious Diseases. But yeah, he just need to be a bit optimistic, I'm sure will be fine etc

[Mr.Tease]

4 minutes ago, squirrelarmy said:

It’s not great. You just have to prepare yourself mentally for it. I’ve just made a fairly large purchase so my beer money for this month has already been spent so I won’t have the temptation to go out and break lockdown. I’ve got a few games I’ve been meaning to finish so will have plenty to keep me occupied. 
 

Hopefully enough people do similar things and minimise contact with others so the cases drop to a level so we can be social again. 

Yeah, this situation may finally force me to play red dead redemption 2 (all the 'realism' faffing about you have to do has acted as an almighty deterrent!). 

I've got plenty of TV shows and films to watch, music to listen to, stuff to read, drawing and painting stuff. I'll split the next 6 months into two 3 month chunks and hopefully will pass relatively quickly 

[steviewevie]

3 minutes ago, Homer said:

Not for me, I like it.

errr...in what way?

[Fuzzy Afro]

Just now, steviewevie said:

Well, he's professor of infectious disease modelling at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine and the director of the Centre for the Mathematical Modelling of Infectious Diseases. But yeah, he just need to be a bit optimistic, I'm sure will be fine etc

I mean I don’t doubt their credentials when it comes to modelling the disease itself, but they’re only concerned with the public health implications of it. Politicians have more things to consider. 

[Mr.Tease]

4 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

I don’t want stricter measures, they’re dehumanising. 

We've gathered that, I think having tens of thousands of people dying because you don't want to give up your hobbies for a few months is dehumanising. 

[steviewevie]

Just now, Fuzzy Afro said:

I mean I don’t doubt their credentials when it comes to modelling the disease itself, but they’re only concerned with the public health implications of it. Politicians have more things to consider. 

yeah sure, and he says that in the interview.

[Fuzzy Afro]

4 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

I wonder what labour will do with this amendment...tricky. And SNP...the scottish parliament make their lockdown/restriction decisions don't they, so what do SNP care?

Word on the street is the opposition are backing. Worth remembering that they can still confirm support for a specific measure, just means Boris can’t do whatever he likes. Scrutiny is never a bad thing. 

[Fuzzy Afro]

1 minute ago, Mr.Tease said:

We've gathered that, I think having tens of thousands of people dying because you don't want to give up your hobbies for a few months is dehumanising. 

I don’t think people being able to spend time with their loved ones is “hobbies”, but it’s worth considering that the cure could be worse than the disease, especially given that most of those who die from this are already very close to death anyway, so effectively the measures only buy them an extra few months. 

[zahidf]

8 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

I wonder what labour will do with this amendment...tricky. And SNP...the scottish parliament make their lockdown/restriction decisions don't they, so what do SNP care?

Labour will vote for it because they will then have a say in parliament.

[zahidf]

5 minutes ago, Mr.Tease said:

We've gathered that, I think having tens of thousands of people dying because you don't want to give up your hobbies for a few months is dehumanising. 

Thats unfair. Banning household mixing for a few months isn't a minor thing.

[Fuzzy Afro]

Just now, zahidf said:

Thats unfair. Banning household mixing for a few months isn't a minor thing.

Spot on. I should point out that I’d be more than happy with them closing pubs and restaurants, limiting gatherings to six people etc. It’s just full on lockdowns are a step too far, especially given the age profile of those who die from this virus. 

[steviewevie]

It's shit no matter what, which is why need to find a balance which is what govt is trying to do.

[zahidf]

 

[steviewevie]

2 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

Spot on. I should point out that I’d be more than happy with them closing pubs and restaurants, limiting gatherings to six people etc. It’s just full on lockdowns are a step too far, especially given the age profile of those who die from this virus. 

Keeping pubs/restaurants/shops/schools open but limiting households visiting each other is not a full lockdown.

[Mr.Tease]

1 hour ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

I don’t think people being able to spend time with their loved ones is “hobbies”, but it’s worth considering that the cure could be worse than the disease, especially given that most of those who die from this are already very close to death anyway, so effectively the measures only buy them an extra few months. 

Anyone who dies or loses a relative can't spend time with them ever again. 

I watched my dad die a horrible death from pneumonia (a result of cancer), I wouldn't wish that on anyone. I don't think you appreciate how awful a death that is. Covid is worse because you can't even be with them while they're dying and they die alone. If I can stop other people from going through that by not meeting up with my loved ones for a few months, so be it.

What you think is suffering and hardship, really isn't in comparison to those who have died of covid, lost someone to covid or worked in the NHS dealing with the onslaught, and I do get annoyed that you're so dismissive of vulnerable people. If we don't get this under control, it will run rampant, hospitals will get overwhelmed and it will kill a lot more people than those who 'only had a few months of life left'. 

Edited September 26, 2020 by Mr.Tease

[rivalschools.price]

13 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Well, he's professor of infectious disease modelling at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine and the director of the Centre for the Mathematical Modelling of Infectious Diseases. But yeah, he just need to be a bit optimistic, I'm sure will be fine etc

Well my mate Terry from the pub says that he’s talking bollocks so it’s hard to know who to believe.

[Zoo Music Girl]

3 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

Spot on. I should point out that I’d be more than happy with them closing pubs and restaurants, limiting gatherings to six people etc. It’s just full on lockdowns are a step too far, especially given the age profile of those who die from this virus. 

You'd be happy with that because that's your ideal scenario. You've said before that as long as you can see you partner you don't care about the rest. But people who work in pubs and restaurants and will be out of work probably would rather keep them open. Everyone has their own things to lose and everyone is suffering because of this. No one is a winner. 

Wish you'd stop saying the only people affected by this are already close to death. It's just not the case that because you are old or have a serious health condition your life is not worth living so should be sacrificed for everyone else. These are people who want to see their loved ones too.

[Mr.Tease]

6 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Thats unfair. Banning household mixing for a few months isn't a minor thing.

It's a lot less than the alternative 

[mcshed]

11 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

especially given that most of those who die from this are already very close to death anyway, so effectively the measures only buy them an extra few months.

Speaking of dehumanising.

[FestivalJamie]

4 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

Spot on. I should point out that I’d be more than happy with them closing pubs and restaurants, limiting gatherings to six people etc. It’s just full on lockdowns are a step too far, especially given the age profile of those who die from this virus. 

If people actually followed the rules; didn’t have house parties, protests against restrictions and actually wore masks when they needed to, we wouldn’t be in such a bad position and we wouldn’t even be talking about full lockdown.

We can blame the government all we want but when the public ignore the rules put in place for public safety, it’s not the government’s fault when we have to consider a stricter lockdown.

Im sorry you are against one, but your comments about the age profile dying from this virus are very insensitive to be honest. My aunt (in her 40s) has been suffering with long covid since March. I also had a friend who is 19 year olds! 19!!! And she has no underlying health conditions- she was on a ventilator with this virus back in march/April time. 

I also have another friend who is in her 20s who had to go to hospital because of it.

So whilst their outcomes might have been worse, I don’t think having long covid and 2 young people hospitalised is acceptable. The stats might make you believe only older people are dying, and maybe that’s true, but there’s a lot of younger people being hospitalised from this disease and a lot of others being left with long covid. 40 years of age is not old and someone shouldn’t have to suffer with long term health problems from a virus at that age.

The virus is horrible, but the public’s  attitude is worse. People don’t care about anyone else anymore and if they continue to act like that we will have no choice but for stricter measures (banning households mixing etc).

[Fuzzy Afro]

I’m sure I read that the average age of a covid death is higher than the average life expectancy in the UK, that’s what I meant by the few months thing 

[mikegday]

1 hour ago, Ozanne said:

Track and Trave, is that the new Government scheme to get night clubs back open and also test for covid too!? 😜

Haha you’re onto something!

Edited September 26, 2020 by mikegday

[FestivalJamie]

4 minutes ago, Zoo Music Girl said:

Wish you'd stop saying the only people affected by this are already close to death. It's just not the case that because you are old or have a serious health condition your life is not worth living so should be sacrificed for everyone else. These are people who want to see their loved ones too.

Agreed. This is what I’m trying to get across as well. The comments are very insensitive to everyone suffering from this disease right now.

Banning households mixing is a small price to pay to save the lives of those who might suffer with this virus in the future, perhaps they won’t catch it if we stop transmission chains now. 

I have vulnerable relatives, I don’t want to see them suffer. I’d rather take the action now so they, along with a lot of other vulnerable people aren’t affected. And as I said, it’s not just old and vulnerable people affected by this virus too. I’m not a fan of the insensitivity.

[Fuzzy Afro]

Sorry for being insensitive  I’m just really struggling and wish it didn’t have to be this way. @FestivalJamieraises good points about the long covid